The new course of the Justice and Development Party: The culture of reconciliation
The referendum on April 16 was a cornerstone for Turkey's democracy. The centralized system of bureaucratic tutelage, which continued from the proclamation of the Imperial Edict of Gülhane up until today, shall be replaced with the will of the people and exerted through democratic procedures. The reaction of the Republican Peoples' Party (CHP) against the ongoing political transformation is predictable, as they represent the traditional system of bureaucratic tutelage. Yet, the partisan political attitude adopted by some Western states, notably Germany, is as surprising as it is illegitimate.
One of the most prominent debates of the political process in question was about the social consequences of the referendum. It is commonly asked whether the present political tension would continue or if Turkey would take the path of normalization in the post-referendum period.
The political and economic changes in Turkey are at the center of global attention with its geopolitical position, young population, and growing economy. Aside from the superpowers of the world, Turkey is a leading country with political, economic, cultural, historical and sociological relations with many, if not all countries of the world. From the Middle East to Europe and from Africa to Caucasia, Turkey's influence over those regions emerges from its Ottoman legacy, Islamic bonds, the demographic linkages, and economic ties.
When the opposite paths of polarization and reconciliation appear in the post-referendum process, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the president and now the official leader of the AK Party, openly took up the culture of reconciliation. He declared immediately after the referendum: "We will knock at the doors of not only those who supported us, but also those who opposed us." Indeed, the AK Party has always leaned to the culture of reconciliation.
In the founding years of the AK Party, Turkey was in deep political crisis and lacked strong political leadership. While desperation dominated daily life, military tutelage was overwhelming civilian politics. The first AK Party government concentrated on dealing with Turkey's accumulated problems and troubles one by one. Even the wise people, who situated themselves in opposition to the government, applauded the substantial reformations realized in the fields of democracy and human rights.
In fact, penetrating the state apparatuses of the police and judiciary, it was the Gülenist Terror Group (FETÖ) that aimed at alienating the AK Party governments from the democratic culture of reconciliation. They were aware of the fact that the political power of the AK Party relied solely on the support of the people. Thus, directly targeting at its popular legitimacy and encouraged by its former success with the "Ergenekon" trials against the traditional Kemalist civilian and military bureaucratic elite, FETÖ intensified the brutal force of the police against the peaceful protests of the students and football fans, whose football clubs were all being accused of chicanery. In a similar vein, FETÖ abused its power in the police to increase social tension by brutally, intervening in the May 1 protests. As it could openly be observed at the beginning of the Occupy Gezi protest, not marginal leftist groups, but FETÖ and its western supporters administered the Gezi resistance. Their aim was the intensification of social tension and the polarization of society, which would in turn destabilize the AK Party government.
The attempted bureaucratic coup d'état of Dec. 17 and 25, the attempted military coup d'état of July 15, social tensions, political crises and successive national and local elections held the AK Party out of the culture of reconciliation. Yet, after the results of the referendum were declared, President Erdoğan immediately took up a place not with polarization, but with the culture of reconciliation by concentrating on the resolution of political, economic and social problems through a conciliatory political discourse. In this respect, it is reasonable to argue that the AK Party has the necessary political experience to enhance the culture of reconciliation.
One of the most prominent debates of the political process in question was about the social consequences of the referendum. It is commonly asked whether the present political tension would continue or if Turkey would take the path of normalization in the post-referendum period.
The political and economic changes in Turkey are at the center of global attention with its geopolitical position, young population, and growing economy. Aside from the superpowers of the world, Turkey is a leading country with political, economic, cultural, historical and sociological relations with many, if not all countries of the world. From the Middle East to Europe and from Africa to Caucasia, Turkey's influence over those regions emerges from its Ottoman legacy, Islamic bonds, the demographic linkages, and economic ties.
When the opposite paths of polarization and reconciliation appear in the post-referendum process, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the president and now the official leader of the AK Party, openly took up the culture of reconciliation. He declared immediately after the referendum: "We will knock at the doors of not only those who supported us, but also those who opposed us." Indeed, the AK Party has always leaned to the culture of reconciliation.
In the founding years of the AK Party, Turkey was in deep political crisis and lacked strong political leadership. While desperation dominated daily life, military tutelage was overwhelming civilian politics. The first AK Party government concentrated on dealing with Turkey's accumulated problems and troubles one by one. Even the wise people, who situated themselves in opposition to the government, applauded the substantial reformations realized in the fields of democracy and human rights.
In fact, penetrating the state apparatuses of the police and judiciary, it was the Gülenist Terror Group (FETÖ) that aimed at alienating the AK Party governments from the democratic culture of reconciliation. They were aware of the fact that the political power of the AK Party relied solely on the support of the people. Thus, directly targeting at its popular legitimacy and encouraged by its former success with the "Ergenekon" trials against the traditional Kemalist civilian and military bureaucratic elite, FETÖ intensified the brutal force of the police against the peaceful protests of the students and football fans, whose football clubs were all being accused of chicanery. In a similar vein, FETÖ abused its power in the police to increase social tension by brutally, intervening in the May 1 protests. As it could openly be observed at the beginning of the Occupy Gezi protest, not marginal leftist groups, but FETÖ and its western supporters administered the Gezi resistance. Their aim was the intensification of social tension and the polarization of society, which would in turn destabilize the AK Party government.
The attempted bureaucratic coup d'état of Dec. 17 and 25, the attempted military coup d'état of July 15, social tensions, political crises and successive national and local elections held the AK Party out of the culture of reconciliation. Yet, after the results of the referendum were declared, President Erdoğan immediately took up a place not with polarization, but with the culture of reconciliation by concentrating on the resolution of political, economic and social problems through a conciliatory political discourse. In this respect, it is reasonable to argue that the AK Party has the necessary political experience to enhance the culture of reconciliation.
Last Update: May 06, 2017 01:24