Originally posted by Joseph
View Post
DOGU ERGIL
Racism or transformation
I did not know what racism was until I went to the United States for graduate studies. One of the first classes I had to attend was “Relations and Politics of Race.”
This was a novelty to me, and I came to realize that there were racial problems in another world. My second experience came to me as a distasteful soul searching. For a while I was spending time with a female African American student. When we strolled through the streets of downtown Philadelphia in the early 1970s or sat down in coffeehouses, people shot us disapproving glances and the like. All of this irritated me to the point of refraining from going out with her though it caused me pain to succumb to such pressure. I had met with no such collective sentiment in my own country and thus decided that we Turks were free of racism.
The first incident that shook my firm belief was a statement by a fellow graduate student in the Ph.D. program at New York State University-Binghamton a few years later. The director of the sociology department had invited new doctoral candidates to his home for a welcome party so we could meet each other and our instructors. I introduced myself as a Turk. To me this meant being a citizen of Turkey and was also an ethnic identity. I had no idea that these two could be two separate entities until another student introduced himself as an Armenian from ?stanbul, Turkey. I was dumbstruck. Not that I did not know we had citizens of Armenian, Greek and other origins, but the way an individual identity was expressed by distinguishing between ethnic (or cultural) and official/legal components had amazed me. The reality that someone could be an Armenian or anything other but an ethnic Turk and a citizen of Turkey came to me as a surprise. From then on I began to question every official definition, trying to differentiate between individual and collective identities and definitions. The world was simple and comfortable no longer. However, this way I could better understand why non-ethnic Turks felt as though they were under pressure and subjected to unfair treatment being forced legally to be a “Turk” despite being quite ready to be loyal citizens of the Republic of Turkey.
The authoritarian, exclusive and unequal official definition of citizenship has once again surfaced with the racist statements of the director of the Turkish Historical Society (TTK) Professor Yusuf Halaço?lu. The “Armenian question” is one of official Turkey’s main concerns. First of all there is a definitional problem. For Armenians and many foreigners it means genocidal treatment of Armenian citizens by the Ottoman government in 1915. For Turks who have adopted the official line, it is matter of Armenian betrayal to the government and country struggling with Russian occupation and ensuing deportation.
The Turkish side has all along defended the line that the incidents had neither the intention nor the quality of genocide, which implies a deliberate and official policy of wiping out a racial, ethnic or religious group completely. This rationale has also been adopted by the republican governments though Armenians and others argue that a deliberate crime was planned and executed to get rid of the Armenians on Ottoman soil.
Now there is a fresh entry to the official record that surprised many of us. Professor Halaço?lu claimed that “unfortunately, those Armenians who feared for their lives converted to Islam and took on Alevi Kurdish or Sunni Muslim Turkish identities.” He also asserted that there are no Alevi Kurds and those who say so are originally of Turkish ethnic origin. The most frightening of his statements was that since 1936, the state has conducted an in-depth survey of Armenians who converted to Islam and the list is in his (the state’s) possession.
This is an utterly racist outburst, but not one paid attention to the timing of it. Halaço?lu revealed these official racist practices of tracking down former Armenians right before the Jewish Anti-Defamation League declared its acknowledgement of the Armenian genocide during the Ottoman era. This means the certain adoption of a similar resolution in the US Congress that has been delayed for some time. What the Turkish state reflex means is that Armenians did not disappear in whole, they just changed shape. Overnight they transformed into Turks and Muslims. Which is more respectful for a state -- to get rid of a people for the wrongdoings of some, or to make them invisible by forcing them into conversion and proselytizing?
12.09.2007
Comment