Turkey turned a historic corner this month, as approximately 51.4% of over 58 million voters marked “yes” for the charter amendment which transforms the parliamentary governmental structure into an executive one, giving the president expansive powers.
In a televised statement, President Erdogan thanked the voters, looking confident in his newfound transformative role. He remarked that a deep and significant change has taken place, and that a new era has started.
The former mayor of Istanbul has risen through the ranks of political power to become the most powerful president in Turkey’s history.
The referendum enables the president to rule uncontested after the 2019 elections, have two terms, and appoint senior officials, judges, plus the cabinet, with minimal oversight from a weakened parliament without a prime minister.
What caused this radical turn of events in a land that held parliamentary democracy since 1920s?
Terror-tremors
Turkey is still reeling from the terrorist attacks, and a strongman rule has gained favourability.
Upon landing at Ataturk Airport, one sees a memorial dedicated to the 45 people killed by a terrorist attack last June. The IS terrorists’ gunfire and suicide bombing inside the airport injured over 200.
Multiple bomb attacks have taken place across the nation, some by IS and others by Kurdish militants. Moreover, the attempted military coup from the middle of last year left 290 fatalities, and reminded the citizenry of instability in their republic.
Travelling across Istanbul, one gets a sense of vibrancy that has not been diminished by the referendum. It’s the commercial hub of the nation after all, people are coming, people are selling, it’s a marketplace of all commodities, big and small.
A divided Turkey
To gain a perspective from the field, I talked to a Turkish carpet-seller near Blue Mosque, who lamented how IS attacks have scarred the nation. Another mentioned that gaining access to the European Union remains a pipe-dream, as 80% of the EU members do not want Turkey in their organisation.
I spoke to a gentleman inside a bookstore in Taksim Square, the heartland of Istanbul. He mentioned that the “yes” vote is a regressive step. Having studied in the US, he knows that a presidential system of governance works in America, with its checks and balances, but that is not the case in Turkey. The institutions are not formed for an effective counterbalance to expansive presidential powers.
A Kurdish restauranteur in the Sultan Ahmet tourist district remarked that he cannot be happy with the “yes” vote, as politicians are prone to corruption. Although he is not particularly satisfied with the current parliamentary system, giving the president more powers is not the solution.
Although the roads and thoroughfares in Istanbul are bustling with trade and tourism, there have been nearly 50,000 arrests after the July incident
A hotelier mentioned that with just 51% of the votes supporting his measure, President Erdogan cannot really call this a victory, as he forecasted a huge margin of victory while campaigning for this referendum.
Two shoe-sellers who favour President Erdogan gave a thumbs up when mentioning of the referendum passing. One mentioned that the system will be even better than the executive form of power in the US.
The “no” vote prevailed in Istanbul, but the “yes” side received support from the conservative heartland and Kurdish southeast, which has experienced multiple separatist militant attacks.
Thirteen of Turkey’s largest cities, which account for 60% of its GDP, voted “no.”
Ironically, analysts have noted that those voting “yes” cited the strong economy and infrastructural development overlooked by President Erdogan.
It must be kept in mind that this vote took place amidst a state of emergency implemented after the July coup attempt.
Although the roads and thoroughfares in Istanbul are bustling with trade and tourism, there have been nearly 50,000 arrests after the July incident, and the ruling party was afforded 10 times more airtime than all the opposition.
Even the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe has chimed in by declaring that voters were not provided impartial information and limitations of freedom created a negative effect.
Murat Yetkin, editor-in-chief of the leading Hürriyet Daily News, wrote that President Erdogan has been wanting this change for at least a decade.
He was able to push this agenda through parliament with the backing of the prime minister, who will not have this job after the changes are implemented.
The prime minister gave a glowing victory speech after the referendum passed. If someone is strongly advocating for a change that abolishes his current position, there must be far greater benefits to be had.
What about EU membership?
Austrian and German government officials have already called for closing the doors on Turkey’s bid to join the European Union.
It was always a lofty goal, but now, it seems that the Turkish state knows it will never be integrated into EU, and is boldly charting its own course.
As several noted Western media outlets are calling President Erdogan a modern-day sultan, I recall visiting the famed Topkapi Palace, the seat of the Ottoman Empire, and wonder if this wondrous land that straddles eastern and western civilisations is heading forward to even greater heights or regressing towards a one-man sultanate from Erdogan’s turnkey project.
Tamim Choudhury is a Texas-based Communications Analyst.