The Turkish question

Known unknowns of Erdogan's victory

It says much for the gap between market perception and popular opinion in Turkey that the Turkish lira sank to a new record low on Monday even as cities erupted in celebration after Recep Tayyip Erdogan secured a victory in the presidential elections. In one of the most hard-fought elections since the Turkish republic was founded almost 100 years ago, Mr Erdogan secured a four percentage point victory in the run-off against secular challenger Kemal Kilicdaroglu. He overcame one of Turkey’s worst economic crises in a generation and the mishandling of an earthquake that left over 50,000 people dead. The Turkish strongman, 69, who has established his power by the simple expedient of jailing, exiling, and silencing all Opposition after a failed coup against him in 2016, largely draws his support from the central Anatolian mainland, home to 90 per cent of the population. Poorer, largely rural, and more religiously conservative than those living in the European portion of the country, they have been victims of Mustafa Kemal ‘Ataturk’s’ authoritarian Europeanising and secularising policies.

In his 20 years in power, first as prime minister from 2003 and then as directly elected president since 2014, Mr Erdogan sought to mobilise this insecurity with a brand of muscular, Islamic nationalism, with a brisk mosque-building programme — including turning the Hagia Sophia back into a mosque — and investment in Anatolian urbanisation. Such robust religious nationalism as state policy caused the Turks to overlook Mr Erdogan’s alleged personal corruption and a stalling economy with inflation raging at 43 per cent and unemployment at 10 per cent. Mr Erdogan follows a somewhat novel economic policy, focusing on growth and economic competitiveness rather than taming inflation, consistently slashing interest rates. As the Turks and the money markets contend with unconventional economic policies, Mr Erdogan’s independent approach to European foreign policy and the Nato (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) alliance remains a major cause for concern. Western leaders have issued cautious welcomes, not least because Mr Erdogan’s victory was won through the exercise of a democratic process. But the concerns were clear.

Turkey is Nato’s largest partner in Europe but Mr Erdogan’s refusal to condemn Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine or abide by Western sanctions have put the alliance in a bind. Mr Erdogan plays a balancing act. Turkey supplied Ukraine with 50 Bayraktar TB2 drones, which Mr Erdogan presented as a transfer between a private company and Kyiv. At the same time he delayed Finland’s inclusion in Nato and has withheld approval to Sweden on grounds that the two Scandinavian countries have granted asylum to Kurdish militias, which Ankara has labelled terrorists. If his autonomous foreign policy has kept his European alliance partners off balance, it has earned him benefits from Russia: A critical deferred payment on Russian energy imports that, reportedly, enabled him to spend lavishly on his election campaign. It is unclear yet what Mr Erdogan’s victory will mean for India. The relations between the two countries have been less than optimum. India’s stellar role in rescue missions after the recent earthquake may have warmed relations but Turkey’s continued support to Pakistan has remained a point of difference, even as Mr Erdogan has been vocal on India’s treatment of its Muslim minorities. In short, Mr Erdogan will remain a significant known unknown in the evolving geopolitical landscape.