Turkish Elections: At The Crossroads Of Populism

Turkey’s fate hangs on May 14, 2023. On that day, voters will choose between President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s current populist regime or opt for a new path. These elections impact not just Turkey’s domestic sphere, but global populism as well.

Under Kemal Kilicdaroglu’s leadership, the Turkish opposition presents a noteworthy and inventive approach to navigate populist dilemma. This strategy, which I frame as countering populism and polarization through pluralism, achieved success in the 2019 local elections and may triumph once more.

President Erdogan, is a seasoned populist. He predates other populist leaders such as former U.S. President Donald Trump, Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi, former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban. They all boast anti-establishment views, emotional appeals, and polarizing speech.

Yet Erdogan is distinct. While his approach echoes others, context, goals, and methods vary with these leaders. In his long tenure in power, he weaved anti-elitism, religious identity, and nationalism in a unique blend.

What is populism and what it is not

Populism often stems from real grievances, but it doesn’t guarantee the empowerment of “popular will” or democracy. Often, it results in the consolidation of power by a single leader or group who claims to represent the people’s interests while sidelining or suppressing dissenting voices.

Focused on “the people,” populism opposes perceived elites. It wields emotional appeals, divisive rhetoric, and oversimplified solutions to complex issues, be they genuine or fabricated. As it is often the case with terrorism, populism, shouldn’t be confused with an ideology.

Populism is a strategy, adaptable to many ideologies, including nationalism, liberalism and socialism. It highlights “the people” as if it is a single unity, and their needs, challenging the establishment.

Elitism or technocratism is its often-defeated opposite. In Turkey however, the way forward against populism is not to retreat to old tactics. After numerous setbacks over the last two decades, Turkey’s opposition have taken up the banner of pluralism against populism: embracing diversity, inclusivity, and dialogue.

Populism in Erdogan’s leadership

Overall, Erdogan’s leadership style can be characterized as populist, as he has tapped into the frustrations and grievances of a significant portion of the Turkish population and consolidated his support through emotional appeals and identity politics.

Anti-establishment sentiment. President Erdogan has successfully positioned himself as a champion of the “common people” against the traditional secular elites, who were historically influential in Turkish politics. By doing so, he has managed to consolidate a significant base of support among those, especially Turkey’s conservative majority, who used to feel marginalized or excluded from the political process.

Emotive nationalist and religious appeals. Erdogan’s emotive nationalist and religious appeals stir support by invoking Turkish and Islamic pride and historical greatness. This resonates with citizens who feel Turkey’s global status has been undermined. They see Erdogan as a strong leader, able to humble other leaders with his prowess. In his later years, he has leaned on nationalist rhetoric to rally support and deflect criticism, presenting his policies as vital for national progress and security through a strong sense of Turkish and Islamic identity.

Authoritarian tendencies. Under Erdogan’s leadership, Turkey has experienced a gradual erosion of democratic institutions, press freedom, and the rule of law. Critics argue that his government has become increasingly authoritarian, consolidating power and suppressing dissent.

Religious identity politics. Erdogan’s party, the Justice and Development Party (AK Party), has its roots in political Islam, and he has sought to promote a more conservative and religiously-oriented Turkish society. This has been achieved by leveraging religious identity politics to solidify his support among conservative and religious voters.

Polarization tactics in Erdogan’s approach

Us vs. Them rhetoric. Erdogan casting himself and his supporters as champions of the common people, “the nation“, against domestic enemies or Western countries. This narrative unites his supporters while marginalizing opposition.

Religious and cultural divisions. Erdogan’s emphasis on conservative Islamic values has deepened divisions between religious conservatives and secular segments of Turkish society. By appealing to religious identity, he has solidified his support among conservative and religious voters, while also exacerbating social divisions.

Suppression of dissent. Erdogan’s government has cracked down on opposition voices, including journalists, academics, and political opponents. This has contributed to a more polarized political climate, where critics are labeled as enemies of the state or terrorists.

Navigating the Populist Dilemma: Pluralism

Pluralism is a political philosophy that values diversity, inclusivity, and dialogue among various groups, interests, and perspectives in society. Unlike populism, which sets “the people” against an elite class, pluralism acknowledges that societies consist of multiple groups with distinct values, interests, and identities.

In political power, pluralism supports distribution and fosters negotiation and compromise among groups. This approach encourages a more democratic process, considering various perspectives and interests in policy-making and governance.

President Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AK Party) successfully targeted secular elites. In AK Party’s narrative, elites refer to secular, Kemalist, educated urban dwellers, often civil servants, who look down on less educated communities from the periphery, especially Kurds and religious conservatives. It does not necessarily refer to “the rich people“.

Elitism favors a select group based on wealth, status, or education, while technocracy depends on technical experts. Pluralism, however, advocates for participation from a wide range of perspectives and interests, rather than perpetuating the dominance of an elite class or relying solely on the expertise of a select few.

Potential Regional Impact of Opposition Victory in Turkey

Turkey’s opposition, under its presidential candidate Kemal Kilicdaroglu, embraces a pluralist narrative and composition, except for policies on Syrian refugees.

Known as the “Table of Six,” the Turkish opposition is a diverse coalition of six political parties with varying ideologies, including secularist, liberal, nationalist, and religious conservative perspectives. This official alliance gains external support from left-wing, left-liberal groups, individuals, and notably, the Kurdish movement. This broad-based coalition signifies a unique and substantial political development in Turkey.

The alliance’s surprising resilience owes to grassroots unity and Kemal Kilicdaroglu’s political leadership. As the leader of the main opposition party, the Republican People’s Party (CHP), Kilicdaroglu’s ability to unite disparate factions and maintain the alliance’s cohesion is crucial to its success.

Non-populist alternatives are essential to counterbalance the negative effects of populism on democratic norms, social cohesion, and the rule of law. By advocating for an inclusive and diverse approach to politics, non-populist movements can restore public trust in democratic institutions and foster a collaborative decision-making process.

A victory for this grand coalition might signal a major shift in Turkish politics, with regional and global implications. Its varied composition demonstrates that parties with different ideologies can collaborate to confront populist leaders and pursue common goals. This alliance could offer a blueprint for similar movements in countries experiencing populism’s rise.