Problem perception in Ankara political corridors

In short, I underlined that the “accepted” and “tolerated” classification concerning ruling powers was the basis for the anger. While this kind of classification should not exist in democracies, in Turkey, not only is it practiced, but over time, “tolerated” actors become “intolerable” actors.

Some have said this classification sums up Turkey's 80-year political experience, while others have questioned the identity and position of those who use this classification. An economist friend of mine underlined that “intolerance” was the basis of both interim regimes and economic problems in the country.

The most profound argument was that “antidemocratic power groups that make this classification haven't been able to bring about an acceptable ruling power in so long, and since it seems unlikely that they will from now on, they have no other choice but to tolerate what comes ahead.”

There was also an interesting question: “How will the Kurdish initiative in the fight against terrorism, which is one of the most important problems in Turkey, impact the mode of anger and the range of tolerance?”

This was one of the several questions to which we sought an answer during the week. While leaders adamantly stayed in anger mode, the following assessment on tolerance was very important: “Each time peaceful solutions to resolve the Kurdish problem were brought to the agenda in the past, a provocation would obstruct the process. If there is no serious reaction to the point that we have reached today, that means the hands and feet of those who are intolerant toward the elected are tied.” But there is still suspicion that there will provocations to ruin efforts to find a solution to the Kurdish problem, the psychological barrier of which was overcome after Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan agreed to meet with the Democratic Society Party (DTP).

DTP leader Ahmet Türk warned that the process should not be spread over a long period of time, pointing to the possibility of provocateurs sabotaging it. The meeting between Erdoğan and Türk was delayed several times because of similar attempts. Right when Erdoğan was getting ready to respond to the request for a meeting, he announced that soldiers had been killed in a bomb explosion attributed to the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and that therefore he would not meet with Türk at that time.

Indeed, there is a strong widespread sentiment that the progress achieved with the Ergenekon case has increased the chances of the Kurdish initiative being successful. But one of the other challenges of the job is the problem perception technique of politics. This technique, which can be summarized as “opposing just to oppose,” plays a role in leaders staying in anger mode, which is seen as an effective formula that protects their political constituents. The Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and the Republican People's Party (CHP), the two leading opposition groups, believe their constituents will disappear if the problem is solved. As a reaction, they are trying to melt away the ruling power's voter base by spreading the notion that through the Kurdish initiative the ruling power is taking PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan on as an adviser.

But the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) argues that with the end of despair and the arrival of peace, it will free Turkey from its burdens and add strength to its power. While there is no information on the content of the plan except that work is under way, as Interior Minister Beşir Atalay announced, there is intense debate going on about what the initiative will include, who the government will address, what kind of administrative formula the government will propose, how the issue of education and broadcasting in the native language will be dealt with, what the effects of strengthening local administrations will be, how arms will be laid down and what will happen to those who lay down arms.

In response to comments that there are attempts to weaken the momentum for peace by intensifying debates, AK Party deputies say: “We are at the point of no return. We will not take a step back.” The side that informs the public the best and is the most persuasive will benefit the most.

Different assessments concerning the parliament speaker elections

Despite the opposition's harsh reaction, Prime Minister Erdoğan applied his long-planned strategy for the parliament speaker elections. His insistence on electing former Justice Minister Mehmet Ali Şahin although the opposition openly supported Köksal Toptan and discreetly supported other candidates led to a number of conclusions.

There are two conflicting assessments concerning plans to change the Constitution. According to one assessment, the AK Party will not propose changing the Constitution to Parliament because by selecting Şahin, the prime minister has signaled that he will not seek a compromise.

According to the counter assessment, Erdoğan's selection of Şahin can indeed be interpreted as a sign that he is not looking for common ground, but it must not be forgotten that even with Toptan, who was the most compromising name, it was understood that the search for a compromise did not yield any results. Just because Erdoğan and the AK Party won't search for a compromise doesn't mean they no longer want to change the Constitution. To the contrary, it means they will introduce a comprehensive constitutional change package despite the opposition (CHP-MHP). We have to wait and see which will be right, the first assessment or the second.

However, I must say, if a civilian constitution is deemed necessary for the Kurdish initiative, a proposal package that will require a referendum may make the second assessment more likely.

Turkish Energy Minister Taner Yıldız (second from L) and Russian Deputy Prime Minster (L) Igor Sechin, Russia's top energy official, participated in the opening ceremony of the eighth term meeting of the Turkish-Russian Joint Economic Commission in Ankara on Wednesday. Energy alliance brings countries back from brink of war As busy as he is, Energy Minister Taner Yıldız became a shining star this past week. An economist friend of mine underlined the importance of the agreement signed between Erdoğan and Russian Prime Minsiter Vladimir Putin, saying: “The energy alliance between Turkey and Russia reshaped the course of a very important historical process. If this agreement had not been reached, a war between Armenia and Azerbaijan was at hand.” Realizing that I was not complimenting his views, he went on to explain: “Energy security has been one of the most important causes of wars in oil-rich regions. Of course an unwanted war between Azerbaijan and Armenia would not be visibly caused over energy or oil. But ultimately it would be a process that would ruin Nabucco. Turkey not only reinforced its position in energy security but at the same time prevented a war that was clearly nearby.” Delaying all other meetings to after Putin's visit, Energy Minister Yıldız must have taken a deep breath after the agreement was signed.