Did Earnings for Canal Istanbul in Turkey and the world? Lost? Opportunity? A threat?

When the Channel Istanbul Project was officially launched by the Prime Minister during the 2011 election campaign; In my social media accounts, I wanted to convey a message to the political actors who might be the subject of the issue. I said, “Power can declare a mega or crazy project like Kanal Istanbul. If possible, discussions should not be made. Although it will be entered into discussions; whether or not the country's resources are used effectively, more importantly, it should be managed on the axis of geopolitical-strategic opportunity or threats. This discussion or criticism; How much does the project cost? How long is it? How much excavation, how much concrete is used? Does the groundwater disappear? How many ships go? Is it earthquake resistant? Are water sources contaminated? As a result of explosions, rock units are destroyed and there are leaks from cracks? As a result of risk analysis should not be made with technological arguments that can be solved. Otherwise; legitimacy, plausibility and innocence. kazandır

In addition to this project, which was expressed as the project of the century, the Rize-İskenderun line was directed to the Black Sea-Mediterranean Waterway, the Euphrates River, the North Anatolian Fault route and the Marmara Sea, and the Kızılırmak River to the Black Sea instead of the Mediterranean Sea. approaches should be developed. işt In our country that entered the election area at that time; some of our citizens will not have noticed this irony, I wonder if our village or town passes through? I've been addressing your questions or demands. Unfortunately, the discussions on the subject; the next day the solution was started on the technical feasibility axis, which was very simple. Until the last days was continued intensified. Moreover, the subject that requires multi-disciplinary expertise; as a result of the discussion by unrelated persons in the media; the legitimacy of the project was served by the people in the opposite side.

In essence, when viewed from today's technological level; Kanal Istanbul project; Considered as a very simple technical activity; It can also be described as a comprehensive stream rehabilitation project. From a wider multidimensional, multi-purpose perspective, it is a mega project that requires complex, high-tech applications. It is a well-known fact that channels such as Suez and Panama can be built at the technology levels of a hundred years ago and they can continue their services easily today.

Nano-technology materials, gigantic construction machines are developed, robotic life is dominant, space mining is on the agenda, the Industrial 4 revolution is taking place today, such a project; it is a shame to discuss the technical, even economic feasibility, of the relevant technocrats and the era.

If this is so, rough discussions in this direction should be ended. If it is to be done, it should be done on a scientific platform with the participation of all relevant people and institutions. This task is central power.

On the other hand, the idea of ​​an artificial channel is not new, but especially in terms of strategic, geopolitical gains and losses; It has been started without any consensus, even at a minimum level, between Istanbul and other relevant persons and institutions in our country and internationally. Therefore, the groundwork has been prepared for the discussion of many and various dimensions ranging from the legitimacy of decentralization of governance to the potential impacts of the channel on international politics, economy, environment and urban life.

As a result; Leaving aside the technical feasibility of the project; The main motivations and claims, strategic and geopolitical dimensions, functions, difficulties and limitations on the axis, avoiding speculative approaches should be evaluated from a multi-faceted perspective.

Final decisions must be made by scientific methods that are far from sensuality and hamasset. I hope all parties act with common sense, avoiding cheap, populist polemics. The project becomes the “Century” project rather than “Crazy”.

Professor Dr. Ali Kahriman

Chairman of the Board of Explosive Engineering Association