Washington Post
Driven Life" and others in a dynamic conversation about faith and its
impact on the world.
Turkish PM promises reform to religious minorities
By Ayla Jean Yackley
Reuters
Saturday, August 15, 2009; 3:13 PM
ISTANBUL (Reuters) - Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan promised democratic
reforms on Saturday in a rare meeting with Turkey's religious minority
leaders highlighting the issue of minority rights, a key stumbling
block in its EU membership bid.
Greek Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and leaders of the
small Armenian, Jewish, Syriac Orthodox and Syriac Catholic
communities had lunch with Erdogan and senior ministers on Buyukada
island near Istanbul, a patriarchate official told Reuters on
condition his name not be used.
The lunch meeting coincided with government reform moves to address
decades-old tensions with the country's 12 million Kurds. Erdogan, a
devout Muslim whose government is viewed with suspicion by some for
its Islamist roots, alluded in his speech to a broader reform process.
"It is now for us essential to embrace all 71.5 million of this
nation's people in respect and love," he said, repeating his
opposition to ethnic nationalism and saying his government kept an
equal distance to all faiths.
"Are there shortcomings in implementation? There are. We will overcome
these together in this struggle. I believe this democratic initiative
will change many things in this country," he said in comments reported
by broadcaster CNN Turk and confirmed by patriarchate official.
"VERY FRIENDLY MEETING"
Erdogan and Bartholomew, the Istanbul-based spiritual leader of the
world's 250 million Orthodox, later toured the Aya Yorgi Church, where
they had a private conversation in which the patriarch voiced his
community's concerns, the official said. The two men last met in 2006.
Erdogan and Bartholomew also visited a former orphanage on Buyukada
that the Turkish state seized from a Greek Orthodox foundation a
decade ago. The European Court of Human Rights ruled last year Turkey
had wrongly confiscated the property, but the government has yet to
implement that ruling.
Bartholomew also raised the issue of the closed Orthodox seminary on
the nearby island of Heybeli, or Halki in Greek, but Erdogan made no
statement on the issue, the official said.
"We believe the prime minister is looking for a way to open the
school. There is movement on this," the official said. "It was a very
positive, very friendly meeting."
Turkey signaled last month the seminary may open after pressure from
the EU and U.S. President Barack Obama, who has called for its
restoration during a visit to Turkey in April.
The EU has made re-opening the Halki seminary a litmus test of the
government's commitment to religious freedom for non-Muslims in
largely Muslim but officially secular Turkey.
Turkey closed the Halki seminary in 1971 during a period of tension
with Greece over Cyprus and a crackdown on religious education that
also included Islamist schools.
About 2,500 ethnic Greeks remain in Turkey, as well as approximately
60,000 Armenians, 20,000 Jews and 10,000 Syriacs.
The meeting with the minority leaders was organized by Turkey's chief
EU negotiator Egemen Bagis, who was in attendance with the other
ministers.
(Writing by Daren Butler; editing by Ralph Boulton)
Turks interrupt Christian worship at Monastery
Aug 18, 2009
by Pontosworld.com
Once again, Pontic Greek pilgrims from many parts of the world
congregated at one of the holiest places of worship, the Monastery of
Panagia Soumela in Turkey. It was apparent from the outset however
that the pilgrims weren't welcome this year. Priests were ordered to
remove their crosses and holy garments at the airport upon entering
the country, boatloads of pilgrims from Georgia were prevented from
disembarking at ports, and the passage of another eight busloads of
pilgrims from Greece were hampered in their approach to the monastery
by Turkish authorities.
The 15th of August is the holiest day of the Pontic Greek calendar. It
is the one day of the year that descendants of Pontic Greeks who lived
for centuries in Turkey, can revisit the Holy monastery and pay their
respects at the monument in a peaceful manner.
For some reason this year, Greek authorities were pre-warned by
Turkish authorities that certain public performances would not be
allowed. The Greek response in particular by Mr Ivan Savvidis on
behalf of the Council of Greeks Abroad, was that the forced removal of
religious emblems and dress, as well as the banning of peaceful
worship at the Christian monastery was `a violation of the individual
rights of a person'.
The religious service did take place in the presence of a crowd of
followers, but was interrupted by the director of the Museum Nilgün
Yılmazer, as well as officials who poured water over candles and
removed them in an attempt to end the service. Considering the yearly
service has been taking place at the monastery for a number of years
previous to this, the interruption was bizarre in that it created
precedent with regards to such peaceful gatherings taking place in
Turkey in the future.
The treatment of religious minorities in Turkey is one of the main
stumbling blocks for Turkey's bid for EU membership. By coincidence or
not, on the very same day which these bizarre events at the Monastery
took place (15/8/2009), Prime Minister of Turkey Recep Tayyip
ErdoÄ=9Fan met with Turkey's religious minority leaders including
Greek-Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew in an effort to pass reforms on
the issue of minority rights. One can only hope that reforms are
passed and actually followed, so that events such as these are not
repeated.
The Soumela Monastery was founded in 386 A.D by two Athenian monks and
lies on a steep cliff face on mount Mela in the Trabzon province of
north-eastern Turkey. The monastery has been a place of worship for
Pontic Greeks for thousands of years and is the home of the miraculous
icon of Panagia Soumela. The monastery is made up of a church, several
chapels, and at one stage housed 72 cells, guest quarters, an
aqueduct, icon room, library and dormitories. As with other Christian
places of worship in Turkey, the monastery is now a museum and
attracts a huge number of tourists which provides a lot of income to
the operators. The monastery was abandoned in 1923 following the
forced expulsion of Pontic Greeks in accordance with the Exchange of
Populations between Greece and Turkey. Restoration work has been
carried out on the historic Pontic monastery under the responsibility
of the Turkish Ministry for Culture. Reports indicate that the works
have been to excessive lengths, with many cracks appearing thereby
disfiguring the monument and detracting from its religious character.
HOLY CROSS CHURCH AS ALTERNATIVE TO OPEN TURKISH-ARMENIAN
BORDER
News.am
19:56 / 08/17/2009
Silence is still reigning in Armenian-Turkish relations. The cause of
this silence was a joint statement made by the Armenian and Turkish
Foreign Ministers and adoption of a road map on the night of April
22. Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu breaks this silence
now and again by saying the same words: Turkey wants to improve
its relations with Armenia, and peace must be established in the
region. Time shows they are mere words, and Turkey does not take any
practical steps. Moreover, Mr. Davutoglu is obviously hinting that
the establishment of Armenian-Turkish relations is conditional on the
settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which, however, is not
stipulated by the agreement on the improvement of Armenian-Turkish
relations.
October is drawing near. That month, in Bursa, Turkey, the
Armenian national football team is to play a return match with the
Turkish team as part of the qualifying round of the world football
championship. Turkish President Abdullah Gul, who visited Yerevan at
the invitation of his Armenian counterpart Serzh Sargsyan to watch a
match between the two teams, invited the Armenian leader to Turkey
to watch the return match. However, Ankara, feeling Serzh Sargsyan
may not visit Turkey as a result of a frozen process of establishing
bilateral relations, has started drawing everybody's attention to
this fact. The matter particularly concerns the Holy Cross Church on
Akhtamar Island, Lake Van. The church has no cross on and works as a
museum. The Turkish authorities seem to have "stored" this alternative
to make use of it as a playing card.
Everybody was surprised at a statement made by Turkish State Minister
Egemen Baðýþ, who visited the Holy Cross Church. He proposed erecting
a cross on the church and resuming religious services there before the
football match and the Armenian President's visit to Turkey. After
returning from Akhtamar Island, Minister Baðýþ stated. "In Athens
I saw a mosque that was closed. I was upset very much, and I feel
upset now that I have seen the Akhtamar church in this state. What
a pity! What situation is it? To close an Armenian temple, ban
the Kurdish language - the Greeks are bad as well. We have lived
in a horror film for years. Communism is coming - close the border
with the Soviets. Fundamentalism is coming - close the border with
Iran. Terrorism - lay mines on the Syrian border. Armenians' demands
- close the border with Armenia. Well, where are we going? This is a
way of isolating a nation from the entire world. In the very center
of Lake Van I saw how the nation is savagely!
destroying its history and heritage. I think I saw a Loch Van monster,
which has been searched for many years. Yes, we are this imaginary
monster as we have for many years been destroying our freedom, faith,
wealth, history - savagely destroying."
The purpose of that speech is clear: distracting the international
community's attention from the frozen process of Armenian-Turkish
rapprochement. However, the situation was properly assessed in Armenia,
and an adequate response was given. At a press conference held jointly
with the Serbian President, who was on an official visit to Armenia,
Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan stated he would visit Turkey provided
that the Armenian-Turkish border was unblocked or relevant measures
were under way.
Soon after that, the Turkish Minister of Culture and Tourism, who was
touring through the country's central regions, made a statement on
the valuable historical monuments in Turkey. He addressed the issue
of preserving the cultural heritage left by different civilizations
in the country. He stated: "There is no Muslim, Armenian, Greek
culture. They are all the wealth of Anatolia and our values. We must
take care of them, preserve them and show them to tourists. What was
left by the Seljuks, Ottomans and other civilizations that inhabited
this area belongs to us," the Minister said.
In mid August, Turkish State Minister Cevdet Yýlmaz visited the Holy
Cross Church. He pointed out that the church is of high importance
for Armenians and, after being renovated, it has become even more
beautiful and convenient for tourists' visits. Responding to a question
concerning the possibility of religious services in the church,
Minister Yilmaz said that the problem (??) has not been examined. He pointed
out the necessity for considering the conditions available and the
legal status. "Turkey is a secular state, and all the religions are
equally distant from the State. So we respect all the religions. In
this context, we have no problem," Yilmaz said.
As can be seen, Turkey is deliberately stirring up the interest in
Akhtamar Island and in the Holy Church Cross. Thus, the Turkish side
is trying to push the execution of its commitments assumed on April
22 to the background. It is great that the Turkish authorities have
admitted the fact that the Holy Cross Church must be crowned with a
cross and function as a church, but not a museum. But this all must not
be a subject of bargain and offered to Armenia as an alternative. By
doing so Turkey is shirking its commitments.
CONSTANTINOPLE AND NORSIN
Mumtazer Turkone
Sunday's Zaman
16.08.2009
There is a contradiction in a question posed by Devlet Bahceli to
the president, who referred to Guroymak as Norsin. "Will you also
change the signboard reading 'Istanbul' that you encounter on the
highway traveling from Gebze to Istanbul to 'Constantinople'?" asked
Bahceli. Here are my questions: What will happen if we change
it? What change will this make? The answer: Only our habits will
change. Why? It is because there is nothing in the name "Istanbul"
that belongs to Turks, Turkishness or the Turkish language other than
our habits. Istanbul as a name is as alien to the Turkish language
as Constantinople; it may even be more alien.
We may discuss all aspects of the Kurdish issue. We may tolerate
Bahceli's and Deniz Baykal's opposition stained with rage and
political interests. In the end, diverse views will clash freely with
each other, and everyone will be held responsible for the views they
advocate. Eventually, democracy will create a common ground. Therefore,
we can tolerate all sorts of ideas and discuss all the different
opinions with maturity. But can we do so with ignorance? Who can
say that s/he is entitled to inflict unhappiness on a great nation
because of his/her ignorance?
Etymologically, Istanbul is derived from the Greek word
Constantinople. It is written and pronounced in different
forms. Stampoli is the closest one to the original. Istanbul is
the Armenian pronunciation of the Greek word that means "civic,"
"of city" and "urban." Inspired by the Armenian word "Esdanbol,"
we started to call this beautiful city Istanbul.
Many of the settlements in Turkey do not have Turkish names. All the
city names ending with "-bolu," including Gelibolu, Safranbolu,
Tirebolu and even Istanbul, are derived from the Greek word
"polis" meaning "city." Because of the same reason, we call our
civilian security organization "polis" like many countries around
the world. Iskenderun is derived from Alexander and named after
Alexander the Great, the great commander and ruler. As one can
easily guess, Kayseri comes from "Kaiser" (Caesar), the title of
Roman emperors. Diyarbakir is an Arabic word, while some Kurds prefer
to call it Amed, a name also used by Armenians. In the eastern and
southeastern provinces, many settlements still have names derived
from Armenian. There is a simple reason for this. The Turkish language
has only existed in these lands for 1,000 years, but Anatolia is the
cradle of many ancient civilizations.
Changing the names that people have been using for centuries
overnight has nothing to do with the nationalism of the dominant
nation. Changing these names is purely an attack of vandalism on
culture and history. Such an attack may come only from a mind that
is primitive, uncivilized, parvenu, wild and ill, a mind that is full
of hatred. Ignorance is another characteristic of such a person. This
untamed ignorance even went further, changing the purely Turkish names
of places after the military coup of Sept. 12, 1980. For example, the
name of the village of Dodurga near Ankara was changed, but someone
said: "What the hell are you doing? Dodurga is the name of a Turkmen
clan." So the village regained its name.
Not only our language, but our civilization also has a great mixture
of diverse wisdom. The Ottoman Empire was established in this diverse
synthesis. This synthesis accommodated the Mogul customs, the Ottoman
timar system, Sassanid (Persian) bureaucracy, Islamic law and Turkish
traditions.
"Norsin" sounds familiar to me. As "Nor" is derived from "Nur"
(light), I can assert that it is associated with proper names such as
"Nursin." I do not have to run an etymological analysis in order to
understand what "Istanbul" means.
Law No. 2932, passed by the military junta as a last-minute piece of
legislation in 1983, deprived Kurds of their language. To call Kurds
our "sisters and brothers" while at the same time defending the names
changed at that time is nothing other than a big contradiction. This
is particularly so if those who did not object to this ban and the
name changes at that time -- including myself -- are expected to
engage in self-criticism.
Changing the name of Istanbul to Constantinople is perfectly acceptable
from a linguistic point of view, but we have the right to be given
a reasonable explanation for refusing to call Guroymak Norsin.
Today's Zaman
Does a Turkish-Armenian like Armenia?
by
ALÝN OZÝNÝAN*
16 August 2009, Sunday
There is no doubt that the identity-building process of
Turkish-Armenians is complicated, multidimensional and volatile; it is
also under the heavy influence of other dynamics.
The impact of the political change Turkey is going through on the
shaping of the internal dynamics of the Armenian community cannot be
ignored.
Bold, anxious, repressed or hypocritical, and most of the time
cautious and balanced, the attitudes of the different segments of
Turkish-Armenians provide important clues for understanding the
process.
During his speech at a workshop on relations between Turkey and
Armenia held by the Foundation for Political, Economic and Social
Research (SETA), sociologist Ferhat Kentel gave a few examples of
discrimination against Armenians in Turkey. At the meeting hall, an
Armenian woman (I did not have the opportunity to ask how she defined
herself, but most likely she would prefer Turk of Armenian origin as
her identity) strongly opposed Kentel's arguments, saying: `You don't
have the right to speak on behalf of us. We do not have any problem in
this country. You are saying we cannot become civil servants or
military officers, so what? We are happy with our current status.' I
think this excerpt does not suffice to summarize the above statement,
but it sure makes you think about how to define the process.
I felt the same way while reading the book, `Ermenistan'da bir
Türkiyeli.' (A Turk in Armenia) by Bercuhi Berberyan. Even though I
abandoned my intention of buying the book when I noticed its back
cover, featuring an attitude of obsession over a homeland and the
pursuit of help from others in the identification of a homeland, as
reflected in the sentence that reads, `A Turkish-Armenian who is not
considered a citizen in a place that she considers a homeland and does
not see the place considered her homeland as her home,' I finally
decided to read about the person from Turkey who got confused after
her short stay in Armenia. While reading the travel notes from a
10-day trip in this country, it was possible for me to notice the
strong and pathological state of mind of some of the members of the
Armenian community in Turkey.
What am I doing here when I had the opportunity to lead a life in
Europe?
Armenians in Turkey rely on religion and language to preserve their
identity. The uneasiness of the Armenians after the promotion of the
Turkish language and the strong emphasis on the use of Turkish symbols
in 1950s and '60s and the fear caused by the Armenian Secret Army for
the Liberation of Armenia (ASALA) attacks took a whole different form
after the 1990s. The Armenian community came to the conclusion that
they should be supportive of Turkey's EU bid and its democratization
in order to preserve their fundamental rights; with the spread of this
conviction, Armenians agreed to fight like authentic citizens instead
of acting like outsiders in this country. The nationalistic discourse
that gained momentum almost concurrently was accompanied by violent
actions, and this re-emerged in the chronic habit of calling
minorities foreigners. Surely, the people were enjoying a process in
which they were less scared when they call themselves Armenians. This
process was shaped by diverse internal and external dynamics.
The murder of Hrant Dink dramatically affected the process and caused
the past fears of repression and defeat to resurface, but the process is
still alive. Armenia's independence during this period of fluctuations and its
promising relations with Turkey have a special place in the lives of
Turkish-Armenians even though they are not aware of it. While they
become self-confident when the president of Turkey, where they live as
citizens, pays a visit to Armenia to see a soccer game, the same fact
makes others resistant and opposed to such moves.
The book I referred to above as the author who is unable to find her
homeland and the woman who argued at the meeting that she was pretty
happy living in Turkey are simple examples of this. While the concept
of `homeland,' a concept that we love and adore so dearly, refers to
the place where a person was born or lives, it has gained a political
dimension since 1860 in parallel to a French word, patrie. In other
words, there is no problem with calling a place where we are born,
live or ethnically belong to as homeland. That said, you may have
problems when it comes to citizens' rights. The book in which
Berberyan publicizes her memoirs starts with her testing herself. The
suspicion outlined in the sentence, `I could have headed to Europe
with such a great amount of money; why did I choose Armenia?'
emphasizes the core theme that Armenia is not a special place for her
and the author is not attached to this country. Berberyan does not
particularly like anything about Armenia, including the coffee and the olives.
She often misses Ýstanbul; she misses everything about Ýstanbul. She
argues that the spoken version of the Armenian language (eastern Armenian,
pretty different from the western form) is vague and rude. She counts the days
left until her return to Ýstanbul. In the meantime, she criticizes everything about
Armenia. Actually, this style is supposed to provoke an idea of a
proper Turkish citizen in the eyes of the readers; however, I feel
pity and sorrow for her because I simply observe an effort to stress
that she is a Turkish citizen who cannot have any ties with
Armenia. It is just like what the woman said in the meeting where the
sociologist wanted to talk about the problems of an ethnic minority in
Turkey.
Anything unlike them is just wrong
Why do some Armenians hold such ideas? Do not get me wrong; they do
not renounce their Armenian identity. They just choose not to send
their kids to their community schools because they simply think that
they should act pragmatically; the Armenian language will be of no
help or use in their lives, so private school is a better option. Some
of them are not willing to see that the Armenian language is fading
away, but they are concerned about the disappearance of Native
Americans; in other words, this is a sign of general sensitivity and
all about being a world citizen. The Armenian community's relations
with the diaspora are strained. Some of their unease is related to the
diaspora's accusation that they have converted to Turks, but actually,
this is an accurate accusation; everything about them says they have
become just like Turks. Not holding positive sentiments about the
country to which they should be attached because of their ethnic
orientation, not speaking its language and reiterating their loyalty on
every occasion to the country where
they are legally citizens actually says they are concerned about
expressing themselves accurately. Undoubtedly, everyone is free to
identify their homeland, the schools where they will study and pursue
their degrees, the languages they will speak and the newspapers they
will read; however, unfortunately, as a result of the assimilation
policy pursued by the Turkish state as well as improper modernization,
the Armenian community has come to the conclusion that everything that
is not like them is wrong and dangerous.
The twisted elitism that Berberyan is suffering from reinforces her
idea of a unique and single model of Armenian-ness. This different
Armenian just cannot stand another Armenian identity; she complains
that their language and customs have been eroded, and she presents
this as an absolute truth instead of the outcome of her subjective
approach.
True, many things in Armenia are different from what is in Turkey's
Ýstanbul. The eastern Armenian language is different from western
Armenian. The smiles of girls that Berberyan dislikes are different
from the smiles of girls in Ýstanbul, but this is not a problem at
all. Quite the contrary, the idea suggesting that everyone should be
the same is dangerous. Armenians in Armenia bury their dead fellows to
the sound of the duduk -- a regional flute-like instrument -- instead
of church ceremonies. But I am sure that they are as sorry as
Turkish-Armenians when they lose a relative. This growing intolerance
reminds me of opera lovers who hate hearing folk songs, the professors
who do not admit covered students into their classes, the woman who
refused to accept an Alevi girl as her daughter-in-law, the man who
dislikes Bulgarian migrants because he feels they are not Turkish
enough and the mindset that defines the ability of people from diverse
religions and ethnic origins to live together peacefully as `tolerance.'
This small society is excessively affected and influenced by the larger one.
*Alin Ozinian is the press representative of the Turkish-Armenian
Business Council.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
