Tweet
ERDOGAN: TO BE OR NOT TO BE
by Steven A. Cook
February 20, 2013
Turkey's Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan addresses members of
parliament from his ruling AK Party (AKP) during a meeting at the
Turkish parliament (Umit Bektas/Courtesy Reuters). Turkey's Prime
Minister Tayyip Erdogan addresses members of parliament from his
ruling AK Party (AKP) during a meeting at the Turkish parliament
(Umit Bektas/Courtesy Reuters).
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has already established
himself as the most important politician of his generation. He has
won two elections in a row with sizable majorities and presided over a
period of remarkable economic growth and political change in the decade
since his Justice and Development Party (AKP) came to power. Erdogan,
whose charisma is apparent even to non-Turkish-speaking audiences
and who has an innate sense of the Turkish public, now has a chance
to move beyond his current lofty status to a truly historic figure.
Indeed, Prime Minister Erdogan has the opportunity to become the most
significant Turkish statesman since Mustafa Kemal-who literally became
the "father of the Turks" when the Turkish Grand National Assembly
bestowed him the name "Ataturk" in November 1934. Yet the Turkish
leader is about to let a potential legacy as a transformative figure
slip from his grasp.
Prime Minister Erdogan has a problem. By agreement within the Justice
and Development Party no leader can serve as head of government for
more than two consecutive terms, meaning that Erdogan is barred
from running again in 2014. He quite correctly believes that he
has more work to do-among a range of ambitious initiatives he would
like to preside over turning Turkey into a regional energy hub;
consolidating Ankara's new-found regional influence; and overseeing
further transformation of Turkey's political system.
Consequently, Erdogan has let it be known, though not in so many
words, that he would like to be Turkey's next president just not
in the way that powers of the presidency are currently configured.
The powers of the Turkish presidency are not "largely symbolic" as
observers often erroneously indicate. Under the 1982 constitution,
the president can call parliament into session, promulgate laws,
resubmit draft legislation to parliament, accredit representatives
to Turkey and receive those of foreign countries, call new elections
for the Grand National Assembly, issue decrees with the force of law,
appoint rectors of universities, name members to the State Supervisory
Council, Higher Education Board, and various parts of the judiciary.
As important as these powers and prerogatives may be, however, the
Turkish presidency is an apolitical post whose incumbent is expected
to avoid the day-to-day rough and tumble of the Turkish political
arena, and refrain from trying to drive political events. The Cankaya
Palace's current resident, President Abdullah Gul, has perfected the
role of above-the-fray-endowed-with-gravitas-elder-statesman that is
suited to the Turkish presidency. As successful as Gul has been, Prime
Minister Erdogan clearly wants something quite different and has thus
spent a lot of time recently on the issue of constitutional change.
There are few Turks who would deny that their country needs a new
constitution. The current document dates back to November 1982 and
was written at the behest of the military junta that took over the
country on September 12, 1980. Despite the extensive amending that
the AKP has overseen since 2003, the constitution is a relic of a
Turkey that no longer exists. As Turkish society has outgrown the
drab conformism that Kemalism demanded and has become more complex,
differentiated, and dynamic, Turkey needs a constitution that both
befits and furthers its goal of becoming a consolidated democracy.
As a result, Erdogan and the AKP-in conjunction with other political
groups-began drafting a new constitution in October 2011 with this
aim in mind.
Yet sixteen months into the process, one has to wonder whether a
new constitution is being written for Turkey or for Prime Minister
Erdogan. During this time it has become clear that Erdogan wants to
revamp the presidency to suit his desire to play a more active role
in politics after he is termed out as prime minister. In the abstract
this is not such a bad thing. There are successful democracies that
feature a presidential system. At the same time, however, social
science research indicates that presidential systems are more prone
to the accumulation of executive power and authoritarianism than
parliamentary systems. It is unclear whether Erdogan's opponents
are familiar with these data, but they nevertheless fear what an
empowered Erdogan presidency might mean for the country. Much of
what has reportedly been proposed does not differ too much from
current presidential powers, though in an important change the
executive would have far greater ability to shape the judiciary
than previously thereby weakening the balance of power-a hallmark
of any democratic system. The prime minister and the AKP have been
adamant that the new constitution will strengthen and deepen Turkish
democracy, but their record over the last five years suggests that
the opposition's fears are not unfounded. After all, Turkey is a
country where journalists are routinely jailed on dodgy grounds, an
alleged conspiracy of something called the "deep state" to overthrow
the government in 2007 has morphed into a conspiracy of its own
against peaceful critics of the AKP, the machinery of the state has
been used against private business concerns because their owners
disagree with the government, and freedom of expression in all its
forms is under pressure. Spokesmen for the AKP will offer a variety
of explanations for these deficiencies, from "it's the law" and the
"context is missing," to "it's purely fabricated," but they do not
wash under the weight of the evidence. Under these circumstances,
opponents of the AKP worry that Erdogan-or any future president,
for that matter-will pursue unchecked an agenda contrary to the
public will.
Speaking of which, a recent survey that Kadir Has University conducted
found that 65.8 percent of the Turkish public indicated that they
wanted to keep the current parliamentary system. If Turkey did make
the switch to a presidential system, 34.3 percent would support an
Erdogan presidency. To be sure, this is only one poll and 34.3 percent
support is actually quite strong in comparison to other potential
candidates, but there is a sense that Prime Minister Erdogan is not
master of the Turkish political domain on the constitution and the
presidency. Even as senior AKP leaders have indicated the party's
willingness to be flexible on a presidential system, some of the prime
minister's recent moves suggest that he is willing to go to significant
lengths to secure support for a new constitution with enhanced
presidential powers. The peace talks with the Kurdistan Workers'
Party (PKK), the overtures to the Kurd-based Peace and Democracy Party
(BDP), which Erdogan accused not too long ago of being in cahoots with
the terrorists of the PKK, and the sudden release of BDP politicians
from prison may be good for Turkey overall, but it also smacks of
political cynicism. Erdogan also showed up at the hospital bed of
retired General Ergin Saygun to wish him well. Saygun was Deputy Chief
of Staff until 2009 and was sentenced to eighteen years in prison for
plotting a coup against the prime minister's government. In addition,
after presiding over the decimation of the senior Turkish command,
the prime minister has now publicly complained that there are too
many generals imprisoned.
Erdogan's sudden concern for the well-being of the commanders suggests
he is looking for additional constituencies in the coming domestic
battles over the constitution.
It does not have to be this way, however. Erdogan could set aside
personal ambition for what is in the best long-term interest of
Turkey and allow the country's political factions to fight out a new
constitution regardless of what the prime minister wants. It does
not seem that he can do that, however, which means that Erdogan will
always be one of Turkey's most consequential politicians, but he will
miss the chance to be a great statesman.
http://blogs.cfr.org/cook/2013/02/20/erdogan-to-be-or-not-to-be/?cid=nlc-pub
lic-the_world_this_week-link20-20130222
by Steven A. Cook
February 20, 2013
Turkey's Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan addresses members of
parliament from his ruling AK Party (AKP) during a meeting at the
Turkish parliament (Umit Bektas/Courtesy Reuters). Turkey's Prime
Minister Tayyip Erdogan addresses members of parliament from his
ruling AK Party (AKP) during a meeting at the Turkish parliament
(Umit Bektas/Courtesy Reuters).
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has already established
himself as the most important politician of his generation. He has
won two elections in a row with sizable majorities and presided over a
period of remarkable economic growth and political change in the decade
since his Justice and Development Party (AKP) came to power. Erdogan,
whose charisma is apparent even to non-Turkish-speaking audiences
and who has an innate sense of the Turkish public, now has a chance
to move beyond his current lofty status to a truly historic figure.
Indeed, Prime Minister Erdogan has the opportunity to become the most
significant Turkish statesman since Mustafa Kemal-who literally became
the "father of the Turks" when the Turkish Grand National Assembly
bestowed him the name "Ataturk" in November 1934. Yet the Turkish
leader is about to let a potential legacy as a transformative figure
slip from his grasp.
Prime Minister Erdogan has a problem. By agreement within the Justice
and Development Party no leader can serve as head of government for
more than two consecutive terms, meaning that Erdogan is barred
from running again in 2014. He quite correctly believes that he
has more work to do-among a range of ambitious initiatives he would
like to preside over turning Turkey into a regional energy hub;
consolidating Ankara's new-found regional influence; and overseeing
further transformation of Turkey's political system.
Consequently, Erdogan has let it be known, though not in so many
words, that he would like to be Turkey's next president just not
in the way that powers of the presidency are currently configured.
The powers of the Turkish presidency are not "largely symbolic" as
observers often erroneously indicate. Under the 1982 constitution,
the president can call parliament into session, promulgate laws,
resubmit draft legislation to parliament, accredit representatives
to Turkey and receive those of foreign countries, call new elections
for the Grand National Assembly, issue decrees with the force of law,
appoint rectors of universities, name members to the State Supervisory
Council, Higher Education Board, and various parts of the judiciary.
As important as these powers and prerogatives may be, however, the
Turkish presidency is an apolitical post whose incumbent is expected
to avoid the day-to-day rough and tumble of the Turkish political
arena, and refrain from trying to drive political events. The Cankaya
Palace's current resident, President Abdullah Gul, has perfected the
role of above-the-fray-endowed-with-gravitas-elder-statesman that is
suited to the Turkish presidency. As successful as Gul has been, Prime
Minister Erdogan clearly wants something quite different and has thus
spent a lot of time recently on the issue of constitutional change.
There are few Turks who would deny that their country needs a new
constitution. The current document dates back to November 1982 and
was written at the behest of the military junta that took over the
country on September 12, 1980. Despite the extensive amending that
the AKP has overseen since 2003, the constitution is a relic of a
Turkey that no longer exists. As Turkish society has outgrown the
drab conformism that Kemalism demanded and has become more complex,
differentiated, and dynamic, Turkey needs a constitution that both
befits and furthers its goal of becoming a consolidated democracy.
As a result, Erdogan and the AKP-in conjunction with other political
groups-began drafting a new constitution in October 2011 with this
aim in mind.
Yet sixteen months into the process, one has to wonder whether a
new constitution is being written for Turkey or for Prime Minister
Erdogan. During this time it has become clear that Erdogan wants to
revamp the presidency to suit his desire to play a more active role
in politics after he is termed out as prime minister. In the abstract
this is not such a bad thing. There are successful democracies that
feature a presidential system. At the same time, however, social
science research indicates that presidential systems are more prone
to the accumulation of executive power and authoritarianism than
parliamentary systems. It is unclear whether Erdogan's opponents
are familiar with these data, but they nevertheless fear what an
empowered Erdogan presidency might mean for the country. Much of
what has reportedly been proposed does not differ too much from
current presidential powers, though in an important change the
executive would have far greater ability to shape the judiciary
than previously thereby weakening the balance of power-a hallmark
of any democratic system. The prime minister and the AKP have been
adamant that the new constitution will strengthen and deepen Turkish
democracy, but their record over the last five years suggests that
the opposition's fears are not unfounded. After all, Turkey is a
country where journalists are routinely jailed on dodgy grounds, an
alleged conspiracy of something called the "deep state" to overthrow
the government in 2007 has morphed into a conspiracy of its own
against peaceful critics of the AKP, the machinery of the state has
been used against private business concerns because their owners
disagree with the government, and freedom of expression in all its
forms is under pressure. Spokesmen for the AKP will offer a variety
of explanations for these deficiencies, from "it's the law" and the
"context is missing," to "it's purely fabricated," but they do not
wash under the weight of the evidence. Under these circumstances,
opponents of the AKP worry that Erdogan-or any future president,
for that matter-will pursue unchecked an agenda contrary to the
public will.
Speaking of which, a recent survey that Kadir Has University conducted
found that 65.8 percent of the Turkish public indicated that they
wanted to keep the current parliamentary system. If Turkey did make
the switch to a presidential system, 34.3 percent would support an
Erdogan presidency. To be sure, this is only one poll and 34.3 percent
support is actually quite strong in comparison to other potential
candidates, but there is a sense that Prime Minister Erdogan is not
master of the Turkish political domain on the constitution and the
presidency. Even as senior AKP leaders have indicated the party's
willingness to be flexible on a presidential system, some of the prime
minister's recent moves suggest that he is willing to go to significant
lengths to secure support for a new constitution with enhanced
presidential powers. The peace talks with the Kurdistan Workers'
Party (PKK), the overtures to the Kurd-based Peace and Democracy Party
(BDP), which Erdogan accused not too long ago of being in cahoots with
the terrorists of the PKK, and the sudden release of BDP politicians
from prison may be good for Turkey overall, but it also smacks of
political cynicism. Erdogan also showed up at the hospital bed of
retired General Ergin Saygun to wish him well. Saygun was Deputy Chief
of Staff until 2009 and was sentenced to eighteen years in prison for
plotting a coup against the prime minister's government. In addition,
after presiding over the decimation of the senior Turkish command,
the prime minister has now publicly complained that there are too
many generals imprisoned.
Erdogan's sudden concern for the well-being of the commanders suggests
he is looking for additional constituencies in the coming domestic
battles over the constitution.
It does not have to be this way, however. Erdogan could set aside
personal ambition for what is in the best long-term interest of
Turkey and allow the country's political factions to fight out a new
constitution regardless of what the prime minister wants. It does
not seem that he can do that, however, which means that Erdogan will
always be one of Turkey's most consequential politicians, but he will
miss the chance to be a great statesman.
http://blogs.cfr.org/cook/2013/02/20/erdogan-to-be-or-not-to-be/?cid=nlc-pub
lic-the_world_this_week-link20-20130222