A caricature of Turkey for Middle East and the real dynamics of democracy
by Orhan Kemal Cengiz

In most of these discussions Turkey’s name is somehow mentioned as a kind of model for these countries that are in transition, the consequences of which cannot be foreseen with certainty.

I have tried to follow these discussions, especially those in which Turkey’s name is mentioned as a model. It was really very interesting to see what some commentators understand from the “Turkish model.” I put sound and in-depth analysis aside. But there were some others that presented an interesting caricature of Turkey. And interestingly, there were some Turks amongst those who came up with this caricature model of Turkey.

I am really amazed with the infinite capacity of the human mind to distort apparent realities. According to these caricatures, which are also presented as a model for Middle Eastern countries, Turkey, more or less, is a country as follows: There are now Islamists in power, but thanks to the secular army, these Islamists have been tamed and moderated. And, as a result of this process, Turkey is still a democracy. Since there are strong Islamist structures in all these countries, they can follow the “Turkish” model. Namely, if Islamists come to power under the guardianship of the military in those countries, in Egypt for example, there would be no problem.

Well, where shall I start? This caricature simply turns real dynamics in Turkey upside down. Turkey is not a democracy because there is a secular army that has guardianship over the political system, but instead Turkey is democratizing due to the very military’s hegemony and grip on power weakening. And a full analysis of the real political situation in relation to democratization in Turkey, of course, would be much more complex than my simple formula.

I think Turkey has been democratizing in exactly the same way as what happened in Western democratization. Democracy comes after power struggles, after breaking down the power block that existed in this country. The bourgeoisie in Europe fought against the king and the aristocracy not because they were too democratic but because they wanted to have a fair share in the distribution of power. From this struggle democracy emerged. This is exactly what has been happening in Turkey for a while.

We had this military and civil bureaucracy on the one hand and quite a tamed bourgeoisie that owed its richness to the state on the other. This has been the power block in Turkey since the establishment of the Turkish Republic. The military saw itself as the sole owner of the country and the bourgeoisie was also in their service. After all, the Turkish rich became rich because of the privileges provided to them by the military-ruled state. They became rich as a result of usurping non-Muslims’ commodities; they became even richer with the high walls of customs raised for them by the state.

Try to think about the Turkish military and old bourgeoisie as the king and aristocracy in Western Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries. And you can think of the “Anatolian Tigers” (a term used for the newly emerged religious-conservative businessmen from Anatolia) as the new bourgeoisie fighting against this power block of king-aristocracy and military-old bourgeoisie.

A so-called Turkish “Islamist” party has come to power on the shoulders of the “Anatolian tigers,” who emerged after Turkish markets opened up to the external world in the Turgut Özal era in the 1980s and later. This new bourgeoisie does not feel it owes anything to the state. On the contrary, it saw old power relations as a serious constraint to its well-being and future in Turkey.

The military is still there and the old bourgeoisie is still there, and we have had this power struggle going on at full intensity from which Turkish democracy has been emerging for some time. Add to this a 60-year multiparty system, an interrupted relationship with Western institutions for the last 50 years and the huge influence of the EU accession process on Turkey and then you’ve got a formula for Turkish democracy.

Consequently, I do not think we have a ready formula for Turkish democracy for the rest of the Muslim world. However, undoubtedly, Turkey can be a huge inspiration and incentive for the democratization of the Middle East as long as we understand it correctly and as it is.