In the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo massacre in 2015, political leaders gathered in Paris and led a public show of support in favour of free speech. Chief among them was Germany Chancellor Angela Merkel.
In the wake of recent events, her presence at that rally for free speech is looking less like a farce and more like an act of outright political dishonesty.
Merkel has chosen to abandon the principles she supposedly hailed as sacrosanct in exchange for political expediency.
Last month, the German satire show Extra 3, broadcast a clip titled ‘Erdowie, Erdowo, Erdogan’. The two-minute clip made fun of Turkish President Recip Tayyip Erdogan.
It raised some important points on his questionable political track record, his excesses in constructing a new presidential palace in Ankara, his poor record in terms of the freedom of the press, his decision to bomb Kurdish targets (thereby indirectly aiding Isis) and his apparent imperial ambitions.
The song makes fun of his manner describing him as the “Big Boss from the Bosphorus”. The clip merges a number of unflattering footage of Erdogan and creates a brilliant piece of political satire.
A gulf exists between the values espoused by many European citizens and those held by the government of Turkey
Merkel and Jean Claude Junker do not emerge unscathed either; they are criticisedfor seemingly bending over backwards to appease the Turkish leader.
The song’s chorus went: “Be nice to him since he’s holding all the cards... Hand him your money, he’ll build you a large refugee tent.”
Beyond the German-speaking parts of Europe, had it not been for the Turkish President himself, this satire would have likely been lost in translation. He seemed to object to being portrayed in such a manner.
The German ambassador in Ankara was summoned and subjected to a monologue highlighting the errors of Germany’s ways.
German comedian Jan Boehmermann responded by reading out an explicitly foul poem on the Turkish President. His poem was deliberately intended to provoke a reaction from the Turkish government; the latter fell for his bait. The Deputy Prime Minister of Turkey reacted by calling this a “serious crime against humanity”.
An already incensed Erdogan could not bear this act of lèse-majesté. Under an archaic provision in German law – a provision which hasn’t been updated since 1871 – the Turkish President could request that Boehmermann is prosecuted for insulting a foreign head of state. This prosecution could only take place on one condition; it required Merkel’s assent.
In an astounding move, the once self-proclaimed champion of free speech assented to this prosecution. Boehmermann will now be tried in Germany for insulting a foreign head of state. This decision was not well received. Members of the governing coalition openly voiced their dissent claiming this development was inconsistent with the modern understandingof democracy.
Merkel remains stoically defiant. She stated that justice must take its course and the government cannot intervene. She claimed that Germany has close ties to Turkey and that approximately three million people in Germany have Turkish roots. Moreover, she made reference to the economic ties which bind the two countries as well as Turkey’s valuable contribution to Nato.
The first part of her argument is a cogent and sound.
The separation of powers is a cornerstone of modern democracy and the executive should never meddle in the affairs of the judiciary.
However, her reference to Germany’s economic, social and political ties with Turkey has inevitably cast a shadow on the judicial proceedings and on her moral authority. By upholding the letter of the law, Merkel’s arguments seem to have broken its spirit.
The actions of Turkey are also disturbing. They further confirm the widely-held perception that a gulf exists between the values espoused by many European citizens and those held by the government of Turkey.
They attracted unnecessary attention and exposed a government which seems to be ill at ease with its past, uncertain and defensive about its present, and ruthless about pursuing its goals for the future.
The incident also raises other questions on the centrality of geopolitics in domestic policy decisions. Governments with differing and opposing stances should attempt to establish good relations. Such relations promote stability and security.
However, governments must also be mindful over certaincore issues such as the rights and freedoms of individuals. Friendly relations and international agreements should not necessary translate into sub-tle servitude.
This servitude exposes a dangerous political amorality which seems to be the preferred value system for contemporary political leaders. The decision by the already-embattled Merkel was met with much sound and fury. Nonetheless, this opprobrium is unlikely to lead to any significant changes. Citizens deserve better; however, they very rarely have a choice.
André DeBattista is a member of the Political Studies Association (UK) and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts.