About
the Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy
The
Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy (Wetenschappelijke Raad
voor het Regeringsbeleid, WRR) is an independent advisory body on behalf of
Dutch government policy. Although the WRR is funded from the budget of the
Prime Minister’s Office, it operates as an independent think tank,
establishing its own work and research programme. The government may formally
ask for a policy advice on a specific subject, but it is ultimately up to the
Council itself whether or not to meet such a request. The Council focuses on
policy issues that are relevant in the long term. Its seven members are all
university professors who are appointed for a period of five years. They
represent various academic disciplines, e.g. economics, law, sociology and
public administration. In addition, the Council has a small, highly qualified
staff.
WRR
reports are sent to the government, which as a rule publishes its reaction
within 3 months. The present report, The European Union, Turkey and Islam, is
the outcome of a policy advice formulated at the Council’s own initiative.
Presentation
by prof. Michiel Scheltema
Ladies
and gentlemen,
Today
the Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy presents the
English-language version of its research report entitled The European
Union, Turkey and Islam
.[1]
This addresses whether the fact that the majority of its population is Muslim,
forms a hindrance to Turkey’s accession to the European Union.
Why
is this question relevant? Certainly not because we feel that Turkey should
somehow be judged according to standards other than the EU’s Copenhagen
criteria. After all, it is a fact that at the European Council of Helsinki
(1999) the European heads of government have committed themselves to
Turkey’s candidacy for membership. And it is also a fact that a European
Union committed to the principles of the secular constitutional state cannot
exclude a European country on the basis of its dominant religion. For these
reasons, the final political decision in December on Turkish membership
negotiations should not be ‘polluted’ by misunderstandings about Islam.
So
why still focus on Turkish Islam in its own right? Why not concentrate on the
formal accession requirements? We felt it necessary to do so because the wider
public debate outside ‘Brussels’ will not be limited to the
Copenhagen-criteria. Already, there is a wide rift between EU watchers (who
understandably focus on these formal criteria) and the broader public on the
issue of Turkey. Many people are worried about Turkey’s ‘Islam factor’.
If and when an accession treaty is signed, it will require ratification,
either by national parliaments or by popular referenda. We strongly believe
that this ratification process should be based on an informed overall
judgement by the European populations, and one that includes a knowledge of
Turkish Islam and Turkish Muslims. Therefore, we have addressed these issues
explicitly, and we hope this will eventually contribute to a well-informed
European public debate on Turkish accession.
The
answer to our central question is crystal clear: No, Turkish Islam is not a
hindrance to Turkey’s EU accession. However, there are misunderstandings
about Islam and Muslims that also impinge on Turkish Islam and Turkish
Muslims. For instance, many people believe that Muslims are (potentially
violent) fundamentalists who are keen to establish a theocracy and shari’a
law. The examples of Sudan, Pakistan and Iran illustrate what this means for
democracy and human rights. What people often do not know is that Islam, like
Christianity, is a religion of many different creeds and beliefs. The
relationship between state and religion varies widely across the Muslim world.
As
we argue in our report, the Turkish constitution and the state apparatus
strictly protect the state’s autonomy towards religious communities. This
situation did not emerge overnight. It is the outcome of a long process of
secular state-building that began long before the creation of the Turkish
Republic under Kemal Atatürk. His reforms can be seen as the tailpiece of
more than a century of profound changes. These largely mirrored changes
elsewhere in Europe, were based on domestic choices rather than external
forces and were supported by the forces of Islam. As elsewhere in Europe, they
were heavily inspired by the Enlightenment and the French Revolution. Thus,
the 19th century witnessed the end of absolute rule, the
introduction of a constitution and the advent of parliamentary elections.
Large parts of the Swiss civil code were imported, traditional shari’a
punishments were formally abolished (1858) and in 1924 the few remainders of
Islamic law were removed. It is no coincidence that when Atatürk introduced a
very rigorous separation of state and religion under the new Turkish Republic,
he was actually inspired by France’s system of laicité
. Both France and Turkey periodically experience heated debates on the wearing
of headscarves in public spaces which move on rather similar constitutional
territories. These examples also illustrate that Turkey is not as different as
it is often made out to be.
This
brings me to the rise of Islam-inspired political parties and the position of
the ruling AK party. Do these developments represent a danger to Turkey’s
secular state? We do not think so. Islam
as a politically
relevant phenomenon should be seen in the context of its forced marginalizing
in the previous decades. Until recently, Islamic
parties were met by profound distrust from the establishment in and around
governmental institutions, who identify strongly with Kemalist thinking. Both
the Constitutional Court and the armed forces have intervened on several
occasions and banned such parties. This denial of Islamic identity by the
upper classes was never shared by the population at large. Its emergence was
underpinned by important socio-economic changes in Turkey, such as the rise of
a substantial middle class in rural areas and in the smaller towns, for whom
Islam constitutes a normal part of everyday life.
Islam-inspired
political parties such as those of Necmettin Erbakan have never attracted more
than 21 per cent of the Turkish electorate. Nor have they contested the
secular nature of the democratic state. Rather, by insisting on the
individual’s freedom of religion and opposing strong government controls on
religious communities, they have advocated a different type of secularism than
that contained in Kemalist state ideology. While supporting the existing
democratic system, moreover, they have fought to make it accessible to
religiously-inspired political parties.
The
current governing AK Party is still more explicit on this human rights based
secularism. It considers differences in religion, culture and opinion as an
enrichment of society, and secularism as one principle of freedom which allows
for genuine pluralism. Its concept of human rights is inclusive, by explicitly
discussing the equal rights of non-believers. Moreover, it is aware that these
concepts, and the measures to implement them, are not simply means of
obtaining an EU entry ticket, but are actually essential for the country’s
further democratisation and modernisation.
Does
all this imply that Islam in Turkey is wholly unproblematic for the EU? We
argue there are problems, but not in the sense of a dominant Islamic influence
on the state. Rather the opposite is true; the state’s control over Turkish
Islam is too large. Turkey has a form of state-Islam that is supervised by a
state body, the Directorate for Religious Affairs (or Diyanet). Since 1982,
its messages combine a
strong emphasis on social conservatism and nationalism with a moderate Islam
which is mainly
propagated through compulsory lessons in religion and ethics and
state-controlled radio and television. As a result, the state not merely
provides institutional support for one specific brand of religion, it is also
actively involved in the substance of religion. There is no doubt that these
arrangements create tensions with the freedom of religion. After all, this
basic principle assumes that the state respects the autonomy of religious
communities and guarantees that
religious believers (and atheists and apostates) face no restrictions in the
exercise of their rights.
However,
rather than simply condemning this situation, EU member states should also put
it into perspective. While Turkey needs to reform its arrangements in the
run-up to EU accession, it is equally worth remembering that many current
member states do not always observe strict neutrality towards religion and
religious denominations either. Some have a formal state church, others have
created de facto
privileged positions for some denominations, for instance by granting one
denomination the monopoly on religious education in state schools. Such
diverse national arrangements often reflect divergent, historically rooted
relations between religion, state and society. There is thus no unambiguous or
fixed European standard against which Turkey can be judged. Nor are there a
priori reasons to assume that Turkey would not be able to conform with the
EU’s minimum standards on the freedom of religion and the autonomy of state
and religion.
Let
me finish with one last remark. In December 2004, the European Council will
make an overall assessment based on the Copenhagen criteria on whether
membership negotiations should start ‘without delay’. Our report does not
address this issue. Our research explicitly confirms the decision of the
Union’s heads of state that Turkish Islam is not a hindrance to Turkey’s
membership. We also hope that other politicians will not shy away from making
this case before their national publics.However,
to say that Turkey can
join is not to argue that Turkey also should
join to avoid all kinds of backlashes within Turkey itself or within the
Muslim world. Turkey can only really be made to feel welcome if it joins the
EU irrespective of Islam. Only then would it send out a clear signal that the
West and the Muslim world are not on an irreversible collision course.
Unfortunately, such a signal is sorely needed nowadays.
The
original, Dutch-language version of the Council’s report entitled De
Europese Unie, Turkije en de islam
was presented to the Dutch government on 21 June 2004.
|