Focusing on the issue of party alliances in Turkey since 2017 includes an obligation rather than a choice. Whether a political party enters into an alliance or not is shaped not only by internal party decisions or expectations, but also by many different factors.
The most important motivation of the alliances that have been established or made efforts to establish is the efforts to establish a legitimate ground for themselves. This situation is directly valid for the current People's and Nation Alliance, and it also determines the direction of all alliance discussions today.
As it is known, the People's Alliance was established by trying to find a legitimate ground for itself through the "continuity of the state". Since 2018, all discourses are still built on this. In the Nation Alliance, the concern about the course of the country and the belief that the government was unable to govern the country formed the basis of legitimacy. Different opposition parties came together to form a bloc.
However, as of the point reached today, it is seen that there is a serious crisis of legitimacy in both alliances.
Why are they experiencing a crisis of legitimacy? Because they have no real ideals, goals or principles. That's why there are always contradictions between what they do and what they say.
It is necessary to be confident in order not to experience a legitimacy crisis. However, today's parties are not sure of themselves so that they can be accepted as "confident" in the eyes of the citizens! A leftist does not act like a leftist, a conservative as a conservative, a nationalist like a nationalist! He says that if we win the municipality, no one will lose their job, he starts the massacre as soon as he is elected. He talks about the protection of the family, the corruption of the crop and the generation, but he defends the Istanbul Convention, the Paris Climate Agreement!
He says that if we win, Jerusalem will win, and when the elections are over, he starts to say that we need to normalize with Israel! When he is not sure of himself, he starts to calculate, "How can I be legitimate in front of the citizens?"
The People's Alliance, formed by AKP and MHP, is trying to include new parties other than BBP in order to give the appearance of a nationalist-conservative bloc to overcome this crisis. On the other hand, in the Nation Alliance formed by CHP and Good Party, even interesting formulas such as "alliance within alliance" are brought to the agenda. It is assumed that this will convince the voters who do not want to vote for the Nation Alliance due to the existence of HDP and CHP. Although there are initiatives of various parties such as Future and DEVA in this mobility process seen in the two alliance blocks, the most important party that will determine the real positioning is undoubtedly the Felicity (Saadet) Party.
Because Saadet Party, due to its political background, is the only party that has the potential to form the basis of legitimacy for alliances. For example, Future and DEVA do not have such a feature. This is because these parties cannot overcome the credibility problem in the first place, since they were founded only by those who started speaking after being removed from the AKP.
Moreover, the AKP's share in the economy and foreign policy scorecard is also worth mentioning. I do not say this in terms of throwing the responsibility on these names, I am just ascertaining the fact, because they still believe that the policies of that period were correct. Returning to the subject, the Saadet Party's participation in the People's Alliance is important in that it directs those who think of breaking away from the AK Party to reconsider their decisions, rather than the rate of votes it will gain.
Because the Saadet Party's strong inclusion in the alliance will open the door to a belief that the AKP will return to the National Vision codes, and in this way, an environment of trust in the eyes of AKP voters.
Likewise, when Saadet Party decides to take part in the Nation Alliance, the concerns of the voters who do not consider voting due to the rhetoric of the strict secularist sections within the CHP and the presence of the HDP will be greatly reduced.
A Nation alliance without Saadet Party will not be a preferable alternative for voters who intend to break away from the AKP. Therefore, unless there is a serious surprise development, the results of an election to be entered in this atmosphere will not cause any change. On the other hand, a third alliance that will be formed by right-wing parties under the leadership of Saadet Party will not have legitimacy problems and will be preferable. Finally, when Saadet Party does not enter into any alliance, the legitimacy crisis of alliances will become more visible. For this reason, the positioning of Saadet Party will be very decisive for itself, for Turkey and for world politics.
Why do I say world politics, because in an environment where politics is drowned in "alliance" discussions, seeing the issues only through alliance negotiations means "to fall into the current error". National Vision followers know that the election results in Turkey also shape the plans of Zionism.
Assuming that foreign militaries remain bystanders in the process of establishing and shaping alliances means being imprisoned in the current delusion. It is thought that the last local elections and the developments after it provide an opportunity to raise awareness at a sufficient level in this sense. So much so that our Erbakan Hodja's statements that "other parties are no different from each other" have once again been strongly documented.