While many Turks were expecting the country's Twitter ban to near an end, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan instead upped the ante on Sunday, March 23, and threatened to expand the restriction to other popular social media networks such as Facebook and YouTube.

“They claim their freedom is being taken away from them. With all due respect, though, we will continue our fight against those who violate our privacy, who tap into our [telephone] conversations and listen to them,” Erdogan said at his election rally in Istanbul, directly linking the Twitter ban to the graft probe, which brought him, his family members and his government under a criminal spotlight more than three months ago. “If Twitter is going to take an honest attitude, if YouTube is going to follow an honest approach, then we will give all sorts of support. If Facebook gives up its immoral activities, we will support it. If it is going to cause harm to families, it is going to find the government of the Turkish Republic standing against it.” He added: “Ah, my dear brothers, ah. You should know what else they are doing. Do you know what they are talking about now? They talk about some further leakages on March 25th, March 30th. Sure it can be the 29th but not the 30th [the day of the local election]. Whatever it is that you will come up with, whatever kind of montage or dubbing, you will be crushed underneath these lies, threats, montages, shamefulness and viciousness.”
 
Since the corruption allegations became public, the prime minister has been talking of an “independence war” against those seeking to bring him down. With this fervent style of speech, he is almost counseling his followers to detest those disagreeing with him. While the country’s social fabric is being rewoven as a result of this kind of narrative, the facts are increasingly becoming irrelevant.
 
As reported here previously, the Turkish Communications Directorate (TIB) justified its decision for a general ban on Twitter on four separate court cases, none of which have anything to do with the graft probe. Erdogan, however, publicly makes this connection. Ersan Sen, a highly regarded Istanbul based lawyer in criminal cases, told Al-Monitor, “The government is taking advantage of this issue, and is trying to further expand its authority. The people at the rallies would not know about the legal bases of these issues, or how such decision is arbitrary and the government is enforcing a disproportionate authority restricting people’s freedom.” He added, “The TIB has only shared the date of the court decisions without stating the prosecutorial reference numbers that gives it the legal authority to exert this ban in general. Let’s assume for a moment, though, that there actually is a decision by the prosecutor’s office: That decision needs to be put forward before a judge for approval in less than 24 hours, and the judge needs to decide on it in less than 24 hours. In sum, there is actually no decision taken by a judge that authorizes a general ban to Twitter access from Turkey. Therefore, the TIB is actually in violation of the law by implementing such restriction in its entirety.”
 
Although Turkish President Abdullah Gul approved in February the recent Internet law, he also said on Sunday, March 23, that it was “not legally possible to shut down the Internet and the platforms [such as Twitter] in general.” He expressed a hope that the access to this popular social media network resumes soon. The government instead blocked access to public Domain Name System (DNS) servers provided by Google, making Turkey the first country ever to take such drastic measure to block access to Twitter. The perception on the Turkish street among the opposition is that the government is exercising a disproportionate use of authority in cyberspace just as police abused their authority during the Gezi Park protests in late May and early June of 2013.

Erdogan, however, claims that Twitter is applying double standards, shutting down accounts when the United States or Britain demand it, but talking about defending freedom when it comes to countries like Turkey, Ukraine or Egypt. Furthermore, Erdogan vows that he will do his best to protect the national interests of the country regardless of what Westerners say.
 
Such narrative stimulates people’s nationalistic ambitions just ahead of Sunday's [March 30] local elections. Minister of Health Mehmet Muezzionglu, for example, said, “A nation that is in love with its sovereignty makes anyone opposing its interests to kneel down. That is what Recep Tayyip Erdogan did. Twitter kneeled down before our prime minister.” But Erdogan’s once-strong international allies have a different perspective. The United States had extended a special support to the Islamist-based Erdogan government from the day it assumed power in November 2002, as the Americans expressed a narrow empathy for the Islamists’complaints about a ban on headscarves in government offices and that the then-government’s style of rule contradicted religious freedom. Today, it is a different story.

Douglas Frantz, assistant secretary of public affairs at the US State Department, titled his March 21 blog entry describing internet censorship as “21st century book burning.” He wrote, “In an era in which the Internet serves as the world’s community forum, censorship anywhere is a threat to freedom of speech everywhere…A friend like Turkey has nothing to fear in the free flow of ideas and even criticism represented by Twitter. Its attempt to block its citizens’ access to social media tools should be reversed.” Frantz added, “We have found that the most powerful weapon against hateful, libelous or untrue speech is more speech. True, there are times when certain types of speech — criticism of policies, or worse, stories revealing scandals — seem at first to undermine our government. Some officials may be tempted to view the press or open discussion forums as the enemy. The way we respond to criticism is what separates vibrant democracies from authoritarian regimes.”
 
The EU commissioner for digital agenda, Neelie Kroes, tweeted on March 21 that Turkey's blockage of Twitter “is groundless, pointless, cowardly.” She said the "Turkish people and international community will see this as censorship. It is.”
 
Transportation Minister Lutfu Elvan, however, considers the government’s decision to be neither a sign of growing authoritarian leanings nor as censorship, but a rightful tactic of challenging Twitter’s double standards. “When we express our legitimate concern, it becomes a freedom of speech issue,” he said on CNNTurk. “They jail people for harshly criticizing President Obama.” The American people, however, are actually granted the most luxurious freedom of speech on the face of the earth by the First Amendment of its Constitution, which gives people the right to express their criticism of their elected officials without concern of government reprisal. But facts, as always, have become the first victim of politicians. And as long as Erdogan stays in power, there seems to be no hope that this arbitrary trend of taking advantage of law enforcement and the judiciary will change.