Very sad day for a divided Turkey - Erdogan secures a narrow victory

THE establishment of modern Turkey and the establishment of this State occurred at the same time. 

A Turkish republic was set up in October 1923, and Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was its first president. For the next decade, he led the modernisation of his country. Access to education was extended, Islamic courts were closed, and Islamic canon law was replaced with a secular civil code. Atatürk introduced a new alphabet, language reform and new laws around dress — the iconic fez was banned. Spectacularly, in a society shaped by the precepts of Islam, he introduced equality between the sexes and gave full political rights to women in 1934. He dragged his country, often kicking and screaming, into the modern world.

This weekend’s vote changes all that. It gave President Recep Tayyip Erdogan sweeping executive powers, and the possibility of remaining in office for more than a decade. He will reverse Atatürk’s and his successors’ modernisation programme and undo many of the measures aimed at westernising the country of 75m people. Erdogan was elected prime minister in 2003 and he has made no secret of his determination to revert to an older, less tolerant style of administration, one that reflects Islamic doctrines even if they penalise non-Muslim Turks. Erdogan’s response to Turkey’s ailing democracy is to establish an autocracy, set aside many laws designed to protect citizens, especially those around the separation of powers.

As part of this retrenchment, critical media voices have been silenced, sometimes with force. In January, more than 80 journalists and 150 media workers were in Turkish jails for doing no more than questioning Erdogan and his party. The vote will intensify the measures taken against critical journalists and the resistance of media proprietors will vanish.

The prospect of Turkey joining the European Union will vanish too. Though these ambitions have modified in recent years, Erdogan’s victory rally pledge to hold a referendum on the reintroduction of the death penalty bring them to an end, a point already made by the European Commission.

The narrow margin of Erdogan’s victory has polarised the country to such a degree that the EC has urged the president to “seek the broadest possible national consensus” before changing the country’s constitution. The vote is almost the same as the one in Britain to quit the European Union — 51.41% supported the amendment but 48.59% opposed it. Erdogan will, however, shrug off suggestions that the margin is so narrow, that the opposition to his proposals so great, that he hardly has a legitimate mandate to establish a dictatorship.

Erdogan may find support in a world where democracy is being challenged, where autocrats in Russia, the Philippines, in Egypt and the Arab world, and an apprentice strongman in the White House are ignoring the system of checks and balances enshrined in most democracies. Since Turkey and Ireland were established as modern states nearly a century ago, they developed in parallel ways. That comparison ended this weekend and, despite all of our weaknesses, it is a cause of considerable comfort that the prospect of an Irish Erdogan is incomprehensible. It is though a very dark day for Turkey.