AKP’s Hegemony and Democratic Consolidation

  • E. Fuat Keyman
  • Sebnem Gumuscu
Part of the Islam and Nationalism Series book series (INAT)


This chapter discusses the implications of AKP’s hegemony for democratic consolidation in Turkey and argues that the power of the AKP, stemming from its transformative role in Turkey’s modernization and globalization, has not paved the way to consolidation of democracy, despite the initial democratic reforms the party implemented in its first term in office. On the contrary, the more the AKP has become powerful, the more its relation to democracy has become instrumental and majoritarian. Its electoral hegemony helped the party to successfully challenge the balance of power between the state and the government, evident in the process of civilianization; yet the same electoral hegemony also allowed the party to monopolize power and eliminate checks over it. Moreover, the AKP has not furthered and upgraded Turkish democracy by making it more pluralistic and participatory; instead, the AKP experience has involved what can be called the “instrumentalization of democracy”; first, by reducing democracy to parliamentary majoritarianism, second, by privileging a specific and religious right-claims and freedoms over the others, even to the degree of discrimination. 1 Hence democracy deficit characterized one of the main dimensions of the AKP experience, clearly evident in democratic erosion in key areas such as freedom of expression, information, assembly, and association, demonstrating that the normative commitment to democracy and the strong will for consolidating Turkish democracy constitute the limit of this experience.


Foreign Policy Power Fusion Military Coup Incumbent Party State Elite 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 2.
    Ergun Ozbudun, Contemporary Turkish Politics (Boulder: Lynee Rienner, 2000).Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    Menderes Cinar, “The Electoral Success of the AKP: Causes for Hope and Despair,” Insight Turkey, 13 (Fall 2011): 107–127.Google Scholar
  3. 5.
    Cinar, “The Electoral Success of the AKP,” 114; Ahmet Kuru, “The Rise and Fall of Military Tutelage in Turkey: Fears of Islamism, Kurdism, and Communism,” Insight Turkey, 14 (2) (2012): 44.Google Scholar
  4. 7.
    Ibid.; Zeki Sarigil, “Civil-Military Relations beyond Dichotomy: With Special Reference to Turkey,” Turkish Studies, 12 (2) (2011): 265–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 8.
    Ali Carkoglu and Binnaz Toprak, Religion Society and Politics in Changing Turkey (Istanbul: TESEV Publications, 2007).Google Scholar
  6. 13.
    The founding ideology of the Republic, Kemalism, which is a project of republican modernization formulated by Kemal Ataturk, is built on six main principles: republicanism, nationalism, populism, etatism, secularism, and reformism-revolutionism. In the Kemalist ideology, elites are considered to be agents of change in the country bringing “modernity,” economic development, and prosperity to the masses. See Umit Cizre-Sakallioglu, “Parameters and Strategies of Islam-State Interaction in Republican Turkey,” International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 28 (May 1996): 231–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 16.
    Muftuler-Bac and Keyman , “Turkey under the AKP: The Era of Dominant-Party Politics.” Journal of Democracy, 23 (1) (January 2012): 85–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 25.
    E. Fuat Keyman, “Modernization, Globalization and Democratization in Turkey: The AKP Experience and its Limits,” Constellations, 17 (2) (2010): 100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 26.
    Akin Unver, “Clash of Communities: Turkey’s Dormant Domestic Cold War,” Political Reflection Quarterly Journal, 1 (Spring 2011): 2–3.Google Scholar
  10. 28.
    Hasan Bulent Kahraman, Sosyal Demokrasi Düşüncesi ve Türkiye Pratiği (Istanbul: Sodev, 2000);Google Scholar
  11. Suat Kiniklioglu, “The Democratic Left Party: Kapikulu Politics Par Excellence,” Turkish Studies, 3 (2002): 4–24;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ayse Gunes-Ayata, “The Republican People’s Party,” Turkish Studies, 3 (2002): 102–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 29.
    E. Fuat Keyman and Ziya Onis, “Globalization and Social Democracy in the European Periphery: Paradoxes of the Turkish Experience,” Globalizations, 4 (2) (2007): 211–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 42.
    Charles Tilly, Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), p. 14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© E. Fuat Keyman and Sebnem Gumuscu 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Fuat Keyman
    • 1
  • Sebnem Gumuscu
    • 2
  1. 1.Istanbul Policy CenterSabanci UniversityTurkey
  2. 2.Sabanci UniversityTurkey

Personalised recommendations