At the NATO Summit, Secretary-General Mark Rutte responded to a question by saying, “Democracy is more than just elections. Elections are, of course, important, but democracy also means a free press.”

Rutte’s response also opened the door to a debate on democracy. Rutte is undoubtedly aware that he is speaking about a regime in which election results have effectively been abolished, and that his words carry no meaning beyond mere rhetoric. What really deserves attention, however, is not this response, but the question posed to Mr Rutte: ‘Do you think Ankara is still a suitable venue for hosting the summit of liberal democracies?’

This question highlights that, whilst NATO member the US and Western countries continue to define themselves as ‘liberal democracies’, Ankara maintains a distance from this label. The major misconception of the opposition movements in recent years lies precisely here: this misconception concerns the existence or possibility of liberal democracy.

Yet today, one can speak neither of the existence of liberal democracy nor of its possibility. As we recall, this myth of liberal democracy was brought to the fore as part of the era of globalisation that began with the defeat of real socialism. Following the disappearance of the last remnants of the old authoritarian world, it was widely claimed that capitalism would spread as a democratic form—displacing all forms of repressive, authoritarian regimes.

This new world order, built upon the claim of the globalisation of democracy and prosperity, has now been left behind, along with the major crises that have been heaped upon the peoples. All that remains amidst the rubble are new fascist regimes in which even the crumbs of democracy have been swept away; new grounds for racist conflict, fuelled by divisions based on identity; and nothing but deep inequality and poverty.

The deep crisis of capitalism is manifesting itself in the form of a backlash from societies plagued by inequality—a backlash that the ruling classes are unable to control. Meanwhile, the imperialist capitalist system is fracturing along the lines of competition in the economic, commercial and military spheres. In response to this, the increasingly evident policy of the US and the imperialist powers is a new concept of war, as exemplified by ‘NATO 3.0’.

Whilst this new orientation is taking shape as a kind of Third World War centred on China, its scope is by no means restricted to the region. A broad spectrum, ranging from cyberspace to commercial transport routes, is being defined as a military theatre of war. This theatre of war also encompasses the socio-political sphere. It is precisely for this reason that democracy and the people’s impact on politics are viewed not as a source of strength, but rather as a sign of weakness. To the extent that each of the new fascist movements and the growing authoritarian regimes worldwide are built around strong leaderships, we observe that they are seeking to effectively turn politics into an extension of the concept of war by eroding democratic institutions, laws and constitutions. It is impossible to analyse the rise of neo-fascism independently of this orientation of the imperialist-capitalist system – specifically, the axis represented by ‘NATO 3.0’.

When it comes to Turkey, it is well known that views often frame democracy within the context of relations with the West, particularly in discussions regarding the EU. We witnessed a similar situation at the NATO Summit. Some even argued that Turkey’s drift away from NATO and the West would mean drifting further away from democracy, and consequently that the left’s opposition to NATO amounted to a form of anti-democracy.

That these views have no basis in reality can be seen by examining the role of the US and NATO in the country’s dark and bloody history. Setting aside the direct, bloody interventions epitomised by the 12 September coup, as well as certain situational conflicts, the events of the past quarter of a century – during which Turkey has been gradually dragged towards Islamist fascism since the AKP came to power – also serve as proof of this.

Today, too, Turkey is positioned as a buffer zone between Europe and the Middle East. What truly concerns the West is not whether democracy exists in Turkey, but whether it serves as a buffer state for migrants. Within the NATO 3.0 Concept, Turkey is intended to function both as a frontline outpost with new military bases and, within Europe’s new security orientation, as a military and production hub.

Consequently, there is not so much a contradiction as complete harmony between the political Islamist government—and its current drift towards a reactionary regime without elections or opposition—and the US and NATO. Any opposition strategy based on the possibility of liberal democracy and its export from the West is, as it was yesterday, doomed to failure today. It must be clear that within such a war concept, there is no place for democracy, nor will there be any room for peace and freedom.

Furthermore, at this stage, we are also seeing that even in the West, the possibility of speaking of liberal democracies—even at the level of rhetoric—is becoming increasingly difficult. From the US to France and Italy, examples continue to mount not only of neo-fascist movements marching towards power, but also of centrist parties imposing their authority in the pursuit of imperial and neoliberal interests.

The only way to overturn the fascist trajectory imposed by this comprehensive war concept is for everyone resisting the regimes of this system—organised and unorganised opposition forces alike—to forge a power capable of taking control of its own destiny. In fact, both opposition and resistance can now be waged not within the realm of dominant politics or its old institutions and structures, but along a new, vibrant axis rooted entirely in the struggles taking place within the social sphere.

Note: This article is translated from the original article titled Yeni savaş düzeninde demokrasi ve halk, published in BirGün newspaper on July 12, 2026.