Features
Türkiye’s Resurgence: 100 Years as a Republic
by Nilantha Ilangamuwa
The Turkish Republic embarks on its second century, standing as a resounding testament to resilience and unyielding strength. Amidst relentless challenges, both from within and beyond its borders, President Recep Tayyip Erdoðan’s leadership shines as an exemplar of unparalleled political acumen in the rich tapestry of this pivotal crossroads between the East and the West. Turkish society, defined by its unwavering resilience and adaptability, recently showcased its mettle in the aftermath of a catastrophic earthquake. Against all odds, political stability has remained an unwavering cornerstone.
The Ottoman Empire, a once-mighty dominion, officially met its end on November 1, 1922, with the dethronement of the last Ottoman Sultan, Mehmed VI. It gave birth to the Republic of Türkiye on October 29, 1923, under the visionary guidance of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, who proclaimed, “Science is the most real guide to progress.” This momentous transformation marked the definitive conclusion of the Ottoman era. The new Turkish leadership adopted the Gregorian calendar, and to this day, October 29th is celebrated as Republic Day in Türkiye.
The Republic’s foundation is firmly rooted in the collective efforts of countless unsung heroes, each with their own unique stories. The past serves as an unwavering wellspring of inspiration for the present and a beacon of promise for the future, bearing witness to the indomitable spirit of a people who have ardently embraced the ideals of democracy, equality, and progress as they march boldly into their next century.
The establishment of the Republic of Türkiye from the ashes of the Ottoman Empire is undeniably a tale of triumph, fortified by its secular nature and the principles of Kemalism. It has played a pivotal role in shaping Turkish politics, underscoring the separation of religion and state, Turkish national unity, and modernization.
In stark contrast, Erdoðanism, marked by Islamic conservatism, a degree of authoritarianism, populism, market-friendly economic policies, and elements of Turkish nationalism, has exerted its influence on Turkish politics since the early 2000s, sparking intense debates about the role of religion in public life and the concentration of political power. These two ideologies stand as distinct historical and contemporary forces shaping Turkish governance and political identity.
The Turkish experience with democratic governance has not been devoid of significant challenges, driven by cultural, social, and economic factors. Yet, despite these formidable obstacles, Türkiye has made remarkable strides in its democratic journey since its first free election in 1950. The nation has borne witness to frequent elections, a robust multiparty system, the emergence of various interest groups, and a vibrant free press serving as the unwavering guardian of democracy. Conversely, tensions arising from modernization have been amplified by the pluralistic nature of Turkish democracy, resulting in heightened systemic stress as diverse groups press forward with conflicting demands, at times, upon insufficient governments.
The fierce partisanship among Turkish political factions and the cutthroat competition between parties and interest groups have severely undermined the effectiveness of the democratic system. This polarization has reached a boiling point, resulting in several significant economic and internal security crises over the last few decades, ultimately leading to military interventions and political instability.
Türkiye finds itself in the unique position of being a transitional society, amalgamating elements of both developed and developing states. Traditional norms, including an authoritarian value system and deeply rooted sectarian, ethnic, and urban-rural rivalries, persist alongside the forces of modernization.
The bedrock of modern Türkiye was meticulously laid by Atatürk, a visionary leader who envisaged the transformation of the remnants of the Ottoman Empire into a Western-style nation-state after World War I. Contrary to popular belief, Ambassador R. Demet Şekercioğlu emphatically underscores that Atatürk’s vision aimed not only to create a robust, democratic, secular, and modern state but also to preserve Turkish identity.
As we celebrate the 100th Anniversary of the Republic of Türkiye, it is imperative to recognize its resounding success on the global stage, boasting achievements in the G20, NATO, the national defense industry, energy hub status, humanitarian efforts, and unwavering dedication to an enterprising and humanitarian foreign policy, guided by the principle of “Peace at home, Peace in the world.”
Atatürk’s firm emphasis on cultural and institutional modernization, as encapsulated in his “six principles” of republicanism, populism, nationalism, laicism, statism, and reformism, played a pivotal role in shaping the nation’s character. However, some astute analyses argue that this unrelenting focus on modernization, without addressing the imperative of social revolution, has left voids in Türkiye’s development, contributing to ongoing instability. Atatürk’s principles were designed to replace Ottoman legacies with a new legitimacy, founded on ethnic Turkish identity, class harmony, secularism, state capitalism, and an unyielding commitment to change.
Yet, grave issues have persisted, echoing the lamentable legacy of deliberate ignorance by powerful nations. In the aftermath of World War I and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the promise of an independent Kurdistan was shattered by the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923. Initially, the Treaty of Sèvres had guaranteed the Kurds local autonomy and eventual independence, but the Allies, in a betrayal of their commitments, reneged on their promises. This egregious ignorance fractured the Kurdish population, dispersing them across Türkiye, Iran, Syria, Iraq, and the Soviet Union, with the geopolitical interests of global powers playing a pivotal role in denying them sovereignty.
Following World War II, a fleeting Republic of Kurdistan briefly emerged in Iran but was ruthlessly quashed in 1946. The concept of self-determination, a fundamental right for all people, woefully failed to address the specific plight of the fragmented Kurdish population. The post-WWII decolonization processes did little to rectify this.
Ensuring the meaningful participation of minorities in state affairs remains paramount for internal social stability, yet recognition of ethnic differences continues to pose a formidable challenge in the host states of Iran, Syria, and Türkiye. Presently, this crisis has been cynically manipulated by the West to perpetuate instability in the region, paralleling the enduring struggles of the Palestinians.
As astutely highlighted by George Friedman, a distinguished geopolitical analyst, Türkiye stands as an historic powerhouse within the Muslim world, rapidly modernizing and shaping its future trajectory. Alongside other Muslim nation-states such as Egypt and Iran, Türkiye’s unique position sets it apart as not only a major modern economy but also the largest in the region, surpassing Iran. Crucially, Türkiye occupies a strategic crossroads between Europe, the Middle East, and Russia. With its economy surging and its influence growing, Türkiye is poised to reassert itself as a dominant force in the region.
It is of paramount importance to recognize Türkiye’s profound historical significance, once standing as the seat of a mighty empire. “Until World War I, it reigned as the foremost Muslim nation on the global stage. Today, in the midst of the Islamic world’s tumultuous struggle with fragmentation, Türkiye emerges as a compelling contender in the region,” astutely asserts George Friedman. Its evolving perceptions of the United States and the potential for ideological shifts have the power to reshape the geopolitical landscape, marking a pivotal moment in global dynamics. Türkiye’s ever-evolving role, combined with its economic prowess, has the potential to trigger a significant realignment within the Muslim world, bearing profound implications for regional and global politics.
Simultaneously, historian, Professor Dr. Ýlber Ortaylý, underscores Türkiye’s distinctive position among its neighbors and the imperative of achieving peace. In his Hürriyet article commemorating the Republic’s centenary, Dr. Ortaylý delves into Atatürk’s concerns regarding centralized power and underscores the urgency of eradicating nepotism and parochialism in both the public and private sectors.
He accentuates the pivotal role of nurturing a robust, independent intellectual class, capable of guiding political parties rather than succumbing to their influence. This serves as a reminder that every success story carries with it a heightened degree of collective responsibility, rooted in mutual respect for the common good. As Plato eloquently articulated in his seminal work, “The Republic,” “Justice means the right condition of the soul, which is concerned with the best and most advantageous life, and which, as being the best and most advantageous, is also the happiest.”