Turkey is running toward early elections on June 24. The proposal to hold early elections was first made by the Nationalist Movement Party's (MHP) parliamentary group. As it was agreed by the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party), the parliamentary and presidential elections were brought forward to an earlier time.
But curiously, some foreign forces do still interfere with Turkey's domestic affairs although the country has multiparty system since 1946 and since then has been the only country in the region who is able to determine its government with democratic elections.
Last week, U.S. Department of State spokesperson Heather Nauert insolently expressed her "concerns" regarding the upcoming elections. I am referring here to someone speaking on behalf of a country where the rigged election debates do still continue even though a-year-and-a-half has passed since the presidential election.
A similar statement was also issued by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) lately.
Comprising names elected in the national parliaments of a number of countries including Turkey, the Monitoring Committee of PACE recommended postponing the elections by arguing that conducting democratic elections is not possible under the present circumstances and therefore the legitimacy of the elections will be doubtful.
This is a direct intervention in the domestic affairs of Turkey, an independent and sovereign state of law. Besides, it is an arbitrary statement since the present situation does not violate any laws or practices.
The early elections do not constitute any problem in the framework of the Constitution and the election laws. The state of emergency, which was declared following the July 15 coup attempt, is pertinent to the state's right of self defense as in France, who went to the polls under similar conditions. Consequently, it bears no relation with the elections.
Turkey's Supreme Election Board (YSK), the highest electoral authority in the country, also stated that the period given to the electoral period is sufficient.
Furthermore, the YSK has been taking initiatives to prevent any problems that might arise in representation due to the time limit. For instance, the barriers before the opposition parties such as the newly-formed Good Party (İP), who could not meet the organizational requirements needed to take part in the elections, have been eliminated.
So, is the committee not aware of these simple facts?
Of course, a part of the members might be uninformed or biased about the issue. Probably, as usual, they have issued some learned comments on a Muslim Middle Eastern country whose location they could barely identify on a map.
Nevertheless, it is evident that political reflexes have been effective in issuing such a decision. The same structure also lately allowed the terror group PKK's Syrian branch the Democratic Union Party (PYD) and its armed wing the People's Protection Units (YPG) leader Salih Muslum to deliver a speech.
So, their stance is clear. But it is still curious how the West cannot see the fact that it actually undermines the opposition in Turkey rather than favoring it by giving support to the opposition through such anti-democratic interventions.They still could not realize that the Turkish electorate does not favor such outside interventions in the people's will.