Hacker News Reader

Comment by elthran | Hacker News Reader

I wonder how much more of this sort of thing has to go on before the media begins widespread use of the word "dictator" for Erdogan? Illegal criticism, seizing opposition media, violent oppression of minorities, potential election shenanigans - I can imagine next he'll appoint himself President for Life and rename the it the People's Republic of Turkey.

I feel the same thing applies to Putin, but we'll never see the term used due to the immense power he and his Russia wield internationally when compared to small fry Turkey

View on HN

Turkey is considered a US ally. We don't use the term dictators for our allies. (see Saudi Arabia for example).

The correct term for the leader of Saudi Arabia is 'king', though, so it is quite understandable that dictator is not used there.

Which of course doesn't make the situation any better.

And Saddam Husseins correct title was 'President' and Hitlers correct title was 'Führer' or 'Reich Chancellor', but they were still dictators.

He is the Turkish Putin.

I find it worrying. Turkey seemed to be such a success until a few years ago. A booming, increasingly western economy, seeming stability. Somehow you expect dictatorship to come with a revolution, but it seems it can slowly creep up on you. All it seems to take is a strong, popular leader.

People think they like strong, popular leaders, but I find them a threat to democracy. They tend to think they're doing everyone, the country, a favor by latching on to power and never letting go again.

Putin does not take orders from America or EU, Erdogan does. Putin's got a PhD, Erdogan's got nothin and can't speak any English. So it's ridiculous comparing them two.

There are a lot of similarities though. Both trying to be president for life, having huge palaces, throwing reporters in jail, corrupt, somewhat popular at home and so on.

What, do they have to be identical to make the comparison? I could refer to Putin as the Russian Erdogan, but Putin was there first.

Because, it was all fun and games until a hacky "arab spring" like attempt in 2013 summer and later Gulenists decided to take government down at the end of 2013. Even though Government won the battle it was a strong blow. Government went into deep paranoia and now doing things like paranoid fools.

Putin is quite the authoritarian, yet I don't think you can compare Erdogan to Putin. They are not even on the same level.

I agree they're not on the same level - but I think this is more Putin have a superior intellect and grasp of subtlety and Realpolitik than Erdogan. I'm fully expecting Putin to pull the old President/Prime Minister switcheroo again in 2024, after winning the 2018 election.

Putin subtle? Like the switcheroo? And a second one would be subtle? The guy's an outright buffoon.

It's not that Putin is subtle. It's that Erdogan is much less so.

I'm not sure about that, in 2030 he'll be 75 years old, he might have different perspective at this age.

you clearly underestimate the man. erdogan is a brilliant politician probably the greatest of our generation with putin and do not worry he does not need europe. actually joining europe will be bad for turkey on so much levels that it does not make sense

Same hunger for power, different stages of progress.

This.

And they want to join the EU...!

And why wouldnt they? What really bugs me is that probably will be let into EU.

I think Turkey won't become a full EU member for at least 20 years. Turkey is childishly sensitive about its military past, and still refuses to acknowledge Cyprus, which is a full EU member state.

I've found the following 2013 status report [1] which is surprisingly readable. From this document (my interpretations, not quotes):

As a prelude to EU membership, the EU and Turkey entered a Customs Union in 1995. The formal accession process, which requires that Turkey ratify and comply with 35 chapters, was started in 2001 but put on hold in 2004 by Turkey's refusal to accept Cyprus (a new EU member) as part of the Customs Union.

Between 2006 and 2011, hardly any progress was made, with the EC and EP basically playing good-cop bad-cop with Turkey: the Commission would highlight the few positive steps made, while the Parliament kept slamming Turkey over the slow pace of change. This made the support for the EU changes wither in Turkey.

In July 2012, Cyprus gained presidency of the EU and Turkey halted all formal talks, although the EC (again playing good cop) did continue negotiations about visa requirements between Turkey and the EU. Then the 2013 Gezi park protests happened, and that only soured the relationship more.

As of today, only 15 out of 35 chapters in the accession process have even been opened, and only one (Science&Research) has been completed. Since Turkey's first application for EU membership in 1987, 17 states have completed the full membership process, while Turkey's PM keeps making clear that he doesn't even understand the fundamental principles underlying Europe's free society.

No, I really don't see Turkey moving closer towards the European Union. Maybe when the AKP loses power...

[1] http://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS22517.pdf

Turkey has been useful for the Germans to keep Merkel from fulfilling the promise that she doesn't want fulfilled: which is, getting 800000 refugees there. Why? partially because they might have an integration problem (there was criticism of immigrants before) why is that? either intolerance, a bad integration program, too many immigrants, or a mixture of all those. So, for now, Turkey is useful, and the EU heads of state play along with a dictator

Reply on news.ycombinator.com