An analysis on Turkish elections was published in Foreign Policy, entitled “Turkey’s Opposition Lost to Erdogan, Then It Lost Its Mind.” The article reads: “Since June 24, when Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan celebrated his thirteenth consecutive electoral victory, his opponents have been in a headfirst free fall. Their sad state captures the fundamental problem of Turkish politics: The opposition is out of ideas and lacking in inspiration and its leaders care more about keeping their seats than keeping their country afloat.”

It is an entirely different discussion as to whether the opposition had a mind to lose, but it is obvious that their current situation is saddening. Ever since Kemal Kilicdaroglu became the chairman of the main opposition, Republican People’s Party (CHP), on May 23, 2010, he changed the Central Executive Board of the party nine times, organized five conventions, renewed the party assembly numerous times, and assigned a total of 300 new names throughout this period. But all these changes did not save Kilicdaroglu from facing nine election defeats within eight years. And this time, the party did not only lose the election but also took a heavy blow despite the CHP’s presidential candidate Muharrem Ince earning eight points higher than the vote share of his party in the presidential elections.

I assume that they are referring to these factors when they say that the opposition is out of its mind. On the night of the elections, the party’s deputy chairmen argued on televised programs that the presidential election would definitely make it to the second round according to the results they obtained. When Ince could not be reached for a long period after the results were announced, it was claimed that Ince was abducted by Erdogan, and most of the electorate believed this absurd claim. Ince said: “I was not abducted. Those claiming or believing such a thing must be schizophrenic.” A week later, the deputy chairmen of the party had to admit that they lied during the election night and were in fact already informed about the results after some party members exposed what happened that night.

However, it is true that Ince’s vote share in the presidential election was eight points higher than the CHP’s vote share in the parliamentary election, which naturally led Ince proponents to demand a change in the leadership and call for an extraordinary convention in the party. Kilicdaroglu blamed Ince by arguing that the latter only cares about his seat, to which Ince responded: “I do not care about my seat, but organizing a convention is essential.” Upon that, the party’s head office suggested holding the convention if 615 signatures could be gathered amongst the delegates. For a couple of weeks, several deputy chairmen of the CHP and Ince quarreled through Twitter. Kilicdaroglu proponents blamed Ince for being “rude and shallow” and being a “denigrator,” to which Ince responded: “If I am to get elected, I will be your chairman, too. I understand that you are under pressure.”

Two weeks later, Ince proponents announced that they gathered the required number of signatures to organize the convention. However, the head office stated that “Out of 618 signatures, four are duplicated, five do not belong to a delegate, 31 are revoked, 4 are forged, and 5 are not signed in the relevant date. Consequently, the sufficient number of signatures could not be collected and thus the convention will not be organized.” When the revoked signatures triggered speculations that Kilicdaroglu exercised pressure on the delegates, the head office said: “They revoked their signatures just as they signed, which is very natural.” After this statement, eight Ince proponents went on a hunger strike. They waited with placards reading “I love living and keeping everything alive. But I am hopeless. Either I die, or I will see the convention. The choice is yours.” But they ended the strike when the head office did not give any response.

Sad, isn’t it? The CHP and its leader Kilicdaroglu, who faced nine election defeats, did everything to hinder Ince’s competing in the convention although they had presented Ince as the presidential candidate only two months ago. Amid all the debates, Kilicdaroglu contented himself with changing the Central Executive Board for the tenth time.

Meanwhile, the oppositional Good Party (Iyi Party) Chairwoman Meral Aksener left the first party meeting after receiving a 7.29 percent vote share despite all the hype revolving around her in both the national and international media. On the next day, she announced that she had left her seat and would not become a candidate in the party convention. But she returned only a week later. The party members did not know that Aksener would leave, and they did not know whether she would run for chairperson when she returned, and now they are not sure if she will stay even if she becomes the chairwoman. According to rumors, Koray Aydin, one of the leading figures of the Iyi Party, will join the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) while several other members are said to join the CHP or the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party). According to another rumor, Aydin will not join the MHP but become the chairman of the Iyi Party while the other party members will either remain independent or join other parties.

This is the current state of the parties and their leaders who vowed to make a change and govern Turkey only two months ago.

Last week, sentimentalist remarks and tweets of some politicians from the U.S. and Turkey pervaded the agenda for some reason. Maybe it was the summer heat. I am mentioning the U.S. President Donald Trump, Turkish politician Meral Aksener who assumed that she would be the President of Turkey up until the June 24 elections, and Muharrem Ince, who believes that he will be the chairman of Turkey’s main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP).

According to the sources close to Washington, the tweet posted by Trump in address to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan was an emotional reaction as Trump wanted normalization with Turkey as opposed to the Neo-evangelists who favor taking harsh measures. It was said that the U.S. President had a great disappointment and posted that tweet when pastor Andrew Brunson was put under house arrest in Turkey and that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was also surprised by the tweet. In his tweet addressing Erdoğan for the release of Brunson, who is subject to trial in Turkey on the allegations of military and political espionage and abetting a terror group, Trump said: “The United States will impose large sanctions on Turkey for their long time detainment of Pastor Andrew Brunson, a great Christian, family man and wonderful human being.”

But the expressions in the tweet are utterly emotional, and can even be called romantic. A person who is tried for the allegations of espionage and abetting terrorism may also be “a great Christian, family man.” It is only natural that his family need him, well, a family is such a thing. Apparently, what seems totally normal for the U.S. President can be terribly wrong for Turkey as the U.S. insists that the Gulenist Terror Group (FETO) leader Fetullah Gulen, who orchestrated the 2016 coup attempt in Turkey, did not do anything wrong. Gulen and his operatives can freely live in the U.S. without being subject to any criminal investigation. Given the present conjuncture of the world, almost the entire world will soon regard what the U.S. considers right as wrong, except for Israel. But this is not the topic of this article.

Sources from Washington stated that the U.S. President threatened North Korea Leader Kim Jong-un with a tweet after the latter announced that he will not halt the country’s nuclear missile programs, but they reconciled six months later. It seems that such sentimentalism can be seen in politicians of each scale. It has also affected the İyi Party Chair Meral Aksener, who received 7.26 percent of the vote in the presidential and parliamentary elections held in Turkey. In a party meeting in which the reasons for their defeat were discussed, Aksener allegedly said that she genuinely believed that she would make it to the second round in the presidential race.

Apparently, she made herself believe that she would be the next president of Turkey in a blindfolded way and also convinced those around her. But as the meeting continued, a party member allegedly told her that she left them in the lurch, saying in a tweet that “You have not only lost the election, Madam. You have lost people’s belief in you,” in response to which Aksener was incensed and left the room. She said to her staff: “Everyone in our culture knows who is called madam. Brothel mistresses are called madams. You left me alone, you did not bring that disrespectful person to line.”

The next day, Aksener posted a tweet saying that her party will convene, and that she will not run for the chairmanship of the party. Upon this, the party’s supporters incessantly asked her to turn back via twitter. Speaking to no one throughout the process, Aksener gave a responding tweet two days later: “I will not become a candidate in the convention, this is my final decision.” Then, the partisans tweeted that Aksener would like to draw interest so the proponents must not lose their interest in the subject. Everyone can get a bit sentimental sometimes. In the Iyi Party’s case, two people chained themselves to the entrance of Aksener’s house while a group of provincial party chairs attempted to stand on a vigil in front of her house. This emotional overload continued and culminated on Saturday last week: Upon the party’s call, the partisans coming from all across Turkey gathered in front of Aksener’s house, crying “face us” by altering the party slogan “face the sun.”

Meanwhile, the main opposition CHP and its presidential candidate Muharrem Ince have also been undergoing some emotional crises. It seems that Ince did not believe that he could be the next president of Turkey unlike Aksener but he apparently believed that he would be the chairman of the CHP while running for the presidency. As his vote share in the presidential election was 8 points higher than the vote share of the CHP in the parliamentary election, he has been posting emotionally charged tweets addressing his party’s base and Turkey for the last couple of weeks. While he is tweeting things such as: “The ones glued to their seats go all lengths to stay there,” to satirize the CHP Chairman Kemal Kilicdaroglu, he is also writing messages implying that he wants to see the support of Turkish people to compete against President Erdogan.

On 24 June, Turkish voters re-elected President Recep Tayyip Erdogan with 52,6 percent of the votes. His closest rival, the CHP’s candidate Muharrem Ince, received only 30,6 of the votes. By this, Erdogan got 11 million votes more than Ince, who consequently congratulated Erdogan on Monday due to his victory. The CHP Chairman Kilicdaroglu, however, rejected to congratulate Erdogan while stating that the AK Party is the loser of the elections. However, in the parliament, the People’s Alliance, which consists of the AK Party and the MHP, received more than 53,6 percent of the votes and thus achieved a majority with 344 seats in the parliament (AK Party 295 seats and MHP 50 seats, of 600). Interestingly, even Erdogan addressed his party’s parliamentary vote by stressing “we got the message,” while on Tuesday, CHP Chairman Kilicdaroglu, with no surprise and as expected, did not step down even though his party’s parliamentary votes decreased from 26 to 22 percent.

It’s perhaps too early to analyze all components of the election results in depth, but it’s quite possible to address some striking issues. First of all, these elections symbolize the ultimate transformation of Turkey’s system of government into a Turkish type of presidential system. The first step had been initiated in 2016 as the AK Party and MHP proposed a constitutional change, which was accepted by a majority in the referendum held on 16 April 2017. Now, the majority of Turks once again voted in favor of the new system by rejecting the opposition parties’ offer to turn back to a parliamentary one.

The majority of Turks once again voted in favor of the new system by rejecting the opposition parties’ offer to turn back to a parliamentary one.

The second striking issue concerns Turkey’s political stability. Apart from the fact that now eventually eight political parties will be represented in the parliament and cause a democratic diversity, the strict division of the executive and legislative branches will not cause any problems for the executive presidency. Furthermore, the fact that the President’s ministers cannot be selected from MPs anymore will cause a rather professionalization of a rapid and effective governmental acting.

The third issue is about the chronic wishful thinking of foreign media representatives. During the recent election period, we witnessed once again that several foreign media outlets disregarded various fact-based issues while supporting above all CHP’s candidate Muharrem Ince and his political campaign. It’s also not a secret that HDP’s candidate Demirtas and recently the Iyi Party’s leader Mrs. Aksener were supported by both foreign media outlets and politicians.

Although Iyi Party entered the parliament, Mrs. Aksener herself, due to not being an elected MP, will be out of the parliament and most probably her leadership will be questioned by other party leaders.

Although Mrs. Aksener’s party entered the parliament, she herself, due to not being an elected MP, will be out of parliament and it is most likely that her party leadership will be questioned by other party leaders. Thus, foreign analysts may also stop trying to manipulate their own audience by disregarding, for instance, populist and baseless statements by Muharrem Ince while permanently promoting him. Turkish voters have rejected populist and anti-refugee statements whereas Western voters increasingly favor similar promises – a fundamental difference between Turkish and Western ways of persuading voters.

Election results shows that Turkish voters reject populist and anti-refugee statements whereas Western voters increasingly favor such discriminative promises – a fundamental difference between Turkish and Western ways of persuading voters.

The fourth striking phenomenon is about the CHP’s chronic problem; that is to say, its lack of credibility. Even though the CHP tried to build a legal “National Alliance” and a de facto alliance with the HDP, it has been unsuccessful in persuading –in particular– Turkey’s conservative voters. It’s obvious that Turkey’s oldest party will never be as strong as to build the government due to its chronic problem of lacking self-criticism with regard to its radical secular past. If the CHP does not make any self-criticism in various fields there is no possibility to win any general election in Turkey. This has been proved once again.

CHP, Turkey’s oldest party, will never win any general election in Turkey if it does not face its chronic problem that of lacking self-criticism.

By not understanding Turkish voter dynamics and their preferences, it’s useless to count on foreign media support that build on baseless populism. But it seems that in the upcoming days the CHP will face a power struggle in order to elect a new party leader. By this, it’s typical for the CHP, that a person, who lost nine elections within eight years, still insist on the party’s chairmanship while commenting on the party’s presidential partial successful candidate Ince by saying that the voter turnout for him had been “below expectations.”

Turkey has entered a new era with a new system of government. It would not be wrong to state that the main objective of the opposition parties, which was to block Erdogan from winning in the first round and to cause a “divided government” between the legislative and executive branches ultimately ended in a fiasco.

On 24 June, Turkey’s presidential and parliamentary elections will be held. Subsequent to the declaration of the date of the snap elections, on 18 April, political parties in Turkey started their campaigns and published their election programs. The upcoming elections represent a final switch to Turkey’s new system of government which was accepted by a referendum on 16 April last year. The elections to take place in the next four days are also the first elections in Turkish history according to which both elections are executed simultaneously.

To get a clear perception of the recent election period, I’ll try to point out some crucial issues.

First of all, even though Western media outlets do not address this issue, the presidential elections are conducted in a diversified political atmosphere. There are six presidential candidates representing different political and societal expectations striving for the country’s highest political position. This is actually a diversity covering most of Turkey’s dominant political camps. In addition, ten political parties are participating in the parliamentary elections. The very interesting issue during this election period is the fact that at least six parties will definitely be in the parliament subsequent to the elections due to the new law on election alliances. According to this law, which was approved by a majority vote led by the ruling AK Party and the MHP in March 2018, the country’s 10 percent electoral threshold will still be in place but it will apply to the sum of the votes of the parties in the alliance. Thus, the number of MPs will be determined according to the sum of the votes of the election alliance. Interestingly, this issue which gives the possibility also to small political parties to join the parliament, is not addressed by foreign media due to the fact that this step has been initiated by the AK Party and MHP.

Furthermore, apart from President Erdogan and his party’s campaign, one has noticed that among the opposition only the CHP’s presidential candidate, Muharrem Ince, was able to make some striking statements. President Erdogan, for instance, while conducting his campaign, stressed the need for a strong executive and legislative organ in the upcoming period. Thus, he asked the people to vote for him as well as his AK Party in parliament. On the other hand, Ince insisted on an election campaign which differentiated itself from previous CHP discourses and biases. By this, Ince tried to portray himself within a rather conservative Muslim circles-friendly and pro-HDP image, which, however, totally contradicts the CHP’s traditional positions. It’s also fascinating that while Ince has been appointed as the party’s presidential candidate, CHP Chairman Kemal Kilicdaroglu excluded all MP candidates, who are known to be close to Mr. Ince, with regard to the upcoming parliamentary elections. This image actually displayed who has the control of the party and who has concrete and real expectations from the election results.

By focusing on the other parties presidential candidates and their campaigns, its seems that no candidate was able to neither determine nor influence the political discourse during the recent two months. For instance, the MHP-split Iyi Party’s leader Meral Aksener, who runs as the Iyi Party’s presidential candidate, had no concrete proposal for Turkey’s future despite rather populist statements. For Mrs. Aksener, it’s also very frustrating due to the fact that President Erdogan did not address her once during the entire election campaign. To be honest, it cannot be said that there is public support regarding the Iyi Party even though Western politicians supported her as well.

The Kurdish left ethno-nationalist HDP’s presidential candidate Selahattin Demirtas and his party HDP, though, are extraordinarily supported by foreign media and even foreign political circles. By taking the HDP’s propaganda into consideration, the misleading conclusion above all in Western circles occurs, such as the false portrayal of the party as a quite liberal-leftist party that allegedly prioritizes human rights etc. By this, the party’s actual closeness and even links to the PKK terrorist organization is disregarded by foreign media and HDP supporters. For instance, it’s even ironical that the HDP’s presidential candidate, Selahattin Demirtas, was publicly supported by his brother Nurettin Demirtas, who lives as a PKK-terrorist in Iraq’s Qandil mountains. Of course, besides various statements and positions which do support the PKK, this fact has also been disregarded by HDP supporters and Western media.

Other performances of presidential candidates, such as the Felicity Party’s Chairman Temel Karamollaoglu and the Patriotic Party’s Chairman Dogu Perincek, have been also very low. Neither certain statements of these leaders were seriously taken into account by other leaders nor their election programs seem to persuade and do excite the electorate.

Thus, it’s quite obvious that the AK Party dominates the election campaign while the CHP seems to be divided into two parts. On the one hand, Muharrem Ince is trying to win the presidential election while Kilicdaroglu sets a focus on the parliamentary election and a potential inner-party rivalry subsequent to the elections. On the other hand, it’s striking that Ince makes use of populism by not explaining several promises in depth. For instance, Ince declares that he has no problem with women who wear headscarves while he does not explain his previous and well-known anti-positions just some years ago. The same counts for his populist statements with regard to HDP voters.

The AK Party stresses the new Turkish presidential system in the upcoming period while the CHP –and all other opposition parties except the MHP– do not explain how they schedule to switch back to a parliamentary system. This issue gets even more complex when Ince states that he wants to lead the country as an executive president while Mrs. Aksener calls for a rapid future plan. Finally, it’s also very bizarre that the dominant opposition parties do not address Turkey’s fight against terrorist organizations such as the PKK, FETO  in depth – neither in the candidates’ nor the parties’ program.

Last week, Turkey’s political agenda was mostly dominated by the opposition parties’ search for a candidate in the presidential elections. Since there was still ambiguity in the opposition parties’ electoral strategy despite the short period of time, leaders of the opposition parties had face-to-face meetings to convince each other about their strategy. The outcome of their search for a candidate reveals that the opposition parties failed to form a broad-based alliance against President Erdogan even if they acted in a manipulative way to do so. Nonetheless, it should also be reminded that the opposition parties will never give up finding a way to unite against President Erdogan until the elections.

The most controversial topic in the search for a candidate was the possible candidacy of former president Abdullah Gul. Even if Abdullah Gul served in high positions within the AK Party before, the Felicity Party proposed his name to other parties and tried to convince them on his candidacy. Although Abdullah Gul has stood aloof from the AK Party since 2014, his acceptance of the Felicity Party’s proposal was quite surprising in view of the fact that President Erdogan took a lot of risks to nominate him as a candidate in the 2007 presidential elections. During the 2007 elections, the opposition parties organized a series of rallies and the military and Constitutional Court tried to prevent holding elections. However, the AK Party and Erdogan stood firm against suppression and Gul was elected as the new president. Thus, his possible candidacy was seen as “betrayal” by the AK Party circles.

Last weekend, Gul conducted a press conference and stated that he would not be a candidate in the upcoming presidential elections. Nevertheless, he confirmed that there had been a proposal from the Felicity Party to him and he was willing to accept it if a very strong consensus was reached. As Gul stated, the leader of the Felicity Party, Temel Karamollaoglu, worked hard to convince Kilicdaroglu and Aksener on Gul’s candidacy. Even the HDP was about to join this alliance if the other parties accepted. Although there was not any principle or issue that these parties agreed on and they were ideologically incoherent, they just wanted to form an alliance against the election of President Erdogan under new the presidential system. At the end of the day, this event revealed the clear-cut dissociation between Abdullah Gul and the AK Party.

One of the reasons behind the failure of the Gul project was Aksener’s rejection of backtracking on the presidential bid on behalf of Gul. Due to Aksener insisting on her own candidacy, the broad-based consensus on Gul could not be reached. Both the Felicity Party and the CHP tried to convince her but she rejected to do so. Additionally, the CHP circles showed a great reaction even if Kilicdaroglu had a positive attitude about Gul’s possible candidacy. This process had two prominent outcomes in the opposition site’s election strategy. The first one was the failure of the Gul project. The second one was the failure of having a joint presidential candidate.

Two important strategies of the political opposition failed in the election process. However, this does not mean that the opposition parties will quit searching a way for uniting against President Erdogan and the AK Party. The next two months will be highly crucial in terms of the opposition parties’ new initiations. It can be said that because they failed to do so in the presidential elections, the parties will try to find a way to form an alliance in the parliamentary elections.

Following the power struggle within the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), the Iyi Party was established on October 25, 2017, almost five months ago. During the establishment process of the party, it was stated that the party would bring a new understanding to Turkish political life instead of being a continuation of the MHP. The leading figures in the party, who also define themselves as nationalists, stated that the party would embrace people coming from various circles and not only nationalists, in accordance with its catch-all party characteristic.

According to Meral Aksener, the leader of the party, besides the former MHP members, the right-wing voters and moderate leftists alienated by existing party politics would gather under the roof of Iyi Party. However, the last five months have illustrated that the party is far away from its target point and suffers from an identity crisis, which was rooted in the establishment process of the party and its aftermath.

First signs of the identity crisis were seen when the name of the party, the program, and the legislation were announced. Even if the party claimed to become Turkey’s largest catch-all party, it was seen from the names on the Founders Committee that most of the founding members had been involved in political affairs on the nationalist and centre-right lines in the past. Thus, one of the first criticisms was that the new founded political party was dominated by symbols of nationalist thought, from the names in the Founders Committee to the leadership cadre and the party program, despite its claim to be a catch-all party.

The nationalist discourse in the party’s program also strengthened these criticisms that the program states that “politics will be created over values and nationalism will be moved to cultural and economic areas.” Similarly, the whole program was dominated by nationalist discourse and far away from bringing connecting issues in society into the forefront more than dividing ones to get support from various circles.

Another striking issue related to the identity crisis was the dominance of populism and pragmatism in the party discourse without having a flexible ideological stance. The party program included objectives such as entering into the top 10 economies of the world and increasing national income, making a democratic political party law, being among the first twenty countries in the PISA order, reducing the unemployment rate below 7% at the end of five year and realizing industry 4.0 revolution in technology. The most striking among these goals was the promise of returning to the parliamentary system with a constitutional amendment within a year. All of these promises show the populist side of the party, which, indeed, contradicts the nationalistic discourse.

Even if the party’s leader and cadres still insist that the party does not define itself on nationalism, the contradiction of values and acts caused intra-party conflicts which resulted in the resignation of some prominent founding members – the last one of whom was the vice chairman of the party. While other parties in the system were blamed for not representing the general will, the biggest failure of the Iyi Party has been so far to define itself with the old terminology of party politics. The problematic nationalist-populist discourse utilized without a clear-cut definition brought the party to a deadlock. Reducing the party’s ideological baggage to such an extent that can lead to the creation of further conflict zones could result to a “split within a split” during the 2019 elections.

Contrary to the conviction of some European journalists, Meral Aksener is nothing like Marine Le Pen. Nor is she anything like the politically ambiguous Macron who ascended to the Elyseé, crushing the French political left and right. First of all, Aksener isn’t a new face – she’s a 61-year-old politician who has been in politics for 23 years. While she was a nationalist, a follower of the Grey Wolves movement in Turkey during her student years, she has been involved with almost all right-wing political parties in Turkey.

Meral Aksener first entered politics in 1994 together with Turkey’s first female Prime Minister, Tansu Ciller. Aksener ran in the mayoral elections in Kocaeli, but lost. On the road to parliamentary elections in 1995, the coalitions formed with the leftist Social Democratic Populist Party (SHP) during the prime ministries of both Suleyman Demirel and Tansu Ciller had left Turkey in ruins. Consecutive unidentified murders were committed, the Turkish Lira lost 168 percent of its value and interest rates skyrocketed to 7000 percent.

As one of the closest aides to Ciller, in 1995 Aksener became a parliamentary candidate for the True Path Party (DYP). Necmettin Erbakan’s Welfare Party (RP) was the victor of the election, while Ciller’s DYP came third. Aksener became the Minister of the Interior during the RP-DYP coalition, which was eventually deposed by the military that was defined as a “post-modern coup” by its perpetrators. Both Aksener and her leader Ciller were targeted by Turkey’s most influential media group, Dogan Media Group. While having previously supported Ciller, Dogan Group began to target her after she formed a coalition with Erbakan. Attempting to protect Ciller in her capacity as Minister of the Interior, Aksener threatened the aforementioned media group: “We’ll find it difficult to hold back the youth fanatical of Ciller. This is my last warning. We will not be held responsible for what may happen.” While there were attempts to revoke Aksener’s parliamentarian immunity after this statement, the coalition government was deposed by the military, which left everything in shambles.

Although the 1997 “post-modern” military coup erased Ciller from Turkish politics, Aksener attained a long-lasting prestige in the field. While the military were briefing academics, high judges and journalists about the government, Aksener, as the Minister of the Interior, had emphasized that she would dismiss any governor who attends those briefings. This stance she took against the military increased the sympathy for Aksener by Turkey’s political right. Following, Aksener joined the reformers (later known as the Justice and Development Party, or AK Party), who departed from Erbakan in July 2001. A couple months later Aksener joined the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and became a special advisor to the party’s leader, Devlet Bahceli. Aksener was MHP’s candidate for Istanbul during the mayoral elections in 2004, which she lost. While she was elected as a Member of Parliament in 2007 and in 2011, she was not listed as a candidate by Bahceli in November 2015. Aksener was an ambitious politician, and furious by the acts of Bahceli, she convened to MHP’s extraordinary congress in an attempt to become chairperson of the party. Adding this attempt to her list of losses, she eventually formed her own political party.

Once sympathized by the right-wing for her unyielding stance against the military, Aksener entered a new era accused of being affiliated to the Fetullah Terrorist Organization (FETO). While it was acknowledged as a congregation, FETO was known for being sympathetic towards Aksener. Moreover, it is no secret that FETO encouraged Aksener to become a presidential candidate since 2012. In spite of this, there isn’t any strong evidence about Aksener forming an organic relationship with FETO – the clandestine organization that infiltrated the state offices step-by-step in 40 years and eventually orchestrated the July 15 coup attempt in 2016. Although she had not stated it outright, sources close to her claimed that Aksener told her close friends in the meantime that the December 17-25, 2013, “judicial coup” attempt in Turkey not only shuddered herself but also the whole Parliament. However, strangely thereafter, Aksener took a position that enabled her to be blamed of being a FETO sympathizer, probably due to her political ambitions and calculations for the future. While FETO members were being cleansed from public institutions, Aksener did not only fail to criticize the criminal cult leader Fetullah Gulen, but also rejected the “Hashashin” statements made against him and his followers. Aksener criticized every operation the government conducted against FETO, seizing their assets such as private preparatory schools, banks, media outlets and associations, which funded the terrorist organization with the pretense of humanitarian aid.

Whether willingly or unwillingly, Aksener stood silent for months after FETO’s murderous July 15 coup attempt. It became impossible for her or any other political actor to maintain their positions prior to the coup with respect to FETO. So, Aksener began her statements by saying: “I believe President Erdogan is sincere in his fight [against FETO].” In addition, departing from her previous stance, she included policies about fighting FETO in her party program. Other manifesto promises include ensuring Turkey becomes one of the top ten economies in the world, increasing national income, entering the top 20 countries in PISA listings, decreasing unemployment to under 7 percent within 5 years and realizing a 4.0 revolution in technology industry.

Aksener wants to become president in order to realize the above-mentioned goals. Considering the political landscape of Turkey however, her manifesto promises are highly ambitious – in Turkey today the AK Party retain around half the electoral vote, while the other half is shared between the Republican People’s Party (CHP), MHP and the Democratic People’s Party (HDP).

Hoping to receive support from the Kurdish population in Turkey, Aksener launched her party campaign by visiting Bitlis and Mus – cities in East Anatolia where the AK Party and HDP are the prominent competitors in the region. She rented a house in Bitlis for 650 Turkish Liras and made her first speech: “We will adopt the discourse of love and goodness. I will create projects by listening to you. If I break my promise, you can come and stone my house in Ahlat (a district in Bitlis).” Not giving any credit to rhetoric, Kurdish voters will treat Aksener as their neighbor, but they will not vote for her. Indeed, no one reacted to her statement – not even to the “stoning” part, with strong local motives. In addition to the Kurds, Aksener is also after the Alevi vote. However, their vote is shared between CHP and HDP.

In order to appeal to all political factions, Aksener has gathered various figures, who are mostly irrelevant and incompatible to each other. The commonality between these individuals is that while they have been active in politics for many years, they have been unsuccessful and, thus, forgotten by the public. Although there are a number of new faces, this doesn’t really change anything for the party.

For instance, Ruhat Mengi, a fervent advocate of animal rights, yet lacking the same commitment to human rights, has voiced the Kemalist laicist rhetoric of the 1930s throughout her carrier as a journalist. Mukadder Besegmez, from a completely opposite background, is a traditionalist who comes from Erbakan’s “National Outlook Movement.” Another example is Deputy Chairperson Koray Aydin, who is an idealist that previously blamed Aksener of being a FETO member. Aydin also ran for the chair of MHP twice, and failed.

Individuals that have failed to obtain the leadership of MHP seem to have merged into Iyi Party, as Umit Ozdag, another individual who was unsuccessful in his bid, is now the Deputy Chairperson of the Iyi Party, responsible for media and propaganda. Ozdag’s father was one of the military officers who orchestrated the May 27, 1960 coup, which resulted in the execution of Prime Minister Adnan Menderes and 3 ministers. Ozdag’s father later became a prominent member of the National Unity Committee that administered the country after the coup. Of course, while Ozdag cannot be held responsible for his father’s political past, when asked about this history he replied: “My father was an exemplary Turkish military officer. He was involved in the coup because he believed it to be true.” This is not the only time Ozdag made reckless statements. Only recently he claimed that over 1 million Turks live below the starvation line and that 32.6 percent of Syrian refugees in Turkey are overweight, while 27.7 percent of them are obese. While this statement lacks any logical assessment, according to Ozdag, Syrians are feasting, while a part of Turkey is starving.

While Mengi, Besegmez, Aydin and Ozdag are only a few examples, which illustrate the lack of consistency in the party, there are other individuals in the Iyi Party who served as former ministers of the DYP, Democratic Left Party (DSP) and Motherland Party (ANAP) – all of these parties faded away in the 2002 elections.

Will Meral Aksener be able to ascend to the presidency with this team? This seems impossible. So, will she be able to surpass the electoral threshold? It’s too early to answer this question. In illustration of the inconsistency and ideological emptiness of the Iyi Party, MHP Secretary General Ismet Buyukataman stated: “Aksener reminds me of the character Maho in the 1980s hit film ‘Banker Bilo.’ Maho promised his fellow villagers to take them to Germany and loaded them into the dumper of a truck, touring the whole country for days. When the villagers were unloaded from the truck, they found themselves not in Germany, but on the mountainsides near Istanbul.”