PSIR426

PSIR426Military intervention and the slide into disorder

(1971-80)W 5

The second interruption of civilian rule would come to an end with the October 1973 elections. Even though parliamentary forms and formal legalisms continued to prevail in this period, they could not provide sufficient cover for torture and imprisonment and liberal bodies such as Council of Europe explicitly criticized the military regime.

W

Military intervention and slide into disorder (1971-80)

Why? The immediate excuse of the 1971

intervention was the urban unrest created by the rising workers’ and students’ movements.

Soon after, the TİP (Turkish Workers Party)

was closed down on 20 July 1971. Yet there were no actions undertaken against the terrorists of the right and the MHP, under whose aegis they worked.


Turkey signed a new agreement with the IMF in 1970 as a response to high-inflation, balance-of-payments deficits and poor foreign exchange position. As a result of the foreign debt aggravating at the end of the 1960s, the international organisations such as the OECD and IMF started to advise Turkey to devalue the Turkish lira and take measures to promote exports.


The measures necessitated by Turkey’s agreement with the IMF in 1970 have been especially extended in the two-year period following the intervention.


The economic measures of the 1971 regime had two motives:

The principal aim was to strengthen the position of bourgeoisie vis-a-vis a growing labour movement. Martial law proscribed workers’ strikes and restricted the rights of association.


During the two years which the military was effectively in power, industrial wages that had enjoyed a continuous rise during the previous decade suffered a 10 percent decline.

Secondly, the military regime had a differential impact

favouring big industrial capital. Following the 1971 intervention the economic domination of large industrial capital was consolidated. Thereby this period witnessed an acceleration of the monopolisation process. As example, bank credits were expanded which provided cheap money to business.


Party politics: A historic development took place in the

year 1972, with the pro-establishment CHP’s turn to left under the leadership of Bülent Ecevit. Ecevit took control of the CHP by defeating İsmet İnönü. The party was now able to develop a broader social base by winning some support among workers, peasants, the petty bourgeoisie and the intelligentsia.


In the election campaign, Ecevit promised to defend the small shopkeeper from the predatory advance of the “super market” and the department stores. He promised to create a new sector in which the small producer could invest without being swallowed up by the monopolies.

Ecevit has been successful in gaining the support of

the working class and the left. In September 1973, DİSK appealed to “workers, peasants, artisans, petty officials, and all citizens who were underprivileged to vote for the CHP as the sole party which defended constitutional freedom and democratic rights”.


On the other hand, the major party on the right, Adalet Partisi (AP) the successor of the DP that was banned after the 1960 coup, represented the bourgeoisie. However, the bourgeoisie coalition previously accommodated under the AP flag would soon be undermined by the birth of two new parties; Milliyetçi Hareket Partisi (MHP) and Milli Selamet Partisi (MSP).


The birth of MHP and religiously oriented MSP were the political consequences of industrialization that undermined local small scale industry.At this stage, small entrepreneurs were increasingly feeling the detrimental impacts of monopoly capitalism.

Since the major companies controlled credit and the money market by setting up their own banks to finance their enterprises, the small producer was starved of capital. This led to an increasing number of bankruptcies in the 1960s and 1970s. The number of bankruptcies increased by 20 percent in the course of the year between 1969-1970.


In this sense, the rise of the MSP and MHP undermined the support base of AP by being the expression of the economic discontent of losers of the ISI model.

MSP gathered its support from smaller business interests in the country’s hinterland whereas the MHP capitalized on the discontent of the smallest businesses and socially and economically frustrated small town youths. The common denominator of the two parties was their anti-capitalist rhetoric that can be interpreted as a manifestation of the resentment of the small capital in the face of encroachment of urban monopoly capital.

In time MHP -which took part in two coalition governments- proved to be a major threat to the regime through organizing a movement based on fascist mobilization.


This period was characterized by the political violence caused by extremist left wing groups as well as fascist groups.

However, there was no symmetry between the terrorism of the MHP, supported by the Demirel government and intent upon seizing power, and the adventurous acts of elements of the left, whose terrorism was the product of the innumerable setbacks and disorientation since the military coup of 1971.


Against the mobilization led by the MHP were a coalition of forces:

Labour militancy Variety of democratic forces such as professional

associations of doctors, economists, engineers, technicians, lawyers, professors and teachers came together in this alliance against the MHP. The “democracy rallies” organized by the anti-fascist movement nationwide attracted tens of thousands. Soon after DİSK became the leading organization within this alliance.


In the years 1973 -1980 there has been five changes of government.

None of the parties had an absolute majority

so coalition or minority governments were inevitable. Although these coalition governments took some steps aiming to tackle the economic crisis, it was becoming increasingly difficult to control the mounting political violence in the streets.


In January 1978 Ecevit announced his government, supported by the Independents.

The new government had not only an economic crisis in its hands but also a violent fascist movement that grew increasingly.

Death toll reached to three to four deaths a day during most of 1978. The tense atmosphere finally erupted in a major massacre in Kahramanmaraş at the end of the year, which led to the death of one hundred people. The massacre was MHP orchestrated and targeted the Alewi minority.


Ecevit’s government had to declare martial law reluctantly.

The masses in the provinces under martial law lived under severe repression and this led to general disillusionment with Ecevit’s regime. It was not only the introduction of martial law that caused the disillusionment.


In April 1978, Ecevit administration reached an agreement with the IMF on a two year stand-by with restrictive monetary and fiscal policy, devaluation and better debt management. In other words Ecevit followed the usual remedies to check inflation that placed the burden on the wage earners.

He managed to convince Türk-İş and member unions to agree to restrain wage demands, yet this was denounced by DİSK and in a short time the party lost the support of many workers.


Ecevit was not only losing the support of working class that felt let down and alienated by his acceptance of the arduous austerity program, but he was also increasingly making an enemy of the big bourgeoisie, who was openly critical of government’s policies towards late 1970s.

In the summer of 1979, TÜSİAD started a press campaign targeting the government’s economic policies, criticizing its inability to export, scarcity of foreign exchange, unemployment and inflation. TÜSİAD explicitly expressed its demand for free enterprise and liberal economy. In this sense, bourgeoisie opposed Ecevit’s policy of resisting IMF demands of devaluation.


Oil Crisis (of 1973 that led to increase in the price of oil), and Turkey’s intervention in Cyprus not only aggravated Turkey’s foreign deficit but also made it difficult to obtain foreign credits. The difficulties in obtaining foreign credits led to the processes of production and accumulation coming to a halt.


These developments not only marked the end of ISI but also the class alliances that was peculiar to this era. The rising wages had started to put a pressure on the profits. The industrial bourgeoisie had tolerated the increases in the wages for the sake of the extension of the internal market and high profits.

Yet, as the accumulation process started to face problems, industrial bourgeoisie lost its tolerance. By the end of the 1970s, workers’ struggle grew and intensified. Strikes, factory occupations, student protests and demonstrations marked the years 1978-1980.


In the meanwhile, clash between right wing and left wing militants left thousands dead. This was a period of street violence and assassination of members of parliament, prominent journalists and university professors.

The death toll for 1978-79 reached to 2,500. By the summer of 1980 political murders were guessed to be over 20 per day.


Ecevit’s government came to an end in 1979. Voters showed their disillusionment in the elections of October 1979.

The AP gained the 47 per cent of the vote. Demirel announced his minority government on November 12 1979.


24 January 1980 decisions At the end of the 1970s, Turkish economy was

going through the most severe phase of the crisis. The economy, which had exhibited rates of growth exceeding 7 percent per annum and rates of industrial growth over 10 per cent per annum during the 1960s and early 1970s, had come to a virtual halt in the midst of one of the deepest foreign exchange crises. The rate of unemployment was estimated to be around 20 percent. In 1980, for the second year in a row, the rate of inflation reached to 100 percent.


In these circumstances, Demirel’s government put in force a new stabilisation program on 24 January 1980. 24 January decisions envisaged a reduction in government involvement in productive activities and an increased emphasis on market forces: the replacement of an inward-looking strategy with export promotion policies and the attraction of foreign investment.


The the aim was to build up that sector of the economy which would export and be competitive on the world market. The reforms included abolishing reducing direct government participation in the economy, important steps were taken in the direction of liberalizing the trade regime and the capital account and a decisive shift occured with respect to exchange rate policy.


The provision of a competitive structure involves the reduction of the domestic level of consumption. For this, two things need to be repressed:

Agricultural prices (as they become a source of cheap inputs)

Industrial wages (which primarily become an element of cost of an export-oriented process of accumulation).


However, in an era marked with intensifying class struggle and a situation reminiscent of civil war, it would be difficult to implement these policies by a weak coalition government. This political deadlock coupled with intensifying class struggle, economic crisis and street terror would eventually give way to the 12 September military coup launched in 1980.


PSIR426

Documents

Transcript of PSIR426