-~:
About the Book and the Editor ATATURJ( AND THE MODERNIZATION OF TURKEY edited by Jacob M. Landau Mustafa...
274 downloads
2166 Views
9MB Size
Report
This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form
........
-~:
About the Book and the Editor ATATURJ( AND THE MODERNIZATION OF TURKEY edited by Jacob M. Landau Mustafa Kemal AtatOrk, who founded the Republic of Turkey sixty years ago, dedicated himself to westernizing the Turkish state and its society and culture. In this first attempt to evaluate Atatlirk's overall contribution to the modernization of Turkey, an international group of scholars examine a broad range of subjects, including the Kemalist ideology in the context of Atati"lrk's quest for modernism; Ataturk's impact on Turkey's political culture and civil bureaucracy; his experiments with state inten'ention in the economy; and his attempts to reform Turkish law, education, and language. Although the main focus of the book is on C\'aluating how Atatiirk's innovations effected change in the Turkey of his day, the authors also consider the contribution of the Kemalist regime in the light of what had occurred earlier, during the late Ottoman Empire, as well as how its legacy has affected the Turkey of today. Jacob M. Landau is professor of political science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and coordinator of ~iddle East research at the Ulli\Tfsity's Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Pe,lee.
Published in cooperation with The Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Ataturk and the Modernization of Turkey edited by Jacob M. Landau
Westview Press / E.]. Brill /
Boulder, Colorado
Leiden, The Netherlands
A WeJn'iew Replica Edition All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by ,IllY means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any inform,trion storage and retrie\'al system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Copyright © 1984 by Westview Press, Inc. Published in 1984 in the United Stares of America by Westview Press, Inc, 5500 Central Avenue, Boulder, Colorado 80301. Frederick A, Praeger, Presidell[ ;lIld Publisher Distributed outside North America by E.J. Brill, P.O. Box 9000, Leidcn, The Netherlands Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Main entry under ritle: AtatOrk and the modernization of Turkey. Includes index. I. Kcmalism-Addresses, essays, lectures. 2, TurkeyPolitics ,md go\'ernment-1918-1960-Addresses, essays, lectures. 3. Turkey-Ciyilization-'--Occidcll[al intlucnces -Addresses, cssays, lectures. 1. Landau, Jacob M. DR590.A837 1984 956.1'024 83-16872 ISB~ (U.S.) 0-86531·986·3 ISB~
(!'\crh.) 90 04 07070 2
Printed and bound in the United States of America 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Contents
Preface Introduction: Ataturk'~ Achievement: Some Considerations, Jacob Mo Landau
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ix xi
PART 1: KEMALIST IDEOLOGY 1 2
The Kemalist Regime and Modernization: Some Comparative and Analytical Remarks, SoN. Eisenstadt Prelude to Reforms: Mustafa Kemal in Libya, Rachel Simon 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
The Origins of Kemalist Ideology, Paul Dumont
4
Atarurk's Quest for Modernism, Osman Okyar
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3 17 25 45
PART 2: POLITICAL CULTURE AND BUREAUCRACY 5
The Political Culture of Kemalist Turkey, Franlt Tachau 0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
The Impact of Atatiirk on Turkey'S Political Culture since World War II, Udo Steinbach 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
Ataturk and the Civil Bureaucracy, Metin Reper
8
Continuity and Change in Turkish Bureaucracy: The Kemalist Period and After, ilter Turan 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000000000000
57 77 89 99
PART 3: SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES 9 10
Kemalist Views on Social Change, Sabri Mo Akural The Traditional and the Modern in the Economy of Kemalist Turkey: The Experience of the 1920s, William Mo Rale
0
0
0
000
00000000000000000000000000000000000000
1]71
125
153
ii
Contents
1
Atatiirk's Etatism, Z. Y. Hershlag ....... ................. 171
:ART 4: WESTERNISM AND CULTURE 2
The Modernization of Education in Kemalist Turkey, Michael Winter . ....................................... 183
3
Ataturk's Language Reform as an Aspect of Modernization in the Republic of Turkey, G.L. Lewis ..... 195
,4
Ataturk and the Arts, with Special Reference to Music and Theater, Metin And . ........................ 215
l5
Ataturk's Legacy: Westernism in Contemporary Turkey, David Kushner . ................................ 233
'ART 5: PERCEPTIONS OF KEMALISM l6
The Kemalist Reform of Turkish Law and Its Impact, Vakur Versan .. ........................................ 247
l7
Kemalism as an Ideology of Modernization, jsmet Giritli .......................................... 251
~ist of Contributors ........................................ 255 :ndex ..................................................... 257
Preface
The papers in this volume were presented and discussed at an international symposium on Atattirk and the Modernization of Turkey, which was held at the Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, in October 1981, to mark the centenary of Mustafa Kemal's birth. Scholars from six countries-France, Great Britain, Israel, Turkey, the United States and West Germany-examined and discussed Atatiirk's lifework and achievements at the symposium, in an attempt to evaluate their significance for his own time as well as for post-Kemalist Turkey. It is our hope that this volume of proceedings will make a contribution to the understanding of the impact of Atatiirk and his followers on Turkey in the twentieth century. It is my pleasant duty to express my appreciation to the Truman Institute for convening the symposium and for undertaking the publication of these proceedings together with Westview Press. Special thanks are due to Mr. Barry Youngerman for copy-editing a difficult text so ably and in such a good-humored manner and to Ms. Norma Schneider, Director of Publications of the Truman Institute, for her indefatigable and patient handling of all the details necessary for the editing and publication of this work. I am responsible for any errors of fact or judgment that remain.
Jacob M. Landau Jerusalem, 1984
Ataturk's Achievement: Some Considerations Jacob M. Landau
A serious study of the essence of modern Turkey must include an evaluation of the pervasive impact of Mustafa Kemal Atatlirk and the reasons for his success. Merely to suggest that he was a markedly charismatic leader would be begging the question: how did he succeed, in the face of enormous odds, in turning defeat into victory, first on the battlefield and then during the ensuing peace? Atatiirk's feats as strategist and field commander in both the First World War and Turkey's War of Independence would have sufficed to ensure his place among major world leaders. However, he will probably be remembered even more as the builder and modernizer of the Republic, a role that demanded vision, determination and endless patience. Even before he was elected Turkey's first president, a position to which he was reelected three times, Atatiirk had adopted certain ideas on how a modern state and society should look, had begun to recruit his cadres, and had planned how to implement the ideas that were later dubbed Kemalism. What is most impressive about Atatlirk as reformer is the totality of his approach, his drive to institute change in practically all areas of life, from the roots up. His step-by-step implementation of these objectives testifies to a sense of realism and excellent timing: for him reforms were the art of the possible. Not every reform was a success; but even the failures, by highlighting the difficulties he had to face, testify to the scope and nature of his achievements. Perhaps his most signal failure was in the economic field. However, Turkey was a poor, little-developed country, lacking many of the skills necessary for economic expansion. Furthermore, its economy was largely dependent on external factors, and suffered heavily from the international economic crisis that began in 1929. To Ataturk's credit, he did manage to institute some heroic economic measures at the time, which yielded dividends in later years. The new regime was more successful in foreign relations, another field in which Turkey's actions were somewhat dependent on others. That Turkey mended its fences very capably and has managed to remain at peace is no mean achievement considering its geopolitical situation. XI
XII
Jacob M. Landau
Atatiirk wanted peace in order to concentrate on reforming Turkey and its people, a task that occupied most of his energies during the fifteen years of his presidency. He continued to supervise the details even in his final years, failing health notwithstanding. Many of the ideas tried out in that period were his own; others were taken from his predecessors or from people in his entourage. But it was always he who made the final decision regarding which reforms to apply, how to implement them, and in what order of priority. And it was he who constantly urged one and all to carryon. To accomplish these goals, he surrounded himself with capable and willing collaborators, many of them hand-picked from among those he called the "men of the future." Among his many accomplishments, the following stand out in particular: creation of a modern republican state structure with a constitution, an elected parliament and other western-type institutions; founding of a political party as the chief agent of modernization, and brief experiments with a multi-party system; recruitment of a modern bureaucracy; building of a new capital at Ankara; disestablishment of religion by removing religious officials from their institutionalized positions and secularizing education and the courts; emancipation of women both politically (through passive, then active voting rights) and socially (by instituting monogamy and discouraging the veil); adoption of the Latin in place of the Arabic alphabet, and reformation of the Turkish language; and urging men to adopt western clothing. Each one of these would have to be considered ambitious; together, their impact was staggering. But Atatiirk knew that in order for them to succeed to the point where they set new everyday norms, a radical change of outlook was imperative. Therefore, he and his close collaborators-the new Turkish elite-set personal examples in every area. However, this by itself would hardly have sufficed, for the old habits were deeply ingrained, especially in the countryside where the. bulk of the people lived. Futhermore, some of the reforms were actively opposed by various sectors of the population. Atatiirk therefore set out to alter the mentality of his peopleperhaps his most difficult task. He encouraged national pride, especially in the wake of military victory, and never tired of telling his countrymen that they should be happy to call themselves Turks. For he wanted to instill in them a new sense of purpose within the framework of the new patriotism. The language reform and intensified historical research were both meant to further pride in an attachment to Turkey. This was not as easy as it may sound, for it entailed the abandonment of old loyalties: to Islam, to the Ottoman Empire, and to people of Turkic origins beyond the borders of the new republic. The new Turkish patriotism may have also been intended as an antidote to communism and fascism, which were already beginning to make themselves felt in the country.
Ataturk's Achievement: Some Considerations
xiii
Atatiirk's primary goal was a modernized, secular Turkey which could compete successfully with other states, nations and societies at the highest level of contemporary civilization. But he also wanted to mold a Turk who, while modernized (he would probably have said civilized), would still be proud of his own heritage and deeply attached to his fatherland. Considering Atatiirk's background and temperament, it is easy to understand why he chose this combination of values; but that did not make the task of reform any easier. On the contrary, there is a dialectical contradiction between modernism and patriotism, and this did in the end have an affect on what he tried to accomplish. In any case, fifteen years were hardly enough for such a massive endeavor. Although his immediate successors continued Atatiirk's campaign, they lacked his stature; also they were forced to contend with the manifold problems raised by the Second World War and its aftermath. Even today, the majority of the rural population remains largely unaffected by modernization and closely attached to traditional ways. In the 1960s and 1970s, new ideologies offered tempting alternatives to Kemalism. Mainly but not solely on the left, some of them found eager adherents. The Kemalists were criticized for having left the fundamental social and economic structure largely intact while concentrating on more superficial, symbolic issues. They were also criticized for being insensitive to some of the enduring cultural values of the bulk of the Turkish people. Nonetheless, the very fact that the critics on both sides of the political spectrum had to take Kemalism as their frame of reference, if only to attack it, goes far to prove the vitality of the Kemalist approach. Similarly, the military interventions of 1960, 1971, and 1980 were all carried out in the name of Kemalism against a perceived menace to the state and its ideology. The most recent intervention displays all the signs of a return to the Kemalism conceived by Atatiirk. Finally, the fact that UNESCO declared 1981, the centenary of his birth, as "The Year of Atatiirk" testifies to his unique stature and to the durability of his work. This brings us back to our original question: what was the secret of Atatiirk's success? Perhaps we can approach a satisfactory answer by saying that his charisma, sense of mission and unyielding drive for change, combined with his realism and knack for selecting suitable assistants, helped bring about lasting modernization in many areas of Turkish life. Numerous are Atatiirk's admirers throughout the world, but it is the Turks who most cherish him and his service to Turkey. Like George Washington, Atatiirk has remained "great in war, great in peace, great in the hearts of his fellow countrymen."
Part 1 Kemalist Ideology
1 The Kemalist Regime and Modernization: Some Comparative and Analytical Remarks S.N. Eisenstadt
The Classical Theories of Modernization In the following pages we shall attempt to analyze some aspects of the Kemalist regime and the transformation of Turkish society under its aegis from the point of view of the comparative study of modernization, thus throwing light on the validity of different theories of modernization. A closer look at the Kemalist experience exposes the relative inadequacy of those early theories of modernization which posited a unilinear development or transition from traditional to modern societies, and a movement of the latter toward some common end stage. The studies of development and modernization that became, from the Second World War, a major focus of research in sociology, political science, economics and anthropology heralded a revived interest in comparative macro-sociological studies, in the dynamics of various civilizations, in the relations and contrasts between modern and premodern western and non-western civilizations, and in the historical process, which had been among the major foci of classical sociological theories. These studies also served as the background for most aid and d.evelopmenr programs undertaken by national and international agenCies. The emphasis was on how to "develop" the "under-developed" societies. New analytic approaches and new methodological tools of inquiry were used in post-Keynesian and econometric studies, attitude studies, survey research, demographic and ecological research, and in sociological and political analysis. This work linked up with some of the major theoretical developments in those fields, especially the 3
S. N. Eisenstadt
"systemic" and structural-functional approaches to social and political life. This combination of developments in sociological theory with research into the "Third World" reopened the major classical problems of sociological theory. These included the characteristics and internal dynamics of various types of societies, their processes of change and conditions of stability, the process of transition from one type of society to another, and the extent to which such transition evi!.1.c.~s a discernible universal evolutionary tendency from the simple to the complex. The analysis of historical process thus came back to the forefront of sociological concern and theory. The research that developed out of these concerns and dominated comparative studies in the social sciences in the 1950s and 1960s attempted first of all to identify the differences between traditional and modern societies. These were defined in many ways by using socio-demographic indices such as urbanization, occupational structure, the spread of the communications media and the like. They were also defined in terms of structural differences-traditional societies being characterized, to use P~n~L.tcuuinDlogy, by pa~~icularistic and ascripti\,e criteria of role allocation, and modern societies by universaJis_l!C:_.,ln
