Last week was almost the longest and most tragic week in Turkey's modern history, due to the devastating earthquake that struck the south of the country and created a humanitarian catastrophe that the country had not witnessed for nearly a century.

In this great ordeal, national unity was supposed to prevail in place of political polarization, and that there would be no place to talk about politics, at least until the completion of the extraction of those trapped from under the rubble, the burial of the bodies of the dead, and the transfer of the homeless from their destroyed homes to temporary housing, but that did not happen. It totally happens.

The leaders of the opposition parties, including the leader of the Republican People's Party, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, who is presenting himself as a candidate for the presidential elections, were quick to direct criticism towards President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, holding him responsible for the disaster, and accusing his government of failing to manage relief and lack of necessary preparation before the disaster.

For two decades, Erdogan has been distinguished by his insistence on implementing large construction projects, but the time factor may not be appropriate for him this time to show his ability to recover from the disaster, in light of the fact that the next elections have less than 3 months left.

Although Erdogan himself acknowledged the existence of gaps in the relief process, and attributed them to reasons such as the great damage caused by the earthquake and the difficult climatic factors that complicated the rapid arrival of relief teams to all affected areas, criticism of the opposition seemed mainly motivated by what it believes is an opportunity to mobilize opinion. The year is behind her before the elections, which are supposed to take place in the next few months.

From the first moment, the disaster brought with it big and difficult questions about its expected impact on domestic politics, and imposed a new challenge on Erdogan at a time when he was preparing for his most difficult electoral test in his political career.

Turkey has a not too distant experience with a similar natural disaster that occurred more than two decades ago when a devastating earthquake struck the Marmara region, killing 17,000 people, and had deep political repercussions that paved the way for Erdogan to come to power after 3 years.

The weak response of the state at the time in managing the disaster was a major reason for that political shift.

Although Erdogan's administration so far of the disaster of the February 6 earthquake cannot be compared at all to the management of the 1999 disaster, it may lead to a similar political result if he does not succeed in managing the process of recovering from it quickly.

Some of the immediate damage to Erdogan may not be repairable, especially in light of the questions raised about the poor quality of many of the buildings that collapsed in the earthquake. However, transparency in holding officials accountable and good management and speedy recovery from the disaster will limit the damage.

Erdogan has successful experiences in dealing with natural disasters and recovering from them.

However, the current disaster is very large in terms of its human losses and material damage, which affected an area estimated at 500 square kilometers, and it constitutes about 10% of the gross domestic product.

Nearly 20 million people were affected by the earthquake.

Recovering from the disaster and reducing its repercussions for Erdogan will require showing determination to hold accountable those responsible for the corrupt construction work that exacerbated the human losses and immediately embarking on a massive reconstruction of the stricken areas, and the required allocation of tens of billions of dollars will be added to the other financial burdens facing the state budget resulting from Large spending on economic stimulus packages and salary increases to counter inflation.

For two decades, Erdogan has been distinguished by his insistence on implementing large construction projects, but the time factor may not be appropriate for him this time to show his ability to recover from the disaster, given that the next elections have less than 3 months left if their date is advanced to Next May 14, as Erdogan previously promised.

Here, another potential impact of the earthquake on the political scene emerges, centering around the future of the elections themselves, and whether they will actually be held under these circumstances.

There are 3 scenarios that determine the fate of the upcoming elections, and all of them involve political risks for Erdogan, albeit to varying degrees:


First, that Erdogan proceeds with a decision to advance the election date to next May 14, which is an option that has become less likely due to the new circumstances imposed by the earthquake disaster. on internal priorities.

Secondly, Erdogan abandoned the option of early elections and held them instead on their original date on June 18, which gives him an additional month to deal with the repercussions of the earthquake.

In addition to the fact that an additional month will not be sufficient for the president to reduce the possible repercussions of the disaster on his electoral chances, this option is not without other risks.

Taking into account the importance of the economic circumstance in Erdogan's previous desire to advance the date of the elections, the recovery from the earthquake disaster will exacerbate the economic pressures.

The third scenario is the postponement of the elections.

Although Article 78 of the constitution allows the elections to be postponed for only one year due to the war, one of the options offered is for the ruling party to search for other ways to postpone the elections and a decision to do so by the Supreme Elections Council, especially since the council’s decisions cannot be appealed before the judiciary or any other authority under the Constitution.

However, the possibility of postponing the elections may create a constitutional debate over the authority entrusted with making the decision, which deepens the political and societal polarization.

Although the date on which the next elections will be held will mainly determine the extent of the potential damage to Erdogan as a result of the earthquake disaster, the disaster imposed a major shift in internal priorities and will dominate political and electoral discussions from now on.

Erdogan has always been adept at turning major crises into opportunities to enhance his political presence.

For example, a year after thwarting the failed military coup attempt in 2016, he was able to pass a constitutional referendum to switch to the presidential system, then succeeded in being re-elected as President of the Republic the following year.

However, his ability to limit the repercussions of the earthquake disaster on his political future, or turn it into an opportunity to enhance his image at home as a strong leader capable of dealing with crises of this magnitude, depends primarily on how he responds immediately and long-term.

In light of the fact that the sure consequences of any failure to manage the disaster will be costly for Erdogan, his current main priority will focus first on limiting the social and economic damage in the affected areas, and secondly blocking the way for opposition parties to exploit this crisis and turn it into a new electoral advantage for them, which cannot be achieved. He did it without showing full transparency in holding those responsible for the exacerbation of human losses accountable and initiating a rapid reconstruction.

As for the opposition, its ability to consolidate its political position after the disaster of the earthquake depends on the outcome of Erdogan's dealings with it and not on its rhetorical skill in criticizing the president and his government.