Tweet
THE UNPREDICTABILITY OF THE AKP
Hurriyet
March 23 2010
Turkey
"Non-Muslims have suffered a lot in Turkey. The wealth tax [directed
at rich non-Muslims in 1942] was a disgrace. The closure of the Greek
seminary [on Heybeliada, in 1971] was a great shame. The Sept. 6-7
incidents [a violent campaign against Greeks and other non-Muslim
minorities in 1955] were an inhumane conspiracy that humiliated Turkey
in the eyes of the world."
No, this is not a quote from Baskın Oran, Murat Belge or Ufuk Uras.
These are the words of Huseyin Celik, deputy chairman of the Justice
and Development Party, or AKP, in a recent interview.
I quote the conservative politician because I was really surprised
reading the interview. His analysis of the treatment of minorities in
this country, in the past and in the present, strongly resembles the
way liberal Turks would describe the repressive policy of the Turkish
state towards all its citizens who were considered to be "the other."
Are these the opinions of the deputy chairman of a party that is
seen by many in Turkey as the defender of the country's majority
Sunni Muslims?
It is just one example to show how difficult it is to categorize the
ruling party. That is, for those who have not taken sides yet. Many
in this country already did. The AKP opponents interpret every move
by the government as proof of a perfidious strategy to undermine
the secular and modern fundamentals of the Turkish Republic. They
sometimes have to admit that AKP's plans may sound nice and that
the prime minister is the best salesman around. But in the end,
they share a basic distrust of the party that has labeled itself as
democratic conservative. AKP-skeptics prefer another description:
authoritarian Islamists.
AKP supporters could not disagree more. They portray the party's
performance as a courageous, uphill struggle of the formerly excluded
against the status quo forces. In their view, the latter are bent on
defending undemocratic practices, a rigid interpretation of secularism
and a nationalist bias, all under the disguise of protecting the
Western vocation of the modern republic.
I guess most Turks are somewhere in the middle and tend to agree with
Taraf editor-in-chief Ahmet Altan when he described the AKP leader,
using a football metaphor, as "a forward who occasionally fills the
audience with joy and hope and at other times leads people to tear
their hair and bite their fingers in despair and anger."
Just to give you few examples of the sometimes mind-boggling mistakes
of the prime minister and his party, here's a list: he defended
indicted war criminal Omar al-Bashir, waged a private vendetta
against the Dogan Media Group and threatened to expel undocumented
Armenian workers.
But then, there are the brave initiatives too: promising to repair
the mistakes made in the past by the Turkish state in dealing with
its ethnic and religious minorities. Pushing back the role of the
military. Or, the latest example: amending the 1982 Constitution.
One can discuss the details of some of the elements in the package and
whether it is correct to put them all together for a yes-or-no-vote.
But let's be fair: these changes were long overdue and, if and when
adopted, will make Turkey a more democratic country. Personally I
would add: closer to European Union membership as well, although I
realize that this is not the main concern of most Turks nowadays.
I am afraid that Turkey and the rest of the world will have to live
with this unpredictability of the governing party. Because there
seems to be no grand design for Turkey at the AKP headquarters,
basic instincts, last moment improvisations and smart ways to by-pass
establishment forces dominate the agenda.
It sometimes drives you crazy, it sometimes makes you smile. And,
most probably, we are only at half time!
Hurriyet
March 23 2010
Turkey
"Non-Muslims have suffered a lot in Turkey. The wealth tax [directed
at rich non-Muslims in 1942] was a disgrace. The closure of the Greek
seminary [on Heybeliada, in 1971] was a great shame. The Sept. 6-7
incidents [a violent campaign against Greeks and other non-Muslim
minorities in 1955] were an inhumane conspiracy that humiliated Turkey
in the eyes of the world."
No, this is not a quote from Baskın Oran, Murat Belge or Ufuk Uras.
These are the words of Huseyin Celik, deputy chairman of the Justice
and Development Party, or AKP, in a recent interview.
I quote the conservative politician because I was really surprised
reading the interview. His analysis of the treatment of minorities in
this country, in the past and in the present, strongly resembles the
way liberal Turks would describe the repressive policy of the Turkish
state towards all its citizens who were considered to be "the other."
Are these the opinions of the deputy chairman of a party that is
seen by many in Turkey as the defender of the country's majority
Sunni Muslims?
It is just one example to show how difficult it is to categorize the
ruling party. That is, for those who have not taken sides yet. Many
in this country already did. The AKP opponents interpret every move
by the government as proof of a perfidious strategy to undermine
the secular and modern fundamentals of the Turkish Republic. They
sometimes have to admit that AKP's plans may sound nice and that
the prime minister is the best salesman around. But in the end,
they share a basic distrust of the party that has labeled itself as
democratic conservative. AKP-skeptics prefer another description:
authoritarian Islamists.
AKP supporters could not disagree more. They portray the party's
performance as a courageous, uphill struggle of the formerly excluded
against the status quo forces. In their view, the latter are bent on
defending undemocratic practices, a rigid interpretation of secularism
and a nationalist bias, all under the disguise of protecting the
Western vocation of the modern republic.
I guess most Turks are somewhere in the middle and tend to agree with
Taraf editor-in-chief Ahmet Altan when he described the AKP leader,
using a football metaphor, as "a forward who occasionally fills the
audience with joy and hope and at other times leads people to tear
their hair and bite their fingers in despair and anger."
Just to give you few examples of the sometimes mind-boggling mistakes
of the prime minister and his party, here's a list: he defended
indicted war criminal Omar al-Bashir, waged a private vendetta
against the Dogan Media Group and threatened to expel undocumented
Armenian workers.
But then, there are the brave initiatives too: promising to repair
the mistakes made in the past by the Turkish state in dealing with
its ethnic and religious minorities. Pushing back the role of the
military. Or, the latest example: amending the 1982 Constitution.
One can discuss the details of some of the elements in the package and
whether it is correct to put them all together for a yes-or-no-vote.
But let's be fair: these changes were long overdue and, if and when
adopted, will make Turkey a more democratic country. Personally I
would add: closer to European Union membership as well, although I
realize that this is not the main concern of most Turks nowadays.
I am afraid that Turkey and the rest of the world will have to live
with this unpredictability of the governing party. Because there
seems to be no grand design for Turkey at the AKP headquarters,
basic instincts, last moment improvisations and smart ways to by-pass
establishment forces dominate the agenda.
It sometimes drives you crazy, it sometimes makes you smile. And,
most probably, we are only at half time!