THE LAST BELL FOR "TEACHER"

- Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu's decision not to run for the post of chairman of the AKP (the ruling Justice and Development Party), and, therefore, to resign during the extraordinary congress of the political organization to be held on 22 May this year, had an effect of a shock. Could you comment on the situation? What events preceded this move and what are the true reasons for it?

- President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is a leader with the largest number of victories in elections in the democratic history of Turkey. He has quite a strong charisma. He could rather be called a sole symbol that represents the social base of the AKP. He enjoys undisputed authority both within the party and with his voters. He is the first president to have been elected by universal suffrage. Based on the foregoing, we can say without a doubt that Erdogan influences all government actions. However, the current constitution of the Republic of Turkey limits the powers of the president, giving him only symbolic powers, the breadth and fullness of which are clearly insufficient for Erdogan. He would most probably prefer a system of direct presidential rule, such as in the United States.

Ahmet Davutoglu is a successful professor of international relations. His influence on the party and voters is limited. He is a supporter of a continuation of the current parliamentary system. He considered it to be the most useful one for Turkey. At the same time, he tried to limit the interference of Erdogan's retinue in the work of the government. According to the president and his retinue, Davutoglu did not take sufficient measures to introduce a presidential form of government and even said that election results showed disapproval by the people of the establishment of that system. This is how differences arose between the prime minister and the president. The president used his authority to convince the party leadership to convene an extraordinary congress and thus created conditions for the removal of Davutoglu from the post of party chairman, which inevitably led to Davutoglu's resignation as prime minister. One can feel resentment in the statement Davutoglu made after he took the decision to resign. This suggests that he made the decision to resign reluctantly.

- A leak to the press of revelatory information called "the Pelican brief" was a key event in the process that resulted in Davutoglu's resignation. Could you tell us about the content of the controversial material?

- That material appeared online on 1 May and produced a true explosion in the Turkish media scene. The author of the publication is still unknown. However, the fact that the material originated from the Twitter accounts of people from the president's retinue and also was pronouncedly revelatory and accusatory with regard to the prime minister and his associates gives us grounds to suppose in whose interest this kind of an attack could have been carried out. The material says that the election of the "Teacher" (reference to Davutoglu, given his academic past) as chairman was an initiative of the "Leader" (this is how Erdogan is referred to within the party). According to the authors of the publication, despite the fact that his influence on party members and his personal charisma were not sufficient, the main reason for his appointment was hope for his personal loyalty to the president. Further, the "Teacher" is accused of staging his own intrigues and attempting to remove the "Leader" from influencing intra-party and state affairs. The publication touches upon the "Teacher's" unsuccessful foreign policy moves. It is no accident, according to the authors, that the "Teacher's" thesis "zero problems with neighbours" turned into "zero neighbours without problems".

One way or another, as you did mention, the appearance of the text online brought to the foreground all differences between the first and the second persons in the Turkish leadership and by nature was an open challenge to Davutoglu. Everyone knows now what the outcome was.

- Some observers say that anti-Russian rhetoric and statements by Davutoglu were among reasons for the emergence and escalation of the crisis in the relationship between Turkey and Russia. What impact do you think Davutoglu's departure may have on the process of normalization of relations between the two countries?

- It will not have much impact. The normalization of relations between Turkey and Russia is a very important topic. I think a number of measures will be taken on this issue in the near future to step up "goodwill and trust". Reduced tension in the Syrian issue should be extremely effective. I think that some steps and initiatives will also be taken within the framework of NATO. Russia also describes the situation as harmful and completely unreasonable. Confrontation with Turkey and the Islamic world is very erroneous and irrational for Russia.

- Speaking of Turkey's foreign policy, one cannot but mention the thaw and some kind of a reset in relations between Ankara and the Western world. According to experts, it is wrong not to take into account the personal contribution Davutoglu made to improving relations between Turkey and the EU. Can Davutoglu's resignation suspend or slow down this process?

- As you mentioned, the relationship between Turkey and the EU was not constructive for a long time. Davutoglu's efforts generated many positive changes over a short period of time. Those changes gave an impetus to the development of effective cooperation. The draft agreement on visa free travel can be regarded as his personal victory. A very fertile ground was prepared for the relationship with Europe to be reset and become more trust-based. I want to believe, and it really is very important, that the new government will continue with the creative activities of the "Teacher". Davutoglu is a politician who knows the global system and the way the EU works fairly well. It is not clear yet how the future cabinet will manage the problem. But I have no fear that the basic principles of state policy can change in some way.

- There are four people mentioned among likely candidates for the post of the future prime minister of Turkey: former Justice Minister Bekir Bozdag, Deputy Prime Minister Numan Kurtulmus, Energy Minister Berat Albayrak and Transport Minister Binali Yildirim. Which of them do you think stands a bigger chance of becoming prime minister? Is there anyone else, not mentioned above, who could be elected prime minister?

- According to my observations, the new prime minister will come from the above-mentioned list, although the president may choose a completely different person. The important thing is that that prime minister will not have powers that big and will most likely be a temporary one, seeking transition to a presidential form of government.

I do not think that Numan Kurtulmus stands great chances of winning in the struggle for the premiership. In other words, we can say that either Bekir Bozdag or Berat Albayrak or Binali Yildirim will become party chairman and prime minister. Each of these candidates has his own strengths and weaknesses. Binali Yildirim is a strong charismatic leader, who spearheaded the creation of the AKP and enjoys the trust and liking of party members. But his strong positions within the party may also play against him, given the president's jealousy of any competing force, despite the fact that Yildirim has been a close associate of Erdogan since the times of their work in the municipality of Istanbul. We also cannot forget about corruption scandals around Yildirim.

Many experts, both in and outside Turkey, highly assess the chances of President Erdogan's son-in-law Berat Albayrak becoming prime minister. Others are more sceptical about this prospect because the election of a family member to such a high position may cause a negative reaction among the masses. Sources close to the presidential administration recall that when Berat Albayrak was elected member of parliament and appointed minister of energy, negative reaction played no role and, therefore, he has all the chances of becoming the next prime minister of the country.

As for Bekir Bozdag, he is a staunch supporter of the presidential form of government and should he become prime minister he will most likely devote his activities to legitimizing that form of government. As a theologian and lawyer, he is popular with the conservative wing of the leadership and the clergy. But his capacity to influence the party electorate is clearly limited.

- How would you comment on the rumours about the plans of the ruling party to hold an early general election this summer and, having obtained an absolute majority in parliament, to initiate the adoption of a new constitution and change the form of government in the country from parliamentary to presidential?

- Yes that is the case. The president is using internal friction within the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and the pro-Kurdish People's Democratic Party (HDP) to try and hold an early parliamentary election and, having obtained the majority of seats in parliament, to adopt a new constitution, thus legitimizing the presidential form of government. Opinion polls at the moment show that the HDP is unlikely to get a seat in parliament. The same fate awaits the nationalists, if the intra-party opposition fails to topple party leader Devlet Bahceli, who takes his lead from the authorities. As already noted, recent developments are directly linked to those plans. However, I am not sure that they will achieve their main goal easily and smoothly. A lot depends on internal processes within the MHP. First outlines of future political battles in Turkey will be coming soon.