turkey

The Failed Coup in Turkey: Comments & Predictions

Here comes some of my personal comments and predictions following the failed coup attempt in Turkey. Some important points have been missing in the media reports:

Turkey Coup 2016

1) The denouncements of the coup by world leaders are natural. But why has the world not as strongly denounced the coup that Erdogan already executed, by gradual taking control of all institutions, including the judiciary? In practice he has made himself a dictator. Also denounce that!

2) The blaming of Fetullah Gülen by Erdogan has its obvious reasons, and should not be repeated in the media as if it was a truth. By blaming his arch enemy, a single guy and a “few” officers, Erdogan wants to take away focus from the fact that about 50 percent of Turkey’s population despise him, and maybe not supported the violent coup, but at least wants a change away from his authoritarianism. 

3) The failed coup attempt is not a victory for democracy. On the opposite, Erdogan will use this failed attempt to take even more control over institutions and make himself into a dictator, now also in writing. Already he has fired about 3000 judges as a result and wants to implement death penalty to scare any opposition to complete silence.

4) Last but not least, the turkish society will most likely become even more divided, and in the long run, I have a hard time seeing how such a divided country can continue to be a functioning unit. With that said, things will probably get much worse before they get any better. However, the world leaders, not the least the ones of EU, have to stop cuddling with Erdogan by silently accepting his hate speech rhetorics and crack down on all opposition. Again: Erdogan’s gradual coup over the last couple of years, has to be denounced in the same fashion as the coup of yesterday was denounced.

Turkey Coup 2016

Interpersonal trust – Q & A

Since my article about interpersonal trust turned out to be both popular and controversial, I decided to give my answers to some common questions in this blog post.

Lets start with the most burning one of them all:

Turkey heart flag

You are a foreigner, so why do you write shit about Turks? (“Fuck off!”)

Well, this was happily only the response by a small minority of the commentators, but still, the question deserves an answer.

Firstly, the numbers representing trust in the Turkish society, were not made up by me. These were based on real answers from real people, consisting of a representative random selection of the different countries’ population. In that sense I was merely stating a fact. The numbers was not some “mumbo jumbo”, as one of the commenters said.

Secondly, I am an enormously big fan of Turkey, and love the people, the society and its culture. I love more or less everything about the country, except… well this trust issue. I experienced it very clearly while residing in the country, and saw first hand how it damaged peoples lives. But by pointing out this problem, and its negative consequences there was no ill-intention. The opposite. As I wrote in the previous blogpost on the issue, lack of trust easily becomes a vicious circle that is hard to break. But the first step if you want to break it, is to clearly identify it. Was it then wrong of me to write about it? Maybe it was a bit provocative, but once again, I had no ill-intention in doing so. I love Turkey! Why else would I write this blog to begin with?

I don’t agree that Turks trust no one!

This was one of the most common misconception in the critique against the article: That the low interpersonal trust-score for Turkey, meant that Turkish people trust no one. This not at all how the score should be interpreted.

Interpersonal trust is measured by asking a statistically representative selection of a population the following question: “Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted or that you need to be very careful in dealing with people?”. The main indicator is then the percentage of people who reply “most people can be trusted”.

So, in case of Turkey, the result does not mean that Turkish people do not trust anyone. It just means that Turks are more reserved to people in general. How much they trust their family and friends are not specifically the subject of this question.

Bakkal defter note book

A Bakkal Defteri is a notebook in which debt to the shop owner is written down.

In Turkey we have something called Bakkal Defteri, isn’t that a sign of trust?

I think that the Bakkal Defteri-system, where credit is given to locals of a Mahalle by the owner of a local store, is especially interesting to discuss in the context of interpersonal trust. At first I admit that it might look like it is a system based on trust between individuals. But if you scrutinise it, I would rather argue that it is built on a strong social control. Why?

  • Credit is only given to people that the shop owner knows well and lives in the area
  • In a traditional Mahalle, everyone knows each and most people live in the same area for all their life = it is impossible to run away from your debt
  • If you still avoid paying, everyone will know about it = trouble ahead

There is also a very good reason why this system, is a necessity in Turkey to begin with: Salaries and payments are more erratic since unions are weak, and there is a need for a system that still puts food on the table for hardworking people (read about the workers on the third bridge here). The reason why some Bakkals give credit to begin with, is probably also because there are often many in one area, and competition between forces them to provide extra services to keep their customers.

So, even though there is some amount of trust involved in this system, I would rather argue that it is mainly built upon social control and necessity.

This is also my general impression of how it works in Turkey: Trust always seems to be accompanied by some sort of social control. This constitute a big difference towards the Northern European countries.

In Turkey people are more likely to talk to strangers than in Europe, isn’t that a sign that they trust people more?

Yes, Turkey has a very strong social culture. But is that really because people trust each other more to begin with? I would rather argue the social culture in Turkey, comes from the fact that the country lacks strong formal institutions, which means that everything from finding a job to getting justice in court or help if you get unemployed, all goes through your social network. The more friends you have, the more likely you are to live a secure and happy life.

This constitute again a big difference towards the Northern European countries, where formal institutions instead are strong.

The social culture can also be directly deduced from the lack of trust: If you don’t trust “people in general”, it means that you have strong incentives to turn “people in general” into friends. And how do you do that? Well, you start talking to them…

So, from my point of view, the act of talking and trying to make friends, isn’t necessarily a sign of trust to begin with.  It can rather be interpreted as a sign of the opposite.

Do you agree or disagree? Use the comment field below!

Why has the world given up on Turkey?

Turkey accession talk cheating elections

I can’t help being surprised of how little that has been reported about the development in Turkey after the elections. Before the Gezi protests, Turkey was perceived as a promising, developing democracy. But now, one year later, Turkey undoubtedly has more similarities with Russia than any European country.

The problem is not only extensive pressure on the media and heavy censorship of the internet. It is not only the fact that judges and prosecutors cant do their job without approval from higher authority – meaning, well, Erdogan. Now, the very core of democracy, the elections, have been taken away as an opportunity for citizens to decide about their country’s future.

After YSK, the board responsible for organising the elections, denied a recount in Ankara, despite a very tight race, and obvious indications of cheating, I have a hard time seeing that things will get better in the short- or even in medium-term. The reason why Turkey will not quickly return to the right track, is because the man in power, Erdogan, have no incentives to steer in that direction. Rather the opposite. He has too much to lose.

Still, the foreign media rather focuses on the strong support that Erdogan still holds, almost baffled by the fact that a politician can be corrupt and still win elections.

In my opinion they should rather focus on the election fraud, and the increasingly impossible situation for the opposition parties. If the elections had been truly fair, it is likely that Turkey would be in a completely different situation at this point. To run a country with the capital belonging to the opposition, is not an easy task. Not the least would the loss of Ankara, also have been perceived as a punishment for corruption and other misdoings.

Maybe western journalists are just generally tired of reporting about a country in which punishment and reward do not follow a western logic.

Or, has Turkey for them just become another of these countries, to which democracy came, before it’s politicians and citizens learned to understand and respect it?

Part 2: Three gentlemen

Three gentlemen Turkey

One day before the elections I went to a classic Turkish fish restaurant together with some friends. The restaurant was located in one of the more wealthy parts of Istanbul. This is an area, where the main opposition party, CHP, always gets a very high percentage of the votes and where people on average aim for a westernised lifestyle.

But this night I would learn, that the political life still had its own distinguished features, specific to Turkish culture.

After ordering a bottle of Rakı – the national drink before AKP replaced it with the non-alcoholic Ayran – and after the first mezes had arrived to the table, I spotted three older men sitting a bit away from us in a corner. They were well-dressed, in suits, and with friendly faces. As our eyes meet, I raised my glass towards them and they saluted back.

“Where are you from? Are you from Germany?” one of the men said in broken English as I passed their table returning from the restroom a bit later.

I answered them and we started to chat. Soon they asked me to sit down with them.

“What do you think about the food? Delicious, isn’t it?” one of the men said.
“Excellent, It was very good. We are waiting for the main course. Do you know the owner?”
“Know the owner!” he exclaimed. “He is the little brother of my childhood friend. We go here all the time. We grew up not far from here.”

As the discussion unavoidably entered in to the area of politics, it turned out that one of the men, was senior local politician, working for the main opposition party, CHP. Glad to make his acquaintance we continued to talk, and after discussing the economic development of Istanbul, my mouth slipped – it must have been the Rakı – and I told them about a idea for a business based in Istanbul.

The politician immediately turned rather serious.

“We should talk” he the said. “We should exchange numbers and meet!”

I looked at the other men and they nodded.

“You should meet him, he can make anything happen” one of them said.

“Everything is possible.” the politician continued. “You can talk to me, and we can make a deal!”

He was saying all this in the way any old and powerful man in Turkey would do. But since he was a politician, there was no doubt about the meaning of his words.

From many friends I knew and heard stories about how knowing the right people, especially within politics and municipality, could mean the difference between bankruptcy and success. If someone within the system saw that your business was successful, they often wanted a cut. They would try to get it by pointing out problems of different kinds, mostly technicalities that at first seemed ridiculous. However, such a situation could quickly grow into a nightmare. Licenses could be withdrawn, deliveries could stop, police could come visit. The solution was always compensative one, meaning money under the table.

What the politician now offered me, was a shortcut. But of course it would not be a free one.

And I came to think: Even though he represented the opposition party, there was, in essence, little difference between him and e.g. Erdogan. They where of the same generation and in terms of attitude to corruption, they were soul mates.

No wonder why the voters did not punish Erdogan for being corrupt!

Part 1: The Taxi Drivers

Taxi in Istanbul

The taxi drivers

A couple of nights before the local election I was out walking. Outside one of the night clubs in the central historical part of Istanbul, where you will find many of the liberal Gezi youngsters partying and drinking, stood a group of taxi drivers, with their yellow cars, waiting for the night club guests to be in need of their services. I could tell, somehow, from the way they looked towards the entrance, that they weren’t happy with what they saw.

“How is business going?” I asked them.

Surprised that I spoke to them in Turkish, they asked where I came from, and after I answered we continued to talk about other things. I suggested that spring had come to Istanbul, they said it had been a warm winter.

After a while I cleared my throat.

“What are you going to vote for in the elections?”

A slightly noticeable discomfort spread among them, they started to look at each other, some turned aside and laughed nervously.

“I am going to vote for AKP” one of the short men, said, “I am voting for Tayyip!”, he continued in a louder voice, looking to the other men for assurance.

“Have you always?”

“Of course!” he exclaimed, like it was the most ignorant question on earth. “There is no one else than Tayyip Erdogan!”

The other men repeated “Tayyip Erdogan” in some sort of mumbly choir and laughed.

“So, You also vote for the AKP?”

“Of course” they all said.

A short moment of silence occurred.

“So, what do you think about the corruption allegations? Are they real?”

The men’s discomfort now became more evident than before, and one of them was just about to open his mouth, when a tall and rather well dressed man suddenly came in front of me.

“We don’t talk about this! AKP is going to win, we gonna vote for them, and Fetullah Gülen will be gone. Thats it!” he said in an aggressive manner.

I took a step back, and if the man had had a more rough look, I would have escaped the scene. But instead I stood silent observing how he seemed to spread fear among the men. He was clearly above them in the pecking order.

“We gonna win on sunday!” he continued now facing the men. “AKP will win! We going to vote! And after that Turkey will continue as usual!”

Then he hastily went away after someone had called on him from another group of taxis a bit away. All of us watched his back in silence as it faded into the night.

“Who was that?” I asked after a while.

“It is our boss!” the short man said. He organizes our taxis, gives us work…”
“From the municipality?” I said.

The short man smiled insecurely.

“Maybe!”

To me, this was a perfect illustration of how freedom of thought and expression in Turkey is a luxury that only can be afforded by the very few who are economically independent. One of the main reasons for AKP’s success is that they have managed to activate the grass roots of the society and make politics out of almost everything in their everyday life. In a society that is almost to an absolute extent already built upon friends, family, and social network, this has become a very efficient way to maintain support and silent opposition among the poor conservative, working people, who is in an overwhelming majority in the country. Especially occupations that in some way is under the government and municipalities control, have quickly turned into professions where only people who agree with the AKP is allowed to enter. This is valid for the professions high up in the hierarchy down to the very bottom, where even workers, are expected to agree with everything the AKP stands for. If you do not agree, you will face problems, likely get fired.

I said goodbye, and the group of men was dispersed. The short man jumped in to his taxi, started the engine and drove slowly towards a waving group of youngsters at the night club’s entrance.

 

 

 

Nothing changed… Or?

2.jpg650

After an even struggle in many of Turkey’s biggest cities, it is clear that little will change in formal terms as a result of the local elections. On average, AKP got about 45 percent of the votes, and kept power in the most important cities of Istanbul and Ankara.

However, the voting process, all the way from the opening of the ballot stations has been lined with incidents indicating unfairness and cheating. Electricity was cut while votes were counted in districts where CHP were expected to achieve a strong support. Ballots giving support to CHP and MHP have been found in trashcans throughout Turkey. In Ankara, ballot guards has been hindered by the police to enter the venues where the ballots were counted. And in some places, still at the writing moment, volunteers are guarding the ballots in districts where votes for CHP are expected to be high, to assure they will not come into hands of AKP officials or the police, before they are being counted by the YSK, the board responsible for counting the votes.

So, to sum it up, AKP has shown little respect for the ballot box that they so much have been praising ever since the Gezi protests.

However, it is still undeniable, that AKP has a very strong support in the country. The reasons for this have previously been discussed in this blog. But in my next post, I will give account for three personal encounters during my visit in Turkey, taking place both before and after the elections, that I think are symbolically important in order to understand the situation and the challenges ahead.

The question is: are people really supporting Erdogan, or are they just being pragmatic?

 

 

 

2 scenarios: What will happen in Turkey?

What will happen in Turkey?

A poster for an ungoing campaign urging people in general to vote in the coming local elections.

The election campaign leading up to 30th of March is likely going to be the dirtiest in the republic’s modern history. The fight between the AKP and the opposition parties has already passed the point where civilized debate is possible. Ankara’s controversial mayor Melih Gökcek, has even suggested that he might be assassinated during the election campaign. I think that he is not alone worrying that the hateful climate in the country is going to lead to violent clashes, and even planned attempts on politician’s lives. Erdogan has effectively prepared a fertile ground for violence to emerge.

The reason why the tone in the campaign is hateful is that the outcome of the election will drastically influence Turkey’s future. In many ways it is a fight for life and death between the main opposition and Erdogan personally.

Here are two possible scenarios and their short and long term consequences:

1. AK Party gets ABOVE 40% of votes – status quo

In this scenario Erdogan will be able to sell that the population of Turkey agree to his narrative on the corruption probe. It will also continue the winning strike of the AK Party and make his ministers and party members stay loyal to him. Another, and more important consequence of this scenario, is that Erdogan will have plenty of room to continue restructuring the country’s institutions to his own liking. The biggest loser will naturally be democracy in general, and in specifics, the opposition, individuals, companies, newspapers and institutions that have been critical to Erdogan. Without any resistance, and with the full power of the police, the judiciary, MIT etc. behind him, he will  start a witch-hunt for everyone he considers as an opponent to his cause to stay in power. Turkey will quickly develop into a one-party-state, and any return from there will be a very long and slow process.

2. AK Party gets BELOW 40% of the votes – Ankara or Istanbul is lost

A result below 40% will instead be a blow to Erdogan, especially if Istanbul or Ankara is lost to CHP. Erdogan will, however, initially try to sell the election as a victory, pointing to the fact that the party still has a majority of the total votes in Turkey. But eventually discontent will grow, since he won’t be able to stabilize the country and restructure it to his own liking in the same way as before. Especially he will have a hard time to pursue his goal of a presidential system with himself as president. The struggle between AKP and the opposition parties will at the same time become more even, and together with the economic effect of the interest rate-hike in January and the weakening of the lira kicking in, people will get the impression that Erdogan is losing control. It is then  likely that the members of AKP  will start thinking of a future without him as their leader. How long this would take, is impossible to predict, since it depends on how much below 40%  AKP receives in the election.

So, which one of the two scenarios is the most likely?

In one way I am certain that even more incriminating voice recordings of Erdogan is soon to be released. But as I have already pointed out earlier in this blog, a big chunk of the population in Turkey only have access to government-friendly information about what is going on in the country; about 80% of the voters belonging to Erdogan’s core group does not have access to Internet. This group is additionally more occupied with making ends meet than to follow and question political issues they do not fully understand. In order for this group to turn away from Erdogan, something extraordinary has to happen, and I am afraid some files on the Internet are simply not enough.

Only one thing is certain. More political and economical turmoil is unavoidable in the near future!

Diyanet – a state within the state

Diyanet – a state within the state

Mehmet Görmez, the president of Diyanet, the ministry of religious affairs.

Erdogan has accused the Gülen movement of forming a state within the state. However, a majority of the Turkish people  believe that this is an exaggeration. About 60 percent of people asked in polls think that Erdogan instead is trying to cover up the corruption within his own government by blaming the Gülen movement.

But something that could be called a state within the state actually exists in Turkey, sponsored with the tax payers money. Its name is Diyanet, The Ministry of Religious Affairs. It serves directly under the prime ministers office.

Ataturk founded Diyanet in 1924 as a replacement for the caliphate, that was managing the religious affairs during the Ottoman era.  Diyanet’s role thus became to support the building and management of mosques and to teach citizens about religion in different ways.

Since AKP came to power in 2002, the size and influence of Diyanet has increased dramatically. Its personnel has doubled to almost 120 000 people, and more than 2000 people from the Diyanet has been positioned within other state ministries, without clear reasons. The ministry’s tone against other religions has also become more harsh; it publishes propaganda books against christianity as one example. 

But the most jaw-dropping thing with this ministry is its budget. During the AKP rule, it has skyrocketed to an astonishing TL 4.6 billion in 2013 and it is going to increase to TL 5.4 billion in 2014.

To get the impression of how much money Diyanet is given each year by the AKP, lets compare its budget to the budgets of other ministries in 2013.

A budget of TL 4.6 billion is:

1.6 times larger than the budget allocated to the Ministry of the Interior

1.8 times larger than the budget allocated to the Ministry of Health

1.9 times larger than the budget allocated to the Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology

2.4 times larger than the budget allocated to the Ministry of Environment and Urban Planning

2.9 times larger than the budget allocated to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

3.4 times larger than the budget allocated to the Ministry of Economy

4.6 times larger than the budget allocated to MIT – Secret Services

How this enormous amount of money is spent is far from known. In 2009 it was reported that only  TL 3 million went to support the building of mosques. The rest seem to be put into religious education, religious services towards families and providing each mosque with an Imam. But its hard to find any reason how this can add up to TL 5.4 billion. If you don’t consider corruption, that is.

In short, Diyanet is a discriminative, religious institution, employing 120 000 people with a jaw-dropping budget that is not properly accounted for.

From my point of view it is the closest you can come a state within the state in Turkey.