Political Engineering Yesterday and Today

Politics is a field of government and communication that time changes mercilessly. A field everyone knows, or rather thinks they know, yet whose subtleties many of us have in fact never mastered.

In Turkey’s recent history, for those who have reached a mature age, politics has turned into a slippery field in which ethical values are exhausted day by day, every act is seen as legitimate on the road to power,  and politicians are not independent and free but “servants of the state”.

Yes, perhaps we did not have a perfect political life in the past either. Society’s priorities and demands were taken less into account, and because of inadequate technological means, people chose those who would govern them by voting for political figures they hardly knew. Some politicians lied, made impossible promises, lacked sufficient education, and could even suddenly switch parties and disregard everything they had said before.

Politicians, often affected by coups and memoranda, could not lead a free political life under the shadow of the military boot, true. There was hardly a politician who had not been jailed or wronged, true. Yet at times likely to affect the country’s fate, and when important events occurred, they could stand tall and, even if political adversaries, act together with other parties on matters of homeland and nation. Sadly, our eyes now search for politicians who can take part in debate programmes together, laugh off positive and negative criticism, listen respectfully to the other side whatever their political views, and do not see themselves as owners of the state while serving their country.

We used to have a political life shaped, or made to be shaped, by coups, party closures or economic crises. It was often subjected to internal and external interventions, and democratic rights were frequently violated. Can we say that much has changed today? I don’t think so.

We now face entirely different techniques and tactics.

The military coup of 27 May 1960, the embargoes before and after the 1974 Cyprus Peace Operation, the military coup of 12 September 1980,  the assassinations of journalists, bureaucrats and politicians, the postmodern coup of 28 February 1997 and, finally, the developments before and after the 1 March 2003 parliamentary motion are the most striking periods in which political engineering was carried out in a “bloody” way. Some techniques, though seen as primitive today, are still in use. Unsolved assassinations and attacks unfortunately remain valid engineering tactics and methods that never seem to be erased from our political history.

In recent years, with the impact of technological developments as well, very different methods of political engineering have emerged.

Social media comes first in this sense. Certain events that cause public outrage can, with the impact of social media, be carried onto the current political agenda and made politicians’ top priority. State secrets or private footage of politicians spread through these platforms can even end people’s political careers.

We are now living in a new political era in which social media is very influential. An era in which even political party leaders cannot express their thoughts freely. An era in which people cannot comfortably express their feelings and thoughts for fear of ‘what will happen to me if I say this’. An era in which the punishment for crimes, and even whether something is a crime at all, changes according to closeness to the views of the government. An era in which what was said yesterday is denied today and no one blushes over their inconsistent statements. An era in which everyone who does not think like oneself is declared a traitor and attempts are made to block even the fine and socially beneficial deeds of ‘the others’.

In 2007, a statement written by the then Chief of General Staff, General Yaşar Büyükanıt, was published on the official website of the Turkish Armed Forces and was at the time called the E-Memorandum. In 2012, the former Chief of General Staff, retired General İlker Başbuğ, detained and arrested in the “Internet Memorandum” investigation, was accused of authorising the setting up and running of websites against the government. In 2010, the release on the internet of ‘inappropriate’ footage of CHP leader Deniz Baykal and some MHP deputies, which shook our political world, caused serious upheaval in the political parties: Leadership cadres changed, and reputations and votes were lost. In the coup attempt of 15 July 2016, described by many as suspicious, President Erdoğan joined a live broadcast by phone, made statements and called people into the streets. These events can be added to the list of important events showing the impact of technology on politics.

And now the most important political engineering of recent years is being carried out with ‘a camera and a tripod’. Sedat Peker’s statements, which began in May 2021 and shed light on a small part of the dark side of our recent political history, fell onto the country’s agenda like a bomb. Information and documents emerged that in normal times would have had the effect of an earthquake in politics. Because those addressed by the statements were officials of the ruling party, this information and these documents did not have the impact they deserved. Various sections of society agree that the statements, prepared very professionally and carefully, did not come from one person alone. Although Sedat Peker said in his revelations that he received help from friends only for ‘some’ information, the picture that emerges points to the existence of a professional team.

No one knows what the coming days will bring, but it seems that the sincerity and goodwill of old no longer remain in our political life. As a country we cannot show a common political stance towards the outside world. We do not know how much longer we will be forced to live in a country run by politicians who will not hesitate to throw the country into the fire for their personal interests. Let us hope that Atatürk’s foresight about politicians remains at the level of negligence and misguidance.