ASSEDEL recently had the opportunity to speak with Pelin Ayan Musil, a researcher, academic, and political scientist at CEVRO Univerzita. Her specialisations include democratic backsliding, regime transitions, political party systems, and contemporary Turkish politics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
From this lens, we discussed T\u00fcrkiye\u2019s political trajectory, focussing on the transition to authoritarianism that has taken place under Erdo\u011fan\u2019s two decades in power, as well as the reactions of the European Union and Council of Europe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
From Democratisation to Backsliding<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n She recounted that the first term of Erdo\u011fan\u2019s AKP government is usually seen not as a period of backsliding, but conversely, of democratisation in T\u00fcrkiye. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u2018Between 2002 and 2007, the first term of the government, we actually see that the country has really democratised to an extent that had not been witnessed in the past. By that time the major threat to Turkish democracy was seen as the military.\u2019<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n In addition, Erdo\u011fan\u2019s government fostered better relations with European partners, dedicated unambiguously to EU accession.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ms. Musil points to the second term, beginning in 2007, as the moment when things began to change. This was brought about partially by a breakdown in EU-T\u00fcrkiye relations over the accession of Cyprus to the EU, and a resulting shift towards populist, anti-European rhetoric in the Turkish government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, she notes that many scholars still consider 2007\u20132011 as part of T\u00fcrkiye\u2019s democratisation phase, as the majoritarian shifts in T\u00fcrkiye\u2019s political system during the second term were still cloaked in methods of popular democratic participation, such as referendums.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u2018I think the 2010 constitutional referendum is a very major step of a clear authoritarian tendency, because it came as a package which looked democratic at one point \u2026 but also introduced these new measures \u2026 which gave more power to the executive.\u2019<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n Vulnerability and the Turn Towards Authoritarianism<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n When asked about the factors that have made Turkish democracy particularly vulnerable, Ms. Musil pointed towards a traditional political culture of strong leadership and domination of elites, thus weakening civil society and mass participation in politics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u2018Democracy came to T\u00fcrkiye in 1950 through a consensus among the elites. It was not the people that actually brought democracy; it was not their revolutionary attempt to bring democracy, it came as a top-down mechanism through the elites.\u2019<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n She also pointed to 2015 as a key turning point, with the first elections that took place in an unfair and unfree environment, followed by a more overtly authoritarian form of rule under the presidential system that began in 2017, with power concentrated in a small unelected elite surrounding President Erdo\u011fan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ms. Musil compared the Turkish case with those of Hungary and Serbia, but noted that conditions in T\u00fcrkiye are now significantly worse than either of those cases. The level of repression faced by political dissidents in Hungary, she says, is significantly less, owing partially to Hungary\u2019s EU membership. While the leading opposition figure in Hungary is now a Member of the European Parliament, his counterpart in T\u00fcrkiye is now a political prisoner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n The European Perspective<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n On the topic of the European response to developments in T\u00fcrkiye, she discussed how the positions of the EU and Council of Europe recently have been largely satisfactory in terms of consistently condemning violations of democracy and human rights in T\u00fcrkiye. <\/p>\n\n\n\n However, she states that in the earlier stages of Erdo\u011fan\u2019s government, the EU could have done more to take T\u00fcrkiye\u2019s positions seriously, which may have inhibited the development of the strong anti-EU rhetoric that serves to bolster Erdo\u011fan\u2019s domestic position. She also points towards the pre-eminence of security concerns in determining the EU-T\u00fcrkiye relationship, with concerns over Turkish domestic politics not being as strong of a factor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u2018[European actors should] continue to have a transnational linkage with the pro-democratic domestic actors. This keeps them alive. When they raise concern about the Istanbul mayor for instance, who is jailed, it keeps the dissent alive.\u2019<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Overall, our discussion, while painting a bleak picture of T\u00fcrkiye\u2019s trajectory, was insightful and informative. The full interview is available to watch here.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n