Today’s links.
Michael Koplow has an analysis on his indispensable Ottomans and Zionists blog on “What comes after the Turkish protests.”
Two op-eds in today’s NYT. In one, MIT economist Daron Acemoglu informs us that “Development won’t ensure democracy in Turkey.” In the other, Soner Cagaptay says that “The middle class strikes back.” Money quote:
The new middle class that the A.K.P. has built is telling its government that democracy is not just about winning elections; it is also about building consensus. And they are telling Mr. Erdogan that while they may vote for him, they do not necessarily support all his policies.
This is good news for Turkey’s future. The country has crossed a threshold — it is too middle class and too diverse to fall under a one-size-fits-all democracy. And the A.K.P. will have to listen to opposing views, even though it remains the most popular party in the country.
Turkey has become the first majority middle-class and majority Muslim society in history. Now it can become the first consolidated democracy among all Muslim countries, if Mr. Erdogan begins to respect the will of his people.
The middle class and, more generally, civil society, which is finally waking up and taking matters into its own hands, as Guardian correspondent Luke Harding reports
“In the past, the army would step in if the government abandoned secular values,” another protester, Onur Özgen, said, referencing the Turkish military’s earlier practice of staging undemocratic coups. “They can’t do it any more. Most of the generals are in jail. So people have realised they have to voice their own concerns. There is no other way to change [things] than ourselves.”
In view of the pathetic political opposition (CHP et al), Turkish civil society will need to muster all the force it has to counter the impulses of its tough guy PM. In a commentary on “The Bulldozer” (i.e. Erdoğan), journalist Michael Weiss, who has read WikiLeaks, has this titbit
America’s former ambassador to Turkey, Eric Edelman, writing what he thought was a classified memo in 2004, was at least good enough to furnish the U.S. State Department with a few prescient caveats about this natural politician, all related to deficiencies in Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s character. The then-newly elected Turkish prime minister was “seriously vulnerable to miscalculating the political dynamic, especially in foreign affairs, and vulnerable to attacks by those who would disrupt his equilibrium.” His pride was “overbearing.” His ambition was messianic: Erdogan believed himself “anointed” by God to lead Turkey – never a good sign in a freshman head of state. And his “authoritarian loner streak” rendered around him little more than sunken-chested yes-men incapable of controlling an outsized ego and “thin-skinned” disposition. Also, Erdogan had an incurable “distrust of women,” which is why there were none in positions of authority in the Islamist Justice and Development Party (AKP) that he co-founded. This is also probably why heterosexual smooching on subway platforms, seven years on, is a major cause of national concern to him.
On the AKP, he has this
David Gardner of the Financial Times was clearly right when he observed: “Another way of looking at the AKP is as a party of building contractors, who have never seen anything they did not want to build, and have grown accustomed to bulldozing anything in their path.”
Some planned future bulldozing may end up not happening, as Claire Sadar speculates on the Atatürk’s Republic blog
This should be (and is) is the least of Turkey’s concerns right now, but I cannot see how the IOP will ever agree to give the 2020 Olympics to Istanbul after this weekend.
Inshallah.
In The New Yorker, Orhan Pamuk offers his “Memories of a public square” (i.e. Taksim).
And finally, FP has a post on how “Turkish protesters have invented a new verb: ‘chapul’”
Erdogan’s reference to protesters as “capulcu” (looters) has taken Twitter by storm. Turkish social media users have anglicized the word to “chapul” — and they’re bearing it proudly.
According to one Urban Dictionary definition, chapul is a verb that signifies “resistance to force” — to “demand justice” and “seek one’s right.”
Looks like it’s already gone international (though the correct French spelling would be ‘tchapuler’)
Leave a Reply