The
Historical Foundations of Secularist Trends in Contemporary Turkey
Prof. Dr. Ibrahim Khalil Al-Allaf
Introduction
Secularist trends in contemporary Turkey
founded by Mustapha Kemal Ataturk
(1881-1938) after the first world war were by no means a novel phenomenon. They
are rather an outstanding ring in a long series of reformations launched in
Ohomean Empire since the first half of the eighteenth century driving at the
modernization of Turkish society according to the western way of life while leaving
basic norms of Islamic jurisdiction intact.
In this
light it becomes all-too-evident that Mustapha Kemal had derived from and
walked on the footsteps of a movement which goes back to Ottoman Sultans some
two centuries ago. Thus, Mustapha Kemal's
achievements must be viewed in connection with previous reformation measures
adopted by the Ottoman authorities, namely, by Sultan Ahmad III (1703-1730) and
his successors to affect changes in the administration, economy, and social
life of the Ottoman peoples and, in the same time, keep up the integwity of the
Ottoman State.
This paper
drives at studying two significant aspects to the reformation in the Ottoman
Empire and Modern Turkey: The First is to trace back the foundations of
seculawist trends in the Ottoman Empire highlighting the salient domains and
the legal procedures. It encompassed down to its branching off with Mustapha
Kemal efforts . The second is to track
the policy of kemalism in the Aeld of establishing a novem nationalistic state
according to secularist principles which exlude religious impact from politics.
The Nature of the Ottoman State:
To
delineate the dimensions of secularist trends which began to emerge in the
Ottoman Empire with the advent of the eighteenth century A.b., and which
obviously ran counter to the traditional directives of Islam, it is
indisensiple to scan the nature of the Ottoman state and see whether it was an
Islamic state par excellence?
It is a
historical fact that religions factor was at work in the establishment of the
Ottoman state towards the end of the thirteenth century. That is because it was
then one of the several prinecdoms established on the borderlines with
Byzantium nourishing the idea of holy war for the purpose of Islam expansion.
Early Ottomans were indeed convineed that they were people of a message and
were accordingly bound to extend the borders of Islamic domain "Dar'ul.
Islam", and that theirs was a legitimate continuation of Muslim caliphate
with its capital at Baghdad which the Mongols overthrew in 1258 A.D. In spite
of the foundlessness of the theory of the caliphate transfer from the last
Abbaside caliph to Selim I(1512-1520), and the fact that such a theory is
historically baseless; Ottoman Sultans in the age of decadence and military
defeats before the powers of the Christian West, began to feel interested in
Islam. So they adopted the tittle of Muslim caliphs. It is also well worth
pointing out that regardless of the fact the Ottoman Sultan was combining both
temporal and religious powers, the concept of the independent state even in the
period of decline in the sixteenth century A.D., did not lose its legitimate overtones.
Since the
seventhenth century, however, Ottoman sultans began to lose their karizmatic halo
which had gradually moved from sceptre to state. It was then very much possible
to detbrown or even kill the sultan by the name of the state without the least
consequences. Thus Ottoman state was by no means a pure Islamic State that is a
state with a religiously based and designed regime.
Facts
prove that the Islamic shape of the Ottoman Empire was not bat an outward
figurehead it casually adopted under pressure coming out from encounter with
the west since the advent of the eighteenth century. Metin Heper goes further
to add that Turkish authority used to assign to religion a definite place in
Turkish society . This place, he
continues, was by no means marginal. Also, Ottoman Sultans used to resort to Sultanic
norms in promulgation of laws and regulations more than they did to Islamic jurisdiction.
State was founded in the sultanic melieu as an instrument for tackling down to
earth concerns. Moreover, the Islamic institution headed by Sheikh'ul-Islam
was, together with its officials, a satellite to the sultan. Contrary to their
shiite peers in the neighbouring Safawi state in persia, the Ulema in the
Ottoman state relished co-operation with the political authority as the only
means with which they could guarantee good-living and prestige, let alone the
limited impact they would obtain over the secularist administration. Examples
in Ottoman history on verdicts given by religious muftis (Sheikhs of Islam) to
the effect of legitimizing mundane practices of the sultans are beyond caunt.
Heber concludes that the ruling Ottoman authorities
never hesitated in affecting "secularist" changes in state organs
based on borrowing western modes and thoughts alien to Muslim traditions. He
attributed that to Ottoman leading mentality during the first decades of the
eighteen century A.D., when European
intellectual impact overflooded Europe and reached grassroots in the Ottoman
state. Thus it was a natural outcome to break free from the restrictions of
Muslim jurisdiction. It seems likely that the sunni. Hanafi doetrine which
stresses analogy and reason had played a significant role in piloting Turkey
towards modernization and promulgatiooon of contremporary legal system
according to Western prototype. This shift became urgent in the light of
outdated insitutions that do not meet modern trends of development.
Some
sultans, politicians, and the intellgentsia recognized the necessity of
borrowing European patterns as a pancea that would bring to life the Ottoman
state and halt its galloping decline . However, this understanding contradicts
the convention of another group who maintain that decline was not due to Islam.
On the contrary, it was due to the loss of Islam and to the increasing
relinquishment of the forefathers norms and ethos. They blamed the Ulema for
not taking the lead in enlighting and guiding the sultans to the true path.
They also complained that offices were being handed out to ignorants through
nepotism and swiindling. Yet, it seems that the scales was for the first group
who voted for Western adaptation and it was therefore the reformation in the
Ottoman Empire followed the line of borrowing form Europe its modern systems
and apply them on Ottomon life while
leaving Islamic jurisdiction untouched.
Reformation movement in the Ottoman Empire was largely an internal
concern. Growing Middle class in Istanbul, regardless of the European pressure
on the Ottomans to catch up with reformation and deal with equity with Muslime
and non-Muslim subjects within its domain, had supported every step towards the
liberation of the country from feudal lords and religious zealots. It did not
hesitate in giving out all possible assistance to the central government in its
effort to establish a new administration and modern civil code. The government,
in its turn, welcomed this co-operation for demolishing status quo would up
lift its power and sustain its control. Thus Turkey walked in the footsteps of
Europe itself where the rising middle class sidled with the ruling monarchs to
undermine feudal order ad set up a powerful government during the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries.
Secularist Trends in the Ottoman State.
Niyazi Berkes pinpoints the year 1718
A.D., as a starting-point for the adoption of secularist thought in the Ottoman
Empire. Flickerings" of secularist ideas began to glimmer in the Ottoman
horizon. A French officer, namely De Richefort put up a project proposal to the
sublime porte to the effect of introducing aspects of European progress into
the Ottoman Empire. The proposal entails the setting-up of a team of
especialized engineers to be directly-related to the sublime porte . Khalid
Ziyyada goes further to state that sultan Ahmad III (1703-1730A D.) had adopted
that project and was particularly careful to maintain contacts with the
European capitals and imitate their social life and architecture. This treand
had culminated in the introduction into Istanbul the first press in 1728 but
only after assidulous efforts by an Ottoman citizen, namely . Ibrahim
Mutafariqa to persuade sheikh u'l. Islam and Ottoman officials of its
harmlessness.
It is
well-worth pointing out in this connedion that the first book outhored by
Ibrahim Mutafgariqa in 1731 bore the tittle :The Origins of Government in the
constitution of Nations: which refers to the prevailing secularism in Europe
and how it drives at the separation of religion from state. He says:
"Christian nations have today disposed of holy rites to manage the
state affairs. That is to say there is no God-promulgated law which they feel
religrously bound to abide by whether in promulgation of new laws or decisions
relating to the administration of the state. The only abido by those laws ad
decrees issued from the light of their reason".
Sultan
Mahmud I(1730-1754) continued his fathers reforms. During his reign significant
borrowings from Europe were made. The French De Bonval (1675-1747) had
submitted a project for the establishment of an Engineering School. Also during
his reign the distinctive features of an Ottoman enlightened elite with
knowledge of European tongues and ambition to modernize their state began to
surface. Among those was the Minister Raghib pasa who establvhed a public
library and ordered the translation of some European sources into Turkish
during the reign of Ottoman III (1754-1757 A.D.)
As for
Sultan Mustapha III (1767-1773 A.D.) he
ordered the reorganization of marine ad artellary corpos according to
European techniques and weapons
depending on supervision of European experts and officers headed by the French
Barun Dotott.
With the
successive victories of the French Revolution in Europe and the French
onslaught against Egypt in 1798 which was an Ottoman province then, the drift
towards reformation received a new momentum. The very superiority of the French
army confirmed the necessity of reformation. It is also noticeable that the
principles raised by the French revolutionaries stressed on Freedom.
Brotherhood of man, and Equality had stined the thought of Ottoman reformists.
Thought acculturation was achieved by both French military missions sent to
Istanbul to modernize the Ottoman armed forces, and through diplomatic
representation whether European resident in Istanbul or Ottoman resident i
European capitals and particularly in Paris.
Selim III (1789-1807 A.D.) was the first
Ottoman sultan to bear the title of Reformist in the pre Tanzimat period
(1834-1876 A.D.). That is because Selim III had initiated the first comprehensive project of reformation
according to the European model. Among his outstanding reforms were the
abolishing of yenisari and the formation of a new army, the founding of a
monetary fund to provide for modern institution and technical institutes, and
the maintenance of permanent Ottoman embassies abroad. However, these reforms did not pass
unchallanged for ulema objected to the founding of a new army under the pretex
that ouch army was a replica of a faithless counterpart and was therefore, a
heretical innovation. The yenisaries supported the Ulema and declared their
disobedience in a muting culminating in the dethrowning of the sultan in May
1807 A.D., and bringing Mustapha IV (1807-1808) in his place. Few month later a
counter-revolution erupted when supporters of the new order overthrew Mustapha
IV and brought to the thrown prince Mohamud II (1808-1839 A.D.).
Sultan
Mahmud II was unanimously considered as the promulgater of a most extensive
reformation programme in the Ottoman Empire. Among the outstanding provisions
of his reformation programme were the abolishment of treaditional military
units known as yenisaries in 1826 A.D., reinstitution of direct state control
of provinces, modernization of the educational system through the establishment
of modern official schools supervised by the state and the setting up of a
supreme council for legislation and assigning to this council the task of
reviewing laws. This council, however, was to schoot up the state consultative
council in 1868. Sultan Mahmud II pursued reformations assiduously. He issued a
penal code, introduced European uniform and European order to the Ottoman army,
established a house for translating, a council of ministors aftor the European
example to reinforce administrative competence, reopened Ottoman embassies
abroad, dispatched 100 scholarship students to Europe, established an official
gazzette entitled "Taquim Waqa'ie" (Calendar of events) whose first
issue was in November 1831 A.D. Thus,
initiating modern journalism in the Ottoman Empire. And, Finally, Sultan Mahmud
II had cancelled out both Bektashi and Mavlawi Suft orders for their connection
with the Yenisaries In doing so Sultan Mahmud II had excluded both religious
figures and sufi sheikhs from the military,legislative and educational
institutions. Thus he had created a suitable atmosphere for the continuation of
change in Ottoman society and modernizing it according to secularist norms and
principles.
Most
importantly, Sultan Mahmud was deeply concerned with issuing an official
declaration confirming the principle of Human Rights and the right to equality
among all subjects of the Ottoman state regardless of their religious faith: He
says to this effect:
"I
proclaim, from now on, that Muslims are Muslims in their mosques only, and
Christians are Christians in their churches, and Jews are Jews in their temples
.
But,
outside these places, they are all equal and enjoy the same political rights."
In his
comment on this declaration, Geoffrey Lewis says that this declaration projects
sultan Mahmud's desire in separating religion from the state for in it he
stresses equity among religions and the citizens sharing of the same political
rights to replace the previous traditional division based on distinguishing two
categories of citizens where there is on the one hand Muslim eitizens and on
the other hand just non-Muslim subjects.
With the
coming to helm of sultan Abdu-Majeed (1839-1861 A.D.) a new stage of
reformation known as known as Tanzimat had begun. This stage continued until
the proclamation of the constitution in 1876. On the third of November 1839 A.D., the Sublime porte
issued a reformation covenant called "Khat Shareef Kolkhana" which
opens a chapter of reformations. This
covenant was reinforced by another reformation charter known as "Khat
Shareef Hamayon" on the 18th Feb., 1856 A.D. These two
reformation covenants drove at
invigorating administration and forming a society where both Muslim and
non-Muslim subjects live on equitable terms besides ameliorating social and
economic conditions. In consequence, a new movement to modernize and reorganize
laws was initiated and the issue of civil code marked a historic point of
departure in 1869-1876 A.D. This was ensued by the establishment of civil
courts in 1869 A.D., which parallel on the surface religious courts but
narrowed in practice the latter's range of jurisdiction. Reformation bills had
paid a special concern to education and highlighted its importance by setting
up a committee for its scaning and evaluting. This committee had submitted its report
in 18446 A.D. It did not proposed abolishing religious schools but suggested
the establishment of a new educational system on parity with the religious
schools . Then a law to the effect of educational reformation was issued
in August 1846 A.D., according to which the government took up supervision on
education instead of Ulama. A Ministery of Educartion was set up in 1866
A.D. This ministery was in charge of
establishing new schools that lie beyond the reach of religious ulama. Those
schools were to instruct civil sciences such as arithmatics, geometry, health,
geography and history. The instructors were to receive their training
independently beyond the reach of Ulama and religious authorities. Although the
outcome of these changes in education was not directly felt, their ruit in the
long run was great in two respects: first they were correct starting-point
since they resulted in the coming into existence of an intellectual and
ambitious class of people a ware of western cultural values, and second, this
shift had wrung educational tools out from the hands of a traditional caste
used to influence social life, namely the Ulama, and replaced those tools in
the hands of the state which opened a new horizon for generations to develop.
As for
social aspects, the Ottoman sociely began to navigate towards modern life. This
trend featured in the organization of state buildings and in their provision
with new fittings and furniture. Westen clothes replaced together with fez, the
Muslim puffed gown and headgear, and notable, nobles and the rich moved from
their old shabby houses in old avenues in Istanbul and large Ottoman cities to
newly-built houses which mirrored European prototypes. The state, on its part,
promulgated laws to the effect of changing the economic and social structure of
Ottoman society. Most outstanding among those laws were the law of land and the
law of provinces.
When
Sultan Abdul-Aziz ascended (1861-1876 A.D.), the energy of the Ottoman young
generation armed with education reached its outward expression and zenith.
Those youth asked for more reformation measures and it was in journalism that
new generation found on outlet for their energy. They both criticized the
status quo and made public new concepts such as patriotism, independence and
love of motherland. So pcople became a ware of these concepts. The surge had
been too powerful towards seformation that a thinker like Diyya Gok Alp did
later criticized Ottoman Tanzimat and stated that they were founded on
reconciliation fromula while he supported a complete severence between religion
and politics. He also disparaged the concept of double-harnessing Western and
Eastern cultures for there are fundamental conceptual differences between them.
He suggested the complete and all-out adoption of Western way of life.
The
Tanzimat movement had been culminated in the issue of 1876 constitution. This
was the fruit of efforts made by a group of liberal reformists such as Midhat
pasa. The constitution which was based on the pelgian counterpart falls in 119
provisions announced in a public celebration staged on 23rd.
November, 1876. Sultan Abdul-Hamid II (1876-1909 A.D.) declared that the
constitution drives at the accomplshment of civil and political equity among
all the Ottomans. The agreement between the constitution and Islamic legitimacy
engaged the concern of all reformists at that time that sheikh ul-Islam told
sultasn Abdul-Hamid II the day the constitution declared that it was on parity
with the right path of Islam.
Provision
six of the 1876 constitution staters that"Islam is the official religion
of the Ottoman state. Also, that everyone has the right to practice the rituals
his religion dictates. The constitution states too that sunnite sultandom
stands for the grand Islamic caliphate and it therefore, belongs to the elder
son of dynast of Ottoman, and that the appelaltion Ottoman applies to all
subjects of Ottoman State regardless of his religion and nationality, and that
education in all schools is to be paced under the state supervision.
On the 19th
March, 1877 Ottoman parliament convened with its two councils and Sultan
Abdul-Hamid gave a speech in which he confirmed the necessity of sparing no
efforts for the sake of the progress and welfare of the nation. He also praised
the Tanzimat. During the session some MPS showed both courage and frankness in
airing their opinions and pointing out the problems the country suffers from.
However, sultan Abdul-Hamid could not tolerate such freedom and his despotic
disposition gained the upper hand over him so he exploited the Russion
declaration of was against Turkey on 24th April, 1877, to abrogate
the parliament, suspend the constitution and adopt the call for Islamic Unity-a
slogan for his anti-freedom and counter-democratic policy. The call for Islamic
Unity, however was nothing but a political strategum employed by the sultan to
withstand colonial penetration into Ottoman provinces.
Despotic
rule of Abdul-Hamid II had resulted in the growth of nationalistic consciousness
among Turks and other peoples within the Ottoman Empire. Thus the Union and progress committee which
was an underground revolutionary organization set up in 1889 A.D., and was
connected to the Freemasons lodges, succeeded in staging a military coup which enforced Sultan
Abdul-Hamid to recover 1876 constitution. However, the Unionists did not waste
time in taking the opportunity of the counterrevolution taking place on the 13th
April, 1909 which called for the rule of Islamic law "Sharica". They
accordingly managed to issue a religious
verdict to the effect of uncrowning Sultan Abdul-Hamid II and seating his
brother prince Muhamad Rashad with the name of Muhammad V (1909-1918 A.D.) on
the thrown.
In the
aftermaths of the 13th April, 1909 event and the dethrowning of
Sultan Abdul-Hamid II, the Unionists realized that "Islam" was
unquestionably a force to be reckoned with. Therefore they affected certain
changes in the restored constitution recoved in 1908. They stated in article 7
that the Sultan is responsible of defending Islamic law "Shari'a".
They also stated in article 18 of the
above constitution that the laws should be grounded on the rules of sharica.
They confirmed, bunked by religious Ulama, that it was necessary to compromise
between secularistic systems and Islamic principles. Sheikku'l-Islam,
namely" Sahib Mullah had particularly helped them in this resped as he
annaunced to the public a manifeso in
which he stuted that" the constitutional government is one of the most
accordable of governments with the spirit (zest) of Islam.
But the
Unionists themselves did not implement what they had already stated in the
constitution and ruled the country by their three accustomed mottoes of
centralism, Turanism and Turkification, moreover, many Unionists were
affiliated to freemasons' lodges.
When the
First World War erupted, the Ottoman Empire entered the War on the side of the
axis powers. As a result the Ottoman army suffered great casualties in the
Iraq, Syria, and Egypt Fronts whereupon the British and French forces made
significant penetrations in Ottoman territories to the effect that Sultan
Muhannad Wahida'l-Din (Muhammad VI) who was given the helm after his brothers
death on the 3rd July, 1918 had tumbled to the Allies' influence.
In May,
1919 A.D., the Ottoman government dispatched Mustapha Kemal to Anatolia to
major general the Third Army mustered at Erdrum and sevas. But Mustapha Kemal
presided over a resistance movement hostile to the Government of Istanbul . He
was able to gather supporters and called for convening of a conference in
Erdrum on the 23rd July, 1919 A.D.
This conference issued a declatation confirming the maintenance and
integrity of Anatolia and called for national armed forces to defend it. On
the 19th March 1920 A.D, the
Grand National Assembly was set up and it held its first session at Ankara
electing Mustapha kemal as its president.
Secularist Politios during the Reign of Mustapha Kamal
Ataturk:
When
Sultan Muhammad VI resorted to religion against Mustapha Kamal and his
supporters by eliciting a verdict from Sheikha'I-Islum Drui Efendi Abdullah accusing Mustapha Kemal of
heresy and calling Muslims to fight him, he retorted by eliciting a counter
verdict from sheikhu 'l-Islam of Ankara
condemning the former verdict on the grond that it was null and void
since it had been issued under foreign occupation of the country. What had in
fact exasperated and raged Mustapha Kemal was the Sultan's condescence to
forcign occupation while fiercefully fighting at the same time any step towards
European cultural advance. This contradiction had occasioned the question
Mustapha Kemal put to himself frirst and to his people later:"How could
Turkey accept the West as an occupation and reject it as a culture? What Turkey
had rather to do was the sharp opposite, that is to accept the West as a
culture and reject it as an occupation!".
Mustapha
Kamal had led the Turkish armed forces and achieved major victories in Izmir
and other places, thus forcing the allied forces to enter into negotiation with
Ankara. But they also invited Istanbul goverment to participate as well. In
consequence the Grand National Assembly held a stormy session in which
representatives attacked the foreigner-ridden government of Istanbul. On the 30th
of Octorber a draft proposal to the effect of declaration a Republic was
submitted. But the Assembly did not reach an agreement on the propsool until
next day, that is the First of November, 1922 A.D. when Mustapha Kemal
delivered a speech in which he confirmed the possibility of separating the
"Sultanate" from the "Caliphate" with the transfer of the
former to the Grand Hational Assembly stressing that the caliphate had been
terminated since Hulak's execution of the last Abbaside legitimate caliph,
namely: Al-Mustacsim bi'-Lah in 1258 A.D., and the Selim I (1512-1520 A.D.)
when occupied Egypt in 1517 A.D., did not pay much concern to transferring the
caliphate to himself from the caliph Al-Qa'im. After Mustapha Kemal had
finished his speech, the Grand National Assembly took a rather significant
measure, that is separating the sultanate from caliphate and stripping the
"Caliph" from his temporal authority only to remain with the tittle
of caliph. The purpose of this step wasclearly to send a signal to the Alliance
powers that the government in Ankara could not tolerate two Turkish
delegations: One from Istanbul and the other from Ankara, rather the only
legitimate representative was the government of Ankara. The signal also
maintained that the Sultan in Istanbul had insulted the dignity of the Turkish
nation, and that the Grand National Assembly was the only supreme authority and
it had issued a decree to the effect of cancellation all the laws and decrees
which the government of Istanbul had issued
starting from 6 March, 1920 A.D. to add fuel to fire, the Grand National
Assembly accused the Caliph Muhammad VI on the 16th March, 1922
A.D., of treason. But the Sultan ran away on board a British frigate to Malta
next day. Thus, the goverment of Ankara remained the only legitimate authority
in Turkey. On the 6th October, 1923 A.D. Kemalist forces entered
Istanbul, and on the 29th October, 1923 A.D., the Grand National
Assembly held a historic session culminated in the declaration of the
establishment of Turkish Republic and the election of Mustapha Kemal a First
president of teh Republic. Ankara, henceforth, became the official capital of
the Republic instead of Istanbul which harboured the memories of Ottoman
Sultanate and Caliphate.
The necessary
steps to secularize the Turkish state were not taken until after the
declaration of the Republic for Mustapha Kemal did not play down the role of
the caliphate in dominating peoples emotions even on the day of the
cancellation of the Sultanate. He was telling the Grand National Assembly about
the "blessed trustworthiness" and what it might bring of welfare to
the country. He did not demand from the Assembly but an agreement to assign to
both caliphate and Sultanate a definitive rank where each can be distinguished
form the other as was the situation in Egypt before the Ottoman invasion with a
sole difference that is while the Sultan in Egypt was a person, his counterpart
in Turkey is the Grand National Assembly. On the same time, Mustapha Kemal did
not relish the prefixation of the word "Efendi" to the caliph since
this word was a foreign borrowing and was, therfore, unsuitable to collocate
with a word of such sublime was, therefore, unsuitable to collocate with a word
of such sublime connotation. A caliph is the "Servant of the Muslims"
and a "Servant of the two Holy Shrines" and as such it should be not
haphazardly used. In this connection, a
committee was appointed by the National
Assembly session on 1st October, 1922 to offer the tittle of caliph
to Abdul-Majeed the son of sultan Abdul Aziz. Mustapha Kemal had accordingly
forwarded a telegram to prince Abdul-Majeed telling him that the Grand National
Assembly had unanimously elected his a caliph for all Muslims and that his
election was announced to all Muslims in
the World.
Mustapha
Kemal was satisfied, at the beginning, with the distinction between the
religious and the political authorities which the caliph enjoyed. Stripping the
political authority from the sultan while maintaining him as a caliph. However,
after the signing of the army, Mustapha Kemal was vehemently prepared to take
the second important step. This time the abolishment of caliphate. The step was
amplty justified since Mustaph Kemal felt that caliphate had lost its significance
and grounds for existence. Also, because the caliph had become a fountain-head
for conspiracies and a plea for others to interfere in the internal concerns of
the state of Turkey which its leadership could no more tolerate any threat that
would undermine its existence consequently the office of caliph should only be
reserved in the existence. Consequently the office of caliph should only be
reserved in the book of memory. For these reasons the Grand National Assembly
declared the abolishment of caliphate on the 3rd March, 1924 with
reference to the laws No: 429, 430, 431. and to justify this measure of
caliphate cancellation, the Assembly released a messege to the nation bearing
the tittle:"Caliphate and the Authority of the Nation" which
emphasized that the caliph derives his authority from the nation, and that it
ws the nation that selects the caliph and it was the only power that possessed
the right to appoint or displace him.
It becomes
all-too-evident taht Mustapha Kemal was very much careful in all the steps he
had taken, to build up a modern Turkish state in all the steps he had taken to
build up a modern Turkish state that can match up to the rank of the advanced
European states. He felt that it was time for the Turks to reconsider their
interest and sever their ties with the Muslim nations among whom they
co-existed for many centuries. The frand National Assembly did not fail to
remind the Turks taht "Wasn't it not for the sake of the caliphate, Islam,
and Muslim Ulama', that poor Turkish peasants fought and were killed for five
uninterrupted centuries? It is now time for Turkey to look after its
interests:"
By
abolishing caliphate, Turkey had removed a barrier on its way to achieve two
objectives: The first was that Western powers had began to pursue a much more
flexible line of action with Turkey andseemed ready to recognize its
independence. The second was the growing confidence of Turkish statemen to
announce overtly their will for secularization of the Young Republic. Some
observes had considered that step as an uncalculated risk initiated by Mustapha
Kemal to replace Islamic thought by a secularist Western thought.
Seen from
a wider spectrum, it was indispensible for the new Republic to harbour these
changes within a framework of a new constitution. And it so happened. On the 20th
April, 1924 a new constitution was promulgated it encompassed 105 articles
stressing that the supreme authority belongs to people who are represented by
the Grand National Assembly" the parliament" The constitution also confired personal
freedom and the rights to believe, think and make assemblies. It also set a
legal configuration for the Turkish state modelled after the liberal, Western
ideal . The constitution did not mention
in its context any thing about religious authority except the article stating
that "Islam is the official religion in Turkey". On the other hand,
the constitution states that "no one is to be watched for his religion,
faith and religion both are a concern of the heart and it was utterly
permissible to hold religious celebrations and offer religious services that do
not run counter to order morals or laws. Finally, the costitution states
article that " implementation of
fundamental Islamic laws is the duty of the Grand National Assembly:. However,
when Mustapha Kemal sensed the significance of a political organization in the
implementation of his plans and falicitation of his task, he laid the
foundations of the people's party. And on the 20th July, 1923 he
drew down a programme for this party. This programme can be summerized in two
poinbts: the first is to promote Turkey up to a typical modern state, and the
second to strike out any religious, sectarian, class, racial or economic
difference that would undermine equity of rights and freedoms among its
members.
Secularism
was one of the basic pillars on which the organization of Turkish state rested.
Official curicula dictated that both legal system and regulations were to be
henceforth based on the the so-called scientific mentality that harmonizes well
with the fundamentals of modern culture. Religion, on the other hand, was an
emotional matter and it was, accordingly, to be confined within the subjective
world of the individual. Anyway , secularism is Turkey did not entail that law
excluded religion, it rather meant organizing it by laws. Laws respect personal
belicts of people , and the penal code of 1926 embraced an article on offences
relating to freedom of belief. Thus separating religion from the state is an
indispensible means for the progress of a nation. This does not mean that the
state is atheistic denying the existence of God. But rather that the state did not play any religious role for two
reasons: first, religious belief was not
but a matter of purely subjective feelings. Second to sidestep political and
social cleavages which worked in the recent past for the disintegration of the
Ottoman Empire which was composed of different cultures, and religions. Bernard
Lewis says to this effect: "The foundation of Kemalist policy towards religion was based on
Laicism and was irreligious".
It is
worth mentioning, in this respect that the exploitation of religion by the
European powers to intofere with Turkish affairs and previously with the Ottoman polides, was one of the
reasons that encouraged Mustapha Kemal and his colleagues to head towards
secularion and prove the pretex of European interference worthless.
The
peoples party held its first conference on 15th October , 1927 where
in both programmer and by-laws of the party were decided. The motto of the party which was composed of
four arrows resting on four pillars representing, Republicanism, Publiasm,
populism, and secularism was drawn out. The second conference of the party held
in 1931 had added two other pillars, these were Etatism and Revolutionions.
Thus, Turkey has, as 1937 constitution mamtains, become public, popular,
statistic, secular, and revolutionary Republic.
Mustapha
Kemal believed that the independence of Turkey was the first step towards
establishing a modern state according to secularist principles. This made him
go ahead with his efforts towards full-modernization of Turkish society .He
therefore ordered the implementation of a series of measures and changes that
were accompanied by a soot of regimentation. Those measures and changes were so
extensive that they covered all aspects of Turkish life. Among these was the
confirmation on educating Turkish generation according to the above-mentioned
principles which cannot be achieved without concentration on nationalistic and patriotic feelings
besides the projection of linguistic, familial, and social characteristics.
The next
important step was the issue of Religious Reformation law of 1924 which
abolished the office of Sheikhu'i-Islam and all the legislative and jndical
institutions related to him. The law also abolished the Mortmain (Awqaf)
ministry and transferred supervision of religious schools to the state
educational administration . it had also established the Ministry of Religious
Affairs ad conne4cted it to the paesident office. Moreover, on the 8th
April, 1924 the government ratified the law of courts, constituency which
abolished the Religious courts and pensioned their judges off. These changes
were affected on the justification that they set a barrier on the was of
mdoernization and setting up a uniform legal system.
Mustapha
Kemal then waged war against religious practices and formalities. He launched a
campaign against Sufi orders. To this effect, he gave a speech on 30th
August, 1925, in Kastomania where Mavlw Sufi order thrived. He said that
"The Secularist Republic of Turkey could no longer tolerate Sheikhs, Dervishes and their following of the
order to prosper on Turkish
land". He continued: " asking for
help and assistance from the dead is nothing but a blow to civilized human
society And, of, there were an order of any sort it was the order become
humans, it is up to them to accept what civilization offers and interact with
it. As for the sheikhs of the sufi orders, they must comprehend these statement
clearly and take the lead in closing down their hospices and saint lodges by
their own submissive initiative or else I will knock them down upon their
heads".
On his
return from that city, the council of Ministers held a meeting on 1st
Sep., 1925 culminated in the issue of three exclusive decrees. These are:
1- The
abolishment of all Sufi orders and elosing down of hopices and zawaiyyas
connected to them.
2. Prohibition
of religious uniforms except on ulama.
3. The
compulsory wearing on of hats for all state officials.
Those laws
were soon branched off. Ulama' were forbidden from wearing their uniform unless
inside mosques. Hats were enforced on thewhole nation to wear, while they were
previously enforced on officials only. It is noticeable that while abolishing
of sufi orders, closing down of hospices, enforcing hats on men and stripping
veils from women were not very much
un-Islamic, the Kemalists found in them necessary procedures to complement
their secularist measures.
Consequently, some intellectuals and religions figures tried to resist
those secularist measures and they deemed it as a departure from Islam. But
Mustapha Kemal was on the alert so he introduced into the penal code an article
that prevents the employment of religion for political ends. It runs as
follows:
"Those who instigate the general public to do actions taht
undermine state security under the mask of religion or urge them into
disobedience of secularist laws and regulations under pretex that secularism
sacrileges religions beliefs and institutions are subject to punishment
according to official laws . Also,
organizing a political party based on religions instructions is punishable by
law".
Articles
241, 242, and 259 have also stated that religions officials including muftis,
preachers, orators and prayer-leaders who disregard application of states laws
and regulations or who instigate people not to obey laws and regulations are
subject to punishment. They have also stated that every one who stage a
religions celebration outside places of worship is subject to punishment.
On 6th
October 1926, the state had adopted a number of Swiss and Italian penal laws to
replace a series of laws known then as the gazzette of shariah laws . Thus a new penal law based on an Italian
counterpart was issued. A civil law for marriage was also issued. This law
forbade polygamy. With the ratification of the new civil low by the Grand
National Assembly, it was indispensible to review all subjective laws according
to the principles of the secular policy of the state.
It is
worth-bearing in mind that all these secularist laws had been promulgated in
Turkey while the constitution there was still holding that "Islam is the
official religion of the state" and that" the implementation of the
provisions of Islamic laws (Ahmamu'l-Shariah) lies within the responsibility of
the Grand National Assembly". Therefore, a number of deputies of the
peoples party took the initiative and presented on the 20th April,
1928, a proposal to the Grand National Assembly demanding the Assembly to
consider agreement on the rectification of the constitution. On the selfsame
day the Assembly agreed on the proposal and affected the rectification
demanded. These rectifications were not in essence, but the cancellation of the
2nd article which states that "Islam is the official religion
of the state in Turkey." However, Turkey was still to wait some other
decade for the statement that "Turkey is a secular state " to appear
in the constitution of 1937. This seemed
only possible when Mustapha Kemal himself forced his utter control on the
Assembly, thus reducing the ratio of religious representatives from the
significant percentage of %21 to less than %1 only.
Kemalist
carried on their efforts towards modernization of Turkish society. They decided
to adopt the western calender, numerical systems and holidays and the Assembly did not hesitate a moment in
ratifying such decisions in 1926. Among these novelties the Kemalists
introduced were the introduction of Christian calender to replace the Islamic
counterpart the initiation of the process of purification of Turkish language
to the effect of dropping out persian
and Arabic borrowings from it on 3rd Nov., 1928, and the appliation,
on the largest possible scale of latin alphabet to replace the Arabic alphabet
which was widely used during the Ottoman period. The oath of honour of both the
president of the Republic and of the representative in the GNA was altered in
1928 A.D. Thus, striking out the word "Allah" and replace it with
the word "honour". Call for
prayer was dropped out and instead of "Allahu'Akbar" (God is Great)
the phrase".
Reechoed
in Turkey's skies. The Qur'an itself was translated into Turkish language and a
Turkish comment of the Qur'an was soon in circulation. The committee in charge
of eleting certain textbooks from the curicula such as history within the
corpus of Islamic law rediculed such
topics on the justification that such
and such topics were laid down to respond to life in Arabia fourteen centuries
ago. They also rediculed the prejudices of religious bigots describing them as
both pontifications and primitive soothsayings. The committee finally , stressed
that swiss law was being more suitable for the new Turkish society and much
more satisfying to its needs.
The
kemalists adopted new procedures and promulgated new laws to enforce secularism
on Turkey during the period 1928-1938 A.D. Among those new measures was the
promulgation of new laws regarding the status of women, making women on equal
footing with men and giving them their right to take part in political, social,
and cultural life in Turkey. In 1931-32 A.D. The Government went further as to
cut down the number of mosques, and the number of preachers to 300 ones to be
paid by the state. They were required not to exclude the speeches they give on
Fridays to religions topic only but also to include matters relating to
economic and social life. The government then closed down two of Turkeys most
famous mosques, namely: "Aiya Sofia" which was transformed into a
museum, and "Al-Fatih Mosque" to be transformed into a deposit.
On the 29th
Oct, the government issued a decree to the effect of introducing a family
surname. A novelty unknowe during the Ottoman period . The government also
ordered the revoke of old tittles such as pasa, peg, Efendi, Jilibi, Khanim
indicating certain social ranks and replaced them by family surnames and
honorific Mr. And Mrs. In the elections of spring 1935 seventeen women
entered the GNA, and in June, 1935
weekend holiday was changed 30 as to begin from saterday afternoon till Monday
morning just like Europe making Friday which has a particular holiness for
Muslims an ordinary day. The justification the press provided for that is that
European weekend is much more fitting and practical for commercied
teansactions, and business administration of such major institutions as the
government, banks companies and fiscal and financial bodies that were related
to Europe.
Freemason
lodges welcomed those secularist trends in Turkey. They considered their
success a triumph for free masonary. This had become euphoria especially when
the people's party had adopted secularism in its programme. Accordingly
Freemason lodges decided to close down and leave out their furniture and belongings to public Houses which the
people's party had established with the aim of promoting the secularist spirit
in Turkey. A scholar has commented on that saying : Freemasonary was able to
achieve some of its "Internationa by making Turkey sever its connection to
both its objectives past and its Islamic environment.
Conclusion
Mustapha
Kemal Ataturk had tried transforming Turkey into a European state and severing
it from both its muslim past and Ottoman Empire. Turkish middle class who
interests were interlaced with the West had supported him in all the measures
he adopted. This it did to fulfil two objectives: first to undermine the economic
and social foundations of traditional Ottorman classes such as the notables and
religious groups as well as their Islamic ideology and second, to work for the
establishment of a new political and economic structure based on Westem
prototypes and armed with the weapon of secularism.
However,
one is bound to ask whether the Kemalists had succeeded in their mission and
given the Tunks a new identity ? and if secularist trends had found a response
in the very depth of Turkish people's psychology. To answer those questions we
have to say that Turkey is still facing secial, economic, and political
problems which reveal that the changes the Kemalists affected in society were
no more but an imitation of formal and surface aspects of Western systems, lows
and institutions. This did not move the enthusiasm of the greater majority of
common people-particularly in the countryside who only fell short from active
resistance to these changes. A consequence which made Ataturk's successors
realize that it was impossible to ignore a rather significant reality that
religion is one of the most political and social forces influencing Turkish
society.
Notes & References
1. On this topic see, for instance. Weiker, Walter, F.
The Modernization of Turkey from Atyaturk to the present Day. New York. 1981,
p. 10. 2. After severe defeats the Ottoman arinies
suffered as in the battle of carlofilz 1699 A.D., and the loss of vast
territories the Ottoman state implemented a wide range reformation movement
which encompassed its military economic social, and administrative systems.
That retormation movement received a new momentum up on the promulgation of
Tanzimat in 1839 A.D. This movement gave rise to a coflict between the
conservatists and reformists which draged on for the 18th and the 19th
centuries. Common people did not take part and were not concerned with these
developments which were reserved for the ealightoned elite and a pact of
politicians . see weiker , ibid., p. 105. Also, Khalid Ziyyada. Discovery of
European Progress: A study of European Impact on the Ottomans during the 18th
Century. Beimeth, 1981, p-8ff.
3. "Secularism" denotes the separation of
religion form the state. This term emerged in Europe sine the middle ofthe 19th
century, Another term that gained currency in Turkey after the crystalization
of its secularist tendencies. That is "Laicism" GK: Laikos which
applies to ordinary man of the street as distinguished from the clergy. Both
terms were used to signify separation of the religion from the state. See
Berkes, Niyazi. The Development of Secularism in Turkey Montreal, 1964, p.5.
4. On this thought and the factors of the rise of
Ottoman Empire see kiperte, Fu'ad. History of the Ottoman Empire. Beruth, 1977;
Shannawi, Abdul-Aziz. The Ottoman state: A Wronged Islamic state. Two volumes,
Cairo, 1978, and Famhat M.N. "Methodological Notes re the Evaluation of
Ottoman Empire" Al-Hilal, Cairo, No. 7, 1986, p.74. The Arab intellectual
Satic'l-Hisri was one of the first who took the lead impugn the idea of caliphate
transfer to the Ottomans; see' Al-Hisni, Satic Arab countries and the Ottoman
state. Beinuth, 3rd edition, 1965. Asad Rustum had also impugned t
his idea in his book Opinions and Researchworks. Beiruth, 1967, pp.16-19. See
also Ahmad, Ibrahim Khalil the History of Arab Homeland during the Ottoman
Epoch. Mosul, Dar'l-Kutub lil-Tiba'a wa'l-Nashr, 1983, pp.62-66., wherein a
reference is made taht the first to mention the resignation episode was the
French historian Dowson in his book A General View of the Ottoman Empire
without providing his reference.
7. Heper,
Metin. "Islam, polity and Society in Turkey: A Middle Eastem
perspective".
8. The verdicts
covering the period 1922-1924 including the collection of Fatawi
"Verdicts" of Ali Efendi'l-Fu'adiyya are available at the disposal of
researchers, see Farahat, ibid., p.76.
9. Heper,
ibid., p.349.
10. For details on both sides'
points of view see Ahmad, ibid., pp. 178-179.
11. Quriceli Doci Beg
submitted a report to sultan Murad IV in 1630 where in he reviewed causes of
the dedine laying the charge for that on the clergy stressing that they had
adopted a lenient attitudes towards sharicah matters. See Qoci Beg Risalasi,
Istanbul; Also, Ziyyada, ibid, pp. 19-24.; Ali, Shakir Ali. Iraq's History
During the Ottoman period- 1638-1750 A.D. Baghdad, 1985, p.42.
12. Ahmad, I. Kh. Ibid., p.,
P. 179.
13. Ibid., p. 179.
14. He is one of the first
pioneers who wrote on secularism in Turkey, its coming into existence and
development, see his above quoted book p.23.
15. Ziyyada. Ibid., p.119.
16. The reign of sultan Ahmad
III was known as the Tulip era. A period that witnessed the wide spread of
cultivation of this flower which had become the symbol of flowering of poetry
and literatire in the Ottoman Empire-See Ziyyada. Ibid., p.120.
17. Ibid., p.39
18. Ibid., p.43
19 Ibid., p.45-47
20 Ibid., p.47.
21. Ahmad., ibid., pp.180-181.
22. Ibid., p.181
23. For details on Sultan Mahmud II programme of
reformation see : Al-Bahrawi, Muhammad Abdul-Latif. The Movement of Ottoman
Reformation during the Reign of the 2nd Sultan 1808-1839 A.D. Cairo,
1978.
24. Ahmad., ibid., pp. 189-190.
25. Ibid., p. 189.
26. Ibid., p. 189.
27. Lewis, Geoffrey. Modern Turkey. London, 1974,
p.43.
28. Ibid., p.43.
29. Some observers give a later date than 1876
A.D., for the continuation of Ottoman reformation movement, and consider the
reformations introduced by Mustapha Kemal as an off-shoot to Ottoman
reformations. See Jiha, Shafiq. "Tanziat or the Reformation Movement in
the Ottoman Empire 1856-1877 A.D. "Majalatu' l-Abhath. Beiruth, 18th
year, part 2, June 1965, p.108.
30. Ad. Duri, Abdul-Aziz. Historical Genesis of
Arab Nation: A study of Identity and consciousness. Beiruth, 1984, p.132.
31. For details on educational reformations see.
Ahmad. Ibrahim Khalil The Evolution of National Education in Iraq 1869-1932
A.D. Baghdad, 1982, p.30.
32. Berkes., ibid., p. 30.
33. Ahmad., History of Arab Homeland during the
Ottoman Epoch. Pp. 196-197.
34. For details see Gokalp, Ziya. Turkish Nationalism
& Western Civilization. New York, 1959, p. 269.
35. Ahmad., ibid., pp. 210-211.
36. Ibid., p. 211.
37. Ibid., p. 210.
38. See Al-Bustani, Suleiman. A Reconsideration
& Memory or The Ottoman state before and after the constitution. Recension &
study by Ziyyada, Khalid. Beirath, 1978, p. 160.
39. Ahmad., ibid., p.211.
40. Ibid., pp. 212-213.
41. Barakat, Ahmad Fahd, Shawabka. The Movement
of Islamic Unity for the 2nd half of the 19th century to
1909 A.D. Amman, 1978 which is generally regarded as one of the best studies on
this topic.
42. For details on the emergence of Union and
progress committee see Ramrose, Ernest The Young Turkey and the 1908 Revolution
tr. By Salih Ahmad Al-Ali. Beiruth, 1960.
43. For details on this movement known as
Reactionism see Takat, Fuad. 31-Mart Irtija. Istanbul, 1327 A.H. pp. 2-3.
44. Suleiman, Ahmad Al-Said. Religious and
Nationalist Trends in contemporary Turkey. Cairo, pp.41-42.
45. Ramrose., ibid., p. 127.
46. Karl-Brochelmann. History of Islamic Nations.
Tr Nabih Amin Faris & Munir
Balabaki. Fifth Impression, Beiruth, 1968, p. 688
47. Al-Zein, Mustapha. Ataturk and his
Successors. Beiruth, 1982, p.276.
48. Ibid., p. 277.
49. For details see Mustapha Kamal Ataturk. A
speech . Istanbul, 1963, p. 576.
50. Azzo, Hanna Behnan. Political Developments in
Turkey 1919-1923 A.D. Unpublished M.A. Dissertation, College of Arts, Baghdad
University, 1989, p.118.
51. Low, Norman. Mastering Modern World History.
Hong-Kong, 1982, p, p. 118.
52. Abdul-Rahim Mustapha, Ahmad. On the Origins
of Ottoman History Beiruth, Daru'I-Shuruq 1982, p. 312.
53. Suleiman., ibid., p. 61.
54. Abu Nasr, Omer," 20 Years after the War
1918-1938". Al-Majala, No. 3. Damascus. 1939, p. 29.
55. Ghafoor, Abdul-Jabbar Qadir "Religion
and Sufi orders" p. 92. A chapter in Contemporary Turkey by Ahmad et al.
Mosul, 1988.
56. Brochelmann., ibid., p. 696.
57. Mansur, Furuq. " Islam and the
Foundation of Government". Majalat
Al-Mawrid,
58. Abdul-Razaq, Ali. Islam and the Origins of
Government. Damascus, without date, p. 230.
59. Armstrong, Hess. The Gray Wolf: Mustapha
Kemal. Cairo without date, p. 198.
60. Soylemex, Yuksel. "Turkey: Western on
Moslem". Turkish Review-Quarterly
Digest. Autumn, 1992, p. 50. It is worth – mentioning that some Turks raised
the slogan *Sharq Wada)"Goodbye East"! see in this connection,
Shakir, Amin et al. Turkey and Arab policy. Cairo, Without date, p. 104.
61. Lewis, Geoffrey. Ibid., p. 92.
62. Some researchers consider Tunzimat as a
West-oriented movement whose purpose was to pacify Europe and lure it into a
much more flexible and sympathetic behaviour to wards the Ottoman Empire. The Tanzimat were also viewed as a viaduct
over which the state would pass leaving its levantine Islamism to the oxidental
secularism. See Abdul-Hamid, Muhammad Harb. "The Distinctive Features of
the Historical, and Ideological Foundations of Safety party in Turkey". In
the Educational Beaurean for Arab Gulf states-as forum on Trends in
contemporary Muslim Thought. Bahrin 22-25 Feb., 1985, p. 440 Likewise, another
researcher sees that the price Turkey paid for its independence was the
severance of its ties with the East and Islam and that Mustapha Kemal was only
able to restore Turkish sovereignty over its territories at the expense of
compliance with Western conditions, see Mustapha Nabil "The Evaluation
of Ottoman State "Majalat al-Hilal,
Cairo, Year 93, No. 12, Dec., 1985, p. 42.
63. Soylemez., ibid., p. 50.
64. For details on the making of the people's
party see Ahmad, I. Kh. "Political parties in Turkey" – A chapter in
contemporary Turkey by Ahmad, I. Khalil et al, Dar Al-Kutub lil Tibaa wal
Nashr, Mosul University, Mosul, 1988, pp. 157-164.
65. For details see: Darwaza, Muhammad Izzu
Modern Turkey Beiruth, 1946.
66. Weiker., ibid., p 105.
67. Soylemez. Ibid., p.51.
68. Al-Jumaill, Qasim Khalaf Asi. Developments
and Trends in Internal Turkish policy 1923-1928 A.D. Unpublished M.A.
Dissertation, College of Arts, Baghdad University 1985, p. 202.
69. Lewis, Bernard. The Emergence of Modern
Turkey. Oxford University press, 1960, p. 406.
70. Al-Jumaili., ibid., p. 203.
71. For details see Ahmad I.Kh and Murad, Kh.
Ali. Iran and Turkey: A study of Modern and contemporary History. Mosul, 1992,
p. 245.
72. Hourani, Albert. The Emergence of the Modern
Middle East. Oxford, 1981, p. 189. In this connection soylemez call those laws
"Draconian laws) see Soylemez,
ibid., p. 50.
73. Darawaza., ibid., pp. 160-168.
74. Al-Zein., ibid., p. 280.
75. Mustapha., ibid., p. 314.
76. Soylemez., ibid., p. 50.
77. Ottoman Empire was a meeting-ground for
several sufi orders. Some of these orders such as Bektashi, Mavlawi, Qadiri,
and Naqshabindi had played a significant role in social and political life, see
Ghafoor., ibid., pp. 89-92.
78. Al-Zein., ibid., p. 279.
79. Suleiman., ibid., p.64.
80. Suleiman., ibid., p. 64.
81. One of the ironices that call our attention
is that sultan Mahmud II had ordered the wearing of "Tarbush" as a
symbol of modernization to replace traditional Muslim headgear. However,
Mustapha Kemal after the lapse of a century ordered the wearing of a hat to
stand for mdoernization and the West to replace the "Tarbush" which
became a symbol for traditional reactionary see Al-Jamil, Sayyar kawkab.
"Impacts of Modernization. In:
The First Conference of Turkish studies, Mosul University, June, 1989, p. 18.9
82. Al-Nicaymi., ibid., p. 38
83. Suleiman., ibid., p. 65.
84. Al-Zein., ibid.,n p. 279.
85. Ibid., p. 280.
86. James, A. Bill and Carl Leiden. The Middle
East and power. Toronto, 1977, p. 43.
87. Shaw, Stanford J. And Shaw, E. K. History of
the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey. Vol II., Cambridge, 1977, p. 385.
88. It is worth-mentioning that the writer Halide
Edib had criticized the statement that"Islam is the official religion in
Turkey" and demanded its deletion from the consitution, see Halide Edib.
Turkey Focus West. New York, 1930, p. 214.
89. Suleiman., ibid., p. 65.
90. Soylemez., ibid., p.50.
91. For details see frey, Frederick. W. The
Turkish political Elite. New York, 1965, pp. 59-60. Also, Al-Jawahiri, Imad
Ahmad "Ataturk Principles and political Activity in Turkey 1923-1960 A.D.
Dirasat Arabiyya, Year 18, No. 8-12, June-Oct., 1982, p.100.
92. Mustapha., ibid., p. 315.
93. For details on linguistic reformation and the
activities of Turkish Language society founded in 1926 see shaw and show.,
ibid., p. 376.
94. Suleiman., ibid., p. 68.
95. Ibid., p. 63.
96. Ibid., p. 63.
97. Mustapha., ibid., p. 316.
98. Ibid., p. 317.
99. Ibid., p. 317.
100. Al-Jamil., ibid., p. 20.
101. For details on freemasonary see the
invaluable study soysal, Ilhan. Turkiya ve Dunyada Masonluk ve Masonlar.
Istanbul, 1978.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق