ORIENT (2019) Politics after Turkey’s exit from democracy

Open Democracy, 2019

Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 2019

Scholarly interest in Turkish politics and society continues, albeit a drastic shift away from the 'democratisation reforms' of the early 2000s to an increasingly 'authoritarian' rule since (at least) 2013. In this context of regime change, there are many different ways, complementary or otherwise, that account for Turkey's political trajectory. Exit from democracy, a collection of essays edited by Kerem Öktem and Karabekir Akkoyunlu and originally published in Southeast European and Black Sea Studies (2016, issue 4), for instance, has more of a descriptive and analytical character. The essays in this volume grapple to describe and understand what has been changing in Turkey with a vision to provide answers to how and sometimes why questions. Articles in this collection focus on how to make sense of Turkey's transition and how to account for AKP policies pertaining to the institutional setup and economic, social and cultural areas. Another edited volume (eds. by Esra Özyürek, Gaye Özpınar, Emrah Altındiş) entitled Authoritarianism and resistance in Turkey has a rather different and broader content with a special focus on a historical contextualisation of the current changes and critical analyses of issues like minority rights, the 'Armenian genocide', freedom of expression, and areas including 'social movements' and 'culture and arts' in addition to politics and the economy. In this latter volume, the reader is able to find also more 'engaged', 'political' criticism of an increasingly harsh authoritarian regime in Turkey; this is a consequence, perhaps, of the nature of interviews with academics, lawyers, journalists and civil activists, most of whom have been actively engaged sporadically in oppositional politics. A third volume, Regime change in contemporary Turkey, on the other hand is the work of Necati Polat, a distinguished scholar of international politics and the law, and is made up of two parts: the first 'describes' what has changed, while

This article examines the characteristics of the current political regime in Turkey in an attempt to classify it on the democracy-autocracy spectrum. Borrowing the definition of competitive authoritarian regimes from Levitsky and Way, three defining regime attributes are investigated: elections; protection of civil liberties; and a level playing field for the opposition. The main argument is that the current Turkish regime fits the definition of ‘electoral authoritarianism’ on multiple fronts, especially considering the lack of civil liberties protection and the uneven playing field for the political opposition. The prospects for further democratization also look bleak for the foreseeable future.

Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 2016

Turkey's 'authoritarian turn' in recent years indicates a democratic breakdown that can best be analysed by analytically distinguishing between two simultaneous developments. The first is the reproduction of Turkey's long-existing semi-democratic regime-which the article calls old authoritarianism-in a new historical and dominant politicalideological context and under an Islamist-leaning government. The second is the emergence of a new type of authoritarianism-dubbed new authoritarianism-that is in many respects unprecedented for Turkey, is in need of better comprehension and displays important parallels with contemporary troubles of democracy in the world. Focusing on political society and institutions is insufficient to adequately examine the emergent authoritarian regime, for example to identify it as a regime type, to explain its popular support and to foresee how durable and repressive, and to what extent party-based rather than personalistic, it may become. It is necessary to combine insights from the new political economy of welfare, transition and communication with those from political and institutional democratization. Doing so suggests that new authoritarianism generates a new kind of statesociety relationship where, paradoxically, political power becomes simultaneously more particularistic, personalized and mass-based. Hence, new authoritarianism has democratizing potential, but can also become more oppressive than any other regime Turkey has previously experienced. Oscillation between these two outcomes is also possible.

Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 2016

This introductory essay gives a synoptic overview of what we will describe as Turkey’s ‘exit from democracy’, a shift to authoritarianism and an Islamist ‘revolution from above’ that comes on the back of a much longer ‘passive revolution’. Secondly, it engages with the ideas and papers emanating from an International Symposium on ‘Populism, majoritarianism and crises of liberal democracy’, which the authors convened at the University of Graz in October 2015.

This essay gives a synoptic overview of what we will describe as Turkey’s ‘exit from democracy’, a shift to authoritarianism and an Islamist ‘revolution from above’ that comes on the back of a much longer ‘passive revolution’. Secondly, it engages with the ideas and papers emanating from an International Symposium on ‘Populism, majoritarianism and crises of liberal democracy’, which the authors convened at the University of Graz in October 2015.

Political Quarterly, 2023

This article reflects on the reasons why Erdoğan and the Justice and Development Party (AKP) could still win in the recent 2023 presidential and parliamentary elections in Turkey despite, among other daunting issues, the deep economic crisis and their unsuccessful handling of the February 2023 earthquake. The article discusses the role of the state apparatus and the media under a neopatrimonial system, as well as the role of the EU, which turned Turkey into a rentier state with the refugee deals. The discussion considers whether Turkey could still be seen as a competitive authoritarian regime and points to the difficulties in determining whether regimes such as the Turkish one are competitive authoritarian or not until the election results are seen and the opposition candidates actually win.

British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 2018

The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2018

Under the Justice and Development Party AKP and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkey has become one of the most polarized countries in the world, and has undergone a significant democratic breakdown. This article explains how polarization and democratic breakdown happened, arguing that it was based on the built-in, perverse dynamics of an “authoritarian spiral of polarizing-cum-transformative politics.” Furthermore, I identify ten causal mechanisms that have produced pernicious polarization and democratic erosion. Turkey’s transformation since 2002 is an example of the broader phenomenon of democratic erosion under new elites and dominant groups. The causes and consequences of pernicious polarization are analyzed in terms of four subperiods: 2002–2006, 2007, 2008–2013, and 2014–present. In the end, what began as a potentially reformist politics of polarization-cum-transformation morphed into an autocratic-revolutionary one. During this process, polarization and AKP policies; the politicizat...