I completely agree that the problem is extremely difficult to solve. I also agree that many of Turkey's institutions don't work well. But I'm not sure that every relevant system is so dysfunctional that no scheme for risk mitigation could possibly succeed.
Turkey isn't a failed state. Many things here do work. If you're in Istanbul, look out your window: You don't see anyone shooting anyone, starving to death, or dying of epidemic disease. The grocery stores are full of food. Levels of street crime are low. You're looking at a vibrant city with a fairly advanced infrastructure. Problems, yes. A basket case, no.
I think it's reasonable to notice all the obstacles to putting our ideas into action -- of course it is -- but I wonder if we shouldn't spend a bit of time thinking about why Istanbul is doing so well, given all the institutional obstacles to getting anything done. Some systems and institutions here obviously do work. Which ones are they?
Wouldn't it make more sense to focus on working with systems that are already working, rather than against the ones that don't? We're not, after all, realistically going to be able to reform the constitution, the legal system, the Turkish press, or the bureaucracy.
What's already working well in Istanbul, and how can these groups and systems help us to solve this problem?