Ataturk: Secularising theocracy
| 
| 
When in the 1920’s sovereignty of the people was being established in Turkey replacing the sovereignty of the Caliph, in 1949 Pakistan’s Constituent Assembly was bestowing sovereignty upon Allah
The Ottoman Empire was ruled by a single family for almost seven centuries (1301-1922). The entire power vested with a single ruler called the Sultan within a highly centralized system of governance. Education was controlled by the state and religion was incorporated in the state structure. The Sultan who also happened to be the Caliph was considered as the “protector of Islam.” The Islamic ideology and the concept of Jihad united the ruling elite. Effective application of the concept of Jihad resulted in an Empire stretching from the shores of Arabian Peninsula to the outskirts of Vienna.
The successive Sultans established units of extremely fanatic slave fighters who were mostly Christian converts. These slaves were equipped with high-quality gunpowder. They participated in the conquest of Constantinople in 1453, marking the end of Byzantine Empire after 1100 years of rule. The city of Constantinople was then renamed as Istanbul i.e. “city of Islam.” Under the Millet system minorities were given limited rights, however, they would pay jazia (Islamic tax) as dhimmis (low caste citizens) to the state. Some of them, seen as performing services for the state were exempted. The jazia regime was relaxed in the mid-19th century.
The devshrime (gathering) system was introduced in the 14th century where conquered Christian communities, particularly in the Balkans had to surrender twenty percent of their male children to the State, who were then converted to Islam to serve as slaves. The devshrime continued till the end of the seventeenth century. A policy of fratricide was also exercised wherein all brothers of the Sultan would be locked up and later killed as and when the heir to the throne was born. The Sultan lived in the Topkapi palace and would wear a new silk robe every day. To give legitimacy to his rule Prophet Mohammad’s mantle, standard and footprint were brought from Egypt and placed in Topkapi palace so that the Sultan could claim leadership of all Muslims. More than 1000 concubines brought from all over the world inhabited the small rooms of Sultan’s harem while the permanent staff comprised eunuchs.
Mustafa Kemal Ataturk assumed Turkish presidency in 1923 and the first thing he focused on was the framing of a new constitution which was promulgated in 1924.
Unlike the despotic Sultans who remained active on the external front capturing more and more territory for the Ottoman Empire, Ataturk concentrated on internal reformation. He transformed Turkish society from perceiving itself as a part of a vast Muslim Empire into a modern, democratic, and secular nation-state and dedicated his life to social, legal and political reforms.
The Caliphate was abolished in 1924.The Sultan and his family were exiled after being declared persona non grata, and a new constitution took effect in the same year. To replace caliphate, popular sovereignty was established through representative democracy. The state ensured freedom of religion and worship while standing aloof without exercising any influence, as there was no room for political Islam in the new system. In the same year i.e. 1924,the Islamic education was replaced by the National Education System. Islamic law and Islamic courts were abolished and replaced by Swiss civil and Italian penal code.
Beginning in the year 1923, laws were passed which banned religious clothing such as the fez (traditional headdress) and the turban whereas wearing the burqa (veil) was discouraged. On the other hand Western-style attire was actively promoted, like the hat was made compulsory for civil servants.
On February 25, 1925 the Turkish Parliament passed a law stating that religion was not to be used as a tool in politics. Although the political power of the Caliph was neutralized, Muslim brotherhoods in the form of convents and dervesh lodges still existed. This was an extension of political power of the Caliph in the society. These were also disbanded. In 1928 the constitutional provisions declaring Islam as the state religion were also deleted. The Millet system which granted limited rights to minorities was also brought to an end.
Ataturk, through a series of reforms granted women not only the right to vote and get elected, but also instituted legal equality between the sexes. The institution of polygamy was prohibited as well as divorce by renunciation while civil marriage was introduced.
The current 29-letter modern Turkish alphabet was established replacing the complex Persian-Arabic script. All parallel systems of education were unified including the madrassa schools and brought under the control of the Ministry of National Education.The old-style universities were closed down and large-scale transfer of scientific knowledge from Europe was instituted.
Numerous state-owned factories were set up for manufacturing and processing agriculture produce. An entire rail network was also established throughout the country in a short span of time. Gregorian calendar replaced the Islamic calendar and Monday to Friday workweek was instituted.Prior to that, the weekly holiday was observed on Fridays which was replaced by Sundays as the official day off. The international system of measures was also adopted. Despite protests by some on religious grounds Ataturk ceded nothing to the traditionalists and stayed firm.
Mustapha Kemal Ataturk is a shining example of a visionary leader who transformed a theocratic state into a modern secular state. Today Turkey’s GDP (Purchasing Power Parity) is US $960.5 billion, against Pakistan’s US $464.9 billion, while its GDP growth rate is 8.2% vis-à-vis Pakistan’s 2.3%.Turkey’s GDP per capita is US $ 12300 in contrast to Pakistan’s US $ 2500, whereas the tax to GDP ratio in case of Turkey is 32.5% against Pakistan’s 10.2%.Despite political upheavals, Turkey has a strong and stable secular democracy and it enjoys a respectable position in the comity of nations.
Why is it that Turkey progressed and Pakistan regressed?
When in 1928 the Turkish Parliament was opting for a secular state and the constitutional provision declaring Islam as the state religion was being deleted, 21 years down the road in 1949 Pakistan’s Constituent Assembly was passing the Objectives Resolution, moved by Liaqat Ali Khan, the Prime Minister, proclaiming that the future constitution of Pakistan would be modelled on the ideology and faith in Islam. In the 1973 constitution Islam was declared as the state religion.
When in the 1920’s sovereignty of the people was being established in Turkey replacing the sovereignty of the Caliph, in 1949 Pakistan’s Constituent Assembly was bestowing sovereignty upon Allah.
When in the 1920’s the Turkish Parliament was adopting time-tested European models to reconstruct their civil, commercial and penal law, Pakistan’s 1973 constitution envisaged that “All existing laws shall be brought in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Quran and Sunnah”.
And then came the fall out. The Ahmadi riots of 1953, to banning of Christian nurses’ recruitment above their representation in the population in 1979, to the introduction of separate electorate for minorities, to the insertion of section 295-C in the penal code in 1986,we find the State not playing an impartial role but acting as a party in matters of faith. In 1985 the words relating to freedom of religion for minorities were expunged from the constitution by Zia-ul-Haq.
Sectarian killings, terrorism and insurgencies followed. And presently Pakistan is the undeclared hub of international terrorism, while militant organizations with their own brand of Islam proliferate. The normal sections of the society are confused, while caught in between defining Islam and adapting to demands of a modern life, often causes the narcissistic personality syndrome.
Introduction of Islam into matters of faith by the state is now taking its toll.The Judge who sentenced MumtazQadri, Salman Taseer’skiller, has left the country along with his family due to threat to his life, while MumtazQadri the convicted murderer awaits a hero’s welcome as and when he comes out of the gates of Adyala Jail.
| Waseem Altaf is a social activist. |
Comments
I apologize. It was your article on Qurban i in the last edition that smelt what I Wrote. Sorry if I've felt wrong.
-----
One more thing. Even though I called the similarities not really significant, they were not insignificant similarities either.
They had impact but it will take another post to explain why Pakistan got to where it is so quickly because there were certain internal and external factors that pushed Pakistan hard and some of them were entirely different than the similarities to Turkey situation. This is like saying why Pakistan need Zia and not Bhutto to Islamize the country. Even though Bhutto actually politically and economically aligned Pakistan to the Arab world.
How is this similar to Pakistan?
The political slogan for Pakistan was a homeland for Muslims and it was important for the leaders of the new state to essentially establish credentials that were different from India. In 1947 and in the next 2 years they allowed the country to drift towards a religious identity even though most of them did not agree with the lifestyle that was expected in an Islamic society. Turkey wanted to move to the west to establish its new identity and Pakistan moved to the religion to establish its new identity.
The similarities don’t end there. Over the years Turkey relaxed from its push after Kamal died as none of his successor had the political capital to pursue what Kamal started as vigorously as he did. Still their aversion to the political will of the people led them to hang one Prime Minister and many other curbs on the opposition. Now they are on retreat and a religion oriented party enjoys the majority.
In Pakistaan aadha teeter and aadha batair continued until the 70s because the center had problems in selling its view point and politics to the majority of the country that lived in East Pakistan. They E.Pak) were okay with a benign attitude towards religion but were not sure that they wanted it to the extent that the West Pakistan elite wanted them to go. Once East Pakistan was gone, wedding of the feudal and tribal culture with religion in Pakistan took place. The Ahmedi declaration was the first sign.
An assembly elected on progressive slogans reverted back to its feudal and tribal roots and obliged the mullah against an entirely urban religious fundamentalism under the Ahmedi movement.
The wedding of the tribal and feudal cultures accelerated because another factor had emerged that the Pakistan elite saw its new savior. The Arabs with their oil wealth were becoming the primary source of funds and jobs; the more Pakistan appeared like them, the more chances it had to get money from them and send more of its sons for jobs to those countries. The Arab financial revival started in the 70s after the oil embargo of 1973, and the pace of Islamisation in Pakistan picked up many notches after that.
You see Turkey adopted westernization under what they called secularism to make themselves more acceptable to the West for primarily economic reasons. Pakistan adopted Islamisation to become more acceptable to the Arabs for the same reason. I don’t have to provide the examples of how the Saudi brand of Islam was promoted in Pakistan but it was promoted for exactly the same reasons that Turkey needed for westernization.
Thank you.
The wrong implication in this article as well as that of Mr. Arshad's in this edition is suggesting Religion as mother of evils. They imply that without renouncing faith...../quote]
Dear Rashid Khan. I fully agree much of the contents of your post. But please let me know by quoting paragraph which is implying that religion is mother of all evils... in my "distorting secularism" article. I have read again every line of my article to find your allegation...but sorry could not find such kind of things. why human mind is happy to distort things. The soul of my and other articles is: YES Mother of evils is mixing of religion with politics and state affairs.. whosoever and wheresoever is done. This is the only CLEAR AND LOUD MESSAGE GIVEN IN ALL ARTICLES in this issue of Viewpoint.
Ottomons had already started copying Christian Europe in the the 18th and 19th century but the natural lethargy of the empire; as is at the end of civilization, could not keep pace with the reborn and zealous Europe.
India on the other hand had largely a rustic, exploited, divided polity of cultures and tribes mainly based on agriculture but exploited over centuries of foreign rules and invasions. They were rather enslaved in their own land.
Come the Brits, French or Portuguese, Indians were too conservative to adopt western new discoveries and ideas.
Look at Arab Peninsula. They too were part of the empire but were backward as we in Sub Continent were. Despite natural resources, they aren't any better than Pakistanis in terms of present civilizational values.
Turky might have taken a different and leading role had it not been for the 'liberal and secular' usurper, Kamal.
The wrong implication in this article as well as that of Mr. Arshad's in this edition is suggesting Religion as mother of evils. They imply that without renouncing faith, material progress is not possible but to them I pose a question; has Europe/West totally shun it's religion? Where Pharoah's atheists?
Religion bashing is not liberalism. Freedom to chose faith is among the basic human rights for which liberalism stands.
Liberalism is listen to your critic without getting reactionary.
Azad is right as long as we do attack on individual's faith in the name of secularism, the latter will be construed as anti religion. This is where no progress can be made.Since the objective is progress and betterment of humanity, religion has to respected which is more than anything to its believers.
It ought to be kept in mind that more than 98% of world population believes in their religions. Those beliefs might be wrong or debatable but mocking someone never helps him/her rectifying their faults.
Religion can never be taken out of majority's life. We have to live with this reality. All we can do is to preach , For You Yours and Me, Mine'. And that state should have nothing to do with anybody's religion. This is what I understand Secularism should be.
PS. Gentlemen using abusive language are requested to mind their language. We are only in a peaceful discourse not a wrestling arena. Another sign of true intellectual debate is its dispassion.
Parliament of Pakistan.
It is pandemonium of the chiefs of different tribes, Landlords, retired civil & military beau- crates. They are so insensitive about the real problems of the common men that it is absurd to hope and expect anything good from them. They are wrangling with one another for promotion of their interests.
On 28th of April 2008, every Pakistani is shocked to hear the news that a large procession of Muslim League (n) leaders reached Dubai to meet and convince the co- chairman of PPP Asif Ali Zardari to agree upon some political matters, when a poor noble person hanged himself because he could not bear the torture from the Bank for nonpayment of a little loan .
A woman in a open bazaar of Multan is selling her four sons because her husband is suffering from cancer and she cannot feed her children. The photo of an old woman who is lying on the Mall Road of Lahore in the opening because she is lonely, helpless soul in the Islamic country when billions rupees are being robbed in the name of Zakat and a huge foreign exchange is wasted to hold meeting in foreign country to discuss the local problems. The common men in the country are fed up with life because of price hike, injustice and corruption prevalent everywhere, while our leaders are engrossed in the luxuries of gossip that has nothing to do with the common men. Here is a story about the character of our Parliament.
The members of the Parliament of Pakistan are not real representatives of the inhabitants of the country. Everyone knows that more than 95 percent of population of the country is worried about the next meal, the education of their children and medical care. The price hike of the commodities of daily use has made the life of common men miserable. In such situation it is not possible at all for a common man to fight election for the seat of National Assembly or Provincial Assembly because, it casts billions of rupees. The election has become only a ‘ show’ of democracy. In fact there never have been any genuine election. Our election of National and Provincial Assemblies are Hobson’s choice in the real sense of the word.
The situation is forged sentimentally: in these elections in which a person must accept what is offered because there is no alternative other than taking nothing at all. Every citizen knows that election has become in Pakistan an industry. Most of the political leaders have palaces in foreign countries. They keep their money, mostly looted money, in foreign banks. Benazir deposits in European Banks and her palace in U.K. had been main headings of the print media. Mr. Sharif is not also behind in this Sharaft ( nobility).
In the perspective of the political history of 62 years of Pakistan, our politicians and elite are so devilish that they have tarnished the fair name of democracy. In their dictionary, democracy can be defined as ‘ the government off the people, far the people and buy the people’.
About independence, on the name of which, these dacoits have been looting the country for the last 62 years, I would like to give the opinion of Liaquat Ali Khan, the first Prime Minister of Pakistan on the subject of independence.
“ That freedom means freedom only from foreign domination, is an outworn idea. It is not merely governments that should be free but the people themselves who should be free; and no freedom has any real value for the common man or woman unless it also means freedom from want, freedom from disease, freedom from ignorance. [ Address in America]
In perspective of expressions of Liaquat Ali Khan about the freedom and independence of the common citizen of Pakistan we stand now where.
Please forgive me for fabricating an tale to elucidate the character of the components of national assembly of Pakistan
‘ The ghost of ib’n-e batouta visits Pakistan to meet loha chors {iron thieves} joo’ti chors {shoes thieves} religion chors, the enemies of Pakistan, the hunters of men and the “ ten percent”. He asks the swiftest and the easiest way to find and meet them. A person who knows the history of all of them, says to them, “ Please do not go Lahore, Gujarat. Peshawar, Charsada, Karachi and Larkana to find them. Get a ticket of Islamabad, find the most grand building of the city. Enter it and you will find there all of them busy in deep thought how to plunder and destroy the country. ‘
I feel anguished to pen a picture of my beloved country so dismaying. These are my observations, one may agree to them or not but he will find my heart-felt feelings underlying in them. May God save my beloved country from these vultures. Amen.
Muhammad Asghar Butt
RAW motherfuckers? I guess this inspector khan who cant tell his real name and may be not the real name of his father even. He seems CIA motherfucker or contrary to RAW , a very mature well done motherfucker. I will demand the admin that find out his email address and publish it here or track his IP address to tell who is he?