The secular nationalists: No king but Caesar

These crusade-phobic Turks also see a fifth column of the enemy in their very midst: the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul. The very title proves the existence of the evil intentions of the Patriarchate, these Turks say, because "ecumenical" means "universal." "So what," you may ask. Well, the argument is that by using the term "ecumenical," the Patriarchate is claiming for itself an authority that will surpass that of the Turkish Republic. And that this might have political implications, such as the re-establishment of the Byzantine Empire and, thus, the end of Turkish sovereignty over Istanbul.

Of course, the Patriarchate existed well before the Turkish Republic, even before the first Turk set foot on Anatolian soil, with its ecumenical title. Moreover, the Ottomans who conquered Istanbul in 1453 granted the Patriarchate full religious freedom and saw no trouble in its name. Actually until a decade ago, no one cared about what it called itself. But in line with the rising nationalist tide, the term "ecumenical" first became a target and then a heretical word. Although prominent Muslim intellectuals such as Ali Bulaç have defended the right of the Patriarchate to define itself, many nationalists, including the secularist ones, are furious about it. "Secularism" is understood in Turkey not as the separation of church (or mosque) and state, but as the domination by the latter — or the Caesar, if you will — of the former.

What connects all this to the pope's visit is the question whether he will use the term "ecumenical" while referring to his Istanbul-based colleague, Patriarch Bartolomeos. There are a plenty of discussions nowadays in the Turkish media about how to prevent the pope from using that blasphemous term and what to do if he does. A similar worry is what to do if he wishes to pray at Aya Sofya, the magnificent church that was turned into a mosque in 1453 and a museum in 1935. Alas, his prayer might infringe on Turkish sovereignty under one of the greatest domes on earth. All nationalists, from the most secular to the most religious, are deeply worried about this and many other similar perceived threats. That's why, in today's Turkey, die-hard Islamists and hardcore secularist Kemalists can join forces to rally against the EU process, or simply, against freedom.

Making moderates' life difficult

As mentioned before, this nationalist perspective is not shared by all Turks. In Turkey, there are many opinion leaders who argue for more freedom for everyone, including the Patriarchate and all the minorities. They can be roughly defined in two categories: Muslim liberals and secular liberals. Although the former are often called "conservatives" because of their stance on moral issues, they are pro-freedom in political terms.

The current Justice and Development Party (AKP) government has enjoyed the support of both of these liberal camps in the past four years; however, they have recently been feeling themselves under so much pressure from the nationalist trend in society and the bureaucracy that they had to take a few steps back. Alas, they were accused of "treason" for being soft on Cyprus and the Kurds, liberalizing the Turkish economy or letting unconventional intellectuals speak out on controversial issues like the Armenian tragedy of 1915. Their cooperation with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and their welcoming of foreign direct investment is also attacked. A nationalist Web site goes as far as to call the AKP a "Jewish party" in bed with the elders of Zion. The government, along with the moderate Muslim communities in the Turkey, is also attacked for being an example of "moderate Islam." The Islamists abhor the term "moderate" in that definition, the secularists the "Islam" part.

The real problem is, though, that the West has not been helping this "moderate Muslim" government — and all such tendencies in the Islamic world — with its words or deeds. The carnage in Iraq created deep resentment against the United States, and the European Union disillusioned many Turks with its discouraging approach and double standards. The rise of Islamophobia in the West just creates more fuel for the fire. And, as if there were not enough trouble, Pope Benedict XVI himself alienated a billion Muslims with his Regensburg speech.

This is the landscape into which the pontiff will step next week. He will find very few real sympathizers, more welcomers and a lot of non-welcomers. The latter group does not mean that he is in danger: Turkish authorities will protect him in the same way that they did U.S. President George W. Bush, and am I sure that he will be treated well. The fact that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdo?an will be out of the country during those days is a pity, and people are wondering whether this is intentional. Hard to tell. But note that Necmettin Erbakan, the leader of the Islamist Saadet (Happiness or Contentment) Party (SP), is accusing the AKP of wanting to "kiss the hand of the pope who is coming to re-establish Byzantium with the patriarch." It just might not be the politically correct meeting to hold.

However, the AKP's second man, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül, offered to meet the pope at a dinner, but the pope refused. This confused many minds here: Why is the pope coming? Does not he wish to establish dialogue with Muslims? Or is he coming simply to join forces with the patriarch? Many Turks are pondering these questions, and the Holy Father would do a great favor for all of us if he heals the fears of the nationalists and softens the reactions of Muslims to his Regensburg speech. Dialogue and understanding among the faithful is desperately needed today, and we pray and hope the pontiff will aid in that.