The opposition People's Alliance in Turkey Will it hold until 2023?

The opposition People's Alliance in Turkey is experiencing a chill between its two main components: the Republican People's Party (CHP) and the Good Party, due to the divergence of different points of view.

Which leads to the question of whether this alliance can survive until 2023, and to question the assumptions that may lead to its collapse in fact.

Since the Turkish Parliament ratified the Electoral Alliances Law in 2018, the internal political scene has been based on two main alliances: the People’s Alliance, which includes the ruling Justice and Development along with the National Movement and the Grand Union, in contrast to the opposition People’s Alliance, which includes the Republican People’s Party. The largest opposition party, along with the Good Party, and informally the Peoples' Democratic Party, accused of being affiliated with the PKK terrorist organization.

As is well known, these two alliances entered the parliamentary and presidential elections in June 2018, which resulted in the "Public Alliance" winning 344 seats in Parliament on the one hand, and the victory of this alliance's candidate for the presidency, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, on the other. The opposition People's Alliance won only 189 seats in parliament, and its candidate, Muharram Inge, lost, of course.

What is being talked about now is an assessment of the strength of the opposition People's Alliance, in light of the many thorny issues between the "Republican People" and "The Good", perhaps the most prominent of which is the informal or under-the-table relationship between the "Republican People" and the "Peoples Democratic Party", Which is believed to have increased in recent times and has become more visible and public.

The Good Party stems from a nationalist background. The founder of the party, Meral Aksener, was until the end of 2016 a prominent parliamentarian within the Nationalist Movement Party. The national nature of the "Good" party requires it to put a distance with a party accused of collaborating with a terrorist organization such as the "Democratic Peoples".

Since the "Republican People" places great emphasis on the importance of allying with the "Democratic Peoples" to win its votes in the presidential elections, it directly causes embarrassment for its "good" ally and prompted him to repeatedly declare and reveal his position on the "Democratic Peoples".

That is why we hear from time to time statements from the leader of the “Good” Aksener, in which she asserts that her party views the “democratic peoples” as it views the terrorist organization PKK, and that her party can never ally with this party, but without, of course, entering into an argument. Direct with the Republican People's Party, its important ally.

Despite the attempt by the opposition People’s Alliance to confirm the strength of this alliance and the absence of anything to disturb it, clear indicators, especially recently, highlight the points of contention clearly, and we are talking here about the shocking position of the “republican people” during the vote on the presidential memorandum that asked Parliament to authorize an additional two years. In order to send military forces to Syria and Iraq.

What happened during the vote in the Turkish parliament is that the "Republican People" voted against the memorandum, along the lines of the "Peoples Democratic Party" position, while the "Good" party voted in favor of the memorandum, similar to the "Justice and Development" and the "National Movement", which showed the position The contradiction between the "republican people" and the "good" over a national issue par excellence aimed at confronting the threat of PKK terrorist organizations near the border with Syria.

Not only did the "republican people" vote against the decision, but its leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu said that voting in favor of the presidential memorandum is considered "treason", which in other words means charging his ally with "treason", so how did the latter respond?

Of course, the Good Party fell this time with great embarrassment, perhaps unprecedented, due to the position of its ally, the "Republican People", which is far from nationalist on the one hand, and the leader of the latter, Kılıçdaroğlu, accused the Good Party of treason indirectly. When the "Good" party tried to respond, it took a timid way of responding, far from escalation, definitively denying the possibility of "sane" describing it as treason.

Why doesn't the Good Party take a tough stance on the Republican People?

It is logical for the observer to question the reason for the ambiguity of the position of the "Good Party" in contrast to the clarity of the position of the "Republican People", whether regarding the alliance with the "Democratic Peoples" or other issues.

The main reason for this is that the Good Party, since it is not open to an alliance with the coalition of the ruling public, does not prefer to remain alone outside the opposition People's Alliance, as it already aspires through its alliance with the "Republican People" to achieve electoral gains that guarantee its survival in Parliament on the one hand, and obtaining positions if the People’s Alliance wins the upcoming presidential elections, on the other.

Therefore, he always resorts to escalation with the “Democratic Peoples” in a way that guarantees him before public opinion, especially his nationalist segment, that “Good” is not reconciled with the political extensions of the PKK terrorist organization, but without challenging the Republican People’s Party and its position on this issue. also.

What can be said is that this position of the “Good” party does not seem convincing to public opinion in fact, but rather plunges it into a whirlpool and contradiction, because the nationalist segment questioned the “good” party about the reason for staying with the “republican people” in light of the latter’s persistence His accelerating rapprochement with the “Democratic Peoples”, and the supporters of the “Democratic Peoples” attack the “good” and question the type of opposition he practices, and call him double standards.

Can the opposition People's Alliance stand up to 2023?

So far, the two People's Alliance parties ("The Republican People" and "The Good") are trying to maintain, as much as possible, the link that guarantees them to continue the alliance until 2023, with one goal being to defeat the coalition of the public and Turkish President Erdogan, but despite the relentless attempts to draw This character in front of public opinion, the differences continue to appear in public more with the passage of time.

This means, therefore, the possibility of the dispute getting out of control at a moment when the "Good" party feels that its popularity is in danger, especially after the defection of many of its parliamentarians due to issues of this kind, but this is more likely to happen if the "Republican people" presents. In public, he has declared his relationship with the Peoples’ Democratic Party, and in this case “good” will certainly not continue this alliance, and it will be more likely to join the coalition of the public than to stay with the Peoples Democratic Party.

Finally, we are dealing with this issue, and there is more than a year and a half left until the presidential and parliamentary elections in mid-2023, and it is customary for many surprises to occur before the elections during the electoral campaign, as we may witness more splits from the “Good” party at that time, especially With the "republican people" continuing to take positions that annoy and embarrass the "good" party.(Mohamed Nour Farhoud,Press writer and editor)