Turkish Election Results
M. Orhan Tarhan
August 01, 2007
The Turkish parliamentary elections occurred on July 22, 2007 and the religious Justice and Development Party (A.K.P) of Recep Tayyip Erdogan won it by getting 46.66 % of the vote. Because in 2007 fewer parties remained under the 10 % threshold than in 2002, this time A.K.P will have only 340 seats in the Parliament. Only two other parties, CHP and MHP, and some independents will have seats in the 550 seats parliament.
The AK Party will then be able to form a government just by itself but will have much less than 2/3 of the vote to change the constitution, unless it incorporated the Kurdish PKK independents.
Ataturk said that every people get the government they deserve. Since this last election was won pretty fairly, I must say that the Turkish people deserve it.
In this article I want to analyze (1) why the AK Party won this election, (2) why Europe supports the AK Party, and (3) what kind of a future can we expect for Turkey.
In his 15 years of presidency, Ataturk established the conditions under which the Turkish nation could live independently as a modern and survivable nation. That included the closing of religious schools and replacing them by secular schools, outlawing of the Sharia (Koranic Laws) and replacement by modern European laws, separation of religion from state (Laicism) , and the emancipation of women. He advised that science (and not religion, tradition, or superstition) is the best guide in life. He said that if Turks will practice these principles, they will continue to survive as a strong, independent nation.
Unfortunately, Ataturk’s followers did not really understand him. Starting with Ismet Inonu, they started to dismantle his system. Inonu broke the ban on religious schools and instituted the first Imam-Preacher school. These religious schools multiplied during later presidents because they were bringing votes from the ignorant paisantry. At one point they were infiltrated by political Islam teachers and have become an anti-secularism force in the country. Before 1960 a religious party was formed. Although it was clearly unconstitutional, the parliament did not try to close it. In 1960 the military closed it, but after return to democracy, the same people reopened the same party under a different name and again the parliament did not try to close it. This process repeated several times and before 2002 we see the AK Party emerging from Erbakan’s old party. The share of the religious vote was as low as 5 % at the beginning and no one took them seriously. But the brain-washed graduates of the Imam-Preacher schools continuously increased the religious vote until last week AKParty registered 46.66 %.
The secular parties have no grass roots. They were continuously busy with re-election and had no interest in the people. During their time the Turkish lira fell from $1 to less than $0.000 001. They were incompetent and corrupt. Thus, the electorate fired them in 2002.
AKP used American election campaign techniques such as those practiced by Chicago’s old mayor Daily. They brought services to the people. Recently, in the middle of the summer they distributed coal for the winter, just before the elections. They have some notable achievements: They brought the inflation rate down to single digit. During their time the per capita income of Turks more than doubled. Obviously, these are wonderful things. But, Turks paid for these improvements with heavy Islamization that will bring them back to the middle ages.
The secular people have been able to organize huge meetings but could not generate charismatic leaders. The heads of the secular parties are mediocre politicians but no leaders.
That is why A.K.P. won this election.
To understand why Europe supports AKP, we have to go back in history. Since the second siege of Vienna (1683) the Ottoman Empire had been declining and losing the territories it occupied in Europe. At 1914 the Ottoman Empire had almost nothing left in Europe, but considerable territories left in Asia, namely the Anatolian motherland and Arabic-speaking, oil rich provinces. Before the start of WWI, the Ottoman foreign service made a correct move and tried to approach the British, but the British did not want to have the Turks on their side, because they wanted to grab Ottoman territories. As a result of the stupidity of Enver Pasha and his accomplices, the Ottoman Empire found itself in the War, on the Side of Germany, Austria, and Bulgaria. In 1918, England and France occupied the Arabic-speaking provinces of the Ottoman Empire. In Anatolia, Ataturk generated a national movement, gathered a parliament, raised an army, decisively defeated the invading armies, and proclaimed a republic. In the Treaty of Lausanne, Europe had to accept Turkey’s full independence. Turkey was the only winner among the WWI group of Germany, Austria, Bulgaria, and Ottoman Empire. For over 80 years Europe had to respect Turkey and its modernization. Now, the emergence of a religious party in Turkey gives them an opportunity to contribute to the defeat of the successful revolution of Ataturk. As my good friend Bob Dickie put it so eloquently, “Ataturk wanted Turkey to become modernized and more Western in political and economic orientation; the West was afraid to let it happen”.
What kind of future can we predict for Turkey?
For the near future, things seem to be pretty clear. AKP will continue to govern Turkey. The economy will be good, the big industrialists will be happy. But Islamization will probably continue at a slow speed. Turkey will never be accepted into the European Union and soon or later this fact will sink into the Turkish public opinion.
My only hope for Turkey is in the long range. Big revolutions that changed peoples’ lives and minds usually were not accepted at once. The pendulum swung backward and it took quite some time for it to swing forward again. The French Revolution for Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity produced Napoleon who made himself Emperor. After Napoleon’s defeat by the Russian winter and the British, France had a new king and a parliament that was “more royalist than the king”. Eventually, after its defeat by Bismarck’s Germans in 1871, France became a Republic and staid that way ever since. Similarly, the present Islamization, might be the reaction to Ataturk’s laicism. Let us hope that eventually some smart Turks will see that Ataturk’s reforms were better for Turkey than AKP’s Islamization and succeed in convincing their compatriots. Maybe my great-grand children will see that.
The AK Party will then be able to form a government just by itself but will have much less than 2/3 of the vote to change the constitution, unless it incorporated the Kurdish PKK independents.
Ataturk said that every people get the government they deserve. Since this last election was won pretty fairly, I must say that the Turkish people deserve it.
In this article I want to analyze (1) why the AK Party won this election, (2) why Europe supports the AK Party, and (3) what kind of a future can we expect for Turkey.
In his 15 years of presidency, Ataturk established the conditions under which the Turkish nation could live independently as a modern and survivable nation. That included the closing of religious schools and replacing them by secular schools, outlawing of the Sharia (Koranic Laws) and replacement by modern European laws, separation of religion from state (Laicism) , and the emancipation of women. He advised that science (and not religion, tradition, or superstition) is the best guide in life. He said that if Turks will practice these principles, they will continue to survive as a strong, independent nation.
Unfortunately, Ataturk’s followers did not really understand him. Starting with Ismet Inonu, they started to dismantle his system. Inonu broke the ban on religious schools and instituted the first Imam-Preacher school. These religious schools multiplied during later presidents because they were bringing votes from the ignorant paisantry. At one point they were infiltrated by political Islam teachers and have become an anti-secularism force in the country. Before 1960 a religious party was formed. Although it was clearly unconstitutional, the parliament did not try to close it. In 1960 the military closed it, but after return to democracy, the same people reopened the same party under a different name and again the parliament did not try to close it. This process repeated several times and before 2002 we see the AK Party emerging from Erbakan’s old party. The share of the religious vote was as low as 5 % at the beginning and no one took them seriously. But the brain-washed graduates of the Imam-Preacher schools continuously increased the religious vote until last week AKParty registered 46.66 %.
The secular parties have no grass roots. They were continuously busy with re-election and had no interest in the people. During their time the Turkish lira fell from $1 to less than $0.000 001. They were incompetent and corrupt. Thus, the electorate fired them in 2002.
AKP used American election campaign techniques such as those practiced by Chicago’s old mayor Daily. They brought services to the people. Recently, in the middle of the summer they distributed coal for the winter, just before the elections. They have some notable achievements: They brought the inflation rate down to single digit. During their time the per capita income of Turks more than doubled. Obviously, these are wonderful things. But, Turks paid for these improvements with heavy Islamization that will bring them back to the middle ages.
The secular people have been able to organize huge meetings but could not generate charismatic leaders. The heads of the secular parties are mediocre politicians but no leaders.
That is why A.K.P. won this election.
To understand why Europe supports AKP, we have to go back in history. Since the second siege of Vienna (1683) the Ottoman Empire had been declining and losing the territories it occupied in Europe. At 1914 the Ottoman Empire had almost nothing left in Europe, but considerable territories left in Asia, namely the Anatolian motherland and Arabic-speaking, oil rich provinces. Before the start of WWI, the Ottoman foreign service made a correct move and tried to approach the British, but the British did not want to have the Turks on their side, because they wanted to grab Ottoman territories. As a result of the stupidity of Enver Pasha and his accomplices, the Ottoman Empire found itself in the War, on the Side of Germany, Austria, and Bulgaria. In 1918, England and France occupied the Arabic-speaking provinces of the Ottoman Empire. In Anatolia, Ataturk generated a national movement, gathered a parliament, raised an army, decisively defeated the invading armies, and proclaimed a republic. In the Treaty of Lausanne, Europe had to accept Turkey’s full independence. Turkey was the only winner among the WWI group of Germany, Austria, Bulgaria, and Ottoman Empire. For over 80 years Europe had to respect Turkey and its modernization. Now, the emergence of a religious party in Turkey gives them an opportunity to contribute to the defeat of the successful revolution of Ataturk. As my good friend Bob Dickie put it so eloquently, “Ataturk wanted Turkey to become modernized and more Western in political and economic orientation; the West was afraid to let it happen”.
What kind of future can we predict for Turkey?
For the near future, things seem to be pretty clear. AKP will continue to govern Turkey. The economy will be good, the big industrialists will be happy. But Islamization will probably continue at a slow speed. Turkey will never be accepted into the European Union and soon or later this fact will sink into the Turkish public opinion.
My only hope for Turkey is in the long range. Big revolutions that changed peoples’ lives and minds usually were not accepted at once. The pendulum swung backward and it took quite some time for it to swing forward again. The French Revolution for Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity produced Napoleon who made himself Emperor. After Napoleon’s defeat by the Russian winter and the British, France had a new king and a parliament that was “more royalist than the king”. Eventually, after its defeat by Bismarck’s Germans in 1871, France became a Republic and staid that way ever since. Similarly, the present Islamization, might be the reaction to Ataturk’s laicism. Let us hope that eventually some smart Turks will see that Ataturk’s reforms were better for Turkey than AKP’s Islamization and succeed in convincing their compatriots. Maybe my great-grand children will see that.
Print
Email
