Turkey Analyst,
vol. 4 no. 13
27 June 2011

WHAT THE COLUMNISTS SAY

Commentators in Turkey were accorded little time to analyze the results of the June 12 general election; the outcome of the election was quickly overshadowed by the decision of the Supreme electoral board (YSK) to strip Hatip Dicle, a leading independent candidate who is supported by the Kurdish BDP, of his parliamentary seat, and by the refusal of the courts to release five other Kurdish MP-elects who are also imprisoned. The Kurdish issue has now come to dominate the political agenda, as it is widely recognized that the success of the proposed endeavor to draft a new constitution depends entirely on how Turkey’s political system acquits itself on this matter. Several commentators express the wish that Prime Minister Erdoğan live up to the pledges that he made on election night.

ÇANDAR: THE RESULTS OF THE JUNE 12 ELECTION HAVE BEEN ANNULLED
Cengiz Çandar in Radikal does not mince his words as he comments the decision of the Supreme electoral board (YSK) to strip the Kurdish deputy-elect Hatip Dicle of his parliamentary seat. If the decision of the YSK nd the subsequent decision of the 35 BDP deputies to boycott the Grand National Assembly in protest are not rescinded, that will effectively mean that the June 12 general elections have been annulled, together with their results. The situation is indeed that grave. Of course, what I am saying is meant in a metaphorical sense; the parliament can of course convene without the participation of the BDP. It can pass laws. It can even draft a constitution. There are no obstacles to any of these things taking place. But a parliament without the BDP, a parliament where nearly 3 million Kurdish votes are unrepresented, will not be able to solve the Kurdish question. It may draft a new constitution with the purpose of solving the Kurdish issue, but such a constitution will nonetheless remain on paper. Because, regardless of what is stated in such a constitution, it will not be legitimate in the eyes of a substantial portion of the Kurds, when those who represent the Kurdish question have not participated in its drafting, indeed when they have been prevented from participating.
 
AKYOL: THE BDP NEEDS TO CHANGE ITS TONE TOWARD THE AKP
Mustafa Akyol in Star that BDP-supported deputy-elect Sebahat Tuncel has published an op-ed piece in the New York Times recently. The title of the article read “Arab Spring, Kurdish summer”. Tuncel enumerated the demands and the complaints of the Kurdish nationalist movement to which she belongs. She leveled fierce criticism against the AK Party government. Tuncel claimed that Prime Minister Erdoğan is “insincere”, and she wrote that the AK Party “increased the military operations”., “shut down “ the Kurdish party (DTP) and that it has “arrested Kurdish politicians”. In effect, the exaggerated opposition to the AK Party that finds expression in the New York Times article reflects what has lately become the most pronounced line of the BDP. Yet there is a paradox here: like it or not, the AK Party is the party that has taken the most important steps ever in the history of the republic with regard to the Kurdish issue. Even though it caters to Turkish nationalism as well since it is a mass party, it has nonetheless carried through the most important reforms that pave the way for the freedom of the Kurdish identity. Thus, you would expect that someone whose mission is the freedom of the Kurds would look favorably on the AK Party and present criticism in a constructive tone. However, what matters for the BDP is not only the freedom of the Kurds. What is as important is the question of who is going to assume the leadership, who is going to accede to power in the space created by the collective rights once they are granted to the Kurds. Perhaps it is even more crucial. In this perspective, the AK Party is the greatest threat against the BDP; because nearly half of the Kurdish population insists on supporting the AK Party in the elections. That makes the wind out of the claim of the PKK movement to be the sole party of the Kurds. Yet the representatives of the BDP need to overcome the complex that this paradox creates and deploy a constructive language, so that the points where they are right don’t become overshadowed by their injustices.

ALTAN: PLAYING THE NATIONALIST CARD WAS NOT NECESSARY
Ahmet Altan in Taraf asks if Erdoğan really needed to play the nationalist card in order to secure his election victory. If we look at the results, there was no need for such an offensive. We are now able to conclude that nationalism not only failed to push the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) below the ten percent threshold, but that it in fact also worked to mobilize Kurdish nationalism. The AKP lost eight deputies to the BDP in the Southeast. BDP, which everyone agrees was the second winner of the election, owes its success to the Turkish nationalism that Erdoğan overemphasized as much as it does to its own labors. And the MHP, which hovered around seven percent was also boosted by the nationalist competition. What can we expect, now that we have put the elections behind us? What is obvious is that we are going to establish a new republic in place of the military tutelage. The fact that Erdoğan was denied the 367 seats in parliament which would have fulfilled his presidential dreams will perhaps help him realize that history has something much more attractive than an all-powerful presidency in store for him: the role as the founder of the new republic.

AKYOL: SOLVING THE KURDISH ISSUE WOULD MAKE ERDOGAN HISTORIC
Taha Akyol in Milliyet observes that quite a few of those who commented on Prime Minister Erdoğan’s victory speech on the night of the June 12 general election said “he always delivers good speeches from the “balcony”, but then his positions harden and he becomes more authoritarian”. But I say, “this time it’s different!” I say so because that is my wish; but the second reason is the fact that the conditions have changed: this is Erdoğan’s last tenure as prime minister! From now on, he has no fights with other parties to look forward to; only two things await him: The first and currently topical one is drafting a constitution and the issue of how he is going to steer the Kurdish process. And the second thing, related to these matters, is his place in history. The introduction of a civilian constitution and to be successful in resolving the Kurdish issue is reasonably going to resonate more than economic projects. Who would not concur that a leader who is successful in those respects deserves to be called one of the greatest statesmen in the history of the republic? And to succeed with that, he will have to sooth tensions, be persuasive, and reach for conciliation. In order to ascend to Çankaya (the presidential palace) and to get a good rating in history, he needs to execute the things that he promised on the balcony on election night. That is why I believe that this time his speech on the balcony did shed light on the future that we can expect. That is what I want to believe.

KAHRAMAN: THE BDP WILL HAVE A CRUCIAL ROLE
Hasan Bülent Kahraman in Sabah writes that the Kurdish BDP has secured a pivotal role in Turkish politics. The BDP has succeeded in ensuring the national unity of the Kurdish movement; people from different ideological camps, from Şerafettin Elçi to Altan Tan, came together around the Kurdish movement. The Kurdish question is not only a problem of the southeast of the country, but it is the problem of the whole country. There is no way you can solve the problem by shutting your eyes to this reality. The problem is not going to be solved in the southeast, but in the west (of Turkey). Secondly, it has now become all-apparent that the Kurdish problem is above all a constitutional problem. It is not an economic and social or cultural problem. Consequently, its solution is directly related to the question of democratization. This is a difficult objective to attain. Everything suggests, however, that the new parliamentary order, with the presence of a socialist-Kurdish alliance playing a crucial role, is a candidate to midwife an important political change. But this also places a new responsibility on the Kurdish side. The formulation of a solution will require the utmost sensibility, given the diversity on this side, from radicalism to moderation, with a multitude of power centers and a variety of internal dynamics. The BDP and the socialists are at an extremely important turning point.

© Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program Joint Center, 2010. This article may be reprinted provided that the following sentence be included: "This article was first published in the Turkey Analyst (www.turkeyanalyst.org), a biweekly publication of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program Joint Center".

The Turkey Analyst
The Turkey Analyst is a publication of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Joint Center, designed to bring authoritative analysis and news on the rapidly developing domestic and foreign policy issues in Turkey. It is published bi-weekly, and includes topical analysis, as well asa summary of the Turkish media debate. It is edited and compiled under the supervision of Svante E. Cornell and Halil M. Karaveli.

The Turkey Analyst welcomes article submission. Please contact Halil M. Karaveli, Managing Editor.

The Joint Center
The Joint Center was created in 2005 through the merger of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute, at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies, and the Silk Road Studies Program, at the Stockholm-based Institute for Security and Development Policy.

The Turkey Initiative
The Joint Center launched a Turkey Initiative in 2006 in order to improve understanding of Turkish domestic and foreign affairs in Europe and the United States.

To Subscribe:
To subscribe to the Turkey Analyst email announcements, please contact Martina Klimesova with an email containing "subscribe Turkey Analyst" in the subject line.