Lauren Booth
By Lauren Booth
In the coming days and months ahead, Erdogan could do well to temper his administrative wrath with Islamic mercy. If, that is, he in any way fears the power of the international media and retains a shred of interest in entering the EU, both of which seem doubtful.
Turkey is at the tip of serious and necessary changes needed for its survival as a successful, thriving, Muslim-majority nation. In the UK, what quantifies as a ‘shocking month’ in politics has seen surprising changes- a new woman at Number Ten, and a near silent crowd waving baguettes in a slightly mournful way on the streets of London post Brexit. At the crossroads between Europe and Asia in a similarly shocking short timescale we have seen spates of carnage due to terrorist attacks across major Turkish cities and then a military coup attempt.
In June, Istanbul’s Ataturk airport was the scene of suicide bombings by IS killing 41 and injuring more than 200. This came after two suicide attacks in tourist areas of Istanbul and two car bombings in the capital, Ankara. Weapon-happy groups are ready to murder Turks for their political ends.
The question is, what should President Erdogan, long accused by advocacy groups including Amnesty international of being an overly authoritarian presence, do in the light of multiple enemies? This weekend, streets and squares remain filled by millions of flag waving men, women and children, nervous about the future, yet cheered by the show of strength by their president to maintain order in a chaotic situation. Despite western media coverage efforts to devalue their presence, this show of strength supports Erdogan’s measures to maintain control and calm.
The battle for ideas, the right to air or share those which are obnoxious, even potentially dangerous to stability, and the need to secure a nation in this increasingly unstable era is a major consideration from Ankara, to Washington, via Paris and London. It is a power-play far from limited to President Erdogan’s office.
Horrifying events in France have allowed weakened President Francoise Hollande the authority to extend a state of emergency, first announced last November. This comes in response to both the Paris attacks that left 130 people dead, and continues in light of the crazed, attack in Nice by Lahouaiej-Bouhle, of Tunisian background, who killed 84 people when he drove into a crowd on July 14, Bastille Day. The French state of emergency, extended until the end of January, will mean the country could be under special measures for an unprecedented 14 months.
The media in France and beyond are largely supportive of what is viewed as a vital necessity in the hunt for terrorists. The security of European citizens is of paramount importance. Indeed the media in both France and the UK (where we have remained relatively safe) are consistently calling for leaders to take a ‘tough’ stance against destabilising internal influences, including organisations or individuals. So, how different are the French and Turkish states of emergency? One is called over-zealous and dangerous, while the other is described as a ‘necessity’ for ‘reasons of state security.’
Both Presidencies have given themselves the right to partially negate sections from the European Convention of Human Rights (EHCR). Article 15 of the ECHR allows for certain rights to be waived “in a temporary, limited and supervised manner”.
On its website the French government says authorities may now: -Dissolve groups and protests deemed to pose a serious threat to public order.
-Search homes, luggage, vehicles, bags and even pockets without judicial warrants
-Hold under House arrest any person whose activity is considered a threat to security and public order. And more.
In Turkey these measures have been increased to include actions against publishing, and broadcasting and closure of education centres and businesses.
As well as media questioning whether the President was in fact behind the Turkish coup himself in an aggrandising attempt, what has infuriated many Turks is the routine and speedy manner in which their bravery in the face of a dangerous, violent situation has been undermined. As events unfolded, President Erdogan made his now legendary Face Time call to the public. This brilliant move was repeated on Thursday. In the next missive Erdogan urged: “Do not abandon the heroic resistance you have put up for your country, homeland and flag.” The people respond, teeming onto streets in major cities every night, for scenes of joyous flag waving.
Yet, these citizens from all parties and all denominations have been billed across British and US airwaves and front pages as a “mob” of Erdogan supporting “Islamists.”
Oguzhan Asiturk, is Head of the Advisory Board of Milli Gurus. Milli Gurus is a political and religious movement inspired by Necmettin Erbakan, former Prime Minister of Turkey. Erbakan was himself forced from office by military pressure in February 1997. Milli Gurus is no blind supporter of the current Turkish Presidency, expressing views that Erdogan seeks too close ties to the EU, Israel and US interests.
In a written statement, Oguzhan Asiturk, told The Peninsula: “There seems no sign that this (coup) was an action to render Erdoğan greater power. Millions of people obeyed the request by the President to go out and resist against the tanks and helicopters, which were firing upon them with bullets.”
Meanwhile, CNN, Reuters and Associated Press reports have consistently focused on the alleged firing of “about 50,000” state employees in Turkey as a kind of proof that the Turkish leadership is acting counter to its citizens’ interests, asking if he is planning to take the country in the same direction as the arrested military plotters. CNN’s report on July 19 went on to state that the Turkish Presidency “intensifies its vast purge — battering the country’s security forces and many of its democratic institutions. Teachers, journalists, police and judges alike have been caught in a net which authorities are casting wider by the day, in what is increasingly looking like a clampdown to suppress dissent”. ‘Purge’, ‘witch-hunt’, and ‘suppression’— key words to the coverage.
The media in Europe, Britain and the US rages against Erdogan, cloaking his current decision-making as a longed for (even somehow pre-arranged) counter coup. This is out of step with the slightly more honest reflections of a US State Department spokesman. Mark Toner said that the investigation and arrests are ‘understandable’ and ‘justified’. In a press conference on 19 July 2016 he told reporters, “What we have said and what our assessment continues to be is that it is understandable and justified, frankly, that the government would take actions to go after the perpetrators, to conduct a thorough investigation into what happened.” Likewise, in a press release from the Whitehouse, President Barack Obama said “that the United States is willing to provide appropriate assistance to Turkish authorities investigating the attempted coup”.
Just three countries in the world clearly supported Turkey’s elected president from the start; Morocco, Qatar, and Sudan. These three may yet find themselves on the right side of history in the case of Erdogan’s ability to stabilise Turkey — and by extension, the Middle East.
As for the mainstream international media, they seem increasingly out of step with western leaders who may quietly envy Erdogan’s prowess, widespread support, and powers.
The writer is a journalist, broadcaster and media consultant: www.laurenbooth.org , Twitter:@LaurenBoothUK
