The Gezi protests: an outburst at Turkey's shatter-zone.

• Author: Sozen, Edibe
• Position: Report

Taksim Square, where Gezi Park is located, is Turkish society's shatter-zone, par excellence. By shatter-zone in socio-political terms, we mean an area where different lifestyles meet and coexist; a space likened to the fissures of society where people take refuge to resist homogenizing processes. Indeed, Taksim is the main shatter-zone of Istanbul, where diverse lifestyles have taken refuge and have resisted against hegemonic ideologies. It is made up of artists, writers, actors, and others who pursue bohemian lifestyles and subscribe to unorthodox ideas. The many bars and cafes, and the people they attract, mark Taksim as the epicenter of anti-establishment gatherings. Keeping in mind the nature of Taksim's constant social role in Turkey's public sphere, it is important to note that the events, which took place between May 27 and June 12 in and around Taksim, were not of a political movement, and therefore not to be associated with a political ideology of any kind. Rather, the events were the materialization of Taksim's long enduring social attitudes. In other words, the fissures engendered an outburst--insofar as it was a sudden, unrestrained, and violent expression of emotion--and series of disjointed social effects. Indeed, the Gezi events were explosions of indignation by those who had long felt excluded and marginalized, almost as a way of life. While the opposition parties felt a flare of delight from the demonstrations, the truth remains that the Taksim mentality has constantly been that of a shatter-zone, regardless of the political identity of the "establishment." Therefore, the outburst failed to create a sustainable movement or establish an alternative political platform.

On May 27, the protest started as a sit-in by a group of environmentalist youths to oppose a development project that involved the uprooting of trees in order to build a replica of a 19th century Ottoman era artillery barrack, Topcu Kislasi, that would house a hotel and a small shopping mall, along with several small meeting rooms. (2) The next day, the police used pepper-spray to disperse the protesters. The demonstrators reacted by vandalizing property in the area, including shop-windows and cars. On May 29, a larger crowd came to establish a camp in the park. The significant difference in attitude and behavior between the campers and the demonstrators was noticeable, as only the latter were involved in confrontations with the police.

As the media started to romanticize all protesters, be they campers or demonstrators, more young people joined them. In addition, a series of misinformation about the project began to dominate the social media, including the claim that Bulent Arincs son was partner to the project. (3) It was presented as the government's attempt to "destroy the green space and the park to build another shopping mall, known as AVM in Turkish (Alis-Veris Merkezi), and a hotel." Police were unable to dislodge the campers, and as their numbers grew, the police, under the direct order of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, organized a massive down operation and dispersed the protesters. The government held several meetings with the campers and demonstrators, and promised to wait for the court decision before continuing with plans for the park. On May 30, when they refused to empty the park, police intervened and dispersed the demonstrators and campers. The protesters used social media to share images of police brutality, which provoked anger among other anti-AK Party sectors of the population. Anti-government channels, such as Ulusal TV and Halk TV, provided live coverage.

On June 1, the government decided to pull the police force from the site. The following day, all opposition groups poured into Taksim Square with a single slogan: "Erdogan resign!" Protests in other locations were relatively small and concentrated in major squares, among the cities of Ankara, Izmir, Eskisehir, Adana and Istanbul. However, these failed to generate over 2,000 participants and hardly interrupted daily life. Erdogan remained strong-armed, calling the protesters capulcu (marauder or bum). The protesters actually embraced the title, and within a day capulcu became a household name. There are now a capulcu teahouse, a capulcu library, and capulcu summer-camps to bring the protesters together to discuss the situation in the country. Capulcu has even transformed into a name for anyone who dislikes Erdogan. For instance, Cem Boyner, one of the leading industrialists, and Ergun Ozen, the CEO of Garanti Bank, claim that they "are also capulcu." (4)

The events were embellished by a symbiosis between the media and the demonstrators. Both sought each other, and the interaction itself facilitated international comparisons of Taksim with Tahrir Square. (5) The perpetuation of newsworthiness then became a goal for both the demonstrators who were looking to generate news, and the media looking to convey drama.

How did the International Media Cover the Story?

In its hyper coverage of the Gezi events, international media demonstrated a commitment to political and commercial interests, rather than understanding the ins and outs of Turkish society. Although the demonstrators never reached more than 2,000, the international media nonetheless portrayed them as mass protests, even as acts of rebellion, against the government. The gap between the actual events and their presentation was troubling, as if the media, rather than covering the events, covered up the true reality of what was taking place. Orientalist and Islamophobic images and idioms were evoked in the "coverage" For instance, the media looked away from what percentage supported the government's position, and rather highlighted that "49 percent did not vote for Erdogan." Moreover, there was a tendency or desire to portray these events as the Turkish version of the "Arab Spring." The protesters did indeed call for Erdogan's resignation, as did people for Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in Tunisia, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, and Moammar Gadhafi in Libya. However, they failed to recognize the many reasons why Turkey is not Egypt, Libya or Tunis. Furthermore, aside from differences in governance, it is important to point out that the protesters were Turks, not Tunisians, Egyptians or Libyans. A proper coverage of the international media's own work would have given much reason to suspect that major European powers supported the demonstrations and were looking to suggest the emergence of a political crisis in Turkey. There seemed to be clear incentives for European powers to tarnish Turkey's international standing in consideration of the ongoing competition over goods in Russia, Asia and the Middle East. Although on the rise, Turkey has been openly excluded from the EU process due to its cultural identity. The concern over the successful blend of Islam and democracy is not only European, but shared by the oil-rich Arab monarchies of the Gulf. It may be that under rising Turkish success, certain media outlets seek to highlight its failures. In order to understand the European media coverage of the Gezi park incidents, one must consider references to old Orientalist images and the dehumanization of the Muslim-Turks. (6)

The misrepresentation of Erdogan's standing in Turkish society was an inherent theme throughout media coverage, which failed to mention that Erdogan is still the most powerful and respected leader with a strong majority support. Erdogan maintains popularity among 50% of Turks with respect to economic development and stability. Moreover, Erdogan expanded his power base during each election, due to his sustained economic growth, the rising standard of living in every part of the country (especially in the most impoverished eastern Anatolia), the deepening Turkish democracy by directing the military into its barracks, and introducing a new reform project to address Turkey's chronic Kurdish problem, which has claimed thousands of lives and large economic resources. Erdogan has been successful in building roads, ports, a new railroad system, updating the healthcare system, and continuing to expand the infrastructure of the education system. In response, more and more people have cemented his legitimacy by voting for him. He has transformed the Turkish economy and connected small towns with the global community by building cyber infrastructure and establishing community college-like universities in every provincial capital. As part of Turkey's growing global ties under Erdogan, visa requirements for Turks have been removed in more than 57 countries.

In some manner, Erdogan became the casualty of this phenomenal economic growth in the...