HISTORICAL DECISION

On April 16, Turkey held a constitutional referendum, which apparently is going to have a paramount significance for the further development of the country. This was a crucial step taken by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in order to transform Turkey from a parliamentary republic to presidential one.

AKP succeeds… thanks to MHP

According to the results of the referendum announced by the Supreme Electoral Council (SEC) of Turkey, 51.41% of Turkish voters supported the constitutional amendments aimed at the establishment of a presidential republic. This includes, in particular, the election of the president by popular vote (one person can rule within two five-year terms), abolition of the premiership, granting the president rights to appoint ministers and remain a head of his own party. Also, the president will be able to initiate legislative initiatives, dissolve the parliament, declare and lift the state of emergency, and initiate a disciplinary investigation against any of the civil servants in Turkey. It is noteworthy that the president will also enjoy additional civilian control over the army through the establishment of the State Supervisory Council, and be able to appoint the head of the General Staff of the Turkish Armed Forces. Undoubtedly, these measures will completely deprive the army of political identity and a power to influence the political life of the country.

Thus, the initiators of the referendum - the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and personally the Turkish President Recep T. Erdogan won. However, it is not an absolute victory per se. In fact, the initiators failed even with the support of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), which is part of the coalition formed with the AKP.

51% of the votes cast in support of AKP’s constitutional reform means that the remaining 49% (almost half of the Turkish population) does not support the country's transition to the presidential model of government, at least in a form proposed by the current government. The supporters of the reform won in 48 of 81 Turkish provinces. However, the largest cities such as Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, as well as Diyarbakir with predominantly Kurdish population voted against. This essentially implies that the urban population, including its secular part, is afraid of moderate Islamist aspirations of the AKP government and the perspective abandonment of political and ideological foundations inherited from the founder of the Turkish Republic, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. On the other hand, the "nay" fixed in Diyarbakir does not mean an absolute Kurdish opposition to Erdogan's presidential project, as some Kurdish-populated areas in the east of Turkey supported the rejection of the parliamentary model of government. In short, the constitutional reform has split Turkey into two halves.

It is obvious that Erdogan and his ruling AKP won even with a slight margin of vox populi. And it seems the Republic of Turkey is going to open a new page in its history, inevitably. President Erdogan stated that the people have made a "historic decision" by adopting "the most significant reform in the history of Turkey". In his address to his compatriots, Mr. Erdogan said: "For all who said yes or nay, 80 million people of our country and the Turkish citizens living abroad – this is our common victory."

CHP does not support either

Immediately after the referendum, the leading opposition parties, the Kemalist Republican People's Party (CHP) and pro-Kurdish Democratic Peoples’ Party (HDP), expressed their readiness to challenge its results. On the eve of event, the oppositionists insisted on the irrelevance of holding a nation-wide voting under the existing state of emergency in Turkey. In support of this claim, they cited several "performance indicators" of AKP and personally Mr. Erdogan such as the strengthening of censorship, increasing number of prosecuted journalists, and those who have been dismissed from office because of their criticism of the current Turkish government. Both parties accused the authorities of manipulating the votes. In particular, CHP demanded to cancel the results of the referendum since the decision of SEC to consider the ballots and unsealed envelopes valid was illegal. As a result, say the Kemalists, this mockery of justice cost a decisive portion (3-4%) of all votes. CHP leader, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, stated that "at least 50% of the population says no to constitutional amendments, thus the results of the voting do not manifest a public consensus."

In reply, the authorities made it clear that they would not satisfy the claims of the opposition. This move was obvious anyway, given the euphoria that the AKP electorate and President Erdogan were feeling. In fact, the Turkish president does not hide his intention to use the people's will to extend the term of his reign, which may extend up to 2029. The authorities do not see any reason to doubt the accuracy of the referendum, so the SEC rejected the appeal of the opposition demanding to reconsider the results. Minister of Justice, Bekir Bozdag, went even further stressing that the opposition could not appeal to the Constitutional Court since the decision of SEC was final. Meanwhile, the police detained 19 people accused of organizing illegal protests against the results of the referendum. According to Turkish media, law enforcement agencies believe that the actions were intended to "provoke hatred" and "could take the riot to streets". And this is yet another sign of the complexity and ambiguity of current political situation in Turkey.

The West is the odd one out, or Who should "know its place"

The results of the referendum announced by the Turkish authorities provoked opposition not only from a number of political forces inside the country but far beyond it. Especially, the European authorities actually rejected the honest and transparent nature of the Turkish voting. Just before the event, the Western media fanned propaganda hysteria to present Erdogan as a politician seeking to establish his dictatorship in Turkey amidst seriously deteriorated relations between Ankara and the EU, which have intensified after the German and Dutch authorities banned the public appearance of Turkish ministers before their compatriots living in those countries. Therefore, Brussels’ reaction to the results of Turkish referendum was not surprising. In a joint statement made by the EC President, Jean-Claude Juncker, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini, and European Commissioner for Enlargement and Neighborhood Policy, Johannes Hahn, Brussels addressed the Turkish authorities to "seek consensus" given "a small difference" in votes of supporters and opponents of presidential republic in Turkey.

The Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Thorbjørn Jagland, also made a similar appeal: "In view of the small difference in votes, the Turkish government should be cautious in its further actions... Now the most important thing is to preserve the independence of the judiciary power".

The observers of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) announced that the holding of the referendum allegedly did not meet the standards of the Council of Europe, as voters did not receive objective information about the reform, observers from public organizations were absent on a number of sites, the opposition did not have sufficient access to the media etc. ODIHR Director, Michael Georg, Link, called for recounting the votes, which would increase confidence in the electoral process in Turkey.

Ankara’s reaction to this criticism was straightforward. President Erdogan recommended the OSCE observers "to know their place". He categorically stated that the referendum put a full point to all the debates about the change of the Constitution and transition to the presidential form of government and that the positive outcome of the referendum was achieved, despite the opposition of "those who have a world view of the Crusaders." "We survived as a nation. We can bow only to our holy places and no one else," said the Turkish president.

Mr. Erdogan reminded that before the referendum, some European governments banned public statements by Turkish politicians in their countries, and expressed his satisfaction with the large percentage of the European Turks who voted in his support. So, 63, 71, and 73% of Turkish citizens residing in Germany, the Netherlands and Austria, respectively, took part in the constitutional reform in Turkey.

"Look what they wanted to achieve and what happened... The results of the voting made the EU politicians crazy because they wanted to see a different outcome, but their negative attitude helped me win," said Mr. Erdogan.

Against the challenges of time

The results of the referendum and the underlying political background manifest the growing tide of contradictions both within the Turkish society and in Ankara’s relations with the West. However, the historical experience of Turkish statehood makes us be sure of the steadfastness of the foundations of this country, which is facing with a number of serious domestic and foreign policy challenges. Turkey must give a worthy response to these challenges. First of all, it is necessary to defeat terrorism of any kind, consolidate the Turkish nation, and prevent any attempts by certain world powers to damage the security and territorial integrity of the country.

The main conclusion, stemming from deep political processes unfolding in Turkey and concerning both the transition to presidential form of governing and the gradual abandonment of Kemalism in lieu of an absolute and unconditional leadership imperative for the modern Turkish statehood, is that the elite and a large part of the population have now relied on a strong leader. The most active part of the Turkish society is hoping that this sole-source leader will be able to repel the deadly threat of terrorism coming from both the PKK (Kurdistan Workers Party) and the jihadist Islamic State. He is also expected to solve Turkey's most difficult geopolitical challenges, particularly caused by Syria and Iraq, these virtual traps set up by global powers and causing troubles for the peoples of these Arab countries, Turkey, and the entire Middle East.

It is most likely that the recent referendum in Turkey will lead to further alienation between Ankara and Brussels. In any case, Turkey's accession to the European Union under the current conditions is not possible. And this is yet another source of hope that many Turks, aware of the inevitability of the country's abandonment of the long-term dream of its European future, impose on the charismatic leader Erdogan. In this sense, the referendum is another vote of confidence, given by the majority of the Turkish people to the incumbent president, whose fate determines a strategic choice for the future of both the internal situation in Turkey and the country's role in the world arena.