TURKISH “NATION STATE” PRECONDITIONS
In the beginning of November of the current year the Turkish Defense Minister Vecdi Gonul paid an official visit to Brussels to take part in the meeting of the European Union Defense Ministers. The latter one made a speech in the ceremony in commemoration of Ataturk held on November 10 in the Turkish embassy in Brussels and expressed a very noteworthy and, at the same time, scandalous idea connected with Turkish “nation state.” According to him, for the homogeneous form of up-to-date Turkey they are obliged to a number of circumstances – the exchange of population between Turkey and Greece in 1923, according to which the Greeks inhabited in Turkey were exiled to Greece, and the Muslim Turks in there – to Turkey. During that exchange, according to different sources, for about 1.5 – 2.5 million Greeks moved to Greece and 350-500 thousand Turks moved from Greece to Turkey. By the way, the Turkish Defense Minister said, “Today if Greeks went on living in the Aegean Sea basin and Armenians - in many places in Turkey, would we be able to be the same nation state. I don’t know how to explain how important the exchange of Greeks was.”
In reality these words hide a whole ideology of the present day Turkish state, the roots of which are long enough to reach the Ottoman Empire. According to that ideology, Turks cannot peacefully coexist with Armenians, Greeks or other non-Muslims in the same state and, as they say, be a “nation state.” In perhaps inconsiderate words of the Defense Minister is also hidden the traditional approach of the Turkish ruling elite, that’s to say, Armenians, Greeks and other non-Muslims are to be annihilated, assimilated or exiled from the country. At the same time this honest confession about ethnic discriminations made us reconsider the issue of peaceful coexistence with Turks, because, as a matter of fact, the Turkish officials themselves directly or indirectly prove that these propagandas are either false or have no value for them.
The Defense Minister Vecdi Gonul has also emphasized the importance of the principles the Turkish Republic applied in its formation period – “nation building” and economy: “I used to work in the Chamber of Commerce in Izmir, and there wasn’t even one Muslim among the chamber founders, they all were Europeans. Before the Republic was established in Ankara there were four districts in Ankara, which belonged to Armenians, Greeks, Jews and Muslims. The fertile lands of Aegean Sea were in the hands of minority.” Criticizing the “sad” past the Turkish Defense Minister must be very happy with the present condition, as the picture today is quite different from the past. The Minister Gonul spoke positively about expulsion of non-Muslims from economy.
The ides of the Minister Gonul found a wide respond both in Turkey and above its boarders. For example, a well-known Turkish political scientist Professor Baskin Oran estimates the population exchange of 1923 as ethnic and religious cleansing and considers that this exchange and “1915 exile of Armenians destroyed Turkey’s multiformity.” According to the Professor, all these did a lot of harm to Turkey, at that, in different spheres. Oran has also considered that the expression of these ideas, especially in abroad, is wrong: “These words have been told in abroad. I first think what the foreigners must have said at this. It is right, the exchange of Greeks by the Turkish Republic was not bloody, like in case of the Ottoman Empire, however, how expedient it is to say it in the presence of foreigners. These words are culturally, economically and politically wrong.”
A number of Armenians from Constantinople wrote an open letter concerning to the Minister’s words to the Turkish Prime-Minister and were supported for about 20 intellectual-scientists. According to them, the Minister was proud and was boasting of ethnic discriminations practiced in their country, as a result of which millions of people had been exiled from places they were inhabited for thousands of years. The official Athens also responded to the Minister’s words: the Press Speaker of Greece’s Foreign Ministry Yorgus Kumuchakos estimated it in the following way. “One can notice dangerous and unacceptable logic in the Minister’s announcement.” In the Turkish “Zaman” newspaper Ihsan Daghin asks a truthful question – Is the Minister Gonul the member of the ruling Justice and Development Party or the Committee for Union and Progress of Young Turks? And he thinks that the confession of Enver Pasha’s our day successor may become an important trump card in the issue of the “Armenian exile,” certainly, not in favor of Turkey. Many people blame the Minister that he had made a serious mistake to say these words, which will be used by Turkey’s enemies, and first of all by the Armenian Diaspora. The Turkish “Solidarity for Human Rights and Persecutions” organization brought an action against the words of the Minister, saying that there were clearly expressed elements of ethnic discrimination in his words.
After the clamor resulted by the words of Gonul, the Defense Minister made a few unsuccessful efforts to proofread his words, saying that he didn’t mean our days, but the events which happened 80 years ago. However, isn’t the picture today the depiction of what had happened at the beginning of the century?
Just like it was fairly mentioned by the Turkish scientist Cengiz Aktar, “It was God who made Gonul speak” and these words have been defined to be confession. And really, it may be considered to be a confessing announcement about the state adopted policy, as, as a result of the Armenian Genocide, massacres of Greeks and Assyrians, the successor of the Ottoman Empire, the Turkish Republic, has inherited incomparably less number of communities of national-religion minorities, however, the state policy and attitude adopted to them has remained the same – the minorities are dangerous, enemy and strange.
One can state as a fact that from the very first day the Turkish republic was establish, national minorities has been subject to different persecutions and pressures, although their rights were theoretically protected by the Lausanne Treaty. A whole complex of pressures was exerted in the Turkish Republic to non-Muslims – exile, assimilation, religious, political, economic persecutions, and all these directed to form a homogenous, “national” Turkey. A number of components of the persecution policy adopted by Turkey, such as tax of Property1, military draft of 20 classes2, the events3 of September 6-7, 1955, actions of “compatriot, speak Turkish4” etc., were serving this objective.
1In the beginning of WWII (1942) the Turkish government headed by the Prime Minister Sukru Saracoglu submitted the so called law on “Property tax” for approval of the Great National Assembly, which was adopted on November 11, 1942 by unanimous voting of 350 deputies of the Parliament session. Even with the naked eye it is obvious that the law is directed against national-religious minorities. “Property tax” divides tax-payers into 4 groups – according to religious belonging a)Muslims, b)non-Muslims, c) apostates d) foreign subjects. As a matter of fact, by this was violated the regulation of the Constitution according to which all the citizens, including non-Muslims, were enjoying equal rights in Turkey, and it was more reminding the period of the Ottoman state, when non-Muslims paid taxes quite different from the ones of Muslims. Not including the apostates into the group of Muslims, the Turkish state once more demonstrated that it didn’t trust that group and didn’t perceive it as “true Muslims.” There are also facts that some Armenian, Greeks and Jews who adopted Islam paid taxes not like Muslims or apostates, but like non-Muslims.
In the law it was envisaged that Muslims and foreign subjects had to pay taxes at the rate of 12.5%, non-Muslims- 50%, apostates (i.e. the ones Islamized) – 25% of the whole property. As in Turkey of that period the biggest non-Muslim communities were Armenian, Greek and Jewish ones, it is quite natural, that the tax was mainly directed against them.
To determine the rate of the tax and its collection, was established a special commission. Special attention was devoted to all the commission members to be pure-blooded Turks. It is not to be given secondary importance to the issue that there were many former Ittihads. One of the illegal clauses of the law was the fact that the commission itself determined the extent of the tax, i.e. there were no clear criteria. However, illegal clauses were not limited by this: the other norm roughly violating human rights was that the tax-payer had no right to bear a complain against the extent of the tax, i.e. the tax rate willfully fixed by the commission was final. While determining the tax rates the commission did not take into consideration real incomes and means of a tax-prayer and he was taxed approximately, at will and mood.
In the process of collecting taxes there was another important detail, to which we would like to attract attention. The Turkish authorities also made a difference among non-Muslims and Armenians, who, in comparison with other non-Muslims, were taxed at the highest percents. So, for example, a Turkish tradesman was to pay 4.7%, Greek-156%, Jew – 232% and Armenian – 232% of his annual income, and, as a matter of fact, the Greek tradesman, in comparison with the Turk, paid 31, the Jew – 36 and the Armenian 47 times more. 15 days-long term was fixed for the tax to be paid, which was later on prolonged to 30 days. If, during this period the tax-payer could not pay the tax, his movables and immovables was alienated and sold by auction at low prices: but before that the tax-payers themselves tried to pay their belongings at low prices. Let’s also mention that in case there were short of money, the belongings of his relatives were also subject to confiscation and selling. And, if this money was not enough too, the taxpayers were condemned to penal servitude to work and pay their “debt” to the state. The main place for servitude was Ashkale province in Erzurum district famous for its cold climate, which was also called “Turkish Siberia”.
At the Turkish governmental session held on November 7, 1943 was adopted a regulation of labor liability under19288 including the following articles: according to I article, were classified tax-payers condemned to forced labor. First of all labor camps were to be sent those who hadn’t paid taxes at all, than the ones who paid partially and so on. It was envisage to pay the convict certain number of money making 250 kurushes a day, 60 kurushes of which were to be kept for nourishment, dwelling and other expenses and the other part was to be kept for paying debts for “Property Tax.” According to the 15th article, the tax-payer was to work till all his debts for “Property Tax” were paid. However, this article made an absurd situation for many tax –payers, and perhaps meant life-long penal servitude. Thus, for example, the tax-payers who had 400-500 liras and more debts had to work 1600 years to pay their debts with their salaries. In 1869 the tax-payers sent to camps were from Istanbul, 889 – from Izmir, 100 –from Baku. According to the official data 1400 non-Muslim tax-payers were sent only to Ashkale, 1229 of which were from Istanbul. 21 out of them (according to another data) died in Ashkale.
It was also important the issue to whom the belongings taken from nationalists and sold by auction passed on: as the facts have come to prove all these belongings were at very low prices bought by Turkish businessmen, organizations and banks. As a matter of fact, “Property tax” carried out its mission – to hand all the economy of the country over to Turks.
Only after material, moral, spiritual and physical devastation of national minorities, the Turkish authorities, also yielding to foreign pressure, canceled “property tax” as a manifestation of “good will.”
2Among other persecutions registered in different periods of the history of the Republic of Turkey little importance is devoted or is completely ignored the so called conscription of 20 classes draft in 1941 (according to some sources, from May 1-15) to non-Muslim inhabitants by Turkish authorities. At the height of WWII Turkish authorities hurriedly declared conscription: according to 20 classes the adult men representatives of national minorities from 18-60, Armenians, Greeks, Jews, were sent to “army.” Everybody was conscripted without any exceptions, even the ones who had just returned from military service. The peculiarity of the conscription was the fact that it was applied only to non-Muslims citizens. Another important nuance was that the conscription was not declared about beforehand: potential conscripts were gathered within several hours, without prior notification.
Turkish sources accentuate that the decision about conscription was thought over thoroughly: special efforts were made for no one to know about this decision but corresponding authorities. This conscription was notable as the male non-Muslims conscripts were not solders: they did not get military education, they were not given arms and military uniform. These unarmed “solders” did construction works. After the conscription they did not obey the Ministry of Defense, but the Ministry of Public Works in Turkey.
The non-Muslim conscripts were mainly inhabited in camps located in the country’s eastern regions, where because of extremely bad conditions were spread diseases becoming the reason of death and disablement of many people. In spite of the fact that there aren’t nay official figures left about the number of ones perished, according to eye witnesses and many sources, there were many of them.
In one of the sources is mentioned an extremely important fact: together with non-Muslims, Islamized Armenians were also taken to “service.” It has come to prove that the conscription of 20 classes had a clearly defined ethnic shade, and even forcedly Islamized Armenians were source of danger for Turkish authorities. This fact has also came to prove that the state structures, from the very beginning of Islamization, kept them under their rapt attention and controlled everything happening in their surrounding. After all there were not considered to be Muslims in reality.
While speaking about the reasons and aims of the conscription of 20 classes, it is to be mentioned that a little number of sources and the stories of witnesses confirm that this, along with other derivative goals, was directed at ethnic cleansing. An important reason of conscription is considered that in those years, getting ready to the possible war, the Turkish authorities in advance gathered and neutralized national minorities called “The 5th Column.” Different sources mention that by this conscription the state also had an objective of removing non-Muslims from the sphere of trade, where they had serious positions.
3On September 6-7 of 1955 Greek and Armenian inhabitants of Istanbul and Izmir became subject to hooligan assaults prepared on the state level beforehand. The cause of it became news spread by the state about firing the house of Ataturk who was in Salonika. After that furious mobs assaulted Greek and Armenian blocks, robed and fired houses, shops, and churches; tortured, raped and killed people. But to this Turkish authorities reacted only a day later, when the work was done. The facts unfolded later on in course of court investigation proved that the assault was organized by the state, under direct participation of high ranking state officials.
4In different periods of the history of the Turkish Republic (for example ,in 1930, to 1960) were carried out so called actions “Compatriot speak Turkish,” the main targets of which were again national minorities. Groups of young people were mainly walking through blocks mainly inhabited by national minorities and claiming them to speak only Turkish: In case of disobedience the consequences were unpredictable. In reality, it was the continuation of the centuries-long policy of language assimilation.
Return
Another materials of author
- ABOUT THE EDUCATIONAL PROBLEMS OF TURKEY’S ARMENIANCY[12.07.2012]
- ON MANIFESTATIONS OF SELF-ORGANIZATION OF THE ARMENIANS IN TURKEY[29.05.2012]
- THE ISSUE OF THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE AND MODERN TENDENCIES OF TURKEY’S POLICY[14.05.2012]
- THE STUDY OF THE ISSUE OF ISLAMIZED ARMENIANS IN TURKEY: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS[12.04.2012]
- THE ISSUE OF THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE IN THE TURKISH PARLIAMENT [08.12.2011]
- ON SOME TENDENCIES OF CONTEMPORARY TURKISH HISTORIOGRAPHY[17.11.2011]
- “THE BEST TREATISE OF THE YEAR” ANNUAL CONTEST[12.10.2011]
- ON MODERN TENDENCIES IN TURKISH ETHNIC POLICY[06.10.2011]
- DEVELOPMENTS AMONG THE ASSIMILATED ARMENIANS IN TURKEY: DYARBAKIR[28.07.2011]
- THE MODERN ISSUES OF THE CIRCASSIANS IN TURKEY [07.07.2011]
- ON THE MODERN TENDENCIES IN THE “ARMENIAN POLICY” OF TURKEY [20.06.2011]