On the impact of foreign interference in the Turkish elections

As in previous elections, interest in the upcoming elections in Turkey goes beyond its geographical borders, as the attention of many in the region and the world is focused on its course and expected results, and the level of interest increases due to the state of intense competition and close opportunities between competitors for the first time to this degree.

While the interest seems logical and justified, there is some discussion about the possibility of external interference to influence the outcome of the election, especially with the Turkish foreign minister saying in this regard.

The idea of foreign interference in the elections is popular due to the tension in Turkey's relations in recent years with a number of regional and international parties, and the dissatisfaction of many of them with the policies of the Turkish president or his person.

Soylu Declaration

A few days ago, in an election activity, Interior Minister and Justice and Development Party candidate for parliamentary elections, Suleiman Soylu, said that May 14, the date of the elections, is an attempt at a political coup from the West after he failed in the military coup in 2016.

The statement sparked great controversy, as the opposition considered it an indication that Erdogan and the Justice and Development Party (AKP) do not intend to hand over power if they lose the elections, while the ruling party circles circulated it as a possibility of foreign interference in the upcoming elections.

The minister recalled US President Joe Biden's statements when he was still a presidential candidate, that his country should support the Turkish opposition to topple Erdogan, and when asked about that, he said that he meant to overthrow him in the elections. Hence, the minister saw that the opposition alliance and its agreement on a consensus candidate (which it could not do in the previous elections), and its coordination to this degree among themselves, are merely a reflection of Biden's words or a practical application of them.

In a subsequent interview with Haberturk, Soylu said his party would respect the voter's decision, but that it was his duty to clarify the issue regarding this voter's possible foreign interventions, i.e., he reaffirmed the narrative of external interference.

In the same context, the statements of the Turkish president, who criticized the words of the opposition People's Alliance candidate, Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, about securing foreign investments of $ 300 billion, which Turkey will come in the event of his victory, can be put in the context of external interventions in favor of one party over another.

These statements add to some recent talk in pro-Turkish circles about a Western role in supporting the opposition, especially the mayor of Istanbul Greater Istanbul, Ekrem Imamoglu, when he was a potential candidate for the presidential elections, such as the latter's meeting with ambassadors of some Western countries. There were also unconfirmed rumors that Western parties had a role in the six-party consensus after the Good Party left it following the selection of Kılıçdaroğlu as the consensus candidate for the presidency.

The Minister of the Interior also made the last reference at the aforementioned meeting, who said that he had confirmed information by audio recording that the six-party table had sent a delegation to the ambassador of one of the European Union countries, to inform him of a common text that they had agreed upon.

The idea of foreign interference in the elections is also popular due to Turkey's tense relations in recent years with a number of regional and international parties, many of which are dissatisfied with the policies of the Turkish president and/or his person. In addition to Western media campaigns attacking Erdogan before each election, the latest of which was the cover of the London newspaper The Economist a few days ago about "the most important elections in 2023", which called for the victory of the opposition and the overthrow of Erdogan using phrases such as "Save democracy" and "Erdogan must go."

To what extent can external interference affect the upcoming electoral process?

The role of the outside

The idea of foreign interference in Turkish elections can be discussed on three levels: desire, seeking, and influence. That is, are there any motives for external parties to want to influence the outcome of the upcoming elections, are there any of them who have made an effort in this regard, and finally, and most importantly, to what extent they seem to be able to influence the results?

Before considering these levels, it should be noted some important data in the hands of the assessment: the first is that foreign policy usually has limited impact in Turkish elections, and in the upcoming elections it is less present and influential due to the weight of internal files, such as the economy, earthquake, refugees, alliances, and others. Second, the polarization between the government and the opposition over foreign policy has subsided in the past two years after Ankara rapprochement with a number of regional parties. Third, tensions with the United States in particular have eased relatively through some Turkish steps, the latest of which is the approval of Finland's membership in NATO. Finally, some, perhaps most, foreign interventions tend to backfire: rally more around Erdogan.

With regard to the United States in particular, where the Turkish interior minister's statements referred to it directly, tension has been the most prominent feature of its relations with Turkey over the past years, more precisely with Erdogan. However, recent months have brought some variables, such as Ankara's agreement to Finland to join NATO, and Washington is accustomed to managing relations with Erdogan, his style and maneuvers, and therefore may not necessarily want an alternative that does not guarantee how he will manage the relationship or whether he will succeed. One indication of the relative change of the US position on Erdogan is Washington's agreement in the middle of last month – that is, in the context of the elections – to sell communication system modernization kits, equipment and defense services to modernize its F-16 fighter jet fleet.

On the other hand, Russia is implicitly willing for the Turkish president to continue in office because of his balanced position in the Russian-Ukrainian war, good bilateral relations, and so on, in exchange for the Turkish opposition's statements to return to the traditional position closer to the West. Putin's participation in the opening of the Akkuyu nuclear plant, postponing part of the outstanding payments of the Russian natural gas bill, and accelerating the path of rapprochement with the Syrian regime can be read as tacit support steps for Erdogan.

Some other regional powers that may have a vision or interest in the victory of one side or the other do not seem to have the tools of influence as Washington and Moscow. With the short time remaining until the elections, the chances of intervening to influence do not appear to be great, except for direct intervention to harm the economy, in theory, which is a very low probability on the one hand and may not have a significant impact on the other.

Therefore, the internal dynamics appear to be the most important and present and influential in the upcoming Turkish elections. As for the external factor, it is present at the level of motivation and desire, as well as at the level of pursuit and effort such as coordination efforts between the opposition parties (if confirmed) and so on. As for the impact, especially what could change the results of the elections, there are no clear indicators in this direction, but perhaps there are indicators in the opposite direction, as it was widely estimated that some external forces prefer to run in the elections against Erdogan as a consensus candidate for the opposition, but Kılıçdaroğlu imposed himself on his party and the six-party table in a way that almost led to the dissolution of the latter, and this is a factor within par excellence.

One of the indicators of this is the heat of electoral campaigns and the great effort made by candidates for the presidential elections in particular, as they conduct an average of 3-4 electoral festivals in different governorates daily, as well as electoral promises that race to raise the ceiling of government services and spending and achieve the demands of voters in an unprecedented manner and at levels that do not compare with the promises of the last elections, sensing that the final decision is in the hands of the voter, who will determine the president of the country and the composition of parliament in a few days.

For all of the above, the influence of external powers on the course of the upcoming Turkish elections and their results is limited. While the margins of influence in these elections are relatively larger than in the past due to economic conditions and the unity of the opposition and the unity of the competition, they nevertheless remain much lower and perhaps marginal compared to the crucial internal dynamics in the course of the elections, as always.