Unless the CHP does away with Kemalism...
 
 
  |  
  |  
  |  
  |  
RSS
  |  
  |  
  |  
21 May 2013 Tuesday
 
 
 
 
 
 
Columnists 20 July 2012, Friday 3 0 0 0
MARKAR ESAYAN
m.esayan@todayszaman.com

Unless the CHP does away with Kemalism...

A cursory look at political developments during the last 10 years makes it clear that the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) has been saliently increasing its electoral support in each successive election.

 In the last parliamentary elections, about 22 million voters in Turkey voted for the AK Party. Roughly half this number voted for the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP).

If we analyze the motives voters had for supporting the AK Party, we might say that they voted for this party as a sign of approval of the services and stability it has provided. On the other hand, a certain sense of dissatisfaction and pessimism is detectable in the people who voted for the CHP. Certainly there are reasons for this, and I shall discuss them below. But I would like to include a small reminder before analyzing the CHP’s 34th party congress, the most significant event in the political scene in the past week.

Shortly before the general elections of 2010, the CHP changed its leader. This change did not -- and could not, for that matter -- come through normal means. For the uninitiated, let me note that the CHP perceives itself as the founding party of the Turkish republic. It also sees Mustafa Kemal (Atatürk) as the founder of the Republic, which is true. Until Democrat Party (DP) leader Adnan Menderes, who would later be executed by secularists in the wake of the 1960 coup, came to power (1950-1960), the CHP, as the Kemalist state’s only party, governed the country with an iron fist and employed the fascist republic model as its form of governance. The deep-running prejudices and lack of trust among the people of Turkey were sown in this period; in particular, stripping non-Muslim minorities of their wealth and their banishment from the country, the massacres of Alevis and Kurds and the pressures on the religious practices of Muslims can be described as social engineering efforts. The CHP had put a Western spin on these fascist practices, claiming that it was performing them in order to create a contemporary, secular and united country, and for this reason the West not only did not criticize these practices; it praised them.

Following this short introduction, I should also note that between 2002 and 2010 -- a period that may later be labeled the second foundation of Turkey -- the CHP worked as the parliamentary branch of juntas and tried to prevent Abdullah Gül from being elected president because his wife is headscarved. The CHP also acted as the mouthpiece of all antidemocratic initiatives, such as the April 27 memorandum and the Constitutional Court’s meddling in politics. The CHP has relied so heavily on and invested so much hope in the military handing it political power on a tray, instead of coming to power by formulating policies, that it has become rotten inside, alienating its voter base.

Plotters within the state

The attempts to overthrow the government that started before the AK Party came to power and continued uninterrupted until 2009 were not successful. These attempts were uncovered, and the perpetrators are standing trial in a series of critical cases, such as those against Ergenekon -- a clandestine organization nested within the state accused of attempting to overthrow or manipulate the democratically elected government -- and the Balyoz (Sledgehammer) coup plan. Those who created and used the CHP finally, though belatedly, realized that the CHP would be able to come to power by collaborating with juntas. With this realization, an operation was launched against the CHP’s former leader Deniz Baykal. Baykal became the victim of a sex tape conspiracy that was rumored to have been staged with the help of some intra-party groups and media outlets. Thus Baykal was forced to resign, after Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, who would later replace him, and his closest senior aides had deserted him in the wake of the scandal. At that time, Kılıçdaroğlu would parrot, “I won’t run for party leadership,” but in the end he became the CHP’s new head.

This event is still enigmatic, and Baykal does not seem inclined to have it investigated. But that is not what this article is about.

For the foregoing reasons, the CHP was stripped of the luxury of securing power through the bureaucracy, and was now feeling the need to deal with the nuts and bolts of politics. Despite the cloud obscuring the dynamics of this change, I find the CHP’s return to the political arena a positive development. Independently from whatever powers launched the operation to reorganize the CHP and for what purposes, I believe as long as Turkey’s political stability and demilitarization progresses, the ulterior motives of those who reformatted the CHP will not surface, and the CHP will change as it warms to politics, whether by design or default. But it is hard to predict how long this will take.

As a matter of fact, the bitter truth is that the CHP is very unlikely to close the gap unless it does away with Kemalism and makes a radical self-criticism. However, during the last party congress, Kılıçdaroğlu did not try to exclude Kemalists and neo-nationalists (ulusalcı) and nominated Ergenekon defendants for the Party Assembly (PM), which is proof that the change he refers to is only palliative. Indeed, he had allowed two major Ergenekon defendants, Mehmet Haberal and Mustafa Balbay, to run for Parliament and get elected as deputies, in a move that indicated that he was inimical to the process of settling accounts with the deep state and coup perpetrators, a process to which the overwhelming majority of the public attach great importance.

Of course, it could be argued that even if Kılıçdaroğlu wishes it, he may not be able to convince the party’s voters of the necessity of a radical change, because these voters have long been manipulated by unreal fears of “sharia is coming,” and have come to see themselves as a privileged group among an ignorant public. This argument is certainly true. Even if he wishes to, Kılıçdaroğlu cannot say, “Kemalism has already expired; it has caused great sorrows, we’ll no longer be a Kemalist party.” If he says that, what happened to Baykal will happen to him as well. A party that cannot dispense with Kemalism cannot be “new,” and if it cannot be new it cannot secure votes beyond its existing voter base. How can the public trust a party that has made Ergenekon defendants deputies, while the overwhelming majority of the public lend support to moves to confront coup perpetrators? Moreover, the party that apologized for the Dersim massacre, one of the darkest moments in the country’s history, was the AK Party, not the CHP, despite the latter having presided at the time of the massacre. And although he is an Alevi from Dersim, rather than lending support to the prime minister’s apology, Kılıçdaroğlu slammed it. This was a bad move in the eyes of potential new voters.

Occasionally, Kılıçdaroğlu makes important moves. For instance, he made striking statements about the resolution of the Kurdish issue, and held a meeting with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to discuss it. Given the fact that the CHP had depicted the AK Party’s Kurdish initiative as “treason” in 2009, even this small change should be appreciated. Yet there are still doubts as to how this change in discourse will be reflected in the party’s practices. This is the case independent of Kılıçdaroğlu. For this reason, the CHP’s neo-nationalist-dominated organizational structure exhibited great rage against Diyarbakır deputy Sezgin Tanrıkulu, who was considered the golden child of the CHP’s Kurdish initiative.

However, knowing that the CHP cannot grow in this way, Kılıçdaroğlu is opening doors to such political change. At the same time, he fears angering the party’s voter base and being in conflict with them. Therefore, in this last party congress, he included representatives from every faction in the list. However, he cannot maintain this delicate balance for an extended period.

Confronting their legacy

In other words, sooner or later, the CHP will have to confront Kemalism. Luckily, this is the best option for the party. The worst possibility is that Kılıçdaroğlu withdraws to the former CHP policies in response to the reactions to this process, ensuring that it remains the country’s main opposition party for a long time to come. The only positive development may be that progressive groups within the party grow under the leadership of Kılıçdaroğlu, or any other leader, going on to purge the neo-nationalist elements of the party and create a new social democratic party out of the CHP, relegating the old CHP to history. Even the name, “CHP,” is an obstacle to the party’s growth.

It is hard to be a leader of the CHP and ensure that the CHP changes. Therefore, the best policy is to lend support to those, like Kılıçdaroğlu, who try to do positive work in the party.

Columnists Previous articles of the columnist
19 May 2013
National unity and solidarity
17 May 2013
No libretto for history?
15 May 2013
Why all this violence?
12 May 2013
Turkey has to grow up
10 May 2013
Polarization and deep state
8 May 2013
Turkey's dilemma
5 May 2013
Getting rid of this shame
3 May 2013
What happened in Taksim on May 1?
1 May 2013
Is 1915 genocide or what?
28 April 2013
My father
26 April 2013
It's now democratization's turn
24 April 2013
Exit from a well 1,915 meters deep
21 April 2013
How should the events of 1915 be perceived
19 April 2013
This is almost the end for Kılıçdaroğlu
17 April 2013
All that is solid melts into air
14 April 2013
Without creating new ‘others'
12 April 2013
Will anything good come from Muslims?
10 April 2013
The price CHP pays for its stance
7 April 2013
As the CHP is dragged towards euthanasia
3 April 2013
Significance of new constitution for Turkey
31 March 2013
Gökçeada Greek Primary School and ghosts from the past
29 March 2013
The butterfly effect of the solution
27 March 2013
Leyla Zana's contribution to peace
24 March 2013
Hizmet movement and the peace process
22 March 2013
As the poisonous parentheses close
20 March 2013
If there was no Ergenekon trial
18 March 2013
CHP, not Turkey, will be partitioned
15 March 2013
Redeeming democracy
13 March 2013
CHP and peace
10 March 2013
The big peace gong has not rung yet
6 March 2013
Chemistry of and roadblocks to solution
3 March 2013
The provocations that have come to nothing
1 March 2013
When will big peace come?
27 February 2013
Kurdish politics on a test drive
24 February 2013
Logic of peace
22 February 2013
Are we really getting closer to peace?
20 February 2013
Transformation of nationalism
17 February 2013
Kurds, Muslims and neo-nationalists
15 February 2013
The CHP's İmralı ‘correction'
13 February 2013
Baykal coup in the CHP
10 February 2013
The dignity of politics and the deep state
8 February 2013
Opportunity for urban transformation
6 February 2013
Getting rid of the straitjacket
3 February 2013
Problems exhausted too
1 February 2013
Turkey's CHP problem
30 January 2013
Turkish issue and the CHP
27 January 2013
Kılıçdaroğlu's choice
25 January 2013
Why can't we postpone the reforming of the state?
23 January 2013
Paris killings and their wake
20 January 2013
A tough week
18 January 2013
Dink case and democratization
16 January 2013
Post-PKK Turkey
13 January 2013
The PKK issue and provocations
11 January 2013
Supreme Court head prosecutor: Dink killed by an organization
9 January 2013
Tragedy in Zonguldak
6 January 2013
The new process
2 January 2013
While the deep state waits…
30 December 2012
Polarization and stability
28 December 2012
The state apparatus resurfaced
26 December 2012
What is deep state?
23 December 2012
Coup changes appearance
19 December 2012
Human rights struggle in the new age
16 December 2012
As the state tries itself
14 December 2012
Search for common sense in AK Party
12 December 2012
What were in those reports?
9 December 2012
Let us make sure history does not repeat itself
7 December 2012
Turkey in past decade and past week
5 December 2012
The Kurdish issue and populism
2 December 2012
Turkey: a country of paradoxes
30 November 2012
What is Turkey’s role in the imminent comeback of the East?
28 November 2012
Why can’t we make a new constitution?
25 November 2012
Özal: Once again
23 November 2012
Where does Kenan Evren’s self-confidence come from?
21 November 2012
Gaza and three possibilities
18 November 2012
Price of delay: paid
16 November 2012
Mastering time and price of delay
14 November 2012
Death penalty debate and questions
11 November 2012
Golden Age or Stone Age?
9 November 2012
Key to a victory: politics of non-deception
7 November 2012
A radical package
4 November 2012
Özal and the Kurdish issue
2 November 2012
Changing the factory settings: thoughts on the AK Party and the Turkish Republic
31 October 2012
Continued reforms or chaos?
28 October 2012
Hunger strikes and political constriction
24 October 2012
Link between economy and democracy
21 October 2012
Murder of Christian missionaries and the deep state
19 October 2012
The importance of coup trials
17 October 2012
Why is EU membership important?
14 October 2012
We could have shared the Nobel
12 October 2012
EU progress report and recent times in Turkey
10 October 2012
A deus ex machina: Recep Güven
7 October 2012
No to war… but
5 October 2012
Turkish foreign policy and Syria
3 October 2012
Differences between two speeches
30 September 2012
Turkey's red lines
26 September 2012
Post Balyoz, pressure mounts on Court
23 September 2012
Turkey's future and the Balyoz decision
21 September 2012
Turkey’s military problem
19 September 2012
Kılıçdaroğlu’s Menderes visit
16 September 2012
Film provocation as the East returns
...