What are the three possible scenarios waiting for Turkey after the June 24 elections?
By refusing the native-national politics proposed by the AK Party, the opposition fails to present its own political project.
Turkey will reach the moment of political normalcy and Erdogan will then retreat to a less prominent position. Under current conditions those criticisms of one-man rule towards Erdogan represent nothing but an utter ignorance of politics.
“The presence of large contradictions within the opposition bloc may easily be manipulated by the People Alliance. Thus, with this ostensible weakness and being positioned against the fundamental societal demand of non-domination, the prospect for the opposition to win the 24 June elections seems so bleak. In sum, in the face of these indicators the TAMAM campaign cannot be more than a passing fad.”
The shift to a presidential system may be the most critical step in institutionalizing democratic politics in Turkey. It promises to further the empowerment of the elected representatives of people vis-à-vis the bureaucracy, enlargement of the sphere of politics and increase the influence of elections. In a nutshell, it places the popular will above any other will and at the center of politics. This is the core of the silent revolution that Erdogan has achieved in the last 15-plus years.
While anti-Erdoganism may unite a crowd of people in Turkey, the opposition needs to change its election tactic in order to achieve any sustainable result.
As Turkey has entered into the atmosphere of early elections, there is one crucial question that begs to be answered: Why does the opposition in Turkey fail to win elections?
Turkey’s opposition policy of polarization resembles more of a policy of self-interest.
Is the AK Party’s politics of native-national a reflection of their decline?
“Following the momentum of economic and political liberalization in Turkey, and as the realm of politics gained relative autonomy from the state, it became apparent that the secular-nationalist identity was insufficient to bring society into unity.”