For almost two weeks we have been sitting in Parliament and working to push through a constitutional amendment package that includes three very important amendments.

These amendments basically seek to make closing a political party more difficult, increase the number of members of the Constitutional Court and to improve the structure of the Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK). The other amendments are also in the direction of normalizing Turkey and making it a more transparent and accountable country.

Yet, in a remarkable move, the political party that has most suffered from the closure of their parties -- the Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) -- opposed the proposed eighth amendment. Thus, the eighth amendment did not pass the necessary 330 threshhold for it to be voted on in a referendum.

Interestingly, the BDP has been siding with the Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) on this issue and has been cooperating with the nationalist opposition. It was a truly exceptional moment to listen to Mr. Bengi Yýldýz from the BDP defending the choice to oppose the amendment that would have made closing political parties much more difficult. I believe the BDP will genuinely regret this. If my political instincts do not betray me, the BDP will have considerable difficulties explaining to the electorate why on earth it opposed an amendment that would have made a closure case against it almost impossible.

Turkish political culture suffers from a malaise that is difficult for foreign audiences to understand. It could be roughly described as opposing anything that comes from the ruling party.

Regardless of the content of the legislation, a blind belief that anything and everything must be opposed at any cost is not only eroding the quality of the body politic but also creating a significant credibility problem for the opposition. The BDP’s recent position vis-a-vis the eighth amendment has just created that in the eyes of the electorate. What logic could possibly prevent the BDP from supporting an amendment that would greatly benefit it and improve the quality of our democracy?

How does it think the electorate will react when it campaigns against the referendum that will likely take place in July? Does it think that the electorate is stupid? The electorate will not buy the current BDP line that argues that the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) has not dealt with it in a compromising fashion. The electorate will see that the BDP has failed to show prudent political will; that it has failed to come out of the shadow of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and that it lacks any political room to maneuver. What they will see is that it has betrayed a cause that would have undoubtedly led to a more democratic and stable political order in this country.

For this, the electorate will punish it. However, apart from the ramifications for the BDP, what matters more is that this attitude is a signal of developments and confrontations to come between the AK Party and the BDP. This state of affairs leaves little room for optimism. It is likely that there will be more violence and a reaction by the government to counter it. This can only benefit those who do not want to see a normal democracy consolidate in Turkey.

I must recognize Mr. Ufuk Uras’s principled political approach and genuine democratic position as he came out and voted for the 17th amendment -- another critical amendment. His decision was welcomed by a large audience. All in all, it appears the BDP’s current posture can only benefit those who see political gain in further terrorism and violence. It remains for us to congratulate the BDP joining the anti-AK Party establishment along with the MHP and the CHP. I hope they will feel very comfortable among their newly found buddies.