Turkey Analyst,
vol. 4 no. 3
7 February 2011

WHAT THE COLUMNISTS SAY

The question of a new constitution, which the ruling AKP has promised will be enacted by the parliament that is elected in June, is gradually coming to the forefront of the Turkish debate.  However, the nascent constitutional debate has quickly come to focus on Prime Minister Erdoğan’s personal aspirations, rather than on how civil society and individual liberties are going to be strengthened. As it is becoming apparent that Erdoğan wants a new constitution so that a presidential system can be introduced, several commentators are pointing to the risk that the cause of a civilian constitution is about to be hijacked by his power ambitions.

ERDOĞAN: WE URGENTLY NEED A NEW CONSTITUTION
Mustafa Erdoğan, in Star, notes with satisfaction that it seems that the new parliament that will be elected in June is going to take upon it to enact a new constitution. Turkey urgently needs a new constitution. Our present constitution conserves it statist-authoritarian core, despite the amendments that have been made. In its present shape, this constitution will not meet the requirements of a free and civilized society. The constitution from 1982 is utterly unsuitable to serve as a platform for the solution of chronic problems such as the Kurdish and Alevi problems. On the contrary, this constitution represents the principle obstacle to the resolution of the problems that relate to identities, nationalism, religion/ conscience and state tutelage. In the wake of the referendum on constitutional amendments last year, which were approved by nearly 60 percent of the voters, it does not seem possible that our society can be persuaded to retain the 1982 constitution. As a consequence, there is a great need for civil society initiatives that can encourage the political parties that are for their part less enthusiastic about a new constitution to take action, as well as to discourage those who seem keen to thwart the enactment of a new constitution. The participation of society in the process is crucial for its legitimacy. Nonetheless, the principle mission in this endeavor will have to be shouldered by the political parties. Let’s hope that they are going to share the enthusiasm of civil society and ensure that the upcoming election campaign is turned into a “campaign for a constitution”.

ERGİN: ERDOĞAN AND THE PRESIDENCY
Sedat Ergin in Hürriyet quotes Prime Minister Erdoğan who has stated he prefers that Turkey adopts a two party system, like the American one. Erdoğan said “look at America, where the parliament works much more efficiently and with such a system which I find useful, you ensure stability.” And a few days later, Erdoğan stated that he welcomes that the population discusses the adoption of a presidential system, including the American version of it. With these statements, Erdoğan has effectively delineated the debate about the new constitution. There is a broad societal consensus that Turkey ought to rid itself of the constitution that was bequeathed by the military junta of the 1980’s and adopt a civilian constitution. Erdoğan’s statements carry the risk of breaking up this consensus. It is common knowledge that the reason Erdoğan introduces the presidential system is because he aspires to become president. And Erdoğan, who abhors sharing power with others, would never let himself be a president with limited powers, so he will definitely go for a presidential system.  Ultimately the question is who will check an omnipotent Erdoğan?

GÜRSEL: ERDOĞAN WANTS TO PERPETUATE ONE PARTY RULE
Kadri Gürsel in Milliyet writes that what the AKP and Prime Minister Erdoğan wants is not so much a two party system, where two parties alternate in power, but permanent one party rule. And it is with that goal in mind that the AKP is deliberately keeping Turkey polarized. Society is fractured by a religious conservative rhetoric and policies that alienates the secular middle class; that is the reason behind the restrictions on the sale of alcohol, and that is why Erdoğan called the statue in Kars a “freak”, and why it is intimated by AKP leaders that seculars only care about alcohol and sex. While such statements and acts alienate this minority, they ensure that the conservative majority remains mobilized behind the AKP, which is seen as the defender of religion and moral values. It is a strategy of controlled polarization, perpetuating the rule of the AKP.

ALTAN:  AN ADOPTION OF AN AMERICAN PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEM WOULD SOLVE ERDOĞAN’S AS WELL AS THE KURDS PROBLEM
Ahmet Altan in Taraf writes that the only part of the population of Turkey that can be expected to be influenced by the popular revolts in the Middle East is the Kurds. The moment this people, that cannot use its language freely, determines that they are not going to be offered a political solution their legitimate rage will translate into truly powerful civil disobedience. If the upcoming election, which will be held against the backdrop of the discussions about the new constitution, does not result in the enactment of a new constitution that accommodates the rights of the Kurds, this is what we are going to experience in Turkey. Prime Minister Erdoğan views the issue of the new constitution exclusively from the perspective of a “presidential” system. He introduces different versions of such a system in the debate. His reference to Putin’s Russia was truly unfortunate. And now, he has proposed the American system instead of the Russian one. He has spoken about the merits of the “two chamber” system in America. And most importantly, he has reminded that “the governors are elected”. If Turkey opts for a system like the American one, if the governors are popularly elected and come to share power with a U.S.-like president and are granted wide-ranging authority, such a structure would solve Erdoğan’s problem as well as the problem of the Kurds. In that case, we would have a presidential system which would not allow Erdoğan to become a Putin, while the Kurds would enjoy the right to elect their own governors, just like the voters in the other provinces, and could use Kurdish as a second language in the public sphere. Turkey would be emancipated from the suffocating hold of the centralized state. If we are going to have a presidential system, the best alternative is to adopt the American system where there are states and where the governors and other public servants are popularly elected. Now, I don’t know how realistic this is. There is no doubt that Erdoğan, with his successful record is going to be easily elected president. What is less certain is whether or not he will be able to persuade his own party about the advantages of adopting a system in which the Kurds would be allowed to elect their own governor. What is certain is that Turkey is about to go through a major change, closing the first chapter of the republic and introducing its second chapter.

İDİZ: THE AKP NEEDS TO DEVELOP ITS DIALOGUE WITH EGYPT’S MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD
Semih İdiz in Milliyet observes that those representatives of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood who address themselves to Western audiences these days go out of their way to assure that Egypt is not going to become another Iran. First of all, they remind that they are Sunni, and not Shia, and secondly they implore Westerners to view them not as potential Talibans, but as Turkey’s ruling AKP. We hear similar messages from Tunisia. This underlines that the recent events in the region is going to give the AKP new responsibilities. In other words, Turkey has become the point of reference for those in the Middle East who aspire for democracy. This also makes it necessary that the government of Erdoğan puts its own house in order whenit comes to democracy, human rights and the rule of law. For instance, the AKP government needs to recognize the incompatibility of being incensed by Egyptian police brutality while simultaneously backing up the police in Turkey that employs disproportionate violence against peaceful protesters. If Turkey is going to be able to live up to the expectations of those in the Middle East who wants to be inspired by its example as they strive for a democratic society, it will first have to be persuasive itself. The AKP also needs to develop its already existing dialogue with parties such as the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt and an-Nahda in Tunisia in order to explain the Turkish model for them and in order to persuade them to not to waver from the aim of securing democracy, rule of law and human rights.

© Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program Joint Center, 2010. This article may be reprinted provided that the following sentence be included: "This article was first published in the Turkey Analyst (www.turkeyanalyst.org), a biweekly publication of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program Joint Center".

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.