Mediaboss Marketing

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is notoriously thin-skinned. He responds to even the slightest criticism, with outrage and repression. While the world may view Turkeys leader as a moral midget, Erdogan sees himself as a giant on the world stage, deserving of the same respect in Berlin, Amsterdam, and Brussels that he demands in Istanbul and Ankara. He simply cannot broker European disagreement with his pronouncements and policies, believing that dissent is an insult to his self-perceived infallibility, wisdom, and position.

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan addresses his supporters during a rally for the upcoming referendum in Konya, Turkey, April 14, 2017. REUTERS/Umit Bektas

It is against this backdrop that European leaders should take the latest threat emerging from Turkey seriously. Turkish nationalist Sedat Peker, often described by the Turkish press as a mafia leader, initially threatened to use the Turkish diaspora in Europe to destabilize host countries but, more recently, has suggested that Turkey should seek to assassinate the prime ministers and presidents of European countries that defy Erdogan.

Given Pekers past convictions and established ties to the underworld, thats not necessarily an idle threat, nor can European officials take it as bluster given Turkish espionage on Turkish Kurds, journalists, and dissidents. Nor should Europe be alone in their concern. Wikileaks exposure of Erdogans son-in-laws emails show Turkish organizations and paid agents have also engaged in such actions in the United States.

There is precedent here. A victory for the yes camp in Turkeys referendum would simply culminate Erdogans slow motion revolution to reorient Turkey away from the West and to close the door on the era of Ataturk, modern Turkeys secular founder. Simply put and without hyperbole, the shift of Turkey back to the unabashed Islamist camp would mark as much of a sea change as Irans Islamic Revolution.

After the Islamic Revolution in Iran, Iranian assassins traversed Europe hunting down those who opposed the new regime. Ayatollah Khomeini saw himself as Gods representative on earth and could tolerate no dissent. There is no reason why Erdogan could not engage in the same behavior. Indeed, it appears Erdogan is considering such a move. While the Erdogan regime cracked down on Peker for threatening a bloodbath against academics who signed a petition calling on security forces to stop targeting Kurds in Turkeys southeast, Erdogan has been noticeably silent in restraining Pekers threats to European leaders. Nor do states take the risk to conduct surveillance on targets if they are not at least considering further action.

Originally posted here:
Will Erdogan lash out in Europe? - American Enterprise Institute

As Turkey votes today on new powers for the president, one dissenting voice can be heard on the streets where he grew up

At 9am today, Hussein Ustunbas will leave his modest flat in the Kasimpasa district of Istanbul to cast a vote for the man he thinks will save Turkey.

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a friend and former neighbour, is the only bulwark against the chaos that has swept his homeland, he believes.

We want stability, said Ustunbas, 67, a retired mechanic whose living room wall bears a photograph of his family posing with Erdogan and his wife, Emine. If he wins, there will be no suffering.

Across the road Ozcan Yildirim, 50, will leave his bakers shop for the same polling booth. But, to the disgust of his neighbours, he will vote no in a referendum on changes to the constitution that would make the president

Read the original post:
Lone rebel in Erdogan's back yard - The Times (subscription)

By Melina Dunham and Lisel Hintz By Melina Dunham and Lisel Hintz April 14 at 7:00 AM

After years of wrangling for constitutional reform to consolidate his political power, Turkeys President Recep Tayyip Erdogan may finally get his wish. On Sunday, Turkey will vote on a referendum that seeks to formally switch the governing system from a parliamentary to presidential regime.

Nearly all in Turkey agree the current constitution, drafted by the military in 1982, needs to be updated. However, the ruling Justice and Development Partys (AKP) previous use of constitutional reform packages to reconfiguredomestic politics is hotly contested. And this time around, opposition actors believe the stakes are higher than ever.

The AKP-backed referendum unsurprisingly seeks to further reduce the role of the military in politics. After all, the Turkish Armed Forces and the AKP have had a rocky relationship to say the least, especially since the failed July 2016 coup attempt and the governments subsequent purge of the military. What is surprising are the extreme, even bizarre tactics to which the party is resorting to win in Sundays polls. Examining the AKPs efforts reveals just how much of a personal and professional stake Erdogan has in this referendum.

[Journalism is becoming powerless: Inside a nervous Turkish newsroom as the government closes in]

In an attempt to delegitimize the opposition, AKP campaign materials have linked No voters with Fethullah Glen a self-exiled Islamic cleric living in the United States, whom the AKP blames for the 2016 coup attempt branding supporters of both as terrorists. Hammering home the terrorism theme, one campaign poster ominously suggests voting No in the referendum equates to voting Yes for Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

Turkey's people will vote on April 16 on a referendum that could change the constitution to grant President Tayyip Erdogan new powers. (Reuters)

In one particularly unusual bid to gain votes, Erdogan recently issued an emergency decree allowing beauticians to use hospital-grade tools for laser hair removal. Though viciously mocked by critics on social media, the highly publicized event served as a rally of fashionable women for Erdogan and the Yes vote.

What has prompted Erdogan and his supporters to resort to such tactics?

The short answer is because he has so much at stake. If the referendum passes, it would not only institutionalize a regime that has incrementally eroded Turkeys separation of powers under recent AKP rule but also entrench Erdogan at that regimes helm. If the Yes votes have it, Erdogan, the leading political figure since becoming prime minister in 2003, then assuming the presidency in 2014, could rule essentially unchecked until 2029, possibly even longer by some estimates.

But not if a motley myriad of No supporters has anything to say about it.

Opposition to an executive presidency makes for strange bedfellows

The Republican Peoples Party (CHP) is the main opposition party and has long criticized what they see as the AKPs Islamization of Turkeys secular republic. The extreme-right Nationalist Action Party (MHP) is more divided. While aging MHP leader Devlet Baheli switched his tune from comparing Erdogan to Hitler to trying to rally his partys support for the referendum, rival MHP member Meral Akener gathered momentum after sharing a photo of her hand with a henna tattoo of a Turkish flag to announce her No vote on social media. The resulting hashtag #KinaliEllerHayirDiyor (Hands with Henna Say No) trended as a symbol of resistance for days.

Though ideologically at extreme odds with the MHP, Turkeys pro-Kurdish Peoples Democratic Party (HDP) also virulently opposes the referendum. And whileKurdish leadership had briefly supported the idea of a presidential system during a short-lived solution process from 2013 to 2015, the breakdown of negotiations and of the PKKs cease-fire has since hardened the enmity between the leaders and their respective constituencies. Despite the imprisonment of its two co-chairs and many local leaders on terrorist charges, HDP members seem determined to continue their No campaign.

In a close race, government repression matters

This weekend, however, none of this varied and strident opposition may matter much. Predicted outcomes of the referendum have fluctuated and vary by polling agency. In general, No seemed likely to prevail shortly after the vote was announced, while numbers released by Turkish polling companies ANAR and Konsensus on Wednesday predict a slight victory for Yes.

Reports suggest that AKP supporters are engaged in undemocratic practices to stymie opposition, including tactics known by scholars of comparative politics to create an uneven playing field. In particular, AKP has dominated the media by violent intimidation, media takeovers and silencing opposition voices. The Yes campaign received approximately 90 percent of airtime. Supposedly neutral public appearances such as inaugurations or, say, decrees about beauticians often turn into campaign speeches, while Turkish media generally neglect or refuse to cover opposition rallies.

Meanwhile, No billboards have been removed in AKP-friendly districts and campaign songs encouraging voters to reject the referendum have been banned. The Turkish government has also targeted social media users; 21-year-old Ali Gl was arrested after posting a No-themed video on YouTube, in which he rhetorically asks if he will be arrested.

Although independent election observer groups cannot participate at the polls due to the state of emergency, party members can witness polling procedures. Many would-be party observers have had their applications rejected by local election boards favorable to the AKP. Other reports of foul play include beatings of declared No voters and threats by AKP officials that Kurdish homes destroyed during the military campaign will not be rebuilt if No prevails.

Take it outside! Domestic politics in the foreign policy arena.

When actors face obstacles to political projects at home they may take the fight outside, as Europe has witnessed lately. Erdogan sent Foreign Minister Mevlut avuolu to the Netherlands to hold rallies stirring up support for the referendum among Turks living abroad. When Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte himself facing an election blocked avuolus entry in a last-minute show of political strength, Erdogan turned this rebuff to his advantage by accusing the West of openly obstructing the referendum.

Erdogan responded to his ministers being turned away by calling Europeans racists, Nazis and fascists. Adding that medieval Europe was the enemy of the Turks and Islam, the president cleverly used Turks resentment at apparent European discrimination to suit him electorally. By creating an external enemy while courting votes internationally, Erdogan generates support from Turkeys nationalists at home and abroad.

Risky business

With the election too close to predict, both sides are clearly under pressure. Resource control and the use of intimidation from the Yes side force us to consider just what is motivating Erdogan to play every possible card in his hand for a victory.

For Erdogan, this is a referendum not only on a presidential system but also his entire political career. Should it fail, he could be prosecuted by future unsympathetic governments for charges from corruption to supporting terrorism. As prospect theorists predict, individuals in the domain of losses are more risk-acceptant than those in the domain of gains. For all the confidence he projects, Erdogan likely knows he is facing a potential existential threat, and this referendum may be the riskiest gambit he has yet undertaken.

Melina Dunham is a student at Barnard College, Columbia University majoring in political science and will be attending the Paris School of International Affairs at Sciences Po in the fall to pursue a masters degree in International Public Management.

Lisel Hintz is a visiting assistant professor of political Science at Barnard College, Columbia University and will be an assistant professor at Johns Hopkins Universitys School of Advanced International Studies beginning Fall 2017.

Original post:
Turkey's President Erdogan has gone to extremes to win Sunday's referendum. Here's why. - Washington Post

The Star Online

Turkish Vote to Broaden Erdogan's Powers Is No Sure Thing Wall Street Journal (subscription) ANKARAPresident Recep Tayyip Erdogan's proposed constitutional overhaul to undercut Turkey's parliamentary system in favor of an executive presidency, the subject of a referendum on Sunday, could alter the nation more radically than at any point ... Erdogan and Putin back investigation into Syria chemical attack ...The Star Online Erdogan, Putin discuss latest developments in SyriaTrend News Agency TASS: Russian Politics & Diplomacy - Putin, Erdogan discuss ...TASS Sputnik International all 10 news articles »

Visit link:
Turkish Vote to Broaden Erdogan's Powers Is No Sure Thing - Wall Street Journal (subscription)

Want smart analysis of the most important news in your inbox every weekday along with other global reads, interesting ideas and opinions to know? Sign up for the Today's WorldView newsletter.

In the past year,our focus on the rise of right-wing populism has centered mostlyon the West. The British vote for Brexit, the triumph of President Trump, the electoral surge of far-right leadersin Austria, the Netherlands and France all were seen as part of the phenomenonof Westernvoters rejecting liberal dogma and turning toward a more aggressive nationalism.

But as Basharat Peer, an international opinion editor at the New York Times, notes in his new book, you can't consider the broader appeal of "majoritarian" politics without looking further east. In "A Question of Order: India, Turkey and the Return of Strongmen," Peer examines the parallel successes of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, two right-wing religious nationalists who rule vast multicultural democracies.

Peer, an Indian journalist from conflict-riven Kashmir,is concerned about the illiberal Hindu nationalism espoused by Modi and his followers. He saw echoes of suchpolitics in Turkey, where Erdogan has championed a Muslimnationalism that has won support in the Anatolian heartland and among ordinary Sunni Muslim voters but has alienated other Turks.

On Sunday, Turkish voters will go to the polls in a referendum that could deliver Erdogan an even more powerful presidency and, in the process, cement his rule for more than a decade to come. The past year has already seen Erdogan consolidate his positionwith large-scale purges, and critics fearthe fate of Turkish democracy now hangs in the balance.

Today's WorldView interviewedPeer about his book, the Turkish referendum and the comparisons between Erdogan and Modi. We've lightly edited the interview for clarity.

How significant is the referendum in Turkey?

Itis one of the most significant events in Turkish political history. Erdogan could winimmense powers and possibly run the country till 2029. If he doesn't win, I fear there would be a great deal of uncertainty. One can't be sure, but there are voices within his Justice and Development Party who are not happy with him. They might feel emboldened. I am worried how he would react to failure.

You began reporting on Turkey for your book before the failed coup attempt in July, which Ankara pins on exiled Turkish cleric Fethullah Gulen. How did that and the purge that has followed sharpen your understanding of what's happening in Turkey right now?

It was sad to see Turkey drift toward chaos, fear and authoritarianism. An immense human cost was paid in the war in the Kurdish areas. The Kurdish party, the HDP, which won big in parliamentary elections in 2015, is now decimated. The hopes of a resolution to the Kurdish problem are shattered. And in the center, after the coup, Turkish politics became paranoid. The purges were ruthless and went beyond any potential role of the Gulenists. Too many lives were destroyed, and Turkish institutions were badly weakened.

Turkey and India are both large, complicated countries in their own right. What do we gain by placing them in the same frame?

A sense of how similar illiberal majoritarian politics are. Both nation-states rose from the collapse of empires, are multi-ethnic societies and have had charismatic Western-oriented founding fathers who undertook major social engineering projects. Mustafa Kemal Ataturk attempted to mold Turkey by way of French secularism. India's first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, promoted a different kind of secularism, which was not against religion but tried to ensure that the state maintains equal distance from all religions. They became the dominant ideas of both the countries for decades, but there were groups of citizens who contested those civil religions: the Islamists in Turkey and the Hindu nationalists in India.

But while theyemerge from a similar reaction to entrenched establishment secularism, Modi and Erdogan operate in ratherdifferent political contexts. Erdoganis arguably much more of an "authoritarian" than Modi.

Erdogan does run a rather different system of governance. He is seen as more authoritarian today, but his first decade in power was a time he was praised and lauded by everyone for his efforts to join the European Union, liberalize some aspects of Turkish life and transform the Turkish economy in an impressive way. Erdogan began very well.

Is that where you see a parallel to Modi?

Modi began with a pogrom. He came to national attention in India in February 2002, when violence against minorities happened under his watchas the chief minister of the Indian state of Gujarat. Allegations that he was complicit or let the violence happen have followed Modi ever since.

But Modi seems to have shrugged off that legacy now. He, like Erdogan, is credited as being a ruler who can "get things done" and revitalize the economy.

For some people, not for all people. He did successfully portray the impression of man who gets things done when he was campaigning. The Indian economy has fared better under him, but it is not quite booming. He has not worked any miracles. Sadly, since Modi came to power we have had terrifying social turmoil in India. Minorities are under attack, civil liberties are being curtailed, people have been lynched on the suspicion of eating beef.

And that is where you find stark similarities with Erdogan in the latter years of his rule. Erdogan's Muslim nationalism and Modi's Hindu nationalism have little room for people who don't belong to their persuasion. They have little tolerance for dissent. They have both whipped up hysterical nationalism and use the talk of war and terror to keep their supporters riled up against perceived enemies. Both have unleashed pitiless violence against peripheral rebel populations Erdogan against the Kurds and Modi against Kashmiris.

Some people connect Erdogan and Modis particular forms of populism to whats happening with an ascendant far right in the West. Do you see them as part of this global right-wing resurgence?

There are elements of populism in Modi and Erdogan, but they are also very different from the populist movements in Europe or the rise of Donald Trump in the United States. Modi and Erdogan are both traditional politicians who grew up in ideologically committed religious-nationalist political movements. They were not running beauty pageants. Modi and Erdogan come from the established political systems of their countries, though they use the story of their humble beginnings, their outsider status and doses of populism. At the moment, what they do share with the European populists is their majoritarian politics, their targeting of out-groups and minorities within the populations their disdain for the old establishments.

Want smart analysis of the most important news in your inbox every weekday along with other global reads, interesting ideas and opinions to know? Sign up for the Today's WorldView newsletter.

Read more here:
Erdogan and Modi aren't the Trumps of the East - Washington Post