A Comparative Study of Israeli and Turkish Cases of “Security-Driven Populism”

• In Event: Autocratic Dynamism and Democratic Backsliding in MENA

Abstract

According to the prevalent definition of populism, as articulated by Mudde and Rovira-Kaltwasser in their ideational approach, populism can be characterized as a thin-centered ideology that perceives society as fundamentally divided into two homogeneous and antagonistic groups: "the pure people" and "the corrupt elite." Populists claim to represent the general will of the "people" grounded in this Manichean perspective, frequently channeling public discontent towards shared adversaries, including elites and political rivals, by leveraging preexisting (albeit exaggerated) social anxieties (Mudde 2017; Mudde and Rovira-Kaltwasser 2013, 2018).
While existing literature on populism suggests that the social anxieties manipulated by populists are typically either economic or cultural, Levi and Agmon (2021) have introduced a novel category termed "security-driven populism" in their analysis of the Israeli case. Unlike populism motivated by economic or cultural clashes, security-driven populism is rooted in tensions related to national security. This paper contends that Turkey represents another instance of security-driven populism. Despite the extensive body of literature on Turkish populism, this study marks the first endeavor to examine it through the lens of "security-driven populism." Thus, the objective of this paper is to conduct a comparative analysis of Likud populism in Israel and AKP populism in Turkey. Based on interviews conducted with the Israeli and Turkish political elite and security bureaucrats between 2019 and 2021, the focus will be on how both of these governing populist parties construct their discourse around "national security" issues concerning their significant minority groups, namely Arabs and Kurds, and how this has contributed to the erosion of democracy and human rights in both countries.
We will argue that the Israeli and Turkish cases are similar as they are both deeply securitized countries. National security is a paramount concern in both countries and “terrorism” is identified as an existential societal problem. Parallel to Israel, where Israeli Arabs, a significant minority group, are part of a national collective in conflict with the majoritarian ethnic group, Turkey has Kurds as a large minority associated with the perceived national enemy—Kurdish terrorists, represented by organizations like PKK and YPG. Firstly, in both countries, the security issue, namely terrorism, is amplified and sensationalized to heighten public anxieties. Populist governments position themselves as the exclusive solution capable of effectively addressing this problem. Secondly, akin to how Likud marginalizes left-wing parties and pro-human rights NGOs, the Kurdish party and individuals or organizations expressing concerns about the Kurdish problem or human rights issues in Turkey are delegitimized and labeled as terrorists or supporters of terrorism. Right-wing governments in both nations equate dissenting voices within society with external enemies, framing political opposition as an act of betrayal. Thirdly, drawing on the concept of "securitization," defined as "the process by which an issue becomes defined as a 'security issue,' understood as an existential threat... requiring in response the adoption of exceptional emergency measures" (Rushton, 2018), both Israel and Turkey witness the implementation of extreme military measures by populist governments in the pursuit of enhanced "security," suppression of the political opposition, de-democratization of the political regime by assaulting democratic institutions like judiciary and civil society organizations, and the resultant deterioration of the human rights situation.
Therefore, Israel and Turkey present intriguing cases of populism characterized by a predominant emphasis on "security." These cases defy simplistic categorizations within the conventional typologies of populism, highlighting the unique and complex nature of their populist governments.

Authors

• Yonca Özdemir, College Of William & Mary

• Asli Elitsoy, University of Copenhagen