Publications by Fellows: Ece Ozbey: What’s Radish Got to Do with Turkish Democracy?

The deployment of “Turpun büyüğü heybede.” serves as a stark allegory for the deepening democratic backsliding in Turkey, where the threat of more severe actions looms large over the opposition and the very foundations of democratic governance. This phenomenon—well-documented by international watchdogs and scholars—entails the gradual erosion of institutions, curtailment of civil liberties, and strategic electoral manipulation.

In this light, the proverb encapsulates the broader pattern: the arbitrary use of legal mechanisms to systematically suppress dissent. İmamoğlu’s case, along with over 100 of his colleagues (including his chief spokesperson Murat Ongun), is not an isolated incident, but rather the latest, “bigger” instance pulled from the saddlebag.

It continues the precedent set by the ongoing persecution and pre-trial detention of prominent figures such as Selahattin Demirtaş, Figen Yüksekdağ, and Ümit Özdağ, as well as the removal of numerous elected district mayors from both the CHP and the pro-Kurdish DEM Party, replaced by government-appointed trustees. Not to mention the systematic targeting of civil society actors, academics, and journalists that has been ongoing for over a decade.

Prosecution or Persecution? The Case against İmamoğlu

The official reasons cited for İmamoğlu’s arrest revolve around a litany of serious allegations, including corruption, extortion, bribery, money laundering, and aiding the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). The dual nature of these charges points to a calculated strategy aimed at maximizing public condemnation and legal repercussions: accusations of financial impropriety resonate with broad swaths of the electorate, while insinuations of PKK ties provoke nationalist sensitivities and justify more stringent measures. The timing further reinforces suspicions of political motivation, coming just days before İmamoğlu was expected to be officially nominated as the CHP’s presidential candidate following an internal primary election. Even with the next elections scheduled for 2028, sidelining a prominent figure in the main opposition and a major contender to Erdoğan preemptively at this stage significantly reshapes the political landscape and undermines the integrity of the democratic process.

Compounding these legal proceedings was the annulment of İmamoğlu’s university diploma days before his arrest, citing irregularities with Council of Higher Education regulations and issues with his transfer from a private university in Northern Cyprus 35 years ago—a decision that, if upheld, would effectively disqualify him from running for president under Turkish law. İmamoğlu has pledged to contest this ruling, but the fact that Istanbul University’s Board of Executive Directors made this decision, overstepping its authority and contradicting an earlier report prepared by the relevant faculty, raises serious concerns about governmental influence, this time over academic institutions.

From Protest to Pushback: The Cost of Defiance

Over the past week, mass protests have erupted across Turkey, with demonstrators taking to the streets in major cities like Istanbul and Ankara, leading to clashes with law enforcement, who deployed pepper spray and water cannons, and to over 200 arrests (mostly university students, activists, and journalists)—scenes reminiscent of the Gezi Park demonstrations in 2013. This outpouring of public anger, described as the largest in over a decade, underscores the deep-seated frustration with the government’s actions. The increasingly repressive response—the ban on public gatherings and restrictions on public transport in Istanbul and Ankara, escalated security measures, and forceful dispersal—reveals a clear determination to quash dissent and maintain control.

Yet the persistence and breadth of these protests, even amid a harsh crackdown, signal profound public unease among the Turkish populace regarding the decline of democratic freedoms and the weaponization of the state.

Opposition parties, led by the CHP, have rallied in condemnation, calling the arrest “a political coup against the next president” and an assault on the democratic will of the people. CHP’s Ankara Mayor Mansur Yavaş—another potential contender already speculated to be the government’s next target—denounced the jailing as a “disgrace to the judicial system,” reinforcing growing concerns over the erosion of judicial independence. In a symbolic act of defiance, the party pressed forward with its primary election to endorse İmamoğlu as their presidential candidate, urging not only members but all citizens beyond the party lines to participate and demonstrate their resistance to what they perceive as political persecution. The reported turnout of nearly 15 million people (around 2 million of whom were party members) sent a powerful message: a refusal of the arrest’s legitimacy and a collective commitment to resisting authoritarian drift.

The international response has been swift. While key players, most notably the United States and the United Kingdom, have tread cautiously, drawing justified backlash for their muted responses, even from the CHP leader Özgür Özel himself, widespread criticism has poured in from foreign leaders, governmental offices, international institutions, and human rights organizations. The consensus is clear: İmamoğlu’s arrest is not a matter of routine legal procedure but a politically motivated attempt to neutralize the opposition. This shrinking space for dissent, if left unchecked, risks further isolating Turkey on the global stage.

The political instability has also already rippled through the economy. The immediate aftermath of the arrest saw the Turkish Lira plummet to a record low against the US dollar while the Istanbul Stock Exchange’s main index experienced a significant drop, triggering a 30-day ban on short-selling. Investor confidence has been shaken, exacerbating an already fragile economy burdened by inflation and currency depreciation. Adding to this, CHP leader Özel has urged a targeted economic boycott of pro-government businesses, particularly mainstream media outlets, in response to İmamoğlu’s jailing. Capital flight looms, and long-term foreign investment may dwindle—possibly undermining months of effort by economic officials to stabilize the situation.

Erdogan’s Expanding Reach and Authoritarian Playbook

Meanwhile, Erdoğan and his allies continue to defend the judiciary’s actions, insisting on institutional independence, and accusing the opposition of corruption and links to extremist organizations. In theory, the prospect of significant economic fallout and diplomatic pressure could serve as a constraint on how far they might go to exert control. In practice, however, Erdoğan has repeatedly shown a willingness to risk both in order to consolidate power—demonstrating a stronger-than-ever inclination to assert his influence over the media, courts, military, and even academia. His second explicit reference to the saying underscores that he is not prepared to step back, but this goes beyond mere rhetoric. From circulating misleading footage, depicting protests in Georgia as if they occurred in Istanbul, to deporting foreign correspondents and abruptly imposing license requirements on critical alternative media broadcasters via government agencies, he appears ready to deploy every tool at his disposal. His statements and conduct reflect a growing disregard for international norms, democratic values, and institutional autonomy.

Most troublingly, the charges against İmamoğlu and others rest heavily on anonymous witness testimonies and vague, unsubstantiated evidence. İmamoğlu vehemently denies the charges and describes them as part of a politically orchestrated “smear campaign” intended to damage his standing. As of now, none of the arrestees has been convicted; they remain in pre-trial detention. İmamoğlu has been “temporarily” removed from the office, and an interim mayor has been elected by the opposition-run municipal council. Nevertheless, the appointment of trustees by presidential decree to both the municipality and its subsidiaries, as well as to the CHP itself, remains a looming possibility.

Regardless of the final verdict, the arrest of İmamoğlu has already inflicted significant damage on Turkey’s democratic fabric. It has further eroded what remained of the belief in the impartiality and independence of its institutions. Even if İmamoğlu and the others are ultimately released without charge, the message sent by these actions—that dissent can be met with state power and that legal processes can be used to target political rivals—is likely to have a chilling effect on political participation and freedom of expression in the short to medium term.

Radish, Resistance, and the Road Ahead

Yes, Erdoğan’s proverbial radish hinted at something bigger and more ominous—a veiled warning to anyone bold enough to challenge his authority. By invoking this expression, he sought to project an image of strength and resolve, sow fear, and shift the political narrative without making overt threats.

This is authoritarianism’s quiet violence: one does not need to jail everyone to try and silence many. The ambiguity of what the “bigger radish” entails cultivates an atmosphere of uncertainty, dread, and self-censorship—at least, that is the intended outcome.

In this case, though, what started as a folk saying has become a symbol—not just of repression, but of growing resistance to it. The events surrounding İmamoğlu’s arrest have marked a new phase in Turkey’s democratic unraveling: one that lays bare the instrumentalization of law, the erosion of institutional independence, and the rising cost of political opposition. They have exposed the fragility of democratic institutions and the ongoing struggle to uphold democratic norms and the rule of law in the face of authoritarian tendencies.

Yet the backlash may also signal something else—a civic awakening. Rather than backing down, İmamoğlu responded with strategic clarity, using Erdoğan’s move as a springboard to embrace a presidential run and embark on a nationwide campaign tour. Seizing the moment, he transformed political pressure into political capital, generating a surge of momentum few expected. If there is a “biggest radish,” perhaps it is this: the realization that Turkey’s democratic future hinges not only on court rulings or party leadership, but on the resilience of its citizens, the unity of its opposition, and an unwavering commitment to defending democratic principles.

This article was originally published in the Review of Democracy.