writes Selahattin Erdem for Yeni Özgür Politika.he expectation that it is the US that will bring about the democratisation of Turkey is also startling. In fact, it was the system led by the US that gave rise to Justice and Development Party – Nationalist Movement Party (AKP-MHP) fascism, and they will use it as much as they can to their own ends. And this is what they are trying to do,”
The long-awaited NATO summit was finally held on 14 June. The Biden-Erdogan meeting too, loaded with mystery and expectation in Turkey, at last took place on the same day. While there were many who were pleased at these two events, there were as many who were unhappy. In the end, everyone presented their own reactions as evaluations of the events.
It became clear that either people were unable to see further than they looked, or they were repeating what they had learned by rote. So there are some corrections to be made.
Certainly, the NATO summit was somewhat different from the meetings in which Trump was involved. So it appeared, anyway. There was a certain conspicuous order, discipline and seriousness.
As well as the main meeting involving everyone, there were numerous one-on-one meetings. There were those who highlighted the main meeting, using phrases like, “NATO’s vision for 2030”. These people evaluated the situation as “NATO restructuring itself and beginning to restructure the world.”
Naturally, there were those, too, who emphasised the importance of the one-on-one meetings over the main meeting. These people behaved as though everything revolved around the US, stating, “Biden and the US have returned to the world.” While there were plenty who were happy about this, there were also those who complained that “Biden did not prioritise democratisation.”
It is indisputable that Biden makes a difference to US meetings. Certain things initiated by the previous president Trump are suspended. With Biden, the US once again achieves its seriousness as a bureaucratic state and once again engenders trust in the NATO allies. For this reason, the recent NATO meeting was superficially more orderly.
But the changes are for the most part on this level, that is, they are superficial. It is important here to be able to look at what is not in open sight. It is wrong to look at outward appearances and make evaluations such as “NATO is being restructured, the 2030 vision, NATO will restructure the world.”
The concepts in question have been used in NATO for years, but not very much ‘new’ is emerging. On the other hand, there are no activities within NATO to ensure the emergence of new ideas and practices to guide the world. On the contrary, the crisis and the chaos of capitalist modernity deepens and perpetuates itself. The military ‘low intensity Third World War’ persists.
The US and NATO have neither the power nor the political will to bring an end to this crisis and chaos. So how shall NATO achieve a new vision? On what basis will it restructure the world?
Certain administrations have been toppled in the Middle East, with that of Saddam taking the lead; but what has replaced them is there for all to see. Global capitalism has not been able to achieve much of its aim of parcelling up the Middle East for the free movement of capital, more profit, more security and the security of Israel. More than that, NATO’s opponents, China and Russia, are as strong as they have ever been. In a period when the US is afraid of losing its sovereignty in the face of China’s rise, how will NATO alone be able to restructure the world?
It is wrong to look at the 20th century and say, “see, thirty years have passed: we are partially out of the crisis, capitalism will restructure itself.” Yes, the 20th century was like that, but that was not as a result of the character of capitalism: it happened because of the Russian revolution of 1917, which was unable to bring about a world socialist revolution. Just because there is no question of such a thing happening in our day does not make it right to say, “capitalism is coming out of a crisis and NATO is redesigning the world.”
Similarly, it is not correct to look at the hostility to Russia and China in the US and say, “A new Cold War period has started, let us go back to our old set-up. Yes, there are intense conflicts and disagreements between the US and Russia and the US and China today. But it is wrong to equate the situation to that of the animosity between the US and the Soviet Union. This animosity is more like that between the Germans and the British than that between the US and the Soviets. It is clear that this cannot immediately be defined as “the start of a new Cold War.”
Quite the opposite: what is now happening should be seen as the intensification of conflicts and disagreements and the deepening of the crisis and chaos within the capitalist system, the continuation of the ideology-heavy ‘Third World War,’ the inability of the forces of the system to find the strength to extricate themselves from the existing crisis and chaos, and in these circumstances, the NATO meetings should be seen as efforts to seek measures to prevent the collapse of the system.
Let us move on to the situation of Turkey, the position given to Erdoğan within NATO, and the US-Turkey one-on-one meetings. Some will say, “Biden did not bring down the Erdoğan adminstration, he did not bring democracy to Turkey.” These concepts are really astonishing.
It is plain to see that the concept and expectation that the Justice and Development Party – Nationalist Movement Party (AKP-MHP) administration might be brought down by the US is completely misguided. The expectation that it is the US that will bring about the democratisation of Turkey is also startling.
In fact, it was the system led by the US that gave rise to AKP-MHP fascism, and they will use it as much as they can to their own ends. And this is what they are trying to do.
Thus, we understand that there are those who imagine that the administration of Tayyip Erdoğan will be moved from the frontline to the opposite side by the US and NATO just like the administrations of Saddam and others, and brought down with similar methods. Whereas, Turkey is a NATO country, and NATO is not an external force in Turkey as it was in Iraq and Syria, it is a completely internal force. As a result, the struggle is not on a frontline, it is from inside. Hence, the nature of the NATO meeting and the one-on-one meetings.
In fact, the existing situation shows quite clearly that it is the end of the road for the AKP-MHP administration. It is clear from the recent meetings that more conflicts of interest will come about. This, in turn, will create more opportunities and possibilities for the forces of democracy that want to bring down the fascist dictatorship. Naturally, this is an important and meaningful time for those who are able to observe and evaluate these opportunities and possibilities and can display the strength to bring down this fascism through a democratic revolution.