Ayfer Ekin
Turkey held its local government elections this year in March, and in a major blow to President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s hold on Turkish politics, his ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) faced its biggest electoral defeat in two decades. The main opposition party, the Republican People’s Party (CHP), won seats in 36 out of 81 provinces and claimed mayoral victories in the five biggest cities of Turkey, delivering a blow to the AKP. In this article, Ayfer Ekin analyses the implications of these results, reflecting on the ongoing Kurdish resistance against authoritarianism, and the possibility for alternatives in the region.
The results of the local government elections, held earlier this year in Turkey, caused a stir both within and outside the country. The ultranationalist coalition led by the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) has lost its power and is mostly confined to the rural areas now. What could these results mean for Turkey’s politics? Many analysts point out that towards the end of the last century, the country’s Islamic resurgence also began with a strong showing by nationalist parties in the local elections. Is it then logical to think that tide is finally turning in favor of secular politics?
The reality of contemporary politics in Turkey, however, indicates that it’s premature to draw that conclusion because the fascist AKP- MHP (Nationalist Movement Party) alliance is not a ‘normal’ government and cannot be treated as one. Hence, it is important to situate the results of the recent elections in the context of how the AKP became an authoritarian government and then evaluate the possibility for alternatives in Turkey and the wider region.
The formation of the AKP and the rise of authoritarianism
The AKP has officially been in power for 22 years – since 2002. However, the groundwork for the politics represented by the AKP dates back to the military coup of September 12th, 1980. Governments favorable to finance capital and neoliberal policies were formed all over the world, either through well-managed transitions or after military coups. In Turkey, the groups which resisted neoliberal policies were either sidelined or dissolved. Islamic formations, grounded in traditional approaches, were one of the leading groups that initially stood against the rise of neoliberalism in Turkey. The AKP was, however, shaped as a project to include these groups within the emerging system. The Islamic groups, because of their grassroots contacts, were thought to be the best bet towards implementing neoliberal policies. Also, some of the liberals and social democrats went along with the AKP in its formative years. But when Islamic capital started to take a share from the general market capital, it grew and also needed an ideological makeover.
Not surprisingly, it soon began distancing itself from the liberal groups. The founding codes of the Turkish Republic – one nation, one language, one homeland – continued to be implemented under AKP rule and became excessively repressive against the Kurdish people. Earlier, the fascist practices of the secular Turkish dispensation, which had been in power in the country since the founding of the republic, had not been successful against the Kurdish movement. Furthermore, the fact that much of the Kurdish society is close to traditional Islam was also a factor in the rise of the AKP. It was clear that Turkey’s “Greater Middle East” project could only be implemented through the AKP. For these reasons and many more, the AKP was developed as part of a larger political strategy and received great support at home and abroad.
In June 2014, after nearly twelve years of being in power, the AKP suffered its first electoral defeat. In agreement with the far-right MHP, the elections were held again in November. The AKP-MHP alliance was ideologically centered on the genocide of the Kurdish people, the elimination of all opposition groups, and the expansion of the dictatorship that would be institutionalized in Turkey and then spread to the entire Middle East by feeding Islamic jihadists. For this reason, the media was completely controlled; Kurdish cities were razed to the ground; invasions were carried out against Rojava (the Kurdish enclave in Syria); the demography of the region was changed; all the gains of the Kurds in local governments were usurped under the name of trustees; hundreds of politicians engaged in democratic politics were either imprisoned or forced to live outside their country; intellectuals, writers and academics were subjected to repression; the economy was used as a weapon against everyone; sexism, religionism and nationalism were pumped into society through well-organized government initiatives. Erdoğan determinedly perpetuated his power through all means possible.
Preparations and expectations for the 2023 local elections
After the last general elections in May 2023, the AKP prepared for local elections with the guarantee of a five-year rule. A victory in the local elections would consolidate their power and eliminate any opposition. Erdoğan stirred the pot of opposition parties with the press and his army of trolls, while scheming how to seize power in every small town. The AKP carried fake voters to the settlements in Kurdistan. Soldiers and policemen who did not live or ever set foot in those localities were registered as voters. Tribal leaders and individuals were bribed with large sums of money. All the means of the state, and of course, the legal and coercive apparatus were actively put into use.
But this time, despite all the measures he took, Erdogan could not achieve the result he wanted. The corruption of the government, the unsustainability of the economy and the perceived threat against their lifestyles pushed people to search for an alternative. War at home and abroad, genocidal practices, lawlessness, and economic terror did not bring the people to their knees. They rejected nationalism and demanded justice. The people embraced their will better this time than in other elections.
Although the election results surprised many people, it’s important to note that in the general elections held in 2023 also the people’s preference was more or less the same. Due to a lack of coordination among opposition parties, AKP and Erdoğan won the election that they did not win. But this time they couldn’t repeat that fraud. The people stepped in, resisting the usurpation of their will through legal manoeuvres. For the first time, the entire opposition supported this resistance.
Opposition and Resistance
It is true that authoritarianism in Turkey has increased since 2014; but so has resistance. For instance, in the local elections in 2017 and 2019, the people voted for the pro-Kurdish BDP (Peace and Democracy Party) in their municipalities. However, the government appointed trustees in 99 out of 101 municipalities won by the BDP in 2017. Once again, in the 2019 elections, pro-Kurdish candidates regained municipalities in many centres. This time, trustees were appointed to all but 4 municipalities. The people who voted for pro-Kurdish candidates lost their elected representation due to the appointment of trustees. However, despite the two trustee usurpations in 2017 and 2019, the will of the Kurds could not be overtaken. The people did not accept both usurpations; they continued to recognise the elected co-mayors and council members. The will of the people elected by the local governments was taken as the basis and they were considered as interlocutors.
The Kurds have been at the forefront of resistance. Thousands of prisoners lost their lives for this cause, their families continue to resist, and women have taken to the streets to protest. Despite the use of all kinds of banned weapons and advanced techniques by the Turkish authorities, Kurdish freedom fighters have continued with their resistance. The opposition in Turkey also needs to be divided into two: an intra-system opposition and a leftist, socialist, anti-system opposition. One cannot expect too much from the intra-system opposition. For instance, the main opposition party (the CHP), kept the people who were seriously opposed to the AKP policies away from the streets, which left the anti-system Kurdish and leftist opposition isolated, prolonging the life of the AKP.
The joint movement of the anti-system opposition is of enormous importance to the resistance. The working class and left socialists have continued to explore opportunities to act together, with a significant part of the left and some faith groups already in the HDK (Peoples’ Democratic Congress) with the remaining groups forming the ‘Labor and Freedom Alliance’. The recent election results and especially the joint struggle against the usurpation of the will of Van caused serious discussions. The AKP attempted to take over the will of the people who voted for the DEM party candidates in the Kurdish provincial capital of Van by appointing a trustee. In response to this, thousands of people – from Turkey’s democratic, leftist and socialist forces – united to protest against this trustee usurpation, which resulted in the state stepping back from its initial decision. Hence, these elections have once again demonstrated that when forces are united, extraordinary results can be achieved.
Nation-state as the root of fascism
Much of the opposition in Turkey is under the delusion that if the AKP and Erdoğan are defeated, the socio-political and economic problems will be solved. While the departure of the AKP will bring important changes with it, these shifts will not end the problems at their source. This is what distinguishes the Kurdish movement from the current opposition. The Kurdish resistance traces the problem to the nation-state structure. All nation-state structures are fascist structures, and democracy is nothing more than a cover. When societies refuse to play along with this deception, the true character of fascism is revealed. While we (the Kurds) state that the problems stem from the nation-state structure which needs to change, and that opposition forces should participate in the electoral process from a position that aims to implement this change, the majority of the remaining opposition thinks that the problem is that of “one man”. However, dictatorship cannot be reduced to personal ambition and passion for power. It is more realistic to look for the problem in the nation-state structure. Such a perspective allows us to understand why various movements against fascism have not been entirely successful. While individuals may leave, the structure remains essentially the same.
It should not be inferred that we (the Kurds) are minimizing the consequences of the election results for Turkey and the region. However, if the opposition views this as only a “one-man” problem, little will change. But, if it considers these elections as a step towards addressing the injustice inherent in the nation-state structure, it may open the doors to a new era in the Middle East, which is what is needed.
The Left and the Kurdish Question
Over the years, the Kurdish question in Turkey has evoked a wide array of responses from the left. The main reason for this is the insistence on maintaining – or departing from – the ‘one-nation’ mentality in the formation of the nation-state. While some movements are based on the official state approach and see the Kurdish question as a problem of terrorism and Kurds as terrorists, others view the Kurdish struggle as their natural right to exist as a people.
The Kurdish movement has been based on a common struggle with the Kurdish people and the Turkish progressive revolutionary movements from the very beginning. It has made every effort to develop this common struggle. For instance, the People’s Democratic Congress (HDK) is a congress formed as a result of this common struggle and strives to address the Kurdish question as part of its wider effort to end ethnic, religious and gender discrimination in Turkey. The decisive role of the Kurds in the recent election results will force the main opposition and other left formations to be more sensitive to the basic Kurdish agenda. However, nationalism is still strong in these parties and how far the main opposition is willing to embrace the Kurdish agenda will determine whether it can usher in lasting ethnic accord in the country.
The Kurdish people did not give up their right to nationhood. Instead, they rejected the idea that the only way to become a nation is to establish a nation-state, and espoused the idea of democratic nationhood, which is not only an antidote to nationalism, but also more in line with the reality of life, peoples and society. Our insistence on the primacy of this issue, of course, affects the entire Turkish society.
The Turkish state has exerted enormous efforts towards preventing Kurdish ideas and thoughts from reaching the rest of the country. The mainstream press, which speaks with a single voice, keeps divisions between the Kurds and the rest of the country alive through wicked propaganda, simultaneously amplifying, both, Turkish as well as Kurdish nationalism. Any effort towards reconciliation with Kurds has become risky for non-Kurdish Turks in every respect. Those who get closer are forced to take a step back by media lynch campaigns. Professional chambers, bar associations and journalists are being suppressed. Academics have lost their careers and many have had to flee the country. Nevertheless, the desire of the Turks and Kurds and other ethnic groups to live together is growing stronger every day. For example, Assyrians, Armenians and to some extent Arabs are getting closer to the idea of democratic nation-building.
Picture of the DEM Party
The construction of democratic modernity and repoliticising society
The Kurdish movement has a distinctive stance on democratic politics from many left-wing socialist parties and formations. While some groups contest elections as a faux-democratic game of the bourgeoisie, others think they can achieve their goals only through elections without advancing other areas of struggle. The Kurdish movement differs from these two approaches; it has advanced a well-defined agenda for the freedom of society, and it engages in political formations with the aim of democratizing politics. What this means is that politics should be determined by the people, rather than just by their representatives.
The history of civilization has been marked by periodic interventions in political formulations within society. Capitalist modernity is regarded as the culmination of that process where politics is essentially reduced to advancing the interests of an elite group under the pretext of spreading prosperity in society. 1 Elections are held to determine and legitimise this elite group, which uses its power and legitimacy to work against the well-being of the people. In democratic politics, on the other hand, it is the people who take ownership of their problems, find their solutions and carry their existence into the future.
Society must be alert to apoliticisation in this age of capitalist modernity. Education and organizing must contribute towards the repoliticisation of people. While electoral politics may help with this goal, participation in a democracy goes beyond that. Society must advance an agenda, which ensures collective interests and elect representatives to power only if they are sensitive to these commitments.
In recent times, capitalist modernity with the help of liberalism has largely succeeded in defanging anti-system forces like the feminist movement, environmental movements, anti-capitalist groups, socialist forces, which were quite powerful in the 1960s and 70s. By the 1990s, capitalist modernity emerged as the only operative society-wide system, pushing the working class, women, and people on the margins into despair. Yet, the theory as well as the praxis of alternatives to this pernicious reality of capitalist modernity has continued to emerge and evolve: the Kurdish movement, in particular, has sown the seeds of hope through its grassroots level work in various parts of the middle-east, the enclave of Rojava, in Syria, being a prime example.
The Kurdish movement focuses on local government elections to give impetus to the idea of change from below. While we run for elections according to the laws of Turkey, unlike other parties, we have a system where each settlement determines its administrators through direct democracy. We determine the co-mayors and members of the councils by setting up pre-election ballot boxes. In other words, the people express their will in the ballot boxes before the official election. Furthermore, while Turkish laws prohibit the practice of co-presidency in local governments, the Kurdish movement has implemented joint leadership of women and men in local governments since 2013. This ensures equal representation for women, and allows their perspective and experience to be reflected in decision-making.
For the Kurdish movement, oppressive regimes are the main obstacle to the construction of democratic modernity, and it’s of utmost importance to weaken them. Since all the pillars of democratic modernity are interconnected, it is necessary to advocate for change in all of them – i.e. the struggle against capitalism and industrialism as much as the nation-state. The strategy to achieve this is well defined: firstly, identifying a clear goal, secondly, identifying the obstacles in front of this goal, and thirdly, finding the right answer to the question of how these obstacles can be eliminated. While the paradigm of democratic modernity is the intellectual answer to capitalist modernity, building a democratic society in line with this paradigm and organizing democratic confederalism, the system of self-governance of society, indicates real anti-systemism.
Interconnected Struggles and Developing an Organised Stance
Resistance struggles are always interconnected. For instance, the connections between new socialism, jineology and ecology are inseparable. How can we achieve new socialism without accepting women’s science, i.e. jineology. Is socialism or even life itself possible without an ecosystem? Therefore, a development in one area is strongly connected to another. This underlines the failure of organizations that advocate for socialism, feminism, or environmentalism as single issues.
Highlighting ecology only in political manifestos means little. The AKP’s manifesto includes more environmental statements than all other parties except the DEM party. However, during the AKP rule, mountain destruction has reached the highest levels; construction of dams, mines and gold exploration with cyanide has accelerated; agricultural and forest areas have been sacrificed for rent and construction of roads; and many similar practices have caused widespread ecological destruction. It is important to address the ecosystem holistically without reducing it to mere ‘environmental problems’, and take a stand against capitalism, which is the root cause of contemporary environmental exigencies. The DEM party has pioneered this by developing a program that encompasses democratic, ecological and women’s liberationist paradigms. The main opposition party has done very little so far.
The Opposition in Turkey: Looking to the future
The results of the local elections have been greeted with great enthusiasm by everyone in wider Kurdistan except for those who work in close cooperation with Turkey, such as the KDP (Kurdish Democratic Party). The AKP is targeting Kurds in and outside of Turkey through assasinations, bombings and military assaults, and consequently all important developments in Turkey are relevant to Kurds everywhere. The national consciousness of the Kurds has developed considerably and each part is closer to the other intellectually and spiritually.
There is a possibility that resistance will develop as a result of this election. But we (the Kurds) are still uncertain because diverging positions of these parties on the solution to the Kurdish question have strengthened authoritarianism; if there is no change on the Kurdish question, it would be difficult to coordinate and sustain resistance. While the narrow Turkish nationalist perspective is still very strong in these parties, there are segments that want to get rid of the authoritarian regime. The Kurdish movement finds an alliance with these segments more meaningful than a coalition with larger parties. The Kurdish movement and its friends will expand the struggle for the democratization of Turkey, striving to construct democratic modernity. We are ready to partner with any party that is uncomfortable with fascism and authoritarianism, and wants to resist.
Ayfer Ekin, born in 1970, is an educator. In 2002 she participated in the Kurdish women’s movement, and in 2004, she was involved in a political party. She was forced to live in Europe in 2022 due to political pressures.
- Capitalist modernity is the last stage of a historical process based on the system of masculinity, hierarchy, authority, and nation-state, that developed through the colonisiation and commodification of the labor of women, based on ideological, political and economic intervention in natural society that has caused deep crises. Read more about capitalist modernity here: https://www.philosophy-world-democracy.org/articles-1/construction-of-a-democratic-ecological-and-gender-libertarian-communal-economy-in-kurdistan ↩︎