How can democracy and rule of law prevail only half a decade after the toppling of a dictatorial regime, while even Turkey is still unable to do it after decades of reform? The first comprehensive constitution in an Islamic nation was enacted in 1876 by the Ottoman Turks. Six parliamentary elections were held during the Ottoman Empire until it collapsed after World War I. New constitutions and parliamentary elections followed during the subsequent republican era. 1946 marked the first multi-party general elections for Turks, something Iraqis only managed in 2005.
Proponents of the Iraq war highlight a few democratic accomplishments there. Iraq is in effect only at the beginning of a long and bumpy road to full-fledged democracy. If you don’t believe me, check what we have in Turkey now. A constitution largely shaped by the military following a coup in 1980; 24 political parties shut down by the Constitutional Court since its inception in 1963, the latest but not least move in that direction being last week’s indictment against the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) by the chief prosecutor -- or democracy persecutor -- of the land.
A close ally of the West during the Cold War, Turkey has been a member of NATO since 1952 and an associate member of the European Economic Community since 1963. Ankara entered into official negotiations for full membership in the European Union in 2005, supposedly having met the Copenhagen political criteria. In the meantime, on the exaggerated premise that secularism is being undermined, the military and judiciary seek annulling 47 percent of the Turkish electorate’s choice -- the number that voted for the AK Party in July 2007. The military threatened a coup last April. The chief prosecutor joined them by requesting the closure of the party and the banning of its 71 top members, including Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, from engaging in politics for five years. A ban is also sought for President Abdullah Gül, a member of the AK Party until he was elected president last year. Welcome to the world’s showcase for Muslim democracy! And good luck with Operation Enduring Freedom and democracy in Iraq…
The following excerpt from the US 2007 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices explains very well the current situation in Turkey: “Some government and military officers at times undermined the judiciary’s independence, and the overly close relationship of judges and prosecutors continued to hinder the right to a fair trial.” It was no accident the latest EU Progress Report, released in November 2007, also said, “More needs to be done in terms of strengthening the independence and impartiality of the judiciary.” True, the European Court of Human Rights, an institution which generally tends to be government-friendly, has approved political party closures by the judiciary before. But who says they would do it if the laws were written in a more democratic way?
Outside pressure has traditionally been a significant catalyst for reform in Islamic nations. That has increasingly been the case with Turkey, since the 19th century. (In a more radical sense, that has been the case with Iraq since 2003 as well.) If it weren’t for the prerequisites of starting and pursuing the EU membership process, Turkey would be in a far worse position in terms of democratic practices. Despite so many reforms, including the surges by the Özal and Erdoğan administrations, authoritarian tendencies remain very powerful.
Turks generally look toward the West and care about what’s being said about them, whether they like it or not. Even the repressive elements in Turkey’s Kemalist state establishment do not want to be radically at odds with the West, which would result in a serious divergence from the modernization path of the nation’s founding fathers, first and foremost Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. That’s precisely why Turkey’s Western friends and allies should continue to kindly remind Ankara of core democratic values. A principled and consistent stance on behalf of better governance in Turkey would not hurt Western interests, at least in the long run.
In this sense, one can say Washington did not do a great job when the Turkish military issued a warning of intervention last April. But they have done much better with their reaction to the judicial coup attempt against the AK Party. US spokesmen essentially called for respect for democracy, rule of law and voter preferences. This cannot be read as backing a particular political movement in Turkey, but instead as universal support for a more efficient democracy. A healthier Turkish democracy, with a more pro-religious-freedom interpretation of secularism, is in the best interest of both Turkey and the West.
So where do we go from here? Turkish democracy will continue to have its ups and downs for the foreseeable future and will eventually evolve into a completely Western-style one. I have no doubt about it. Obviously, it’s not going to be an easy or short process. Supporters of reform inside and outside should not lose patience. Fortunately, the patience quotient for Turkey is much smaller than Iraq and most other predominantly Muslim-populated nations. But as a pioneer of reformation, the Turkish case needs to be dealt with the utmost care. If the democracy experiment in Turkey fails, it would be almost impossible to succeed in the greater Islamic world.
