so, who is this guy, erdogan, anyways?

well, like russia, turkey is in theory subject to periodic elections to change power, although the elections in turkey are somewhat of a joke, due as much to a disproportionate amount of power invested in the rural regions as due to endemic state corruption. like putin, erdogan would have probably won every election he's fought in without cheating, but that doesn't mean they didn't cheat, anyways, just to demonstrate they were in charge. i mean, if you can't rig the election, you're not really in power, right?

so, one way or another, he might not be around too much longer. but, the turkey he's going to leave behind no doubt will be.

now, don't misunderstand my conclusion, here. erdogan is a wily character, no doubt. there was a strange tradition in turkey recently, although i suppose it has it's roots in the iconoclast controversy, where the military would allow elections so long as the outcome remained a secular government, and launch a coup if the government was seen to be carrying forward any kind of islamicization. excuses about the first world war aside, what istanbul really feared was influence from mecca, and then from riyadh - it sought to separate the population from a millennia of history as a muslim province, much of it with illegitimate power as a usurped colonial force from the previous era, and instead assert a concept of turkish nationalism. for, it realized that the combined arab countries that it had colonized for so long were now a direct threat to it, should it conform too heavily to the culture in those states. it had to limit the influence of islam to avoid being absorbed by it.

whether these fears remained valid through the rise of arab socialism is questionable, but the tradition remained in place, nonetheless. upon first taking office, there was every reason to assume that the military would effortlessly remove erdogan should he work towards this goal.

but, erdogan did what no turkish leader had done before him - he reformed the military culture by purging officials thought to be capable or interested in carrying out a coup and replacing them with loyalists. so, when the united states agitated for a coup to replace him, it was unable to do so effectively. that arguably makes him the first fully independent turkish leader since ataturk.

a turkish declaration of independence from nato would have dramatic shifts in the global power balance, simply due to the fact that they would immediately become a regional power. i would not expect the turks to immediately end co-operation with nato, but increased co-operation with russia could neutralize significant strategic advantages that nato has in both the black sea and the baltic regions. and, of course, nato would lose a large, modern, capable standing army, even if it doesn't defect anywhere particular immediately.

so, erdogan was wily enough to change the structure of the state in such a way that he could not be removed in a coup. that's in some ways impressive. and, he seems to have the resources to do sneaky things in the regions directly around his borders to advance his country's own interests. the history is complicated, but, rather than fear russia today, he no doubt believes that turkey could eclipse russia in economic union, and ultimately become the dominant partner in a counter-european axis - an error that is hitleresque in potential scope. wily leaders are in truth best met with checks and balances.

but, while erdogan is wily at home, he is not so wily as putin is when it comes to foreign policy. he does not have the grasp on the games being played, does not have the grasp of tactics or strategy and frankly doesn't have access to the same resources, either in intelligence or in academia.

the empire is right to treat him as a dumb barbarian that can be easily manipulated through hot-headed outbursts of emotion.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard,