“Turkey’s Democracy & Foreign Policy Record, Social Movements & Recent Developments in the Middle East”

Interview with Mr. Abdüllatif Şener (Part II):

Research Turkey – – August 31, 2013Interview – As Centre for Policy and Research on Turkey (Research Turkey), we held an interview with former Turkish Minister of Finance and Deputy Prime Minister Mr. Abdüllatif Şener. As a publicly and very well-known political actor, Mr. Şener was also one of the founding members of the AK Party (Justice and Development Party). He served as an AK Party deputy in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey between 2002 and 2007.

Besides his political experiences, we have talked about a wide range of issues which are high on the agenda. The first part of the interview with Mr. Abdüllatif Şener, which was published last week, has drawn a great interest.  The second part of the interview includes ideas and personal views of Mr Abdüllatif Şener on a wide range of issues which are hotly discussed topics such as rising tension in Syria; Great Middle East Project; the Gezi Park protests which started in Istanbul and spread to other cities in Turkey; the relationship between religion and politics; democracy and media freedom in Turkey; Turkish economy and corruption incidents; opposition in Turkey; and the adventure of the new constitution.

Synopsis of the Interview:

“Erdoğan acts without considering religion even at some basic issues but he hands down sharp religious messages about some issues that the public highly considered. For this reason, the people who have religious susceptibility vote for AK Party”.  “The contradictions that AK Party makes about religion would easily be figured out if there were freedom of press or if these issues were discussed openly in Turkey. However, the right of free access to information is taken from the hands of citizens today”.  “In any modern democratic country, no political party can take 49% of the votes. This is possible only in the countries like Turkey where all media channels work for the sake of the government”.  “I consider the AK Party not as an Islamic party but as a party which collect votes by using Islamic discourses. Since the religious susceptibility of citizens is high, the Prime Minister makes use of it”.  “I do not consider Erdoğan as a person thinking in an Islamic way, I also do not believe that he has Muslim susceptibility. His way of policy-making fits neither Islam nor humanity nor national interests”.  “The Syrian opposition, including El Nusra, has been carrying out terrorist activities. The strongest logistic support to these groups is provided by Turkey”

“If Turkey did not provide the logistic support to the opposition in Syria, there would not be an opposition conducting terrorist activities anymore, it would have just ended and thousands of people would have not have died in Syria”.  “It is wrong to think that democracy came to Middle East after the Arab Spring. It is obvious that the developments were controlled by external factors and the Arab Spring was channelled by some”.  “If the aim is democracy, the biggest democratic demonstrations are in Bahrain. Saudi soldiers are killing Bahrainis. No TV channel is broadcasting about this incident. Why? Because the opposition in Bahrain is against Israel. Democracy in Bahrain is not in line with their goals.” “In this process Turkey has become a jobber of some Western countries, it could not read the developments and it did what was said to be done”.  “This government has been trying to prepare a civil constitution for 10 years and it cannot. At the same time, Erdoğan is saying to Assad ‘turn into the democracy, you have a week’. How is this sentence suitable with political science and sociological fact?”

“Bashar Assad is inclined to democracy personally and since he came to power, he has made some democratic changes. Some Western politicians sent an ultimatum to Assad to make him give up his opposition against Israel. The aim is not democracy”.   “Turkey is certainly not a regional power. The Prime Minister has his weaknesses. He has been obliged to do what he has been manipulated into. The role in Middle East was assigned to him, it was given to him, and he does not have it on his own”.  “There is important information about the Prime Minister in the WikiLeaks documents. In one of those documents it does not imply he has some bank accounts, it clearly says he has 8 private accounts, which is very important. This means ‘We are even tracking your breathing, therefore you either show compliance or we destroy you.’  Erdoğan has understood the letter very well”. “The Prime Minister stated that ‘I have not one of Allah’s pennies in any Swiss banks. I know the periodicities and nuances which were used by Islamic community well. The sentences as answer he used are very tricky. No Muslim in Turkey uses ‘I do not have any Allah penny (kuruş)’ phrase.  This use underestimates the Allah concept, but we are sensitive about that, we do not use it”  “There is pillaging in Turkey; the public resources are being pillaged. Although the media does not mention it, the citizens of Turkey know that there are important corruption incidents in Turkey”- “There remained no green area breath in İstanbul. You attempt to raise a building in the only green area that can be seen in Taksim. Why? The monument of corruption will be built there, there is no other aim”

“There is no judiciary; there is no media, you do not have a place to react in Turkey. There is no balance of power. Also, when I say there is no media freedom in Turkey. There is no balance of power. There is terrible media pressure on the citizens, which is propagating for the government and for the Prime Minister. We could not handle this anymore”

“These protests are the most common and most enduring civil protests in the history of the Republic. In all 81 cities in big counties the protest occurred at the same time”  – “Democracy is dangerous to the power of the Prime Minister. There is a nested structure of government which is full of corruption incidents.  This is the biggest reason for silencing the media. He is being anti-democratic with a protection reflex for himself and his power” “Previously, the journalists and reporters who collected news from the ministries were being rewarded. But now, journalists and reporters are getting fired because of their disturbing news about ministries, the government and the Prime Minister Erdoğan”“Gezi Park incidents occurred because opposing parties could not meet the demand of opposition in the society in Turkey”

“In Turkey, the political power crossed the lines of being a democratic power; constitutional order is entirely annihilated, however the opposition parties cannot restrain government party’s anti-democratic attitude”  “Gezi Park protests were not organized by the opposing parties. Citizens with democratic awareness who have and communicated through social media initiated these protests” “These protests took place in every part of Turkey. The Media did not broadcast properly, and many TV channels censored these incidents from the beginning. The ones that could not resist anymore, took care not to enrage the Prime Minister in choosing the headlines and the format of delivering news”

“The Turkish public did not properly see these protests in Turkey. The very important electoral body in Turkey didn’t know about these protests for days”

“The status of the economy in Turkey is not good. Nobody in the west should evaluate the economy by the figures the government presented in Turkey”

“The Turkish Statistical Institute is directly dependent on Prime Ministry, other economic units are parts of the cabinet; the government.  None of these units can publish figures that will disturb the Prime Minister” –  “Concerning the PKK initiative and peace process, there is an expression in Anatolia; they say, ‘you must count the chicks in Autumn’. In other words, they say that if there is something new that looks promising, if a new thing is formed with the spring, to see if it will continue its existence, you need to wait for Autumn”

 “The Prime Minister might be considering the Presidency, but the presidential system will not come to Turkey” “For issuing a constitution, you have to be democratic, but the Prime Minister says that I am the majority and I do whatever I want. His perspective on constitution is not right”

 “I do not think that the Prime Minister is sincere about the new constitution. I do not think that he has any purpose other than placing the presidential government.  However, he doesn’t have enough power anymore”

“I know that there are several trials and studies concerning establishment of a new party against AK Party. If they get off the ground, then they will have chance”

“The EU process will not end for Turkey until EU ends. Turkish history has always been interested in the West. The EU will also always be interested in Turkey, and the process will continue”

Full text of the Interview:

“In any modern democratic country, no political party can take 49% of the votes. This is possible only in the countries like Turkey where all media channels work for the sake of the government”

In Turkey, the relation between religion and politics has always been one of the hotly debated matters. Some parties are accused by instrumentalising religion for their political aims. You have been a member of such kind of parties. The AK Party is also criticized in this context and even they faced the fear of closure for this reason. Is the AK Party a party which makes religion an instrument of politics? Or do political parties misuse religion? How should the misuse of religion be interpreted? For example the CHP was also accused of misuse of religion because of the great emphasis on secularity. How do you interpret this religion-politics issue?

In Turkey, the electors have always had religious susceptibility and the political parties have always given reference to this susceptibility. We experienced this both by Menderes and Demirel. You can also see this at different political parties but the tone of this may change. Despite this difference in toning, Erdoğan acts without considering religion even at some basic issues but he hands down sharp religious messages about some issues that the public highly considered. For this reason, the people who have religious susceptibility vote for AK Party This is perceived very well at the base and it gives strong signals. For this reason, the people who have religious susceptibility vote for the AK Party. This is about how he communicates to the people. However, in my opinion the contradictions that the AK Party makes about religion would easily be figured out if there were freedom of press or if these issues were discussed openly in Turkey. However, the right of free access to information is taken from the hands of the citizens today. Citizens are not well informed about what is happening inside the government or what the Prime Minister does or does not. There are hundreds of TV channels and they are making propaganda of the Prime Minister, and try to rationalize him. They are constructing a public opinion in line with the Prime Minister’s discourses. This is the meaning of 49% of votes, actually. In fact, I have a thesis that if in a country a political party takes 49% of votes this is not due to the success of the party but it is due to the lack of democracy in that country. In any modern democratic country, no political party can take 49% of the votes. This is possible only in the countries like Turkey or Nazi Germany where the citizens’ right of access to information is taken from their hands and all media channels work for the sake of government. Turkey is experiencing this.

“I do not consider Erdoğan as a person thinking in an Islamic way, I also do not believe that he has Muslim susceptibility”

I want to discuss this issue a bit more. Recently, religious dynamics have gained importance in Prime Minister’s discourses. We can see this at his explanations about Syria at foreign policy, and also at his explanations about Gezi protests at domestic policy. The claims that AK Party is an Islamic party have raised both at Turkish and Western press. How do you evaluate this?

 I consider the AK Party not as an Islamic party but as a party which collect votes by using Islamic discourses. Today, we are experiencing the times when both the obstacles that are put by law and opposition party do not function. Thus, no matter how much the party exceeds the legal limits there are no legal obstacles in front of the party. However, since the religious susceptibility of the citizens is high, the Prime Minister makes use of it. Since sociological dynamics in Turkey are different than in Europe when the Prime Minister uses the religious discourses truculently the population in Turkey reaches sharper beliefs about his pietism. However, this is a scenario. The sympathetic discourses about the murderers misusing Islamic values in Syria show how he can trample on religion when the conditions are occurred. Just like this, I do not consider Erdoğan as a person thinking by Islamic way, I also do not believe that he has Muslim susceptibility. His way of policy making fits neither Islam nor humanity nor national interests.

“The Syrian opposition has been conducting terrorist activities, and the strongest logistic support is provided by Turkey”

By the way, we can continue about Syria, if you would like. How do you find Turkey’s foreign policy towards Syria?

Europe may be approaching the Syrian policy from a different perspective; even they evaluate in a different way. I have to consider this issue by taking into consideration the concerns of the Turkish government. I said this at the beginning, and both United Nations (UN) and Western public opinion admitted that the Syrian opposition has been carrying out terrorist activities. About two years later, the U.S. the U.S. also admitted that some groups, including Al Nusra, are terrorist organizations. However, I am stating that all groups make terrorist actions not only Al Nusra but also Al Qaide, the most merciless terrorist organization in the world, conducts suicide attacks. They enter a mosque, bomb it, and kill thousands of people. They go to tombs and set off bombs there and kill innocent people, they bomb bazaars, they attack villages and they cut children’s throats. Even, according to explanations made by the UN, this opposition uses chemical weapons. The strongest logistic support for these groups is provided by Turkey. This opposition fights in Syria and in order to rest and eat kebab they come to Turkey. Turkey is a place where they can breathe. If Turkey did something about its border, there would not be an opposition conducting terrorist attacks anymore, it would just end. They occupy the cities, make civil populations go from those cities and they fight against Syrian army with their developed weapons. In which corner of the world, the U.S., England the state will keep quiet if a terrorist organization rakes through the streets in cities? The prior duty of the state is to liquidate these armed terrorist groups. This is the case in the U.S., England or Syria. However, the Syrian opposition is the most merciless terrorist organization; they are using children, women and the civil population as shields and fighting against the army in cities, which causes lots civilian loss. Almost 100 thousand people were killed according to recent data. In my opinion, without considering the  other opinions in the world, if Turkey made an arrangement  for its border and did not provide the logistic support those 100 thousand people would have not have died. Furthermore, the so called Syrian opposition is not Syrian at all almost 90% of them came to Syria from 30 different countries and were educated by Al-Qaeda. How an opposition is this? This is not a national opposition. Let’s think in Islamic way, 100 thousand of children, women are dying, there are lots of crippled people and lots of people who lost everything by the side of your border, and you make politics for the sake of Islam. This is a shame. Throw everything to wind, the responsibility of the Prime Minister about the massacre in Syria cannot be compared to those head scarf issue in Turkey. For example, talking such kind of things in such a tone is impossible in Turkey; TV channels will not let you speak this way.

Some AK Party spokesmen stated same things after the claims, like the police used unbalanced force at the Gezi protests in June and AK Party’s reflections were exaggerated when they connected to some foreign press institutions. However, they defended the idea that what would you do if there were attacks with stones and sticks to your party buildings. Even Prof. Dr. İbrahim Kalın, one of the advisors of the Prime Minister, defended the intervention by stating that what you would do if people walk to the White House. As you stated that in Syria this is happening not by stones and sticks but by weapons, but according to Prime Minister these are right. Is not it a contradiction? What is the difference in Syria?

The Prime Minister considers Assad’s forces as exaggerated and claims that he has to transfer these forces. Therefore, he evaluates the massacres made by opposition in Syria as right actions. This is obviously a game and an abuse. However, he is more powerful than Assad and he has no tolerance to any kind of reaction. Giving an answer to this by making a joke will be better I think: I think Prime Minister is jealous of Assad because if the conditions in Turkey were suitable he would establish a much more conservative administration. He cannot stand that Assad’s concrete authority is more than his authority, so he tries to defeat him in Syria. Joking apart, now the authority he has exceeds the Assad’s.

“It is wrong to think that democracy came to Middle East after the Arab Spring. It is obvious that Arab Spring was controlled by external factors”

How do you evaluate the Arab Spring? Do you see it as an ‘Arab Spring’ or an ‘Arab Winter’? Do you think Turkish foreign policy has become more proactive and been able to foresee the recent developments? Or has it remained more reactive?

This so called ‘Arab Spring’ process should be analysed carefully. It cannot be arranged with instant incidents. Democratic development does not emerge suddenly in a country, it is a process. The first Turkish constitution was written in 1877; we prepared our first constitution approximately 140 years before. We turned into constitutional monarchy 105 years before. We established the republic in 1923. The transition to multi-party system was in 1946. This means for 67 years Turkey has experiencing multi-party system. Its democracy is a half century older than the Middle Eastern democracies only in terms of multi-party experience. It is wrong to think that democracy came to Middle East after Arab Spring; it is obvious that the developments were controlled by external factors and Arab Spring was channelled by some. In this process, Turkey has become a jobber of some Western countries, it could not read the developments and it did what was said to be done. For example, Erdoğan was against the NATO intervention in Libya, he realized in 15 days and he mobilized for military support. Syria is another disaster. I mentioned the democracy story of Turkey above. In spite of this historical background Erdoğan is bringing the Turkish democracy back, he is destroying freedom of the media, he is eliminating civil society, and then he is blaming Assad not for turning into democracy and he is calling for a war. Is the support of West or Turkey for Arab Spring taken seriously? The most authoritarian regimes of the Middle East; Saudi Arabia and Qatar (Qatar’s Emir assigned his son as the new emir with a press conference), support the terrorists of Syria. Is there logic in it? If the aim is democracy, why do Qatar and Saudi Arabia not have democracy? If it is democracy, the biggest democratic demonstrations are in Bahrain. Half of the population is on the streets. With the guidance and permission of the West, Saudi soldiers are killing Bahrainis, and no TV channel is broadcasting about this incident. Why? Because the opposition in Bahrain is against Israel. Democracy in Bahrain is not in line with their goals. That is why, if the real aim is democracy, everybody should act with principles, especially the West, the U.S., England, France should know that the opposition in Syria is the cruellest terrorists in the World. I cannot stand that Western countries support terrorists.

Turkey had an insistent and interfering approach on the overthrow of Assad’s regime in Syria. Almost all the foreign policy was based on overthrowing Assad, and that is why as Assad stays in power Turkey started to lose its reputation. In foreign policy, the main strategy is to have different plans and not to put all the eggs in one basket. Why do you think Turkey associated its foreign policy to Assad’s overthrowing?

You have a very good point. This government has been trying to prepare a civil constitution for 10 years and it cannot. At the same time, Erdoğan is saying to Assad ‘turn into democracy, you have a week’. How is this sentence suitable with political science and sociological fact? This is a process. And Assad is criticized for issues related to his father, this is also ridiculous. Bashar Assad is personally inclined to democracy and since he came to the power, he has made some changes. He made changes related to the elections and he showed that he has plans for transition to democracy in a pace of tolerance of people. In the first place, he was planning to live in the palace of his father. But his wife was against this plan.  She said that ‘we should be among the people’. They lived in the house which is similar to my house in Ankara without security guards around in the middle of Damascus. His wife is civil person and she is one of the famous Sunni people in Syria. They both studied in Europe. They are familiar with European culture. They were still living without security guards as a civil family even after the protests started in Syria. A Western journalist was surprised that he did not see any security provisions around the house when he was there for an interview. Now, you say to that man ‘turn into democracy’. In spite of experience and accumulation of a century long democracy, the government who has 2/3 of the votes, could not make a civil constitution. The commission in the parliament could not still come up with a text. Which political scientist or sociologist can say that a person who holds the power could change the regime whenever he wants? This is not consistent at all. The aim is not democracy. The aim is to weaken the support for Israel. Some Western politicians sent ultimatum to Assad to make him give up his opposition against Israel. However, he continued his traditional political line, true or false the politics of that country. The reason shown is not right or true.

It is said that Assad did not make the reforms he promised?

It is not true. The West has held a hostile attitude against Assad ever since. For instance, as I once travelled to Syria as the vice Prime Minister, the Hariri incident occurred. Assad had been blamed for the murder of the Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri by the international community. The actual point with this claim was to drive Syria into a corner due to its opposition against Israel. On the other hand, Assad has come clean after the work of a commission which was formed in order to investigate Hariri’s assassination. The commission proved that he had nothing to do with it.

“Turkey is certainly not a regional power. The Prime Minister has his weaknesses. This role was given to him he does not have it on his own”

There are also analyses which find that Turkish foreign policy has been successful. For example, Turkey is now claimed to be a power in its territory. Even many articles have been published in which Turkey’s interference in Syria is seen as a step to become an imperial force. Are you in disagreement with this claim of Turkey’s being a regional power?

Turkey is certainly not a regional power. The Prime Minister has his weaknesses. He has been obliged to do what he has been manipulated into. These WikiLeaks documents are one of the significant cornerstones of Arab Spring. The WikiLeaks documents include information published related to the leaders to be overthrown which are put forward in order to be used against them in community’s perspective. Also, there was information about the leaders in the Middle East who were going to act as an active external force in this Arab Spring. The message was clear, ‘You will get nothing fortunate unless you support this process.’ Please check that there is important information about the Prime Minister in the documents.  In one of those documents it is shown that the Prime Minister has 8 private bank accounts in Swiss banks. Look, it does not imply he has some bank accounts, it says he has 8 private bank accounts, which is very important. This means ‘We are even tracking your breathing, therefore you either show compliance or we destroy you.’  Erdoğan has understood the letter very well.

 The Prime Minister refuted these claims. He said these are not true?

He did not have any other option. Because the media is not free, these claims were on Wikileaks first, they did not broadcast for 2 days, they were silent, but it spread in social media via internet so Prime Minister had to make an explanation. He said that he was defamed from the bench loudly. He added that ‘I do not have one of Allah’s pennies in any Swiss banks’. I know the periodicities and nuances which were used by the Islamic community well. The sentences as answer he used are very tricky. No Muslim in Turkey uses the phrase: ‘I do not have one of Allah’s pennies (kuruş)’.  This use underestimates the Allah concept, but we are sensitive about that, we do not use it. He says that he does not have one of Allah’s pennies in any Swiss banks. There is no kuruş in Swiss banks, there are Euro and Dollar. This is a consciously chosen wording. The main thing I want to say is the idea of being a power in Middle East is an invention of him to create himself a prestige. The role of him in Middle East is the assigned role. This role was given to him he does not have it on his own. He was against patriots first, and then he placed them. Firstly, he asked what is NATO doing in Libya then he sent the decision of NATO which is attacking Libya to the parliament and then taking it out of the parliament. He is improvising his speech firstly, then the duty comes and he accepts this duty.

“There remained no green area breath in Istanbul. You attempt to raise a building in the only green area that can be seen in Taksim. Why? The monument of corruption will be built there, there is no other aim”

What do you think about Gezi protests? Why did Prime Minister Erdoğan overreact? Why was the police attack so harsh? How do you interpret this?

You analyse it both from the aspect of people and of Prime Minister. We can analyse the Gezi protests with the aspect of protestors as such. There is pillaging in Turkey, the public resources are being pillaged. Although, the media does not mention it, the citizens of Turkey know that there are important corruption occurrences in Turkey. Reconstruction corruption is very significant. There remained no green area breath in Istanbul. You attempt to raise a building in the only green area that can be seen in Taksim. Why? The monument of corruption will be built there, there is no other aim.  The citizens are on the streets because either they are trying to protect the environment or they are specifically against the corruption. There is no judiciary; there is no media you do not have a place to react in Turkey. There is no balance of power. Also, when I say there is no media freedom in Turkey it does not mean only censorship. Moreover, hundreds of TV channels are supporting the mistakes of the government day and night. They are trying to rationalize what the Prime Minister is doing. There is terrible media pressure on the citizens, which is propagating for the government and for the Prime Minister. We could not handle this anymore. For instance, I cannot turn on the TV.  The Prime Minister is there at least 10 of 24 hours. Seeing his face and hearing his voice all the time became abrasive to the point people could not stand this any longer. The people protested in the squares individually with the help of social media sharing without an inclusive organization, without a leader and a pioneer independent from each other. As far as I know, these protests are the most common and most enduring civil protests in the history of the Republic. This should be named as such. In all 81 cities and in big counties, not in only one square, in lots of squares and on lots of streets the protests occurred at the same time. The Prime Minister holds a mass meeting to show he can collect more people in a month, but this is not its counterpart. A party leader organizes a meeting. Trying to say that ‘my meeting is more crowded’ shows how the Prime Minister perceives democracy and this is the main problem.  When you measure how they are being inconsiderate to the demands of people, you can see the big diseases and inadequacies within the government party.

“Democracy when we look from the perspective of the Prime Minister is dangerous to his power. There is a nested structure of government which is full of corruption incidents. This is the biggest reason for silencing the media”

Is there a problem in the democracy perception of the Prime Minister or is he using this as a political instrument?

This is the democracy understanding of the Prime Minister. He cannot be a democrat even if he wants. Look, the citizens are protecting the environment and they are declaring that they are against corruption and they are demanding democracy with these protests. The main message they give to the Prime Minister is that ‘We do not expect you to raise the standards of democracy, we want to protect the point you take democracy’. They are saying ‘enough’ to the Prime Minister.

Why can the Prime Minister not be a democrat even if he wants? Did not the AK Party get the support of a vast majority of people with the democracy promises?

Democracy when we look from the Prime Minister’s perspective is dangerous to his power. There is a nested structure of government from the municipalities to the ministries which are full of corruption.  This is the biggest reason for silencing the media. When the media is free, it is collecting news from the ministries. This news can ruin the perception of public opinion. He is being anti-democratic with a protection reflex for himself and his power. That is, it is not possible for him to be a democrat.  The system he has established does not let him be a democrat. The system he has established can ruin itself when there is a democratic atmosphere. That is why it is not possible. Democracy needs transparency. Previously, the journalists and reporters who collected news from the ministries were being rewarded.  Even the ministers, whose unfavourable news was declared by journalists, were attending the award ceremony. Now, journalists and reporters are getting fired because of their disturbing news about the ministries, the government and Prime Minister Erdoğan. Therefore, he protects himself. While he is protecting himself, he is using the state power. He is giving instructions to administrative chiefs and to security units with his speeches. That is why people are treated so harshly.

“The Gezi Park protests are the most common and most enduring civil protests in the history of the Republic. These protests were not organised by the opposing parties but by citizens with democratic awareness who communicated through social media”

Another fact that Gezi protests pointed at is even though in mass incidents opposition parties generally become more powerful, in Gezi protests this did not occur. Either people hit the streets because opposition parties could not duly perform their duties or opposition parties couldn’t organise the masses by giving the right reaction to this resistance. A large majority of Gezi protestors were also remaining distant to the opposition parties. It is clear that opposing parties also should learn a lesson as much as the government party. What is your opinion?

Actually, the Gezi Park incidents occurred because opposing parties could not meet the demand of opposition in the society. In Turkey, political power crossed the lines of being a democratic power; legislative, judicial and executive branches that are constitutionally separated powers lost this key feature, the Prime Minister became the sovereign power, transparency and auditability in the financial management of the government are destroyed; there is no free press or NGO left that can freely perform democratic protests. Constitutional order is entirely annihilated; however the opposition parties cannot restrain the government party’s anti-democratic attitude. Because, media, NGOs and the constitutional institutions (such as universities) that have to be independent have become subject to the control of government, and the Prime Minister. Opposition parties only talk, and even these speeches do not have wide media coverage, the government party ignores these criticisms and moves on because they are not effectively publicized. Therefore, the Gezi Park protests came out because of the fact that people who have democratic awareness reached a boiling point. These protests were not organised by the opposing parties, and also there is no organisation that is made by a specific NGO. Citizens who have democratic awareness communicated through social media, the protests started and went on. Some NGOs have taken place in the protests, but this great fire and continuous protests formed a movement that is beyond all the participating groups. Of course, all the opposition parties and NGOs need to take a lesson from this situation. However, it’s been beneficial that opposition parties didn’t try to undertake these protests.

“Media did not broadcast properly, and many TV channels censored these incidents from the beginning. The ones that could not resist any more, took care not to enrage the Prime Minister in delivering the news”

In the process of the Gezi protests, the attitude of media also drew attention. As you said, it has been criticised that incidents were completely ignored or garbled. Most of the incidents were shared through social media, and the masses that can use it are limited. Moreover, Gezi protestors had to call TV channels to start broadcasting by gathering outside some of the TV channels’ buildings. In this process were you also censored?

These protests that last more than 20 days took place in every part of Turkey and still continue at the time when we are conducting this interview. The media did not broadcast properly, and many TV channels censored these incidents from the beginning. The ones, that could not resist any more, took care not to enrage the Prime Minister in choosing the headlines and the format of delivering the news. For example, BBC here called me; interviewed me; we have an agreement, they said that half of the interview will be featured on CNBC and the other half will be featured on NTV. They gave both CNBC and NTV’s airing times of the interview. In the time of the CNBC’s airing time of my interview they did not feature it so I told the BBC in here. They said “they have to broadcast it, we have an agreement; otherwise they lose their reputation”. I said “The airing time is ending, it will not be broadcasted.” Then they said “We asked about it too, there has been some important news, and they reported that news.” I said “No”, “You are mistaken, the thing they call important news is the cartoon they feature on our air time on CNBC”. CNBC is a financial channel, it makes news; it doesn’t feature cartoons. NTV as well, broadcasted only 1 minute of my speeches by cutting different parts of the program that was supposed to be broadcasted for 15 minutes. They featured my harmless sentences. For example, I said that these incidents cause the government to lose votes. Wow, what an amazing thing to say, however this was a transition sentence that I used incidentally. What I want to say is that Turkish public did not properly see these protests in Turkey. The very important electoral body in Turkey didn’t know about these protests for days.  The majority of the people do not watch the channels that feature these incidents, and also do not use social media etc., therefore people were unaware of the actual incidents. Despite this, I mean, the situation of the communication about these incidents proves how righteous the protestors are in their protest and that they protest democratically.

It was alleged that military coup d’état plans lie behind the Gezi protests. Prime Minister Erdoğan claimed that ‘interest rate lobby’ caused these incidents.

It has nothing to do with it. Everything has a lobby. If you are the government then you establish the economy properly. Will we change into a monarchy to have a stable economy? When he says that there will be an economic meltdown so give me absolute authority of monarchs, will that be given, is that so?  What happened to strong economy? It means that the economy is weak. So, protests are not related to this, people who participated in these protests do not know about these lobbies. These are spontaneous incidents.

“The status of economy in Turkey is not good. Nobody in the west should evaluate the economy by the figures the government presented in Turkey”

How do you see the status of economy in Turkey?

It is not good. Everything is predicated on corruption and trickery. In short: nobody in the west should evaluate the economy by the figures the government presented in Turkey. Some economists in Turkey come up and talk about economy according to the official figures. Is there anybody who thinks that the Prime Minister who wants even the self-regulating and independent organisations to broadcast as it suits himself forces them to do so and generates this situation; is not intervening in the figures of these units that are directly dependent on himself? Turkish Statistical Institute is directly dependent on Prime Ministry, other economic units are parts of the cabinet; the government. None of these units can publish figures that will disturb the Prime Minister. I mean, whoever evaluates the economy according to these official figures, is making a mistake in Turkey.

Recently, the government had a PKK initiative. The negotiation process started with the PKK and Abdullah Öcalan or the on-going negotiations are declared to the public. “Wise-men” assigned for the peace with PKK. How do you interpret this process?

Before I go into detail, I want to answer this with an example that symbolizes the situation in Turkey. As you know, chickens hatch chicks in spring but either cats or eagles steal them. With years of experience, people developed an expression in Anatolia; they say ‘you must count the chicks in Autumn’. In other words, they say that if there is something new that looks promising, if a new thing is formed with the spring, to see if it will continue its existence, you need to wait for the Autumn. I do not know how suitable this metaphor is but we must discuss this peace process in the Autumn.

The presidential government is also often discussed and brought up in Turkey. Especially Prime Minister Erdoğan and some authorities from AK Party allege that this system might be good. It is also often expressed that Prime Minister Erdoğan has the dream of becoming the president. What do you think about this? Do you think the Prime Minister thinks about the presidency or the presidency of the Republic of Turkey?

My opinion is that he might be considering presidency, this must be taking place in the initiative for sure, but presidential system will not come to Turkey. I mean, the Prime Minister does not have the power and balances to switch to presidential system until the presidential election.

“I do not think that the Prime Minister is sincere about the new constitution. He says that I am the majority and I do whatever I want. I also do not think that he has any purpose other than placing the presidential government”

How do you see the process of drafting a new constitution? After 2007, commissions consisting of academicians were established and drafts were prepared. Now as those drafts and studies do not exist new commissions are being established and new studies are being made. Why cannot we create a new constitution?

For issuing a constitution, you have to be democratic. He says that accept it if you want, if you do not, I will make the constitution as the predominant power. However, the constitution is not a text that is constituted by the majority rule in any part of the world.  The constitution exists for protecting the rights of the minority beyond the majority, but the Prime Minister says that I am the majority and I do whatever I want. His perspective on constitution is not right. I do not think that he has clear thoughts on some fundamental issues such as what is constitution made for, what constitution protects, what is important in constitution or on the enactment of constitution. For example, a constituent assembly must be established first if a civil constitution will be made. That assembly prepares the constitution then puts it into the legislative process, and that constitution needs to be approved in referendum. But there is no such perception. I do not think that the Prime Minister is sincere about the new constitution. I also do not think that he has any purpose other than placing the presidential government. However he does not have enough power anymore. I mean, it is not only because of Gezi, it is as it is from the beginning. He thinks that Turkey exists for him. He thinks that public force, all the public spaces, and democratic institutions in Turkey are there for him, this is how he feels. This can be seen when his behaviours are analysed. Therefore, he was thinking that in this democratic system, presidential system will be bestowed upon him. However, it is not possible for him to obtain this any longer. I do not think that in Turkey, this kind of an amendment will be approved by the assembly and the public anymore.

These recent protests, many members of parliament from AK Party were left out due to the third term rule, the argument discourses between the Gülen movement and the AK Party strengthened the rumours about establishment of a new political party. Do you think there is a possibility of a new, strong party to be formed against AK Party in the near future?

I know that there are several trials and studies, but I am not sure if it can really happen. If there will be, and if they get off the ground, then they will have chance.

“The EU process will not end for Turkey until the EU ends. Turkish history has always been interested in the West. The EU will also always be interested in Turkey, and the process will continue”

 How do you see Turkey’s EU membership process? Do you think that the EU project is completely over for Turkey?

The EU process will not end for Turkey until the EU ends. Turkey is one of the first countries that followed this process since the late 1950s. Actually, Turkish history has always been interested in the West for 1500 years. It always came to the West from Central Asia. We have always liked the West. The EU will also always be interested in Turkey, and the process will continue. There can be interruptions, adverse events occasionally but despite this the main thing will not be lost.

Do you support Turkey’s membership in the EU?

I think Turkey’s membership would be beneficial for both Turkey and Europe. The Problem here is mutual. Of course several anti-democratic scenes are not good. Beyond this, what will the EU say about it? In the end, the one who will make a decision is the EU. Besides they will make a decision by alliance. If one of the EU countries says that they do not want it, Turkey’s full membership in EU will not be possible. Above all, Turkey did something different than other EU member states. Other countries first became members of the EU then joined the Customs Union. Turkey joined customs union in 1996. We have been in the Customs Union for 17 years but still waiting for full membership.

You have been in London for a while. What do you think about it here? Did you have a chance to observe immigrants who came from Turkey and the students here?

Turkey and England speak for two different social and cultural environments. Here, I especially observed the students. We have citizens, students, teenagers who come to London, England, to learn the language and study in universities. It is necessary to protect and guide them. I’d like to point out that our citizens who come here, for either to learn a language or for the higher education, have important problems. As far as I see, there is no mechanism that is formed for monitoring and tracking these issues. For the studies to be productive, they must be supported. People who come here must not grope, this is the deficiency here. Our embassy here is responsible for important tasks about this subject. The same applies to our citizens who emigrated here. There is the need of scientific studies, questionnaires and analyses on this subject. These studies must be provided by the embassy and what needs to be done must be determined by discussions. A unit must be formed inside the embassy for people who come here to universities or language schools and students must be guided and supported.

Mr. Şener, thank you for this pleasant interview and conversation.

Thank you. I wish you continued success.

Please cite this publication as follows: Research Turkey (August, 2013), “Interview with Mr. Abdüllatif Şener (Part II): “Turkey’s Democracy and Foreign Policy Record, Social Movements and Recent Developments in the Middle East””, Vol. II, Issue 6, pp.75-88, Centre for Policy and Research on Turkey (ResearchTurkey), London, Research Turkey. (http://researchturkey.org/?p=4031)