Archive for June 2015

U.S. Acting as Air Support to Al-Qaeda in Syria Against ISIS

June 9, 2015

U.S. Acting as Air Support to Al-Qaeda in Syria Against ISIS

June 7, 2015 – 7:41 pm

via U.S. Acting as Air Support to Al-Qaeda in Syria Against ISIS | PJ Tatler.

 

U.S. coalition aircraft struck ISIS positions in support of Syrian rebels, including Jabhat al-Nusra, Al-Qaeda’s official Syria affiliate, along with another prominent jihadist group, Ahrar al-Sham. This is a dramatic shift from just a year and a half ago, when Obama administration officials said they would support Islamist groups as long as they weren’t allied with Al-Qaeda.

Agence France Presse reports:

US-led aircraft bombed Islamic State group fighters as they battled rival Syrian rebels, including Al-Qaeda loyalists, for the first time, a monitoring group said on Sunday.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights described the overnight raids in northern Aleppo as an intervention on the side of the rival rebels, which include forces who have been targeted previously by US-led strikes.

“The coalition carried out at least four strikes overnight targeting IS positions in the town of Suran,” the Britain-based Observatory said.

“It’s the first time that the international coalition has supported non-Kurdish opposition forces fighting the Islamic State,” Observatory director Rami Abdel Rahman told AFP.

He said at least eight IS fighters were killed in the strikes and another 20 were injured.

This is also the first time that the U.S. has openly acted as air support for Al-Qaeda.

It needs to be stressed that U.S. airstrikes have targeted Jabhat al-Nusra in just the past month. Now we are effectively their air force. Nusra was designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. in December 2012.

Some may remember the breathless media reports last September that a previously unmentioned terror group operating inside Syria was plotting attacks on the U.S. and other Western targets, described by U.S. officials as the “Khorasan group.” As Al-Aan TV later revealed, the “Khorasan group” was nothing more than an elite group of foreign fighters working as part of Jabhat al-Nusra.

Thus began a series of U.S. strikes targeting al-Nusra:

Sept. 23: An airstrike killed Nusra leader Abu Yousef al-Turki.

Nov. 13: A Nusra base near Idlib was hit killing two.

Nov. 19: A storage facility controlled by Nusra was struck near the Turkish border at Harem.

March 9: A local Nusra headquarters in Bab al-Hawa was targeted close to the Turkish border.

May 20: Two Nusra buildings in Tawama were destroyed, killing 15 fighters.

This dramatic shift in U.S. policy towards al-Nusra has not gone unnoticed:

So what changed?

Leaked Information: Khamenei’s Lies Exposed

June 9, 2015

Leaked Information: Khamenei’s Lies Exposed, Front Page Magazine, June 9, 2015

(?????????????????? — DM)

1.29.13-Ayatollah-Ali-Khamenei-431x350

[W]hat the ayatollah is announcing to the media — that basically the Islamic Republic does not desire to seal a final nuclear deal with the six world powers — is not the truth.  The leaked information (in Persian language) indicates that the Supreme Leader has already instructed the nuclear negotiating team and his advisors to ignore his public statements and seal the final nuclear deal.

******************

Iran’s paramount religious leader can be described as one of the longest-ruling dictators in the Middle East who still enjoys the throne. An ideologue and a Shiite Islamist, he is also a shrewd Machiavellian politician.

Although he attempts to project himself to the Muslim world as a united religious leader who pursues truth, faith, and honesty, his double-faced character can easily be detected in the discrepancies among his statements and policies.

When Khamenei came to power, he lacked the charisma of his predecessor, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. To rule, he continued the major policies of his predecessor, relying on hard power and hardliners to suppress domestic opposition, making different statements to the public than in private, and funding Shiite or non-Shiite extremists groups in the region such as Hezbollah and the Houthis.

In addition, he created the Office of the Supreme Leader, comprised of close advisors and excluding the presidential and other major offices in order to further consolidate his power and prevent the leaking of information. The Islamic Republic’s major domestic and foreign policy decisions are made in the small gilded circle of his office and he is the final decision-maker of the country.

To rule, the ayatollah began wielding power without being held accountable. In order to do so, his government pre-select a handful of candidates to become president. Presidents do not have any actual power, but would be held accountable, blamed for any gaffes such as economic mismanagements and failure in nuclear talks, among other things. This system has so far worked for the ayatollah.

His predecessor and founder of the Islamic Republic came to power by promising people that oil revenues will be distributed among the population and that people do not have to pay for major bills such as electricity or water (in a speech that he gave in Behesht e Zahra). The videos and audios of that speech were removed from public access. Now, one can even be punished or executed by the Islamic Republic if the government finds that particular speech in one’s possession.  Ayatollah Khamenei also continued this dual policy of deceiving the public.

Most recently, with regards to the marathon nuclear negotiations, Mr. Khamenei’s double standards have become more obvious due to leaked information.

In less than a month, the six world powers (known as the P5+1; the United States, China, Germany, United Kingdom, France, and Russia) and the Islamic Republic will be reaching the deadline for their marathon nuclear talks, marking one the lengthiest international negotiations of our generation.

The position and opinion of the Islamic Republic’s paramount leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on the nuclear negotiations and the terms of the final nuclear deal can be characterized as the most crucial factor in determining whether a final deal will be reached by the end of June or not.

Khamenei recently stated, “We will never yield to pressure… We will not accept unreasonable demands… Iran will not give access to its (nuclear) scientists,” he added, “They say we should let them interview our nuclear scientists. This means interrogation… I will not let foreigners talk to our scientists and to interrogate our dear children… who brought us this extensive (nuclear) knowledge… We will not allow the privacy of our nuclear scientists or any other important issue to be violated.”

Nevertheless, what the ayatollah is announcing to the media — that basically the Islamic Republic does not desire to seal a final nuclear deal with the six world powers — is not the truth.  The leaked information (in Persian language) indicates that the Supreme Leader has already instructed the nuclear negotiating team and his advisors to ignore his public statements and seal the final nuclear deal.

The Supreme Leader’s double-standards and the difference in what he states publicly and what he instructs behind the scenes, indicate that he indeed needs the final nuclear deal and he will be more likely willing to allow inspections in order to obtain the deal. Ayatollah Khamenei is cognizant of the fact that the final nuclear deal is geopolitically, economically, and ideologically a win for him. Iran’s nuclear infrastructure will not be dismantled, Iran’s break-time to become a nuclear state will shrink from one year to zero in the next few years, Iran’s economy will be strengthened, and the US will likely ignore Iran’s increasing influence and their proxy wars in the region because of the nuclear deal.

Khamenei is being disingenuous with the public and other nations for several reasons. First of all, The fact that Iran’s negotiating team are continuing with the talks, sitting at the same table with Obama administration’s diplomats, and the fact that there is contradiction between what the Supreme Leader and his advisors stated publicly and behind the scenes indicates that Khamenei is giving a green light to the nuclear team to get a nuclear agreement from the White House, the major player in the talks.  Secondly, by showing that Iran is not in need of such a deal, Khamenei is giving leverage to the Iranian negotiating team to obtain more concessions from the West.

Khamenei attempts to publicly show that he is a strong religious and nationalistic leader who is totally against foreign inspection and monitoring of his country. Finally, he desires to project the picture that he is not desperate for the final nuclear deal in order to get as many concessions as he can from the Obama’s administration. And so far, his tactics and dual policies have worked for him in further strengthening his throne and power.

Soup Sandwich: Obama and His National Security Team Has no Plan to Combat ISIS

June 9, 2015

Soup Sandwich: Obama and His National Security Team Has no Plan to Combat ISIS, ISIS Study Group, June 9, 2015

(This appeared in an e-mail this morning from Foreign Policy Strategy Report:

Wait, where is everybody? Several hundred U.S. soldiers and Marines at al Asad air base in Iraq are standing by, ready to train some Iraq soldiers. But those Iraqi troops have stopped showing up, leaving the Americans all alone at the sprawling base. FP’s John Hudson, Lara Jakes and Paul McLeary report that across Iraq, there seem to be more U.S. trainers than recruits, with only 2,600 Iraqi soldiers currently receiving training from about 3,000 U.S. military personnel.

While the training has dried up, at the G-7 summit in Germany, President Barack Obama maintained that the United States and its allies must speed up the training of the Iraqi security forces….even, presumably, if they aren’t showing up.

— DM)

President Obama did some talking about the Islamic State (IS) after the G-7. Of note is that he admitted to not having an actual strategy in combatting IS and the threat it poses to the free world. In typical fashion he fails to hold himself accountable for his actions and points the finger at everybody but himself. He’s known about the threat of IS for since 2010 when Baghdadi’s guys initiated the “Breaking the Walls Campaign” in Iraq (which the Long War Journal did a great job of covering btw). This quote from our illustrious President was quite telling:

“I don’t want to put the cart before the horse. We don’t have a strategy yet,”

Obama: No ‘complete strategy’ yet on training Iraqis
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/08/politics/obama-abadi-iraq-germany-g7/

And here’s President Obama’s press conference after the G-7 (we recommend fast-forwarding to the 18:00 mark to get to the good stuff):

 

 

The President comes off as well-versed in “saying the right things” when it comes to things like Greece, healthcare or raising minimum wage. However, he starts stumbling the minute someone asks about IS. At around the 19:00 mark of the aforementioned video he said that we’re making “progress” in pushing IS back, but then goes on to say that as we “secure” an area they move into other areas the Iraq Security Forces/Popular Mobilization Committee (ISF/PMC) left. This is the President’s definition of “winning” the fight against IS. We’re sorry if this offends his supporters (not really), but what’s happening on the ground in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen isn’t the US “winning” this fight against IS, Iran or al-Qaida (AQ).

His “solution” to the problem being an acceleration of training up the ISF is smoke and mirrors, really. You can train the ISF up all you want and it won’t make any difference because at its core both the IA and Iraqi Police (IP) have been purged of their most capable commanders and replaced by incompetent officers. The fact that the IA is now 80% Shia further alienates itself from the Sunni Arab and Kurd communities. Even Secretary of Defense Ash Carter stated all the training in the world can’t help the IA due to the cowardice that’s endemic throughout the force. As much as the Iranian regime denied this and pushed back against Carter’s assessment, IRGC-Qods Force commander GEN Suleimani shares many his beliefs in the poor state of the IA – and that’s a big reason why Suleimani has been influencing the establishment of the Iraqi National Guard by working to ensure that the ranks are filled with Shia militia personnel. Oh, and btw, a lot of those “fresh troops” the President was referring to are already being put through the meat grinder in places like Bayji and Ramadi – and the results aren’t pretty.

Iranian Regime, GOI Take Issue With US SECDEF’s Assessment that IA are Cowards
http://isisstudygroup.com/?p=6707

ash-carter-300x169

SECDEF Ash Carter is the only guy in the Obama administration who seems to “get it” – too bad the powers that be forced him to walk back his accurate assessment on the cowardice seen throughout the IA
Source: Wall Street Journal

Again, none of this is surprising to our readers who’ve been with us since the beginning of our site. President Obama had a quasi-strategy of sorts that we covered in last summer’s “Obama’s ISIS Strategy: Failed Before it Started” that was followed up by “Another Reason Obama’s ISIS Strategy Has Already Failed.” To the uninitiated, the Obama strategy called for trainers and the arming of so-called “moderates” in Syria while supporting an Iraqi Army (IA) that has taken on sectarian characteristics. He’s banking on doing the bare minimum to basically run out the clock so that he can say he “didn’t deploy combat troops to Iraq.” In other words, he has a plan alrighHe’s been very untruthful because he’s dramatically increased the US military footprint in Iraq since last summer. Their situation is also much more dangerous now than it ever was during the OIF-era thanks to the restrictive ROE he slapped our brethren with prior to authorizing their deployment. Additionally, his term “no boots on the ground” is misleading because those “advisors/trainers” we’ve deployed are all ground troops – many of which are located in bases currently under siege such as al-Asad Airbase or Habbaniyah. If these aren’t American “combat troops,” then what are they, aid workers? Bystanders? The Obama administration may give the “trainer” label on our guys being deployed to Iraq, but the inconvenient truth of the matter is that they all have either “US ARMY” or “US MARINES” tags on their uniforms.

Obama’s ISIS Strategy: Failed Before it Started
http://isisstudygroup.com/?p=1730

Another Reason Obama’s ISIS Strategy Has Already Failed
http://isisstudygroup.com/?p=1757

US-Backed Syrian Group Disbands – But Were They Ever Truly “Moderate” to Begin With?
http://isisstudygroup.com/?p=5286

It was painful to watch President Obama – the alleged “leader” of the free world – have a hard time answering some pretty easy questions asked about US policy to combat IS. President Obama and his national security team had more than a few years to develop a strategy – but didn’t. Why is that? Its because President Obama doesn’t want his domestic agenda to get sidetracked by things like the foreign-policy arena. He just points the finger at everybody else saying “its their fault” while not formulating any real solution. He’s on his 7th year in office and still blames his predecessor for everything. Coming from military backgrounds ourselves, we were taught that a leader doesn’t make excuses. He makes things happen. A leader doesn’t keep rolling with a plan if it clearly isn’t working. A leader will adjust accordingly and inspire his subordinates to press on. That’s what a leader does. We’re not seeing that from this President. As we’ve stated earlier in this article, he’s just trying to “run out the clock” of his second term so that this will become the “next guy’s problem.” Unfortunately for him, it doesn’t work that way. His inaction and arrogance has directly led to the rise of IS, and his current policies have allowed the terror organization to expand into other locales such as Yemen, Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and the North Caucasus region. History won’t look so kindly on him as the current American media. The public will see this manifest itself in the next administration, when our country gets attacked on our home soil – again. Of course there’s the hope that the American people will finally realize this is what a “hope and change” foreign policy is all about before its too late. But we doubt it.

Screen-Shot-2015-06-08-at-2.21.59-PM-300x173

Oh yeah, President Obama knew PM Abadi was next to him and acted as if he wasn’t there – kinda like his approach to foreign policy
Source: CBS News

If you want additional details on the lead up to the rise of IS, then check out the history lesson we put together for President Obama’s counterpart Rand Paul, who is just as naive on foreign policy as he is:

Rand Paul Needs a History Lesson..
http://isisstudygroup.com/?p=6782

Links to Other Related Articles:

Defeating The Islamic State
http://isisstudygroup.com/?p=1708

Egypt Atmospherics
http://isisstudygroup.com/?p=614

War Weary Americans OK With Israeli Attack on Iran

June 9, 2015

Americans On Iran: Continue Present Negotiations But Okay For Israel To Bomb Facilities

By John Zogby 6/07/2015 @ 8:01PM Via Forbes


Some say we are at the final stage. Photo Credit: Getty

(With over 50,000 wounded soldiers to nurture here at home, it’s no wonder Americans want to step back.  Please support your favorite wounded warrior charity with a generous donation for those who gave so much more.   – LS)

Public opinion on the Iran nuclear deal provides mixed signals for the President and Congress, according to a new Zogby Analytics poll. On the deal itself, the poll asked 909 likely voters nationwide which of the statements represented their views more:

Continue present negotiations between the major powers and Iran that limits nuclear development by the United Nations over ten years and allow for the frequent inspections by the United Nations on exchanges for a gradual lifting of many sanctions currently in place.

OR

Stop the present negotiations and tighten the sanctions against Iran until Iran is ready to end all nuclear development, even if it means the US losing support of countries like France, Germany, and Britain.

Overall the more peaceful and diplomatic approach wins by ten points 42% to 32% for the more aggressive option, with 23% not sure. It is the demographics that are fascinating, however. Men favor the diplomatic option 48% to 36% with only 11% not sure. While the gap between the options is narrower among women (36% to continue negotiations, 28% for ending them), 33% are not sure. Support for diplomacy is reduced with age. Among 18-29 year olds, support for diplomacy is 48%-27%, but 43%-29% among 30-49 year olds, 39%-35% among 50-64 year olds, and tied at 37% among those over 65. Democrats support diplomacy and negotiations 56%-17% as do independents 40%-31%, while Republican favor a more aggressive policy 49% to 28% for continued negotiations.

But that is among a war-weary American public because on the other hand, voters do not mind the US encouraging Israel doing the dirty work. We then asked the following question:

Do you mainly support or oppose the US allowing Israel striking against Iranian nuclear sites?

By a factor of 2 to 1 American voters support the allowing Israel to strike – 45% to 23%, with 32% not sure. Support is stronger among men (56%-25%) than women (36% -21%). Age groups are supportive – 44%-30% among 18-29 year olds, 42%-21% among 30-49 year olds, 49%-20% among 50-64 year olds, and 50%-22% among those over 65. Democrats support allowing Israel to strike (36%-28%), as do independents (42%-25%). But Republicans are in favor 4 to 1 – 59% to 15%.

What should we make of this? First that Americans support active diplomacy and engagement with both Iran and the major powers. They are war weary and they will take a deal to keep the US out of harm’s way. But second, if there is to be a quicker military solution to end this problem, then let Israel do it. Few Americans will cry if Iran’s nuclear acquisition is halted but Americans cannot stomach another long term military engagement.

Palestinians: US court ruling on Jerusalem passports sends a message to Israeli ‘occupier’

June 9, 2015

Palestinians: US court ruling on Jerusalem passports sends a message to Israeli ‘occupier’ – Arab-Israeli Conflict – Jerusalem Post.

PA officials hail Supreme Court decision to strike down law listing “Israel” as the place of birth of American citizens born in Jerusalem.

 

Palestinian officials on Tuesday welcomed the US Supreme Court decision to strike down a law that allowed for the listing of “Israel” as the place of birth on passports belonging to American citizens born in Jerusalem.

Palestinian Authority chief negotiator Saeb Erekat lauded Monday’s ruling, saying it will send a message to the Israeli government that “Jerusalem is an occupied territory.”

The court’s decision served as a major blow to more than a decade of efforts to bolster Jerusalem’s status under American law as an undisputed part of Israel.

Erekat added that the top American court’s ruling highlighted “that the Israeli decision to annex Jerusalem to be settlements, to dictate the results of negotiations before they begin by demolishing homes, by expelling Palestinians, fait accompli policies, is not going to lead anywhere.”

“It’s a total violation of international law,” he added.

Meanwhile, Nabil Abu Rdaineh, spokesman for PA President Mahmoud Abbas, hailed the “important decision” that he said runs in accordance with UN resolutions.

“This is a clear message that Israel occupies east Jerusalem as well as the West Bank and Gaza Strip,” he charged.

The 6-3 ruling was a victory for the administration of US President Barack Obama, which said the law unlawfully encroached on the president’s power to set foreign policy and would, if enforced, undermine the US government’s claim to be a neutral peacemaker in the Middle East.

Israel had no formal response to the decision, with Foreign Ministry spokesman Emmanuel Nahshon saying that Israel does not relate in the media to US court decisions.

However, Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat responded by saying, “Just as Washington is the capital of the US, London is the capital of England, and Paris is the capital of France, Jerusalem was and will always be the capital of Israel – but more than that, it’s the heart and soul of the Jewish nation.”

Barkat called on Obama to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital immediately, especially in light of the global boycotting faced by the country.

Yonah Jeremy Bob contributed to this report.

Super Power Poker – Live From Iran

June 9, 2015

Super Power Poker – Live From Iran, Clarion Project via You Tube, June 9, 2015

The stakes are the highest they’ve ever been. Nuclear Iran. The US, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Israel play for the security of the world. This is the ultimate hold’em game. Who holds the aces, who will go all in, who is bluffing and who has a tell that will leave them with nothing but a mushroom cloud. No nukes for Iran.

 

Syria Asks IAEA for Help Converting Nuclear Reactor

June 8, 2015

Syria Asks IAEA for Help Converting Nuclear Reactor, Jewish Press, Hana Levi JulianJune 8, 2015

The border police run an exercise, while they train for chemical , biological or atomic. warfare. Feb 14 2011.  Photo by Nati Shohat/Flash90. *** Local Caption *** îâá éøåùìéí  àéîåï àáë çìéôåú îéâåï àéîåï úéøâåì úøâéì Israeli’s Border Police training for chemical, biological, and nuclear attacks. Photo Credit: Nati Shohat / Flash 90

IAEA head Yukiya Amano told reporters Monday that Syria has told the agency it would ship the higher-grade uranium abroad.

However, it is not clear where Syria would ship the higher-grade uranium — Iran is Syria’s closest ally – and neither is it clear what grade its uranium currently is.

**********************

The regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has asked the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency for help with a nuclear reactor near Damascus, international media agencies reported Tuesday.

The UN agency is studying the Syrian request to help convert the reactor, which currently runs on highly-enriched uranium, into one that uses lower grade nuclear fuel.

IAEA head Yukiya Amano told reporters Monday that Syria has told the agency it would ship the higher-grade uranium abroad.

However, it is not clear where Syria would ship the higher-grade uranium — Iran is Syria’s closest ally – and neither is it clear what grade its uranium currently is.

Low enriched uranium is defined as that which is enriched to less than five percent of fissile purity. Weapons quality uranium is enriched above 20 percent but that which is used to fuel an atomic bomb is enriched to 90 percent.

Amano said the IAEA is studying the request and has yet to make a decision.

ISIS Reaches New Levels of Intolerance by Declaring War on Pigeons

June 8, 2015

Syria: Isis Executes 3 Pigeons on ‘Spying’ Charges

By Johnlee Varghese June 8, 2015 13:29 IST Via International Business Times

A not-so-kosher pigeon mock-up from WWII at the ‘Top Secret’ Spy Museum in Oberhausen, Germany. (Reuters)

(Folks, you just can’t make this stuff up! Just when you thought radical islam couldn’t be more intolerant.  Next up, exploding pigeons. – LS)

The Islamic State (Isis) militants in Syria have reportedly executed three pigeons that it had arrested on charges of spying.

The UK-based Express reported that the pigeons belonged to an anti-Isis group. The 5 June report noted that the executions were carried out recently.

The development has come at a time, when Isis has issued a dictate, banning pigeon breeding claiming the sight of the birds’ genitals as they fly overhead is sinful according to Islam.

The ban order issued by a radical Isis cleric in Dier ez Zour in Syria gave all local breeders one week’s time to stop, else face public flogging.

“All those who keep pigeons above the roofs of their houses must stop doing this entirely within a week of the date of the issuing of this statement,” Daily Mail reports, citing the Isis document.

“Whosoever violates it will be subject to consequences of reprimand including a financial fine, imprisonment and flogging,” the notice added.

This is, however, not the first time that Isis has come down on pigeon breeders.

In January, NBC News had reported that 15 boys and young men were arrested in the eastern province of Diyala, Iraq, by the jihadist group. Three of those arrested were executed for taking up the “un-Islamic” pastime, while the remaining children and young men were forced to join the Islamic State.

The father of one arrested 21-year-old, Abu Abdullah, told NBC News: “My son was standing beside me. I asked them why, and they said, ‘He is not following the real Islam, he must be punished for being a pigeon breeder. This habit is taking him away from worshipping Allah.” That was the last time the 52-year-old farmer saw his son.

Meanwhile, the Isis fighters put the pigeons in bags and burned them.

A pigeon flies by a mosque in Egypt. [Representation Pic]
A pigeon flies by a mosque in Egypt. [Representation Pic]Reuters File

Spy Pigeon Arrested in India

In May, the Indian Police had arrested a “spy pigeon”, who might have been carrying a secret message from Pakistan.

The bird was found by locals in the village of Manwal, near the India-Pakistan border in Punjab. The Times of India reported that the bird had strange markings on its feathers.

Later, the police officers discovered a message written in Urdu and a series of numbers.

Pathankot’s senior superintendent of police Rakesh Kaushal told Wall Street Journal India that police heard of instances of pigeons flying “with cameras” to spy on the ground.

Turkey: “An End to an Era of Oppression”

June 8, 2015

Turkey: “An End to an Era of Oppression,” The Gatestone InstituteBurak Bekdil, June 8, 2015

  • “We, through democratic means, have brought an end to an era of oppression.” — Kemal Kilicdaroglu, leader of the main opposition, Republican People’s Party (CHP).
  • Erdogan is now the lonely sultan in his $615 million, 1150-room presidential palace. For the first time since 2002, the opposition has more seats in the parliament than the AKP.

For the first time since his Islamist party won its first election victory in 2002, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was nowhere to be seen on the night of June 7. He did not make a victory speech. He did not, in fact, make any speech.

Not only failing to win the two-thirds majority they desired to change the constitution, the AKP lost its parliamentary majority and the ability to form a single-party government. It won 40.8% of the national vote and 258 seats, 19 short of the simple majority requirement of 276. Erdogan is now the lonely sultan at his $615 million, 1150-room presidential palace. For the first time since 2002, the opposition has more seats in parliament than the AKP: 292 seats to 258.

“The debate over presidency, over dictatorship in Turkey is now over,” said a cheerful Selahattin Demirtas after the preliminary poll results. Demirtas, a Kurdish politician whose Peoples’ Democracy Party [HDP] entered parliament as a party for the first time, apparently with support from secular, leftist and marginal Turks, is the charismatic man who destroyed Erdogan’s dreams of an elected sultanate. Echoing a similar view, the social democrat, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, leader of the main opposition Republican People’s Party [CHP], commented on the early results in plain language: “We, through democratic means, have brought an end to an era of oppression.”

What lies ahead is less clear. Theoretically, the AKP can sign a coalition deal with the third biggest party, the right-wing Nationalist Movement Party [MHP], although during the campaign, MHP leader Devlet Bahceli slammed Erdogan harshly for the embarrassing corruption allegations against the president. At the same time, a CHP-MHP-HDP coalition is unlikely, as it must bring together the otherwise arch-enemies MHP and HDP.

1098Turkey’s Nationalist Movement Party leader Devlet Bahceli addresses supporters after the release of preliminary election results, June 7, 2015. (Image source: MHP video screenshot)

The AKP management may be planning for snap, or early, polls but there are hardly any rational reasons for it except to risk another ballot box defeat. Parliament may try a minority government, supported by one of the parties from outside government benches, but this can only create a temporary government.

Two outcomes, however, look almost certain: 1) The AKP is in an undeniable decline; the voters have forced it into compromise politics rather than permitting it to run a one-man show, with in-house bickering even more likely than peace, and new conservative Muslims challenging the incumbent leadership. 2) Erdogan’s ambitions for a too-powerful, too-authoritarian, Islamist executive presidency, “a la sultan,” will have to go into the political wasteland at least in the years ahead.

The AKP appeared polled in first place on June 7. But that day may mark the beginning of the end for it. How ironic; the AKP came to power with 34.4% of the national vote in 2002, winning 66% of the seats in parliament. Nearly 13 years later, thanks to the undemocratic features of an electoral law it has fiercely defended, it won 40.8% of the vote and only 47% of the seats in parliament, blocking it from even forming a simple majority.

Cartoon of the day

June 8, 2015

H/t joopklepzeiker

Obama Palestinian