Veiled Democracy?

Ray · 02-11-2008, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Op-Ed Contributor

Veiled Democracy?

By NOAH FELDMAN
Published: February 8, 2008
Cambridge, Mass.

THE West doesn’t know quite what to think of Turkey’s Islamic-oriented ruling party: does it envision a liberal, European future for Turkey or an Islamist one? A vote this week on the seemingly minor issue of whether head scarves should be allowed at universities will help us begin to answer that question.

The ban on women covering their heads on campus has long been a thorn in the side of the Justice and Development Party. The rule has the perverse effect of keeping devoutly religious women out of higher education. A few years ago, while on a trip to lecture about Islam, I met a daughter of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan — not in Istanbul, but at Indiana University, which she was attending at least in part so she could cover her head while getting an education.

The ban — a relic of the aggressive secularism enforced by modern Turkey’s founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk — can be repealed only by a constitutional amendment. Such an amendment was just one of dozens of changes that the Justice and Development Party was expected to propose a few weeks ago as part of a comprehensive overhaul of Turkey’s state-centered, ethnically narrow Constitution.

The description of the package of draft amendments that was leaked to the press would put Turkey on a decidedly liberal constitutional course. Reports said that it would vest sovereignty in the people, not the state, and acknowledge that the category “Turkish” in reality encompasses people of all ethnicities — implicitly including Kurds, whose separate identity has long been suppressed. The new Constitution would give parents increased control over their children’s education, allowing them to opt out of state-mandated religious instruction. In this context, lifting the head-scarf ban could be seen as just another step toward the religious liberty that liberal, Western states claim to prize.

But before the amendment package could be formally introduced, a minority secularist party, the Nationalist Movement Party, introduced an amendment limited to ending the head-scarf ban. Support from that party essentially guarantees passage for any initiative the government favors — and, indeed, it passed a preliminary vote on Thursday and is likely to get final approval tomorrow. Apparently, Prime Minister Erdogan felt he could not turn down the opportunity to get the head scarf ban revoked.

Unfortunately, the passage of the head-scarf amendment casts doubt on whether the rest of the constitutional package will be introduced at all. Some hard-liners within the ruling party seem to be questioning whether it is worth the fight over liberal constitutional ideals if the gains to religion like lifting the head scarf ban can be achieved other ways. They have a point: the party must always be careful about provoking the military, which sees itself not only as the protector of secularism but of traditional Turkish nationalism, and is wary of any major liberalizing changes.

The issue raises a big question about Mr. Erdogan: is he dedicated to his party’s plans for comprehensive constitutional reform, or is he simply serving the interests of religion? The latter would be a grave error — if Turkey is to continue its integration into European and Western civilization, it needs to show that liberal values and Islam are not only compatible but complementary. The audience for this message includes Europe, which for historical reasons is skeptical — perhaps too skeptical — about bringing a non-Christian nation into the orbit of the European Union.

Yet there is a more important audience: the Muslim world at large. The rising global Islamist movement is embroiled in its own epochal debate about whether an authentically Islamic government can and must respect individual freedoms and the equality of all citizens. The best possible refutation of the claim that Islam and democracy are incompatible would be to point to an existing government where liberal and Islamic values work together.

In Turkey, starting with the head-scarf amendment — a case study of religious freedom against coercive secularism — is perfectly fine. Liberalism, after all, has its roots in the desire to protect Christian religious liberty. But the historical staying power of liberal democracy has come from expanding citizenship and extending constitutional protections to minority groups and others vulnerable to government coercion. Turkey has the chance to blaze that trail in the Muslim world — it’s up to Mr. Erdogan to keep moving ahead.

Noah Feldman, a contributing writer for The Times Magazine, is a professor at Harvard Law School and a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/08/op...in&oref=slogin

Much has been said on WAB about the creeping influence of religion in secular Turkey.

Actually, it is not material what religion a country follows, but in the case of Turkey and the attempts, involuntary if you wish, of taking a retrograde step from Ataturk's vision is what is causing interest. Ataturk's Turkey is a totally different country in all ways, compared to its obscurantist and power in the hands of the select Arab neighbours. It is like a breathe of fresh air in a stifling atmosphere of militant growth of spreading pristine Islamic thoughts that the Wahhabis are embarked on.

Therefore, innocuous acts that indicates the influence of the Wahhabic capture of the Islamic imagination is indeed worrisome.

There is hope that the secular fibre of Turkey is so strong that all attempts to overthrow Ataturk's wise attempt to put an Islamic nation on the same footing as any western nation may come to nought!

gunnut · 02-11-2008, 06:12 AM

Sir I have a different view. As you know I'm not a big fan of banning stuff that doesn't hurt others. If women want to wear headscarf than they should be allowed to. It's freedom and well within their right to be modest.

However, I understand the fear of many people, it's not the head scarf that matters. It's what may follow. The more conservative muslims might gradually require women to wear a certain style of clothing as seen fit by their interpretation of the religion.

I'm all for lifting the ban of head scarf if women are also allowed to wear see through shirts and pants so low that half of their panties can be seen by others. I'm a big fan of that dress code.

Ray · 02-11-2008, 17:20 PM

I presume that many, including me, would not bat an eyelid about scarves and things being worn by anyone, be it as a part of a religious code or just a fashion statement.

You have hit the nail on the head - thereafter, what?

This maybe an irrational fear, but then the armed and dangerous and violent fanaticism that quite a few are displaying over religion, sparks the fear of the herd mentality seizing people wherein they turn out to become a menace to general society is what creates the worry and the apprehension!

02-11-2008, 06:12 AM	#2 (permalink)
gunnut *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 01-27-06 Location: DPRK, Democratik People's Republik of Kalifornia Posts: 13,831 Country:	Sir I have a different view. As you know I'm not a big fan of banning stuff that doesn't hurt others. If women want to wear headscarf than they should be allowed to. It's freedom and well within their right to be modest. However, I understand the fear of many people, it's not the head scarf that matters. It's what may follow. The more conservative muslims might gradually require women to wear a certain style of clothing as seen fit by their interpretation of the religion. I'm all for lifting the ban of head scarf if women are also allowed to wear see through shirts and pants so low that half of their panties can be seen by others. I'm a big fan of that dress code. __________________ "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

02-11-2008, 17:20 PM	#3 (permalink)
Ray Suspended Join Date: 08-20-03 Posts: 29,172 Country:	I presume that many, including me, would not bat an eyelid about scarves and things being worn by anyone, be it as a part of a religious code or just a fashion statement. You have hit the nail on the head - thereafter, what? This maybe an irrational fear, but then the armed and dangerous and violent fanaticism that quite a few are displaying over religion, sparks the fear of the herd mentality seizing people wherein they turn out to become a menace to general society is what creates the worry and the apprehension! Last edited by Ray; 02-11-2008 at 17:23 PM..

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
In China, Talk of Democracy Is Simply That	Ray	International Economy	1	04-22-2007 09:55 AM
Half of Pakistanis not keen on democracy	Ray	International Politics	87	12-29-2006 15:01 PM
Who is really afraid of democracy?	Ray	International Economy	3	05-14-2006 04:52 AM
Is Promoting Freedom and Democracy worth it?	Ray	American Politics	22	05-04-2005 21:55 PM

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)