Good Party (IP) Chairperson Meral Akşener is doubling down on “fielding mayoral candidates individually.” Although the People’s Alliance, led by the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party), talks about contesting mayoral races with “battering ram” candidates, Akşener remains inclined to get her party’s General Executive Council to make that decision permanent. She does not heed the warning of pro-Republican People’s Party (CHP) commentators that opposition mayors will not get reelected under the circumstances either.
Akşener insists on her party fielding its own candidates despite having made positive remarks on the mayors of Istanbul and Ankara, Ekrem Imamoğlu and Mansur Yavaş, earlier. Yet, she hasn’t ruled out county-level cooperation. She says that she opposes the politics of alliances that fuel polarization. In truth, the IP chair dislikes the opposition’s brand of alliance politics. Comparing the two alliances, she describes the People’s Alliance as “rational” and “inseparable,” whereas she sees the Nation Alliance as “kicking each other under the table.” Her comparison inherently signals some level of envy.
I posit that Akşener’s opposition to alliance politics reflects three factors. Primarily, the alliance system has favored CHP at the expense of right-wing opposition parties until now. Secondly, the Nation Alliance had a problematic experience in the May 2023 elections. Finally, becoming part of an alliance hurt the IP disproportionately in the 2019 and 2023 elections.
Standing atop the major fault lines in Türkiye’s political arena, the IP seeks to create a third way by making a strong start. In other words, Akşener looks for a way out of the lose-lose equation that she has tried twice already. Taking that step, however, requires her to risk an opposition defeat in next year’s municipal elections. That’s why she must face harsh criticism from the CHP’s secularist media establishment – against which she proved quite fragile on March 3-6, 2023.
At a time when CHP Chairperson Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu talks about his party’s “dominance” ahead of the municipal elections, Akşener faces an uphill battle. Her rejection of alliance politics must simultaneously weaken the People’s Alliance, which consolidated in 2016, and not fuel fragmentation and frustration within the opposition bloc.
First and foremost, I believe the IP suffered disproportionately from the alliance system. It appears that Akşener also reached that conclusion based on Kılıçdaroğlu’s imposition as the opposition’s joint presidential candidate and what happened around the "table for six." Indeed, she already acknowledged that those experiences had some residual effects on the IP’s organization and base.
Could the IP create a third way to transcend alliance politics? Would that initiative help its leader resist calls for her resignation after next year’s municipal elections? Will she negotiate terms for an alternative partnership with the embattled CHP? Akşener and the IP will answer those questions over the following weeks.
If the IP chairperson chooses to field her own mayoral candidates, placing at risk CHP-affiliated mayors to distinguish herself from the ruling alliance and CHP, she might find a new opportunity in the 2028 elections. If she gives up on that plan in exchange for half-baked proposals like nominating the two popular mayors for vice president, the electorate might conclude that Akşener’s political statements cannot be trusted. Let us see whether Akşener has the necessary courage.
