Erdoğan: Between Personal Faith and the Architecture of Political Power- Author: Gouya Roshan ( Güya Aydin)

 

Erdoğan: Between Personal Faith and the Architecture of Political Power

Power possesses an insatiable appetite. Left unchecked, it will even enlist religion in its own service.

For years, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has presented himself through concepts such as faith, Islam, the nation, mosques, and religious values. For millions of people, he symbolizes the integration of religion into politics. His critics, however, argue that he built a bridge from religion to political power—and once he crossed that bridge, he transformed it into a fortress for preserving his rule.

This article is not about hatred; rather, it is about breaking an idol: the idol of Erdoğan's politics, which has too often been placed beyond questioning.

If faith is the measure of governance, then why have political positions changed whenever political interests required it? Why has yesterday's enemy become today's partner? Why have agreements been made that contradict yesterday's passionate slogans?

If faith is truly the compass of politics, why does Turkey remain a member of NATO? Why have economic relations with Israel never been completely severed, even during the most severe political tensions? Why, whenever national interests or the continuation of political power demanded it, have yesterday's positions given way to today's compromises? The reality is that states are governed not by beliefs, but by interests.

The answer is painful.

Because in Erdoğan's political world, what is often treated as sacred is not faith, but power.

Of course, Erdoğan is not alone. History is filled with leaders who first rose through the faith of the people and later used that same faith as a ladder to preserve their authority. The danger begins the moment people start treating criticism of a politician as an insult to religion. From that moment on, the state ceases to be an institution accountable to its citizens and begins to regard itself as something sacred.

A government that invokes God from the podium should be more willing than any other government to be held accountable. If it is not, then we must ask ourselves: Is religion serving justice, or has justice been sacrificed for the sake of political power?

A politician who labels every failure a conspiracy, every critic a traitor, every journalist and artist an enemy, and every opponent a threat to national security gradually deprives society of its ability to think independently. A state that fears questions will, sooner or later, come to fear the truth itself. No political leader is beyond criticism, even if they invoke the name of God a thousand times. Repeating God's name does not fill the void of accountability.

It is essential to distinguish between personal faith and the political exploitation of faith. Faith makes a person humble; power, if left unchecked, convinces a person that truth can only be spoken through their own voice.

This is the greatest mistake every government is capable of making.

Erdoğan may be a sincere believer—or he may not be. Only God knows that. What people can judge is not a leader's intentions, but their decisions. History judges leaders not by what is in their hearts, but by what they do.

The greatest betrayal of religion is not attacking it; it is using it to make political power unquestionable. Once faith becomes a shield for politics, the first victim will be faith itself.

Leaders come and go, but the wounds left on society by the sanctification of political power can remain for generations.

A society that elevates its politicians to the level of innocence no longer has citizens—it has followers. And followers do not ask questions. They only applaud. Yet history is written not by applause, but by truth. And truth kneels before no power.