Turkish crackdown

Ever since the failed coup in 2016 in Turkey, the AKP-led government in Ankara has hardened[1] its attitude towards all sorts of dissent.[2] While governments have a duty to guard against any unconstitutional takeovers[3] of the state, they must not use this as a cover to smother[4] all opposition. Unfortunately, developments in Turkey are taking a very authoritarian turn. On Friday, six journalists were handed life sentences for “aiding plotters” of the coup. The sentences came even though in one of the cases Turkey’s constitutional court had ruled that the detention of the accused amounted to a violation of his rights. In the period since the coup, the Turkish state has led a sweeping[5] crackdown against all those even suspected of harbouring sympathies for exiled cleric Fethullah Gulen, whom the state accuses of orchestrating the failed putsch.[6] Mr Gulen has denied any role. According to reports, more than 50,000 people have been jailed while around 150,000 have been sacked or suspended, including government servants, teachers and others.

But it is not just Gulenists that the Turkish state is rounding up.[7] Last month the authorities detained several doctors, members of the Turkish Medical Association. The medics[8] were rounded up for criticising Ankara’s incursion inside Syria to battle Kurdish militias active in the Arab country. President Erdogan termed the doctors “terrorist lovers” for daring to criticise the military operation. In a related development, over 300 people have been held for opposing Turkey’s Syrian incursion, including those who made comments on social media, accused of spreading “terror propaganda”. All these arrests reflect that in Turkey, there is shrinking space for dissent. Without doubt Turkey faces many threats; the attempted coup was a very real challenge to the authority of an elected government. Moreover, a bloody war is raging next door in Syria, while a low-level Kurdish insurgency continues inside Turkey. But while the country may be located in a rough neighbourhood and is facing internal issues, all challenges must be confronted while safeguarding democratic rights, chiefly freedom of speech. Parties and individuals must be free to criticise the actions of the Turkish state; if the government feels the criticism is misplaced, it must engage its critics in debate instead of jailing them or terming them ‘traitors’. Turkey has had a long history of military intervention and its transition to democracy has been achieved after many sacrifices. Therefore, Ankara must guard democratic values and resist the allure of authoritarianism.

(Adapted from Dawn on February 17th, 2018)

---

[1] if sb's feelings or attitudes harden or sb/sth hardens them, they become more fixed and determined; make or become less sympathetic

[2] disagreement

[3] the seizure of control of a country; coup, overthrow, seizure

[4] suffocate; stifle

[5] full; broad; wide-ranging and comprehensive

[6] military coup

[7] if police or soldiers round up a group of people, they find them and arrest or capture them

[8] a doctor or medical student

The zero man

The Lodhran loss could be a blip[1] or it could be confirmation of what many have long suspected — that Imran can’t win, doesn’t know how to win.

That’s fine.

Many have lusted after power, few have achieved it. Imran has over-promised and under-delivered for so long now that a definitive[2] defeat the next time round wouldn’t be such a big deal.

At this point, Imran winning may be the bigger surprise.

But even in defeat, an impact can be had. So you don’t get to be in government or parliament in large numbers, but there’s still a chance to shape the governance agenda or the national discourse.

Kinda like the PPP did with the south-Punjab-province gamble. Knowing it was heading for a walloping[3] in the last election, the PPP tried the ethnic card: vote for us and we’ll give you your own province.

There’s nothing really — nothing new, significant or potentially lasting — that Imran has added to politics here.

It was all kinds of stupid. Two Punjab provinces would have doubled Punjab’s share in the Senate and representation in the CCI, ECP, NFC and sundry federal bodies. It would have given Punjab two high courts, possibly funnelling[4] more Punjab judges to the Supreme Court.

If the smaller provinces think they have a bad deal of it right now, two Punjab provinces would have been a whole other headache.

But the PPP was desperate, the Seraiki vote was its only chance in Punjab and an election had to be fought.

It did cause a change of sorts, though. Alarmed by the possibility of their prized possession being split and concerned that the separatist genie may be difficult to put back in the bottle, the PML-N began to take south Punjab seriously.

A decent electoral haul from south Punjab followed and the past four years have been spent pouring money into the region. South Punjab isn’t and will never be Lahore, but the political distance between Lahore and south Punjab has shrunk.

The heavy turnout in the by-election was a clue as is the problem of having too many winners in the PML-N camp. Having too many winners in the same constituency fighting for the same ticket can be a problem, but it’s a better problem than having no winners.

Point being, the PPP’s desperation forced the PML-N to respond to the ethnic card by doing more of the stuff the N-League is handy at, like pouring cement and tar and sprucing up infrastructure and handing out stuff.

So back to Imran. Imagine he disappears and the PTI implodes.[5] Poof,[6] gone, suddenly, all of it. What would the contribution left behind be, to national politics, to what other parties do, to how the system behaves?

That’s what’s so irritating about Imran.

You can’t think of anything.

It’s all the more frustrating because of how far he’s come. From a party of one he’s dragged the PTI all the way to becoming the second largest party in the country. Even now, he’s still got a realistic shot[7] at power in a few months.

But there’s nothing. Nothing durable that the PTI has contributed, by design[8] or accident, to the national game. PTI groupies[9] harp on[10] about the anti-corruption stuff, but it’s mostly more of the same.

Sure, Imran has made anti-corruption his signature[11] message, but by narrowly focusing on Nawaz, and occasionally Zardari, he hasn’t moved the needle[12] on systemic corruption. ‘My opponent is corrupt’ isn’t exactly a novel political message.

PTI haters will flag[13] the coarsening[14] of political rhetoric that the PTI has effected.[15] It’s true that Imran has been crude[16] and the PTI got a jump on[17] the social-media game with a mocking, ugly tone.

But tales of what BB suffered at the hands of the IJI and the PML-N before the Sharifs became holier-than-thou[18] are hardly forgotten. And the universality of social-media ugliness suggests it’s less the PTI and more the medium that has unleashed wretchedness globally.

Up and down and through the PTI agenda you can sift and search and there’s nothing really — nothing new, significant or potentially lasting — that Imran has added to politics here.

There’s nothing even that Imran has forced the PML-N to change tack[19] on.

Unless Nawaz barnstorming[20] the country like Imran is considered a change. Given the success Nawaz seems to be having with it, if you were the PTI you’d probably rather that Nawaz hadn’t taken to matching jalsa for jalsa.

Electoral reforms were the great possibility — and the catalyst[21] was definitely Imran’s campaign to delegitimise the results of the last election. But once it became clear that the PML-N wasn’t about to be ousted, Imran lost interest in electoral reforms.

In the end, the electoral reforms package was overshadowed[22] by the Nawaz-as-party-president clause and the repulsive[23] character who arrived in Faizabad.

So vote for PTI or don’t vote for PTI, love Imran or hate Imran. But also allow yourself a little irritation.

Because for all the noise Imran has made, for all the votes he’s won, for all the disruption he’s caused, he’s managed to achieve virtually nothing.

He doesn’t seem to know how to win nor has he forced, directly or indirectly, deliberately or unwittingly, positive change in anyone else or the system itself.

It’s annoying, irritating and exhausting.

(Adapted from Dawn on February 18th, 2018)

Top of Form

---

[1] blip: a temporary problem

[2] definitive: final; not able to be changed

[3] walloping: a heavy defeat

[4] direct; guide; move into and through a narrow space

[5] fail completely economically or politically

[6] used when talking about sth disappearing suddenly

[7] a chance to do something

[8] a plan or an intention

[9] an enthusiastic fan

[10] repeat something; to repeat or stress something in a way that becomes tiresome

[11] distinctive characteristic

[12] change a situation to a noticeable degree

[13] indicate something: to draw somebody's attention to something

[14] roughen; harden; make sb become less polite and often offensive in the way they behave

[15] make sth happen

[16] vulgar or obscene

[17] gain an advantage, especially by doing something earlier than someone else

[18] characterized by an attitude of moral superiority

[19] course of action; direction; path

[20] travel from place to place giving performances

[21] incentive

[22] dominate; take attention away from somebody

[23] very unpleasant