Turkey and Russia, along with China and Iran, are often lumped together in the group of large authoritarian countries which, in the 21ste century, challenge the West as a whole… with their own imperial ambitions.
This amalgamation is based on a basis of truth: there is, among the leaders of these countries supposed to represent the “global South” (a vague concept), a shared distrust and contempt for the “collective West” (Vladimir Putin’s expression). ; no less vague concept). There is a sense of opportunity in the face of its current weaknesses: Trumpism, populism, contested democracy, European divisions over Ukraine, etc.
There are ambitions for at least regional influence, in each of these countries: Iran and its networks in the Middle East, neo-Soviet Russia facing Ukraine and its “near abroad”, China facing to Taiwan and its maritime neighbors, neo-Ottoman Turkey aspiring (in Syria and elsewhere) to regain its past power.
Between them, these so-called “allies” are not really allies. Historically and geopolitically, they are as likely to clash as to associate. Not ten years ago, Russian and Turkish planes were shooting at each other in the skies over Syria. The great convergence between Russia and China has downsides, things left unsaid, old rekindled distrusts… and the possibility of the former being subjugated by the latter.
And even if, in concert with this shared detestation (West = capitalism, imperialism, false democracy, supposed universal values, superiority complex), there is an authoritarianism common to all these countries… this authoritarianism comes in various, variable ways, perhaps reversible.
* * * *
Which brings us to Turkey.
The defeat of the AKP, the “moderate Islamist” party which has ruled this country for 20 years, in Sunday’s municipal elections, shows one thing: internally, Turkey is far from the authoritarian, quasi-totalitarian brutality of the regime. Putin, even if the repression of the Kurds – collectively assimilated to “terrorism” – is real and ruthless.
Unlike Russia, authoritarian Turkey – with, for ten years, the subordination of the army, the justice system and a good part of the media to the AKP government, itself vassalized by an all-powerful president – remains a country where we can hold elections, count the votes without tinkering with them and leading to a result unfavorable to the regime.
On Sunday, the opposition captured or retained seven of the country’s ten main cities. With the AKP at 35%, three points behind the social-democratic, secular and “post-Atatürk” CHP. With Erdogan reacting unexpectedly, the tone calm and composed, unusual for this normally aggressive tribune and expert in insults. “We did not get the results we expected,” he said. “The real winners are not the candidates, but the Turkish nation. […] We have demonstrated the maturity of Turkish democracy. »
Can we imagine, for a second, Vladimir Putin losing an election, then praising “the maturity of Russian democracy”?
The Chinese case is something else again, since its totalitarian perfection goes beyond what we see in Russia — where facade elections are still organized (a Stalinist tradition that China has abolished).
As for Iran, today subject to the dictatorship of the Revolutionary Guards (economic mafia), at the good will of the Supreme Guide and to rigged elections, it was until 2009 a country where real consultations were organized. A country where, even amputated, the elected branch of institutions was not without powers. A country where — unlike those of Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping or Bashar al-Assad — the head of state could get up one morning and read in the newspaper: “The president is an ass and he must go. »
In this sense, and even if these are only municipal elections, Turkey, with its civil society, its opposition political parties still alive, sends a signal of hope in the face of the global wave of authoritarianism.