Last summer,
Turkey has witnessed an unprecedented social mobilisation, maybe the most
significant and intensive one in the post-1980 military coup period. Between the
28 and 30 of May, a group of environmentalists, who were camped in the Gezi
Park to prevent the destruction of the park for the re-construction of the 18th
century Ottoman Taksim Barracks, were violently evicted by the police. While
the activists were beaten and tear gassed, their tents and equipment were
burned by the officials. This sparked a massive outrage and paved the way to
the subsequent demonstrations and clashes with the police forces that lasted
for almost four months. In this guest post, Ertan Erol assesses the wider implications of this moment of social
mobilisation in Turkey.
The reaction
of the members of the governing Justice and Development Party (AKP) remained
undecided and more or less surprised until the Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan
concretised his hard-line position accusing the protestors of being looters and
part of a foreign conspiracy that aims to increase interest rates and, thus,
damage the Turkish economy. While the PM gradually elevated his criticisms on
the protests and launched series of pro-government rallies called ‘Respect to
People’s Will’ in the major cities of Turkey, the pro-government media launched
a campaign of slander making various claims about the protesters, allegedly
showing their links with foreign agents and their fanatically anti-religious
and anti-Islamic orientations. In the international arena the AKP officials
also continuously claimed that the police reaction was moderate, at least not
heavier or different than the use of police force in the Western world. PM
Erdogan himself gave the example of the police intervention during the Occupy
Wall Street events in New York claiming that 17 people had been killed, which
was immediately refuted by the US Embassy in Ankara.
Nevertheless,
the AKP’s arguments trying to justify the use of police force during the Gezi
Resistance have no credibility. A recent report published by Amnesty
International (October 2013) noted that the right of peaceful assembly that is protected
by various international conventions and by the 34th article of
Turkey’s constitution was arbitrarily denied in many parts of the country due
to the abusive use of force by the police (quoting the Turkish Medical
Association): 8000 people were injured of which 61 severely, 11 lost an eye,
104 suffered head injuries and 3 people died as the direct result of the brutal
use of force (2013: 15). In the same report it was also stated that the police
force abused the use of less lethal weapons such as tear gas and water cannons.
According to government sources only in the first 20 days of the protests
130.000 gas canisters had been used, while 60 water cannons, which in some
cases carried water mixed with chemical irritants that might cause first degree
burns on human skin, were arbitrarily implemented against the protestors and
bystanders (2013 18, 19). The report also noted unofficial detentions, sexual
assaults, beatings by the police force, and the arbitrary prosecutions and
raids aimed at organisers of the protests, lawyers, journalists, medical
personnel and social media users.
The Gezi
Protests and the violent, repressive and illegal response by the government and
its law enforcement forces was immediately interpreted as an authoritarian turn
in the AKP’s 11 years of rule. However, I argue that the protests and the
government’s strong response needs to be located and identified within a wider
process of neoliberal re-territorialisation of Turkey in the last three
decades. Only by doing that, is it possible to identify these protests in the
context of legitimacy crises that neoliberal hegemony is also facing
simultaneously in other parts of the world such as Mexico, Chile, Brazil and
Colombia.
In that
sense, it is indispensible to look back to 2010 and pin down the TEKEL workers’
resistance as a turning point, which should be seen as the beginning of the
political legitimacy crisis of the AKP rule. In
2010 when the state tobacco company TEKEL was privatised and the TEKEL workers
were forced to choose between resignation and accepting to sign yearly
contracts, which were not guaranteed to be renewed, the TEKEL workers launched
a fierce campaign of resistance and camped in a public park in Ankara. Since
the 1980 military coup, it had been the first time a working class movement was
able to mobilise and maintain a significant amount of people. It is possible to
argue that the reason why the AKP government used brutal police force to
disperse the workers and protesters was the vitality of the case as the most
obvious crack in the neoliberal hegemonic coalition that the AKP was
representing. Thus, the TEKEL resistance became a turning point both for the
government and the social movements either in the urban areas concerning public
spaces or in the rural areas against the construction of micro dam projects.
Since the TEKEL resistance it has become practically impossible to make a
public demonstration criticising government policies without receiving strong
police intervention with tear gas, detention and arbitrary legal prosecution.
In 2013, starting from a protest in Taksim against the destruction of an old
cinema building to the clashes following the prohibition of the May Day
celebrations in Taksim square, the erosion of the political legitimacy of the
AKP government increased the repressive response of these peaceful protests.
This situation paved the way to the social explosion on 31st May
which led to the four months of anti-government protests and different forms of
political disobedience, which are now all summed up under the name of Gezi
resistance. The impact of neoliberal re-territorialisation of public space in
Istanbul coincided with the wider aspects of the crisis of neoliberal hegemony,
which led to the explosion of social struggles and opened up significant space
of self-determination and counter-hegemonic socio-spatial practices.
Hoping to tackle this
problem of legitimacy, the AKP government recently presented a series of
liberalising reforms, a ‘democratisation package’, offering changes such as lifting
the ban on the use of headscarf by public servants, or the general use of Kurdish
letters Q, X and W and the original names of Kurdish towns, as well as returning
the land previously belonging to an Assyrian Monastery in the southeast of
Turkey. However, the package can hardly be perceived as a serious attempt of
democratisation, since it is far from satisfying even the basic demands of the
minority groups in Turkey or responding to the calls of the general public such
as for the elimination of the 10 percent national threshold in general
elections.
In this context, one of
the most common slogans of the protests becomes more meaningful: ‘This is just
a beginning, the struggle will continue’. There is a direct link between the
TEKEL resistance, the resistance in the Anatolian mountains and the Gezi Park
protests, and additionally between the recent social struggles in Chile,
Mexico, Brazil and Colombia. All are responses to processes of neoliberal
re-territorialisation of social space on the periphery of global capitalism.
Therefore, it should be expected that we will witness a continuous
proliferation of social mobilisations and resistances in these countries, as
neoliberal restructuring intensifies and extends the contradictions of
neoliberal hegemony across different social scales.
Ertan Erol has finished his PhD on
the regional integration and development projects of Mexico and Turkey at the
University of Nottingham in 2013. He is now working in the Department of
International Relations at the University of Istanbul as an assistant
researcher.
Hello,
ReplyDeleteThe author should also acknowledge that we lost TEKEL resistance. The resistance process is forgotten in public discussion (except those tiny resistant groups) and didnot produce any durable effect on the general politics or even public memory in Turkey. The linkage between TEKEL and Gezi is almost non-existent, except again those ones who participated both and maybe in their self-fulfilling best wishes. Let us not romanticise the events and be realistic.
Hi,
ReplyDeleteThanks a lot for the comment. As I tried to argue, the link between TEKEL and Gezi (and between Gezi and the resistance movements of the Mexican teachers, Colombian peasants or the Brazilian urban discontent) is the neoliberal restructuring of the peripheral capitalist space. I think if we focus on these processes which creates the structural conditions of these movements rather than some personal or rhetorical links, then we would be able to link ‘different’ political periods within the last three decades of authoritarian neoliberalism in Turkey which was started and institutionalised by the 1980 coup d’état and continued and perfected by Erdogan’s 11 years old government. This would prevent us from wrongly identifying the AKP’s rule as a pseudo moderate/pro-Islamic period but an era when Turkey’s financial and industrial capital has been trans-nationalised and the neo-liberal reforms had been completed.