This is our principled opposition
The only meaningful alternative that would favor the CHP is its formation of a long-term coalition with the AK Party. In this way, it can prove itself, get rid of its chronic opposition position and make contact with the masses
As Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu said on the night when the election results were announced: "Things have started to fall into place." This remark was indicating that the ostensible false instability would not last long and Turkey's normalization process would continue. But after only two weeks, we have come to understand that the pieces of politics would be tied to the limits of reality. In other words, the romantic dreams of the restoration of the first week are now being put aside, which means that a coalition that excludes the Justice and Development Party (AK Party), is neither meaningful, nor fair, nor realistic.
The first reason of this is that the idea of restoration is related with the demonization of the AK Party, and is a revanchist move. The opposition parties can have consensus against some laws and implementations introduced by an AK Party government. But cooperation against the presence of an AK Party government does not have a convincing basis. Secondly, such a project means the articulation of a demand that is not so fair to Kurds. Today, the only addressee of the reconciliation process is the AK Party. The desire to push this party almost out of the political limits would mean the postponement of the reconciliation process to an uncertain future and, probably, the steps taken in the process would move backward as a result. Keep in mind that Republican People's Party (CHP) Chairman Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu announced his party's principles in 14 articles during last week's CHP group meeting, and they did not cover the Kurdish question.
In this case, restoration means the Kurds need to put aside the reconciliation process with an existential self-sacrifice and implies that they might not find a suitable addressee again. It is not expected that the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) will accept that. Thirdly, this proposal is not realistic since this is the only alternative in which the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) would lose apart from early elections. In brief, restoration is only a CHP project and Kılıçdaroğlu cannot even display the capacity to create the minimum conditions required to realize it.
The CHP's problem is simple. As their vote rates, which have not shown any change for years, indicate, early elections would not favor this party. With the HDP's being a meaningful alternative, the CHP would possibly lose some of its parts in every subsequent election held. Remaining as an opposition party would not favor the CHP, either. It will be stuck in the role and discourse of the main opposition once again, which it has held for years and which does not bring any votes to the party. Also, a short-term coalition partnership would not do any good to the party. In this case, the party will seem as if it cannot maintain power and support the AK Party.
In a nutshell, the only meaningful alternative that would favor the CHP is its formation of a long-term coalition with the AK Party. In this way, it can prove itself, get rid of its chronic opposition position and make contact with the masses. What kind of an attitude do you expect from such a party before coalition meetings? One does not think of the possibility that it would display an attitude that puts a spoke in the wheel of a possible cooperation with the AK Party. But Kılıçdaroğlu did just that. In the latest group meeting of the party, he did not make a speech on coalition, but addressed the people as if he was making an election speech, continuing to raise the bar. Maybe he thought he owed it to the electorate, or his psychological balance has been disturbed to be captivated by the blowing prime ministry winds.But for the time being the dynamics function raising the bars for the CHP or MHP, hardening the other's position on the AK Party, and as a result, a coalition becomes impossible. If both sides maintain this attitude, we will go to early elections, and both parties would probably lose in that. Moreover, since the opposition will be seen as responsible for the failure of forming a coalition, AK Party votes might rise to a level to come to power alone again. Then people would question how smart this principled politics is and deepen their knowledge about the opposition.
The first reason of this is that the idea of restoration is related with the demonization of the AK Party, and is a revanchist move. The opposition parties can have consensus against some laws and implementations introduced by an AK Party government. But cooperation against the presence of an AK Party government does not have a convincing basis. Secondly, such a project means the articulation of a demand that is not so fair to Kurds. Today, the only addressee of the reconciliation process is the AK Party. The desire to push this party almost out of the political limits would mean the postponement of the reconciliation process to an uncertain future and, probably, the steps taken in the process would move backward as a result. Keep in mind that Republican People's Party (CHP) Chairman Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu announced his party's principles in 14 articles during last week's CHP group meeting, and they did not cover the Kurdish question.
In this case, restoration means the Kurds need to put aside the reconciliation process with an existential self-sacrifice and implies that they might not find a suitable addressee again. It is not expected that the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) will accept that. Thirdly, this proposal is not realistic since this is the only alternative in which the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) would lose apart from early elections. In brief, restoration is only a CHP project and Kılıçdaroğlu cannot even display the capacity to create the minimum conditions required to realize it.
The CHP's problem is simple. As their vote rates, which have not shown any change for years, indicate, early elections would not favor this party. With the HDP's being a meaningful alternative, the CHP would possibly lose some of its parts in every subsequent election held. Remaining as an opposition party would not favor the CHP, either. It will be stuck in the role and discourse of the main opposition once again, which it has held for years and which does not bring any votes to the party. Also, a short-term coalition partnership would not do any good to the party. In this case, the party will seem as if it cannot maintain power and support the AK Party.
In a nutshell, the only meaningful alternative that would favor the CHP is its formation of a long-term coalition with the AK Party. In this way, it can prove itself, get rid of its chronic opposition position and make contact with the masses. What kind of an attitude do you expect from such a party before coalition meetings? One does not think of the possibility that it would display an attitude that puts a spoke in the wheel of a possible cooperation with the AK Party. But Kılıçdaroğlu did just that. In the latest group meeting of the party, he did not make a speech on coalition, but addressed the people as if he was making an election speech, continuing to raise the bar. Maybe he thought he owed it to the electorate, or his psychological balance has been disturbed to be captivated by the blowing prime ministry winds.But for the time being the dynamics function raising the bars for the CHP or MHP, hardening the other's position on the AK Party, and as a result, a coalition becomes impossible. If both sides maintain this attitude, we will go to early elections, and both parties would probably lose in that. Moreover, since the opposition will be seen as responsible for the failure of forming a coalition, AK Party votes might rise to a level to come to power alone again. Then people would question how smart this principled politics is and deepen their knowledge about the opposition.
Last Update: June 23, 2015 22:10