FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Meaning of AKP’s Victory in Turkey

After elections, money markets are sometimes the best political barometers. On Monday, the Turkish Lira leapt by 3 percent against the US dollar as the markets opened. A new period of stable single-party rule is opening in Turkey after five months of uncertainty and violence following the deadlock in the June general elections. But while the economic outlook may have improved,Turks are coming to terms with a political earthquake which leaves President Erdogan and the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) of  his lieutenant, Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, vastly strengthened and the opposition in pieces.

Instead of the renewed deadlock predicted by most, though not all opinion polls, the AKP surged to victory, picking up a comfortable majority of around 40 extra seats, 23.4 million votes (the largest number ever) and 49 percent of the votes – nine percentage points up on the June result.

These results are only provisional figures from the media and political parties. Just three hours after the election closed on Sunday, with nearly all the votes counted astonishingly fast nationwide, the High Election Council (YSK), the regulating authority, closed its news site, which gives the formal results and has not reopened it since, despite many requests on social media. Its chief says the final official results will be available in 10 days or so.

How did the AKP stage its triumphant comeback? Its opponents claim it created a climate of fear by ending the ceasefire with the Kurdish PKK and so triggering an avalanche of terrorism and counter-attacks and then told the country that this was the result of the failure to give it a majority. A vote for it would bring back peace, while a vote for the opposition might mean continued deadlock and even a third general election to resolve it.

Others point to the curbs on press and media freedom this summer. Just four days before the elections, courts were ordering the instant takeover of an opposition newspaper and television station loyal to the 74-year old exiled Sufi cleric, Fethullah Gulen, who lives in the United States but is wanted in Turkey for alleged terrorist charges. Gulen is generally regarded as having been behind an attempt to unseat Erdogan in December 2013 through serious corruption charges. These were later quashed and last night’s result means that no more will be heard of them.

But there are also more practical reasons behind the AKP’s victory. It followed classical modern party political campaign tactics, concentrating on marginal seats, trying to expand its following in areas which were already sympathetic to it. Even in its own heartland provinces there was a strong swing to it.

By comparison, the two larger opposition parties ran feeble campaigns which amounted to a few posters and some TV advertising. Canvassing, leafleting and the other hallmarks of an election campaign seem to be something that they don’t do – despite massive annual government subsidies in the budget. Because of the climate of violence they also cut down on their traditional main activity, election rallies. They failed both to press their opposition to the AKP and its authoritarian style of rule or to show how they would actually run the country (apart from some rather obvious campaign ploys such as extravagant promises to subsidise fuel).

For the CHP, the centre-left main opposition party, the result is not a direct catastrophe. It picked up a meager 100,000 extra votes and about 0.4 percent of the poll, but it will continue to enjoy the subsidy income (US$56 million in 2015)  which gives it a towering headquarters building in Ankara that dwarfs Western European party HQs actually in power. It will also probably continue to be a party which looks inward and seems often to cold-shoulder new blood.

The rightist MHP (Nationalist Action Party) which is the main rival of the AKP in central Anatolia but stoutly refused either to go into coalition with it or to join forces with the rest of the opposition, has paid for its intransigence by losing 2 million votes (presumably mostly to the AKP) and its parliamentary representation has slumped to an anticipated 40 seats compared to 80 in the short-lived last assembly. Despite this there seems to be little question of a change of leadership.

Its members are now likely to be wooed by the AKP as it attempts to find the extra votes it needs in the assembly to move towards changing the constitution and making President Erdogan officially an executive president – though in practice he is pretty much that already.

The greatest battering was taken by the pro-Kurdish HDP (Peoples’ Democratic Party) as it slipped tantalisingly close to the 10 percent barrier, emerging eventually just 0.4 percent above it. But, because of its concentrated geographical support base, it will have about 59 seats, putting it ahead of the MHP and making it Turkey’s third largest party. But somehow it lost 1.3 million voters, presumably Kurds who decided to return to the AKP.

It too could now face approaches from the AKP to cut a deal with it over constitutional changes – something to which the party’s co-chairman, Selahattin Demirtas, is vehemently opposed. This idea collapsed last spring. The problem in reviving it would be that the Kurds would expect some measure of real autonomy, something the AKP is unlikely to concede.

As for the AKP’s priority, it has already indicated that its first goal is to change the constitution, something which is still arithmetically quite difficult. President Erdogan also indicated before the elections several times that the drive against the Gulen movement will continue. It has also to carry on with the fight against the PKK, whose militants may have had their hand strengthened by the poor showing of the HDP, as well as ISIL. Opposition media groups such as Zaman and the Dogan Media Group are likely to face a further squeeze.

Internationally, although President Erdogan seems to have felt the world media was against the AKP, the EU has reacted positively to the AKP victory, indicating that it enables the union to work more closely with Turkey. It has already signalled that it does not want to press human rights criticism, pragmatic recognition perhaps that the AKP is here to stay.

This article originally appeared on Middle East Eye.

 

More articles by:

David Barchard has worked in Turkey as a journalist, consultant, and university teacher. He writes regularly on Turkish society, politics, and history, and is currently finishing a book on the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century.

Weekend Edition
April 20, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Ruling Class Operatives Say the Darndest Things: On Devils Known and Not
Conn Hallinan
The Great Game Comes to Syria
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Mother of War
Andrew Levine
“How Come?” Questions
Doug Noble
A Tale of Two Atrocities: Douma and Gaza
Kenneth Surin
The Blight of Ukania
Howard Lisnoff
How James Comey Became the Strange New Hero of the Liberals
William Blum
Anti-Empire Report: Unseen Persons
Lawrence Davidson
Missiles Over Damascus
Patrick Cockburn
The Plight of the Yazidi of Afrin
Pete Dolack
Fooled Again? Trump Trade Policy Elevates Corporate Power
Stan Cox
For Climate Mobilization, Look to 1960s Vietnam Before Turning to 1940s America
William Hawes
Global Weirding
Dan Glazebrook
World War is Still in the Cards
Nick Pemberton
In Defense of Cardi B: Beyond Bourgeois PC Culture
Ishmael Reed
Hollywood’s Last Days?
Peter Certo
There Was Nothing Humanitarian About Our Strikes on Syria
Dean Baker
China’s “Currency Devaluation Game”
Ann Garrison
Why Don’t We All Vote to Commit International Crimes?
LEJ Rachell
The Baddest Black Power Artist You Never Heard Of
Lawrence Ware
All Hell Broke Out in Oklahoma
Franklin Lamb
Tehran’s Syria: Lebanon Colonization Project is Collapsing
Donny Swanson
Janus v. AFSCME: What’s It All About?
Will Podmore
Brexit and the Windrush Britons
Brian Saady
Boehner’s Marijuana Lobbying is Symptomatic of Special-Interest Problem
Julian Vigo
Google’s Delisting and Censorship of Information
Patrick Walker
Political Dynamite: Poor People’s Campaign and the Movement for a People’s Party
Fred Gardner
Medical Board to MDs: Emphasize Dangers of Marijuana
Rob Seimetz
We Must Stand In Solidarity With Eric Reid
Missy Comley Beattie
Remembering Barbara Bush
Wim Laven
Teaching Peace in a Time of Hate
Thomas Knapp
Freedom is Winning in the Encryption Arms Race
Mir Alikhan
There Won’t be Peace in Afghanistan Until There’s Peace in Kashmir
Robert Koehler
Playing War in Syria
Tamara Pearson
US Shootings: Gun Industry Killing More People Overseas
John Feffer
Trump’s Trade War is About Trump Not China
Morris Pearl
Why the Census Shouldn’t Ask About Citizenship
Ralph Nader
Bill Curry on the Move against Public Corruption
Josh Hoxie
Five Tax Myths Debunked
Leslie Mullin
Democratic Space in Adverse Times: Milestone at Haiti’s University of the Aristide Foundation
Louis Proyect
Syria and Neo-McCarthyism
Dean Baker
Finance 202 Meets Economics 101
Abel Cohen
Forget Gun Control, Try Bullet Control
Robert Fantina
“Damascus Time:” An Iranian Movie
David Yearsley
Bach and Taxes
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail