Analysts examine the attitude of the politicians, the “no” front and the shortcomings of the referendum campaign with less than a month remaining until voting.The Radikal daily’s İsmet Berkan thinks political party leaders are settling accounts and directing heavy criticisms at each other over irrelevant issues ahead of the referendum, especially given that many constitutional reforms have already been enacted in the past and none of them were presented to a referendum. “During the 2002-2006 period, Turkey realized more extensive and more significant constitutional reforms, none of which was presented to a referendum. They all had extensive social support, even the [Republican People’s Party] CHP voted in favor of the reforms, and business organizations backed all the packages from A to Z,” explains Berkan. Considering their past support, he wonders why a less extensive reform package has become the subject of such debate today. “The package that is to be presented to a referendum is a continuation of the EU reforms and an insufficiently radical one, in my opinion. However, the circles that used to support Turkey’s EU membership and reforms made to this effect tend to say “no” to the reforms today. This shows that they are not concerned about the package’s content, but the [Justice and Development Party] AK Party government,” he argues.
The Star daily’s Mustafa Karaalioğlu dwells on the CHP’s leading the opposition to the reform package, which he does not find surprising or coincidental. He says no substantive debate is taking place among the opponents of the package because those opposed, mainly the CHP, base their objections to the reforms on a fight to secure their existence. Finding the CHP’s opposition to the package understandable given this fact, he adds that he wonders how people victimized by the Sept. 12, 1980 military coup can say “no” to the reforms. “Do they know what they are saying ‘yes’ to when they vote ‘no’,” asks Karaalioğlu.
Sabah daily’s Engin Ardıç complains that the man on the street is not sufficiently informed about the contents of the package, thus most view the referendum as a way to support either this or that party by saying either “yes” or “no.” He suggests that the public be informed about the contents of the package in the simplest way possible so that they know what it is they will be voting for.
