PECULIARITIES OF TURKISH DEMOCRACY

The second municipal elections in Istanbul closely monitored all over the world ended quietly. Due to large difference in votes between the candidates, all parties acknowledged the results of the vote; even the ruling party did not object. In the evening of the same day, Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan and another candidate for mayor of Istanbul from the Justice and Development Party (AKP), Binali Yildirim, congratulated Ekrem Imamoglu. If during the first elections held on March 31, the difference between the candidates was only 25 thousand votes (13 thousand after recounting the ballots), then during the repeated referendum on June 23 the gap was drastic: 806 thousand votes. In other words, this time the residents of Istanbul expressed more strong support for Imamoglu.

Elections are over. In the next five years, Ekrem Imamoglu will be a mayor of the largest city in Europe. He was supported by 54.21% of voters, or 4,741,868 residents of Istanbul. Certainly, such an outcome is significant support for the newly elected mayor of Istanbul. But in the future he will face serious tests.

Significance of Istanbul

Istanbul Municipal Council has about 180 members from the ruling coalition and about 140 opposition representatives. This is where Imamoglu will encounter the most powerful opposition. His second serious problem is the economic situation in the municipality, which, according to official data, owes 500 companies about 26.8 billion Turkish Liras (TL).

Budget of the municipality this year is 23.8 billion TL. Given the additional 2.5 and 8.5 billion TL of IETT (general directorate for exploitation of public transport) and ISKI (general directorate of water supply and sewage systems), respectively, the budget of the organization is about 34.8 billion TL, i.e. approximately 75% of the current debt of the mayor’s office, which could create serious problems for Imamoglu in the future.

Today, however, everyone is interested in the reasons that led to what we have after the last election. What happened so that the Union of the People coalition, which was jointly founded by AKP and MHP (Nationalist Movement Party) and won the presidential and parliamentary elections just a year ago and the recent municipal elections by the total number of votes lost two major cities (Istanbul and Ankara) and all municipalities on the Mediterranean coast of the country? What is really going on in Turkey?

Traditionally, Istanbul is considered the stronghold of all the dominant political forces in Turkey, in particular AKP. In other words, it is the affiliation of a mayor of Istanbul to ruling party that determines the power of the party in the country. For example, the incumbent president Recep Tayyip Erdogan began his political after being elected a mayor of Istanbul in 1994. Since 2002, when AKP won the special election and came to power in Turkey, mayor of Istanbul has always been a member of AKP.

Now the ruling party lost the economic capital of the country. In 2018, more than half of Turkish exports went through Istanbul. In January-November last year, the volume of export operations in the third largest tourist city of Europe exceeded $78 billion. And now the largest city of Europe no longer 'belongs' to AKP. What could have happened such that the alliance of Republican People’s Party (CHP)-Good Party- Virtue Party defeated AKP a year later and secured 54% of votes in parliamentary elections (even without Virtue Party)? Although at the presidential and parliamentary elections held on June 24, 2018, AKP-MHP alliance managed to win 53.7% of the votes in Istanbul.

Effect of local factors

Undoubtedly, the winner himself deserves a tribute. Ekrem Imamoglu was a breath of fresh air not only for Istanbul but for all of Turkish politics. The star, inconspicuous in the large political arena and recognizable only by one-fifth of the country's population, the forty-nine-year-old head of the Beylikduzu municipality (one of the districts of Istanbul) emerged after two recent election campaigns. Against the harsh rhetoric of the ruling political elite, Imamoglu brought in an image of a “soft,” cheerful politician ready to execute the functions that can consolidate society. And it had the desired effect. Istanbul voters have chosen not the second person of the ruling party, but the representative of the party with a 28 percent electorate in Turkey (maximum CHP could achieve in all elections in the last ten years). Certainly, the fact that Imamoglu was not a representative of the traditionally secular electorate of CHP, but is from a religious-conservative family played a role.

But this victory is not only the success of Imamoglu and his team. A certain part of poor voters of one of the most expensive cities in the world supported the opposition candidate largely due to some of the current government’s failures in economic sphere, in particular, due to rising inflation and unemployment.

Finally, the Kurdish factor. According to statistics, 14% of Turkey’s population and 15% of Istanbul’s residents are Kurds. So, one and a half million Kurdish voters live in Istanbul currently. Religious-conservative Kurds from this amount of voters have traditionally supported AKP for the last 17 years of the party’s rule. However, with the advent of Kurdish parties such as Democratic Party of Peoples (HDP), and even earlier the Party of Peace and Democracy (BDP), majority of Kurdish votes left AKP, although these parties were mostly left-wing political organizations. In recent years, HDP, as a rule, has secured no more than 10-11% of votes. In the last election, Kurds did not support AKP preferring CHP candidate instead. Obviously, the appeals of Kurdish leaders, in particular Selahattin Demirtas, who is currently in custody, played an important role. On the contrary, the Kurdish electorate did not respond to the letter from the leader of terrorist Kurdish Workers' Party (PKK) Abdullah Ocalan, transmitted by a university teacher who met with him in prison on the island of Imrali and urging the Kurds to remain impartial in the elections. According to some observers, an event that occurred a few days before the elections, i.e. the struggle between AKP and CHP for Kurdish voices had a negative effect for the AKP-MHP coalition, forcing part of the nationalist electorate to turn away from the ruling party.

Regional and international factors

One of the photographs published in the Turkish media in connection with the June 23 elections depicts a group of people cheering for joy, allegedly at the US consulate in Istanbul. It is believed that the photo has been taken during the announcement of the victory of Imamoglu at the consulate. But this information is contradictory, since it looks unconvincing to have so many people in the consulate on Sunday evening. It would be more logical to assume the use of the photograph for propaganda purposes. On the other hand, given the current tensions between the US and Turkey, it is clear that Washington welcomes the victory of secular politician Imamoglu. Americans still cannot come to terms with Erdogan’s purchase of Russian S-400 rocket launchers, which will most likely lead to more sanctions against Ankara or banning of the purchase of American F-35 fighters. Moreover, according to Turkish officials, after the attempted coup on July 15, 2016, it was clear that Washington was doing everything possible to make Erdogan leave his current post. It is not clear how the Americans can influence the elections in Istanbul, but the fact that they are happy with the victory of Imamoglu is obvious.

According to some analysts, the aftermath of events that took place in the Middle East shortly after the Arab Spring was a heavy blow to political Islam, which had a huge success after the revolution in Iran and had its 'golden period' in the early 2000s. Islamists came to power in Turkey in 2002, and in Palestine after the 2006 elections. Even in the West, the Muslim model of democracy, actively promoted by Turkey and personally by Erdogan, was considered a role model for the entire Islamic world. Interest in it began to grow from the very first days of the Arab spring, during relatively peaceful revolutions, when a number of countries tried to accept and implement the Turkish model of governance. However, popular uprisings soon gave way to a bloody massacre, and the plans to overthrow the Syrian president Bashar al-Assad have never come true thanks to Russian and Iranian. Muslim Brotherhood movement, which came to power in Egypt after the revolution, was overthrown in a military coup a year thanks to the joint efforts of Saudi Arabia, UAE and Bahrain. It became clear that the Arab Spring was not a process of Islamic awakening at all.

In addition, the merciless terrorist war in the Middle East had a serious blow to the adherents of political Islam and Shariah in general, both in Turkey and in other Muslim countries.

For example, according to a survey conducted by the Gallup Institute in 2007, 7% of Turkish population supported full transition to Shariah law, while 26% were not against the use of at least some of them. Remarkably, the Gallup survey for 2016 showed that only 13% of the country's population supported the introduction of Shariah commands to the existing laws of the Republic of Turkey, and the number of those who were against the influence of religion on politics and laws, supporting the establishment of complete secularism in the country, increased from 27% in 2012 up to 36% in 2016.

Of course, all this political squabble and intense regional processes could not help but affect the Turkish voters during the last municipal elections. Even if none of the above factors were decisive, each of them had some impact on the final outcome of the referendum. Probably, we will feel this impact in the future.

What comes next?

It is too early to think that the last municipal elections in Istanbul will be a fatal blow to the current political power of the country. As Mr. Erdogan stated at the last party meeting on June 25, the authorities "will take into account the popular message." So, we still have four years ahead.

But this period can also turn into a serious test for AKP too. Angry and resentful groups within the ruling party can leave it to create a new party. For example, former president Abdullah Gul, former prime minister Ahmet Davutoglu and former deputy prime minister Ali Babacan have allegedly prepared to form a new party before the elections. According to the statement by Kemal Ozturk, former general director of Anadolu news agency, Babacan will soon leave AKP to create a new party. In this case, AKP may have serious loss and disintegration, which can lead to severe fragmentation within the conservative electorate. On the other hand, Imamoglu’s victory significantly contributed to saving the image of Turkish democracy. Groups that have regularly accused the incumbent government of authoritarianism and complete eradication of democratic elections are now forced to recognize Turkey’s commitment to the principles of democracy. This will be a good immunity for Turkish society and the government at least until the next municipal elections in 2023.