Posted on March 26, 2021 by Ali Tuygan
March 26, 2021
The Council of Europe Convention on
Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence,
known as the Istanbul Convention, was opened for
signature on 11 May 2011, in Istanbul. Turkey was the first member state to
ratify it.
Monday, March 8, was International Women’s Day 2021. In a message
President Erdogan said:
“… To carry our
country forward, to achieve our objectives, we shall keep walking, women and
men, shoulder to shoulder as a nation.
“We are proud of our
women who throughout history have remained at the forefront in every aspect of
life, and who set examples with their struggle and achievements…
“I condemn, in
strongest terms, every kind of physical and psychological violence against
women, which I consider a crime against humanity.”
Turkish women, though mostly doubtful,
if not distrustful, of Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party’s (JDP) approach
towards women must have seen the message as a reassurance. After all, in 1934
during Atatürk’s time, they were among the first in Europe to achieve the right
to vote and run for elected office through a constitutional amendment.
On March 13, Turkey’s State Council decided that Ataturk’s relief
should be removed from state medals.
The same day, the State Council also decided to end the reading of
the student oath from elementary schools. The student oath is only a few
lines. It starts “I’m a Turk” and ends, “How happy is the one who says, ‘I am a
Turk’ ” I took that oath every day when I was in the elementary school. It only
reflected a commitment to our hard-won independence, Turkey’s Republican
values and to progress.
In both cases, State Council’s relevant
chambers had previously decided otherwise. In the former case the Presidency,
and in the latter one the Ministry of National Education had appealed against
the chamber’s decision. And the State Council’s Assembly overturned the
decisions of its chambers.
On March 17, Turkey’s chief prosecutor asked the Constitutional
Court to ban Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), the main pro-Kurdish opposition
party.
The same day, HDP deputy Gergerlioğlu was stripped of his status
as a member of parliament as the Speaker read out the Court of Appeal decision
upholding a two-and-a-half-year prison sentence. The Court of Appeal’s decision
is now being challenged before the Constitutional Court.
REPORT
THIS AD
On March 18, the 106th anniversary of the Gallipoli Victory,
President Erdoğan issued a message expressing gratitude to Ataturk and to those
who lost their lives in that epic battle.
On March 20, Turkey withdrew from the İstanbul Convention by a
presidential decree which said that the Convention was “nullified” with respect
to Turkey. Whoever wrote decree, must have thought that the word
“nullify” is a more defiant expression than the timid “withdraw”. In Turkey,
“null and void”, “of no consequence”, are widely expressions used by government
officials in rejection of European Court decisions or advice by our
“traditional allies”.
The withdrawal decree triggered a debate
regarding its constitutionality because the Convention had been ratified by the
parliament unanimously in 2012. It provoked reaction from the UN, the Council
of Europe, the EU, and Turkey’s “traditional allies”. But who cares? They are
of no consequence. The chief imam of the Grand Hagia Sophia Mosque approved the
nullification.
Turkey’s withdrawing from a major
international convention, simply referred to as the “İstanbul Convention” was
appalling if for nothing else, its title. Mehmed the Conqueror, women
heroes of our history must have turned in their graves.
The same day, Governor of Turkey’s Central Bank was fired after
132 days in office. As Governor his first act had been to raise interest rates.
As the Asian markets opened, the Turkish currency hit record lows against the
euro and US dollar, losing 10% of its value.
The chief imam of the Grand Hagia Sophia
Mosque tweeted, “The reduction of interest rated, and their
eventual elimination is a dictate of both Islam and wisdom. In strong
economies, interest rates vary between 0-1 %. This is why, fighting
usurers is a dictate of Islam.”
On March 24, Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (JDP)
had its annual party congress in Ankara. In remarks to the congress as party
leader, President Erdoğan elaborated at length on JDP’s accomplishments and
mentioned the challenges ahead. On foreign policy, he notably said, “… We are determined to turn our region into an island of peace in
the period ahead by increasing the number of our friends and putting an end to
animosities.” His words must have reminded some of former foreign
minister Ahmet Davutoglu’s policy of “zero problems with neighbors”.
Hopefully, Mr. Erdoğan’s new regional
vision would not suffer the same fate.
In his references to Turkish history,
President Erdoğan mentioned Sultan Alp Arslan of the Seljuk Empire, Süleyman
Shah and his grandson of Osman I, the founder of the Ottoman Empire, Mehmed the
Conqueror. He mentioned late prime ministers Menderes, Özal, Erbakan and the
founder of his coalition partner Alpaslan Türkeş. He did not mention Atatürk.
Finally, on March 25, Speaker of the Parliament, Mustafa Şentop during a
tv interview said that President Erdoğan can withdraw from the Montreux
Convention and other international instruments as he withdrew from the İstanbul
Convention. The constitutionality of his view aside, his reference to the
Montreux Convention was appalling. If a slip of the tongue, it was an
unfortunate one. If not, even worse.
As I said in an earlier post, “In the light of the diplomatic and military history of the
region, ambitions of major players, strategic rivalries, and the evolution of
the global landscape, one can say with certainty that putting the Montreux
Convention at risk would have most negative political and security implications
for Turkey. As a polarized and diplomatically isolated country with a more than
fully loaded foreign policy agenda, this would be last thing we need.”[i]
So, even a reference to
withdrawing from the Montreux Convention runs counter to Turkey’s highest
national interests, period.
The foregoing are the developments of
only two weeks of disarray, confusion, and wobbling. They raise more questions
than provide answers. They show that the country has lost direction; that
despite the fine talk it is polarized. But this much is clear: JDP’s
Islamization of Turkey, its undermining of Atatürk’s secular, progressist
Republican legacy continues unabated, nearing the point of no return. Had
secularism been embraced by Middle East leaders and peoples, the region would
not have suffered decades of fratricide enabling external powers’ selfish
interventions. But who cares so long as an Islamist public discourse brings in
votes, leads to submission?
Middle East leaders who were jealous of
Turkey’s progress under Atatürk’s leadership but did not have the courage to
follow his example and preferred an easier path to perpetual power must be
delighted. Turkey’s “traditional allies and partners” should also be happy
because they would prefer Turkey becoming just another Middle East country to
its remaining on Atatürk’s path. After all, it was Atatürk who said, “as they have come, so they will go” and forced
them to retreat and to shelve their centuries-old projects.
Only five more days to celebrate April
Fools’ Day…
—————————————————————————–
[i] https://diplomaticopinion.com/2020/01/28/the-montreux-convention-russias-perspective/
No comments:
Post a Comment