Tag: Kilicdaroglu

  • Turkey Opposition Mulls Options 100 Days Before President Vote

    Turkey Opposition Mulls Options 100 Days Before President Vote

    By Isobel Finkel May 02, 2014

    With 100 days left to Turkey’s first direct presidential elections, the opposition has yet to choose a candidate to run against its likely opponent: either incumbent Abdullah Gul or Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

    “It’s wrong to have a debate simply about whether it will be Gul or Erdogan,” Kemal Kilicdaroglu, the leader of the main opposition Republican People’s Party, or CHP, said at a press conference in Istanbul today. “First we have to talk about what kind of a president we want, and whether it’s right to have someone accused of corruption occupying that seat.”

    While just over three months remain until the August 10 poll, Kilicdaroglu said his party is still in the process of reviewing its options. He declined to name candidates who might make the shortlist.

    Turkey’s most recent elections, for mayors nationwide on March 30, occurred against the background of a sweeping corruption probe into Erdogan’s government, which resulted in a market sell-off and the largest leadership shake-up in the ruling party’s 11 1/2-year rule. The CHP increased its share of that vote to 28 percent from 23 percent in 2009, leaving it more than 10 percent short of the ruling party’s almost 46 percent tally. The government also boosted its share of the national vote by almost 10 percent compared with the previous poll.

    Kilicdaroglu said his party faces a challenge in a country where power has been centralized around Erdogan and it struggles to get media attention. He said he’ll focus on spreading responsibility for opposition wider, rather than on a single candidate.

    “In a country where all the state’s institutions have been co-opted by the government, the job of opposition is no ordinary task,” Kilicdaroglu said. “Opposition is not just the job of political opposition; it’s the job of the universities, of intellectuals, it’s the job of women,” he said.

    A Turkish prosecutor today said he wouldn’t pursue charges against suspects in an investigation into real estate corruption, one of three simultaneous probes into graft that were made public on Dec. 17. Erdogan has said the probes are politically motivated and has vowed to purge followers of U.S. cleric Fethullah Gulen, whom he blames for the investigation, from Turkish state institutions.

    There’s no friction within the ruling party about the selection process for its presidential candidate, Erdogan told reporters today in Ankara. Erdogan and President Gul are in consultations and will decide which of them will run, Gul said in a press conference from the city of Zonguldak.

    via Turkey Opposition Mulls Options 100 Days Before President Vote – Businessweek.

  • Turkey: No Checks, Few Balances

    Turkey: No Checks, Few Balances

    by Steven A. Cook 

    April 23, 2013

    TurkeyPharaoh
    Republican People’s Party (CHP) leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu addresses the media as he is flanked by his deputies at the Turkish Parliament in Ankara (Umit Bektas/Courtesy Reuters).

    “Recep Tayyip Erdogan is Turkey’s first Pharaoh!” a contact in Turkey declared to me recently over breakfast in Ankara.  “Not a Sultan?,” I countered teasingly.  “No, the Sultans had some checks on their power.  Today Tayyip Erdogan’s power is absolute.”  My friend, who would fall within the category of right-of-center nationalist, assured me that his Pharaoh comment was not meant to be an insult, but rather a statement of fact.   That’s hard to believe given what the leaders of ancient (and not so ancient) Egypt stood for and the principles by which Erdogan and his associates claim to have governed Turkey for the last almost eleven years.  Indeed, when Erdogan, Abdullah Gül, and the people around them broke from Turkey’s Islamist old guard and established the Adelet ve Kalkinma Partisi (Justice and Development Party, AKP) they offered Turks a vision of a democratic and prosperous Turkey.

    Between 2002 and 2007, the Justice and Development Party, first under Abdullah Gül’s brief tenure as prime minister and then Erdogan, delivered on both.  In those five years, the Turkish economy grew an average of over 6 percent annually and the AKP-dominated Grand National Assembly passed a range of significant political reforms that resulted in the European Union’s official invitation to begin negotiations to join that exclusive club of democracies.  It seemed clear that by the time AKP won 47 percent of the vote in the July2007 elections, the Islamists (they prefer “conservative democrats”) had actually done what the  country’s secular nationalists had only claimed to do—which was in the words of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, “raise Turkey to the level of civilization” through the modernization and democratization of Turkish political institutions. The AKP also invested in services for Turkey’s middle and lower classes, who value the advances in transportation and healthcare as much, if not more, than the successful efforts to subordinate the military to civilian leaders, for example.

    Since 2007, however, AKP’s reform efforts have slowed and in some areas there have been notable reversals, especially when it comes to freedom of expression.  Moreover, the party has become a machine par excellence with its connections to media outlets, business, and government contractors,  which only bolster its monopoly on political power at the local and national levels.  A decade after assuming power, Prime Minister Erdogan is the sun around which Turkish politics revolves—a fact he both knows and seems to relish. He seldom seems to wrestle with a decision, enjoys swatting away questions from observers who clearly “do not pay close enough attention,” and brooks no criticism from an opposition that he does not take seriously.

    Of these, the latter is the most salient politically, but there is very little reason for Prime Minister Erdogan to give his primary opponents—the Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP)—much in the way of respect.  The CHP has 135seats in the Grand National Assembly and the MHP controls 53 mandates in the 550 seat parliament.  These may seem like a lot, but the vote totals for both parties are confined to specific regions of the country (the Aegean coast and European parts of Turkey for the CHP and mostly Iğdir province for the MHP) whereas AKP has significant cross-regional appeal and thus enjoys a parliamentary majority of 327 seats.   More importantly, while both parties have become adept at complaining about Prime Minister Erdogan and criticizing the AKP, they are unable to articulate an alternative vision for Turkey’s future.  I have a good understanding of what the CHP and MHP are against, but I have a harder time understanding precisely what they are for.  I’m willing to allow for the fact that I might be missing something in translation, but it seems that millions of Turkish voters are also confused.

    The inability to offer Turks a vision goes hand in hand with what seems like a strong aversion to modernize their internal structures and political processes.  Take the CHP, for example.  As I was departing Turkey on Saturday, the papers reported that the party’s Deputy Chairman, Gülseren Onanç, was forced to resign.  Ms. Onanç is a young, well-educated, successful businesswoman who was responsible for CHP’s public relations.  Her crime?  She appeared on a television program against the expressed wishes of party chairman Kemal Kiliçdaroğlu and dared suggest that 65 percent of the CHP’s grassroots support the government’s efforts to bring the war with the Kurdistan Worker’s Party (known as the PKK)—a terrorist group that has waged a campaign of violence in Turkey since 1984 that has cost 40,000 lives—to an end through negotiations.  In other words, Onanç was doing her job, but in the CHP’s patriarchal politics, nothing happens unless Kiliçdaroğlu says so.  It was not too long ago that analysts regarded Kiliçdaroğlu to be the savior of the CHP, which was reeling from a sex scandal and poor electoral performances.  There have not been any more illicit videos of CHP officials, but further loss of momentum for the party has marked Kiliçdaroğlu’s tenure.  On the substance of what Onanç said, it seems clear that the party leadership would rather censure one of its potential future leaders than take part in a process that may finally bring peace to Turkey.  Either Kiliçdaroğlu and the people around him do not want to bring the conflict to an end because of an attachment to an ethnic based nationalism (a problem also among Kurdish opponents of peace) or they see it as a wedge issue.  Either way, Onanç’s dismissal reflects a political party that has yet to come to grips with how much Turkey has changed.  The old truths and myths no longer apply in a more complex and differentiated society whose people want more than the drab political conformity that Kemalism (and the CHP) demand.  The AKP surely wants to take credit for Turkey’s transformation, but it was happening well before Erdogan and Gül defied their mentors way back in 2001.

    This all brings us back to Erdogan and his alleged Pharaoh-ness.  Not to diminish either Erdogan’s achievements or his faults but the desultory state of the opposition has no doubt contributed to his mastery of the political arena.  I know Turks who don’t share AKP’s views on a variety of issues, but nevertheless vote for the party because they have no other real choice.  Others choose not to vote.  Without any viable options among the opposition an important check on Erdogan and the AKP does not exist, which does not bode well for the consolidation of democracy in Turkey.  When journalists are jailed, corporations are punished with huge tax levies because their owners are deemed unfriendly to the AKP, and the courts are used to dole out political payback, it is the fault of Erdogan and his party’s other leaders whose authoritarian tendencies are clear, but it also the  responsibility of Turkey’s other political parties who are all at once ineffective, insular, and feckless, rendering them trivial in Turkey’s fascinating transformation.

  • CHP leader: ‘Genocide’ being committed against Istanbul’s skyline

    CHP leader: ‘Genocide’ being committed against Istanbul’s skyline

    Main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu said a crime as big as ‘genocide’ is being committed against Istanbul’s skyline.

    The CHP leader said on his Twitter account on Tuesday that neither humanity nor history will forgive those who destroy the historic skyline of the city. He later shared an image showing an old photo of Sultanahmet and a new photo of the same area side by side. The newer photo shows three skyscrapers visible behind the historic mosque. The skyscrapers in the image are highlighted by drawn-on light bulbs, reminiscent of the logo of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party). In the corner of the image there is the figure of Ottoman Fatih Sultan Mehmet, who conquered Istanbul in 1453. The sultan is shown wiping away his tears with a handkerchief in one hand and holding a tulip in the other. In the original version of the famous sultan photo, he is sniffing a flower in one hand and holding a handkerchief in the other.

    Kilicdaroglu accused the AK Party of allowing this construction to damage the silhouette of the historic city. At a symposium over the weekend, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan warned mayors against unplanned and improper urbanization. Erdogan urged those who think only of “stone and concrete” when it comes to city planning to re-evaluate their ideas and create cities that have “souls and direction.”

    In remarks to Today’s Zaman, experts unanimously stated that the damage to Istanbul’s historic silhouette has been done and they urged authorities to take action against further unplanned urbanization. In 2012, the traditional silhouette of Istanbul, which comprises Hagia Sophia, Topkapi Palace and the Blue Mosque, was marred by a high rise building erected in the district adjacent to the historic peninsula. Currently, a new bridge under construction over the Golden Horn, a mosque on Camlica Hill and the rebuilding of Taksim Square are being debated because of aesthetic concerns.

  • ‘Turkey shot self in foot with its hostile anti-Syria policy’

    ‘Turkey shot self in foot with its hostile anti-Syria policy’

    The leader of Turkey’s main opposition party Kemal Kilicdaroglu says that Ankara has shot itself in the foot with its hostile anti-Syria policy.

    Kemal Kilicdaroglu, leader of the main Turkish opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP)
    Kemal Kilicdaroglu, leader of the main Turkish opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP)

    During a speech in the southern city of Adana, the leader of the Republican People’s Party (CHP) condemned Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s stance towards Damascus.

    Kilicdaroglu accused Erdogan of siding with Saudi Arabia and Qatar against the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad.

    He said that the Turkish government’s stance towards Syria is not in line with his country’s national interests, but instead serves that of the US, Germany, and France.

    The opposition leader further warned Ankara against anti-Syria policies by saying that they would leave Turkey isolated in the region. He said Turkey should focus on gaining allies in the region instead of turning them away.

    Qatar has recently allowed the Syrian opposition to open an embassy in its capital Doha. This is while the original Syrian embassy in Doha remains closed.

    In February, Kilicdaroglu criticized Erdogan’s policy regarding Syria, calling it a “grave mistake.” He also said that as a result of Ankara’s financial and military support for the Syrian opposition, increasing numbers of Syrian people were losing their lives.

    Protests have been held in Turkey against the government’s anti-Syria policies over the past months.

    Syria has been experiencing unrest since March 2011. Many people, including large numbers of Army and security personnel, have been killed in the violence.

    The Syrian government has said that the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and that a very large number of the militants operating in the country are foreign nationals.

    Several international human rights organizations have accused foreign-sponsored militants of committing war crimes.

    SZH/HN

    via PressTV – ‘Turkey shot self in foot with its hostile anti-Syria policy’.

  • Erdogan Angered After Opposition  In Turkey Meets With Assad

    Erdogan Angered After Opposition In Turkey Meets With Assad

    Turkish PM Erdogan shakes hands with main opposition leader Kilicdaroglu in Ankara

     

    Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan shakes hands with main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu (R) as they meet in Ankara, June 24, 2012. (photo by REUTERS)

    The visit of four parliamentarians of the main opposition Republican People’s Party [CHP] to Damascus on Thursday and their meeting with Syrian President Bashar Assad has once again exposed an important weakness of the ruling Justice and Development Party [AKP] government.

    By: Kadri Gursel for Al-Monitor Turkey Pulse.

    About This Article

    Summary :

    Syrian President Bashar Assad’s meeting in Damascus with members of the opposition Republican People’s Party has exposed the weakness of Turkey’s Syria policy, writes Kadri Gursel.

    Original Title:
    Erdogan Angered by Turkish Opposition Meeting with Assad
    Author: Kadri Gursel
    Translated by: Timur Goksel

    As I wrote previously, the Turkish public doesn’t strongly support Ankara’s goal of toppling Bashar Assad and the Baath regime and replacing them with a new rule dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood. But this capacity gap Ankara is facing in its Syria policy is not confined only to lack of adequate public approval and support. More crucial is the antagonism and polarization caused in segments of the society and national politics by the Syria policy.

    The visit of the CHP delegation to Damascus and their meeting with Assad is an outcome  of this antagonism.

    The AKP rule couldn’t transform its policy for regime change in Syria to a “national cause” by persuading the majority of the public. It simply could not goad the public to get excited by its policy. If they had been successful, the CHP delegation could not have gone to Damascus. They would have been worried about public reaction to such a visit.

    That AKP couldn’t fully convince its own constituency of the legitimacy and validity of its Syria policy is a fact. But roots of the polarization between the main opposition and the ruling party on Syria case go deeper.

    Their antagonism arises from the Alevi-Sunni polarization in Turkey. Although the Alevi minority in Turkey diverges from Arab Alewites in their beliefs and rituals and have indigenous features peculiar to Anatolia, they don’t regard the Syrian regime with sentiments of confrontation and hostility as does the Sunni mainstream Islamic current that prevails in Turkey.

    Turkish Alevis are majority secularists. When you add their fears of Sunni Islamism, it is inevitable that they feel an affinity to the secularist regime in Syria.

    And, also to be noted is that the Turkish Alevis heavily vote for the secularist CHP.

    The same goes for Arab Alewites of Hatay and Mersin regions who had elected three of the parliamentarians that were in the delegation that visited Assad. The sympathy for the Assad regime openly voiced in these two provinces is a cause of distress for the ruling party circles.

    You have to look at the photos printed in Friday’s Turkish papers showing Safak Pavey, the deputy chairman of the CHP and member of Parliament from Istanbul, and the three other parliamentarians, Aytug Akici [Mersin], Hasan Akgol [Hatay] and Mevlut Dudu [Hatay], in the light of these facts.

    According to reports in the Turkish press, the CHP delegation asked Assad for the release of journalists — American Austin Tice and Palestinian Bashar Khaddumi —known to be detained by the regime. Four months ago, a CHP delegation that also included Mevlut Dudu and Hasan Akgol went to Syria and took delivery of Turkish cameraman Cuneyt Unal who had been in a regime prison for more than three months.

    The ‘’humanitarian mission’’ label affixed to this meeting must not have convinced Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. His harsh reaction was headlined by mainstream daily Haberturk: “Why Did You Send Them to That Brute?”

    The “brute” that the prime minister was referring to is Syrian President Bashar Assad.

    It was the CHP chairman, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, that Erdogan was taking to task with the question that he asked at an Ankara press conference: “Why did the main opposition of this country send its parliamentarian to that brute? What did they achieve there?”

    It is possible to understand the anger of the prime minister. At issue is the political support by Turkey’s main opposition party to a regime and its leader that has been demonized by the prime minister of Turkey and his government. “Humanitarian mission” pretext is not convincing to the government.

    It was hardly surprising that Bashar Assad in a statement issued in Damascus saluted the CHP delegation and the Turkish opposition. The statement said Assad told the CHP delegation: “Syria has to distinguish between the attitudes of the Turkish people, who support stability in Syria, and the Erdogan government that supports terrorism, extremism and destabilization in the region.”

    The statement also said that the delegation led by parliamentarian Hassan Akgul conveyed the “Turkish people’s rejection of interference in internal affairs of Syria and their wish for good relations with their southern neighbor.” The Damascus meeting thus provided a vehicle to transmit Assad’s views explained to the CHP delegation to the Turkish public as well.

    According to a news report by Utku Cakirozer, the Ankara representative of daily Cumhuriyet, when asked in the meeting, “Is a regime without Assad feasible?,” Assad replied:

    ‘”I can’t leave even if I wanted to. I will not abandon ship until we get to a calm port in this storm. My people are behind me. If the storm ends one day, if there are elections, democracy comes and people tell to me leave, then I will. I mean I will go if I have to, but my people have to tell me that.’’

    It was possible to understand from these words that Assad has no intention of leaving Damascus until the 2014 elections. Assad’s remarks about Erdogan constituted a challenge:

    ‘’The Syrian crisis has become an existential struggle for Erdogan and Emir of Qatar. If Syria wins, they will lose in their country. There is also an ideological dimension of this affair. They want to see political Islam dominate Syria. We want t preserve secularism.’’

    Assad reportedly said, “Turkey has the most influence on the situation in my country. Most weapons and terrorists come via Turkey. Twenty-five percent of our land border with Turkey is under the control of the PKK, and 75 % of it is under Al Qaeda.”

    Assad also appealed to the Turkish nationalist public by saying: “There is an increased opportunity for the Kurds to set up a state in the region. Kurds in Northern Syria have linked with Iraqi Kurds. It is a matter of time for a Kurdish state.”

    It appears that the visit of the CHP delegation to Damascus has become a serious headache for AKP’s Syria policy.

    Kadri Gürsel is a contributing writer for Al-Monitor’s Turkey Pulse and has written a column for the Turkish daily Milliyet since 2007. He was also a correspondent for Agence France-Presse between 1993 and 1997, and in 1995 was kidnapped by the PKK, an experience recounted in his book Dağdakiler(Those of the Mountains), published in 1996.

    Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/03/turkey-opposition-damascus-visit-against-ankara-syria-policy.html#ixzz2N2Clpsay

  • Turkish opposition leader condemns ‘dictator’ Erdogan

    Turkish opposition leader condemns ‘dictator’ Erdogan

    Kemal Kilicdaroglu, chairman of the Republican People’s party, warns that PM is driving Turkey towards constitutional ‘disaster’

    Simon Tisdall

    guardian.co.uk, Friday 15 February 2013 12.33 GMT

    Recep Tayyip Erdogan

    Recep Tayyip Erdogan

    Kemal Kilicdaroglu says Recep Tayyip Erdogan (pictiured) is determined to make himself president. Photograph: Adem Altan/AFP/Getty Images

    Turkey’s prime minister is behaving like an “elected dictator” and inciting a constitutional crisis in a bid for greater personal power, the leader of the country’s main opposition party has warned.

    Kemal Kilicdaroglu, chairman of the social democratic Republican People’s party (CHP), said Recep Tayyip Erdogan, premier since 2003, was determined to change the Turkish constitution to create an executive presidency, to which post he would switch after elections due next year.

    “Turkey needs a new constitution to protect individual rights,” Kilicdaroglu said. The 1982 charter imposed after a military coup was out of date and at odds with Turkey’s EU ambitions, he said, but Erdogan’s plans ignored the need for a separation of powers, for instance by empowering the president to appoint judges.

    “The prime minister is more and more authoritarian, unfortunately,” Kilicdaroglu said. “The sovereignty of fear is ubiquitous. No one can talk with ease on the telephone. Civil society is under pressure. The universities cannot express their view. The labour unions are completely silent. The media are fearful.

    “There is not one single dissenting voice within his own party. The attempt to create an executive presidency is all about the concentration of power in a single hand. It will be a disaster for Turkey. It will cancel all the democratic gains Turkey has made.”

    The confrontation over drafting a new constitution is expected to come to a head next month, after Erdogan’s ruling neo-Islamist Justice and Development party (AKP) indicated it would impose a guillotine on debate in the Turkish parliament’s all-party constitutional commission by the end of March. Kilicdaroglu has described the move as “blackmail”.

    If agreement is lacking, the government needs the backing of at least four opposition MPs to push through the new charter and send it for ratification in a national referendum. The AKP has 326 seats in parliament. It requires between 300 and 367 votes to authorise a referendum, which it is confident it would win.

    “If the parliament cannot do it, we will take the constitution to the people,” Erdogan said in a speech on Friday.

    Alarm about Erdogan’s intentions intensified after he startled political observers by suggesting a deal with the Peace and Democracy party (BDP), which represents Kurdish interests.

    The AKP government has jailed hundreds of BDP activists and supporters, including MPs and lawyers, under Turkey’s sweeping anti-terrorism laws, and several dozen jailed Kurds held a protracted hunger strike last year.

    Kilicdaroglu said the manoeuvre, coupled with recently revived contacts with the jailed Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan, was a cynical attempt by Erdogan to buy votes while avoiding violence before the 2014 election season.

    The BDP’s deputy parliamentary chair, Pervin Buldan, responded to Erdogan’s overture by setting conditions on her party’s co-operation, including an inclusive redefinition of citizenship and the lifting of all restrictions on using the Kurdish language in the public sphere. But Buldan did not rule out a deal.

    Devlet Bahceli, leader of the rightwing Nationalist Movement party (MHP), another opposition group, denounced the AKP plan, telling the Hurriyet newspaper: “This is a declaration of war against Turkishness.” Turkey’s future was now in the hands of Ocalan’s outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ party (PKK), Bahceli said.

    Kilicdaroglu was interviewed during a meeting at the House of Commons sponsored by Keith Vaz MP and chaired by Jo Glanville of English PEN, which promotes and defends freedom of expression.

    Emma Reynolds MP, the shadow Europe minister, suggested opposition in some western European countries to Turkey’s EU membership bid had set back the cause of reform and encouraged a return to authoritarianism in Turkey. She expressed Labour’s support for its Turkish “sister party”.

    Kilicdaroglu told the meeting that many writers and columnists critical of Erdogan’s rule had been “disenfranchised” – removed from their jobs – and that those still working were obliged to observe forms of self-censorship. He noted that more journalists were in jail in Turkey than in any other country.

    “When the press is not free, the people are not free,” he said. “Whether this is a healthy environment in which to frame a new constitution is a matter I leave to you to decide.”

    via Turkish opposition leader condemns ‘dictator’ Erdogan | World news | guardian.co.uk.