T Ü R K İ Y E ' N İ N B İ R İ K İ M İ
|
T Ü R K İ Y E ' N İ N B İ R İ K İ M İ |
| |
| ||
| |||
|
Y A Z A R L A R | 13 ARALIK 2005 SALI | |
| |||
|
| |
Those of us who feel no shame escaping once in a while to the explanatory comfort of Murphy’s Laws would certainly find it understandable: The ruling Justice and Development (AK) Party government in Turkey is a perfect example of those laws’ applicability -- Anything that can go wrong will go wrong for the AK Party government. If it's possible for several things to go wrong, the one that will cause the most damage will be the one to occur. If there's a worse time for something to go wrong, it will happen then. It must have been the time when the government was faced with its first serious crisis, when a train crashed in Pamukova in July 2004, that I found out what was missing and I formulated my first theory: This government lacks the ability to handle crises and has no aptitude for crisis management. The situation was handled so badly that the crash itself was the least of the government’s worries. The government that came into power with overwhelming support a year and a half before was about to collapse due to an ordinary accident which could happen anywhere, anytime. I remember writing at the time that the government had to get its act together by establishing a crisis management team. The latest debate over alcoholic beverages, or rather specially designated public places for its consumption, reminded me of Murphy’s Laws once more. No new application of official regulations is in order, no cities or precincts in them would be set aside as alcoholic zones, nobody would be affected by any decision in the end. But I myself am suspicious when I write that nothing would change and that those who fancy wine or any other alcoholic beverages will drink it anyway in any place designated for the purpose. ’Designated’ is the key word here. Some, when they heard the word designated, were annoyed. As is the case for almost all countries, in Turkey as well, alcoholic beverages are purchased in particular places. This is not new. Landlords apply for a license and when they acquire it they serve alcoholic beverages to clients on their premises. Certain localities, according to their proximity to places of education and worship, are off-limits. Fair enough, I may say. The old rules for determining such designated places are intact but one little rule has changed: Who's to grant licenses for such places? A law was enacted late last year and it delegated issuing licenses to local municipalities. Before that it was the local directorate of the central government that did so. The governor had the last word as he's an appointee. Now it's up to local municipalities to decide on designated areas for pubs and other places where alcoholic beverages are served. The recent fuss over alcohol is rooted in this single rule change. Those creating a fuss over the issue haven't accepted the assurances or promises from the government or the local authorities that there will be no change to the application of the basic rules. The interior minister came forward to answer allegations and even Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan himself intervened to clear up misunderstandings, with no significant success. The only allegation with any real meaning for suspicions of the local municipalities’ intentions is their reluctance to serve alcoholic beverages in their own local restaurants and official establishments. Under the Turkish Constitution (Article 58), the state has the obligation to protect youngsters from addictions dangerous to their health, including alcohol addiction. With this obligation in mind, the establishments officially belonging to municipalities do not offer alcoholic beverages. This application started when conservatives were elected as mayors, and the very first to apply this rule was Tayyip Erdogan himself when he was elected mayor of Istanbul in 1994. How many establishments or eateries belonging to municipalities are there in any given city? In Istanbul there are several old historical buildings serving as restaurants. In a city harboring thousands of restaurants with wine and other beverage menus, those several are only havens for conservative patrons who only enjoy an alcohol-free environment. In Anatolia, since a great many municipalities do not have any establishments or localities belonging to them, there is no cause for concern. Tempest in a teacup, eh? It may create no anxiety in any country or for any government, but in Turkey since the AK Party is in power this non-issue has escalated into a major crisis. Then, suddenly I sensed that my second theory has come to fruition: This government lacks not only the brain to manage crises, but it also lacks an early warning system. Any sensible political entity could have foreseen that a change of venue for license issuance would create a problem and have prepared for it, but not this government, which lacks an early warning system. Since it also lacks the necessary bodies to manage an emerging crisis, a non-issue can cause a great deal of furor and anxiety. Anything that can go wrong will go wrong here. If there is a possibility of several things going wrong, the one that will cause the most damage will be the one to go wrong. If there is a worse time for something to go wrong, it will happen then. Long live Murphy! When something happens in Turkey nowadays, we have to prepare for the worst.
From The New Anatolian, 13 December 2005
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||
|
|
Ana Sayfa |
Gündem |
Politika |
Ekonomi |
Dünya |
Kültür |
Spor |
Yazarlar Televizyon | Sağlık | Bilişim | Diziler | Künye | Arşiv | Bize Yazın |
|
| Bu sitede yayınlanan tüm materyalin her hakkı mahfuzdur. Kaynak gösterilmeden çoğaltılamaz. © Yeni Şafak Tasarım ve içerik yönetimi: Yeni Şafak İnternet Servisi |
