... Ataturkism ..., but ...

We all know, Ataturk is somehow a national symbol for the majority of Turks in Turkey and is therefore more or less what Stalin is or seems to be for Georgians in Georgia. The people mainly approve of Ataturks achievements, maybe not quite comparable in intense with the approval of the Georgians for Stalin, but at least a little bit comparable with them and maybe even more than a little bit.

Ataturkism can be called an ideology, a way to look at the world, a perspective. The Turks try to apply to Ataturks heritage - one must say, their way. Whether it is all right „their way“ or not, is for quite some people the question, the point to which everything within the country seems to be bundled up with.

In this regard it seems to be of a matter to keep in mind that Tayyip Erdogan, the present prime minister, has more religious toned demands on the politcal agenda than the politicians before him - Erbakan, of course, not taken into account. Islam forms alongside with Ataturkism Erdogans aura and/or charisma preponderend. The first mentioned part of his political and personal aura, Islam, has, some might remember, the highest degree in our existence in general. It is us as well, who have broadly concerning the latter the same understanding or insight about what finally is the highest value in or of life. So how is the second part, Ataturkism, appart from other factors, fitting together with the first, Islam, in the countries structure and the person, Tayyip Erdogan, and how in detail does he manage to keep a leading role in politics and society while intermingling the both? T. Erdogan is the prime minister of Turkey and I think it is - these days at least - acceptable to agree upon the fact that Tayyip Bey (Mr.) is an undisputed leader, whom nobody can challenge in Turkey, even if some say, Islam is deeper rooted in the make of his personality than Ataturkism. T. Erdogan is a scholar of a religious school (Imam Hatip),whichmeans,he hasnot attended the public ones, and some state, maybe unjustly, that he discovered Ataturkism for his course only after he took office as a prime minister, because otherwise he would not have had any chance to calm down protests and laizistic rooted resistance within the population and the almost almighty military.
Mehmet Agar, the leader of the DYP-Party, the one who took office from Tansu Ciller, he who was in the ‘wild’ days (beginning and mid 90’s of the last century) the governor of the Diyarbakir province, with its renowned military prison, when the south-east of the country was in turmoil, could be the closest, to challenge Erdogan in power, but not now or in the near future - so it seems to be.

Whether Erdogan plays with the thought to become a historical figger just like Ataturk? That indeed is psychologically an in regard of is policy making an interesting question. I would not be surprised, when such spirit will arise one day - if it has not already arisen. That would be indeed, you may kindly forgive what comes next, an interesting Klon. The equation should maybe reduced to: Islam x Ataturk = T. Erdogan.

Well, let us quickly understand, why becoming famous like Ataturk, who after all is the founder of the present republic, seems to be indeed a suitable life-source for Erdogan. This rather simple but highly complicated aim is a tool ever since in motion in mankind, but we do not talk of this too much, many seem to take it for granted, and in deed it is so simple, one can follow this logic so easily, because in life, there exist many stories about token steps for something great/er in life. Such can be traced and found almost everywhere, it seems to be a very human matter.
Many people, just like myself, do content on creating symbols therefore which hopefully will be available for the world after ones death. They are created to last if possible eternally. This is why people will have increasingly higher in number their own webside. I and many others like myself content on building such remembrances. More traditionally is writing books, but this methode is being transformed more and more into digital space, in which the masses finally are enabled to take their written-down place and share in history - a definite and even definable ever more logged-in reality. The drive to prevail in glory beyond the lifetime is for some people some kind of religious compensation, helps in times to smooth down bad conscious pretty well, some psyichologist will agree, like a prayer.

Ataturkism, you may now associate, is a report given out many years ago, and if you allow me to put it under this marking, the Koran as well reports about the value/s layed down to form the comunity. And once again for remembrance: how does T. Erdogan combine the two (Islam/Ataturkism) and where will this „Klon“ drift to? What decisions have been taken and how to predict the coming once? What view prevails in Ankara? How does one see the world out there?

If I got the reactions about the addresses being made by some european politicians right, talking about Ataturk an his doctrin „which fumbles almost into every corner of turkish life with increasing absurdity“, than one can call the reactions in Turkey sharp dislike. Such critizism of Ataturkism was even for many intellectual Turks one more proof about the willingness of the West to ruin Turkey the ‘gentle’ mens way.

Tayyip Erdogan, I believe, has understood that he can and must be a leader figger. He is aware of this. And just like our mayor of Berlin before his inauguration for the job said: „ ... and that is good so!“

Ataturk had to decide quite high-explosive (the latter expression is the word my small Langenscheidt-Dictionary (German-English-German) gives for „brisant“) matters. It is not exaggerating to say, he then had Europe right in his living room and I am afraid to say: much may have changed, but not around this matter and not at all too much from within.
What to do? Kick oneselves free? Or mix the cards new? The „kick oneselves free“ option could result into a even more drastic isolation of the country in the world. Turkey and its people do quite often - can be heard in all social classes - complain about being alone, without a trustable partner in the world. Well, if one looks at the past, one could say: „might as well be the case!“
It is true, there are weighty external factors: Amerika, Israel, Germany, NATO, Greece, and so forth (asf.). I tend to be more and more convinced about that Turkey better not decides on anything, but instead should be satisfied with being decided upon, and mix the cards new this way? That would be indeed a gamble-like conviction. Could be, there are many people supporting this approach, and not only in Turkey for Turkey, who knows? But since T. Erdogan is a political figger or issue as well as the people around him - his wife, family, friends, money relations, his course of life, asf., included -, and since always something has once to be agreed upon, particular in such a prominent position, and the decision taken might even be in times having traces of the before mentioned „having been decided upon,“ is it nevertheless on him to choose and to decide and form the decisions or choices being taken and at the same time, amongst others, at least to reflect upon what reactions will possibly be triggered deciding on this or that. Interesting is to look at how the decision making is being done within the party, the parliament and ostensibly or really without taking the military, like it used to be, into account.

The leading AK-Party of Erdogan seems to learn a little the hard way that certain decisions concerning religious things can not always be realized - and it even happened already that he and his party were asked by Sezer the President of the Republic not to bring a certain resolutions into life, but to hold it back and wait for a „more suitable moment!“ The AKP seems though to be more elastic than any other government before - maybe wise to exclude Turgut Özal here.
Demirel spoke as the first none personally direct involved high-ranking turkish politician of a „kurdish reality“ which in its time created much hope amongst the people in the south-east of the country and gave hope for a solution of the problem/s, at least a more civil handling of it and the demands of the people and the situation they where living in. The reality turned nevertheless out to be, that after Demirels reign Tansu Ciller, as we say in German: left the military „free hand“ in the under special surveillance taken area of the south-east and parts of the east of Turkey. The government left the regulation of daily life more or less up to the people and the military and in particular the solving of the prevailing ‘problem’ (take note of the singular-form of the word in use: „‘problem’“), the problem of kurdish terror and like others prefer to call it: fight for acceptance of kurdish identity.
Erbakan seems to have convincingly promised changes after Demirels reign, concerning the „problem“ and understood to raise public interest and hope within the population of the south-east in particular. I believe, this somehow same spirit brought Tayyip Erdogan into power. Would Erbakan not have been wiped away by the military and had he more carefully chosen the places he was visiting, which were more or less provocative for the West, not so much for Russia, who has just like China, Pakistan and I believe quite some more nations most probably enjoyed such an questionable politic towards the West, would Erbakan have had the chance, given out again, but this time to Erdogan, to solve the „problem“ and to install some kind of correction concerning the path the country takes by installing some kind of light islam orientated awareness, which couldhave been even digesteable for the West and the turkish military.
Erdogan instead showed and proved that he had learned from the mistakes done by his former teacher Erbakan, and he therefore placed his political actions at a seemingly right time and the right place and even seemed to manage the filigree question of how, when he most likely with the help of Allah refused to have american troops stationed in Turkey and war material transported through respectively deposited in the south-east of the country. A military stationing of the US was, you will remember dear reader, planned to last 10 years and maybe more. This was talked about in a rather self-evident manner from, what the Turks call „the Hammer-Power,“ which stands for USA. Tayyip Erdogan as the percepted leader of turkish politics had because of the menthal setting or mood within the society, and the historical challenge that came his way that way, not really another suitable choice than to show that he was the percepted leader of the course for the country, for Islam in the south-east of Europe, maybe, who knows, with faint memories already or still of the ceased Chalifat, of turkish Superpower splendour: the Ottoman Empire.

Ataturkism it seems will prevail with T. Erdogan, although, rather changed, as shown above, in appearance. The claim to lead the nation to a projected better in this worldly life by saving certain traditions seems to be worthy the course - for sure for Tayyip Erdogan, who wants to leave his mark on the back of history. Doing good deeds, after all, is not only a prospeterian or christian (asf.) task, even Ataturkism, the ideology which brought the turkish society laizism, has been born for a just and good course or deed - the meassures taken to realize such may be criticizeable, but ...!