BY IBRAHIM KALIN
TODAY'S ZAMAN- Now that the constitutional amendments have passed with 58 percent of the vote what will be next on Turkey's agenda. While the referendum is a major victory for Turkish democracy and the Erdogan government, the underlying fault lines of Turkish politics, with its fragile alignments, are still in place and point to a difficult period for consensus building on the country's key issues.
EU officials and European political leaders, including German Foreign Minister Westerwelle, welcomed the changes as a step that will bring Turkey closer to its EU membership goal. The changes do indeed raise the standards of democracy, transparency and civil liberties in Turkey. Yet, given the skepticism of the "no" camp, the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government will have to continue to explain what the amendments will mean for Turkey.
The foreign media gave huge coverage to the referendum and its results. From The New York Times to El Pais of Spain, most foreign media interpreted the "yes" vote as a positive step for Turkish democracy. Perhaps the most striking headline came from Haaretz writing that "Victory in Turkey referendum makes Erdogan second only to Ataturk." The headline refers to Erdogan's fifth electoral success in a row since he took office in 2002.
Many see this as an important component of Turkey's economic success under the AK Party. This is also a key element for the new dynamism of Turkish foreign policy. Turkish politics has faced the chronic problem of coalition governments in the past, and one cannot find even one successful example where coalition governments have produced economic development or political stability. Many foreign investors see the referendum result as a positive development; now they can continue to have confidence in the Turkish economy.
In domestic politics, the ruling AK Party has certainly won an important victory just eight or nine months before elections next year. Faced with the fierce opposition of nationalists and secularists, the party will now have more self-confidence in electoral politics and continue to carry out political reforms to the extent that is possible in an election year. But turning this referendum into a vote of confidence for Prime Minister Erdogan and his government was the biggest mistake of the opposition parties.
Now the most important challenge for the AK Party is to manage the growing divide between the yes and no votes in Turkey. Not unlike the anti-Obama attitude of Tea Party members in the US, the anti-AK Party segments of Turkish society feel an existential threat in the AK Party's growing electoral base and reformist policies. Much of those feelings are misplaced and reflect the petty realities of party politics. But the debate about the future course of Turkey is real and will shape the dynamics of Turkish politics in the years to come. In his speech on the evening of the referendum, Erdogan reached out to those who voted no and promised to work together with everyone to build a stronger Turkey. Whether this call will be taken up or not will have serious implications.
In his short statement, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, the new leader of the Republican People's Party (CHP), expressed his satisfaction with the 42 percent "no" vote. But the fact is that he has been handed his second defeat after his bid to be mayor of Istanbul in last year's municipal elections. It remains to be seen if CHP cadres will move on with him or seek a new leader for the 2011 elections. The fact that Kilicdaroglu was unable to cast his vote because he was not registered was probably the biggest joke of this referendum.
Devlet Bahceli, the leader of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), is likely to lose his seat as party chairman in the next elections. Bahçeli had the hardest time explaining his "no position" to his constituency, a constituency that has experienced the hardships of the 1980 military coup and the uneven structure of the judiciary. The referendum results confirm that a considerable part of the nationalist base voted yes. Even Bahceli's own district, Osmaniye, voted more yes than no. In his referendum statement, Bahceli rejected the referendum results as a step that will "bring Turkey into darkness." This attitude is likely to create a further gap between Bahceli's leadership and nationalist voters.
The opposition parties' all-or-nothing style of opposition contributes to the ideological divide and makes it next to impossible to seek nationwide consensus on Turkey's key issues. Such issues as writing a new constitution, developing the political reforms needed for Turkey's EU membership and resolving the Kurdish issue all call for a broad-based consensus in Turkish politics. Needless to say, this is a major task and will require the political wisdom and leadership of all actors. Consensus building has never been easy in Turkey. But this is precisely what Turkey needs to chart a new course.