The iftar dinner, which was announced a few months ago, brought to light deep cleavages among the Alevi community itself as some Alevi organizations boycotted the dinner because they doubted the government’s sincerity, and even announced that Alevis attending the dinner would be shunned by the community. Just like the Kurdish issue, the Alevi problem is among the most pressing and long-standing problems of the country as Alevis complain that they are subjected to the discrimination of the state, which they believe has a stance close to that of the Sunnis, and say their cultural rights are not fully recognized. This iftar dinner, which many saw as a chance to bring the state and its Alevi citizens closer in order to sort out years-long disputes, seems to be a missed opportunity on the part of the Alevis. Milliyet’s Hasan Cemal completely shares the Alevis’ complaints that they have long been discriminated against by the state and have not been able to enjoy their rights; yet, he suggests that they should have made use of this chance, a prime minister attending an Alevi fast-breaking dinner for the first time in the republic’s history, and showed unity in attending the dinner, which would at least have been a start to bring the Alevis’ problems to the table. In light of this, he thinks that the rise of many and different voices among Alevis about attending this dinner has once again showed how the Alevi community is divided and fragmented. According to Cemal, debates around this fast-breaking dinner also proved the existence of bigotry that is in total contradiction with the culture of democracy surrounding Alevi organizations in Turkey. He thinks that Erdoğan’s attending was a handsome gesture for the maintenance of peace among people from different faiths in Turkey, so it should have been responded to accordingly. “The extended hand should have been shaken. While shaking this hand, the Alevis could have mentioned their demands that have been ignored. It did not happen. It is a pity. The doors of dialogue should be opened. Turkey needs this,” emphasizes Cemal.
Bugün columnist Gülay Göktürk dwells on the notion of sincerity, which some Alevi organizations have accused the government of lacking about its plans with respect to Alevi citizens. Göktürk believes that the sincerity criterion in politics is quite an ambiguous one, hard to measure. “How can you measure someone’s sincerity? How will you be able to read people’s minds? It is not possible to understand whether the intentions of politicians are sincere, and it is equally as meaningless,” says Göktürk. Thus, she suggests that the only way to figure out whether one is sincere or not is to test their actions. “If Erdoğan’s government is now talking about expanding the rights of the Alevis, we have to believe in this unless the opposite happens. If you turn your back to the government, doubting its sincerity instead of encouraging it to make democratic moves, this will be not defending the Alevis’ rights but punishing the one who is willing to help you,” she claims. In Göktürk’s view, if the government is not sincere, this will manifest itself in its actions in a short time. So she thinks a recent legal ruling that does not recognize Alevi praying houses (Cemevis) as places of worship will be a good test for the government to prove its sincerity by voicing its discontent over the ruling.
Star’s Ahmet Altan discusses what could settle the Alevi problem in Turkey and shows the law as the only address for the solution of the Alevis’ problems. He contends that if the rights and liberties of the Alevis are recognized by law, this will bring a final solution to their long-standing problems.
