Proces ewolucji systemu partyjnego w Turcji po II wojnie światowej

ONCE MAKING RESEARCH on the Turkish Political system, there are many doubts concerning its nature. While some scholars as Schumpeter claim that the institutional prerequisites, amongst which periodical elections can be outlined as one of the most significant, are sufficient in placing Turkey next to developed, western democracies, others refute this approach, claiming that the respect of civil rights, or the existence of a mature civil society, are more important issues and aft er the assessment with respect of them, the authoritarian features of Turkey seem to be paramount. While the issues in regime classification are dubious, certain matters remain obvious. First of all, modern Turkey had been founded on the Ideology of Kemalism, which enforced a transformation „from above” rather than one deriving from the society. Secondly, the Islamic and militaristic traditions, the result of a long, historical process are strongly rooted in the mentality of both the elites and the ordinary citizens place Turkey in a context considerably different from that of most of the European states. Both of the above mentioned factors turn out to be serious impediments in the quest for effective democratization. In addition another feature of Kemilism – westernization, namely the prompt adaptation of western institutions and procedures, also doesn’t seem provisional for the development of a genuine democratic regime, as certain practices and procedures are completely alien and to a large extend contrary to Turkish traditions and culture. The Turkish political reality and the nature of the political system can be understood only in reference to the earlier mentioned problems, as the most important political cleavages were a natural consequence of the wider cultural and historical context. The most important division between the center, represented by the groups adhering to secularism and Kemalism, namely the state elites and the military, and the periphery, devoted to the strongly rooted Islamist ideology, seem to be the most significant platforms of political competition and exist in Turkey ever since the reforms of Atatürk gave birth to the Turkish nation. In addition it is also noteworthy to mention, that the clash between the center and periphery also couples with the geographical and social stratifications in which the parties defending the ideology of Kemalism, for example The Republican Party (CHP) and the populist Party (SHP) represent mostly the cities and richer regions of Turkey, while the urban, poorer regions are represented by rightist parties as The democratic Party (DP), Motherland Party (ANAP), the True Path Party (DYP), or the previously ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP). Another important factor which has to be explained is the fact, that on both sides, mostly after the first military intervention in 1960, there is a significant amount of anti-system parties, from which the extreme rightist parties seem to be more vocal than those from the opposite part of the political stratum. The phenomenon of political Islam is an issue which is most concerning, as the AKP, which is the leading party in Turkey since 2002, is strongly representing the ideology of Islam. As long as the more moderate AKP remains continues ruling, the Turkish process of democratization doesn’t seem to be threatened. However, due to the fact, that the rightist electorate’s support is not yet stabilized, the menace of extremist Islamists gaining power seems to be an option.