Sinan Ülgen
{
"authors": [
"Sinan Ülgen"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Europe",
"Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [
"Turkey’s Transformation",
"Brexit and UK Politics"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [
"Eurasia in Transition"
],
"regions": [
"Middle East",
"Europe",
"Türkiye",
"Levant"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy",
"Political Reform"
]
}Source: Getty
Europe Must React to Turkey’s Vote
Turkey’s recent constitutional referendum passed with the support of little over half of the Turkish population, giving Prime Minister Erdogan an electoral victory and consolidating his political authority.
Source: The Financial Times

The outcome should therefore be seen as yet another electoral victory for Mr Erdogan, who spearheaded the “yes” campaign, consolidating his hold over the Turkish political scene. Analysts predict that the vote will now enable him to push his agenda of transforming Turkey’s parliamentary system into a US-style presidential system. The unfinished business of designing a new constitutional order will also top the agenda of the next elections – the AKP has now rekindled its hopes of winning a third term in the general elections slated for the first half of 2011.
The vote was far from united, however – western and Mediterranean Turkey, including all coastal regions, voted “no” while the rest of the country, with few exceptions, backed the amendments. The Kurdish Peace and Democracy party (BDP) also demonstrated its ability to control a large part of its constituency in south-east Turkey. The BDP had called for a boycott of the referendum, and in some areas turnout dropped as low as 7 per cent, while the national average was 77 per cent.
But perhaps the most significant change brought by the referendum campaign is the greater visibility brought to the objective of EU membership. The “yes” campaign made reference to the EU to convince Turkish public opinion of the package’s benefits. And today’s statement by the European Commission welcoming the adoption of the package underscored the growing interest of the EU in Turkey’s domestic dynamics.
In its role as a watchdog of democratic principles in candidate countries, the EU should now closely monitor the implementation of the reform package. Brussels should not shy away from commending the government for its democracy-friendly vision. But it should also be willing to criticise Ankara if, on the back of his electoral success, Mr Erdogan starts to steer the country, as the opposition fears, towards more authoritarian rule.
About the Author
Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe
Sinan Ülgen is a senior fellow at Carnegie Europe in Brussels, where his research focuses on Turkish foreign policy, transatlantic relations, international trade, economic security, and digital policy.
- The EU Equivocating on Turkey Is Bad GeopoliticsCommentary
- Can the EU Achieve Its Tech Ambitions?Q&A
Raluca Csernatoni, Sinan Ülgen
Recent Work
Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie India
- India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible PathwaysArticle
A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.
Rajiv Bhatia
- Emerging From the “Zombie State” of Trade Agreements: The India-EU FTACommentary
The India–EU Free Trade Agreement (FTA) is shaping up to be one of the most consequential trade negotiations, both economically and strategically. But, what’s in the agreement, what’s missing, and what will determine its success in the years ahead
Vrinda Sahai, Nicolas Köhler-Suzuki
- India and a Changing Global Order: Foreign Policy in the Trump 2.0 EraResearch
Trump 2.0 has unsettled India’s external environment—but has not overturned its foreign policy strategy, which continues to rely on diversification, hedging, and calibrated partnerships across a fractured order.
- +6
Milan Vaishnav, ed., Sameer Lalwani, Tanvi Madan, …
- The Impact of U.S. Sanctions and Tariffs on India’s Russian Oil ImportsCommentary
This piece examines India’s response to U.S. sanctions and tariffs, specifically assessing the immediate market consequences, such as alterations in import costs, and the broader strategic implications for India’s energy security and foreign policy orientation.
Vrinda Sahai
- NISAR Soars While India-U.S. Tariff Tensions SimmerCommentary
On July 30, 2025, the United States announced 25 percent tariffs on Indian goods. While diplomatic tensions simmered on the trade front, a cosmic calm prevailed at the Sriharikota launch range. Officials from NASA and ISRO were preparing to launch an engineering marvel into space—the NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR), marking a significant milestone in the India-U.S. bilateral partnership.
Tejas Bharadwaj