Political debate and cleavages in Turkey today are between those who hold favorable views of globalization and thus work toward greater integration in the global system, and those who perceive globalization as the "number-one threat," who thus employ all possible means to stop pro-globalization groups.
Last week two top Turkish military commanders gave important speeches outlining their views on Turkish politics as well as global developments. The statements of Chief of General Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ and Land Forces Commander Gen. Işık Koşaner revealed that the top military brass opposes globalization, global actors and global values.
Well, they may have a point. Though globalization does not have a particular problem with Kemalism, it shakes the fundamentals of all ideological states. An ideological state controlled by a vanguard elite including the military, in the name of Kemalism in the Turkish case, is not sustainable in a globalized world.
With globalization also come transparency, competition, and interconnectedness, all problems for an ideological state and its vanguards. It is impossible to govern a society that is integrated into a globalized world through commands from the top. People, economy and politics will be under the influence of diverse networks, ideas, and interests. Such a society will no longer rely on "official truths" imposed on them and the welfare/ liberties gifted to them by the state elite. Instead, a society integrated with the world is empowered to seek its truth, its welfare, and its liberties. Obviously, such features of globalization make it very difficult to control the state and society. Thus the military naturally prefers a closed society with controllable social, political and economic agents.
For the last six years, the average annual foreign direct investment (FDI) increased considerably, reaching $20 billion in the last couple of years, more than 20 times higher in comparison to earlier periods. Moreover, billions of dollars are traded in the stock exchange and in the banking system. All these make the "management" of the economy difficult from a "nationalist" point of view that prefers a centralized national economy that is not "vulnerable" to global trends. Would a military hostile to global trends and actors be happy with the current inflow and activities of foreign capital? Who is inviting foreign capital and "selling out" Turkey's national assets to them? These are key questions to understanding the underlying reasons for the power struggle in recent years.
To Turkish generals, international organizations, transnational civil society organizations and multinational corporations all pose threats to Turkey, Turkish security and Turkey's political regime. What they really mean is that globalization threatens the Kemalist regime that provides them with discursive justification for the military's power and privileges in the system.
In the generals' speeches a deep-seated hostility towards transnational actors, ideas and movements are clearly visible. Turkish civil society is targeted as being designed by "transnational actors." Democracy and human rights are evaluated as a disguise to divide the country and change the regime. How come these ideas willingly support Turkey's democratization process? "Too much democracy threatens secularism," they argue. So we should conclude that "Western democracies went too far and turned into theocracies." Fear of not only globalization but also of democracy prevails throughout the speeches of the top two military commanders. In fact, globalization is feared because it encourages democratization.
The generals speak of a "global system" that wants to take over Turkey. But thanks to the "Atatürkist thought system," Turkey has not surrendered to the hegemony of the global system. I really wonder if Turkey is an ally of Chaves' Venezuela or the West. These are old-fashioned Third Worldist generalizations with no correspondence to the reality on the ground.
The problem is that the Turkish military used to be the forerunner of modernization in this country. It is also the military of a country that has been a member of the Western alliance for over 50 years. As such, it is supposed to be an institution that is integrated into an international security community, NATO, with close links and cooperative international arrangements. Unfortunately, it turns out now that a reformist and pro-modernization military with international experience and supposedly culture has turned into a pro-status quo institution resisting change.
Yet the reasons are understandable: The "power monopoly" of the bureaucracy, including the military, is being eroded by globalization. This is the bottom line for their fear of globalization and resistance to democratization.
01.09.2008
Last week two top Turkish military commanders gave important speeches outlining their views on Turkish politics as well as global developments. The statements of Chief of General Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ and Land Forces Commander Gen. Işık Koşaner revealed that the top military brass opposes globalization, global actors and global values.
Well, they may have a point. Though globalization does not have a particular problem with Kemalism, it shakes the fundamentals of all ideological states. An ideological state controlled by a vanguard elite including the military, in the name of Kemalism in the Turkish case, is not sustainable in a globalized world.
With globalization also come transparency, competition, and interconnectedness, all problems for an ideological state and its vanguards. It is impossible to govern a society that is integrated into a globalized world through commands from the top. People, economy and politics will be under the influence of diverse networks, ideas, and interests. Such a society will no longer rely on "official truths" imposed on them and the welfare/ liberties gifted to them by the state elite. Instead, a society integrated with the world is empowered to seek its truth, its welfare, and its liberties. Obviously, such features of globalization make it very difficult to control the state and society. Thus the military naturally prefers a closed society with controllable social, political and economic agents.
For the last six years, the average annual foreign direct investment (FDI) increased considerably, reaching $20 billion in the last couple of years, more than 20 times higher in comparison to earlier periods. Moreover, billions of dollars are traded in the stock exchange and in the banking system. All these make the "management" of the economy difficult from a "nationalist" point of view that prefers a centralized national economy that is not "vulnerable" to global trends. Would a military hostile to global trends and actors be happy with the current inflow and activities of foreign capital? Who is inviting foreign capital and "selling out" Turkey's national assets to them? These are key questions to understanding the underlying reasons for the power struggle in recent years.
To Turkish generals, international organizations, transnational civil society organizations and multinational corporations all pose threats to Turkey, Turkish security and Turkey's political regime. What they really mean is that globalization threatens the Kemalist regime that provides them with discursive justification for the military's power and privileges in the system.
In the generals' speeches a deep-seated hostility towards transnational actors, ideas and movements are clearly visible. Turkish civil society is targeted as being designed by "transnational actors." Democracy and human rights are evaluated as a disguise to divide the country and change the regime. How come these ideas willingly support Turkey's democratization process? "Too much democracy threatens secularism," they argue. So we should conclude that "Western democracies went too far and turned into theocracies." Fear of not only globalization but also of democracy prevails throughout the speeches of the top two military commanders. In fact, globalization is feared because it encourages democratization.
The generals speak of a "global system" that wants to take over Turkey. But thanks to the "Atatürkist thought system," Turkey has not surrendered to the hegemony of the global system. I really wonder if Turkey is an ally of Chaves' Venezuela or the West. These are old-fashioned Third Worldist generalizations with no correspondence to the reality on the ground.
The problem is that the Turkish military used to be the forerunner of modernization in this country. It is also the military of a country that has been a member of the Western alliance for over 50 years. As such, it is supposed to be an institution that is integrated into an international security community, NATO, with close links and cooperative international arrangements. Unfortunately, it turns out now that a reformist and pro-modernization military with international experience and supposedly culture has turned into a pro-status quo institution resisting change.
Yet the reasons are understandable: The "power monopoly" of the bureaucracy, including the military, is being eroded by globalization. This is the bottom line for their fear of globalization and resistance to democratization.
01.09.2008
No comments:
Post a Comment