TURKISH RE-SET

The results of snap parliamentary elections in Turkey shocked almost all the political analysts. Turkey has returned to a one-party system of administration and the outcome of the elections could see the start of radical changes both inside the country and abroad. The ruling Justice and Development Party [AKP] won 49.4 per cent of the vote, although many, including the party's own functionaries, did not expect more than 41-44 per cent. All the other bodies that could have made it into parliament were a long way behind the winner. The only exception was the main opposition power - the People's Republican Party (CHP) - but, bearing in mind the optimism of the pre-election forecasts, it could only improve its result by 0.4 per cent compared with the June elections, when 25 per cent of the electorate supported it. The figures for the People's Democratic Party (HDP) and the Nationalistist Movement Party (MHP) can only be described as disastrous. Compared with the June campaign, the nationalists, having lost almost 5 per cent, received 11.9 per cent of the vote, and the pro-Kurdish HDP only just made it into parliament, winning just 10.5 per cent of the vote.

So, the ruling AKP was given the legal right to create a government and run the country on its own.

A complete victory

The AKP as a political structure was able to make the correct conclusions following the June elections. A replenishment of its resources soon bore fruit. Taking on board what happened on 7 June, AKP chose a strategy which could be described as follows: "Knock on every door and shake every hand".

During the June elections one of the negative factors for the AKP was the fact that, because of the party's rules, which forbid its members from standing for three terms in a row, many experienced politicians were unable to take part. By making certain amendments to the rules, the party made maximum use of the experience of the "old guard" in the November elections. At the elections the AKP used those people who at one time held key posts and held a high degree of trust among the electorate. In the years they were in power, a most successful policy was carried out in the sphere of transport, the health service and social security. For example, in the western regions the former transport minister in the AKP government, Binali Yildirim, conducted an active campaign around Izmir. As a result, the AKP took second place in Izmir, winning the support of 31.5 per cent of the vote, whereas in the previous elections the figures were by no means encouraging. AKP achieved even better results in the Mediterranean regions. The nomination of Lutfi Elvan, the former transport minister, from Antalya and Mevlut Cavusoglu, the former foreign minister, from Mersin enabled the AKP to win even in these regions which are traditionally taken by the opposition.

In its anti-AKP statements during the election campaign in June, the opposition focused on criticism of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The spending on the building of a new residence for the president was particularly a subject of intense debate. But before the autumn elections President Erdogan invited the people to his residence, thereby demonstrating that the new palace belongs to the people and not just to him. This welcome into the presidential palace led to a change in the people's conscience and the public's perception of the palace.

Another factor in the increased number of votes for the AKP was the party's review of its commitments. Not relying especially on economic slogans during the summer elections, in the run-up to the autumn elections the ruling party armed itself with slogans which met the economic demands of the electorate. In this respect, the people felt that the opposition, which was unable to agree among themselves, would not be able to carry out its pre-election promises. And of course, the AKP's many years of experience in running the country played a most important role in attracting people's votes. In other words, the AKP was able to gain the confidence of the people in its reformist policy for the future.

How the opposition "fell"

The main opposition party - CHP - prepared much better for the summer elections than previously but was unable to continue its successful pre-election strategy into November. And a number of unsuccessful moves turned some of the electorate away from the party. One of these was by CHP's deputy Mahmut Tanal, who asked Turkey's Supreme Election Board (YSK) to ban the ruling party's pre-election song which began with the words "Haydi Bismillah", because the use of religious words infringes the election laws. The YSK upheld Tanal's request, but this backfired against the CHP.

It should be recalled that in the rural areas the CHP is traditionally criticized for its policy of separating the people from Islam. Although the CHP's leader, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, made a number of vociferous statements to destroy this stereotype, especially in the run-up to the summer elections, this propaganda was forgotten after Tanal's move, reanimating the negative attitude towards the CHP in the provinces.

Also, after the terrorist act in Ankara, the CHP did not hold any rallies and direct contact with the people was broken. The electorate, for its part, was unable to get a satisfactory reply as to why a coalition government was not created. And given this criticism, retaining its number of votes should be regarded as a success for the CHP.

The opposition Nationalist Move-ment Party (MHP) lost 5 per cent of the vote compared with the previous elections mainly because of its uncompromising behaviour after the elections. Almost immediately after the election results were announced on 7 June, the MHP's chairman, Devlet Bahceli, hinted at the likelihood of snap elections, which caused a negative attitude among many people. One should also look at the role of the 2001 economic crisis when Bahceli was deputy prime minister. Experts believe that a crisis was inevitable in many ways because of his performance. Devlet Bahceli, who has a jealous attitude to his opponents within the party, did not allow them to stand as candidates. He was worried by the growing reputation of Sinan Ogan and Meral Aksener and so he "arrested" their upward movement in the party. The outcome was that many young supporters and the Istanbul electorate turned their backs on the party. Another important factor, as in the case of the CHP, was the MHP's refusal to have direct contact with the people through the media.

Having commanded attention after the summer elections, the pro-Kurdish People's Democratic Party (HDP) was unable to repeat its success in November. One of the main reasons for its failure was the loss of votes in the eastern and south-eastern provinces of the country. The increasing terrorist acts and attacks by fighters of the Kurdish People's Party (PKK) seriously worried the population which was accustomed to a peaceful way of life. Besides, the youth wing of the PKK - YDG-H - prevented the free movement of people, trying to collect taxes, controlling roads and punishing those who didn't support their actions. This attitude towards their fellow citizens significantly reduced the turnout at the elections, thus weakening the HDP's positions in this region. Voters in Turkey's western regions expected that that the party would distance itself from the PKK terrorists but the HDP failed to do so and even in some cases came out as the political wing of the PKK, which led to their losing votes in Istanbul and Izmir.

Single rule and expectations

In its fourth term in government the AKP faces serious internal and external challenges. Within the country the struggle against terrorism is an urgent matter. At the same time, one can expect a resumption of peace initiatives for the Kurdish population in the east of the country. The subject of the Syrian refugees remains a very pressing one, also requiring quick solutions. Besides this, in its new term in office, the AKP will focus particular attention on resolving economic tasks and trying to restore economic growth.

In foreign policy, the Syrian crisis is, of course, paramount because the increasing confrontation between Russia and the USA in Syria is creating additional threats for Turkey's borders.

Besides this, the deterioration in relations with the West is having a negative impact on the AKP's positions within the country, and one may expect that Turkey will try to restore that level of relations with the USA and Europe that it had before 2011.

So, the AKP government has a very difficult agenda.