At dawn on February 6, an earthquake measuring 7.7 on the Richter scale struck southern Turkey and northern Syria, and at least 10 Turkish provinces were directly affected by it, amid expectations of heavy losses in lives and buildings, which brought to mind the most severe earthquake that Turkey knew in 1999. .

Marmara earthquake

If Turkey is known as a country of military coups, it is also a country of earthquakes, as it is located on an active belt and has known many of them in its history. Rather, it witnessed a major earthquake at least every 30 years, according to some estimates.

Some particularly large earthquakes had political consequences, foremost of which was the 1999 earthquake known as the Marmara, Izmit, or Golcuk earthquakes.

On August 17, 1999, Turkey witnessed an earthquake with a magnitude of 7.6 on the Richter scale. Its epicenter was in the Izmit region near Istanbul and at a depth of 17 kilometers from the surface of the earth, and it caused a large number of victims as well as massive destruction.

At the time, it was estimated that 17,480 people died, 23,781 others were injured, 505 people were permanently disabled, and more than 285,000 homes and about 43,000 workplaces were damaged.

However, a subsequent report by a parliamentary committee confirmed the death of more than 18,000 and the injury of nearly 50,000.

While some unofficial sources talked about many times these numbers, bringing the number of those affected by the earthquake in various direct and indirect forms to about 16 million people.

The Marmara earthquake was large and devastating, and the number of victims and injured increased mainly because of the fragile nature of the buildings that are not resistant to earthquakes.

But the most important thing regarding him was the absence of the state first, and then its impotence second.

Long hours passed, and sometimes days, before the concerned officials arrived in the affected areas, and then the rescue work showed the country's unpreparedness for a disaster of this kind, neither in terms of buildings nor in terms of rescue in terms of planning, preparation, requirements and implementation.

Therefore, the 1999 earthquake was a station of great popular anger against the government and the political and party system as a whole, and added to the political blockage and economic crisis, resulting in disbelief in the existing political elite and the search for an alternative, and all of this was among the reasons for the victory of the nascent party at the time (Justice and Development) with the confidence of the Turkish street in The first elections he ran in 2002.

Today, more than two decades later, the Kahramanmaraş earthquake reminds of the 1999 earthquake, and spontaneous and/or intended comparisons are made between them, so how was the matter with the new earthquake?

In the political consequences of the earthquake, the disagreements and bickering between the various parties were absent in the first hours of the earthquake, and everyone agreed on the meanings of solidarity and interdependence and trying to help.

But that does not mean that it will necessarily go to the end

Kahramanmaras earthquake

On the sixth of this month, a severe earthquake struck southern Turkey, with its epicenter in Kahramanmaraş province, with a magnitude of 7.7 on the Richter scale and a depth of 7 kilometers above the earth's surface.

The earthquake affected 10 governorates, and it also caused remarkable damage in Syria, and people felt it in Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan and even Egypt.

More than that, the same region witnessed a second earthquake of magnitude 7.5 a few hours later.

This means that the current earthquake is stronger than the 1999 earthquake and is more destructive and widespread, which means that heavy losses are expected as a result of it.

Perhaps this meaning was present to the Turkish authorities since the first hours of the earthquake, and therefore they issued a level four warning, which means their inability to perform rescue actions on their own and their need for urgent international support, in addition to declaring general mourning in the country for a period of one week from the first day.

In the direct comparison between the two earthquakes, regardless of the technical details of them, we appear before two different scenes in time.

The first, the rapid, that is, immediately after the earthquake, in which the government presented a completely different performance than the Marmara earthquake.

The concerned ministers were in the earthquake zone in the first hours, led by Vice President Fuad Aktay, who led the rescue operations himself.

The institutions worked in two simultaneous and complementary tracks.

The Disaster and Emergency Control Authority (AFAD) led relief operations, including evacuation, shelter, rescue, guidance, etc., while the Ministry of Health took care of medical matters such as first aid, treatment, and health follow-ups, as well as blood donation and other requirements.

Ministries and other institutions worked in coordination with and under their command.

In his frequent press conferences, Aktay was keen to instill hope and confidence, despite the enormity of the event, in the hearts of the citizens, as he repeatedly repeated the phrase "things are under control", conveying a lot of information about rescue operations, numbers of deaths and injured, numbers of damaged buildings, relief work and the provision of shelter, food and fuel. And the international aid that was requested and some of it arrived, and even the conditions of airports, ports and dams.

In this way, the state/government remained the main and almost sole source of information, and was able to control the media landscape, refuting some false news, and presenting a clear message that it did not lose control in light of the difficult conditions.

There are two important meanings in this scene: spreading hope and good communication with people, both of which are important in a scourge like this.

With regard to the political consequences of the earthquake, disagreements and bickering between the various parties were absent in the first hours of the earthquake, and everyone agreed on the meanings of solidarity, interdependence, and an attempt to help.

But that does not mean that it will necessarily go to the end, as there is another scene expected with the passage of time.

It is likely that the various parties will resort to politicizing the facts of the earthquake and its aftershocks.

With the passage of days and the scene becoming more and more clear, especially with regard to human losses in particular, the scale of the disaster will be more severe for everyone, humanly, urban, economically, socially, and certainly politically.

In the context of the approaching fateful elections, this politicization seems inevitable.

Here, the government will deliberately present an image of control and coordinated serious action from the first moments, including a request for international support, as a country in the world cannot face a scourge of this kind and that degree alone, and it will arm itself with the experience of its institutions in this type of natural disaster.

And before all of that, the government will say that its precautionary measures, foremost of which are the construction laws and conditions for post-2000 buildings, had a major role in reducing the volume of losses of various kinds, especially in lives, and that had it not been for the civil development project, for example, the outcome would have been much greater.

On the other hand, the opposition will rely on the large number of those affected - deaths and injuries - and the extent of destruction and damaged buildings, to say that the government's negligence contributed to the increase in the bill, and that if it had fulfilled its full responsibilities, the losses would have been less than what happened.

Here, the opposition will focus on the incompleteness of earthquake prevention measures on the one hand, and the delay in the arrival of aid and rescue teams to all areas affected by earthquakes (which is vital with regard to the number of victims) on the other hand.

In conclusion, the Kahramanmaraş earthquake will most likely have its aftermath in the form of political repercussions that are no less important and dangerous than the aftershocks.

The performance of the government on the one hand and the allegations of the opposition on the other hand will be in a state of fierce competition to convince the Turkish people of the validity of this or that proposition.

And with time, the current earthquake will impose itself as one of the important files in the context of the upcoming elections - along with the economy, foreigners, and others - for the ruling coalitions and the opposition, as well as other parties and the street alike, and in everyone's imagination the 1999 earthquake in terms of results and consequences, specifically the evaluation of the government's performance by citizens / voters.