In an uncharacteristic action on June 13, 2013,
the European Union belatedly earned its credentials for the Nobel Peace
prize it had been surprisingly awarded on December 10, 2012. The European
Parliament (EP) passed a non-binding Resolution on the situation in Turkey
[2013/26664(RSP)] stating that the Turkish police had used excessive
violence in an effort to disperse a group of demonstrators that had been
protesting against the planned felling of trees for a new construction project in Istanbul's
Gezi Park in the Taksim Square area.
It was of course well known by this time that the
police intervention in Istanbul had led to clashes with the protestors,
and that the protests had spread to more than 70 cities in Turkey. Using
tear gas, water cannons, plastic bullets, and pepper spray, among other
things, the police action had resulted in a number of deaths, thousands
wounded, mass arrests, and severe damage to private and
public property. Doctors and lawyers who helped the protestors had been
detained. Police brutality had been reproved by media in Europe and the
U.S., but the Turkish media had remained virtually silent about the
excessive violence.
The protests, which gained widespread support
among different social and occupational strata of Turkish society, and
among men and women equally, had gone beyond the issue of Gezi Park. The
protests became linked with governmental and legislative decisions which
imposed restrictions on the sale of alcohol, instituted educational
changes that stressed religious precepts, limited abortion, and made the
recommendation that women have at least three children. Protestors also
were critical of the lack of representation of minority voices in
governmental decision making, inadequate fair trial and due process
procedures in the judicial system, restriction of the rights of minority
groups, and the controversial behavior of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan.
For the European Union, all these events have been particularly
troubling. When Turkey applied to join the EU in 1987, its membership was
denied, but in 1999 the country was given the ambiguous status of a EU
candidate, a status that is still under discussion. A member of the EU has
an obligation to respect and promote democracy. The EU is aware that
Turkey has violated the fundamental principles of freedom of assembly,
freedom of expression both in person and on line, and freedom of the
press. It is not likely to accept a country in which police invade private
homes to arrest people or monitor social networks.
What was most surprising in the EP Resolution is
the language in which it voiced its criticism. It spoke of its "deep
concern at the disproportionate and excessive use of force in response to
the peaceful and legitimate protests." This language hitherto has only
been applied to almost every action of Israel in its self-defense against
terrorist attacks. It was therefore noteworthy that, for the first time,
the term "disproportionate behavior" was applied to another country, this
time Turkey.
The contrast in response to criticism is
striking. When criticized Israel has analyzed its behavior and has sought
to remedy its alleged mistakes where appropriate. Erdogan, on the other
hand, has been unwilling to admit any major mistakes or to apologize (an
act he demanded of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu several
months ago at the instigation of President Obama), for the violence.
Instead, he accused the protestors as being responsible for terrorism,
violence, and vandalism. He called the EP undemocratic, and refused to
recognize its resolution as legitimate. He attacked the social media,
particularly Twitter, which he regards as a menace.
On a broader level, Erdogan has accused the
Western democracies of hypocrisy and "double standards," saying that
police in Europe and the U.S. have used similar methods in dealing with
protestors. Fantasy if not acute paranoia has taken hold. The Turkish
foreign minister equated the Wall Street protestors with those in Gezi
Park. On June 21, 2013 the mayor of Ankara, an associate of the prime
minister, posted a note that the protests were part of an attempt by the
American "Jewish lobby" to undermine the Turkish government. The "Jewish
conspiracy" appeared to consist of the usual suspects, all Jewish
neo-conservatives, who had attended a meeting of the American Enterprise
Institute, which he asserted equally bizarrely was a branch of the
American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
But some non-Jews were also guilty. Erdogan
blamed Germany and France, more particularly former president Nicolas
Sarkozy, for blocking Turkishadmission into the EU. Not surprisingly
the EU cancelled a parliamentary visit to Turkey, saying that the country
should know how to deal with criticism.
Turkey has claimed to be a democracy and indeed
an advanced democracy. It has been admired as a model for moderate Muslim
regimes to emulate. But it is not the inclusive, pluralist kind of Western
democracy in which the majority party in power attempts, in varying
degrees, to consult with opposition groups or include them in
decision-making. The media silence in Turkey is noticeable. Already, 49
members of the media are in prison for journalistic-related reasons, a
larger number than in any other Middle East country. Erdogan's Turkey is
not dedicated to the principle that all people are created equal,
politically or culturally.
Erdogan, who was elected in 2011 for the third
time in free and fair elections, is now planning, after the next election
in 2014, to change the political system from its present parliamentary
form to a presidential system in which the elected president would have
strong powers, and separation of powers and checks and balances will
become less meaningful.
There is no question that Turkey until recently
has been favorably regarded by the United States. Its strategic importance
is understood and it is a member of NATO. While Erdogan and his Justice
and Development Party (AKP) have been in power since 2002, the economy has
grown by over 40 percent. But the central problem is that during this
period Erdogan has become increasingly authoritarian, making decisions in
more isolated fashion, and taking Turkey in a more Islamic direction. His
attitude has been one of antagonism towards the West, not engagement.
Moreover, this attitude, which accompanies his increase in authoritarian
behavior, has been demonstrated openly, not in a subtle quiet
manner.
Erdogan, in spite of Turkey's membership of
NATO, has been assertive in making clear his disagreements with the West.
In June 2010 Turkey, which has illegally occupied part of Cyprus since
1973, was one of the two nations to vote in the UN Security Council
against the tightening of sanctions on Iran, thus undermining diplomatic
efforts on the issue. Paradoxically, Erdogan today is confronted by
aggression from the Assad regime in Syria, strongly supported by
Iran.
In 532 A.D. the Nika riot, the most violent in
the history of Constantinople, was started over a minor issue, a dispute
over a chariot race. In response, on the orders of the Emperor
Justinian, half the city was burned and more than 30,000 people
slaughtered. The United States and Europe must help prevent a similar
outcome over the original minor issue of razing a public park to build a
shopping center.
The EU is not normally regarded as a bastion of
political courage. However, in its strong concern about excessive use of
force by Turkey it has shown that it can act bravely rather than appease a
ruler engaged in brutal behavior and illegal state violence. It has also
shown that international bodies do have the capacity and will to criticize
countries other than Israel
No comments:
Post a Comment