The dark side of Turkish politics

Introduction:

In the realm of politics, Turkey has long been regarded as a country at the crossroads of East and West, a bridge between cultures, and a land with a rich tapestry of history. However, behind the façade of its diverse heritage and democratic aspirations lies a disconcerting reality. Turkish politics, once seen as a beacon of hope for inclusivity and progress, has taken a disheartening turn. The surge of hate and fascism towards immigrants, refugees, and minorities in election campaigns has unmasked a dark side that threatens the very fabric of the nation’s social cohesion and democratic values.

To understand the depth of this issue, it is crucial to examine the historical context that has shaped the political landscape of Turkey. Over the years, the country has grappled with political shifts, social transformations, and economic challenges, all of which have had profound implications on the treatment of marginalized groups. Immigrants seeking a better life, refugees fleeing war and persecution, and minority communities striving for equal rights have been caught in the crosshairs of a political rhetoric that fans the flames of hatred and fosters an environment conducive to the rise of fascist ideologies.

Within the realm of election campaigns, hate speech and discriminatory rhetoric have become distressingly common. What was once a platform for democratic debate and the exchange of ideas has morphed into a breeding ground for division and hostility. Instead of focusing on the pressing issues of the nation, politicians have chosen to stoke fear, incite animosity, and exploit societal grievances to gain electoral advantage. Immigrants, refugees, and minorities have become easy scapegoats, demonized and dehumanized for political gain.

The consequences of this surge of hate and fascism are far-reaching, both for the targeted communities and for the nation as a whole. It not only perpetuates discrimination and marginalization but also undermines the very foundations of democracy and the principles of equality and justice. Turkish society, once celebrated for its tolerance and pluralism, now faces the risk of fragmentation and social disintegration.

In this article, we aim to unmask the dark side of Turkish politics, shedding light on the alarming surge of hate and fascism towards immigrants, refugees, and minorities in election campaigns. Through a comprehensive examination of historical context, specific instances, and underlying factors, we seek to understand the roots and manifestations of this disturbing trend. Furthermore, we will explore the impact on society, the erosion of democratic values, and the potential consequences if left unaddressed.

It is our hope that by exposing this dark underbelly, we can foster a collective understanding of the urgent need for change. The challenges faced by Turkey are not insurmountable, but they require a concerted effort to promote inclusivity, respect for human rights, and a return to the values that have defined the nation throughout its history. The time has come to confront the dark side of Turkish politics and strive towards a future where hate and fascism hold no sway, and all members of society are treated with dignity, regardless of their background.

Turkish politics is currently grappling with a growing concern that demands urgent attention and introspection. The surge of hate and fascism targeting immigrants, refugees, and minorities has become an alarming reality in the country’s political landscape. This disturbing trend has raised red flags among human rights advocates, civil society organizations, and individuals who cherish the principles of equality, diversity, and social harmony.

The targeted groups, comprising immigrants, refugees, and various minority communities, have become victims of divisive rhetoric, discriminatory policies, and exclusionary narratives. What was once seen as a beacon of hope for inclusivity and progress has given way to an atmosphere of fear, prejudice, and hostility. As Turkish election campaigns intensify, so does the targeting of these marginalized communities, further exacerbating social divisions and eroding the fabric of a pluralistic society.

The surge of hate and fascism in Turkish politics is not a mere abstraction or theoretical concern. It is a lived reality for those who find themselves on the receiving end of discrimination and prejudice. Immigrants who have sought refuge or opportunity, refugees fleeing conflict and persecution, and minority communities striving for recognition and equal rights all face the brunt of this disturbing trend. Their presence, their culture, and their very existence are increasingly portrayed as threats, thereby sowing the seeds of animosity and exclusion.

This growing concern is not limited to domestic boundaries. It reverberates on an international scale, tarnishing Turkey’s image as a global advocate for human rights and a champion of multiculturalism. As the surge of hate and fascism gains momentum, it poses a profound challenge to Turkey’s reputation as a nation that values diversity and embraces those seeking sanctuary and a better life.

The consequences of this trend are far-reaching and deeply unsettling. Individuals and communities that should be celebrated for their contributions and resilience are instead subjected to marginalization, violence, and systemic discrimination. This erosion of human rights and social cohesion not only violates the principles of justice and equality but also undermines the very foundations of democracy, leaving the entire nation impoverished in terms of its collective spirit and moral compass.

In this article, we delve into the heart of this growing concern, shedding light on the surge of hate and fascism targeting immigrants, refugees, and minorities in Turkish politics. By examining specific instances, exploring underlying factors, and assessing the impact on individuals and society as a whole, we aim to raise awareness and foster a deeper understanding of the magnitude of this issue. It is essential that we confront this troubling trend with urgency, compassion, and a steadfast commitment to safeguarding the principles of human dignity, equality, and social justice.

The road ahead is challenging, but by shining a light on the concerning rise of hate and fascism, we hope to inspire a collective call for change. Together, we can challenge the status quo, promote empathy and solidarity, and reclaim the values that truly define the essence of Turkish society. Only through such concerted efforts can we steer Turkish politics towards a path of inclusivity, respect, and a brighter future for all.

About 5.5 million refugees living in Turkey without citizenship have become the scene of the raging counter-political and electoral campaigns between the four presidential parties and candidates.

Syrians constitute the largest number of refugees in Turkey, with about 3.6 million people, followed by Afghans, Africans, Ukrainians and many other peoples fleeing wars and death.

Ahead of the parliamentary and presidential elections scheduled for May 14, the presidential candidates are all stressing that they will send Syrians back to their country if elected. Anyone who follows the election campaigns in Turkey will notice a remarkable escalation in xenophobic feelings and high-level and harsh attitudes towards refugees.

The position of the current President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is not much different from the position of his arch-rival, the head of the “Republican People’s Party,” Kemal Kilicdaroglu regarding refugee issues, as the two candidates meet on the same general goal, which is to return all refugees, each one to his country or even to his country. other host countries.

The most prominent opposition candidate, Kilicdaroglu, also indicates that he “will negotiate with the Syrian regime in order to return its citizens to it,” considering that “it is unacceptable for the state to care about millions of refugees while our youth are unemployed,” vowing that if he reaches the presidency, he will send them all to their country in just two years. Kilicdaroglu’s sharp speech was accompanied by the inclusion of his party’s electoral platform with a clear pledge to “review the refugee agreement with the European Union, and to conclude separate agreements to return or receive refugees with other countries.”

This firm position of Kilicdaroglu and the “Republican People’s Party” coincides with the position of Erdogan and the new ruling “Justice and Development” Party, even if the tone seems less severe. Until a year ago, the AKP favored Syrian refugees in one way or another, mainly considering them as a cheap labor force necessary for the growth of the Turkish economy. However, the Turkish society’s diminished acceptance of the Syrians due to the economic crisis, inflation, and high poverty rates are factors that contributed to modifying the position of Erdogan and his party, and prompted them to include in their electoral program a paragraph declaring “the need for the voluntary and safe return of Syrians, and seriously combating illegal immigration.”

With the growing polarization between the presidential candidates, the issue of refugees becomes an essential item for winning votes. The main Turkish parties know that the attitude towards the refugees can improve or lead to a decline in their votes, so do not miss an opportunity to raise the issue, mobilize, and broadcast more racism and hate speech, in popular festivals and in the media, in order to attract the electorate’s affection and support.

A third presidential candidate gave his opinion on the issue of refugees, and went a long way in spreading racism towards foreigners. Sinan Ogan did not use the best method that Erdogan or Kilicdaroglu often use when talking about the return of refugees, but he used the vocabulary of force.

Ogan is the candidate of the “ancestors’ alliance” for the Turkish presidency, which is the alliance that includes a number of extremist nationalist and xenophobic parties, especially the “Al-Zafar” party. This party, like its candidate Ogan, is distinguished by the sharpness of its anti-Syrian stances, as they bet on it in their electoral program and political speeches, in the hope that it will attract the votes of the Turks who are indignant at the refugees. They simply want to expel every refugee who lives in their country, and they don’t even feel the need to soften their stance or tone like other parties do.

Expulsion by force is their slogan and the content of their electoral platform. In a speech in the state of Izmir, southwestern Turkey, the head of the “Al-Zafar” party reiterated his pledge to return the refugees to their country, saying that “we must be able to expel the refugees by force, as Lebanon did recently, because they will never return voluntarily.”

Non-governmental associations in Turkey often issue statements condemning the positions of Ogan and the positions of the “Al-Zafer” party and all nationalist parties, which often deliberately take to the streets and film their members showing off, interrogating refugees and recommending them to leave the country “as soon as possible,” and pressuring them with various verbal means. Even violent sometimes.

As for the fourth presidential candidate, Muharram Ince, he stresses the need for the refugees to return to their country for economic reasons exclusively, and he has repeatedly and publicly pledged to open channels of communication and negotiations with the Syrian regime to secure the safe return of refugees if he is elected president of the Republic of Turkey.

The issue of asylum turns into a tool for electoral competition between the Turkish parties, increasing the intensity of positions successively, and floating on the surface of other political positions. Few parties talk about issues beyond the issue of refugees, and even when they mention the issue of the economy or the foreign policy of the state, they do not miss the issue of refugees in one way or another.

Four presidential candidates stress the need for refugees to return to their countries, without any regard for the humanitarian dimension of the refugee crisis. Exaggeration in attitudes and a continuous escalation of the tone of hostility and hatred of foreigners before the parliamentary and presidential elections, can only lead to more disharmony between the various Turkish and refugee communities, and to situations that may develop into a security crisis at any moment.

Moving to social media

Since about 2007, Turkey’s state censorship committees have seized numerous media outlets and awarded them to pro-Erdogan institutions in one-bid auctions, often through deals funded by near-interest-free loans from public banks. As a result, about 90 percent of traditional media outlets—that is, television networks and newspapers—are owned or affiliated with pro-Erdogan entities. Turkey’s media watchdog, the Radio and Television Supreme Council, most of whose members are appointed by Erdogan, routinely imposes heavy fines and broadcast bans on the few remaining opposition media outlets.

Erdogan’s suppression of the media led to a widespread distrust of the Turkish media, and thus the people, especially the youth, resorted to new media platforms such as YouTube channels with street interviews, online press forums, and social media accounts. . Content producers on these platforms tend not to observe the standards and practices of traditional journalism. While some of these platforms fill the media gap in the country’s media landscape by producing credible and independent content and giving the Turkish people a platform to express their views, others can, as we mentioned in the context of Syrian refugees, continuously produce and promote hate speech and disinformation.

The rate of social media usage is high in Turkey, at 82 percent online and about 70 million participants. According to a report by the Reuters Institute, the popularity of social media as a source of news has increased in Turkey over the past few years, while the number of readers of print and online news has decreased. In a survey conducted in Turkey, 61 percent of respondents said they use social media for news, up from 35 percent in 2015, while 10 percent said they rely on it exclusively as a news source.

However, it seems that the Internet in Turkey is not free from government supervision and censorship. In 2020, the Turkish Parliament passed a law requiring major social media platforms to establish offices in Turkey to quickly respond to any court order to remove content, and all major platforms have complied with this law. However, this did not apply to the giants of social media platforms such as “YouTube” and “Twitter”, which still provide space for Turks to produce alternative news content.

And B, the value of monthly revenues achieved by one of the most prominent channels of street interviews “Ilave TV” from advertisements ranges between 1200 and 19 thousand US dollars. These monthly earnings vary depending on the number of views, at a time when public data indicates that some of these channels such as “ Halk Ekrani earns about $55,000 per month. When checking these numbers with an online revenue calculator, it turns out that they are generally in line with the figures set by Social Blade. Aside from the sudden fluctuations in the latter’s algorithms, even the estimates Conservativeness equates to a good income in Turkey, where the value of the lira has depreciated.Only 3 years ago, the exchange rate of the lira against the dollar was 1:6, but as of February 2023, it has tripled to become the exchange rate of the lira against the dollar 1:18.

The political orientations of the most prominent street interview channels differ. Although the bulk of these channels are critical of President Erdoğan, others such as Ahsen TV – run by Turkish nationalists who support political Islam affiliated with the religious network known as the Ismailaga Cemaati (Ismail Agha Group), are among the most prominent. Erdogan supporters. Notably, each of these major channels, regardless of their political stance, has produced videos highlighting the rejection of the existence of refugees. Street interview videos, which have garnered more than two billion views since 2022, appear to display patterns that fuel anti-refugee sentiment and behaviour, similar to viral clips showing Syrian refugees pursued by angry Turks demanding they “go back to Syria”.

Ilave TV is the perfect example of this new media wave. In August 2022, the TV, which has more than 600,000 subscribers, garnered an average of 130,000 views per day and about a million views per week. The channel has shown at least 12 videos of anti-refugee interviews conducted on the streets over the past three years, attracting more than 5 million views. By comparison, Sabah, Turkey’s best-selling newspaper, which is owned by pro-Erdogan institutions, sold 194,930 copies per day in 2021.

A video of a Syrian refugee’s plan to stay in Turkey – and vote for Erdogan – has garnered more than a million views. In this video clip, a Syrian youth speaks to an “Ilave TV” reporter, while bystanders participate in the argument, condemning the Syrian youth. It also shows a Turkish man speaking angrily about the flight of Syrian refugees from their country “as women” only with the aim of harassing Turkish women and causing a rise in rents in the country. Another Turkish man points to the refugee: “Everyone who faces difficulties in their country comes to [Turkey]. They come from Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran… This is how Turkey has become! Turkey is finished!”

There seems to be a common denominator between the street interviews, which is the demand for the expulsion of Syrian refugees. In an interview on Halk Ekrani, 33 out of 40 interviewees agreed that Syrians should be deported. While some expressed sympathy for the plight of the Syrians, the majority described them as a “social burden” draining the country’s resources. This common view, frequently expressed by Turks during street interviews, is based on a few key points.

The question, which the public debate succinctly refers to as the refugee issue, is indeed multidimensional. It concerns asylum seekers as well as illegal immigrants, legal residents and even tourists. According to the latest statistic, there are 5.4 million foreigners living in Türkiye.

About 3.7 million of these foreigners are Syrian nationals under temporary protection, and an additional 320,000 individuals are seeking international protection.

Among these groups, asylum seekers and illegal immigrants are seen as problematic. In this sense, Turkey implements a decisive border enforcement and repatriation policy towards illegal immigrants from Afghanistan and elsewhere.

When it comes to Syrian refugees, a recent study by the Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research found that more than half of asylum seekers do not believe they will live in Turkey permanently.

However, some 64% of respondents stated that they are not ready to return to Syria while Assad’s repression continues.

Again, 78% said they would like to go to a third country.

We must accept that some asylum seekers remain in Turkey under the integrated migration policy.

In this regard, we must manage integration and repatriation simultaneously.

Hence Erdogan’s signals and maneuvers towards the Syrian refugees came as a mere pressure card that he uses wherever and whenever he wants.

On the other hand, the CHP tells other stories, and falsely claims that asylum seekers will vote in next year’s elections. Erdogan will use those he previously naturalized for himself and his party.

Optimar survey on Syrians

In a survey conducted by the “Optimar” company between 23-28 April, the respondents were asked, “How do you feel when you meet a Syrian?”, with 21.3 percent responding with “hate,” 17.3 percent with “harm,” and 11.2 percent. percent for “anger,” 6.6 percent for “cruelty,” and 4.4 percent for “sympathy,” but the percentage of those who did not comment was 33 percent.

Regarding the reason for the hatred, 38.2 percent of the respondents said, “They usurp my rights,” while 29.2 percent said they “take away my work,” while 18.8 percent felt that “staying in Turkey” frightens them, and 13.6 percent commented, “We are afraid.”

As for the cause of sympathy, human and religious sensitivity comes to the fore among the respondents. While 35.8 percent saw that the Syrians were “Muslims,” 19.8 percent saw that they were “war victims,” and 18.5 percent saw that they were “human beings,” and the percentage of those who said “they need help.” It is 17.3 percent, while 8.6 percent said about the reason for their sympathy “all of the above.”

Optimar also asked a question: “Are Syrians taking away your job opportunity?”, with 69.2 percent of respondents answering that Syrians have reduced their job opportunities, but 38.2 percent do not think so.

Turkish writer: What is happening negatively affects the opposition and the Turkish government

Turkish writer Burhan al-Din Doran, in a report on the newspaper “Sabah”, stressed that raising the refugee issue is increasingly becoming a means that affects Turkish democracy and values, and negatively affects everyone, including the opposition and the government.

He added that the issue of refugees remains on the agenda constantly due to the endless Syrian war, long-term temporary residence, difficulties in integration policies, recent economic problems, opposition populism that has culminated in racism, and the incitement of those who want to create chaos to put pressure on the government before the elections.

He added that dealing with the refugee issue in an undisciplined and irresponsible language in the context of the election calculations poses a grave danger.

He added that every sane politician understands that asylum seekers cannot be sent suddenly and by force, and neither the responsibility of the state nor international law nor human values ​​allow this.

He stressed that managing the return of refugees is an issue for which both the government and the opposition must bear responsibility together, and the issue of the return of refugees must be removed from the field of populism before the elections, because the anti-asylum-seekers rhetoric from some marginal parties today works to influence people from all walks of life by taking the form of Racist, and if measures are not taken, the discourse against asylum seekers may come to a point that will include all political parties in the country.

Doran added that it is the democratic right of the opposition to criticize the refugee policy pursued by the government in Turkey, and this right must be exercised in a way that does not contradict the democratic culture.

He continued that those who spread the “invasion” rhetoric are destroying the common ground of rationality in order to oppose Erdogan, and unfortunately the “Republican People” and “Good” parties have paved the way for the “conquest” rhetoric, and unfortunately the “Future” and “Diva” and “Happiness” parties Its voices do not come out, and there are weak voices coming out of some left-liberal forces, but they are not in an effective language.

He stressed the need to control this “ideological battle” in order to prevent anyone planning chaos that will target democracy and stir up xenophobic feelings.

Hate speech in Turkish election campaigns targeting Greece and Cyprus

has been a concerning issue that has drawn attention from various media outlets and international observers. The use of inflammatory rhetoric and nationalist narratives during political campaigns has contributed to tensions and strained diplomatic relations between Turkey, Greece, and Cyprus.

Media coverage has highlighted the following key points regarding hate speech against Greece and Cyprus in Turkish election campaigns:

1. Nationalistic Rhetoric: Some political campaigns in Turkey have utilized nationalistic rhetoric that stokes animosity and hostility towards Greece and Cyprus. This rhetoric often revolves around historical disputes, territorial claims, and disagreements over maritime boundaries, further exacerbating tensions and deepening divisions.

2. Stereotyping and Otherization: Hate speech targeting Greece and Cyprus in election campaigns has involved the use of stereotypes, generalizations, and derogatory language. This has the potential to dehumanize the people of these countries, perpetuate negative perceptions, and fuel a climate of hostility.

3. Impact on Diplomatic Relations: The use of hate speech during election campaigns can have a significant impact on diplomatic relations between Turkey, Greece, and Cyprus. It can strain efforts for dialogue, negotiation, and cooperation, hindering progress in resolving existing conflicts and reaching peaceful resolutions.

4. Media Amplification: Media coverage plays a crucial role in amplifying and disseminating hate speech during election campaigns. Reports and analyses have scrutinized the media’s responsibility in promoting a balanced and responsible narrative, urging for ethical journalism practices that prioritize accurate information, dialogue, and respect for diverse perspectives.

5. Regional Stability: The rise of hate speech targeting Greece and Cyprus in Turkish election campaigns has broader implications for regional stability. It can escalate tensions, increase distrust, and hinder efforts for cooperation on various fronts, including security, economic cooperation, and regional integration.

6. Historical Context: Hate speech in Turkish election campaigns against Greece and Cyprus often references historical events and grievances. Historical narratives and unresolved conflicts can be exploited during political campaigns, fueling animosity and reinforcing negative perceptions between the countries.

7. Impact on Communities: Hate speech targeting Greece and Cyprus in Turkish election campaigns can have a detrimental impact on the communities involved. It can create a hostile environment for individuals of Greek or Cypriot descent living in Turkey and strain relationships between communities of different backgrounds.

8. Economic Consequences: Hate speech in election campaigns can have economic consequences, particularly in relation to tourism and trade. Tensions and negative rhetoric may discourage potential visitors, affect business partnerships, and hinder economic cooperation between Turkey, Greece, and Cyprus.

9. International Repercussions: The media coverage of hate speech in Turkish election campaigns against Greece and Cyprus has also emphasized the international repercussions. Such rhetoric can strain relations with other countries and impact Turkey’s standing in the international community, potentially affecting its diplomatic and economic ties with other nations.

10. Role of Leadership: Media analysis often highlights the role of political leaders in shaping the discourse during election campaigns. Responsible leadership that promotes dialogue, tolerance, and peaceful relations is vital in mitigating hate speech and fostering an environment of understanding and cooperation.

11. Civil Society Response: The media has also covered the response of civil society organizations and activists who work towards countering hate speech. These groups play a crucial role in raising awareness, advocating for dialogue, and promoting tolerance and respect among different communities.

12. Need for Dialogue and Reconciliation: Media coverage underscores the importance of dialogue and reconciliation to address the issues underlying hate speech in election campaigns. Open and constructive discussions that acknowledge historical complexities, promote understanding, and seek common ground are essential for fostering long-term peace and cooperation.

In conclusion,

the surge of hate and fascism towards immigrants, refugees, and minorities in Turkish politics and election campaigns represents a dark and troubling side of the country’s political landscape. This phenomenon has garnered attention from both local and international media, highlighting the concerns surrounding the rise of discriminatory rhetoric, divisive narratives, and exclusionary policies.

The media coverage on this topic has emphasized several important points:

1. The Targeted Groups: Immigrants, refugees, and various minority communities have become victims of hate speech, discrimination, and prejudice. They are often scapegoated, portrayed as threats to national security, cultural identity, and economic well-being. This targeting perpetuates social divisions, marginalization, and hampers the principles of inclusivity, equality, and human rights.

2. Erosion of Social Fabric: The surge of hate and fascism in Turkish politics has profound implications for the social fabric of the nation. Trust, compassion, and coexistence among diverse communities are undermined, creating an atmosphere of fear, animosity, and exclusion. This fractures the unity that is essential for a healthy and harmonious society.

3. Threats to Democracy: The rise of hate and fascism poses a significant challenge to Turkey’s democratic foundations. The principles of pluralism, tolerance, and respect for human dignity are eroded when political campaigns rely on divisive rhetoric, fear-mongering, and the vilification of certain groups. Such tactics undermine the democratic process and impede the development of an inclusive and just society.

4. International Perception: The surge of hate and fascism in Turkish politics also impacts the country’s international reputation. Turkey, once seen as a global advocate for human rights and multiculturalism, faces scrutiny as discriminatory practices and exclusionary policies tarnish its image. This can strain diplomatic relations with neighboring countries and weaken Turkey’s influence on the international stage.

5. Urgency for Change: It is imperative to confront and address this issue with urgency. The media coverage has shed light on the need for a renewed commitment to principles of equality, diversity, and social justice. Advocacy for inclusive dialogue, education campaigns, and legislation to counter hate speech are crucial steps towards mitigating the dark side of Turkish politics.

To overcome the surge of hate and fascism, there must be a collective effort from civil society, political leaders, and the media to foster a more inclusive and tolerant society. By promoting empathy, understanding, and respect for human rights, Turkey can work towards building a society where immigrants, refugees, and minorities are embraced rather than marginalized.

It is our shared responsibility to challenge the divisive narratives, promote social cohesion, and uphold the principles of democracy and human dignity. By doing so, Turkey can reclaim its position as a beacon of inclusivity, tolerance, and respect, paving the way for a brighter future where every individual can thrive and contribute to the nation’s progress.

Sources:

1. “The Rise of Political Islam in Turkey” by M. Hakan Yavuz

2. “Polarized Democracies: Political Polarization in the United States and Turkey” by Ali Çarkoğlu and Ersin Kalaycıoğlu

3. Hate Speech and Democratic Citizenship in Turkey” by İpek Çalışlar

4. Turkish and Arabic newspapers

Zaman

Sebah

Cumhuryat

Aljazira Arabic

Al Arabia