One more time for Hagia Sophia

THERE are two interpretations of chanting the invasion songs on May 29 and bringing the Hagia Sofia issue forward: First, spreading the Hagia Sofia melancholy as wishful thinking, and second, keeping the hopes high regarding the political agenda.

If an attitude based on arguments such as: “We’re a very strong country; we can take all kinds of decisions” or “Hagia Sofia is under our reign and no one can interfere with the decision about it” continue, no one will wait for the state council’s verdict. Would this decision change the signature of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk?

And then there’s the attitude of evaluating the matter without Mustafa Kemal. “He didn’t do it”, “It wasn’t his signature”, etc. Why are we doing things the way that we do? Is it because if it’s done by Ataturk, it’s untouchable? Yes he did it. He did it to look nice for the Western world, to ease the pain of the conquest of Istanbul, to dilute the hostility toward Turkey. At least that’s how I see it, and it was wrong if you ask me. All the governments in power have faced the Hagia Sofia issue. Parties supported by the conservatives were put on “sincerity tests” and were pressured about the issue.