The results of the upcoming Turkish general elections have come to concern not only the people of Turkey, but also a number of media outlets based in Germany, the U.K. and U.S. I will not refer to those media outlets by name, as I think such distorted broadcasts or newspapers, which go as far as to interfere in Turkey and its election process, have the same objectives and are driven by the same motives.
The nasty capital, which supported the perpetrators of massacres and genocides over a vast geography including Africa, the Middle East, the Balkans and Latin America throughout the 20th century, turned a blind eye to Egyptian dictator Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi, who toppled the country's democratically-elected president Mohammed Morsi with a military coup, and opened fire on thousands of people who protested this injustice. Now, the same capital is striving to hamper Turkey's peace process and democratization by criticizing President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.
First, let me say the military coup staged by el-Sissi, along with the death penalty given to Morsi, is one of the most strategic moves of the powers that want to take the Middle East and the whole world back to the nightmare of the 1990s. These two incidents are not only major developments for Egypt and the Middle East, but also a democratic litmus test for the whole world, particularly the Western world. The implementation of Morsi's death penalty will go down in history as an incurable conscientious offence. Also, this malevolent step will pave the way for new civil wars over a vast geographic area spanning from the Middle East to the Balkans.
The firm stance that Erdoğan and Turkey maintain against all these happenings has begun to dissuade the world from what is wrong and European countries have come to realize what they are and what they are doing. Egypt has started to take steps to annul the execution of the death penalty. As a result, the EU and U.S. have come to approach Turkey's stance and acknowledge it to be right. Had Turkey not taken this stance and showed political resistance, the world would be continuing the way it used to. Today, Turkey is the sole country that unconditionally supports peace and democracy in its surrounding region. Additionally, it is an outward-looking strategic country that pursues a market economy, allowing free entries. It is a strategic country because only if Turkey's market mechanism gains strength and the economy is established on a sound basis, can the EU overcome the crisis it is currently experiencing.
It is an undeniable fact that poverty escalated and turned into a systemic risk across the world between 1980 and the 2008 financial crisis – a time that can be described as a period of neoliberal globalization. At this juncture, let us take a closer look at criticisms that are aimed at Erdoğan from the Western world, particularly from the U.K. All along the line, Erdoğan has been verbalizing an outward-oriented, market-based and anti-monopolistic economic model that aims to reduce poverty. Since 2008, Erdoğan has chastised impoverishing neoliberal economic policies that transfer funds to the outside, pushing Turkey to make a preference. The 20th stand-by agreement that Turkey did not sign with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Southeastern Anatolia Project (GAP) Action Plan were two major steps that Turkey took at these historical crossroads. With the GAP plan, Erdoğan transferred large amounts of funds to the eastern provinces that are mainly populated by Kurds, paving the way for the current peace process. All these steps mean that Turkey is becoming more democratic and further opening up to the outside.
Turkey's opposition parties, particularly the main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP), criticize Erdoğan and the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government for this, accusing them of "breaking away from the world." Likewise, the media outlets that represent the aforementioned nasty, global finance institutions have initiated intense disinformation in this regard. The facts are being distorted in two major areas: The first concerns interest rates and interest rate lobbies, and the second concerns the assertions that the Erdoğan period established a closed economy that is based on unearned income in fields such as the construction sector. However, the reality is quite the opposite of such claims. First, the debates over interest rates initiated by Erdoğan reflect Turkey's desire to switch to a new and production-based growth model as well as its will to politicize and institutionalize this model.
Turkey will achieve an industrial, knowledge, society-oriented and competitive economy to the extent that it escapes neoliberal policies that are based on interest rates and unearned income. The primary objective is to have an economy that is competitive and completely outward-oriented, allowing unlimited free market entries. This economy requires a financial system that strengthens the market with anti-monopolistic regulations. In 2013, the government headed by then-Prime Minister Erdoğan took many steps toward anti-monopolistic regulations in many fields, with energy taking the lead. If the AK Party does not emerge victorious once again from Sunday's elections and a new AK Party government, which will maintain and deepen peace and democratization in strong Turkey, is not formed, this does not mean a loss for Turkey alone, but also for all democratic powers in the world. Despite all the endeavors of anti-democratic powers, this is a slight possibility that can hardly come true.