The first steps opening the way to the ''New Turkey'' were realized by the late President Turgut Özal. It turned out that Özal could only advance these steps when he found a more suitable ground, such as his presidential era. On the other hand, when Özal rose to Çankaya, he left behind a weak ANAP Party. The Berlin wall was torn down in 1989 and the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991. The bipolar world system, which was running on a cold war axis, ended without even shooting one bullet. Özal, who was worn out at Çankaya, and an ANAP government, who lost its social support, could no longer respond to the ''great restoration'' need of Turkey. Hence, Turkey was dragged into a darkening process with ''February 28''. Özal''s sudden death expedited this process. The military tutelage, which played the dominant role in the state authority due to the equations designed according to the cold war times, showed resistance against this great restoration demand. Turkey''s last decade was spent with the struggle between military tutelage and civil politics. The new Turkey, which normally would have emerged at the beginning of the 1990s, could only appear on the agenda of the society approximately 20 years later.
The 2000s were the beginning of the 21st century which opened new horizons for humanity. According to Alain Minc, the ''new middle age'', which was symbolized with the threat of the ''nuclear war'', ended. According to Isaiah Berlin ''this was the most dreadful century of western history''.
According to Francis Fukuyama, it was ''the end of history''. And according to Samuel Huntington, the clash of civilizations and inter cultural conflicts were on the edge. With the collapse of the old regime, the questions of how this new gap could be filled or what kind of changes it would trigger in the surrounding countries were waiting for answers. Just as historian Eric Hobshawm said, the problem was bound with what the future would bring. The world entered the new century with ''expectations'' and ''obscurities''.
The French political scientist Prof. Pascal Bonface wrote the book, ''the willing of weakness: Is it the end of the international and strategic passions?'' involving his important analyses. The preface of its Turkish edition in 1997 was written by the then Paris Ambassador, Tansug Bleda, who mentioned that Boniface shed a remarkable light on the new fabric of the international relationship. Bleda said, ''The fact that Turkey is becoming a ''world state'' increases the significance of the decision making process nurtured by a variety of opinions and a careful examination concerning the current complicated structure of its international relationships which we should conduct.'' When Belda wrote these words, Turkey was exposed to the ''February 28 post-modern coup''. To speak of a ''world state'' has to do with rescuing Turkey from its shackles, realizing the needed great restoration and channelizing its social resources and energy towards constructive goals and its capacity for forming all these on both national and international levels.
In this context, ''a new Turkey'' is the expression of a world state and the will of being a proud nation.
Of course, the term ''new Turkey'' should not remain simply as a rhetorical speech or discourse. On the other hand, creating a pessimistic ambiance by associating every negative thing with the ''New Turkey'' is a deformed manner of opposition. We know what the old Turkey was. Now a new Turkey ideal is standing before us as a super party structure. The New Turkey is a process. In order that this process can be advanced in a healthy way, everyone is needed for his or her own positive contribution. Parties, intellectuals, soldiers, ideological groups, NGOs, journals, TVs and academics, instead of confining their energy in narrow fields, isn''t it better for them to color the new Turkey ideal in solidarity?
The first steps opening the way to the ''New Turkey'' were realized by the late President Turgut Özal. It turned out that Özal could only advance these steps when he found a more suitable ground, such as his presidential era. On the other hand, when Özal rose to Çankaya, he left behind a weak ANAP Party. The Berlin wall was torn down in 1989 and the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991. The bipolar world system, which was running on a cold war axis, ended without even shooting one bullet. Özal, who was worn out at Çankaya, and an ANAP government, who lost its social support, could no longer respond to the ''great restoration'' need of Turkey. Hence, Turkey was dragged into a darkening process with ''February 28''. Özal''s sudden death expedited this process. The military tutelage, which played the dominant role in the state authority due to the equations designed according to the cold war times, showed resistance against this great restoration demand. Turkey''s last decade was spent with the struggle between military tutelage and civil politics. The new Turkey, which normally would have emerged at the beginning of the 1990s, could only appear on the agenda of the society approximately 20 years later.
The 2000s were the beginning of the 21st century which opened new horizons for humanity. According to Alain Minc, the ''new middle age'', which was symbolized with the threat of the ''nuclear war'', ended. According to Isaiah Berlin ''this was the most dreadful century of western history''.
According to Francis Fukuyama, it was ''the end of history''. And according to Samuel Huntington, the clash of civilizations and inter cultural conflicts were on the edge. With the collapse of the old regime, the questions of how this new gap could be filled or what kind of changes it would trigger in the surrounding countries were waiting for answers. Just as historian Eric Hobshawm said, the problem was bound with what the future would bring. The world entered the new century with ''expectations'' and ''obscurities''.
The French political scientist Prof. Pascal Bonface wrote the book, ''the willing of weakness: Is it the end of the international and strategic passions?'' involving his important analyses. The preface of its Turkish edition in 1997 was written by the then Paris Ambassador, Tansug Bleda, who mentioned that Boniface shed a remarkable light on the new fabric of the international relationship. Bleda said, ''The fact that Turkey is becoming a ''world state'' increases the significance of the decision making process nurtured by a variety of opinions and a careful examination concerning the current complicated structure of its international relationships which we should conduct.'' When Belda wrote these words, Turkey was exposed to the ''February 28 post-modern coup''. To speak of a ''world state'' has to do with rescuing Turkey from its shackles, realizing the needed great restoration and channelizing its social resources and energy towards constructive goals and its capacity for forming all these on both national and international levels.
In this context, ''a new Turkey'' is the expression of a world state and the will of being a proud nation.
Of course, the term ''new Turkey'' should not remain simply as a rhetorical speech or discourse. On the other hand, creating a pessimistic ambiance by associating every negative thing with the ''New Turkey'' is a deformed manner of opposition. We know what the old Turkey was. Now a new Turkey ideal is standing before us as a super party structure. The New Turkey is a process. In order that this process can be advanced in a healthy way, everyone is needed for his or her own positive contribution. Parties, intellectuals, soldiers, ideological groups, NGOs, journals, TVs and academics, instead of confining their energy in narrow fields, isn''t it better for them to color the new Turkey ideal in solidarity?
