COMMENTARY İBRAHİM DALMIŞ COMMENTARIES A Quick Glance at the History of Elections Elections in Iraq: What Does the in Turkey Future Hold? İBRAHİM DALMIŞ RANJ ALAALDIN The AK Party: Dominant Party, New Turkey Hezbollah and Syria: From Regime Proxy and Polarization to Regime Savior E. FUAT KEYMAN RANDA SLIM The Structural Causes of Political Crisis The Impact of the “New” Zero in Turkey Problems Policy and the Arab Spring OSMAN CAN on the Relations Between Turkey and Lebanese Factions Strengths and Constraints of Turkish Policy MUSTAFA YETİM and BILAL HAMADE in the South Caucasus BAYRAM BALCI 6 Insight Turkey COMMENTARY A QUICK GLANCE AT THE HISTORY OF ELECTIONS IN TURKEY A Quick Glance at the History of Elections in Turkey İBRAHİM DALMIŞ* ABSTRACT Generally speaking, two traditions – right-wing politics and the Left – have dominated Turkish politics over the years. This study aims to analyze historic election results in order to deter- mine roughly how much popular support each political movement enjoys in the country. Starting from transition to multi-party sys- tem in Turkey, one can see the emergence of several ideologies, groups and political parties that appeal to various social classes. Although military interventions caused a rupture in the democ- ratization of the country, there has been a lively political environ- ment with dynamic party politics and elections. During the span of Turkish democracy, a number parties were established and closed. This article examines the trajectory of elections and par- ty perfomances with a special emphasis on ideology and electoral base of the parties. n the months leading up to the lo- glorified projections were more in cal elections on March 30, 2014, line with wishful thinking and pipe ITurkey’s political scene set the dreams rather than real-life facts. stage for an unusually intense debate. As soon as the election results start- During this period, various anti-gov- ed flowing in, the opposition began ernment media outlets expressed sharing anecdotes about the late Aziz their firm belief that the country’s po- Nesin, a secularist writer and humor- litical landscape was on the brink of a ist who once famously claimed that major transformation. So strong was 60 percent of Turkish citizens were their conviction that opposition com- idiots. Timeless classics such as how mentators had begun to speculate terribly ignorant the voters were and that the ruling AK Party government that the country indeed was suffering would have no choice but to call for from Stockholm syndrome began to * PollMark early elections and possibly find itself quickly circulate around social media Market and Public Opinion removed from power. The elections, outlets. Research however, yielded unsurprising results as the balance of power between the As a matter of fact, the pre-election Insight Turkey Vol. 16 / No. 2 / political parties remained largely un- overexcitement and post-election 2014, pp. 7-17 altered. Thus, it became clear that the emotions of this nature have tradi- 2014 Sprıng 7 COMMENTARY İBRAHİM DALMIŞ Polling clerks while counting the votes of Turkey’s 2014 local elections. AA / Cem Öksüz tionally been common features of politics, social liberalism and a stat- elections in Turkey. Furthermore, ist economic policy. Having attained there is no indication that the current considerable popularity in the final situation will change in the foresee- years of the Ottoman Empire, this able future. Generally speaking, two political tradition had a serious fol- traditions – right-wing politics and lowing among the elites who founded the Left – have dominated Turkish the Republic in 1923. Their adversar- politics over the years. This study ies, understandably enough, made aims to analyze historic election re- the case for a decentralized admin- sults in order to determine rough- istrative structure that would bolster ly how much popular support each local values, social conservatism and political movement enjoys in the economic liberalism, with a particu- country. lar emphasis on democracy and po- litical liberties. The Ottoman Empire’s gradual dis- integration and its failure to compete From the Republic’s establishment with the West gave rise to two polit- until its transition to a multi-par- ical traditions, which evolved into ty system in 1946, the Republican distinctly opposite camps as a result People’s Party (CHP) single-hand- of numerous developments in the late edly ruled the country as a handful 19th and early 20th century. In gen- of attempts to facilitate opposition eral terms, one of the groups aspired parties proved futile and occasional- to reach the ideal of Western values ly bloody. It was in this context that through a centralized administration, the Democrat Party (DP), which a fundamentally secularist brand of emerged immediately after the adop- 8 Insight Turkey A QUICK GLANCE AT THE HISTORY OF ELECTIONS IN TURKEY tion of multi-party politics, was Before proceeding with our analysis, founded by none other than former a methodological explanation might CHP politicians, including Celal Ba- be necessary: In every given election, yar, Adnan Menderes, Fuad Köprülü the results are calculated with ref- and Refik Koraltan. For the purposes erence to the number of registered of this study, however, we shall ig- voters that participate in the election nore otherwise significant nuances without any procedural mistakes. In and describe the CHP and its succes- other words, election results ignore sors as the Left, while political parties registered voters that do not partici- tracing their heritage to the DP will pate in the election as well as invalid be referred to as the Right. votes. For instance, let us consider that two candidates run for public Figure 1 provides a list of political office in a district with 100 registered parties that participated in parlia- voters and that the top candidate re- mentary elections since 1950 and ceives 40 votes while the runner-up identifies their position within the wins 20 votes, meaning 40 people broader Left-Right dichotomy: did not participate in the election. In Figure 1: A categorization of political parties in parliamentary elections since 19501 2014 Sprıng 9 COMMENTARY İBRAHİM DALMIŞ this case, the official results would in- 1950 and 2011 with reference to the dicate that the winner received 66.7 total number of registered voters. As percent of the vote while their closest such, the figure also identifies the opponent won 33.3 percent. As such, percentage of voters that did not par- 40 percent of all voters would effec- ticipate in the election(reactionary) tively translate into 66.7 percent of as well as the popularity of contend- valid votes, just as the loser’s 20 per- ers, such as independents, whom we cent would show up in the official re- cannot designate as part of either sults as 33 percent. It would be mean- group (uncategorized). ingless, of course, to expect election results to be reported with reference As the data suggests, the Right re- to the total number of registered vot- ceived over 50 percent of the vote ers. In the same spirit, assuming that in the first free and fair elections in failure to participate in the elections 1950 and recorded an approximate- indicates apathy and a lack of interest ly 5-percent gain four years later. In might entail misleading assessments the 1960s and the 1970s, the Right’s of election results. All quantitative share of the total votes remained con- data that this study presents, unless sistently below the 50-percent mark, otherwise stated, reflect the distribu- although the first elections after the tion of votes with reference to the to- 1980 military coup drastically im- tal number of registered voters since proved the movement’s popularity. we conceptualize the decision to not Despite some losses in the 1990s, the participate in elections as a political has been a consistent upward trend in reaction or a lack of viable options as support for the Right since 2000. opposed to a passive stance. Meanwhile, the Left had a slightly Figure 2 demonstrates the popu- different experience. First of all, it lar appeal of the Right and the Left is important to note that the CHP’s in parliamentary elections between share of the vote in the 1950 elections Figure 2: Distribution of all registered voters in parliamentary elections, 1950-2011. 10 Insight Turkey A QUICK GLANCE AT THE HISTORY OF ELECTIONS IN TURKEY represented a historic high for the camp. While the Left’s popular ap- Right-leaning voters have a peal diminished in subsequent elec- tions, the CHP’s increasing popular- tendency to not participate ity under Bülent Ecevit in the 1970s in the elections at times when partially reversed their losses, while contemporary circumstances failing to break the 30-percent mark. In the aftermath of the 1980 military restrict the domain of coup, the Left came close to receiving parliamentary politics 30 percent of the vote in 1987 and 1999, but the overall trend has been downward. While reactionaries could also ac- count for the fluctuations in the Left’s A closer examination would also re- vote, the coefficient (0.33) makes this veal that the Right and the Left fol- explanation less meaningful. Simply lowed similar trends in the 1960s and put, right-leaning voters have a ten- again after 1980, as a decline in the dency to not participate in the elec- former camp’s popularity typically tions at times when contemporary coincided with a drop in the latter’s circumstances restrict the domain of votes, and vice versa. This phenome- parliamentary politics. Furthermore, non would attest to the limited elec- the high number of right-wing par- toral volatility between the Right ties participating in the contest often and the Left.