He is running headlong into Tayyip's trap!

Suddenly, they have all become apostles of democracy.

Anyone watching would think they had spent their entire lives fighting for democracy, rights, justice, and the law.

As if they were not the ones who dismantled the democracy, secularism, human rights, rule of law, and judicial independence that once functioned in Turkey—albeit imperfectly and with difficulty; as if they were not the ones who maintained their power through the ignorance they fostered and fed by polarizing society; and as if they were not the ones who, at every opportunity, emulated authoritarian and totalitarian regimes around the world, they have now begun to sing in unison to the people of my country with flowery sentences.

For instance, Parliament Speaker Numan Kurtulmuş recently stated that a new constitution has become a necessity, saying it is time for Turkey to get rid of the current constitution, which still bears the traces of a coup.

AKP President Tayyip Erdoğan also said, while returning from Iraq, “There is talk of change in many areas of the world. Sociologies, technologies, climates, and many other foundations are changing very rapidly. To keep up with this, the time has come for Turkey to get rid of the constitutional text that inherently harbors the spirit of the old coup and to attain an innovative and libertarian constitution.”

The whole world knows that these statements have no meaning.

The journalists at the Palace may not have spoken up, but let us ask here.

For example, while the whole world is suffering from climate change, while the sociologies of countries are diversifying due to mass migration, and while artificial intelligence has taken off, which country or countries are using these as excuses to pursue a new constitution?

In reality, their entire concern is to draft a constitution for a new regime where Tayyip remains in power for life, where his family and inner circle gain judicial immunity after him, and which will eliminate the country's political unity and unitary structure—a regime that is multi-identity, multi-legal, strongly religiously referenced, deeply Islamic in tone, and devoid of secularism!

What they have in mind has nothing to do with sociology, technology, or climate...

To not see this, one must be either blind or completely naive.

When the results of the local elections showed that they could no longer hold onto power no matter what they did, they clung once again to the issue of a “civilian constitution.”

They are aware that even the one-man regime they fed to the people of my country as the Presidential Government System will not save them.

Let us underline this with a thick pen.

The political Islam project, engineered across the Atlantic in the early 2000s, has gone bankrupt.

This pathological period in the history of the Republic of Turkey is, one way or another, nearing its end.

Numan Kurtulmuş knows this very well, too.

That is why he is trying to sell the constitutional amendment to the nation as a “necessity.”

Instead of revealing his true intentions, he hides behind the excuse that the current constitution “bears the traces of a coup,” ignoring the fact that it has been amended 19 times to date.

In order to prevent the damage they have inflicted on the country over 22 years from reaching an irreversible point, all opposition segments in Turkey must strongly oppose the government's constitutional amendment theater, “without ifs, ands, or buts.”

Especially the CHP...

The CHP filled its sails with the support the public gave it in the local elections, but immediately after March 31, it began doing everything it could to make the people of my country regret the votes they cast without wasting any time.

For some reason, Özgür Özel—who has been unable to shake off the inexplicable anxiety he has felt since sitting in the Chairman's seat at the CHP, who acts like an adolescent, and who constantly appears as if he is trying to prove himself to someone—cannot seem to clear his mind.

It is very clear that an issue as closely related to Turkey's survival as a constitutional amendment has not been comprehensively addressed by the party's boards, and that a rational approach based on common sense and within the framework of the CHP's fundamental principles has not been determined.

He is constantly playing to the gallery. He wants to be talked about all the time. He likes being the center of attention. That is why he proceeds with speculative statements instead of crystallized, concise approaches.

Unfortunately, he keeps dragging the issue out; he does everything he can to get the press to put him on the front pages.

He came out and said;

“We are planning to meet with the President next week; we will request an appointment from them. He said he would convey certain demands regarding the constitution. Of course, the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM) is the ground for negotiation; leaders always talk to each other. The Speaker of the Parliament also said he would make a visit. For someone to say 'let's change the constitution,' what will you do after you change the constitution you are going to change? You are changing it to comply with it, right? Why don't you comply with the constitution that was changed last time? Is a constitution changed so as not to be complied with? If you are going to change the constitution, we must first see that you are complying with it. Not complying with ECHR rulings, not complying with Constitutional Court rulings, letting a first-instance court crush the Constitutional Court, sending orders to the Parliament from first-instance courts contrary to the Constitutional Court's decision and having them implemented—which constitution is that complying with? The constitution is underfoot. That is why we will both discuss our agendas; of course, there will be negotiations and meetings between leaders, but something is not changed so as not to be complied with. If you want to change something, first comply with the existing one so we can see it.”

I read the sentences above at least ten times. But I could not figure out from these statements what kind of approach the CHP has regarding the constitutional amendment Tayyip wants, or what kind of policy it will follow in this regard.

In the words of the old timers, let those who understand come forward...

Instead of forming ten coherent sentences that clearly explain his point, he has engaged in word salad.

For example, what will happen if Tayyip, to Özgür Özel who stands at attention before him at the Palace, says, “I swear by God, I swear on the Quran that I will comply with the constitution from now on”?

Will he say, "Okay," and support the constitutional amendment?

If he sees the TBMM as the ground for negotiation, and even though Tayyip said, “I will discuss the constitutional amendment when you come,” why does he still stubbornly want to go to the Palace and appear before him?

Is the CHP, in principle, against making a new constitution with this government or not?

If he is against it, why does Özgür Özel constantly stall and not state this in clear language?

If he is not against it, what kind of roadmap does the CHP have?

In short, Özgür Özel is running headlong into this political trap set by Tayyip.

He has learned absolutely no lessons from the recent history of the CHP.

Let us end our article by saying that the end of chairmen who succumb to their political ambition and want to work with Tayyip is rarely a happy one.