Although parties have not yet started to announce their campaigns for the upcoming Nov. 1 elections, political backgrounds, promises and attitudes on PKK terror will be the key factors headlining their agenda
The June 7 elections had two main agendas. The first was whether the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) would be able to form a government by itself, and the second was whether the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) would be able to surpass the 10 percent national election threshold. The AK Party was not able to form a government by itself despite claiming the most votes. The HDP, on the other hand, was able to pass the threshold and became the fourth party in Parliament.
The Nov. 1 elections, to which there remain less than 40 days, has only one point on the agenda. It is concerned with whether the AK Party will be able to form a government by itself or not. This is the matter lying at the heart of the elections race. What is interesting, however, is that despite the short time left before the elections, none of the parties have actively begun an election campaign. We can indicate three main reasons for this. The first is that this election is an early election and the decision for an early election was made only three months after the June 7 elections. This situation has created a motivational deficiency for parties' managements and organization. Considering that Turkey has been through four elections in the last 20 months, this tiredness and lack of motivation becomes understandable. The second is that, with the exception of the AK Party, none of the parties have been able to place a criterion of success before the electorate for the Nov. 1 elections. The success criterion the AK Party has brought before voters is that of forming the administration by itself. The HDP, which placed passing the threshold as a concrete aim, cannot place this same aim as a criterion of success in this election. In the same way, the Republican People's Party (CHP) and Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) also do not have an exciting, tangible election aim they can bring forward for their voters. In this sense, the June 7 election was one where CHP and MHP voters felt there was a possibility of forming a government. While these two parties might not be able to form a government by themselves, the idea was that the CHP and MHP would form a coalition against the AK Party, which was exciting. However, the period after June 7 showed an administrative scenario that excluded the AK Party to be impossible.
The third reason why political parties have not sped up their election campaigns despite the short period left before Nov. 1 is the ongoing terror activities throughout Turkey. The terror attacks that started again by the PKK in the aftermath of the June 7 elections, has changed the agenda of Turkish politics and thus of political parties as well. For this reason the most important point for the Nov. 1 elections is terror attacks, the fight against terrorism and security problems. In this way, the four parties in Parliament are attempting to establish political communication with society through their attitudes toward PKK attacks and terror incidents.
The AK Party is taking on the political responsibility of ongoing military operations and giving the message that these operations will continue until the PKK disarms for the sake of public order and the establishment of security and goes outside Turkey's borders. The AK Party says that the PKK has attempted to legitimize its acts of terror by using discrimination faced by Kurds, and that since 2005 AK Party governments have destroyed the PKK's base through the steps they have taken to combat discrimination within its program of democratization. The AK Party says that the PKK has re-armed because it sees its own existence as being under threat and that it is using the Gezi Park protests in Turkey, the Dec. 17 and Dec. 25 interventions and the civil war in Syria for its own advantage. The AK Party is calling for all national forces to unite against terrorism.
Against this, the CHP and MHP are holding the AK Party responsible for the rising terror and blaming the reconciliation process begun by the AK Party in 2013, which President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has said he has "put in the freezer." Both parties allege that throughout the reconciliation process, the AK Party opened up space for the PKK. Both the CHP and MHP tried to turn the terror attacks that began after the June 7 elections into a political campaign against the AK Party and Erdoğan. They have especially used the funerals of murdered soldiers and police officers as tools of political criticism. In the movements organized by the MHP to protest terrorism, it is of note that rather than being against the PKK, more often the slogans are anti-AK Party and anti-Erdoğan.
For itself, the HDP, rather than acting as a mitigating force against the rising terror incidents, has taken a position openly supporting the PKK. The HDP has continued to use its June 7 elections anti-Erdoğan discourse in an increasing radical manner. In fact, the HDP has cast Erdoğan as the person who began the war.
Turkey is heading toward another election with these discourses and approaches. In the days ahead, political parties will need to initiate a communication campaign about their political promises alongside their attitudes on terror and the PKK terrorist organization. However, with the exception of the AK Party, none of the other parties have a strong motivating force. This will come in front of us as a situation that increases the congestion already present in Turkish politics.
Keep up to date with what’s happening in Turkey,
it’s region and the world.
You can unsubscribe at any time. By signing up you are agreeing to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.