Turkish Forum

Tag: LAGENDIJK

  • The world is watching Turkey

    The world is watching Turkey

    JOOST LAGENDIJK

    [email protected]

    The world is watching Turkey

    The conference season has started again. Last week there was the eighth Bosporus Conference, organized by the British Council, the Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV), a Turkish think tank, and the delegation of the European Union in Turkey.

    The focus, as in previous years, was on the relations between Turkey and the EU. A couple of days ago, the German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF), in partnership with the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Economic Policy Foundation of Turkey (TEPAV), invited a selected group of Turkish and foreign specialists to discuss the impact of the Arab Spring on Turkey, the EU and the US. Next week we will see the second Istanbul Forum, hosted by Suat Kınıklıoğlu’s Center for Strategic Communication, in partnership with the GMF, where several panels will be dedicated to the changes in Turkey’s neighborhood and what that means for Ankara’s policy. Finally, on November 17-18, the Turkish Confederation of Businessmen and Industrialists (TUSKON) will gather another mixed group of Turkish and foreign pundits to see how the common interests in bringing Turkey closer to the EU can be rediscovered. I am sure that there are many other meetings that I am not aware of.

    It is clear that from a European and American perspective, Turkey, more than ever, is a key player in the region and that analysts all over the world are interested in how to interpret Turkey’s policy, now and in the future.

    On the one hand, many wonder how Turkey and the EU will manage to overcome the present stalemate in the official accession negotiations. For understandable reasons, some participants in the conferences I attended are very skeptical about Turkey-EU relations and do not believe there is a way out. Most others admit that there are the difficulties but, at the same time, recognize that there is no interest on the part of the EU nor Turkey to break up. Everybody is curious whether or not recent efforts by the EU to find common ground with Turkey on the Balkans and in North Africa and the Middle East will lead to a renewed sense of common destiny. Overall, the conclusion is that, in order to safeguard their long term economic and strategic interests, Turkey and the EU should try to hang on in the next two years. After the presidential elections in France next year and the parliamentary elections in Germany in 2013, it will be clear whether major internal obstacles inside the EU will be removed. By that time, the EU should also have been able to solve the euro crisis which would allow the union to look beyond its present borders once more.

    Much more exciting than the complexities of Turkey’s relations with the EU, are of course the popular uprisings in North Africa and the role Turkey is playing there. The so-called Turkish Model always pops up in those debates. It was interesting to see at the recent GMF event how analysts from different countries came to totally opposing conclusions. While one Arab specialist underlined the importance of Turkey as a source of inspiration for many activists and democrats in the Arab world, another commentator from the region strongly objected to this positive perception. According to him, the Turkish Model is an urban myth, repeated over and over again by a small group of Arabs who want to please their Turkish and European counterparts and prove to them that there is no need to be afraid of radical changes in Egypt or Libya. In the real world, for instance on most Arab websites and blogs, he claimed, Turkey does not figure as a shining example.

    Most Western participants seemed to be disappointed after hearing this sobering message. Turkish officials pretended not to be and stressed that Turkey has never had any intention to export its successful mix of a liberal economy, a secular state and a democratic society in the making, to a neighborhood that went through a totally different historical experience during the last 100 years.

    I am not so sure whether the mentioned Turkish hands-off policy is completely true. It seems obvious that Turkey has an interest in stable and democratic neighbors that goes beyond finding new markets for Turkish products. The good thing is that we still have quite a lot of time to find out who is right here. We are only at the start of a process in the Arab world that might well take 25 years to crystallize. In other words: many more conferences to go.

    via The world is watching Turkey.

  • Understanding Atatürk

    Understanding Atatürk

    JOOST LAGENDIJK

    [email protected]

    Understanding Atatürk

    It remains one of the biggest mysteries for foreign visitors to Turkey: Why are the pictures and statues of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk still so omnipresent more than 70 years after his death?

     

    There is no country in Europe where you will find a similar situation. In monarchies, portraits of the ruling king or queen adorn official state offices, but these are depictions of the living monarch and will be replaced after his or her rule with those of his of her successor. In republics, the same applies to the president in office. Nowhere else will you find such an abundance of representations of a former king or president so many years after his death. For many Europeans, this calls to mind all sorts of associations with the former communist countries in Central and Eastern Europe or the present day authoritarian regimes in Central Asia, governed by anti-democratic ideologies and old-fashioned despots. By both counts, these comparisons do not bode well for a positive opinion of Turkey.

    On the other hand, most Turks find it hard to cope with this Western incomprehension. They blame the visitors for their insensitivity and lack of knowledge about Turkish history and defend Atatürk’s ongoing domination of public spaces by referring to his pivotal role in saving the country from annihilation 90 years ago and for laying the still invaluable groundwork for today’s Turkey. You will probably find more ardent supporters of Atatürk among the Turks who do not vote for the current ruling party, but even among the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) rank and file, many would passionately make the case for honoring Atatürk’s legacy in such a visible way.

    I vividly recall an incident some years ago when a then-colleague from the European Parliament, knowledgeable about the country and strongly in favor of Turkey’s accession to the EU, cautiously suggested in an off-the-record conversation with Turkish journalists that maybe one day, as a sign of strengthened democracy and growing self-confidence in Turkey, the pictures of Atatürk might slowly fade away. His remarks were leaked and caused a flurry of commotion in the Turkish media. Before being able to visit Turkey again, he had to explain publicly that he did not intend to insult Atatürk or his ideas.

    The Atatürk perception gap between Turks and non-Turks is not going to disappear quickly. But there is good news for those who find it important to bridge that divide and stimulate some common understanding about the founder of the Turkish republic. Now for sale in Turkish bookshops is the latest publication by Şükrü Hanioğlu, a professor at Princeton University in the US and a distinguished scholar on the late Ottoman Empire and the early republic. The book is called “Atatürk: An Intellectual Biography.” In less than 250 pages and in a very accessible style, Hanioğlu shows how the founder of the Turkish Republic was an intellectual and social product of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Through an analysis of Atatürk’s life, ideas and work, the author explores the uneasy transition from the late Ottoman imperial order to the modern Turkish nation-state and traces Atatürk’s intellectual development.

    The book is a must read for both Turks and non-Turks. Turkish historiography tends to view Atatürk as a solitary genius who singlehandedly wrought a miracle in the form of modern Turkey. One way of showing respect for this extraordinary achievement is by hanging his picture on all Turkish walls even today. While fully acknowledging the enormous impact of his leadership, Hanioğlu explains the ways in which Atatürk’s views were shaped, for instance, by his Thessalonikian background and his education at non-religious and military schools. In constructing his vision of a new Turkey, Atatürk acquired most of his ideas from Western and Ottoman grand theories on the importance of science and the diminishing role of religion in the modern world. The book does not shy away from criticism and explains that the radicalism of Atatürk’s program led to the authoritarian character of his politics. Like many other transformative state builders, he harbored little tolerance for dissent or criticism.

    Let us hope that, after reading this book, both foreigners and Turks alike will have a better understanding of who Atatürk really was, where he got his ideas from and why he is so important to Turkey. We will see in 20 years time whether this improved and more balanced awareness will have an impact on the number of pictures and statues of Atatürk in this country and the appreciation for them by guests and hosts alike.

    via Understanding Atatürk.