DPATurkish students shout slogans in support of wearing head scarf, in front of Istanbul University, which does not allow headscarfs, Istanbul, Turkey.
Turkey Steers into a Dangerous Identity Crisis
By Ferda Ataman and Jürgen Gottschlich
Turkey's highest court in Ankara ruled on Thursday that a law passed by Erdogan's government easing the ban on headscarves at universities was unconstitutional. The ruling is a precursor to a dramatic confrontation likely to emerge in the coming months between Erdogan's Islamist-rooted AKP party and the country's secularist forces, led by the powerful military.
The atmosphere on Thursday afternoon in Turkey was fraught with anticipation. It seemed as though the country was waiting for the high court decision. And the justices didn't disappoint: The government's reform of a law regulating the wearing of the headscarf, the court decided, was unconstitutional.
The court delivered the verdict following an unusually short proceeding -- and left little room for compromise. The constitutional amendment -- passed by the Turkish parliament in February with the support of the governing Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the nationalist MHP party -- is null and void. The headscarf ban repeal, the court said in a brief ruling, infringes on the constitutionally mandated separation of church and state.
It is a verdict that went well beyond what observers had been expecting. Politicians and analysts alike had thought the court would merely request a supplementary law limiting the headscarf reform to the universities -- which would have maintained the ban in schools and for those working in public service positions.
Instead, Turkey's high court has handed Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his AKP party an important political defeat. More than that, however, the verdict is a message. Turkey's high court will soon be hearing a case aimed at banning the AKP due to its presumed roots in religion and intention to break down the barriers between church and state. Thursday's verdict seems to indicate that the justices are not going to back down.
The battle over the head scarf is a skirmish in the war currently being fought over the very identity of Turkey. The prevailing bureaucracy and military, the opposition -- stubbornly loyal as it is to the ideas of founding father Mustafa Kemal Atatärk -- and a big chunk of secularist Turks see the governing AKP as a threat to their way of life. They fear the government of Erdogan, along with President Abdullah Gül, who is also from the AKP, wants to strengthen the role of religion in the country. In AKP's rise, they see a creeping Islamization of Turkey.
There is evidence that they may be right -- that under AKP the balance of power is shifting in Turkey, and that the country is becoming more conservative and religious. There are new laws placing restrictions on the way alcohol is consumed and the sight of women wearing headscarves publicly has become more prevalent. In addition, the country's directorate for religious affairs published an article putting the onus on women to refrain from sexually stimulating men. Still, critics say it's questionable whether the developments can be effectively stopped through court rulings or official institutions.
The AKP showed its dissatisfaction with the ruling on Thursday. An AKP spokesman decried the ruling as anti-constitutional, calling it a political rather than legal ruling. "This is interfering with both democracy and parliament's legislative authority," the vice president of the AKP's parliamentary group, Bekir Bozdag, told reporters. "The decision opens the way to controlling every constitutional amendment that parliament would want to make."
But it's clear from the decision that the country is also moving towards a ban of the AKP. And that will create political turbulence for the country at a time when it is aiming toward membership in the European Union. This new verdict might not increase the country's chances. Europe has repeatedly criticized Turkey's heavy handed judiciary for standing in the way of freedom of opinion and true democracy.
The question is whether AKP will accept a ban without mobilizing its supporters. Speculation is already brewing of massive street protests and the possibility of early elections in the autumn. AKP, many suspect, would like to use the protests to build support for a referendum to install a new constitution that would strip the current court of its power.
The military will now be tracking AKP's moves closely. And if it has to, it will defend the country's secularity with any means necessary. Turkey, in short, appears to be on a dangerous path -- and one that may end in confrontation.
* For the latest update on these mounting tensions in Turkey click here http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,564631,00.html
* For the headscarf vontrovesry in Germany see here: Muslim Headscarves Test the Limits of German Tolerance
* The French government has passed a law banning the wearing of Islamic headscarves in schools, which comes into effect at the start of the new school year on 2 September. BBC News Online examines the controversy surrounding the ban, which will affect millions of Muslims. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3328277.stm
* Muslim headscarf controversy in Danish election
* etc, etc, etc...
A note from Radarsite: As the above links so amply demonstrate (and there are many more which could have been added to this list), that ominous Clash of Civilizations is no longer a matter of academic conjecture; it is rather a very real and ferocious battle for the identity of our Western world and beyond. A mere two decades ago this present day crisis would have been all but inconceivable, perhaps even laughable. How could we in our comfortable and successful Twenty-First Century Western civilization possibly find ourselves being torn between our vital world of freedom and democracy on the one hand, and a brutal Seventh Century cult of darkness and negation on the other? How could this preposterous choice between our vibrant and successful capitalist democracy and a backward-looking failed theocracy ever have become a legitimate contest? Where did we go wrong? What did we fail to see and comprehend about this world we were living in?
Are we too generous in our acceptance of the Other? Are we too innocent and naive to recognize Evil when it shows its ugly presence so plainly at our door? Are we dumbfounded at the very concept of naked Evil? Our multiculturalist mentors did not prepare us very well for this inevitable eventuality, did they? On the contrary, they zealously erased all those disturbing chapters from all of our textbooks in the name of their superior vision of cultural relativism.
The increasingly bitter battles over the wearing of headscarves or veils by Muslim women in the West is becoming , or most certainly should become a major issue, for it is intensely emblematic of this monumental struggle for the hearts and souls of our freedom-loving nations and for the future of our children. There can no longer be any doubt as to their tremendous symbolic political significance; they are as meaningful and disruptive and confrontational as a Nazi swastika armband.
This, then, must be our proverbial line in the sand. This is where the West must make its stand. This must be the symbol of our resolve, our strength and our will to survive. These Islamic headscarves are the virtual flags of our enemies, and we cannot, we must not, allow them to be planted in our soil. It is a matter of cultural honor and ultimately a matter of our very survival. - rg
.jpg)
.jpg)
.BMP)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
When Mustafa Kemal Ataturk founded the modern nation of Turkey, he took a page from the US and insisted on a full separation of the State and Religion. In doing that he made Turkey into the only nation with a Muslim majority who has freedoms guaranteed by their constitution. Since 1923, the mullahs have tried to destroy this dream of his. But it has prevailed.
ReplyDeleteSome of the Social Reforms he did:
1925, The hat, as opposed to the fez, was introduced.
1925, The activities of religious sects were banned by law.
1925, Western calender was introduced.
1926 The liberation of the women of Turkey by giving them political and social rights.
a) Civil Rights granted
b) Rights for women to be elected to the parliament.
1928, International numeric system was introduced.
1931, The Metric system was introduced.
1934, Nicknames and personal titles were abolished.
1934, Religious attire was prohibited in public. According to this law, religious personalities, irrespective of the religious groups they belong were not supposed to wear religious attire in public, but only in sanctuaries.
1934, The surname law was passed. The modern secular system of jurisprudence instead of religious law is integrated.
He set the example for the Muslim world, it is too bad that the rest of them cannot follow it.
That's a magnificent list, isn't it?.
ReplyDeleteWhen I wrote that article a while back "AA For Islam", I asked who could be Islam's Big John, to lead them out of their downward spiral, I was thinking of course about the only one they ever had -- Ataturk. But you're right the Islamists have been fighting ferociously ever since to get back their lost power. And now it seems to be coming to a showdown.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
I applaud the courts for upholding their Constitution rather than folding to political pressure. I, of course, question the spirit of the law itself (not so much separation of church and state as it is squelching of the church), but such matters are not for the courts to decide. If Findalis is correct, they lived up to their responsibilities perfectly.
ReplyDeleteThe sad thing is...whether it's morally right or wrong to enforce such laws, yielding to opposition will do little more than give them a foothold from which to demand less innocuous changes.
If you dye a skunk’s white stripes, it will be difficult to recognize at a safe distance, subjecting innocent bystanders to unnecessary risk of being coated with an indelible stench.
ReplyDeleteIf you amputate a rattle snake’s rattles, you8 make it difficult to recognize, subjecting innocent bystanders to the risk of a painful and potentially lethal bite.
Likewise, a Muslim’s hijab or turban is a warning sign, while part of a uniform, it serves to alert us to the presence of an enemy.
You don’t make skunks or rattlesnakes safe to be around by concealing their identity. The same principle holds true for Muslims.
It is time to quit fixating on the superficial and pay attention to the substantive issues which nobody has the courage to confront.
Hey guys, don't know if you've heard of this yet, but....
ReplyDeleteI thought I should bring this to your attention, if it isn't already...
Harry's Place is being sued by a radical Islamist...
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/07/10/were-being-sued-by-hamas-uk/
We've started a blogburst to help them.
http://www.neoconstant.com/314/support-harrys-place-blogburst/
All the best,
Erik Kain
Well well well! Seems like Europa is sick to death of mohammedism and all it's trappings. That Der Speigel link featured several stories that remind the historically saavy that Europa wrote the book on ethnic cleansing.
ReplyDeleteIt would be nicely ironic if Turkey were to become the first real battleground between islam and Western values.
ReplyDeleteAnd the EU will come down heavily on the side of the islamists....but the Turkish Army isn't likely to be fazed by any force the EU can muster.
Interesting times.