Turkey Analyst,
vol. 3 no. 18
25 October 2010

WHAT THE COLUMNISTS SAY

The recent Turkish debate has been entirely consumed by the matter of the Islamic headscarf. The ruling Justice and development party (AKP) has declined to allay the fears of the seculars that the ban on the headscarf in government offices and in high and elementary schools is eventually going to be lifted, now that the symbol of the Islamic movement has been accepted in the universities.  The insistence of the AKP to promote the freedom of the headscarf, while it neglects other aspects of democratization, has drawn sharp criticism from quarters that are usually supportive of the ruling party. Liberal commentators observe that the AKP understands freedom as being more or less exclusively about the headscarf.

ÇANDAR:  THE CAUSE OF FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY CANNOT BE PROMOTED ONLY WITH THE HEADSCARF
Cengiz Çandar in Radikal finds similarities between the present political situation and the events that followed the elections in 2007. The AKP seems to possess a striking ability to squander the opportunity to advance the cause of freedom and democratization. Just like in 2007, a democratic momentum is now being squandered. Instead of pursuing a general democratization, the AKP chooses to promote exclusively the cause of the headscarf. Of course, a package of democratization is going to include the right for education for those who wear the headscarf. But it will also have to include the right for education in Kurdish – which would greatly contribute to the resolution of the Kurdish issue – and freedom for the Alevis to have their places of worship, as well as the abolition of compulsory religious education. If you shut the door for education in the “mother tongue”, if you, after eight years in power, have still not sorted out where you stand in the matter of the Alevis’ religious freedom and in the matter of compulsory religious education, then you will not be able to take a single step in the matter of the headscarf either. You simply cannot advance the cause of freedom and democracy with only the headscarf.

ALTAN: ISSUING MEANINGLESS ULTIMATUMS IN THE DEFENSE OF SECULARISM LETS THE AKP OFF THE HOOK
Ahmet Altan in Taraf reacts strongly against what he describes as the “meaningless ultimatum” of the chief prosecutor of the High appeals court. Defending the ban on attending university wearing the headscarf, the chief prosecutor has called the government and the political parties to order by reminding that the legislative and the executive branches of government are bound by the rulings of the courts. The ultimatum of the chief prosecutor in fact has no legal basis whatsoever, and will not have any legal consequences. However, this meaningless declaration will have political and societal consequences. And these are mainly going to benefit the AKP. The AKP is a party that becomes bewildered, that is clueless as soon as the discussion progresses beyond the point of securing the freedom to wear the headscarf. It has never gotten around to fully endorsing basic human rights and freedoms. It has proven itself incapable of forcefully implementing the reforms that would secure the path to EU membership. The Kurdish issue and the situation of the Alevis are not being adequately addressed. Yet people like the chief prosecutor always come to the rescue of the AKP. If it hadn’t been for people of his kind, the AKP would have been forced by society to take steps that advance the cause of general freedom. Now, thanks to the chief prosecutor, the whole matter (of democratization and freedom) is reduced to the headscarf, which amounts to letting the AKP off the hook.

ÜLSEVER:  THE USE OF THE HEADSCARF SHOULD BE FREE, EXCEPT FOR THOSE STATE FUNCTIONARIES WHO MUST BE IMPARTIAL
Cüneyt Ülsever in Hürriyet proposes a solution to the headscarf issue from a liberal vantage point: As free individuals with full rights, adults are free to dress like they wish.  Obviously societal mores and morality qualify that freedom, but such restrictions are not laid down by the law. The only legal restrictions that can be imposed on individual choices of dress are those that are called for by the function exercised by certain public servants. However, it is not because of the principle of secularism that certain restrictions must be imposed, but because it is crucial to secure that those who decide in matters that have an impact on individual rights and freedoms are not suspected of being other than impartial. Judges, prosecutors (not defense lawyers), teachers, inspectors, military and police officers fall into that category, although there are other public servants as well. While not disowning the two sides’ respective fears and rights, I make this suggestion in the hope that it will contribute to the creation of a societal common ground and in order to help realize the determination to coexist.

GÜRSEL: THE FUTURE OF DEMOCRACY IN TURKEY DEPENDS ON SECULARISM BEING REINTERPRETED AND PROTECTED
Kadri Gürsel in Milliyet doubts that the people of Turkey truly share a determination to uphold coexistence. In fact we may very well lack the “determination to coexist”. But then, what are we going to about it? Are we going to seek refuge in the hope of somehow being able to rid the country of the others? The future of democracy in a country like Turkey, which is defined by linguistic, religious and ethnic heterogeneity and where there is a multitude of life styles, depends on secularism being reinterpreted, modernized and safeguarded. As Cüneyt Ülsever has correctly noted, the obligation of impartiality necessarily imposes certain restrictions on how some public servants may dress; those who dispense with services that have a bearing on individual rights and freedoms cannot display religious symbols, as they must retain an absolute equidistance to all creeds. What has happened today is that the discussion has come to shift to the matter of setting the headscarf free in the public realm, which in turn is a direct consequence of the September 12 referendum on constitutional reform that has significantly emboldened the ruling AKP. This government is not prone to seeking consensus; it rather seeks to impose its will. And concurrently, the fact that its opponents, the defenders of the old republican regime, continue to cling to an authoritarian interpretation of secularism bestows further legitimacy on the attempt of the AKP to remove the obstacles to the use of the headscarf in the public sphere.

YILMAZ: THE OPPORTUNITY THAT PRESIDENT GÜL WASTED
Mehmet Y. Yılmaz in Hürriyet writes that President Abdullah Gül has once again wasted an important opportunity to show that he is a president that stands above party politics. In fact, the president has had many opportunities thus far to show that he is a not an “AKP president”. But as Gül has now selected the new members of the Supreme Board of the Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK), we are once again forced to conclude that every one of the president’s choices conform to his and the ruling AKP’s political views. It is to be regretted that the president has passed over this opportunity to allay the fears of a substantial part of the population that the judiciary is going to be made subservient to the AKP. Abdullah Gül would have strengthened his own position as chief of state if his choices had been less partisan.

© Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program Joint Center, 2010. This article may be reprinted provided that the following sentence be included: "This article was first published in the Turkey Analyst (www.turkeyanalyst.org), a biweekly publication of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program Joint Center".

The Turkey Analyst
The Turkey Analyst is a publication of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Joint Center, designed to bring authoritative analysis and news on the rapidly developing domestic and foreign policy issues in Turkey. It is published bi-weekly, and includes topical analysis, as well asa summary of the Turkish media debate. It is edited and compiled under the supervision of Svante E. Cornell and Halil M. Karaveli.

The Turkey Analyst welcomes article submission. Please contact Halil M. Karaveli, Managing Editor.

The Joint Center
The Joint Center was created in 2005 through the merger of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute, at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies, and the Silk Road Studies Program, at the Stockholm-based Institute for Security and Development Policy.

The Turkey Initiative
The Joint Center launched a Turkey Initiative in 2006 in order to improve understanding of Turkish domestic and foreign affairs in Europe and the United States.

To Subscribe:
To subscribe to the Turkey Analyst email announcements, please contact Martina Klimesova with an email containing "subscribe Turkey Analyst" in the subject line.