Monday, 12 October 2009
‘High treason’ is not an alien concept in Turkish political life, yet the fact that it has been expressed too often for the last few months has caused much bewilderment in the minds of the public. On the contrary, while this concept had been used before to designate fugitives, terrorists and foes and their accomplices, it has recently been associated, directly or indirectly, with highly respected names and institutions starting with the President of the Republic.
The language of wrath being felt more and more with the recent democratic opening in Turkey has targeted state-citizen, government-governed relations based on tolerance and state actions with broader participation based on transparency. Thus, in such a process when large numbers of people are accused of high treason the language of wrath dispels even further the dream of the new environment characterized by solidarity, national unity and tolerance that the democratic opening aims to achieve.
When what those blamed for high treason have expressed is taken into consideration the President’s speech in May in which he argued in light of the emerging conjuncture that historic opportunity has arisen in relation to Turkey’s prolonged combat against terrorism ‘is singled out. President Gül’s recent speech at the Turkish Grand National Assembly’s opening ceremony has been subjected to the same accusation as well. Pointing out the democratic opening will help build and strengthen Turkish national unity, Gul said that “A state that fears variety and differences prevailing in society cannot attain the ultimate goal of modernity Ataturk had set… defending national unity and variety within the nation not as alternatives or negatory but as supportive of each other constitutes the main bone of modern democracies.”
The President’s speech in which he put forward a philosophical background featuring almost as the roof of the democratic opening was based on emphasizing on Turkey’s problem-solving mentality in the 21st century, the digestion of democracy and rule of law, and on the importance of those values in solving the problems Turkey has faced. This emphasis is significant indeed. The president’s faith in the rule of law and human rights in the process of the democratic opening can be easily seen in those words as he put it: “nobody can violate laws even for the purpose of preserving the state and regime, to do so will be the most serious danger in front of state security and the regime.”
It could be telling to scrutinize what the Turkish government, accused of partitioning the country and high treason, has expressed recently. In its last congress the ruling party stressed that the variety in Turkey has in fact played important role in providing national unity and cohesiveness. By referring to torch-like leading figures ranging from Sufis such as Yunus Emre to Rumi, Cem Karaca to Ahmet Kaya, the national poet Mehmet Akif to theologian Said Nursi, from Ahmed-i Hani to Sufi Haci Bektas-ý Veli it could be claimed that the cultural, political, religious, and social dimensions of the new democratic opening have been drawn. Thus, the main idea can be said to be the search for an upper identity based on the will to help the prevailing variety turn into richness and let ‘differences’ flourish and thrive.
Undoubtedly, one can criticize various aspects of the approach the government has adopted. Yet, ‘high treason’ is a serious accusation and has been used too often lately. Even the expression in the National Security Council Declaration that “maintenance of the continuing work [on the democratic opening] has been advised” has been likened to the Armistice of Mudros by the opposition parties.
Examples as such can be multiplied; yet, it has been only confusing to blame respected state institutions, organs and names for partitioning the nation or for high treason. If there exists hard evidence to support such claims they should be laid open and shared with the public. The easiest way for the claimants to prevent confusion in the Turkish public would be to ‘enlighten’ the country by sharing what they hold in their possession and terminating the democratic opening process, which they think is full of ‘dark!’ and ‘contemptible!’ conspiracy theories.
*This piece penned by Ihsan Bal was first published in HABERTURK newspaper on October 06, 2009.
Why and How Did the U.S. Torture?
