Since the establishment of the Turkish Republic, four constitutions have been adopted (1921, 1924, 1961, and 1982), which were significantly amended by the successive parliaments in light of new developments, yet remained short of meeting universal democratic standards. The last two constitutions were drafted in the aftermath of military interventions, and none of them have been produced out of negotiation, bargaining or a compromise process. Within the framework of the EU reforms, Turkey’s most recent constitution of 1982 has been amended several times – so much so that almost one third of the constitution has been reconstructed. There have been demands for the drawing up of a new constitution from both right and left wing parties, but the idea has never been realized.

SETA PANEL  Chair:     Talip Küçükcan     SETA Participants:     Dr. Bashir Ansari     Afghan intellectual and writer     Prof. M. Nazif Shahrani     Chair, Department of Near Eastern Languages and Cultures & Central Asian and Middle Eastern Studies,     Indiana University, United States Date: August 13, 2009 Time: 11.00 Venue: SETA Foundation, Ankara  

The revamped Southeastern Anatolia Project (GAP) was launched by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Diyarbakır last week in the company of 12 of his ministers, 75 deputies and an army of bureaucrats. In the biggest sports stadium in Diyarbakır (which only hosts 1,300 people), he spoke for two hours about the new program and how it will change the socioeconomic structure of the region.

It was in 1965 when İsmet İnönü, former Turkish president and leader of the Republican People's Party (CHP), defined the CHP's position in Turkish politics as the "left of center."

A debate over the headscarf is revealing new dimensions of political discourse in Turkey. While conservatives and liberals use the universal language of basic rights and liberties, laicists use a heavily religious language to prove that the headscarf is not a religious obligation.

SETA CONFERENCE By  Kim Beng Phar  Visiting Scholar, Waseda University, Organization of Asian Studies / SETA Research Fellow Date: November 15, 2007 Thursday Time: 15.00 - 16.30 Venue: SETA Foundation, Ankara   The Impact and Implication of East Asia as a Global Political Actor: The Risk/Perils of Indifference In, and by Turkey

Everybody from Ankara to Brussels is asking the question “With the Justice and Devlopment Party (AK Party) strengthening its position in government and Abdullah Gül as the new president, will Turkey renew its efforts to join the EU as a full member?” No matter how the AK Party and the Turkish people answer the question, much still depends on what happens next in Europe.

Abdullah Gül has been elected the 11th president of the Turkish Republic. Some analysts called his candidacy controversial and warned of a major backlash. All that is past now. A number of challenges lie ahead for Gül. The challenges, however, are not only for him but also for the future of Turkish democracy. Gül received 339 votes in the third round. This is more than the last three presidents got: Turgut Özal got 263, Süleyman Demirel 244 and Ahmet Necdet Sezer 330. The choice of the new Turkish Parliament reflects the will of the majority of Turkish voters. According to a recent poll conducted by research firm Konda, if there was an election today the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) would get 54 percent of the vote. This means two things: First of all, there is still a steady flow of votes from the center-right (Democrat Party, DP, and Motherland Party, ANAVATAN) to the AK Party. And second, Gül’s presidency has been interpreted as the right choice by both the AK Party and other center-right voters.  

After days of debate and uncertainty, Abdullah Gül is finally a presidential candidate. Now Gül is busy trying to garner support for his nomination and, all being well, will be elected by the end of this month. What kind of a president will he be? And will his presidency provoke another political crisis in Turkey? These two questions will dominate the agenda for months to come. However the developments so far already provide some clues. By nominating Gül again, the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) read the election results in the way their constituents read them -- Gül’s presidency was part of the election campaign from the very beginning. It would be wrong to reduce the AK Party’s victory to Gül alone, but the AK Party’s record over the last four-and-a-half years and what happened during Gül’s candidacy was a complete package for the vast majority of those who voted for the AK Party on July 22.

Election campaigns in Turkey are in full swing. The political parties have mobilized all of their resources to get more voters on their side. But the July 22 election appears to be more than just politics as usual. Four main factors underlie the current election campaign. The first is “power politics.” All political parties are vying for a greater share at the ballot box. Political leaders are engaged in heated debates, accusing one another of not representing the center. The center keeps shifting from ultranationalist to social democrat and conservative. Promises range from the reasonable to the far-fetched. All political actors are desperately trying to gain the people’s confidence.  

Opposition is one of the major elements in a democracy’s becoming institutionalized, putting down roots and developing in a healthy manner. 

We are currently living in a state of uncertainty under which we are not clear as to whether the expression “Turkey is having an election on July 22” is a mere assertion or a decision. Apparently not every decision to hold elections naturally leads to an election atmosphere.   

Is Europe big enough for Turkey? A recent opinion poll conducted by Financial Times/Harris says no. This public sentiment is particularly worrying at a time when Turkey is fast approaching the July 22 general elections. The Financial Times/Harris poll was conducted online in Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the US. According to the results 71 percent of French citizens and 66 percent of Germans oppose Turkey’s full membership of the EU. Such results are not new. The Eurobarometer, another major poll conducted regularly across Europe, has been yielding similar results for the last three years.    

At its face value, these are exciting times for Turkish politics. A number of attempts are underway to unite the political right and the political left. They are driven by a zeal to save the Republic again. But no alliance is good without a common enemy. And the new enemy is AK Party Such attempts at unification have been undertaken before. Leadership for the political right and the political left in Turkey has always been up for grabs.

The string of events beginning with Abdullah Gül’s candidacy for president has revealed once more the fragile nature of Turkish democracy. While an ideological battle is being fought over who owns the core values of the republic, the current crisis puts democracy in Turkey to the test. The current crisis is carefully crafted and based on an old theme in Turkish politics: the ideological legitimacy of those who demand change

We’re only five weeks away from April 16, when the candidates for the new president of Turkey will be announced. According to the rules, the new president has to be elected within 10 days of April 16. While the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) continues to keep silent on its name(s), the opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) is moving ahead under the assumption that Recep Tayyip Erdogan will have himself elected president.

The Alliance of Civilizations initiative is one of the major attempts of our day to bring different cultures and civilizations together. Like all great ideas, it has arisen out of a need to address a problem: the problem of recognizing cultural differences without denying their existence on the one hand, and without turning them into causes of conflict and war, on the other. In a world in which all of us passionately seek a moral and political center, the need for uniting rather than dividing is obvious. Reaching that goal, however, remains a daunting task.