Democracy and the coup

By Talat Farooq
July 19, 2016
Print : Opinion

Our media and politicians are waxing eloquent about how the Turkish people the
awam have saved and strengthened democracy. The assumption is flawed on two
counts: a) that democracy has been saved, and b) that people-power alone was
enough to challenge the poorly planned and badly coordinated military coup.
President Erdogan has ushered in commendable
with his Islamist credentials have built a loyal,
despite his popularity, he is a controversial figure.
then there is the other half of the Turkish society
what it perceives as his authoritarian tendencies.

economic growth and this along

conservative following. However,
True, his supporters are many but
that is highly uncomfortable with

Erdogans quest for replacing the parliamentary system with a presidential one is
seen as a clear manifestation of his need for personal empowerment through an
authoritarian constitutional regime.
One is a witness to the plight of those working in the universities and banks run by
the Hizmat Foundation of Fetullah Gulen. They have been facing arbitrary arrests and
detentions with no recourse to justice. The presence of the police on campus is not
an uncommon sight.
Similarly, uncooperative media persons have been facing arrests, prison terms and
forced closures of their businesses for ostensibly undermining state security. The
Gullenists maintain that Gulens stand against governmental corruption involving
some close relatives of the president is what invited Erdogans wrath against his
former close friend and ardent supporter.
Turkish police forces brutally suppressed demonstrations in Istanbuls Gezi Park and
in other cities in June 2013. Since then the president has attacked social media,
particularly Twitter which is popular among young middle-class Turks, as harmful for
Turkey. Subsequently, hundreds of Turks have been prosecuted for allegedly
offensive tweets mocking the president. Yet, ironically, on Friday he himself resorted
to social media to urge his supporters to fight the coup plotters in the streets of
Ankara and Istanbul.
Erdogan has been trying to purge dissenting judges from the top courts for some
time; in the wake of the failed coup he has achieved this with a single stroke of the
pen. The failed amateurish coup seen by many in the opposing camp as staged is
likely to make it easier for Erdogan to make the constitutional changes needed for
replacing the current parliamentary governance model.
Moreover, it will provide the opportunity to further purge the military. There is no
denying the fact that in a democratic setup the military must be under civilian
control. However, it is also important to remember that a pliant military leadership
that is reluctant to offer candid input in the formulation of strategic policies may fail
to fulfil its fundamental role.

Genuine democracy is not about empowering one branch at the expense of another;
it is more fundamentally about separation of powers, checks and balances and rule
of law. A failed coup therefore will not automatically usher in a stronger Turkish
democracy.
Secondly, the awam did not single-handedly thwart the attempted coup. One must
not take away anything from the ordinary citizens who came out in droves to
challenge the coup-plotters; they were heroic and their sincere passion was moving.
One must also appreciate the opposition leaders who denounced the coup. In a sign
of how little apparent public support the coup plotters had all three opposition
parties in parliament united against the coup. (What their reaction might have been
in case the coup was successful is of course another matter.)
That said, the crucial role of the military and the national police in preventing a
successful coup must also be acknowledged. Major elements of the Turkish military
and Turkish Special Forces stood behind Erdogan. Gen Hulusi Akars (genuine or
forced) refusal to back the coup was likely a key reason why it quickly unravelled.
Fighter jets took out a military helicopter involved in the rebel attack against the
communication provider Turksat and launched air strikes at rebel tanks outside
parliament. Without this military support for the government and lack of support for
the rebellious faction it is difficult to imagine how unarmed protesters could have
stopped the heavily armed coup plotters without excessive bloodshed leading to
uncontrollable chaos.
It is becoming increasingly clear that Erdogan will use the failed coup to launch an
even bigger attack on the Gulen movement. Fethullah Gulen has categorically
denounced the coup. It is debatable what Gulen, whose movement has strong
political, social and financial influence in Turkey, stood to gain from an ill-planned
and amateurish coup attempt.
There are a number of fault-lines in Turkish society. One sincerely hopes that Erdogan
will use his steadily growing power to close the gaps. The future of Turkish
democracy lies in the balance. And a strong, democratic Turkey is indispensable for
the Muslim world.
Coming back to our media and certain politicians enthusiasm for the populist
sentiment in Turkey; those who are trying to find commonalities between the Turkish
and Pakistani situations would do well to remember that despite his controversial
policies Erdogan remains a popular leader because he has delivered on the economic
front resulting in legitimate popular support.
Moreover, there are many Turks who do not support Erdogan but who are also
against the militarys political dominance because they do not wish a repeat of the
economic and political instability that marks Turkeys coup-ridden past.
In Pakistan, however, despite a desire for democracy the public perception of our
political elite is less than complimentary. In the unfortunate case of a similar crisis
(God forbid), a call for people to lie in front of tanks may very well fall on deaf ears.
The writer is an academic, currently affiliated with Meliksah University, Turkey.
Email: talatfarooq11@gmail.com