In a show of courage, Erdoğan mentioned the names of many iconic figures who have left their mark on Turkey's cultural mosaic. The prime minister mentioned Ahmet Yesevi, Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli, Pir Sultan Abdal, Hacı Bayram-ı Veli, Yunus Emre, Mevlana Jelaluddin Rumi, Said Nursi, Sabahat Akkiraz, Tatyos Efendi, Cem Karaca, Ahmet Kaya, Mehmet Akif, Necip Fazıl, Nâzım Hikmet and Ahmet Hani and said a picture of Turkey without one of these figures would be incomplete, drawing applause from many.Yeni Şafak's Fehmi Koru says the most important aspect of Erdoğan's speech was its extensive and embracive tone, which he says carried the Justice and Development Party's (AK Party) standards to a higher level, making it difficult for other parties to engage in politics simply by perpetuating their traditional line. “If we are to look for only one standard the congress was based on, it would have to be an embracive attitude. With this congress, the AK Party seems to have aimed to carry itself from its traditional grass roots. Indeed, it has achieved this in its discourse. Erdoğan's speech was one which embraced the entire nation. He sincerely stood up for individuals from every religious, ethnic and political view who left their mark on the nation and country. Ethnic differences and the existence of an assortment of views in the country are no longer ‘divisive' [thanks to] his speech; they have, instead, gained a ‘unifying' aspect,” explains Koru.
In his view, Erdoğan's inclusive discourse is what now makes the job of Turkish opposition parties difficult. This is because the opposition has so far tried to identify the AK Party with a certain ideology, forgetting that the AK Party is a political party and that it came to power through a public vote. “They claimed that the AK Party had a hidden agenda and that it would begin to implement it starting from the day it gained power. The AK Party's latest initiatives were even described as ‘divisive' by opposition parties. But the AK Party congress has shown that the party has adopted a political discourse which prioritizes the territorial integrity of the nation and stresses the importance of the nation's unity and solidarity. When opposition parties accuse the AK Party of being ‘divisive' or ‘reactionary' tomorrow, less people will be inclined to believe them,” Koru remarks.
Regarding the opposition parties' problem with expressions such as “mosaic,” “identity,” “sub-identity” and “difference” in light of Erdoğan's speech, Akşam's Aslı Aydıntaşbaş says it is hard to understand the reactions of the opposition because in every part of the world, democratic nation-states become successful only through the mosaic model, i.e., one that accepts diversity. “This is not a liberal interpretation. This is the reality today. If only the Republican People's Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) had made an effort to be on the right side of history,” says Aydıntaşbaş.
Radikal's Akif Beki welcomes Erdoğan speech and his emphasis on Turkey as a mosaic because this has led many in Turkey to start digging into the country's cultural mosaic to compile a list of people they think are essential to any picture of Turkey.
