TÜRKİYE ORTA ASYA HABER KKUORDİNATÖRÜ

WORLD SOCIAL DEMOCRATS PLATFORM - WORLD SOCIAL DEMOCRATS FOUNDATION: SWEDEN: Malmö Turkey Under Erdoğan: An Increasingly Weakened State ABSTRACT The fundamental paradox of contemporary authoritarianism is how the concentration of power in the hands of a seemingly omnipotent executive branch can create a weak state. After the twin earthquakes of February 6, 2023, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan promised to be efficient and decisive. However, disaster management was characterized by delayed decision-making, weak coordination, limited capacity for rapid mobilization and communication, and an emphasis on narrative control rather than effective implementation. This demonstrates how personalistic rule hollows out state institutions and reveals the limits of good governance. Throughout the 2017 Constitutional Referendum campaign, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan promised that the national transition toward an extreme presidential system would deliver efficiency and decisiveness. He argued that centralizing power would overcome bureaucratic tutelage, accelerate decision-making processes, and provide stability. Despite his claims, the government's response to the twin earthquakes of February 6, 2023, tells a different story. The earthquakes affected 14 million people in eleven provinces, killed over 50,000, and destroyed tens of thousands of buildings. At the moment when coordinated state action was most urgently needed, the system paralyzed. Decision-making slowed, coordination faltered, and institutions struggled to act effectively. The earthquakes thus revealed a paradox: the concentration of power in an all-powerful leader created an increasingly ineffective state. Since 2018, broad presidential powers over appointments, institutional design, and the budget have concentrated power in the presidency. This extreme centralization weakens state capacity by prioritizing loyalty over merit to secure political support. The appointment of loyal individuals not only erodes competence and professionalization but also encourages micromanagement. Conversely, the reduction of state autonomy discourages talented bureaucrats from taking initiative because they know they can easily be replaced. Thus, while loyal individuals cannot act autonomously because they lack competence, talented bureaucrats cannot act because they are politically vulnerable. Turkish bureaucracy rewards loyalty over merit Modern bureaucracies are based on expertise and professional norms. However, under an overly presidential system, key public offices are increasingly filled through nepotism, where political loyalty replaces competence. The Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency (AFAD), responsible for coordinating disaster response, exemplifies this shift. Its management consists of centrally appointed officials with limited disaster management expertise. Critics describe the institution as a 'family farm' dominated by political allies with party or family ties. The Turkish Red Crescent was embroiled in controversy when it emerged that it had sold thousands of tents to a charity instead of distributing them directly to survivors in the early days of the disaster. Despite intense public outcry, its president remained in office for months, only resigning after losing the support of the ruling party's elite. These cases are part of a broader pattern that has become apparent since the transition to a presidential system in 2018. The Turkish Court of Accounts has documented widespread politically motivated appointments across the bureaucracy, stating that such appointments 'threaten the effective functioning of Türkiye's public administration.' A climate of fear and inertia in the Turkish government Effective governance also requires a degree of bureaucratic autonomy to adapt to changing circumstances within defined powers. Under Erdoğan's centralized rule, bureaucratic discretion has been replaced by the expectation of complete compliance. Ministers and senior officials are becoming increasingly dependent on the president's approval, even for routine decisions, knowing that taking initiative without authorization carries political risk, while obedience ensures their survival. This hierarchical structure creates a climate of fear and inertia within the state. During the 2023 earthquakes, officials at all levels—AFAD personnel, provincial governors, municipalities, and military units—waited for instructions from the presidency. The presidency's insistence that all coordination pass through AFAD's central command slowed mobilization during the critical first hours when survival rates were highest. Survivors in heavily affected provinces reported delayed arrivals of AFAD teams, while trained volunteers were told to wait for official authorization before intervening. Military units, historically central to disaster logistics and response, were deployed more slowly and over much longer distances.