This study is an attempt to examine how Turkish Islamist intellectuals theorize, formulate and particularize their own version of exceptionalism. Exceptionalism in the Turkish Islamist discourse relates mostly to their reading of the historical and actual/latent role, identity and superiority of Turkey in the course of the international relations of the “Muslim world”. In fact, the discourse of exceptionalism is frequently encountered in international relations. It is commonly associated with the United States while a burgeoning literature has started to draw attention to the exceptionalist discourses of several other actors, such as China, Russia, India, and France. When it comes to the “Muslim world”, one can encounter the Arab, Iranian and Pakistani versions of exceptionalism with their particular claims to a Pan-Islamist leadership. Turkish Islamists have long propagated for a Pan-Islamist re-organization of the international relations of the “Muslim world”, and their Pan-Islamist proposal revolves fundamentally around Turkish exceptionalism. While several aspects of Turkish Islamists’ exceptionalist discourse have been highlighted as part of a set of discussions on “neo-Ottomanism”, its central elements have remained far from systematically identified. Building on a discourse analysis of Islamist journals published in Turkey from the 1940s to the 2010s, this study breaks down Turkish Islamists’ exceptionalist discourse into its components, and argues that the exceptionalism of Turkish Islamism has five main characteristics: historical status of leadership, belief in benignity and paternalism, sense of orthodoxy, magnification of comparative material power, and missionary zeal. First, the conception of historical status of leadership attributes both a role identity and a historical legitimacy to Turkey to lead the “Muslim world”. Second, belief in benignity and paternalism offers a narrative of the Ottoman benevolence and the Muslim advocacy of Turkish leadership. Third, sense of orthodoxy is provided in two main ways: the perfection of the Ottoman experiment, and a silent and an outspoken sectarian self-esteem. Fourth, magnification of Turkish power is justified on two main grounds: geopolitics and modernization. Last, missionary zeal entails the enhancement/recovery of Turkish status and power, and the messianism of Turkish responsibility. Accordingly, Turkish Islamist intellectuals portray Turkish leadership as inevitable, legitimate, benign, orthodox, feasible, and missionary. As such, Turkish exceptionalism emerges as one major way to overcome the tension between the umma and the nation and to mitigate the imperatives of the nation-state and states-system.

Veiled women in Turkey suffered for decades under a ban issued in 1982, constraining them from entering universities, government offices and many other official public places with their veils on. In 2011, the Islamist Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi - henceforth JDP) lifted the veil ban. Thus, JDP significantly contributed to the normalization of veiled women’s public and political presence. Around that time, many women started to unveil in series voluntarily. In 2019, hundreds of women shared their unveiled images under the popular hashtag ‘10 Years Challenge’ on several social media platforms, revealing the extent of the phenomenon. What has changed in a decade that stirred such a radical turn in these women’s lives, who once waged a fierce fight against the ban, now choosing to unveil in the absence of it? This research proposes to analyze how women in Turkey negotiate their veiling/unveiling decisions along with the shifting political scene from a militantly secular authoritarian state to an authoritarian Islamist government with its boldly expressed ideal of ‘raising a religious generation’. My research is made of two interwoven parts. Firstly, I aim to examine how JDP policies and discourses, particularly those targeting women, reshaped the meaning of the veil and, thus, women’s unveiling decisions. Then, I intend to focus on the possible impacts of the robustly growing Islamic feminist movement in Turkey on unveilings. Islamic feminism refers to a globally growing body of scholarship and activism which rely on women-friendly interpretations of Islamic texts, mainly the Qur’an and Hadith (Prophet Muhammad’s sayings). Many Islamic feminist scholars claim that the veil is not a mandatory practice in Islam. That is why analyzing Islamic feminist scholarship is a significant component of my methodology. Three main aspects of this project highlight its originality. Firstly, it is a historically unique case study. There have been no communal voluntary unveilings in the history of Muslim countries without its top-down imposition. Secondly, in an era of growing religious fundamentalism, rethinking religion from a woman-friendly perspective will effectively contribute to increasing the visibility of the Islamic feminist movement in Turkey and thus advancing women’s empowerment in general. Lastly, this research aims to enhance our understanding of hegemony as an ideological struggle, a process of negotiating power among various actors rather than a top-down domination.

This ethnographic research examines Syrian civil society formations, focusing specifically on Syrian non-governmental civil society organizations (NGOs) in Istanbul. The primary objective is to explore the relationship between Syrian refugee NGOs and the Turkish state, emphasizing Syrians' learning process of civil society in Turkey and their experiences in the field. It seeks to understand how these NGOs adapted and evolved in response to the civil society environment in Turkey through engaging in participant observation and semi-structured interviews. The research also analyzes the basic dynamics and strategies of interaction between Syrian NGOs and state mechanisms. It aims to uncover how these NGOs navigate their relationships with the Turkish state and the implications this has on their operations and objectives. Furthermore, the research highlights the fundamental challenges faced by Syrian NGOs in Turkey and the role of Syrian immigrant NGOs in providing services and fostering a sense of belonging and solidarity among Syrian refugees. Adopting Foucault’s concept of “field of visibility”, it seeks to depart from conventional views that perceive these NGOs solely as charity organizations or integration facilitators. Instead, the research argues an alternative perspective that emphasizes Syrian NGO members' political subjectivities and multifaceted relationships with the Turkish state. Besides this, the research sheds more light on how Syrian refugees adopt legal and political strategies to find a place in Turkish civil society. In summary, this research argues that Syrian NGOs in Turkey are in the process of learning the concept of civil society within the Turkish context after escaping from the war-torn authoritarian state. It also delineates the experiences of these NGOs in civil society, enabling refugees to establish their own political participation and strategies for engaging with state power in Turkey. These Syrian NGOs play a significant role in creating a sense of permanence for refugees who experience political, economic, and legal liminalities in Turkey. The research contributes to the existing literature by emphasizing the political subjectivities of Syrian refugees within the civil society sphere of Turkey. This research provides an alternative perspective highlighting Syrian NGO members' political capacity and multifaceted relationships with the Turkish state, underscoring their potential to resistance. It might also contribute to wider literature by unleashing a discussion about the existent condition of civil society in Turkey regarding Syrian NGOs strategies of resisting the liminality in Turkey.

Challenging widespread readings of politics in Muslim countries as torn between “Islam/ism” vs. secularism” or “democracy”, my book, Contesting Pluralism(s): Islamism, Liberalism and Nationalism in Turkey and Beyond (Cambridge UP, in-press), offers an alternative key to (Turkey’s) politics. Debunking Orientalist binaries, the book proposes an original framework with which to distill causal complexity in political contestation. On the basis of extensive historical and contemporary research, including 15+ years of ethnographic immersion and 100+ interviews, I show that contestation is actually driven by shifting alliances for and against pluralism. Cross-camp coalitions pit people who are willing to co-exist with “Other(s)” against champions of unitary, ethno- or ethno-religious nationalism. Using this novel pluralizers vs. anti-pluralist key to retell Turkey’s story from the late Ottoman empire to the present, the book offers new explanations for major outcomes from revolutions to coup d’etats. In so doing, it offers a framework for re-reading the relationship between religion, politics and pluralism which travels across—but also beyond—the Muslim-majority world