Is a bon pour L’Orient governance enough for Turkey?

Turkey belongs to the Middle East. So said 58% of participants to a recent Kadir Has (Khas) University survey. At first, I was surprised to see this result. Turks usually prefer to see themselves as being part of Europe. We constantly underline our country’s Europeanness, be it in saying that we have the “biggest truck fleet in Europe,” or our membership in the Erasmus student exchange program. But perhaps things are changing. The Khas survey conducted in the first half of this past December indicates the emergence of a new pattern. Let me elaborate.

56% and 57% of the survey participants consider Turkey as a democratic and a modern country respectively. These results are telling. Turkey, of course, is a rather democratic and a modern country in comparison to its neighbors in the Middle East. In terms of a modern, functioning market economy, the only two countries worth mentioning in this region are Turkey and Israel. All other countries have controlled economies. That is why, in the case of Turkey and Israel, trade can continue while relations between governments sour. Of course if they start talking, it will certainly boost existing ties. The more open you are, the more modern you become.

The same is also true for democracy in our neighborhood. Israel and Turkey are the only functioning democracies in this pocket of the World. At this stage, you may be tempted to cite the flaws in both countries. Harsh security operations may come to your mind - the Palestinian issue for the Israelis and the Kurdish issue in Turkey. Just this week, Turkish leaders had some strong words against a group of academics who signed a petition critical of the security policy and the ongoing operations in the country’s southeast. The government is now encouraging legal action against them. Israel, needless to say, is deepening a policy of occupation and apartheid against the Palestinians. These things are surely less than democratic, but it would be wrong to compare this place to Europe. According to Middle Eastern standards, these countries are democratic. I think this is what the survey respondents have in their mind too.

Seeing this pattern made me realize the old bon pour L’Orient diplomas distributed by some French universities in Ottoman times. “Good for the East” meant that this was an inferior diploma, and certified people to conduct their craft in the East only. If a person wanted to work in Europe, he would have to get a regular diploma. Just as professional standards were lower then, standards of democracy and modernity are lower today.

Is a “bon pour L’Orient democracy” enough for Turkey? That is a question that needs to be answered by Turkish citizens. Just look at the graph in World Bank’s “Turkey’s Transitions” report on governance indicators like voice and accountability, control of corruption, government effectiveness, rule of law and regulatory quality. Turkey is definitely far better than the Middle Eastern average when it comes to global governance indicators. Yet in all counts, Turkey is far worse than the OECD average. It is also far worse than Korea. OECD countries are generally far richer than the countries in the Middle East, when controlled for natural resources, such as oil, which is little more than a free handout.

So Turks need to decide, sooner rather than later, if you ask me. A Turkey belonging to Europe could make the jump to higher quality – in terms of both democracy and economy – much faster. A country like China is so huge that it can create alternative models of modernization. Turkey has no such luxury. It needs to make a choice between two worlds, and time is running out.

Figure 1. Worldwide Governance Indicators , 2013