ADVERTISEMENT

Erdogan’s Violent Victory

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
79,354
62,361
113
Erdogan continues his disturbing trends in a U.S. ally and the one relatively stable Muslim democracy in the region:

For President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, violence made all the difference. It turned “stability” into the key word of an election that ushered his Justice and Development Party, or A.K.P., to the decisive victory denied it in the June 7 vote. One-party rule is back in Turkey and one man pulls the strings.


Improbably, Erdogan was able to embody stability when the politics of instability have been his modus operandi over the past five months. Or perhaps not so improbably — Erdogan, in power now for a dozen years, understands the psychology of fear and the force of Sunni Turkish nationalism, especially when the old specter of the Kurdish conflict appears.


The president has played with fire. His stance toward the terror-wielding jihadis of the Islamic State has married symbolic opposition to benign negligence, enough anyway to produce two terrorist attacks, one near the Syrian border on July 20 and one last month in Ankara, that left about 130 people dead. Most of the victims were Kurds. Goaded and attacked on several fronts in recent months, inside and beyond Turkish borders, the militants of the Kurdistan Workers Party, or P.K.K., returned to violence, killing two Turkish policemen on July 22. The old war stirred. It allowed Erdogan to suggest that only he stood between Turkey and the mayhem in neighboring states.


That, in a nutshell, is what changed between June and now. Erdogan did not respect the will of the people, of which he likes to speak. The June result was not to his liking; he set out, by all means, to overturn it and secure a parliamentary majority. Fragility was his political ally.


The A.K.P., embodying the conservative Sunni nationalism of the Anatolian heartland against the republican secularism of the coast, leapt to 49.3 percent of the vote from 40.9 percent in June. It took 317 seats, enough to govern alone, against 258 five months ago. A far-right party and the Kurdish-dominated People’s Republic Party, or H.D.P., lost votes as extreme nationalists and conservative Kurds opted for Erdogan. The scale of the shift, in short order, was extraordinary.

Still, the H.D.P., the new kid on the Turkish political block, managed to pass — just — the 10 percent legal threshold to enter Parliament. That was critical. Without the H.D.P., the A.K.P. dominance would have been so crushing as to enable Erdogan to change the Constitution and create an executive presidency on a whim. He will still push for that, but there will be pushback. Turkey, long the best hope for a Middle Eastern Muslim democracy, has not yet disappeared entirely over the authoritarian brink, but it is close.

Selahattin Demirtas, the charismatic leader of the H.D.P., said, “Maybe we lost one million votes but we are a party that managed to stand up against all massacre policies.” That, he suggested, was a “great victory.” Certainly, it was a significant one.

The H.D.P. is wounded but not moribund, despite widespread arrests of its members. Its future may hinge on how far Demirtas, criticized for not condemning P.K.K. violence with sufficient stringency, is able to chart a new, inclusive and nonviolent Kurdish course. Its appeal to non-Kurdish voters, the surprising development of June, hinges on that.

But Demirtas is vulnerable to Erdogan’s machinations. It is unclear how far the turbulent downward spiral of the past five months can be contained. The president’s genie of violence is out of the bottle. He has attacked a free press, undermined the rule of law, polarized the country and instilled an atmosphere where any opponent is “anti-nation” and treasonous.


“Let’s work together toward a Turkey where conflict, tension and polarization are nonexistent,” Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, declared in victory. That, from Erdogan’s man, sounded like hypocrisy at best.

Turkey for now seems set on the intolerant path of the 21st century authoritarian democracies that owe much to President Vladimir Putin of Russia — societies where dominance of the media, manipulation of conflict, unbound nationalism and the trashing of the rule of law allow the creation of a democratic masquerade. This represents a betrayal of the fuller democracy, freed of the threat of military coups, Erdogan promised Turkey a dozen years ago and seemed for a moment to represent.

It is time to end that betrayal. The alternative is more violence. This was victory in a democracy undermined.

I spoke to Ahmet Hakan, a prominent journalist beaten up during the campaign by unknown assailants. Hakan comes from a background of A.K.P. sympathy but has become critical. “My biggest criticism is that they do not tolerate criticism,” he told me. “I am not categorically against the government but they are so intolerant they cannot tolerate this. I saw the A.K.P. as trying to democratize Turkey, but step by step it became a one-man party.”

I asked who attacked him. Government cronies? He declined to say. “But the political atmosphere under this government makes this possible.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/03/o...lick&contentCollection=Opinion&pgtype=article
 
Defying predictions, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party, the A.K.P., won a conclusive victory in Sunday’s national elections in Turkey, freeing it from the need to form a coalition to stay in power. Mr. Erdogan proclaimed it a vote “in favor of stability,” and that is what it apparently was — though it was Mr. Erdogan who churned up much of the turmoil that frightened voters back into his camp.

Though the A.K.P. won about half the vote, it did not gain enough seats in Parliament to enable Mr. Erdogan to change the Constitution to create the strong executive presidency he has sought since he assumed the office last year. But the A.K.P. majority will mean a continuation of 12 years of one-party rule, and most probably a continuation of Mr. Erdogan’s increasingly authoritarian domination of the Turkish government.

Mr. Erdogan engineered Sunday’s vote after the last elections, on June 7, not only failed to secure the seats he needed for his presidential scheme, but cost the A.K.P. its majority and allowed a pro-Kurdish coalition, the Peoples’ Democratic Party, to enter Parliament for the first time. Instead of helping to form a coalition government after that vote, Mr. Erdogan called for new elections.

In the intervening time Turkey resumed bombing attacks on Syrian Kurds and violence flared in the country’s volatile southeast. Opposition politicians were assailed and the government’s longstanding harassment of the news media reached new levels. On the eve of the election, the police raided the last television channels critical of Mr. Erdogan, which had belonged to an Islamic movement that had gone from support of Mr. Erdogan to fierce opposition.

In the early years of A.K.P. rule, Mr. Erdogan had been hailed in Europe and the United States as the face of moderate Islam. Turkey’s economy bloomed, human rights improved as Turkey sought membership in the European Union and Mr. Erdogan achieved a cease-fire with Kurdish rebels. But much of that has been undermined, and Mr. Erdogan has come under increasing criticism in the West, as he has turned steadily toward authoritarian rule, assisted by his ally and prime minister, Ahmet Davutoglu.


The worst outcome of the election would be for Mr. Erdogan to use the results to justify further intimidation of critics as he seeks to make the presidency more powerful. Even if he does not achieve that goal, he will continue wielding power from behind the scenes, and there are fears that the pro-Kurdish coalition and others who campaigned against him will become targets of reprisals.

In a chilling taste of what may be coming, on the day after the election Turkish police officers raided a weekly magazine charged with “insulting the Turkish president.” The editor was detained and distribution was halted.

Mr. Erdogan was quick to take aim at his foreign critics. The vote, he said, “should be respected by the whole world, but I have not seen such maturity.” It should be respected; voters have put their trust in him to restore stability. The question now is whether he will use his office to ensure the survival of democracy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/03/o...ys-president-erdogan-pay-off.html?ref=opinion
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT