Police barricade in Gezi Park – one of the last green spaces in Istanbul’s Beyoğlu district and an “oasis” in Taksim Square, a large stone plaza of mostly open space with a few statues, fountains and entrances to underground stations (May 2013). Credit: Wikimedia Commons

By Tessa Love
ISTANBUL, Oct 14 2014 (IPS)

A year after the Gezi Park uprising – a protest that began as an act to save trees – exploded into anti-government riots around the country, sparking cohesive community efforts to fight urban sprawl, the face of environmental activism and awareness in Turkey has changed.

“It’s no coincidence that the demonstrations were ignited by an ecological issue, by concerns of urban development,” said Morat Ozbank, an assistant professor of political theory at Bigli University and a board member of the Turkish Green Party. “And this later became an issue of human rights and democratisation.”

At 11 pm on May 27, 2013, bulldozers moved into Gezi Park – one of the last green spaces in Istanbul’s Beyoğlu district and an “oasis” in Taksim Square, a large stone plaza of mostly open space with a few statues, fountains and entrances to underground stations.  They were there to clear the trees for the controversial construction of an Ottoman-era style shopping mall.“The mega-projects are disastrous for Istanbul. All development is hurting something. Urban planning is a rational profession, but the government does not listen to this rationale. They take our public spaces and sell them for construction” – Akif Burak Atlar, secretary to the board at the Turkish Chamber of Urban Planners

Within 20 minutes, throngs of people filled the park to block the construction, and they stayed for 20 days before being forced out by police.

The proposed shopping mall was just one of a long list of mega-projects spearheaded by Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Other projects include a third bridge across the Bosphorus, a tunnel for private vehicles beneath the same waterway, the world’s largest airport, and a second Bosphorus on the Asian side of the city.

Many of these projects are being carried forward despite opposition from bodies such as the Union of Chambers of Turkish Engineers and Architects (TMMOB), which is responsible for assessing the potential impact of proposed projects and advising against those that could be detrimental to the environment.

According to Akif Burak Atlar, secretary to the board at the Turkish Chamber of Urban Planners, all of these projects fit that description.

“The mega-projects are disastrous for Istanbul,” he says. “All development is hurting something. Urban planning is a rational profession, but the government does not listen to this rationale. They take our public spaces and sell them for construction.”

Atlar believes that every neighbourhood in Istanbul should legally have a certain amount of green space to uphold urban planning standards. Nevertheless, public parks are being destroyed and, beyond the city limits, miles of wild forests have been destroyed to make way for the third bridge and the second Bosphorus.

While all of these projects had elicited outcries from various small organisations and legal action from TMMOB before May 2013, nothing came close to the response at Gezi Park.

“Gezi was a unique moment is Turkish history,” says Atlar. “There was no leader, no formal organisation. It was an awakening.”

One year later, this movement is still alive and although policies regarding urban planning have not changed at governmental level, grassroots organisations have joined forces in the hope of making changes where they can.

One of these – Northern Forest Defence – is a movement organised by free volunteers to defend the last forests of northern Istanbul. Known as the “Child of Gezi,” it works to halt the development of mega projects like the third bridge, as well as working within small communities to stop the destruction of public parks for development.

While many of these efforts are small, Cigdem Cidamli, a founding member of the organisation, believes that they are essential to the progress of urban defence. “Small movements can’t change as much as big movements,” she says, “but we can’t have big movements without the small ones. So now we are trying to create more integrated channels of solidarity.”

Cidamli, Atlar and Ozbank all agree that the integration of organisations is the most recognisable accomplishment of Gezi so far. Many neighbourhoods now have an urban defence group to discuss a wide range of issues including urban development.

Many of these groups have come together to form larger organisations such as Taksim Solidarity, Istanbul Urban Defence and Northern Forest Defence.

One small group, Caferaga Dayanismasi, is a collective in the Kadikoy neighbourhood that conducts meetings and organises activist movements from a “squat” – an abandoned building that members have occupied and are renovating.

Bahadir, a member of the squat, says that the best thing they have done as a group is to have occupied and cultivated an empty lot that was going to be turned into a car park. Now it is a community vegetable garden where neighbours, both the young and the old, get their hands dirty.

Cidamli is thankful to Gezi for this development. “After Gezi, people are looking inward to create solidarity in small ways,” she says. “We can’t have Gezi every day. So, instead, we cultivate tomatoes.”

With this growth in community-minded activism, Bahadir says that the city cannot cut down a single tree without sparking a protest.

But so far, the only major development that has successfully been halted is the shopping mall at Gezi.

“The funny thing is, they can’t do anything in Taksim Square right now,” says Ozbank with a smile. “They can’t touch anything … not even to beautify the place.”

(Edited by Phil Harris)

A woman collapses in front of a police barricade during one of the Occupy Gezi protests. Credit: Arzu Geybulla/IPS

By Ariam Frezghi
ISTANBUL, Jul 13 2013 (IPS)

Among the many issues bringing protestors together at Gezi Park, the now-iconic site of struggle in Istanbul’s Taksim Square, is the demand for women’s liberation.

Coming from many walks of life and expressing a myriad of ideals and values, the women of the Occupy Gezi Movement have nevertheless voiced a collective desire: to fight the undercurrent of deeply entrenched patriarchal values and reclaim autonomy over their own bodies and lifestyles.

These demands are now coalescing around proposed legislation from the country’s Health Ministry that will call on pharmacies to limit the sale of oral contraception known as the morning-after pill only to those with a doctor’s prescription, a practice that is uncommon for most drugs available to the public here.

Under Turkey’s conservative-leaning Justice and Development Party (AKP) government, women are encouraged to have at least three children to help maintain population growth rates.

Feminists and women’s rights groups representing almost 400 people say the new legislation is part of government attempts to impose traditional values onto their lifestyle, and will only reinforce stereotypes about the “ideal” Turkish woman, while stigmatising those who stray from this image.

“I can’t go to the family doctor (for my contraceptive needs) because it is a secretive issue for me,” said Merve Kosar, a 26-year-old Istanbulite who relies on the pharmacy to replenish her supply of the drug.

In Turkey, most non-narcotic drugs are available for purchase over the counter. Insisting on a prescription from a family doctor, who can report to other members of the family, places added pressure on women to conform to conservative mores.

Women like Kosar, who make the conscious decision to have sex before marriage, are worried about having fewer options to guard against unwanted pregnancies.

Nearly 34 percent of once-married and currently married women said they use morning-after pills as their main form of contraception, according to the 2008 Turkey Demographic and Health Survey.

Still, the possibility of parliament passing the bill under a larger package of reforms sometime this year seems likely and concerns women’s rights groups who say the announcement will hinder some from asking pharmacies for pills.

An article in the Hurriyet Daily News cited a notice from the Health Ministry, which stated that “growth hormones, antibiotics, antidepressants, and antihistamines” must be sold with a doctor’s prescription to reduce the misuse of drugs.

According to Zerrin Guker, a pharmacist in the commercial neighbourhood of Karakoy who sells 15 to 20 boxes of the morning-after pill per month, some customers have been misusing the drug by purchasing it a few times per week, which can cause hormonal side effects.

A 27-year-old protestor named Elif, who declined to give her last name for fear of retribution, said she suffered blood clots and nausea after taking the pill once; yet she still believes in a woman’s right to choose and says the government’s proposed restriction is designed to prevent unmarried women from having sexual relationships.

“Most women can’t even buy tampons or feminine products from stores because they are ashamed,” she told IPS, stressing that the culture of shame has become entrenched in society.

A long fight to overturn these attitudes is slowly showing results: ideals about abstinence until marriage, for instance, are shrinking, as women continue to speak out about their grievances with men including harassment and sexist swearing, practices that have infiltrated the Occupy Gezi Movement.

At a recent meeting in Yogurtçu Park in Istanbul’s Kadikoy district, more than 100 women gathered to discuss their experiences at Gezi Park.

One protestor said a drunken man grabbed her buttocks one night, while bystanders justified his actions saying he had been under the influence.

Another woman read out a list of complaints with the governing party, which included attempts to get rid of “dekolte” (low-cut dresses) and state attempts to ban abortions and “keep women at home.”

A year ago, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan called for tighter restrictions on reproductive health by drafting a bill that would shorten the time period in which women can have an abortion from 10 weeks to eight weeks.

“There is no difference between killing the foetus in a mother’s womb or killing a person after birth,” Erdogan said in a speech before female politicians in the capital, Ankara, last year.

His words drew the ire of around 3,000 to 4,000 protestors, mostly women, who marched against the anti-abortion law in Kadikoy last June, waving banners proclaiming statements such as: “It is my body, so who are you?”

When abortion became legal in 1983, the Turkish Population and Health Survey found that 37 percent of once-married Turkish women had at least one abortion. As of 2008, that figure stood at 14.8 abortions per 1,000 women.

While the latest call to limit oral contraception has yet to spark demonstrations, many believe it will eventually ignite the tensions that have been simmering for years now.

Ayse Dunkan, journalist and activist, believes the outcry will pick up momentum, with more people rebelling against the “conservative concept (that) women (must) stay home and raise children.”

Such ideals, she told IPS, have resulted in Turkey having the world’s second highest population growth rate after China.

Selime Buyukgoze, a volunteer at Mor Cati, an Istanbul-based network for battered women, called the proposal “problematic” since the morning-after pill must be taken within 72 hours of having unprotected sex and few women will be able to reach their doctors that soon.

Like most others, though, her biggest fear is that doctors will break a woman’s confidence by reporting her lifestyle to the family.

Ahmet Kaya, a family doctor who sees almost 150 patients a week, rebukes that claim. “If your patient doesn’t want you to inform her family, you can’t make that call,” he told IPS.

At the moment, pharmacies are continuing to sell the pill without asking for a prescription

It remains to be seen whether or not the government will push ahead with the law, or whether it will respond to the will of more than 1.5 million female protesters.

Protestors in Turkey’s Gezi Park show no signs of backing down. Credit: akli denge-Mental Balance/CC-BY-2.0

By Jacques N. Couvas
ANKARA, Jun 8 2013 (IPS)

Now approaching its third week, the “Occupy Taksim” movement, a peaceful sit-in to save Istanbul’s Gezi Park from redevelopment, has taken on a festival-like atmosphere, with protesters organising to stand guard around the clock, provide uninterrupted food and water supplies, and carry out a self-initiated cleaning of the grounds.

As the demonstrators grow more settled, however, the government has not changed its position towards them.

Upon his return from the Maghreb at 1:40 am Friday, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan reiterated his initial decision to demolish Gezi Park. He did not cede to public requests that he apologise for police violence used to disperse protesters and show greater respect for individual fundamental rights and freedom of expression.

“The police are doing their duty. These protests, which have turned into vandalism and utter lawlessness, must end immediately,” Erdoğan declared.

Addressing thousands gathered at Istanbul’s Ataturk airport in the early hours of Friday, he blamed terrorists, Marxists, the opposition and foreign conspirators for the unrest and its immediate economic consequences.

“No power but Allah can stop Turkey’s rise,” he said, in a speech that often referred to the importance of individual and state compliance with divine principles. “May Allah preserve our fraternity and unity.”

In a reference to the chief executive of a leading Turkish bank, who said this week that he was one of the “marauders”, a term Erdogan used to describe the demonstrators, the prime minister said, “If a general manager of a bank voices support for those organising this [Gezi] vandalism, he will find us standing against him.”

Erdogan also condemned intellectuals, saying, “Those who call themselves journalists, artists, politicians, have, in a very irresponsible way, opened the way for hatred, discrimination and provocation.”

Shared blame

Later in the morning, Turkish President Abdullah Gul sent a different message while speaking to a group of visiting foreign students on the importance of the respect of  “otherness”.

“Efforts to oppress one another become the source of many sufferings and conflicts,” Gul said.

On Thursday evening, Fetullah Gulen, a popular Turkish Islamic scholar, made a much-awaited speech on the Taksim crisis from Pennsylvania, where he has confined himself for over a decade.

Gulen urged authorities not to underestimate and overlook protests, saying, “We share blame” for the unrest. He frequently used “we” to refer to members of his movement in particular and repeatedly blamed his movement for doing too little to eliminate problems Turkish society faces, particularly on an ethical level.

Gulen supported Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) at its inception but began to distance himself from it in 2010.

Gulen’s speech fell short of admonishing the government for its handling of the crisis and seemed to support Erdogan’s stance – that elections are the only way to change the situation. Many of Gulen’s followers, who include journalists and academics, had expected a clearer position on fundamental rights.

Opposition criticism

Observers here fear that the deadlock between the prime minister and protesters will only prolong the Taksim movement.

Turkey’s political opposition has thus far abstained from adding fuel to the fire through statements or rallies, and in an exclusive interview with IPS, Faruk Logoglu, deputy chairman of the major opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) and vice-chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee of the Turkish Grand National Assembly (TBMM), rebuffed Erdogan’s accusations that the opposition had instigated the Taksim demonstrations.

CHP is the country’s oldest political party, established in 1919 by Turkey’s founder Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, and officially registered in 1923.

In the interview (full version available here), Logoglu also outlined the risks for the country should the government continue on its current course vis-à-vis Turkey’s secular middle class.

Logoglu believed the current minimum requirement for restoring social peace would be for Erdogan to personally apologise for the acts of the police and his ministers, governors and chiefs of security responsible for managing the conflict on the field.

He called on the prime minister to officially commit to changing state policies with respect to human rights, privacy of citizens, and freedom of expression, demonstration and choice of lifestyle.

Logoglu, a former career diplomat and ambassador to Washington, also suggested that the current discontent with a large part of the population stems from its frustration with government’s foreign policy.

Logoglu claimed that CHP proposed a detailed plan 18 months ago for a diplomatic solution to the Syrian crisis. “If the Prime Minister had been open to discuss[ing] the initiative,” Logoglu suggested, “Turkey would have gained recognition as a serious mediator and the Syrian population would have been spared destruction and shedding of blood.”

As protests in Turkey stretch into their second week, the precise terms and conditions that could bring the social unrest to an end are unclear, though many speculate about what would end the deadlock between the government and protesters.

In an exclusive interview with IPS correspondent Jacques N. Couvas, Faruk Logoglu, deputy chairman of the major opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), discussed the current crisis in Turkey and the conditions he believed the government would have to fulfill to end the crisis.

Faruk Logoglu, deputy chairman of the Republican People’s Party (CHP) in Turkey. Photo courtesy of the CHP

In the 2011 general elections, CHP received 26 percent of the vote. It is the second largest party in the Turkish parliament, with 134 of 550 seats. Logoglu is vice chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee of the Turkish Grand National Assembly (TBMM) and a former ambassador to the United States.

Q:  How do you regard Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s accusations that the opposition has been fomenting unrest?

A: This is a ridiculous claim. Demonstrators gathered of their own will and initiative. Neither the CHP nor any other political party has participated in any official capacity.

The protests were a spontaneous manifestation of discontent with the government’s domestic and foreign policies. The population staged a civic uprising to say that enough is enough.

Q: In Tunis on Thursday, the prime minister said that he would proceed with the Ottoman Artillery Barracks project. How do you see this statement as affecting the demonstrators and the crisis in general?

A: Gezi Park is a symbol of a new political dynamic in our country that says, “Either you change and respect democracy and human rights, or we will continue.” The  [ruling] Justice and Development Party AKP had better understand what is happening in Turkey before it is too late. If they take the wrong steps, everyone will pay a high price.

Things were not going so well – before and after these demonstrations – in foreign policy, society, economy and other areas. If the government uses repressive totalitarian methods, my prognosis is that unrest will continue.

Our party has no control over the demonstrators. There are certainly members of our movement who demonstrate in their capacity as private citizens, but not to our knowledge nor under the CHP banner. The same applies to other parties.

Many protesters have no party affiliation but are associated with organisations with professional and intellectual affinities, such as unions, trade associations or universities.

Q: Foreign commentators have likened the Taksim and Gezi Park demonstrations to the Arab Spring’s beginnings. How do you regard this comparison?

A: What is going on these days in Istanbul and the rest of Turkey is not the Arab Spring, the Arab Revolution or the Orange Revolution.

The main difference is that we already had democracy. CHP has underlined the existence of Turkish democracy as a system for months. We already said, before the events, that democracy could not be taken away from us.

Q: What tangible remedies does CHP propose to resolve the present conflict?

A: The demonstrations started peacefully and must end peacefully. Those responsible for turning a sit-in into a social conflict should make the first move of appeasement.

When a British solder was murdered in London, the British prime minister, David Cameron, cut short his official visit to France. He did this for a single individual. Yet when Turkey is ablaze, the prime minister went to visit Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia. It doesn’t make sense.

The first order of business is for the Turkish prime minister to go on TV and apologise to the Turkish people for the brutal use of force by the police, for his insistence on razing a park in Istanbul to build a shopping centre, and to admit that he was wrong.

He should repent and ask for forgiveness by the people, but that may not be enough to restore peace. He will have to change his policies, which violate human rights in terms of freedom of speech, of media, of communication, of assembly, of demonstration, of individual privacy of life. These are part of the reality of what Turkish people want to live.

We expect that the European Parliament will give clear support to our citizens in this matter.

Q: Supporters of the demonstrators have commented that Turkey’s foreign policy and threats to Syria may have added to the discontent of the middle classes. What is CHP’s policy on foreign relations?

A: From the very start of the Syrian crisis we have taken a position of non-interference in the internal affairs of Syria. Such position aimed at encouraging both the Damascus regime and the Syrian opposition to negotiate in order to chart a peace agreement without foreign intervention.

One and a half years ago, we proposed an international conference, initiated by Turkey, to include the permanent members of the United Nations (U.N.) Security Council, the European Union, the representative of the U.N. secretary-general, the Arab neighbours of Syria, Turkey, and, of course, Iran, the Syrian opposition and the Syrian government. We proposed this not just once, but three times, in writing to the prime minister of Turkey.

Now, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov have agreed on a similar plan. We do support this initiative, but had our party been heard a year and a half ago, better results would have been achieved.

At CHP, we value Syrian people as neighbours. We regard them as relatives.  We don’t want foreign intervention and certainly not military intervention in Syria. We believe the best way out of that crisis is through a political process.

A smashed NTV satellite van in the centre of Taksim Square in Istanbul highlights protesters' frustration with how Turkish media has covered their movement. Credit: Jillian Kestler-D'Amours/IPS

By Jillian Kestler-D'Amours
ISTANBUL, Jun 7 2013 (IPS)

Sitting with hundreds of other protesters in the centre of Istanbul’s Gezi Park Thursday night, Arzu Marsh rummages through her backpack to show off what she calls her makeshift “emergency kit”: medical masks, a red spray-bottle filled with a liquid that lessens the effect of tear gas, a scarf and some food.

But perhaps the most important item is what’s sitting in her lap, and, every few seconds, lights up with incoming text messages: her cell phone.

“I’m from Ankara, so all my friends and all my family are from Ankara, and as soon as I put [photos and videos on] Facebook, everyone saw it, and of course they also shared,” Marsh explained, referring to images of recent anti-government protests in Istanbul.

“Now, we are all following…Facebook or Twitter. We are not following any [traditional] news,” she said.

As spontaneous chants of “Everywhere is Taksim! Everywhere is resistance!” spread through the crowd, and a banner reading “Keep resisting Ankara – we are with you” hung overhead, Marsh told IPS that sharing information on social media about protests across Turkey has not only helped keep activists motivated but also built solidarity across political and geographical divisions."We all follow Facebook or Twitter. We are not following any [traditional] news."
--Arzu Marsh

“Yesterday we heard that… there was a [protest] in Rize, so we had an applause for Rize. It was very emotional, and it motivates you,” she said.

Distrust of traditional media

A smashed, bright yellow, satellite TV truck, belonging to one of Turkey’s leading broadcasters, NTV, sits in the centre of Taksim Square. Its doors are ripped off, windows shattered and tires punctured.

It is also covered in graffiti and highlights protesters’ frustration with the mainstream media in Turkey.

At the height of police violence in Istanbul’s Gezi Park last week, most local television networks ignored the events and instead continued with their regular programming, including cooking and travel shows.

While these same stations are now reporting on the protests – and NTV issued an apology for its initial lack of coverage – activists say social media continues to fill an important void and is the primary source of information for many.

“There’s a new, young generation that does not trust mainstream media broadcasts and they seek information that is independent and objective,” explained Emrah Ucar, an Istanbul-based activist who founded a popular social media network, called “Ötekilerin Postasi”, or “The Other Post”.

Indeed, as demonstrations continue across the country against the government’s increasingly authoritarian controls, protesters have developed an elaborate – and often times, humorous and creative – social media network to organise and sustain their protest.

The “Ötekilerin Postasi” now gets 1.7 million clicks per day, Ucar said, and is reaching a more widespread and politically diverse segment of Turkish society than it ever did before.

“What’s most important about social media is making people feel that they are participating in the production of news. When they get this feeling, they make it an issue for themselves and they participate in the commenting and spreading of the news,” he told IPS.

Government policies create ‘chilling effect’

Widespread arrests and detention of journalists, defamation lawsuits and government pressure on critical media outlets and columnists – including Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s publicly calling out journalists for their reporting – has had a “chilling effect” on the Turkish media, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).

Turkey jailed the highest number of journalists worldwide in 2012, often through the use of draconian and easily applied criminal laws. The government has also imposed fines on major media conglomerates, forcing them to sell off assets and downsize their operations, and helped facilitate the transfer of large news outlets to pro-AKP owners.

“We have seen changes in the editorial management of newspapers, firing of critical columnists, and a gradual but consistent shift away from commentary and news that are unpleasant or critical of the government,” Asli Aydıntasbas, a columnist at the daily Milliyet newspaper, told CPJ.

“Newspapers routinely exercise self-censorship and suppress critical information and news—even in the face of declining circulation,” Aydıntasbas added.

According to Selcan Kaynak, a political science professor at Istanbul’s Boğaziçi University, the media’s failure to promptly report on the Gezi Park protests reflects its overall refusal to report on issues that are critical of Turkey’s Justice and Development Party-led (AKP) government.

“It’s really, in one word, hegemony that is being established. There are some critical columnists, or independent newspapers, but they’ve been marginalised. There [have] been very strict controls [of what goes] reported and unreported,” Kaynak told IPS.

Still, the fact that there was a complete media blackout at the start of the recent protests in Istanbul was “shocking”, Kaynak said. “They thought, I guess, that by ignoring this, the rest of Turkey…would have no idea, and it would just go by and they would go on with the usual business.”

Social media ‘menace to society’

According to Aslı Tunç, head of the media and communications department at Istanbul Bilgi University, social media helped give a platform to opposition voices in Turkey that were growing online, even before the protests began.

“This didn’t happen overnight,” Tunç told IPS. “Those voices were there already. But the mainstream media did not cover [them], did not give them a voice on their televisions or [in their] newspapers, and they tried to marginalise [them].”

On Wednesday, 29 people were arrested – and later released without charge – in the city of Izmir for allegedly “inciting riots and conducting propaganda” after posting things about the protests on social media website Twitter.

In a speech last weekend, Erdogan himself called Twitter “a menace to society”. He also said “the best examples of lies can be found there”.

The defiant prime minister, who just returned from a diplomatic visit to North Africa and has refused to back down from his aggressive position against the demonstrations, has also called protesters deviants, extremists, and even looters – “çapulcu”, in Turkish.

In response, protesters quickly re-appropriated the word, and are now proudly calling themselves Çapulcu, using it in posters around Taksim Square, and in photos and updates shared online. Protesters even created a website, called ÇapulTV, where they are live streaming from Gezi Park, while an Anglicised version of the word – “chapulling” – has taken on the new meaning of fighting for your rights.

“[The protesters] proved that Twitter, social media, is a very powerful organisational tool,” Tunç said. “The young people especially proved that social media is part of media now. You cannot ignore the power of social media.”

Protesters gather in Taksim Square in Istanbul, not far from Gezi Park, where protests were sparked last week against the government's most recent urban redevelopment project. Credit: Jillian Kestler-D'Amours

By Jillian Kestler-D'Amours
ISTANBUL, Jun 6 2013 (IPS)

Few imagined that the symbolic act of standing in front of bulldozers in Istanbul’s Gezi Park in an effort to block a development project near the city’s central square would have caused the reaction it did.

The defiant act – and the Turkish police’s violent response – pushed thousands of Turks out into streets across the country over the last week to decry their government’s increasingly authoritarian controls, lack of public accountability, police violence and numerous urban development projects that are irreversibly changing the face of the country.

For many, the plans to uproot trees in Gezi Park are just the latest in a long string of urban projects that ignore the cultural and historic heritage of Istanbul. More over, these projects are built at the expense of the poor and fail to consider residents’ input.

“The poorer people are being driven out of the centre of the city and pushed to the edges,” explained Kevin Robins, an Istanbul-based urban planning researcher. “On the other hand, [there is] the taking over of more and more inner-city areas for the young, affluent middle-class.”

“The mixture…of classes that existed in Istanbul is now being eroded quite dramatically,” Robins told IPS, describing the phenomenon as “polarisation”."The mixture...of classes that existed in Istanbul is now being eroded quite dramatically."
-- Kevin Robins

“There’s a general feeling that there’s an attack on the way of life,” he added.

According to a report last year in The Guardian, redevelopment projects are slated for some 50 neighbourhoods in Istanbul, and in 2012 alone, 7.5 billion Turkish liras were allocated to urban renewal across the city.

Last week, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister and head of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), unveiled his controversial plan to build a third bridge – a 1,275-metre suspension bridge, with an expected price tag of six billion dollars – across the Bosphorus, linking the European and Asian sides of Istanbul.

Opponents to the plan say the bridge will destroy some of the only remaining green areas in the city and have condemned the government’s lack of consultation with local community groups.

Erdogan has also pushed for building a shipping canal across the Bosphorus, calling it “a project of such immense size that it can’t be compared to the Panama or Suez canals”. In May, the government signed a contract to develop a third airport in Istanbul, with a capacity of 150 million passengers.

In recent years, residents of many Istanbul neighbourhoods, especially those home to impoverished, minority groups, like the Tarlabaşı or Sulukule areas, have also been pushed out to make way for real estate developers and luxury housing projects.

So-called gecekondu neighbourhoods – unlicensed shantytowns established decades ago by migrants from eastern Anatolia who moved to Istanbul for work opportunities – are particularly vulnerable to being displaced for the sake of development, with the government and its agencies not only confiscating land but also evicting and sometimes relocating residents to the city’s outskirts.

According to political scientist Mine Eder, the rapid pace at which the Turkish government has launched these urban redevelopment projects is what sets gentrification in Turkey apart from other developing countries around the world.

“There’s a deliberate demolishing to create more money, and really, to create this exclusionary zone for the rich. There is a whole re-appropriation, re-definition, and privatisation of the public space,” explained Eder, who teaches at Istanbul’s Boğaziçi University and specialises in the impact of gentrification on minority groups in Istanbul.

“[Erdogan’s] vision is driven by this sort of obsession with tourism and Istanbul becoming this big, giant, commercial centre,” Eder told IPS. “That vision is behind that unquestionable bulldozer construction. ‘Bulldozer neo-liberalism’ is a term that sort of encapsulates the whole thing.”

Nor is the government’s aggressive push for urban development projects limited to Istanbul.

On the road leading from the airport to Turkey’s capital city, Ankara, tall apartment blocks are being erected on numerous hilltops, construction cranes pepper the skyline, and huge billboards, sponsored by the government’s housing authority, TOKI, aim to entice potential homeowners.

“It’s happening everywhere. You see quite dramatic changes going on in Anatolian cities now, making them unrecognisable. Istanbul is clearly the dominant focus, but Ankara also has huge expansions, huge developments, and huge middle-class housing areas,” Robins said.

By 2023, the 100th anniversary of the founding of the modern Turkish republic, Turkey hopes to be among the top ten economies of the world and reach a gross domestic product (GDP) of two trillion dollars and 500 billion dollars in exports annually.

According to Eder, the protests in Gezi Park signal a historic moment in the reign of the current AKP government, forming the strongest and most unified opposition movement in recent years to these unsustainable economic and urban development projects.

“Until now, there was absolutely no one who could actually sit, metaphorically, in front of that bulldozer, and say you can’t go in here,” she said. “Now, they’ve done it.”

“Peace at home, peace in the world” is the official motto of the Turkish Republic. Coined in 1931 by the republic’s founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, it implies a causal relationship, but the events this week in Istanbul and dozens of other cities of Turkey suggest that causality can work in reverse order, too.

With protests continuing over the past week, two years of Arab Spring and intense socioeconomic unrest in southern Europe seem to be spilling into Turkey, which until now had stayed out of trouble.

Still, the economy is strong, although not as strong as it has generally been in the past decade. As a result, the similarities Turkey shares with northern and southern Mediterranean countries that are also going through a crisis have more to do with poor leadership.

Financial success, fuelled by foreign direct investment (FDI) in luxury real estate in Istanbul and along Turkey’s Aegean coast and by massive privatisation of state enterprises, has given the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) unparalleled popularity as well as an increasing feeling of invincibility."The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) has unparalleled popularity as well as an increasing feeling of invincibility."

Since AKP’s 2011 electoral victory, this sentiment has translated into diminishing transparency and accountability by key government figures. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, AKP’s leader and the Turkish prime minister, and a handful of close collaborators have ostentatiously disregarded calls by trusted advisors to consider the average citizen’s concerns and be more inclusive of the 50 percent of Turkey’s population that has not voted for AKP.

Lack of government transparency, such as in southern Europe, and arrogance towards citizens and their fundamental freedoms, such as in the Middle East, have paved the way to an explosive manifestation of the sense that enough is enough, resulting in three deaths, over 1,000 injuries and 1,700 arrests.

Some observers claim that the crisis started with a kiss, referring to a ban in May by Ankara’s authorities of displays of affection by couples in public areas that triggered youth demonstrations in the capital. Others point to earlier signs of discontent.

In May 2012 and the following fall, Erdogan challenged women’s rights to abortion and caesarean section for giving birth, repeatedly proclaiming that women should have a minimum of three children. Women’s associations took to the streets.

More recently, the Turkish parliament, where the AKP holds 326 of 550 seats, passed legislation severely restricting the promotion and consumption of alcohol, and Erdogan has promised high taxes on alcoholic drinks.

Secularist Turks, some of whom have voted AKP in past elections because of the government’s economic performance, have begun complaining that Erdogan is interfering with people’s lifestyles in an unacceptable way.

At the same time, citizens are tired of an excessively liberal economy that has increased the income gap between the bourgeoisie and the working classes.

The decision to turn Gezi, the only green park in central Istanbul, into a shopping mall and luxury apartment complex was the trigger rather than the cause of the Gezi revolt. Cumhuriyet Avenue, adjacent to the park, has already been demolished to make way to a large complex of expensive shops, residences and shopping malls, while Taksim Square, a landmark of Istanbul, will be converted to a large mosque.

Independent research by a non-governmental organisation published in 2012 showed that Turkey, with a total population of 75 million, possesses 85,000 mosques, 17,000 of which were built in the past 10 years.

In comparison, the country has 67,000 schools, 1,220 hospitals, 6,300 health care centres and 1,435 public libraries. The annual budget of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism is less than half of that of the Directorate General of Religious Affairs, which represents the Sunni Muslims of the country (80 percent of the population).

FDI that has flowed into Turkey since 2002, mostly from Qatari and Saudi investors and U.S. and Dutch pension funds, has concentrated on speculative high-end real estate projects. The number of shopping malls grew from 46 in 2000 to 300 in 2012. Istanbul alone currently has 2 million square metres of malls under construction, according to CBRE, an international consulting firm.

A series of privatisations announced this year – a railway system, the national airline, major energy state enterprises, the highways and bridges network – will provide funds for undertaking grandiose construction projects: a third bridge over the Bosporus, a third airport in Istanbul, an artificial second Bosporus that will facilitate even more premium real estate developments, and the largest mosque in the Middle East, to be built in Istanbul.

The demonstrations that began ten days ago were spontaneous and peaceful and appeared to reflect citizen frustration with aloof state governance, but the zero-tolerance attitude adopted by the police and incendiary statements by Erdogan and certain ministers have transformed them into an unexpected political crisis that has uncertain implications for Turkish democracy.

IPS has spoken with political personalities and well known journalists who have been reluctant to discuss the situation as it evolves.

The personal secretariat of Fetullah Gulen, a Turkish Muslim theologian and head of a worldwide movement promoting moderate Islam and inter-faith dialogue, told IPS that Gulen will issue a statement at the end of this week. Currently living in self-exile in the state of Pennsylvania in the United States, he is followed by millions of Muslims.

As rallies continued Wednesday and student mobilisation has been announced for Thursday, the Turkish president, Abdullah Gul, and the vice prime minister, Bulent Arinc, both known for political maturity and moderation, have tried to offer limited excuses for police excessive force.

The true litmus test for the evolution of Turkey’s political climate will take place upon Erdogan’s return from North Africa later this week. But statements similar to those he made before his departure, such as “I will press with the Gezi project—if you don’t want a mall I will build a mosque” or labelling the protesters “marauders”, are unlikely to restore social peace.

To old hands in Turkish politics, the current unrest is reminiscent of the hegemonic style of the Democrat Party leadership of the 1950s.

“In 1957, Prime Minister Adnan Menderes and President Celal Bayar were quite confident because they had received 47 percent of the votes in the elections,” said Huseyn Ergun, a veteran politician and current chairman of the Social Democrat Party (SODEP), described.

“They had started to put sanctions on the opposition party and its deputies. They also had an investigation commission in parliament against the opposition and destroyed Istanbul landmarks. You know how all this ended.”

Indeed, their reign ended in 1960 with a military coup, history that Turks are not eager to see repeated in their lifetimes.