Laying the Cornerstone for a New Turkey: The June 24 Elections.

• Author: Altun, Fahrettin
• Position: COMMENTARY - Essay

Introduction

On June 24, 2018, with a participation rate of 86.24 percent in parliamentary and 86.22 percent in presidential elections--a level that has not been reached by many western democracies--Turkey elected its President and parliamentarians. The winners of this election were Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi, AK Party). Thus, by obtaining 52.5 percent of the vote, Erdogan became the first President under the new system, while the AK Party received 42.6 percent of the vote and obtained 295 seats in the parliament. Under the leadership of Erdogan, apart from becoming the party that gained the most votes in the election, by forming the People's Alliance (Cumhur ittifaki) with the Nationalist Action Party (Milliyetci Hareket Partisi, MHP), the AK Party laid the way for a strong parliamentary coalition. As such, after the June 24 elections, the People's Alliance took its place in the legislature with a total of 344 Members of Parliament (MP) forming a substantial majority. Formed in opposition to the People's Alliance, the Nation Alliance (Millet Ittifaki), composed of the Republican People's Party (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi, CHP), Iyi Party and Felicity Party (Saadet Partisi) failed to reach its aims. Within this framework, as the participants of this alliance, the CHP received 22.6 percent of the vote and 146 MPs while the Iyi Party received 9.96 percent of the vote and 43 MPs. The Felicity Party only received 1.4 percent of the vote and thus failed to elect any MPs, however, the party had put two of its candidates into CHP lists and they were therefore elected to parliament. Also, by supporting the Nation Alliance from out with, the political representatives of the PKK--the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) with the help of the CHP, received 11.7 percent of the vote and obtained 67 MPs.

While determining Turkey's political fate, the June 24 elections were also of significant importance as the election allowed for the final step of the transition to the new presidential system of governance that was accepted on April 16, 2017. Consequently Turkey, currently in a process of democratic transition, left behind the slow and disorganized parliamentary system and moved forward with the new presidential system. Within this period, the Turkish electorate refreshed their trust in Erdogan and with strong political support, displayed their belief in the new system. In opposition to this, candidates defending the old system experienced a clear defeat, in fact, the vote that Erdogan received alone was more than the total vote for all other presidential candidates; CHP's presidential candidate Muharrem Ince received 30.6 percent, Iyi Party candidate Meral Aksener received 7.3 percent, HDP's candidate Selahattin Demirtas 8.4 percent and finally, Felicity Party candidate Temel Karamollaoglu only received 0.9 percent of the total vote.

Within this framework, the June 24 elections have brought important dynamics into Turkish political life. Events that occurred between the referendum and the elections and the strategies of the alliances have left their mark on the election process. With the new system of governance showing how important it is in specifying the country's sociologic political position.

This commentary aims to provide an analysis of the period from the April 16 referendum to the June 24 elections. It initially discusses the importance of the presidential governance system and the different reasons why an early election was needed. This is followed by a discussion of the different stages of preparation undertaken by the political parties with regard to the June 24 elections, and by drawing on their strategies and rhetoric assesses the extent to which this has been reflected in the election results. Finally, this commentary briefly analyses the election results.

Why Snap Elections?

Since 2002, President Erdogan has been in favor of holding elections on time and has not approached any offer of an early election warm-heartedly. The only exception to this was in 2007 when elements of the status quo created a crisis aiming to prevent the AK Party from having any say in the presidential appointment. In response to this, Erdogan decided to hold early elections and took the country to elections three and a half months before the initial date. (1) While Erdogan has strongly insisted on holding elections on time, he has at times acceded to holding snap elections in extraordinary situations. This principle showed itself in the run-up to the June 24 elections, which were the result of extraordinary circumstances, which will be discussed under five subheadings.

Firstly, with the successful alliance that the AK Party and MHP formed after the failed July 15 coup attempt, both parties wanted to protect the alliance and wanted to eliminate any political instability that could be experienced while Turkey was witnessing its systematic transition. Therefore it was in fact the leader of the MHP, Devlet Bahceli, who first called for snap elections and President Erdogan responded positively.

Secondly, the domestic and international threats made against Turkey's stability, economic development and societal peace made early elections a "national obligation." In particular, the financial attacks at an international level on Turkey's growing economy, and the attempt to manipulate the markets are crucial reasons as to why the elections had to be held immediately. It is possible to argue that had the elections taken place in 2019, there would have been unease in the markets, which could have increased the possibility of difficulties in investment moves, big development projects and in finding financial support. The threat Turkey is faced with is not only economic. Ankara is currently pursuing military operations in Northern Iraq against the PKK/PYD terrorist organization. In order to maintain these operations and to ensure political stability, Turkey needed the swift completion of the transition to a new system of governance; when taking into consideration that the fight against terrorism is a first-degree factor that affects Turkeys political stability, it is possible to state that the decision to hold snap elections was rational and essential.

Thirdly, Turkey has been in an atmosphere of election expectation for 22 months. After the ruling AK Party and the MHP started to collaborate, whether intended or not, the assumption of snap elections amongst the public and within the state apparatus was evident. However, pointing to November 2019 as a possible date for the elections caused stagnation in both the public and private sector.

Fourthly, the opposition began to feel overwhelmed in the face of the AK Party-MHP alliance and attempted to use non-democratic means including the organization of street protests similar to that of the "Gezi events" of 2013. The sole common point bringing the...