Turkey’s
Perverted Secularism
By Siddique Malik
www.spreadfreedom.com
When
it comes to secularism, Turkey’s establishment
has it all wrong. Under persistent military pressure,
successive Turkish governments have regulated
one of citizens’ basic rights, i.e., the
right to dress as one pleases. This makes Turkey,
an otherwise relatively modern country, look like
a tyranny. Suppression engenders extremism, and
once a society is afflicted with this disease,
it is only a matter of time before it will be
face to face with fanaticism. What happened in
Turkey on May 17, 2006 should open the eyes of
all those who shamelessly impose their perceptions
of ‘suitable behavior’ on society.
A man calling himself “a soldier of Allah”
burst into a courtroom of Turkey’s highest
court, the Council of State, and started to shoot
at judges. Five judges were injured, on of whom,
Judge Mustafa Yucel Ozbilgin, later succumbed
to his injuries. The shooter was upset over the
court’s decision to uphold a sanction against
a female public servant for wearing headscarf
to work, because of her religious considerations.
However, the court is not to blame for this verdict
because it simply interpreted the bizarre statutes
that outline a dress code for female public servants.
These statues are a hangover from the days of
the founder of modern Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.
When he overthrew the country’s religion-based
oligarchy called the Ottoman Empire, he went overboard.
Some of his actions were drastic but unnecessary,
culturally offensive and anti-freedom. He ordered
a restructuring of the Turkish language, switching
its Arabic based alphabets to European style alphabets.
Also, he banned religious symbols, like the headscarf.
Surely, this must have triggered resentment and
sowed the seeds of societal fissures.
However, considering that he rid his country of
a corrupt oligarchy, Ataturk can be forgiven for
these excesses. Had it not been for him, perhaps
today’s Turkey would be a failed state,
instead of being vibrant enough to become a NATO
member. If Ataturk had lived longer, perhaps,
he would have eventually reversed the anti-freedom
laws. Every one is allowed to make a mistake or
two, especially when one is engaged in dealing
with history’s tidal forces. It is the responsibility
of such a leader’s successors to plug these
gaps. This is how America got its bill of rights.
America was lucky because its successive leaders
believed in improvising the republic rather than
using its birth defects to protect their personal
interests and pursue parochial causes. Turkey,
like many other countries was not so lucky. Its
army developed a taste for power (direct and indirect),
and wanted to preserve tools that could help it
suppress the people. Preserving secularism became
an excuse for suppressing freedoms. Power grabbers
love tools of suppression.
Another such country is Pakistan, where people
are exploited by religious extremists and feudal
lords, in cahoots with the army, in the name of
religion. These elements have conveniently forgotten
the secular intentions of Pakistan’s founding
father, the British educated lawyer, Mohammad
Ali Jinnah. Lucky for these power hungry demons
and unlucky for Pakistanis that he died just a
year after the country was created. He thus could
not leave his imprint on his nascent nation. Since
then, the power hungry establishment has enforced
many suppressive statues on one pretext or another.
Consequently, today, fanaticism is a huge problem
in Pakistan.
Of course, I condemn the callous act of violence
in the courthouse in Ankara. But it is time that
Turkey fixes its completely inaccurate and inhuman
interpretation of secularism. Turkey’s stance
is in violation of human rights, and it hurts
the concept of secularism on at least two counts.
First of all, it brings a bad name to secularism,
the only civilized way to ensure societal equity
and harmony. Since majority of the Turkish people
are Muslims, it gives bigots in other Muslim countries
ammunition to malign secularism, and if Muslims
worldwide need one thing desperately, it is a
commitment to secularism. Otherwise, they will
remain mired in an endless orgy of breach of human
dignity and resultant chaos.
Secondly, by suppressing people’s religious
rituals in the name of secularism, Turkey creates
a wrong impression that secularism must remain
apprehensive of religion, and this is totally
unfair. Secularism respects all religions and
the right of the followers of all religions to
freely practice their faith as they deem it fit.
Secularism frowns upon the state’s flirtations
with religion or vice versa. Turkish style suppression
of religion constitutes a de-facto involvement
of religion in government. Therefore, Turkey may
think that it is secular but practically, it is
not.
Turkey must abrogate its anti-headscarf law. This
will do Turkey a world of good in the context
of its current foreign policy goals, too. Turkey
wants to become a member of the European Union
but Europe is skeptical of Turkey’s commitment
to human rights, and this law adds to this skepticism.
Meanwhile, in an aberrant response to its current
social problems, France recently banned female
students from wearing headscarf in public schools
- exploitation of religion is alive and well in
France. Here is an earth-moving opportunity for
Turkey. It should abrogate its anti-headscarf
law and then give France a lecture or two on human
rights which France obviously needs. It’s
about time a Muslim country is seen promoting
human rights rather than always being labeled
as a violator.
Turks poured into streets at the murdered judge’s
funeral, chanting pro-secularism and anti-fanaticism
slogans. Also, they have been raising voices in
favor of women’s right to dress as they
please. Obviously, the people of Turkey comprehend
the interdependence of secularism and freedom.
Their work is thus cut out; they must make their
military release its dilapidating grip on their
secular democracy.
Secularism without full freedom is a farce, as
is religion through imposition. The defunct Soviet
Union did not allow religion into governmental
affairs. Cuba, China, North Korea do not do allow
this mixing, either. This conduct cannot be pro-secular
because these governments are anti-freedom. On
the other hand, Stone Age dispensations such as
Iran and Saudi Arabia force their ruling cabals’
religious perceptions down their people’s
throats, another form of anti-freedom behavior.
Does Turkey want to be identified with these truculent
and constrictive setups, or it rather be listed
with truly free nations like America?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
