Europe

Home page

Europe

Gezi Park protests reveal weak opposition

23 June 2013 00:26 (UTC +04:00)

The protests started as a sit-in demonstration against the demolition of a park, as part of the redevelopment of the Taksim Square area, and soon became an anti-government movement. But this awakening of civil society in Turkey was not sudden and has more than one reason. Among the reasons, the most important one is a weak and divided opposition.

Opposition is universally defined as an important pillar of democracy that ensures the political and economic stability of a country. Among the many political experts, Professor Fuat Keyman also notes that opposing and criticizing government policies, suggesting appropriate alternatives and keeping the public informed about issues relating to government administration are responsibilities of an opposition in a democratic political system. A stronger opposition always keeps the government under pressure and thus determines a better performance of the governing system.

Many intellectuals and experts believe the lack of a strong opposition in Turkish politics paved the way for the Turkish civil society movement to become stronger and more powerful over the years. A segment of the Turkish population called the “liberal Turks” feels unrepresented. They fear Prime Minister Recep Tayyip ErdoÄŸan has been neglecting their views and that the opposition has failed to put enough weight against his style of handling the internal affairs of the country. The failure of the opposition to challenge the government and prevent it from implementing its “conservative” policies and reforms made this segment of Turkish society insecure, leading them to raise their voices on the streets.

Professor Mensur Akgün, director of the Global Political Trends Center (GPoT), notes how the failure of the political opposition to offer a serious challenge to the government impedes further development in the country. “If we had a viable opposition in Parliament which people could trust, we wouldn’t have seen people taking to the streets,” he says. Professor Akgün further explains how the opposition had failed to provide tangible alternatives and lacked a vision with respect to all the issues. “The opposition found it hard to take a solid stance and didn’t know what to do when the protests started. Some just gave statements supporting the protests, while others completely disassociated themselves from the protesters who clashed with police,” he says.

Seasoned international relations Professor BaskÄ±n Oran confirms that weak opposition is a strong reason for the public dissent. In light of the Taksim protests he says, “Turkey does not lack a strong opposition; it has no opposition at all, and that led to the Taksim events.” He further attributes weak opposition as the reason for a more dominant and conceited prime minister. Failing to pose an alternative to the government and unable to contribute to the overall sense of trust in society, the opposition has made Prime Minister ErdoÄŸan more imperious, bossy and autocratic. “This lamentable situation of the opposition provokes the prime minister’s lamentable psychology, which wants to control and dominate everything and everybody and listen to no one,” he adds.

Syed Nazakat, a senior journalist from India, finds it tempting to compare the protests in Turkey with the mass protest movement in India led by a former army driver, Anna Hazare. “While in Turkey the catalyst became the park, in India it was the corruption which brought tens of thousands of people together to protest against the government’s inability to stop corruption,” he says. Hazare’s demand was that the government introduce a strong anti-corruption law, with sweeping powers to investigate every part of the government. He and other leaders of the mass movement led protests, held demonstrations and sat on fast until death, and all through the protests they claimed that their movement was apolitical in nature. “The support for the movement slowly waned as it was criticized by many for striving to bypass parliament by putting unreasonable demands on the government. Eventually the protests were dogged by controversies over the ransacking of public property, probity and political leanings of some of its leading members,” he explains.

Although compared to Turkey, India had a stronger and much united opposition, the continuous failure of the opposition to criticize the government on corruption led people to protest and dissent against its government. “The protesters ultimately failed to connect with the wider public and the movement rapidly declined. The protests in Turkey and in India were driven by political undercurrents, led by youth and the middle class and escalated because of government highhandedness,” he observed.

No matter what these protests in Turkey culminate in, they have definitely tightened the noose around the AK Party government.