Asharq Al-Awsat Exclusive - Meral Aksener: Turkey’s Iron Lady Threatening Erdogan’s Control

Turkey's 'Iron Lady' Meral Aksener. (AFP)
Turkey's 'Iron Lady' Meral Aksener. (AFP)
TT

Asharq Al-Awsat Exclusive - Meral Aksener: Turkey’s Iron Lady Threatening Erdogan’s Control

Turkey's 'Iron Lady' Meral Aksener. (AFP)
Turkey's 'Iron Lady' Meral Aksener. (AFP)

Veteran Turkish politician Meral Aksener has stolen the spotlight as the country gears up for the 2019 presidential elections. Dubbed the Iron Lady, after former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, Aksener rose to prominence in 2016 after her dispute with Devlet Bahceli of the Nationalist Movement Party. Observers also took noted of the “she-wolf” when she openly opposed President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s referendum to transform Turkey into a presidential system.

Born to Greek immigrants in Izmet northwest of Istanbul in 1956, Aksener pursued a degree in History at Istanbul University. She then earned a PhD in the same field from Marmara University, Erdogan’s alma mater.

She pursued a career in academics before deciding in 1994 to try her hand at politics. She ran for parliament in 1995 and won a seat in one of the Istanbul provinces, representing the conservative True Path Party. Under the term of late Prime Minister Necmettin Erbakan, Aksener was appointed Interior Minister in 1996 and 1997, making her the first woman in her country to assume this position.

During her stint in office, she displayed a noticeable hard line in confronting the banned Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), as well as the military command that had enjoyed great political power in Turkey. She openly declared her opposition to military intervention in politics, which eventually cost her position as minister when the army forced the government out of office in the “white” or “postmodern” coup of 1997.

Aksener was reelected to parliament in 1999, gaining prominence among right-wing parties. She eventually joined Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party, which he established with former President Abdullah Gul and others. She however quit after four months when she realized that the party offered nothing new in its proposals and therefore did not differ from any of the previous Islamic parties in the country.

In 2007, Aksener joined Bahceli’s Nationalist Movement Party because it suited her nationalist ideals. She remained in the party until her fallout with Bahceli in the aftermath of the failed July 2016 coup against the government. Bahceli chose to follow Erdogan’s lead and support Turkey’s transformation into a presidential system, putting him at odds with Aksener.

She consequently announced her defection from the party, along with a number of other members, launching a campaign against Erdogan’s referendum on amending the constitution to introduce the presidential system.

Her rift with Bahceli deepened when she attempted in 2016 to hold a general assembly for the Nationalist Movement Party in order to change its leadership. The meeting was set to be held at an Ankara hotel, but police cordoned off the area, barring the gatherers from meeting. This was interpreted at the time as a move by Erdogan to protect his new “ally” Bahceli.

Aksener however seized the opportunity and played the development in her favor when she climbed up on one of the buses that was being used for the meeting and delivered a speech to her supporters outside the hotel. Her speech marked the beginning a new phase of her political career and paved the way for her establishment on October 25 of the Good Party. She wanted from this party to be an actual expression of the right-wing opposition and not just a passive voice that goes with all of Erdogan’s stances and actions. Her party included four lawmakers of the Nationalist Movement Party and a lawmaker from the Republican People's Party, the country’s largest opposition party.

The Good Party held its first general conference at Istanbul’s Nazım Hikmet Cultural Center, which is affiliated with the Republican People's Party, after hotels and assembly halls in Ankara refused to host the meeting because they feared appearing as advocates of Aksener’s party.

Members of the audience chanted during the conference “Miral for prime minister” in what was seen as support from among her party for her to run for president in 2019. Observers saw the occasion as a challenge by Aksener to Erdogan, saying that she could be a threat to the current president because they both share the same popular base of conservatives and nationalists.

Confirming her ability to breach Erdogan’s popular base, Aksener embarked on various campaigns throughout Turkey in what was interpreted as an attempt to garner supporters from not only right-wing groups, but other segments as well. In her speech during the declaration of the Good Party, she cited many former Turkish leaders starting with founder of the Turkish republic, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, secular former PM Bülent Ecevit and Islamist Erbakan to appeal to as many voters as possible.

She stressed during her speech that “Turkey and the Turkish people had grown tired. The state has been eaten up and there can be no solution but changing all of the political environment.” Aksener underlined the importance of the rule of law, protecting the institutions and respecting legal proceedings. She attacked Erdogan, saying that he only views the world in black and white.

“I on the other hand do not see the law as being either right or wrong. I believe in the law and its sovereignty,” she declared.

She also appealed to female voters by pointing out that Erdogan sought to “keep us at home.”

Aksener’s hardline right-wing roots appear to be the main negative factors that can limit her popularity among Kurdish and minority voters. She herself had acknowledged this, remarking that her party is not based on ethnic ground, but the “national identity.”

She had previously rejected peace negotiations past governments had carried out with the PKK, saying that the law gave enough guarantees to ensure the rights and needs of minorities in Turkey. She however did oppose the arrest of MPs from the pro-Kurdish Peoples' Democratic Party, noting that it was an attempt by Erdogan to intimidate the Kurds ahead of the presidential referendum. The government had cracked down on the party members in wake of the 2016 failed coup.

Aksener herself was not spared intimidation and she came in 2016 under a fierce pro-government campaign that tackled her personal life after she made moves to oust Bahceli from the presidency of the Nationalist Movement Party.

“The coordinated campaign that has been ongoing since April 2016 is aimed at forcing me to back down, but they have failed,” she declared.

At any rate, observers see Aksener as an attractive candidate to many Turkish voters because she is not affiliated to Islamic political groups, even though she often describes herself as a “Muslim who respects the religion.” This puts her at odds with the leftist secular opposition, which Erdogan had succeeded in stifling. She is also seen as an acceptable option for the conservatives, who do not want to go so far in their opposition as to vote for the left. Secularists may meanwhile view her as an acceptable and less dangerous substitute to Erdogan. Moreover, she will appeal to female voters, whose rights she has advocated.



Challenges of the Gaza Humanitarian Aid Pier Offer Lessons for the US Army

A truck carries humanitarian aid across Trident Pier, a temporary pier to deliver aid, off the Gaza Strip, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian group Hamas, near the Gaza coast, May 19, 2024. US Army Central/Handout via REUTERS
A truck carries humanitarian aid across Trident Pier, a temporary pier to deliver aid, off the Gaza Strip, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian group Hamas, near the Gaza coast, May 19, 2024. US Army Central/Handout via REUTERS
TT

Challenges of the Gaza Humanitarian Aid Pier Offer Lessons for the US Army

A truck carries humanitarian aid across Trident Pier, a temporary pier to deliver aid, off the Gaza Strip, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian group Hamas, near the Gaza coast, May 19, 2024. US Army Central/Handout via REUTERS
A truck carries humanitarian aid across Trident Pier, a temporary pier to deliver aid, off the Gaza Strip, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian group Hamas, near the Gaza coast, May 19, 2024. US Army Central/Handout via REUTERS

It was their most challenging mission.
US Army soldiers in the 7th Transportation Brigade had previously set up a pier during training and in exercises overseas but never had dealt with the wild combination of turbulent weather, security threats and sweeping personnel restrictions that surrounded the Gaza humanitarian aid project.
Designed as a temporary solution to get badly needed food and supplies to desperate Palestinians, the so-called Joint Logistics Over-the-Shore system, or JLOTS, faced a series of setbacks over the spring and summer. It managed to send more than 20 million tons of aid ashore for people in Gaza facing famine during the Israel-Hamas war.
Service members struggled with what Col. Sam Miller, who was commander during the project, called the biggest “organizational leadership challenge” he had ever experienced.
Speaking to The Associated Press after much of the unit returned home, Miller said the Army learned a number of lessons during the four-month mission. It began when President Joe Biden announced in his State of the Union speech in March that the pier would be built and lasted through July 17, when the Pentagon formally declared that the mission was over and the pier was being permanently dismantled.
The Army is reviewing the $230 million pier operation and what it learned from the experience. One of the takeaways, according to a senior Army official, is that the unit needs to train under more challenging conditions to be better prepared for bad weather and other security issues it faced. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because assessments of the pier project have not been publicly released.
In a report released this week, the inspector general for the US Agency for International Development said Biden ordered the pier's construction even as USAID staffers expressed concerns that it would be difficult and undercut a push to persuade Israel to open “more efficient” land crossings to get food into Gaza.
The Defense Department said the pier “achieved its goal of providing an additive means of delivering high volumes of humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza to help address the acute humanitarian crisis.” The US military knew from the outset “there would be challenges as part of this in this complex emergency,” the statement added.
The Biden administration had set a goal of the US sea route and pier providing food to feed 1.5 million people for 90 days. It fell short, bringing in enough to feed about 450,000 people for a month before shutting down, the USAID inspector general's report said.
The Defense Department’s watchdog also is doing an evaluation of the project.
Beefing up training Army soldiers often must conduct their exercises under difficult conditions designed to replicate war. Learning from the Gaza project — which was the first time the Army set up a pier in actual combat conditions — leaders say they need to find ways to make the training even more challenging.
One of the biggest difficulties of the Gaza pier mission was that no US troops could step ashore — a requirement set by Biden. Instead, US service members were scattered across a floating city of more than 20 ships and platforms miles offshore that had to have food, water, beds, medical care and communications.
Every day, said Miller, there were as many as 1,000 trips that troops and other personnel made from ship to boat to pier to port and back.
“We were moving personnel around the sea and up to the Trident pier on a constant basis,” Miller said. “And every day, there was probably about a thousand movements taking place, which is quite challenging, especially when you have sea conditions that you have to manage.”
Military leaders, he said, had to plan three or four days ahead to ensure they had everything they needed because the trip from the pier to their “safe haven” at Israel's port of Ashdod was about 30 nautical miles.
The trip over and back could take up to 12 hours, in part because the Army had to sail about 5 miles out to sea between Ashdod and the pier to stay a safe distance from shore as they passed Gaza City, Miller said.
Normally, Miller said, when the Army establishes a pier, the unit sets up a command onshore, making it much easier to store and access supplies and equipment or gather troops to lay out orders for the day.
Communication difficulties While his command headquarters was on the US military ship Roy P. Benavidez, Miller said he was constantly moving with his key aides to the various ships and the pier.
“I slept and ate on every platform out there,” he said.
The US Army official concurred that a lot of unexpected logistical issues came up that a pier operation may not usually include.
Because the ships had to use the Ashdod port and a number of civilian workers under terms of the mission, contracts had to be negotiated and written. Agreements had to be worked out so vessels could dock, and workers needed to be hired for tasks that troops couldn't do, including moving aid onto the shore.
Communications were a struggle.
“Some of our systems on the watercraft can be somewhat slower with bandwidth, and you’re not able to get up to the classified level,” Miller said.
He said he used a huge spreadsheet to keep track of all the ships and floating platforms, hundreds of personnel and the movement of millions of tons of aid from Cyprus to the Gaza shore.
When bad weather broke the pier apart, they had to set up ways to get the pieces moved to Ashdod and repaired. Over time, he said, they were able to hire more tugs to help move sections of the pier more quickly.
Some of the pier's biggest problems — including the initial reluctance of aid agencies to distribute supplies throughout Gaza and later safety concerns from the violence — may not apply in other operations where troops may be quickly setting up a pier to get military forces ashore for an assault or disaster response.
“There’s tons of training value and experience that every one of the soldiers, sailors and others got out of this,” Miller said. "There’s going to be other places in the world that may have similar things, but they won’t be as tough as the things that we just went through.”
When the time comes, he said, “we’re going to be much better at doing this type of thing.”
One bit of information could have given the military a better heads-up about the heavy seas that would routinely hammer the pier. Turns out, said the Army official, there was a Gaza surf club, and its headquarters was near where they built the pier.
That "may be an indicator that the waves there were big,” the official said.