Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

The smoke lifts

• Mark Mardell
• 23 Jul 07, 12:44 PM

For a short while, the sun-loungers lay unencumbered by bodies burning in the 46C heat. But the holiday resorts will be filling up again as people return to the seaside after breaking their holidays to vote in the Turkish elections.

In the cities, the colourful election bunting has already come down. In Ankara, they're sweeping up after the AKP's ecstatic street celebrations, following a victory that surprised even the ruling party's most loyal supporters.

It is almost unheard of for a party of government that has been in power for five years to actually increase its share of the vote. Yet Justice and Development (AK, that is), which claims to be a moderate conservative party with Islamic roots, rather than a religious party, put on about 13%.

Fewer MPs

It could be such a simple story. But it's not. The party has increased its authority, but reduced its power in parliament. A stunning victory then, that leaves it with fewer seats.

They have a huge moral mandate. This is not a hollow victory. Not a pyrrhic victory. But if the earth moved for them, there was no landslide as a result. As Napoleon or Stalin might have said: "How many legions does a moral mandate have?" This odd twist comes about because Turkish electoral law keeps out of parliament any party that does not get at least 10% of the national vote. Last time round, that meant there were just two parties in the parliament. Now there are four main groups and that means fewer MPs for the ruling party.

For those who like their politics free of turmoil and conflict, this is probably a good thing. The cause of the election was parliament's failure to agree a candidate for president. The government needed a two-thirds majority to force through its preferred candidate, whose wife wears a headscarf and so outrages the army and the secularists. It still lacks that majority. Although the prime minister made it clear more than a week ago that he would look for a compromise candidate, had his moral mandate have come with an absolute majority there would have been inevitable calls from within the party to force a showdown with the army. Who would win that contest? Who knows?

Ataturk's heirs

I always think the day after elections is like the day after a battle. The smoke drifts away, the forces are in new positions. But there is no time to relax. The new deployment raises new questions that weren't clear before. There are fresh dilemmas and questions raised for the tacticians and strategists from both winning and losing sides. Here are some of the key questions:

• Is the new parliament a recipe for a new agonised debate about identity? The two new forces are the Nationalist Action party, which some say is quasi-fascist, and the Kurdish independents (standing as an independent is a way round the 10% rule). It's obviously an explosive mix. Although the Kurds won't try to insist on taking the oath in their own language there will be other perhaps unforeseen opportunities for wrangles inside Parliament. More importantly, there is bound to be a big new debate about the place of "mountain Turks" (as Kurds are sometimes referred to) in the Turkish state.

• What alliances will form in the new parliament? Could Justice and Development do a deal with either the Kurds or the Nationalists? If they found a common presidential candidate with the Kurds, that could really have the top brass polishing their tanks. A more likely, and more powerful, deal with the nationalists would be controversial and further undermine the official opposition.

• What happens to the heirs of Ataturk? This is a fifth crushing defeat for the Republican People's party, the CHP. Their over-the-top warnings that Turkey was about to turn into Iran, made their message look ridiculous even to many of those who are very, very worried that the government will turn the clock back and threaten their Western lifestyle. Their reliance on their buddies in the army made them look the old-fashioned ones, a relic from the 1930s, and forced some liberals into voting for the government. They have few ideas or platforms other than "stop the other lot". Without detracting from the winners' victory, they gained votes from the lack of a credible, modern alternative. As I wrote yesterday, there is a gap in the political market. It could be filled by a new party or a revolt within the CHP. But I can't see any "Young Turks" in sight. If they don't reform themselves, the AKP will reach across into the centre ground, and as long as the economy stays strong, become the natural party of government.

And then the two big ones...

• Mildly Islamic or wildly Islamist? Will the ruling party continue to prove, as it has to many Western observers, that it is a moderate party, its success based on economics, rather than religion, with few ambitions to destroy a secular state? Of course, much depends what you mean by "secular". I'm sure it is amazing to many Muslims in Britain that a woman can't go to university in a mainly Muslim country like Turkey if she wears a headscarf. In Britain such a rule would be regarded as the state intruding into the very heart of religious freedom and civil liberty. Of course Britain is not a secular state, with the head of state the head of the official religion, but few would argue that it is not a modern liberal democracy. In Turkey will there be an increase of headscarf wearing? And will the government encourage new dress codes, different laws on public morality or drinking alcohol? So far, I can see very few signs of fundamentalism in Turkey, but it is not impossible some could use Justice and Development in the way Militant tried to use Labour. Most important of all, do the secularists begin to relax or will they feel increasingly beleaguered, aliens in their own country?

• Will it continue to be true that any elected party in Turkey is permanently over the barrel of the army's guns? It was the army's "military memorandum" that began this crisis and one newspaper here says the election is a "Civilian memorandum" in reply. Today the army website has only bland notices about construction tenders and conscription dates. Like a strict father, who has shouted "I will not tolerate such behaviour in my house young man!!!" Now the head of the family sits in the living room studiously ignoring the partying upstairs, hoping they will quieten down. He'd love to take the strap from the wall, like in the old days, but hesitates confronting a group of burly teenagers, knowing any confrontation would not be pretty.

What will they do if the next choice of president is not to their liking? Or when there is another, almost inevitable clash over some other secular/religious issue? Some think the army is still vital, as a lid stopping an overwhelmingly Islamic country adopting overwhelmingly Islamic values. Equally, it could be seen as the lid of a pressure cooker, unnaturally raising temperatures, and encouraging the whole thing to blow. Whether a force for good or ill, the army is perhaps the biggest block to Turkey's EU ambitions: Turkey may be secular, but it is not fully democratic while the army has such a role, and no EU country would think of letting Turkey into the club. How the army reacts in the next year will be vital to Turkey's future.

• Permalink
• Comments