The easiest thing to do now, seems to just attribute this result to the fact that "the people were very angry" - and say that they punished the parties in the government, scolded the opposition parties, said this to that and that to this.
But it would be wrong to attribute AKP's success to just the people's anger. Or falling into the delusion, as we do after each election, that the voters were trying to give a message with their actions.
A party established with insurgence
I guess it was important that "new" and "young" people established AKP with revolt. Everyone is sick and tired of the ones who have been in politics for the last hundred years and their successors!
It's in fact like Ozal in 1983: They are new, but do not pose a threat as the "unknown" normally would- after all, they come from the National View Organization, they were in the Welfare Party (RP) when it rose to power, and Recep Tayyip Erdogan served successfully as the mayor of Istanbul.
They respect the moral values, but they say that they want Turkey to join the European Union (EU) instead of shutting out the rest of the world, or turning its face towards the Islamic world. They seem to have adopted a democrat view that is quite convincing because they have faced with a lot of injustice and unfairness in the past.
Similar to Ozal, they have an "I understand your situation," manner to themselves- flexible and soft. I believe that the "hey look, we won't harm you, calm down, drop out what you have in your hand," approach they have had since the day they established the party, is very effective- even if there is a crisis, it will not be because of how they behaved.
AKP's program, CHP's attitude
Instead of empty sentences and promises, AKP programs are composed of detailed sections written by experts, who really know what they are talking about. For example, the section on women is much more sophisticated and radical than the Republican People's Party (CHP)'s program: It addresses many issues, from social security and shelters for housewives, to increasing the percentage of girls going to school.
There is not a single sentence saying, "On our path to the EU/ sexual equality is a requisition of civilization." (and for me, this is good enough). If we were to decide just by looking at the party programs, we would have to leave aside whatever we are doing and go support AKP! (In my opinion, CHP's "we are the natural owners of this" attitude is really frustrating- with a self-created put-on democrat behavior, they have stretched their existence in politics to the end. Did you hear them say anything more sophisticated than what they said in the 1920s about the issue of gender equality?)
AKP's party program is really radical and advanced- what puts me in doubt is not knowing who will be implementing this program; because, I don't know the women in this party at all. When I think about AKP's women, I can only think about that strange woman who followed them around everywhere for some time- but neither a competent woman who talked on behalf of the party, nor a woman, who is a strong and ostentatious organizer similar to those of the Welfare Party.
When asked about the headscarf issue, Recep Tayyip Erdogan used to lose his temper and say things in a "don't invent things now," mood. As Erdogan spoke in that mood, I always thought about this- if there were a strong presence of women within the party, the leaders would not be rejecting to talk about the headscarf issue.
Turning the headscarf into a political symbol has always resulted to be a disadvantage for women- the "covered" women from the conservative parties had to step back so that they did not become "the heel of Achilleus " of the party- and so here we are tête-à-tête with Vecdi Gonul!
Problems and questions
Clearly, it is meaningless to treat AKP as "an anti-secularism, anti-republican reactionary (nevertheless, it seems that this unjust treatment has had an educational effect on them!!)- Moreover, repeating that many voters did not end up being represented in the parliament because of the elections system, and arguing that this parliament is not a legitimate one, is just nasty! Wasn't the last parliament illegitimate too, then?
So didn't we have a representation problem before, and now suddenly we have it? Isn't this exactly what the rich spoilt kid of the neighborhood would do after losing the soccer game? He would foolishly complain, take his ball and run away. We have to look but not see- after seeing what the woman minister, "responsible of women's affairs" from the Democratic Leftist Party (DSP), has done, one cannot help but think, "they cannot do anything worse than this anyway!"
We will see if they will keep their promises about women's issues- we will also see these:
* They say they place importance on democracy within the party. How much will this concept of democracy encompass women? Will they take measures within the party to encourage women to participate?
* Will they be able to turn the Women's Status and Problems Department into a really useful and efficient institution? This department is a very important component of the state policies towards attaining gender equality. (Will they be able to pass a law, not suffocate it under an irrelevant ministry, and appoint personnel.)?
* You can sense a classical conservative approach in the party program with sentences starting with, "defending the respectability of housework." Will they continue not considering women as valued members of a family?
* How will their relations be with women's organizations? Will they only support the conservative women's organizations?
We will see. (AB/BB/EA/NM)
