The German think tank, the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), has outlined Berlin’s and Brussels’ expectations regarding Ankara.

An assessment by Yaşar Aydın, titled Türkiye on the Road to Autocracy, looks at the Turkish government’s options from Berlin’s perspective following the arrest of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (İBB) Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu.

Aydın highlights the economic dimension of the Erdoğan administration’s operations against opposition-held municipalities, noting that municipalities run by the CHP (Republican People’s Party) house 62% of the total population, generate 73.4% of the GDP, hold 84.5% of total private savings, and account for 79.6% of Türkiye’s total exports.

Aydın states, “Furthermore, the average per capita income in CHP-run municipalities exceeds that of AKP-run municipalities.”

The author suggests this situation gives the CHP a strategic advantage in exerting decisive influence over the economic cycle and thereby creating an alternative sphere of power, emphasizing that construction companies previously doing business with the AKP can now also work with CHP municipalities, making them more “self-confident” in their relations with Erdoğan.

The SWP author adds, “This new economic power of the CHP is particularly important as high credit interest rates have been curbing investment and orders in the construction sector for about two years.”

The SWP analysis argues that the economic instability arising from İmamoğlu’s arrest has significant costs for the government, pointing to both the depletion of Central Bank reserves and rising interest rates.

Aydın argues that Türkiye faces three scenarios going forward: 1. Consolidation of autocracy; 2. Dissolution of the People’s Alliance; 3. An agreement on early elections.

Aydın suggests the first option would create economic instability in Türkiye, arguing that the country needs external resources for economic growth, but the arrest of the largest city’s mayor would create an unfavorable investment climate.

In the second option, he warns that the MHP (Nationalist Movement Party) leaving the People’s Alliance and forming a two-thirds majority with the CHP and DEM Party to dissolve parliament would cause instability. The SWP analyst, pointing out that a CHP-DEM-MHP alliance would be a kind of “motley crew” coalition, does not find this option favorable for Berlin and Brussels either.

According to Aydın, the best option for the EU and Germany is an early election by agreement. In this scenario, İmamoğlu is released from pre-trial detention, and charges against him are dropped, provided the CHP agrees to the dissolution of parliament and new elections.

According to Aydın, this series of events could lead to a more stable political transition process where Türkiye establishes a new electoral system and politically repositions itself under a new president and a CHP-led alliance.

Furthermore, an orderly transfer of power accompanied by political and economic stability would offer an opportunity to reset EU-Türkiye relations and could strengthen the EU’s geopolitical position.

According to the SWP analyst, there are “regional responsibilities” that the EU and Germany expect Türkiye to fulfill, and stability in Ankara is therefore important. These responsibilities are described by SWP as: regulating and countering migration flows; deterring Russia; and helping to stabilize Syria.

According to Aydın, while the US has so far voiced little criticism regarding recent developments in Türkiye, the reactions from EU institutions and Germany have been relatively measured.

Aydın writes: “Two approaches are being debated in Germany: i) avoiding closer security cooperation with the current government, and ii) maintaining relations with the Erdoğan administration through quiet diplomacy that encourages adherence to the rule of law and democratic principles. The second approach is based on the assessment that the EU depends on a stable Türkiye, both as an important NATO partner, especially for deterring Russia, and as a buffer to control migration flows to Europe.”

According to Aydın, while this assessment is correct, it overlooks an important point: In the current geopolitical situation, Türkiye continues to need NATO’s protection to ensure its national security and the EU’s presence as an economic partner and a market for Turkish goods and services to keep its economy on a growth path.

According to SWP, this fact is also highlighted by Türkiye’s continued active efforts to play a key role in the European security architecture, and the same applies to the Turkish defense industry: despite technological advancements, Ankara remains dependent on the EU in many areas.

Aydın states, “It is unrealistic to completely escape this dependency through cooperation with other states or blocs. Indeed, the sustainable development of Türkiye’s defense industry will continue to require close cooperation with EU member states.”

The author concludes: “In this context, Germany and the EU can exert influence on Türkiye by setting the following conditions for increased security cooperation, further integration into the European security architecture, and more cooperation in defense: Türkiye must return to the rule of law, halt its slide towards full autocracy, and respect human rights.”

Aydın writes that Germany can use negotiations on the modernization of the customs union and visa facilitation as leverage against Türkiye, pointing out that both issues are of great importance for Türkiye, which is trying to improve its domestic investment environment. He notes that the Turkish economy is closely intertwined with the EU economy, and regaining economic dynamism largely depends on deepening these ties.

The SWP analyst’s thesis is as follows: “Türkiye and its industrial sector aim for greater integration into European supply chains; however, if the country continues to slide towards autocracy, its chances of benefiting from reshoring will significantly diminish, creating a substantial economic incentive to reconsider the autocratic path. The EU and Germany can raise the prospect of further integration of supply chains while warning the Turkish government against progressing towards autocracy.”