Author: Aylin D. Miller

  • What will be the outcome of the Georgian-Ossetian war?

    What will be the outcome of the Georgian-Ossetian war?

    MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti military commentator Ilya Kramnik) – The very real possibility of full-scale war between Georgia and South Ossetia raises questions about its possible outcome.

    At present, the Georgian armed forces have more than 30,000 men, including 20,000 ground forces. They are equipped with more than 200 tanks, including 40 T-55s and 165 T-72s, which are currently being upgraded. Apart from tanks, the ground forces have 200 combat armored vehicles, including about 180 infantry combat vehicles and armored personnel carriers (APCs). The ground troops can receive artillery support from 120 artillery pieces of 122 mm-152 mm caliber, 40 multiple-launch rocket systems, and 180 mortars.

    The Georgian Air Force is equipped with five Su-25 (Frogfoot) close support aircraft, 15 L-29 and L-39 combat training aircraft, which can be used as light assault planes, and 30 helicopters, including eight MI-24 attack helicopters.

    Available estimates put the South Ossetian forces at a mere 2,500 officers and men, or 16,000, including reservists. They are armed with 15 T-55 and T-72 tanks, 24 Gvozdika and Akatsiya self-propelled artillery units, 12 D-30 towed howitzers, six multiple-launch rocket systems, four 100-mm Rapir anti-tank weapons, and more than 30 mortars. In addition, the South Ossetian army has 22 infantry combat vehicles, 24 APCs, and six combat patrol vehicles.

    The infantry is equipped with small arms of Soviet or Russian make, and has several dozen Fagot and Konkurs anti-tank rocket systems. Its air force consists of four MI-8 multi-purpose transport helicopters. South Ossetia can defend itself against air attacks with four to six Osa, three Tunguska, three Shilka, and six Strela-10 air defense rocket systems. It also has 12 23-mm ZU-23/2 twin antiaircraft guns (some of which are mounted on GAZ-66 trucks), and up to 100 Igla and Strela man-portable air-defense missiles.

    A forecast of the outcome of this war (as well as a potential conflict with Abkhazia) cannot be based on mathematics alone. In the mountains, even a very small unit can resist a numerically much stronger enemy. In this case, the outcome of the conflict will primarily depend on the training of forces and the influence of third parties.

    The training of the Georgian army is not likely to have changed much in the last two months and, with the exception of a few units, it is not rated too high. Like the Abkhazian armed forces, South Ossetian armies are better trained and motivated. Moreover, the Abkhazian leader has already expressed readiness to support South Ossetia in a war against Georgia.

    Georgia can win only if it is backed by the United States and its other allies. And even with such support, its victory will mean heavy losses, and entail lengthy guerilla warfare.

  • Russia’s military aircrafts bomb Marneuli for the second time

    Russia’s military aircrafts bomb Marneuli for the second time

     

     
     

    [ 08 Aug 2008 19:47 ]
    Marneuli – APA. Russia’s military aircrafts bombed Marneuli, city compactly-settled by Azerbaijanis, for the second time.

    APA reports that the aircrafts dropped two more bombs on the military aerodrome a few minutes ago.
    Casualties were reported in the first bombing.

     

     

    ******************************************************************************** 

     

    Chairman of Public Union “Georgia is my motherland”: Four were killed as Marneuli aerodrome was bombed

     
     

    [ 08 Aug 2008 19:45 ]
    Baku. Tamara Grigoryeva – APA. Four Georgians were killed as Russian military aircrafts bombed Marneuli aerodrome, chairman of Public Union “Georgia is my motherland” Ali Babayev told APA.

    He said that there were no casualties among the Azerbaijani workers of the aerodrome. Babayev said Russian aircrafts bombed the aerodrome twice. The first bomb fell on take-off strip and the second one on the canteen.

  • Russian aircraft bombing Tbilisi took off from Armenia

    Russian aircraft bombing Tbilisi took off from Armenia

     
     

    [ 08 Aug 2008 18:12 ]
    Moscow – APA. Russia’s Defense Ministry confirmed that additional forces had been sent to support peacekeepers in Georgia-Ossetia conflict zone, APA reports quoting RIA Novosti.

    The ministry said necessary assistance would be offered to the Russian peacekeepers and citizens of unrecognized republic. North Caucasus military district said that Russian combat equipment entered Tskhinvali. Georgian new agencies report that Russian military aircrafts bombed Vaziani base near Tbilisi at 15.10 by local time. Two bombs were reportedly dropped on the military base. No casualties are reported in the base. Gruziya Online website reports that the aircraft that bombed Vaziani base had taken off from the territory of Armenia. The agency mentions that there is an air regiment in Russian army’s 102nd base in Gumru, Armenia. According to the agreement signed between Georgia and Armenia, Armenia can not allow any other state to attack Georgia from its territory.

    U.S. President George Bush met with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin in Beijing and called on the parties to cease the fire in Georgia-Ossetia conflict zone immediately. European Union and OSCE released analogous messages.

  • Armenia Concerned About South Ossetia Fighting

    Armenia Concerned About South Ossetia Fighting

     

     

     

     

     

    By Ruben Meloyan

    Armenia joined the international community on Friday in expressing serious concern about the outbreak of deadly fighting in South Ossetia that threatened to degenerate into an all-out war between neighboring Georgia and Russia.

    The Armenian Foreign Ministry said official Yerevan is closely monitoring the situation and urging the conflicting parties to call a halt to military operations..

    “We are certainly concerned about the situation and hope that a solution will be found very quickly,” Deputy Foreign Minister Gegham Gharibjanian told RFE/RL. “We hope that the parties will make maximum efforts to quickly stop bloodshed and find peaceful solutions to contentious issues,” he said.

    A separate statement by the Foreign Ministry said Armenia’s embassy in Tbilisi and the consulate general in Batumi have been instructed to be “in constant touch with Georgia’s central and regional authorities.” It said the diplomatic missions will also provide “necessary assistance” to Armenian citizens in Georgia who will wish to return home.

    Georgian troops launched a major military offensive on Friday morning to regain control over South Ossetia which had won de facto independence from Tbilisi in a 1992 war. They reportedly seized much of the regional capital Tskhinvali by early afternoon, triggering a Russian military intervention.

    News reports from South Ossetia said a convoy of Russian tanks and other military vehicles was moving towards Tskhinvali from Russia’s republic of North Ossetia later in the day. Also, Georgian government officials said Russian military aircraft bombed Georgian army positions in South Ossetia and the Vaziani military airbase near Tbilisi. The airbase is less than 50 kilometers from Georgia’s border with Armenia.

    Observers believe that a large-scale Russian-Georgian war is a nightmare scenario for Armenia, which uses Georgia’s territory as its main commercial conduit to the outside world and maintains close political and especially military ties with Russia.

    The spiraling hostilities prompted the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe to call a special meeting of its decision-making Permanent Council in Vienna on Friday afternoon. Finland, the current holder of the OSCE’s rotating presidency, warned that the conflict could escalate into “a full-fledged war.” “War would have a devastating impact for the entire region,” Finnish Foreign Minister Alexander Stubb said in a statement.

  • Turkey’s economic indicators worsen

    Turkey’s economic indicators worsen

    WSJ

    By Sinan Ikinci
    8 August 2008

     Email the author

    On July 26, Turkey’s Deputy Prime Minister Nazim Ekren announced that the AKP (Justice and Development Party) government has decided to establish a committee, comprised of government officials, representatives from the private sector as well as academics, to develop a long-term solution to the country’s longstanding current account deficit.

    Until now, the AKP government has refrained from any measures to tackle the growing trade and current account deficits, other than making occasional demagogic statements for public consumption.

    Since the late 1970s, Turkish capitalism has been on the path of deeper integration into the world capitalist economy. It has been progressively liberalised in line with the structural adjustment programs of the IMF and the World Bank and in response to the European Union’s demands in the context of the EU’s accession process. The year 1989 stands out as a critical milestone in this integration into the process of globalisation. In that year, the ANAP (Motherland Party) fully liberalised capital movements, adopted the convertibility of the Turkish lira and authorised foreign currency holdings by residents in Turkey.

    Given the country’s level of integration into the capitalist world economy in the age of the globalisation of production, it is excluded that this new committee will produce any effective or sustainable solution to Turkey’s trade and current account deficits. All it can do is give some support to local producers of intermediate goods with half-measures, while at the same time guaranteeing that Turkish capitalism will meet its international commitments.

    Ekren’s own words are proof of this: “When we discuss the incentive method and assess it together with the current account deficit, the importance of the change in production function becomes important for Turkey.” He added that Turkey would not be able to overcome the current account deficit by maintaining traditional production methods. On July 14, just 12 days before Ekren’s press conference, Economy Minister Mehmet Simsek told reporters, “There is no short-term solution for the current account deficit.”

    Nonetheless, the decision to establish such a committee is in itself important as an indicator of the desperation of the AKP and Turkish capitalism as a whole.

    Apparently the AKP government wants to avoid any criticism, once the inevitable crisis breaks out, that it did nothing to avoid the crisis. It also aims to share political responsibility for a new financial meltdown with business circles and academia. In this respect, the move makes some sense, as Turkey is entering the second half of the year with growing problems. The favourable global economic conjuncture of 2002-2007 is a thing of the past, and there is no doubt that Turkish capitalism faces a very difficult period.

     

    Turkey’s ever-expanding current account deficit 

    Turkey is one of the worst-performing countries amongst the so-called “emerging market economies,” and its foreign trade and current account deficits have produced concerns for a long time. On November 21, 2007, the Financial Times noted, “Turkey’s ever-expanding current account deficit has become the Achilles’ heel of the country’s economy.”

    Since the devastating financial crisis of 2001, Turkey’s current account deficit has been rising dramatically. The deficit stood at $1.5 billion in 2002, rose to $8 billion in 2003, $15.6 billion in 2004, $22.6 billion in 2005, $32.3 billion in 2006 and $38 billion in 2007. For 2008, it is estimated that the current account deficit will reach $50 billion, and, according to some economists, this figure could be much higher.

    According to the recent data issued by the Central Bank of Turkey, during the first five months of 2008 the current account deficit grew by 33 percent compared to the same period of 2007. On an annual basis, the current account deficit reached the level of $43.1 billion as of May 2008. In May 2007 the deficit stood at $38.5 billion. This amounts to a 12.5 percent increase on an annual basis.

    At the end of 2007, the government was expecting a current account deficit of $39 billion for this year. This huge underestimation is hardly surprising, as the government has systematically and grossly missed its current account deficit targets since 2002, even as it has revised them upwards throughout each year.

    As the current account deficit has been growing at a faster pace compared to economic growth since 2002, the ratio of the deficit to national income has skyrocketed. In terms of this ratio, Turkey has one of the most dramatic deficits amongst countries on a similar footing.

    The current account deficit, which has reached an unprecedented size in both absolute value and in terms of its ratio to GDP (Gross Domestic Product), is indisputably the most critical indicator of the damage inflicted upon the Turkish economy by the global crisis.

     

    Turkish capitalism is extremely vulnerable 

    In an article published last November, the Economist ranked India, Turkey and Hungary as the most vulnerable countries amongst the 15 biggest “emerging market economies” according to economic risks based on the size of their external and budget deficits, inflation rates and the pace of growth in bank lending.

    Since then, financial institutions, rating agencies and individual economists have made similar assessments. For instance, in April, Standard & Poor’s decided to reduce the country’s credit rating to BB. Fitch and Moody also rate Turkey’s long-term foreign currency debt at the level of BB. This means that Turkey now stands three steps below “investment grade”.

    Long before the Economist issued its assessment and the downgrading by the rating agencies, in a study dated July 2005 and entitled “What Might the Next Emerging-Market Financial Crisis Look Like?” economist Morris Goldstein pointed to Turkey as one of the most vulnerable of the “emerging economies.” In this study, Goldstein identifies nine indicators for vulnerability of “emerging economies to various shocks, including a slowdown in import demand in both China and the United States, a fall in primary commodity prices, increased costs and lower availability of external financing, alternative patterns of exchange rate changes, and pressures operating on monetary and fiscal policies in emerging economies.” Turkey was rated the most vulnerable in five of these categories.

    Even worse, Turkey’s current account deficit continues to grow despite the fact that economic growth is loosing steam. As the table below demonstrates, this trend became visible since the end of 2004. Moreover, in 2008, this contradiction will become even starker.

    A comparison of economic growth and the ratio of the current account deficit to GDP indicates that the relationship between economic growth and the current account deficit has broken down. For instance, the rapid growth rate of 1990 and 1997 required only a current account balance to GDP ratio of 1.7 percent and 1.4 percent respectively. And in a period when the growth rate is decreasing, the steady increase of the trade and current account deficits shows that this “breakdown” has already assumed a pathological character.

    In a recent article entitled “Turkey and the Long Decade with The IMF: 1998-2008” economist Erinc Yeldan underlines this pathological break down process: “To understand the significance of this figure [Current Account Balance / GDP], it has to be noted that Turkey traditionally has never been a current account deficit-prone economy. Over the last two decades the average of the current account balance hovered around plus and minus 1.5-2.0 percent, with deficits exceeding 3 percent signalling for significant currency adjustments as had been realised in 1994 and 2001.”

    This break down of the relationship between growth and the current account deficit represents the final stage of the increasing dependency of the Turkish economy on the inflow and outflow of external resources—in other words on the whims of international finance capital. The crises of 1994, 1999 and 2001 are concrete examples of this, leaving behind a trail of economic and social devastation and with the working class and other layers of the population footing the bill.

    Meanwhile, the size of the assets owned by foreign capital has reached the level of Turkey’s national income for first time in the country’s history.

     

    The nature of the capital inflows 

    An examination of the main items in the balance of payments shows that foreign capital inflows increased substantially during the period of 2003-2006. Foreign capital inflows reached the level of $57 billion and $55 billion in 2006 and 2007, respectively.

    This means that Turkey has managed to attract a relatively larger share of the foreign capital inflows to the “emerging markets.” During the last five years, international capital injected a total of $186 billion into the Turkish economy. This has meant a strategic boost for the AKP government, which has slavishly followed the dictates of the international banks and the EU.

    The AKP distanced itself from the traditional line of the Turkish Islamist movement known as the “national view” doctrine and adapted a very friendly approach to the West and global finance capital. On the other hand, the AKP has sought to further the interests of the Islamist wing of the Turkish bourgeoisie and thus has been steadily undermining the hegemonic position of the “secular” wing of the ruling class.

    In this context, it is important to note that at his recent press conference, when asked a question about the current relations between Turkey and the IMF, Ekren said that the technical studies regarding the IMF are to be announced soon. The AKP government is probably completing the necessary preparations for another three-year standby agreement—this time a precautionary one.

    In an article entitled “The domino effect” published on July 3, the Economist summarises the mentality of speculative capital movements: “In a world of low interest rates, international investors were hungry for yield, and so piled into currencies that offered higher interest rates, namely those of Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Iceland, as well as many emerging markets.” Turkey has been one of the rising stars of the latter group.

    In the midst of 2007, the Financial Times pointed out the imbalances of national currencies created by these international investors: “A simple purchasing power parity exercise suggests that the New Zealand dollar is 20-25 percent overvalued against the US dollar, while the Turkish lira is about 65 per cent overvalued. The yen meanwhile is roughly 30 per cent undervalued.”

    The period of the AKP government overlapped —somewhat coincidentally—with an extremely favourable international economic situation for Turkish capitalism. By 2002, the financial markets had recovered from the Asian crisis of 1997, and international capital was again beginning to flow into developing countries like Turkey.

    After the 2001 crisis, Turkish capitalism solved the problem of financing the “post-crisis adjustments” by offering very high financial returns based on lucrative arbitrage possibilities to the global markets.

    Although, as set forth in the reports prepared by the Central Bank of Turkey, domestic demand is now sluggish, the bank has been increasing its benchmark interest rate in order to maintain “investor confidence” and “international creditworthiness,” i.e., placate speculative capital. The short-term interest rate set by the Central Bank is now 16.75 percent, the highest in any major “emerging market.”

    This means a huge transfer of resources to speculative capital owners—both domestic and international—while the vast majority of people living in Turkey have been struggling against high unemployment, poverty and social and economic inequality. Turkish capitalism managed to achieve an advantage over other countries with cheap labour through unemployment, new pro-business regulations and brutal exploitation. The betrayals of the trade union bureaucracy have played a crucial role in this respect.

    In any event, Western business circles are pleased with the performance of the AKP. The French business paper Les Echos paid its own tribute to the Erdogan government in its Tuesday edition.

    “Here, Western business pays tribute to a partial triumph of Islam. Yet this is not an inexplicable paradox. While terrorists—in the name of the Koran—endeavour to destroy everything that functions, this form of political Islam has managed to bring a certain measure of political stability to the country, to the delight of investors. … Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has managed to push through a policy of economic development and budgetary discipline and put an end to the repeated cycle of crises. The seeming paradox lies in the fact that in so doing he has favoured the emergence of a powerful new middle class which votes for his party regardless of how Islamist it might be.” (05/08/2008)

    The IMF and the World Bank as well as the AKP government have tried to portray the post-2001 recovery and relatively fast—albeit jobless—economic growth as the result of “successful crisis management” and the implementation of correct economic policies, i.e., austerity measures and market reforms. The unmentioned reality behind the growth and deflation is the unprecedented appreciation of the new Turkish lira (YTL) as well as sharp reductions in wages and the worsening of working conditions, i.e., a dramatic increase of the surplus value extracted from the working class.

    Government officials repeatedly point the finger at the global increase in energy prices. Certainly surging petrol and natural gas prices widen Turkey’s trade and current account deficits, as the country is heavily dependent on imported energy. As the chief economist at AK Securities, Hakan Aktar explained to the Financial Times, “A $10 increase in petrol prices means Turkey’s current account deficit widens by another $4 billion.” However, this can only explain a part of the ballooning deficit.

    As Yeldan explained in his article, Turkey’s relatively rapid economic growth was “speculative-led in nature.” Yeldan notes, “The main mechanism has been that the high rates of interest prevailing in the Turkish asset markets attracted short term finance capital, and in return, the relative abundance of foreign exchange led to overvaluation of the Lira [local currency]. Cheapened foreign exchange costs led to an import boom both in consumption and investment goods. The overvaluation of the Lira, together with the greedy expectations of the arbitrageurs in an era of rampant financial glut in the global finance markets, led to a severe rise in its foreign deficit, and hence, in external indebtedness.”

    Turkey’s external debt stock has been increasing substantially—from $130.1 billion at the end of 2002 to $247.5 billion as of March 2008. More importantly, the private sector, especially the non-financial institutions, are responsible for much of the increase in external indebtedness, and this has already created the conditions for a debt crisis. This is why, in March, the World Bank’s country director Ulrich Zachau said, “What is a significant risk is the significant exposure of the Turkish corporate sector to foreign currency borrowing … The Turkish corporate sector as a whole is exposed to foreign currency risk.”

    Bourgeois economic textbooks offer no solution here, because if the currency of a country with a large current account deficit, such as the Turkish lira, depreciates, this will not help the country reduce its trade and thus current account deficit. A significant devaluation of the Turkish lira would not only put private companies at risk, as mentioned above, but would also raise energy costs. Spiralling exchange rates would further worsen the current account deficit, shatter debt and many other macro-economic ratios and create further pressure on inflation, which is already out of hand. Just a few months ago, the Central Bank’s inflation target for 2008 was 4 percent. On July 28, Central Bank Governor Durmus Yilmaz revised the Bank’s forecast for year-end inflation to 10.6 percent.

     

    Alarm signals 

    But it is not only the inflation rate that is increasing the vulnerability of Turkish capitalism by causing investors to be more cautious. Dark clouds are rapidly gathering on the horizon.

    During the January-May period, FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) inflow declined by 47.9 percent to $6 billion, compared to $11.1 billion during the same period last year. On the other hand, for the same period, FDI outflows increased 12 percent—from $1.4 billion to $1.6 billion. Taken together, the net decline corresponds to 54.6 percent!

    As a result of plummeting FDI, the major financing for the current account deficit now comes from increasing the external debt of banks and the non-financial private sector. Net borrowing by non-financial Turkish companies increased 22 percent in the first five months. This compensates somewhat for the decline in FDI, but also exacerbates the risk of a debt crisis even further. Such a change in the composition of external capital flows is very dangerous.

    Even worse, the latest figures reveal that the Central Bank’s foreign currency reserves have recently been used to finance the deficit. In the first five months of the year, the decline in reserves was $1.1 billion. On July 14, Ali Ihsan Gelberi, manager of the economic research department at Garanti Bank, the Turkish lender co-owned by General Electric Co. told the Turkish Daily News, “We used to have a noteworthy amount for financing with foreign direct capital. Then only private sector borrowing and portfolio investments remained. The private sector continues borrowing one way or another. However, it is not easy to tell how long this may continue. A proportion of the deficit financing was reportedly covered with the Central Bank’s reserves last month. If we keep on using reserves to finance the deficit, that may create problems in the future. This may cause a significant pressure on the foreign currency.”

    Turkish capitalism, while suffering a deepening regime crisis, is also on the verge of a new severe economic crisis. This is no isolated occurrence, as in the space of 14 years Turkey experienced three major crises. Once again, the economy is on the brink of collapse and default, while the vast majority of the population has already been suffering immense hardship. No doubt, these hardships will intensify dramatically when Turkey once again finds itself starved of credit from the international banks.

    See Also:
    Turkish courts impose ban on YouTube
    [6 August 2008]
    Dormitory collapse in Turkey kills 18
    [5 August 2008]
    Constitutional Court rules against ban on Turkey’s ruling party
    [2 August 2008]

  • Erdogan, Ergenekon, and the Struggle for Turkey

    Erdogan, Ergenekon, and the Struggle for Turkey

    by Michael Rubin
    Mideast Monitor
    August 8, 2008

    Last month, Turkish prosecutors issued a 2,455-page indictment detailing an alleged plot to overthrow Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan by an elaborate network of retired military officers, journalists, academics, businessmen, and other secular opponents of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP). Although the precise facts of the case are not yet clear, the so-called Ergenekon conspiracy appears to be a largely fictionalized construct, with an ongoing investigation geared mainly to warding off constitutional challenges to the ruling party, not coups.

    Background

    The AKP, the latest of several Turkish Islamist political reincarnations, rose to power in November 2002 on a wave of popular dissatisfaction with economic malaise and corruption scandals within establishment parties. Although the AKP captured barely a third of the vote, this translated into a two-thirds parliamentary majority because much of the popular vote went to parties that failed to meet the 10% electoral threshold for winning seats.

    When the AKP came to power, Erdogan disavowed any intention to implement the Islamist agenda he had embraced in the past. Nevertheless, his government worked to weaken or disable all of the inherent checks that would prevent the establishment of an Islamic state in the longer run.

    Although Erdogan has presided over economic growth averaging nearly 7% per year, his management of the economy has been deeply politicized. Turkey’s banking and financial board now consists exclusively of AKP appointees, most of whom had careers in Islamic finance institutions. A number of civil servants in technocratic posts have said that the AKP has instituted an interview process, controlled by party loyalists, to supplement the examination process that screens government employees.

    The AKP has greatly compromised the independence of the media. Its most notorious encroachment came last year, when the government seized control of the country’s second largest media group, ATV-Sabah, sold it to a holding company managed by Erdogan’s son-in-law, and pressed state banks and the emir of Qatar to provide the financing.[1] In addition to cultivating a massive loyalist media base, the prime minister has effectively bought the silence of other large media conglomerates by distributing lucrative government contracts and privatization deals.

    The AKP has also limited the military’s influence in politics by reducing the power of the National Security Council and placing it under a civilian head. This is not a cosmetic change. Almost every month, government ministers appear before the council to answer questions and justify government actions. The cabinet prioritizes the National Security Council’s recommendations. Civilian leadership has removed the military’s ability to set the agenda and, in practice, strengthened the separation between uniformed services and civilian governance.

    The Erdogan government has tried to undermine Turkey’s secular educational tradition, most notably by lifting a long-standing ban on religious attire in universities. According to Egitim-Sen, a left-of-center teachers’ union, Islamic influences are creeping into textbooks.[2] Only fierce public opposition stalled more sweeping educational initiatives.

    President Ahmet Necdet Sezer served as a critical check on the AKP’s ambitions. During his presidency, he vetoed 65 bills, largely on constitutional grounds, negating more than 6% of those submitted by the AKP-dominated parliament.[3] For example, he vetoed a bill that would have lowered the mandatory retirement age of judges. Had it passed, the bill would have greatly expedited Erdogan’s drive to replace Turkey’s justices with party loyalists. Since the AKP gained control of the presidency last year, this check has been eliminated.

    This leaves the judiciary as most powerful check on the AKP’s power. The Constitutional Court, which has sweeping authority both to overturn legislation and ban political parties that contravene Turkey’s secular constitution, has remained staunchly independent thus far because the president appoints the justices (from among candidates nominated by other judicial organs). Although AKP co-founder and parliamentary speaker Bulent Arinc warned in 2005 that the Constitutional Court could be dissolved if it continued to veto legislation,[4] it remains intact and resolute. However, the election of AKP loyalist Abdullah Gul as president means that its independence won’t last forever.

    The AKP has had more success exerting influence over the lower courts. In December 2007, the government enacted a new law that requires all judicial candidates to take an oral exam administered by the AKP-controlled Ministry of Justice (codifying a practice already in place). The Union of Turkish Bar Associations organized a demonstration by thousands of lawyers, arguing that this law would allow the ministry to screen candidates based on their political and religious views. According to the US State Department’s annual report on human rights practices in Turkey, the Erdogan government has “launched formal investigations against judges who had spoken critically of the government.”[5]

    Wherever the AKP has managed to penetrate the judiciary, the results have been worrisome. Pro-AKP judges have placed liens against the property of political opponents, seized media outlets, and overturned earlier decisions levied against Islamists.

    The AKP has extensive control over the police. Followers of Fethullah Gulen, a cult leader whose followers seek to Islamize Turkish society if not overthrow the secular order have, according to a broad range of Turkish journalists, civil society leaders, and even Gulen followers, infiltrated the police. The police often target secular opponents of the AKP on both the national and local level. Businessmen who donate money to AKP opponents have complained of police harassment and spurious investigations.

    The AKP has also expanded the authority of the police. In February 2007, according to the State Department, parliament “significantly expand[ed] the authority of security forces to search and detain a suspect.”[6] Four months later, the Turkish news newspaper Radikal noted a rise in allegations of mistreatment and torture by police in Istanbul.[7]

    One of the most egregious abuses of power in the criminal justice system involved Yucel Askin, rector of Yuzuncu Yil University in Van. Askin had staunchly opposed Erdogan’s efforts to reduce barriers to college admission for students educated in exclusively religious seminaries and also had enforced the ban on Islamic headscarves on campus. In 2005, police raided his house in search of illicit artifacts (Askin was a known collector of antiquities) and hauled him off to jail. However, they were forced to release him after it was discovered that he had government licenses for every artifact in his possession. Three months later, police arrested him again, this time on charges of accepting kickbacks from the university’s purchase of medical equipment. Again, however, he was released when a judge determined that the university bought the medical equipment in question a year before Askin became rector. While Askin got his life back, the university’s general secretary was not as lucky. Enver Arpali committed suicide after being held for months in prison without trial in the same case.[8]

    While the AKP has moderated its Islamist agenda at the national level in order to maximize its appeal at the ballot box and stave off the threat of military or judicial intervention, secular opposition leaders fear that this moderation is tactical – that Erdogan is biding his time until obstacles are out of the way. “Democracy is like a streetcar. When you come to your stop, you get off,” he said when he was mayor of Istanbul in the 1990s.[9] At the local level, where tactical caution is not required, the AKP continues to pursue a more radical agenda in municipalities firmly under its control, such as banning alcohol and imposing gender segregation in public transport.

    Secular leaders also point to the prime minister’s dictatorial style as a harbinger of what lies ahead. Erdogan, who once bragged of being “the imam of Istanbul” when he was mayor of the city,[10] rules over the AKP in much the same fashion. “Erdogan accepts no advice and no criticism. He’s become a tyrant,” one member of the AKP’s own parliamentary bloc told The Economist.[11] AKP members say that Erdogan handpicked the slate of parliamentarians who could run for re-election under his banner. While the dictatorial control of Turkish political parties is a phenomenon that spans the political spectrum – affecting the center-left Republican Peoples Party (CHP) and National People’s Party (MHP) just as much – the problem is more worrisome in a ruling party that governs without coalition partners.

    Rather than bridge the gap between Turkey’s religious and secular constituents, Erdogan has widened it. Although the AKP won 47% of the popular vote in the latest parliamentary elections last year, millions of Turks took part in the waves of anti-government demonstrations that erupted the preceding May.[12] In one recent public opinion poll, only 30% of respondents said they would vote for the AKP if elections were held today.[13]

    Staunch secularists believe that this is an insufficient mandate to make sweeping unilateral decisions on basic national issues, and they are using one of their last remaining institutional footholds – the Constitutional Court – to do something about it. In recent months, the court has overturned Erdogan’s attempt to allow Islamic headscarves in universities and formally sanctioned the AKP for its contravention of the constitution (as well as levying financial penalties against it). Erdogan’s supporters denounce such opposition as anti-democratic and reactionary, even fascist. It is in this context that the Ergenekon investigation emerged.

    The Investigation

    Allegations of a vast conspiracy by prominent secularists to murder and terrorize civilians first began to dominate the headlines in March 2007, when the left-of-center Turkish political weekly Nokta published what it claimed to be diary entries of retired admiral Ozden Ornek. The excerpts discussed a 2004 plot to incite violence as a precursor to a military coup. Although Ornek denied the authenticity of these excerpts, their publication revived a long-standing claims that a shadowy network of generals, intelligence officials, and organized crime bosses have worked in tandem over the years to stage acts of violence.[14]

    The timing of these explosive revelations raised suspicions, occurring just weeks before parliament was scheduled to elect a new president, amid widespread speculation that the AKP would attempt to put a dedicated Islamist in the post. While Gul (like Erdogan) has moderated his public pronouncements over time, he was once very direct. As Islamists rose in political power in the mid-1990s, Gul said, “This is the end of the republican period . . . the secular system has failed and we definitely want to change it.”[15]

    As Erdogan’s attempts to anoint Gul to the presidency faltered for lack of a parliamentary quorum and the country prepared for early elections, pro-AKP media outlets produced a stream of stories about an alleged “deep state” conspiracy, reporting that went hand in hand with efforts by Erdogan and his allies to portray secularists as the true enemies of Turkey’s constitutional order.

    In June 2007, police raided an apartment belonging to a retired military officer in the Umraniye district of Istanbul and discovered a cache of 27 hand grenades,[16] providing a modicum of evidence to support what heretofore had been only rumor and coincidence. According to police investigators, the grenades matched another one that was used (but failed to detonate) in a May 2006 attack on the office of the center-left newspaper Cumhuriyet.[17]

    The government, for its part, argues that many of the Islamist terror attacks that have taken place in Turkey in recent years are false flag Ergenekon operations. In May 2006, an assailant swept into the Danistay, the supreme administrative court. Shouting “God is great” and “I am a soldier of God,” he sprayed the justices with gunfire, in alleged protest for the Court’s refusal to ease restrictions on the Islamist headscarf, murdering Mustafa Yucel Ozbilgin. Tens of thousands of Turks attended his funeral, chanting anti-AKP slogans, and heckling Gul (then foreign minister) when he arrived to represent the government.[18] According to police, the assailant confessed to participating in the Cumhuriyet grenade attacks, although his past Islamism and the lack of evidence showing any linkage leads many secularists to conclude that the killer gave a false confession to further glorify his exploits.

    In a similar fashion, various pro-AKP media outlets have suggested that the murders of an Italian Catholic priest, Turkish Armenian writer Hrant Dink and the April 2007 murder of Christian missionaries were also Ergenekon corollaries.[19] The problem is that the Islamists captured in these cases have no credible links to the secular establishment.

    The Umraniye raid led to the first of several arrest sweeps over the next thirteen months. All of them coincided very closely with major political developments and lacked adherence to basic investigatory and judicial protocols. Authorities detained nearly all suspects prior to issuing an indictment. While such detentions have occurred before in security cases, seldom if ever did they involve such senior personalities, continue for so long and with such sensationalist media leaks.

    Most of the arrests occurred in middle-of-the-night raids. Police held these suspects incommunicado for the first 24 hours without allowing them even to call their lawyers. In most cases, police initiated questioning only on the fourth day of detention in order to raise detainee anxiety. Lawyers for those arrested say that police have refused to furnish them with transcripts of the interrogations.

    Kuddusi Okkir was arrested in June 2007 on suspicion of financing the alleged Ergenekon plot and held for over a year without charge. For the first eight months he was held solitary confinement, with the authorities refusing even to allow his wife to visit. When he was diagnosed with lung cancer while in prison, officials rejected numerous petitions to enable him to receive outside medical treatment. They finally relented when he fell into a coma in early July 2008, but by then it was too late – he died four days later without ever regaining consciousness.[20] Another detainee held without charge, Ayse Asuman Ozdemir, developed liver disease while in captivity and was also denied critical medical treatment. She finally received furlough after the death of Okkir caused an embarrassing uproar for the government, but it may also be too late to save her.[21]

    On March 21, Abdurrahman Yalcinkaya, chief prosecutor of Turkey’s Court of Appeals, filed a lawsuit in the Constitutional Court demanding the closure of the AKP and the banning of over 70 top AKP officials from politics for five years for “violating the principles of a democratic and secular republic.” Erdogan responded hours later with a midnight roundup of new Ergenekon suspects. Whereas previous suspects arrested had been largely fringe figures, this time the net was widened to include some of the most prominent secular intellectuals in Turkey, such as Dogu Perincek, leader of the Workers’ Party; the bed-ridden octogenarian editor of Cumhuriyet, Ilhan Selcuk; and Kemal Alemdaroglu, a former president of Istanbul University. It appears that Erdogan also put the offending judges under surveillance. A scandal erupted in May when the vice-president of the Constitutional Court complained that he was being followed. Uniformed police responding to his complaint found that his pursuers were undercover officers.[22] However, there have been neither subsequent charges nor explanations of the incident.

    On July 1, as Yalcinkaya stood before the Constitutional Court to present his case for closing the AKP, Turkish police responded with another tit-for-tat roundup of leading secularists, including Mustafa Balbay, the Cumhuriyet Ankara bureau chief; Sinan Aygun, the president of the Ankara Chamber of Commerce; retired general Sener Eruygur, the president of the Ataturk Thought Society, and retired general Hursit Tolon. Once again, the timing of the raid was not coincidental – the police received their warrant on June 29, but delayed executing it until Yalcinkaya’s arguments were underway.[23]

    On July 24, police detained another 26 people, including several members of the Workers’ Party and staff members of Milli Cozum, a right-wing journal, who were charged with “insulting top state officials via media organs.”[24] In total, over one hundred journalists, politicians, and others have been detained in the investigation.[25]

    Many of the suspects in these later waves of arrests appear to have been victims of expansive electronic surveillance and guilty of little more than criticism. Those who have been released from detention describe interrogations which resemble fishing expeditions, with police asking them questions such as “Are you aware that you have insulted government leaders many times?” and “Why do you swear so much when you talk on the phone?” Police have even asked some to list with whom they talked when they attended receptions at the US embassy.[26] Selcuk was confronted with wiretapped conversations he had with Cumhuriyet foreign correspondents, discussing their work and story ideas. Ufuk Buyukcelebi, editor of Tercuman, told reporters that police confronted him with a phone tap showing that he had said the AKP “would be closed.”[27] Balbay says that all police questions related to his critical reporting on the AKP.[28] G-9, a group of nine press associations, called the arrests “an effort to silence opposition journalists.”[29]

    Another disturbing aspect of the investigation is the cozy relationship between investigators and pro-AKP media outlets. The most egregious example of this came in May 2008, when the Islamist daily Vakit published an apparently wiretapped conversation between the deputy leader of the CHP and a governor.[30]

    When the authorities finally unveiled an indictment in July 2008, the contents were unconvincing. The prosecutors said they prepared the indictment with the assistance of 20 witnesses whose identities they refuse to reveal. According to CNN-Turk, these witnesses will also testify in secret.[31] The “coup diary” was omitted from the indictment,[32] even though its alleged contents were the primary impetus for the Ergenekon prosecution. Accordingly, the accused cannot address the authenticity of the diary as it will not be entered into evidence. The indictment appears to absolve both the military and the Turkish intelligence service,[33] and limits the charges to terrorism or forming an illegal group, rather than plotting a coup per say.

    Especially troubling is that, despite being a couple thousand pages long, the indictment lacks specificity as to which suspects are charged with what crimes. Indeed, many of the charges center on incitement and interfering in government work, the type of language more common in dictatorships like Syria and Saudi Arabia than in Turkey. Selcuk, for example, is accused of “providing guidance, with his writings, to the suspects engaged in a coup effort,”[34] a charge that an Islamist newspaper has also leveled against this writer.[35]

    Another concern is the fact that Zekeriya Oz, the lead prosecutor in the case, is a virtual unknown, in his early thirties, with previous experience only as a public prosecutor in two small towns. This has raised questions as to his competence and whether he has the stature to resist political interference.

    Even the limited amount of physical evidence in the case is only as reliable as the integrity of the police who uncovered it. Suspiciously, the grenades seized in Umraniye were reportedly destroyed by court order (though some reports have suggested that only the explosive cores were destroyed).[36] Should the justices uphold the police reports, the defense will be unable to advance alternate theories about the provenance of the grenades, the availability of their type across Turkey, or the linkage between them and other incidents.

    At any rate, there are widespread suspicions that police investigators may have planted evidence. On April 10, 2008, workers at the Ankara Chamber of Commerce reported the discovery of a handgun hidden in a toilet in Aygun’s private office, which Aygun had them promptly report. His subsequent arrest led his associates to suspect that the gun had been planted to be found during a subsequent raid. After his July 1 arrest, Nuri Gurgur, the organization’s assembly chair, commented, “If we had not found that handgun then, the police would surely find it today, and it would be impossible for us to prove that Aygun had nothing to do with the gun.”[37] Such suspicions will rise as the indictment focuses on secret witnesses and computer files whose origins are already disputed.

    What Next?

    Throughout this saga, pundits close to the ruling party have repeatedly drawn equivalence between the Constitutional Court case and the Ergenekon investigation. “Circles who invited everyone to have respect for the judicial process in the [AKP] closure case raised hell the other day during the Ergenekon arrests and made accusations that Turkey has become a ‘police state,’” columnist Cengiz Candar wrote, “But these same groups regarded the closure case as the judiciary’s business.”[38] Ali Aslan, a columnist for the Islamist daily Zaman, expressed similar logic.[39] The obvious subtext of such columns, many of which reference private conversations with the prime minister, is that those who defend Turkey’s secular tradition have no right to demand rule of law and or complain about prosecutorial misconduct. They also indicate that the ruling party may be more interested in headlines than in actually seeing the Ergenekon prosecution through.

    In the end, the Constitutional Court did not ban the prime minister from office or strip his parliamentary immunity, making it more difficult to determine to what extent the Ergenekon case is fabrication or exaggeration. An Istanbul court slated to hear the Ergenekon case has cleared its docket until April 2009. At stake when a verdict is returned on Ergenekon, though, will not just be Turkish national security, but also the credibility of the judiciary.

    [1] “Circulation wars; Turkish media,” The Economist, 10 May 2008.
    [2] “Flags, veils and sharia: Turkey’s future,” The Economist, 19 July 2008.
    [3] Sabah (Istanbul), 30 March 2007.
    [4] Cited by columnist Sahin Alpay, Zaman, 7 May 2005. Review of the Turkish Islamist press, BBC Monitoring, 7 May 2005.
    [5] US State Department, Country Report on Human Rights Practices, 2007.
    [6] Ibid.
    [7] Ibid; Radikal, 22 June 2007.
    [8] Sabah, 13 November 2005.
    [9] “The Erdogan Experiment,” The New York Times, 11 May 2003.
    [10] Hurriyet, 8 January 1995.
    [11] “Flags, veils and sharia: Turkey’s future,” The Economist, 19 July 2008.
    [12] “Thousands stage new pro-secular rally in Turkey,” Agence France Presse 26 May 2007.
    [13] Milliyet, 30 June 2008. See also Gareth Jenkins, “Poll Suggests Weakened but Stable Support for AKP,” Eurasia Daily Monitor, 30 June 2008.
    [14] Stephen Kinzer. “State Crimes Shake Turkey as Politicians Face Charges,” The New York Times, 1 January 1998.
    [15] “Turkish Islamists aim for power,” Manchester Guardian Weekly, 3 December 1995.
    [16] “Ergenekon remains hidden in the shadows,” Turkish Daily News, 17 July 2008.
    [17] Yavuz Baydar, “Conspiracies flourish in times of mass psychosis.” Today’s Zaman, 16 June 2007.
    [18] Sebnem Arsu, “Thousands March in Turkey at Funeral of Slain Judge,” The New York Times, 18 May 2006.
    [19] Today’s Zaman, the daily newspaper of the Islamist Gulen movement, urged prosecutors to dig deeper into links between the Dink assassination and the alleged Ergenekon conspirators. Emine Kart, “Dig deeper into Dink murder-Ergenekon link.” Today’s Zaman, 13 July 2008.
    [20] Yusuf Kanli. “Death of the ‘financier of a gang,’ Turkish Daily News, 7 July 2008.
    [21] “Ayse Asuman Ozdemir tahliye edildi,” Radikal (Istanbul), 18 July 2008.
    [22] See Gareth Jenkins, “Alleged Surveillance of Senior Judges Raises Questions about Politicization of Turkish Police,” Eurasia Daily Monitor, 20 May 2008.
    [23] “Opposition says Ergenekon government tool,” Turkish Daily News, 2 July 2008.
    [24] “26 detained in new wave Ergenekon arrests,” Turkish Daily News, 24 July 2008.
    [25] Ibid.
    [26] Email communication with Turkish academic, Istanbul, 12 July 2008.
    [27] “Sorguda ilginc sorular,” Hurriyet, 5 July 2008.
    [28] “Former generals arrested as Ergenekon leaders,” Turkish Daily News, 7 July 2008.
    [29] “Ex-generals, journalists detained in Turkish probe: report,” Agence France Presse, 1 July 2008.
    [30] Vakit, 26 May 2008; “Watergate Scenes in Ankara: Who Bugged the CHP?” Turkish Daily News, 29 May 2008.
    [31] “Military prosecutor steps into Ergenekon.” Turkish Daily News, 15 July 2008; “Ergenekon indictment accepted,” Turkish Daily News, 26 July 2008.
    [32] Ibid.
    [33] “Ergenekon indictment accepted,” Turkish Daily News, 26 July 2008.
    [34] NTV television, 14 July 2008.
    [35] Hasan Karakaya, “Ergenekon-dan Neocon’-lara bir yol gider!” Vakit, 5 July 2008.
    [36] Taraf, 26 July 2008.
    [37] “A few hours when jeopardy doubled.” Turkish Daily News, 2 July 2008.
    [38] Cengiz Candar, “Waking up to Ergenekon,” Turkish Daily News, 3 July 2008.
    [39] Ali H. Aslan, “Turkey’s American Prosecutors,” Today’s Zaman, 18 April 2008.

    Michael Rubin, editor of the Middle East Quarterly, is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and senior lecturer at the Naval Postgraduate School.