About us | Advertising | Contact | Get Home Delivery | Archive
Mar 20, 2010 Homepage
News
Business
Interviews
Columnists
Op-Ed
Arts & Culture
Expat Zone
Features
Travel
Leisure
Life
Cartoons
Women
Health Briefs
Weird But True
Sports
Turkish Press Review
Today's think tanks
Turkey in Foreign Press

Columnists
DOĞU ERGİL d.ergil@todayszaman.com Politics

The tug of war between the elected and the appointed


The dramatic public appeal of the Higher Education Board (YÖK) on April 5 that the Parliament’s selection of the next president should be held with 367 members (two-thirds of the total number of deputies) was a wake-up call.

Today's interactive toolbox
Bookmark and Share
Video Photo Audio
Send to print Send to my friend
Post your comments
Read comments
The warning reveals that those who oppose Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s presidency will make every effort to deny him this opportunity. If the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) does not heed this warning, it means opposing forces/actors will take the issue to the Constitutional Court. Given the fact that YÖK President Professor Erdoğan Tezic is a prominent constitutional law scholar, the warning by YÖK carries some weight.

Why is academia, the military, the judiciary and the secular sections of the bureaucracy opposing Mr. Erdoğan’s presidency? After all he is the prime minister and in this post he is more powerful than the president. Well the answer is not as simple as the question.

The government and its share of power has always been looked upon as ephemeral and reserved for those transitory cadres that come and go with elections. Furthermore this (political) power is limited and strictly checked by institutions and laws made and supervised by the powerful bureaucracy, the judiciary included. In the Turkish context it is called “state power.” The state’s power is definitive and supersedes the political power that is utilized to run the day-to-day affairs of society.

Those that wield state power oversee how basic institutions function and make corrections when there are deviations from state policies that are shaped by written rules and unwritten directives. It is this tutelary function of the holders of state power that make them strong, unaccountable and privileged. The presidency is the epitome of everything associated with the state. A group that loses its grip on the presidency may lose its unchallenged position in the socio-political hierarchy, never to recover it. It is because of this concern that three actual and one threatened military coup have been put into effect since 1960.

Additionally there is a more-or-less clear definition of the qualities of the president of the republic: they have to be secular, statist, nationalist, modern and in harmony with the armed forces of the country. I would add “immune from corruption or any other questionable economic dealings,” but considering the rumors surrounding our recent string of presidents, this aspect has been subdued, although it has been revitalized with Mr. Erdoğan’s candidacy. The sum total of these qualities dovetails into the wholehearted reference to the president, “Your Excellency”.

Mr. Erdoğan is not the type to be called “Your Excellency” or “sayin,” by the standards of the Turkish state elite. They will simply deny bowing before him. Furthermore given the vagaries of the Turkish electoral system, only one third of the electorate has endorsed an AK Party majority in the Parliament and this partial popular shall be instrumental in electing the next president. Although the procedure is legal, there is a serious problem of representation and an ensuing problem of legitimacy that would haunt a president elected by the AK Party alone.

The Turkish state elite has distinguished itself from the other ruling elite of the non-western countries as being secular and compatible with western values. This quality has been labeled as “Kemalism,” identifying its doctrine as that of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Mr. Erdoğan does not come from the Kemalist tradition. Nor does he come from a tradition of either ideologically or socially defined secularism. Instead he has always identified himself with the Islamic tradition of Turkey, which has been at times antagonistic to both Kemalism and Western values. In this context his values are seen as shaped more by Middle Eastern Islamic groups than Europe. It is only after he ascended to power as prime minister that it seems he has come to grips with the realities of the world and the power structure in his country, and moderated his relatively sharp religious stance with a more democratic attitude. Yet this transformation has not convinced a large part of the electorate, and none of the state elite.

These circles believe that Mr. Erdoğan will revert back to his ideological roots, if and when he becomes the next president. In this capacity he is expected to endorse obscurantist laws and appoint religiously motivated personalities to critical official posts. It is no surprise that the YÖK declaration reads as follows: “The presidency is a post with many powers, but no accountability. The president is empowered to veto laws and influence autonomous institutions and superior judicial organs of the state [by selecting and appointing a part of their members]. Either the powers of the president must be reduced to fit the character of a parliamentary system, or these powers must be increased, and a semi-presidential system must be adopted whereby the president is elected by popular vote through a two-tier election system.”

That is the gist of the problem. No one must contend with the privileged position of the state elite, whose source of power is not popular choice, but nonetheless wields the power of the state machinery. It may be that this is an over-simplified statement, but I cannot come up with a better explanation.

As regards my personal opinion, Mr. Erdoğan has the legal right to be elected president, but he lacks the qualities of a sophisticated statesman and is ill-equipped to be a national leader of international stature. Yet given the foul play of those who are not accountable to the people, it could be that his election will do away with much of the undeserved privileges of the old guard, that use state power without accountability. But then this may also be a naïve expectation that will not come true for some time to come.

15 April 2007, Sunday
DOĞU ERGİL
   
Articles of Today
The ‘genocide’ problem: states, parliaments and people
BERİL DEDEOĞLU
Greek Cypriots blocking Turkey’s judicial reform
ABDULHAMİT BİLİCİ
Opportunity for judicial reform
MÜMTAZER TÜRKÖNE
Who is who?
CHARLOTTE MCPHERSON
Either the state or a raven’s carcass
MEHMET KAMIŞ
Let it play out for everyone’s sake
ABDULLAH BOZKURT
‘Model partner’ or ‘genocide offender’?
GÜRKAN ZENGİN
Can (Turkish) soccer hooliganism be stopped?
KLAUS JURGENS
A small package but a big step for democracy
FATMA DİŞLİ ZIBAK

Other Articles of the Columnist

  The tug of war between the elected and the appointed
  A fresh initiative on kirkuk
  Europe and the EU
  The European Union at 50
  Electing, or selecting the next president
  War on ignorance vs. war on terror
  Strategic depth concerning northern Iraq
  Psychopathology or surge of nationalism
  [Windfalls of the week]Irony of history
  Presidential elections
  [Windfalls of the week]Questions on cross-border operation
  Shadow over US-Turkish relations
  [Windfalls of the week] An American problem: Waived morality
  Problems of nationalism
Columnists
ABDULHAMİT BİLİCİ
ABDULLAH BOZKURT
ALİ BULAÇ
ALİ H. ASLAN
AMANDA PAUL
ANDREW FINKEL
ASIM ERDİLEK
AYŞE KARABAT
BEJAN MATUR
BERİL DEDEOĞLU
BERK ÇEKTİR
BÜLENT KENEŞ
BÜLENT KORUCU
CHARLOTTE MCPHERSON
DOĞU ERGİL
EKREM DUMANLI
EMRE USLU
ETYEN MAHÇUPYAN
FATMA DİŞLİ ZIBAK
FİKRET ERTAN
GÜRKAN ZENGİN
HASAN KANBOLAT
HÜSEYİN GÜLERCE
İBRAHİM KALIN
İBRAHİM ÖZTÜRK
İHSAN DAĞI
İHSAN YILMAZ
KATHY HAMILTON
KERİM BALCI
KLAUS JURGENS
LALE KEMAL
MEHMET KAMIŞ
MICHAEL KUSER
MUHAMMED ÇETİN
MÜMTAZER TÜRKÖNE
NICOLE POPE
ÖMER TAŞPINAR
ORHAN KEMAL CENGİZ
PAT YALE
ŞAHİN ALPAY
SELÇUK GÜLTAŞLI
SUAT KINIKLIOĞLU
YAVUZ BAYDAR