The Western media doubling down on its anti-Erdoğan campaign in the home stretch is hardly surprising. In addition to The Economist, which went well beyond endorsing the opposition candidate in Türkiye’s presidential race, publications like Foreign Policy, Le Point, L’Express, Der Spiegel and The Washington Post have been notably involved in the Turkish elections.

With Türkiye entering the final week of the 2023 election campaign, rhetorical battles have notably escalated. It would be wrong to reduce that development to peak polarization because what observers have called this year’s most important election remains critically important for the country’s future.

In the aftermath of the twin quakes in Türkiye, we see that some states are trying to help beyond their capacities, while others are a little below par

Ahead of the May 2023 elections in Türkiye, the Western media launched a campaign to “unite the opposition to get rid of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.” In recent months, anti-Turkish and anti-Erdoğan articles have appeared more and more frequently in United States and European publications.

Western media’s opposition to President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is possibly the world’s worst kept secret. Western commentators immediately jump to conclusions about the supposedly expansionist goals of Erdoğan’s Turkey whenever Ankara launches a fresh foreign policy initiative. Experts in Washington, Paris, Athens, Abu Dhabi and elsewhere make the same arguments in an attempt to contain Turkey’s influence to an unbearable extent. At the heart of those comments lies the claim that the Turkish president has isolated his country in the international arena, which will lead the nation to a disaster and that the Turkish people deserve better.

Since the outbreak of the Syrian civil war in 2011, Turkey has faced the gravest problems in the region regarding security, economics and refugees. That picture has not changed. At every turn, a new wave of issues knocks on Turkey’s door. That Europe and the U.S. have not taken initiatives required for a political transition in Syria is a major factor in this. Another leading cause is Russia’s desire to solve the crisis through military force. From the outset, Russia has deployed a course of destruction called the 'Grozny model." It is a policy consisting of three stages: besiege, destroy and rule. Russia has implemented this formula in many areas, particularly in Aleppo, which has wreaked extensive destruction and killed thousands of civilians.

The 'Deal of the Century' announced by U.S. President Donald Trump on Jan. 29 has been handled by the global media in a way that can be considered novel. That discourse, the like of which we have seldom ever encountered, was reflected both in written content and in photos. Images provided by global news agencies like Reuters and AP revealed content that can be viewed as "critical of Israel." Various mainstream media organizations ranging from The Guardian, Washington Post and BBC to The New York Times have published pieces and opinions criticizing the "Deal of the Century."

PKK's existence in Turkey, Syria and northern Iraq is the number one national security problem for Turkey. This is the Turkish red line that Western media organs have been refusing to see

The PKK/YPG threat in the region is far from over, but the group's nationalist project — the so-called 'cantons' — are now dead in the water

Although their practices are already beyond the pale in terms of journalistic ethics, both the U.S. and the European media are apparently seeking to set a new record with regard to their old prejudices

On Monday evening, U.S. President Donald Trump made a highly anticipated phone call to inform Turkey that U.S. troops would leave northeastern Syria, where the Turkish military was going to launch an incursion..

For the moment, it seems that there is no way to wake the European states and their media outlets up to the naked truth that the humanitarian crisis in Syria is not over and that refugees, fearing for their lives, are still fleeing the country in droves

The CHP and the Good Party (İP) have a responsibility to help the HDP distance itself from terrorism – as opposed to blaming the government and encouraging the HDP to stick to its guns

There is a growing tendency among Western media outlets; they seek to answer what the West must do, given President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan will remain in power for another four years. Believing that the risk of "losing Turkey" is higher than before, they advocate the "carrot and stick" approach. Let me say at the outset that this is a fruitless endeavor.

Turkey's foreign policy at the moment is full of hot topics, including the S-400 air defense system agreement, the country's removal from the F-35 fighter jet program, potential U.S. sanctions, the Eastern Mediterranean and northern Syria. How those issues are resolved could determine the next four years of Turkish policy.

The S-400 air defense system's delivery to Turkey has sparked debate among Western governments on Ankara's future treatment. The question at hand goes beyond concerns about the fate of Turkey-U.S. relations. This is much bigger than one key NATO ally removing another key ally from the joint F-35 fighter jet program.

The Pentagon removed Turkey from the F-35 fighter jet program, despite U.S. President Donald Trump's earlier comments about Ankara being treated unfairly over its move to purchase the S-400 missile defense system from Russia. That Congress favored Turkey's removal was no secret either. It remains to be seen whether the United States will levy sanctions on Turkey under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA).