|
|
![]() Caught Between 2 Bad Choices -- |
Is Turkey stuck with this choice of President and First Lady? ![]() Click for enlargement! Thanks to Hürriyet Gazetesi -- 5 March 2007 |
It's lose-lose for Turkish secularists...
In Part 1 of this article we raised the question, "Would 5 more years of Erdoğan as Prime Minister be better for Turkey, than 7 years of Erdoğan as President?" According to Journalist Oktay Eksi, the answer is a resounding 'No'... because, Erdoğan as Prime Minister would still be AKP Party Leader in 'the cat bird seat' -- and would still be able to control the appointment of a crony (like Abdullah Gül, who would be forever in Erdoğan's back-pocket) to fill the Presidential seat. Erdoğan would thereby (directly or indirectly) control 2 of the 3 branches of the Turkish government -- the Executive and the Legislative. And that, according to Eksi, would mean, "the end of democracy" in Turkey. On the other hand, Eksi explains, if Erdoğan becomes President, he is obliged by law to sever all political ties -- which would mean giving up his AKP party leadership role. An Erdoğan-less AKP, says Eksi, will fall to in-fighting, decline rapidly -- and splinter into at least 4 independent parties. That latter scenario, according to Eksi, is a 'better result' in the long run, for those who favor an Ataturk-principled Turkish State. The 'better result' won't come cheap, though, because... Erdoğan as President will have powerful influence over Turkish institutions that are vital to the county's well-being... such as the Constitutional Court, the Council of State, the Supreme Court, the Board of Higher Education, the Universities, the High Board of Prosecutors/Judges, and the Supreme Military Command of the Turkish Armed Forces -- just to name a few 'lightweight' institutions that fall under the Turkish President's purview. And, as Eksi says, that "holds many threats for the future of the secular republic."
Between these choices, then, secular Turks are in a lose-lose situation. But Eksi opts for Erdoğan as President -- being the lesser of two evils. He says, "If we have the opportunity of ridding ourselves of the AKP, at the cost of enduring Erdoğan as President for seven years, we have to favor this option." The 2nd option (Erdoğan as PM for 5 more years) would be devastating, and mean "the end of Democracy" in Turkey. Or maybe he's just another US politician who doesn't know Comments Posted by Jerry | April 11, 2007 Have you considered that Obama was complimenting Turkey by NOT including it in the 'Middle East'. Every since I moved to Turkey, it has been DRILLED into my head that Turks are NOT Middle East....and I'm quite sure he's aware of too. Just a thought. Habibullah's Reply | April 12, 2007 Turkey is unmistakably 'in the region' by anyone's approximation (whether the 'drill' is in play, or not). But further...Where's the compliment, when Candidate Obama chooses to slight Turkey's hard-earned democracy in favor of a dubious geographical label? Sadly, we don't share your optimism about this Candidate's knowledge of the region, nor (for that matter) are we optimistic in that regard about the other 2008 US Presidential hopefuls we've seen so far -- from both US parties. I never thought I'd hear myself say this, but where is Bill Clinton when we really need him? |
Related:
© [LPT] - Politics and Religion

© Learn Turkish of the People!