SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the another-day-another-populist-strongman dept.
Turkish President May Receive Increased Power
The Associated Press via CBC reports on preliminary results of a referendum held in Turkey on whether the powers of the president should be increased:
With 99 per cent of the ballots counted, the "yes" vote stood at 51.37 per cent, while the "no" vote was 48.63 per cent, according to the state-run Anadolu Agency. The head of Turkey's electoral board confirmed the "yes" victory and said final results will be declared in 11-12 days.
BBC News quotes the leader of an opposing party:
The main opposition, the Republican People's Party (CHP), has called for a recount.
Deputy leader Bulent Tezcan denounced "violations" in the electoral process. "We will pursue a legal battle. If the irregularities are not fixed, there will be a serious legitimacy discussion," he said.
additional coverage:
- NPR
- BBC News
- Reuters
- CNN (editorial)
- New York Times
- Foreign Policy blog (editorial)
Turkish Electorate Appears to Choose Dictatorship; Opposition Cries Foul
Common Dreams reports Erdoğan Claims Ultimate Power in Turkey After Nearly Split Vote.
As one opponent of the referendum noted: "Threats, oppression, imprisonment, censorship, defamation--and yet half of the people of Turkey voted" against.
In a very close--and closely watched--referendum vote, Turks on [April 16] handed President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan what many say is authoritarian rule.
With more than 99 percent of ballots counted, Erdoğan claimed a win with 51.36 percent voting in favor of the referendum and 48.64 voting against.
However, the Guardian reported,
disparities persisted into Sunday evening, with the opposition saying not all ballots had been counted and they would contest a third of the votes that had been cast. [Sadi Guven, the head of Turkey's high electoral board, or YSK] said the YSK had decided to consider unstamped ballots as valid unless they were proved to be fraudulent after a high number of complaints--including one from the ruling AK Party--that its officials had failed to stamp some ballot papers.
The No campaign said the YSK's last-minute decision raised questions about the validity of the vote.
TheFederalistPapers.org reports Turkey Votes To Turn Itself Into An Islamic Dictatorship.
Turkey's new dictator, President Recip Tayyip Erdoğan claimed victory in Sunday's vote on whether he should essentially take almost complete control over the country.
The opposition has said they would contest the election, citing rampant voter fraud, but the election is no less stunning.
Turkey is a member of NATO and a crucial ally (sometimes) in the fight against terrorism.
[...] If the results are upheld, it gives Turkey's government--with Erdoğan at the helm--widespread authority to scrap the centuries-old parliamentary system, replacing it with a presidential model. It would concentrate massive power in the hands of the president who has recently jailed opponents and cracked down on dissent.
Erdoğan will be able to appoint senior judges, declare a state of emergency, dissolve parliament, and in some cases issue new laws be [decreed].
It will also theoretically allow Erdoğan, who has dominated Turkish politics as president and prime minister since 2003, to stay in office until 2029.
(Score: 3, Informative) by looorg on Wednesday April 19 2017, @10:33AM (18 children)
Probably nothing good will come of it for the rest of the world (or the western world at least). What happens to the turks tho is well their problem. They voted for him, they seem to like him so who are we to argue. From the looks of it on the surface it would seem Turkey is making great strides become the new Iran - an Islamic Republic, they are just not going full out theocracy yet even tho it seems Erdogan is not far from being a living kalif. I recon the main difference between Iran and Turkey will be that Turkey is mostly Sunni, like their bff:s in Saudi Arabi and that Iran is Shia. So the various little religious proxy wars via certain organizations are sure to continue.
I would assume that we can be fairly certain that the door to any kind of EU membership is firmly shut and slammed in their face at this point, it was a hard thing to swallow before this. It's standing in NATO is probably still strong due to geopolitics and the bases are needed for all the events in the middle east, eastern Mediterranean and it's close border with Russia.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bradley13 on Wednesday April 19 2017, @10:45AM (7 children)
What happens to the turks tho is well their problem.
In a sense, true. However, you don't really believe that the majority of the population wants this, do you? I mean, aside from the people in jail, the people threatened with jail (or, in the case of the Kurds, with military reprisals), the people intimidated into not voting. Aside from all of that, I'm quite sure that Erdogan would have ensured the vote went his way regardless, after all, vote-counters have families too...
So, sure, it's the Turks problem. But it's a problem for the rest of Europe as well, because we have to live next door to this.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by looorg on Wednesday April 19 2017, @11:18AM (5 children)
Do I believe there was some kind of election fraud? Highly probable. With that in mind you could also then conclude that the remaining population that gets to vote have been stacked in favor of Erdogan, a lot of it might come from the purge after the latest failed coup. The Kurds are 15ish % of the population and they have always been put down. The central government probably has a big hard on for keeping them down and are massively afraid of a complete Syrian collapse where the Kurds can then carve out a working "homeland" across Northern Iraq (which seems to already be a reality) and parts of Syria (almost there). If that thing gets traction the only remain part would be a fair chunk of south-eastern Turkey. They clearly want to avoid that at almost any cost.
As far as Europe goes the problem has imo been that we have been to soft on Turkey and Erdogan. Stringing them along instead of telling them off. If "Fortress Europe" was a real thing we wouldn't have to worry about Turkey. Now we are trying to bribe them to keep all the refugees. We should build a big fucking wall (quite possibly not an actual wall), everyone that comes across into Greece, Italy or anywhere in Eastern Europe should be pushed back out of Europe and then we could just tell Erdogan to go fuck himself. Sucks for the refugees but then we can't be the only safe spot available to them, we are full.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 19 2017, @11:33AM
Can do, Won't do. Seems a lot of politicians these days have other alliances than their own people. So while it's no problem to solve really. It will not be done.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday April 19 2017, @03:50PM
I'm surprised the vote was as close as it was.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Wednesday April 19 2017, @06:03PM (1 child)
Do I believe there was some kind of election fraud? Highly probable.
Yes, but regardless of the extent of possible fraud in this case, I think we're beginning to see the end of democracy worldwide, or at least widespread recognition of its failure. For every dictator who is fraudulently elected, there is another example of a tyrant who is voted in voluntarily by the public.
Of course Plato recognized this back in the days when democracy was a new idea. If people don't know this already, they really should acquaint themselves with Plato's five political systems [wikipedia.org]. You may not agree with his outlook or preference for "philosopher kings," but history has clearly proven him right again and again as democracy turns into "mob rule" and that mob eventually votes in favor of tyranny.
This has happened again and again throughout history, which is why the Founders of the U.S. took such great pains to take power away from the people and direct democracy. But in the past century or so, populism has led to the rallying cry of "democracy" as a force for good in the world, which means more "power to the people."
Ironically, though, history has shown us that "the people," having been granted power, frequently vote it away to a dictator who promises them stuff they want (food, safety, homes, land, jobs, etc.). The educated people of the 18th century had read their history and understood this. Of course, there's no perfect system -- putting power out of the hands of the people risks corruption at other levels of government.
In recent years, it has been common to slam other "bad" countries for having "bad democracies," i.e., even if they are nominally democratic, their system isn't functional. But given recent events in many countries, I think it's worthwhile considering whether that strict distinction between "good" and "bad" democracies is really sustainable. Plato warned us that democracies can easily degrade into tyranny. At some point we seem to have forgotten that lesson -- or perhaps thought, "Oh, no -- that couldn't happen in a modern democracy! We have the RIGHT kind of government! It can't happen here!"
Folks, it's happening. Around the world. Even classic "good" western democracies are increasingly voting in favor of people who promise them totalitarian regimes. France could be the next to take a big step away from freedom in favor of vacuous populist rhetoric. The dominos may be starting to tumble, and most people don't even notice. All we worry about are rare "terrorist" events (most of them committed by mentally ill people with no strong ties to actual organizations) and people who don't look like us. We chase people who promise us jobs and houses and good lives, but who really have their own agendas that ultimately work against the people in the long run.
Maybe it was always thus. But I have to admit that for the first time in my life, I'm getting worried about the very future of democracy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @01:04AM
A lot of democracies are already corrupted such that they proceed with actions that are not in the interest of the people. The reaction is of course to vote into the far end of the political spectrum in order to make sure there's a course change even if it has bad side effects.
There seems to be a lot of mentally ill people with good coordination skills. What is more interesting is the lack of action of the government both in removing these people from the society and from letting more in.
When the people vote power goes wrong another vote btw is the one of using ones feet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 19 2017, @11:02PM
Subsequent headlines:
"Massive Electoral Fraud" in Turkey's Referendum [alternet.org]
Dark Cloud of Illegitimacy Hovers Over Turkey Vote [bipartisanpolicy.org]
...and, as for Iran being the boilerplate for crooked election, folks might want to check out what happened in Georgia's special election yesterday to replace the congressman who was appointed CIA Director.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 19 2017, @03:12PM
I would assume that we can be fairly certain that the door to any kind of EU membership is firmly shut
It's Turkey's Brexit. Even the margin is the same.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 19 2017, @11:30AM (3 children)
It's standing in NATO is probably still strong due to geopolitics and the bases are needed for all the events in the middle east
Shouldn't be to sure of that. Don't be surprised if they get kicked out. And of course getting involved in all kinds of Sunni proxy wars which may drag NATO into the mess. Another solution is to do the Egyptian thing and re-establish the military ruling, probably with help by expertise "consulting" from the other side of the Atlantic.
Funny thing. When Russia disappeared as a threat then suddenly Muslims appear. Like the conflict is constant but not the opponent.
The new sultan will establish a grand paradise with sexual abuse theocratic schools (according to reports), death penalty, censorship, endless conflicts and North Korea style towards neighbors. Now that we are at it. Suppose Sunni-Turkey happens to be attacked by Shia-Iran. And then being a member of NATO. Everybody got to help them defend themselves.
(Score: 2) by looorg on Wednesday April 19 2017, @01:04PM (2 children)
Don't be surprised if they get kicked out.
That could set a dangerous president and I'm not sure they would want to go there. No country has ever been kicked out of NATO before, sure there has to be a first time for everything. France left once but then later rejoined. It is a matter of defence, you can't start a war and then when shit goes bad run crying to NATO and demand protection. If they would I'm fairly sure NATO would collapse in its current form as I would suspect a lot of members just wouldn't show up.
That said tho there are probably a lot of countries that don't really fit into NATO that are currently members, they don't have the military power or the money to back up an actual membership. Most of them are let in for geographical and strategic reasons. Montenegro is apparently going to be the next NATO country. Not really quite sure what to say about that. They don't have a large military (their entire defence force is about 2000 men), they don't have any money and geographically they don't really add anything. So I'm not really sure why they are even let in except as some form of "thank you" or as a bribe.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday April 19 2017, @03:18PM
Montenegro could be let in because other NATO members don't want to see them 'annexed' by another power hostile to NATO members.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @02:28AM
That could set a dangerous president
No, no no! They already have one! It's ve-e-ery nice-a! You have committed an egg-corn, like the nuts on the mighty Oak tree. The word you were looking for is precedent [lascribe.net]. Remember, spelling and grammar and correct language are very important in retraining the reputation of SoylentNews as a reliable source of fake news. Thank you for your cooperation.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday April 19 2017, @12:00PM (4 children)
With a "mentally-unstable"-like leader** and little to none at all leverage on him, NATO's got to ask itself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya,...?
** (only a month or so ago, the Nazi [bbc.com] vs dictator [sbs.com.au] spat with Europe).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Insightful) by looorg on Wednesday April 19 2017, @01:21PM (3 children)
With a "mentally-unstable"-like leader** and little to none at all leverage on him, NATO's got to ask itself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya,...?
This is reminiscent of what a lot of European papers wrote when Trump became president of the USA. "OMG! Trump is the leader of NATO now! He is going to drag us into nuclear war at the drop of a hat or insult ..." etc etc. But then perhaps a complete lack of understanding how NATO works shouldn't be allowed to get in the way of a good outrage.
Neither Trump nor Erdogan are probably the only "insane" or undesirable leaders of NATO countries. But then NATO isn't being run personally be either of them. Elected politicians come and go -- multinational organizations are supposed to be above that and function no matter whom is in office in the various homelands.
Example. Greece joined NATO in 1952, same year as Turkey joined. Between 1967 and 1974 the country was a military dictatorship, or controlled by a military junta. As I recall their excuse was that they "had to take control" to prevent (or save) the nation from falling under the influence of communism. I would assume that Greece was to valuable to be kicked out for geographical reasons, also if it had fallen to communism it might have joined the WP and that would not have been good from a NATO perspective. But with that in mind -- NATO seem to have a somewhat pragmatic look upon national leadership. They come and go while NATO prevails.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday April 19 2017, @03:47PM
"OMG! Trump is the leader of NATO now! He is going to drag us into nuclear war at the drop of a hat or insult ..."
It's only been a little over 100 days, and he's already fired a bunch of cruise missiles and dropped the MOAB. Give him another year.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday April 19 2017, @09:53PM
It's probably easier to get NK to launch an attack than it is to convince NATO to go to war. They both end the same way, though, NATO going to war.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Thursday April 20 2017, @07:03AM
The difference is that in America there are still the checks and balances (and Trump has experienced them first hand already). In Turkey, they already had been much weaker than in America, and this referendum was to basically completely remove them.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday April 19 2017, @01:27PM
What happens to the turks tho is well their problem.
Unless they use the resources of their country to encourage similar governments in other countries. For example, Turkey provided substantial support to ISIS by buying oil.
and Turkey will be that Turkey is mostly Sunni, like their bff:s in Saudi Arabi
Why do you think Turkey is extremely friendly with Saudi Arabia? Sure, they have the same flavor of religion (but so does Iran, Sunni/Shi'ite is not that big a difference in the first place - it's the other differences in culture, societies, and ethnicities that keep the two factions at odds). But they're different ethnicities and different political systems.