Monday, April 25, 2011

Towards normalization of Turkish politics?

The election campaigns have started. Political parties have nominated their candidates for Parliament and announced their election manifestos.

But just when things seemed pretty normal, the Supreme Election Board (YSK) vetoed the nominations of some independent candidates supported by the Peace and Democracy Party (BDP), creating a wave of political and social reaction. But it quickly took a step back and rectified the situation. However, what has remained are agitated supporters of the BDP and the increasing sensitivity of Turkish nationalists. The short-lived crisis benefited both.

Despite this short-lived crisis, so far Turkish politics certainly appears more stable and predictable when compared to the circumstances prior to the elections of 2007. Then the military was in the game of politics, determined to block the election of a president by the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) majority in Parliament. Moreover, the opposition to the ruling party was based on an Islamist-secularist divide without putting forward any policy alternative. It was a time described by opponents of the AK Party as when the republic was in “danger.”

Four years later this nonsense has been stopped. The military seems to have understood that its attempts to influence the election process often backfire. People tend to react democratically and side with those victimized by the military. So, I expect that the military will remain silent during this election process.

In addition, the main opposition party seems more sensible in its approach to political competition. With the resignation of the old leader of the party, Deniz Baykal, also went the old form of politics based on defending the state and the regime against the people. This old perspective utterly failed in creating an alternative to the AK Party. It is no surprise to me that the June elections will take place without Baykal’s leadership. The day after the 2007 general elections I wrote in this column that “Baykal has led his last election campaign as leader of the CHP.”

Since then, the CHP has changed not only its leader but also its political discourse. The 2011 election manifesto of the Republican People’s Party (CHP) presents a break from the CHP of 2007. It no longer calls on the people to defend the regime, secularism, and Kemalism but instead outlines how the CHP will protect and empower the people. In many ways, the election promises of the CHP are crude populism, but nevertheless, they indicate that the CHP is now much more interested in addressing the needs and demands of the people. This is good for both the CHP and Turkey as the party becomes less ideological and more policy-oriented.

So this election will be an election in which “visions” of political parties will compete with each other, signifying the normalization of Turkish politics.

This might be advantageous for the ruling AK Party as it has mastered developing projects and delivering services during its years in power. No doubt its strength lies in its performance over the last nine years. Management of the economy, which has generated remarkable economic growth under low inflation, is one of its greatest assets. With projects that improved services in health care, transportation, education, and social security, as well as conditions in villages and small towns, the AK Party government has managed to satisfy the needs and demands of large segments of society. Steps taken in the direction for democratization that include constitutional changes and the Kurdish initiative are also very positive.

But a problem for the AK Party is that although it has a very strong record to defend in this field of projects and services, it is not used to this kind of opposition. Because it was futile for opposition parties to organize their resistance against the AK Party on secularism and the lifestyle issues, the AK Party felt most comfortable countering this form of opposition. The CHP with a new policy style is a challenge for the AK Party. It may push the AK Party to be defensive, as turned out to be the case with the issue about the duration of compulsory military service.

Anyhow, Turkey is sailing in the realm of rational politics, not the realm of irrational fears about the future of the regime, as we witnessed four years ago.

Monday, April 18, 2011

Central bank governor and the poverty of White Turks

I keep writing that the old business elite and the White Turks are incapable of understanding the new Turkey. They are blinded by their Kemalist and secularist prejudice, coupled with their thirst for privileges.

Their opposition to the appointment of Erdem Başçı as governor of the Central Bank of Turkey in 2006 and the later smear campaign against Durmuş Yılmaz, who was eventually appointed governor, clearly illustrate how poorly they see the new dynamics and new actors in Turkey. Today some of the Kemalist White Turks are ashamed of themselves, given the outstanding performance of these two economists leading the central bank.

Başçı is now the governor of the central bank. His appointment is yet another indication of the defeat of the so-called White Turks, who the new Turkey does not need.

Başçı’s appointment was vetoed in 2006 by the then Kemalist President Ahmet Necdet Sezer. The reason for this veto was that Başçı’s wife wore a headscarf. This “simple-minded” attitude back in 2006 tells us a lot about the poverty of the myopic White Turks. They were not looking for merit but checked whether he was religious or not, and for that looked at his wife’s choice of clothing.

It is not really difficult to understand why the Kemalist White Turks have lost. For them what matters is not merit and qualification but loyalty to the Kemalist ideology and the continuation of their privileges. They are educated but ignorant, and rich but poorly connected to society and the world around them.

The fact that the international financial sector increased Turkey’s credit rating on Başçı’s appointment is, I think, a slap in the face of the arrogant but incompetent White Turks, who had blocked his appointment as governor five years ago.

This is only one side of the situation. On the other side is a shameful episode brought on by the White Turks. Back in 2006, when Başçı was vetoed, the Kemalist president had no choice but to appoint another person, Yılmaz, as governor, but the appointment was accompanied by an immediate smear campaign. Journalists poked into his private life, revealing his house and his wife, publishing big pictures of shoes left outside the door. The self-proclaimed ideologue of the White Turks, Ertuğrul Özkök, then wrote in his column in the Hürriyet daily commentary on Yılmaz, his lifestyle, his wife and his house. It was disgusting. Even as I write these sentences I find myself scowling as if I were looking at those dirty, revolting campaigns conducted by Özkök’s Hürriyet.

The campaign against Yılmaz was a reflection of hatred and jealousy, implying that while there are “presentable” White Turks ripe for this prestigious job, the government nominates those “ordinary” Turks with Islamic lifestyles. Then and now I only feel pity for them. Pity on them who have lost their privileges, turning them into “ordinary” Turks like the ones they look down on. But these “ordinary” Turks who lost their privileges are not able to compete in the free market of ideas and skills with real “ordinary Turks.”

On succession in the Turkish Central Bank, the Wall Street Journal writes: “The new governor will take over an institution whose credibility with markets has improved dramatically over the past decade. Mr. Yılmaz’s five-year tenure saw Turkey’s inflation rate fall to record lows, while the economy rebounded strongly from the impact of a global recession.”

Poor White Turks, the person they tried to belittle has succeeded in running the central bank with first-rate performance. In doing so, Yılmaz’s main aide was Başçı, whose appointment was vetoed by the Kemalist president in 2006. No doubt Yılmaz was one of the best governors in the world and, as a result, was recognized as the best central bank governor by Euromoney in 2009.