The political economy of the CHP-Mehmet Şimşek meeting

CHP Chairman Özgür Özel’s meeting with AKP Chairman and President Tayyip Erdoğanis being widely debated. There are those who approve and those who oppose it. 

As in every field, dialogue in politics is good, but what matters is that dialogue and actions take place on legitimate grounds. If you ask, “What is legitimate ground?” the Republic of Türkiye the legitimate basis is the constitution. There is a Constitutional Court that does not even comply with its own rulings, judicial decisions, or the laws they have enacted, a "One-Man Regime"One-Man Regime" exists.  

I believe that all kinds of illegitimacy, starting with the President's third-term candidacy, are being legitimized through the main opposition channel, despite our constitution and laws. The previous chairman Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu also legitimized the referendum that brought about a regime change with unstamped ballots, along with many other instances of illegitimacy that followed. 

Now on the agenda is the meeting between the CHP's economic staff and Minister of Finance Mehmet Şimşek.The two party leaders made the decision for this meeting and instructed their respective teams. Within the economic public sphere, criticisms have emerged, primarily stating: "As the CHP, why are you trying to get under this wreckage and share the responsibility? Instead of offering proposals for the tax system, you should be engaging in harsh opposition to remove this network of destruction from power and demand early elections." Undoubtedly, there is a degree of validity and truth to these approaches. I find it more appropriate to move the issue beyond daily debates and address it from the foundation. The economy cannot be separated from politics. The systems, models, plans, and monetary and fiscal policies implemented in an economy are primarily based on a choice. And most importantly, there is the issue of distribution, which is constantly pushed into the background and intended to be forgotten by interest groups in economic debates. We call this entire set of choices, from production to distribution, political economy.

Let us examine the AKP's political economy. Contrary to what the majority says, I do not believe that the "AKP implements a market-oriented, neoliberal" economic model. Although I do not embrace the neoliberal market model at all, this model also has its own rules. These rules are not valid in the economic policies implemented by the AKP. Rules change overnight. It is a kind of 

"Crony Capitalism" or one that uses state power (influence) to favor specific groups. “Middle Eastern-style Sultanism” would be a more realistic definition.

THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE WAS NOT A TURKISH STATE BUT A DYNASTIC STATE

The Ottoman Empire, was a Turkish tribe and was founded as a Turkish Beylik state. By the time it grew and transformed into an Empire and a Dynastic State, it had long since lost its character as a Turkish state due to the nations in the expanding territories becoming subjects and the influence of the Islamic religion. Atatürk’s Republic of Turkey, which he founded in 1923 after winning the War of Independence, the Republic of Turkey is a nation-state based on citizenship. Secularism is among its most important characteristics. 

Political Islam and its representative, the AKP, want to completely change the nation-state and secular structure of the Republic of Turkey. They are adopting a Dynastic State model based on the 'ummah' and servitude to the Sultan, as it was in the Ottoman Empire, rather than a nation-state (nationality) based on free individuals and citizens. They aim to establish a profound admiration for the Ottomans and the Ottoman state order. During their 22-year rule, they have made significant progress on this path, backed by the support of US imperialism and capital within the scope of the Greater Middle East Project. Refugee and migration policies, the recently implemented hot money policy, and the new curriculum introduced in education will be the final, striking blows. 

THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF POLITICAL ISLAM

The economic preferences of this choice by political Islam, or in other words, its political economy, are shaped accordingly. What is that political economy? It was implemented in plain sight. Let us summarize it briefly. 

In the first period of their rule, they viewed Turkey as a 'Dar-al-Harb', (a non-Muslim country to be plundered). Public facilities and factories were sold or closed down, and mines, natural resources, and agricultural lands were looted as if by plunderers by local cronies and foreign-capital companies. 

Following that, the regime in Turkey changed with the 2017 referendum and the 2018 presidential election. Under the name of the Presidential Government System, a transition was made to a one-man regime defined as “Sultanism.” All state institutions, including the parliament, the military, the judiciary, and the police, came under the command of a single person.

Through implemented policies and intense propaganda, the consciousness of a nation-state and citizenship was weakened. As a result of deliberate impoverishment policies, a significant majority of citizens, struggling to make a living, were transformed into a type of “subject content with what is given” instead of “objecting” and forgetting their “demands for fundamental rights.” 

The Ottoman Empire was not a state based on a nation or a tribe. It was a dynastic state. Therefore, its economic preferences and political economy were not aimed at the enrichment or increased prosperity of the country or the subjects (we cannot call them a nation) loyal to the Sultan, but rather at increasing the income and wealth of the Dynasty. With the capitulations, the Ottoman Empire had become a semi-colonial state. Its subjects were being exploited, but the Dynasty was getting richer. 

The Ottoman-aspiring Dynastic State model does not exist in our constitution, but it exists in practice. An economic policy based on the enrichment of the palace administration and the cronies around it is in effect... For example, increasing agricultural production or solving the problems of farmers in agriculture is not important. During this period, the Ministry of Agriculture, at the expense of increasing foreign debt, enabled a narrow circle to get rich through the importation of agricultural products by granting privileges to certain individuals, and also provided temporary abundance in the market through imports; however, agriculture subsequently collapsed. While food prices are constantly falling globally, they continue to rise in our country. The country and the people have become impoverished, while a narrow circle has become wealthy.

CAPITULATIONS AND PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS

Public-Private Partnership projects implemented during the AKP era, highways, bridges, airports, city hospitals, treasury guarantees... The mining licenses granted, the destroyed pastures, agricultural lands, and forests... Electricity distribution companies, vehicle inspection stations... All of these lead to the exploitation of the country's resources and the impoverishment of society, but they ensure the enrichment of the Dynasty and its circle. Just like the capitulations and tax-farming tenders in the Ottoman Empire... 

The fundamental feature that distinguishes the Ottoman or AKP economic model from countries that implement typical liberal or neoliberal policies is this: For example, the US, UK, Canada, Germany, and even China—which is governed by the Communist Party but integrated into the neoliberal world order—protect their own capitalist classes while also looking out for the welfare of their own people and the country's resources. 

Now the question is this: Which technical aspects of the economy will you discuss with an AKP whose political economy is this? Is there any point in discussing implementation flaws, monetary policy, fiscal policy, tax policy, interest rate policy, pensions, minimum wage, base prices in agriculture, or how to lower inflation in an economy whose preferences are shaped in this way?

First, we must correctly identify what those who govern the country prefer. Then, we will interpret the economic policies implemented accordingly. Our objection should be to the preferences themselves, before the implementations in interest rate, monetary, tax, and budget policies. There are so many trained, valuable economists who can solve what comes after... 

I believe that Prof. Dr. Yalçın Karatepe, the Deputy Chairman responsible for the economy, whose views I respect and value and who frequently touches upon the subject of preferences in the economy, has much to explain not only to the voters but also within the hierarchy of the CHP. His job is not easy either... Even if the Chairman has changed, the transition from the environment-flavored neoliberal policies presented at the 'CHP 2nd Century Call Vision Meeting' held on December 3, 2022, to Social Democratic economic policies does not seem like it will be very easy.