Recep Tayyip Erdogan: a “sultan” pursuing a neo-Ottoman anti-Western expansion political approach? Maybe so. But what is undeniable is that: he is an autocratic anti-Kemalist leader, embodying 21st-century Turkish political Islam.
What is his main objective? The resurrection of an empire? Possibly. Primarily, he uses the international stage for electoral purposes.
In his willingness to cover internal crises and dissidence, the Turkish president seeks to consolidate his “imperialist” project while awakening the nostalgia for Ottoman glory. But his plan seems like a risky one.
A depleted economy
Recently, Turkey’s economic situation has significantly deteriorated due to Erdogan’s disastrous monetary policy. The Turkish president has ignored basic economic principles and overrode the decisions of Turkish central bankers, a number of whom he has fired successively.
By requesting a cut in key interest rates, doing so during a period of inflation, the president has chosen to go against the tide. The result of this policy is to increase the devaluation of the Turkish lira against the dollar and the euro, which, in turn, worsens the inflation. A vicious circle that Erdogan has decided to ignore, putting the blame on the “conspirators who work against the nation’s interest”.
Unsurprisingly, the combination of the inflation with the depreciation of the lira lead to a decrease in the purchasing power, and therefore to the impoverishment of a significant portion of the population. A salary adjustment of wages will only aggravate the situation, as it will keep on feeding the same vicious circle. Even if this populist method is designed to attract more voters, ultimately it has a negative effect on consumption as a whole.
Erdogan the adventurer, began his career as a football player before moving into politics through his Islamist affinities.
In December 2017, one dollar was worth 3.91 Turkish lira. Today, one dollar is worth 18.63 lira: a depreciation that has increased by almost five-fold in five years. The only advantage of the lira’s fall is the fact that the exports became more competitive thanks to a valuable exchange rate. On the other hand, imports became pricier, which is a major problem in a country that heavily depends on imported power supplies.
Thereby, the economic crisis is a major threat to Erdogan’s candidacy in the upcoming elections on June 18th. Even if his political party remains a front-runner in the polls, it will only obtain a relative majority in Parliament. He will then have to form a coalition with opposing parties. Protests have already started to increase, while a solid and viable opposition currently shaping up could threaten the stability of an authoritarian regime.
Falling back on foreign policy
After years of boycott alongside its ally, Qatar, Erdogan eventually bowed to the Saudis, hoping to receive liquidity injections into a cash-strapped Turkish economy.
To rehabilitate his image, the president chose to help voters forget about internal crises. Naturally, he turned to foreign policy. Erdogan recently established himself as an indispensable mediator between Russia, Ukraine, and the rest of the world by facilitating the agreement on the export of Ukrainian wheat.
This role allowed him to avoid adopting the sanctions against Russia, which his “Western allies” urged him to do. Most of all, he avoided alienating the main energy supplier: Russia. And, by exporting drones -incidentally manufactured by his son-in-law-, he remained on good terms with the Ukrainians. In fact, the president can take credit for this balancing act.
President Erdogan looking quiet reluctant, as he receives his Israeli counterpart Isaac Herzog in Ankara.
At the same time, Erdogan is conducting a charming offensive with Gulf countries, notably Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, in the hope of attracting investments. He even reconciled with President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi to find an alternative for Turkish products in the Egyptian market.
Finally, he had to reestablish ties with Israel, a country he abhors, even if it meant disappointing part of his Islamist electorate. This hasty decision came as the Jewish state announced a gas pipeline project linking the Levantine Basin to Europe via Cyprus and Greece.
The aforementioned policies have the potential to provide some breathing space to the Turkish economy, but their outcomes are slow to materialize. The approach also carries the danger of dependence on other regional economies considered unstable, while the doors of Europe are ready to help. Provided that Turkey behaves like a democratic and modern country, respectful of human rights.
Nationalism, the opium of the Turkish people
Putin, Raisi, and Erdogan: with two countries, Iran and Russia, both subject to international sanctions, the Turkish president’s choice threatens to turn his country into one of the components of a losing trio.
Finally, Recep Tayyip Erdogan is stepping up by adopting a policy with warranted benefits: one of firmness towards external enemies. Since the 1950s, Turkish leaders have incessantly stirred the nationalist sentiment of their constituents whenever they needed electoral advantages.
The president has recently increased hostile statements against the PKK. Using as a pretext an attack of obscure origins in Istanbul in November, Erdogan decided to launch, in retaliation, a military operation in northern Syria. This “invasion” of northern Syria is a very risky venture, as it has already shown its ineffectiveness and contributed to making his Western allies extremely wary of him.
Oblivious of NATO, Erdogan keeps on taking the role of troublemaker among Westerners.
At the top of the allies’ list are the Americans, who have bases in Syria and maintain alliances with Kurdish factions to counter the threat of ISIS. Knowing that the US is one of Turkey’s main weapons suppliers, one can gauge the gravity of the situation. This also justifies why Washington is still adamant about providing Ankara with its share of the F-35 project, a state-of-the-art fighter jet.
By the next June 2023 elections, Erdogan will undoubtedly choose to intensify his provocations towards Western powers, and pursue his belligerent policy with his neighbors. It remains to be seen whether the dismembering of his foreign policy and his Islamic-Ottoman projects will be beneficial for the future of his country. A fleeting glance at some lessons provided by history are enough to presume that it might not be the case.