Snap election with pending domestic and foreign crisis

KADRİ GÜRSEL

The ruling party’s affairs were rapidly turning for the worse and, knowing that they were powerless to halt this, they had to embark on a snap election with no time to spare.

The 24 June decision was a logical decision in accordance with the Erdoğan-Bahçeli alliance’s interests. Had this not been done and had the elections been held as per schedule on 3 November 2019, the cost of all kinds of measures taken to counter not least the negative developments in the economy and the strengthening dynamics of alliance on the Good Party-SP axis on the right-wing opposition would have risen exponentially with the passage of time.

This road to be embarked on in an environment of crisis could have ended with the ruling party itself collapsing under the pressure of this heavy cost or its collapse being precipitated due to this.
Now, conversely, by holding a snap election in two months’ time, they will attempt to shore up their power at a relatively low cost against the destructive consequences as things turn for the worse. Please note I am not talking about them being able to rectify the situation through a snap election. If they stay in power, there will be no change in the direction and outcome of developments.

Moreover, we are not the ones alleging that things are heading for the worse; the alliance partners say so. In MHP General Chair Devlet Bahçeli’s speech at his party’s parliamentary group last Tuesday incumbent on him thanks to the division of labour between him and his partner President Erdoğan, the words he chose to justify his call for an early election spoke volumes:

“Under today’s conditions in which there is a wish to drown Turkey in debate over the system, it becomes increasingly difficult with each passing day to make it through to 3 November 2019 in a state of stability and balance.”

Meaning that the systemic crisis was threatening the country’s stability and balance.
None less than Bahçeli was speaking of the gradual escalation of the ongoing regime crisis in Turkey where the ruling party cannot dispense with the state of emergency.

And in no uncertain terms:
“Many negative factors which affect social, economic and political dynamics are blooming along the road leading to the election process.”

What Bahçeli is getting at is that a multidimensional and complex crisis has erupted and is escalating. This is as much as the poor fellow can bring himself to say.

Meanwhile, with Bahçeli having requested a 26 August election last Tuesday, Erdoğan’s announcement the day before yesterday of the snap election date of 24 June following the meeting of half an hour that he duly held with the latter was political theatre staged as dictated by the role sharing among partners.

But, there was also “ad-libbing” in this theatre.

For example, Bahçeli implied that if an immediate election were not held, the alliance between him and Erdoğan could crack:

“It is necessary for Turkey’s survival that that the national agreement having come into being with the People’s Alliance be preserved with care and attain its goals.”
It is necessary to concede that the MHP General Chair had special reasons for desiring an early election. He needed an election to prevent slippage from the party base into the Good Party and, to this end, to see to it that the ranks of the MHP, hungry for power since 2002, immediately started to taste the fruits of power.

On the other hand, how could, “Turkey’s regional and international relations and their social, political and military ramifications, and also the uncontrolled migration under the direction of international actors,” to which he referred in his speech, constitute a reason for bringing the election forward?
I mean, would those in power be incapable of withstanding these threats if there were no snap election?

The army, intelligence, police, judiciary and media – everything – are under the ruling party’s full control. It is impossible for power to be strengthened further because everything power related is in the rulers’ hands anyhow.

This invites the thought that there must be an expectation of the risks in the problematic areas that Bahçeli mentioned above coming to fruition. For example, certain unwanted clashes in Syria and a wave of migration from Idlib. There you have it. The wish is for the elections be held at once before these threats become reality and for the Erdoğan-Bahçeli alliance not to lose votes due to these factors.

These very points were raised by President Erdoğan the day before yesterday in the speech in which he announced the election date:

“Events of historical importance centred around Syria and Iraq make it imperative for Turkey to surmount the uncertainties...”

“The intensity of the agenda facing Turkey dictates that the ensuing uncertainty be eliminated immediately by announcing an early election decision.”

“Developments in Syria...”

There is clearly a reason of foreign origin for the holding of this election in a snap manner. The Syria issue impacting on the ballot box to the alliance’s detriment.

Let me also ask: What uncertainty?

Is this new method of government that was approved by a narrow majority in the tainted 16 April 2017 referendum not itself the source of the uncertainty and unpredictability in that it has consolidated all power and authority into the hands of a single person and made the balance and oversight inherent in democracies impossible and has deactivated the institutional mechanisms that block arbitrary rule?

İç ve dış krizlerden önce baskın seçim