“Turkey’s centenary could mark the end of the Erdoğan era,” reads the title of an article in The Economist, a British weekly that often deservedly draws the ire of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. The article, published in November 2022, predicted that an ailing economy and other issues would precipitate the fall of Erdoğan, one of the most influential leaders of the Republic of Türkiye.
A year on, Erdoğan goes strong after securing another five-year term in office while the said centenary of the republic draws close. The secret of his success as the leader of a party that has governed Türkiye since 2002 is not immediately obvious but following in the footsteps of the republic’s founder Mustafa Kemal Atatürk is among them.
When Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party (AK Party) came to power in 2002, critics were quick to brand him as an "Islamist" intent on undoing Atatürk’s secular legacy. More than two decades later, secularism remains in its place, as does Erdoğan, the country’s first leader under the new executive presidency system. Those claiming that Erdoğan and fellow “Islamists” would introduce an Iranian-style Shariah in the country have been proven wrong. What they missed due to their ideological blindness is Erdoğan’s efforts to achieve what Atatürk was set to do before his life was cut short due to a sudden illness at the age of 57. Erdoğan, pushing 70, meanwhile, fulfills his dream of a prosperous and fully independent Türkiye.
The shadow of a troubled economy, aggravated by a dire global situation, appears to curtail the dream of a prosperous Türkiye, but the country is still on course for growth. A recent World Bank report forecast a growth of 4.2%, up from a previous projection of 3.2%, this year.
As for independence, Türkiye took and still takes decisive steps to ensure it, whether in economy or defense. When Atatürk took the helm of the country, a fledgling heir to a vast empire sprawling from the Middle East to Europe, independence and sovereignty were two key concepts of the republic. “Sovereignty unconditionally belongs to the nation,” Atatürk declared as he guided the country from its War of Independence against a diverse array of foes toward a republic based on democracy. Unfortunately, a military elite that perceives Atatürk, a career officer, as its idol betrayed this notion multiple times, first in 1960, by seizing power and dealing a blow to the democracy Atatürk envisioned. It was Erdoğan who, for the first time in the republic’s history for a political leader and a president, rallied the nation to stand against putschists to protect the sovereignty. On July 15, 2016, the Turkish nation proved to the world that it would not bow down to putschists anymore when it exhibited a strong resistance against a junta formed by military infiltrators of the Gülenist Terror Group (FETÖ).
Along with FETÖ, “sovereignty” was threatened by another terrorist group, the PKK. Since the 1980s, the separatist group grew as a major security risk for the country, especially in the southeast, where it drew recruits and slaughtered civilians. With support from Europe, which harbored PKK supporters, and the United States, which openly provided military support to them in Syria, the PKK escalated its campaign of terrorism. Erdoğan first tried to resolve the issue peacefully, but when it failed, Türkiye launched an all-out offensive against the PKK. Today, the terrorist group is largely eradicated and, as Erdoğan recently pointed out, is in “its death throes.” Cross-border operations in Syria and Iraq in the first week of October are a sign of Türkiye’s determination to wipe out terrorists wherever they are sheltered, regardless of whoever protects them.
The republic itself almost lost its meaning after Atatürk’s demise, and it was only after the victory of the Democrat Party (DP) of Adnan Menderes in the first genuinely multiparty elections of Türkiye that the country truly restored the power to the nation itself. Yet, this democratic experience was cut short 10 years later with Türkiye’s first major coup in 1960. The military junta that hanged Menderes eventually “handed over” the power to the nation, but the republic never fully recovered from the fallout of the coup. More coups followed in the ensuing decades as the putschists in the army got accustomed to the tradition of “intervention” to the execution of democracy whenever they disliked the government, and thousands were voted into office.
For the secular elite, military coups were necessary to steer the nation to an “Atatürkist” course, and democracy could never be above their warped mindset. They distorted Atatürk’s ideals for their own interests, to crack down on everyone threatening their secret rule of Türkiye. From leftists to nationalists and conservatives, everyone should have toed their line. They conveniently ignored Atatürk’s ideal while declaring the republic in 1923: giving power to the people and people they voted for instead of an absolute monarch.
Every coup, in a twist of fate, propelled politicians who managed to carve out a positive image as “man of people” to the higher offices. It was Turgut Özal, a bright bureaucrat, after the 1980 coup and Erdoğan after the 1997 coup. The first electoral victory of the AK Party and Erdoğan more than two decades ago owes as much to the nation’s yearning for a savior from the oppression of putschists, which succeeded in indirectly ousting another government they did not like in 1997. Erdoğan ultimately became the voice of the masses. The country’s elite turned a blind eye before, from pious Muslims to voters tired of short-lived coalition governments, from the Roman community to former leftists and even some supporters of the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP). Under the leadership of Erdoğan, Türkiye reached the highest number of female lawmakers in Parliament and women, who used to be ejected from public places just because they wore headscarves, are among them.
As the leader of a nation besieged and survived by countless battles and wars since the late 19th century, Atatürk, a hardened veteran who fought on multiple fronts, was the champion of peace. His immortal words, “Peace at Home, Peace in the World,” were a reflection of the foreign policy of the new republic. For instance, less than a decade after he successfully drove out invading Greek forces as part of the War of Independence, Atatürk led the efforts to sign a friendship agreement with Greece. In 1934, Eleftherios Venizelos, who was prime minister of Greece during the Turkish War of Independence, nominated Atatürk for the Nobel Peace Prize due to the Turkish leader’s valuable contribution to maintaining peace between their countries.
Though some interpret it that Atatürk softened Türkiye’s stance and tried to turn it into a full pacifist, neutral country, some seven years later, Atatürk showed that he was only a fierce advocate of Türkiye’s interests and would fight for them no matter what the circumstances are. Despite his worsening illness, he pursued diplomatic means for the annexation of Hatay to Türkiye from a French mandate and implied that he was ready to lead Türkiye to another battle to ensure that the present-day southern Turkish province would remain a Turkish territory. Just a few months before his death, Atatürk secured a deal with France on the fate of Hatay, though he could not witness full annexation of the province, which was ruled by a Turkish-run republic for a brief time before that republic de facto joined Türkiye in 1939.
Today, Erdoğan pursues a foreign policy based on the global peace Atatürk dreamed of. It has evolved over the past two decades but always adhered to the principles of prioritizing Türkiye’s interests rather than bowing down to the demands of allies or foes. The president walks a balanced course in diplomacy and is both an outspoken defender of the oppressed (such as Palestinians or Syrians displaced by the war) and a diplomat intent on making as many friends as he can. He is among the few leaders who did not antagonize Ukraine while dealing with Russia and vice versa in the shadow of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. He was the harshest critic of Israel and is a champion of the Palestinian cause but yet firmly believes in the necessity of reviving ties with Tel Aviv despite differences. The same olive branch has been extended to Syria’s Assad regime and Egypt most recently.
Another dream of Atatürk was bringing Türkiye to “the level of modern civilizations,” namely the West. Erdoğan’s AK Party embodied this dream in its name with "development," and Türkiye witnessed giant leaps to that end, from reforms in health care to infrastructure. Though it is still not accepted as a member, Türkiye drew inspiration from the European Union to implement social reforms and reinstate the rights of minorities in the past two decades.
