Once a clear answer is given to this question, the frame and content of the opening will also be clarified. However, there is no such clarity yet on this matter. There is much ambiguity rather than confusion because this opening, which will shape the future of the entire society, started as the initiative of certain and limited leadership and a section in that society. Removal of this ambiguity is vital for the future of Turkish politics as well as the political career of the Justice and Development Party (AK Party).However, I should note at this point that the need for an opening in politics should be appreciated, that a strong political will should take action to this end and that the matter should be thoroughly discussed in Parliament. Once a healthy and efficient discussion is held in Parliament and an agreement is reached during the deliberations over the normalization of the regime, if this happens, the renewal and transformation process will take place rapidly. However, this did not happen and the AK Party, which has masterfully used the pressure of the change, realized that it needed to resort to people.
Two things will happen when the opening succeeds. The places of the state and the nation will be switched. The era of the state’s nation will be over and it will be replaced by the nation’s state. Secondly, the dominant powers failing to appreciate their local realities, viewing the outer change as a conspiracy reacting to any demands on the system, will be replaced by visionary actors and an approach seeking to integrate with the world and appreciating the needs of the current world.
Turkish political tradition has been shaped by a process where the state was the central actor. All laws and practices from the Constitution to the bill on political parties ask the people as well as the political parties to all be the same. The pro-state tradition has imposed its own approach and understanding, and for this reason, diversities remained unnoticed and change was seen as extraordinary and unusual. In such an environment, alternatives were not considered at all. This led to the isolation of the country and created an authoritarian regime resistant to change.
Considering that Turkey did not lose a battle, the actor that would lead to change could not be an external one. This could be an internal player unwanted by the regime. There is a nice statement suggesting that those who control the past will also control the future. Up until now, the founding actors have interpreted and written the history as they wanted. They have tried to administer and shape the future relying on that teaching. It shaped the conscience of the people and determined their lifestyles and worldviews. However, this artificial perception became outdated in the current conditions because it failed to meet the needs of the current world and made it impossible for the people to understand the realities surrounding the globe.
The peripheral actors have become more visible in the political space thanks to the accelerating migrations towards urban cities since the 1960s. They are large in numbers; besides, because they owed nothing to the state, they were not influenced by the authoritarian secularism and the official culture of the nationalism that praised the state rather than the nation. They first became influential in economic life and they acquired the strongholds of the political elites; this situation was announced as a coming danger posing a threat to the regime; the holders of this view argued that the republican regime was slipping away from their hands.
There are two dimensions to the definition of consensual citizenship in Turkey: first, you have to be a Turk in ethnic origin; secondly, you have to be part of Sunni Islam. We fail to understand the grave consequences of this approach because of the official practices for those who fall outside of these definitions and categories.
We have come to the conclusion based on these internal conflicts and tensions that our republic’s project of nationalization has failed because of its major aspects and features that exclude the differences and diversities. In fact, despite all calls for unity and togetherness, we are part of a society and nation comprised of smaller communities conflicting with each other and holding suspicions of others.
Turkey also fears the possibility that democratization may be an external program imposed by external actors. Some of the holders of this view are absolutely positive that Western actors are trying to plot a conspiracy against our country by making references to democratization in Turkey. If a nation has become fearful of democracy and now views it as an external phenomenon, it means that it is ready to surrender its will and determination to powerful actors. This is even worse than tyranny. In that case, reason is surrendered to fear and intimidation.
Peace means that enmities will be over. Peace means democratization and normalization. It also means that relations should be based on consent and agreement. In short, it means the humanization of everything distorted by ideology. We have to drop skepticism and hopelessness; instead, we must roll up our sleeves to accelerate the process. This is our debt to ourselves, to the people we made suffer in the past and to our children who will build our future.
