That is not true, as Cihan Tugal points out: "the AKP is widely expected to win the Autumn 2007 elections, and has largely retained its support among provincial capitalists, the pious small bourgeoisie, the newly urbanized poor, important fractions of the police and much of the liberal, left-leaning intelligentsia" ("NATO's Islamists: Hegemony and Americanization in Turkey," New Left Review 44, March-April 2007, <http://newleftreview.org/?page=article&view=2657>).
Against that diverse multi-class coalition represented by the AKP stand the supporters of the military, representing the more established power elite, such as the MHP (Milliyetçi Hareket Partisi, National Movement Party, also translated as National Action Party), the CHP (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi, Republican People's Party), etc. who are rallying against the AKP.
> The AKP itself is quite neoliberal and pro-American.
Who said otherwise? I spelled that out repeatedly here. The AKP is like the PT in economic and foreign policies, both retaining the support of the poor despite that. There can be a worse thing than plain old neoliberal capitalism, though.
> (It's interesting to see such sympathetic coverage of AKP
> in the New York Times, which is not otherwise known for its sympathy
> to Islamist forces. And it's also interesting that their new
> correspondent in Istanbul, Sabrina Tavernise, collaborated with
> Michael Gordon on some "Iran is smuggling bombs into Iraq" stories.
> For that, YF christened her the "new Judith Miller" <http://
> mailman.lbo-talk.org/2006/2006-December/025854.html>.) So if we're
> talking about economic elites, then the politics of secularism are
> hardly clear - especially since there were many anti-imperialist,
> anti-coup secular forces also involved in the demos.
Someone forwarded me Kasim Akbas' posting to another mailing list. Most socialists in Turkey avoided these right-wing nationalist rallies, says Akbas: "Most of the socialist groups do not support last two 'republican' demonstrations (on 14th and 29th of April, in Ankara and Istanbul). According to them these demonstrations are not about social justice, freedom or democracy but only about the continuity of repressive republican regime" (Kasim Akbas, "Yanıt: [Marxism] Istanbul demonstration,", <http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/marxism/2007-April/011737.html>).
I'd say those socialist groups who abstained from the rallies are smarter than a few who attended, though I do fear for the lives of the former if worst comes to worst.
The worst doesn't have to happen, however, as the EU and the USA probably don't want a coup just now. The ruling class of the multinational empire seem to favor early elections:
<http://www.ft.com/cms/s/3ac08e8a-f708-11db-86b0-000b5df10621.html> Turkey needs early elections, not army
Published: April 30 2007 20:11 | Last updated: April 30 2007 20:11
Turkey has entered a dangerous political crisis. The heavy-handed intervention by the army in the stand-off between the neo-Islamist government and the secular establishment over electing the next president has turned the clock back on Turkey's emergence as a fully-fledged liberal democracy. It risks coarsening public and political life to the point of open confrontation.
The generals' declaration – that they are the "absolute" guardians of the secular republic created by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk – is a pronunciamiento from another era. An army that has ousted four elected governments since 1960 – the last one in a "soft" coup against an Islamist administration 10 years ago – is threatening to do so again.
That would be a terrible mistake.
First of all, the thesis that the Justice and Development party (AKP) government led by Recep Tayyip Erdogan is intent on installing theocracy by stealth does not really stand up. Mr Erdogan's party combines the deeply conservative and religiously observant traditions of Anatolia with a huge constituency in Turkey's modern but Muslim middle class. It was created from the debris of failed Islamist movements in order to supersede them; a rough analogy would be the way the Christian Democrats emerged as modern parties of the centre right in much of Europe.
Second, the AKP is a successful, reforming government. It overcame a deep financial crisis, and enlarged democratic, human and minority rights through the biggest ever overhaul of Turkey's laws. It has a good chance of being re-elected. That is partly why Turkey's fragmented, largely unmodernised secular parties are trying to win back in the streets what they lost in the ballot box – and goading the generals into helping them.
The trigger for this crisis was Mr Erdogan's decision to nominate his foreign minister, Abdullah Gul, for president, to be elected by parliament, where the AKP has a thumping majority. The minority opposition's attempt to get the constitutional court to change the rules is spurious and opportunist.
But underlying this clash is an umistakable whiff of class animus. Many in the urban secular elites equate Islam with backwardness and fear that their socially liberal lifestyle will be constrained as observant Muslims from the Anatolian countryside gradually become a majority in Turkey's cities. Both sides need to address these fears and attitudes openly.
That is not going to happen if the constitutional court finds procedural excuses to invalidate Mr Gul's candidacy, much less if the army intervenes. The return of the military to centre stage, moreover, would put an end to Turkey's stalled but still intact candidacy to enter the European Union, exacerbating the already worrying signs of a country turning in on itself.
The best way to resolve this crisis is to bring forward general elections due by November. That should be the occasion for re-establishing common ground rules and a common definition of secularism. With passions at their current pitch, that will be, of course, risky. But not as risky as the alternatives. -- Yoshie