The United States is deeply polarized over how involved government should be in looking after the health of the nation. The Obama administration has drawn what to many seems the obvious conclusion that the private sector, free and unsupervised, is no better at looking after the wellbeing of citizens than banks were at looking after people's cash. Spending on health care will in the next decade rise to 20 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP), but this represents a poor return on investment. European nations spend half this amount on a system which provides universal coverage, but still 46 million Americans have no insurance at all. A McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) report (2007) suggests $480 billion is wasted every year in excessive administrative costs and poor care. The question is what to do about it and how to pay for it, and here the US administration is fuzzy on those bedeviling details. Or rather it has raised the issue in the hope that when the dust has settled some sort of consensus will emerge.
And, of course, what a lot of dust there has been. As might be expected, any industry that accounts for nearly a fifth of the US economy buys an awful lot of passion. There appears to be a grassroots movement which regards any attempt by the government to regulate national health as socialism by another name and worse than gun control. The Obama-ites have let it be known that they suspect some of the more vituperative protest is not so much “grass roots” as “AstroTurf,” i.e., artificial fury financed by health industry dollars. It's not that difficult to engage people's attention in their own wellbeing and to exploit concerns over a potentially scary issue. So America is having a debate not unfamiliar in Turkey, over what constitutes an authentic public opinion and how susceptible a public policy agenda is to being manipulated by vested interests.
Turkey, too, is waist deep in discussion over an issue every bit as intractable as public health. The current government now openly acknowledges that the nation has invested far too much in resources and lives and historically paid far too heavy a price without ever confronting head on the source of discontent in the Kurdish parts of the country. The conflict is not confined to the Southeast but has had a corrupting effect on other institutions. Using covert methods to deal with Kurdish insurgency is where many of those now standing trial in the Ergenekon conspiracy hearings first cut their teeth.
To define Turkey's Kurdish problem, as many now do, as a problem of incomplete democratization is correct inasmuch as it makes the Kurdish issue everyone else's problem. However, it does not make it any easier to solve. The government now proposes a solution but, as with Mr. Obama's new health plan, has left it up to the overactive imagination of its critics to specify exactly what this might entail. The government is testing the waters of public opinion to determine exactly how brave it can be. This is another way of saying that it is engaging in a process of public consultation. At the same time, it will be hoping that the braying wolves will exhaust themselves before the actual proposals are revealed.
The hope that the furor will die down may well be in vain. In Turkey, the Kurdish conflict has given rise to vested interests that thrive on its perpetuation. Those who benefit either financially or politically from instability are only too happy to feed people's fears. However, one factor working to the government's advantage is the Ergenekon trial itself. It has greatly weakened (and let us hope we are not speaking too soon) those who would use manipulation, provocations and violence to oppose a solution even being discussed. On the other hand, passions on this issue are genuine and grounded in a long history. Grass roots or AstroTurf, they have to be heard.
