Why Turkey's liberals criticize the AK Party
 
 
  |  
  |  
  |  
  |  
RSS
  |  
  |  
  |  
22 May 2013 Wednesday
 
 
 
 
 
 
Columnists 30 December 2012, Sunday 1 0 0 0
İHSAN DAĞI
i.dagi@todayszaman.com

Why Turkey's liberals criticize the AK Party

Liberals who supported the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) in the past have increasingly become critical of the party and its rule. This appears to the AK Party leadership as a case of disloyalty and to the opposition as a vindication of their stand against the AK Party.

For those who really want to understand the liberal critiques of the AK Party, here is the clue. On Oct. 11, 2007, my column was titled “Limits of liberal support for the AK Party.” Let's look at it again and we will start to understand the recent disenchantment of liberals with the AK Party.

“Embracing liberal values has certainly gained sympathy and even support for the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) among liberal circles. Continuation of this, however, depends on the performance of the AK Party in some crucial policy areas.

“Most important of all is the EU process. Liberals attach great importance to a speedy integration with the EU, viewing the process as a unique opportunity to establish and consolidate a working market economy, full democracy and a universal standard for human rights in Turkey. While the AK Party government was hailed as the starter of negotiations earned with courageous political reforms, it was also heavily criticized for slowing down the reform process afterwards. To see the continued commitment of the AK Party to the membership and its corollary political reforms is the key to the liberal support. What is expected from the AK Party in this post-election period and with the renewed mandate is to energize the reform process and press hard for concluding the negotiations. If the AK Party seems unenthusiastic about EU membership, the bases of the liberal-democrat-conservative coalition will crumble. Without an EU membership perspective that generates a broad progressive coalition, the AK Party will commit political suicide: It will either submit to or be defeated by the pro-status quo powers.

“Protection and promotion of human rights for all is another key policy area on which the AK Party should perform well in order to keep the support of the liberals. This requires a notion of protection of the rights and liberties of all citizens without falling into the trap of ‘majoritarian' democracy. Protection of minority views, lifestyles and beliefs is part and parcel of a liberal democracy. Any deviation from this will turn the liberals against the AK Party.

“The AK Party cannot refrain from taking steps to materialize full democracy. If the AK Party looks ready to compromise on the principles of liberal democracy, including a proper form of civil-military relationship, it should forget about liberal support. The appearance of the AK Party negotiating with bureaucracy -- with a result that sustains tutelage democracy -- will certainly alienate the liberals. In this context, not to take a step back from making a new liberal constitution is a test case for the AK Party.

“Another issue area that is important for liberals is the Kurdish question and the issues of ethnic and religious diversity. If the AK Party falls into the trap, as pushed by the state bureaucracy, of pursuing a homogenizing national policy toward the Kurds and other ethnic and religious identities, it cannot count on the support of the liberals. In order to make peace with the civilian and military bureaucracy the AK Party may be tempted to play ‘tough' on the Kurdish issue and ‘soft' on political reforms. Both will strip the AK Party off its reformist and civilian characteristics.

“Another sine qua non of liberal sympathy for the AK Party is the expectation that the AK Party fight against radical nationalism, not only in Turkey but within itself. This is the soft belly of the AK Party. I think liberals are aware of the presence of the statist/nationalist pull within the party… The party leadership is capable of taming nationalism, but instead, if it falls victim to radical nationalism, it will lose its reformist stand. Once this happens the AK Party will dissolve into the state and status quo just like its opponents. This would be the end of a reformist party and the end of the liberal/democrat/conservative coalition.

“It is clear that the AK Party will face its greatest opposition ever if it is seen as abandoning the objectives of building full democracy and pursuing the EU membership. These two broad objectives constitute the very basis of the liberal, democrat, conservative alliance…”

Think of each and every issue I raised five years ago: the EU, a new constitution, the danger of majoritarian democracy, respect for minority views, values and lifestyles, the Kurdish question, tendency for radical nationalism…

So, from a liberal point of view, why not now criticize the AK Party?

Columnists Previous articles of the columnist
12 May 2013
What can Turkey do about Syria?
5 May 2013
Imprisoned by the state
28 April 2013
The PKK's gain
21 April 2013
The state and society in post-Kemalist Turkey
14 April 2013
Is the PKK resisting Öcalan's directive?
7 April 2013
To build a ‘greater Turkey' with the Kurds
1 April 2013
Are Turkish people ready for Kurdish peace?
24 March 2013
Pax-Ottomana for the Kurds
17 March 2013
A state in the making: Kurdistan
10 March 2013
Who can survive without the state?
3 March 2013
An oriental way to solve the Kurdish problem
24 February 2013
Greatest obstacle for a Kurdish solution
17 February 2013
Who will topple Assad, and when?
10 February 2013
Is Turkey immune to international criticism?
3 February 2013
Hierarchy of nations: Turks and others
27 January 2013
Turkey's quest for a Eurasian Union
20 January 2013
Kurdish initiatives compared: any difference?
13 January 2013
Competing strategies in the Kurdish question
6 January 2013
Is a Kurdish solution in sight?
30 December 2012
Why Turkey's liberals criticize the AK Party
23 December 2012
Imagining an AK Party society
16 December 2012
Will the Arab Spring be hijacked?
9 December 2012
Pursuing Islamism with democracy
2 December 2012
TV soaps: People's choices vs. state's choice
25 November 2012
A ‘revisionist power' that needs NATO's protection!
18 November 2012
From Nasser to Erdoğan: unfulfilled promises
11 November 2012
Friends who don't care about human rights
4 November 2012
Turkey's Kurdish conflict: pathways to progress
28 October 2012
Kurdish question and Turkish opposition
21 October 2012
What's wrong with the zero problems policy?
14 October 2012
Why the AK Party does not need the EU
7 October 2012
Ready for a war, but who will be the warriors?
30 September 2012
Talking to the PKK
24 September 2012
The end of a myth
16 September 2012
The new ‘other': the Kurdish political opposition
9 September 2012
The changing identity of the AK Party
2 September 2012
Can Turkey pursue an imperial foreign policy?
26 August 2012
What is the PKK trying to do?
14 August 2012
Re-securitization of Turkish politics?
5 August 2012
The future of the Kurds: democracy or partition?
29 July 2012
Good for the Kurds, bad for the Turks?
22 July 2012
Emergence of the ‘new AK Party'
8 July 2012
Who can solve the Kurdish question?
1 July 2012
Egypt and Turkey, military and democracy
17 June 2012
Kurdish solution by offering gifts
10 June 2012
The Kurds of the AK Party
3 June 2012
What is wrong with the AK Party?
27 May 2012
Turkish foreign policy: Time for a re-evaluation
20 May 2012
Changing positions in Turkish politics
13 May 2012
Public perception of coup trials
6 May 2012
Post-Kemalist tutelage
29 April 2012
What do the Kurds want?
22 April 2012
Can Barzani be a mediator?
15 April 2012
The end of military tutelage in Turkey?
8 April 2012
The fall of the generals
1 April 2012
Islam and the nuclear issue
25 March 2012
Resolving or managing the Kurdish question?
11 March 2012
Annexing Cyprus
4 March 2012
Is Kemalism an alternative to the AK Party?
26 February 2012
The paradox of the Assad regime
19 February 2012
Lessons for the AK Party and MİT
12 February 2012
Whose war is it anyway?
5 February 2012
AK Party’s new mission
29 January 2012
Europe: a Christian continent?
22 January 2012
Murder as a collective crime
15 January 2012
Racism, immigrants and the state in Germany
8 January 2012
General Başbuğ: Who was he?
1 January 2012
A difficult period for the AK Party
25 December 2011
The French disconnection
18 December 2011
A war America lost
11 December 2011
Reforming Europe, abandoning Turkey
4 December 2011
Why Turkey is for ‘regime change’ in Syria
27 November 2011
Dersim massacre as a civilizing project
20 November 2011
Abandoning the old paradigm in the Cyprus dispute
13 November 2011
Was Atatürk a dictator? Ask him
30 October 2011
Are the Islamists ready to govern?
23 October 2011
A burden for all Kurds
16 October 2011
New constitution: Is it possible?
2 October 2011
A post-Kemalist constitution for Turkey
25 September 2011
Are we ever closer to a Kurdish solution amid violence?
18 September 2011
Secularism for Arabs and Turks
11 September 2011
Israel’s missed opportunity
5 September 2011
Who will decide the future of Turkish-Israeli relations?
28 August 2011
Military as a national security problem
21 August 2011
Towards a Kurdish solution without the PKK
14 August 2011
The AK Party, 10 years later
7 August 2011
Has the military lost?
17 July 2011
What's next for Kurdish politics?
3 July 2011
What is the opposition doing?
26 June 2011
Judicial sabotage
19 June 2011
Why do people vote for the AK Party?
12 June 2011
Turkey the day after elections
5 June 2011
Why is The Economist afraid of democracy?
29 May 2011
Will the military come to rescue the secularists?
22 May 2011
Politics of elections, politics of change
15 May 2011
What people think of bin Laden and Assad
8 May 2011
Sacrificing the ‘Kurdish solution’ to the elections
1 May 2011
A constitution without an official ideology
25 April 2011
Towards normalization of Turkish politics?
18 April 2011
Central bank governor and the poverty of White Turks
...