Uncivil society under a jealous god
By dominating the entire society, and not leaving any legitimate room for civil religious movements, the Turkish state has unintentionally channeled the ‘Islamic energy’ to politics. If there is a ‘State ideology,’ it is only natural that believers try to redefine it according to their value system.
A few weeks ago, I gave a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations entitled “Turkey’s Political Battle: Secularism vs. Democracy.” While I hope that the event, organized and presided by CFR’s articulate Turkey expert, Steven Cook, helped the audience, I am pretty sure that it helped me. Once more I had an opportunity to see how Westerners perceive Turkey. From all the answers, reactions and comments that I received, and not just at the CFR meeting but also on many other occasions, I have come to notice that there is an important barrier for the uninitiated foreigner to understand Turkey’s politics. Over here some political concepts have very different meanings.
For instance take the term, “secular state.” For an American, this term implies a state that not just refrains from imposing religion, but also respects its role in society. But in Turkey the term “secularism” is used by most of its staunch defenders as “a way of life” that needs to be imposed on the citizens, and a warrant to suppress religious communities and movements.
In Turkey, the term “republic” has a unique meaning too. In the U.S., it implies that people have complete power and that they can regulate the state’s principles and policies. In Turkey the opposite can be true. Some die-hard defenders of “the republic” actually see it as a good shepherd that all citizens should obey and regulate themselves accordingly. “The ideology of the modern Turkish Republic,” said President Sezer in a much-debated speech, “is a State ideology that all citizens have to side with” – capital “S” was in the original.
In the face of such attitudes, one wonders whether the Turkish Republic exists for its citizens, or whether its citizens exist for the Turkish Republic. I of course think that the former notion must be the case, but apparently there are elders of Ankara who agree with the latter view.
A ‘moderate Muslim’ county?
And here lies I think, the mother of many problems in Turkey. The state is just too powerful, dominant and vigilant. It is, to recall an ancient text of wisdom, like a “jealous God,” which wants to see no other identities and ideologies before him.
This authoritarian nature of the state sometimes also distorts the way Turks understand American approaches. Take for example the remarks made by some U.S. officials in recent years over Turkey’s identity as a “moderate Muslim country.” Many secularist Turks reacted fiercely to that and reminded, “Turkey is a secular state.” What they missed was that there is a big difference between a country and a state, for there is much more to the former than the latter. In a country, there are also individuals and civil society, which can have identities and beliefs of their own. And in Turkey most of these happen to have been shaped by Islam.
Failing to appreciate that fact points to the fundamental problem we have here. Since the state does not believe in the autonomy of civil society, it does everything to create and design it in its own image. The NGO’s which reflect the “State ideology” are supported and praised – such as the “Society of Atatürkist Thought,” a bastion of militant secular-nationalism – but others are not welcome, and can be totally banned.
This is especially all the more apparent in the case of religion. In Turkey only the state has the right to establish any religious organization, and civil society simply is not supposed to do anything about faith. Let me tell you what this practically means. Imagine that you are a young, enthusiastic Turkish Muslim who wants to do something to serve God. What can you do? Can you join or establish something like say, “The Society for the Advancement of Islam”? No. Any unofficial organization that has a religious purpose is illegal. Or can you go and set up a “Sufi Soup Kitchen,” or a charity named “Muslims for Poor Kids”? No. In Turkey, you cannot establish any club that has anything religious in its name or charter.
Of course there are Sufi orders and other religious communities that act under euphemistic names. However the lack of freedom in society creates a lack of transparency that prevents the flourishing of more open, responsible, and pluralistic models of religion.
Minimize the Leviathan:
Let’s also consider education. Imagine that you are a devout Turkish parent and wish to provide a religious education to your children. What can you do? Can you send your kids to a private “Islamic college?” No. That’s illegal in Turkey where all education is regulated by the state and in accordance to secular standards.
The only religious education available is given at the public schools known as “Imam Hatip.” These provide some Koran and hadith courses along with the standard curriculum. But the military intervention of 1997 brought many disadvantages to the graduates of these quasi-religious schools – an act which has been interpreted by the religious circles as yet another case of oppression alongside other troubles such as the ban on headscarves.
Now here is the crucial point: By dominating the entire society and not leaving any legitimate room for civil religious movements, the state has unintentionally channeled the “Islamic energy” to politics. If the state is all-encompassing and too imposing, controlling the state becomes a matter of life and death. If there is a “State ideology,” it is only natural that believers try to redefine it according to their value system.
This means that the much-feared “political Islam” in Turkey, which is already in decline for various other reasons, will be even weaker if the state becomes smaller and liberal. If we minimize our secular Leviathan, then there won’t be much demand for an Islamic version either.