In the constant struggle for an open society or its opposite, a key element is the political class. It has been deeply shattered by the dynamics of the push for social change and still seeks ways and tools to catch its pace in order to take the lead in focus and determination. It even includes the Justice and Development Party (AK Party), which has so far presented a zigzagging road map of political leadership, often falling short of the demands of the complex mindset of its supporters, displaying weaknesses, emotional tempers, some shallowness and a short attention span. Yet, in a remarkable duality of political identity, it has been keeping up with the struggle to create a new profile for a political class that would pioneer the open society that change requires. The heat of the debate is maintained primarily by this new type of politician, which does not give up and moves forward in a peculiar trial-and-error way, not only by keeping antennas out for solutions in a pragmatic spirit, but also by forcing new responses to old questions. They do not refrain from challenging the clichés on major issues of history that have left profound marks on psyches here. The more that is done in line with this challenge, the more visible the gap between the old and new patterns of behavior within the political class becomes.
The recent examples that come to mind are the repeated statements by President Abdullah Gül, a politician, as he says, who has been in active politics “in the system” for only a decade. The bold remarks he made were followed by a ruling of a local court in Ankara, a move that means that he may be put on trial, in defiance of the constitutional immunity granted to his post, which has led to the widespread conviction that “the system” is striking back. Another example is more fresh. In a speech condemning xenophobia in Düzce, near Ankara, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan was firing missives against the ills of Turkey's past. “For years some things were done in this country,” he said. “Those with a different ethnic background were chased away from our land. As a matter of fact, this was the result of a fascist approach.”
Despite hardship and massive and “systemic” political pressure, this type of “new politician,” erratic though he or she may often be, is digging a new trench for future generations. Yet, nobody knows where exactly this struggle is. Turkey's political class may be in the midst of an extended identity crisis. The Republican People's Party (CHP), led by Deniz Baykal, therefore, believes in the conventional, statist approach and has thus far not shown any signs of change. But there is more to it than the CHP. In a sense, it is a generational fight. The gap I mentioned has to do with age and old experiences. Glory in the old days may look long gone to many, but Turkey's elderly, never-retiring politicians do their utmost to remain as alternatives.
And they may have fallen into delusion. Necmettin Erbakan, now 84, displays ambitions. Obviously there is nobody around him to hint at the fact that his time has passed. When I met him for the first time, Hüsamettin Cindoruk was in a victorious mood. It was 1991, and the True Path Party (DYP), led by Süleyman Demirel, also now 84, had won a “come-back victory” soon after the military-imposed political bans were lifted. I had visited him at his residence, days after the election, and asked: “Will you change the military-dictated Constitution?” “Yes, we need a completely new constitution, immediately,” he said.
Following a disastrous performance in many fields and swollen problems, they are back, too. Cindoruk, now 76, is the new leader of the Democrat Party (DP), with Demirel in the deep background. Interviews on Monday in two dailies are revealing when it comes to where the old political class still stands.The reporter asks, “Because you are back, it means, as you implied before, the conditions in Turkey must have become critical?”
Cindoruk: “There is an ideological struggle [of the AK Party] against the state. We are at knife's edge. One must return [to politics] if the state calls.”
Reporter: “Why should the state call you back?”
Cindoruk: “It told me that it was in danger.” He also says there is no need for any hurry in regard to the Kurdish question.
The DP is now “refreshed,” as it were, and hoping to infuse enthusiasm into Turkish politics. But could this be a winning approach for votes? What is the plan? To create a platform of a “center for the status quo,” for a joint list of the CHP and the DP, with others, to challenge the AK Party in the next elections?
To many, this may sound like a hallucination. The axiom that suggests, “Parties at the center in Turkey until very recently operated as ‘the state's branches',” is now deeply rooted in the very psyche of many voters. Still, the battle within the political class, between the old and the new, will be open-ended. Much depends on the courage of the new and the shrewdness of the old.
Benzer Haberler 
