|
Opinion |
 |
|
|
Turkey
in Summer But political events in Turkey have brought on a squall to destroy all summertime bliss. The government stands as precariously as the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Former Turkish Foreign Minister Ismail Cem on July 22 launched a new reform party that welcomes rather than deplores the onset of the twenty-first century. Cem had bolted from Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit's government and Democratic Left Party. He avowed that his New Turkey Party was prepared like a race horse for anticipated polling in November. And, like the decisive majority of politicians, Cem promised all things to all people: "We will work with our people, with our tradesmen, merchants and our workers on one side, to create employment, but without punishing them by creating new taxes on employment and production...We have a formula: we call for secularism which is respectful of religious sensitivities." Cem eschewed even a faint echo of Winston Churchill's blood, toil, sweat and tears call to sacrifice. Turkey's admission to the European Union may pivot on Cem's political strength. He is the polar opposite of a Euro skeptic. He champions political reforms that are central to EU membership, including abolition of the death penalty and enlarged constitutional space for freedom of speech and political association. EU membership for Turkey would seem at least fivefold blessed: it would boost Turkey's economy by more intensive competition and freer movement of labor; it would require an accelerated sale of government-owned enterprises which are an incubus to economic efficiency and a high octane fuel for crony capitalism; it would demand greater fiscal frugality and a slashing of budget deficits; it would steer EU development aid to Turkey's rural villages and communities; and, it would fortify Turkey's still vulnerable democracy by enlisting EU voices and diplomatic support against extremist candidates or political parties, as happened with Marie La Pen in France and Jorg Heider in Austria. EU membership would thus reduce the risk of permitting fringe candidates to participate openly in the political arena. MHP leader Devlet Bahceli is a doughty opponent to Cem on EU membership. He staunchly insists on retention of the death penalty, even if for Abdullah Ocalan alone. That rigidity seems a steep price to pay for EU exclusion. A mountain of criminal justice studies show that at best capital punishment (in lieu of life imprisonment without parole) deters a minuscule number of offenders with no discernable impact on the incidence of crime. For instance, the twelve States in the United States that have abolished the death penalty sport crime rates, mutatis mutandis, indistinguishable from the thirty eight States where capital punishment has been retained. Moreover, the death penalty for Ocalan could propel him into martyrdom, where his mischief would be greater than if he wasted away in prison. John Brown, Joan of Arc, Ken Sarawiwa, Sir Thomas Moore, and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto all became larger than life by their executions much to the mortification of their executioners. Israel profited from that instruction in desisting from liquidating Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat. Mr. Bahceli also gripes about the EU's insistence that section 312 of the criminal code be amended to permit a much broader swath of political opinion and associations. But if Turkey is to continue its stunning strides towards Europe and western style democracy with its distinctive cultural idioms, then it would seem imperative, absent emergencies, that the remedy for bad counsels or advocacy be more and enlightened speech, not enforced silence. Furthermore, an opponent who can be seen and addressed is ordinarily less dangerous or alarming than an opponent forced underground by the law and reduced to lawlessness as the only viable means of political dissent. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. Amidst this summer's political skirmishing, United States Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz conversed with Turkish government officials and military leaders over United States plans to overthrow Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. The Deputy crooned to a swooning audience that if Iraq morphs into a democratic state, "it won't be only the people of Iraq who benefit from this, but it would be the whole world, and very much this region...Turkey stands to benefit enormously if Iraq becomes a normal country." What Mr. Wolfowitz omitted, however, was that democracy has never garnered even a cameo appearance in Iraq's entire history, and has no democratic statesmen waiting in the wings to replace President Hussein. Kurdish leaders Barzani and Talabani don't even merit honorable mention. The example of neighboring Afghanistan where the United States is attempting to nurse a democracy from the devastations of Taliban is further discouraging. President Hamid Karzai was elected by international lobbying at the loya jirga; he refused to create a legislature as too bothersome; he appointed a team of ministers unilaterally, and several with deeply stained histories; he exercises effective rule only on a few streets, and bows to warlords everywhere else; and, he swapped his indigenous Praetorian Guard for United States special forces because fearful of assassination by his own inner circle. In sum, democracy building by the United States in Afghanistan has proven farcical. Why wouldn't a companion initiative prove equally futile in a post-Saddam Iraq? What would America do differently there than has been done in Afghanistan to avoid a democratic shipwreck? Those questions the Deputy Defense Secretary did not answer. Constitutional scholar Bruce Fein is a nationally syndicated media commentator and ATAA Adjunct Scholar. |