Events Detail

l

Left to Right: Zeyno Baran, Olivier Guitta, F. Stephen Larrabee and Salameh Nematt

Event Summary:

At opposite ends of the Mediterranean, in Turkey and Morocco, political forces named Justice and Development Parties competed in recent national parliamentary elections. Both were considered “moderate Islamist” parties, both were viewed as favorites prior to the election, and both were competing in countries that are distinguished from most other majority-Muslim nations by their moderation and tolerance. Yet, in Morocco, the Justice and Development Party’s performance fell short of most expectations. Is “moderate Islamism” the correct framework within which to understand these two parties? Moving beyond the coincidence of their names, what substantive similarities and differences exist between the Turkish and Moroccan Justice and Development Parties? What lessons should the United States draw from the differing results of these elections?

In the July 22 elections in Turkey, the Justice and Development Party (AKP in its Turkish abbreviation) won a decisive victory, claiming nearly 47 percent of the votes and 340 of 550 available seats. The AKP’s success not only secured a second term in office for Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, but also ensured a mandate for the nomination and election to the presidency of Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, whose first attempt at gaining that office was blocked by Turkey’s secular establishment—largely due to his Islamist past and his wife’s Islamic headscarf. Many critics in the US and the Arab/Muslim world said that AKP had merely learned to advocate for a moderate Islamic policy in order to come to power even though the party still remains true to its more Islamist roots. Now that AKP controls the presidency and the parliament, what implications will this power have for Turkish foreign policy?

The September 7 elections in Morocco, by contrast, did not result in similar success for that country’s Justice and Development Party (in French, abbreviated PJD). In fact, the PJD placed second to the secular, pro-government Istiqlal party, winning 47 seats to the latter’s 52. This poor showing was unexpected by many observers, especially in light of the AKP’s success in Turkey. What did these commentators miss? Some have subsequently argued that the cynicism and apathy of Moroccan voters contributed to PJD’s “failure,” while others have pointed out that the Turkish political system makes it much easier than does the Moroccan structure for one party to emerge from the balloting with a decisive majority. Or do the differing electoral outcomes reveal ideological distinctions between the two parties, or between the two electorates?

On September 18, Hudson Institute’s Center for Eurasian Policy hosted a panel discussion to address these and other key questions resulting from the two elections. Zeyno Baran, director of Hudson's Center for Eurasian Policy, moderated the discussion.

First, Rusen Cakir's primer on the two Justice Developments Parties was presented.  Then, Olivier Guitta presented his examination of the Moroccan elections and its implications for the PJD.  Next, F. Stephen Larrabee gave an overview of the rise of religion-based politics in Turkey, as well as his analysis of the implications of the AKP's recent victory for US policy.  This was followed by