Several of the leading commentators in the Turkish media are engaged in a searching deliberation about the nature of the AKP and more generally about the question of the future of democratization in Turkey. The recent, violent clampdown by the police on protesting university students and in particular the fact that Prime Minister Erdoğan defended the methods of the police prompted many otherwise pro-government commentators to call attention to the democratic deficiencies of Turkey’s ruling party. Meanwhile, it was asserted that the problem is aggravated by the fact that the AKP is not rivaled by a truly liberal opposition. In general, the impression conveyed by the commentaries is that Turkish politics is in an impasse, with the political parties offering little hope that they are willing or able to contribute to further democratization.
ALTAN: TURKEY’S IMPASSE IS THAT NOT EVEN THE MOST DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS FULLY DEMOCRATIC
Ahmet Altan in Taraf writes that the impasse of Turkey in general and of the democrats in particular is that the AKP is the country’s most democrat party, but that the AKP is insufficiently democratic. Consider that even the youth, which should represent the most libertarian ideas in any country, voices its opposition in terms that evoke the discourse of retired generals. They are more reactionary and more nationalistic than the AKP. That the opposition parties CHP and MHP are against integration with the world is already known. Although it has not been able to follow through its reforms, the AKP nonetheless stands as the sole plant in the field of democracy, having initiated the openings to the Kurds, to the Alevis, with its EU reforms and with its firm stance against military tutelage. But even this, the most democratic of the parties in the country, defends the police which violently beat up the protesting youth. We live in a country where the most democrat party cannot be fully democratic, where society is incapable of producing an alternative that would rival the AKP in the contest for democracy. Why is it so? Ultimately because we are living through a period of transition; with the repression of the state loosened, formerly oppressed groups now seek to impose their own identity as they crave recognition. Democracy is not understood as standing up for the rights of everyone. Yet let’s not be too concerned either; strange things naturally occur as we are a society that goes through democratization without prior intellectual preparation. In that respect we are like children who learn the lessons of life by trial and error.
BAYRAMOĞLU: THE AKP HAS A PATRIARCHAL VIEW OF SOCIETY
Ali Bayramoğlu in Yeni Şafak seeks an explanation to the ruling AKP’s recourse to a patriarchal, authoritarian style of governing. The AKP has been an agent of reforms, widening the civilian space by rolling back the state; but democracy doesn’t equal the widening of the space for politics, it also requires that civilian and peaceful values actually flourish in that space. However, there is no opposition that presents an alternative to the AKP by demanding more change, more reform and democratization. And when there is only one agent in the transition from a semi-authoritarian system to a semi-open system, the style of that agent tends to become autocratic. The other part of the explanation resides in how the AKP actually views society. The fact that the AKP endorses change and reform does not alter that model, it only masks it. The AKP’s societal view is impregnated with the spirit of “traditional solidarity” which in turn depends on the “benevolence” of the giver; there is no reciprocity between those who receive and give. Those who are the beneficiaries of the benevolence are not expected to raise direct demands; indeed Turkish conservatism postulates the existence of a “homogenous nation” where there are no divergent inclinations, and which is assumed to be uniformly affected by the right political moves of the rulers. As a consequence, in this model politics is understood as consisting only of rights and wrongs, of absolutes. If absolutism sides with change, you are lucky. If it smacks of authoritarianism, you are doomed.
DOĞAN: THE LACK OF A CREDIBLE OPPOSITION IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM FOR THE AKP
Yasin Doğan in Yeni Şafak writes that the lack of a credible opposition is a problem for the governing AKP. What the leader of the CHP is offering the country is unfathomable. It does not seem that we can expect any serious and concrete policies from Kılıçdaroğlu in the short term, as he tries to make do with empty and shallow polemics. The MHP has become totally marginalized, capable of producing only irrational outbursts. The BDP has identified itself uniquely with the Kurdish issue, and has nothing to offer Turkey in broader terms. What happens in a country that is plagued by a vacuum of opposition? How will democracy develop in a country where the opposition parties are incapable of rivaling the ruling party? Traditionally, the opposition has depended on the military for doing the job for it. But today, the military has retreated from that arena, and is concerning itself with carrying out the duties of its profession. So, now we can observe that the hopes of the opposition are pinned on the demonstrations and the protests of the youth; they are the ones who are supposed to wear the government down. It’s deplorable that politicians, academics and NGOs that are incapable of presenting any alternative policies, visions and projects have come to hope for deliverance by the youth. Of course, expecting the youth to fulfill the role that the CHP and the MHP are unable to live up to would be one alternative, but that shouldn’t be a youth which throws eggs and which assaults seminars.
KURBAN: THE AKP FACES DIFFICULT CHOICE BETWEEN ITS PLACE IN HISTORY AND THE SENSITIVITIES OF ITS BASE
Dilek Kurban in Radikal writes that the “openings” that the AKP has launched during the last two years represent a significant progress indeed for Turkey, not least because the party that is responsible for these openings to the Kurds and to the Alevis has a Sunni Muslim and nationalist base.
Nonetheless, the AKP now has to make up its mind and deliver on its promises; only good intentions will not suffice. However, the method employed by the government in enacting the openings to the Kurds and the Alevis suffers from a fundamental flaw. It is the fact that the most basic, legitimate democratic rights of people who have been denied those rights by their own state for decades, indeed centuries, are treated as being subject to negotiation. Whereas the government already should have granted the rights of the Kurds and of the Alevis – equality, education, religious freedom, freedom to organize – by its own initiative, it has made them conditional on the approval of the pious Sunni Muslims and of the Turks. Subjecting the inalienable human rights of citizens to negotiation is not only unacceptable; it is also dangerous as it opens the way for authoritarianism by making the rights of everyone negotiable. On the other hand, this is a state attitude with ancient traditions in Turkey. In that respect, the AKP is far from being unique. In fact, the AKP aspires to change state traditions and political culture. Now, the AKP cannot avoid making a choice between the place it envisions for itself in the political history of Turkey and the sensitivities of its base. That requires a fundamental change of mentality in the leadership of the AKP. Does Prime Minister Erdogan see himself as ready to and capable of enacting such a change?
ESAYAN: IT’S UP TO US CITIZENS TO BRING PEACE TO TURKEY
Markar Esayan in Taraf observes that Turkey’s most severe problem is the drama of the Kurds who want to live in honor and dignity in their own home. One and a half a million Kurds were expelled (in the 1990’s) from their villages that were burnt down. But it’s possible to live together. Turkey should be a secure home for all of its inhabitants. But I have no patience to wait: I cannot wait for the AKP to become more democratic, or for the CHP to produce a libertarian opposition that has settled its accounts with Kemalism. Then, what is the solution? It is spelled conversation, dialogue. We need more interaction, more courage, more of curiosity in each other. It is the “small and insignificant” people engaged in a constant dialogue with each other that should change this country. This time, change should not be prescribed from above, but emanate from below. We should force peace on the holders of power by speaking out for the rights of each other. Our call for democracy should not degenerate into an attempt to secure the monopoly to inflict pain from the power. We need to get to know each other better, and to repair our damaged relations, instead of constantly sanctifying our own victimhood. Then, you will see how politics, as well as the military and the bureaucracy, will change. We need to assume our responsibility, because now we are no longer ignorant as we were in the past about what was going on; that makes us responsible for every atrocity that is committed in this country.
The Turkey Analyst
The Turkey Analyst is a publication of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Joint Center, designed to bring authoritative analysis and news on the rapidly developing domestic and foreign policy issues in Turkey. It is published bi-weekly, and includes topical analysis, as well asa summary of the Turkish media debate. It is edited and compiled under the supervision of Svante E. Cornell and Halil M. Karaveli.
The Turkey Analyst welcomes article submission. Please contact Halil M. Karaveli, Managing Editor.
The Joint Center
The Joint Center was created in 2005 through the merger of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute, at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies, and the Silk Road Studies Program, at the Stockholm-based Institute for Security and Development Policy.
The Turkey Initiative
The Joint Center launched a Turkey Initiative in 2006 in order to improve understanding of Turkish domestic and foreign affairs in Europe and the United States.
To Subscribe:
To subscribe to the Turkey Analyst email announcements, please contact Martina Klimesova with an email containing "subscribe Turkey Analyst" in the subject line.
