Terrorist attacks in Ankara - the work of the Kurds or the provocation of special services?
Recall that 17 February 2016 was in Ankara, the attack occurred. In the center of the Turkish capital, not far from the buildings where the Turkish parliament and the general headquarters of the armed forces are located, a car filled with explosives blew up. The explosive device was put into action at the very moment when a motorcade carrying a Turkish army soldier caught up with a car. The explosion killed a 28 man, injured a 61 man. The overwhelming majority of those killed and injured turned out to be military personnel of the Turkish armed forces, including the 22 dead - pilots of the Turkish Air Force. On the morning of February 18 2016, Turkey was shaken by a new terrorist attack. In the province of Diyarbakyr, a convoy of military equipment of the road clearance unit was undermined. Six soldiers of the Turkish army were killed, another soldier was injured.
Almost immediately, before investigating the incident, the Turkish authorities were quick to accuse the regime of Bashar al-Assad of the terrorist act of the Syrian Kurds. At the same time, the Turkish authorities prohibited local media from publishing any version that differs from the official point of view of the authorities. This measure is used in Turkey very often - especially after terrorist attacks or riots. Despite the fact that Turkey is considered to be a democratic republic and the United States doesn’t have serious questions for Erdogan, strict censorship is functioning in the country, which does not allow publishing unofficial information about terrorist acts. However, the foreign press operating in the territory of the Turkish state, as a rule, does not comply with this prohibition. Shortly after the terrorist attack in the center of the capital, the name of the main suspect was announced in the Turkish media. The authorities reported that the suicide bomber was a certain Salih Behkar, a Syrian Kurd who had been in Turkey since July 2014. Allegedly, his fingerprints, taken at the entrance to Turkey, coincided with the fingerprints found during a survey by police and special services of the exploded car.
The President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan himself accused the Syrian Kurds. According to the Turkish president, the country's security services have every reason to suspect the organization of a terrorist act The Kurdistan Democratic Union is the main political party uniting the Syrian Kurds and closely associated with the Kurdistan Workers' Party. The Democratic Union is considered a fairly moderate political party compared to other organizations of Kurdish patriots, but it is his fighters that make up the bulk of the people's self-defense detachments - the main armed force fighting in northern Syria against terrorist groups. By the way, Russian, European and American politicians cooperate with representatives of the Democratic Union of Kurdistan, so it is possible that the Turkish president decided to specifically accuse the Kurdish party of a terrorist act in order to confirm its long-standing main thesis - “the Kurdish national movement is terrorists”. Of course, the Democratic Union of Kurdistan did not take responsibility for the terrorist act, moreover, officially denied any involvement in the explosion in the Turkish capital, which did not prevent the Turkish troops immediately after the terrorist act in Ankara to deliver new blows to the positions of the Kurdish resistance - to this Once the Turkish Air Force bombed the position of Kurdish troops in Iraq. Erdogan’s words about the Kurds ’involvement in the Ankara terrorist act were also confirmed by his associate, Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu. He said that self-defense forces created by the Kurdistan Democratic Union are responsible for the terrorist act. Recall that the Turkish official point of view is to identify the Syrian “Democratic Union” party with the Kurdistan Workers Party operating in Turkey. The Turkish authorities reject any dialogue with the Kurdish national movement and define the PKK and the CP exclusively as terrorist organizations.
But the terrorist act in the Turkish capital caused controversial assessments by Western states, including the United States - Turkey’s main military partner in the NATO bloc. The US State Department refused to identify the Kurdish national movement as a terrorist, and advisor to the president of the United States on national security, Ben Rhodes, said that the US intelligence services still cannot determine who is the real organizer of the terrorist attack in Ankara. The US official also stressed that the United States considers allied relations with Syrian Kurds to be especially important in the context of a joint struggle against terrorist groups. Against the background of the loyal attitude of the United States and the European Union to the Kurdish resistance, which the Turkish authorities do not like very much, the explosion in Ankara sounded very well. The Turkish authorities immediately rushed to declare the Kurds guilty, as if confirming that they really are terrorists. However, the position of the United States appears very interesting. If Washington has officially declared that it does not yet have information about the true organizers of the explosion in Ankara, then this casts a shadow on the Turkish special services themselves. After all, the attack could also be Erdogan's provocation, designed to convince the world community of the use of terrorist methods by the Kurdish parties.
It has long been known that Erdogan is very unwilling to create a Kurdish self-governing territory as a result of the merger of three Kurdish enclaves in northern Syria - with centers in Azaz, Afrin and Kobani. It is in order to prevent the Kurds, Turkish troops and shell the northern regions of Syria. For Ankara, Kurds pose a much greater danger than radical religious extremist groups, many of which are secretly supported by Turkish special services. At the same time, the United States of America, seeing the determination and uncompromising nature of the Kurds in the fight against IS (the organization banned in Russia), is trying to build relations with the Kurdish opposition. For this, Erdogan has repeatedly criticized US behavior. In some ways, by the way, the Turkish president is right - the United States does not demonstrate consistency in the choice of allies and at the moment it has clearly "swung" to the side of the Kurdish movement, although Turkey has been a long-standing strategic ally of the United States since the post-war years. Apparently, at the moment, Erdogan expects to begin a military operation against the Syrian Kurds and, at the same time, the troops of Bashar al-Assad, confronting the United States and NATO with a fact. When the operation begins, the US will have no choice but to put up with the entry of Turkish troops into Syria. Therefore, Erdogan acts decisively enough, and in order to justify himself in the eyes of the world community, he is ready for any provocation - including the death of his own military personnel. In the end, what is the matter to the Turkish president, will these soldiers die from air defense systems in Syria or become victims of another terrorist act in Turkey? Therefore, the version that the attack in Ankara was prepared, if not by the special services themselves, then, at least with their knowledge, should also not be excluded. Having betrayed the Kurds as terrorists, it will be much easier for Erdogan to get the support of the world community if Turkish troops are brought into Syria. Moreover, the Turkish president understands that if the “Syrian campaign” begins, he will have to face not only Kurdish militias who do not have heavy weapons, but also the Syrian army of Bashar al-Assad, and most importantly, the Russian aviation and air defense systems. Erdogan fears to face Russia alone - it is for greater security that he needs the support of NATO allies. In the event of a direct collision with Russian aviation or air defense systems, Turkey is likely to immediately seek help from other countries of the North Atlantic Alliance.
Azaz in the siege of the Kurds, Afrin - under the shelling of the Turks
Recently, success has clearly accompanied the Syrian Kurds. National self-defense units proved to be the most combat-ready formations among the other parties to the Syrian conflict. The Kurds have a very high fighting spirit - these people are well aware that they are fighting not just for their freedom, but also for the life and future of themselves and all subsequent Kurdish generations. There are a lot of women in the National Self-Defense Units - adhering to the idea of equality, the Kurdish national movement opened the way for women to join the ranks of their armed groups. Now Kurdish women make up 40% of the personnel of combat units and have long proven themselves to be excellent fighters. In addition, there are many non-ethnic Kurdish volunteers in the ranks of the Kurdish formations. And these are not only Armenians, Assyrians, Arab Christians from the surrounding areas, but also Europeans and Americans who sympathize with the Kurdish national liberation movement or who adhere to left-wing and radical ideas. All this diverse army is quite successfully smashing the militants of terrorist organizations. However, the victories of the Kurds add fears Ankara - Erdogan has repeatedly stated that the creation of the Kurdish autonomy or the Kurdish state on the Turkish border will lead to very dangerous consequences. It is with concern about the creation of Kurdish autonomy that the conflict with Russia initiated by Erdogan is connected. Air strikes of the Russian aerospace forces on the positions of terrorists play into the hands of the Kurds, leading to serious losses among the main opponents of the Kurdish national movement - the militants of terrorist groups of the IS organization banned in Russia (DAISH). The advancement of the Kurds in the near future may lead to the fact that the Kurdish-controlled areas of Northern Syria will join in the same space - for this, Kurdish militia have left to capture a number of key points between Afrin and Kobani. On the night of 15 on 16 February 2016 Kurdish troops along with protruding Assyrian militia on their side seized the village of Tel Rifaat, located near the small town of Azaz. There is something symbolic in Azaz - it was here that the 11 of June 1125 was fought by the Crusaders against the Seljuk Turks. Now Azaz, or Azaz, is a small town in northern Syria, whose population before the outbreak of the war was just over 66 thousand people. In Azaz, anti-Assad opposition forces are based, which are also the main enemies of the Kurdish militia. It is not by chance that Turks became agitated when they saw that Azaz could also befall the fate of other settlements liberated by the Kurds. Thus, Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu made it clear - Turkey will not allow Azaz to fall. If Kurd’s troops take Azaz by assault, Aleppo will remain the last major point in the north of Syria, controlled by anti-Assad groups. In order to drive the Kurds away from Azaz, Turkish artillery shells the border area. Turkish media constantly broadcast messages about the situation in Azaz, which is declared the “last bastion” of the anti-Assad opposition. weapon, ammunition, the defenders of Azaz were surrounded. In fact, the question of taking this city is a matter of time. Of course, if Turkey does not intervene in the hostilities, by open military intervention in Syrian territory. The fighting for Azaz - so far between government forces and the Syrian "opposition" - intensified in early February of the 2016 year. Syrian government forces, covered from the air by the Russian Aviation Troops, captured the road that leads from the Turkish border to Azaz. These actions of the Assad troops immediately entailed a reaction from Turkey. Ankara began with aggressive statements, and 10 in February 2016 launched attacks on the outskirts of Azaz. The Turkish Air Force bombed the Syrian Meneg airbase, controlled by Kurdish forces. On the night of 17 in February, 2016, a large militant detachment of the Dzhebhat an-Nusra terrorist group in opposition from Assad, crossed the Turkish border in cars and moved towards the town of Azaz. According to experts, we are talking about the formation of about 2000 people. However, the issue of affiliation of the attacking militants to the Djabhat al-Nusra grouping remains controversial.
Later, units of the Turkish engineering troops invaded Syria. In the Afrin district inhabited by Kurds, near the villages of Sorka and Ekbis, Turkish sappers dig trenches and assemble barbed wire fences. True, the Turkish units have not yet penetrated deep into the Syrian territory - they are located at a distance of 200-300 meters from the Turkish-Syrian border. The batteries of the KORKUT Turkish air defense also moved to the Syrian border. These are the mobile platforms on which the radar and the dual-speed Oerlikon 35-mm guns are installed. According to experts, these guns are used against helicopters and airplanes flying at an altitude of up to 400 meters. Apparently, Turkey’s military preparations are connected with Ankara’s plans to create a “safety zone” 10 kilometers wide. According to the plans of the Turkish generals, the city of Azaz, which is of strategic importance in the context of the confrontation of Assad and Kurdish troops, must also enter this zone.
As early as November 2015, Russian aviation launched a series of attacks on Azaz, as a result of which a convoy of twenty trucks belonging to the Turkish organization IHH (Humanitarian Relief Foundation) was destroyed. Officially, this organization is engaged in the transportation of humanitarian aid, and in Azaz, as reported by the Turks, the column carried cement and building materials. In fact, the columns of the “humanitarian” organization are frequent guests in Syrian territory. Apparently, it is precisely these columns that supply the Syrian terrorist groups with weapons and ammunition. Even the leadership of Turkey does not hide the role of the Turkish state in supporting terrorists. The media had previously reported on columns of MIT Turkish military intelligence trucks delivering weapons to terrorist groups. Then Erdogan, who first tried to deny the fact of support for the militants, “split up” and in one of his speeches he directly said: “So what is it that they had weapons? I believe that our people will not forgive those who sabotaged our support. ” Now Turkey is demanding the creation of a “security zone” - obviously, in order to ensure uninterrupted supply of weapons and ammunition to controlled armed formations, without the risk of strikes by Russian aircraft and shelling by Syrian government forces or Kurdish self-defense units. The creation of a “security zone” around Azaz, according to Turkish leaders, will impede “a change in the demographic situation of the region,” as Deputy Prime Minister Yalcin Akdogan put it. Obviously, by “changing the demographic situation”, the Turkish side implies the myth it spreads about the settlement of all northern regions of Syria with Kurds and “ethnic cleansing”, allegedly being carried out by Kurdish formations against Arabs and Turkomans practicing Sunni Islam.
Kurdish troops aim not only to oust the militants of terrorist groups and the “moderate opposition”, but also to directly reach the Turkish border. Great importance for the Kurdish militia is the city Afrin. This small city in the Syrian governorate of Aleppo, which is the center of the Afrin district. The population of the city of Afrin is just over 44 thousand people, almost all city residents are ethnic Kurds. About half a million people live in the Afrin area. Since 11 July 2012, Afrin is controlled by the Kurdish Popular Self-Defense Detachments and is one of the strategically important centers of Kurdish resistance. An autonomous region controlled by the Kurdish militia was created here. In addition, Assyrian and Arab formations are in alliance with the Kurdish self-defense detachments. The command of the Syrian Kurdistan people's self-defense detachments has set the Kurdish formations the task of connecting the Afrin with the populated Kurds to the eastern regions of the Syrian Kurdistan, after which the Syrian-Turkish border will be under complete control of the Kurds and, accordingly, Turkey will not be able to supply terrorists with weapons and ammunition, the flow of Turkish radicals will be stopped arriving in Syria through a “breach” in defending the Syrian-Turkish border. But the most important thing is that the main channel for supplying free oil from the terrorist-controlled areas of Syria and Iraq will be cut off, and it is precisely the smuggled oil entering Turkey that is of strategic interest to Erdogan (especially since his family’s personal financial interests are closely connected with the oil business ). That is why Turkish troops began shelling Kurdish positions in Afrin in mid-February. Around 22.30 18 February 2016, the Turkish artillery attacked the city of Afrin, which killed a man and a girl, and three teenagers were injured of varying degrees of severity. 19 February 2016 The Turkish armed forces repeated artillery strikes against Afrin from the territory of Turkey, demanding that the Kurdish forces leave their defensive positions north of Aleppo. Barack Obama, who strongly emphasizes that he agrees with Erdogan on the need to stop Russian attacks on the "opposition" in Syria, however, called on Ankara to show restraint and stop bombarding the Syrian territory occupied by Kurds.
Washington can not decide
Thus, we see that the United States maintains its dual position, not wanting to completely break off relations with Turkey. Since Ankara is the most important US ally of NATO in the region, Washington is forced to react to Erdogan’s actions against the Kurds only with vague remarks. So far, Turkish President Erdogan defiantly refuses to follow the requests and proposals of the American President Barack Obama to stop the artillery strikes against the positions of the Kurdish militia. The telephone conversation with the White House did not even affect the Turkish president. 20 February 2016 The Turkish troops continued shelling the Syrian territory - just at the time when Erdogan had a telephone conversation with the American president. He cannot speak out against Erdogan and the European Union, although many European left parties openly sympathize with the Kurdish movement. The fact is that the majority of Syrian refugees now arrive in Turkey, where they remain for a long time. It is Turkey that actually controls the placement of Syrians fleeing from the war, and if the European Union demonstrates too negative an attitude towards Erdogan’s policy, Ankara may simply not obstruct the refugees on their future trip to Europe - and then European countries will be waited by an influx of a couple of million Syrians, and at the same time and immigrants from other countries of the Middle East, following through Turkey to European countries.
However, 20 February 2016, the Permanent Representative of Turkey to the United Nations, Halit Chevik, said that Ankara will not conduct a land armed operation in Syrian territory without a decision of the international coalition or the UN Security Council. The Turkish representative noted that his country respects the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Syria, but at the same time intends to destroy terrorists who threaten the national security of the Turkish state. In fact, these words of the Turkish diplomat mean that Ankara will not abandon the strategy of rocket and air strikes on Syrian territory, primarily on the positions of Syrian Kurds. Turkey’s unwillingness to bring ground troops into Syria without agreement with NATO partners is understandable - in the event of an unauthorized entry of troops, Turkey will have to deal with its consequences, including the reaction of the Russian side. Since Ankara will not pull an armed confrontation with Russia alone, she can only rely on the help and support of her allies in the “international coalition”. Turkey’s closest ally, Saudi Arabia, which promised to support Ankara in the event of a military operation in Syria, can hardly be regarded as a strong and reliable partner. It is well known that, despite significant funding and good technical equipment, the armed forces of Saudi Arabia are weak — and among the main reasons for this are both the poor level of training of military specialists and the low morale of Saudi military personnel, manifested in the banal reluctance to fight and die. The financial motivation of military personnel is good in peacetime, but during a war for many mercenaries, the issues of preserving their own lives and health come to the fore and become more important than receiving material remuneration for their service. For a long time, the Saudi troops, and with the support of contingents from other Gulf countries, are not able to cope even with the Yemeni Hussites, what can be said about the consequences of the confrontation with full-fledged regular armies. At the same time, the American side is so far showing unwillingness to even talk about a ground operation. Thus, the official representative of the US State Department, Mark Toner, said that the United States does not intend to conduct a land operation in Syria, but regularly examines the possibility of increasing strikes on IG positions (prohibited in Russia).
Saudi allies first learn to fight
With regard to the likelihood of Saudi Arabia’s participation in the fighting in Syria, Iran’s opposition, the main geopolitical and ideological rival of Riyadh in the Middle East, is categorically opposed to the very presence of the Saudis in this country. Relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran finally deteriorated after the Saudi authorities carried out the death sentence imposed on the famous Shiite preacher Nimra Bakr al-Nimra (1959-2016). Recall that the executed 2 January 2016 g. Sheikh Nimr was considered one of the most respected Shiite leaders of Saudi Arabia. He often addressed in his sermons a very important issue - discrimination against the Shiite minority by the authorities of Saudi Arabia. In Saudi Arabia, from 10 to 15% of the population adheres to the Shiite trend in Islam. Most Shiites live just on the coast of the Persian Gulf - in the oil-bearing region of Saudi Arabia. But the Wahhabis who are in power in the kingdom are negatively disposed towards Shiism, which inevitably affects Shiite civil rights. In particular, they do not have their own Shiite courts, but Shiite testimony is not recognized in Sunni courts. Shiite youth experience discrimination in finding employment and enrollment. The political factor is also mixed with religious hostility - the Saudi authorities consider the Shiite minority to be a conduit for Iranian influence in the state, a kind of “fifth column” that is oriented towards Iran and is completely controlled by Iranian secret services. Sheikh Nimr en-Nimr was repeatedly arrested by the Saudi special services, and in July 2015. was wounded by the police in the leg during the arrest and arrested. This happened after the riots in the eastern parts of the country. The court sentenced the 56-year-old sheikh to death for "inciting hatred and shaking national unity." The death sentence was approved by King Salman. After the execution, the body of an-Nimr was not handed over to relatives. The execution of an-Nimr caused a very negative reaction in Iran, many prominent figures of whom promised to avenge the sheikh. Syria is the field where Iran can settle accounts with Saudi Arabia. Another such region is Yemen, where the armed confrontation of insurgents, the Hussites and the troops of the Arab coalition led by Saudi Arabia, has continued for several years. There are also Iranian advisors involved. When the leadership of Saudi Arabia announced its readiness to start a ground operation in Syria in the near future, the position of the Iranian side was voiced by the Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the IRI Armed Forces, Brigadier General Masood Jazayri. He said that Iran is categorically against the introduction of Saudi and Turkish troops into Syria, but if the deployment of troops takes place, Iran will send such a number of military advisers to Syria, which will allow the Turkish and Saudi troops to invade Syria. In addition, General Jazayri did not fail to recall the presence of Saudi troops in Yemen, stressing that the Saudis had exhausted their military capabilities. The actions of Saudi Arabia and Turkey can lead to even greater destruction in Syria, the Iranian leadership is convinced. However, the thesis of General Jazayri that the Saudis have exhausted their military capabilities, it seems quite justified. Alone, Saudi Arabia will never decide to deploy troops to Syria, and in the case of joint actions with Turkey, it is the Turkish armed forces that will have to bear the brunt of combat operations.
The prediction of Iranian leaders about the destabilization of the political situation in Saudi Arabia itself in the event of the introduction of troops into Syria looks quite likely. It is known that not all figures of the highest authorities of the Saudi kingdom support the position on the introduction of troops into Syria. Unknown hackers uncovered the internal correspondence of Saudi Arabia’s top leaders. Thus, a number of generals consider the entry of troops into Syria a very dangerous decision, referring to the experience of the Yemeni operation, which is characterized as a failure. Therefore, if Riyadh dares to start a land operation, it will be only in alliance with other Sunni states, first of all with Turkey and several monarchies of the Persian Gulf. But the lack of regular Saudi troops in Syria does not mean that Riyadh does not participate in the conflict anyway. So, in the ranks of terrorist groups fighting against the regime of Bashar al-Assad, there are hundreds of militants - citizens of Saudi Arabia, many of them are led by detachments of terrorist organizations. In addition to the personal presence of mercenaries and terrorists, Saudi Arabia provides financial, logistical, organizational, informational support to numerous radical and terrorist organizations operating in Syria. If, however, regular Saudi troops are introduced into Syria, they will either have to fight only against Assad, which will automatically lead to strikes on the Saudis by Iran and Russia, or, in the case of imitation of antiterrorist actions, they will fight against themselves, the groups are supported by Saudi organizations and if Saudi troops strike them, then a paradoxical situation will arise where Riyadh will be on the side of Tehran and Damascus. But without participation in hostilities against terrorist groups, Saudi Arabia will not receive support from the United States and then, together with Turkey, it will have to be independently responsible for the actions of its troops in front of Iran and Russia.
Perspectives of invasion may be deplorable for Ankara and Riyadh
If Turkey and Saudi Arabia bring troops into Syria and embark on a large-scale ground operation, then the course of further events will be very difficult to predict. Firstly, a direct military confrontation on the Syrian land of the Turks and Saudis with the Iranian ground forces and the Russian military aviation becomes almost inevitable in this situation. Secondly, for Turkey and Saudi Arabia themselves, the consequences of hostilities can be very difficult. As for Saudi Arabia, this state is still in a very difficult situation. The Saudi army "stuck" in the fighting in Yemen, and its military potential was a big question after for a long time it was not able to neutralize the insurgent troops of the Hussites. In the political life of Saudi Arabia, the need for change is brewing, due to the banal impossibility of the existence in the modern world of a state that has preserved its social relations at the medieval level. Sooner or later, but in Saudi Arabia, modernization should begin and it will be extremely painful, it is likely to result in military coups, and even in civil wars in the kingdom. What is one growing Shiite movement in the eastern provinces of Saudi Arabia? Riyadh’s only hope is US support, which will not allow Shiites to gain strength. After all, if control over the eastern provinces of the kingdom will be in the hands of Shiites, then this will be the strongest blow to the entire political system of Saudi Arabia and, in general, the monarchies of the Persian Gulf - state entities whose political reactionism was consciously maintained and conserved by the United States and Great Britain from the middle of the twentieth century. But even if this aspect is not considered as the liberation movement of the Shiites in the eastern provinces, then the position of the Saudi throne is very precarious. The eighty-year-old King Salman is a compromise figure, behind whose back there has long been a struggle between representatives of rival groups of the Saudi elite. As it happens in feudal societies, in the extreme case the elderly monarch may turn out to be “suddenly mortal,” and the heir to the throne who replaced him may lead a completely different policy.
Turkey, in the event of a full-scale war in Syria, risks a further escalation of the conflict with the Kurds. If the Turkish troops and the Syrian Kurds enter into direct combat contact in Syria, then the armed forces of the Kurdistan Workers' Party will invariably become active in Turkey. Since the PKK has never abandoned partisan methods of fighting in the cities, a wave of sabotage directed against the objects of the armed forces and the police can reach Turkey. Will Ankara be able to wage two wars at once - in Syria and on its own territory? Moreover, discontent with Recep Erdogan’s policies is growing in Turkey. Despite the fact that he was able to enlist the support of the majority of voters, Erdogan’s main electorate is poorly educated people in rural areas and small towns who hold conservative and religious-fundamentalist views. The Turkish intelligentsia, a significant part of business circles and many high-ranking military are very unhappy with the policy of Recep Erdogan, who actually cancels the conquest of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, moving towards the clericalization of Turkish society. In addition, the failure of the foreign policy of Turkey is obvious. Because of the sick ambitions of the president, who imagines himself a “messiah” capable of restoring some modern similarity to the Ottoman Empire, Turkey has quarreled with all the closest states - Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Greece, Israel, Iran and even Russia, which has long been an important economic partner Ankara The deterioration in relations with Russia has already led to billions in losses for the Turkish business. Will its owners, whose pockets become empty because of Erdogan’s actions, really support him? The same can be said about the officer corps of the Turkish armed forces, which have traditionally been considered a stronghold of the secularism of the Turkish state and have kept loyalty to the ideas of Kemal Ataturk. Therefore, it is likely that in the event Turkey got involved in the war in Syria and, especially, the protracted nature of the war, in Ankara, a military coup could simply occur, as has happened more than once in the Turkish stories.