The presidentialization of Turkey during the administration of R.T. Erdogan: opportunities and limitations

The article examines the evolution of the Turkish form of government as a unique case of rapid presidentialization, reflected both in the practical content of the relationship between the branches of government and the constitutional rules of the game in the triangle «President – Parliament – government». The specifics of the process of presidentialization are investigated within the framework of a neoinstitutional approach. The constitutional and legal aspects of the relationship between the branches of government, historical determinants, the specifics of the party system and the interaction of the head of state and the government, and external influence are analyzed. The «path of dependence» of the Turkish system is represented by the historical competition of projects for the personification of power, parliamentarism and military rule. At the beginning of the XXI century, the period of fragmentation of the party system of the 1990 s was replaced by the dominance of the Justice and Development Party of R.T. Erdogan in the legislature, which laid the foundation for personification. After the consolidation of state bodies under the control of the AKP, there was a consistent decrease in the autonomy of prime ministers. In the constitutional dimension, there has been a transformation of the institutional design from a parliamentary republic to a presidentialized system with the monism of the executive branch and the establishment of the interdependence of the political destinies of the president and parliament. One of the conditions for the success of the transit was the elimination of the political role and autonomy of military institutions, which for almost 100 years acted as a controller of social development. By the 2020 s, the answer to the concentration of power resources in the hands of R.T. Erdogan's goal was to consolidate and increase the representation of the parliamentary opposition in the VNST, which, combined with the inertia of the army's view of its own political role, creates the likelihood of a revision of the form of government. The main factors of the stability of the presidentialized form of government will be the ability to overcome the manifestations of the socio-economic crisis, the historical inertia of the political role of the army, and the crisis of leadership during the transit of presidential power. The study of the factors of presidentialization identified in the framework of the study can be used in analyzing the evolution of semi-presidential republics, including the post-Soviet space.

1. Avatkov V.A., Sbitneva A.I. Turkey in the modern world: between democracy and authoritarianism. Current problems of Europe. 2023, N 1, Р. 270–288. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31249/ape/2023.01.12 (In Russ.)

2. Avatkov V.A. The Turkish Republic. Domestic policy: from 2002 to 2018 – Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Iurait, 2020, 203 p. (In Russ.)

3. Aytaс G. Analysis of Turkey's security policies in the period 1990–2005 through changing security theories. Journal of international social research. 2017, Vol. 10, N 54, Р. 269–278.

4. Bakharev A.A., Kuznetsov I.I. Interaction of the President, government and Parliament in semi-presidential systems: a comparative analysis of the experience of Russia, Ukraine and Turkey. Political science (RU). 2019, N 4, Р. 112–113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31249/poln/2019.04.03 (In Russ.)

5. Duran B., Mis N. Turkey’s presidential system: Model and practices. Ankara: T SET Vakfı İktisadi İşletmesi, 2018, 280 p.

6. Duverger M. A new political system model: Semi-presidential government, European journal of political research, 1980, Vol. 8, N 2, P. 165–187.

7. Elgie R. (ed.). Semi-presidentialism in Europe. Oxford: Oxford university press, 1999, 320 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/0198293860.001.0001

8. Farrell B. Chairman or Chief?: the role of Taoiseach in Irish Government. Dublin: Gill and MacMillan, 1971, 110 p.

9. Gülener S., Miş N. Constitutional framework of executive presidency in Turkey. SETA analysis. 2017, N 190, Р. 1–32.

10. Gur S. Presidentialism: what it holds for the future of Turkey: a dissertation. Louisiana: Louisiana state university, 2015, 150 p.

11. Kharitonova O.G. The crisis evolution of the Turkish political system. The Journal of political theory, political philosophy and sociology of politics Politeia. 2018, N 3 (90), Р. 181–205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2018-90-3-181-205 (In Russ.)

12. Linders N. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan: leadership style and sensitivity to role change and traumatic events: bachelor thesis. Leiden: Leiden university, 2017, 32 p.

13. Medushevsky A.N. Theory of constitutional cycles. Polis. Political studies. 2006, N 2, Р. 51–59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2006.02.05 (In Russ.)

14. Panov P.V. Institutionalism of rational choice. In: Patrushev S.V. (ed.). Institutional political science: Modern institutionalism and political transformation of Russia. Moscow: ISP RAN, 2006, Р. 43–92. (In Russ.)

15. Poguntke T. The presidentialization of parliamentary democracies: A contradiction in terms?: Paper prepared for presentation at the ECPR workshop «The presidentialization of parliamentary democracies?», Copenhagen, 2000. – Р. 19.

16. Poguntke T., Webb P. The presidentialization of politics in democratic societies: A framework for analysis. In: Poguntke T., Webb P. (eds). The presidentialization of politics: a comparative study of modern democracies. New York: Oxford university press, 2005, Р. 1–25.

17. Sadykova L.R. Islamic Renaissance in Turkey on the border of the XX-XXI centuries. MGIMO review of international relations. 2009, N 5, Р. 149–157. (In Russ.)

18. Sartori G. Comparative constitutional engineering: an inquiry into structures, incentives, and outcomes. NYU Press, 1997, 217 p.

19. Shlykov P.V. Military elite and political power in Turkey in the 2000 s: a paradigm shift? Russia and the Moslem world. 2013, N 4 (250), Р. 107–109. (In Russ.)

20. Shlykov P.V. The Army and the military elite in the context of Turkey's political transdormation in the 2000 s and 2010 s. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 13. Vostokovedenie. 2020, N 1, Р. 121–136. (In Russ.)

21. Shugart M.S., Carey J.M. Presidents and assemblies: Constitutional design and electoral dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992, 316 p.

22. Zaznaev O.I. Understanding the forms of government in modern political science: the latest discussions. Political science (RU). 2014, N 1, Р. 10–33. (In Russ.)

23. Zubkova A.I. «Taksim is everywhere, resistance is everywhere»: a political analysis of the protests in Turkey. RUDN Journal of political science. 2013, N 4, Р. 68–70. (In Russ.)