Why Did Turkey Come to Terms with McKinsey?

The object of criticism of President Erdogan"s visit to the United States is not his speech at the UN General Assembly or his passing meeting with the US President, whom he called "my friend Donald" last year, but the agreement reached with McKinsey in connection with the control of the New Economic Program, released on September 20.

Turkey, proud of having paid off all the debts to the IMF in the spring of 2013, today transfers control of its economy to a foreign private company. This means that this fact is behind the establishment of control on September 12 by Erdogan and his son-in-law - Minister of Treasury and Finance Berat Albayrak over the management of the Varlık Fondu (Estate Fund). This openly confirms and leaves no doubt that it was McKinsey that was behind the transfer of the Fund"s management to Erdogan and Albayrak. It turns out that the international credit institutions did not take seriously the former leadership of the Estate Fund, which includes government agencies and banks (this is about $ 200 billion).

The transfer of control over the country's economy to a foreign company has created a stir, and also caused sharp criticism. Minister Berat Albayrak said that "McKinsey will not interfere in any performing business, but will only exercise control with some interruptions." And since the statement could not calm the strained nerves or the criticism, the currency rate, which was prone to fall, instantly jumped. Who had the idea to transfer control over the economy of Turkey to McKinsey? It is known that Turkey finds it difficult to pay even part of its foreign debts, which have reached about half a trillion dollars. After about a year ago President Trump transferred the Gulf countries under his control, Turkey did not receive a cent from Arab countries (only the Emir of Qatar showed his love for the Turkish President by presenting him a personal plane worth 400 million dollars).

Despite the fact that in the Central Bank, interest rose by 11 points for two months, it was also not possible to "tear off money" from London. The EU and the countries of the Far East do not want to finance infrastructure, but concrete production projects. And in a period when hope is once again tied to the IMF, Erdogan and Albayrak consider this to be "shameful."

It is so because to contact the IMF directly is like returning to March 2001. It is impossible to justify this step or at least to explain it not only to the opposition, but even to the most ardent supporters. On the other hand, during the economic crisis in February 2001, Turkey"s foreign debt amounted to 130 billion dollars, but now this figure has increased by about 4 times. This is one of the reasons that complicate return to the IMF. The third reason is related to Erdogan"s political career. So, Erdogan, who himself came to power on a wave of severe devaluation in 2001, may knock on the IMF"s door 16 years later less probably than all other world politicians.

About how multifaceted the problem is, we can understand from the words of one AKP politician who did not want to identify himself and told the German media in early August due to the increased devaluation that Erdogan would rather accept bankruptcy than turn to the IMF. It seems that this multi-vector approach conditions Turkey"s appeal not directly, but deviously. In other words, this time Turkey operates through McKinsey Company.

October has come and the budget deficit will gradually emerge. However, from time immemorial, the worst for Turkey was November, and everyone knows that.

Well, after October, November is coming...