Le maire d'Istanbul, Ekrem Imamoğlu, est arrêté

 

Le populaire maire d'Istanbul, Ekrem İmamoğlu (1971-), largement considéré par les électeurs de l'opposition comme le prochain président de la Turquie, a été arrêté le 23 mars 2025, le jour où son parti a organisé une élection primaire pour le désigner comme candidat présidentiel du parti pour les prochaines élections qui auront lieu en 2028 selon le calendrier habituel. İmamoğlu a été arrêté sur la base d'accusations telles que la direction d'une organisation criminelle, la corruption et la mauvaise conduite, ainsi que des dizaines de membres de son personnel et de fonctionnaires municipaux, et a été conduit à la prison de Silivri. İmamoğlu a également été accusé d'aider l'organisation terroriste PKK par le biais de la plateforme « Consensus de la ville » (Kent Uzlaşısı), mais comme il a déjà été arrêté pour corruption, la demande d'arrestation dans le cadre de l'enquête sur le terrorisme a été rejetée. Cela signifie que le gouvernement ne nommera probablement pas de fidéicommissaire (kayyum) à la municipalité métropolitaine d'Istanbul (IBB) et qu'un membre du CHP (Parti républicain du peuple) du conseil municipal remplacera İmamoğlu en tant que nouveau maire. Toutefois, si İmamoğlu est arrêté ou reconnu coupable d'accusations de terrorisme, l'administration centrale aura la possibilité de nommer un fidéicommissaire à l'IBB.

La décision d'arrêter İmamoğlu a donné lieu à d'importantes manifestations dans tout le pays, en particulier dans les grandes villes et les universités. De nombreux groupes universitaires ont même appelé au boycott des cours jusqu'à ce qu'İmamoğlu soit libéré. Le président Erdoğan a quant à lui condamné les manifestations et accusé le CHP d'essayer de « perturber la paix et de polariser notre peuple ». Erdoğan a également menacé les manifestants et a déclaré que les auteurs d'actes de vandalisme lors des manifestations seraient tenus responsables de leurs actes. Selon CNN, plus de 1 000 personnes ont déjà été arrêtées lors des manifestations. Ce nombre pourrait augmenter rapidement dans les jours à venir si les manifestations se poursuivent.

En réponse à ce processus controversé, le leader du principal parti d'opposition, le CHP, Özgür Özel, a appelé au boycott des chaînes de télévision pro-Erdoğan et des entreprises qui ont ignoré et/ou méprisé les protestations populaires à travers le pays, tout en décrivant l'ensemble du processus judiciaire comme « un coup d'État contre la démocratie ». Özel a également promis de poursuivre une lutte légale et démocratique contre l'arrestation d'İmamoğlu et a affirmé que les preuves contre İmamoğlu ne sont pas justes, basées principalement sur des témoignages de témoins secrets. Le ministre de la justice Yılmaz Tunç a quant à lui déclaré que le processus judiciaire se poursuivait sans aucune interférence politique et que tout le monde devait respecter les lois du pays.

Entre-temps, l'élection primaire du CHP du dimanche 23 mars 2025 s'est transformée en une épreuve de force pour tous les acteurs de l'opposition dans le pays. L'administration du CHP a décidé de placer des bulletins de vote supplémentaires dans toutes les circonscriptions et a invité les non-membres du parti à voter pour İmamoğlu, le seul candidat du parti aux primaires. Selon le président du parti, Özgür Özel, outre les 1,6 million de membres du parti, 13 millions de personnes extérieures au parti ont également voté pour İmamoğlu. Cela signifie que près de 15 millions de personnes ont participé à l'élection primaire et ont montré leur réaction au gouvernement Erdoğan. İmamoğlu a finalement été déclaré candidat du parti à la présidence. Cependant, en raison de l'annulation de son diplôme universitaire par l'université d'Istanbul et des accusations portées contre lui, il semble très improbable qu'İmamoğlu puisse se présenter à la prochaine élection présidentielle. Dans ce sens, le CHP pourrait présenter un autre candidat avant l'élection qui promettrait de sauver İmamoğlu de la prison. En outre, en raison des allégations de fraude contre le congrès du parti à la fin de 2023, au cours duquel Özgür Özel a étonnamment battu le président de longue date du CHP, Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, l'administration du parti a décidé d'organiser un congrès extraordinaire le 6 avril 2025. Le chef du parti, Özgür Özel, a déclaré qu'il s'agissait d'une décision de précaution visant à empêcher une éventuelle nomination d'un administrateur au sein du parti.

Alors que l'opposition du pays considère ce processus comme la mort de la démocratie et la transition de la Turquie vers un régime ouvertement autoritaire, la presse pro-gouvernementale et les citoyens préfèrent se concentrer sur les accusations contre İmamoğlu et l'administration d'IBB. La presse progouvernementale a lancé une campagne active pour diffamer İmamoğlu en écrivant et en parlant abondamment des accusations contre İmamoğlu sans se soucier de la « présomption d'innocence » (principe d'innocence jusqu'à preuve du contraire). Les loyalistes d'Erdoğan soulignent également que la décision rapide de l'administration du CHP de nommer İmamoğlu des années avant la prochaine élection présidentielle montre qu'ils étaient au courant de la procédure judiciaire à leur encontre. En réponse, les partisans du CHP et les principales figures de l'opposition soulignent le calendrier de la procédure judiciaire, à la veille de la déclaration d'İmamoğlu en tant que candidat officiel de son parti.

Quelle que soit la réalité, c'est un fait que la polarisation politique de la Turquie s'est considérablement accrue avec ce processus. Il existe désormais un grand bloc contre les acteurs pro-gouvernementaux tels que l'AKP, le MHP et d'autres partis islamistes/ultranationalistes/conservateurs, composé principalement du CHP mais comprenant également de nombreux autres groupes sociaux et différents partis politiques. En ce sens, il semble que deux grands partis et blocs continueront à se disputer le pouvoir politique en Turquie et que le CHP est devenu un véritable « parti de masse » au cours de ce processus. C'est pourquoi, si les prochaines élections se déroulent correctement, le CHP pourrait avoir une grande chance de remporter la course avec İmamoğlu ou un autre candidat comme le maire d'Ankara Mansur Yavaş ou le président du parti Özgür Özel lui-même.

La décision du troisième bloc, les Kurdes (représentés principalement par le parti DEM), sera un autre facteur crucial pour l'avenir du pays. Alors que les partis politiques pro-kurdes défendent traditionnellement la démocratie et les libertés politiques dans le pays et éprouvent une grande sympathie pour Ekrem İmamoğlu, ils semblent un peu désorientés et hésitants pour le moment, en raison des pourparlers en cours avec le leader emprisonné du PKK, Abdullah Öcalan, et de la possibilité de finaliser un accord de paix avec le gouvernement actuel.

Pour commenter objectivement, les événements en Turquie ont éclaté à un moment où les régimes démocratiques sont en déclin dans le monde entier, ce qui a donné une chance au gouvernement turc de survivre malgré les grandes manifestations. Il semble que le président des États-Unis Donald Trump et son équipe soient trop occupés par la diplomatie avec la Russie pour la paix en Ukraine et que la démocratie en Turquie ne soit pas leur priorité. L'Union européenne (UE), quant à elle, a toujours été plus critique à l'égard des développements autoritaires en Turquie qu'à l'égard des États-Unis, mais elle n'ose peut-être pas risquer de perdre le soutien du gouvernement turc en raison de l'accord critique sur les migrants syriens et de la position d'équilibre de la Turquie par rapport à la Russie en Ukraine et en Syrie. En ce sens, je pense que le président Erdoğan joue ses cartes avec beaucoup de prudence et d'intelligence en matière de politique étrangère et force les acteurs étrangers influents à dépendre les uns des autres. Pour faire simple, à l'heure où les mouvements d'extrême droite tels que l'AfD (Alternative pour l'Allemagne) en Allemagne atteignent leur apogée, l'annulation de l'accord sur les migrants syriens avec la Turquie pourrait conduire à un flux de centaines de milliers d'immigrants illégaux supplémentaires en Europe et avoir des conséquences désastreuses. De même, ni les États-Unis ni la Russie ne peuvent se permettre de perdre complètement la Turquie pour conserver leur influence dans de nombreuses régions où Ankara est très active et influente. C'est pourquoi je ne pense pas que des sanctions sérieuses puissent être prises par les États-Unis ou même par l'Europe dans cette conjoncture. Mais permettez-moi d'ajouter que si des sanctions économiques sont appliquées contre Ankara, cela entraînerait probablement des conséquences catastrophiques pour l'économie.

Enfin, à mon avis, les conditions structurelles, les erreurs critiques de politique étrangère commises par Washington et Bruxelles dans un passé récent et les compétences exceptionnelles du gouvernement turc en matière de diplomatie publique et de propagande ont conduit à la régression du régime démocratique compétitif dans le pays. L'attitude obstinée de l'opposition, qui ne coopère pas avec le régime d'Erdoğan, pousse également le gouvernement dans ses retranchements et transforme le jeu politique en Turquie en « Squid Game », une question de vie ou de mort. C'est pourquoi, pour survivre et sauver son peuple, Erdoğan agit aussi très durement et le système ne laisse aucun espace pour les négociations démocratiques et la coopération, les éléments essentiels d'un régime démocratique digne de ce nom. Il ne faut pas oublier que les liens de la Turquie avec le monde non occidental et non démocratique se sont considérablement développés ces dernières années et que le pays est devenu un « partenaire de dialogue » de l'Organisation de coopération de Shanghai (OCS) et un « pays partenaire » des BRICS+. En outre, au cours des trois dernières années, les principaux partenaires commerciaux de la Turquie ont toujours été la Russie et la Chine. En ce sens, d'un point de vue géopolitique, je pense qu'à moins que les liens de la Turquie avec les États-Unis et l'UE ne soient rétablis correctement, le pays se transformera de plus en plus en une « région intermédiaire » (arabölge) entre le monde occidental et le monde non occidental, reliant deux mondes différents à la manière d'un « pont ».

Voici quelques photos intéressantes des manifestations en Turquie :

Prof. Ozan ÖRMECİ

Istanbul Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu Is Arrested

 

Istanbul's popular Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu (1971-), who is widely seen by the opposition voters as Türkiye's next President, was arrested on March 23, 2025, on the day his party held a primary election to nominate him as the party's presidential candidate for the next election that is going to take place in 2028 in regular schedule. İmamoğlu was arrested based on charges such as leading a criminal organization, bribery, misconduct, and corruption, along with dozens of his staff and municipal officials and was brought to Silivri Prison. İmamoğlu was also accused of aiding the terrorist organization PKK through "City Consensus" (Kent Uzlaşısı) platform, but since he was already arrested on corruption charges, the request for arrest as part of the terrorism investigation was rejected. This means the government will most probably not appoint a trustee (kayyum) to Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IBB) and a CHP (Republican People's Party) member from the Municipal Council will replace İmamoğlu as the new Mayor. However, if İmamoğlu is arrested or found guilty of terrorism charges as well, the central administration would have a chance to appoint a trustee to IBB.

The arrest decision for İmamoğlu led to huge protests across the country, especially in big cities and universities. Many university groups even called for a boycott of the courses until İmamoğlu is freed. President Erdoğan on the other hand condemned the demonstrations and accused CHP of trying to "disturb the peace and polarize our people". Erdoğan also threatened the protesters and said that those who are responsible for vandalism acts during the protests will be held accountable for what they did. According to CNN, more than 1,000 people were already arrested during the protests. This number could rise rapidly in the coming days if the protests will continue. 

As a response to this controversial process, the main opposition party CHP's leader Özgür Özel called for the boycott of pro-Erdoğan TV channels and firms that ignored and/or despised popular protests across the country while describing the whole judicial process as "a coup against democracy". Özel also promised to pursue a legal and democratic struggle against İmamoğlu's arrest and claimed that evidences against İmamoğlu are not just, based mostly on testimonies of secret witnesses. Justice Minister Yılmaz Tunç on the other hand stated that the judicial process continues without any political interference and everyone should respect the laws of the country.

In the meantime, the CHP's primary election on Sunday (March 23, 2025) turned into a showdown for all opposition actors in the country. CHP administration decided to put extra ballots in all constituencies and invited non-party members as well to vote for İmamoğlu, the only candidate of the party for the primary. According to party chair Özgür Özel,  in addition to 1.6 million party members, 13 million people outside of the party also voted for İmamoğlu. This means almost 15 million people participated in the primary election and showed their reaction to the Erdoğan government. İmamoğlu was eventually declared as the party's presidential candidate. However, due to the cancellation of his university diploma by Istanbul University and ongoing charges against him, it seems highly unlikely for İmamoğlu to be able to contest in the next presidential election. In that sense, CHP might come up with another candidate before the election who would promise to save İmamoğlu from prison. Moreover, due to fraud allegations against the party's congress in late 2023, during which Özgür Özel surprisingly defeated CHP's long-serving chair Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, the party administration decided to organize an extraordinary congress on April 6, 2025. Party leader Özgür Özel said that this is a precautionary decision to prevent a possible trustee appointment to the party.

While the opposition in the country considers this process as the death of democracy and Türkiye's transition into an openly authoritarian regime, the pro-government press and people on the other prefer to focus on accusations against İmamoğlu and the IBB administration. The pro-government press has been initiating an active campaign to defame İmamoğlu by writing and speaking extensively about accusations against İmamoğlu without caring so much about the "presumption of innocence" (innocent until proven guilty principle). Erdoğan loyalists also underline that the CHP administration's quick decision to nominate İmamoğlu years before the next presidential election shows that they knew about the legal process against them. As a response, CHP supporters and leading opposition figures indicate the timing of the judicial process, on the eve of İmamoğlu's declaration as the official candidate for his party.

Whatever the reality is, it is a fact that Türkiye's political polarization has risen significantly with this process. Now there is a large bloc against the pro-government actors such as AK Parti, MHP, and other Islamist/ultranationalist/conservative parties, composed mainly of the CHP but also including many other social groups and different political parties. In that sense, it seems like two big parties and blocs will continue to compete for political power in Türkiye and CHP has become a real "mass party" or even a "catch-all party" during this process. That is why, if the next elections are conducted properly, the CHP might have a huge chance to win the race with İmamoğlu or another candidate such as Ankara Mayor Mansur Yavaş or the party chair Özgür Özel himself.

The decision of the third bloc, the Kurds (represented mainly by the DEM Party) on the other hand will be another crucial factor for the future of the country. While pro-Kurdish political parties traditionally defend democracy and political freedoms in the country and have great sympathy for Ekrem İmamoğlu, due to ongoing talks with imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan and a chance to finalize a peace deal with the current government, they seem a bit confused and hesitant for the moment.

To comment objectively, events in Türkiye erupted at a time when the democratic regimes are in decline in the whole world, which gave chance to Turkish government to survive despite large protests. It seems like the United States (USA) President Donald Trump and his team are too busy with diplomacy with Russia for the peace in Ukraine and the democracy in Türkiye might not be their priority. The European Union (EU) on the other hand has always been more critical of authoritarian developments in Türkiye compared to the USA, but now they might not dare to risk losing the Turkish government's support due to the critical Syrian migrants deal as well as Türkiye's balancing position against Russia in Ukraine and Syria. In that sense, in my opinion, President Erdoğan plays his cards very carefully and cleverly in foreign policy and forces influential foreign actors dependent on each other. To put it simply, at a time when the far-right movements such as the AfD in Germany reach their peak, the cancellation of the Syrian migrants deal with Türkiye might lead to a flow of hundred thousands of more illegal immigrants into Europe and lead to disastrous consequences. Likewise, neither the USA and nor Russia can afford to lose Türkiye completely to keep their influence many regions where Ankara is very active and influential. That is why, I do not think serious sanctions might come from the USA or even from Europe at this conjuncture. But let me add that if economic sanctions are applied against Ankara, this would probably lead to a catastrophic consequence in the economy.

Finally, in my opinion, the structural conditions, critical foreign policy mistakes by Washington and Brussels in the recent past, and the Turkish government's exceptional skills in public diplomacy and propaganda led to the regression of the competitive democratic regime in the country. The opposition's stubborn attitude in not cooperating with the Erdoğan regime also drives the government into a corner and turns the political game in Türkiye into "Squid Game", a matter of life and death. That is why, to survive and to save his people, Erdoğan also acts very harshly and the system does not leave any space for democratic negotiations and cooperation, the essentials of a proper democratic regime. It should not be forgotten that Türkiye's developing ties with the non-Western and non-democratic world also have increased considerably in recent years and the country has become a "dialogue partner" for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and a "partner country" for the BRICS+. Moreover, in the last three years, Türkiye's biggest trade partners have always been Russia and China. In that sense, looking from a geopolitical perspective, as far as I am concerned, unless Türkiye's ties with the USA and the EU are restored properly, the country will increasingly transform into an "intermediate region" (arabölge) between the Western and non-Western world, connecting two different worlds like a "bridge". 

Here are some interesting photos from protests in Türkiye:

Prof. Ozan ÖRMECİ

Le maire d'Istanbul, Ekrem Imamoğlu, est détenu

 

Le maire populaire d'Istanbul, Ekrem İmamoğlu (1971-), qui est largement considéré comme le prochain président du pays dans le processus potentiel post-Erdoğan dans les années à venir, a été arrêté hier pour corruption et allégations de liens avec l'organisation terroriste sécessionniste et hors-la-loi PKK. La nouvelle choquante est tombée mercredi, dans la matinée du 19 mars 2025. Un jour plus tôt, un autre développement choquant a eu lieu et le diplôme universitaire d'İmamoğlu (BA) de l'Université d'Istanbul a été annulé par l'administration de l'université en raison d'irrégularités présumées dans son transfert de licence de l'Université américaine de Girne (Kyrenia) dans le nord de Chypre. Selon le président du CHP, Özgür Özel, ces décisions montrent le penchant autoritaire du régime de Türkiye similaire aux putschistes du passé (15 juillet 2016) et la crainte d'Erdoğan d'être en concurrence avec İmamoğlu lors de la prochaine élection présidentielle. En outre, la détention d'İmamoğlu a suscité de grandes manifestations dans tout le pays, en particulier parmi les jeunes et dans les universités, car İmamoğlu est souvent perçu comme un nouvel espoir pour l'opposition.

Ekrem İmamoğlu est devenu une star politique en 2019 après avoir remporté les élections locales pour la municipalité métropolitaine d'Istanbul deux fois du parti pro-laïque CHP (Parti républicain du peuple). İmamoğlu, qui a à peine battu son grand rival et ancien Premier ministre Binali Yıldırım en mars 2019, s'est transformé en étoile montante dans le pays après l'annulation des élections par le YSK (Comité électoral suprême). En juillet 2019, lors d'élections répétées, İmamoğlu a atteint un niveau de vote historique avec le soutien de provenant de segments très différents de la société. Au cours des années suivantes, İmamoğlu est devenu un homme politique populaire à l'échelle nationale, capable d'unifier des groupes sociaux très différents, y compris les électeurs classiques pro-laïques du CHP, les gauchistes, les modérés de centre-droit ainsi que les Kurdes et une partie des groupes islamistes-conservateurs. Originaire de la ville conservatrice-nationaliste de Trabzon, dans la région de la mer Noire (Karadeniz), İmamoğlu a même été décrit comme « l'Erdoğan du CHP » en raison de son style populiste et de sa personnalité pieuse. İmamoğlu a pu conserver sa place de maire d'Istanbul lors des élections locales de 2024 face à Murat Kurum, proche collaborateur d'Erdoğan et tête de liste au sein de l'AKP (Parti de la justice et du développement) au pouvoir. Avant l'annulation de son diplôme et sa détention, İmamoğlu se préparait à être déclaré candidat à la présidence de son parti, le CHP (Parti républicain du peuple), avec une primaire organisée par le CHP le 23 mars 2025, soit ce dimanche. Selon les sondages actuels, İmamoğlu aurait battu Erdoğan dans une élection présidentielle en face à face. Ces décisions ont donc éclipsé la déclaration de candidature d'İmamoğlu. De plus, il semble que le maire d'Istanbul pourrait ne pas se présenter à la présidence lors des prochaines élections en raison de son incarcération potentielle. À mon avis, les membres du CHP continueront à voter pour İmamoğlu ce dimanche et le désigneront probablement comme candidat présidentiel du parti pour les prochaines élections. Cependant, si İmamoğlu est arrêté ou si la décision d'annulation de son diplôme n'est pas annulée, il pourrait ne pas se présenter à la présidence. Dans ce sens, le maire d'Ankara Mansur Yavaş pourrait être le candidat présidentiel du CHP et de l'opposition en général.

Les accusations contre İmamoğlu sont basées sur deux questions principales. L'une d'entre elles concerne la corruption liée aux contrats d'appel d'offres passés par la municipalité métropolitaine d'Istanbul (IBB). L'autre accusation concerne la plateforme « Consensus de la ville » (Kent Uzlaşısı) que l'équipe d'İmamoğlu a mise en place avant les élections locales de 2024. A travers cette plateforme, le Parti DEM pro-kurde a soutenu la candidature d'İmamoğlu et n'a pas disputé les élections avec son candidat. Cela a été un facteur important dans le succès d'İmamoğlu contre Murat Kurum lors des élections locales critiques de mars dernier. Le procureur d'Istanbul a considéré l'initiative « Consensus de la ville » comme une aide au PKK et à son organisation politique DEM Parti et a qualifié İmamoğlu de « chef de file d'une entreprise criminelle ». En outre, le procureur général a demandé la détention/l'arrestation d'une centaine d'autres personnes, dont le proche collaborateur d'İmamoğlu, Murat Ongun, et le directeur de la campagne électorale, Necati Özkan. En ce sens, ce n'est pas seulement İmamoğlu mais toute l'équipe d'İmamoğlu qui a été ciblée pour corruption et aide à des organisations terroristes.

D'autre part, de nombreuses personnes en Turquie et dans le monde qui ont des opinions critiques à l'égard du régime d'Erdoğan considèrent que ce processus est plus « politique » que « judiciaire ». Il est vraiment intéressant de noter qu'alors que le gouvernement turc tente de mener un processus de paix avec le leader emprisonné du PKK, Abdullah Öcalan, une coalition électorale avec le parti DEM, légal et légitime (qui a des liens avec le PKK), pourrait être considérée comme un soutien apporté à l'organisation terroriste par les autorités judiciaires turques. En ce sens, même si l'acte d'accusation et l'affaire nous diront la vérité sur les allégations contre İmamoğlu et l'administration du CHP, la perception d'un processus de chasse aux sorcières politique est très forte parmi les groupes d'opposition dans le pays.

Ces développements choquants ont suscité la colère de l'opinion publique, en particulier parmi les électeurs de l'opposition, et ont provoqué des manifestations dans de nombreuses universités et lieux publics. İlhan Uzgel, vice-président du CHP et professeur de relations internationales, a qualifié ces développements de « recul démocratique » et a affirmé que la Turquie était en train de passer d'un « autoritarisme compétitif » à un « autoritarisme non compétitif ». Entre-temps, je dois ajouter que le gouvernement essayait de préparer une nouvelle constitution avec l'aide de l'opposition avant ce processus tendu, mais l'opposition refusait catégoriquement de coopérer avec le régime d'Erdoğan en raison des actes antérieurs du gouvernement. En ce sens, mon observation est que l'autorité judiciaire a décidé d'accélérer le processus d'enquête sur İmamoğlu après l'approche froide du CHP dans le processus d'élaboration de la constitution et le pas décisif d'İmamoğlu pour devenir le candidat présidentiel de son parti à l'avance. C'est pourquoi il semble qu'à partir de maintenant, le processus politique turc sera très risqué et problématique et que les deux blocs principaux et rivaux essaieront de se nuire et de se détruire l'un l'autre.

Enfin, j'espère que les deux plus grands partis politiques du pays, l'AKP et le CHP, pourront trouver un moyen de coopérer et de résoudre les problèmes nationaux et internationaux du pays plutôt que d'entamer un bras de fer qui nuirait à toutes les parties et au pays en général. La Türkiye a besoin d'un gouvernement de consensus national (Ulusal Mutabakat) dans une conjoncture très critique en raison des développements en Syrie, des pourparlers de paix avec le PKK et des relations tendues avec les grandes puissances telles que les États-Unis et la Russie. J'espère que le président Erdoğan pourra mener le pays dans la bonne direction et rétablir un régime démocratique en coopérant avec l'opposition. Je souhaite également que l'opposition n'aborde pas Erdoğan comme un ennemi, mais comme le président légitimement élu de la Turquie. Enfin, j'espère que l'opposition préférera les négociations démocratiques et la coopération plutôt que les affrontements de rue comme dans les années 1970.

Prof. Ozan ÖRMECİ

Istanbul Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu Is Detained

 

Istanbul's popular Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu (1971-), who is widely regarded as the country's next President in the potential post-Erdoğan process in the coming years, was detained yesterday with corruption charges and allegations of links with the secessionist and outlawed terrorist organization PKK. The shocking news came on Wednesday, the morning of March 19, 2025. A day earlier, another shocking development took place and İmamoğlu's university graduation diploma (BA degree) from Istanbul University was cancelled by the university administration due to alleged irregularities in his undergraduate transfer from Girne American University in North Cyprus. According to the CHP chair Özgür Özel, these decisions show the authoritarian leaning of Türkiye's regime similar to coup plotters in the past (July 15, 2016) and Erdoğan's fear of competing with İmamoğlu in the next presidential election. Moreover, İmamoğlu's detainment sparked large protests across the country especially among the youth and in universities since İmamoğlu is often perceived as a new hope for the opposition.

Ekrem İmamoğlu became a political star in 2019 after winning the local elections for the Metropolitan Municipality of Istanbul twice from the pro-secular CHP (Republican People's Party). İmamoğlu, who barely defeated his strong rival and former Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım in March 2019, transformed into a rising star in the country after the cancellation of the elections by the YSK (Supreme Electoral Committee). In July 2019, in repeated elections, İmamoğlu reached an all-time high vote with support from coming from very different segments of society. In the next few years, İmamoğlu became a nationwide popular politician who has been able to unify very different social groups including classical pro-secular CHP voters, leftists, center-right moderates as well as Kurds and some portion of Islamist-conservative groups. A native of conservative-nationalist Trabzon city in the Black Sea (Karadeniz) region, İmamoğlu was even described as "Erdoğan of the CHP" due to his populist style and pious personality. İmamoğlu was able to keep his place as the Mayor of Istanbul in the 2024 local elections against Murat Kurum, Erdoğan's close associate and a top name within the ruling AK Parti (Justice and Development Party). Before the cancellation of his diploma and detainment, İmamoğlu was making preparations to be declared as his party CHP's (Republican People's Party) presidential candidate with a primary to be held by CHP on March 23, 2025, this Sunday. According to contemporary polls, İmamoğlu would have defeated Erdoğan in a head-to-head presidential election. So, these decisions overshadowed İmamoğlu's presidential candidacy declaration. Moreover, it seems like Istanbul's Mayor may not run for the presidency in the next elections due to his potential incarceration. In my opinion, CHP members will continue to vote for İmamoğlu this Sunday and probably name him as the party's presidential candidate for the next elections. However, in case İmamoğlu is arrested or the decision for the cancellation of his diploma is not reversed, he might not run for the presidency. In that sense, Ankara Mayor Mansur Yavaş could be the presidential candidate of the CHP and the opposition in general. 

Accusations against İmamoğlu are based on two main issues. One of them is about corruption related to tender contracts made by the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IBB). The other accusation on the other hand is about the "City Consensus" (Kent Uzlaşısı) platform İmamoğlu team established before the 2024 local elections. Through this platform, the pro-Kurdish DEM Parti supported İmamoğlu's candidacy and did not contest the elections with their candidate. This was a major factor in İmamoğlu's success against Murat Kurum in last March's critical local elections. Istanbul Public Prosecutor considered the "City Consensus" initiative as an aide to the outlawed PKK and its political organization DEM Parti and called İmamoğlu a "criminal enterprise ringleader". Moreover, the Public Prosecutor called for the detainment/arrestation of around 100 more people, including İmamoğlu's close aide Murat Ongun and election campaign manager Necati Özkan. In that sense, not only İmamoğlu but the whole İmamoğlu team was targeted based on corruption and help to terrorist organizations.

On the other hand, many people in Türkiye and in the world who have critical views toward the Erdoğan regime considered this process more "political" than "judicial". It is really interesting to note that while the Turkish government is trying to conduct a peace process with the imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan, an electoral coalition with the legal and legitimate DEM Parti (which has some links with the PKK) could be considered support given to the terrorist organization by the judiciary authorities in Türkiye. In that sense, although the indictment and the case will tell us the truth about the allegations against İmamoğlu and CHP's İBB administration, the perception of a political witchhunt process is very strong among the opposition groups within the country. 

These shocking developments created public anger, especially among the opposition voters and caused protests in many universities and public places. CHP Deputy Chairperson and Professor of International Relations, Dr. İlhan Uzgel commented on these developments as "democratic backsliding" and claimed that Türkiye is making a transition from "competitive authoritarianism" into "uncompetitive authoritarianism". In the meantime, I should add that the government was trying to prepare a new constitution with the help of the opposition before this tense process, but the opposition was categorically refusing to cooperate with the Erdoğan regime due to previous deeds of the government. In that sense, my observation is that the judicial authority decided to accelerate the process of investigating İmamoğlu after CHP's cold approach to the constitution-making process and İmamoğlu's decisive step to become the presidential candidate of his party in advance. That is why, it seems like from now on it is going to be a very risky and problematic process in Turkish politics and the two main and rival blocs in politics will try to harm and destroy each other.

Finally, I hope that Türkiye's two biggest political parties AK Parti and CHP could find a way to cooperate and solve the country's domestic and international problems rather than starting arm wrestling which would harm all sides and the country in general. Türkiye needs a national consensus (Ulusal Mutabakat) government in a very critical conjuncture due to developments in Syria, peace talks with the PKK, and tense relations with great powers such as the United States and Russia. I hope President Erdoğan can lead the country in the right direction and reestablish a democratic regime by cooperating with the opposition. I also wish the opposition not to approach Erdoğan as an enemy but as the legitimately elected President of Türkiye. Lastly, I hope the opposition would prefer democratic negotiations and cooperation rather than street clashes like in the 1970s. 

Prof. Ozan ÖRMECİ

Interview with Professor Herbert Reginbogin: Living in a Trumpian World

 

Herbert Reginbogin is a professor at the Catholic University of America, Institute for Public Policy, researching new security architecture and American Foreign Policy. For over three decades, Professor Reginbogin has been involved in transatlantic relations, teaching at Potsdam University (Germany), Boğaziçi University (Türkiye), European University of Lefke (North Cyprus), Çağ University (Türkiye), Istanbul Kent University (Türkiye), and the U.S.-based Touro Law School as well as Guest Professor at several universities and law schools throughout the U.S., Europe, and East Asia. His work extends into multidisciplinary topics related to human and energy security, religious identity, freedom, and international law. Professor Reginbogin has written several books and articles on these topics, dealing with various political, economic, financial, and social issues facing Europe, Russia, the Middle East, and East Asia. In addition, Reginbogin has worked on several high-profile litigation cases and energy security issues in the Eastern Mediterranean, E.U., and the U.S. about international maritime law, international refugee issues, the destabilization of the international world order, and kleptocracy. He sits on the advisory board of the Institute for Peace (Vienna) and is the Acting President of the Turk Heritage Organization (Washington, DC). His books include Neutrals and Beyond the Cold (July 2022, contributed and edited with Pascal Lottaz and Heinz Gaertner), The Vatican and Permanent Neutrality (April 2022, edited with Marshall Breger), Permanent Neutrality. A Model for Peace, Security, and Justice (2020 edited with Pascal Lottaz), Notions of Neutralities (2019 edited with Pascal Lottaz), Financial Markets of Neutral Countries in World War II (2012 edited by Robert Vogler et al.), Faces of Neutrality (2009), Guerre et Neutralite, Les Neutres Face a Hitler (2008), Der Vergleich (2006), Nuremberg Trials: International Criminal Law Since 1945 (2006 edited with Christoph Safferling), and Hitler, der Westen und die Schweiz  (2001 co-authored with Walther Hofer) as well several articles in law reviews and academic journals.

International Political Academy (UPA) coordinator and Istanbul Kent University staff Prof. Ozan Örmeci conducted a Zoom talk with Professor Herbert Reginbogin on March 16, 2025 on contemporary developments in the United States political life, President Donald Trump's picks for his new cabinet as well as his proposals and initiatives for reaching peace in Ukraine and Palestine. 

Dr. Özker Kocadal'la Yine Yeni Yeniden Kıbrıs Müzakereleri

 

Dr. Özker Kocadal, KKTC’de Uluslararası Kıbrıs Üniversitesi’nde Siyaset Bilimi ve Uluslararası İlişkiler bölümünde öğretim üyesi olarak çalışmaktadır. Exeter Üniversitesi’nden Siyaset Bilimi alanında doktora derecesi sahibidir. Araştırmaları, özellikle uluslararası arabuluculuk ve barış inşası olmak üzere devlet içi çatışmaların barışçıl çözümüne ve ayrıca orta güçlerin uluslararası sistemdeki rolüne odaklanmaktadır.

Avustralya'da Federal Seçimler İçin Geri Sayım...

Giriş

Okyanusya kıtasında yer alan Birleşmiş Milletler (BM) üyesi 15 devlet (alfabetik sırayla: Avustralya, Endonezya, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Adaları, Mikronezya Federal Devletleri, Nauru, Palau, Papua Yeni Gine, Samoa, Solomon Adaları, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu ve Yeni Zelanda) arasında en güçlü ekonomisi olan Avustralya, son yıllarda Amerika Birleşik Devletleri (ABD)-Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti (Çin) rekabeti bağlamında da giderek değer kazanmaktadır. İngiliz siyasal geleneğinden etkilenmesinin de desteğiyle 1901'den beri Başbakanlarını daima demokratik seçimlerle belirleyen Avustralya'da, yeni hükümeti belirleyecek federal seçimlerin bu yıl içerisinde 17 Mayıs'a kadar yapılması gerekmektedir. Bu yazıda, Avustralya siyasal sistemi hakkında kısaca bilgi vererek, 2025 federal seçimlerini değerlendireceğim.

Okyanusya haritası

Sayılarla Avustralya

Gelişmiş Batılı bir devlet kabul edilen Avustralya, 27 milyona yakın nüfusu (dünyada 55. sıradadır) ve yaklaşık 7,7 milyon kilometrekarelik devasa yüzölçümü (dünyada 6. sıradadır) ile, Okyanusya ve Uzak Asya bölgesinde gelecekte bir büyük güç haline gelmek için muazzam potansiyele sahiptir. Başkenti yaklaşık 460.000 kişinin yaşadığı Kanberra kenti olan Avustralya, Sidney, Melbourne, Brisbane ve Perth gibi daha büyük ve gelişmiş şehirlere de sahiptir. 

1,75 trilyon dolarlık toplam gayrisafi milli hasılası ile, Avustralya, dünyanın en büyük 13. ekonomisi olarak da dikkat çekmektedir. Yaklaşık 65 bin dolarlık yıllık kişi başına düşen gayrisafi milli hasıla ile, Avustralya, aynı zamanda dünyanın 16. en zengin halkına ev sahipliği yapmaktadır. Birleşmiş Milletler İnsani Gelişmişlik Endeksi'nde 10. sırada ve çok iyi durumda olan Avustralya, Freedom House'a göre ise 95/100 puanla çok iyi bir demokrasi (özgür devlet) statüsündedir. Avustralya, dış politikada ise, BM dışında G20, OECD, Dünya Ticaret Örgütü (WTO), İngiliz Milletler Topluluğu (Commonwealth), Dünya Bankası, Asya Kalkınma Bankası, Asya Altyapı Yatırım Bankası ve MIKTA gibi oluşumlara üye durumundadır.

Avustralya bayrağı

Avustralya Siyasal Sistemi

Federal yapıdaki bir parlamenter demokrasi olan Avustralya, kağıt üzerinde halen İngiliz monarkı (III. Charles) tarafından yönetilen ve İngiliz Kralı veya Kraliçesi adına bir Genel Vali'nin (günümüzde Sam Mostyn) görev yaptığı gelenekle barışık, ancak bağımsız bir devlettir. Avustralya'da yasamadan sorumlu olan Parlamento iki meclisli (kamaralı) olup, 151 sandalyeli Temsilciler Meclisi ve 76 üyeli Senato'dan oluşmaktadır. Ortalama üç yılda bir yapılan seçimlerde, meclis çoğunluğunu sağlayan parti veya partilerden oluşan koalisyon iktidara gelmekte ve bu sayede yürütmeden sorumlu olan hükümet kurulmaktadır.

Ülkede iktidarı sık sık birbirlerine devreden iki büyük parti ve blok olup, bunlar; merkez sol çizgideki Avustralya İşçi Partisi (ALP-Labour) ve Avustralya Liberal Partisi ile Avustralya Ulusal Partisi arasında yıllardır devam eden merkez sağ çizgideki Liberal-Ulusal Koalisyon'dur (Coalition). Son yıllarda ülkedeki siyasal güç dağılımına bakıldığında; 1996-2007 döneminde dört seçim kazanarak uzun yıllar iktidarda kalan Liberal-Ulusal Koalisyon Başbakanı John Howard'ı, 2007-2013 döneminde İşçi Partili Başbakanlar Kevin Rudd ve Julia Gillard takip etmiş, 2013-2022 döneminde ise Liberal-Ulusal Koalisyon üç seçim kazanarak, Tony Abbott, Malcolm Turnbull ve Scott Morrison gibi üç farklı Başbakan çıkarmayı başarmıştır. Ülkedeki önceki federal seçim olan 2022 seçimlerini ise İşçi Partisi kazanmış ve parti lideri Anthony Albanese bu tarihten beri Avustralya Başbakanı olarak görev yapmaktadır.

Anthony Albanese

2025 Federal Seçimleri

Avustralya'da bu yıl içerisinde gerçekleşecek olan federal seçimlere iktidardaki İşçi Partisi yine Başbakan Anthony Albanese liderliğinde girecek, iktidarın diğer iddialı adayı Liberal-Ulusal Koalisyon ise Avustralya Liberal Partisi lideri Peter Dutton'ı Başbakan adayı olarak halkın karşısına takdim edecektir. Ayrıca son yıllarda adından söz ettirmeye başlayan ancak halen siyasal sistemde güçlü konumda bulunmayan Avustralya Yeşiller Partisi (AG) de parti lideri Adam Bandt ile seçim yarışına renk katacaktır. Seçimde adından söz ettirebilecek bir diğer parti ise sağ popülist çizgideki Pauline Hanson'ın One Nation'ı (PHON) adlı siyasal oluşumdur.

Peter Dutton

Ülkede 2023 yılı içerisinde geçmişte soykırıma uğratılan Aborjinlere yeni haklar sağlayacak bir anayasal referandum düzenlenmiş; ancak bu referandumdan yüzde 60 civarında oyla olumsuz yanıt alınmıştır. Bu yıl başından beri yapılan çeşitli anketlerde ise federal seçimlerin sonuçlarına dair farklı çıkarımlar yapılmaktadır. Ancak tüm anketler göstermektedir ki, hem iktidardaki İşçi Partisi, hem de muhalefetteki Liberal-Ulusal Koalisyon'a 1950'lerde yüzde 98 düzeyinde olan destek (iki partiden birine oy verme eğilimi), günümüzde yüzde 70'ler seviyesine inmiştir. Bu da, yakın gelecekte Avustralya Yeşiller Partisi'nin iki partili sistemi çok partili sisteme dönüştürebileceğini düşündürmektedir.

Güncel bazı anketler incelendiğinde; iki büyük partinin oy oranlarının birbirlerine çok yakın olduğu ve bazı anketlerde İşçi Partisi'nin, bazı anketlerde ise Liberal-Ulusal Koalisyon'un önde gözüktüğü anlaşılmaktadır. Ancak neredeyse tüm anketlerde Avustralya Yeşiller Partisi'nin oy oranları rekor seviyelere gelerek yüzde 12-13'leri bulmakta, benzer şekilde PHON da yüzde 5-7 seviyesinde yüksek oy oranlarına ulaşmaktadır. Bu da, Avustralya'da seçmenin klasik iki partili sistemden sıkılmaya başladığını göstermekte ve federal seçimler sonucunda "hung parliament" (hiçbir partinin çoğunluğu sağlayamadığı parlamento) durumunun oluşabileceğini ortaya koymaktadır. Bu durumda ise, yeni dönemde Avustralya'da zayıf bir azınlık hükümetinin kurulması ihtimali belirmektedir. Ancak elbette, seçimler öncesinde ABD'deki Donald Trump rüzgarı ve Avustralya'nın son yıllarda alınan önlemlere rağmen en büyük ticaret ortağı olan Çin'in etkisiyle seçmenlerin karar değiştirmeleri ve iki büyük partiden birine yönelmeleri olasıdır. Bu anlamda her ne kadar Avustralya'nın ABD ve Batı yönümlü dış politikasında iki büyük parti arasında bir tür uzlaşı olsa da, İşçi Partisi'nin sol ideolojik kökleri nedeniyle Pekin'e biraz daha ılımlı yaklaştığı düşünülebilir. 

Sonuç

Sonuç olarak, iyi bir demokrasi olan ve yaşam standartlarının çok yüksek olduğu Avustralya'da bu yıl içerisinde düzenlenecek olan federal seçimler, ülke içerisinde ve tüm dünyada ilgiyle takip edilecektir. Avustralya'da ve Batı dünyasında son yıllarda abartılı bir şekilde pompalanan Çin karşıtlığına rağmen, Avustralya, Çin, Hindistan ve Japonya da dahil bölgedeki tüm ülkelerle barışçıl ilişkiler kurarak ve ticarete devam ederek bugünlere kadar rejiminin demokratik ve liberal niteliğini korumayı başarmıştır. Bu da, Moğolistan örneğinde de olduğu gibi, Çin'le ticaret yapmanın bir devleti otomatik olarak otokrasi yapmayacağına dair önemli bir veri (kanıt) olarak düşünülebilir.

Prof. Dr. Ozan ÖRMECİ

Kapak fotoğrafı: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/ng-interactive/2025/mar/12/australian-election-2025-polls-today-opinion-poll-tracker-essential-newspoll-2pp-party-labor-coalition-anthony-albanese-peter-dutton-latest

Homeland Series and the Politics of 'Securitization' in Popular Culture

Abstract: The series “Homeland” is a popular American television series that aired on Showtime Networks for 8 seasons between 2011 and 2020. The series, in the intelligence-crime-action-thriller genre, was developed by Howard Gordon and Alex Gansa based on the Israeli TV series “Hatufim” (“Prisoners of War” in English) and created by Gideon Raff. The series, which attracted great attention worldwide and quickly became a phenomenon by winning Golden Globe awards, immediately stood out among its peers by delving into controversial political issues and presenting a security-oriented political perspective. In addition to the series’ high-level cinematographic quality, the series’ choice of subject matter and the security-oriented and realistic political perspective it presented were also very effective in this success. In this study, information will be provided about this phenomenon series and then the phenomenon of “securitization politics” in popular culture will be analyzed in the context of the topics covered in the first 4 seasons of the series and the perspective presented.

Keywords: Homeland, Securitization, Popular Culture.

***************************************************************

INTRODUCTION

The series “Homeland” is a popular American television series that aired on Showtime Networks for 8 seasons between 2011 and 2020 (Imdb.com). The series, which is an intelligence-crime-action-thriller, was developed by Howard Gordon and Alex Gansa based on the Israeli TV series Hatufim (Turkish: “Prisoners of War”, English: “Prisoners of War”) and created by Gideon Raff (Imdb.com). The leading actors in the series are Claire Danes as Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) agent Carrie Mathison, Mandy Patinkin as CIA chief Saul Berenson, Rupert Friend as CIA hitman Peter Quinn, F. Murray Abraham as another CIA chief Dar Adal, and Damian Lewis as Nicholas Brody, an American soldier who is captured by Al Qaeda and turned into a radical Islamist terrorist (Imdb.com). The series, which attracted great attention worldwide and won Golden Globe awards, quickly became a phenomenon, and immediately stood out among its peers by delving into controversial political issues and presenting a security-oriented political perspective. In addition to the high quality of the series, the choice of topics and the security and realist political perspective it offers have also been very effective in this success.

In this article, information will be given about this phenomenal series and then the phenomenon of “securitization politics” in popular culture will be discussed in the context of the topics covered in the first 4 seasons of the series and the perspective offered. To do this, the author first will analyze the main characters and themes of the series in the first 4 seasons. Secondly, the “securitization” theory will be explained shortly. In the third and final part, “Homeland” tv series’ securitization cases will be exemplified and criticized.

HOMELAND SERIES: CHARACTERS AND TOPICS COVERED IN THE FIRST FOUR SEASONS

“Homeland” series is basically about the American intelligence agency CIA’s fight against security threats in the world. In the first 3 seasons, the main players in the series are; Carrie Mathison (Claire Danes), a talented CIA agent with bipolar disorder, Saul Berenson (Mandy Patinkin), an experienced CIA chief and powerful enough to direct the CIA’s security policies, and Nicholas Brody (Damian Lewis), a United States (U.S.) Army personnel who was kidnapped by Al Qaeda and tortured for 7 years before being rescued and returning to his country as a hero. In the following seasons, the ruthless CIA hitman Peter Quinn (Rupert Friend), who carries out every order he receives without question, and another CIA chief Dar Adal (F. Murray Abraham), who is in competition with Berenson, will also become the main players of the series, and as of season 3, the Brody character (who is executed in Iran) will not be in the series. Apart from these people, the series also features dozens of interesting side characters.

The series, which was broadcasted for 8 seasons and 96 episodes and was followed with interest in Türkiye, was intended to be shot in Türkiye for one season (season 4) upon the request of the production company; however, the Turkish government did not allow the shooting due to concerns that Iran’s money laundering activities in the series would also make Türkiye look bad (Cumhuriyet, 2014). Thereupon, the character of Carrie Mathison, who was initially assigned to Istanbul according to the script, was assigned to Pakistan as a result of later developments.

The first season of the series focuses on the character Nicholas Brody, who returns to his country as a hero after being held captive by Al Qaeda and begins to rise rapidly in politics, and tells the story of Brody’s experiences after his return to the U.S. From the first day, CIA analyst Carrie Mathison thinks that Brody may have been brainwashed due to the torture and events he was subjected to during his captivity and suspects that he is a terrorist. For this reason, Mathison, who uses many legal and illegal methods to follow Brody, has problems with her chief and master Berenson and his superior David Estes (David Harewood) on this issue and even has to lose her job in the end. The Mathison-Saul duo constantly keep Brody, who is seen as a great hero throughout the country, under surveillance outside of the official activities of the organization. Indeed, as a result of the severe torture he was subjected to and the psychological techniques used on him, Nicholas Brody has become a Muslim sympathizer of Al Qaeda, but he hides it very well. At the end of the season, Brody gets the chance to kill the Vice President of the U.S. and the important people with him; but luckily, he cannot carry out the operation because the bomb mechanism of the assassination vest he is wearing does not work. However, before this action, he records a video in which he confesses everything and explains what he has done, and this video recording is stolen from the place he hid in his house.

The second season continues with Saul and Carrie following Brody as a continuation of the first season. Brody, who is elected as a congressman, becomes a double agent thanks to Carrie’s efforts, with whom he begins a love affair, and begins to provide information to both the CIA and Al Qaeda. The CIA is particularly interested in Abu Nazir (Navid Negahban), who organized many terrorist attacks and lost his son in an airstrike carried out by the U.S. while Brody was being held captive. Although Nazir thinks that Brody is playing both sides, he thinks that he can help the organization if he reaches a good position in politics, and for this reason, he does not lose contact with him. In fact, Brody kills the Vice President in accordance with his orders. Now, his path to becoming the Vice President of the U.S. has been opened, and Nazir is the one who is the happiest about this. However, Nazir, who came to the U.S. thanks to the information Brody gave, is killed. At the end of the season, as a result of an action organized by Al Qaeda, who wanted to take revenge on Nazir, dozens of agency employees die in a huge explosion at the CIA headquarters in Langley. Although Brody had nothing to do with this attack, the video he recorded for his previous action was leaked to the media by Nazir’s men. Thus, everyone thinks that Brody did the action. Brody escapes the country with the help of Carrie.

In the third season, Brody tries to hide in Caracas, Venezuela, but is made addicted to drugs by the men who hide and detain him there. After David Estes’ death in the explosion, Saul Berenson, who became the interim director of the CIA, intensifies his activities against Iranian intelligence together with Carrie. At this point, Saul, who implements a great deception plan, makes it seem like Carrie has been expelled from the organization and excluded, and closely follows the efforts of Iranian intelligence to get close to her. As a result of these studies, Majid Javadi (Shaun Toub), the number two name in Iranian intelligence, is convinced by Saul and Carrie to work for the U.S. The plan is simple; Javadi will be put in charge of Iranian intelligence and will act in coordination with Saul to prevent a possible U.S.-Iran war. In return, the CIA will not give documents related to Javadi’s corruption to Iran. For this purpose, Nicolas Brody, who was rescued from Caracas, was secretly brought back to the U.S. and prepared for the operation, crossed the Iraqi border and surrendered to Iranian security forces. Brody, who was welcomed as a hero in Iran, fulfilled the responsibility he had taken on with great courage despite the conditions being against him and killed Danesh Akbari, the number one name in Iranian intelligence. However, Brody was later caught and executed by hanging in Iran. Carrie, who was depressed due to Brody’s death, officially returned to the organization and was appointed as the chief in Istanbul. Thanks to the work of Saul and Javadi, a nuclear agreement was made between the U.S. and Iran and the risk of war was eliminated.

In the fourth season, Carrie starts working in Pakistan instead of Istanbul as a result of a change of duty. Due to the murder of CIA station chief Sandy Bachman, who was serving in Pakistan, relations between this country and the U.S. are tense. In addition, Pakistani intelligence is also organizing counter-operations against the CIA and putting them in a very difficult situation. Especially because Dennis Boyd, the academic husband of U.S. Ambassador Dana Boyd, who is serving in Pakistan, gives information to Pakistani intelligence, the CIA’s business is going very badly. Another important problem is the activities of Haissam Haqqani (Numan Acar), a terrorist leader similar to Osama Bin Laden. Haqqani organizes the kidnapping of Saul and in return ensures the release of many Al Qaeda militants. Some people from Pakistani intelligence also help him. However, Haqqani’s plan is not limited to this; thanks to the information received from Dennis Boyd, a major terrorist attack is carried out on the U.S. Embassy. Many people are killed there. Peter Quinn decides to kill Haqqani himself for revenge. However, when Carrie sees Dar Adal with Haqqani, everything changes. The CIA has made a deal with Haqqani. Carrie, angry at this situation, leaves the agency and starts working in a private company in Germany. Peter Quinn takes on dangerous missions in Syria.

THE SECURITIZATION PHENOMENON

The concept of “securitization”, which first entered the academic literature in 1995 with the writings of Ole Waever (1995), later became an important approach in the field of International Relations thanks to the work of the Copenhagen School (Durak, 2024: 336-350). The Copenhagen School has a Realism-based and security-focused approach, the most important representatives of which can be considered as Barry Buzan, Ole Waever and Jaap de Wilde. The book Security: A New Framework for Analysis (Buzan & Waever & De Wilde, 1997) written by this trio is the cornerstone work of this school. According to Gözügüzelli, the Copenhagen School, which brought a new security idea to contemporary security studies and provided an analysis of security, emerged after the 1980s, but it is a school whose work came to the forefront with the end of the Cold War and accelerated security studies (Gözügüzelli, 2016: 678).

According to Ole Waever, who founded this school, security refers to the existence of a security threat and the situation in which certain measures are taken against it (Waever, 1995: 7). Insecurity, on the other hand, describes a situation in which there is a security problem but no adequate measures are taken or a response is given. According to Baysal and Lüleci; “The securitization theory, which has a constructivist basis, sees security as a speech act. According to the theory; security issues are constructed as security threats through speech acts. In this way, it becomes legitimate to resort to extraordinary means against constructed security threats. Those in power can choose to legitimize the sanctions they will impose by presenting the issues for which they want to take extraordinary measures as security threats.” (Baysal & Lüleci, 2015: 63).

In this context, the politics of securitization follows the following order; first, issues that are not politicized and do not fall within the scope of the state’s interest are politicized and turned into political agenda items through speech acts. Later, the issue that has been made political is treated as containing security risks, and the issue is presented as a threatening issue in which the state is the rule maker and even a monopoly. In this way, the state is prevented from dominating this area and developing movements that are against or independent of it. The table that Başar Baysal and Çağla Lüleci use in their articles should be used to illustrate this (Baysal & Lüleci, 2015: 75):

Table I. The logic of securitization

The opposite of this, “desecuritization”, is when a phenomenon, action or person that was previously considered a threat is no longer considered a threat. According to Gözügüzelli, if a problem does not attract the attention of politicians for a long time, it will resolve itself (Gözügüzelli, 2016: 681). Or, in a way that is the opposite of the securitization process, an issue can be transformed from a security issue into a purely political issue over time, and its political aspect can be eroded and it will cease to be a problem in the future.

HOMELAND SERIES AND THE POLITICS OF SECURITIZATION

When the episodes of the first four seasons of the “Homeland” series are examined, it can be easily noticed that the production securitizes certain issues and facts in line with the main line of American foreign policy and security understanding which is based on the fear of radical or extremist Islamic movements.

First of all, the Nicholas Brody character defines people who are captured by Al Qaeda and similar terrorist organizations as a serious security risk. Indeed, Brody first becomes a Muslim as a result of what is done to him here, and then becomes an Al Qaeda activist. Again, the reactions shown to him by his family members after it was noticed that Brody started praying in his garage after his return to the U.S. show that Islam and religious rituals and practices in accordance with Islam are also perceived as a security issue in line with widespread American tendencies. For sure, this trend did not start with the “Homeland” series and is closely related to how the Islamic world is perceived in the Western world and the state of Muslim societies due to economic and political problems. However, the series reproduces such popular images and discourses, feeds them and makes them even stronger. Although the series emphasizes that not all Muslims are bad or terrorists through characters such as the headscarf-wearing CIA employee and accountant, it is possible to say that the general perspective is extremely prejudiced regarding Muslims. This situation is also very much in line with the conservative/nationalist “Christian” politics of U.S. President Donald Trump.

In this context, the external threat countries chosen as targets in the series are also very important. The Muslim geography, which hosts Al Qaeda and similar terrorist organizations, and especially countries such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, and (Islamic Republic of) Iran, are shown as the most risky and hostile countries in terms of American intelligence in the series. According to the series, Arabs are a nation that provides natural resources to terrorist organizations and, like the character Nazir, are fundamentally against the West. In addition, although Pakistan was until recently a country that has very close relations with the U.S., it is portrayed quite negatively in the series and it is emphasized that Pakistani intelligence and Al Qaeda work together. Iran is also presented as a dangerous country that organizes terrorist acts and intelligence operations against the U.S.; however, the view that an agreement with this country would be more beneficial is reflected in the series, reminiscent of the nuclear agreement made during the Barack Obama period.

Again, it is quite striking that the U.S. is presented in the series as the side that represents what is right, good, and beautiful in every subject. Of course, the U.S. is a democratic and human rights-respecting state and is one of the most comfortable countries in the world to live in in many ways. However, no country can be 100 % right on every subject. The U.S. has also made and continues to make many mistakes in its foreign and domestic policies in the past and today. The racism problem in the American society and widespread violence-based crimes show that the American system has also its own problems in terms of human rights and democracy. Therefore, a more balanced narrative language can be expected to be used in such productions. “Homeland” series in this sense was educative and also open to critical thinking in terms of its securitization efforts of Islam and the Muslim world.

CONCLUSION

This study tried to analyze American-made popular tv series “Homeland” in terms of its securitization efforts. The views and stereotype-based patterns reflected in the “Homeland” series and similar films may not be considered unjust and unjustified when the terrorist acts are also taken into consideration. However, the critical issue here is what will be securitized. Making a religion a total security issue may actually lead to events that could lead to greater security risks. Because monotheistic religions with billions of believers are very powerful discourses that have survived for hundreds of years. Therefore, distinguishing between religion itself and those who engage in politics based on religion, and even those who see the use of violence as legitimate in this politics, is one of the points to be considered when making a securitization discourse in popular culture.

Ozan ÖRMECİ

Full Professor, Istanbul Kent University

ORCID: 0000-0001-8850-6089

Email: ozanormeci@kent.edu.tr

 

REFERENCES

[1] Başar Baysal & Çağla Lüleci (2015), “Kopenhag Okulu ve Güvenlikleştirme Teorisi”, Güvenlik Stratejileri, Vol. 11, no: 22, pp. 61-96.

[2] Barry Buzan & Ole Waever & Jaap De Wilde (1997), Security: A New Framework for Analysis, Lynne Rienner Pub.

[3] Cumhuriyet (2014), “Türkiye Homeland dizisinin çekimlerine izin vermedi”, 03.10.2014, https://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/turkiye-homeland-dizisinin-cekimlerine-izin-vermedi-126813.

[4] Görkem Durak (2024), “Contribution of Copenhagen school to the security studies”, Ordu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, Vol. 14, no: 1, pp. 336-350.

[5] Emete Gözügüzelli (2016), “Belçika’da Güvenlikleştirilen Sözde Ermeni Soykırımı, İslamofobi ve Belçika Türkleri”, in Ozan Örmeci & Hüseyin Işıksal (eds.), Mavi Elma: Türkiye-Avrupa İlişkileri, pp. 677-705.

[6] Imdb.com, “Homeland”, https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1796960/.

[7] Ole Waever (1995), “Securitization and Desecuritization”, in Ronnie D. Lipschutz (ed.), On Security, New York: Columbia University Press.

Prof. Dr. Ozan Örmeci'den Yeni Makale: "An Analysis of the 2024 Romanian Presidential and Parliamentary Elections"

 

İstanbul Kent Üniversitesi Siyaset Bilimi ve Kamu Yönetimi (İngilizce) Bölümü Başkanı ve Uluslararası Politika Akademisi (UPA) Kurucu Genel Koordinatörü Prof. Dr. Ozan Örmeci’nin yeni makalesi "An Analysis of the 2024 Romanian Presidential and Parliamentary Elections", KENTUSAMDER (Kent Üniversitesi Siyaset, Sosyal ve Stratejik Araştırmalar Dergisi) dergisinin 1. cilt, 1 nolu sayısında yayımlandı. Aşağıdaki linklerden bu makaleyi okuyabilirsiniz.

• Örmeci, Ozan (2025), "An Analysis of the 2024 Romanian Presidential and Parliamentary Elections”, KENTUSAMDER, Cilt 1, Sayı: 1, ss. 126-143 (Academia)
• Örmeci, Ozan (2025), "An Analysis of the 2024 Romanian Presidential and Parliamentary Elections”, KENTUSAMDER, Cilt 1, Sayı: 1, ss. 126-143 (Research Gate)

Kanada'da Başbakan Değişimi ve Yaklaşan Federal Seçimler

Güneydeki etkili komşusu ABD'nin de etkisiyle, siyasal sisteminin oluşmaya başladığı 19. yüzyılın ikinci yarısından itibaren iktidar mücadelesinin daha ziyade sağ muhafazakârlar ile merkez liberaller arasında yaşandığı ve sol siyasetin arka planda kaldığı Kanada, şu sıralarda hareketli günler yaşıyor. ABD Başkanı Donald Trump'ın gümrük tarifeleri ile tehdit ettiği Kuzey Amerika devleti, 2015 yılından beri üstüste üç federal seçim (2015, 2019, 2021) kazanarak yaklaşık 10 yıldır ülke siyasetini domine eden Kanada Liberal Partisi (LPC) lideri ve Başbakan Justin Trudeau'nun siyasete vedası sonrasında yeni Başbakanına hazırlanıyor. Bu yazıda, Kanada'da yaşanan değişim sürecini ve tarihi henüz belirsiz olan 2025 federal seçimlerini inceleyeceğim.

Justin Trudeau

Kanada siyasetini 10 yıldır adeta tek başına sırtlayan Justin Trudeau, genç, karizmatik, barışçıl ve liberal duruşuyla ülkesini çok iyi temsil etmiş ve Kanadalıların gönlünde adeta taht kurmuştu. Yakışıklı bir siyasetçi olarak dikkat çeken Trudeau, uluslararası basında da sıklıkla yer alarak Kanada'ya istediği popülariteyi sağlamış ve genelde vatandaşları ve ülkesindeki siyasal analistlerden övgüler almayı başarmıştır. Ayrıca, hatırlanacak olursa, elit bir aileden gelen Justin Trudeau'nun babası Pierre Trudeau da 1968-1979 ve 1980-1984 döneminde dört farklı seçim kazanarak 16 yılı aşkın süreyle Liberal Parti adına Kanada'da Başbakanlık yapmıştı. Ancak Justin Trudeau rüzgarı 10 yıllık süreçte biraz duruldu ve siyasetin getirdiği stresli ortamda önce eşinden boşanan, daha sonra da Liberal Parti içerisinde anlaşmazlıklar, partinin anketlerde yaşadığı oy kayıpları ve son olarak ABD Başkanı Donald Trump'ın tehditleri nedeniyle yıpranan Justin Trudeau, 2025 yılı başlarında gözyaşları içerisinde istifa kararı aldığını duyurdu.

Mark Carney

Bu tarihten itibaren Liberal Parti içerisinde liderlik ve Başbakanlık yarışı başlarken, uzun süre Justin Trudeau hükümetlerinde Bakanlık ve Başbakan Yardımcısı olarak görev yapan partinin başarılı isimlerinden Chrystia Freeland ile Kanada Merkez Bankası ve İngiltere Merkez Bankası'nın guvernörü olarak görev yapan başarılı ekonomist Mark Carney iddialı iki aday olarak öne çıktılar. 9 Mart 2025 tarihinde sonuçlanan parti-içi liderlik yarışını Carney kazanırken, bu şekilde bu yıl içerisinde yapılacak federal seçimlere kadar Kanada Başbakanı olarak görev yapmaya da hak kazanmış oldu. Harvard ve Oxford mezunu olan Carney, Goldman Sachs deneyimi sonrasında 2008 küresel krizi sırasında Kanada Merkez Bankası guvenörü (Başkanı) olarak gösterdiği üstün performansla takdir topladı. Carney, bu başarısını Brexit döneminde İngiltere Merkez Bankası guvernörlüğü döneminde de sürdürdü ve "kriz zamanlarının yöneticisi" olarak Batı dünyasında nam saldı. Carney, şimdi seçimlere kısa süre kalmışken, Trump'ın tehditleri karşısında halka güven veren bir teknokrat olarak Kanada Muhafazakâr Partisi'nin (CPC) kazanmasına birkaç gün öncesine kadar kesin gözüyle bakılan bir seçimi kazanmaya çalışacak. Carney, parti lideri ve Başbakan olması sonrasında yaptığı ilk açıklamada, "Amerikalılar hata yapmasınlar; buz hokeyi ve ticarette Kanada daima kazanır" diyerek Trump'ın tehditlerine karşı efektif politikalar geliştireceğinin sinyallerini verdi. 

Pierre Poilievre

Ancak Kanada Liberal Partisi ile birlikte ülkenin iki köklü partisinden biri olan Kanada Muhafazakâr Partisi de iktidarı kaybettikleri 2015'ten beri ilk kez seçimlere bu kadar iddialı hazırlanıyor. 2022'den beri partinin lideri ve ana muhalefet lideri olan Pierre Poilievre, Trudeau'yu anımsatan genç ve karizmatik lider profiliyle anketlerde oldukça başarılı bir performans sergiliyor. Genelde "popülist" bir siyasetçi olmakla eleştirilen Poilievre, özellikle ekonomik sorunlar üzerinden hükümeti yıpratmayı başarıyor. 

Yakın zamana kadar yapılan güncel anketlerin hepsinde Kanada Muhafazakâr Partisi'nin seçimi kazanması neredeyse kesin gözükürken, Carney rüzgarıyla son anketlerde Liberal Parti'nin çıkışta olduğu ve seçimi kazanması ihtimali belirmiştir. Ancak elbette en geç 20 Ekim'de düzenlenmesi gereken federal seçimler için daha belli bir süre bulunmaktadır ve bu süreçte oy oranlarında ciddi değişimler yaşanabilir.

Her ne olursa olsun, tüm uluslararası düzeni altüst eden Donald Trump ABD'si ile ilişkilerin seyri bakımından Kanada'nın Carney liderliğinde göstereceği tavır, yalnızca Kanada değil, tüm Batı ülkeleri için önemli bir test işlevi görecektir. Carney, bu süreci başarıyla yönetirse liberalleri bir kez daha iktidara taşıyabilir. Aksi durumda ise, muhafazakârların iktidarı neredeyse kesin bir gelişme haline gelecektir.

Prof. Dr. Ozan ÖRMECİ