Diploma leak in power crack

Policy Service

While the debate about the crossroads regarding the regime is taking place in Türkiye, the pro-government debates about preparations for the post-Erdogan era are also on the agenda.

Every important issue in the country is being brought to the attention of the government. A similar situation recently unfolded with the diploma scandal.

As you may recall, Fahrettin Altun was dismissed 15 days before the diploma scandal, a situation attributed to internal government infighting. Altun's name returned to the spotlight with the diploma scandal. But this time, it became a subtext to the partisan conflict over the diploma.

The most controversial figure during the scandal was Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan , who also became a key figure in the matter.

HOW DID THE SUPPORTER SEE IT?

This time, we have seen different approaches in the pro-government media, which has been presenting fake diploma and e-signature scandals that reveal the corruption in the country with almost uniform headlines on every issue.

The newspaper that consistently featured the scandal in its headlines was the pro-government flagship, Hürriyet. On August 5th, Hürriyet ran the headline, "Everything is lies, everything is fake," and continued to feature the same story on its front page yesterday.

It seems Hürriyet wanted the incident to be discussed without touching the Palace and certain power centers. It supported this stance not only with headlines but also with columnists. Ahmet Hakan's writings on the subject yesterday are another indication of this.

Another prominent newspaper around the same time was Türkiye. From the very beginning, the newspaper published articles claiming the situation was being exaggerated. On the first day of the scandal, it stated, "The gang was dismantled a year ago. The Center for Combating Disinformation (DMM) listed 10 lies spread through the fake diploma scandal. The DMM's statement referred to coordinated operations conducted by public institutions," putting an end to the matter. It also made sure to link the increasing number of reports to FETÖ. According to Türkiye, the primary reason for publishing these reports was nothing more than an attempt to undermine the government.

THICK OR SEEDLING?

Perhaps by coincidence, two different names consistently graced the front page on the same days. While MİT Undersecretary İbrahim Kalın received praise from Hürriyet, Türkiye newspaper chose Hakan Fidan.

Abdulkadir Selvi, in his column on August 4th, deemed it appropriate to use the title "The İbrahim Kalın Difference" and stated the following: "The methods İbrahim Kalın employed in the operation that rescued the MIT officers were effective. Since the day İbrahim Kalın became the head of MIT, he began to reflect his own style on the organization."

Hürriyet was not content with this article and did not neglect to mention Kalın's achievements in many news articles.

Around the same time, Yücel Koç, a columnist in Türkiye Newspaper, said, "We will not let Fidan eat."

Every AKP official, old and new, is now loudly making statements about preparing for the post-Erdoğan era. The presence of AKP members uneasy about Hakan Fidan's name being brought to the forefront is no longer a secret in Ankara. Those who claim the decision regarding Fahrettin Altun is part of this dispute are now talking about new tensions involving Fidan, Kalın, Yerlikaya, and Bilal Erdoğan.

The AKP has entered a very fragile period. Every harsh agenda in the country widens the cracks. The fact that the fake diploma scandal has been echoed from different perspectives in pro-government media and used as a weapon in the fight is more than enough to demonstrate the intensity of the conflict.