The past few days have witnessed a complete turnaround in the discourse of the President of the Turkish Republic regarding the date of the elections. Despite the rumours circulating in the media and after denying for months the possibility of holding snap elections, Erdoğan has called the country to the polls following a request from his ultra-nationalist coalition partner, the Nationalist Action Party (MHP). Since this might well be one of the most historic elections in Turkish history, due to the system change it will bring about, there is much debate on not only the reasons of such a hurried call but also on its fairness. Even if the possibility of holding elections earlier than expected was in the minds of many, the date finally selected has been an even greater surprise: 24 June 2018, almost 17 months earlier than planned and within barely two months.

‘The cross-border operations in Syria and historic events centring around Syria and Iraq made it a must for Turkey to overcome the uncertainty as soon as possible’ said the Turkish President when calling for snap elections. With this statement he expressed his desire to formalise his de-facto presidency sooner than expected. Looking at recent developments, many are convinced that this had been the intention all along.

Where are we now?

The country has two months to put together a two-tier presidential election together with a parliamentary vote. The Supreme Electoral Council (YSK) has to prepare all the ballot boxes and ballots and all the impartial boards to observe the elections. In the meantime, the opposition parties must choose their candidates both for the presidential race and their future parliamentarians in each city. They must also decide whether to take part in the elections in coalition or separately while at the same time seeking a strategy and charismatic candidates to compete against a political mastermind.

“With the recent changes in the electoral law, voters can be assigned to any polling station in the district, eliminating the possibility of public control and opening up the possibility of fraud”

All election registers must be revised to check for possible irregularities, covering 58 million voters in 81 cities. The opposition will have practically no opportunity to double-check them all. Previously, all voters registered in the same building voted in the same polling station, giving neighbours some oversight of the voting process. With the recent changes in the electoral law, voters can be assigned to any polling station in the district, eliminating the possibility of public control and opening up the possibility of fraud in voter registrations.

There have been other recent changes in the electoral law. The new amendments allow the security forces to be stationed very close to the polling stations while government-appointed civil servants act as observers and preside over polling-station committees. Secondly, local electoral boards are allowed to move ballot boxes to other districts if they consider there is a security threat. Both changes are highly problematic in the Kurdish villages of eastern Turkey. Third, and even more importantly, officials can decide to accept as valid unstamped ballots, a significant issue in the constitutional referendum in 2017 that heightens the fear of ballot stuffing in the upcoming elections as well. All these changes were carried out in March, making it easier to believe those who claim that the process had been planned beforehand.

Why such a hurry?

The next question that comes to everyone’s mind is: why the hurry? The answer could be threefold:

1. The Turkish economy is showing signs of a sharp deterioration and it will be very difficult for the government to keep it stable until November 2019. The current-account deficit and the strong dependence on foreign borrowing and investments hamper the government’s control over it. Furthermore, household purchasing power is being eroded by inflation and the constant devaluation of Turkish Lira and there is a growing possibility that voting might be driven by economic considerations, punishing the government for its poor economic performance.
2. Turkish nationalism is running very high following the military operations in Afrin. The government feels very powerful and believes that nationalistic sentiments are increasing its potential share of the vote, especially taking into consideration the coalition with the MHP. Criticism of the West and negative campaigning against the EU and the US is also present, amplifying and strengthening the impact.
3. The opposition is divided and wholly unprepared. The main opposition party, the Republican People’s Party (CHP), has been unable to provide any credible alternative to the government for the last 16 years that the AKP has been in power. The former co-chairs of the second-biggest opposition party, the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), which made the AKP lose its majority in June 2015, are in jail. Eleven of the party’s MPs have already lost their seats. Their democratically elected local representatives have been removed from their posts. There is some debate about whether the newly-founded right-wing IYI Party can even run in the elections and if so whether it can be a real alternative. In any case, the opposition parties will all be seeking options to challenge President Erdoğan, since they are still playing the game by the rules.

“The country is under a state of emergency and almost all mainstream media outlets are controlled by businessmen close to the government”

In addition, the country is under a state of emergency –so that any rally or public demonstration can be banned– and almost all mainstream media outlets are controlled by businessmen close to the government. Under the circumstances, this will be yet another election held on an ‘unlevel playing field’, as the electoral observers of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe described the situation at the time of the constitutional referendum in 2017. That highly contested referendum showed how strongly polarised the country is, ending in a stalemate. A clear victory for President Erdoğan might not be so sure if the economy turns bad, national pride fades away and the opposition parties begin to offer viable alternatives. Erdoğan has played the pragmatist since his first days in office. He has changed strategies, switched allies and taken all manner of risks to pave the way to his assumption of the presidency. Will he lose it all? We shall see. Will voters disenchanted by his increasing authoritarianism seek a democratic change? We shall also see.

Ilke Toygür
Analyst, Elcano Royal Institute | @ilketoygur