Erdogan Should Look Across the Aegean
Military coups have been an integral part of politics through most of the modern history of Greece and Turkey, shaping them domestically and determining relations between them. If war is diplomacy by other means, in these two neighbors and NATO allies, military coups were politics by other means. The attempt by military forces to overthrow Turkey’s elected government underlines the different course the two countries have taken in the past few decades. What follows may lead them even further apart.
Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, appears determined to use the failed coup as an opportunity to wipe out opposition, ordering a sweeping purge of the military, the judiciary, the police, academia, the civil service and some journalists.
Before the July 15 mutiny, Mr. Erdogan was already showing autocratic tendencies: curbing media freedom, cracking down on demonstrators, cultivating tension with his country’s Kurdish minority, deposing his own prime minister for not being enthusiastic enough in his support, allowing readings of the Quran in the Hagia Sophia museum — formerly the greatest cathedral of eastern Christendom.
Now he is pushing to reinstate the death penalty and blaming the United States for supporting the mutiny, while demanding the extradition of a religious leader and former ally, Fethullah Gulen, who is in self-imposed exile in Pennsylvania.
The Turkish leader is challenging the two forces that could strengthen his country’s democracy and its place in the world — the European Union and the United States — when he needs them most. One reason the coup failed is that Turkey’s moves toward European Union accession had weakened the military’s role and standing in society.
Greece is a world away from the days when its own military would overthrow governments, because the country joined what is now the European Union in 1981, just seven years after the end of a right-wing military dictatorship. Before that junta collapsed, military factions had carried out coups and counter- coups for most of the century as republicans and monarchists, leftists and right-wingers vied for control. Membership in the European Union united the country, providing stability and prosperity.
Mr. Erdogan is investing in further division. The three-month state of emergency he declared recently will allow him and his ministers to bypass Parliament in limiting or suspending rights and freedoms, and in passing new laws.
Since the mutiny, as many as 10,000 people have been imprisoned and some 60,000 civil servants suspended or fired. Social media and private television channels ended up providing him with a platform to rally support during the coup attempt. The thirst for democracy, the bravery shown by citizens from across the political spectrum, made it all but impossible for the mutiny to succeed. But now Mr. Erdogan seems to be turning his back on all that helped save him.
The Turkish armed forces, traditionally seen as the guardians of the secular republic established by the military hero Mustafa Kemal Ataturk in 1923, lost much of their power because military intervention is incompatible with European Union principles. Also, while the Justice and Development Party (A. K. P.) was moving Turkey toward democratization and European Union accession, the military could no longer appear the only pro-Western force and the true guardian of the law — as it claimed when it carried out successful coups in 1960, 1971, 1980 and 1997.
When the government did swing toward Islamization of politics and society, the military was already weakened, divided among supporters of the government, the Gulen movement and the old Kemalist “deep state.” Also, the reforms of recent years made even supporters of liberal democracy fight against the coup attempt, to protect what had been gained, in support of an elected — albeit authoritarian — president.
By rejecting Turkey’s European Union prospects, persecuting large sections of society and challenging the United States ( Turkey’s major ally), Mr. Erdogan is not only alienating forces that would undermine any military intervention — he also risks uniting them against him. As his A. K. P. won half the votes in the last elections, a united anti-A. K. P. front would lead to even more dangerous division. This could encourage further Islamization, with Mr. Erdogan relying on more extremist forces to crack down on his opponents.
Turkey is crucial to what happens in the rest of the Middle East and, to a great extent, Europe. Any spiral into violence will further destabilize Syria and Iraq, hinder the war against the Islamic State, and perhaps send more refugees toward Greece and the rest of the European Union. Last year’s influx of refugees unleashed nationalistic and xenophobic forces in many European countries, threatening the union’s cohesion. As Europe tries to cope with Brexit and terrorism, a new surge in refugees could prove an existential challenge.
But no country is more at risk than Turkey itself. If Erdogan could learn the lesson of the unity shown by brave citizens on the night of July 15, if he looked across the Aegean to Greece and saw the benefits of liberal democracy and European Union principles, he would move toward national reconciliation. If he sticks with confrontation and division, Turkey could tear itself apart.