THE JUNE UPRISING IN TURKEY

Emre Eren Korkmaz

Istanbul University Faculty of Political Sciences

International Relations Doctorate Program

---

Textile Workers Union/Confederation of Progressive Trade Unions of Turkey

Director of Organization and International Relations

emreerenkorkmaz@gmail.com

Published in SEER Journal for Labour and Social Affairs in Eastern Europe,

2013, Issue 3.

ABSTRACT

The June Uprising was an unexpected explosion of the already accumulated reaction

and anger of millions of Turkish citizens that opened a new chapter in Turkish

political history by actualizing the most massive, determinant and militant mobilization

against the oppressive measures of the government. The aim of AKP Government,

which is becoming increasingly authoritarian, to change the basics of the system and

the weakness of the formal opposition create suitable conditions for the uprising. This

was an uprising against the Power, but not aiming to overthrow it. The June Uprising

has not ended yet and should be analysed well by political scientists aiming to read

the future of the Turkish politics.

KEYWORDS

June Uprising in Turkey, Gezi Park, AKP, Erdoğan, chapulling

INTRODUCTION

Everything started with a cloud of gas. Then an unexpected explosion of the already

accumulated reaction and anger of millions of Turkish citizens came to the light,

opening a new chapter in Turkish political history by actualizing the most massive,

determinant and militant mobilization against the oppressive measures of the

government.

Taksim is the central square in Istanbul. This square is not a place of attraction only

for tourists, but also for all kinds of political movements seeking to gather and

express their demands. It is important to note that Taksim Square is a symbolic place

for the labour movement in Turkey in which The May Day massacre occurred in

1977. Last 10 years witnessed the insistence of the labour movement to celebrate

May Day in Taksim Square (it was forbidden since 1977) in some of which the

government banned the celebrations in the Square and police forces used violence

to stop workers trying to reach the Square; or in some other years, the government

accepted Unions’ demands and allowed demonstrations that hundred thousands

poured into the Square making Istanbul May Day the second most massive May Day

of the Earth after the one in Habana, Cuba.

Taksim Square owns this historical symbolic importance however the June Uprising

did not occur as a consequence of this historical legacy of the Square, now the place

of the attraction was a part of the Taksim Square, Gezi Park which is the only green

area, Public Park in central square of Istanbul.

Istanbul is the biggest metropolitan city in Turkey and it has changed very fast in last

15 years due to the construction of skyscrapers and shopping malls in all part of the

city aiming to exploit every piece of land for commercial activities as a way of capital

accumulation for rent-seeking business groups which are encouraged by the

government that aims to run the economy via continuously receiving short-term

foreign debts. (Sönmez, 23.06.2013)

Istanbul owns tens of shopping malls, most of which are facing economic difficulties.

However government planned to destroy the central Gezi Park and build a shopping

mall constructed in the style of the 19th century Ottoman military barracks, Topçu

Kışlası, which had been destroyed in Early Republican Period due to the fact that this

Barracks had a symbolic importance of being an headquarter of reactionary forces

that rebelled against the Second Constitutional Monarchy in 1909. Therefore, not

only because of the destruction of the only green area-public park of Taksim Square,

but also this contains an ideological-symbolic confrontation among seculars and

Islamists.

1. THE BRIEF HISTORY OF THE UPRISING

A group of environmentalists together with some leftist groups and some Members of

Parliament protested Government’s decision for the destruction of the park by

pitching up tents in the Park and organizing a pacifist-peaceful protest to stop

bulldozers and caterpillars. On the early morning of 31st of May, police broke up this

protest by using excessive tear gas, beating these a few hundred environmentalists

and burning their tents. People could learn this violence via media broadcasting a

police was pouring pepper gas over face of a young lady wearing a red dress, which

later turned to be one of the symbols of the resistance: Lady in Red, kicking another

young guy who was trying to run away, arresting young people who were cuddling

trees to protect them and other polices burning tents.

1.1. Istanbul Resistance

On the evening of 31st of May, thousands of people gathered in Taksim Square to

protest the police violence against peaceful demonstrators who were attacked while

they were sleeping in their tents. However, instead of the government’s apology,

once again the police attacked people in Taksim. The protestors decided to resist,

but they did not have anything to protect themselves. The police was using

thousands of capsules of pepper gas, firing plastic bullets over them. People were

leaving the streets under pepper gas but was gathering in the next street and

refusing to leave Taksim. In order to protect themselves from plastic bullets and

water cannons, people began to build barricades and waiting behind the barricades.

At usual times, after a few hours of resistance and small clashes, protestors were

leaving the area and police could “clean” the Square. However, on 31st of May, this

did not occur, protestors were not leaving the Zone, all square was surrounded by

protestors and continuous police violence could not dispatch the masses. Clashes,

barricades outspreaded to nearby districts such as Beşiktaş, Şişli, Kurtuluş and

despite the late night and early morning, the number of protestors was increasing by

the participation of people living in these districts which were angry with the police

violence and arrogance of the government.

Via social media, the resistance was spread to large masses and in different parts of

Istanbul people started to gather at the centre of their districts1. In Asian side, in

1 There should be a special focus on the role of social media in the movement. According to a

research done by Social Media and Political Participation Lab in New York University, between 31st

May and 9th June, more than 22 million tweets were shared by the hashtags on the uprising. The

research states that “Since 4pm local time yesterday,(31

st May) at least 2 million tweets mentioning hashtags related to the

protest, such as #direngeziparkı (950,000 tweets), #occupygezi (170,000 tweets) or #geziparki (50,000 tweets) have been sent. As we show in the plot below, the activity on Twitter was constant

Kadıköy, Maltepe, Kartal; in European side, in Bakırköy, Avcılar thousands of people

began to gather after 11 pm. The author of this article was at Kadıköy at 11.30 pm,

where there were a few hundred people in the centrum and in a short while, after the

demonstration began, thousands of people poured to the streets to protest the

government. Until 2 am, people were gathering together into a larger group which

could not be counted easily but may be defined as tens of thousands, chanting

slogans as “government resign”, “end to fascism”, “shoulder to shoulder against

fascism”, people were sharing news from the social media with each other that

clashes/resistance was continuing in Taksim and people started to walk over Taksim

from different districts. These news motivated people but Taksim was on the

European side and there was not any ferry or bus service at that time of the night, so

people decided to walk to Taksim which is 18 km from Kadıköy and people had to

pass the Bosporus Bridge. On the way, people living around the motorway woke up

because of the slogans with surprise; some were participating to the march while

some others were turning on and off their lights to show their support. After walking

almost 4 hours, thousands of people passed the Bridge and reached Beşiktaş, the

nearest district to Taksim in which protestors were resisting against the police until

the morning and people coming from Asian side joined the resistance.

All night, resistance continued, people were informing each other via social media,

sharing photos and necessary information as where the police is located (so they will

not go there), what to do when one faces pepper gas, where to hide, where the

nearest doctor lives, etc. Progressive doctors and lawyers were distributing their

mobile numbers and addresses via social media and small medical clinics were

formed in houses and offices of some parties and organizations. Photos and videos

showing protestors using a caterpillar and driving over police, lorries stopping police

vehicles and saving protestors, old ladies distributing lemons and water to protestors

who were affected from pepper gas, interesting and mostly funny graffitis and

throughout the day. Even after midnight local time last night more than 3,000 tweets about the protest were published every minute. (…) What is unique about this particular case is how Twitter is being used to spread information about the demonstrations from the ground. Unlike some other recent uprisings, around 90% of all geolocated tweets are coming from within Turkey, and 50% from within Istanbul (see map below). In comparison, Starbird (2012) estimated that only 30% of those tweeting during the Egyptian revolution were actually in the country. Additionally, approximately 88% of the tweets are in Turkish, which suggests the audience of the tweets is other Turkish citizens and not so much the international community. These numbers are in spite of the fact that there are reports that the 3G network is down in much of the area

that is affected. Some local shops have removed security from their WiFi networks to allow internet access, but almost certainly the reduced signal will have impacted the tweeting behavior of those on the ground. (…) (On 9

th June) Social networking sites, such as Twitter, Facebook or Tumblr, appear to be playing a

prominent role in the coordination of the still ongoing protests in Turkey. There is abundant evidence suggesting that social media have been pivotal in the spread of information, especially in the absence of coverage by traditional media; to recruit and mobilize protesters; to coordinate the movement without the infrastructure of formal organizations; and to draw the attention and support of the international community. That social media is at the heart of these protests was defiantly acknowledged by the Turkish Prime Minister himself when he described them as “the worst menace to society”. There are also reports that 25 people were arrested because of their use of Twitter to spread information about the protest.” (SMAPP NYU, June 2013)

snapshots of police violence were motivating people to join resistance. As a result of

this network, the number of people participating in the protests increased.

On 1st June, the social democrat main opposition party, CHP (Republican Peoples

Party) had a public meeting in Kadıköy which was declared long before. However,

under the intense pressure of people, CHP cancelled its meeting and called

everyone to walk over Taksim Square, liberate the square and Gezi Park. After the

call of the main opposition party, ten thousands of people who came for the meeting

to Kadıköy poured to public ferries to pass Beşiktaş. Thousands of people filled

ferries as similar with Indian trains, passed Bosporus and joined the resistance. At 4

pm on 1st June, after a more than 24 hours non-stop resistance, hundred thousands

of people surrounded the Taksim Square and police had to withdraw from the

Square. Over 500.000 people filled the Square, reconquered the Gezi Park, once

more hugged trees of the Park and celebrated their victory.

People could succeed in saving Gezi Park and they could freely demonstrate in the

Taksim Square but there was no any leading party or organization. People from

various political currents, from left to right who were opposing the authoritarian rule of

Erdoğan Government were together in the Square. Young people pitched up their

tents again in Gezi Park, placards of various political organizations were hanged.

Taksim Solidarity Platform, composed of over 100 professional organizations, parties

and NGOs, which was established to preserve Gezi Park at the beginning of the

year, became the central organization/network of the movement. Taksim Square

together with Istiklal Street and Gezi Park were occupied by people. Despite the

existence of hundred thousands of people and participation of various political and

ideological groups, people were sensitive to each other to preserve jointly formed de-

facto peaceful occupation of the Square. Forums were formed, via forums and social

media people debated on certain issues and Taksim Solidarity Platform acted as a

Spokesperson of the Movement to declare common demands.

Taksim Solidarity Platform and its spokesperson Dr. Arzu Çerkezoğlu, General

Secretary of DISK (Confederation of Progressive Trade Unions of Turkey) stated to

the press on 2nd June that there were 4 demands:

“Any ban or physical restriction on meetings, gatherings or demonstrations

affecting Taksim and Kizilay squares, as well as all other squares and public

areas as well as restrictions on the right to free speech be lifted.

All those responsible for commanding, enforcing and perpetrating the repression

of the democratic rights of the people to demonstrate, starting with those who

stood up to the destruction of Taksim Gezi Park, and the violent crackdown that

resulted in the injury of thousands and five deaths must be unseated and

brought to justice, starting with the governors and police chiefs of İstanbul,

Ankara, Hatay and Adana.

The use of agents such as tear-gas must be prohibited.

Those who were taken into custody due to their participation in the protests

across the country must immediately be released and that an official statement

must be made to state that they will not be charged.

Parks where we gather in moments of disaster must be opened to the public

immediately, starting with Gezi Park.” (Taksim Solidarity, 2013)

During the occupation of Taksim Square and Gezi Park, a communal life was formed.

Under the guidance of the Taksim Solidarity; a common kitchen, a Revolution Market,

Revolution Library, a Children Playground, a medical clinic were built up. All these

services were done voluntarily and nothing was for sale. Lists of necessities were

declared via social media, and posters and people who would like to contribute to the

struggle could buy these necessities and leave them to the voluntaries. Direct

democracy was practiced via forums and all political currents and movements could

express themselves by opening their tents and sharing their documents. There was

also a concert platform in which artists could perform their plays. All entrances to

Taksim Square were closed by barricades and people could enter the Square by

passing from these numerous barricades. Youngsters were guarding 24 hours behind

the barricades. This was a genuine alternative to the existing system. (Erdemol,

2013, p. 21)

On the morning of 11th June, police intervened to Taksim Square by claiming to open

the Square to traffic and to clean and protect the historical statue and Atatürk Cultural

Centre which had been turned to a demonstration area of various political

movements hanging their placards. There was a small resistance against the police,

very small group reacted police with Molotov cocktails which were then accused to be

police agents by the protestors of Gezi Park circulating photos of these “resisting

people” and showing them in their police uniforms in other occasions. Istanbul Mayor

stated that there would not be any intervention to the Gezi Park, they just wanted to

open Square to people and clean barricades. Police forces could enter Taksim

Square 11 days after the initiation of the movement but only occupied a certain

corner of the Square without intervening to the demonstrators. At that night, while

police was waiting around the famous statue, people carried a piano to the front of

the police barricade and a German pianist Davide Martello gave a concert to

thousands of people sitting around him and people sang songs, danced, chanted

slogans, protested police violence and commemorated their young comrades who

lost their lives during the Resistance2.

Four days later, on 15th June, police once again attacked Gezi Park, and recaptured

the Gezi Park from peaceful demonstrators and gave an end to the “Taksim

Commune”. The mayor and the government promised that Gezi Park would be

preserved, the project for building a shopping mall was delayed or cancelled (in some

2 You may listen the concert from this web site http://webtv.hurriyet.com.tr/20/50759/0/1/taksim-meydani-

nda-piyano-dinletisi.aspx

statements it is delayed, in others cancelled) and mayor closed down the park to

people by showing the reason to renovate the Park. The Park could re-open on 8th

July. (Amnesty, 2013)

Taksim Commune could live for 15 days, something experienced for the first time in

Turkish political history. This was the greatest demonstration of direct democracy in

which various and even opposing political currents and people acted in a democratic

way and did not let any provocative conflict among each other. After the invasion of

police forces, Taksim Solidarity stated that they insisted on their demands, the

struggle would continue, and people would continue gathering in forums in all public

parks of their districts and could continue spirit of this communal, democratic

experience. (Taksim Solidarity, 2013; Yaraşır, 2013)

Clashes around Taksim continued a few more days after the re-occupation of the

Gezi Park by the police. On 17th June, to protest the police forces’ violence against all

groupings of people, one guy, Erdem Gündüz, started an original protest in Taksim

Square, the standing man, as one man standing alone, does not speak and move,

maybe the most passive protest of the world, created confusion among police forces

what to do, because they understand that he protests them, so they should disperse

him, but he does not move and chant slogans, this confusion and panic of police

motivated people to gather and protest government by giving the message that even

police attacks everyone that moves, they would protest without saying anything and

moving. (CNNTürk, 18.06.2013)

1.2. Resistance in other cities

The June Uprising spontaneously spread to other cities in Turkey. In 80 of total 81

cities except Bayburt, people joined the anti-government protests. (Star, 20.09.2013)

The police violence on 31st May, was also protested in many other cities on 1st June

and mobilization continued during the month.

In other Turkish metropolitan cities which could be defined as regional cities with

universities, industrial zones and commercial centres, as Ankara, Izmir, Adana,

Hatay, Eskişehir, hundred thousands of people protested government and resisted

against police violence. After gathering in own districts, people were walking

spontaneously from various districts to the main square of the city and when police

used violence, they formed barricades and resisted. The intensity of violence was

even more in these cities.

According to the official reports of the Ministry of the Interior, on 23rd June, 2.5 million

people joined anti-government protests in 79 cities. On 20th September, the number

increased to 3.545.000 in 80 cities. (Star, 20.09.2013; Milliyet, 23.06.2013)These

numbers are found controversial by many observers, because in the first days in

Istanbul, Taksim Square, Istiklal Street and Gezi Park were full of people and there

were massive demonstrations in all parts of Istanbul. Similarly, hundred thousands

were on streets in Izmir and Ankara, ten thousands were at demonstrations in Hatay,

Eskişehir, Antalya, Edirne and Bursa and there were many marches in almost all

cities and towns. These protests continued non-stop almost one month and big

meetings and concerts were organized in following months gathering hundred

thousands together. Even if we just accept Ministry’s official numbers, these statistics

demonstrate the fact that this uprising was the most massive mobilization of people

during the history of Turkish Republic since 1923, or even all history of modern

Turkey since 19th century.

According to a report prepared by authorities but not stated officially, in the first 22

days of the protests, over 7.5 million people joined protests. On 1st June, there were

five hundred thousand people in Taksim and on 2nd June, this number increased to

nine hundred thousand and the total number that poured to streets in all parts of

Istanbul was three million people. (Aydınlık, 13.09.2013)

1.3. Casualties

In Ankara, a policeman shot Ethem Sarısülük, a 27 year old metal worker, just 2

meters away from his head on 1st June and he died on 14th June in hospital and this

moment was broadcasted in TV channels.

In Eskişehir, Ali İsmail Korkmaz, a 19 year old university student, was beaten up by

a group of policemen and civil fascists on 2nd June and died on 10th June after

staying in coma.

In Hatay, a city on Syrian border where people suffer from the civil war in Syria,

Abdullah Cömert, a 22 year old worker, was killed by a gas capsule on 3rd June.

In Istanbul, Mehmet Ayvalıtaş, a 21 year old worker, died on 2nd July when a car hit

him during the demonstrations.

Once again in Hatay, Ahmet Atakan, a 22 year old worker, died on 10th September

as a result of police violence.

Also, a police officer in Adana, Mustafa Sarı (27) fell from bridge and lost his life

while he was running behind protestors. It is claimed that police forces were forced to

work long hours in order to suppress protests. (Hürriyet, 2013)

According to a report of the Turkish Medical Association (TTB), in the first 45 days of

the struggle, there had been more than 10.000 reported injuries and 63 of them were

serious injuries. 11 people lost their eyes and 106 people had serious head injuries

(head trauma) due to the pepper gas capsules that were directed on them. It is

estimated that the real number is far more because of people’s fear to go to hospital

to avoid being recognized by police.

Berkin Elvan (16) was shot by pepper gas capsule in Istanbul while he was going out

from his home to the grocery and he was still in coma when this article was written

(22.10.2013).

Zeynep Eryaşar (55) and Serdar Kadakal (35) in Istanbul and İrfan Tuna (47) in

Ankara died as a result of heart attack after being exposed to pepper gas which is

defined as a chemical weapon. (TTB, 2013)

Also the ministry stated that until 20th September, 5.341 people were detained by

police forces, 160 people were arrested. By 23rd June, 240 police vehicles were

damaged and total damage was 140 million Turkish Liras (52 million Euros). (Star,

20.09.2013; Milliyet, 23.06.2013)

2. THE REASONS OF THE UPRISING

Millions of people and various political groups joined this mobilization with different

aims and reasons; therefore it is difficult to show a few certain reasons for this

uprising. The concrete and common demands of the Movement with regard to the

Gezi Park were counted above as stated by Taksim Solidarity Platform and only

focusing only on such demands would not provide us a sufficient answer for the

explosion of the people’s anger and mobilization of millions in all parts of the country.

The main motivation of people was their anti-government opinions and feelings which

can be counted in a long list of reasons. The scope of slogans and demands of

people were changing from preserving Gezi Park to the resignation of the

government but the main demand could be defined as the resignation of the

government which has been becoming increasingly authoritarian following a series of

successful election results.

In order to understand the specific, concrete and daily reasons of the uprising, it

would be better to understand the general perspective paving the way to this

uprising.

The coup d’etat and military government formed on 12th September 1980 acted very

hard to suppress all leftist movement in the country, which had reached its peak

strength in 1970s. All organizations were banned; thousands of people were arrested

and ten thousands were detained. A new system was formed in all aspects spanning

from political system to education system and working regime in order to avoid

getting organized and unionizing extremely difficult. The military regime also shifted

from welfare state to neo-liberal reforms and introduced a new economic system

which was extremely pro-business and against labour rights.

By 1980, Turkey joined the general global tendency of shifting to neo-liberal reforms

and opening its domestic market. After 40 year-long neo-liberal reforms including

privatization, changing the working regime by introducing more flexible working

relations, the expansion of precarious working conditions, increasing dominance of

Transnational Corporations over the national economy and continuous oppression of

the labour/people movements, it is possible to establish a link between the current

uprising in Turkey with the social movements at global level. (Yaraşır, 2013) The role

of middle classes and white collar employees in the June Uprising is widely debated,

on which we will focus in the following chapters, but it is necessary to mention that

these educated employees, who participated in the movement at a broad level, are

the ones who were affected negatively from neo-liberal economic policies, losing their

previous privileges and getting closer to blue-collar working class.

After elected governments internalized the logic of the coup d’etat, they preserved

the main characteristics and borders of the system. However, 1990s marked with a

turmoil in which the civil war with Kurdish separatist nationalist movement had been

intensified from one hand and from the other, economic crises following each other

during the decade until 2001 and insistence on privatization and neo-liberal reforms

worsened the economic situation. Coalition governments and political fractions within

the ruling elite made it more difficult for sustaining a stable well-functioning political

system. In 2001, Turkey faced a huge economic crisis that caused the three parties

in the coalition government to lose their representation in the parliament after the

election by not able to overcome 10 % threshold in which two of them (DSP and

ANAP) were completely eliminated by losing their credibility in the society. After the

crisis, IMF formulated a program that prerequisites more privatization and more

precarious working conditions together with more strict control of financial and

banking system. Additionally, due to the imprisonment of the PKK leader Öcalan in

1999, in 2001 there was relatively a peace and very lower level of armed conflict in

Kurdish question.

AKP (Justice and Development Party) was formed on August 2001 by cadres of the

former Islamist party (Fazilet Partisi), who had been banned by the Constitutional

Court. The founders claimed that they had changed politically and accepted

conservative democracy with moderate Islamic ideology. Upon enjoying huge support

from the US and the EU as well as the media, they could come to government in

November 2002 where the rest of traditional parties were suffering from the

legitimacy problem in the eyes of people due to the severe economic crisis.

AKP strictly maintained the IMF program of the previous government, enjoyed the

opportunity of the relative peace in the Kurdish issue and by demonstrating itself as a

reformist party against the so-called “forces of status quo” which were defined as

traditional Kemalist bureaucracy of military, judiciary and civil bureaucracy that were

against the AKP government from the first day because of its Islamist roots. This

“reformism” was supported by the US and the EU because this fraction of the ruling

elite had suspicious attitude towards the US because of its the Middle East policies

(Turkish Military’s objection to the Iraq Invasion of the USA was criticized by the US

officials) and towards the EU because of its support to Islamist government. AKP also

found favourable international economic conditions in which foreign capital and short

term debts could be directed to the Turkish economy which provided high interest

rates for” “foreign investors”.

Therefore in the first 5 years of the AKP government, everything seemed to go well,

they could enjoy support from the US and the EU, they could receive foreign capital-

debt easily, could implement IMF’s economic package that could show the economy

is restoring and going well with high economic growth rates; Kurdish issue was going

on a relatively peaceful manner with comparison to the violent decade of 1990s; and

AKP was acting as a reformist democratic party gaining support from left and right

liberal intellectuals together with media and business groups and through the “show

trials” against cadres of Kemalist bureaucracy in military, judiciary and executive

organs of state by claiming that they were organizing a plot and coup d’etat against

the elected government, they could strengthen their position in transformation of the

state against the rival political elite. AKP also succeeded in privatizing all state owned

enterprises, distributing state owned estates to the profit-seeking business groups

and took important steps in transforming working regime by introducing more

precarious working conditions. (Sönmez, 23.06.2013)

However, the picture began to change in the second half of the 11 year-long rule of

AKP Government. AKP could succeed in all elections during its rule and could

strengthen its vote share, which gave more confidence to the Government that they

began to claim that they represent “the will of the nation”. This feeling of power and

weakening of the bureaucratic opposition provided a more arrogant way of doing

politics, refusing demands of the opposition, transforming state mechanism in a more

open and challenging way and by leaving behind the image of reformism, AKP began

to act in a more authoritarian way, aim to legitimize their decisions by giving Islamic

ideological references, quitting its alliance with liberal intellectuals and fostering neo-

liberal policies. (Erdemol, 2013, p. 9) Economic conditions began to deteriorate due

to global economic and financial crisis with lower growth rates and repayment of

debts were giving danger signals, more unemployment and worse working conditions

were threatening labouring classes. Similar problems occurred in Kurdish issue that

Kurdish movement was not satisfied with the AKP because of the gap between the

promises and the practices and armed conflict began once again that caused

government’s acceptance to negotiate and bargain with the imprisoned PKK leader

Öcalan in a hidden way, causing suspect and anger both in Kurdish movement and

in left and right Turkish nationalist-Kemalist movement. This “Peace Process” and

ceasefire created favourable conditions for people to mobilize. (Müftüoğlu,

16.06.2013; Yaraşır, 2013; Kocadağ, 2013, p 8) Additionally, the “show trials” against

military and civil Kemalist bureaucracy began to be exposed as a result of the

controversies and unlawful, fake evidences and society’s support began to decrease

to these trials. AKP government’s Islamist projects and their intention to change the

education system according to Islamic ideology and their arrogant way of

implementing such changes without any need to consult took anger of the secular

masses. Last but not least, international support to the AKP began to be questioned.

As Turkey’s “active” Middle East policies, its open support to Muslim Brotherhood

and its intervention to the domestic politics of Arab countries and logistical support to

Al Qaeda militants in Syrian civil war began to be criticized by the Obama

Administration and the EU became more suspicious about the AKP’s rule. (EC

Progress Report, 2013; Sönmez, 29.07.2013)

Additionally, AKP began to use more police violence towards their opponents. Just

focusing on a few months before the June Resistance, it is possible to see the police

violence towards trade unions and workers who would like celebrate May Day in

Taksim Square, and during April, police constantly attacked over protestors including

famous Turkish actors and even Costa Gavras with pepper gas and water cannons

who protested the demolition of the historical first cinema of Turkey, Emek Sineması

and constructing a shopping mall (!) in the place of the historical cinema. Police

violence was used against many different protests from feminist organizations to

youth movements and football fans/ultras that it is widely said by opposition figures

that all members of opposition will taste pepper gas at least once in their lives.

PM Erdoğan’s speeches and his arrogant style also motivated people to mobilize

against him. Almost every day, he had been giving speeches in different occasions

and various meetings and all these speeches were broadcasted live in all TV

channels, which also resulted in reaction among citizens. His comments about the

secular lifestyle, criticizing young lovers kissing each other and walking hand in hand

in public spaces, his insistence in advising couples to have at least three children, his

comments on the abolition of abortion, his definition of all alcohol drinkers as

alcoholics and telling them to drink at their homes and his instruction to the local

municipality of Beyoğlu (including Taksim) not to let bars and cafes to have tables

outside on the street, and his explanation of the recent law on restricting the sale of

alcohol with Islamic references and when opposition criticized him, his answer as he

would do God’s commands instead of laws written by two alcoholics, referring to the

founder of modern Turkish Republic Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and his comrade, 2nd

President following Atatürk, Ismet İnönü; his insistence to build two mosques at

Taksim Square and Camlica which would serve as the ideologic symbols of the “new

regime” or “The New Turkey” and his instruction to media businessmen to dismiss

well-known authors and columnists who criticize government and creation of a media

that supports the government caused anger and opposition towards PM Erdoğan’s

rule. (Erdemol, 2013, p. 16)

As it is seen, there is a long list of reasons. In short, PM Erdoğan’s arrogant speech

style, economic problems, developments in Kurdish issue, (both Kurdish movement

is not satisfied and Kemalist-Nationalist movement increasingly oppose the so-called

Peace-Process by the fear of separation) police violence towards all opposition

forces, and people’s feelings of threat towards secular lifestyle and freedoms as well

as the weakness of the conventional opposition parties created favourable conditions

for people to mobilize.

3. THE GOVERNMENT’S REACTION

AKP Government was shocked by this sudden and massive, militant uprising against

its rule. Government reacted with excessive police violence over protestors as

mentioned above, thousands of people injured and six people died. The right of

peaceful demonstrations, which is a constitutional right, was violated by police forces

not only in June during the uprising days, but also this violence continued in

September and October mainly in Istanbul (Kadıköy and Taksim), in Hatay and in

Ankara (ODTÜ). Even the President of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations, Metin

Feyzioğlu stated that they only demand the recognition of their right to criticize the

PM and opposition should not be treated as an enemy. (Feyzioğlu, 02.09.2013)

On the third day of the uprising, 2nd June, PM Erdoğan left the country for a North-

Africa tour and returned back on 6th June. PM Erdoğan was not around in the first

week of the uprising and his Ministries and the President were trying to deal with this

issue. Before leaving the country, he stated that all these people participated to

uprising are çapulcu (chapulcu) which means “looter” in English. This accusation was

accepted by millions of people and protestors began to define themselves as

çapulcu, even transferred this word to English as chapuller and chapulling3. He had

also stated that he represents the will of the nation, he received 50% of the votes in

elections and instead of opposing on the streets, PM Erdoğan invited his opponents

to compete with him in the bullet box. He also said that if the opposition can mobilize

a hundred thousand, he can mobilize one million people. He claimed that he was

trying hard to convince the 50% to stay at their homes who would like to go out

streets to attack protestors-chapullers by giving signals of a civil war. (Hürriyet,

04.06.2013)

Just giving a few more statements of the Government would be sufficient to

demonstrate the logic of the Government. On 2nd June, PM Erdoğan stated “We

cannot sit and watch a few hooligans coming to square and provoke people.

Because when the nation voted for us, they voted for us to guard our history.” On 24th

June, PM Erdoğan stated “They were still all there. The limits of tolerance have been

exceeded. I told my Minister of the Interior: within 24 hours, you will clean up the

Atatürk Cultural Centre. You will clean up the square. You will clean up the statue.

After that, you will clean up Gezi Park. They ask: who gave the order to the police? I

did. I did. Yes. Were we supposed to sit and watch the forces of occupation? Were

we supposed to wait until the whole world would join in and celebrate?” Additionally

Egemen Bağış, Minister for EU Negotiations stated on 15th June “I am specially

calling all our citizens who have been giving support to these protests. They should

return to their homes. Unfortunately, at this stage, the state will have to consider

every individual there as member of terrorist organizations”. (Amnesty, 2013)

3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapulling

PM Erdoğan’s strategy was polarizing the society in order to keep its supporters

behind the government and preserve the unification of the party. He constantly called

protestors as “they” and made division between “them and us”. Before the June

Uprising, PM Erdoğan had been giving statements as he was the PM of all the nation

and PM of all citizens without making any difference between voted for him or not but

after the Uprising, he began to calculate his support as 50 %, aimed to show this

voting preferences may not be changed and he acted as PM of this 50 % and “they”,

“others” got out of his scope, no need to convince “them”. As mentioned in the

Reasons of the Uprising chapter, AKP could get higher votes after a successful 5

year-term both from economic side and peaceful process in Kurdish issue, as a

reason of providing a period of stability after political turmoils of 1990s and by using

media effectively and eliminating power of bureaucratic opposition via “show trials” he

could be able to gain 50 % vote. However, AKP is a kind of coalition party from

Islamists to right liberals and AKP could succeed by taking votes of central right and

added this over Islamist core supporters. Therefore a successful opposition may

attract central right votes, which may be defined as conservative and secular, and

there may be a danger of division within the party. However as could be seen by

October, despite the gossips on preparation of a new right wing party within the AKP,

(Aydınlık, 10.03.2013) PM Erdoğan has been successful in keeping its party together

and polarizing the nation into two main groups 50% vs 50%.

In order to polarize the society, PM Erdoğan constantly repeated some claims

against protestors as “they drank alcohol inside a mosque, they attacked a young

lady because she was wearing headscarf” which may provoke religious beliefs and

sensitiveness of conservative people, but these accusations could not be proved and

conservative masses did not prefer to mobilize despite PM’s special attempts.

(Kocadağ, 2013, p. 12) PM Erdoğan even targeted and threatened the richest

business group, Koç Holding, by claiming that they are supporting the Resistance.

The “evidence” is that after police violence, protestors could save themselves by

hiding in Divan Hotel which is owned by Koç Holding. (Sönmez, 27.07.2013)

The June Uprising also exposed the political power-media relations that mainstream

TV channels could not give news about the uprising in Turkey because of the intense

pressure of censorship coming from the government. During the most intense

clashes in Istanbul, Ankara and other cities where hundred thousands were

marching, CNN Türk was broadcasting a documentary of penguins and NTV, another

main news channel, was showing a gourmet program. People also protested these

news channels, burned a vehicle of NTV and penguins have become another symbol

of the Movement.

Advisers of the PM and some pro-government columnists also began a campaign

against the Chapullers and fabricated many theories to denigrate the Movement. The

common theory was that this uprising was planned and coordinated by foreign forces

which are against the growth of power of the Turkish Republic which is shifting from a

regional power to a global player and owning a stable and strong economy. Then,

who are these foreign forces? It is not possible for these theorists to target the US or

the EU, so they targeted different forces. PM Erdoğan also accepted some of them

as he talked about “interest rate lobbies”. Most probably by interest rate lobby he

defines the financial speculative market players which Turkish government worked

hard to attract for short term debts. Then PM Erdoğan also talked about the role of

the Jewish lobby which was hardly criticized by the US and Israel, then not talked

about this group anymore. Also some advisors of Erdoğan showed Otpor, Soros and

other networks who would like to create trouble within Turkey. (Ergin, 30.08.2013;

Hürriyet, 10.06.2013; Yeni Şafak, 15.06.2013; Odatv, 16.06.2013) However,the

government refused to accept this Uprising as a democratic and national movement

bringing together various political currents and ordinary citizens who have concerns

about the future of the country. Despite such statements, President Abdullah Gül

gave positive statements in meetings with the US and EU officials and in their

interviews with the international media. For instance, President Gül stated on 24th

September in the USA that he is honoured with the Gezi Movement that showed the

high level of democratic progress in Turkey that Turkish citizens share similar

demands with the citizens of the US or the UK, however, he claimed that after a few

days, this mobilization began to be exploited by radical currents. (Hürriyet,

24.09.2013)

4. WHO ARE “CHAPULLERS”?

There have been many debates on who these chapullers are. Is this a revolt of white

collar workers, middle classes or Y Generation? Is this an uprising for liberties and

freedoms or is this a part of the class movement or is it a revolt of conscience? It is

not possible to point a certain stratum of the society in this movement as responsible

for the uprising in which millions participated, therefore in order to understand who

the chapullers are, we may firstly focus on the core of this movement which were the

ones staying in Gezi Park and creating the Taksim Commune and then we may have

a broader view to understand social classes and sections of society which have

participated at massive level.

People, who stayed at the Park in their tents, were mostly young people, university

students and young professionals. Just focusing on the Gezi Park people would not

provide us the general picture but this was the core group that motivated the struggle.

There are three main researches on people in Gezi Park.

The first was done by the Bilgi University on 4th June, just a few day after the

occupation of the Square with 3 thousand protesters and done in 20 hours via

internet. According to this research;

64 % were between 19 and 30 years old,

53.7 % had not been in such demonstrations before, so this was their first

experience and 70 % do not feel close to any political party.

The authoritarian rule of the PM Erdoğan is the first reason of being at Gezi

Park with 92,4 %. The excessive violence of police is the second reason with

91,3 % and violation of democratic rights is 91,1 %. People participated to

save the Park is 56,2 %.

81,2 % states that they struggle for freedoms and 64,5 % struggles for secular

system.

79,5 % is against coup d’etat. (T24, 04.06.2013)

The second research was done by Konda Research Company on 6-7th June with

4441 people staying in different parts of the Park (different political groups had tents

in different parts of the Park) in 30 hours.

69 % heard the movement from social media and 15 % from their friends.

73 % decided to come Gezi Park after the police violence.

30 % stayed permanently in the park, the rest visited the Park every day or a

few days in a week.

6,4 % came to the Park by the support of their affiliated party. 92 % of

students decided individually to come to the Park.

58 % was there because of the feeling that their freedoms are in danger. 37 %

was against AKP. 34% wanted more freedom.

52 % is not decided for the party they would vote or they will not go to bullet

box.

In the previous elections, 41 % voted for CHP, 17 % was under 18 years old,

20 % didn’t vote, 15 % voted for independent candidates (Kurdish nationalist

party, some socialist and nationalist parties participated elections with

independent candidates to overcome 10 % threshold).

For next elections, 31 % would vote for CHP, 8 % for BDP (Kurdish nationalist

party-Peace and Democracy Party), 18 % will not vote for any party, 29 % has

not decided yet.

The average age is 28 and 50,2 % is women.

13 % is MA-PhD student, 43 % has undergraduate diploma.

52 % is wage-earner, 37 % is student. (Konda, June 2013)

The third research was done by GENAR Research Company on 8-9th June with 498

people, 78 % of which was people in Gezi Park and the rest with people in Taksim

Square and around.

58 % states that the real reason is personal characteristic of the PM Erdoğan.

46 % joined to support and contribute to the resistance.

When they were asked the major problems of Turkey, protestors think that 19

% is the absence of freedom, 16 % is injustice, inequality and discrimination,

11 % is unemployment and 10 % is economy.

33 % defines themselves as Kemalist, 19 % is pro-freedom, 12 % is socialist,

9 % social democrat, 8,4 % is democrat,

Similarly with the Konda research, in this research, 54 % is wage-earner.

(Genar, June 2013)

In another research done by Konsensus Research Company, done between 3rd and

19th June in 81 cities of Turkey among 1500 people, 54 % of the society supports the

Gezi Park mobilization. 29 % of people who had voted for AKP also support the Gezi

Park movement according to the research. (Konsensus, June, 2013)

In a broader sense, it is possible to count the social classes and sections of society

that supported the June Uprising as follows,

Wage-earners joined this Movement in a massive scale. Traditional working class

was at the mobilization. However, trade unions did not have any effect over the

Movement. Moreover, two of three confederations, namely Türk İş and Hak İş, which

have pro-government leaderships, signed a common declaration together with some

employers associations against the Movement. Some progressive unions within Türk

İş supported the Movement. DISK (Confederation of Progressive Trade Unions of

Turkey) and KESK supported the Uprising actively, and by being a member of the

Taksim Solidarity Platform, they called their members to join the Movement. They

also declared general strike on 5th June and organized demonstrations under their

own banners. (NTVMSNBC, 05.06.2013) However these Unions are relatively weak

organizations, (DİSK has 100.000 members within 16 million wage earners) and

these strikes had symbolic importance. Workers participated to the struggle after

work hours, they did not stop production. Wage earners, blue and white collar

workers, sub-contracted workers, workers under precarious working conditions joined

Resistance in massive scale. (Boratav, 22.06.2013) Due to weakness of the labour

class organizations, it is not possible to count the rate of participation of working

class but this may be seen by the high level of mobilization in districts where working

class-labouring classes reside in Istanbul, Ankara, Hatay, İzmir, Eskişehir and other

cities. (Korkmaz, 19.08.2013)

White collar workers, “plaza workers” (the ones working in skyscrapers for big

capital), and highly educated employees have been active during the mobilization.

High participation and activism of these employees was surprising because of the low

level of organization and relatively high wages they earn, however, precarious

working conditions and demands of freedom and liberties motivated these sections of

the society. These are the ones facing the rapid proletarization. (Bürkev, 24.06.2013;

Boratav, 22.06.2013; Yıldızoğlu, 27.06.2013) They could also use social media very

effectively. On 3rd June, thousands of “plaza workers” protested NTV media channel

on the lunch break at the richest district of Istanbul by the reason of censorship to the

Uprising. (Bianet, 03.06.2013)

Women were very active in the Movement. Women were feeling threat about their life

styles and feminist movement had been active before the Uprising in protesting

Government and PM when they had statements about the ban on abortion and

having at least three children, introducing flexible working conditions for women and

PM’s and Ministries’ various statements about the dresses and moral principles for

women. Therefore, the accumulation of such concerns motivated women to join

Resistance in massive scale and in an active and militant way. The youth was also

very active during the mobilization. By using social media effectively and presenting

their own style of humour and slogans, they could mobilize in a speedy and massive

way and they could resist behind barricades days and nights.

Football fan groups were also very active during the Movement. Turkish football was

highly politicized during the AKP Government. The government tried to control and

influence football teams and when they could not achieve their attempts, “show trials”

were introduced once again by claiming to make chicane to the only ones who had

refused Government’s demands as Fenerbahçe and Beşiktaş. During these trials,

football fan groups mobilized to defend their teams and they had clashed with police

many times. This process politicized football fan groups and many leftist football fan

groups were formed. During the Uprising, these football groups mobilized with high

motivation and they could transfer their experiences on clashing with police and

forming barricades to other people. Especially Beşiktaş, Fenerbahçe and

Galatasaray fans, which had serious conflicts with each other before the Uprising,

resisted together and “Istanbul United” and “Brotherhood of Colours” became their

slogans. Beşiktaş fan club Çarşı, which is one of the oldest football fan groups in

Turkey since 1980s and well known with its leftist and social political thought,

became “the star” of the Resistance by using their creativity in struggle against the

police. Beşiktaş is the closest district to Taksim Square and the hardest

confrontations were in Beşiktaş, therefore, the fans of the football club of this district

were active during the Resistance and Çarşı attracted much sympathy from people.

Alevis4 also joined the Resistance in a massive scale. Alevis have strongly positioned

themselves against AKP Government who have been following Sunni political

Islamist politics. AKP Government tried to initiate a reform package for Alevis a few

times which all failed. Alevis face discrimination especially in state bureaucracy; their

place of worship, Cemevi, is not recognized by the state and Alev, their children are

forced to learn Sunni Islam in primary schools and the government transfers high

amounts of money to the Directorate of Religious Affairs which only supports Sunni

Islam. Alevis campaign to be recognized by the state and defend that these practices

and policies are against secularity.

Kurds also joined the Resistance. However, Kurdish national movement with its legal

and illegal-armed organizations had a suspicious approach towards the Uprising.

AKP Government initiated a Peace Process to solve the Kurdish question including

hidden negotiations with PKK leader Öcalan who is in prison and with BDP (Peace

and Democracy Party) in the Parliament. AKP government offers and promises

reforms in Kurdish question and PKK has declared armistice and called their armed

groups to leave country back to their liberated zone in Northern Iraq. When people

mobilized spontaneously in June, most of them were carrying Turkish flag which is

defined as a sign of patriotism for people and Kurdish movement had concerns to

understand the political essence of the Movement which might be a right wing-

nationalist uprising. However, later, Kurdish movement’s leaders stated self-criticism

when it is clearly understood that this uprising was in politically left and when AKP

could not satisfy the Kurdish national movement with their practices and they

declared that they would support the Resistance, but in practice, Kurdish Movement’s

organized forces did not mobilize their masses and there had not been big

demonstrations in Kurdish cities. It is also necessary to note that one of the first

symbols of the peaceful resistance to preserve Gezi Park was S. Süreyya Önder, a

well-known film director and Member of Parliament from pro-Kurdish BDP who did

not let Municipality’s bulldozers to destroy Gezi Park on 29th and 30th May and police

decided to attack protestors early morning on 31st May and then Uprising occurred.

There were some attempts from the mainstream media to define chapullers as

people without ideologies. However chapullers have clear demands. They want the

resignation of the government. They want to save the environment and object neo-

liberal rent-seeking urbanization projects. They are against all kinds of discrimination

to women, LGBTT, Kurds and Alevis. They are against authoritarian rule and want

more freedom. These are naturally “leftist” demands and own an ideology. (Erdemol,

2013, p. 14)

4 Alevi society is a minority religious group in Turkey. Apart from the majority of the Sunni Muslims, Alevi belief is

in line with Shia Muslim but origin to the Anatolia influenced from former Anatolian and pre-Islamic Turkish religions and beliefs. Alevis are secular and leftist in majority.

.

CONCLUSION: FROM JUNE TO NOVEMBER

When Gezi Park was reoccupied by police forces, Taksim Solidarity Platform called

people to gather in public parks of their districts, organize forums to discuss, mobilize

and continue the resistance. In all parts of Istanbul and in many cities and towns,

people began to gather each night at public parks and practice direct democracy,

debate, decide and act together. In July and August, people gathered to protest

government in certain days and protests and clashes continued in Istanbul, Ankara,

Eskişehir and Hatay. Both from the Resistance and government, there was a debate

on “return of the uprising in September”, because people were at holiday and in

September, people will return their homes, universities will re-open and football

league will start and resistance would continue.

The government prepared for the possible “hot September” scenario, bought more

pepper gas and police vehicles. Prime Minister and Ministers threatened people not

to continue the resistance. For instance, the Minister of Sport and Youth and the

Minister of Interior stated that they would not let protests in football stadiums, special

prosecutors would be employed in stadiums, there would be electronic tickets and

there will be cameras everywhere that would make it possible for the police to watch

each one in the audience and if there was an attempt for a protest, the police and the

prosecutors would intervene and would not let these people to come stadiums once

again. (Radikal, 31.07.2013) Additionally, the state department of dormitories and

scholarships stated that there would not be scholarships and place in dormitories for

students who join protests. (Bugün, 31.07.2013) Istanbul Mayor began to ban all

events and demonstrations in Gezi Park after re-opening of the park. Even a couple

who met during the Resistance and would like to merry at Gezi Park was banned and

police attacked people gathered for the wedding with pepper gas. (Milliyet,

20.07.2013)

The government’s policy was to suppress all opposition and protests in July, August,

September and October by using police violence and to hinder the opposition from

getting organized and strengthen. Increase in violence may divide and weaken the

opposition and resistance. However, from September to November, İn Istanbul

(Kadıköy and Taksim) and in Ankara (Middle East Technical University) there were

mobilizations of people and the police used violence over them, but people did not

mobilize for a similar level of uprising as in June but preferred to gather in forums, big

concerts were organized, peaceful demonstrations were made. In short, the

opposition/resistance preferred to follow its own way, did not accept the

government’s choice for conducting more violence. In universities, the threat to cut

scholarships did not work and university students in many universities have been

continuing protesting government. The government focused on METU (Middle East

Technical University, which is one of the most distinguished universities of Turkey) to

initiate a project to destroy the METU forest and build a motorway in October and all

university protested this project, there have been many clashes with police forces. In

football stadiums, ten thousands of people have been protesting government and

police violence at 34th minute of the match which is the traffic code number of

Istanbul. Threats over football fans did not work.

To conclude, since the June Uprising, the resistance-opposition movement gained

the moral superiority over the government. Before June, AKP Government was seen

unchallengeable and enjoyed the moral superiority against its opponents, however,

since June, AKP government is in a defensive position. The support it has from both

in domestic and international politics is in decrease. Erdoğan is perceived as an

authoritarian ruler and its opponents call him “dictator”. Additionally, Erdoğan rapidly

lost his charisma and support in Middle East. Last but not least, the economic

situation sounds the note of alarm, economic growth based on foreign debt create

danger about stability.

Turkey has three elections in coming months. The nearest one is the local elections

in March 2014, then there will be presidential elections in the middle of 2014 and

general elections in 2015. The local election is more than a local election, would

reflect the current polarization in the society, especially local elections in İstanbul, as

the most populous and the most important city, would reflect the future of the AKP

government. Presidential elections will be also important, because president has a

more symbolic role and tend to be independent from daily politics and parties and

Prime Minister is the main leader of the executive in Turkish system. Therefore, if

Erdoğan is elected as President, he would not be able to control his party and the

government and main alternative to Erdoğan is the current President Abdullah Gül

which is known in the public that Mr. Gül and Mr. Erdoğan have conflicts with each

other. Even in the June Uprising, Mr. Gül gave positive statements about protestors

in Gezi Park and expressed condolences for people losing their lives during the

mobilization. (EC Progress Report, 2013) Before June Uprising, PM Erdoğan stated

that he prefers a presidential system as in the USA and he would like to change the

system, however with the June Uprising, this seems not possible as even PM

Erdoğan does not prefer to repeat this argument. Therefore, this election, which

would be affected from the results of the local elections, would provide clearer picture

about the general elections.

This was an uprising targeting the Government but not aiming to overthrow it.

(Erdemol, 2013, p.11) This uprising opened a new chapter in 90 year-old history of

Turkish Republic. (Yaraşır, 2013) The June Uprising clearly changed the political

environment and power balances of the political elite. This uprising provided more

fertile conditions for the out of parliament opposition and other social organizations.

The June Uprising showed that AKP Government is in decline and could not be able

to continue its power for a long time. The June Uprising broke the chains of the Left

which was suppressed by the military junta in 1980 and gave confidence once again

to the movement. The June Uprising did not simply occur and finish. It opened a new

chapter in Turkish political system that would affect the future of Turkey.

REFERENCES

Amnesty International, October 2013. Gezi Park Protests: Brutal Denial of the Right

to Peaceful Assembly in Turkey. London

Aydınlık Gazetesi, 10.03.2013, AKP İçinde Yeni Parti Hazırlığı

http://www.aydinlikgazete.com/mansetler/19877-akp-icinde-yeni-parti

hazirligi.html accessed 20.10.2013

Bianet, 03.06.2013. NTV önünde gezi parkı protestosu

http://www.bianet.org/bianet/yasam/147168-ntv-onunde-gezi-parki-protestosu

accessed 20.10.2012

BBC Türkçe, 06.06.2013, Erdoğan Dönüyor,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/turkce/haberler/2013/06/130606_erdogan_donuyor.shtml

accessed 20.10.2013

Boratav, Korkut. 22.06.2013. Korkut Boratav’la Röportaj. Sendika.org

Bugün Gazetesi, 31.07.2013. Eylemciye burs tartışması

http://gundem.bugun.com.tr/eylemciye-burs-tartismasi-haberi/741275

accessed 20.10.2013

Bürkev, Yalçın, 24.06.2013. Yalçın Bürkev’le Röportaj, sendika.org

CNNTürk, 18.06.2013. Taksim’de Duran Adam Eylemi.

http://www.cnnturk.com/2013/turkiye/06/18/taksimde.duran.adam.eylemi/7120

11.0/ Accessed 20.10.2013

Erdemol, Mustafa K., 2013, Gezi Parkı Direnişi, Küçük Bahçede Büyük Kıyamet.

Yazılama Yayınevi, İstanbul.

Ergin, Sedat, 30.08.2013, Obama’dan Türkiye’ye Yeni Bakışın Şifreleri, Hürriyet

Gazetesi.

European Commission, October 2013, Turkey 2013 Progress Report.

Hürriyet Gazetesi, 04.06.2013, Başbakan: % 50’yi Evinde Zor Tutuyorum.

http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/23429709.asp accessed 20.10.2013

Hürriyet Gazetesi, 10.06.2013, Kimdir bu “faiz lobisi”?

http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/ekonomi/23472025.asp accessed 20.10.2013

Hürriyet Gazetesi, 24.09.2013, Gül: Gezi Olayının Başlangıcı ile Gurur Duydum.

http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/24774561.asp accessed 20.10.2013

Hürriyet Gazetesi, 02.09.2013, Metin Feyzioğlu’ndan Sert Eleştiriler

http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/24633061.asp accessed 20.10.2013

Kocadağ, Arif, July 2013. Taksim Meydan Okuması. İsyan Edin, Birleşin, Örgütlenin!.

Umut Yayımcılık, İstanbul 2013.

Korkmaz, Eren. 19.08.2013. “Gezi” Notları ve Beklentiler.

http://www.sendika.org/2013/08/gezi-notlari-ve-beklentiler-eren-korkmaz/

accessed 20.10.2013

NTVMSNBC, 07.04.2013. 'Emek' Protestosuna Biber Gazı,

http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/id/25434134/ accessed 20.10.2013

NTVMSNBC, 05.06.2013, Sendikalardan “gezi” grevi

http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/id/25447157/ accessed 20.10.2013

Milliyet Gazetesi, 20.07.2013. Gezi parkında “nikah” gerginliği

http://gundem.milliyet.com.tr/gezi-parki-nda-nikah-gerginligi

/gundem/detay/1739405/default.htm accessed 20.10.2013

Müftüoğlu, Oğuzhan. 16.06.2013, Gezi Eski Kalıpları Çöpe Attı. Akşam Gazetesi.

Radikal Gazetesi, 31.07.2013. Stadyumda “her yer taksim her yer direniş” yasağı!

http://www.radikal.com.tr/spor/stadyumda__her_yer_taksim_her_yer_direnis_

asagi-1144238 accessed 20.10.2013

ODA TV, 16.06.2013, Gezi direnişinin ardında Otpor mu var?

http://www.odatv.com/n.php?n=gezi-direnisinin-arkasinda-otpor-mu-var

1606131200 accessed 20.10.2013

Social Media and Political Participation Lab/New York University, June2013, A Breakout Role for Twitter? The Role of Social Media in the Turkish Protests, http://smapp.nyu.edu/reports/turkey_data_report.pdf Accessed 20.10.2013

Sönmez, Mustafa, 23.06.2013. Bir Meta Olarak İstanbul.

Mustafasonmez.net Accessed 20.10.2013.

Sönmez, Mustafa. 27.07.2013. Fesuphanallah, Sıra #direnKOÇ’ta.

Mustafasonmez.net accessed 20.10.2013

Sönmez, Mustafa. 29.07.2013. AKP’nin Dış Desteği Çökerken. Mustafasonmez.net

accessed 20.10.2013

Taksim Solidarity, 22.06.2013. To the Press and the Public.

http://taksimdayanisma.org/basina-ve-kamuoyuna-22-haziran-2013?lang=en

accessed 20.10.2013

Türk Tabipler Birliği, Gezi Direnişi, http://www.ttb.org.tr/index.php/gezidirenisi.html

accessed 20.10.2013

Yaraşır, Volkan. 03.07.2013. Gezi Parkı Direnişinden Ayaklanmaya, Kızılbayrak

Gazetesi.

Yeni Şafak Gazetesi, 15.06.2013, Kod adı İstanbul isyanı,

http://yenisafak.com.tr/gundem-haber/kod-adi-istanbul-isyani-16.06.2013

533074 accessed 20.10.2013

Yıldızoğlu, Ergin, 27.06.2013. Ergün Yıldızoğlu ile Röportaj. Sendika.org