What kind of normalization?

Since the March 31 local elections, there has been constant talk of a "normalization" (yumuşama). The meetings between the chairman of the ruling party and the leader of the main opposition party at the AKP Headquarters are being presented as concrete evidence of this normalization. The fact that the CHP chairman is set to meet with the MHP chairman in the coming days is being interpreted as a sign that this normalization process will continue.

It is an indisputable reality that Turkey needs normalization and that the public desires it. First and foremost, the question of what the parties understand by normalization and whether they are using the word in the same sense needs to be answered. Secondly, everyone agrees that if the AKP had emerged victorious from the local elections, no one would be talking about normalization.

Since everyone wants normalization, it is understood that there is an undemocratic situation or an abnormality at play. Where does this abnormality stem from, and who is responsible for it? Despite all the constitutional amendments and the reform and harmonization packages passed by the Turkish Grand National Assembly and through referendums, who is responsible for the ongoing abnormality? What kind of new status quo has been substituted for the status quo that was accused of being an obstacle to Turkey's development and democratization and was subsequently liquidated?

Who or whom did the secular, democratic status quo—which made Turkey a respected and influential state in the region—bother? By whom or by which groups was secular Turkey, as an alternative to theocratic/despotic Middle Eastern regimes, liquidated under the demagoguery of democratization and civilianization? Who or whom are responsible for Turkey falling into this state, where its prestige in the Middle East is decreasing rather than increasing as it becomes more religious and models itself after Middle Eastern despotism?

At the root of the problem lies an understanding that is at odds with the founding equation of the New Turkey, symbolized by the date October 29, 1923. Turkey is experiencing exactly what would happen if an understanding that is incompatible with the state/regime architecture of October 29, 1923, were to seize political power. This fundamental contradiction, this radical objection, is being masked by the demagoguery of democratization and civilianization; the supporters of the new despotic/theocratic status quo want to hide and veil their attacks on the regime equation of October 29, 1923!

If normalization is truly desired, the despotic-theocratic understanding and practice must be abandoned, and a return to democratic institutionalism must be achieved. The partisan presidency, the "reis" (leader) regime which signifies a postmodern sultanate, and the shadow of the "one-man" rule cast over the legislative, executive, and judiciary branches must be abandoned.

If normalization is truly and sincerely desired, the insistence and stubbornness on raising "medieval generations" instead of "Republican generations" through a new (!) curriculum to be implemented in all educational institutions, starting from preschool, must be declared abandoned, and society must be relieved!

If normalization is truly desired, instead of tailoring the law to the "reis" and substituting "reis law" under the demagoguery of a "civilian constitution," a promise must be made in the presence of the Turkish Nation that the executive will act in accordance with the law and that a return to the institutionalism of a contemporary state of law will be made.

Those who send messages of normalization must be told, with all simplicity and clarity, that normalization can only be achieved by returning to a democratic regime, and that normalization is impossible under the "reis" regime and under theocratic/despotic administration!