As President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan announced his decision to visit the Republican People’s Party (CHP) chairperson Özgür Özel, ushering in a period of detente in Turkish politics, some of CHP’s mentors were alarmed. They have been speculating on Erdoğan’s plan in an attempt to figure out what he intends to do.
Most of them are worried that CHP, which recently replaced its leader, could experience internal turmoil. Others disagree with the current Chairperson's decision to abandon polarization and harsh statements, fearing that the opposition bloc, which has been feeding off anti-Erdoğanism, will weaken. The former CHP Chairperson's remarks –“One does not negotiate with the Palace but merely fights it”– was a case in point.
Meanwhile, some believe that Erdoğan seeks to entrap CHP by bringing up constitutional reform and pretending to promote detente to prolong his rule and fuel competition among CHP’s potential presidential candidates. Such commentators warn that the party must not allow itself to be tricked.
Finally, some observers explain which policies CHP needs to develop to build on its municipal election victory and become the main player in 2028. Even the most confident commentators, however, insist that the party must complete its change process and avoid the “trap” of mentioning potential presidential candidates.
In truth, both CHP and the AK Party need to reflect on the electorate’s message and make certain changes. Indeed, the CHP Chairperson himself warned that the March 31 election must not cause the Republicans, who lost last year’s presidential and parliamentary elections, to take it easy; the Justice and Development Party (AK Party), too, needs an overhaul as it seems unlikely for the movement to win back its former supporters, who became disenfranchised, alienated or critical, just by replacing some administrators or through economic recovery. It is necessary to comprehensively reflect on a broad range of issues, from its organizational culture to its way of doing business. It is obvious that the burden and costs of governing Türkiye for a quarter century make such reflection inevitable.
I posit that President Erdoğan launched the process of the détente in light of that dire need. It will not be easy to discuss change against the backdrop of harsh statements and accusations. In this regard, the current situation enables the AK Party and CHP alike to pursue an agenda of change. Over the coming months, we will see which movement will take better advantage of détente. That is why we should ask who will seize this opportunity better – rather than whom the new conditions benefit.
The bottom line is that both political parties must develop a new kind of politics. The AK Party needs to take that step to recover, spend the next four years effectively and renew its mandate in 2028. CHP, in turn, has to be successful in local government and prove to the people that it is a viable alternative for the country.
It is necessary to expect challenges from beneficiaries of harsh statements and polarization. Indeed, former CHP Chairperson Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu has been talking about “the Palace” – seemingly attempting to sabotage his successor’s new approach.
Although Özel optimistically claims to be “on the same page” as his predecessor, Kılıçdaroğlu continues to fuel anti-Erdoğanism within CHP. I do not know whether the movement’s old and new chairpersons are playing good and bad cop. What is clear, however, is that the prominence of Kılıçdaroğlu’s harsh and polarizing discourse within the Republican habitat remains the single greatest obstacle before Özel’s approach – which he unveiled by pledging to show due respect to the highest office in Türkiye.
Kılıçdaroğlu may be gone, but it would be a mistake to underestimate the power of his politics.
