‘Forces working to dent support for AK Party ahead of 2011 elections’

 According to Sencar, the latest example of this was Israel’s attack on a flotilla of volunteers transporting aid for Palestinians living in the blockaded Gaza Strip that left at least nine activists dead and dozens wounded on Monday.

“Maybe Israel tried to tell the world that ‘Now let’s see how [Prime Minister Recep] Tayyip Erdoğan will rescue these people!’,” Sencar said, commenting on the Israeli administration’s pre-dawn guerilla operation on the Turkish-flagged ship that carried about 700 people who support Gazans.

Sencar also spoke of a domestic operation to weaken Erdoğan, an operation linked to Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu’s speedy ascension to the leadership of the opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) following a sex scandal involving old-timer Deniz Baykal, the CHP’s former chief.

Sencar elaborated on these developments in response to questions posed by Sunday’s Zaman.

How do you evaluate the rise of Kılıçdaroğlu to the CHP’s top rank in such a short period of time?

We have to evaluate the political scene in order to find answers to that question. Tayyip Erdoğan has publicly announced a plan -- he desires to be the president of Turkey while keeping the AK Party in power for a few more terms. This has been met with concern by some anti-AK Party circles, who have decided to stop Erdoğan’s run for the office in Çankaya.

Who exactly would try to stop Erdoğan? Can you be more specific?

These would be the people who think that they would be harmed by Erdoğan’s presidency. They would organize actions to stop Erdoğan. These people could either be supporters of Ergenekon or other political actors who perceive Erdoğan’s possible rise to Çankaya as a threat. There could also be groups abroad, Israel or the United States. It is impossible to know who, but the important thing is their goal: They want to stop Erdoğan. Let’s remember there have been 30 articles for a constitutional reform package that have been debated in Parliament, and only Article 8, which would make political party closures more difficult, did not receive the 330 votes required for approval. This wasn’t a coincidence. Some people desire to keep [open] the option to close the AK Party down. Later, Deniz Baykal left the political scene in a very unexpected and easy way and in a very short period of time, like a week! We observed that the Aydın Doğan and Ciner media groups had [undertaken] considerable efforts to force Deniz Baykal to resign. This effort could have been justified, as Baykal has been unsuccessful as a party leader, but like a magic wand’s touch, everything changed in a week as Baykal left and Kılıçdaroğlu rose [to party leadership]. Normally, you can’t carry out such a change of leadership so easily even in small parties in Turkey.

What has happened, then?

Baykal was not successful in his opposition of the AK Party. All of Baykal’s rhetoric was in regards to the fears of a regime change and fears of anti-secularism. His arguments were focused on that idea in a country where there is a serious unemployment problem, there are problems in the education system and there is income inequality. A third of university graduates are jobless at the moment in Turkey. When you talk about different stories in front of these young people, you can’t get them on your side. You need to tell them how you’re going to solve their problems.

Kılıçdaroğlu has started to talk about such problems, like the ones that you’ve pointed out.

He has done it. He has brought forward some problems, such as unemployment. Another problem he talked about was corruption. However he hasn’t talked about problems regarding Turkey’s democratization process, even though he is an Alevi and probably of Kurdish origin. He intentionally did not talk about those problems, as he said himself.

Are people tired of the AK Party after over seven years in power?

Looking at your survey results, we see that most of the respondents, about 62 percent, do not believe that Kılıçdaroğlu can solve the Kurdish problem. Indeed, about 63 percent of respondents say that he cannot solve the unemployment nor the headscarf issues. So people do not believe that Kılıçdaroğlu can solve such huge problems, but they still support him. Can we say that people are tired of the AK Party after its more than seven years in power?

People already knew that Baykal wouldn’t be able to solve those problems. But Kılıçdaroğlu is a new leader, and people have hopes for him. In addition, nowhere in the world is it possible not to be tired of the power of a political party after seven or eight years in the top position. There are many people whose expectations haven’t been met. For example, regarding the headscarf issue, the government could not solve this shameful problem. You can find legitimate excuses for the unemployment problem because of the global economic crisis, but you won’t be able to talk about any excuses if a young person is still jobless two years after graduating from university. The office of the government should produce solutions, not excuses. You at least give hope to people. If not, the opposition would seize the opportunity.

Yes, you were talking about a larger scenario that carried Kılıçdaroğlu to the CHP’s leadership.

Yes, Kılıçdaroğlu was carried to the leadership as part of a larger scenario. Deniz Baykal was not disqualified as a result of an inner-party struggle. He was not removed from the scene [so the party could] find solutions to the unemployment problem but [so the party could] form a powerful opposition against the government in order to make the government’s constitutional amendment package referendum unsuccessful and to reduce the AK Party’s support before next year’s general election.

But we see that they did not bring more new blood to the party and kept old-timer Önder Sav in a powerful position even though İstanbul provincial branch head Gürsel Tekin had been a contender. How do you evaluate that?

It’s hard to guess what has been going on inside the CHP. But looking at the attitudes of CHP members, we don’t usually see them using good opportunities, getting organized and uniting behind a cause. Their leaders are usually born out of inner-party conflict. Having Sav in the upper ranks of the party indeed shows that a person such as Sav, who is so unconnected with the public, can hold such a position. This is not advantageous for the CHP. I don’t know why Gürsel Tekin was disqualified, but this will cost the CHP dearly because as a local leader he knew how to touch people and had increased the CHP’s votes in İstanbul. There has been an excited crowd behind the CHP because of that, but there is a problem now regarding the sustainability of this excitement.

‘If Kılıçdaroğlu can manage to survive, he can become a strong leader for left’

Can you see the motivation of the 1970s -- which saw Bülent Ecevit’s generally celebrated leadership -- behind today’s CHP?

The CHP has had three important exciting periods in the last 40 years. One was during the years when Ecevit became the leader of the CHP. Another concerned [outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) leader Abdullah] Öcalan’s capture at the time of the DSP’s [Democratic Left Party] leadership, headed by Ecevit. Talking about the CHP again, Kılıçdaroğlu’s ascension to power is the latest exciting period for the party. We can say there is a great hunger for an oppositional force in the leftist, secular and Kemalist circles. Baykal’s removal from the scene caused this excitement. We can say Baykal was such a persona non grata among people who supported the CHP and others from the opposition that there has been this excitement after Baykal’s departure even though it happened through immoral means. On this rapidly flowing water, we now have Kılıçdaroğlu surfing. It is easier to surf on seawater than on rapidly flowing water, so Kılıçdaroğlu faces a hard task. If he can manage to stay on the water, he can become a strong leader for the left. But if he shows timidity on such matters as the Kurdish and headscarf issues, the CHP’s votes will decline and be only 25 percent or even less. I even think that Israel’s reckless attack on the Turkish vessel in international waters has been related to some plans in regards to creating problems for the current government.

Why?

Some powers that may be acting with Israel might be trying to put the AK Party government in a hole.

But how do you explain it? Israel could have done this in its own waters, too.

Maybe Israel especially did it in international waters so the Turkish government would be helpless. Israel could find excuses if it attacked the vessel in its own waters. Maybe Israel tried to tell the world, “Now let’s see how Tayyip Erdoğan rescues these people!” This is a conspiracy theory, but it is not unbelievable to me. And Tayyip Erdoğan, who was in South America at the time of the attack and had time to think about the speech he would make when he returned to Turkey, made the toughest speech of all time against Israel. This incident has increased Erdoğan’s popularity, just like his “one-minute” speech in Davos.

Is talking going to be enough? Kılıçdaroğlu has criticized him because the government did not do anything to prevent the incident or protect the people on the vessels.

Yes; Kılıçdaroğlu did what an opposition party is supposed to do. Tayyip Erdoğan raised the expectations of the public in his speech. If the Turkish government cannot get anything out of Israel to make it pay the price for this reckless attack, then those expectations can turn into something negative against the government. But Erdoğan was able to benefit from the situation, as he saw the plans against him by Israel, and probably the United States. Our May 3 opinion poll shows that 45.3 percent of respondents said Israel aimed at “wearing out and putting Tayyip Erdoğan on the spot domestically and internationally.” There is a public perception that Israel’s operation aimed to wear out the Erdoğan government. As we found out from the news, the Israeli soldiers shouted, “One minute!” as they attacked people, a reminder of Erdoğan’s confrontation last year with Israeli President Shimon Peres in Davos over the bloody Israeli raid on Palestinians in Gaza. On the other hand, 33.2 percent of respondents said in that poll that Israel’s aim was to prevent a breach of the Gaza blockade.

‘Public gives a blank check to Kılıçdaroğlu’

In your May 27-29 public opinion poll, we see some notable results -- such as respondents stating that among the existing political party leaders they trust Prime Minister Erdoğan most, at 38.4 percent, while 23.6 percent trust new CHP leader Kılıçdaroğlu. The opposition Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) leader comes in third with 4.4 percent. We should also note that 21.6 percent of respondents said there is no leader that they trust. Another result is that among the statesmen who have been around for years, 23.3 percent of respondents said their most admired statesman was Erdoğan. President Gül and Kılıçdaroğlu tied for second place with 8.8 percent, followed by Demirel with 4 percent and Baykal with 3 percent. How do you evaluate this?

We have been asking these questions for the last three years, and in no other survey has Abdullah Gül fallen from the second spot and Tayyip Erdoğan from first. This is the first time that Gül and Kılıçdaroğlu received the same level of support as an admired statesman. This indicates a situation wherein the public gives much credit to Kılıçdaroğlu, who has risen to the position of party leader from being an upper-level bureaucrat, as opposed to Gül, who has served at various levels in his [former] party and also served as prime minister and then became president. It is obvious that Kılıçdaroğlu has support from the public, and if he can use it, he can obtain even more support. But if he cannot, his support would decrease like Deniz Baykal’s score, which is remarkably low for a party leader. When we look at the survey results more closely, we see a correlation between the support Erdoğan gets, 38.4 percent, and the percentage of the votes that his party gets, around 38 percent. For the first time, a person who became the leader of the CHP has garnered support -- 23.6 percent -- [equal to] as much as his party has received. Deniz Baykal was never able to do that. We see that the public gives a blank check to Kılıçdaroğlu.

Who is Özer Sencar?

Owner of the Ankara-based MetroPOLL Strategic and Social Research Center, Sencar has been conducting social and political research for the last 13 years. He was a full-time faculty member from 1970 to 2000, serving at the Atatürk, Cumhuriyet and Gaziosmanpaşa universities in various capacities, including administrative positions such as dean and deputy rector.