The Rise of the Welfare Party in Perspective

Third World Quarterly

ISSN: 0143-6597 (Print) 1360-2241 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ctwq20

The political economy of Islamic resurgence in Turkey: The rise of the Welfare Party in perspective

Ziya Onis

To cite this article: Ziya Onis (1997) The political economy of Islamic resurgence in Turkey: The rise of the Welfare Party in perspective, Third World Quarterly, 18:4, 743-766, DOI: 10.1080/01436599714740 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01436599714740

Published online: 25 Aug 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1047

View related articles

Citing articles: 61 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ctwq20

Download by: [SOAS, University of London] Date: 06 March 2017, At: 22:18 ThirdW orldQu arterly,V ol18,No4,pp743±766,1997

ThepoliticaleconomyofIslamic resurgence inTurkey:therise ofthe WelfareParty in perspective

ZIÇ YA OÈ NISË

Therisingelectoralfortu neso ftheWelfareP arty(Refah P artisi( RP)), a party thatd ifferentiatesitselfsh arplyfro mthe`orthodox’p artieso ftherightorlefto f thepoliticalspectrumbycam paigningex plicitlyonanIslam istp latform, constitutesth emosto bviousorv isiblesig nofIslamicresurg encein th eTurkish 1 context. Theturning-pointinth eevolutionof RP intoa majorpoliticalmove- mentcamewiththe m unicipalg overnmentelecti onsofMarch1 994during whichth epartym anagedto cap tureth emayorshipsofthetwokeym etropolitan areaso fIstanbulandA nkara.T hisvicto ryd ramaticallyaltere dtheprevious imageofth epartyin th epublicm ind,namelyas a marginalan dparochial politicalforce ontheextremerightwitha strongregionalo rientation. RP’ s rise toth estatusofanationwidep oliticalmovement,as o pposedto a partyco n®ned mainlyto its in ner Anatolianro ots,w ascon solidatedfu rther bythegeneral electionsofDecember 1995.TheWelfareParty m anagedto in creaseits sh areo f thenationalvo tefro m7.2%in1 987to 2 1.4%in1 995andit em ergedas th e leadingpoliticalp artyin the cou ntry,alth oughits sh are ofthe v otew asn ot suf® cientto g rantita mandateto fo rm agovernmentonano utrightbasis. Followingaserieso funsuccessfulattemptsto form adurableco alitiongovern- mentontheparto ftheestablishedrig htofcentrep arties,the `M otherlandParty’ (ANAP)andth e`TruePathP arty’( DYP)duringtheearlym onthsof1 996,anew coalitiongovernmentwasestab lishedb etween RP and DYP, in which RP emerged asthe d ominantpartner.T hisd evelopmentclearlyconstitutesa landmarkin a countrywh ichis u niqueinth eMuslimw orldin term softh estrengthof its secularisttrad itionsandits ex plicitpro -Westerno rientation.Theemergenceo f RP asa majorp oliticalfo rce undoubtedlyrepres entsa paradoxicalph enomenon forobservers oftheTurkishscen e,a phenomenonwhichm anyinterpretas a fundamentalco nstitutionalch allengetoth esecularfo undationsoftheRepublic, raisingdeepqu estionsconcerningthecompatibilityo fastrongIslamicparty withth eprocesso fconsolidatingliberald emocracy. Before embarkingon an an alysiso fwhy RP hasem ergedas a majorpolitical force sorecen tlyin th econtextofthe1990s,tw oimportantquali®catio nsought tob emadeatth eoutset.T he®rst isth atth epresenceo fanIslam icp olitical partyo ntheelectoralscen einT urkeyis n otanovelp henomenon.Infact, th e originsofthepresentday RP canb etracedb ackto th e`NationalOrd er Party’

Ziya OÈ nisËis atthe Departme ntof E conomics, BogÆazicËiUniversity, 80815 Bebek,Istanbul ,Turkey .

0143-6597/97/040743-24 $7.00 Ó 1997 ThirdW orldQuarterl y 743 ZÇIYA OÈ NISË

(MilliN izamP artisi),of® ciallyfo undedin 1 970,bannedd uringthemilitary coupof1971,andsubsequentlyreem ergingunder adifferentname,th e`Na- tionalS alvationParty’(MilliS elametP artisi( MSP)),duringth e1970s.B oth partiesw ereu ndertheleadershipo fNecmettinE rbakan,w hoseresili enceo nthe Turkishp oliticalsceneisstrik inggiventh ath eisalso th eundisputedleader o f theWelfareP artyat th epresentju ncture. MSP infact m adeitsm arko nTurkish politicsb yparticipatingina number ofcoalitiongovernmentsin th ehighly unstablepo liticalenvironmentofthemidan dlate1 970s.Yet, in co ntrastto th e currentstatu re of RP, MSP wasa smallp artyw ithan essent iallym arginalan d parochialelecto ralb ase. 2 Thesecondquali®catio nthatdeservesemphasisis that,d espiteth eemergence of RP asa nationwidemassp oliticalmovementinrecen tyears,its w eighto r in¯uencein the T urkishsettin gshouldn eitherb eunderestimatedn oroverexag- gerated.Insp iteo fthefactth atth epartyem ergedas the lead ingp artyo nthe basiso fthenationalvo te,its su periorityto o thern ationalp artieso nbothth e rightandleft o fthepoliticalspectrum,andnotablyth eedgethatit h asm anaged toestab lishrelati veto th etwoleadingcontenders ontheright, DYP and ANAP, 3 iso nlym arginal. More signi®can tly, RP’scurrentpo sitionshouldbe p lacedin proper perspectivein the sen seth ataro und80%percentofthepopulationin Turkeyco ntinuesto v otein fav ourofp arties,b othrig htand left, w hichare predominantlysecu larand W esternin th eirb asico rientations. RP hasalongway tog obeforeit is ab leto o btaina majorityv otein p arliamentth atm ayp rovide

amandate,in prin ciple,fo rputtingitsco mprehensiveeco nomic,legal, p olitical andculturalp ackageintoactio n.Thisb ringsusto th epointthata major dichotomyisev identinth ecurrentpo sitionof RP inth econtextofdem ocratic politicsin T urkeyto day.Thepartyh asu ndoubtedlyem ergedas a majorsource ofpoliticalpower inrecent y ears.N onetheless,it rep resentsa peripheralfo rce comparedw ithth epositionofthepoliticalpartieso ftheestablishedsecu lar order,in th esenseth atany m ajororradicalattem ptby RP totran sform society alongIslamiclin esw illth reatenth ebasicp rincipleso ftheR epublic’sconsti- tutionalo rder andthusthev eryfo undationsoftheregimeandtheliberal democratico rderwhich,asm anyleadinganalysts,w ouldag ree issomedistance awayfro mbeingfullyco nsolidated. 4 Theco nsequenceso ftheWelfareP arty’selectoralsu ccessan dapotentially strong RP presencefor thefu tureo fthedemocraticreg imeinT urkeyis an issu e thatd eservesserio usinvestigationinits o wnright.T heprimaryfocu sinth e presentcontext,h owever,w illb eontheunderlyingcauseso fthep arty’sriseto power.T hecen tralqu estiontoad dress, consideringthatp oliticalIslam has deep-seatedhistoricalro otsin T urkey,isth eriseo f RP toth estatusofamajor politicalforce speci®cally in th econtexto fthe1990s.A number ofsch olars hassin gledou tthespeci®c domestico riginsoftheprocessan dthosefeatu res thatare uniquetoth eTurkishR epublic,w itha strongfocusontheposition ofthestatein relati ontoth eIslamicm ovement.T hesesch olarsh avehigh- lightedth etensionsbetweenth eauthoritariansecu larismo ftheR epublican eliteat th e`centre’an dthebroadm assesq uiteco ngenialto Islam icp rinciples andvalueson th e`periphery’,andtheattemptsto reso lvethesetensio ns followingthetransitionto multipartyd emocracyin thep ost-1950era. 5 While not

744 ISLAMICRESURGENCEINTURKEYINPERSPECTIVE negatingtheimportanceo ftheuniquelyhisto ricalfeatur eso ftheTurkishcase, thepresentanalysisd rawsattentionmoreex plicitlytoth eexternald imension, andattemptsto con ceptualisethe rise o fpoliticalIslam inT urkeyd uringthe 1990sasa manifestationorare¯ectio nofthefar-re achingtransformationsthat are occurringatth egloballev elb othin th eeconomicand th eculturalsp here. Particularlysig ni®can tinthis co ntextare thepressures associatedwith th e globalisationofth eworldeco nomyandtheprocessof n eoliberaleco nomic restructuringthatis pro foundlyaffect ingsocietiesinv eryd ifferentpartso fthe world.A tthesametime,w eobservethe p rofoundandyetco ntradictoryim ages transmittedb ytheprocesso fculturalg lobalisationthatalsoex plainswhyparties witha strongreligiousorfundamentalisto rientationp aradoxicallyh aveachance ofelectoralsu ccessin th ecurrenthistoricalco njuncture.

Beyondthetraditionalleft-rightdivide: theascendanceof id entityp olitics inth epost-coldw arcontextandIslamicresu rgence Theintensep rocessof g lobalisationin th eeconomican dculturalrealm sis underminingmanyoftheestablishedco ntours ofpoliticalactivityb othin advancedin dustrialisedco untriesan dinthe d evelopingworld.Whatap pearsto beunder challengeisth enation-stateasw ellas th eclassicalo rganisationof politicsw ithinth efamiliarleft v ersusrightnexus.T henation-statean dits securityis threat enedb ythenew internationald ivisionofproductionand 6

labour. Thelogico ftheglobalm arketp lacep aysnoattentiontow here a productis m ade.S imilarly,theinternational® nancialrev olution,aprocess facilitatedb ymajorim provementsin co mmunicationsandinformationtechnol- ogy,bringsitso wnchallengesto th esovereigntyof th enation-state.T he paradoxofourera isth atth enationstateis p rogressivelylo singcontrolo ver economicactiv ityw ithinits o wnn ationalb orders inan in creasinglyb orderless world.T hepressuresare torelo cateau thorityu pwardseith ertosu pranationalo r internationalinstit utionssuchas th eEuropeanUn ionortheWorldT rade Organizationortod elegateau thorityd ownwardstolo calo rmunicipalorg anisa- tions.Y et,at th esametime,th enationstateco ntinuesto b ethedominant politicalunit.F ormostp eopleth enation-stateis still th eprimaryso urce of identity.Thusa paradoxisem erging.P eople’sexpectationsofw hatth estate oughttod eliver isin creasingw hileth estate’s capacityto p rovidethesem uch neededserv icesis rap idlyin declin e.T hisp henomenoncreatesacrisiso f governancean daloss ofau thorityo ntheparto fthestate. T heglobalisation processin th eeconomicsph ere iscreati ngm ajoropportunitiesfo rexpansion andindividualenrich ment.T heprocess,h owever,is p roceedingatan extremelyu nevenp acecreati ngbothw innersand lo sers. Thelosersare naturally turningtoth enation-statefor protection,butthe n ation-state’sabilityto circumventthenegativerepercussionso fthesem assiveeconomicchan gesan d shieldth e`excluded’fromunfavourableco nsequencesis b ecomingincreasingly limited. Thedeclin eofthenation-statean dthedeclineoftheleft are essentially parallelphenomena.O necanju sti®ab lyarg uethatth emajorblowtocen tre-left, social-democraticm ovementscam efromthecollapseo fthecommunistreg imes,

745 ZÇIYA OÈ NISË leavingcapitalismas th eonlyv iableecon omicsy stemin ex istence.It wouldb e misleading,however,to ex plainth edeclineoftheleftsim plyin th eseterm s. Whatis m ore signi®cant is th atthe glo balisationprocessh asstead ilyu nder- minedth efoundationsofthepost-war Keynesiancon sensusbasedo ncapital- labourcooperationatth enationallevel su pportedb yalargeredist ributive welfarestate. In an env ironmentwheretran snationalco rporationscan relo cate economicactiv ityw ithg reatease in d ifferentparts o ftheworld,thecapacityo f thenation-statean ddomesticlab ourtobarg ainw ithtran snationalcap italhas becomeextremelylim ited.As yet,no p arallelforces existin term softh e transnationalisationofthen ation-statean dlabourtoco unteractthe p ower of capitalat th egloballev el.C learly,thesech allengesh averesultedin a steady erosionofsocialrig htsan dasteadydeclinein th eabilityof the n ation-stateto providewelfare,a trendwhichis v isibleto v aryingdegrees inall ad vanced industrialisedco untries. Similarp ressures, perhapsina more intensefo rm,are occurringindev eloping countriesand are helpingtou nderminetheveryfo undationsofthedevelopmen- talstate. T heprocesso fneoliberaleco nomicrestru cturingwhichis tak ingplace onamassivescaleev erywherearo undtheglobe,in cludingtheex-communist world,th oughatv aryingpaceand in tensity,impliesa radicalshift of em phasis awayfro mthestate to wardsth emarket-determinedallo cationofeconomic activity.A ssociatedw ithth isp rocess,we observerisingunemploymentand inequalityan dacorrespondingerosioninso cialrig hts,in cludingbotha decline

inth ebargainingcapacityof lab ouru nionsasw ellas a reductioninth edegree ofentitlementto k eyso cialserv icesin the areas o feducation,h ealthand so cial security.Theprocessd escribedis clearl ymore painfulina developingcountry contextwherep ercapitain comesarelow erandthedevelopmentalstate’ sability topro videwelfar eandprotectionforthepoorhastrad itionallyb eenfar more limitedcom paredw ithth eWestern-stylew elfarestate. Thestruct uralp ressures wehavedrawnattentionto h avep ushedth esocial democraticpartie sbothin the W estan dinth eemergingsocietiesatth e peripheryin toa deepcrisis. So cial-democraticp arties,traditionallyid enti®ed withred istributivepoliciesinv olvingan im provementinth epositionso fthe poorandthed isadvantaged,havebeenleft w ithlittle ro omtom anoeuvre,at leastin th ematerialortheeconomicrealm .Consequently,theeco nomicpolicies ofthesocial-democraticp artiesin g overnmenthavebecomeindistinguishable fromthoseo fthecentrerig htparties.A saresult,a majordiscrepancyh asarisen betweenth eexpectationsofth etraditionalclienteleo fsocial-democraticparties, namelylab our, peasants,lo wer levelb ureaucratsan dother materiallydep rived groupsan dtheim pacto fsocial-democraticpo licies,whichin m anycasesis n o differentfromwhata typicalrig htofcentreg overnmentw ouldg enerate.T he keyco nclusiontoem ergefromtheseob servationsisth atth eprocesso fintense globalisationoftheworldeco nomyhasb eenasso ciatedw ithth eaggravationo f incomeandw ealthdisp aritiesandthed istributiono feconomico pportunities withinth eindividualnatio nstate.T hein creasingin capacityo fthenationstate, especiallythe failur eofsocial-democraticmovementsw ithinthe in dividual nation-stateto cater ex plicitlyfor theneedsofthep oor,thedisadvantagedo rthe excluded,hascreate davacuumin p oliticalspace.T hisv acuumhasp rovideda

746 ISLAMICRESURGENCEINTURKEYINPERSPECTIVE gatewayfo rthepro liferationo fpoliticalmovementso rganisedon th ebasiso f extremenationalismo rreligiousfun damentalism.It isin terestingandparadoxi- calth ateco nomicglo balisationhasp roducedfo rces whichh avehelpedno tonly toero dethep oliticalpower asw ellas th eorganisationalan dinterventionist capacityo ftheleft,b utalsoto frag menttherightofthepoliticalspectruminto mutuallyin compatiblep oliticalmovements.T hesem ovementsran gefromthe partieso ftheliberalrig ht,rep resentingp rimarilyth einterestso ftherisin g bourgeoisie,w hosein terestsin creasinglycoin cidewithth oseo ftransnational capital,to p artieso rganisedalon gfundamentalistlin escateri ngprimarilyfo rthe disadvantagedo rtheexcludedsegm entso fsociety. Akeyp ointto rem ember,h owever,is thatg lobalisationis notcon®n edto th e economicsp ace.In fact, an eq uallyin tensep rocesso fglobalisationseem stob e occurringinth eculturalrealm with two co ntradictorydimensions,o neinvolving ahomogenisationprocessacro ss societies,the o therw orkinginth edirectionof greaterfrag mentation.At onelevel,w eobserveculturalfo rces orsignalsth at havetheeffecto fpullingsocietiestogetherin term sofformingcommontastes orvalues.T heseco mmonelementsin cludetheincreasingemphasiso nindividualism,materialvaluesan dconsumerism,forces thatare progressivelyho - mogenisingtastes,v aluesor b ehaviouralno rmsacrossh ighlyd iverse societies aroundtheg lobe.A ssociatedw ithth istren disth eparalleltendencyin volving thetransmissionofliberald emocracyan dthediscourseo ncitizenshipan d humanrig hts.V eryfew societies,if any,are ableto escap efromthesepo werful

culturalfo rces.It isalso in terestingandparadoxical,h owever,th atth ecultural impulsestransm ittedto m anyso cietiesinth epostmodernag eare alsop roducing astrongtendencyto wardsculturalrelati vism.Astrikingtrendassociatedw ith the`postmodernco ndition’istheacceptanceo fdiversity,therecognitionoflocal andtraditionalculturesinclu dingreligion,andtherightformultipleperspectives orpathsto m odernityto co -existas o pposedto a single,un ilinear conceptiono f modernityasso ciatedw ithth eWestan dthetraditionoftheEnlightenment.The culturalp luralismasso ciatedw iththe p ostmodernage also im pliesa radicalshift inth edirectionofpoliticalactivityaw ayfrom thetraditionalleft-r ightdivideto issuessu rroundingin dividualid entity.Inretro spect,the p rocesso fglobalisation occurringsimultaneouslyin th eeconomican dculturalsp heresh asbeenin teract- ingandproducingpowerfulim pulseslead ingtotheriseo fidentitypo liticsas the primaryfo rm ofpoliticaldiscourse orcon¯ictin th ecurrenthistoricalcon text. Themassivetransformationsanddislocationsinth eeconomicsph ere tendto generatep rofoundcriseso fidentityand a parallelsearchfo rgreatercertai nty, controlan dprotectionontheparto fthreatenedin dividualsan dcommunities. Moreover,th epressuresorimpulseso riginatingfromtheculturalsp here, associatedwith th edisseminationofdemocraticv alues,accep tanceo fdiversity andpluralismp rovideanex tendedp ublicspace fo rgroupsorco mmunitiesto express theiro wniden titiesan dorganisethem selvesaro undissuescon cerning individualorgroupid entity.Thenatureofidentityp oliticsvaries m arkedlyfro m onesocietyto an other.T heissu esare asd iverse asregio nalin tegrationan dloss ofsovereignty,religionandsecularism,linguistican dracialm inorityrig hts,an d theenvironment.Thisisnottosayth atthetraditionalright±left n exushastotally disappeared.A slongasm ajorinequalitiescontinuetoex istw ithinan dbetween

747 ZÇIYA OÈ NISË individualn ation-statesw ecansafely pred ictthat th eclassicalleft± rig htaxis willrem ainintact .Whatis strik inginth ecurrentcontext,h owever,is that th e traditionalleft-r ightsplit h asb eenco nsiderablyco mplicatedbynew cleavages basedo nexpressionso fidentity.Thesecleav agesran gefromreligiousfu nda- mentalismv ersussecularismto n ationalso vereigntyversu smembershipo fa wider transnationalin tegrationproject,to the righ tso faparticularethn icg roup versustheu nityo fthenationÐstatean duncompromisingindustrialg rowth versusenvironmentalco nservation.Theseare clearlyissueswh ichd onot®t neatlyin tothe tradit ionalleft v ersusrightclassi®catio n.Thesecleav agesb ased onidentityhav e,in fact, been su perimposedo nthetraditionalleft-ri ghtnexus complicating,fragmentingandpossiblydestabilisingpoliticaldiscoursein th e post-coldw ar context. Theb roadp erspectivethatw ehavetried to elab orateso far helpsusto appreciatetheriseof politicalIslam asapotentforce in thecontextofthe1990s. Atonelev el,p oliticalIslam ina latein dustrialisingso ciety® llsth evoidleft b y thedeclineo ftheo rthodoxorsecularso cialdem ocraticp oliticsof th eleft.In otherwords,it emergesas apoliticalmovementexpressingthegrievanceso fthe poorandthedisadvantagedin b othru ralan durbanareas in a socialdem ocratic guise.T heappealof p oliticalIslam asa viablealtern ativetosecu larso cial democracyarises n otonlyfro mthestrengthof its m oralarg umentinfav ourof equityb utalsofro mspeci®c andco ncretean ti-povertyp rojectsd esignedto improvethematerialconditionsofthedisadvantaged,albeiton a highly

target-orientated,selectiveandvisibleb asis.It wouldb eextremelym isleading, however,to ch aracteriseIslam icp oliticalmovementsas sim plythe p olitical expressionofthepoorestan dmostm arginalisedstrata ,largelyex cludedfro mthe bene®ts of the glo balisationprocess.A numbero fobservers ofIslamicm ove- mentsh avedrawnattentiontothe fact th ata signi®cant co mponentofth ese movementsare individualsb asedin u rbanareas, w hoare atth esametime extremelywell ed ucatedp rofessionalso rbusinessmenw ellv ersedin m odern technology. 7 Theseare clearlypeoplew itha modernistorien tationwhoare experiencingarisingstatusinso ciety,andyetare notfullyinco rporatedin toan elitegro up.Statingitsomewhatd ifferently,theyare p artof arising,potentialo r secondaryelite w hoare tryingtoco nsolidateth eirp ositioninso cietyo nthe basisof a commonIslam icid entity. 8 It isim portanttoack nowledge,th erefore, thatp oliticalIslam isa movementth atb indstogether individualsat v ery differentlevelso fthesocialstrata as parto fabroadlybasedp oliticalmovement. Thereligioussymbolismasso ciatedw ithp oliticalIslam providesth eunifying bondthath elpstoeng ineer across-classalliance,b ringingtogetherin dividuals withm arkedlyd ifferentstatusinso ciety.Whatis commontob othg roupsisthat theyare parto fthe`excluded’,butexcludedin averydiffer entsenseo ftheterm. Thepoorandth edisadvantagedw hoform thep rincipalelecto ralb aseo f politicalIslam are excludedin the sen sethat th eyd onotshare inth ebene®ts o f growthin th eageofglobalisation.T heprofessionals,th ebusinessmenan dthe intellectualsw homw ewouldclassif yasthe risin g`Islamicb ourgeoisie’,are clearlybene®tin gfromglobalisationandmodernity,yetalso feel p arto fthe excludedby no tbeingpartof th erealelite in so ciety.Inthis sen se,p olitical Islam asa protestm ovementan dtheideologyo ftheexcludedco nstitutesa

748 ISLAMICRESURGENCEINTURKEYINPERSPECTIVE challengetobo thleft an dright-wingpartieso ftheestablishedsecu larp olitical order.

NeoliberalrestructuringinT urkeyin th epost-1980eraa nd theriseo fthe welfarepa rtyto po wer Theyear 1980marksin m anywaysa crucialtu rningpointinT urkey’spolitical economy.T hesh iftfro mastate-dominated,heavilyin terventionisteco nomic modelto wardsn eoliberalisman dmarket-orientation,asp arto fabroader global trend,effectivelydates b ackto th eimplementationofa majorstructural adjustmentprogrammeundertheauspiceso ftheWorldB ankand IMF in January 1980.9 Ourobjectiveinth epresentcontextiscertai nlyn otto en terin toth e speci®c detailso fthen eoliberalad justmentprocess;rather itis to h ighlightth e linkagesan dmechanismswherebytheprocesso fneoliberalrestru cturingin Turkeyh asco ntributedto the rise o ftheWelfareP arty,apartycam paigning explicitlyonaradicalIslam icplatform.Thelinkageb etweenth eTurkishv ersion ofneoliberalisman dtheriseo ftheW elfareParty to po liticalpower duringth e 1990shasa number ofdifferentdimensionsthatd eserveemphasis. The® rst importantfactortoh ighlightco ncernsth eroleo fthem ilitaryinth e post-1980context.T heseco ndhalfo fthe1970sin T urkeyw asch aracterisedb y considerableecon omicandp oliticalinstability.Onthe eco nomicfront,themajor balanceo fpaymentscrisis o fthelate1 970srepresentedth ecombinedim pacto f

theexhaustionofthedominantmodelo faccumulation,th eimport-substitution modelofdevelopmentan dexternalshocksinth eform ofoilp ricein creases.On thepoliticalfront,a successionofweakco alitiongovernmentsfu rther contributedto eco nomicin stabilityb ypostponingthe ad justmentp rocessan dwere unabletoch eckth eproliferationofterrorism andurbanv iolence,th reateningthe securityan deverydayex istenceo ftheaveragecitizen.Inth isty peofenviron- ment,it was notsurprisingthatth emilitaryintervenedfo rtheth irdtim einth e postwar period,leadingtoth eterminationofdemocraticp olitics,alb eito na temporary basis.In retro spect,m ilitaryrulein T urkeyw assh ort byLatin Americanstan dards.It lastedfro mSeptember 1980uptothe electi onso f November19 83thatm arkedth ereturnto p arliamentaryd emocracy,albeitin a restrictedfo rm.Yetth ecomparativelysh ort periodo fmilitaryruleem bodied somefar-reachingconsequencesfo rthefuture courseo fthedemocraticreg ime. Theobjectiveofthemilitaryduringwh atth eyco nsideredto be a transitional periodleadinguptoth ere-establishmentofdemocracyw asto in jecta substantialm easureofstabilityin tothepoliticalsystem.Thebasicid eawastoeliminate anypotentialth reatsto theconsolidationofthemarket-orientatedrefo rm process byaccomplishingaserieso fmeasures designedto depoliticiseth eeconomy.The Constitutionof1982wasa landmarkin th isco ntext.T henew constitution, diametricallyo pposedto th eliberalconstitutionof1961,wasd esignedto concentrateau thorityw ithth eexecutiveandlimitthe so cialrigh tsprev iously grantedco ncerningtheactivitieso flabouru nionsandinterestasso ciationsin general.W ithinthe b roadco ntours ofthenew constitution,twospeci®c pieces ofactionbythemilitaryhavebeenpartic ularlyin ¯uential.B othm easures were designedto in troducecon siderableelem entso fstabilityin toth esystemand to

749 ZÇIYA OÈ NISË helpd epoliticizeth emarket.Y etth eoutcomeofth emeasuresinsub sequent years hasp rovedp aradoxicalin th esenseth atattem ptsto im posestab ilityan d orderinth eshortterm havecreatedtheseed sofgreaterin stabilityin th elonger term. Them ilitaryinT urkeyh avealwaysbeeno neofthecentralinstitutionso fthe Republicanelite an datraditionalandun compromisingstrongholdofsecularan d territorialn ationalism.Withth eturbulentexperienceo fthe1970sat the b acko f theirm inds,h owever,th emilitaryeliteco nceivedIslam asa majorin strument forpromotingsocialan dpoliticalstabil ity.Consequently,theyfav ouredleg is- lationwithinthe b roadfram eworko fwhatis k nownasth e`Turkish±Islamic synthesis’, amixture ofnationalismand Islam ,asa ®rm barrieragainstpo tential sources ofinstab ility.T hek eyelem entinth estrategyofth emilitarywasto weakenth epoliticalpower oftheleft,w hichth eyregard edas th emajorsource ofpotentialco n¯ictan ddisorder inth epost-1980co ntext.H ence,rath er surprisingly,Islam was employedbythem ilitaryasaninstrumentfo rconsolidat- ingandinstitutionalisingthepost-1980regime. 10 Inco ncreteterm s,th esteps takenin th isdirectionin T urkeyinvolvedth eintroductionofreligiouseducation inp rimarysch oolsas w ellas an increa sein th epowers ofthe D irectorateo f ReligiousAffairs, thekeystate in stitutionresponsiblefor theadministrationof religiousaffairsinan o therwise secularstate. T hiswas donebyincreasingthe ®nancialreso urces availableto it. T heintroductionofcompulsoryrelig ious educationclearlyrepresenteda retreatfromthebasicp rinciplesof m ilitant secularism.Similarly,the®nancialresou rces allocatedto th eDirectorateo f ReligiousAffairs haveresultedin a further proliferationofreligiousseco ndary schools,wh ichh aveemergedas m ajorcentreso fsupport fortheWelfareP arty insu bsequentyears. Theseco ndm ajorp ieceo factionontheparto fthem ilitarywithsig ni®can t longer-termrepercussionsconcernstheclo sure ofthemajorpoliticalpartiesof thepre-1980politicalorder andthebansimposedo ntheirresp ectiveleader s. Thekeyin stitutionso fthepre-1980regime,n otablyth eright-of-centre`Ju stice Party’ (AP),theleft-of-centre`R epublicanP eople’sParty’,( CHP) and the MSP, the forerunner ofthep resentdayW elfareP arty,were removedfro mthepolitical scene.Sim ilarlyth emajorpolitical®gures associatedw ithth esep artiesan d dominantpersonalitiesofth e1960sandthe1970ssu chas D emirel,E cevitan d Erbakanw ereb annedfro mactiveparticipationin p olitics,at least fo radecade. Theintentionunderlyingth esem easureswastom akeanew beginningwithn ew politicalpartiesundera new seto fleaders, hencem arkinga completeb reakw ith thepastas a meansofestablishingastablep oliticalorder.Acco rdingto th e militaryelite,a majorsource ofpoliticalinstabilityin th epasth asb eenth e extremefragmentationofthepartysy stem,withth eexistenceo falargenumber ofpartieson b oththe rig htan dlefto fthepoliticalspectrum.Alsoen gineered wasa 10%nationalth resholdas an electo ralru le,d esignedto lim itth e participationofsmallan dperipheralp artiesin th edemocraticp rocess.W hatth e militaryessentiallyw antedw asa two-partysy stem,witha right-of-centreparty confrontingapartym ildlyo nthecentre -left,un der thedirectionofastrong executive,withp oliticalauthorityrelo catedfro mtheparliamenttowardsastrong presidency. Thesen ew designsap pear sensibleat ® rst sightfrom thepersp ectiveo f

750 ISLAMICRESURGENCEINTURKEYINPERSPECTIVE politicalstabilityas a majorsafegu ardfo rradicalmarket-orientatedrefo rms,if notfromtheperspectiveofliberald emocracy.In retro spect,h owever,th e measures failedto ach ievetheiro riginalo bjectives.In fact, th ereverse wasth e casein th esenseth atth emeasures contributedto th efurtherfrag mentationo f thepartysy stem,aprocessth ateffect ivelystarted with th ereturno fthekey politiciansoftheo ldp re-1980order top oliticsin th egeneralelecti onsof November1 987.Theirretu rnw asm adepossiblebythereferendumofSeptem- ber 1987whichlifted th e10year banim posedb ythemilitaryregime. Thesek eyp oliticians,h owever,rath er thanretu rningtoth enew parties establishedu nder theauspiceso fthepost-1980regime,ch oseto co ntestin politicsu nder partiesfo rmedb ythemselvesin dividuallyand ,hence,u nder their owndirectco ntrol.In m ore concreteterm s,D emirel,fo rexample,retu rnedto parliamentaryp oliticsn otinth econtextoftheMotherlandParty,thek ey centre-rightpoliticalpartyo fthep ost-1983era, b utunderthebanneroftheTrue PathParty .Similarly,Ecevitfo undedthe D emocraticL eftP arty( DSP) instead of joiningth eSocialD emocraticP opulistP arty( SHP),thep rincipalsuccessorto th e RepublicanP eople’sPartyd uringthepost-1983era.Co nsequently,thep revious institutionalp atternw asin terruptedan ddismantledin th esensethat, in p laceo f thetwoprincipalp oliticalpartiesat each en dofthepoliticalspectrum,we observetheemergenceo ftwosep aratep artieso nthecentrerig htco nfronting twoseparatep artieson th ecentreleft, w ithb othsets o fpartiesclaim ingtob e heirsto th eold,establishedpartie softhepre-1980o rder.A closein vestigation

suggeststh atapart fro mtheirlead ershipn omajordifferencesex isto rhavebeen detectedbetween DYP and ANAP,ontheonehand,and SHP and DSP,ontheother, interm sofbasicp rogrammeorideologicalo rientation.T heweakeningofthe establishedp artiesin th eprocessh asp rovidedan op portunityfo rfringeparties, includingtheextremenationalists,to em ergeassig ni®can tparticipantsin th e electoralcon test.T othesurpriseo fmany,despiteth e10%electoralth reshold, thepartysy stemin T urkeystartin gwithth emunicipalelecti onso fMarch1 989, hasd isplayeda highdegreeo finstabilityan dfragmentation.It isth isfrag men- tationofthepartysy stemw hichp rovideda majorav enuefortheriseo fthe WelfareP artyas a politicalforcein the co ntextofth emid-1990s. Turningourattentionto th eeconomicp lane,th eneoliberalex perimentin Turkeyap pears toh avep roduceda mixedset o fresults.A tonelevel,th e experimentwasq uitesu ccessful.A naverageo f5%±6%real GNP growth per annum,if notoutstanding,wash ighbyin ternationalstan dards.T heabilityto shiftfro mahighlyin ward-orientatedeco nomytoa signi®can texporter of manufactures wasalso q uitestrik ing.Arosyp icture canthu sbed rawn highlightingeco nomicd ynamism,risingentrepreneurshipan dthegrowing power ofprivatecap ital,as th eeconomybecamesteadilyin tegratedin to internationalmarkets.Yet there w asalso a darkersideto th eprofoundeconomic transformationunderlyingtheperiod.Theprocesso fneoliberalrestru cturinghas intensi®ed in comeandw ealthd isparitiesinth eTurkishco ntext.T urkeyis classi®ed as o neofth e`emergingmarkets’in term softh edegreean ddeptho f economicd ynamisman dexpansionaccordingtoW orldB ankcriteria,b utatth e sametimeitisacountrywith o neoftheleasteq ualdistributionsofincome,with theginicoef® cientfor1994estim atedas 0.5 0. 11 Thepatterno fhighincome

751 ZÇIYA OÈ NISË inequalityin T urkeyh asu ndoubtedlyb eenex acerbatedby th echronicallyh igh rateso fin¯ationthath aveexistedover thep asttw odecades.Aparallel phenomenontorisin ginequalityh asb eenth emassex odusfromrural,ag ricul- turalareas to th eperipheryo fmajormetropolitancentre s,w ithm igrants emergingasa majorelementofsupport fortheIslamicW elfareP arty.Weshall attempttod emonstrate,however,th at RP hasben e®ted b othfrom thepositive andnegativeaspectso fneoliberaleconomicrestru cturinginth eTurkishcon text. Asa®nalelem ent,th echangingpositionofthestatew ithinth enewly institutedn eoliberalo rder deservesseriousconsideration.Neoliberalismin Turkey,asin m anyothersocieties,d idn otsign ifya shiftfro mastate-ledm odel ofdevelopmenttoan id ealisedfree-marketeco nomy,withm inimalstate in ter- ventionism.Infact, in sp iteo fsigni®can tliberalisationinkey areas o feconomic activitysuch as th e®nancialsecto r, internationaltrad eandcapitalm ovements and,toa lesserex tent,p rivatisationofpubliceco nomicen terprises,th estatehas managedto resu meitsrole as a keyacto rinth eeconomyasw ellas a key distributorofeconomicren tsto th eprivatesecto r. Substantialrents asso ciated withp ublicsecto ractivityco ntinuedto ch aracteriseth evariousstageso fthe post-1980regime,rangingfromexportsubsidiesdu ringtheearlyan dmid-1980s toth ehighinterestearn ingsassociatedw ithlen dingto the g overnment(resulting fromthegovernment’sstrategyofheavyborrowingfromthepublic)and th e opportunitiescreate dbythesaleo fpublicen terprisesin thecontextof the1990s. Furthermore,th edevolutionofeconomicp ower fromcentralauth oritiesto lo cal

governments,a newtren dassociatedw ithth e1980s,g avesubstantialp owers to localg overnmentsto d istributeren tsin the fo rm ofnew constructionp ermits. Thus,allo cationofpublicland stop rivateco mpaniesb ecameanotherso urceo f rentallocationin th enew regime.W hileth estateco ntinuedto b eamajor spender andallocatoro frentsin th eneoliberalo rder,it was alsosu bjectedto majortransformations,n otablyd uringthe ANAP years ofthe1980s.W hatw e observeinthecontextofthem id-1980sisanin creasingpoliticisationofthestate andacorrespondingweakeningofthetraditionalb ureaucracyas a keyelem ent ofthecen tralisedstate. 12 Theincreasingpoliticisationofth estatem eantth at directco ntactw ithp oliticiansbecameincreasinglyim portantforbusinessmeno r private® rmstoach ievegreaterand p referentialaccess to state reso urces. Associatedw iththis p rocess,therewas arelaxedattitu detow ardsdisciplining economiccrim esin a periodassociatedwith risin ginstancesofbribery,co rrup- tionandembezzlement,o fwhichth escandalin volving`® ctitiousex ports’ duringth elate19 80swas amajorexample.Sim ilarly,widespreadtax ev asion andthegrowtho ftheundergroundeconomywere features regularlyh ighlighted duringth atp eriod.Inretro spect,th eneoliberalstatein T urkeyex hibitsa dual face,a dualityw hichis o fsomesigni®can cein th econtextofoursubsequent analysis.A tonelevel,it is a majorplayer inthe eco nomicaren aandamajor allocatorofeconomicren ts.As aresult,th eprivatesecto r’sdynamismco ntinues tob eheavilyd ependentnotonlyo nitso wninitiativesb utalso o nitsabilit yto achieveaccessto state reso urces andincentives.T heretreatofthestatefro mthe economyis,th erefore,a myth.At another level,h owever,asso ciatedwith th e politicisationofren tdistributionisa loss ofcon®d encean dadeclineinth e moralau thorityo fthestatein T urkey.Wehypothesiseth ata signi®can tlink

752 ISLAMICRESURGENCEINTURKEYINPERSPECTIVE existsb etweenth edualface o fthestateand th eriseo ftheWelfareParty ,alink thatw illbeco memore explicitin th esubsequentsectionsofthisessay .

Religiousnationalisma nd across-class alliance: whatmakesth eWelfare Partydistin ct fromthepoliticalp artieso fthe establishedo rder? ThetransformationoftheWelfareP artyfro mamarginal,paro chialentity to a masspo liticalmovementconstitutesa realparad ox.Touncover theparadoxw e needto id entifyfeatu res of RP’sprogramme,o rganisationandbaseo fsupport thattru lyd ifferentiateth epartyfrom theother politicalpartieso fthe`cen tre’. RP isan en igmaticen tityin th esenseth atco nventionalterm ssuchas `righ t’, `left’, `conservative’o r`radical’fail to cap ture itsbro adm essageandare unable top rovideacorrect characterisationofwhere thepartyactu allystan ds.Ju dged byitsp ositionongender,in volvingasubordinaterole fo rwomenat h omeand inso cietyat larg e,it is a politicalmovementontheextremeright.Yet, ju dged byits`ju steco nomico rder’( adilekonomikd uÈzen )rhetoric,withan em phasiso n incomedistributionan dthemoraln ecessityofim provingthematerialposition ofthep oor, itis no tfundamentallyd ifferentfromatypicalso cial-democratic partyo ntheleft. 13 Atthesametime,it d iffers fromaconventionalso cial democraticparty in thesenseth atitplacesm ajoremphasiso nfree enterprisean d privatecap italas the prin cipalen gineofgrowth,downgradingth eroleof th e statein th eprocess.Thebasicm essageis th atp rivateenterp rise,co mmercial

activityan dthepro®t motiveare perfec tlyco nsistentwiththe b asicp rincipleso f Islam,aslo ngasth egainsg eneratedare aproducto flegitimatean dtruly productiveeconomicactiv ity.Acloseread ingofth epartypro grammesan d electionmanifestosoftheWelfareP artyw ouldlead to th efollowingcharacter- isationofthepartyo nanumber ofkeyissu es,d ifferentiatingitfro mother politicalpartieso ftheestablishedord er. First, RP’sperspectiverepresentsa paradoxicalco mbinationof`tradition’and `modernity’.Thepartyis tru lym odernistin its u ncompromisingfaithin th e bene®ts o fcapitalaccumulationan deconomicg rowthfacili tatedb ytheacqui- sitionanduseo fadvancedtech nology.Its emphasiso ntheimportanceo f scienti®c educationandmoderntechn ologyiscertai nlyn olessthan th esimilar emphasisto b efoundinth econtextofothersecu larp artieson the rig hto rthe left.W hatis surp risingtoan o utsideobserver isth elacko femphasiso nissues relatingto co nservationandenv ironment,o rthepo ssibled angers ofsingle- mindedco ncentrationoneconomicg rowthco nsideringthat`balan ce’,`equilib- rium’and`moderation’are amongth ebasicIslam icv alues.In co ntrastto its majoremphasis,h owever,th epartyis tru ly`trad itionalist’in th eculturalsp here onissuesrelati ngtog ender forexample. Second,arecurringthemeinthe R Pliterature isanessen tiallyT hirdW orldist perspectivein volvingarelentlessattack o ntheWest,w itha particularfo cuson Westernv aluesandWesternim perialism.Paralleltotheattacko ntheWestitself isa critiquelabellingtheestab lishedp artiesas `im itators ofth eWest’,while portraying RP asth eonlyp artyfaith fultoth ecountry’sownhistoricalan d culturalh eritage. Third,theeconomicm odelset o utunder thecon troversialjusto rder rhetoric

753 ZÇIYA OÈ NISË is,in fact, co nsistentw ithth eThirdW orldist,an ti-imperialistlan guagefre- quentlyem ployedin RP’spropagandaliterature.T he`justo rder’m odelis portrayedas a thirdro ad,amixedeco nomystructurely ingsomewhereb etween thefree marketcap italismo ftheW estan dthestateco ntrolledso cialismofth e formerEasternB lock.In themixedeconomymodel,priv atein itiativeconstitutes themainen gineofeco nomicg rowth,yetth estatealso h asan im portantroleto playin term sofpro vidingbasicin frastructure anddistributionalassista nce.T he justord er documentalsoco ntainsanumber ofspeci®cally Islam icelem ents, notablya vibrantcase fo rinterest-free banking.Inretro spect,w hatthearchitects ofthejusto rder rhetorich avein m indisa modelof hy per-populismb asedo n amorallyju sti®ed cro ss-classcompromise,d esignedto formabroadco alitionof politicalsupport rangingfromprivateb usinessto th epoorestseg mentso f society.Ina sensethis is qu ited ifferentfrom thepositionofthemajor right-of-centrep oliticalparties,w hichten dtop lacem oreem phasiso nthe individualandth emarketan dlessem phasiso nsocialju stice.It isalsom arkedly differentfromthepositionofso cial-democraticp artieso ntheleft w hoplace moreemphasiso ndemocracy,humanrig htsan dsocialju sticean dlessem phasis onprivateen trepreneurshipan dinitiative. Fourth,theW elfareParty is h eavilycritic alo fthetrad itionalco nceptiono f secularism,erectedrightfromtheveryfo undationandformingoneofthecentral pillarso ftheRepublic,wh oleheartedlyaccept edb ythemajorpartieson th eleft andright.A ccordingto RP,themilitantorauthoritariansecu larismasso ciated

withth eRepublich aslim itedth erightso findividualsin a countrywith a predominantlyM uslimp opulationto p ractisetheir relig ionfreely .Thenatural corollaryo fthisp erspectiveisthat tru esecularisationrequirestru ereligious freedoms.A ninterestingcontrastis evidentinth iscontextbetween RP and other establishedpartie s.T hep rimaryfo cuso fsociald emocraticp oliticsis o nsocial rightsan dentitlementsas w ellas civ ilan dhumanrig hts.T hekeyfo cusof centre-rightpartiesis o ntherightsan dfreedomsassociatedw ithp roperty ownershipan dengagingin en trepreneurialactiv ity.Theprincipalconcerno fthe WelfareP arty,however,is o ntherighttopracti seo ne’sreligionfreely .Hence RP aimstoestab lisha truly`secul ar’reg imeinwhichan yrestrictionsconcerning thefree practiceofIslam willn olonger betolerated. Fifth,thefo reignpolicyo rientationofth eWelfareP artyalso m akesa strong contrastwith o ther establishedp artieso fthepoliticalorder.As partof its anti-Westerno rientation, RP’sprincipalg oalis to fo rgeacloser unionbetween Turkeyan dtherestof th eIslamicw orld.Specialem phasisis accord edto strengtheningrelationswithco untriesof the M iddleE ast,th eemergingstateso f post-SovietC entralA siaan dthehighlyd ynamicseco ndgeneration NICs of SoutheastA sia,w hichin cludekeyco untriesw ithp redominantlyIslam icp opula- tionssuchas M alaysiaan dIndonesia. RP’sforeign-policystan cere¯ ects a curiousm ixtureo fnationalisman dIslamictransn ationalism.Atonelevel, RP’ s approachis tran snationalistin th esenseth atth eemphasisis o nthebrotherhood ofandcooperationamongIslamicco untries.Y et,at th esametime,th ereis a strongnationalistic¯avourto RP’sforeign-policyap proach.In term sofits economicp otentialan dgeopoliticalposition,Turkeyissingledo utasthenatu ral candidatefo rtheleader shipo ftheIslamicw orld.Thereco veryo ftheIslamic

754 ISLAMICRESURGENCEINTURKEYINPERSPECTIVE worldfro mcenturieso foblivionand its rise to a positiono fprominencein th e globalp oliticalecon omygoesh andinh andwithth eriseo fTurkeyto th estatus ofasigni®can tpower, inthe b roader contextofIslamicco operation.It isn o coincidence,theref ore,that RP isex tremelycritic alo fandrejectsanyfu ture unionwithE urope.In fact on eofth eelectoralp romiseso f RP,relegatedto th e backgroundonceelecte d,wastodism antleth eCustomsUnionagreementsigned in1 995,whichcam eintoeffect fro mthebeginningof1996.There havebeen other groupsinth ecountry,n otablyo nthesocial-democraticfront,w hohave alsob eencritic alo ftheterm softheCustomsUnionagreement. RP’sposition, however,is d iametricallyo pposedto th epositiono fthesecular,W estern-orien- tatedp artieso fthecentre.F ortheWelfareParty ,reversingth eCustomsUnion agreementand lo oseningthetieswith E uropewasa mattero ffundamental principlerath er thansim plyan o utcomeofthedebatecon cerningth etermsof thespeci®c agreementconcluded.A vibrantcriticismo ftheUSAasan imperialistp ower inth eregion,aswellas arelentlessattack o nIsrael,co nstitute equallydo minantth emesin RP’sforeign-policyrh etoric. Acloseex aminationof RP’sprogrammaticstatem entsis im portantbecause ultimatelyo neo fthegreatach ievementso fthepartyu nderErbakan’sleadership concernedits ab ilityto d ifferentiateitself sh arplyfro mtheestabl ishedpartie sof thepoliticalorder.At atimewhen,aspart o fglobaltren ds,th esharpdiv isions betweencen tre-rightandsocial-democraticpartieshav elargelyb eenb lurred, appearingto the av eragecitizenonthestreetas sim plyd ifferencesin in dividual RP leadership, couldp resentitselfto th eelectorateas a politicalmovementw ith clearo bjectivesan daconsistentholisticm ission,astrongmoral¯ avour presentedw ithm issionaryzeal. T heuniquepositionofthepartyon a numberof keyissu es,an dtheradicaldepartures ofitsp rogrammefrom thoseof th e orthodoxparties,w ere successfullyem ployedb ytheparty’sleadershipas an electoralstrate gy.Oneofthestrikingfeatures oftheelecto ralcam paignleading uptoth egeneralelecti onsofDecember 1995wasE rbakan’srefusalto participatein telev isiond ebatesam ongmajorp artylead ers, onthegroundsthat allth esepartie swere imitatorsoftheWestan dthusaliento th ecountry’strue culture andtraditions.T hetheme` RP versusth erest’h ighlightedthe u ncompro- misingattitudeofthepartylead ership,vigorouslyd istancingthemselvesfro m thecentrein an attem pttoattrac tsupportfro mthetraditionalco nstituencieso f theestablishedp arties. TheW elfareP arty’sgreatorg anisationalstren gthp rovedto be an otherfeature thatsharplyd istinguishedthe p artyfro mitscom petitors, in¯uencingitselecto ral fortunesin a positived irection.P aradoxically,inan ag ewhere thevisualm edia haveestablishedth emselvesas th edominantmodeofcommunication, RP has placedm ajoremphasiso ngrassrootso rganisationsandface-to-face contactw ith theelectorate.E normousattentionhasbeen g ivento step b ystepm obilisationat thelocallev el,w ithp artym ilitantso rrepresentativesd iligentlyco minginto contactan dgraduallybu ildingsup port byestablishingclo se,p ersonalised relationshipswithpo tentialv oters.C omputersw ere employedw ithg reateffect toaccumulateand p rocessin formationo npeoplelikelyto votefor theparty.The huge®nancialreso urces at RP’sdisposalp layedan im portantroleinthiscontext. Materialbene®ts were offered top otentialvo tersÐty picallyp oorpeopleo nthe

755 ZÇIYA OÈ NISË outskirtso fmajormetropolitanareasÐ in th etermsoffood,shelteran djobs,as wellas co ntributionsto w eddingsandother socialo ccasions.T heseorg anisa- tionaltacticsprovidedstrateg icad vantagesto RP where otherparties,n otablyth e sociald emocrats,w erein o rganisationaldisarr ay,clearlyneglectingissues relatingto v oterm obilisationatth egrassrootslev el. Them unicipalelecti onso fMarch1 994were theturningpointinth e transformationof RP intoa nationwidep oliticalforce.In retro spect, RP appears toh avecapitalisedontheweaknesso fthesocial-democraticleft. T hisisclearl y evidentinth ecaseo ftheirsu ccessin the m etropolitancen treso fAnkara and Istanbul,w here RP managedto rep lace,alb eitb yasmallelecto ralm argin,th e social-democraticm ayors whohadbeen in o f® cesin ce1 989.Thus,in th e contextofthe19 90s,th ereap pears tob eacloseco rrespondencebetw eenth e declineofsociald emocracyas a majorfo rce inT urkishp oliticsan dtheriseo f RP asa radicalalternativetotrad itionalsecularso cialdem ocracy.Thed eclineof thesocial-democraticleft in T urkeyis a complex,multi-dimensionalp henom- enonthatd eservessep aratetreatm ent.T osomeextentit is clo selyrelate dtoth e globalfo rces thatw ehavealread yidenti®ed .Alsoim portantareth estrong divisionsinth esociald emocraticmovementitself,ty pi®ed b ytheillo gical divisiono fthemovementin totw oseparatep oliticalpartiesas w ellas b ythe perenniallead ershipstru gglesw ithinth eindividualp artiesth emselves.In co n- trastto th etightlyk nit,h ierarchicalo rganisationandconsistentvisionofthe WelfareParty ,theso cial-democraticmovementin T urkeyhas b eenin creasingly

characterisedb yfragmentationandth eabsenceo faconsistent,u nifyingvision. Onanumber ofkeyissu eso fpublicpo licy,suchas p rivatisationforexample, thesocial-democraticp artiesw ere unableto p resentacoherentperspective. Internalten sionsas w ellas an in abilityto p resentcoh erentsolutionsto k ey economicpro blemssteadilyd owngradedth ecredibilityo fthesocialdem ocratic alternative. 14 Alsosign i®can twasthe sin gle-mindedcon cerno fthemainso cial-democratic partyof th eearly1 990s,the S ocialDem ocraticP opulistP arty( SHP) under ;dIÊnoÈnuÈ,withissu esrelati ngtod emocratisation,notablywith resp ectto th e advancemento fcivilan dhumanrig hts.A lthoughtheemphasiso ndemocratiza- tionwasahighlyrespectablean dcommendableco ncern,itw asasso ciatedat th e sometimewitha relativelackof interestin eco nomicormaterialissueso fdirect concernto th epoor, whoformedth emainelecto ralbo neso ftheparty.In fact, duringth ecourse ofthe coalit iong overnmentbetweenDY Pand SHP, there appearedto b eacuriousdivisionofresponsibility,withth eright-of-centre DYP concerningitselfwith eco nomicissu essu chas p rivatisation,while SHP was primarilyp reoccupiedw ithdem ocratisationandhumanrig htsabstra ctedfro m economico rmaterialconditions.F urthermore,the con creteex perienceof governmentunder social-democraticmayors inth ekeym etropolitancen treso f IstanbulandAnkara andallegationsco ncerninginef® cient,inco mpetentan d corruptadministrationstronglyco ntradictedthe im ageo f`cleang overnment’ thath adfo rmedth eprincipalelecto ralm essageo fthesociald emocratsin 1 989. TheWelfareP arty,withits em phasiso ndirectm aterialbene®ts to th epooras opposedto ab stractn otionsofdemocracy,asw ellas its p romiseof h onestan d competentg overnment,m anagedto presen titselfto k eysegm entso fthe

756 ISLAMICRESURGENCEINTURKEYINPERSPECTIVE electorateas th enaturalaltern ativeto th esociald emocratsin crisis. O ur diagnosisth at RP’ssuccessw asb asedto a largeextentonthefailure ofso cial democracyin T urkeyis con ®rmedb ytheelectoralp erformanceof th epartyin 1994and1995.Whileth epartyem ergedas a nationwidemovementduringthe mid-1990s,a strongregionalb iasco ntinuedto ch aracterizeits electo ralsu ccess. Theevidencesu ggeststh atR Phascap italisedonsupport inm ajormetropolitan centressuch as Istan bulandA nkara asw ellas in th epredominantlyru ralan d poorer partso fthecountryin In ner,S outhE astan dEasternA natolia,areas where,u ndern ormalcircu mstances,o newouldex pectth esocialdem ocratic messagetob edominant. 15 Oneofthedramaticfeatu res ofTurkishpo liticsin th epost-1989era involved thefragmentationofth ecentrerig htandthedivisionswithinthe cen treleft th at wehavealread ydrawnattentionto.Duringthe1 980sunderth eunique leadershipo fTurgutO È zal, ANAP managedto fo rm abroad-basedco alition, claiming4 5%ofthevotein1 983an d36%in1 987. ANAP’sideologyrepresented anin terestingmixture ofeconomiclib eralismwith h eavydoseso fnationalism andreligiousconservatism,thoughnotofafundamentalistn ature.It wasO È zal’ s personalityan dhisu nusualco mbinationofaliberalW esterno rientationwitha strongattachmenttoIslam ,aconnectioncon®rmedby his lin ktoth eNational SalvationPartyin 1 970,thath eldth e`liberal’an d`conservative’factio nsof ANAP together under oneumbrella.H owever,fo llowingthewithdrawalof O È zal fromactivepartyp oliticsin 1 989after hiselecti onto th epresidency,h is ANAP successorM esutYõlmaz,essen tiallyrep resentingtheliberalfactio nof , couldn otkeepth econservativefactionwithinth eorbitso ftheparty.Inth e 1990stherefore,we observeamuchm ore homogenous ANAP in terms of ideologicalo utlookandelectoralb ase;h owever,it is clearl ynotina positionto replicateth eperformanceo fthepreviousdecade.A detailedanalysisof th e reasonsunderlyingthefrag mentationof ANAP andthecen trerig hting eneralis beyondourscope.T hebasicco nclusionremains,h owever,th atthe frag men- tationofbothth erightandleftin T urkeyhassigni®can tlyh elpedto ad vanceth e electoralfo rtuneso ftheW elfareP artyin the 1 990s.

Businessin terestsandIslamicresurg ence: thesigni®ca nceo f MUÈ SIAD Theconceptualisationofth eWelfareP artyas a partyo fthew eakan d disadvantagedis seriouslyin completein so far asit fails to take in toaccountthe signi®can triseo fIslamiccapitalo rtheIslam icbo urgeoisiein T urkeyduringthe post-1980neoliberalera.Islam icb usiness,in tu rn,hasco nstituteda major ®nancialb asefor theWelfareP arty.It isu ndoubtedlyth ecaseth at,w ithoutthe degree of®nancialreso urces available,th eWelfareP artyco uldn othavefound itselfin a positiontoim plementitsu niqueorganisationaltactic s,p avingtheway fortheelectoralsu ccesso fthemid-1990s.D uringth e1970ssmallb usinessmen andshopkeepers inthe sm allo rmedium-sizedIn ner Anatolianto wnshadb een anim portantconstituencyo ftheNationalSalv ationP arty,th epredecessorofthe WelfareP arty.Hencea certainlinkbetweenIslam icb usinessin terestsand politicalpartycam paigningonexplicitlyIslamicgro undsh asb eenev identright

757 ZÇIYA OÈ NISË fromtheb eginninginth elate1 960s.It wasdu ringthe1980s,h owever,th atw e observeaprofoundtake-off inthevolumeandd eptho fIslamicbusinessactiv ity, aprocessth atclearl yreceiveda signi®cant b oostfro mthemajorin¯owsof Saudicapitalarriv inginth ecountryto tak eadvantageofthen ew opportunities providedby th eliberaleco nomicen vironment,n otablyin th e®nancialsp here. 16 Similarly,thesavingsofthem igrantworkingcommunityin Germ anyhaveb een ¯owingb ackto T urkey,contributingtoth eriseo fIslamicb usinessactiv ityas wellas providinganim portantsourceo f®nancialsu pportfo rtheWelfareParty . Theopportunitiesfo rpro®t providedbytheshiftto amarket-orientatedeco nomy alsoen couragedIslam icb rotherhoodorganisationsornetworks( tarikat) to engageinin vestmentactivityo nasubstantialscale. B ythe1990sIslamic networkshadg rownsigni®can tlyin stren gth,establishingthemselvesas m ajor actors onth eeconomicscen e.A quali®catio niscalled for atth isp ointinth e sensethat th ere isn oone-to-onecorrespondenceb etweenIslam icbro therhoods andtheWelfareP arty.There existw ellkn ownexampleso fIslamicb rother- hoods,w hoseco nceptionofIslam differs signi®cantly fro mthato ftheW elfare Partyand w hosefo llowers are therefore encouragedto v otefo rother parties, notablyo ntheright-of-centreof the po liticalspectrum. 17 Thisq uali®catio n, however,d oesn otcontradictth ebasicob servationth atth ere existsa signi®can t linkbetweena substantialm ajorityo fIslamicbusinesses,stren gthenedcon sider- ablyin th emarket-orientatedenv ironmentofthe1980sandtherise o fthe WelfareP arty.Ino ther words, RP constitutesthe p oliticalexpressionofthese

risingbusinessintere sts. It wouldb einstructiveto d raw attentioninth isco ntexttothe p rincipal associationofIslamicb usinessin terestsin T urkey,namelythe In dependent AssociationofIndustrialistsan dBusinessmen( MUÈ SIAD).Anexam inationof MUÈ SIAD isillu minatinginterm sofillustratingthedepthan dextentofthesurge inIslam icb usinessactiv ityin T urkey.Theformationo fthebusinessasso ciation isa veryrecen tdevelopment.T heorganisationwasfo undedin 19 90byagroup ofyoungbusinessmenw ithan av erageageof33.Over aperiodofafew years membershipo ftheorganisationhasg rownsteadilyto aro und3000in dividual companies.T hen umbers are expectedto rise to 5 000bytheyear 2000.Infact theorganisationhasestab lisheditself as th elargestv oluntaryb usinessasso ci- ationinth ecountry.T hekeyv oluntaryb usinessasso ciationinT urkeyth at representsth einterestso flargeco nglomerates,theT urkishIn dustrialists’an d Businessmen’sAssociation( TUÈ SIAD)hasa membershipof aro und400. MUÈ SIAD membersinclu desomeverylarg ecompanies,of w hichth emost strikingcase is K ombassanlo catedin K onya,th etraditionalstro ngholdo f Islamicb usinessan dtheWelfareParty .Kombassanis itself an intere stingcase inth esenseth atit co nstitutesa network® rm representingth ecombinedcap ital ofmore than3 0000sh areholders, manyofwhomare migrantw orkers in Germany.Withth eexceptiono fsomelargecompanies,h owever,it isfair tosay thatth emajorityo f MUÈ SIAD membersare medium-sized® rms.A nother striking characteristicin volvesth espreadof g eographiclo cation.Inco ntrastto TUÈ SIAD members whoare locatedin Istan bulandth esurroundingMarmara region, MUÈ SIAD membershipis d istributedall o verth ecountry.A nexaminationof MUÈ SIAD membershipsu ggeststhat th elargestm embershipis to b efoundinso me

758 ISLAMICRESURGENCEINTURKEYINPERSPECTIVE ofthemajorm etropolitancen tressuch as Istanb ul,B ursa andIzmir,as w ellas inth ekeytrad itionalIn ner Anatolianstro ngholdssuchas K onyaandKayseri. 18 MUÈ SIAD membersalso in clude,however,® rmsfromsmallerA natolianto wnsthat havebeenid enti®ed as sig ni®can tsuccesssto riesb ythemedia,result inginth e labelth e`Anatoliantig ers’. 19 Thetownsinq uestionincludeDenizli,K ahraman- marasË,CËorum,Gaziantepan dSËanhurfa. Thecharacteristicof th eseto wnsisth at anumberofrelativelysm allo rmedium-sized® rmslocatedin these cen tresh ave managedto estab lishthem selvesas sig ni®can texporters ofmanufactures toth e worldm arket,wh ileat th esamereceivinglittleo rnosubsidyfromthestatefo r thisp urpose.It wouldbe w rongtoclaim th atth ewholeo ftheb oomingsmall ormedium-sizedb usinessactiv ityin T urkeyis rep resentedu nder theu mbrella of MUÈ SIAD,however.In deed,alargecomponentofsucces sfulsmallor m edium- sizedb usinessco mmunitiesd onothaveanex plicitIslam icorien tationand wouldn ormallyv otefor theestablished,secularp artieso fthecentre.Nonethe- less,this o bservationdoesn otinvalidateth epointthata certainkeyelem entof successfulbusinessactiv ityin sm allo rmedium-sized® rmsdoeshavean Islam ic orientationandisaf® liatedw ith MUÈ SIAD. Acentralquestiontoask at th isstag eisw hatex actly MUÈ SIAD’spositioniso n outstandingissueso fpublicp olicyan dhowit d iffers fromtheviewsofitsriv al organisation, TUÈ SIAD,anasso ciationwitha secular,W esterno rientationandth e representativeofbigb usinessin T urkey.Onthebasiso facursoryex amination, onemayarg uethat MUÈ SIAD’sannualreports ontheTurkisheco nomyandreports

basedo nspecialisedresear chin tovariouskeyareas o feconomicpolicyh avethe ¯avouroftheserious TUÈ SIAD reports,un liketheelectionp ropagandaofthe WelfareParty ,notablyth e`justo rder’d ocument.N onetheless,a closeex amin- ationrevealsa number offeatur esth atd istinguishes MUÈ SIAD’spositionsh arply from TUÈ SIAD’sapproachin th eeconomican dnon-economicsp heres.B ysimilar logic,a closeco rrespondencem ayb eidenti®ed b etween MUÈ SIAD’spositionand theperspectiveoftheWelfareP artyo nanumberofkeyissues o feconomican d foreignpolicy. 20 Thep romotionofsmallan dmedium-sized® rmsandthemobilisationof publicresou rces andthe®nancialsy stemfo rthisp urposecon stituteso neofthe recurringthemesinth e MUÈ SIAD perspective.Theemphasiso nsmallan dmedium- sized® rms,h owever,is no tuniqueto MUÈ SIAD sincea number ofother organisationsexistin T urkey,bothp ublican dprivate,w hoalsoseek to p romote smallan dmedium-sizedestab lishments.W hatis u niqueto MUÈ SIAD,however,in linewiththe p ositionoftheWelfareP arty,isa strongrejectionoftheCustoms UnionwithE uropeandacorrespondingemphasiso ntheneedto reo rientth e country’seconomicrelati onshipan dforeignpolicystan ceaw ayfro mtheWest towardsa closer unionwithth eIslamicw orld.Anumber oftheassociation’s researchp ublicationsinvestigateth epotentialb ene®ts to be d erivedfro mcloser cooperationbetweenT urkeyan dotherIslam icco untries.A sparto fitsg rand strategyinvolvingacloser unionwiththe Islam icw orld,theorganisationhas alsofo rmulatedco ncretep rojectsfo reconomicu nionamongIslamiccou ntries. Oneofthesestep sconcernsthemuchp ublicisedp rojectcalled the `C otton Union’.Theprojectco vers fourmainIslam icco untriesÐTurk ey,Pakistan, Uzbekistanan dTurkmenistanÐandvisualisesa combinedstrateg yofexpansion

759 ZÇIYA OÈ NISË toau gmentinternationalco mpetitivenessin co ttontextilesan drelated®eldsin thefourco untriesco ncerned. 21 It isstrik ingth atb oth MUÈ SIAD andth eWelfareParty hav ebeenh eavily in¯uencedb ythesuccessfulmodelso fEastA siancap italism.Lookingtowards theEastfo rabroadm odelo fdevelopment,th ehierarchic,sem i-authoritarian modelso fcapitalismin E astA siaan dSoutheastA sia,w itha strongcommuni- tarianelem ent,app ear more congenialfro manIslam icp erspectivecomparedto Westernm odelso fcapitalisman dtheirassoci atedem phasiso nindividualism, secularism andliberaldemocracy.Theseb roado bservationsmightbeusedto highlightthekeyd ifferencesb etweenthe u nderlyingp erspectiveso f TUÈ SIAD and MUÈ SIAD.First,th eformerisWestern-orientated,securalistan dastrongsupporter ofeconomican dpoliticalunionwithE uropeasa basisfo rbotheco nomic prosperityan dtheconsolidationofliberaldem ocracyin T urkey.Thelatteris more Eastern-orientated,heavilyin ¯uencedby th esuccessfulcasesof E astan d SoutheastA siancap italisman d®ndingcloseaf® nitiesb etweenth ecommunitar- iantradit ionso fIslam andthecommunitarianfeatureso ftheAsianm odels. Second,there appears tob eastrikingdifferencein th eapproacho fthetwo organisationstoth equestionof`d emocracy’itself,alth oughtheissuerequires seriousseparatein vestigation. TUÈ SIAD asan org anizationseemstoh aveplaced muchmore emphasisin recen tyears onexpandingtherightsandfreedomsofthe individual. 22 Atthesametime,however,it tendstop laceless em phasiso nsocial rightsan dincomedistributionas m ajorpublicp olicyissu es. MUÈ SIAD,inco ntrast,

tendstodowngradean dde-emphasiseissues relati ngtofreed omsassociatedw ith liberald emocracy,whichit labelsas aspeci®cally W esternp henomenon.Hence, discussionsofindividualrig htsan dcivillib ertiesd onot®gure in MUÈ SIAD reports,w hileth ere are frequentreferencesto so cialrig htsan dtheimportance ofachievingsocialju stice,m ore sothan tho seto b efoundinthe TUÈ SIAD literature. Withth ediscussionofIslamicb usinessan dthegrowthof MUÈ SIAD as a key associationofIslamicbusinessin thebackground,wemayreturnto ourprincipal themeandventure thefollowinghypothesis.T hetransformationoftheW elfare Partyfrom amarginalfo rce toa signi®can tpoliticalmovementisa parallel phenomenontoan dare¯ectio nofthegrowingpower ofIslamicb usinessin th e Turkisheco nomyandsocietyinth econtextofthe1990s.M ore speci®cally ,the riseo ftheWelfareParty re¯ ects, in p art,th egrowingaspirationso ftherising Islamicb ourgeoisieto co nsolidateth eirp ositionsinso ciety,toach ieveelite statusalsoand ,inp urelyeco nomicterm s,to o btaina greatersh are ofpublic resources,b othat th ecentralandlocallev els,in co mpetitionw ithoth er segmentso fprivateb usinessin T urkey.Consideringtheimportanceo fthestate asa keyalloca torofrentsin majorareaso ftheeconomy,itisnotsurprisingthat businessmenw ithan Islam ico rientationare cooperatingwithactiv itiesb eing organisedat b othth eassociationallev el( MUÈ SIAD)andthep oliticallevel(th e WelfareP arty)to o btaina largeshare ofthepublicp ie.R ecentpress reportso n MUÈ SIAD’sentryas a collectiveunitin tom ajorprivatisationdealsas w ellas o n thebene®ts th atseem to h aveaccru edto Islam iccap italfro mthedeals establishedas a resultofitsclo seco ntactw ith RP mayors inIstan bulandAnkara appear tolen dsupport too urh ypothesis.

760 ISLAMICRESURGENCEINTURKEYINPERSPECTIVE

Earlieron ,wehighlightedth euniqueo rganisationaltactic sthatd istinguished theWelfareP artyfrom itsp rincipalco mpetitors.T heparallelat th elevelo f Islamicb usinessapp ears tob ethenetwork® rm.Itisclearth atthe Islam icb ond isp rovingtob ethekeyelem entin th eintenseco operationamongamultitude ofsmallo rmedium-sizedecon omicu nitsto ach ieveth etypeo fcompetitiveness andaccessto publicreso urces thatwouldcertai nlyno tbefeasiblein theabsence ofsuchco operation.Infact, MUÈ SIAD itselfis o peratinglikeaconsortiumor network® rm,asis evid entinth eorganisation’srecentinterestin p rivatisation offers. Whatis also clear fro mthisd iscussionisth atany co nsideration concerningtheriseof th eWelfareP artyas sim plya temporary ortransient phenomenonhasto take in toacco untthegrowingstrengthan ddynamism,and thecooperativeelementembodiedin Islam iccap italth atform theeconomican d ®nancialb ackboneoftheparty.

Thewelfarep artya nddemocraticco nsolidationintu rkey:the challenges anddilemmasahead Withth eWelfareP artyin stalledas th edominantp artner ina coalitiongovern- ment,th ekeyq uestioninev erybody’smindis w hether astrong RP presence in governmentisco mpatiblew ithth econsolidationofthelib erald emocratico rder inT urkey.Tomanyforeignobservers, lookingatth eTurkishex periencein a comparativeperspectiveandtakingaccountofsomeofthemore radicalan d RP militantversionsofpoliticalIslam inth eMiddleE astan dNorthA frica, appears tob eamildan ddemocraticvarian tofp oliticalIslam. 23 There is no doubtthatth eTurkishv ersionofpoliticalIslam hasbeenstro nglyin¯uencedan d conditionedb ythecountry’sdemocraticp oliticalculture,since, in sp iteo f certainruptures andlimitationsm ultipartyd emocracyh asb eena majorcharac- teristico fTurkeyd uringth epostwar period.Thereis also no d oubtabout RP’ s strongfaithin the p eacefulmechanismsofparliamentaryd emocracyas a means ofgainingaccess to p ower andputtingitsw ideÐran gingp rogrammeinto effectiveaction.It wouldb efair tosay th atan yviolentattempttogain p ower wouldb erejectedex ceptperh apsbyaverysm allm inority.Themajorp roblem posedb ythepresenceo f RP forthelib erald emocraticord er,h owever,arises fromthefactthat p oliticalIslam,byde®n ition,has an en compassingvisionof societycoveringallasp ectso fdailyex istence,ran gingfromdress toed ucation, moralco nductan dthepositionofw omenin so ciety.W hatis com montoth e majorityo ftheleadershipan dtheran kand®leo fthemovementisth atthey wouldlik etom oveforward,albeitg raduallyan dina peacefulmanner,to an idealisedform ofaMuslimso ciety.Althoughit is n otstatedex plicitly,what manysupporters of RP haveinm indisu ltimatelyth eestablishmento f Sharia, theIslamicL aw,withits all-en compassingvisiono fsociety. TheIslam icm ovementinT urkeyan delsewhere hasb ene®ted fro mthe postmoderndem ocratisationwaveduringthe1 990s,in volvingthetransmission ofvaluesconducivetolib erald emocracy,namelythe im portanceofastrongand pluralisticsociety,as well as a culturalrelati vismth atreco gnisedth erighto f `others’to co-ex ist.T hesein ¯uencesw ere conduciveto th eemergenceo f Islamicm ovementso nthepoliticalscenealongsideother,secu largro upsor

761 ZÇIYA OÈ NISË movements.In o therwo rds,th epostmodernw avehaso penedup p ublicsp ace forIslamicm ovementsto ¯ ourish,aspaceth atw asn otpreviouslyavaila ble,at leastn otonacomparablescale.T hecrucialp ointtoem phasise,h owever,is that, whileth eenvironmentofpostmodernityis con sistentwithp oliticalIslam ,the holistic,all-en compassingvisionofp oliticalIslam isn otequallycom patible withth epostmodernm essageofapluralisticso ciety. 24 Turningouratten tionbackto th eTurkishco ntext,a fundamentalch allengeis posedb ythepresenceo fapowerful RP for thefuture ofth eliberalpolitical order.If ourv iewcon cerningth eencompassing,totalisticv isionof p olitical Islam isco rrect,th enth atv isionco mesinto d irectco n¯ictwith th efundamental principleso fsecularismand W esterno rientationthath avebeenthe h allmarko f theRepublicfo raperiodof o ver 70years.A nyattem ptbytheRPtoleg islate itsid ealisedvisionofIslam intoactio nwillru nupagainsta majorwallo f oppositionfromthev astm ajorityo fthepopulation,asw ellas fro mthe establishedb astionsoftheRepublicanco nstitutionalo rder,in cludingthema- jorityo ftheparliament,th ejudiciaryan d,mostim portantofall,the m ilitary. Althoughith asu nintentionallyco ntributedto the rise o fpoliticalIslam in Turkey,themilitaryconstitutesa majorbarrier towardsits furth er advancement inthe cu rrentco njuncture.In fact, at th etimeofwritingthisessay ,someofthe strongestreacti onstoth eproposed RP legislationinth eculturalrealm h ave originatedfro mthemilitaryitself. Ina studyattemptingtocharac teriseth eWelfareP arty,awellk nownTurkish 25

journalist,RusËenC Ëakir,em ploysthelabel`neithersh arian ordemocracy’. This characterisationsuggeststh at RP isn otfu llyd emocraticm easuredbythe standardsoflib erald emocracy,butisalso in p artsign i®can tlyd ifferentinits visionofIslam ascom paredw ithth eIraniano rSaudiArabianv ersionsof Islamicfu ndamentalism,forexample.T hisch aracterisationmaybe v alidin sofar asb othth epartylead ershipan dpartym ilitantsreco gniseth atrad icalch angein thedirectionsthatp oliticalIslam favours, evenb ypeacefulandparliamentary methods,w illface hu geoppositionina countryw hichis un iqueinth eIslamic worldin term softhed epthof its secu larisman dWesternorien tation.Withth e commonvisio nofan id ealisedIslamicso cietyin th ebackground,whatd istinguishes RP sharplyfro mitsco unterpartsin th eMiddleE astis arealisationofthe limitso fwhatit can ach ieveinthe en vironmentinw hichit is o perating. Inan otherin ¯uentialstu dy, TheFailureo fPoliticalIslam ,Frenchan alyst OlivierR oyarguesthat p oliticalIslam islikelyto d egeneratein toeith erasmall, parochial,m ilitantpoliticalm ovementoraWestern-typeright-of-centreparty similarto th eChristianDem ocraticp artiesto b efoundinm anyE uropean countries.26 Inim mediateterm s,b othof th esep ossibilitiesseem to be rem otein Turkey.Infact an in terestingfeature oftheTurkishcase b efore the1990swas theexistenceo fpartiesthatd ominatedg overnmentandwhoseb asicorien tation wasqu iteclo seto E uropeansty leC hristiand emocracy.Examplesin cludethe DemocratParty led b yMenderesin th e1950s,th eJusticeParty led b yDemirel inth e1960sand1970sandtheMotherlandPartyu nderO È zal’sleadershipd uring the1980s.O neoftheunderlyingfeatures oftheright-of-centrep oliticalparties wasth atth eyu sedIslam asa majorpoliticalweaponasa meansofbuilding support andbroadelecto ralco alitionsagainstth emoreov ertlysecu larso cial

762 ISLAMICRESURGENCEINTURKEYINPERSPECTIVE democraticp artieso ftheleft,n otablyth eRepublicanP eople’sParty.Nonethe- less,th esep owerfulrig ht-of-centrep artiesm anagedto co mbineIslam asa tool ofpoliticalm obilisationwitha broadlysecu larpersp ective.It iso bvious, therefore,th at RP iso fadifferentv intageanddepartsrad icallyin its basic perspectivefro mtheestablishedcen tre-rightparties;it is u nlikelyto ch angeits basicco urse inth eforeseeablefu ture. Afragileeq uilibriumappears toex istin th eTurkishco ntext.C onsideringits strongbaseof po liticalsupport,fro mbothm arginalisedg roupsinp overtyas wellas risin gbusinessintere sts, RP isu nlikelyto fad eovernight.At thesame time,there existsan in herentten sionconfrontingtheleadershipo ftheparty.A ny concretean dradicalstepsin th edirectiono fputtingintoactio nkeyelem entso f theIslamicp rogramme,n otablyin th eculturalsp here,are likelyto g enerate retaliationandaconstitutionalcrisis, jeo pardisingthefuture ofth eliberalo rder andthefutureofthepartyitself. Y etanothertensionfacingth epartyarises fro m thefactth ato neoftheun derlyingreasonsfor RP’ssuccessco ncernedits ab ility tod ifferentiateitself sh arplyfro mitsco mpetitors. Apartyth atd istanceditself som uchfro mtherestan dpromiseda radicalprojecto frestructuringcan not simplyb ehavelikeev erybodyelsew henin go vernment.T otalp ragmatismo r inactionislikely to u nderminefuture politicalsupport fortheparty.So RP appears tob esittingonaknife-edgeequilibrium.Anyattem pttoinstituteradical changeislik elyto elicit sev ere resistance,w hilea policyo fcompletein action islik elyto u nderminepoliticalsu pport,b otho fwhichare clearlydetrimental

fromthepointofviewo ftheparty’sfuture growthp rospects.

Concludingobservations Economicglo balisationisa highlyu nevenph enomenonthatg eneratesb oth winners andlosersin the p rocess.W hatth epresentanalysish asattem ptedto establishis th atth emechanismsofeconomicg lobalisationandtheasso ciated processo fneoliberalrestru cturinghavebeeninstru mentalin th eriseo fthe pro-IslamicW elfareP artyto a positionofp rominencein th emid-1990s. Furthermore,th eculturalim pulsesasso ciatedw ithg lobalisationhavealso preparedth ewayfor theriseo fpoliticalIslam inth eTurkishco ntext.Astriking feature ofth eTurkishexp erience,from acomparativeperspective,is that th e WelfareP artyem ergedas a cross-classco alition,incorporatingintoits o rbitth e poorandmarginalisedstrataÐ th eobviouslosersof th eneoliberalrestru cturing processÐas well as certai nsegmentso ftherisingbusinessin terest,agroup clearlyemergingasabene®ciary o ftheg lobalisationp rocess.In factth eWelfare Partyas th epoliticalexpressionofrisingIslamiccap italre¯ ects th ecooperative attemptso ftheseg roupstoo btaina largeshareo ftheben e®ts asso ciatedw ith globalisation.Atamore speci®c level,a multitudeoffacto rs hasb eenresp on- siblefo rtheriseo ftheWelfareP artyto thestatusofamassp oliticalmovement. Suchfacto rs includefragmentationoftheexistingpartysy stem,ahighlyun even distributionofincomeandadeclineinth eredistributivecapacityan dmoral authorityo fthestate.E xternalfacto rs were alsoreleva nt.T hemassivein¯ows ofSaudicap italin toth ecountryas w ellas th esizablein ¯owsofremittances frommigrantworkers inE uropecontributedto th eprocessof Islam icre-

763 ZÇIYA OÈ NISË surgence.A lthoughnotsuf® cientlyem phasisedin th epresentcontext,th e disappointmentsassoci atedwith T urkey’sfailure too btainfu ll-m embershipo f theEUaswellas themuchpu blicisedEuropeanin differenceto atrocitiesag ainst MuslimsduringtheBosnianW ar havealsoin ¯uencedp ublicsentim entinth e countryan dmayhav ehelpedto sw ingthependulumsomewhatin th edirection oftheIslamiccam p.Onapositivenote,th eriseo f RP toa positionof prominencein T urkishpo liticsh ash elpedto d raw publicattent iontotw omajor issues,n amelyth erighttop ractisereligionfreelyas p arto ftheb roader menu ofcivil,so cialand h umanrig htsas w ellas th eneedto d iversifyT urkey’s externalrelationsawayfro masingle-mindedconcernw ithE uropetogreateran d closer contactw itho therreg ionsoftheworldwith com monculturalb onds. Forthesociald emocrats,th emainlesso ntob edrawn isthat, in th ecurrent domesticand g lobalcon text,it is n otpossibleto w inelecti onssimplyas a class partyo fthepooranddisadvantaged.Whatthesociald emocratsn eedto d ecipher from the RP successis that th eyh avetoco nstructa broader coalitionthat includesseg mentso fthesmallan dmedium-scaleb usinessesw hichare onthe increase.Theyn eedto d evelopapolicyag endathatcaters for theinterestso f boththe po orandsmall-mediumscaleb usinessin a consistentfashion.S ocial democratsas w ellas o ther partiesalso h avelessonstolearn fro mtheorganisa- tionaltactic softheWelfareParty an dtheyalso h avetocom etoterm swith Islam asan im portantso cialan dculturalfo rce.F inally,ata more generallev el, akeylesson that em ergesfro mtheTurkishex perienceis th atid entityp olitics

cannotbedivorcedfrom itsb roadereco nomicco ntext.M ore speci®cally ,the Turkishcase illu minatesth edif® cultieso fconsolidatingliberaldemocracyfu lly inan env ironmentwhere incomeandwealthis h ighlyu nevenlyd istributed. Seriousquestionsm ustb eraised,however,co ncerningthedemocraticcred en- tialso ftheWelfareParty .Whileth ere isnodoubting RP’srespectfo rparliamen- taryd emocracyas a meansof gain ingandexercisingp ower, itsun derlying visionisessentiallya majoritarianconceptionofdemocracyw ithlim itedresp ect forminorityrigh tso rtherightso f`others’.Inth atresp ect,its v isionofidentity politicsis au thoritarianin th esenseth ata societyco nsistingo fapredominantly Muslimp opulationisd ividedin totw ocon¯icting cam ps,nam ely`u sagainst them’or`trueb elievers versusnon-believers’.Asharpd istinctioniscalled fo r inth isco ntextbetw eencu lturalIslam andpoliticalIslam .CulturalIslam ,asan importantcomponentofth ecountry’sculturalh eritage,m ayp rovetobe a unifyingforce inth edemocraticp rocessin T urkey.PoliticalIslam ,inco ntrast, islik elyto co nstitutea divisivein ¯uencean d,th erefore,an im portantsourceo f instabilityin th econtextofthedemocraticreg ime.

Notes Paperprepared for presentationat the BRISME SInternationalConfere nceon MiddleEastern Studies held at St Catherine’sCollege,Universityof Oxford, 6±9 July 1997. Thepaper was completedin May 1997 shortly beforethe collapse of thecoalitio ngovernment,with the Islam istW elfareParty as thedom inantelem ent,in June 1997 afterone year of of® ce

764 ISLAMICRESURGENCEINTURKEYINPERSPECTIVE

1 Theunexpec tedrise of theW elfareParty has generatedalargeliteratu reinrecent years. For asmallsam ple, seeSencer Ayata, `Patrona ge, party,and state: the politici zationof Islamin Turkey’ , MiddleEast Journal , 50 (1), 1996, pp40±57; Sabri Sayari, `T urkey’sIslamistchalleng e’, MiddleE ast Quarterly , 3 (3) 1996, pp35±43; Jenny BWhite,Ìslam and dem ocracy:the Turkish experie nce’, Current History ,94(588), 1995, pp7±12; white `Pragm atistsor ideologues?T urkey’s WelfareParty in power’ , Current History , 96 (606), 1997, pp25±30; and David Shankla nd, `Thedem iseof theRepubli canTurkey’ s socialcontrac t’, Govern- mentand Opposition ,31 (3), 1996, pp30±32. 2 On theorigins and perform anceof theNational Salvatio nParty( MSP),theforerun nerof RP inthe pre-1980 paper, see IÇ lkaySunar &BinnazToprak, Ìslam in politics: the case of Turkey’, Governmentand Opposition,18(4) 1983, pp421±441. From acomparativeperspective,see Hootan Sham bayat,`T herentier state,interest groups andthe paradox of autonomy:state and business inTurkey and Iran’ , Comparative Politics,26 (3), 1994, pp307±332. 3 Thedistribut ionof thenational vote at the general election sof 1995 was as follows:W elfareParty, ( RP), 21.4%;TruePath Party ( DYP),19.2%;MotherlandParty ( ANAP),19.7%;DemocraticL eftParty ( DSP), 14.6% andthe Republi canPeople’ sParty( CHP,thesuccessor tothe Social Dem ocraticPopulist Party), 10.7%. Whatis alsostriking in the context of the1995 electionsis thatthe two fringeparties, the extrem e nationalists, theNationa lActionParty ( MHP)andthe ethnic separatis ts, HADEP,alsoobtaine dasigni®cant shareof thenationa lvote. MHP’ssharewas 8.2%,whileHADE P’ssharewas 6.1%.Neitherof thesetwo partiescould be represen tedin parliam entbecause of theirfailure to pass the10% nationalelectora l threshold.Nonetheless, theirelectora lsuccess was signi®cant in term sof underminingthe power baseof the centreparties, clearly facilita tingthe rise of theW elfareParty in the process. For detailedinform ationon individualpolitica lpartiesin T urkey, seeMetin Heper & JacobM Landau(eds), PoliticalP artiesand DemocracyinTurkey ,London:IB Tauris,1991. 4 On thechallen ges confrontingthe process of democraticconsolid ationin T urkey, seeE rgun O È zbudun, `Turkey:how farfrom consolid ation?’, Journalof Democra cy ,7(3), 1996, pp123±138. 5 Thecentre-p eripheryparadig mwas originallydevelop edby SËerifMardin. As anexam pleof thisapproac h tothe study ofIslamin T urkish politics,seehis `Religionandpolitics in m odernT urkey’in Jam esPiscatori (ed), Islam inthe P oliticalProcess ,New York: CambridgeUniversi tyPress, 1983, pp138±159. For arecent analysisthat attem pts tolocate the post-198 0experiencein a centreÐperipher yframework, seeU È mit Cizre-SakalliogÆlu, `Parametersand strategi es of IslamÐstateinteract ionin Republic anTurkey’ , Inter- nationalJournal of M iddleE ast Studies ,18, 1996, pp231±251. 6 On theim pactof globalisationand the rise of identitypolitics ,seein particul arAnthony Giddens, Beyond Leftand Right:The Futureof R adicalP olitics ,Cambridge:Polity Press, 1996;Paul Kennedy , Preparing for theTw enty® rst Century ,London:Fontana ,1993;Vincent Cable, The World’s NewF issures: Identities in Crisis,London:Dem os, 1994;and Paul Hirst &GrahameThompson, `Globalizationand the future of the nationstate’ , Economyand Society ,24 (3), 1995, pp408±442. 7 For acomparativeMiddleE asternperspect iveem phasisingIslam as anurban m ovementre¯ ecting the modernistaspirati ons of risinggroups insociety, see Sam iZubaida, Islam, thePeople and theState , London:IB Tauris, 1993. 8 Our discussionof thesecondar yeliteshas beenin¯ uenced by Faruk Birtek& BinnazToprak, `T he con¯ictual agendas of neoliberalreconstr uctionand the rise of Islamicpolitics in T urkey’, Praxis International ,13 (2), 1993, pp 192±212. 9 On thebroad politica leconomyof Turkeyduring the post-198 0era,see Z iyaO È nisË&StevenB Webb, `Turkey:dem ocratizationand adjustm entfrom above’ , inStephan Haggard & StevenB Webb(eds) Voting for Reform: Democracy,Politic alLiberalizationand EconomicA djustment pp128±184 New York: Oxford UniversityPress, 1994. Seealso the collecti on ofessays inAtila E ralp,Muharre mTuÈmay& BirolYes Ëilada (ed), The Politicaland SocioeconomicTransform ationof Turkey ,Westport, CT:Praeger,1993. 10 For adetailedanalysis of therole of them ilitaryin the post-198 0context,seeHuri TuÈrsan, Èrsatz democracy:T urkeyin the 1990s’ ,inRichard Gillespi e(ed), MediterraneanP olitics ,Vol. 2, pp215±230, London:Pinter, 1996. 11 Theevidenc eon relativeincome inequal ityis basedon the1994 nationalsurvey whose outcomewas disclosedby theState Institut eof Statisticsin1996. 12 On thechanging role of thestate in T urkeyduring the post-198 0era,see Korkut Boratav,Ì Ç ktisatT arihi, 1981±1994’ in Sina Aks Ëin(ed) TuÈrkiyeTarihi, Cilt5, BuguÈnkuÈTuÈrkiye ,pp159±210, Istanbul:Cem Yayinevi, 1995. 13 Our discussionsconcerningthe program maticstatem entsof RP arebased on electionm anifestosand documentssetting out the controv ersial`just econom icorder’ . Thekey docum entsare the followin g: 20 Ekim1991 GenelSec ËimiR efahPartisi Sec Ëim Beyannamesi ,Ankara, 1991; AdilE konomikDu Èzen: 21 Soru 21 Cevap,Ankara, 1991;and RefahP artisi14 Aralik1995 SecËimleriSec Ëim Beyannamesi Ankara, 1995. 14 Thedecline of thesocial dem ocratsshould beplaced in perspect ivein the sense thatthe com binedvote of thetwo principalsocial dem ocraticparties exceede dtheshare of RP inthe general election sof 1995. What is signi®cant, however ,is thepronoun ceddecline of thesocial dem ocratscom paredwith the pre-1980

765 ZÇIYA OÈ NISË

period,when theycould obtain around 40% of thenationa lvoteand even m orein the context of the mid-1970s. 15 For adetailedanalysis of theelectora lperformanceof theprincip alpolitica lpartieson aregionby region basis andillustrat ingthe regiona ldimensionin the fragm entationof thenationa lvote,see Ali C ËarkogÆlu, `24 Aralik1995 SecËimlerindeBo ÈlgesellesËme, Oynaklõk, ParcËalanmaveT emsilAdaleti’ , 25, GoÈ ruÈ sË 1996 pp50±54. For astudy whichem phasises thestrong regionalas wellas therural connect ionunderlyi ng support for theW elfareParty, seeHasan KirmanogÆlu, `RefahPartisin inYu ÈkselisËininE konomiPolitigÆi’, mimeo, Facultyof Economics, Universityof Istanbul,1996. 16 In thepublic image, the Saudi presence in the T urkish economythatorigina tedin the mid-198 0s has been associatedwiththe form ationof ®nancialinstituti ons basedon theprincipl es of interest-freebanking .For evidenceon Saudicapital, see Birol Yes Ëilada,`Islam ,dollarsand politics: the politica leconomyof Saudi capitalin T urkey’,paperdeliver edto the annual MESA Conferencein T oronto, Canada,15± 18 November 1989. 17 Anexampleof such abrotherhood thatis muchpublicis edis thereligio us communityfounded by Fethullah GuÈlen,a discipleof SaidNursi, theNur sect. 18 Dataon thedistribut ionof MUÈ SIAD membershipreveals the followin gpattern.In October1996 MUÈ SIAD had atotalm embershipof 2567. Thelargest congreg ationsof members includedIstanbul (786), Bursa (246), IÇ zmir(205), Konya (184), Kayseri(175), Ankara(169) andKocaeli (107). Oftheseonly Konya andKayseri arethe traditio nal RP strongholds inthe Inner Anatolia nregion.T herest are m ajorm etropolitancentres. It is alsointeresti ng thatthe em ergingtowns associatedwithsuccessfu lindustrialisationin recent years, namelyC Ëorum,KahramanmarasË,SËanlõurfa, Gaziantepand Denizli have a combinedm embershipof 256, whichis alsosigni® cant. Thanks are due to Dr O È merBolat, the General Secreta ry of MUÈ SIAD,for granting meanintervie wandm akingthe inform ationon theassociati on’smembershipavailabl e. 19 Thesuccess story of `Anatoliantigers’ in the rising sm alltowns of Innerand Southea st Anatoliahave been highlightedin a seriesof articlesthat appeare dinthe T urkish daily, Milliyet,duringJuly 1996. 20 For anexpositio nof MUÈ SIAD’sbasicperspect ive,see the annual reports on theT urkish economywhichstart in1994. Seealso the report, EconomicCooperat ionA mong IslamicCountrie s ,Istanbul.Anotheruseful study interm sof illuminatingthe basic MUÈ SIAD perspective,is abook by thepresiden tof theAssociati on, Erol Yarar, 21. YuÈzyilaGirerken Du ÈnyayaYeni B ir BakisË , Istanbul: MUÈ SIAD, 1996. 21 Seethe key report, PamukBirlig Æi , Istanbul: MUÈ SIAD, 1996. 22 Seea recent,m uchpublicis edand controv ersialreport by TUÈ SIAD, TuÈrkiye’deDemokra tikP erspekti¯er , Istanbul: TUÈ SIAD, 1997. 23 For aninterpre tationalong these lines, see Saad Eddin Ibrahim ,`Theother side of them oon:from T aliban toE rbakan’, CivilSociety ,5(59), 1996, p4. 24 On therelation ship betweenIslam and postm odernity,seeAkbar SAhmedand Hastings Donnan (eds), Islam, Globalizationand Postmodernity ,London:Routled ge, 1994. For ausefulexplorat ionof thecom plex anduneasy relation ship betweenIslam and postm odernitywith special referen ceto the T urkish context,see AliYas ËarSarõ bay, Postmodernite,Sivil Toplum veIslam ,Istanbul:IÇ letisËimYayinlar i, 1995. 25 SeeRus ËenC Ëakir, NeS ËeriatNe Demokra si ,Istanbul:MetisYayinlar i, 1994;and Cakõ r, Ayetve Slogan , Istanbul:MetisYayinla ri, 1990. 26 SeeOlivier Roy, The Failureof P oliticalIslam ,Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversi tyPress, 1994.

766