The EconomistJune 29th 2019 Leaders 13W
hat didhe think he was playing at? When Turkey’s auto-
cratic president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, strong-armed his
country’s electoral watchdog into annulling the result of a may-
oral election his party had lost in March, it looked like an obvious
blunder. Surely, many observers thought, the people of Istanbul
would furiously resent having their votes overruled, and flock in
bigger numbers than before to support the opposition man, Ek-
rem Imamoglu? Unless, of course, Mr Erdogan had a sinister plan
up his sleeve to rig the new election.
He did not—or at least not one bold enough to cope with how
voters in Turkey’s largest and richest city gave the challenger an
emphatic victory on June 23rd, by 54% to 45%, far more than his
earlier, slender margin of 0.2%. Democracy,
though ailing in Turkey, is not yet dead.
Mr Imamoglu’s fortitude is hard to overstate.
Standing up to Mr Erdogan’s repressive regime
can be dangerous (see Europe section). Dozens
of Kurdish mayors have been locked up, as have
tens of thousands of people, many of them in-
nocent, whom Mr Erdogan suspects of involve-
ment in, or support for, the failed coup of 2016,
masterminded by members of the Gulenist movement.
The road ahead for Mr Imamoglu is strewn with obstacles. Mr
Erdogan will no doubt fear that a successful mayor of Istanbul
will attract support. People are already talking about the new
man as a contender for the presidency, not least because Mr Er-
dogan himself once trod a similar path, using a stint as mayor of
Istanbul in the 1990s as a stepping-stone to national power.
For Mr Erdogan those days are long gone. Istanbul’s people
have made it clear they want change. The president has become a
liability to his country. His repression of dissidents has poi-
soned relations with the eu, and choked off opportunities for
more trade and investment between Turkey and the giant, rich
economy on its doorstep. His decision, confirmed again this
month, to push ahead with the purchase of Russian air-defencetechnology has infuriated America, Turkey’s most important
natoally. Fearing that Russia will take advantage of the deal to
test its tracking systems on American stealth fighters, thereby
learning how to counter them, America has suspended delivery
of its planes to Turkey and is no longer training Turkish pilots.
Unless President Donald Trump grants a waiver, further sanc-
tions are likely. These will hurt the Turkish economy, which is al-
ready fragile, owing in large part to the president himself. It
emerged earlier this year from a brief recession, but is expected
to undergo a double-dip shortly. The Turkish lira has lost 40% of
its value over the past two years, because of a credit boom that
has been allowed to run out of control. The president insists that
high interest rates would increase inflation—an
eccentric view that economists dismiss out of
hand. Inflation hovers near 20%. Mr Erdogan is
unlikely to get robust advice from his finance
minister, who happens to be his son-in-law.
The central government will probably make
life tricky for Mr Imamoglu. As the ruling ak
party controls 25 of Istanbul’s 39 districts and
has a majority on its municipal assembly, that
will not be hard. Mr Erdogan could mess with Istanbul’s funding,
tie Mr Imamoglu up in red tape or even find some legal pretext to
prosecute him. The president would be better advised to leave
him alone. Anything that harms Istanbul, the centre of Turkish
commerce and tourism, will harm the country as a whole.
The fact remains, though, that Mr Erdogan is in charge. He
won his presidential election by a solid majority last year, and
his akparty, together with its hardline nationalist allies, the
mhp, has a lock on parliament. Another election is not due for
four years. In the short term, change will have to come from
within ak. There is some sign of it. Rumours swirl that Abdullah
Gul, a former president, and Ahmet Davutoglu, a former prime
minister, are considering setting up a breakaway party or parties.
Mr Imamoglu’s success ought to stiffen their resolve. 7Democracy bites back
Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s attempt to annul the mayoral result in Istanbul meets the contempt it deservesTu r ke yI
s american inactionon climate change going to renderbits
of the planet uninhabitable by 2100? Or will Americangritand
ingenuity lower the risks? There is evidence for bothviews.
While the White House was issuing an edict seeking toofferre-
lief to coal-fired power stations last week, New York’s statelegis-
lature was passing a bill that called on the state to eliminatecar-
bon emissions by 2050. America’s political divide oftencreates
split-screen moments. For the 7.3bn people who live beyondthe
country’s borders, this one matters more than most.
America is often denounced as a laggard on climatechange.
The reality is less bad than that suggests. More than halfofallAmericansnowliveinstatesthathavechampionedlegislation
toreducegreenhouse-gasemissions.InthepastyearCalifornia,
Colorado,Maine,NewJersey,NewMexicoandWashingtonhave
alljoinedtheclubofstateswithpoliciestodecarboniseelectric-
itygeneration.OregonandNewYorklooksettojointhem.
Thosewhothinkglobalwarmingisnotman-madeare,inev-
itably,opposedtostatessettinglong-rangetargetstodecarbo-
nisetheeconomy.Evensomewhoaccepttheoverwhelmingsci-
entificconsensushavetheirdoubts.Targetsarenotthebestway
togoaboutreductions,theyargue.A carbonpricewouldbebet-
ter.Marketforcesare alreadyreducing carbonemissions,asStates’ rights
America is not sucha laggardonclimatechangeasitseemsClimate change1