A fascinating post over at the Bosphorus Watch about Abdullah’s Gül interpretation of secularism and about whether or not the military and secular elite should allow Gül to pursue some, mild, reforms. Should women be allowed to wear head-scarves in public buildings?

It seems that Abdullah Gül has immediately created a debate (and set the tone of it) about what secularism exactly is or should be:

President Abdullah Gül described secularism as the rule of social harmony and a model that underpins freedom for different life styles, in his first speech following his election Tuesday.

Gül’s statement was welcomed by many as a new description of secularism, but on the other hand drew criticism from secularist circles.

“It was a nice speech. It was nice because it was openly protecting democracy, rule of law and secular characteristic of the republic,” Hasan Cemal, a columnist for daily Milliyet wrote.

Gül’s description of secularism broadens the official understanding of this core principle, which roughly is “the separation of state and religious affairs.” Although there is no description of secularism in the Constitution, article 24 provides for freedom of religion but at the same time restricts abuse of religion for political purposes.

More:

“We know that Gül comes from an Islamic movement and is a religious man. But there are two points he should not underestimate,” said Ruşen Çakır, a political analyst who has closely followed the Justice and Development Party (AKP) for years. “If he could become the president it is not only thanks to democracy but also secularism that paves the way even for religious persons to be able to climb to the highest point in the state. And secondly, secularism, which means that the state should be neutral toward all religions, is much more necessary for religious people than the non-Muslims or those who have a loose relation with Islam,” he said.

In the past, efforts by the conservatives to emphasize their own description of secularism created internal tensions in the country. Former Parliament Speaker Bülent Arınç openly said that there was a need to redefine secularism. He argued that secularism assures the freedom of all religious activities, in a move to demote its description to liberty of religion. Former President Ahmet Necdet Sezer had slammed Arınç’s effort to describe secularism in his own way.

In other words, it is a matter of interpretation, but one with quite big consequences. Does one consider secularism to be a great tool to protect non-believers from believers, or does one consider secularism to be a great tool to protect the religious from the irreligious?

Laicism - the kind of secularism Turkey has - is the former not the latter. Most people in Turkey were, at the creation of the Turkish Republic, conservative Muslims. Atatürk’s goal, then, was not to protect these conservative Muslims, but to protect the nation from too much political influence of them instead. If Gül now interpretes secularism to be primarily a means to protect the religious, we can count on some political problems in the near future.

Atilla Kart, a Republican People’s Party (CHP) deputy and a member of the Constitutional Commission criticized Gül: “ül should have touched on the fact that religion has become a tool for political gain and that there are efforts to impose religious rule in state affairs. These are the missing points in his speech.” That is of course due to the fact that Gül is the one basically using religion for political purposes.

Professor of law and a former foreign minister, Mümtaz Soysal, rightfully said: “Gül did not underline the fact that secularism requires a full separation of state affairs from religious rules. Gül and like-minded circles consider secularism only as religious freedom.” And this is what many people feared: that Gül and Erdogan would (will) use Democratic freedom to push through Islamist reforms.

Is the situation dangerous at this point in time? No. Are secularists wise to pay close attention to every step Gül takes? Yes.

Please say hello to Turkey’s new President, Abdullah Gül:

Beaming as the votes were counted, a veteran government figure with roots in political Islam won a parliamentary vote to become Turkey’s president Tuesday, in defiance of the country’s strongly secular military. Abdullah Gul’s triumph presented Turkey’s generals with a choice: overthrow Gul in what would be a deeply unpopular coup or accommodate the rise of political Islam in the Muslim world’s most rigidly secular state.

Gul immediately sought to reassure the military and other doubters. “Turkey is a secular democracy. . . . These are basic values of our republic, and I will defend and strengthen these values,” he told parliament after taking the oath as Turkey’s 11th president.

Ellen Knickmeyer points out that “the popularity of Gul’s mildly Islamic Justice and Development Party after five years in power, and the unprecedented economic prosperity it has brought, will probably shield it from any immediate putsch.” Many people consider it to be quite unlikely that the military will stage - yet another - coup. Personally, I think that the military will act if it considers it necessary, but for now it seems that the military is taking a “lets wait and see what happens”-approach. Having said that, the army did send a clear message by not attending Gül swear-in ceremony yesterday. As a besides, his wife was also not present, most likely in an attempt to prevent secularists from bursting out in anger at the sight of a headscarved first lady attending this important political ceremony.

Knickmeyer also points out that the AK Parti is different from other Islamist organizations in, at least, one regard: while people in other Muslim countries voted for Islamist parties in protest of the other parties, Turkey’s voters did not cast a vote against the establishment as much as they rewarded the AK Parti “due to the services they have provided.”

Meanwhile, here are some columns written by Turkish columnists / journalists about Gül’s election / victory:
- “Everything comes up roses for ‘Uncle Tayyip’.”
- “Gül will make it easy.”
- “The first day.”

Also do not forget to read these articles:
- “Generals protest against Gül’s presidency.”
- “Gül elected Turkey’s president.”
- “Is Turkey Facing an ‘Islamist’ Future?”
- “AKP to Disavow Ataturk Principles.”>

H/t to Meltem and Hans for many of the links, also h/t to Holly.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan

I have collected a couple of links to articles about the situation in Turkey / the (likely) election of Gül as Turkey’s next president. As you all will know by now (thanks to Meltem for posting about this topic at my own blog The Gazette), Gül received the most votes in the first round, but not enough votes to become president already. He needs a second (and third) round. Mehmet Ali Birand explains, however, at Turkish Daily News that although Gül did not get elected, he still won. The reason: when he becomes Turkey’s president the end of August, there will be virtually no one who will question the legitimacy of the vote.

The outcome of the elections did not exactly make the Republican People’s Party (CHP) happy: its members are outraged. Not so much because of Gül getting the majority of the votes, but because other opposition parties participated in the election. According to the CHP, the other parties should not participate - especially not the DSP. The DSP, however, decided to meet with Gül and to attend the vote: obviously, its members did not vote for Gül but for their own candidate, but there can be no doubt about it any longer: Gül will become Turkey’s next president. For the first time in its history Turkey will have a (moderate) Islamist as its leader.

Secularists recognize the danger and know that - at least for now - they have lost. Reactions like this one are common and understandable - when independent member of parliament Kemer Genc met with Gül he reportedly told the future president of the Turkish Republic: “your wife, with her turban, makes Turkey resemble an Arab state.” He also warned Gül not to “fill Cankaya Presidential Palace with black-scarved people pretending to be secular.”

Gül response: “I also want a modern democratic country. In a democratic state, the path must be cleared for a structure in which every faction can live in equality and comfort. Also, most of my wife’s friends do not wear turbans.”

Of course, one of the things that secularists fear about Erdogan and Gül is that they use Democratic principles, not because they truly believe in them, but because those principles help them achieve what many consider to be their (secret) goal: establishing a theocracy / Islamic Turkey and, thus, to break with its secular system. Note how Gül did not say that he wants a “modern secular country,” or a “modern secular democratic country,” but “a modern democratic country.” I think it is safe to assume that he did this on purpose.

Deniz Baykal - the leader of the CHP - meanwhile, summarized the fear of Turkey’s secularists thusly: “Gul’s background is one which bears the signature of dangerous ideas and comments about the Turkish Republic. The project to turn Turkey into a ‘moderate Islamic’ nation is continuing. This project will only speed up after the presidential elections. A giant has been created in a laboratory, and this giant is now not even under the control of Prime Minister Erdogan.”

I think that it is safe to assume that the secularists are right: that it is indeed the goal of Erdogan and Gül to transform Turkey into a ‘moderate Islamic’ nation. The question is, will they succeed? In my opinion, it is highly unlikely. The reason: Turkey’s military will not accept it; nor will Turkey’s elite allow it to happen. In the end, Turkey’s secularists (who are not just the elite by the way, also common people) will fight back if necessary. Turkey has been a secular nation for over 80 years. Once Erdogan and Gül truly make a move to break with secularism, I expect the majority of Turks to turn against them ASAP. Especially if Turkey’s secularists keep doing what they do: they must continue to oppose Erdogan and Gül strongly and they must continue to pressure them into accepting Turkey’s system.

Having said that, Turkey’s secularist parties are certainly not perfect. If we look at how these parties dealt with the economy, it suddenly makes sense why so many people whose main concern was the economy, voted for the AK Parti this year. The CHP and other parties have to reform themselves, have to renew themselves in this regard and learn from the AKP. They can also learn how to appeal to the Turkish voters from the AKP. If Gül and Erdogan are anything, it is great salesmen. They know how to sell their product. Deniz Baykal does not.

Lastly, yesterday Meltem already quoted Bekir Coskun, but she did not link to his column. For those of you who want to read it, here it is (or at least part of it).

Turkish Daily News has two interesting articles up about Erdogan and Gül.
- The first one: “Gül’s presidency will fade Turkey’s apartheid, not secularity.”
- The second one: “Is ErdoÄŸan undecided, or trying to impose?.”

In the second article, Yusuf Kanli wonders, “What should we understand from the remarks of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip ErdoÄŸan that while the July 22 election message of the nation cannot be ignored, democracy requires protection of the interests of the minority but seeking political consensus (on the name of the presidential candidate) should not be taken as the majority succumbing to the minority either?”

A little later: “Then, why is ErdoÄŸan pondering the issue so much? Due to the psychological atmosphere provided by the election results and the inner-AKP balances, he might have difficulty in opposing Gül’s candidacy, but if he is not really opposed to it, why is he not endorsing Gül’s candidacy?”

Good questions. The answers remain - as of yet - unknown. Erdogan is an experienced and smart politician. Savvy even. He made only one true mistake since he became prime minister: he did not handle the election for president well. As Kanli writes:

With the MHP’s decision to attend presidential voting sessions and the AKP having 340 votes with which it can easily elect the next president in the third round of voting, there is of course no threat of going to fresh polls, but if ErdoÄŸan, as he did in April, keeps the name of the candidate in his mind, right to the end of the nomination period and try to impose on the last day, we may still have a new president but the country will definitely plunge into a new period of political tension.

The second article is written by Mustafa Akyol. He is - or so it seems - a supporter of Gül. He writes:

Abdullah Gül is a ‘son of the nation,’ as they call him, not a commissar of the state. And his presidency will be a major step forward toward abolishing the official apartheid against Turkey’s practicing Muslims.

Nowadays the big question in Turkey is whether Mr. Abdullah Gül, arguably the most successful foreign minister in the history of this country, will be the next president. Actually the same issue was a bone of contention in April, too, when Prime Minister Tayyip ErdoÄŸan declared Mr. Gül as his candidate for the top post. Mr. ErdoÄŸan’s party, the AKP, had enough seats in Parliament to elect Mr. Gül, but the secular elders of Ankara got infuriated, simply because Mr. Gül is a practicing Muslim and his wife wears the headscarf. Hence they blocked the parliamentary process. Consequently Mr. ErdoÄŸan called for early elections, and, alas, won them on July 22 with an astounding victory.

I see things quite differently. Secularists are not persecuting practicing Muslims. In fact, the far majority (99%) of Turks are Muslims - the far majority of secularists - then - are Muslims (yes, practicing Muslims) as well. As you all know, my fiance is Turkish and I recently spent four weeks in that wonderful country. I spoke to many, many Turks - some of them voted for the AK Parti, but the ones I dealt with mostly were secularists (most of them voted for the CHP even though they detest its leader, Deniz Baykal). All of them - yes, every single one of them - are practicing Muslims. All of them believe very strongly in Allah, and all of them believe that Mohammed was Allah’s prophet. All the men go to the Mosque regularly - every Friday. They believe, however, that politics and religion should be separated. They believe that religion and politics do not mix. History and experience taught them this lesson.

Akyol’s big mistake is that he seems to believe that practicing Muslims cannot be secularists. That is in my opinion not true. They can. Just as practicing Christians can be secularists. Some practicing Muslim women wear a headscarf, some do not. That is not dependent on whether or not she is a practicing Muslim: it has to do with how she interprets the Koran (Qur’an). Some practicing Muslim women simply believe that there is no need for them to wear a headscarf. In secular circles in Turkey, the headscarf is also associated with the oppression of women. Therefore, secular women often choose not to wear one. They believe that they are equal to men. When they enter a mosque, they wear a headscarf (they have to), but in every day life, they believe there is no need for them to cover their head / hair.

The danger with Akyol’s reasoning, is that it almost looks like he is playing the “you’re not a true Muslim card,” or - and that is more likely - that others will use his reasoning like that.

He also writes:

Moreover, the remaining 53 percent of the voters can’t be considered as in opposition to Mr. Gül. The voters of the Nationalist Movement Party (14 percent), the Democratic Party (5 percent), the independents (5 percent), the Saadet Party (2 percent) and other little political parties do not share the Islamophobic fixation that lies behind the anti-Gül hysteria. It is only the ultra-secularist CHP, which gained just 20 percent of the votes, that is obsessed with the presidency of Mr. Gül. It was actually Deniz Baykal, the party’s leader, who initiated this artificial crisis many months ago by swearing, “We won’t allow the headscarf at the top of the state!”

Again, the people I lived with in Turkey and met, mostly voted for the CHP. I do not recognize them in the description given by Mr. Akyol. They are not Islamophobic: they are Muslims themselves. In the West, Islamists often accuse those who are not Muslims and who are secularists of being Islamophobes. This is the first time that I see a Muslim accusing fellow Muslims of being Islamphobes.

Please read more at my own blog, by clicking here.

It’s Gül vs. Sarkozy:

Ankara refused on Thursday a proposal to set up a Mediterranean club, floated by new French President Nicolas Sarkozy as an alternative to full membership in the EU, and urged the conservative politician to respect membership agreements signed between Turkey and the bloc.

Sarkozy, who took over office from Jacques Chirac on Wednesday, is a strong opponent of Turkey’s membership in the EU on the basis that much of Turkey’s territory lies in Asia, he has instead proposed a lose grouping of Mediterranean countries in which Turkey could be a key player.

“Cooperation in the Mediterranean and cooperation in the EU are two different things. Turkey is a country that has begun EU talks and is in a negotiation process,” Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül told reporters.”Erecting obstacles to this negotiation process would mean not respecting signatures, commitments previously made. I do not expect this to happen.”

Some European politicians, notably Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, remain publicly opposed to ever admitting Turkey. But Merkel, whose country currently holds the EU’s rotating presidency, has said she would honor past commitments made to Turkey and would not block its negotiations.

We have to allow Turkey to join the EU. Turkey truly is a bridge between East and West. Turkey is the world’s only truly democratic secular Muslim country: we must celebrate that and encourage it. Furthermore, it’s also good for our own economies: Turkey’s economy will grow… and grow… and… grow for decades. Sure, Turkey is still a relatively poor country, but it’s potential is enormous: what a market for us (I’m Dutch after all). Also, Turkey has a very rich history: Istanbul, for instance, was the capital of the Byzantine empire. Istanbul, and Turkey, have always been part of Europe, were even at the center of European civilization. There are more reasons, of course, one of them is that if we refuse Turkey, Turkey might stop focusing on the West and might associate more with, say, Iraq, and Syria, and Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, and Jordan, etc. Can we truly afford to lose an ally of Turkey’s strategic importance?

Furthermore, those who say that Turkey should never be allowed to join the EU have, I am afraid, never visited Turkey themselves. Those who have always speak extremely highly of Turkey. If West European cultures would be influenced by Turkish culture this would be a good thing: in Turkey they still understand the concept of respect. And of hospitality. And of warmth. And of friendliness. Of course, there are many things that need to change in Turkey: if it were up to me, Turkish culture would look more at the individual and less at ‘the group’ (be it nation or family), and that will happen if we have open borders. As I see it, it will be a win-win situation: in the West, we might adopt some good aspects of Turkish culture, while in Turkey they might adopt some good aspects of West European culture.

And, in the long run, the economies of all those involved will benefit.

Political leaders in the West should - for once - not give in to the will of the public. Instead, our politicians have to do what they did once, a long time ago: they have to try to convince people that popular opinion is wrong. Politicians don’t do that nowadays anymore, they now look at the polls, “visit the country” and do whatever it is the majority wants. That is a mistake. Why? Because the average Joe doesn’t think things through. But, with a little encouragement, Joe does think more carefully and is willing and able to change his (or her) mind.

Cross posted at my own blog.