The results of the June 7th election are being interpreted as the nation's coalition message to the political parties. This interpretation is already a message that has general validity for politics.
However, everyone knows that when you ask them “would you want a coalition?” most possibly the answer will be “no”.
In other words, there is a big difference in the answer when the question is asked more clearly with the outcome of the election results.
There is already a fixed memory regarding the things caused by the coalition governments in the past and how those governments made Turkey unable to be administered. On top of this, there is a more de facto evaluation related with the country's stable growth, development and democratization under AK Party's single-rulership periods after an extremely bad coalition experience. The 41% voting rate achieved by AK Party in the recent elections, despite the vote loss, is the statement that the nation is appreciating that experience. Maybe it's been mentioned a lot; however, it's beneficial to repeat it. The recent vote rates are 6.5% more than AK Party's voting rate on November 3, 2002, when the party came into power alone with 364 chairs. Despite the three rulership periods, seeing that the votes sustained this proportional stability, it's the statement of the credit given to the AK Party's single-rulership.
Today, even if seeing that AK Party obliged to form a coalition government is causing worries, rather than joy, for the ones, who didn't vote for AK Party, then all the sides should evaluate this better.
In the end, if the voters for other parties are frowning on the idea of coalition, despite knowing that their party has no chance to become the single rulership, then it means that there is a certain level of satisfaction and appreciation towards the government administered by AK Party alone. It's the weirdness of the parliamentarian regime to witness this confusion bringing forward an inevitable coalition. If we were under the presidential system, this weirdness would have been sorted out without a doubt. No matter who enters the parliament and no matter what voting rate they receive, under the presidential system, the country will not be drifted to such instability and uncertainty.
However, the nation's order through the ballot box is a coalition, and our duty is to think over the conveniences produced by this difficulty and create constructive politics over those. When observed from this angle, we need to start by saying that we shouldn't be stuck on talking about the bad coalition experiences in Turkey until now and that there is no meaning in writing calamity scenarios.
When it's evaluated properly, we can say that a possible coalition is making it possible to open the rulership bloc and expand the political field in the country. In other words, it's clear that AK Party's 13-year single rulership had an unquestionable contribution towards the country's developments and its position in the world. However, due to the nature of the parliamentarian regime and history of Turkish politics, this single rulership has a result like turning the opposition into a bloc. Separate from its results in domestic politics, the problematic aspect is caused by the responsibility, related with the firmness and unity of the country, being taken on single handedly.
Even the most national matters of the country are starting to be perceived as AK Party's matter and politics. However, the fact that AK Party is single handedly taking on the responsibility of Turkey's, who is surrounded from all corners and exposed to attacks, struggle with its own voting base; it's already harboring serious risks from the point of the country's security. The forces, who are trying to reshape the Middle East and targeted Turkey's unity and integrity meanwhile, can find vast supporting masses from within Turkey.
It's not a good sign to see the Israeli officials, who confessed that the idea of a strong Turkey is keeping them awake at night, or some Western press, who are regarding the election results as the prevention of the next century's Selahaddin Eyyübi, sharing the same excitement as many segments in our country. The ones who possess this view are clearly enemies to their origins of Turkey, not AK Party.
It's thought-provoking for the enemy to find this many supporters from within Turkey. If the cost of overthrowing AK Party is equal to imprisoning Turkey to a complete mess, then we are face to face with a type of politics that will not abstain from demanding this and going down that road.
It's highly possible for a political field, which will perform the necessary sensitivity against this mandatory type of politics, to be revealed during coalition talks. The actual politicking will begin once the sides realize that they cannot destroy each other and they cannot advance by disregarding each other. This realization is making it necessary for everyone to make up their minds, even if we are not completely sure.
