Kalypso Nicolaïdis and Hakan Altınay argue really hard to explain "why the European Union strengthens secularism in Turkey." I really hope they convince the secularists of the wisdom of the EU membership for the sustainability of secularism in Turkey.
But I am afraid they will not succeed. The reason is simple: For the Turkish secularists, the question is not just a matter of secularism. For them, secularism is a "discursive tool" to empower one socio-political/economic group while excluding conservative/peripheral social actors and their interests and identities from the power center. Unless one rightly identifies the underlying causes of the secularists' outcry, it is impossible to address the issue.
Secularists would be appeased only if they are offered the continuation of the privileged status they once enjoyed -- this time by the EU, which may decide specifically to protect the interests of the secularists. The point is whether such a position would fit into the European ideal of equality and non-discrimination.
A democratic politics based on the rights of individuals as outlined in the European Convention of Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU would provide protection for all citizens. Special protection for a particular group, the secularists, would rightly be called privilege.
The secularists in Turkey should first come to terms with democracy and human rights. The top secularists, high-ranking commanders, declared last week how "democracy threatens the regime and human rights divide Turkey into pieces." This reflects the prevailing mindset of the secularists. How can we go along with such an idea while negotiating membership with the EU?
It is crystal clear that secularists have abandoned the ideal of democracy. They at large view democracy as a system that brought conservative (for them Islamist) political parties into power. One should not think that this is a perception of recent years. Before the existence of the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) and even before the emergence of the Welfare Party (RP) in the 1990s, the secularists viewed democracy as a game always won by counter-revolutionaries. The whole story started with the victory of the Democrat Party (DP) in 1950, the first free and fair elections in Turkey. Since then they have looked for anti-democratic means (direct military coup or judicial interventions) to stop the "counter-revolutionaries" who were in fact politicians representing identities and interests of "ordinary citizens" outside the Kemalist-secularist power block. For that, the secularists welcomed the 1960 military coup and the trial of DP leaders by a military-appointed special tribunal that executed Prime Minister Adnan Menders and two of his ministers.
The secularists continued to oppose Süleyman Demirel in the 1960s and Turgut Özal in the 1980s as both were representing the social periphery against the hegemony of the bureaucratic/secularist center -- and neither of them was Islamists.
So if the EU wishes to appease the secularists, it should forget about democratization in Turkey.
Isn't it interesting to note that the secularists today are the staunchest opponents of the EU? They used to support the EU membership, assuming that it would strengthen their position vis-à-vis the "ignorant, uneducated, rural people of the periphery." But realizing that the EU membership in the late 1990s means full democracy, respect for human rights for all and that the rule of law meant giving up all the privileges they had accumulated for years, the Kemalist secularists gave up on the EU objective.
Yes, they were once supporters of Westernization. Posing as Westernizers was useful to underline the cultural/social "superiority" of the ruling elite over the masses. Being a Westernizer was instrumental in acquiring the right to rule by alienating themselves from the masses, which were unfamiliar with Western culture. Thus Westernization was instrumental in establishing and justifying the power monopoly of Kemalist secularists.
This monopoly is challenged by the EU membership as Westernization now means emancipation for the masses since it requires greater democratization, empowering people vis-à-vis the bureaucratic/Kemalist/secularist center. This is why the EU is now detested by the secularist elite and loved by the masses.
The secularists should come to terms with democracy and a peaceful notion of secularism. They should give up instrumentalizing secularism to exclude conservatives from power and benefits. We need a "democratic secularism" as called for by European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso. The issue at stake is not secularism per se but the exclusion of the conservative and peripheral social/political/economic forces in the name of secularism, which cannot be overlooked by the EU.
Turkey can become a member of the EU without the blessing of the secularists, who would oppose anyway, or at least try to slow down, Turkey's European integration unless the EU sides with them to sustain their power privileges in Turkey. No one expects the EU to align itself with such anachronistic secularists, who are not only anti-democratic but also anti-Western. Remember the republican rallies of last year at which they enthusiastically chanted "Neither the US nor the EU."
08.09.2008
But I am afraid they will not succeed. The reason is simple: For the Turkish secularists, the question is not just a matter of secularism. For them, secularism is a "discursive tool" to empower one socio-political/economic group while excluding conservative/peripheral social actors and their interests and identities from the power center. Unless one rightly identifies the underlying causes of the secularists' outcry, it is impossible to address the issue.
Secularists would be appeased only if they are offered the continuation of the privileged status they once enjoyed -- this time by the EU, which may decide specifically to protect the interests of the secularists. The point is whether such a position would fit into the European ideal of equality and non-discrimination.
A democratic politics based on the rights of individuals as outlined in the European Convention of Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU would provide protection for all citizens. Special protection for a particular group, the secularists, would rightly be called privilege.
The secularists in Turkey should first come to terms with democracy and human rights. The top secularists, high-ranking commanders, declared last week how "democracy threatens the regime and human rights divide Turkey into pieces." This reflects the prevailing mindset of the secularists. How can we go along with such an idea while negotiating membership with the EU?
It is crystal clear that secularists have abandoned the ideal of democracy. They at large view democracy as a system that brought conservative (for them Islamist) political parties into power. One should not think that this is a perception of recent years. Before the existence of the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) and even before the emergence of the Welfare Party (RP) in the 1990s, the secularists viewed democracy as a game always won by counter-revolutionaries. The whole story started with the victory of the Democrat Party (DP) in 1950, the first free and fair elections in Turkey. Since then they have looked for anti-democratic means (direct military coup or judicial interventions) to stop the "counter-revolutionaries" who were in fact politicians representing identities and interests of "ordinary citizens" outside the Kemalist-secularist power block. For that, the secularists welcomed the 1960 military coup and the trial of DP leaders by a military-appointed special tribunal that executed Prime Minister Adnan Menders and two of his ministers.
The secularists continued to oppose Süleyman Demirel in the 1960s and Turgut Özal in the 1980s as both were representing the social periphery against the hegemony of the bureaucratic/secularist center -- and neither of them was Islamists.
So if the EU wishes to appease the secularists, it should forget about democratization in Turkey.
Isn't it interesting to note that the secularists today are the staunchest opponents of the EU? They used to support the EU membership, assuming that it would strengthen their position vis-à-vis the "ignorant, uneducated, rural people of the periphery." But realizing that the EU membership in the late 1990s means full democracy, respect for human rights for all and that the rule of law meant giving up all the privileges they had accumulated for years, the Kemalist secularists gave up on the EU objective.
Yes, they were once supporters of Westernization. Posing as Westernizers was useful to underline the cultural/social "superiority" of the ruling elite over the masses. Being a Westernizer was instrumental in acquiring the right to rule by alienating themselves from the masses, which were unfamiliar with Western culture. Thus Westernization was instrumental in establishing and justifying the power monopoly of Kemalist secularists.
This monopoly is challenged by the EU membership as Westernization now means emancipation for the masses since it requires greater democratization, empowering people vis-à-vis the bureaucratic/Kemalist/secularist center. This is why the EU is now detested by the secularist elite and loved by the masses.
The secularists should come to terms with democracy and a peaceful notion of secularism. They should give up instrumentalizing secularism to exclude conservatives from power and benefits. We need a "democratic secularism" as called for by European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso. The issue at stake is not secularism per se but the exclusion of the conservative and peripheral social/political/economic forces in the name of secularism, which cannot be overlooked by the EU.
Turkey can become a member of the EU without the blessing of the secularists, who would oppose anyway, or at least try to slow down, Turkey's European integration unless the EU sides with them to sustain their power privileges in Turkey. No one expects the EU to align itself with such anachronistic secularists, who are not only anti-democratic but also anti-Western. Remember the republican rallies of last year at which they enthusiastically chanted "Neither the US nor the EU."
08.09.2008
No comments:
Post a Comment