Kılıçdaroğlu made an interesting statement yesterday. “The opposition forms the majority with 60 percent. The duty to form the government should be given to them...” Since the balance of the parliament changed, it is obvious that the CHP leader distinguishes the difference between the opposition- power and 60 percent and 40 percent distribution arbitrarily.
It is not very realistic to assume that after the election the main tension axis will be between the AK Party and the bloc of the other parties. Or let's say: assuming that there may be principal and political bonds among HDP-MHP-CHP and the AK Party hostility could establish these bonds, declaring to detract AK Party from the rulership as the only and main problem of the country, and prioritizing this in front of many issues, initially the Kurdish problem, is a subjective, egocentric political reading and expectation.
Of course if the political parties talk to each other and have an agreement, if they declare this, such a door will be opened.
But before drawing sharp maps, firstly they need to come to such a point. For example, Kılıçdaroğlu should accept the proposal to consult with the president who he refused categorically.
It is not possible to be conflictual and constitutive, exclusionary and constructive at the same time.
Turkey got out of a 12-year one-party rulership and is entering into a phase where coalitions are inevitable.
The coalitions are not very successful examples of government types in the Turkish political life.
The lack of reconciliation culture, strong egos, patriarchal political party structures, partisan politics and state tradition made the coalitions often the means of instability and subject of tension. From economy to the other topics, this situation unbalanced the state, the society and the market.
If this is the data, the most important problem in front of the political parties which gained the right of representation in the parliament is, before challenging, drawing artificial diagrams, the efforts to look for taking revenge, to aim the stability of the coalition and the government. The reconciliation culture is trying to raise the level of the interaction of the political diversity and living together in Turkey.
A coalition government, the coalition government protocol have some restrictions. If we take into consideration the conditions Turkey is in, it is not difficult to define the factors of the main frame around these restrictions:
These are fixing the problems and excessiveness of the previous period in politics and implementations within continuity, law and the rules of politics. It is finding a common language and way on the topics like the Kurdish problem and the resolution process, which cannot bear to wait.
It is defining the coming period around the main axis in the foreign policy and economy, perhaps by putting a period of time or setting an election goal.
The most important goal is to develop and learn the habit to administrate together with various political parties and tendencies.
In spite of that, the thing that should not be or seems as the most foolish thing, is setting a kind of former period goal, initially and principally excluding any political parties (this can be AK Party or HDP) from forming a front government and starting an aimless revenge phase. However, there are a lot of actors desiring and talking about this.
Apart from the political parties, those who carry their views and criticism against the AK Party to a point of rage, focusing on a single point, focusing on the personality of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his political emphases, and those who see the only dynamics in the country as the patriarchal administration style are far from seeing the restriction and filing the election results will bring today.
What are these restrictions and filings?
Against a coalition government president's losing the opportunities of being executant, with its dynamic structure that is open to different alliances, the power of action and decision that The Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM) could reach, changing the acceleration of the media-rulership relation arising from the laws and implementation, holds the possibility of breaking the direct leading effect that the one-party rulership formed on the jurisdiction.
Independent from any coalition protocol, the corruption files against the four ministers will already come to the parliament with a single proposal.
Besides looking for defamation, for example, do not meet Erdoğan, don't accept it as legitimate suggestion, call for forming a government without AK Party, reducing the main politics of the new period symbolically as the expectation to kick Erdoğan out of the palace are nothing else than post Kemalist nonsense.