Any serious analysis of the Republican People's Party must first confront the reality of how this party has positioned itself. Because the CHP has never been just a political party in Turkey; it has defined itself as a project of political morality, a regime-building subject and the representative of social conscience. This claim goes beyond ordinary political competition and is based on a direct promise of “difference”. In other words, CHP does not only ask for votes from voters; it also demands the belief that “we are different from others”.
This is precisely why today's events cannot be explained away as simple mistakes, isolated incidents or temporary crises. Because the issue here is not performance, but credibility. The moment a political movement begins to contradict its own claims, the problem is no longer technical but existential.
- The congress claimed to solve this existential crisis. The discourse of “change” promised not only a change of leader, but also a redefinition of political reflexes, institutional patterns of behavior and ethical boundaries. But one of the harshest truths of political theory is this: Change is measured not by rhetoric, but by the response to crisis.
And today that measurement has been made.
The conclusion is clear: Change has not taken place. Moreover, the claim of change has produced a new contradiction. Because the new administration, far from overcoming old reflexes, reproduces them faster, harder and more uncontrolled.
At this point, in order to understand the picture that emerges, it is necessary to look not at individual incidents, but at the recurring pattern. Kuşadası, Marmaris, Uşak... Different cities, different actors, but the same content, the same defense language, the same reflex.
Repetition in politics is no coincidence.
Repetition is character.
If similar crises occur in the same way at different times and in different places, this is no longer an “exception”. It is a structure. And this structure points to an institutional problem that goes beyond individual failures.
But the real breaking point is not even here.
The real break is in the reaction to these events.
Today, the CHP's reaction has turned into an almost mechanically repetitive defense reflex: A “wall of collective defense” built with appropriation before it is clear what happened, an alignment closed to criticism and uniform statements. This reflex is not only erroneous but also dangerous for politics. Because at this point, politics loses its capacity to generate principles and is replaced by relations of belonging.
“The reflex of ”defending our own" is the most primitive form of politics. Modern politics is based precisely on overcoming this reflex. However, the picture emerging in the CHP today shows that this primitive reflex has become centralized again.
From this point on, the following questions lose their meaning:
Is that true?
Is that wrong?
They are replaced by a single question:
Is this from us?
This is the moment when a political movement begins to unravel.
The easiest escape route for politics in Turkey is obvious: Explaining everything with external factors. The “we are under attack” narrative is a classic example of this escape. Of course, the judiciary in Turkey is controversial, political interference is real and power relations determine the nature of politics. But precisely for this reason, the opposition's greatest responsibility is not to lose internal control.
This is what the CHP cannot do today.
A structure that explains everything from the outside cannot see what is going on inside after a while. And a structure that cannot see cannot correct itself. And a political movement that cannot correct itself is destroyed not by its rivals but by its own internal contradictions.
This is exactly what has happened today.
Because it is no longer about individual events.
It is a question of standardizing the response to those events.
And this standard gives away the character of a political party.
CRISES, CORRUPTION ALLEGATIONS AND DIRECT RESPONSIBILITY OF THE NEW ADMINISTRATION
Let's leave the theoretical discussion aside and look at the concrete. Because politics is ultimately tested not by theory but by real events.
The picture facing the Republican People's Party today is now undeniably clear: a growing number of corruption allegations, ethical crises and the erosion of institutional reputation, which have emerged in different cities with similar content and intensified.
Kusadasi, Marmaris, Usak...
Attempting to read these as independent events is either a deliberate manipulation or a failure of the political mind. Because the issue here is not the individual files, but the holistic picture created by these files.
The example of Uşak, in particular, is the most naked version of this picture.
The allegations are not trivial:
- Use of public resources for personal gain,
- Bid rigging,
- Transforming municipal facilities into a network of special relationships,
- Attempts to hide assets...
These are the classic diseases of Turkish politics that have been criticized for years. And the CHP's claim to existence was based precisely on combating these diseases.
But what is happening today?
The reflex in the face of these allegations is the opposite of what one would expect. Instead of demanding that the investigation be carried out in a transparent manner, keeping institutional distance or saying “let's wait and see”, the reflex of direct ownership takes over. A “democracy watch” is being held in front of the municipality and a collective defense language is being established as if there is nothing to discuss.
This is not politics.
It is a reflexive instinct of protection.
And this instinct removes the line that separates the CHP from the others.
More importantly, at this point responsibility is no longer individual.
From this point on, the responsibility lies squarely with the administration.
Because it is leadership that determines how crises are managed in a political party. Leadership is not only talking on good days, but also drawing boundaries on bad days. Who to defend, who to distance oneself from, when to keep silent, when to take a clear stand - all of these are matters of leadership.
And today this leadership is clearly absent.
Therefore, to read the picture as “the mayors” fault" is to deliberately distort reality. Because what makes this picture possible is the political climate that spreads from top to bottom.
At the center of this climate are two names:
Ekrem Imamoglu
Ozgur Ozel
One is the will that determines the political direction of this process.
The other is the figure who institutionalizes and implements this will.
Therefore, every crisis, every contradiction and every defense reflex that emerges today is a direct product of this understanding of governance.
This is where the “we are under attack” narrative comes into play.
And is it really?
Does the possibility that the judiciary in a country is politicized automatically invalidate every allegation? Is every case an “operation”? Is every criticism an “attack”?
If so, then politics becomes completely meaningless. Because nothing can be discussed, nothing can be questioned.
But the truth is that this discourse is not a defense, it is an escape.
Because the possibility of external pressure does not absolve internal responsibility.
On the contrary, it imposes more responsibility.
This is exactly what the CHP is not doing today: taking responsibility.
This irresponsibility is not limited to Uşak. Similarly, the political style of Tanju Özcan is another face of the same problem. This style of politics, based on populism, harshness and uncontrolled outbursts, may win applause in the short term, but in the long run it erodes institutional seriousness.
It is a direct decline in quality for a party with such historical ambitions as the CHP to be defined by such individual outbursts.
But here's the point:
All these examples are not individual problems, but different manifestations of the same mentality.
And the name of this mentality is clear:
Belonging, not principle.
Not interrogation but defense.
Not distance but ownership.
That is why what is happening today is not a crisis but a trend.
And the political responsibility for this orientation is indisputable.
It is no longer possible to attribute this picture to the past.
It is no longer possible to say “left over from the old administration”.
Because the administration has changed.
But the problems are not over.
On the contrary, it has become more visible.
This shows us only one truth:
The problem is not the individuals, but the management approach.
THE DISAPPEARING BALANCE, THE REALITY OF KILIÇDAROĞLU AND THE INEVITABLE END
The true value of a political movement is often recognized when it disappears or changes. This is because some forms of leadership are characterized by their absence, not by their presence.
This is exactly what is happening in the Republican People's Party today.
The Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu era was criticized for years. He was accused of being slow, of being too cautious, of not managing crises aggressively enough. However, the picture that emerges today reveals the real value of that period much more clearly: Balance.
Kılıçdaroğlu's leadership was based on a politics of balance that did not produce quick and harsh reflexes but protected the party from uncontrolled swings. This balance was often invisible because it absorbed crises before they escalated and defused controversies before they turned into sudden explosions.
Today that balance does not exist.
Today, crises are not being managed in the CHP, they are growing.
Problems are not being solved, they are piling up.
And most importantly, mistakes are defended, not corrected.
That's the real difference.
If Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu were in charge of the CHP today, these crises would have been largely prevented from occurring on this scale and at this pace. Because Kılıçdaroğlu's political style was based on controlled distance, not reflexive appropriation. He had a leadership approach that knew how to cool the process, protect the institution and withdraw the individual when necessary, instead of immediately taking sides in every incident.
Today we are faced with the opposite picture.
The new administration, that is, the structure shaped around Ekrem İmamoğlu and Özgür Özel, builds politics not on balance, but on speed and reflex. While this may seem “dynamic” in the short term, in the long term it produces a loss of control.
And this is exactly what is happening today:
Loss of control.
The mentality has changed.
But not in the way it should be.
Reflexes have changed.
But not towards principle, towards comfort.
Because what prevails in the CHP today is not political competition, but political comfort zone. No one wants to take risks. No one wants to say something different. No one dares to say “wrong”.
What is there instead?
There is alignment.
There are uniform statements.
And most importantly, there is a silent race for loyalty.
This is the most dangerous state of a political party.
Because at this point there is no thought anymore.
There is only position.
And the politics of position eventually leads to decay.
This is exactly what is happening in the CHP today:
Corruption.
This word is harsh but true. Because corruption does not start with big scandals. It starts with the normalization of small contradictions. First they are defended, then they become habitual, then they become unquestioned.
Today, this process has been completed.
It is no longer about individual incidents.
It is a question of standardizing the response to those events.
And this standard is clear:
There is no distance.
No interrogation.
No different sound.
Instead:
Copy explanations,
central alignment,
and unconditional ownership.
This is not change.
This is going backwards.
And the responsibility for this regression is clear.
Ekrem İmamoğlu, who set the direction of today's CHP, and Özgür Özel, who institutionalized this direction, are the direct owners of the picture that emerged.
It is no longer possible to attribute this picture to the past.
It is no longer possible to say “left over from the old administration”.
Because you wanted change.
You're in charge.
You make the decisions.
Then the result belongs to you.
And this is what politics ultimately does:
Those who have changed in the wrong direction,
not with their competitors,
in the order of their own creation.
This is exactly what is happening today.