Turkey is a unique nation. With modern, democratic, and largely secular Europe to the West, and the more Islamic and predominantly authoritarian Middle East to the East, Turkey’s geographic location serves as a metaphor for the divide in its identity. Warring economic and cultural influences of the European Union, of which Turkey is a committed member, often conflict with conservative religious Islamic influences that still exist in a nation that is 97 % Muslim. This geographic and cultural conflict, combined with the longstanding Kurdish oppression and the more recent civil war in Syria that is beginning to spill into Turkish territory, makes the country increasingly complex and vulnerable. Recent widespread protests, originating in the iconic and historic Istanbul, have served to highlight the complexity and divided identity of the former Ottoman Empire.
On May 31, protestors gathered in Gezi Park in central Istanbul to voice opposition to planned development of the park. This small protest has since ballooned into a highly disruptive and increasingly violent nationwide movement that has united those wishing to voice grievances towards long time Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The spark for these widespread protests was caused by what was perceived as an overly aggressive response by police to the original protest in the park, however it has also provided an avenue for all of those who are unhappy with Erdogan’s management of the country to voice their distaste. These protests have caused major disruption in Turkey’s two largest cities, Istanbul and Ankara, have left three dead and over a thousand injured. At the moment, there appears to be little sign of protestors relenting, and the sudden surge of discontent has led many to wonder if this recent instability will threaten Erdogan’s government and lead to a ‘Turkish Spring’ in which Erdogan is overthrown in a fashion similar to that of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt or Muammar Gaddafi in Libya.
At first glance, the discontent expressed by the thousands of protestors is difficult to understand. Turkey’s economic strength remains a rarity in the current European Union. While most European economies are contracting, Turkey has continued to grow with relative strength, largely because of Erdogan’s commitment to attracting foreign investment and his devotion to an open market. Under Erdogan, the country has also managed to rein in inflation, which averaged a whopping 57% annually between 1995 and 2004 and is now running at around 9.4 percent, a number that is relatively healthy for an economy experiencing such an influx of capital. Unemployment is expected to hover at 9.4 percent, a number that may be high, but is much lower than that of Spain or Portugal, which have recently seen jobless rates that are close to a quarter of the working class. Even the most passionate critics of Erdogan cannot deny he has overseen a period of outstanding economic growth, and there is little doubt that Turkish workers, minus a widespread revolution, face a much brighter future than their Greek, Spanish or Portuguese counterparts in the European Union.
However, it is not Erdogan’s management of the economy that has irked protestors, but it is instead his recent approach to the civil liberties of Turkish citizens. Turkey has a longstanding reputation of failing to support freedom of the press, furthermore, a recent and severe silent crackdown on Turkish journalists has served as a basis for much discontent within the country. In fact, last year the Committee to Protect Journalists labelled Turkey as the world’s worst jailer of citizens, behind authoritarian China or Iran. Beyond this, citizens are concerned of Erdogan’s rumoured desire to reform the constitution such that he could continue to lead the country for a fourth term after his third term ends in 2015, in a move eerily similar to that made by his Russian counterpart and friend Vladimir Putin. This, along with other moves motivated by conservative religious influences, including stricter laws regarding the sale and consumption of alcohol, anger Turkey’s widespread moderates.
Beyond this, many argue that Erdogan’s aggressive capitalist agenda have unfairly benefited his friends. The most widespread support of this argument was the 2007 sale of Sabah-ATV, a large television and media network that was then publicly owned. The sale saw the transfer of the public corporation to a private company of which Erdogan’s son-in-law was a chief executive, and was conducted in a single bidder process that enraged many Turkish citizens. It is these examples of soft corruption and cronyism that provide further support for the protestors’ rhetoric.
However, Erdogan is no Mubarak, Assad, Ahmadinejad, or Gaddafi. In fact, prior to the beginning of his third term, Erdogan had been praised by the European Union and the United States as a man who has sought to improve the liberties of Turkish citizens. He has permitted judicial oversight from the European Union in a system that, before his political ascension, was crippled by corruption and lack of due process. He has permitted Kurdish expression in mainstream media and politics, allowed the Kurdish renaming of numerous towns and has apologized for former war crimes committed by the Turkish military against the Kurdish minority. Ultimately, it was these and other democratic reforms by Erodgan’s administration that allowed for the coveted entry into the European Union. In fact, many critics state that Erdogan does not desire democratic reform, but he does desire the benefits of European integration, and it is this desire that has overwhelmed his autocratic tendencies and led to reform. Regardless of his motivations, Erdogan’s Turkey is more democratic then the nation that preceded him. It is only his most recent actions that have provided a foundation for the argument that Erdogan has dictatorial tendencies. Even his recent actions, however, fail to counter the fact that Erdogan has been elected in internationally recognized elections three times, an act rarely credited to a brutal dictator.
Erdogan’s track record portray him as a man who was and still is committed to the economic and political growth of his nation, however his commitment to civil liberties is now in question. Many are concerned that Erdogan’s time in power is leading to complacency that is so commonly seen amongst long-time political leaders. Although the protests are gaining momentum, Erdogan presides over a system that is far more democratic than what was in place in either Egypt or Libya. A simple commitment to ending his role as political leader at the end of his third term, as stated by the constitution, as well as a concession to protect Gezi Park from development, would go a long ways in quelling protests. However it remains to be seen if the protests will follow the arc of the now lifeless Occupy Movement, or if a ‘Turkish Spring’ is in the waiting. Although Erdogan must take steps to prevent this, Turkish protesters need only to look to the West and see the economic shipwrecks that compose the European Union, or even worse to the East and the blood stained streets of Damascus to realize that all in all, the hand they have been dealt could have been much worse.
Leave a Reply