Buket Müftüoğlu writes: The New Party and the exhausted energy of the opposition-2

The fundamental fallacy, or conscious manipulation, of the New Party is to reduce the structural transformation that has been taking place since 2010 to the person of Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu.

Today, the fundamental problem of the Republic of Turkey is not Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu. The problem is the support given to Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu for the sake of personal interests by the unprincipled and selfish political cadres who remained silent about the political staff and ideological orientation created during his chairmanship, who remained silent in the face of injustices, and who did not defend the rights of their comrades.

The more severe consequence that has emerged after all these events is that the energy of the Republican opposition has been wasted.

A broad Atatürkist and Republican mass, uncomfortable with the policies of the CHP administration, was mobilized with the hope of a new political breakthrough; rallies were held, people were called to the squares, and a great expectation was created.

However, the success of political movements is measured not by how many rallies they hold, but by the political outcome to which they channel the energy they mobilize.

Hope in politics is not an infinite resource.

Raising people up again and again only to leave them without results erodes trust not only in a single party but in politics itself in that country.

Moreover, the fact that the Republican base, which could have resisted the policies after 2010 within the CHP, was consciously pushed out of the party is also a great loss for politics.

The resulting balance sheet is heavy:

The political cadre that moved away from the founding line of the CHP or remained silent about this transformation has remained within the party; a significant portion of the Republican mass that objected to it has been sent out of the party.

Thus, it is not only the CHP that has been divided.

The political defense line of the Republic has also been fragmented.

The Memory of the State

This transformation has not been read solely through political parties over the years.

The process of wearing down the army, which began with the Balyoz and Ergenekon trials, also took place simultaneously; Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, who came to the chairmanship after 2010, supported these trials internally for a long time and remained silent.

In the ongoing process, the dominance of the mentality that said, "We have trampled Turkish nationalism underfoot," which was strengthened by the changing structure of the Parliament and changes in the judiciary, took the matter even further; this nation has unfortunately witnessed with sadness in recent times that even lieutenants who graduated with high honors and said, "We are the soldiers of Mustafa Kemal," were removed from the army as a result of disciplinary processes.

At a time when names known in the public eye for their Republican identities, such as Nasuh Mahruki and retired Admiral Türker Ertürk, have faced judicial processes and were even detained in the recent past; the tolerance shown to social actions supporting the terrorist organization in a way that contradicts the state's memory of counter-terrorism and the overstepping of bounds by DEM deputies wounds the conscience of the Turkish nation.

For some time now, the rights of our martyrs' relatives and veterans to hold demonstrations while seeking their personal rights in Ankara have also been obstructed.

When the persecution faced by the relatives of martyrs and our veterans is considered together with the celebration images that emerged on the anniversary of the August 15, 1984 Eruh and Şemdinli attacks, the issue is no longer just a peace process.

The issue is the questioning of the relationship between the state's memory and the state's current political orientation.

August 10, 2026: On the Anniversary of Sèvres

And August 10, 2026...

On the anniversary of the Treaty of Sèvres, the regulation forming the legal infrastructure of the "Terror-Free Turkey" process was accepted in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM).

Today, PKK leaders are not only discussing laying down arms.

They are demanding the physical freedom of Abdullah Öcalan, finding the regulation insufficient, and openly expressing their demands for identity and status.

The importance of Murat Karayılan's statements lies exactly here.

The demand is shifting from weapons to law, from law to politics, and from politics to constitutional status.

When the picture from 2010 to today is read together, the strategic result that emerges is clear:

The arithmetic of the Parliament has changed.

The cadre structure of the CHP has changed.

The Republican opposition has been fragmented.

The energy of the opposition voter has been exhausted.

The demands of the PKK have gone beyond laying down arms and reached the discussion of legal and political status.

And at the end of all this, Turkey faces constitutional change and division once again.

This is the Real Issue

The fundamental issue facing Turkey is not Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu.

It is not Özgür Özel either.

It is certainly not Ekrem İmamoğlu or the New Party.

The fundamental issue is the founding principles of the Republic of Turkey and the fact that the pain of the slap delivered to Western imperialism more than a century ago is still alive.

Regardless of their ethnic origin, every patriotic Turkish citizen sees the acceptance of the "Framework Law" not as peace with our citizens of Kurdish origin, but as the first step of the constitutional change imposed by the Greater Middle East Project.

The issue is the political defense line of the Republic.

And the place where that line is opened to discussion is now a matter of the State.

Let us end with the words of the great journalist Uğur Mumcu, who was never forgotten for generations for his patriotic and firm stance on these lands, and who was murdered for this cause:

"Let no one deceive anyone; a 'Kurdish state' under Western support and protection is clearly a 'Sèvres model'."