Saturday, May 12, 2007

We may or may not like the AKP but we cannot call them ‘Islamist’ or ‘fundamentalist.’ They have been more open minded and pro-Western than many of their opponents.

Elif Şafak

  A well-known proverb that is attributed to the ancient Chinese says: “May you live in interesting times.” We Turks are savoring this proverb these days because we are living in very interesting times.  Every day, every passing hour something extraordinary happens in this country. Is it a curse or a blessing to live in interesting times? It is a bit of both. It certainly is exhausting. It is not easy to be a Turk. Western media follows the events in Turkey closely but sometimes fail to comprehend things fully. The recent situation in Turkey has been covered by some Western journalists as a struggle between “secularists” and “Islamists”. It is not as simple as that. When analyzing Turkish politics, words might be deceiving and concepts need to be redefined. 

The AKP is not Islamist:

  To start with, the party in power, the AKP, cannot be called “Islamist”. We may or may not like the AKP but we cannot call them “fundamentalist”. During their rule they have taken more steps than any other party in terms of Turkey s EU membership. They have been more open minded than the Social Democrat party in terms of initiating much needed reforms. In short, they are more pro-Western than many of their opponents. Secondly, not all Turkish “secularists” are democrats. Some openly favor a military coup d etat and invite the army to step in. Furthermore, part of today s opposition comes from nationalist, anti-Western segments of the society. All of this renders Turkey a country in which labels get quite confusing and the “Islamist” party in power looks more progressive than the “social democrats” in opposition. To make matters even more knotty, the army is a major political actor in this country. Turkish politics are complicated. To understand this country s dynamics better it is essential to abandon political clichés and easy generalizations, and start focusing on nuances. The existing political tension increased with the nomination of Abdullah Gül for president. The post of presidency is largely ceremonial but the president holds the right to veto legislation. Besides, the post of Presidency is regarded as “the house of Atatürk” and as such it carries large symbolic value for the whole nation. It represents modernization, Westernization and secularism. As soon as Gül was nominated for this post the movers and shakers started to question his credentials. Is he fit for the task?

Gül is a real liberal:

  Gül has served as Turkey s Foreign Minister and is well liked by many segments of the society. He is kind, easygoing and friendly. He is on good terms with the critical-minded intellectuals in Turkey. He has supported freedom of expression and openly criticized Article 301, taking steps to change it even when some other politicians in his party refused to act. Few people have reservations about Gül personally. But there is one major problem. His wife wears a Muslim headscarf and headscarf is banned from state institutions in Turkey. In a country in which symbols play an important role this has enormous political implications. Now Gül s nomination raises concerns about Turkey s secularism. There is a lot of fear in the air. Fear that a woman with a headscarf will be Turkey s First Lady. Fear that secularism will be undermined. This is only one side of the story. The other side of the story is the army. The Turkish military has always played a pivotal role in Turkish politics, sometimes behind the scenes, often openly. On Friday night the army posted a warning on its website. The statement had a harsh tone and it has been interpreted as a mini e-coup befitting the age of internet. Following the army s warning, more than seven hundred thousand people marched in Istanbul chanting slogans against the government. “The roads to the presidential palace are closed to imams” said one of the signs carried. “We do not want to see a covered First Lady” said another one. Similar demonstrations followed in other cities. Nevertheless overall the crowds were an eclectic whole of different, if not conflicting, groups and voices. One of the characteristics of the rallies was the predominance of female protesters. Turkey s women are becoming more and more active in politics, although in the parliament their number is still small. This is a quarrel about women and by women. Women s bodies and images are the sites in which big ideological battles take shape. The big question is: will uncovered women and covered women respect each other s right to exist?

Who represents the nation?:

  This is a country where modernization and Westernization processes, as well as the most fundamental social transformations, have been triggered and carried out by a political and cultural elite. Who represents the nation? The elite? The army? The politicians? The conservatives? Every group thinks it is them who represent the nation without realizing that the nation is all of us. Interestingly, the hardliner anti-Westerners in Turkey and the hardliner, anti-Turks in Europe have something in common. Both groups think that Islam and Western democracy are incompatible. Both groups are against Turkey s EU membership. The anti-Westerners in Turkey and Turcophobics in Europe share a common ground. They are both xenophobic. Now the vote for presidency has been cancelled and the whole nation is getting ready for early elections, which is the only way out of this deadlock. Just like in many other countries, there is a clash of opinions in Turkey. The majority of the Turkish people are against both Islamic fundamentalism and another military takeover. The only way to cure the problems within democracy is more democracy. In the days to come we need more dialogue and understanding between Turkey s democratic forces and Europe s democratic forces. This is a period of transition. We are learning to deal with pluralism. It might take time to learn. But one thing is clear. Turkey is too dynamic, too complex and significant for the Western world to lose. If the bridges between Turkey and the European Union are abolished the emerging gap will bear negative consequences not only for democrats in Turkey but also for multicultural Europe.