PDF Dosyası - Ankara Üniversitesi Kitaplar Veritabanı

the first military contact with the west, the response was a perceived needto change accordingly to meet the coming challenge. Among the first tobe introduced to western ways were the military who were immediatelyaware of the imbalance betvveen their societies response and the outsidechallenge they faced.Unlike other Middle East reformers, however, Mustafa Kemal standsunique in his conception of the situation as well as the totality of his response."Change or Perish" meant to him change in every sphere of life,not just the military. Whereas Reza Pehlavi and later his son, as well asJamal Abdul Nasser, the Syrian military of the 1940's and many otherMiddle East reformers concentrated most of their efforts on the military,Atatürk's approach was total. There was need to change the mode and thestyle of thinking which, he thought, necessitated that the premises of lifeand living must be completely altered. It was not only the military, or theoutvvard manifestations of life that needed to be changed, but also thevery soul of the individual and the entire society.Hovvever, he was not out to negate religion nor did he wish to challengethe faith, but simply the system which had its own interpretation oflife 1 . This is evident from his proclamation to the Syrians "...As a co-Religionist I pray you not to heed the strife stirred amognst us..." 2 .From his early days Atatürk was tormented by what he vievved as theinadequecy of the Ottoman Empire in meeting both the domestic and foreignchallenges it was facing. He saw in the Ottoman Empire an archaicsystem that was too much entangled, not only by tradition, but also by itsassociaation with its subject peoples. As a Turkish nationalist, he was nottoo unhappy with the demişe of the Empire, a process which he sepeededup with energy. To him, the imperial system was tantamount to the traditionallife vvhich he saw as a cause for backwardness and retardation. PanTuranium was too romantic, unwiedly and also another form of outsideentanglement bound to retard the birth of a new purely Turkish nation.The principles of his revolution, nationalism, secularlism and rationality,populism and etatism had a deep intellectual and emotional impact on hisfollowers. However he "remained free ...to weigh strategies and costs intransforming the society..." 3 . Later, Halpern correctly adds that Attatürkwas a "...brilliant organizer, an educated propagandist, and a charismaticpersonality without ties to any group which hight obstract healthychange. He never allowed his ideology to become rigid, but rather itevolved as a broad guideline to pragmatic action" 4 .1. See Halpern, Manfred, The Politics of Social Change In The Middle East And NorthAfrica. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 4th printing, 1920, p. 1229 and p. 289.2. Zeine n. Zeine, The Struggle ForArab Independence, Beirut, Khayat, 1960, p. 123.3.4.Ibid, p. 36.Ibid, p. 362.86