Turkey's failed coup is not a triumph for liberal democracy

Send your letters in to letters@independent.co.uk

Security officers guard secure the area as President Erdogan arrives to give a speech to supporters following a failed coup attempt (Defne Karadeniz/Getty Images)

Turkey’s failed army coup is a victory for Islamist, not liberal, democracy. Under Islamist democracy, Turkey had more journalists in jail than in China, Russia and Iran. Its religious affairs department recognises only one religion: Sunni Islam. Since other faiths are not recognised by the Turkish State, they have no legal status.

If the army had won, its victory would have been a victory for Turkey’s secularism, religious tolerance and multi-faith coexistence. Now that Islamists have won, Turkey would see a faster roll-back of secularism from its public life, and widespread persecution of its Alevi activists, whom President Erdogan publicly blames for the coup.

The removal of the army from Turkey’s politics may have been desirable, but there is little doubt that it is the 80-year-old traditions of secularism, unremittingly protected by the army, which have created the ground for democracy to flourish. With Erdogan’s victory, that ground is now more likely to be occupied by an Iranian-type illiberal democracy.

Randhir Singh Bains

Essex

After Nice, we mustn't continue this vicious circle

Following the Nice attack, Theresa May called for a tough response and Francois Hollande vowed to avenge the innocent lives lost in Nice by extending military intervention in Syria and Iraq. It is just shocking that even after 15 years of waging a “war on terror”, we continue along this warpath, despite the world becoming increasingly dangerous. If we don't break this cycle of violence then just as we drop more bombs in the Middle East, further retaliatory attacks will take place at home. Sadly, this will become our norm in the same way that war has tragically become the norm for people living in countries which were invaded and destabilised.

Mirza Ali

Essex

How do we solve the single market conundrum?

We must have access to the single market, say the Remainers (an argument outlined in John Rentoul’s piece “For the first time in Britain, we have a Prime Minister who intends to make us poorer”). But how does it differ from a free trade pact?

The United States of America is a single market for goods and services. In contrast, the North American Free Trade Area is essentially about goods. It neither makes provision for the free movement of labour, nor would any American or Canadian politician dare advocate such a provision. The free movement of labour is, of course, a bedrock principle of the EU single market.

Just as non-EU migrants view themselves as British rather than English, so those from the EU will opt for a European identity rather than a British one. Thus the free movement of labour spawns an ever closer political union.

Staying in the single market will satisfy the City but it will eventually have profound consequences.

Yugo Kovach

Dorset

It is possible for Scotland to retain links to the EU and be part of the UK; here is how. We can form a British Isles Single Market (BISM) made up of the UK, Scotland and if wished, Ireland. We can continue a common travel area that extends to the Irish Republic as it does at present. We establish a joint border force for our external borders, as is the case at present with Ireland. Our nations will all use the Pound, contribute to the BISM's budget, adhere to budgetary requirements, under the control of BISM Central Bank. Scotland would gain full fiscal independence. EU/EEA migrants could be accepted in Scotland, after having passed through the common border, but only get National Insurance numbers in Scotland or Ireland. And in return Scotland could access the EU's single market too, applying EU standards to Scotland's trade with the EU. There would be a type of shared citizenship similar to post-Maastricht EU citizenship for the British Isles, alongside Scottish, Irish and UK passports. A common parliament could be established.

It might sound far-fetched but consider the alternatives with two hard borders, the Good Friday agreement in danger, full and acrimonious independence and loss of much of Ireland's market for the UK.

Andrew Reid Wildman

Loughton

More important than ever to guard against bias

A report by the London School of Economics reveals that three-quarters of newspaper reports in the first few months of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership “either distorted or failed to represent his actual views” (“Corbyn views ‘misreported’ by newspapers, report finds”, 17 July). Fewer than 10 per cent of articles were found to be positive about Corbyn.

It’s a good thing that the LSE has done this long overdue research, and crystallised the facts which have long been known or suspected by many. The bad thing is that it just goes to show how the press still has such power over the prospects of our political leaders.

The press destroyed Gordon Brown’s reputation. It then went on to destroy Ed Miliband. It has peaked in an orgy of hostility towards Jeremy Corbyn, while the smarmy and cruel David Cameron has been treated throughout with kid gloves. Inevitably a large percentage of the electorate will to some extent or another be influenced by relentless character assassination, and the votes of some people will be entirely based on how they have been influenced by newspapers.

If the Independent cannot be a shining example of fairness in this matter, then it is left to social media to fill the gaps and present the truth, and that is something used less by the older generation – the generation that votes in the highest numbers – than by anyone else.

This report should be serious food for thought.

Penny Little

Great Haseley, Oxon

Don't forget May's record

As the former Home Secretary becomes Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition fights to keep his job, I can’t help thinking back to the 15^th June last year: the day that Jeremy Corbyn made the ballot for the Labour leadership. That same afternoon, Corbyn was one of a small number of MPs to join a demonstration protesting the abuse and mistreatment of women detained without charge or trial at Yarl's Wood Immigration Removal Centre and calling for that centre to be closed. The rally was addressed by former and current detainees (the latter speaking by phone) whose harrowing stories are generally unheard and who have lived without the democratic freedoms many of us take for granted. Now is not the time to forget the many vulnerable women and men hurt by the policies of Theresa May’s old department nor to lose sight of the solidarity that matters more than a pink bus.

Emma Jones

Abingdon

Making plans for Nigel

It's impossible not to disparage

The disaster called Nigel Farage

He entices the floaters

By lying to voters

Then just walks away from the damage.

James Churchill

Baslow