http://www.mfa.gov.tr/PrintPageE2.asp
June-August 1997
THE COMPATIBILITY OF ISLAM,
DEMOCRACY AND SECULARISM
SÜLEYMAN DEMİREL
His excellency Süleyman Demirel is
President of the
Republic of Turkey
The
Turkish modernisation was built on two main pillars; secularism
and republicanism. It began during the Ottoman Empire and can be
traced back to the XVIIIth Century. The Ottomans have always been
in close relations with the cultural entity which we call “Western
Civilisation”. In fact, the Ottoman Empire was founded first and
foremost as a state located mainly in Europe.
The
modern Republic of Turkey came into being after an independence
struggle, fought against the “West”. Nevertheless, immediately
after the war, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and the founding fathers of
the Republic did not hesitate to turn their face to this very
West. For, with a clear vision they concluded that “progress”
meant being a part of the universal civilisation represented then
by the West.
Indeed, the Turkish revolution and its product, the Republic of
Turkey, are the crowning result of the embracement of the ideals
and thoughts that have gained world-wide acceptance following the
Age of Enlightenment and the French Revolution, by a group of
visionaries and idealists led by Atatürk.
The
Republic of Turkey is the product of a grand historic choice of a
great nation. It was founded in the aftermath of the dissolution
of a multi-national, multi-ethnic and multi-religious Empire.
Along with Atatürk’s ultimate goal of reaching the highest level
of universal civilisation, this historical choice can best be
defined in the context of secularisation.
The
Turkish revolution and its secular republican model introduced
radical institutional, cultural and legal reforms ranging from the
executive and legislative realms to the public and private
spheres.
The
Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a result of a long and
ongoing process of the universalization of rights. It has made
possible the convergence of the fundamental values and principles
of modern societies in the areas of public and private law.
Consequently, today, modernisation can best be defined in the
realm of law. For, the long historical process which has given
life to constitutional democracy is also a process of the
universalization of fundamental freedoms and rights. With
ingenious foresight and wisdom, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk conceived
that the historical and philosophical debate over the question
whether law was universal or local would be settled through the
expansion of constitutional republicanism around the world.
Bearing this vision, he embarked upon a unique legal revolution
that shaped a new set of rules and institutions creating the basis
of a democratic-secular way of life.
The
concepts of national sovereignty and secularism represent the very
basis of this legal revolution. The critical determinant in this
historical transformation has been the understanding that religion
should be confined to the private sphere. Therefore, the
fundamental framework of a modern state structure and way of life
in which everyone had equal rights and responsibilities regardless
of race, creed, religion or language could be forged. In other
words, equality before the law became the cornerstone of the legal
architecture of the Republic. In this context, the adoption of the
Swiss Civil Code in 1926 was a decisive turning point. It
represented the culmination of the constitutional structure based
on the principles of national sovereignty and secularism.
The
crowning achievement of Atatürk’s revolution is the role that it
attached to women. Indeed, the strength of secularism in Turkey is
best illustrated by the new social status of women and their new
role in the public sphere. Secularism emancipated women from
ancient and outdated practices, and eliminated the segregation of
genders. Participation of women in social and public life as full
fledged citizens determines the distinct features of the modern
secular way of life. Turkish women consider their status and roles
as indispensable and irrevocable rights. It is the pride of our
Republic that today, 23 percent of university professors; 40
percent of doctors and nurses; 50 percent of teachers; and 40
percent of judges, lawyers and prosecutors are women.
The
Turkish revolution led by Atatürk has successfully demonstrated
the compatibility of Islam, democracy and secularism. Thus, Turkey
has taken its distinct place among the commonwealth of secular
democracies that are in the forefront of universal civilisation.
Today values such as freedom, equality, human rights and democracy
essentially harbour principles that no widely embraced belief
system or religion denies. Islam is a case in point. The Republic
of Turkey has set the example throughout its history that Islam is
fully in accord with secular pluralist democracy. Turkey is a
unique model among the 54 member countries of the Organisation of
the Islamic Conference in this respect.
The
uniqueness of the Turkish experience can also be described within
the context of education. Turkey’s educational system is built on
civic and secular foundations. On the other hand, Islamic
education in Turkey, unlike the rest of the Islamic world, is
organised along European lines of instruction and not along
traditional Islamic ones. This is a point which has fascinated
many western Islamic scholars. Turkey is the only country in the
Islamic world where one can find close scholarly links between its
theological faculties and the Directorate of Religious Affairs and
the Pontifical University in the Vatican, in the form of exchanges
of doctoral students and even teachers. For example, in the
Faculty of Divinity at Ankara University, a Christian priest from
the Vatican teaches history and ideology of Christianity to
Turkish Islamic students.
In
Turkey, where there is a very long secular past, the return of
religion is mainly experienced as increased individual piety.
Freedom of belief and conscience for every citizen is the
cornerstone of Turkish secularism and democracy. Why is the
Turkish experience important? To respond to this question
properly, we need to analyse the politicisation and radicalisation
of Islam.
Militant fundamentalism has found the opportunity to introduce its
anti-democratic discourse in societies long suffering under single
party regimes. In societies where opposition is constantly
crushed, movements which emerge on the basis of religion as a
common denominator of the oppressed masses simply tend to become
militant.
The
essential problem is the difficult process of transition from
single party regimes to pluralist democracy in many countries. In
the Muslim world, the failure of regimes, especially ideological
ones, to satisfy the masses may lead to a religious revival. The
question is also one of identity. Revolutionary or radical regimes
which deny and despise people and their culture may create an
identity crisis which some groups then try to solve by reverting
to religious fundamentalism. This is to some extent inevitable in
the reforming and modernising efforts of all countries.
In
contrast, Muslim Turkey has shown that this transition can be
achieved without disturbing social order and compromising its
stability. There is a lot to be learned from the Turkish
experience, and a democratic and secular Turkey has a potential to
contribute to the attempts towards integration with the world by
the newly independent states in the Caucasus and Central Asia.
It
is important to notice that the shock waves of the developments of
the last few years brought to the surface a host of militant
reactionisms, from xenophobia and ethno-nationalism to religious
radicalism. Their common denominator is the trauma of the
unprecedented events we experienced. They feed on various
political and social problems, and they will persist.
As
I see it, the question is that everybody seems to notice other’s
problems while neglecting one’s own, although I agree that the
gravity of the problem varies from one place to another.
We
come across the phenomenon of religious revival everywhere,
including the Western Europe. There are certain groups in this
continent who consider religion as a traditional cement of Europe.
They believe that it can play a uniting role at a time when the
deepening integration and the gradual process of transferring
power to supranational authorities in the European Union gain
momentum. “Christian Europe”, which was not mentioned at the time
of the signing of the Treaty of Rome, now seems to be a
commonplace in some circles. These divisive tendencies are in
total contradiction with the ideals of the “Enlightenment” that
shaped the present form of our universal civilisation. Therefore,
we should more than ever bear in mind that Europe is a community
of nations that share values, aspirations and ways of life. And,
it can only be united again around those values and ideals.
I,
for one, do not see any discrepancy between the aims and ideals
enshrined in the Paris Charter and my religion. According to
Islam, which shares its origin in Abraham with Judaism and
Christianity, man is created as the most dignified being.
Principles oriented towards creating the conditions for men to
live a life worthy of living, cannot be spoiled by subjecting
religion to political designs.
Social developments are not a matter of choice. We have to accept
them as they are. Let us not forget that democracy is the only way
to maturity, and that secularism is an inseparable part of
democracy. We have to put our trust in democracy and in people and
patiently wait for the positive outcome, while not forgetting to
pray.
This site is still under
construction. Please visit again for more updates.