The display presented by the latest election results is qualitative enough to affect, not just Turkey, but also the regional balance. The lead role played by the Kurdish issue for a long time, the borders designated by the state – nation system and Sykes-Picot agreement, and the resolution of the status quo is forming its base platform.
Following the Treaty of Lausanne , Turkey had guaranteed its borders, as an emperorship residue, in the eyes of the Western/Great Countries. This guarantee/assurance of the winner countries of World War I, like Britain and France, and the radical reforms, which foresee full secularism/westernization, of the new republic established on Ottomans' residual lands protected and preserved its land integrity and existence despite the merciless/bloody oppression methods towards the Kurdish and Alevi. The status quo/assurance formed in the Lausanne Agreement continued till post-World War II. After that time, Turkey's participation in the UN and NATO, and the Baghdad Pact formed a new line of security and concept for Turkey. The guarantee brought forward by the Treaty of Lausanne continued to exist itself under the NATO umbrella. In the two-bloc World, Turkey sided with NATO against the Soviet/East bloc, and during the Cold War period, Turkey acted as the Southeastern wing of the West/NATO bloc. In the 90s, the Soviet/East bloc and the Warsaw Pact had been resolved. The bipolar world system collapsed. In the Cold War era, the concept of the Northern Atlantic Pact/NATO, which had been formed against the Soviet/East bloc and Warsaw Pact, had changed. In this conceptual change, the position of Turkey needed to be changed. Frankly, Turkey wasn't going to possess its old importance in this new concept, while Turkey's security and land integrity wasn't going to be under guarantee either. Right in that period, the deceased Turgut Özal comprehended this conceptual change and pursued new ways. However, the resistance of the status-quo Kemalist personnel and Özal's early death left all the attempts in this direction futile. Afterwards, coalitions and February 28th processes caused years and opportunities to go out of our reach.
In the following years, some focuses in the deep state stated that Turkey is face to face with two options. According to them; “The country will either expand or disintegrate”. Thus, they've marked the growth option in this direction. Ultimately, they started taking steps towards this direction. For some reason, until 2010-2011 this strategy was being conducted more deliberately and less problematically. After that date, following the atmosphere formed by “Arabic Spring” movements, which started in Tunisia, deliberateness had been left aside and the steering started heading towards adventures. With a similar attitude to “Two Lines of Fire” strategy/adventure, which Germany implemented in both World Wars, the objective was to bear results in a short time. However, within a short time, the Arab Spring somehow turned into autumn, especially in Egypt and Syria, and everything became prolonged. The unpredictable points here are the transformation of unnecessary optimism related with the attitude of Western Countries into frustration. The reality that the Muslim Brotherhood Movement, which was assumed to take over the governments rapidly, has no great response in the eyes of the Arabic communities; and the most dominant one was the Kurdish Issue's place in this equation. By choosing this growth option and constructing this growth strategy over an adventurousness base, these focuses within the deep state put their signatures to a strategic error.
Some personnel of the AK Party rulership, which are based on taking/gathering momentary results from the National View Politics in a short time and which got used to a hasty politics style that cannot tolerate long term strategies, were persuaded to this with the “New Ottoman” notion.
However, the hastiness of the National View politics that is directed at receiving momentary/undated results, wasn't going to provide much to this country in the long term, in the sense of its impatience for long term strategies. The National View politics always showed discountenance towards long term strategies with its impatience/hastiness to gather momentary results. The simple/hasty/impatient side of this political style, which is integrated with pragmatism, unfortunately prevented it from seeing some of the essential country matters. This aspect, turned the existing energy and potential into a momentary consumption material instead of carrying it to the future. In this sense, it would have been impossible for the National View politics to receive positive results by attempting these without being in a radical transformation towards creating long term strategies.
The Kurdish Card was absolutely under the control of the National View politics. Despite that, the National View Politics failed to see that they had this card for many years. At the present point, despite having the Kurdish card since the 1980s and despite all these courtesies and resistances, the politics style of the National View tradition had closed its doors to the Kurds and masses, who wanted to run away from the PKK oppression grasp, with the fear of losing Central Anatolia to MHP. However, the religious elements of the region, which is known for its Religiousness/religious sensitivity since the 70s, were always staying close to this political movement. Besides, the relatives and families of the people, who had been regarded as symbols/idols by the Kurdish Political movements in the past, had participated in the MSP-RP line, and the families, who are accepted as the pioneers and idols of the Kurdish movement, were on the top of that list.