Vatan is a place where people feel safe, it is a precious thing that was saved from invaders and something with which religion was well acquainted.Since the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) came to power, the emphasis on vatan has disappeared in the public sphere. The religious attachment to the concept of vatan has been totally reduced. Now, even in the language of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), which still remains a party that holds some degree of Islamic tone in its rhetoric, we do not see the term vatan being used. Instead, the MHP leadership uses the term ülke. The difference between vatan and ülke is the religious attachment to it. I would say, conservatives have lost their vatan, and nationalists now have their ülke.”
The issue of vatan and ülke in political vocabulary is so important that it is one of the milestones that indicate in what direction the Turkish political discourse evolves.
Traditionally the concept of vatan predominantly existed in the language of military generals. For instance, in one of his speeches, the Turkish chief of general staff, İlker Başbuğ, stated that “for the Turkish military, mission, honor and vatan are above everything.” (tsk.mil.tr, Aug. 28, 2008). Yet it appears it was the only time that Gen. Başbuğ used the term vatan in a public address since he had become the chief of general staff in August 2008. Since August 2008, Gen. Başbuğ has delivered nine detailed speeches, which are posted on the Turkish Armed Forces' (TSK) Web site. In these nine speeches, the term vatan was mentioned only three times. On a few occasions, the term vatan was used as an adjective in the common Turkish phrase vatan evladı, (son of the country). The term ülke, however, was used almost 150 times in various forms.
The language of Gen. Başbuğ provides us enough good evidence to suggest that the term vatan has disappeared even from the language of the Turkish military. When we examine the term ülke in context, it would never replace the term vatan because the religious attachment to the term vatan does not exist in the term ülke. For the public, however, the term vatan is still dominating the public discourse, and it still maintains its original meaning.
Why is it important to stress the differences in the use of these two terms? It is important for at least two reasons. First, it is a milestone that could be considered the first step towards a new form of Turkish nationalism, “religion-free Turkish nationalism.” The term vatan has been one of the “bridge words” between religious conservatives and Turkish nationalists since the establishment of the republic that connects religion with Turkish nationalism. Since the bridges that connect political discourses of religious conservatives and Turkish nationalists have been disappearing, we could see two separate political corridors that could reconstruct the political center in this country in the near future. Related with this, the political confrontation would be on the issues of secular nationalist paradigms and religious moral values. The political periphery would be ethnic and religious minorities that could be the hot spots of political conflicts.
Second, as the term vatan disappears from the political discourse and no other words replace the term, conservative intellectuals lose their attachment to the country as well. As was discussed in academic circles, for Islamist conservatives Turkey is turning into a hotel consisting of a main lobby and rooms to stay in, but they do not feel attachment to it. For the secularists, Turkey is turning into a home “seized by aliens” that include Islamists, liberals, Kurds, minorities, etc.
Benzer Haberler 
