Turkey News
As tempting as it is to think about world news only in terms of sport, a couple of pressing pieces on Turkey of late. Most recently, two bombs exploded yesterday in the neighborhood of Güngören. (For a map see here; for a timeline of recent attacks within Turkey, see here) The first, a relatively small one, drew a crowd of people to the scene, at which point the second bomb went off. As the New York Times explains, the PKK is being blamed for the attacks, although that group has already released a statement denying involvement in the attacks.
The situation is further complicated by the fact that the several key members of the ruling party stand accused of trying to impose sharia law, an offense for which they can be imprisoned and banned from politics. As the Economist explained, many inside and outside of Turkey see the trial as a farce:
If the court rules in favor of the AK Party - an unlikely verdict - it is possible that the powerful minority of staunchly secular Turks will cry foul and seek out other means. In the event the court rules against the AK Party, the party and its leaders, including the President and the Prime Minister, will be forced to decide whether to appeal the decision on the streets, risking military action, or to accept their sentence and reconstitute their support. The Constitutional Court is due to rule on the case later today.
It's an open question whether or not the timing of the bomb attack was designed to sway public opinion in one way or the other. In blaming the PKK, it's possible that the ruling AK Party is trying to remind the Turkish public of its aggressive prosecution of the conflict against the PKK, both within Turkey and just over Turkey's border with Iraq. If the PKK were indeed to blame for this bombing, it might suggest that the AK Party is forcing them to desparate measures. While it's tempting to try to relate the current Turkish political situation to the one which followed the March 2004 attacks in Madrid (and the Popular Party's electoral loss when police ruled out ETA as a suspect as the PP had initiall claimed), the situations are likely not analogous.
And yet it is also unclear how the military is implicted in the current situation. While it's been over two decades since the military intervened in public life, they consider themselves to be one of the pillars of the Turkish Republic. Recent reports (here and here; the comments to the second article are particularly fascinating, with one commenter suggesting that the Islamists within Turkey were initially supported by the military as a bulwark against communism; echoes of Israel's problematic history with Hamas?) have detailed possible military plots against the government, and the close proximity of the attacks to the court ruling suggests a relationship between the two.
The situation is further complicated by the fact that the several key members of the ruling party stand accused of trying to impose sharia law, an offense for which they can be imprisoned and banned from politics. As the Economist explained, many inside and outside of Turkey see the trial as a farce:
To many the case is like a judicial coup: a last-ditch attempt to cling to power by an elite that refuses to share wealth and social space with a rising class of pious Turks, symbolised by the AKP. It may also further discredit the constitutional court. Above all, says Mr Ogur, the case reveals “an army that believes it should have the final say, not elected politicians.”
If the court rules in favor of the AK Party - an unlikely verdict - it is possible that the powerful minority of staunchly secular Turks will cry foul and seek out other means. In the event the court rules against the AK Party, the party and its leaders, including the President and the Prime Minister, will be forced to decide whether to appeal the decision on the streets, risking military action, or to accept their sentence and reconstitute their support. The Constitutional Court is due to rule on the case later today.
It's an open question whether or not the timing of the bomb attack was designed to sway public opinion in one way or the other. In blaming the PKK, it's possible that the ruling AK Party is trying to remind the Turkish public of its aggressive prosecution of the conflict against the PKK, both within Turkey and just over Turkey's border with Iraq. If the PKK were indeed to blame for this bombing, it might suggest that the AK Party is forcing them to desparate measures. While it's tempting to try to relate the current Turkish political situation to the one which followed the March 2004 attacks in Madrid (and the Popular Party's electoral loss when police ruled out ETA as a suspect as the PP had initiall claimed), the situations are likely not analogous.
And yet it is also unclear how the military is implicted in the current situation. While it's been over two decades since the military intervened in public life, they consider themselves to be one of the pillars of the Turkish Republic. Recent reports (here and here; the comments to the second article are particularly fascinating, with one commenter suggesting that the Islamists within Turkey were initially supported by the military as a bulwark against communism; echoes of Israel's problematic history with Hamas?) have detailed possible military plots against the government, and the close proximity of the attacks to the court ruling suggests a relationship between the two.
Comments