We can evaluate the last decade of Turkey from several points of view during the AKP administration.

In terms of its economy, there has been stability and growth with the emergence and the rise of the middle class.On the social field, there are class transitions and equalizations. When it comes to its political field, there are both the overthrowing of the tutelage regime and the expansive coverage of the fundamental rights and freedom regarding the Kurdish question.

All of the three points are quite positive for a democratic narrative. However, there is also a fourth point, which has been problematic since the onset. It occurs in the field of political style or governance.

There is no doubt that this field nurtures on the eastern and Turkish political culture and mentality.

However, AKP has overcome this issue, which was the clichéd will for power issue and the patriarchal style of politics. In fact, this style and its increase have been dominant in the country since 2002. Yet, this problem was not taken into account at the collapse of the ex-regime during the large social agreements; rather, it was fostered and was identified encouragingly with the political authority. On the other hand, this period is over now and today all the problems derive from this point.

If we make an assessment from all the 4 fields above...

AKP gives signs to continue in the initial three fields.

The question and problem that lies here is:

Would the transition process from parliamentary regime into the presidential order increase the patriarchal doze or not?

This is a significant question.

And its reply may be both "yes" and "no".

There is no point to prolong the discussion provided that the answer will be "yes", though. It goes without saying. It is no longer possible for Turkey to bear with the personalization of authority and politics that are not giving space to other fields within the borders of the democratic order.

Besides no matter where its justification comes from or what kind of religious fatwa endorses it, the himmet or "favor" based informal practice that causes the tension and the conflict on the corporate and legal body has advanced to quite a risky level. Such a complexion and set of preferences can obstruct Turkey"s open way.

However the "no" choice is also significant as it shows the opportunities and problems of Turkey and the bridges that these problems connect to democracy come before us as a stronger probability.

In the first of this writing series, I mentioned that AKP was about to pass into the third phase and that Turkey was going to head for a corporate and constitutional regime transition.

This transition does not just point to a semi presidential and presidential regime.

On one hand, the election threshold and the question of election system and representation, on the other, there is the issue of administrative divisions of Turkey that may turn into an aspect of this transition process, too. Apart from all, these are the components of the AKP"s (written) political party program that await the convenient conditions to become realized.

Especially the administrative reconstruction is also directly related to the Kurdish question. The implementation of the European Charter of Local Self Government, the enhancement of the local administration and administrators" power and authority, the revision of the administrative divisions accordingly is a starting point for both changing the democratic image of the country and achieving a democratic elapse, as well as solving the Kurdish question.

Turkey in the next term eventually will head for a regulation as such.

These will not only mean that Turkey will secede to a more democratic area but at the same time it will build a more positive link between the so-called problem and administration.

A kind of embracing discourse that Turkey will have to adopt at the 100th anniversary of the 1915 incidents, the attitude with the identity-history confrontations and a correction policy in eliminating mistakes regarding the genuinely fair cases such as Ergenekon and Balyoz will have to be taken into consideration as the urgent agendas in the new term.

The current government practice is likely to fill the next 10 years with its new cover. Our concern is to make sure that this form of politics goes on its way. However, the ball is in AKP"s court now.

The question is whether it will go towards democracy or chaos.

It will be the choice of the government.