Turkey has completed the June 7 general elections. The Justice and Development Party (AK Party), which has been in power for 13 years, received 41 percent of the vote. However, it could not win 276 seats in Parliament, the number that is required to form a government on its own. The Republican People's Party (CHP), the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and the Peoples' Democratic Party took 25 percent, 16 percent and 13 percent of the vote, respectively. In the present case, first, work on forming a coalition government needs to be started in line with the Turkish Constitution, and the parties have started work to this end in the lobbies. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who was elected president by receiving 52 percent of the vote on Aug. 10, 2014, is entitled to appoint parties to form a government in line with the election results. In a statement that followed the elections, Erdoğan explained how the process would continue in accordance with the Constitution and practices with the following sentences: "As a result of the elections, our nation created a picture that does not allow a party to come to power alone. This picture does not mean that Turkey will remain without a government. The most important feature of democracy is that it keeps solutions open in such cases. No one has the right to say ‘I.' Everyone should put their egos aside; a government should be established in our country as soon as possible." Following these recommendations suggesting melting differences in a pot of consensus, he announced that he would hold talks with the leaders of all the parties that entered Parliament. However, Erdoğan's call to promote coalition alternatives faced the status quo barrier of opposition parties, which put forward some "red lines." Since June 7, all of them have announced again and again that they would never be able to participate in a coalition. The AK Party, which came in first in the elections, demonstrated that it would try coalition alternatives, without describing any red lines and by putting aside its prejudices.With the emergence of this picture, President Erdoğan said in a recent statement to journalists that coalition possibilities should be pushed, adding: "I will appoint the chair of the party that received the greatest number of votes to form a government. If he fails, this time I will appoint the chair of the party that received the second greatest number of votes. As is known, there is a period of 45 days at that point. I hope that (this period) will not grow longer. The ballot boxes pointed to a coalition. Given that all of them fail, it would be inevitable to go to the polls as required by the Constitution." So far, everything and the statements by politicians are very loud and clear. Let us take a look at how German newspapers reflected this political picture in their headlines on the same day:

Die Welt: Erdoğan threatens other parties with re-election

Frankfurter Allgemeine: Erdoğan threatens with early elections

Süddeutsche Zeitung: Erdoğan threatens with early elections

Stren: President Erdoğan threatens with early elections

Der Spiegel: Erdoğan threatens with early elections

Focus: After the AKP's defeat, Erdoğan threatens with early elections

You are right. It would be enough if I conclude the article at this point. But let me reiterate that the German press has gone mad in a mad rush. We Turks know the motive of the alliance that made German newspapers, which can be considered as the antitheses of each other, using the same headlines on the same day. They blame a politician, who highlights the routine process of forming a government in line with the constitution after elections, for threatening the public. The reason for this is that they are so afraid of the stability of Turkey. As it is clearly seen in the aforementioned statements, the politician who they lynch is the sole actor who is resolute about forming a coalition. The moves that Turkey made during the stability of the 13-year one-party government meant breaking Germany's economic monopoly in some fields. The first of these is the construction of Istanbul's third airport, which will be an alternative to Germany's big transfer airport of Frankfurt. The third bridge that is being constructed on the Bosporus is another nightmare for Germany. Knowing the attitude of Turkish opposition parties toward such big projects, Germany does not even want to hear of alternatives to a coalition, such as appealing to the public once again. I would not elaborate on in which democracy the alternative of appealing to the public is described as a threat, refraining from disrespecting the intelligence of readers. This recent lynching campaign, which the German press has launched against a prospective member of the EU with clumsy methods that can even be perceived by a child, should be taught as an example of manipulation in journalism departments.