Turkey’s Erdogan Gets a Pass When It Comes to Human Rights

SPYBALLOON GLOBAL NEWS

Turkey’s Erdogan Gets a Pass When It Comes to Human Rights

Story By #RiseCelestialStudios

Osman Kavala has been in prison for 3,165 days. For the uninitiated, Kavala is a Turkish businessman and philanthropist who has been falsely and ridiculously accused of helping to engineer the attempted July 2016 coup in Turkey.

Ekrem Imamoglu has been in prison for 470 days. Turkish authorities accuse him of insulting Istanbul’s chief prosecutor, corruption, and espionage, but his real crime was being the most popular politician in Turkey and a compelling competitor to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

In May, a Turkish court declared the internal elections of the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) null in a move Human Rights Watch called a “deeply damaging blow to the rule of law, democracy and human rights.” Instead of ordering a revote, the court placed the CHP’s previous leader, a failed and weak politician, atop the party, effectively destroying it.

Supporters of the Turkish government contend that Kavala and Imamoglu were prosecuted in accordance with Turkey’s legal system and that the CHP leadership contest was rife with fraud. Of course, authoritarians always situate their repression in the law. What has befallen Kavala, Imamoglu, the CHP leadership, and countless others is no longer shocking in Erdogan’s Turkey. There are thousands of political opponents—real and perceived—of the Turkish leader and his Justice and Development Party who have had their property seized, families harassed, and freedom taken away with little recourse in a politicized justice system.

What is shocking is the silence of the key leaders in the United States and abroad, including political figures who tend to center democratic values and human rights in the West’s approach to the world and yet have said nary a word about Ankara’s dreadful record. How dreadful? If Turkey wanted to become a member of NATO now instead of in 1952, it would not meet the criteria on democracy, rule of law, and human rights.

Let’s start with U.S. President Donald Trump. In his first term, the one time he focused on Erdogan’s human rights record it was because an American was imprisoned and Trump saw an opportunity to benefit politically from his release. In July 2018, Trump tweeted, “The United States will impose large sanctions on Turkey for their long time detainment of Pastor Andrew Brunson, a great Christian, family man and wonderful human being. He is suffering greatly. This innocent man of faith should be released immediately!” Brunson had been preaching in Izmir on Turkey’s western coast for decades and had been inexplicably jailed after the failed coup took place months earlier. Brunson’s case was important to Trump’s evangelical constituents and thus important to the president.

In his second term, things got worse. Trump appointed an ambassador who often repeats Ankara’s talking points and seems to be confused about who he represents and even where he is from. The president has repeatedly said that he wants to bring Turkey back into the F-35 program despite its purchase of a Russian air defense system and congressional legislation that prohibits the United States from readmitting Turkey so long as Ankara is in possession of the Russian weapons. And the White House has announced its intention to sell U.S. jet engines for Turkey’s domestic fighter aircraft.

One might expect this behavior from Trump, who has a yen for authoritarian leaders and especially for Erdogan. But for many members of Congress, human rights is an important issue. Few in Washington want to revisit the days of the Freedom Agenda, when the United States went on a neocolonial bender to change politics and society in countries around the Middle East, but the United States should stand for something, at least rhetorically. Most members of Congress would likely agree, but they have not been any more vocal than Trump on the Turkish government’s transgressions. This is odd, especially given how much time and attention leading Democrats and Republicans have spent on human rights in China, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Cuba, North Korea, and especially Israel. As one congressional staffer whose boss is interested in Turkey relayed, “Everyone up here just wants to talk about Bibi [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu].”

In fairness, the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, a bipartisan congressional body, did hold a hearing on Turkey recently. Just three out of 51 commission members attended. When members of Congress on both sides of the aisle are selective in their criticism, it betrays and belies much of their outrage about the human rights records of China, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Cuba, North Korea, and Israel. If Kavala and Imamoglu are not worthy of solidarity, who is?

What about European countries and other middle powers? Surely, they can be counted on to center the rule of law and democracy. In January, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney electrified global liberal elites with his “rupture” speech at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, which included these lines:

I would like to tell you that the other countries, especially intermediate powers like Canada, are not powerless. They have the capacity to build a new order that encompasses our values, such as respect for human rights, sustainable development, solidarity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the various states.

Yet six months after Carney’s ringing words and two days after the ousted leaders of the CHP urged members to resist the government’s draconian measures, the trade ministers of Turkey and Canada agreed to exploratory negotiations on a free trade deal. Carney will dine out on his Davos speech for the rest of his life, but Turks and Turkey watchers know it is worth no more than a Farmer’s Breakfast Wrap and a Double Double at Tim Hortons (about 7.50CAD).

The Europeans have been silent as well. At least they have a (semi-)defensible reason. Because they disarmed after the Cold War, Trump is unreliable, and Russia is a threat, the Europeans believe they need Turkey for their defense. As a result, they clearly chose to remain mum on Erdogan’s predatory domestic politics ahead of the NATO summit. Knowing Erdogan—who is looking forward to showcasing Ankara’s importance to Western security—he will interpret Europe’s silence as acquiescence. He is likely correct.

The next time a member of Congress, a Canadian official, or a European leader wags a finger about human rights violations, let’s not take them too seriously. They don’t mean it. If they did, they would call out Erdogan for unjustly jailing his opponents, devastating the opposition, and destroying Turkey’s democratic practices.