Will Sharif be able to follow Mahathir and Erdogan?

Mahathir Mohamad and Recep Erdogan both blamed the West, the Jews and the currency speculators for the crisis and thus restricted people’s right of freedom.

As I read some of the statements made by the Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Erdogan, and the reactions following them, a feeling of deja vu overcame me.

Haven’t I heard (all) this before?

In the late 1990s, the former prime minister of Malaysia, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, was facing an Asian financial crisis. Just like Erdogan is doing now, he blamed the West, the Jews and the currency speculators for the crisis and thus, restricted people’s right to freedom. Unsurprisingly, he was also accused of being authoritarian, anti-Semitic and a propagator of far-fetched but dangerous conspiracy theories.

But these are not the only similarities between the two prime ministers.

Both leaders oversaw a decade of high economic growth in their respective countries and were praised as model Muslim democrats. They both led strong political parties which dominated the political landscape. Mahathir was the leader of the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), while Erdogan is the leader of the Justice and Development Party (JDP).

They represented the downtrodden in their respective societies and fought against the elite. Mahathir’s main constituency was ethnic Malays while Erdogan’s is Turks from interior Anatolia. However, they were both able to expand their appeal over time and won votes from other groups as well.

Both leaders had difficult relations with the media in the latter half of their regime. They were not afraid to criticise and even limit media freedom. Mahathir sued newspapers when he faced a crisis and Erdogan is doing the same as we speak. Erdogan recently banned Twitter and Facebook although the ban on Twitter was overturned by the courts. According to him,

“There is a trouble called Twitter, the finest lies are here. Nowadays, social media is actually the headache of societies.”

They have both forsaken and blamed an Islamic group which was crucial to their initial success. Mahathir sacked Anwar Ibrahim and his supporters while Erdogan is currently blaming Fethullah Gulen and his followers for setting up a parallel government. In both cases, many political analysts doubted their success in the elections without the support of these key groups. However, both leaders managed to win their respective elections easily.

Erdogan celebrated his remarkable feat on Sunday, March 30, 2014 winning his third consecutive local election alongside his three wins in the national elections.

A lot has been written about the superb economic stewardship of both leaders and it has certainly been crucial for their popularity and electoral success. However, not many people know of another key ingredient behind their success – their management of ‘nationalism’.

Like Pakistan, the basis of nationalism is still open for debate in both Malaysia and Turkey. There are ethnic nationalists, religious nationalists and a large group of civic nationalists fighting over the raison d’être of their respective countries.

Mahathir and Erdogan both used this disagreement to their advantage and led coalitions of different nationalists at different times in their careers. Both adopted civic, ethnic or religious nationalism as the situation demanded.

Mahathir began his career as an ethnic nationalist but later won popularity and even premiership as a Malay nationalist. He wrote a controversial book, The Malay Dilemma, to promote special policies for the people of Malaysia. However, once he attained power, he moved to the centre and tried to win over all Malaysians. And by the end of his rule, he started propagating a form of ethno-religious nationalism, highlighting the special role of Malays and Islam in the creation of Malaysia.

On the other hand, Erdogan began his political career as a civic nationalist and despite his Muslim roots, presented himself as a leader for all Turkish people. He disparaged discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, gender or religion. However, in order to curtail the power of the Turkish military, he later became an ethnic nationalist and unashamedly claimed to be the redeemer of the ethnic nationalism of Ataturk and early Turkish Republic.

His current stance is that of an ethno-religious nationalist fighting against the world for his country, just like Mahathir near the end of his career.

Another interesting common factor between Mahathir and Erdogan is that our current prime minister is a big fan of both. In the 1990s, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif wanted to become Pakistan’s Mahathir and now his frequent trips to Turkey indicate his inclination towards following Erdogan’s model.

It seems that our PM can learn how to use nationalism to his advantage from these leaders, in addition to superior economic management.

Sharif was a religious nationalist in the 1990s. He tried to pass the 15^th Amendment to implement his version of an Islamic state but failed. And now the main threat to Pakistan’s integrity is from the Taliban who claim to be religious nationalists themselves.

Just like Erdogan and Mahathir, he must also broaden his coalition and include not only religious nationalists from Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) but also liberals, minorities and ethnic nationalists from Balochistan and Sindh. Only then will he have a chance at the kind of success that Erdogan and Mahathir achieved.