The AKP has been
successful in maintaining power by forming an informal alliance of liberals,
conservatives, even social democrats and Ataturkists. According to a poll
conducted by Metropoll in September and October 2013, 10.4% of AKP base
consisted of those who identified themselves as democrats and liberals, and 5.8%
social democrats.
The informal
alliance has been supported through the 10% national education threshold, which
requires political parties to earn at least 10% of the popular vote to be
represented in the parliament. As the AKP became the power house, right wing
and liberal parties, such as Democrat Party, Has Party and Motherland Party
disappeared from the political scene as they remained out of parliament with
disappointing results. The disappearance was not felt much, until a power
vacuum arose in the opposition.
The excessive
police force directed by Erdogan during the Gezi protests irritated liberal and
social democrat voices among AKP. The case for the closure of prep schools,
which are the main financial base for the Gulen movement, alienated the
Gulenist base. Erdogan put pressure on judiciary and police to halt the
investigation of the 17th December corruption case, which disturbed the
separation of powers, further deepening the rifts within nearly all parts of
the alliance. The language employed by Erdogan has become harsher and more
intolerant, appealing to only a certain proportion of his base. Over the past
month, four MPs have resigned from AKP, and three more are expected to resign.
As the rifts
deepen, the question becomes whether the political vacuum within the AKP can be
filled by the formation of another party. If we assume that all the democrats, liberals,
and social democrats within AKP would support a new party, it would earn 8.1%
of the total vote (based on Metropoll data). If we add into the picture Gulenists and
Ataturkists within AKP, the new party could reach a comfortable 15%, becoming a
serious alternative to AKP. Yet several isssues discourage the formation of a
new party, such as funding, difficulty to organize a political base around the
nation, and uncertainty in Turkish politics. In 2007, right before the election,
we observed the collapse of a coalition of liberals and democrats (Motherland
and True Path Party), due to power politics. The fear of another collapse might
be deterring different voices from coming together.
10% threshold requires the establishment of a
wide coalition, which is risky in its nature and is creating a power vacuum among
the alternatives of AKP. If a new formed alliance party can pass the 10% threshold,
we may see a coalition in the parliament in opposition of AKP. If the new
formed party fails short of 10%, AKP might manage hold in power, but this time
losing its pluralism and remaining with even more isolationist and pragmatic approaches.
Therefore, the fate
of 2015 elections might depend on whether a new alliance could pass the 10% threshold.
Salih Yasun
Cleveland State University
Undergradaute Student
Cleveland State University
Undergradaute Student
No comments:
Post a Comment