BY EROL CEVIKCE
VATAN- Concerning the debate over a new constitution, I think the political goals, rather than legal questions, should be stressed. Actually, one can't deny that the people who want changes to the current Constitution regime have political motives. Differences over the issue of secularism lie behind the political tensions, instabilities and military coups Turkey has seen since 1950. This issue is again at the heart of these debates and one of the main reasons for the war between religions which has been causing sadness worldwide for the past 20 years.
If Turkey wants to move forward on the road of civilization and establish a modern democracy, it has to maintain its position as a secular nation, something achieved by no Muslim country besides us. So debates over the constitution are very important for the country's future. There are two proposals over Article 45, which concerns the right to education. Under the first, the article would say, `Nobody can be deprived of their right to receive higher education due to their clothing.' Under the second, it would read, `Institutions of higher education are free of dress codes.'
We can see that stubbornness over the definition of secularism is the reason for these suggestions made by the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), and both this stubbornness and the headscarf issue are now evident. Actually, though he says just the opposite, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan knows best that the headscarf, the symbol of an `Islamic republic' even in Europe, isn't about freedom to wear what you choose. I learned this in an interview our paper did with former French Prime Minister Michel Rocard. Asked what he thought of the university headscarf ban, Rocard said that ending the ban would be a huge change. He added that Erdogan knew and respected him and should know very well that ending the ban wouldn't change the European public's stance on Turkey for the better, but would rather exacerbate Turkey's isolation. When asked about the similar ban in France, Rocard said that he thought that the ban would be harsher in France than in Turkey. Rocard added that France can't accept a division into sects, as in Britain, because this would end in civil war. Rocard also said that secularism is the basis of co-existence.
Obviously, if those who want to debate and redefine the issue of secularism in terms of freedom of faith and religious exercises aren't ignorant (!), they are the prisoners of their own institutional calculations. If they can escape the pressure of their previous education, they will be able to see that the only issue over which a consensus should be reached is whether our nation's education is secular or not. For our country can only be a strong, respected member of the modern world if its education can embrace a secular, democratic republic and ensure continuation of the revolution of enlightenment. The best evidence that this is possible through secular education is the history so far of the Turkish Republic, which will soon celebrate its centenary.