Istanbul protest at government's cessation of peace process with PKK, July, 2015. Demotix\/Erhan Demirtas. All rights reserved.In spite of being one of the only
\npolities in the Middle East considered as a democracy-model for other Muslim
\nnations by American administrations, Turkey has had an uneasy relationship with
\ndemocracy throughout its history. <\/i><\/p>\n
While its founding fathers
\ndesired western-style governance, Turkey\u2019s first twenty-seven years passed under
\na single-party regime whose opposition parties were closed or banned when they
\ncontradicted the ruling Kemalist ideology. In response to the Soviet threat
\nfollowing the Second World War, the regime adopted multi-party elections in
\norder to be accepted into the western bloc. Yet when the founding Republican
\nPeople\u2019s Party lost power to the Democrat Party in 1950, the military emerged
\nas the ultimate power in Turkish politics. <\/p>\n
Starting with the military coup
\nin 1960, the military intervened in every decade \u2013 in 1971, 1980 and 1997 \u2013
\nwhenever they believed the Kemalist ideology and state security were under
\nthreat. As a result, although there were civilian regimes and electoral
\npolitics in the political system, the Turkish people have rarely experienced
\ngenuine democracy almost throughout their entire history.<\/p>\n
The picture changed in 2007 when
\nthe pro-Islamist Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the military
\nchallenged each other over Abdullah Gul\u2019s nomination to the presidency.
\nAlthough Turkey\u2019s military opposed an Islamist politician\u2019s candidacy, the
\nelection following the disagreement ended with the AKP\u2019s victory, which
\nsignificantly diminished military prestige. A year later, this prestige
\ndeclined further as some retired soldiers, even a former chief of army staff,
\nwere accused of, and put on trial for, planning a coup. With these
\ndevelopments, military control of Turkish politics ended and Turkish politics
\nentered a truly democratic stage for the first time in its history.<\/p>\n
This democratization process
\nraised hopes on many issues, but especially on the Kurdish question. Since
\n1923, both the founding fathers and the military chose to end the Kurdish
\nquestion through military and economic means while social and political
\nconcessions were avoided, using the argument that they may be the first step on
\nthe way to an independent Kurdish state. <\/p>\n
Since its formation, AKP leaders,
\nespecially president Recep Tayyip Erdogan, have opposed militarist policies and
\nin 2009, when the military no longer controlled politics, the party started out
\non important cultural and political reforms. With the confidence of being a
\nsingle party government, the AKP started the Democratic Opening process in 2009
\nand met with several Kurdish groups in order to understand Kurdish grievances.
\nDuring this period, violence between the state and the PKK terrorist
\norganization diminished as indirect contacts between both sides were
\nestablished. In 2013, the government announced a Democracy Package which
\nincluded some cultural reforms and a \u201csolution process\u201d designed to curtail the
\nlong-lasting violence. All these policies, which could not have been undertaken
\nin the period of military control, were the result of democratization. The
\npromise was the solution to the long-lasting Kurdish question.Yet, democracy is
\nnever a perfect political system and may intensify existing problems,
\nespecially once personal and party interests are at stake. After ending the
\nmilitary control of politics, the AKP seemingly slowed democratic consolidation
\nin Turkey. Accession to the European Union, which had been the central focus
\nbetween 2002 and 2007, was removed from the agenda, while growing religiosity
\nin politics and excessive police repression during the Gezi park protests in
\n2013 raised question about the AKP\u2019s commitment to democracy. <\/p>\n
However, despite domestic and international
\ncriticism, Ankara did not step back from the solution process in this period until
\nit came to the recent elections in June 2015. Due to electoral concerns, the
\nAKP suspended the solution process during the pre-election period while
\ncharismatic Kurdish leader Selahattin Demirtas\u2019 moderate speeches increased his
\npopularity not only in the Kurdish region but in western Turkey as well.
\nConsequently, the AKP lost around 9 per cent of the vote compared to the 2011
\nelections while both the ethnic-Turkish Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and
\nethnic-Kurdish Peoples\u2019 Democratic Party (HDP) increased their votes. The AKP
\nlost its ability to form a single-party government by losing its parliamentary
\nmajority.<\/p>\n
This electoral result has changed
\nall the political equations in Turkey. While the MHP increased its opposition
\nboth to the solution process and to the HDP\u2019s presence in the assembly, the AKP
\nalso played on Turkish nationalist sentiment by accusing the HDP of being on
\nthe same side as the PKK terrorist organization. Speeches by AKP officials
\nimplied that the government has no desire to continue the solution process
\nwhich, they believe, cost them their parliamentarian majority. The Suruc
\nmassacre by an ISIS member led to further deterioration of the situation.
\nFollowing the attack, which killed 32 people, the HDP blamed the government and
\nintelligence agencies for not preventing the attack, while the PKK initiated a
\nterrorist campaign by killing Turkish security officers and kidnapping people. <\/p>\n
This has given the AKP and MHP
\nmore of a chance to increase their militarist-nationalist rhetoric, while the
\nHDP has proved unable to criticize the PKK, again mainly out of its own
\nelectoral concerns in southeast Turkey. All parties have chosen to fight rather
\nthan take the last steps in the solution process.<\/p>\n
Consequently, all the political parties
\nare starting to follow the same paths they took in the 1990s. While the PKK
\norganizes terrorist attacks, the Turkish army hits the PKK camps in northern
\nIraq and both the MHP and AKP have started a political campaign to remove
\nKurdish parliamentarians\u2019 immunity. <\/p>\n
The situation today shows that
\nTurkey\u2019s problem with democracy is more structural and normative than simply a
\ncivil-military relations problem. With a politically-aggressive military
\nremoved, Turkish politicians are still unable to play by the rules of
\ndemocracy, as both the AKP and MHP are unwilling to recognize the HDP\u2019s
\nelectoral gains. At the same time, the HDP cannot effectively differentiate
\nitself from PKK terrorism, as its leaders cannot criticize the organization. <\/p>\n
But most importantly, all sides
\nexpend all their effort on protecting their personal and party interests
\ninstead of fixing the system that they broke. In its first real test after the
\nend of military control, Turkish democracy has failed. If democracy cannot keep
\nits promise and bring peace, then what can?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Istanbul protest at government's cessation of peace process with PKK, July, 2015. Demotix\/Erhan Demirtas. All rights reserved.In spite of being one of the only polities in the Middle East considered as a democracy-model for other Muslim nations by American administrations, Turkey has had an uneasy relationship with democracy throughout its history. While its founding fathers…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1252","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1252","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1252"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1252\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1252"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1252"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1252"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}