iEpikaira

Καλωσορίσατε στην εποχή των ενεργειακών σοκ

25.4.26

Reuters: Iran war pushing more than 30 million back into poverty, UN development chief says

24.4.26

By Panu Wongcha-um

April 23, 2026

BANGKOK, April 23 (Reuters) - More than 30 million people will be pushed back into poverty by the impacts of the Iran war including disruptions to fuel and fertiliser supplies just as farmers are planting crops, U.N. ‌development chief Alexander De Croo said on Thursday.

Fertiliser shortages - worsened by the blocking of cargo vessels through the Strait of Hormuz - have already lowered agricultural productivity, the Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) told Reuters.

That would likely hit crop yields later this year, the former Belgian prime minister added.

"Food insecurity ⁠will be at its peak level in a few months - and there is not much that you can do about it," he said, also listing other fallouts of the crisis including energy shortages and falling remittances.

"Even if the war would stop tomorrow, those effects, you already have them, and they will be pushing back more than 30 million people into poverty," he said.

Much of the world's fertilizer is produced in the Middle East, and one-third of global supplies passes through the Strait of ‌Hormuz, where ⁠Iran and the United States are jostling for control.

Earlier this month, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the U.N. World Food Programme warned that the war will drive up food prices, further burdening the world's most vulnerable populations.

De Croo said the knock-on effects ⁠of the crisis have already wiped out an estimated 0.5% to 0.8% of global GDP. "Things that take decades to build up, it takes eight weeks of war to destroy them," he ⁠said.

The crisis was also straining humanitarian efforts as funding shrinks and needs rise in places already facing severe emergencies, including Sudan, Gaza and Ukraine.

"We will have to ⁠say to certain people, really sorry, but we can't help you," he said.

"People who would be surviving on help will not have this and will be pushed into even greater vulnerability."

Source: https://www.reuters.com/world/iran-war-pushing-more-than-30-million-back-into-poverty-un-development-chief-2026-04-23/

Σύνοψη διεθνών εξελίξεων και επιπτώσεων πολέμου στο Ιράν (22 - 24 Απριλίου)

24.4.26

Διεθνής Οργανισμός Ενέργειας: Επιβεβαιώνει αναλύσεις του iEpikaira και λέει ότι, "Έρχεται η χειρότερη κρίση στην ιστορία"!

23.4.26

Τα τρία σενάρια για το τέλος του πολέμου στο Ιράν

23.4.26

Iran War Endgame: Three Plausible Scenarios & World Impact

23.4.26

Σύνοψη εξελίξεων πολέμου στο Ιράν (20–22 Απριλίου)

22.4.26

Edited by iEpikaira

22 Απριλίου – Παράταση εκεχειρίας και εύθραυστη ισορροπία στον Κόλπο

Παράταση κατάπαυσης πυρός: Η εκεχειρία φαίνεται να διατηρείται, με την αμερικανική πλευρά να συνδέει τη διάρκειά της με την πρόοδο σε πιθανές διαπραγματεύσεις. Δεν υπάρχει σαφές χρονοδιάγραμμα ή επιβεβαιωμένη συμφωνία για οριστική λύση.

Εντάσεις στα Στενά του Ορμούζ: Καταγράφονται περιστατικά αυξημένης έντασης στη ναυσιπλοΐα, χωρίς πλήρως επιβεβαιωμένη εικόνα για την έκταση ή την ευθύνη συγκεκριμένων επιθέσεων. Η περιοχή παραμένει κρίσιμη για την παγκόσμια ενέργεια.

Διστακτικότητα στη διπλωματία: Η Τεχεράνη εμφανίζεται επιφυλακτική ως προς τη συμμετοχή σε νέες συνομιλίες, ενώ η Δύση αναμένει πιο συγκροτημένη πρόταση για να προχωρήσει η διαδικασία.

Εσωτερικές πιέσεις: Υπάρχουν ενδείξεις οικονομικής πίεσης στο Ιράν, χωρίς όμως σαφή και ενιαία ποσοτικά στοιχεία που να αποτυπώνουν την πλήρη έκταση των επιπτώσεων.

Σχόλιο: Η εκεχειρία φαίνεται να λειτουργεί περισσότερο ως προσωρινό πλαίσιο παρά ως σταθερή συμφωνία. Η ένταση παραμένει, αλλά χωρίς σαφή μετάβαση σε γενικευμένη σύγκρουση.

21 Απριλίου – Διπλωματική στασιμότητα και στρατηγικά μηνύματα

Καθυστερήσεις σε συνομιλίες: Οι επαφές δεν προχωρούν με σαφή ρυθμό, καθώς απουσιάζει ενιαία πρόταση από την ιρανική πλευρά. Πιθανές συναντήσεις φαίνεται να μετατίθενται.

Ρητορική έντασης: Δηλώσεις από ιρανικούς αξιωματούχους διατηρούν υψηλό τόνο, με αναφορές σε πιθανές επιπτώσεις στην ενεργειακή παραγωγή σε περίπτωση κλιμάκωσης.

Αντιδράσεις για στρατιωτικά μέτρα: Μέτρα όπως ναυτικοί έλεγχοι ή περιορισμοί σε μεταφορές αξιολογούνται από την ιρανική πλευρά ως πιεστικά, εντείνοντας την πολιτική αντιπαράθεση.

Περιφερειακή κινητικότητα: Ορισμένες ένοπλες ομάδες στην περιοχή εμφανίζονται ενεργές, χωρίς όμως σαφή εικόνα για συντονισμένη κλιμάκωση μεγάλης κλίμακας.

Σχόλιο: Η διαδικασία φαίνεται να έχει επιβραδυνθεί. Η ρητορική αυξάνει την πίεση, αλλά δεν μεταφράζεται απαραίτητα σε άμεσες στρατιωτικές εξελίξεις.

20 Απριλίου – Διεθνείς τοποθετήσεις και γεωπολιτική ισορροπία

Θέση της Κίνας: Το Πεκίνο απορρίπτει κατηγορίες περί εμπλοκής, επιδιώκοντας να διατηρήσει ισορροπία στις σχέσεις του με όλες τις πλευρές.

Έλεγχοι σε ενεργειακές ροές: Ενέργειες που σχετίζονται με τη μεταφορά πετρελαίου εντείνονται, με στόχο την εφαρμογή κυρώσεων και τον περιορισμό οικονομικών πόρων.

Κρίσιμα ζητήματα διαπραγμάτευσης: Το πυρηνικό πρόγραμμα, οι βαλλιστικές δυνατότητες και η περιφερειακή επιρροή παραμένουν βασικά σημεία διαφωνίας.

Αμυντικές δαπάνες: Καταγράφεται αυξημένο ενδιαφέρον για στρατιωτικό εξοπλισμό διεθνώς, ως αντίδραση στην αβεβαιότητα.

Σχόλιο: Οι μεγάλες δυνάμεις διατηρούν θέσεις επιρροής. Η κρίση λειτουργεί ως πεδίο ευρύτερου ανταγωνισμού.

ΣΥΝΟΨΗ: Πόλεμος στο Ιράν και περιφερειακή ένταση

Στρατιωτική εικόνα: Υπάρχει τυπική εκεχειρία, με τοπικές εντάσεις και αυξημένη επιτήρηση σε κρίσιμες θαλάσσιες ζώνες. Δεν επιβεβαιώνεται γενικευμένη σύγκρουση.

Διπλωματική κατάσταση: Οι συνομιλίες παραμένουν αβέβαιες. Η πρόοδος εξαρτάται από τη διαμόρφωση κοινά αποδεκτών όρων.

Οικονομικές πιέσεις: Οι κυρώσεις και οι περιορισμοί επηρεάζουν την ιρανική οικονομία, χωρίς πλήρη εικόνα για το βάθος των συνεπειών.

Πυρηνικό ζήτημα: Παραμένει το βασικό σημείο τριβής και καθορίζει το πλαίσιο των διαπραγματεύσεων.

Περιφερειακή διάσταση: Υπάρχει κινητικότητα σε γειτονικές περιοχές, αλλά χωρίς σαφή ένδειξη άμεσης γενίκευσης της σύγκρουσης.

Σχόλιο: Η κατάσταση μπορεί να περιγραφεί ως μεταβατική. Η ένταση διατηρείται, αλλά η εξέλιξη θα εξαρτηθεί από τη διπλωματική δυναμική και την αποφυγή μεμονωμένων περιστατικών που θα μπορούσαν να οδηγήσουν σε κλιμάκωση.

Για περισσότερες λεπτομέρειες και σχετικές πληροφορίες στο Iran War Monitor του iEpikaira ΕΔΩ!

Η Τουρκία αμφισβητεί τους χάρτες αλιευτικής δραστηριότητας στο Αιγαίο

22.4.26

Συνάντηση του υπουργού Εξωτερικών, Γιώργου Γεραπετρίτη, με τον υπουργό Εξωτερικών της Τουρκικής Δημοκρατίας, Hakan Fidan, στην Αθήνα, Παρασκευή 8 Νοεμβρίου 2024. (ΣΩΤΗΡΗΣ ΔΗΜΗΤΡΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ/EUROKINISSI)

Οι Τούρκοι ψαρεύουν όπου θέλουν στο Αιγαίο εδώ και τουλάχιστον 5 χρόνια, αλλά φαίνεται ότι αυτό δεν τους αρκεί. Γι’ αυτό και αμφισβητούν τους χάρτες αλιευτικής δραστηριότητας στο Αιγαίο.

Το τουρκικό ΥΠΕΞ σε ανακοίνωση του, ότι «οι χάρτες που σχεδιάζουν ανύπαρκτα και κατά φαντασίαν θαλάσσια όρια μεταξύ Τουρκίας και Ελλάδας στο Αιγαίο και τη Μεσόγειο, τα οποία παραβιάζουν επίσης τις τουρκικές περιοχές θαλάσσιας δικαιοδοσίας, δεν έχουν καμία ισχύ».

«Όσο για τους παράνομους περιορισμούς στις αλιευτικές δραστηριότητες που επιβάλλονται από την Ελλάδα πέραν των 6 ναυτικών μιλίων των χωρικών της υδάτων, σε μέρη και θαλάσσιες περιοχές όπου δεν έχει δικαιοδοσία και σε διεθνή ύδατα, αυτοί είναι άκυροι για την Τουρκία», προσθέτει του τουρκικό ΥΠΕΞ.

«Η Τουρκία δεν θα αποδεχτεί επίσης καμία μονομερή και παράνομη πρακτική που επιβάλλεται στις νόμιμες δραστηριότητες των Τούρκων αλιέων, οι οποίες βασίζονται στο διεθνές δίκαιο και τα ιστορικά δικαιώματα», τονίζει η Άγκυρα, προσθέτοντας ότι «η Τουρκία επαναλαμβάνει τη θέση της ότι πρέπει να υιοθετηθεί μια ειλικρινής και ολοκληρωμένη προσέγγιση για την επίλυση ζητημάτων με βάση το διεθνές δίκαιο, την ισότητα και την καλή γειτονία στο πλαίσιο της Διακήρυξης των Αθηνών για τις Φιλικές Σχέσεις και την Καλή Γειτονία, της 7ης Δεκεμβρίου 2023».

Πηγή: militaire.gr

Middle East Conflict Adds Pressure on Global Food Supply Chains, Warns FAO

21.4.26

21 April 2026, Rome: The ongoing 2026 conflict in the Middle East is placing additional strain on fragile agrifood systems and global supply chains, threatening the availability, accessibility, and affordability of food, FAO Director-General QU Dongyu said during the 38th Session of the FAO Regional Conference for the Near East (NERC38) in Rome.

Addressing delegates at FAO headquarters, Qu said the region is facing a critical moment and stressed the importance of maintaining trade flows while ensuring access to adequate food for all, especially in countries heavily dependent on imports. The conference was chaired by the United Arab Emirates, represented by Minister of Climate Change and Environment Amna bint Abdullah Al Dahak Al Shamsi, and brought together ministers and policymakers from across the region.

FAO said it is closely assessing the impact of ongoing global conflicts, including the Middle East crisis, on food security and agrifood supply chains in order to provide technical expertise, evidence-based analysis, and policy support to member nations.

Qu warned that disruptions to food production, trade, and distribution systems across the region are being worsened by rising energy prices and disturbances in fertilizer markets. These developments are increasing production costs and reducing agricultural productivity both within the region and globally. He added that the crisis is affecting all agricultural inputs, including chemicals and machinery, and could have long-term consequences for agriculture even if the conflict ended immediately.

The FAO chief also highlighted that farmers, producers, and value chain actors are already facing severe impacts, with livelihoods increasingly under threat. He reiterated that peace remains essential for food security and said resilient, inclusive, and sustainable agrifood systems are vital for recovery, reducing vulnerabilities, and promoting long-term regional stability.

Speaking on behalf of the UAE, Minister Al Dahak said the country’s chairing of the session aims to help shift the region’s agrifood systems from reactive crisis management to proactive innovation. She said stronger logistics networks and strategic partnerships can help the region convert environmental and geopolitical challenges into sustainable development opportunities while keeping global supply chains secure.

During the conference, ministers discussed four major priorities for the region: strengthening food supply chains and logistics while reducing food loss and waste; diversifying food sources and boosting local production capacity; investing in infrastructure, agrifood enterprises, and rural development; and building partnerships that can deliver practical results.

Separate ministerial roundtables also examined coordinated policy responses to disruptions in energy markets and maritime trade routes, sustainable agricultural production and circular solutions, and financing resilient climate-smart agrifood systems through public, private, development, and climate finance.

Source: https://www.global-agriculture.com/global-agriculture/middle-east-conflict-adds-pressure-on-global-food-supply-chains-warns-fao/

“Global agri-food catastrophe”: FAO sounds alarm on Strait of Hormuz crisis

16 Apr 2026 | By Joshua Poole

Key takeawaysThe UN FAO’s chief economist warns that a protracted Strait of Hormuz crisis could lead to a global agri-food catastrophe, triggering rising food prices and lower crop yields.

The unresolved US-Iran conflict, including naval blockades and sanctions, continues to affect key agricultural inputs like fertilizer, oil, and grains, putting global food security at risk.

The FAO calls for anticipatory policy measures, including financing mechanisms to support countries in urgent need of inputs, while the F&B sector faces increased costs and supply chain challenges.

UN FAO chief economist, Maximo Torero, has warned that a prolonged Strait of Hormuz crisis could result in a “global agri-food catastrophe.” The US-Iran war in the Middle East, which began in late February 2026, remains unresolved, with Torero urging anticipatory policy actions to mitigate a price and supply crunch for key agri-food inputs.

Although a delicate ceasefire has been agreed, major elements of the conflict — including naval blockades, sanctions, and military posturing — are still active, so the situation remains volatile rather than fully de-escalated.

The FAO claims that ships carrying critical agricultural inputs, including fertilizer, oil and gas, and grain exports, must start moving through the Strait of Hormuz to avoid a dangerous spike in food price inflation later this year, which could trigger a cascade of effects similar to the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic crisis.

According to the FAO, 20–45% of key agri-food inputs rely on sea passage through the Strait of Hormuz. If farmers produce with fewer inputs, there will be lower yields later this year and in 2027, with higher food commodity prices and retail food inflation likely for the next few years.

Rabobank also recently revealed that it expects food price inflation in Europe to build throughout 2026 and intensify next year, driven by the surging energy costs from the geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, which affect food production, packaging, logistics, and agricultural inputs.

“The clock is ticking,” and crop calendars put poorer countries most at risk of scarce and pricey fertilizer and energy inputs, Torero said in a podcast published on Monday (Apr 13) with David Laborde, the director of the FAO’s Agrifood Economics Division.

“The last thing we want is lower crop yields and higher commodity prices and food inflation for the next year,” he added, noting that would likely force countries to put policies in place to lower domestic food prices, triggering higher interest rates and, as a result, potential slower economic growth around the world.

FAO Chief Economist Maximo Torero warns that continued disruption in the Strait of Hormuz could lead to a “global agri-food catastrophe.”

Global food pressures intensify

The latest FAO Food Price Index (March) was relatively stable due to ample supplies of most food commodities, especially cereals.

However, the FAO warns pressure is rising this month and will intensify in May, as “farmers will make decisions” on whether to switch planting choices to adapt to fertilizer availability. Farmers will also need to decide whether to allocate more land and resources to biofuels to benefit from higher oil prices, which could curtail food supplies.

“We are in an input crisis — we don’t want to make it a catastrophe,” said Laborde. “The difference depends on the actions we take.” The FAO has called on all countries to closely consider biofuel mandates and avoid export restrictions on energy and fertilizers.

The FAO says, “if the standoff in the Strait of Hormuz is not quickly ended, anticipatory actions should be considered, in particular asking multilateral institutions to provide financing to countries at risk of losing access to basic fertilizer inputs, given their planting has started.”

Torero suggested that the International Monetary Fund’s balance of payment facilities, along with the Food Shock Window and the Food Import Financing Facility recommended by the FAO in 2022, could serve as a financing mechanism for inputs. This mechanism would enable countries in urgent need of fertilizers to secure them quickly, without sparking disruptive subsidy competitions.

The FAO has already developed a crop calendar-based prioritization of countries based on when and how much fertilizer they need. “The risks are very clear,” Torero said. “If we don’t accelerate… the risks will exacerbate.”

Geopolitical tensions in the Middle East are exacerbating fertilizer shortages, with critical agricultural inputs caught in shipping delays, impacting global food security.

Middle East conflict: F&B impacts

The Strait of Hormuz crisis is causing significant disruptions in the global F&B sector, primarily due to rising costs for fertilizers, energy, and key agricultural raw materials. Authorities estimate that there are currently several hundred to over a thousand ships stuck or waiting around the Strait of Hormuz and adjacent waters.

Fertilizer shortages, caused by supply chain bottlenecks and higher energy prices, threaten to reduce crop yields, raising production costs across the board, which could lead to price hikes for staple foods, such as grains, oilseeds, and sugars, putting pressure on manufacturers and consumers.

Global shipping delays are exacerbating supply chain challenges, making it harder for countries to import essential food ingredients, particularly in regions heavily reliant on imports. The supply crunch could lead to food insecurity in developing countries, further inflating food prices and intensifying competition for limited resources.

In response, the F&B sector might pivot toward local sourcing and sustainable agricultural practices to reduce dependence on volatile international trade. Meanwhile, the financial strain from increased costs and disrupted supply chains may push small to medium-sized producers to seek more resilient business models.

Overall, this crisis underscores the fragility of the global food system, highlighting the urgent need for adaptability and investment in sustainable, local solutions. Cargill’s chief economist, Lauren Bresnahan, recently told Food Ingredients First how global food systems are far more vulnerable than policymakers assume.

Source: https://www.foodingredientsfirst.com/news/strait-of-hormuz-global-agrifood.html

[iEpikaira: Περισσότερα ΕΔΩ και ΕΔΩ!

Η τρωτότητα των ηγεμονικών δυνάμεων

21.4.26

Nordic Monitor: Turkey has been quietly preparing for a war, with Israel the primary target

20.4.26

Abdullah Bozkurt/Stockholm

A series of recent measures adopted by the government of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan indicates that the country is preparing for a war-like scenario, marked by sweeping changes to military and civilian mobilization rules, the expansion of logistical supply systems and an aggressive push to advance missile and drone capabilities.

Although Ankara has not explicitly identified a specific adversary, growing evidence suggests that the Erdogan government may be steering Turkey toward a potential military confrontation with Israel, possibly in the Syrian theatre. This concern is reinforced by increasingly belligerent rhetoric from senior officials and a notable shift in Turkey’s strategic doctrine, in which the Jewish state is now framed as a fundamental national security threat.

Erdogan has previously attempted to push Turkey toward such a confrontation. In 2010, following the deadly Mavi Marmara incident in the eastern Mediterranean, he sought a military response against Israel but was ultimately blocked by resistance from senior generals. That institutional constraint, however, has since been dismantled.

Over the past decade, Erdogan has systematically consolidated power and reshaped the state apparatus. In 2014 he shut down a long-running counterterrorism investigation into a network linked to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force, paving the way for pro-Iranian figures to rise within the intelligence, police, military and diplomatic services.

Following the false flag coup attempt in 2016, Erdogan carried out mass purges that removed tens of thousands of officers, including much of the pro-NATO leadership within the armed forces. He appointed Adnan Tanrıverdi, founder of the paramilitary group SADAT, as his chief military advisor, and consolidated sweeping executive powers after a controversial 2018 referendum conducted under total government control of the media.

Under Erdogan’s leadership Turkey has expanded its military footprint abroad, arming Islamist groups in Syria and Libya and establishing overseas military outposts from Somalia to Qatar. Ankara has also deepened ties with Hamas — designated as a terrorist organization by its NATO allies — providing operatives with shelter, funding, logistics support and even Turkish citizenship.

At the same time Turkish intelligence and police have intensified crackdowns on Israeli networks, including alleged Mossad operatives tracking Hamas activities in Turkey, while largely overlooking the presence of jihadist groups and Iranian intelligence networks operating on Turkish soil.

A presidential decree that overhauls the mobilization of civilian resources for military use both before and during wartime, granting sweeping powers to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan:

With these developments Erdogan appears increasingly confident in his ability to pursue a direct confrontation with Israel — and has begun laying the groundwork accordingly.

The clearest sign of this preparation came on May 22, 2024, when Erdogan issued a sweeping presidential decree introducing a new Mobilization and State of War Regulation (Seferberlik ve Savaş Hâli Yönetmeliği). The regulation dramatically expands the government’s authority to mobilize Turkey’s entire civilian, economic and institutional infrastructure for potential conflict scenarios.

Replacing decades-old frameworks, the regulation establishes a system designed to transition the country rapidly from peacetime to a war footing — even in the absence of a formal declaration of war.

At its core is the concept of continuous preparedness, allowing authorities to activate wartime mechanisms not only during war but also in broadly defined “tension” and “crisis” periods. These categories are deliberately vague, encompassing internal unrest, regional instability or perceived security threats, thereby lowering the threshold for invoking extraordinary state powers.

The regulation introduces a doctrine of “total national defense,” placing virtually all sectors of society under potential state control. Public institutions, private companies, industrial facilities and transportation assets — including vehicles, ships and aircraft — can be requisitioned. Civilians with specialized skills may be assigned roles supporting military operations, while private companies can be compelled to produce military goods, allocate personnel or convert production lines.

The obligations extend directly to individuals. Reservists must report within 48 hours of a mobilization order, while civilian vehicle owners may be required to surrender their vehicles within as little as six hours, often along with their drivers. Local authorities are tasked with enforcing compliance and reporting violations.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan hosted a Hamas delegation led by Mohammad Ismail Darvish in Ankara on January 29, 2025. The president’s intelligence chief, Ibrahim Kalin, Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan and the national security advisor were present at the meeting.

A significant feature of the new framework is the consolidation of authority in the presidency. Erdogan is empowered to declare full or partial mobilization, determine the geographic scope of such measures and decide which sectors and institutions will be affected.

He can also place civilian institutions under military operational control, impose obligations on personnel and resources and regulate evacuation procedures and emergency governance measures. Although mobilization decisions must be submitted to parliament for approval, the regulation allows immediate implementation upon a presidential decree, reinforcing the executive’s already dominant position.

The regulation also introduces mechanisms that allow civilian institutions to be put directly under military command structures. In such cases public agencies and private companies can be subordinated to military authorities, with their logistics, production processes and operational priorities redirected to meet defense needs. This arrangement effectively merges civilian administration with military command during crisis situations, blurring institutional boundaries.

To support this system the government mandates extensive data collection on national resources, including industrial capacity, workforce qualifications, transportation assets and critical infrastructure. This information is stored in centralized electronic systems managed by security institutions, enabling rapid allocation and deployment during emergencies. Authorities are also granted broad powers to inspect both public and private entities to ensure readiness and compliance with mobilization plans.

The regulation further integrates multiple state institutions into a unified mobilization structure, including the armed forces, civilian ministries, local governments and intelligence services. Personnel from the National Intelligence Organization (MIT) are treated differently under this system, remaining under their agency’s authority rather than being reassigned through standard mobilization procedures, underscoring the strategic importance of intelligence operations during crises.

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan lashed out at Israeli leaders in a parliamentary speech on April 15, declaring, “I remind those baby killers who insult me and my country on social media of some facts once again: The Republic of Turkey is not an ordinary state. No power can wag its finger at Turkey or at the president of Turkey.”

Over the past decade MIT has evolved into a key instrument of political control, used to monitor opponents, orchestrate politically motivated prosecutions and conduct covert operations abroad in line with Erdogan’s strategic objectives.

Economic and financial mechanisms are also embedded in the framework. The regulation provides for pre-planned budget allocations for emergency spending, stockpiling of critical goods and prioritization of military needs over civilian consumption. When financial resources prove insufficient, the state is authorized to compel the provision of goods and services under national defense legislation, extending mobilization into the economic sphere.

All ministries and regional authorities are required to prepare detailed mobilization plans during peacetime, conduct regular exercises and coordinate closely with military institutions. Annual coordination meetings led by provincial and district officials are mandated to assess preparedness, identify shortcomings and implement corrective measures, institutionalizing a permanent state of readiness across the administrative structure.

The new regulation marks a clear departure from the 1990 mobilization regulation titled “Seferberlik ve Savaş Hali Tüzüğü”, which had governed Turkey’s mobilization system for more than three decades. That earlier framework, adopted under a parliamentary system, was more narrowly focused on wartime scenarios and relied on a relatively rigid legal structure that distinguished clearly between war and peace.

Under the 1990 regulation mobilization mechanisms were largely activated after a formal declaration of war or an explicit national emergency, and the process involved a more pronounced role for the cabinet and bureaucratic institutions. Civilian-military coordination existed but was less centralized, and the system placed greater emphasis on procedural steps rather than rapid executive action.

Turkish naval forces are seen conducting evacuation, boarding operations and shallow-water mine countermeasure drills in the eastern Mediterranean on November 28, 2025.

In contrast, the 2024 regulation introduces a preemptive and flexible model that allows mobilization measures to begin during vaguely defined periods of “tension” and “crisis.” This effectively expands the scope of mobilization from a reactive wartime tool into a proactive instrument of state control that can be deployed in a wide range of scenarios.

Another key difference lies in the centralization of authority. While the 1990 framework distributed responsibilities across the cabinet and various state bodies, the new regulation consolidates decision-making power in the presidency. The transition to an executive presidential system of governance in Turkey has enabled this shift, allowing Erdogan to exercise direct control over mobilization decisions with practically no institutional constraints.

The role of the private sector has also evolved significantly. Although earlier regulations included provisions for requisitioning goods and services, the new framework embeds private companies much more deeply into military planning through pre-arranged protocols, detailed data collection and ongoing readiness requirements. This represents a shift from ad hoc wartime requisitioning to a systematic integration of the economy into defense planning.

The threshold for military involvement in civilian affairs has also been lowered. While the earlier framework allowed for military coordination with civilian institutions, the new regulation explicitly authorizes placing civilian entities under direct military operational control during periods of crisis, a move that significantly blurs the line between civilian governance and military authority.

Finally, the new regulation introduces a more expansive concept of “topyekûn savunma” (total defense), extending beyond traditional military preparedness to include economic, social and psychological dimensions, reflecting a broader security doctrine in which the entire society is treated as part of the national defense apparatus.

The Turkish navy is seen during a September 2025 drill conducting live-fire exercises at sea.

Its broad scope and flexible definitions allow wartime powers to be activated in a wide range of scenarios, not strictly limited to conventional armed conflict. Critics warn that such a framework could be used in domestic contexts under the pretext of national security, further expanding executive authority.

The regulation ultimately reflects a shift toward a highly securitized form of governance in which civilian life, economic activity and state institutions are increasingly integrated into military planning. By embedding wartime mechanisms into peacetime administration, it blurs the distinction between normal governance and emergency rule, giving the executive unprecedented leverage over the country’s resources and population.

A follow-up amendment published in the Official Gazette on May 1, 2025, further refined the mobilization framework by regulating the financial and social rights of reservists participating in mobilization exercises and training. Issued by President Erdogan, the amendment ensures that reservists receive compensation aligned with their military rank if their civilian income falls below that level, with the Ministry of National Defense covering any difference. Those without regular income are entitled to rank-based pay or a daily minimum-wage equivalent, while travel and allowance expenses are also covered. The measure institutionalizes financial guarantees for reservists, reinforcing the government’s effort to sustain participation in large-scale, continuous mobilization preparedness.

What is more, a series of seemingly unrelated developments added more fuel to speculation that Turkey has in fact been preparing itself for a conflict. Recent regulations mandating the construction of shelters in new buildings coupled with continued military procurement of alternative fuel transport systems point to a broader contingency planning effort.

Despite Turkey’s extensive NATO-integrated fuel infrastructure including a 3,200-kilometer pipeline network and large-scale storage facilities, authorities have pressed ahead with additional logistics capabilities, ordering tankers and road transport vehicles through state manufacturers.

The government’s increasingly hostile rhetoric toward Israel, combined with public praise for Hamas militants as defenders of Turkey’s interests, has also influenced institutional policies and public perception. These narratives are no longer merely rhetorical; they are shaping strategic planning across state agencies.

Adnan Tanrıverdi, a former chief military aide to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and a staunch opponent of Israel who has advocated for an “Islamic NATO” alliance, played a key role in a purge of the Turkish army, helping replace experienced officers with loyalists and Islamist partisans.

The possibility of military confrontation with Israel is not without precedent. During the 2010 Mavi Marmara crisis, Erdogan pushed for a show of force, including the deployment of naval assets and fighter jets. Senior military commanders, however, strongly opposed the move, warning of the risk of escalation, legal complications and the potential for significant casualties.

Military officers warned that any such move carried a serious risk of rapid escalation and casualties, potentially dragging Turkey into an unnecessary conflict, and highlighted the legal and operational dangers of a direct clash with Israel over the flotilla. Erdogan was unable to overcome resistance from the generals, who at the time were more independent of the executive branch and wielded greater institutional power.

A similar pattern emerged in the early years of the Syrian conflict, when top generals resisted Erdogan’s push for military intervention. That resistance collapsed after the 2016 purges, which removed most, if not all, of the military’s independent leadership.

In the aftermath more than two-thirds of generals and admirals were dismissed or imprisoned, and the armed forces were rapidly restructured along ideological lines. One of the first major decisions following the purge was the deployment of Turkish forces into northern Syria.

Today, the Turkish military is widely seen as dominated by loyalists, Islamists, neo-nationalists and pro-Iranian elements. With the institutional checks of the past largely eliminated, there appears to be little or no internal resistance remaining to challenge Erdogan’s strategic decisions.

If Erdogan chooses to pursue a military confrontation with Israel, there are few — if any — senior officers left in the Turkish armed forces capable of opposing such a move.

Source: https://nordicmonitor.com/2026/04/turkey-has-quietly-preparing-a-war-with-israel-primary-target/

Epikaira

Insights & Geopolitics

Είμαι το μποτ του iEpikaira για τα ελληνοτουρκικά που λειτουργεί ΧΩΡΙΣ Τεχνητή Νοημοσύνη.

Bot: Δίνω καλύτερες απαντήσεις σε σύντομα ερωτήματα με σωστή ορθογραφία...

22 Απριλίου – Κλιμάκωση της κρίσης στα Στενά του Ορμούζ και διπλωματικές εξελίξεις

23 Απριλίου – «Σκιώδης πόλεμος» στον Κόλπο και εσωτερικές εξελίξεις στο Ιράν

24 Απριλίου – Σχέδια έκτακτης ανάγκης και αυξανόμενες πληθωριστικές πιέσεις

ΕΠΙΠΤΩΣΕΙΣ ΣΕ ΕΝΕΡΓΕΙΑ, ΤΡΟΦΙΜΑ ΚΑΙ ΛΙΠΑΣΜΑΤΑ

Τα τρία σενάρια για τη λήξη του πολέμου στο Ιράν

Ι) Ελεγχόμενη αποκλιμάκωση: Ο «ψυχρός πόλεμος» της ερήμου

Η εικόνα στο πεδίο:

ΙΙ) Παρατεταμένη Σύγκρουση: Το δόγμα «ούτε πόλεμος, ούτε ειρήνη»

Η εικόνα στο πεδίο:

ΙΙΙ) Σοβαρή Κλιμάκωση: Ο «Μαύρος Κύκνος» του Κόλπου

Η εικόνα στο πεδίο:

Το χρονολόγιο της κρίσης

Η ενεργειακή ρουλέτα

Επισιτιστική Ασφάλεια: Το καλάθι τη νοικοκυράς στο στόχαστρο

Συμπεράσματα

Οι δείκτες / ραντάρ

1. Managed De-escalation without Full Resolution (Most Plausible)

2. Prolonged Low-Intensity Conflict ("Neither War Nor Peace")

3. Renewed Escalation Leading to Decisive Outcome (Tail Risk)

Temporal Dynamics: How Scenarios Evolve

Oil Price Trajectories: Plausible Ranges Under Uncertainty

Scenario 1: Managed De-escalation

Scenario 2: Prolonged Low-Intensity Conflict

Scenario 3: Renewed Escalation

Food Security & EU Impact: Directional Assessment

Transmission Mechanisms

Directional Price Impact by Scenario

Bottom Line for EU

Overall Assessment & Key Indicators

Top 5 Indicators to Watch

22 Απριλίου – Παράταση εκεχειρίας και εύθραυστη ισορροπία στον Κόλπο

21 Απριλίου – Διπλωματική στασιμότητα και στρατηγικά μηνύματα

20 Απριλίου – Διεθνείς τοποθετήσεις και γεωπολιτική ισορροπία

ΣΥΝΟΨΗ: Πόλεμος στο Ιράν και περιφερειακή ένταση

.

Επιλέξτε μια χώρα

Φόρμα επικοινωνίας