Turkey: AKP faces tough test in Turkey's local polls - by Osman Kaytazoglu

Turkey is going to the polls in local elections on March 30. The vote comes amid allegations of government corruption and bribery, debates about a so-called "parallel state", and with government moves to block Twitter and YouTube heavily criticized.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his ruling Justice and Development Party [AKP] have come out of each general election since the party was first elected to power in 2002 with more votes than before, securing nearly 50 percent of the vote in 2011 general elections.

But this election may represent the AKP’s biggest challenge to date, and is being described as a litmus test for upcoming presidential and parliamentary elections. The main parties fielding candidates are Erdogan’s AKP, the main opposition party Republican People’s Party (CHP), the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and the pro-Kurdish Justice and Development Party (BDP).

The local elections first garnered attention with anti-government Gezi Park protests in June 2013, when thousands of people descended on a park in central Istanbul against the municipality’s gentrification plans.

The elections have been dominated by a new scandal that began on December 17 last year, when three AKP cabinet ministers’ children were arrested on corruption charges, and several government figures were implicated in graft probes.

Turkey’s main opposition party, the Republic People’s Party (CHP), has tried to make sure the graft probe remains at the centre of the election process. "The state’s conscience woke up on December 17," CHP leader, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, said, referring to when the first arrests were made.

Erdogan blamed rival Fethullah Gulen, the US-based head of the Gulen movement, for the recent controversies, and their feud has dominated the headlines. Erdogan described the Gulen movement as "a threat to national security" and called the Gulen movement "a terrorist organisation".

Recent opinion polls show that people are confused about the public AKP-Gulen feud. While 60 percent of Turkish people believe the corruption allegations are true, 57 percent also think that the graft probe is a coup attempt targeting Erdogan.

Ahead of the polls, various audio recordings have also leaked, with the latest reportedly showing top government and security officials discussing launching military operations into Syria. The Turkish government banned Twitter and YouTube over these leaks.

Read more: AKP faces tough test in Turkey's local polls - Europe - Al Jazeera English

Turkey: Move to block YouTube ahead of elections points to growing censorship

The Turkish authorities’ move today to block access to YouTube on the eve of Sunday’s elections, and not long after they restricted access to Twitter, smacks of a wider pre-meditated crackdown on freedom of expression, Amnesty International said.

According to media reports, Turkey’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs cited national security concerns when it sought an administrative order to block the video-sharing platform – allegedly to prevent further circulation of a taped recording of discussions between senior Turkish officials on Syria.

“The Turkish government appears to be itching for pretexts to close down websites because of their capacity to mobilize dissenting opinion and broadcast embarrassing material,” said Andrew Gardner, Amnesty International's researcher on Turkey.

“Coming just days before Turkey goes to the polls and in the wake of Prime Minister Erdoðan’s strident criticism of YouTube, this is clearly nothing more than a crude attempt at government censorship that will only generate deeper distrust and frustration.

“Even if the Turkish authorities have legitimate concerns about some of the content that might appear, it is completely disproportionate to enforce a blanket YouTube ban in the entire country. Access to YouTube must be restored immediately and the authorities must stop blocking sites that expose abuses and provide a platform for dissenting views.”

Read more: Turkey: Move to block YouTube ahead of elections points to growing censorship | Amnesty International

Alternative Energy: Want a competitive Europe? Embrace renewables

Last week, on  March 19, one day ahead of the European Heads of States and Governments’ discussions on the 2030 climate and energy framework proposals, the European renewable energy associations jointly called on EU leaders to fully grasp the long-term benefits of an ambitious nationally binding EU renewable energy target. 

"The European economy is exposed to volatile fossil fuel prices and insecure fossil fuel imports, especially in these days of geopolitical turmoil at our borders. It must confront climate change. It is facing international competition in sectors of strategic importance for Europe’s growth. In view of the European Council meeting tomorrow, the renewable energy associations emphasise the need for a sustainable and cost-efficient energy mix that can help Europe tackle these challenges. According to the European Commission’s own Impact Assessment, the proposals that the Heads of States will discuss tomorrow are not the ones that would bring the most benefits by 2030. 

While a 2030 framework based on a truly ambitious and binding renewable energy target would deliver major savings, such as an additional €260 billion in avoided fossil fuel imports, and 568,000 more jobs1, the discussion has been pre-formatted to only consider the least ambitious pathway. 

An ambitious 2030 climate and energy framework based on a binding national renewable EU energy target is not only justified from a macro-economic viewpoint, but it is also crucial for businesses and investors. Both 

Europe’s economy and its citizens would greatly benefit from a strong commitment of EU leaders towards the energy transition. Such commitment needs to go beyond a simple volatile CO2 price and thus drive investments into clean energy technologies. EU citizens would this way benefit from a secure and clean energy supply, healthier living conditions and a boosted job market, while the European economy would enjoy a competitive and stable energy framework for the years to come. 

The European renewable energy associations thus call on the Heads of States and Governments to fully reap the benefits of a more sustainable energy system and to agree on an ambitious nationally binding EU renewable energy target for 2030."

Read more: 2030-Joint-Press-Release.pdf

Capitalism: Has Anglo-American Capitalism Run Out of Steam? - by George Irvin

The Real News Network has published an interesting interview with SEJ author George Irvin about inequality in the UK and the US and the wider question of whether Anglo-American Capitalism has run out of steam. Watch the full interview : click on the link below below.

Read more: Has Anglo-American Capitalism Run Out of Steam?

Turkey: Local elections to determine Erdogan's future

Turkish citizens going to the polls for local elections will decide on far more than new mayors. After corruption and censorship scandals, they are also going to vote on the future of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Istanbul, the 15-million-metropolis where Recep Tayyip Erdogan started his political career as the city's mayor 20 years ago, is going to play a decisive role in Turkey's local elections on Sunday (30.03.2014). If Erdogan's Justice and Development Party (AKP) were to lose here, it would translate to a serious blow to the prime minister's power.

Mustafa Sarigul is prepared to deal that blow to Erdogan. The 57-year-old mayor of Istanbul's wealthy district of Sisli is on the main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) ticket and faces Erdogan's fellow party member and ruling city mayor Kadi Topbas in elections.

 Polls suggest it's going to be a neck-and-neck contest. During the campaign, Sarigul has promised to introduce free Wi-Fi across the city and provide free public transport for students - a clear signal that he wants to win over Turkey's young generation. According to Erdogan, Sarigul is an "anarchist."

Recent corruption allegations have taken their toll on Erdogan. Every other day, new embarrassing recordings of phone conversations have been leaked online - taped conversations between Erdogan and other government officials on bribery or how to put pressure on the media.

Erdogan has called it a conspiracy orchestrated by the movement of Islamic cleric Fethullah Gulen, who is currently living in the United States. The Gulen movement used to support the AKP but is now at odds with the government.

Erdogan has blamed Gulen supporters for launching a major corruption probe and sacked several thousand police officials, judges and prosecutors believed to be linked to the Gulen movement. Last week Erdogan shut down popular micro-blogging site Twitter to prevent further revelations. Telecommunications authorities on Thursday also enacted "administrative measures" against the YouTube video site. Erdogan's supporters have said such steps are necessary to protect the state while his opponents argue Erdogan launched an attack on democracy and that his actions represent a sign of panic and an increasingly authoritative style of politics.

Fethi Acikel, a professor of political science at Ankara University, said Erdogan's harsh and polarizing demeanor was a carefully calculated strategy. After the protests in Gezi Park last summer, the prime minister tried to aim for a strong Turkish presidential system by applying "controlled pressure" on society, Acikel told DW. Instead of the current, rather weak presidential position, Erdogan was pushing for a powerful head of state, similar to the French or US system - with himself at the helm.

But his plan didn't work out as he intended as more and more Turkish citizens turned away from him. Eight people died during the Gezi protests and polarization in society continued to increase. Corruption allegations fueled the anger even more, because they pointed to the party's alleged dark side. "That's why the local elections are a referendum so to speak on the AKP's nepotistic, corrupt and authoritarian politics," Acikel said.

Read more: Local elections to determine Erdogan's future | Europe | DW.DE | 27.03.2014

The Netherlands: Geert Wilders compared with Nazi propaganda master Joseph Goebbels -

Wilders a reborn Goebbels?

The German Press Agency (DPA) has compared the statements that Wilders made during a speech, to Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels.


Last week, Wilders gave a speech at a PVV campaign event, in The Hague. During his speech he asked the audience: "In this city...and in the Netherlands...do you want more or less Moroccans?". The audience replied with: "Less, less, less!" while applauding loudly. The DPA claims that Wilders rhetoric is comparable to the same statements that Goebbels made during his Sportpalast speech, in 1943.

During Goebbels speech, he averted from his written textand began to mention the complete "extermination" of the Jews. In his written text of the speech, he wrote the word "solution" and fittingly stopped himself before completing his statement. "Solution" referred to the term "final solution" and was seen as a less harsher term to describe the true intentions of the Nazi regime.

After basking in the applause from his PVV party supporters, Wilders said: "Good, we can arrange that.". Last week, Wilders had also stated during a visit to The Hague that with PVV leadership, the city would
have "with less expense and if possible less Moroccans.".

Read more: Geert Wilders compared with Nazi propaganda master Joseph Goebbels - Minneapolis Community Activism | Examiner.com

EU: Why Europeans should think Big and think Bold "instead of harnessed by outdated capitalism" by Yanis Varoufakis

After the United States had lost its surpluses, some time in the late 1960s, the system of fixed exchange rates and highly regulated capital movements, which had nurtured capitalism’s Golden Age, was condemned. Its inevitable collapse could not but push the dollar down, release the bankers from their thirty-year-old restraints, and wind back rights and services that labour had wrestled from capital since the war.

In 2008, the pyramids of private money, that Wall Street and the City of London had built on the back of this constant tsunami of capital, crashed and burned. At first, continental Europeans smiled, allowing themselves an ‘I told you so’ moment, directed at the Anglo-saxons who had spent a decade or two sneering at the Continent’s antiquated commitment to manufacturing. Alas, that moment proved very brief. Soon, they realised that their own banks were replete with toxic assets and that their bankers had been allowed to run debts (or ‘leverage’) twice as great as those in the Anglo-sphere. Put simply, Mrs. Thatcher bubble had been surreptitiously exported to Frankfurt, Paris, Rome, Madrid, Brussels etc. As had the ‘model’ of building up competitiveness by squeezing wages until the local economies, behind the glitzy suburbs and the globalised jet set, were in a permanent state of slow-burning recession.

Post-2008, while the United States and Britain sought to bailout the bankers with a combination of taxpayers’ money and quantitative easing that aggressively sought to re-inflated the deflated toxic assets, Europe was making a meal of the same project. Having rid themselves of their central banks, the Eurozone’s politicians did their utmost to shift all the stressed bank assets onto the shoulders of the weakest amongst the taxpayers, thus causing a horrid recession and putting the European Union on a path leading toward certain disintegration.

Nevertheless, and despite the significant differences between Britain and the Eurozone, the broad picture remains the same: The establishment responded to the financial crisis by inflating bank and real estate assets (that were best left alone) and squeezing the majority of the population with soul and income sapping austerity. In short, the Thatcher model on steroids.

Growth is not the issue. The Left understands that there are many things whose growth must be stumped: toxic waste, toxic derivatives, ponzi finance, coal production, consumption that leaves the consumer unfulfilled and the planet worse for ware, etc. No, the issue is eclectic growth in the technologies and goods that contribute to a more successful life on a sustainable planet. The Left has always known that markets are terrible at providing these technologies and goods sustainably, and in a manner that sets prices at a level reflecting their value to humanity. What the Left was never very good at was in the conversion of that gut feeling into workable policy that the beneficiaries of this policy (i.e. the vast majority) would back.

A spectre is haunting Europe. It is the spectre of Bankruptocracy. A curious regime of rule by the bankrupt banks. A remarkable political arrangement in which the greatest extractive power (vis-à-vis other people’s income and achievements) lies in the hands of the bankers in control of the financial institutions with the largest ‘black holes’ on their asset books. It is a regime that quick-marches the majority of innocents into the trap of austerity-driven hardship that serves the guilty few, while Parliament and civil society are held at ransom. While 2008 was meant to raise ‘regulatory standards,’ we now know that nothing of substance has been done to reform finance.

This is not to say that we are anywhere near ready to replace capitalism. Indeed, realism commands us to recognise that, if anything, Bankruptocracy is well and truly in command of the European continent and the only political forces on the march are those of the bigoted, ultra Right. The Left must not err again, as it did in the 1930s, thinking that capitalism’s great crisis will naturally lead to something better. It may very well bring about the most hideous dystopia. This is why it is of the essence to stabilise capitalism (through banking regulation, a link between central banks and public investment, and a wider social safety net) while struggling to revive democracy at the local, national and European levels. Our success in this limited but crucial goal is a prerequisite for forging a sustainable future in which most people are gainfully employed in innovative enterprises of which they are the sole shareholders.

Read more: Why Europeans should think Big and think Bold