Turkish Political Culture Liberalizing, Greek Scholar says
By Reeta Paakinen
Turkey’s accession process to the European Union has made the country’s political culture in recent years more liberal than ever before, according to a Greek academic of Turkish politics.
By Reeta Paakinen
Turkey’s accession process to the European Union has made the country’s political culture in recent years more liberal than ever before, according to a Greek academic of Turkish politics.
Ioannis N. Grigoriadis is currently assistant professor of political science at Ankara’s Bilkent University although his résumé also includes positions at Athens University and Istanbul’s Işık and Sabancı universities. His book “Trials of Europeanization: Turkish Political Culture and the European Union” was released in Istanbul on Wednesday. The book is based on Grigoriadis’ Ph.D. work at London’s School of Oriental and African Studies, or SOAS, where he conducted research under Professor William Hale.
“Trials of Europeanization” assesses the impact of improving EU-Turkey relations on Turkish political culture and tries to identify progress in domains of national identity, secularism, civil society and state-society relations. It focuses on the past 10 years, starting from the so-called Helsinki Decision in December 1999, when Turkey was declared a candidate for EU membership.
“There is an increasing liberalization of Turkish political culture, an opening of discourse on issues that were taboos in the past. Several issues are being openly discussed, including national identity and secularism; this is very important,” Grigoriadis told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review in an interview.
Since 1999, Turkish civil society has become more active with citizens participating in politics in a much more open manner than in the past, he said.
“There are still some challenges to be dealt with, but progress has taken place. I am not saying things are good in many respects, but things are better. I can identify some changes [in Turkish political culture], which I would consider irreversible [for the most part],” Grigoriadis said.
One of the changes is the evolving discourse on secularism, Grigoriadis said. The book presents two versions of secularism: an assertive one and a passive one. “The polarization of Turkish political culture [in recent years] has led to a debate about liberalizing Turkish secularism as well. This is something new,” he said.
He believes finding a consensus on the headscarf debate is possible. “A consensus can be reached whereby no secular women may be forced to wear a headscarf, while no pious women may be forced to take it off either. This is the key point,” he said.
More work on minority rights needed
In his book, Grigoriadis identifies these positive developments, but also highlights shortcomings such as minority rights. “This is an area in which little progress has been achieved and much remains to be done,” he said.
“A big part of this agenda is linked to the Kurdish initiative although we do not know exactly how far it will go and how openly it will address issues that relate to the Kurds in this country,” Grigoriadis said. “However, Alevi issues are still on the table and non-Muslim rights are also very prominent.”
“In fact, as Istanbul will become the European Capital of Culture next year it will be very important to give evidence of the respect for the multicultural and multi-religious heritage of the city by resolving these issues sooner rather than later.”
Privileged partnership talk erodes credibility
The scholar criticized France and Germany for its “privileged partnership’” rhetoric, something he said erodes the EU’s credibility in regions neighboring Turkey. “Turkey needs to do its homework but the EU should give clear signals that Turkey has a fair chance of becoming a member if it complies with the Copenhagen criteria,” Grigoriadis said. “The statements of France and Germany, to a lesser extent, do a lot of harm to the Turkish democratization process.”
Cyprus a key priority
Despite his focus on Turkish political culture, Grigoriadis’ also said the Cyprus issue should be one of the key priorities of EU foreign policy because of the veto power of Greek Cyprus. Another reason why the issue should be resolved is that some EU member states may use Cyprus as an excuse in opposing Turkey’s EU accession for completely different reasons.
“It will always create problems for Turkey’s accession process. Not least because other countries might be willing to play with this problem in order not to expose themselves for other opinions they may hold about Turkish EU accession. I would point to the Cyprus issue as the number one priority in the foreign policy agenda in the EU,” Grigoriadis said.
In his view, the failure of the Kofi Annan Peace Plan in 2004 was particularly unfortunate. “When the decision was made about the membership of Cyprus in the EU, the Greek Cypriot side argued that if they were kept outside the union because of the lack of solution for which the Turkish Cypriots were responsible, Greek Cypriots would become hostages,” he said.
“At that time, this argument appeared to be convincing as the Greek Cypriot President Glafkos Clerides was the motivator for a solution while [Turkish Cypriot President] Rauf Denktaş was the intransigent one,” Grigoriadis said.
Soon, matters took a different turn, Grigoriadis said. “There was a 180 degree turn because a moderate Turkish Cypriot leader and a more intransigent Greek Cypriot leader [came into the picture]. Most European countries were not happy with the end result of the Cyprus accession without the solution. It did give signals on the Greek Cypriot side whether they can go on with an unresolved problem for indefinite amount of time,” he said.
On the other hand, there were some “legitimate concerns” about some aspects of the Annan Peace Plan, Grigoriadis said. “These were, for instance the guarantor questions or the presence of the military on both sides. They could have been resolved without a major loss for the Turkish Cypriot side.”
Upcoming publications
Grigoriadis’ upcoming work will include a comparative piece on U.S-Turkey relations and anti-Americanism in Turkey, which will appear in the Middle East Journal in January 2010. In September, Grigoriadis’ article on the role of the Church of Greece in Greek-Turkish relations was published in “Religion and Politics in Europe, the Middle East and North Africa” (Routledge 2009).
He is currently doing research on center-left parties in Greece and Turkey together with Ziya Öniş, professor of international relations at Koç University. “I am trying to compare how the center-left parties in Greece and Turkey have evolved since the 1970s. While the Republican People’s Party, or CHP, and the Pan-Hellenic Socialist Movement, or PASOK, were quite similar in the 1970s, they have since taken a completely different path,” he said.
Evolving neighborly relations
The earthquakes in the fall of 1999 in Turkey and Greece marked the start of a new era in contacts at the grassroots level between the two nations.
Greek scholar Ioannis N. Grigoriadis, however, says the right crew of diplomats was already in place for reconciliation to occur.
“In a sense, the earthquakes of 1999 were a tipping point [in Greek-Turkish relations]. The right people – George Papandreou and Ismail Cem – were in the foreign ministries of both countries already,” Grigoriadis said. “However, they still needed an event that could mobilize popular opinion, which was very negative on both sides. The opening the earthquake created was exploited by some forward-looking, visionary politicians on both sides to [get us to] where we are right now.”
Ten years on, there is growing interest in Greece toward Turkey.
“There is a major trend that is also supported by improving economic conditions. People want to learn the language, come here and spend time living in Istanbul and other parts of Turkey, trying to obtain as objective a view of the country as possible,” Grigoriadis said.
The scholar believes there is increasing interest in Greece in the Turkish language too. “People think learning Turkish is a good asset for their career as well,” he said.
Although grassroots contacts between the citizens of Greece and Turkey are stronger than before, there is still a need for high-level political moves, Grigoriadis said.
“Economic relations have become stronger and trade between the two countries has skyrocketed in recent years. Relations at the civil-society level are stronger and there is a lot of interaction and travel between the two countries. The youth in particular are getting to know each other,” he said. “But on the high politics side, things haven’t improved much.”
The strengthening of bilateral relations started slowing down a few years ago. “There was a big opportunity that was lost in 2004 for the resolution of the Cyprus issue,” Grigoriadis said. “Ever since then, issues on the bilateral level, such as the Aegean dispute, have not been resolved.”
“There is a need for a strong political will on both sides,” he said. “But because of populist pressures and changing public opinion, it is important for the political will to be simultaneous in Greece and Turkey.”
(Published on Hürriyet Daily News on 20 November 2009)
“Trials of Europeanization” assesses the impact of improving EU-Turkey relations on Turkish political culture and tries to identify progress in domains of national identity, secularism, civil society and state-society relations. It focuses on the past 10 years, starting from the so-called Helsinki Decision in December 1999, when Turkey was declared a candidate for EU membership.
“There is an increasing liberalization of Turkish political culture, an opening of discourse on issues that were taboos in the past. Several issues are being openly discussed, including national identity and secularism; this is very important,” Grigoriadis told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review in an interview.
Since 1999, Turkish civil society has become more active with citizens participating in politics in a much more open manner than in the past, he said.
“There are still some challenges to be dealt with, but progress has taken place. I am not saying things are good in many respects, but things are better. I can identify some changes [in Turkish political culture], which I would consider irreversible [for the most part],” Grigoriadis said.
One of the changes is the evolving discourse on secularism, Grigoriadis said. The book presents two versions of secularism: an assertive one and a passive one. “The polarization of Turkish political culture [in recent years] has led to a debate about liberalizing Turkish secularism as well. This is something new,” he said.
He believes finding a consensus on the headscarf debate is possible. “A consensus can be reached whereby no secular women may be forced to wear a headscarf, while no pious women may be forced to take it off either. This is the key point,” he said.
More work on minority rights needed
In his book, Grigoriadis identifies these positive developments, but also highlights shortcomings such as minority rights. “This is an area in which little progress has been achieved and much remains to be done,” he said.
“A big part of this agenda is linked to the Kurdish initiative although we do not know exactly how far it will go and how openly it will address issues that relate to the Kurds in this country,” Grigoriadis said. “However, Alevi issues are still on the table and non-Muslim rights are also very prominent.”
“In fact, as Istanbul will become the European Capital of Culture next year it will be very important to give evidence of the respect for the multicultural and multi-religious heritage of the city by resolving these issues sooner rather than later.”
Privileged partnership talk erodes credibility
The scholar criticized France and Germany for its “privileged partnership’” rhetoric, something he said erodes the EU’s credibility in regions neighboring Turkey. “Turkey needs to do its homework but the EU should give clear signals that Turkey has a fair chance of becoming a member if it complies with the Copenhagen criteria,” Grigoriadis said. “The statements of France and Germany, to a lesser extent, do a lot of harm to the Turkish democratization process.”
Cyprus a key priority
Despite his focus on Turkish political culture, Grigoriadis’ also said the Cyprus issue should be one of the key priorities of EU foreign policy because of the veto power of Greek Cyprus. Another reason why the issue should be resolved is that some EU member states may use Cyprus as an excuse in opposing Turkey’s EU accession for completely different reasons.
“It will always create problems for Turkey’s accession process. Not least because other countries might be willing to play with this problem in order not to expose themselves for other opinions they may hold about Turkish EU accession. I would point to the Cyprus issue as the number one priority in the foreign policy agenda in the EU,” Grigoriadis said.
In his view, the failure of the Kofi Annan Peace Plan in 2004 was particularly unfortunate. “When the decision was made about the membership of Cyprus in the EU, the Greek Cypriot side argued that if they were kept outside the union because of the lack of solution for which the Turkish Cypriots were responsible, Greek Cypriots would become hostages,” he said.
“At that time, this argument appeared to be convincing as the Greek Cypriot President Glafkos Clerides was the motivator for a solution while [Turkish Cypriot President] Rauf Denktaş was the intransigent one,” Grigoriadis said.
Soon, matters took a different turn, Grigoriadis said. “There was a 180 degree turn because a moderate Turkish Cypriot leader and a more intransigent Greek Cypriot leader [came into the picture]. Most European countries were not happy with the end result of the Cyprus accession without the solution. It did give signals on the Greek Cypriot side whether they can go on with an unresolved problem for indefinite amount of time,” he said.
On the other hand, there were some “legitimate concerns” about some aspects of the Annan Peace Plan, Grigoriadis said. “These were, for instance the guarantor questions or the presence of the military on both sides. They could have been resolved without a major loss for the Turkish Cypriot side.”
Upcoming publications
Grigoriadis’ upcoming work will include a comparative piece on U.S-Turkey relations and anti-Americanism in Turkey, which will appear in the Middle East Journal in January 2010. In September, Grigoriadis’ article on the role of the Church of Greece in Greek-Turkish relations was published in “Religion and Politics in Europe, the Middle East and North Africa” (Routledge 2009).
He is currently doing research on center-left parties in Greece and Turkey together with Ziya Öniş, professor of international relations at Koç University. “I am trying to compare how the center-left parties in Greece and Turkey have evolved since the 1970s. While the Republican People’s Party, or CHP, and the Pan-Hellenic Socialist Movement, or PASOK, were quite similar in the 1970s, they have since taken a completely different path,” he said.
Evolving neighborly relations
The earthquakes in the fall of 1999 in Turkey and Greece marked the start of a new era in contacts at the grassroots level between the two nations.
Greek scholar Ioannis N. Grigoriadis, however, says the right crew of diplomats was already in place for reconciliation to occur.
“In a sense, the earthquakes of 1999 were a tipping point [in Greek-Turkish relations]. The right people – George Papandreou and Ismail Cem – were in the foreign ministries of both countries already,” Grigoriadis said. “However, they still needed an event that could mobilize popular opinion, which was very negative on both sides. The opening the earthquake created was exploited by some forward-looking, visionary politicians on both sides to [get us to] where we are right now.”
Ten years on, there is growing interest in Greece toward Turkey.
“There is a major trend that is also supported by improving economic conditions. People want to learn the language, come here and spend time living in Istanbul and other parts of Turkey, trying to obtain as objective a view of the country as possible,” Grigoriadis said.
The scholar believes there is increasing interest in Greece in the Turkish language too. “People think learning Turkish is a good asset for their career as well,” he said.
Although grassroots contacts between the citizens of Greece and Turkey are stronger than before, there is still a need for high-level political moves, Grigoriadis said.
“Economic relations have become stronger and trade between the two countries has skyrocketed in recent years. Relations at the civil-society level are stronger and there is a lot of interaction and travel between the two countries. The youth in particular are getting to know each other,” he said. “But on the high politics side, things haven’t improved much.”
The strengthening of bilateral relations started slowing down a few years ago. “There was a big opportunity that was lost in 2004 for the resolution of the Cyprus issue,” Grigoriadis said. “Ever since then, issues on the bilateral level, such as the Aegean dispute, have not been resolved.”
“There is a need for a strong political will on both sides,” he said. “But because of populist pressures and changing public opinion, it is important for the political will to be simultaneous in Greece and Turkey.”
(Published on Hürriyet Daily News on 20 November 2009)
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment