Dr. Abdullah Bousouf, an expert in human sciences, said that the Turkish election campaign was known for its great use of the symbols of the Ottoman history, as it had all the elements of the battle of “breaking bones.” With the dictator and the tyrant, the Turkish president commented that the turnout rate, which is close to 90 percent, is a victory for democracy.
Boussouf explained, in an article obtained by Hespress entitled “Who Can Extinguish Recep Erdogan’s Lamp?”, that the justification for the media coverage that the elections received in Turkey is the central position that President Erdogan’s personality occupies at the level of the map of international relations and his power in making equations of the global system. the new.
He stressed that the Turkish voter will say his speech on May 28, and Turkey will give a new lesson in the electoral participation rate and democratic practice, at a time when some European democracies complain of electoral aversion and weak participation rates.
This is the text of the article:
The world awaits the second round of the Turkish presidential elections on May 28, after a difficult election day (May 14), when both President Erdogan (64 years) and opposition leader Kilicdaroglu (75 years) did not obtain results exceeding the threshold of 50 percent of the Turkish voter turnout.
The electoral campaign was known for its great employment of the symbols of the Ottoman history and the Turkish democratic accumulation, starting with the choice of the polling day, May 14 itself, and the visit of the opposition leader, Kilicdaroglu, to the tomb of Mustafa Atatürk, while President Erdogan prayed in the “Sofia” mosque, and all the messages of alignment and ideologies that these places carry. As well as victory and pride.
Many observers also described the Turkish election campaign as a battle of “breaking bones”, as all the elements of the battle were available, including accusations, exchanges, jostling, congestion, bargaining, promises, catching the other team’s mistakes, extensive use of all media and social networks, and mobilizing the armies of what is known as “media flies” and Erdogan’s duets. / Kilicdar… At a time when the opposition leader employed the space of the kitchen and onions as a reminder of the crisis of high prices and inflation, President Erdogan will respond to him by publishing his picture in military uniform with drone weapons behind him, as evidence of the development of the Turkish arms industry, which strengthened the Turkish presence in more than one hot spot in the world and brought Turkey / Erdogan into the club grown ups.
More than this, while the Turkish opposition media and some foreign platforms known for their hostility to the Turkish president marketed that Turkey “years for democracy,” and some of them described Erdogan as a dictator and tyrant, while others accused him of spreading “Islamic fascism.” President Erdogan commented that the turnout rate approached than 90 per cent is a victory for democracy.
We have followed the analyzes of some Western media platforms, where we felt a sense of mobilization and skepticism in favor of the opposition movement, and giving more media space to the opposition movement without the movement of the government coalition and Erdogan. Important spaces were also devoted to explaining the results of opinion polls and the anger of the residents of the areas affected by the February 2023 earthquake.
I believe that the justification for the strong media coverage of the elections in Turkey, whether during the campaign or during the announcement of the results, is due to the central position that President Erdogan occupies at the level of the map of international relations and his power in making the equations of the new world order. Therefore, publishing correspondents and accrediting senior journalists to cover results announcing the end of Erdogan’s reign, for example, is a journalistic scoop and a historical event, and at the same time announcing Erdogan’s victory is a historic event and a victory in a political, ideological and media battle. Therefore, Erdogan’s personality has been the starter and the news in all of Turkey’s elections for two decades. Was President Erdogan really defeated in the May 14 round?
First, the language of numbers says that Erdogan came outperforming his rival, Kilicdaroglu, by more than two and a half million voters. Add, secondly, that the government coalition won the majority of parliament seats, i.e. 323 out of 600 seats in parliament, which is an important indicator of the health of the Justice and Development Party despite inflation and the Turkish currency crisis, and despite the repercussions of the February earthquake and the bill of 50,000 dead and hundreds of victims… and a positive catalyst for the second round For May 28th. In addition, the language of numbers stated that the majority of the earthquake regions voted in favor of President Erdogan, which angered the opposition movement, which built its campaign on the repercussions of the earthquake and the call for the expulsion of Syrian refugees and migrants fleeing conflict zones and climate fluctuations.
Despite this positive reading of the outcome of the Erdogan movement, we felt the victory with a taste of bitterness, as asylum was registered for the second round for the first time during the era of President Erdogan. Erdogan’s great achievements during his two decades in power could have interceded for him in the decline of the Turkish currency against the US dollar, the rise in inflation and the decline in foreign investment rates.
They were also able to resolve the outcome with a historic participation of nearly 90 percent, especially since Erdogan’s campaign team was speaking the language of achievements and numbers and presenting projects, whether internally or externally, while the opposition campaign team was satisfied with the language of wishes and promises, without relying on numbers or social, cultural or economic maps. .
They could have decided the outcome on May 14 by carefully comparing Erdogan’s history and leadership personality, and the personality of Kilicdaroglu, whom some of the opposition movement described as lacking in “charisma.”
As we approach the 28th of May, the intensity of bickering and accusations of falsifying the results of the first round rise, and the call for a re-counting process, especially in the Kurdish and earthquake regions, and the accusation of the “Anatolia” media agency of favoring Erdogan’s movement over the “six-party table” movement. There are also high levels of rumors about the withdrawal of some opposition leaders, or the fragility of promises, treason, and collusion abroad.
As we approach the day of the second round, the clamor of the results and analyzes of opinion polls rises between those skeptical about Erdogan’s strength to stand firm and win, and those cheering the opposition’s victory and the advent of a new “democratic” era. This is with reference to the alerts of some observers and their saying that if the opposition wins, the political scene in Turkey will be paralyzed, as it will be divided between a legislative institution controlled by Erdogan’s coalition, and the institution of the presidency distributed between a president and several vice-presidents from the “six-party table.”
But what is certain is that the Turkish voter will say his final word on May 28, and Turkey will give a new lesson in the electoral participation rate and democratic practice, at a time when some European democracies complain of electoral aversion and weak participation rates. Who can extinguish the lamp of Recep Erdogan?