I rarely go to Malkin’s blog, but I noted via Memeorandum that she was commenting on the Turkish elections, so I was curious. Her post was pretty much what I expected: Which way, Turkey?:
Turkey is holding parliamentary elections today. The importance of the vote there can’t be emphasized enough. The choice in the minds of many Turks is this: sharia or secularism? East or West?
I suspect that there is a great deal of the right-leaning Blogosphere that believes this to be the case. However, there is no indication that this is, in fact, the case. I am well aware that there are those in Turkey who are quite concerned about what the AKP’s reall agenda is (including at least one very bright former graduate student of mine). However, the notion that this should be painted as “secularism v. sharia” and “East or West” is simply incorrect. For example, it is the AKP that is the party that is most in favor of Turkey joining the EU (that would be a pro-Western stance, for those of you keeping score at home).
The funny thing is that the so-called “neo-con” faction of the GOP ought to be looking at Turkey as their best potential example of the notion that Muslim states can be democratic and the AKP may well be their best example of a moderate Muslim-based political party of any consequence in the entire world. If the AKP ends up governing in a way that does respect rights then it would seem to me to be of use to the neo-cons (to date the only issue that has been a serious contention in this area is that the AKP supports allowing the wearing of headscarves by Muslim women for those who choose to do so). However, it would seem that Islamophobia is more in operation here than anything else.
Also, Malkin’s focus on violence during the election is rather odd, as 17 injuries in a country the size of Turkey hardly seems noteworthy (let alone headline-worthy). Her use of scare quotes around “largely peaceful” are rather telling.
Ed Morrissey also buys into the notion that an AKP victory is a victory for “Islamists”–don’t people realize (answer: no) that the AKP has had a majority in the parliament for about four years now and that during that time that Turkey wasn’t transformed into pre-invasion Afghanistan?
Of course, Ed’s logic on why Turkey has been a “singular success in the region as a Muslim democracy” is strained (to be polite):
That success comes from the constant threat of a military coup; the army has taken control of the government on several occasions when it felt that the secular nature of modern Turkey was threatened. That threat keeps Islamists like Tayyip Erdogan from attempting to create an Iran-like state at the juncture of Europe and Asia.
Yep–nothing says “democracy” like the occasional military coup. And, again, the notion that the AKP’s goals is to turn Turkey into Iran is problematic. Indeed, this entire line of thinking is one which belies Ed’s supposed support for democracy in this case. To wit: the fear is that the people will elect someone who will, in turn, do away with democracy. Therefore, we need a non-democratic Guardian (the military) to assure that the wrong people don’t get elected. That really isn’t an especially good model for democracy.
Sphere: Related ContentThe views expressed in the comments are the sole responsibility of the person leaving those comments. They do not reflect the opinion of the author of PoliBlog, nor have they been vetted by the author.
July 22nd, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Turkey’s EU stance is the biggest bellwether. If we see them wanting not to join then let’s be afraid. Although I’m sure some think it’s a nefarious plot by the AKP to “sneak” more Muslims into Europe.
July 22nd, 2007 at 7:06 pm
The akp is the most corrupt party in Turkish history…even more corrupt than Erbakan’s of not too long ago. They paid naive voters in the country side to vote for them just like Erbakan’s people did. My maid was even approached…offering money for fuel, offering money for food, offering money for the islamic dress (which she didn’t wear). Don’t ever buy into the front that the akp has put up to join the Eu…don’t buy the good economic numbers…..they have cooked the books just like klintin did!! This is surely a sad day in Turkish history. Whatever happened to Ataturk’s principals???????
July 23rd, 2007 at 6:45 am
[...] Right-wing bloggers unable to cope with Turkish election results 23 07 2007 From the Poliblogger, Dr. Steven Taylor: I rarely go to Malkin’s blog, but I noted via Memeorandum that she was commenting on the Turkish elections, so I was curious. Her post was pretty much what I expected: Which way, Turkey?: Turkey is holding parliamentary elections today. The importance of the vote there can’t be emphasized enough. The choice in the minds of many Turks is this: sharia or secularism? East or West? [...]
July 23rd, 2007 at 3:27 pm
I suspect there is almost no risk that the AKP will stop its desire to join the EU as long as the door is not completely closed. On the other hand, I would hope that the EU would actually hold Turkey to democratic and secular principles and not use such criteria flexibly. The country has a very long way to go in terms of democracy (some of which Linda alludes to and then there is the electoral system and the military involvement in politics) and there has indeed been backsliding on the secularism under the AKP.
While I agree completely with the main thrust of Steven’s post, I would note that once the AKP has the presidency (which is not powerless, despite being mostly ceremonial) it will be unchecked by any political institution, including the courts (which are subject to presidential appointment). And it would even be able to stack the military and National Security Council in its favor, assuming no military coup (or credible threat of a coup) to stop it from doing so.
Thus the record of the previous almost five years of AKP governance is only a rough guide to where it might go in the next four (the constitutional term parliament is being shortened). And while military “guardianship” is obviously by definition not democratic, it is valid to note that the Turkish military has checked tendencies of Turkish politics to drift away from secularism in the past. Whether democracy and Islamism can yet be reconciled will be a big test over the coming years, and if Turkey does not turn out well in this regard, what other country would?
July 24th, 2007 at 12:58 pm
While it’s not the best model in the world, many Third World countries do in fact use the military as the guarantors of democracy. The majority does not have the right to trample on the rights of the minority. If the majority elects someone who will run a dictatorship of the majority, the military steps in.
It’s better than the alternative: elected despots. Not all societies are like the US, where right from the start people understood at least in theory that government existed to protect the rights of the individual, not to grant the majority absolute power. In many countries, democracy is understood to be that the side who win, gets everything, including the losers’ life and liberty. I’d prefer military rule in that case.
July 25th, 2007 at 7:52 am
@MSS
The reports I’ve read (Economist I think) suggest that the AKP will look to install a ‘conciliatory’ president.
More generally:
To my mind, this is a wonderful result. The AKP effectively
asked the Turkish public if:
1) They like a fast growing, stable, low inflation economy (the result of AKP policies in their last term)
2) They want their democratically elected governments to be periodically overthrown by the military
3) Implicitly (maybe explicitly - I don’t know enough to say) whether they support the right of Turkish women to wear the veil etc. (NOT - to force women to wear the veil).
The public answered positively to the first (this was a positive election despite being called in response to threats from the military) and they sent an emphatic message to the military that the days of repeated coups are over.
The answer to the third position is more complex but probably the most interesting. I wonder how many of the people decrying this result would feel about the wearing of crucifixes being banned in all public places. I imagine that there would be outcry against ‘those interfering secularists (atheists)’. In Turkey, that’s the situation today. The AKP would allow professional Turkish women to wear the veil and provided that doesn’t interfere with one’s ability to do a job, I fail to see the problem.
Frankly (and this is hardly a minority view), the AKP are starting to look like the old Christian Democratic parties of Europe. To me, what we’re seeing in Turkey is an extremely positive process of democratic maturation (horrible phrase - can’t think of a better one right now). The growing strength of a pluralist Turkish democracy able to accommodate both secular and religious Turks without suffering the sine wave of democracy and coup is an example to the Middle East.
If you want to guarantee an ever strengthening islamist movement in Turkey then stifle the voices of effective progressive political parties like the AKP. If the Turkish secularists want to beat them, they’d better just pull their socks up and make themselves electable.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:27 am
Taylor writes, “Of course, Ed’s logic on why Turkey has been a “singular success in the region as a Muslim democracy” is strained (to be polite)”:
Morrissey writes, “That success comes from the constant threat of a military coup; the army has taken control of the government on several occasions when it felt that the secular nature of modern Turkey was threatened. That threat keeps Islamists like Tayyip Erdogan from attempting to create an Iran-like state at the juncture of Europe and Asia”.
I write, “Morrissey, writes the truth”. It is the rule of Constitutional law the Army is authorized to impose martial law and take over the government…
“Some analysts have suggested that among national institutions, only the armed forces retain the public trust and respect. Since the end of single-party rule in 1950, they have intervened directly three times in the country’s politics. In each instance, civilian control was restored after a transition period during which purported problems were addressed, justice meted out, new constitutions adopted, and economic growth accomplished”.
“On 12 September 1980, the newly elected government of Demirel was overthrown. Five days later, Chief of Staff General Kenan Evren declared that the military was responding to domestic political anarchy. He reinforced this message by laying out the new regime’s program, which included civil order, national unity, and a secular state based on social justice and human rights. Planned months in advance, the coup was welcomed by most Turks as an answer to the preceding years of economic and political stagnation. The delay in overthrowing the government seemed to reinforce the claims of the Turkish military that they were sincere in their desire to prevent civil war and preserve the Kemalist republic”.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:43 am
You miss the point: if the only way that “democracy” is possible in Turkey is for the military to take over whenever it thinks it has to “protect” it, then ultimately it isn’t a democracy at all.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:07 am
It’s a democracy…most of the people are not democratic and this is the reason their Army steps in. When Americans become unruly…the law steps in and/or martial law is imposed to calm the unruly.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:23 am
Well, no.
If the military is given the ability, codified or otherwise, to act as the “guardian” of “democracy” then you don’t have democracy you have, at best, praetorianism.
By definition one cannot have democracy if the government can be seized by a non-elected, non-responsive entity.
A military coup is not the same thing as the police arresting you for being drunk and disorderly.
And you lead sentence is a non sequitur:
First, to assert that “it is a democracy” yet “most of the people are not democratic” is rather contradictory. How can one simultaneously assert that a given polity is “democratic” yet most of the people in it “are not democratic.”
For that matter, what does “being democratic” mean in the context of your sentence? More Turks voted in the recent elections than American ever do in ours, for example. Are they “not democratic” in your estimation because 47-ish% of them voted for the AKP?
Realize, too, the military has stepped in more to protect secularism than democracy.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:53 am
Thank you, Dr. Taylor. “Everyday is a school day and every night is night school”- Jason Leverette, Patriot