• am
  • ru
  • en
print version
06.10.2011

ON MODERN TENDENCIES IN TURKISH ETHNIC POLICY

   

Ruben Melkonyan

In both the Ottoman Empire and Turkish Republic ethnic orientation in domestic policy took an important place. At the same time it should be mentioned that the Turkish ethnic policy has acquired more acute and aggressive character due to the fact that the main goal of the state policy and objective reality seriously contradict each other. Thus, in such multi-ethnic states as the Ottoman Empire and Turkey they contemplated to create homogeneous society and in order to gain their aim they were exterminating and assimilating some nations.

From the very beginning ethnic policy of the Turkish Republic assumed aggressive shape and the most vivid example is the once accomplice perpetrators of the Armenian Genocide – Kurds. Thus, it is known in the Turkish Republic they had not recognized the existence of the Kurdish nation and Kurdish language for many decades. Later on, alongside the sharpening of the Kurdish issue state policy has also undergone some changes.

The Justice and Development Party, which came to power in 2002, carried out the policy of splitting and debilitation. The Turkish authorities managed to drive a wedge between different Kurdish regions. In particular, Kurdish militants in Turkey are divided into two camps – pro-government (“korucu”) and oppositional (represented by the Kurdish Worker’s Party). It should also be mentioned that here Turkish propaganda machinery tries to use anti-Armenian moods present in the society and from time to time different Turkish figures make statements that supposedly the Kurdish Worker’s Party is the Armenian organization.

Besides, there are pro-government and oppositional Kurdish figures in the political field in Turkey who have conflicting approaches on various issues. Including of the Kurds in the state management system by the ruling party as well as granting some privileges to them in the economic sphere drew many Kurds to the pro-governmental camp. Let us also mention that about 30% of the deputies of the ruling party in the parliament are also ethnic Kurds and in eastern provinces there are Kurds among the heads of the regional branches of the Justice and Development Party.

Over the recent period new rather interesting but at the same time dangerous tendencies can be observed in the ethnic policy carried out in the eastern regions of the country, which are mainly inhabited by the Kurds.

Thus, one of the main arguments of the Kurdish claims is considered to be the fact that they constitute absolute majority in some eastern regions of Turkey and, in fact, those regions are homogenous, i.e. Kurdish. Of course such a situation was formed as a result of the genocide policy implemented by the Ottoman authorities when the native population of those lands – Armenians, was exterminated. But currently Turkish authorities try to dispute the homogeneousness of those territories, and with this purpose, they tend to use the factor of the forcedly Islamized Armenians.

For some time the official Turkish historians keep saying that there are many converted Armenians in the eastern regions of Turkey. Of course, definite Turkish state institutions have been aware of that for a while and they did their best to control and finalize the assimilation of those splinters of the Armeniancy. As they have not fully succeeded in this issue, now Turkish authorities try to turn it to advantage.

Stirring up the issue of the splinters of the Armenians living on the territory of historical Armenia, Turkish authorities try to use it to prove that those regions are not “homogeneously Kurdish” and that there are also other ethnic groups. We believe that the attempts of restoration of the Armenian churches can also be considered in this context. All this can cause tension between the Kurds and converted Armenians and have unexpected consequences as the Kurds may start treating those Armenians as competitors.

However, currently it should be mentioned that slight attempts of revival of the Armenian presence are considered positively and sometimes are even countenanced in the Kurdish environment either; anyway threat should also be taken into consideration.

Pursuing the analysis of the modern tendencies of the ethnic policy it should be mentioned that the Turkish authorities try to restrict and balance the Armenian presence in Istanbul and other places by the Assyrian factor. The Turkish authorities aspire to make amendments in the relations between the Armenians and Assyrians which are the second biggest Christian community in the country. In particular, as a result of a tacit competition between the Armenians and Assyrians in some arts and crafts the Armenians are gradually driven out from jeweller’s art in Istanbul and their places are taken by the Assyrians. The latest vivid example of the attitude of the Turkish state can is the fact that one deputy was elected to the parliament from the Assyrian community which number is 7000, meanwhile the Armenian community, which numbers 60 thousand people, in fact either did not manage or was not allowed to do that.

Summarizing we can mention that the all those facts allow us affirming that today one of the main tendencies in the Turkish ethnic policy is maintaining balance by opposing the interests of different ethnic groups. Recently president Abdullah Gul has also made a statement on the ethnic policy carried out by Turkey: “Ethnic, cultural and religious differences may cause split and tension in the society but the state should be able to control the situation”.

Thus, we may say that the ethnic policy still takes an important place in the domestic policy of Turkey and tendencies observed at first sight may seem to be positive but at the same time the traps and threats should not be excluded either.


Return
Another materials of author