Human rights reports and sincerity
The three reports by Freedom House, Transparency International and Human Rights Watch, all published on the same day, based on the similar venomous language and opinions of the members of the Gülenist terror organization, noted Turkey as partly free
As the topic of human rights and democracy has become a tool for foreign policy of international powers, the innocence of friendly criticism has started to disappear in a tragic way.
Turkey, as a role model in its neighborhood, has always been open to constructive criticism and objective evaluations regarding its economic and political standards. In order to reconstruct its standards and evaluate all the comments coming from outside, all of the official and unofficial mechanisms of the Turkish state are operational.
However, each line written by international human rights bodies, to evaluate Turkey's standard of human rights, is seen as a tool in a brutal battle.
Away from objectivity, the main goal of these human rights institutions is seen to defeat Turkey on a battleground.
For example, last week, three reports were published in Europe and the United States in which Turkey's record on human rights and freedoms was highly criticized.
The common points of the three reports were that they were published on the same day and were based on one-sided and revanchist news sources.
Freedom House, Transparency International and Human Rights Watch issued their one-sided judgments of Turkey.
It was obvious that the Gülen Movement was busy providing manipulative information to international human rights bodies.
The Freedom House report on the world freedom index called Turkey to be "partly free."
Freedom House referred to the Gülenist terror organization as the "Hizmet Movement," giving a clue that sources using the jargon of the Gülen Movement were among the whistlers at the human rights body.
And, the report widely consisted of complaints from the Gülen Movement.
Pro-PKK circles were seen to be the second news source in the three reports.
From the terror in the southeast to freedom of the press and expression, Western institutions only depended on anti-government circles, ignoring data provided by parliamentary and governmental bodies.
Freedom House argued that over 40 mayors from the Peoples' Democratic Party's (HDP) local Democratic Regions Party (DBP) were arrested or removed from office, which is not true.
Official arguments, or even the arguments of pro-government organizations were not given attention.
It is not only human rights organizations, but also European parliamentarians and even U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, who depend on one-sided information.
During a visit to Turkey, U.S. Vice President Joe Biden met with four carefully selected anti-government journalists in an attempt to show his and the U.S. Consulate's complicity and solidarity with opposition figures.
European Parliament rapporteur for Turkey, Kati Piri, last week made reference to a pro-PKK source on Twitter without denouncing the terror and violence committed by the PKK, which is recognized as a terrorist organization by the EU. I wonder what kind of Progress Report on Turkey Piri will prepare with her anti-Turkish sources?
Criticism is always worth listening to when it is objective and away from political motivations.
Turkey, as a role model in its neighborhood, has always been open to constructive criticism and objective evaluations regarding its economic and political standards. In order to reconstruct its standards and evaluate all the comments coming from outside, all of the official and unofficial mechanisms of the Turkish state are operational.
However, each line written by international human rights bodies, to evaluate Turkey's standard of human rights, is seen as a tool in a brutal battle.
Away from objectivity, the main goal of these human rights institutions is seen to defeat Turkey on a battleground.
For example, last week, three reports were published in Europe and the United States in which Turkey's record on human rights and freedoms was highly criticized.
The common points of the three reports were that they were published on the same day and were based on one-sided and revanchist news sources.
Freedom House, Transparency International and Human Rights Watch issued their one-sided judgments of Turkey.
It was obvious that the Gülen Movement was busy providing manipulative information to international human rights bodies.
The Freedom House report on the world freedom index called Turkey to be "partly free."
Freedom House referred to the Gülenist terror organization as the "Hizmet Movement," giving a clue that sources using the jargon of the Gülen Movement were among the whistlers at the human rights body.
And, the report widely consisted of complaints from the Gülen Movement.
Pro-PKK circles were seen to be the second news source in the three reports.
From the terror in the southeast to freedom of the press and expression, Western institutions only depended on anti-government circles, ignoring data provided by parliamentary and governmental bodies.
Freedom House argued that over 40 mayors from the Peoples' Democratic Party's (HDP) local Democratic Regions Party (DBP) were arrested or removed from office, which is not true.
Official arguments, or even the arguments of pro-government organizations were not given attention.
It is not only human rights organizations, but also European parliamentarians and even U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, who depend on one-sided information.
During a visit to Turkey, U.S. Vice President Joe Biden met with four carefully selected anti-government journalists in an attempt to show his and the U.S. Consulate's complicity and solidarity with opposition figures.
European Parliament rapporteur for Turkey, Kati Piri, last week made reference to a pro-PKK source on Twitter without denouncing the terror and violence committed by the PKK, which is recognized as a terrorist organization by the EU. I wonder what kind of Progress Report on Turkey Piri will prepare with her anti-Turkish sources?
Criticism is always worth listening to when it is objective and away from political motivations.