Sul numero di giugno ho iniziato una nuova collaborazione su Longitude, il mensile italiano dedicato alla politica internazionale (vanta molte firme prestigiose).
Nel mio primo articolo per loro ho analizzato le ragioni che determinano le continue vittorie elettorali del presidente Erdoğan. Ovviamente, tra queste non ci sono i brogli o le irregolarità messe in evidenza dai soliti noti (il fenomeno è fisiologico, ma ha una portata del tutto marginale): e riguardano invece più che altro fattori sociologici di lungo periodo, oltre che la comprovata capacità di offrire servizi e buona amministrazione.
LEGGI ANCHE: Perché Erdogan non è certo di vincere (su Aspenia)
Vi riporto alcuni passaggi chiave, per leggere l’articolo – anche online – bisogna essere abbonati alla rivista.
President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has won again; this time he has won twice, on the same day. On June 24th, Turkey went to the polls for the most critical (snap) elections of the country’s recent history. Turkish citizens had to choose its first President with formal executive powers and to renew its monocameral Parliament; most importantly, they had to decide between the transition to a fully-implemented presidential system – as determined through constitutional amendments and a referendum last year – and the return to old-style parliamentarianism as proposed by Erdoğan’s opponents.
But why does Erdoğan keep winning elections and referendums one after the other? He could also survive almost unscathed – politically, then physically – the popular street protests of Gezi Park in 2013 and the military golpe in 2016. His many rivals and some independent experts point to his huge asymmetric access to media and public resources that makes uneven the electoral playing field, or even to irregularities in the electoral process itself (in fact, more sporadic than widespread); moreover, the state of emergency introduced after the coup d’état led to some further restrictions for his opponents and to a relentless crackdown on the HDP.
Over a 16-year period he has assured stability against internal and external threats, political dignity and relevance for the more religious segment of society, nationalist pride with giant infrastructural projects, consolidated economic development that led a new and prosperous middle class to arise out of poverty, the extension of welfare benefits and healthcare to all. He has presided over a transformative process, “a silent revolution”, that has brought the conservatives from Anatolia and the peripheries of the big cities to the political and economic core of the country.