Tweet
All eyes on Turkey
THE TROUBLE WITH TURKEY
By John Tirman
Boston Globe, MA
Nov. 30, 2005
IN THE ONGOING debate about "democratization," Turkey is a vivid
example of how difficult it can be. Its inability to end old habits of
repression and embrace democratic values presents an agonizing dilemma
for Europe and a reminder of failed policies of the United States.
Formally a republic since the early 1920s, when its great military
hero, Kemal Ataturk, carved out the modern Turkish state from
the remains of the Ottoman Empire, Turkey has mostly had elected
governments ever since. But it has been a "guided" democracy, and
the guide in this case is the iron fist of the military. It remains
so to this day, despite Turkey's professed desire to become a member
of the European Union.
The powerful military, itself guided by Ataturk's extreme nationalism,
is now demanding the prosecution of some 50 writers and publishers
for insulting the state, raising issues about Kurds in Turkey,
and exploring the Armenian genocide of the First World War. Among
those being prosecuted is Fatih Tas, the publisher of a book I wrote
in 1997 about US-Turkish relations, which he had translated and
released in Turkey earlier this year. Among the cited crimes are
my many interviews with Kurds who had been forcibly evacuated by
the military and descriptions of the scale of human rights abuse,
including 1 million displaced people, many of whom now live in
shantytowns on the outskirts of Istanbul. He could go to prison.
Suppression of speech is not the only problem. Turkish forces recently
bumbled a covert operation in the Kurdish areas of southwest Turkey,
where they planted and exploded bombs to make it appear that the old
Kurdish rebel group, the PKK, remained active and a threat to state
security. It's not the first time such nefarious activities have
been exposed.
These are the actions of the "deep state," that part of the permanent
governing structure -- security forces, intelligence operatives,
paramilitaries -- which abhors the possibility of EU standards being
applied to them. So they create phony crises and arbitrary prosecutions
to subvert those in Turkey who seek EU membership.
Politicians are typically afraid to confront the military over the
abuses and bullying. Prime ministers have been overthrown by the
military and even executed; the current constitution was written by
the generals after a 1980 coup. Political discourse has always been
curtailed, and most journalists, party leaders, and other public
figures censor themselves.
For Europe, the dilemma in all this bad news is obvious. Does Turkey
deserve EU membership? Many Europeans, some of them anti-Muslim,
harbor grave doubts about admitting a poor country of 70 million whose
dispossessed may swarm into the prosperous parts of the continent. They
prefer to highlight the alarming human rights violations. But Turkey
is serving up a ready-made excuse for rejection, with the state firmly
in the grip of hard-line militarists.
For the US government, the chief promoter of Turkey's EU ambitions,
the policy choices are less stark but fraught with embittering
irony. Turkey was for years the largest recipient of US military
assistance after Israel and Egypt, including massive arms transfers
-- ostensibly as a hedge against the Soviet Union, and then Iran and
Iraq. But Turkey refuses to do Washington's bidding in the region,
and anti-Americanism is at an all-time high. And the weapons Turkey
received were used in the civil war with the Kurds that resulted in
40,000 killed.
Meanwhile, the United States is protecting Kurdish ambitions in Iraq,
including its bid for the oil-rich city of Kirkuk. Turkey has vowed to
"take action" should Kirkuk fall into Kurdish hands, since that would
be the missing piece the Kurds need for secession and an independent
Kurdish state. Turkey could intervene militarily, close oil pipelines,
shut off water supplies, support militias and death squads -- generally
adding to the myriad forms of extreme violence that the war in Iraq
has bred.
So the United States finds itself frustrated by a military it helped
strengthen and train. And that explains why American political leaders
have been mute on Turkey's repression of free speech and the cascade
of other misdeeds by the military. We need them to behave in Iraq, and
the price for that is silence on the relentless abuses of democratic
values. It is reminiscent of America's lavish support for the Shah
of Iran in the 1970s and of Saddam Hussein in the 1980s.
Such stratagems never work in the end. Democracy can't flourish
without sunlight, and now it is Washington, again, that is in the way.
John Tirman is executive director of the Center for International
Studies at MIT.
By John Tirman
Boston Globe, MA
Nov. 30, 2005
IN THE ONGOING debate about "democratization," Turkey is a vivid
example of how difficult it can be. Its inability to end old habits of
repression and embrace democratic values presents an agonizing dilemma
for Europe and a reminder of failed policies of the United States.
Formally a republic since the early 1920s, when its great military
hero, Kemal Ataturk, carved out the modern Turkish state from
the remains of the Ottoman Empire, Turkey has mostly had elected
governments ever since. But it has been a "guided" democracy, and
the guide in this case is the iron fist of the military. It remains
so to this day, despite Turkey's professed desire to become a member
of the European Union.
The powerful military, itself guided by Ataturk's extreme nationalism,
is now demanding the prosecution of some 50 writers and publishers
for insulting the state, raising issues about Kurds in Turkey,
and exploring the Armenian genocide of the First World War. Among
those being prosecuted is Fatih Tas, the publisher of a book I wrote
in 1997 about US-Turkish relations, which he had translated and
released in Turkey earlier this year. Among the cited crimes are
my many interviews with Kurds who had been forcibly evacuated by
the military and descriptions of the scale of human rights abuse,
including 1 million displaced people, many of whom now live in
shantytowns on the outskirts of Istanbul. He could go to prison.
Suppression of speech is not the only problem. Turkish forces recently
bumbled a covert operation in the Kurdish areas of southwest Turkey,
where they planted and exploded bombs to make it appear that the old
Kurdish rebel group, the PKK, remained active and a threat to state
security. It's not the first time such nefarious activities have
been exposed.
These are the actions of the "deep state," that part of the permanent
governing structure -- security forces, intelligence operatives,
paramilitaries -- which abhors the possibility of EU standards being
applied to them. So they create phony crises and arbitrary prosecutions
to subvert those in Turkey who seek EU membership.
Politicians are typically afraid to confront the military over the
abuses and bullying. Prime ministers have been overthrown by the
military and even executed; the current constitution was written by
the generals after a 1980 coup. Political discourse has always been
curtailed, and most journalists, party leaders, and other public
figures censor themselves.
For Europe, the dilemma in all this bad news is obvious. Does Turkey
deserve EU membership? Many Europeans, some of them anti-Muslim,
harbor grave doubts about admitting a poor country of 70 million whose
dispossessed may swarm into the prosperous parts of the continent. They
prefer to highlight the alarming human rights violations. But Turkey
is serving up a ready-made excuse for rejection, with the state firmly
in the grip of hard-line militarists.
For the US government, the chief promoter of Turkey's EU ambitions,
the policy choices are less stark but fraught with embittering
irony. Turkey was for years the largest recipient of US military
assistance after Israel and Egypt, including massive arms transfers
-- ostensibly as a hedge against the Soviet Union, and then Iran and
Iraq. But Turkey refuses to do Washington's bidding in the region,
and anti-Americanism is at an all-time high. And the weapons Turkey
received were used in the civil war with the Kurds that resulted in
40,000 killed.
Meanwhile, the United States is protecting Kurdish ambitions in Iraq,
including its bid for the oil-rich city of Kirkuk. Turkey has vowed to
"take action" should Kirkuk fall into Kurdish hands, since that would
be the missing piece the Kurds need for secession and an independent
Kurdish state. Turkey could intervene militarily, close oil pipelines,
shut off water supplies, support militias and death squads -- generally
adding to the myriad forms of extreme violence that the war in Iraq
has bred.
So the United States finds itself frustrated by a military it helped
strengthen and train. And that explains why American political leaders
have been mute on Turkey's repression of free speech and the cascade
of other misdeeds by the military. We need them to behave in Iraq, and
the price for that is silence on the relentless abuses of democratic
values. It is reminiscent of America's lavish support for the Shah
of Iran in the 1970s and of Saddam Hussein in the 1980s.
Such stratagems never work in the end. Democracy can't flourish
without sunlight, and now it is Washington, again, that is in the way.
John Tirman is executive director of the Center for International
Studies at MIT.
Comment