Turkey’s Somalia Policy Aims to Ease Regional Tensions. A systemic impact in a small group or through an international institution: “We will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.” — Martin Luther King
The incoming prime minister’s approach is based on four assumptions. First, he believes that the “era of nationalism” will come to an end in the Middle East and a new crop of religiously conservative leaders will emerge. Second, these new religiously conservative leaders will look to Turkey — and more specifically, to the A.K.P. — as a source of political inspiration. Third, wider religious conservatism will allow Turkey to expand its influence via its shared religious identity with like-minded states. And fourth, the West, especially America, has an interest in preventing democratic change in the region.
President-elect Erdoğan will be much better positioned, with his new mandate, to oversee and support the reconciliation process and to solve once and for all the Kurdish problem. He will finally be in a position of arbitration, in his capacity of a directly-elected president, he will also be in charge of mediating, if need be, between parties involved and supporting the whole process. The outcome of the Kurdish issue and the reconciliation process will, on the other hand, open new perspectives for a new constitution to be devised. Leaders before Erdoğan, like the late Turgut Özal or former President Süleyman Demirel, have tried to solve the Kurdish problem by recognizing the “Kurdish reality.” Despite having democratic legitimacy and mandates, the tutelage system of the old Turkish regime, mainly through the armed forces, did not allow them to continue in that vein. All their attempts have been sabotaged, with the awful results we fully comprehend only now.
What is in fact meant by the “new Turkey, new era” slogan is exactly this: Turkish society has had enough tutors who were seemingly in charge of forging “solutions” to the problems. It wants to solve its problems by itself, which is the true meaning of this directly-elected presidential system. Not only does it refuse existing tutelage systems, but it also prevents new tutelage systems replacing the old ones by mainly installing a leadership directly responsible for voter and controllable by voters. Without understanding this deep transformation of the society, political struggle in Turkey becomes unintelligible for the observer. The main divide remains between forces supporting this evolution and those opposing it. There is also the latent danger of seeing anti-democratic forces to sabotage this transformation. The current political situation still remains under threat by obscure forces whose moves can be unpredictable and detrimental to democracy. That shows all of us how delicate and hazardous the democratic transitions within Turkish society are.
No comments:
Post a Comment