TLF EXCLUSIVE: Turkish Cypriot Journalist Barut: "Headscarf Debate is Ankara's Imposition; A Game to Disrupt the Secular Structure"
Clearly defining the events as "a reactionary activity imposed by the Ankara administration," Barut asserted that this situation was "part of a larger game" aimed at disrupting the secular structure of Turkish Cypriots. Furthermore, according to her, this debate artificially injects an unprecedented "headscarf" or "personal freedoms" issue onto the agenda in Northern Cyprus, where none previously existed.
"Ankara's Imposition: The Game to Disrupt the Secular Structure"
Pınar Barut emphasized that the actions intended under the guise of "freedom of belief" through the proposed "Discipline Regulation" are entirely an imposition by Ankara and nothing more than a reactionary activity. "This is part of a larger game designed to disrupt the secular education and societal structure of Turkish Cypriots," Barut reiterated.
To underscore the manufactured nature of the current debate, Barut recalled that no significant "headscarf" or "personal freedoms" issue has historically existed in Northern Cyprus. She offered a striking example from the past: "In the 90s, while women wearing headscarves could not enter universities in Turkey, they were able to come and study freely at universities in Northern Cyprus."
Barut stressed that respect for individual choices is fundamental in Turkish Cypriot society, adding, "Whether a woman, as an individual over 18, covers her head or wears a miniskirt, chooses a religion or not, is entirely her own decision."
"AKP's Policies and Turkish Cypriot Society's Resistance"
According to Barut, Turkey's ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) is attempting to reshape the lifestyle in Northern Cyprus to align with its ideology. "The AKP has not been able to change the lifestyle in Northern Cyprus, which it effectively controls, as much as it desires. It now seeks to impose the Political Islam policies pursued in Turkey for 20 years here as well, starting with the education system," she explained.
Barut highlighted the strong resistance Turkish Cypriot society, led primarily by teachers, has mounted against these impositions. This resilience is a testament to the determination of the Turkish Cypriot society. Moreover, she added that these events have starkly exposed the position of the government appointed by Ankara: "The people saw the appointees betraying their community simply to gain approval from Ankara. This marked the beginning of a significant awakening."
"The Government's Insistence on the Regulation and the Determination of Societal Opposition"
Barut noted that despite the government's persistence regarding the regulation, societal opposition remains firm and united against it. This unity is a source of hope for the Turkish Cypriot community. She offered a clear perspective on the likely outcome of this standoff: "No power can withstand a socially united opposition. The Turkish Cypriot community knows precisely why it rejects this regulation and is resolute in its struggle."
Barut expressed her conviction that the government couldn't withstand this resistance, explaining, "The appointed government lacks the luxury to weather this storm. If they insist, the general strike threatened by the unions will inevitably be deployed. They cannot risk that."
"The 'February 28 Resurrected' Propaganda in Turkey and Information Pollution"
Addressing the "February 28 resurrected in Cyprus" propaganda being voiced in Turkey, Barut clarified that it originates more from marginal groups than from the AKP's top leadership. She suggested this is likely intentional, so "it doesn't appear as a direct AKP policy."
Building on this point, Barut lamented the severe information pollution in Turkey concerning the Cyprus issue and the island's history. "Even if this particular issue subsides today," she warned, "a new debate could easily be ignited tomorrow based on another nationalist argument." She asserted that the way to break this damaging cycle lies in "more actively articulating the historical facts of Cyprus in the international arena, particularly within Turkey itself."
"Impact of the Headscarf Debate on Elections: Tatar is Losing Support"
Finally, examining the electoral implications—a crucial aspect of the political landscape—Barut highlighted a stark contrast. While the ongoing debates might superficially seem to benefit the leadership in Ankara, she emphasized they are causing a significant erosion of local support for the incumbent administration. This backlash stems from the Turkish Cypriot community's firm stance of "rejecting reactionism, regardless of its source." Barut noted, "Ersin Tatar and the appointed government are losing support even among their voter base," pointing to the telling example of Tatar's own wife, Sibel Tatar, publicly opposing the regulation. "Tatar lost further support because of this," Barut added, casting him "in the awkward position of 'the man not even supported by his wife.'"
The government, Barut stated, desperately wanted to avoid this contentious debate before the elections. However, their dependence on Ankara left them feeling powerless. She described their apparent strategy of operating under the expectation that "Ankara will interfere in the elections anyway" as a "rather pathetic situation."
Ultimately, Barut predicted that this charged political atmosphere would likely benefit the leading opposition candidate opposing Tatar, Tufan Erhürman, despite criticisms from all sides. She concluded that protest votes would probably consolidate around him: "It appears Tufan Erhürman is the candidate poised to gain from this tension; it looks like he will capture the protest votes as well."