The predicament suffered by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan due to the anger wave on the street, probably reminded him – even if he denies it – of the predicament which faced leaders in Arab states, following the eruption of demonstrations that uprooted them from their positions. The difference is that Erdogan's spring, which only he recognizes and which he made ever since the Justice and Development Party won the elections, kept him in control over power for around a decade. And even if he denies it, Erdogan, who made a terrible mistake by describing the demonstrators in Istanbul as being a bunch of looters, reminded the Arabs - who are besieged by the earthquake and anarchy of their spring - of some of those who were toppled by the revolutions and who preceded him in offending the street, showing arrogance towards the disgruntled, defying them, and worst of all hiding behind the logic of conspiracy, of which some winds are blowing from abroad. This abroad in Erdogan's language undoubtedly refers to his archenemy, i.e. the secular Syrian regime, which received a delegation from the Turkish opposition a few weeks ago. This opposition is the one which coalesced with the leftists during the six days that shook Turkey under the Justice and Development Party, as well as its prosperity, tourism, and economic recovery. The prime minister is repeating the game practiced by the Syrian regime, which described the demonstrators as being the tools of a conspiracy, before the revolution turned into a horrific war filled with atrocities and tragedies. And it would be delusional for Erdogan to think that the crowds trying to get near his office in Ankara are pushed by Damascus, which is seeking retaliation, although it wishes to topple the Sultan. It would also be delusional for the prime minister to dupe himself and disregard the hostility he generated among Turkish nationalists due to the settlement deal he sealed with the Kurdistan Workers' Party and its leader Abdallah Ocalan, but also the hostility he generated among the secularists whom he belittled, while excluding the authority of the military institution which they perceived as being the guardian of the republic that is based on the constitutional principles instated by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. It would be delusional for Erdogan not to recall – while seeking the roots of the disgruntlement which divided Taksim Square in Istanbul – how much hostility he showed towards journalists and judges, under the banner of restoring the glories that existed during the era of the Ottomans before their empire fell sick. Although the Turkish Justice and Development Party's Islamists are compared to the Muslim Brotherhood in the Arab world, the fact of the matter is that Turkey under Erdogan is the one which initiated – after a period of reluctance – the extension of its hand to the Egyptian, Tunisian and Libyan Muslim Brotherhood organizations, before becoming their godparent. Today, the prime minister, who is returning to his country from a tour in the Maghreb, can probably sense their winds within his home, recalling the "Leave" slogans which were chanted to Hosni Mubarak, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali and even Gaddafi. True, Erdogan was not involved in corruption or the direct oppression of his political opponents, and true, his government's economic approach granted Turkey a prosperous international presence. However, what does not serve his cause is that he turned the "zero-problem" policy into a faltering diplomacy abroad. The most prominent predicaments were seen at the level of the stumbling diplomacy of defiance towards Israel, the silent conflict with Iran in Iraq, the tensions with Nouri al-Maliki's government, and the issuance of major promises to the Syrian opposition – such as the numbered days of the regime in Damascus. However, Erdogan, "who is no longer thinking" (as per the statement of the Turkish Public Sector Union Confederation), has unintentionally practiced excessive self-confidence and closed off his opponents on the domestic scene. Six days have rocked the empire of Sultan Erdogan, and following his attack against the "looters" among the protectors of the environment in Istanbul, even President Abdullah Gul could not defend him. The Istanbul spring emerged while the head of the government was getting ready to assume the president's tasks following a constitutional amendment. It is thus a conspiracy, as discovered by Erdogan, who is accused of being a dictator. And was this not the same accusation he made against the regime in Damascus while siding with the Syrian people? Obviously, there is a major difference between the tear gas bombs on Taksim Square and the MIG bombs and GRAD missiles used in Homs, Aleppo, and Rif Damascus. In addition, Turkey's MB is not a replica of the Arabs' Muslim Brotherhood. And because this is the case, it is clear that a scapegoat in power and at the head of the police will pay the price, in order to appease the anger on the Bosporus Strait. But will this be allowed by the obstinate leader of the ruling party who has not yet picked up the message behind the protests, one whose main headline is that the Turkish youth does not want a golden cage without freedoms and that no opposition can be eliminated forever in any part of the world? The peak and seriousness of the anger resides in the transformation of the disputes into provocations that would lead to the political liquidation of the opponent and on the street, knowing that the support of spring in the neighboring states does not grant immunity on the domestic scene. Gul himself probably inflicted on Erdogan a new nightmare when he understood what his partner did not.
