The argument was brought forward by Nuray Mert, a columnist and academic, during an interview with the Vatan daily. Mert’s argument was quickly adopted by anti-government circles who expressed fears about Turkey becoming an authoritarian country. This debate is reminiscent of another heated debate before the July 22 elections of 2007, from which the AK Party emerged stronger, receiving 46.6 percent of the vote nationwide. Back then, opponents of the government claimed that Turkey was heading toward an Islamic regime, ruled by Shariah. Since this argument did not scare the public or cut support for the AK Party, it seems now quite doubtful that the authoritarianism argument will work because the steps taken by the government to improve democratic standards will foil the skeptics’ arguments.Milliyet’s Taha Akyol admits that the AK Party uses some oppressive practices that do not comply with the liberal understanding of democracy but he says it would be a sign of lack of honesty to describe the AK Party a fascist party after it liberalized Turkey’s laws during the EU membership process and opened up Turkey to the world. In his view, some of the government’s oppressive practices are not the result of it being a fascist government, but are due to the lack of an opposition alternative to the government. “When there is not an opposition, which is the alternative to the government, the government feels unchallenged, which leads it to act with intolerance and react excessively to any opposition. This is the problem of our democracy,” suggests Akyol.
There is no possibility that Turkey is heading toward civilian fascism under the AK Party’s rule, says Akyol, noting that the legal, social, economic and diplomatic developments initiated by the AK Party during its eight-year term will not allow for the establishment of an authoritarian regime, let alone a “fascist regime,” in the country.
Sabah’s Hasan Bülent Kahraman says he finds the civilian coup discourse very dangerous because such an argument places politics in the same basket as coups. “This is the most terrible mistake that can be made. This understanding basically depends on an alliance with the military. It suggests that the military will break any political deadlocks and what is worse, this argument believes that the military has a democratizing feature. The opposition, which is considered to be among the most important components of politics, is not given any heed by the bearers of this argument. If the political system sustains itself through democracy but the system is not the one they wish, they say a civilian coup is taking place, and hence invite the military to meddle in politics,” explains Kahraman.
