Tulin DALOGLU

Covering customs in Turkey; Do women wearing headscarves need constitutional protection?

The Washington Times

BYLINE: By Tulin Daloglu, SPECIAL TO THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The practice of women wearing headscarves is not unique to Islam. It exists in all Abrahamic religions. Yet in the Judeo-Christian world, it is no longer used by the mainstream to signify religiosity. It does exist and everyone respects it, but in terms of day-to-day life it is seen as an outdated custom – a marker of a different era.
For their part, Muslim women have several different styles to cover their hair. Pakistan’s former prime minister, Benazir Bhutto, is less concerned about showing her hair and neck. Turkey’s first lady, Hayrunnisa Gul, believes that according to her faith she must make sure that no hair and no neck should be visible, as it could excite men. Mrs. Gul, who married a husband twice her age when she was 15 years old, now publicly represents the first majority-Muslim country that embraced secular democracy.
In two weeks, Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) will introduce a new constitution to replace the one adopted after the 1980 military coup. While it could be an opportunity for the country, the debate so far has been focused on the fact that it will give constitutional protection to the practice of women wearing headscarves in universities. From an American standpoint, where freedom of religion is also a constitutional right, this is only natural. But it is also natural to wonder whether, if the U.S. Muslim population were to grow from 3 percent to 30 percent and more women were wearing the hijab, or headcover, in the streets, if such religious expression would be embraced in the same way. Or would it force people to think about different ways to approach the issue?
Yet if Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey, “were … to be faced with this demand today, he would have applied two criteria:would it make Turkey look different from other civilized countries, and how important is this with regard to the overriding aim of promoting the country’s social and economic development?” says Ataturk biographer Andrew Mango. “If the answer to both questions is ‘no,’ he would not have opposed the presence in universities of girls with headscarves even if the sight displeased him.”
But the fact remains that Ataturk believed “[t]hat there was a single universal civilization … He was opposed to anything that set his people apart That is why he attached importance to external signs like dress,” Mr. Mango explained. “Although he discouraged it, he never banned the veil in its various forms. I do not believe that the agitation for the right to wear Muslim dress means that Turkish society rejects Ataturk’s reforms,” Mr. Mango told me. “It took French Catholics more than a century to accept the principles of the French Revolution. In Turkey, the processof internalizing Ataturk’s reforms is proceeding much faster, but it is bound to meet with reverses as organic secularization takes its course.”
And while Turkey’s citizens are undergoing a deep examination of their nation’s secular nature, Turks are still trying to find their identity. President Abdullah Gul looks more comfortable with Syrian President Bashar Assad or Saudi King Abdullah. When the king recently visited Turkey, the president not only welcomed him at the airport but also went to his hotel, overriding a number of protocol rules and angering the secular camp, which in all fairness has virtually no effectiveness left in the political sphere. Mr. Gul’s close relationship with the king makes its own statement: displaying a comfort level with King Abdullah not shared by other Western heads of state.
Furthermore, Mr. Gul emphasizes that through his closeness to the king, Turkey will be able to receive millions of dollars of investment from Saudis. Technically, any worries related to Saudi money would not make sense in European or American markets. No Saudi investment in Paris can change the culture of Parisian life. But it could very well have a significant impact in Istanbul. That is why the Turkish president’s personal life – the age they were when they married and his wife’s headcover – matter for the rest of the country. Furthermore, Mrs. Gul once sued the Republic of Turkey at the European Court of Human Rights for the right to wear the headscarf to a university. Yet, this vocal woman now remains dead silent when a Saudi rape victim is faced with an inexplicable punishment – just last week.
When the headscarf becomes acceptable attire in universities, there will be no female student without a head cover, predicts Beyza Bilgin, a prominent theology professor in Turkey. Of course, we don’t know for sure whether it will happen – whether there will be perceptible public pressure. But just look the other way for evidence: The social experience of those who convert to different religions can tell us something about spoken or unspoken tolerance or actions.
It is impossible to challenge the coming constitutional protection for headscarves at this time. Yet the Western world should be on notice that Turkey, which still remains a secular democracy, may be in danger of a strong wit of dissimulation under AKP rule.
Tulin Daloglu is a freelance writer.