Turkish fright
THE Netherlands goes to the polls today, and it will be extremely interesting to see what effect its still escalating row with Turkey might have on a substantially undecided electorate, with an extraordinary 40pc of voters claiming not to have made up their minds just days before the election, and about 15pc expected to choose sides at the last minute.
One of the biggest questions, obviously, is whether the spotlight on Dutch citizens of Turkish origin will play into the hands of Geert Wilders, the limelight-hogging leader of the extreme right-wing Freedom Party (PVV) or, rather, persuade some potential PVV voters to stick with the status quo associated with centre-right Prime Minister Mark Rutte and his People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD).
The Dutch election has attracted unprecedented attention as the first nationwide electoral exercise in a European nation following Brexit and the triumph of Donald Trump, with Wilders’ party until recently topping the opinion polls on the basis of a broadly anti-immigrant, specifically anti-Muslim and unequivocally anti-European Union (EU) agenda. Intriguingly, some of those contemplating casting a ballot in favour of the PVV are basing their choice on the reasonable assumption that, come what may, Wilders will not be prime minister.
The Dutch elections and the Turkish referendum are the latest battlegrounds for far-right politics.
Until three decades or so ago, as in so many other European nations, the Dutch vote was mainly divided between the Christian and social democrats, with little to distinguish the centre-left from the centre-right, and even after the VVD popped up as a more popular — and more neoliberal — alternative to the Christian democrats, it has had little problem governing in coalition with the ostensibly social-democratic Labour Party (PvdA).
But the times have been a-changing, and it is not unreasonable to assume that the Dutch authorities’ extraordinary measures to prevent Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s representatives from addressing rallies to garner support for a ‘yes’ vote in Turkey’s constitutional referendum on April 16 were intended, in part, to avert the spectacle of large immigrant gatherings on the eve of the local election.
After his foreign minister was refused the right to land in the Netherlands and his family affairs minister was effectively expelled from the country by being escorted to the German border, Erdogan accused the Dutch of being “Nazi remnants”, not long after using similarly offensive language in the German context following curbs on a campaign rally by Angela Merkel’s government.
Inevitably, the German and Dutch governments have taken strong umbrage at the utterly absurd Nazi comparisons, with support from several other members of the EU. Neither of them has deemed it politic to point out that far more potent parallels to the nasty dictatorship that emerged in Germany in the 1930s can be discerned in Turkey, whose elected president is likely to get away with a führer-ish power grab that would not only enhance his already vast capacity to rule by diktat but potentially ensconce him at the helm of affairs until 2029.
Recent opinion polls suggest that the Turkish electorate is deeply divided, with at best a small majority willing to massage Erdogan’s massive ego — despite the fact that the more articulate opponents of his constitutional changes in both the political and media spheres have been incarcerated or silenced by other means.
That would help explain why Erdogan is so desperate to win over the extensive Turkish diaspora — almost half of the three million-plus Turks in Germany, for instance, are entitled to vote in the referendum. On the other hand, only a tiny minority is likely to still be undecided on whether the president deserves effectively to be a 21st-century sultan. It is perfectly possible, in other words, that picking fights with European nations is essentially intended to enhance his nationalist appeal.
Winning the referendum would enable Erdogan to abolish the post of prime minister, preside over a cabinet with less parliamentary oversight and call early elections. And one can understand why some nations might be reluctant to host his appeals for one-man rule — not least if they have been accused, as in the case of Germany, of allowing free rein to terrorists, a term that in official Turkish eyes applies to virtually all Kurds. And it’s not hard to imagine the outrage in Ankara had any European nation, instead of banning rallies, insisted on affording equal opportunity to Erdogan’s opponents to make their case.
It will be profoundly alarming if Wilders emerges from today’s election as the head of the largest party in the Netherlands, but his chances of rising to power remain minuscule. On the other hand, a victory next month for Erdogan — even if he doesn’t sport a ‘Make Turkey great again’ hat — would be tantamount to popular endorsement for a dictatorship.
Published in Dawn, March 15th, 2017