Certainly the world has to accept that his religious-conservative Justice and Development Party (AKP) has swept back into power.

But there can be no respect for the combination of authoritarianism, scaremongering and military posturing that made AKP victory possible.

The poll triumph belongs officially to Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, but his campaign was devised and carried through by the president who is intent on concentrating further personal powers in an executive presidency.

Erdogan’s ambitions were jolted in June when AKP lost its overall majority, partly because of a major advance by the left-wing and pro-Kurdish People’s Democratic Party (HDP), crashing through the 10 per cent limit for parliamentary representation with 13 per cent and 79 seats.

Erdogan’s response was as ruthless as it was calculating, manipulating voters’ emotions by stepping up military action against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and smearing political opponents as terrorists or traitors.

The president’s militaristic and nationalist onslaught helped reduce the HDP share of the vote to just over 10 per cent and also captured a proportion of the electorate that normally backs the far-right MHP.

His verbal attacks targeted opposition parties and also media outlets that he regarded as untrustworthy.

Mobs attacked newspaper offices, closing titles down and preventing any effective alternative to the pro-AKP narrative recited daily by the state broadcaster TRT.

Erdogan profited too from a number of murderous bomb explosions that the security forces attributed to Islamic State (Isis) attempts to destabilise his government.

However, why Isis would wish to do that given Ankara’s ongoing assistance to the jihadists, in terms of a porous Turkish-Syrian border allowing cross-border traffic of Isis fighters, military supplies and looted Syrian oil, is unclear.

In any case, the targets for the “Isis” bombings were HDP election gatherings, killing or wounding hundreds of young activists, preventing the party from holding further rallies or conducting a normal electoral campaign.

The role of security forces in tear-gassing mourners laying bouquets of flowers to honour those massacred in Ankara speaks volumes for presidential attitudes.

Erdogan commented cynically that the election result shows that “people have opted for stability and trust that were endangered in the June 7 vote.”

In reality, instability and distrust are more firmly embedded in Turkish political life.

There will be little said and done in European Union capitals about the shady methods employed by the Turkish president to secure victory.

EU leaders are more interested in persuading Erdogan to co-operate with them to prevent refugees accessing their bloc from Turkey.

But labour movement and human rights campaigners will keep a watchful eye on developments in Turkey and its president’s cynical manipulation of national fears and regional turmoil.

Trident policy

Shadow defence secretary Maria Eagle is correct within the letter of the law to say that the overwhelming decision of Scottish Labour’s conference doesn’t change party policy on Trident.

But she knows that the 70 per cent majority opposing replacement of the submarine nuclear weapons delivery system is in tune with both Jeremy Corbyn and the 250,000 members and supporters who voted for him as leader.

Recent disclosures that the true cost of replacement would be over £130 billion will probably swell opposition throughout the Labour Party.

Trade unions will always defend their members’ jobs. It’s a large part of why they exist, but there can be no veto on party policy by any section of Labour’s membership.

Defence workers’ fears over future employment must act as a spur to the party to engage in research such as that deployed in recent years by Scottish CND to identify areas of skilled work to replace military contracts.