The latest suicide bombing in downtown Ankara that killed 37 civilians naturally shook Turkey and heightened the nation’s worries about terrorism. It also supported, especially for foreign observers, Turkey’s concern over the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) — and by extension, PKK-affiliated Kurdish forces in Syria, even if they are effective against the Islamic State.

However, the way President Recep Tayyip Erdogan responded to this terrorist attack was disturbing. The powerful president is using Turkey's troubles to take his increasingly authoritarian rule to new heights. His objective was evident in the speech Erdogan gave in Ankara on March 14, just a day after the deadly terror attack. He not only condemned the terrorists who use bombs and weapons to kill people, but also what he called “unarmed terrorists” who supposedly help them with their ideas. He said, “There is no difference between a terrorist with a gun and bomb in his hand and those who use their work and pen to support terror. The fact that an individual could be a deputy, an academic, an author, a journalist or the director of an NGO [nongovernmental organization] does not change the fact that that person is a terrorist.”

But how exactly would “a deputy, an academic, an author, a journalist or the director of an NGO” support terrorism? If an individual openly incited terrorist violence, calling for more bombings and other attacks, then Erdogan would be justified. However, it is clear that both Erdogan and his supporters have lately begun accusing people of “unarmed terrorism” for merely criticizing the government’s anti-terrorism measures.

Some 1,100 Turkish academics and foreigners, including intellectual activist Noam Chomsky, signed a petition in January titled “We do not want to be partners to the crime.” The short statement criticized the government for committing human rights violations in its counterterrorism campaign that is ongoing in certain southeastern towns. It blamed the government for committing “massacres” of Kurdish civilians and called for an end to all related security operations. While one could have criticized the text for being silent on the crimes of the PKK, it certainly had nothing to do with inciting terrorism or any other form of violence.