Latest Developments Towards Elections

Dear friends, the elections are almost a month away. Parties submitted their lists to the YSK as of 17:00 on April 9, 2023. Thus, an important milestone has been passed in the process towards the elections. However, this development did not mark the end of the debate, but the beginning of a new debate. How much do the debates that will emerge on this issue have the potential to affect the results of the election? Of course, people who question their ties with their party, who feel resentment or anger towards their party for not being included in the list cannot affect the fate of the election on their own. However, considering that this issue has different dimensions, it is possible to say that it has a potential impact on the election results. Let us now try to discuss these different dimensions from various angles.

How can the approach of the People's Alliance be evaluated?

The fact that HÜDAPAR and DSP, as well as the Grand Union Party (BBP) and Yeniden Refah Party (YRP), which are among the components of the People's Alliance, entered the elections from the AKP lists was effective in the decision of the MHP, the major partner of the Alliance, to enter the elections with its own lists. It should also be acknowledged that the "closeness to terrorism" discourse, which formed the basis of the People's Alliance's propaganda against the Millet Alliance, lost its effect when HÜDAPAR entered the elections from AKP lists. Nevertheless, it is observed that a propaganda process on this issue continues both on social media and in print and visual media. The most important factor here is that a large part of the media follows a pro-government editorial policy. 

Another dimension of the issue is the attitude of the HDP, which is part of a different alliance, in the process. The question Levent Gültekin asks in his must-read article (1) is meaningful: "Does the HDP really support Kılıçdaroğlu?" I would like to re-emphasize a point I made in my previous article. The HDP cannot make a radical change in the near term in its political style, which is predominantly positioned on a certain region and a certain ethnic identity. In the current situation, it cannot adopt an attitude that is not supported by the sociological reality of the region. However, seeing the HDP as the representative of the PKK shows that the elements that shape politics and organizations are not fully taken into account. The reality is that the HDP cannot and will not soon be able to conduct politics independent of the region and its people. Once this is understood, it becomes clear what the problem is and what needs to be done to solve it.

It is impossible to think that the PKK can act independently of US interests in the region. The US attitude towards the PYD, its extension, is clear. Then the question is: Does the US really want the current government to change? In the face of this question, I am one of those who think that the US cannot take the risk of a change of government at a point where it is getting closer to its goals. For this, it is necessary to understand how US foreign policy moves rather than how the US treats Turkey on the surface. 

The fact that the People's Alliance is shaped by parties representing a certain mentality, despite its low voting rate, gives an idea about the changes that will take place in domestic politics if it wins the elections. It is certain that there will be a clear decline in the social status of women. In addition, it is not difficult to foresee that cult-type organizations will gain more power and the mobility of structures already organized within the state will increase. However, the AKP prefers to conceal the far-right identity of the Alliance as much as possible. Instead, it follows a propaganda strategy that emphasizes the successes in the defense industry. In fact, while there have been positive developments in the defense industry, those who know the inner workings of the project processes realize that what has been achieved is far less than what should have been. Unfortunately, the failures in the realization of projects, each of which dates back to the 1990s, are not much questioned by the public. 

It is necessary to open a parenthesis for the DSP, which is included in the AKP lists within the People's Alliance. The inclusion of the DSP, a party from the leftist tradition in Turkey, in the alliance has a symbolic meaning rather than a vote potential. Because those who are familiar with the DSP tradition can predict that DSP voters will not be as close to such an alliance as expected. So, what could this symbolic meaning be? First of all, AKP wants to soften the public perception of a "far-right alliance" and does not want the center conservative voters to break away from it as a bloc in the presidential election. In other words, the move seems to be more oriented towards the presidential election. In addition, it wants to prevent the women in its electorate from breaking away from it. It is possible to say that the attitude of the AKP's mostly low-educated female electorate will be one of the determinants of the fate of the election. 

The President's election promises seem to be substitute measures for every discourse of the opposition that resonates with the public. However, it is a political inconsistency for a government that has ruled the country for 21 years to produce politics in opposition to its own administration. I should point out that I see here more of an effort to prevent the rupture of its own electorate due to the increase in the level of negativity in economic conditions. It is not difficult to see that this will be reciprocated by the AKP's unquestioningly obedient electorate. With about a month to go until the elections and in an environment where all kinds of state facilities are being used asymmetrically for one side or the other, we are likely to see interesting developments in the last two weeks in terms of propaganda. 

What is the stance of the National Alliance?

DP, DEVA Party, SP and Future Party, which make up the Millet Alliance, are running for the elections on CHP lists. However, with the announcement of the lists, different voices started to emerge from within the alliance, which the AKP is uncomfortable with in every sense. This situation provided the AKP with a propaganda material that it could not find without any effort. The government, which has been making various moves to break up the alliance from the beginning and has not been successful in this endeavor, has this time found the opportunity to divide the base almost on a golden platter. The debate on whether the objections are justified or not is quite meaningless at this stage. For this, it is necessary to look at the founding reason and philosophy of the Alliance. 

The main factor that brings the Millet Alliance together is the common recognition of the problems that the country is being dragged down by an autocratic "one man" regime. With 150 years of experience of parliamentary regime, the country's sudden turn away from this path has caused all patriots to worry about possible problems in the future. Therefore, political parties that advocated that the country should return to a parliamentary system came together in line with this goal. Subsequently, the initial goal was expanded and a joint consensus text was signed and made public. The text of the joint consensus is where the discussions really started. 

The goal that brought together the six political parties, which differ markedly from each other in terms of political tradition and ideology, was not fully understood by the grassroots, and everyone wanted to see their own ideas in the joint text. However, this is neither possible in terms of negotiation technique nor in terms of the culture of compromise. For example, the fact that the text does not emphasize Atatürkism does not make it meaningless. Because while there is a great sensitivity to Atatürk at the grassroots level, no one can act without taking this sensitivity into account politically. This is first and foremost against the nature of politics. The text on which the members of the alliance can clearly and unequivocally agree should be a text that different political views can accept without disturbing each other. The joint consensus text is just such a text. In other words, it is a text in which everyone can find not all their views, but only the ones they can agree on. If there was an idea to erase the Kemalist view, which is the basic philosophy of the Constitution of the country, there would not be a consensual text such as the "Constitutional Amendment Proposal". What is not included in the text is not because sensitivities are not accepted, on the contrary, it is because sensitivities are accepted that everyone's views are not included in the text as they are. How else can there be negotiation and compromise?

If the logic of the Alliance can be grasped, today's discussions will automatically give way to calm. The founding philosophy and goals of the Millet Alliance are clearly stated. These goals have been announced to the public with a text based on open negotiations, not secret bargains. The realization of these goals has two pillars. The first of these is the election of the joint candidate Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu as president and the second is reaching at least 360 deputies in the parliament. This approach was also influential in determining the lists. According to the models studied, a method that is estimated to reach the maximum number was determined. 

Elections with a joint list would minimize vote losses. However, opening up the sensitivities of different political views for discussion is exactly what the government is trying to do here. Otherwise, it is not possible for the government to unite the opposition base. For the government, this means losing the election. Here, everyone needs to act realistically and as free of emotions as possible. Of course, no one can claim that this is easy. In an election with a joint list, there is the contradiction of voting for a candidate whose views do not match their own. But the way to overcome this contradiction is to remember that the bases of different parties face the same contradiction and that the important thing is to unite in the idea that brings the alliance together. The real unprincipledness is to support people of different views for years and then to participate in a political movement that those people do not approve of with the expectation of benefit. 

In the presidential election, there is a different picture. Following Muharrem İnce's persistent candidacy, it is almost certain that the election will go to a second round. Of course, everyone will face the historical responsibility for their decisions. The important thing is to compete in a fair electoral environment without resorting to unethical means and to respect the winner. As I have stated in previous articles, Kılıçdaroğlu is responding to the AKP's perception-based strategy with a fact-based strategy. This approach seems right for the time being. Here, the Muharrem İnce factor and the asymmetric use of state facilities for propaganda purposes are issues that have the potential to affect the outcome of the election. 

Conclusion

In the run-up to the elections, I think we are likely to see some very surprising developments in the next month, but the aftermath is as important as the run-up to the elections. My personal view is that if the election is won, people of merit from different segments of society, of different political stripes, should be given the task of rebuilding the country. For example, the former State Planning Organization was an institution where people from very different political views were together but very meritorious bureaucrats were in charge. The country needs more unity, not more division. This cannot be achieved by rulers who pursue a divisive politics.  

When you look at problems with dialectical thinking, you see that the solutions can be very different from those imposed on you. In social equations, there are multi-parameter equivalences rather than equality. When you say "A=B", it becomes difficult to keep that society together. The real divisiveness is to divide society into camps with mathematical precision. Everyone can benefit the country. There is definitely an area where everyone can be useful. Tasks should be distributed accordingly. The important thing is that this distribution of tasks is carried out in a way that the interests of the country require. Regardless of who they vote for, seeing all citizens of the country together on the basis of citizenship is a factor that will directly determine the success of a possible change of government. 

(1) https://www.diken.com.tr/hdp-kilicdaroglunu-gercekten-destekliyor-mu/