The immediate future will reveal whether the secular system conception that's been valid so far will continue or not.

- 11 / 05 / 2008 13:45

Turkey is at another crossroads. The immediate future will reveal whether the secular system conception that's been valid so far will continue or not. The Constitutional Court's ruling on the AKP's (Justice and Development) closure case will signal the beginning of a new process in this country.   While we wait for this decision, it becomes obvious that the European Union constitutes the most effective opposition in Turkey. Neither the CHP (Republican People's Party) nor the MHP (Nationalist Movement Party) are as effective in opposition as the EU. They yell and they get rough, but they don't seem to accomplish a lot. On the other hand, the EU continues the discussion on the concepts and criteria of democracy. EU officials' statements also seem to be the subject that columnists most discuss. 

  If you're careful, you'll notice that these discussions also bring to the surface the confusion and enormous differences that exist between the Turkish and European concepts of democracy and secularism.  For most of us, secularism comes before everything else, and it's alright to deviate from democracy to some degree in order to protect secularism. In Europe, however, democracy prevails over all other principles. Secularism is a part of democracy. It has no prevalence. This difference of mentality originates from our failure to establish a genuine rule of law, regardless of anything we may have to say on that matter. Europe is a body of states governed by the rule of law. In our country, on the other hand, law can be deformed or modified in accordance to the conditions of the day. Europe knows that a big struggle for power is going on in Turkey, but they fail to grasp the full details concerning this fight.Patriots, MHP nationalists and the CHP keep producing conspiracy theories and accuse the EU of wanting to push Turkey into becoming a moderate Islamic country. They view the EU as the champion of the AKP. Olli Rehn and Jose Manuel Barosso are being accused of being anti-Kemalist. Real fundamentalists also view the EU as the enemy. One sector outside the AKP qualifies the EU as the Christian Mafia. In short, it's complete chaos. However, all this confusion is bound to produce a synthesis. You'll see that even those who breathe fire at the EU today, will not be able give it up; for no one knows where Turkey will end up and explode, if it's allowed to drift around the Middle East like a floating mine without the security of the EU's anchor.

  We will miss Rehn and Lagendijk:

  It's the latest fashion to badmouth  Olli Rehn. His attitude towards the AKP's closure case has especially made him the target of secular circles. Another name that draws all the fire is Joost Lagendijk. These two names are being dragged through the mud for daring to oppose the closure case against the AKP. Lagendijk is a member of the European Parliament. In other words, he's free to say what he thinks. Furthermore, a great deal of what he says is very true and logical. However, he's still torn to pieces by the anti-AKP media. I can't understand why we react so strongly against people who state their opinions.

  The right thing to do should be to tell them that you don't agree and leave it at that. The real reason they get so worked up about this is probably the fact that those people represent the EU opposition. While we attack them, we forget that Rehn and Lagendijk have some very important qualifications. They both know Turkey very well and they believe in the necessity of making Turkey a full EU member.  I've heard them speak many times. I've read what they've said during conferences and put in their reports. What we're really doing is  tearing  apart two very good friends to this country. It's different if you are one of  those who say, “My enemy's friend is also my enemy. ” However, these people, whom we're trying to destroy, will most probably leave their present posts in 2009.  Next year, the European Commission will change. The "enlargement" file – in other words, Turkey's file – will probably be transferred from Rehn to someone else. Rehn may remain on the commission, however, France has already announced its wish to take over the ‘enlargement file.' In 2009, we may have to deal with a French person instead of Rehn. It's also very probable that Lagendijk will leave parliament to go back to his own business. I wonder what those who throw arrows at these two now will do if this change takes place. I can tell you that we'll miss Rehn and Lagendijk most bitterly.