Ertugrul Ozkok: One step back prime minister

Then let's come to the civil society's call for the ruling of common sense. If you like, let's start with Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan.

***

Erdogan tells the media to review itself in order to reduce the tension. Of course it should. Let's do... But don't I have the right to expect that from him as a member of the media?

''Prime minister needs to review himself too.'' For instance I expect him to ask himself this question:

''I experienced a much more stable and much more influential period of power in my first term although I had 34 percent vote in the elections. During that term I never had such a clash with media. Now I have 47 percent. But there is no stability in the country. And I can't do the things that I want to do. Why?''

Erdogan should ask himself this question. Of course just asking wouldn't be enough. He should give a sincere and realistic answer to this question. Erdogan until now blamed the third parties rather than himself. He gave the impression with his words that he believes in some ridiculous conspiracy theories. But if he has made self-criticism both he and Turkey could be in a very different point today.

What is the outlook? A government that lost its all authority. A president who feels that he needs to step in. A civil society that got control.

Moreover these NGOs have stepped in three times since June 22. First during the presidential elections. Then the constitutional amendments on easing the headscarf ban. And now during the judicial crisis. Isn't it too much to face three deep crisis and three civil society initiatives in eight months for a government that it thinks it is stable and powerful?

***

The fundamental element of the crisis we are experiencing is making the definition of "majority" and "national will" concepts in wrong ways. Prime minister perceived the power of representation, given in the polls, as a personal capability that also gives himself unlimited power.

The government came from the point of ''I do whatever I want as I have 47 percent of the votes,'' to a point where it is disabled to do anything. Both of them are wrong in terms of democracy. The correct and reasonable thing should be find in the middle of these two.

And the first question we need to ask should be that. ''What does one step back mean for the government?''

***

In my opinion, the answer is very easy. All of us should forget about the presidential elections from now on. But we can form the basis of "a historic reconciliation" for headscarf issue.

The government immediately should give people concrete assurances that will soothe concerns regarding to the secularism. For instance it must declare that women with headscarf will never be allowed to work in state offices, and that students with headscarf will never be allowed to enter primary, middle and high schools, and that they will not bring up religious schools issue.

We can start writing a completely civilian constitution with a historical agreement assuring that the secular system will stay intact. In this regard, I see prime minister's support for NGOs initiative as a hopeful development.