Turkish real sector will undergo big changes in 2010, expert cautions

Speaking with Today’s Zaman, Dr. Şahin said one effect that the newly structured global economy will have on Turkey is an increase in the speed with which companies in this nation will change hands in the coming year.

Some of Şahin’s own ideas on how the global economic crisis actually emerged are striking. Şahin, who has expressed strong allegations in regards to London-based plans and the global crisis, has also noted that global fluctuations strongly affected capital funds not only in Russia but also in the Gulf states.

“There was the creation of tremendous wealth that was not real but was only on paper. Through the use of emotional reactions, the architects of the new financial order were able to bring the price of oil to $150 per barrel at one point. This had no connection with any balance of supply and demand, though. Because, after all, the amount of oil actually produced compared to the amount being consumed is already fairly clear. But by claiming that the refineries were inadequate on this front, they were able to create a certain atmosphere. First, those who were making the most profit from an increase in gasoline prices were ruined. ... Some $600 billion belonging to rich Russians dissipated And for countries rich in oil, the very spots where their money was actually located were ruined,” he said.

Dr. Şahin warned that setting up the new financial order across the globe could take until the end of 2010, and that for this reason, some countries who have difficulties adapting their own financial systems to this order may in fact find themselves falling behind. Şahin also noted that the economic program of US President Barack Obama would be the defining factor during this process.

“In international trade, purchases and sales are not based on a daily program but rather thinking about the future. For example, you may be making purchases based on a time three months in the future. And because these purchases are ones that you cannot later turn around, you wind up creating opportunities for speculative profits. The companies that they were aiming to force into failure through future-based purchases and sales were ones which had already been driven into the ground. But it is also possible to say this will in fact continue. ... In America, using the financial crisis as an excuse, great resources were placed in the hands of large real sector groups during the Bush presidency. At the start, for example, the automotive sector received these funds. When Obama came to power, the agenda turned into placing money not in the hands of auto industry giants but instead in the hands of the people. Because in the end, it is the people who will be buying the cars being produced. And thus they began following a strategy in which it was recognized that by increasing the purchasing power of the people, you also increase production. Despite the fact that Obama, at the G-20 Summit, promised to support the representatives of the real sector, no money has been given to them thus far.”

Şahin notes that while it’s not difficult to figure out who caused the global financial crisis, it is the owners of real money who know who did it. He also says those who were last aware of the crisis were those who thought they were earning lots of money, which in fact was only on paper.

“When you take a look at how the crisis affected different circles, it becomes clear that the Russian and Arab billionaires were the last to know about what was happening because not only did they lose the money they had earned but they also lost large amounts of their main stocks of capital. All that was left in their hands were worthless papers. Papers with no reciprocal value. In the new period before us, we will see a large shift in ownership in the real sector. Those who believe that the actors in the new period will be different or those who believe that the new rulers of the new order will be the representatives of the real sector are very wrong.”

‘Small firms are at greatest risk’

Dr. Şahin has some expectations with regards to Turkey in the coming period. Şahin asserts that the majority of physical holdings of Turkey’s real sector will be changing hands in the coming years, noting: “During the first six months of 2010, large scale changes of ownership will occur in Turkey. We will see this in the new ownership of physical properties. Many companies are now embarking on signing new sale agreements. And in the midst of this new order taking shape, it will become more and more difficult for smaller businesses to stay alive. Of course, the larger and mid-sized representatives of the real sector will stay standing.” 

‘Turkey gained experience on campaign against terror’

Known for his research on financial backing of terrorism, Şahin notes that terror has become the cheapest war method in the world, and for this reason, it will be impossible to stop all financial backing of terrorism. He also asserts that while the Turkish struggle over the last 24 years against terror has cost the nation, it has also brought many advantages to Turkey.

“I accept that we have spent $300 billion over the past 25 years to fight terror in Turkey. This amounts to spending $12 billion annually in this struggle. Don’t think that all of this money is going towards weapons; the state builds a school here, a road there, that sort of thing. But now today we see that the majority of infrastructural problems that used to plague the East and Southeast of Turkey have been solved. And all the investments that have been made are still standing. No one is taking these investments anywhere. I believe that Turkey’s spending, from now on, on weapons and ammunition in the struggle against terror and other extraordinary efforts will not surpass $50 billion.” 

Şahin’s findings on what the struggle against terror has brought to Turkey are interesting. He notes that a lack of preparedness in terms of aircraft carriers and airplanes caused Turkey to carry out its Cyprus peace movement a full 13 years after it had planned the action in 1961-62. Within this framework, he notes that the fight against terror now means that the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) has transformed the Turkish military into a force that uses some of the most modern weapons available in the world.

“Of course, there is a price that had to be paid for transforming a military, which, due to a lack of aircraft carriers and airplanes, was not even able to intervene in Cyprus, which is right next to it, into a military that is one of the world’s most modern. Today, we see that Turkey’s military helps keep stability in the region, while Turkey is a nation whose star is shining. During the Cold War years, Turkey found itself on the brink of war with its neighbors for many years. The fact that we didn’t go to war against a few of those countries was only due to Turkey’s own hesitant stance. This in turn was because we lacked a bit of strength. Despite the fact that our own oil rights were trampled on in Mosul, we didn’t even extend a warning to Saddam Hussein. During the Cyprus peace movement, even our greatest allies did not give us arms. Anyone who is not in the military perhaps cannot understand what a serious blow this was. I am someone who witnessed Turkey being given F-16s by the US; it is impossible today for anyone to understand the situation and what the conditions were.”

Şahin says due to Turkey’s struggle against terror, the nation’s military was not only reorganized but the nation also turned into one that produced its own military materials and ships. Now, it possesses one of the world’s most important defense industries. He says: “After the US invaded Iraq, at least 3.5 million people died. Another 5 million people fled the country. Iraq is in shambles. What has emerged in the meantime is a state with three structures. At any moment, three different states could be created out of these, but even if these do become real states, they will be slave states. They can only remain alive due to the existence of one large state. Even if you were to spend $10 trillion to bring Iraq back to its former state, you would not be able to bring back its former self. Turkey, on the other hand, has spent the past 25 years struggling against terror, and it has become one of the strongest nations around. Turkey will not have to deal with a situation similar to the one in Iraq.”

‘Kurdish problem challenges Turkey’

Touching on the Kurdish problems in Turkey, Şahin states that these problems are not entirely solvable, and that in every era throughout history, Kurds have maintained a stance against the state in every region where they have resided. He says even during the period when the Persians fought the Greeks, the Kurds who lived in the region were constantly switching sides, supporting the side that offered them the better deal.

He says: “There has always been in that region a lack of involvement with the state. In a certain region of Turkey, the nation’s citizens do not enjoy the freedom to travel, live or work. For example, citizens from İzmir or İstanbul can’t just decide one day to leave their cities and go camping on the plateaus of Tunceli or go for a swim in Lake Van. But, on the other hand, citizens living in those areas can travel comfortably to Antalya or İzmir, for example. The whole situation is quite impossible, actually; it is an abomination to the principle of the state. The Kurds have never experienced any problems until today concerning representation. Since the formation of the Turkish Republic, there has always been ethnic Kurdish representation in our Parliament. And today we see that we have more than 100 members of Parliament with Kurdish ethnic roots, which means that the source of the problem is not inequality. It means we are facing a different sort of problem. While we can talk about inequality in education and employment, we cannot talk about discrimination.”

According to Şahin, who also believes that certain factions in Turkey want a degree of instability in the country, the government is doing the right thing by looking at the initiatives on the Kurdish front through the perspective of human rights. He also stresses, though, that the government must be very careful in the steps it takes. 

“The people who live in those regions are tired of being threatened and scared. At the same time, though, they should not be coddled. People who have left the villages and the provinces in droves are now crowded in the slums of cities in the region. They are the ones pouring into the streets to protest. What, do you think you can really see Kurdish merchants or Kurdish government clerks in those protests? It has already been shown that you cannot solve this problem through military action. And it is not possible to find solutions through cultural policies, either. We can instead solve the problem through socio-economic policies.”

Şahin goes on to assert that, even if a fully independent Kurdish regional state is formed in northern Iraq, it will not be sustainable for long. He notes within this framework that no ethnically based state is ever comfortable on the global stage. He says: “Turks have, up until today, formed 16 different states, but none of them has ever been a race-based one. These states always included people from every nation, every ethnic group. There is no tradition of racially based states for Turks. But today, in northern Iraq, we see a regional authority emerging that includes almost no Arabs. Even the Turkmen are not being included. There are only a few countries in the world that base their states on race. Israel, Armenia and Georgia. And today, those three states live under threat. We see, in the meantime, what happened to Lebanon or Yugoslavia when they tried to bring about systems based on race. … When the Croatian people clashed with the state, they were helped at the time by the Bosnians and the Macedonians. When the Serbs lost their minds, they started to attack everyone. Now all of these regions have emerged as their own states, but they are really slave states. They are only able to stay standing due to the presence of foreign soldiers.”