Were you under tutelage?

Were you under tutelage?

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) has used the time of the peace process to pile up arms and that they stocked weapons in very serious dimensions.

This is not new information. This information was served to the pro-government media in the days when PKK attacks began ascending. 

When the president was delivering this statement on the “pool” television, he said, “Here, during this process, our security forces indeed engaged in not pressing any clashes or any kind of armed struggle but we understood later that they have done this during that period.”

I understand the following from the president’s words: During the peace process, the PKK’s acts, stocking of weapons and recruits were not prevented because “security forces” decided to do so. 

The president was the prime minister then and as far as we know this order was issued to security forces as a “political order.” 

Now, in the light of the dimension terror attacks have reached, the president is trying to put the responsibility on the “security forces.” 

He is trying to free himself of the political responsibility from the mistake he made. While he is doing this, he looks as if there was some kind of security force tutelage on the political will and that he had accepted it. 

Well, weren’t all kinds of tutelages over the political structure removed during the Justice and Development Party (AKP) rule? 

Political uncertainty 

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan asked, “If Turkey is in political uncertainty today, is the ruling party or one man responsible for this? Don’t the opposition parties, with their showdowns and patronizing attitudes, have any responsibility?”

Thus he is trying to free himself from the responsibility of a coalition government failed and a Turkey fallen into political uncertainty until new elections.

On the night of June 7, the fact emerged that no coalition government would be formed without the AKP. It was not difficult to see that the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) would never be in the same government. There were two governing alternatives left: An AKP and Republican People’s Party (CHP) coalition or an AKP and MHP coalition. 

But the palace had already decided on early election on that very night and for this reason, talks with CHP never contained any compromise effort for a coalition. 

At the end, they offered a coalition with a three-month duration.  

Is this not patronizing or what? The president said opposition parties were in pursuit of settling accounts.

Obviously we will be hearing this speech frequently during the election campaign.

This is indeed easier than explaining to the voter why they failed to form the government even though they came out to be the first party from the election.