Terrorist Timing in Turkey and Sri Lanka

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-turkey-security/erdogan-says-car-explosion-in-turkey-kills-three-may-be-terrorism-related-idUKKCN1U014D

After weeks of tension the Erdogan government is going ahead and taking delivery of the Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile system. NATO and in particular the United States don't want to see this happen.

This will begin to detach Turkey from the NATO command structure and throw up barriers in terms of its larger strategies and even battlefield tactics.

Though the US denies it, Washington has been trying to remove Erdogan since the beginning of his tenure, culminating in the 2016 attempted coup. Especially after the attempt to overthrow his government and assassinate him, Erdogan has little time for Washington and increasingly Ankara finds itself on opposite sides in the various proxy wars unleashed by the United States, especially since 2011. Erdogan had opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq but did little apart from refusing logistical support. But in Syria and Libya, the policies and goals of the AKP are at odds with those of Washington.

Though there's a deep historical enmity, Ankara and Moscow have begun to find common cause with regard to certain economic and foreign policy issues and Erdogan has been creeping toward Putin's sphere of influence.

For what it's worth Erdogan would carve out his own niche. His Neo-Ottomanism while mostly dead is still an ideology he would like to pursue. But given the increasing polarity which seems to spreading across Eurasia... such a vision seems in doubt.

But the S-400 purchase could be said (at least in part) to represent an application of that thinking though it is completely unacceptable to NATO.

While at this point there are no conclusions to be drawn it is worth noting that the timing of terrorist attacks is often suspicious even convenient. While I heartily reject the theories of some conspiracists that ISIS and al Qaeda commanders take direct orders from Langley and its affiliates, there are nevertheless rather suspicious ties and connections between some Salafi affiliated individuals and Western intelligence agencies. ISIS and the whole Syria episode have been in particular riddled with obscured deeds, lies and a lot of smoke and mirrors.

According to my way of thinking I would expect Turkey to suffer terrorist attacks at this time. The United States will want to continue promoting instability within the country. The US is not openly backing the Kurds but I suspect they're either secretly backing them (within Turkey) or preparing to. It's a little tricky as the PKK was reckoned a terrorist group for decades and the Turkish state was permitted to ethnically cleanse large districts of Kurdistan and murder them by the thousands. The Kurds have plenty of blood on their hands too. Despite the fact that the US has long condemned Kurdish militants in Turkey, the United States is openly supporting PKK affiliates in both Turkey and Northern Iraq. For some of the networks to 'migrate' into Turkey isn't too hard to imagine. Washington opposed the Kurds in Turkey as long as the regime in Ankara was closely wed to NATO. Under Erdogan and especially Erdogan post the S-400 missile deal... that's a different story.

There was a moment of hope when Erdogan first took power. The same was true of Bashar al-Asad. The West blames them for turning away from liberal policies and peace initiatives and embracing violent repression. They have indeed turned away from a Liberal course but they did so for a reason. The West was angling to topple them, to use those very liberties as a means of infiltration and subversion. Erdogan who had at first embraced the Kurds under the banner of Islam (as opposed to Turkishness) turned away from them and the tensions continued to grow as the US openly supported PKK affiliates in Syria and Northern Iraq in its campaigns against both Assad and then subsequently ISIS.

If the past is precedent, the US will use all its tools to promote instability in Turkey. They still want Erdogan gone... and now more than ever. And yet he has waged his own war and clamped down on the social mechanisms of Kemalism and Washington's connections and oversight of these tools.

It may get ugly. Whether the terrorists are mercenaries for hire, or ideologues who are misled by Western instigated agents provocateurs, or ideologues who will 'do a job' to help further their overall movement... these are questions that are rarely answered as the evidence is suppressed or destroyed and those involved are silenced.

Sri Lanka was also shocked by a brutal terrorist attack on Easter Sunday in 2019. This came within the context of the port controversy and the political tug-of-war that's been taking place in their country since Sirisena came to power in 2015. The country is caught between the United States (with India) and China.

Terrorist attacks empower the state and promote militarism and martial crackdowns on civil liberties. In the case of Sri Lanka the attacks were coupled with leaked information regarding failures on the part of the SIS and the other intelligence agencies.

The former president and China ally Mahinda Rajapaksa made much of the failures of the intelligence agencies which has led many to wonder just how to interpret these events. While the attacks could have bolstered the Sirisena government, the Rajapaksa narrative significantly weakens it.

At this point it's not clear what the fallout will be but it is certain that multiple factions are angling for control.

Were the attacks a coincidence? Again, I am unwilling to embrace some of the popular conspiratorial theories regarding these Salafi groups... and yet there are suggestions that they (at least in part and from time to time) coordinate with actors outside their movement.

The timing of these events could be humanly speaking coincidental and the evidence is at best circumstantial, a matter of cui bono. And yet sometimes the seemingly inconclusive evidence when incorporated within a larger framework of coherence becomes rather compelling or is at the very least worthy of serious consideration. The conclusions are necessarily nebulous but that doesn't mean there isn't truth to be found in them.