Whose problem is Kılıçdaroğlu's Alevism?

In these days when we are entering the last year before the Presidential Election, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has officially announced his own candidacy on behalf of the People's Alliance. Of course, it was somewhat of an announcement of the already known, because from the start the People's Alliance has had no problem regarding the candidate. Devlet Bahçeli, the alliance's partner, had long before said "our candidate is Erdoğan" anyway.

Yet the situation of the rival alliance in the race is still unclear. The meetings of the six that they hold to determine a candidate increase the uncertainty and disagreement each time.

Their job is truly very difficult. Determining a name that all six can agree on is not that easy. Perhaps the most reasonable course is for each of them to be a candidate in the first round and for them to agree on whoever receives the most votes. However, this path, which appears very reasonable and possible in theory and among those sitting at the table, does not appear equally reasonable and easy in the field. Because there is sociology in the field, and this sociology may not reach agreement as easily as political leaders do. A name like Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu had seemed very reasonable to the CHP leader as a figure who could compete with Erdoğan, but the questions that immediately came to the minds of the CHP base had not come to Kılıçdaroğlu's mind at the table.

Everything seen as an element of competition in that profile was in any case a feature in which Erdoğan represented the more genuine, the more authentic version. Did the only way to topple Erdoğan lie through bringing forward the person who most resembles Erdoğan? By doing so, the fact that Erdoğan is the most correct option in the current race was in any case being underlined.

THERE IS NO ESCAPE FROM ERDOĞAN

Let there be no doubt today: the personality sought at the table of six is the one who most resembles Erdoğan. But when you put forward such a personality, you have the handicap of having strengthened Erdoğan, that is, the more genuine, the more authentic, the more familiar and well-known one, even further. Whatever calculation is made, no way of escaping Erdoğan is in sight, and this settles on the atmosphere of the table of six like a nightmare.

Lately Kılıçdaroğlu cannot rein in his desire to be a candidate. In his demeanor, movements and attitudes, in his political rhetoric, he imitates Erdoğan, tries to resemble him. Both when attacking Erdoğan and when criticizing him he tries to follow his style, as best he can of course, and, being an imitation, he of course looks ill at ease. He has no success story in his life, and he inspires no confidence that he could do what he abundantly and easily promises.

Within the table of six, the one who would actually get the most votes if he ran, in the current situation, is Kılıçdaroğlu. But his partners at the table do not consider him sufficient despite all his efforts to imitate Erdoğan, and do not support his candidacy.

KILIÇDAROĞLU'S ALEVISM IS A PRETEXT

The view put forward a few days ago by İYİ Party Ankara MP Halil İbrahim Oral, that Kılıçdaroğlu's Alevism would prevent his being accepted by the Sunni segment, was in fact like a confession blurted out of what those at the table think and perhaps cannot say. Never mind Akşener's and the other partners' immediate race to correct and apologize. All of them in fact regard Kılıçdaroğlu's Alevism as an obstacle to gaining the support of a sufficient segment, and consider it one of the grounds for objecting to his presidential candidacy.

Yet until now no one from the AK Party side has raised the Alevism of Kılıçdaroğlu or of any other politician in their political criticisms of him. On the contrary, from the start the AK Party placed ensuring Alevis' freedom to express their own identity at the axis of its opening policies.

Perhaps it approached cautiously the question of recognizing cemevis as places of worship for some Alevis, but it also advocated recognizing all the rights granted to other sects and orders regarding Alevis' living out their own beliefs. Its not granting place-of-worship status was not in order to discriminate against Alevis but, on the contrary, because it saw a firmer way of preventing discrimination. It regarded Alevis as Muslims, as most Alevis see themselves, and regarded the demand for place-of-worship status as part of the plan of those who want to establish Alevism as a religion different from Islam. The AK Party side read very well the results of the many Alevi workshops, held under the coordination of Necdet Subaşı, who has a very good dialogue with Alevis, in which all Alevi spokespersons were heard. At no period in history have Alevis been addressed by the state with their Alevi identity, or shown respect, to this extent. Yet the CHP took in their identities only by ignoring them.

KILIÇDAROĞLU'S PROBLEM IS NOT BEING ALEVI, IT IS BEING A CHP MEMBER

Thus, what the AK Party did was in fact to take steps on the road to a society based on broader democratization, equal citizenship and freedom of belief. In Türkiye everyone, regardless of religious or ethnic identity, is an equal citizen of a democratic country, and everyone must be able to benefit from the rights granted by the constitution without compromising their belief, identity or personality.

Alevi identity is by no means a problem standing in the way of Kılıçdaroğlu's becoming a presidential candidate. If a problem is to be sought, it should be sought in his being the CHP chairman.

For example, if instead of Kılıçdaroğlu, someone else, say Deniz Baykal, were at the head of the CHP as an Alevi, would his candidacy be more acceptable? Of course not. The problem lies not in Kılıçdaroğlu's Alevism but, first of all, in the standing in society of the party he chairs. Another problem is that his political rhetoric and profile still cannot get close enough to Erdoğan, that is, that he has no success story that could get this or that close to Erdoğan, that no weight capable of competing with Erdoğan is seen in him. Otherwise, the reforms, openings and sociological transformation experienced during the AK Party period must have enabled us to overcome the Alevi problem, at least.