Neo-nationalism is anti-Western and distant towards Islam in Turkey

Source: 
Today's Zaman
Publication date: 
Feb 10 2013
Following a Republican People’s Party (CHP) deputy’s infuriating remarks in January suggesting that Turkish nationality and Kurdish ethnicity are not equal, an intensified debate on the emergence of neo-nationalism has erupted in Turkey.
 

Given the strong roots of nationalism in the country, it has become more than necessary to explore what distinguishes milliyetçilik (nationalism) and ulusalcılık (neo-nationalism) from each other. Although the English translation of both words initially seems the same, due to the different political connotations of the two, ulusalcılık is translated as “neo-nationalism.”

Experts who talked to Sunday’s Zaman agreed with the distinction while mostly stating that what distinguishes these two forms of nationalism in Turkey is the perception of religion, the Ottoman legacy and an anti-Western attitude. In the Turkey of 2013, neo-nationalism stands out as a marginal ideology that ironically finds a basis in the leftist parties and distances itself from Islam, vehemently opposes the US and the EU and refuses to be associated with the country’s Ottoman past. In terms of the belief in ethnic superiority, though, both nationalism and neo-nationalism have a similar stance that denies equality to Kurds and religious minorities.

you cannot make me see the Turkish nation and Kurdish ethnicity as equal

CHP deputy from İzmir Birgül Ayman Güler, who is a political scientist by profession, said in January in a speech at Parliament that “you cannot make me see the Turkish nation and Kurdish ethnicity as equal,” which as expected created a vehement reaction, especially among liberals. She was accused of racism by a large group, including the social democrats in her party, while another CHP deputy, Süheyl Batum, a professor of constitutional law, supported her. Contrary to general expectations, CHP Chairman Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu mildly and covertly criticized Ayman and warned all of his friends within the party to be careful about the remarks they make while putting the blame on the media for aiming to lead to a division within the CHP.

Ayman’s remark found support within Turkey’s Nationalist Movement Party (MHP). MHP Ankara deputy Özcan Yeniçeri also accused the media of lynching Ayman as he argued that the media has now been hijacked in Turkey. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, on the other hand, successfully utilized such an opportunity to harshly criticize the CHP as he drew parallels with the “fascist” past of this party in the 1930s. In reference to newspaper headlines of 1930, Erdoğan recalled the remarks of the then-CHP Minister Mahmut Esat Bozkurt that “anyone who is not pure Turkish is only entitled to being maids and slaves [to Turkish people].” Amid the debate on neo-nationalism, Erdoğan removed the word “ulus” in his monthly TV address on Jan. 31, which is associated with neo-nationalism, and changed it to “millet,” which literally means the same but is traditionally preferred by rightist nationalists and conservatives.

According to political scientist Umut Özkırımlı from Lund University in Sweden, known for his work in the field of nationalism, although not much differs between nationalism and neo-nationalism in the Turkish context, the latter defines itself through secularism and rejects Islam. One of the most important distinctions is hence religion, while the other is a strong anti-Western, anti-American sentiment that he finds “extremely anachronistic.”

Similarly, Taraf columnist Emre Uslu says that in Turkey, nationalism has always had a problem with religion and did not really know what to do with it. However, today what distinguishes nationalism from neo-nationalism is their relationship with religion. After the 1980s, as Uslu points out, the former adopted the motto “As Muslim as Mount Hira [in Mecca], as Turkish as Tian Shan [a mountain in the Central Asian Turkish motherland]” in an effort to make peace between religion and nationality. He adds that the policy of the state to use Islam against the threat of communism was influential in this trend. According to Uslu, though, this version of nationalism did not fit into the classic definition of nationalism due to its internalization of religion, but neo-nationalism, which emerged at the end of the 1990s, fits the template.

Radikal columnist Avni Özgürel defines neo-nationalism as nationalism which is favored by leftists reluctant to use the word “millet” [due to its rightist connotations]. According to him, although there is no difference between the wordings of the two ideologies, nationalism represents a conservative attitude in terms of religion, while the other represents a secular one. Unlike others, Özgürel argues that democracy is one of the values that nationalism espouses in Turkey. 

‘Neo-nationalists are not aware that their ideology contains Islam’ 

Professor Baskın Oran, on the other hand, raises a different argument when it comes to the relation with religion in these two concepts of nationalism. “Neo-nationalism has Islam in it, but its supporters are not aware of it,” says Oran as he adds that there is no difference between the two.

According to Oran, neo-nationalism -- which currently finds support within the CHP -- hates two groups in Turkey: Kurds and non-Muslims. For him, the gist of the matter is about the “dominant nation” in the country. The “main Turkish and Muslim element” does not want to give up its status as the dominant nation, an order that dates back to the millet system in the Ottoman Empire set up in 1454.

Oran further argues that no matter who is in power in Turkey, not only the CHP, but the official ideology favors a certain type of citizen: secular, Sunni, Muslim and Turkish. For him, although the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) shattered the secular element in this formula, “the desired citizen” must be Muslim and Turkish. “This is what the Sept. 12, 1980 military junta called the Turkish-Islam synthesis,” recalls Oran, an analysis that all observers of Turkish politics at the time agreed on.

For Şükrü Hanioğlu, a historian at Princeton University, the difference between nationalism and “neo-nationalism that uses the peculiar euphemism ulusalcılık” is how they construct the nation. He states that “while traditional nationalism constructs it by using a combination of ‘invented’ and ‘existing’ cultural traditions including religion (i.e., Islam), the xenophobic, ultra-secular neo-nationalism conceives of the nation through solely ‘invented’ cultural traditions to bypass the Turks’ Islamic and Ottoman heritage.” Confirming the acceptance of Islam as part of traditional nationalism in Turkey, Hanioğlu says that “for ulusalcılık the glorious past of the Turks is in pre-Islamic times, whereas nationalism views Islam as an integral part of Turkish culture and history.”

He notes that although ulusalcılık was one of the tenets of the official ideology, “it lost significant ground to traditional nationalism and the Turkish-Islam synthesis in the following decades and resurfaced as ‘ulusalcılık’ in the 1990s.”

Anti-Western stance of the neo-nationalists is evident in Turkey

The nationalists in Turkey who organized the “Republic rallies” during the 2007 presidential election process to oppose the candidacy of an AK Party member for the highest office of the nation, chanted slogans not only against the AK Party, but also against the EU and the US. “Neither the EU nor the US, but a completely independent Turkey” was one of the slogans of the rallies that were led by the CHP, Workers’ Party (İP), Support for Modern Life Association (ÇYDD) and Atatürkist Thought Association (ADD).

In his column in the Sabah daily on Jan. 30, political scientist Hasan Bülent Kahraman referred to these rallies as the action part of neo-nationalism, adding that it is not limited to it as Atatürkism that was turned into a “mass hysteria,” which was the backbone of this ideology. Similarly, Oran says that neo-nationalists do nothing more than “glorify the Atatürk era” as they -- whom he defines as the rightists of the CHP -- do not feel any nostalgia about the Ottomans.

According to Uslu, the perspective of the West is what distinguishes neo-nationalism from nationalism in Turkey. The former is directly anti-Western and sees the West as the source of imperialism. However, Uslu argues that the anti-Western stance of the nationalists is not ideological, but tactical. He says that “if hard-core neo-nationalists such as Doğu Perinçek of the İP come to power, he would leave NATO, but if it is Devlet Bahçeli of the MHP he would continue relations with it.”

Is everyone nationalist in Turkey?

While there are clear differences between the two forms of nationalism evident in today’s Turkey, it is also argued that by definition nationalism is ingrained in the social fabric of the nation at large. According to Özkırımlı, “Turkish society is nationalist to its core,” and nationalism is one of the two realities of Turkey along with Islam.

Özkırımlı says that all the players in Turkish politics -- from the prime minister to Kılıçdaroğlu and the Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) -- have a nationalist discourse.

In all research and surveys, people first define themselves as Muslim and then as Turkish says Özkırımlı, before he adds that “in practice being Turkish and Muslim are inseparable.”

The fact that everyone is a latent nationalist in Turkey is one of the reasons why neo-nationalism finds a basis despite its archaic and unrealistic nature. Uslu goes further and argues that “there is racism in Turkey which is unacceptable by Western standards.” Calling it a “hidden racism,” Uslu claims that the remarks of many politicians could be considered racist as he refers to Birgül Ayman Güler’s infamous statement as such.

Similarly, Özkırımlı defines Güler’s remarks as racist, saying that “it could even be considered hate speech according to international agreements.” Güler defends assimilation, according to Özkırımlı, because she urges everyone to unite under the Turkish nation. “She creates an automatic hierarchy of ethnicities,” which is racism, according to Özkırımlı, who reacts to Güler without hiding his frustration.

As the debate on racism gains momentum in Turkey, the BDP reportedly had plans to file a complaint against the CHP during an early February meeting in Lisbon of the Socialist International (SI), an international organization of social democratic, socialist and labor parties.

 

SEVGİ AKARÇEŞME

http://www.todayszaman.com/news-306584-neo-nationalism-is-anti-western-a...