by Prof. Dr. Özer OZANKAYA

October 29, 2005 is the 82nd anniversary of the establishment of The Republic of Turkey. It is an appropriate month to reflect on the fundamental values of the Republic of Turkey.

The principles on which the Republic of Turkey was established are principles which have the power to design the civilisation which mankind longs for. This is particularly apparent in the present environment of globalisation, as it becomes clear that the fall of socialism cannot be defined as a victory of capitalism, and as all the world’s nations are once again opened up to an almost explicit colonisation. A further reason for emphasising the principles of establishment of the Republic of Turkey stems from the fact that the Political West, which refuses to consider colonialism a source of shame, is increasingly targeting the Turkish Democratic Revolution.

The principles in question constitute a valuable contribution to civilisation, and they are of proven applicability. They are based on the ideas:

1. of how colonialism can be reduced to submission;

2. that the accurate understanding and honest implementation of the principle of national sovereignty is the main factor in achieving and securing this salvation;

3. that the Republican system is the best way of implementing democracy, and

4. that the fall of socialism cannot be deemed the victory of capitalism, and that humanity needs to make arrangements for economic democracy.

This article will explore these ideas further.

Dealing with colonialism

Every significant human act is based on an effectual thought. Reducing colonialism, which forms the dirtiest pages of the history of humanity, to submission, and preventing its revival, can only be realised through a widespread and valid line of thought.

The principle which caused the success of the Turkish National Independence War is as follows: “The World’s strongest colonial armies can not avoid being reduced to submission against a nation which is aware of its legitimate rights and which designates its administration by its free votes!” Thus the principle that “The independence of the Nation will be saved by the will of the nation!” constitutes the first step of the Republic system.

This principle served not only to defeat the armed assault, but also as the key to avoiding future colonial attacks and to preventing fresh enslavement. A nation which can freely elect and audit its administrators, and which can consciously organize its public (national) life, is a powerful nation which no colonist can dare attack.

National sovereignty…

The idea of national sovereignty – to which, I believe, the Republic of Turkey, has made a significant contribution - emphasises that democracy is not simply the “vote of the majority”. On the contrary it states that the inalienable and non-transferable human and citizenship rights which every citizen possesses from birth, regardless of race, religion, education, social class or gender, cannot be abolished for any reason - not even by public opinion. Furthermore, it states that even the proposal to interfere with these rights is illegitimate. For this would lead to a “dictatorship of the majority” rather than a state of national sovereignty – that is, a Republican system

By counting the “right of resistance to despotism” as the most fundamental human right and by institutionalising it, the Republic of Turkey has secured the principle of national sovereignty. No vote, for example, may be taken to deprive women of their equal citizenship rights with men, to base the educational system on the judgements of a religion or a sect or to designate and appoint civil servants only from within a certain social group. Even to propose a vote to this effect is illegitimate in the Republican system and a government that chooses such a path loses its legitimacy, and individuals are endowed with the “right of resistance to despotism”.

It is due this nature of the concept of national sovereignty that the principle of secularity of the state and public affairs is set out in the Constitution in an article that may not be amended.

…and protecting democracy

The Republic of Turkey has primarily assigned the duty of preventing any such assault on inviolable rights to institutions such as the parliament, the government, the independent courts and the Constitutional Court. Nonetheless, should these institutions themselves be involved in such assaults, or should they fail to prevent them, the Republic has demonstrated an example of democratic engineering by investing the Turkish Armed Forces with the duty of protecting the Republic, in order to prevent any collapse into civil war. The appropriateness of this measure has been demonstrated in practice in the years 1960, 1971 and 1980.

Certainly, this is not a preferred outcome. However, in the absence of institutional arrangements for preventing parliament, the government or political parties from creating a despotic regime, and for subsequently reactivating the election system, the result would be anarchy – in other words civil war- which is worse than the worst system. The Republic of Turkey is based on the principle that managing democracy is primarily the task of civil institutions, and that the civil institutions have no privilege to transgress democracy.

In addition to this Republic of Turkey accepts that democracy needs to protect itself and stress that liberties are not objects that can be kept in a closet after they are obtained but are values that must be fought for everyday.

The best democracy

The Republic of Turkey has correctly and consistently used the concept of the “Republic” always with the meaning of “democracy”. The book ‘Civil Information for the Citizen’, taught in all secondary education schools until 1939, puts it as follows:

“The comprehensive aim of democracy is to enable the whole nation to take up the administrative simultaneously, or at least to ensure that the ultimate will of the state can only be expressed and put forward by the nation… For this reason the governing system which ensures the most modern and most reasonable implementation of democracy is the Republican System.

“In a Republic, the last word belongs to parliament, the members of which are elected by the nation. In a Republic, the President, the government and parliament do nothing but think of and seek to ensure the freedom, security and welfare of the public, because they know that they had been assigned to serve to the nation… rather than to rule as sultan. If they misuse their positions and their duties towards the nation, then in one way or another, they may find themselves facing the national will emerging against them. The obligation to account to the public is incompatible with arbitrary and wilful behaviour.”

Republic versus democracy?

In the postmodern era, people have argued that the Republic is not a democracy, and that the Turkish Revolution established a “Republic” but not a “democracy”. Such views have also enjoyed support within the “Political West”.

Those who support the view that the Republic incorporates norms which limit the scope of democracy are themselves displaying an anti-democratic attitude. There is no hidden, unnamed conflict between democracy and the Republic. The Republic does not seek to win ground from democracy. This is to misunderstand the democratic quality and essence of the Republican revolutions in Turkey.

The view that the Republic should “compromise” with those opposed to secularism ignores the reality that secularism is the essence of democracy, and that any concessions only serve the interests of sect-like forms of organisation which are authoritarian and brainwashing, and which in some cases are closely linked to terrorism, but which have nevertheless been supported by some of the Western states.

Likewise, the view that the Republic is intolerant of different cultures and other ethnic groups ignores the sociological need for a common national identity, a common homeland concept and a common law, without which none of the human rights and freedoms can be achieved. It serves only as a backdrop for failure to condemn ethnic terrorism, Armenian genocide slanders and offensives designed to erode the national borders.

Economic democracy

The Turkish Republic was established in the awareness that both capitalism and socialism lack some of the qualities which are needed if the ultimate aim of democracy is to become a reality, and that humanity longs for a model of civilisation that will also bring about democracy in the economic field. This characteristic of the Republic is frequently distorted or simply ignored.

The Republic has its own approach to the economic requirements of democracy. It criticises capitalism - based on the fiction of the individual living alone - on the grounds that:

1. economic order cannot be established in a society merely through free competition;

2. monopolies cannot be prevented;

3. works which are vital for the public benefit but which are deemed not to be profitable cannot be carried out, nor can works which require extremely high technology and huge amounts of capital;

4. workers cannot obtain just payment and as a result social solidarity cannot be established.

The Republic diverges from socialism - based on the fiction of the state abstracted from individuals – on the grounds that:

1. private enterprise should continue as the main source of economic activities and the state should not allow its activities to reach the point at which they replace private enterprise.

2. decisions in this respect should not be strict rules and should be taken and conducted by governments representing the will of the nation.

It is not surprising to find that those who argue that the Republic is not a democracy also defend the downsizing of the state in the field of economic policy, calling on it to refrain entirely from investment and production. However, the Political West, which imposes this view on the world, has not continued to manage economies on a world scale through its military and political power for the past two centuries. What’s more, Western states have operated direct state management in many fields in their own countries right down to the present day.

(DIPLOMAT - October 2005 - Ankara)