AKP ‘curbed before the country became a one-party state’

This week’s parliamentary elections deepened Turkey’s democracy by, at long last, bringing the Kurds, who make up 20 per cent of the population, into the political mainstream.

The chief victor in this contest between four parties was the leftist People’s Democratic Party (HDP), based on a largely Kurdish constituency, which won five million votes, passed the 10 per cent threshold and won 79 seats in parliament.

Founded in 2012, the party is co-chaired by a man and a woman, Selahattin Demirtas and Figen Yusekdag, and has a 50 per cent quota for women. The party is environmentalist, opposes the introduction of nuclear power to Turkey, and adopts an anti-nationalist stand with the aim of reconciling ethnic Turks and Kurds.

Ahead of the parliamentary polls, the HDP decided to field candidates as a party rather than as independents, the practice previously adopted by pro-Kurdish parties.

In a bid to broaden its appeal, the party enlisted as candidates devout Muslims, Christians, socialists, Alevis, Armenians, Yezidis and Circassians.

The party seeks to reform the country’s current neoliberal economy, strengthen workers’ rights, reach a deal with the Kurds, ensure minority rights and improve the situation of women.

The HDP has been compared to the ruling Greek Syriza party and its Spanish counterpart Podemos, both of which are challenging the traditional parties that have ruled for generations.

Turkey’s democracy was also deepened by the vote against the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) which, since 2002, had held a majority of seats in parliament and has been able to effect changes in Turkey, not all positive.

Thirteen years ago, the AKP made Turkey more democratic by empowering marginalised constituencies, notably devout Turkish citizens sidelined and alienated by the aggressively secular Turkish state.

The AKP permitted women to wear headscarves in public offices and universities and empowered religious folk. However, this election has shrunk the AKP’s representation from 327 seats won in the 2011 election to 258 seats.

The party’s founder and leading figure, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, had planned to use these elections as a means to ensure AKP rule and transform the country from a parliamentary to a presidential system, with the aim of perpetuating his own reign.

But over the past two years, Erdogan has adopted an authoritarian style of governance and used repression to counter critics, whistle-blowers and opponents.

Erdogan displayed his domineering tendencies in 2013 when confronting protests against the development of the Gezi Park in central Istanbul. He also responded to allegations of corruption within his ruling circle by dismissing hundreds of prosecutors, judges and policemen investigating the charges rather than addressing graft and nepotism.

Erdogan’s government also failed to meet the challenge posed by the mine disaster of 2014, which killed 301 and left victims’ families without support. Instead of acting as the president of all Turkish citizens during the parliamentary campaign, Erdogan worked for the AKP.

Fearing election theft, civil society groups fielded thousands of volunteers to monitor polling on election day, to ensure that there would not be fraud and ballot stuffing.

Erdogan has also angered Turkish voters by building a grandiose 1,150-room, $615 million palace he claims is a symbol of the new powerful, assertive Turkey. When criticised, he claimed he had to move as there were “cockroaches” in his office and in the toilets in the old palace. But the new palace has been seen by many as proof that he sees himself as a “sultan” who intends to be president for life.

Erdogan also alienated regional powers by intervening in their affairs. He backed the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt following the ouster of President Mohamed Morsi, a movement veteran, and has backed the Syrian political and armed opposition to secular Syrian President Bashar Assad.

The latter refused the Turkish leader’s call for Damascus to permit the Brotherhood to operate freely as a political party and socio-religious movement as religious, ethnic and sectarian groupings are barred from politics under the constitution.

The conflict has since been joined by a range of fundamentalist groups, including Al Qaeda affiliate Jabhat Al Nusra and Daesh; the latter has taken the battle to Iraq where it holds the key cities of Mosul, Ramadi and Falluja.

Arms, money and men have poured into Syria and Iraq through Turkey and the Turkish press has reported that weapons were found on the way to Syria in lorries belonging to Ankara’s intelligence service.

Turkey’s continued backing of these groups has created problems for the US, which is trying to reverse their territorial advances in Iraq and, to a lesser extent, in Syria even though these groups and their allies pose a serious threat to the entire region.

Discerning Turkish voters understand this even if politicians in the West do not.

The three opposition parties that won seats in parliament, the HDP, the newcomer, and the veterans, the Republican Turkish Party (CHP) and the right-wing National Movement Party (MHP), initially ruled out a coalition headed by the AKP, largely due to Erdogan’s demagogic and destructive behaviour, and conditioned participation on curbing him.

It is significant that the CHP and MHP told their voters to cast ballots for the HDP, which took votes away from the AKP in the Kurdish southeast. Since power-hungry political parties are not known for pursuing the national interests of their countries, this was a wise decision.

It was certainly in Turkey’s national interest that the AKP should be curbed before the country became a one-party state.

It remains to be seen, however, if the four winning parties can come up with a plan for Turkey’s stable democratic governance, head off a new election within 45 days and prevent a return to rule of unstable coalitions.