www.talkcyprus.org

[stavrizatz]

De_La_Soul wrote:
Quote: I read you used this phrase on Kifeas one...'Like the pot calling the kettle black'. Its obvious Turkey has far more human rights abuses then France under its belt, so why would you not discuss Turkey's inhumane laws in such detail than this one by France?
Erolz:
Quote: You want to discuss Turkey’s abuses then start a thread for it.

So here it is.

TURKEY: THE ‘GOOD’ FACE

A strong supporter of the war against terror

A friend and ally of Greece

An important factor for the balance in the Balkans

The promoter of human rights

The protective country of minorities

A country that wants to join the EU

TURKEY: THE REAL FACE

The genocides of the Armenians and Pontiacs

The catastrophe of Smirni (Izmir); the barbaric displacement and slaughter of the people of Izmir has been recorded as one of the most brutal crimes of humanity

Denial of the human rights of 72 minorities who live in Turkey

White cells; the criminals and political prisoners are put in isolation and abused to death.

Threatening claims in the Aegean and Thrace

The illegal invasion of Cyprus, occupying 37% of the island

Responsible for the displacement of approximately 150,000 Greek Cypriots

Approximately 1500 people are still missing since the 1974 invasion. Turkey refuses to provide information about their fate.

The creation of Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus in the occupied areas of Cyprus

The brutal murder of Tasos Isaak and Solomos Solomou at an unarmed and peaceful protest.


source: PEOF Thessalonikis
ps.Also it might be good if someone writes about Republic of Cyprus and Greece abuses.

[Mete]

Quote:
The catastrophe of Smirni (Izmir); the barbaric displacement and slaughter of the people of Izmir has been recorded as one of the most brutal crimes of humanity

You're being dishonest by taking historical events so brutally out of context. If someone doesn't know anything about Greek invasion of Western Turkey, he/she would think that Turkey slaughtered and displaced the people of Izmir just for the fun of it. But we know there's a long history before Turks liberated Izmir from Greek imperialism which includes a huge number of lost Turkish lives.

[stavrizatz]

I am aware of the invasion of Greece in Western Turkey after WW1 and not very proud about it. However it not an excuse for what happened in Smirni.

[Birkibrisli]

Dear Stavros...If you look hard enough in any nation's history you will find all sorts of skeletons in the cupboard,especially if you approach it with blind prejudice...
I am not trying to defend Turkey's record on human rights,just wondering if a discussion like this will get us anywhere nearer to understanding the Cyprus problem.History is written by historians and others who have a vested interest in painting things one way or another.And it is very difficult to sort out the truth from the propaganda,by simply reading books or listening to only one side of any story.My opinion is that we should concentrate our energies to fostering trust and understanding between our people,not antagonising each other with endless accusations of wrongs done now or in the past.If you have decided that Turkey is a bloodthirsty nation hell bent on abusing as many people's human rights as possible,there is nothing much we can say to change your mind.
But if you can bring yourself to considering that the Turkish nation is an insular, insecure,paranoid,confused nation with an inferiority complex that exhibits itself as arrogance and aggressiveness;a nation desperately seeking the love,approval, and acceptance of the world it is deeply suspicious of;and a nation with heavy historical baggage it doesn't know how to shake;you will be closer to the truth.Turkey needs all our understanding,sympathy,and friendly encouragement to take her place in the democratic and liberal world. Harsh judgement and criticism would be counterproductive...

[Dream_Merchant]

Allright, yet another -bash Turkey- thread.

let me get my gloves, seems like we found a punchbag...


*plays Eye of the Tiger in the background


or how about we stop playing nice and I grab the mallet

[turkkan]

Our foreign desk chief here at Referans, Melis Şenerdem, captured the essential question the other day in the run-up to yesterday's unfortunate vote in French parliament, “When are we going to take Turkey's story back from the orientalists?” she asked. It is a question that goes far deeper than today's news of bad political stagecraft in Paris.

Such matters are not something I am ordinarily inclined to approach. I am not a historian. I am no expert on international politics. I enjoy no mastery of Ottoman history, or for that matter of the history of Franco-Turkish relations. How should Turkey react? I'll leave that question to others. But as a foreigner who has lived in Turkey for many years, and as a foreign newspaperman editing a newspaper in Turkish, I do have a perspective that was provoked by Melis' question.

When I travel abroad, or when foreign journalists show up wanting to chat, the questions are often revealingly odd. You can imagine: How did you learn to speak Arabic? How do you tell Turks and Kurds apart (this latter just two weeks ago from a French journalist). When it comes to matters of religion, trust me. You prefer not to know what the questions are like.



Colors lost to a tableau of black and white:

What it is difficult for foreigners to understand -- or what is difficult for me to explain -- is at the essence of my colleague's question. For the effort is always to understand Turkey in clear and black and white terms while this is a society of great ambiguities hued in gray. For the western press, Turkey's “story” is almost always framed around just five or perhaps six limited narratives. There is genocide, the Kurds, honor killings, Cyprus, Article 301 and, these days, rising anti-Americanism. Occasionally this basket of perennials will be refreshed with “the colorful Grand Bazaar” or something derivative. And that's about it. These are all legitimate, indeed critical issues. Yet they leave us with a portrait of Turkey that remains far smaller than the actual frame.

When it comes to the matter of news and the resulting matter of “image,” the public relations industry will divide the palette into “negative” or “positive” news. Most conversations about Turkey's international image ultimately revert to this form. To my mind, this is nothing more than an invitation to a war of propaganda. In place of a search for the “positive” my preference is for a search for completeness. This is what the dialogue lacks.

In my conversation with the team at Referans, my colleague struck on the term “orientalism.” This is of course the concept coined by the late intellectual and writer Edward Said. Said's consistent point in his work and writing, was that the East, at least as it is perceived and understood by the West, is in fact a creation of the West. Hence steps toward dialogue can only reach a dead end. Tone is hostage to the imperatives of black and white.



‘My name is Suleiman':

To the point of allegations of genocide, I am again without expertise. But in 1991 or 1992, when I was a reporter in Washington, a notice arrived at the bureau inviting me to a press event commemorating the events of 1915 at a downtown park -- Dupont Circle for those familiar with the city. The event was to follow a ceremony presenting medallions to five aging survivors of the alleged genocide and arrangements were such as to allow reporters to hear first-hand the account of eye witnesses. The configuration was akin to waiting in line for a bank teller. Reporters queued and then were escorted to the first available survivor at a folding table. When my turn came, I sat down with the first witness, a woman. She began by recounting Turkish brutality and told me how the “river ran red with the blood of Armenians.” She then allowed a few words in Turkish and proceeded to translate. To which I responded, “My dear aunt, if you like we can speak in Turkish.” Her story changed with the language and tears filled her eyes. “Oh you are a Turk,” she said. “We love the Turks. The Turks saved us.” As our conversation switched to Turkish, another witness at a nearby table cut off his interview to run to our table. He grabbed me and kissed me on both cheeks, declaring incongruously, “My son, my son, my name is Suleiman, I am circumcised.”

I failed to persuade them that I was, in fact, not a Turk. I'll save their stories and the events that ensued from this unscripted exchange for another column. What is important is the complexity, the tone, the nuance. For these two elderly witnesses to what happened in 1915 in fact bore two separate identities and carried two separate “stories” each told with sincerity. The media, and particularly the agenda-setting Western media, approach matters of ethnicity and identity as fixed, objective and concrete concepts. In fact, these are concepts that are fluid, subjective and often highly abstract. This is difficult to explain to my Western colleagues.



One newspaper, many languages:

From time to time, foreign journalists look me up in the routine search for sources and background. The drill is now routine. We go down to the cafeteria in the Hürriyet building and exchange pleasantries over lunch. After a half hour or so, they edge ever so gently to broach the “Kurdish question.” My response is always the same: “Don't listen to me, let's go back upstairs and you can talk to my Kurdish colleagues.” They seldom believe this even possible. At which point I like to note that if you poll the “native languages” spoken among our small newsroom staff, you will find speakers of Kurdish, Arabic, Armenian, Bulgarian and Russian. As the original version of this column was being edited, the editor putting my column on the page pointed out an omission in my count. He had grown up speaking Circassian. In Turkish this legacy of empire is simply assumed, it is unremarkable. But for the Western media, this is a reality entirely outside the paradigm of understanding.

Just this week I met an Austrian journalist for breakfast in Bebek. The conversation turned to the matter of “honor killings.” This is a story of extreme importance, in fact a matter of crisis proportions when we examine the rights of Turkish women. But there is also the reality that Europe's highest rates of female participation in the judiciary, in medicine, in engineering, in architecture and even among corporate boards of directors are not to be found in Sweden. Turkish women top this European list. Another shocking tone of gray amid the black and white.

True, surveys reflect rising “anti-Americanism” in Turkey. True, the movie “Valley of the Wolves” broke box office records. But let me share an anecdote as an American. Last year, I was invited to speak at the Sütçü İmam University in the eastern city of Kahramanmaraş. As I began to speak, a young woman leapt to her feet to declare, “I am anti-Bush, I am anti-American.” Her protest prompted the 300-plus students filling the auditorium to burst into applause. I was taken aback, to be sure. But the students let me finish, and we did not agree on everything. And then the students invited me to tea in the canteen. Later, the girl who staged the angry protest sent me an e-mail that included a lengthy critique of American foreign policy. This is how she concluded: “I want to thank you for letting me share what I feel inside and for your politeness at our conference. With my respects -- Melek, Department of History, Faculty of Science and Literature, K. Maraş Sütçü Imam Ünv.” Where else might one find this kind of “anti-Americanism?”

As I said at the outset, Turkey is a country of many dichotomies, of many levels, of great complexity. Melis is correct. Turkey has no simple “story.” And yesterday, we witnessed the result in France of this shallow and incomplete narrative that for so many defines a country. I am left without an answer to the question of my young colleagues as the newspaper Referans: “When are we going to take Turkey's story back from the orientalists?”

[cypezokyli]

very interesting post turkkan

[Khan]

Yes, thank you turkkan, very interesting to read.

[zan]

Turkan, thank you very much for that piece. You know, when we argue on this forum we tend to forget that Turkey is just the name of a country and not the people in it. Apart from the tradgedy of those two elderly people at war with their selves more than anything else the reaction of Melek touched my heart. It touched my heart because I have seen many forgiving and well mannered Turkish womwen and men just like her and it gives me hope that all is not lost.

Quote: “I want to thank you for letting me share what I feel inside and for your politeness at our conference. With my respects -- Melek, Department of History, Faculty of Science and Literature, K. Maraş Sütçü Imam Ünv.” Where else might one find this kind of “anti-Americanism?”

[Birkibrisli]

turkkan wrote: I failed to persuade them that I was, in fact, not a Turk. I'll save their stories and the events that ensued from this unscripted exchange for another column. What is important is the complexity, the tone, the nuance. For these two elderly witnesses to what happened in 1915 in fact bore two separate identities and carried two separate “stories” each told with sincerity. The media, and particularly the agenda-setting Western media, approach matters of ethnicity and identity as fixed, objective and concrete concepts. In fact, these are concepts that are fluid, subjective and often highly abstract. This is difficult to explain to my Western colleagues.



But turkkan you can't leave us high and dry like this.How can these people have two separate identities,two separate stories each told with sincerity?Are you saying that there are bits of truth in each of the stories?

You mentioned a column above.I take this post was copied from another publication.Can you tell us a bit more about the origins of this column?
And what is this Referans you are talking about? Sounds a very interesting place to work...Cheers.

[repulsewarrior]

Thank-you turkkan

[De_La_Soul]

- Second country after America to recognise the Israeli state.

- Dealt arms to the pro-apparthaid South African government while the rest of the world refused to trade with them.

[turkkan]

Quote: Dealt arms to the pro-apparthaid South African government while the rest of the world refused to trade with them.

The world must be so simlpe to you. Are you actually going to claim now the west did not trade with south africa? Or companies who traded with south africa were banned from the west?


Second, dont you have good relations, i mean the Republic of Cyprus, with countries such as Libya and Syria? Amazing human rights records those countries i applaud you for youre integrity.

[cypezokyli]

Quote: “When are we going to take Turkey's story back from the orientalists?”

hi turkan,
i was rethinking today about this question since i was visiting the fuculty of orientalistik in my university.

this "belonging" or not belonging somewhere is (and has always been) kind of difficult, especially for the people or countries "on the edge". just like people of the borders of any new state were most of the times not considered "pure" , the same works with the new created definitions of "europe" and "the orient". stupid definitions if you ask me, with turkey suddenly finding itself sitting exactly in the middle.

i am not arguing that turkey doesnot belong to europe, but i am thinking how turks would feel if when talking about orientalism we exclude them.

(it kind of reminds me of a greek writer who once wrote: when greeks talk about europe they implicitly exclude themselves from it, but they found it outrageous if any european speaks about europe without including greece to it" )

imo taking turkey out of the orientalists, might serve one objective i.e. changing the stereotype europians have for turkey...and makeing it appear closer.... but at the same time, taking it out of the orientalism, its like taking half of its beauty away. its beauty stems exactly from what you pointed out : its diversity, and simply mooving it from one (created) group to the other (also created group) is still something that is not really bringing us close into understanding turkey (assumng that this is the objective) .

bc imo, what you wrote is kind of contradicts itself. after trying so hard to prove that it is not black and white, the proposal of taking turkey out away from the orientalism, is doing precisely that : trying to remove turkey from the white , to the black.
dont you think ?

[turkkan]

For the sake of clairification the above article was written by a french journalist based in turkey, and has nothing to do with me.