No one with a turbaned wife should be elected or…

This incident was not limited to Ms. Munevver’s turban. That was a protest directed against the AK Party’s general stance. The state drew its "red lines" and issued the warning that these lines must not be crossed.

Up to the point where the reception took place part of the public had found these reactions justified. However, this protest was kept up even after it was announced that Arinc’s wife would not be taking part in the reception. That brought about a totally different picture.

By saying, "My wife said will not be attending at her own volution," Arinc showed that he did not want to escalate the crisis. Similarly, Tayyip Erdogan said he would not take Mrs. Erdogan to the reception. Thus Erdogan indicated that the AK Party was going to back down.

In the face of this picture, one would have expected the president and the military to make a gesture, that is, to attend the reception. They did exactly the opposite. I think that their reactions have been carried into an "exaggerated spot". That aspect of the incident that concerned a certain principle, has been forgotten. It has come to be perceived as if a general stance has been taken against turbaned wives.

What are we going to do from now on?
It is as if people who serve at certain state positions are being banned from bringing their turbaned wives to official ceremonies. This is the kind of situation we are faced with.

We have the May 19, Aug. 30, Oct. 29 national holidays ahead.

What will happen then?

Will there be a fresh crisis on all those occasions?

Are we going to ask Arinc to divorce his wife?

Besides, Ms. Munevver has done nothing wrong.

Her husband ran in the election and, though it is common knowledge that he has a turbaned wife, he was elected with a wide margin and sent to Ankara. The party that won a parliamentary majority in the election, has made Arinc Parliament speaker. Ms. Munevver has been wearing a turban all along.

Now we come up and take the kind of stance that amounts to saying, "Parliament speakers whose wives go about wearing a turban cannot bring their wives to the receptions of the Republic."

I cannot see how we will get out of this tangle. If we engage in a mutual display of force, things can get out of hand so easily.

The last thing this country needs is a fresh division along the secularist – anti-secularist lines.

No one wants a return to the past. People expect the party that has come to power with a majority now to make the state function — now that the fights among the coalition parties have become a thing of the past.

Will MGK now operate as a lobby as well?
Meanwhile, the National Security Council (MGK) secretary-general touring Europe in an effort to "shape up" the Turkish associations based there, has caused fresh questions to be asked.

Kilinc Pasha’s Brussels meeting could not be understood by many people. The MGK’s functions have, once again, came to be questioned.

The MGK is deemed to be the highest institution involved in national security. The MGK secretary-general can hardly act according to his own wishes.

In the past too Kilinc Pasha had made headlines due to his negative views about the European Union. Since he wears a uniform and serves as the MGK secretary-general, his moves inevitable create the impression, "This is the way the military think."

Do MGK duties include unification of the Turkish associations abroad so that they would speak in one voice?

Next year Turkey will ask the European Union to set a date for the start of the accession talks. The Copenhagen criteria require mainly that the military must not be on the foreground as a power getting involved in the country’s administration. It is an EU principle that MGK-type institutions must limit their activities to their "consultative body" status.
Under the circumstances, the following question is being asked in many circles: Does the MGK want to prevent Turkey from joining the EU?