Tweet
Hürriyet, Turkey
Jan 17 2009
Dink legacy flourishes two years after death
ISTANBUL - The murder of Turkish Armenian journalist Hrant Dink two
years ago, on Jan. 19, 2006, cut down a person who fought his whole
life to eliminate barriers between Turks and Armenians. After the
murder there emerged a need among the Turkish public to seek out and
learn more about Dink and his convictions.
Dink, executive editor of the Agos newspaper, published in Turkish
and Armenian, was killed in front of his paper's offices, angering
not only Turks but also groups within Armenian society.
The assassination was headline news not only in Turkey but also for
the international press and citizenry. At his funeral, thousands of
people screamed the slogan: "We are all Armenians; we are all Hrant
Dink," as one voice.
This slogan that represented a common conscience was sharply
criticized by some groups in Turkey, but despite this, the struggle
for consensus between the two nations that cost Dink his life, created
something extraordinary.
The Turkish public started to wonder about the Armenian people who
they had been living side by side with for hundreds of years, and also
to question the past. Football diplomacy in recent months began a
rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia that is without doubt one of
the most important results of the process.
From the literary perspective, the interest in the Armenian problem
and Armenians in Turkey has increased since the year 2000. According
to publishers with whom the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic
Review spoke, the number of the books published on the issue grew in
the period from 2000 to 2005.
The biggest boom in the number of published books happened in the year
2005, when the Armenian problem was often in the spotlight. In the
two year period following Dink's assassination, more than 60 books
have been published.
Ragıp Zarakolu, owner of Belge Publishing and founding member
of the Human Rights Foundation, who published books on the events of
1915 for the first time in Turkey in the beginning of 1990s, for which
Zarakolu was put on trial and attacked because of, said: "In 1993, we
published the first book in Turkey on the matter of the Armenian
Genocide: everybody considered us insane back then. Following this,
there has been a notable increase in the number of books related to
the Armenian problem and Armenian society in recent years." According
to Zarakol, the acceleration within academia, especially during the
coalition government of Ecevit and Bahçeli, to publish material
denying the Armenian problem played a role in this increase. Zarakol
said: "There was a great increase in the number of the books on that
basis. The books followed the official policy: the documents they were
based on were from official archives but their integrity was
controversial."
Perception of Dink assassination
Dink almost became a bridge of peace between the two societies to
re-establish dialogue after a period of 100 years by way of his unique
discourse and attitude. For that reason, the Dink assassination will
always be an important turning point in Turkish-Armenian dialogue,
according to some circles.
Ara Sarafian, a historian of Armenian origin and director of the
London-based Gomidas Institute, believes Dink received reaction for
his progressive discourse from Armenian extremists as much as from
Turkish ones. Sarafian said: "This circle alleged Hrant was an agent
of the Turkish Government. They were happy when Dink was silenced: it
is sufficient to check the newspapers published in the diaspora during
those times. That is because both sides (of extremists) did not want a
peaceful solution to the problem."
Just like Sarafian, Jean Claude Kebabdjian, founder of Centre de Reche
rches sur la Diaspora Armenienne (Center of Research on the Armenian
Diaspora), or CRDA, said he believed Dink was the key point for
understanding between the two societies. According to Kebabdjian, the
goal behind Dink's murder was to prevent the actualization of dialogue
between the two societies.
Kebabdjian said the protests that have been organized in Turkey, the
slogan and attempts made toward the solution of the problem by the
Turkish intelligentsia, are respected among French Armenians and
continued: "Their old reactions are slowly changing. That is why the
slogan 'We are all Armenians' was so significant."
However, Kebabdjian said French Armenians have said they believe it is
impossible for Turkey to become a democratic country and doubt the
possibility of establishing dialogue between the two societies.
Dilipak: 'Power has been obtained by the blood of this country's
children' According to Abdurrahman Dilipak, columnist at the
conservative Vakit newspaper and a human rights activist who sets the
agenda through his unique opinions, the aftermath of the assassination
happened to be the exact opposite of what the dark powers wanted:
"Instead of being a cause of a new hostility between the two
societies, Hrant's blood provided an opportunity to decipher the deep
state. That is how the intelligentsia of Armenia realized that Turkish
society is not their enemy."
Dilipak started to talk about Dink with a quotation from the Koran:
"Allah says: Your hostility against a clan should not drive you to
injustice. Whoever kills one person kills the whole of humanity."
Dilipak said he had first met Dink at a debate show on television and
continued: "At the beginning of the show, I was expecting a different
approach from Dink. I had thought the show would cause very heated
discussions but it did not happen that way."
'There is no Armenian taboo in Turkey'
Hasan Celal Güzel, conservative columnist for Radikal
newspaper, has made different statements on the Dink assassination and
the process that followed. Former state minister Güzel did not
agree with the idea of the Dink assassination being a breaking point
for Turkey and said the assassination happened because of the
provocation of gangs such as Ergenekon. Güzel said the Dink
assassination lost Turkey points in the international arena and
continued: "This murder was read in the international arena as if
Turks were intolerant and anti-Armenian."
Güzel said the Armenian problem has never been a taboo in
Turkey and Dink's ethnic background did not disturb anyone: "There is
no problem in Turkey with dialogue between Turkish and Armenian
societies. If it is Armenia and Armenians of the diaspora who mention
dialogue, the only problems in this matter are Armenian's hostility
toward Turks and labeling Turks as committers of genocide."
Güzel said contrary to belief, there had never been a rising
wave of nationalism and Turkish society had always been nationalist in
terms of patriotism.
Is artificial nationalism being encouraged?
Sevan NiÅ?anyan, an academic, agreed that there was no rising
wave of nationalism in Turkey. NiÅ?anyan said military and
political circles were trying to encourage nationalism artificially
because of a rapidly dissolving nationalist consensus: "I think this
attempt is an act of panic and it is destined to fail. It is hard to
continue this primitive discourse in this age of integration taking
over the world with fantastic speed."
NiÅ?anyan said that suspicion and distrust has been growing
toward the Turkish state and its history proposals among
commonsensical members of Turkish society and intelligentsia in recent
years and said: "For many people, it was almost an experience of
disengagement after the assassination. The feeling of 'enough of this'
was felt by more than the few hundred thousand people at the funeral."
'Orhan Pamuk and Elif Å?afak no longer talk about the Armenian
matter' Ahmet Ã`mit, Turkey's adept crime novelist drew attention
to Orhan Pamuk, the Nobel prize winning Turkish novelist, and Elif
Å?afak, another novelist, who previously set the national agenda
with statements on the Armenian issue, but who have recently been
avoiding making comments on the subject. Ã`mit said: "Hrant was an
honest defender of the matter and paid the price. I do not want anyone
to be hurt because of their ideas but the blood spilt is the indicator
of who are the honest ones and how much honesty they have."
Ece Temelkuran, columnist for the Milliyet newspaper, said: "The
Armenian issue is about the foundations of Turkey and anybody who
comments on that is at risk." Temelkuran added: "The Armenian matter
is like an nerve ending in Turkey," and that the most important
development following the assassination happened to be the Armenian
problem turning into a personal issue for the Turkish
intelligentsia. Temelkuran said this attitude would be an important
milestone in the path for a solution to the problem.
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domes tic/10794361.asp?scr=1
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Jan 17 2009
Dink legacy flourishes two years after death
ISTANBUL - The murder of Turkish Armenian journalist Hrant Dink two
years ago, on Jan. 19, 2006, cut down a person who fought his whole
life to eliminate barriers between Turks and Armenians. After the
murder there emerged a need among the Turkish public to seek out and
learn more about Dink and his convictions.
Dink, executive editor of the Agos newspaper, published in Turkish
and Armenian, was killed in front of his paper's offices, angering
not only Turks but also groups within Armenian society.
The assassination was headline news not only in Turkey but also for
the international press and citizenry. At his funeral, thousands of
people screamed the slogan: "We are all Armenians; we are all Hrant
Dink," as one voice.
This slogan that represented a common conscience was sharply
criticized by some groups in Turkey, but despite this, the struggle
for consensus between the two nations that cost Dink his life, created
something extraordinary.
The Turkish public started to wonder about the Armenian people who
they had been living side by side with for hundreds of years, and also
to question the past. Football diplomacy in recent months began a
rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia that is without doubt one of
the most important results of the process.
From the literary perspective, the interest in the Armenian problem
and Armenians in Turkey has increased since the year 2000. According
to publishers with whom the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic
Review spoke, the number of the books published on the issue grew in
the period from 2000 to 2005.
The biggest boom in the number of published books happened in the year
2005, when the Armenian problem was often in the spotlight. In the
two year period following Dink's assassination, more than 60 books
have been published.
Ragıp Zarakolu, owner of Belge Publishing and founding member
of the Human Rights Foundation, who published books on the events of
1915 for the first time in Turkey in the beginning of 1990s, for which
Zarakolu was put on trial and attacked because of, said: "In 1993, we
published the first book in Turkey on the matter of the Armenian
Genocide: everybody considered us insane back then. Following this,
there has been a notable increase in the number of books related to
the Armenian problem and Armenian society in recent years." According
to Zarakol, the acceleration within academia, especially during the
coalition government of Ecevit and Bahçeli, to publish material
denying the Armenian problem played a role in this increase. Zarakol
said: "There was a great increase in the number of the books on that
basis. The books followed the official policy: the documents they were
based on were from official archives but their integrity was
controversial."
Perception of Dink assassination
Dink almost became a bridge of peace between the two societies to
re-establish dialogue after a period of 100 years by way of his unique
discourse and attitude. For that reason, the Dink assassination will
always be an important turning point in Turkish-Armenian dialogue,
according to some circles.
Ara Sarafian, a historian of Armenian origin and director of the
London-based Gomidas Institute, believes Dink received reaction for
his progressive discourse from Armenian extremists as much as from
Turkish ones. Sarafian said: "This circle alleged Hrant was an agent
of the Turkish Government. They were happy when Dink was silenced: it
is sufficient to check the newspapers published in the diaspora during
those times. That is because both sides (of extremists) did not want a
peaceful solution to the problem."
Just like Sarafian, Jean Claude Kebabdjian, founder of Centre de Reche
rches sur la Diaspora Armenienne (Center of Research on the Armenian
Diaspora), or CRDA, said he believed Dink was the key point for
understanding between the two societies. According to Kebabdjian, the
goal behind Dink's murder was to prevent the actualization of dialogue
between the two societies.
Kebabdjian said the protests that have been organized in Turkey, the
slogan and attempts made toward the solution of the problem by the
Turkish intelligentsia, are respected among French Armenians and
continued: "Their old reactions are slowly changing. That is why the
slogan 'We are all Armenians' was so significant."
However, Kebabdjian said French Armenians have said they believe it is
impossible for Turkey to become a democratic country and doubt the
possibility of establishing dialogue between the two societies.
Dilipak: 'Power has been obtained by the blood of this country's
children' According to Abdurrahman Dilipak, columnist at the
conservative Vakit newspaper and a human rights activist who sets the
agenda through his unique opinions, the aftermath of the assassination
happened to be the exact opposite of what the dark powers wanted:
"Instead of being a cause of a new hostility between the two
societies, Hrant's blood provided an opportunity to decipher the deep
state. That is how the intelligentsia of Armenia realized that Turkish
society is not their enemy."
Dilipak started to talk about Dink with a quotation from the Koran:
"Allah says: Your hostility against a clan should not drive you to
injustice. Whoever kills one person kills the whole of humanity."
Dilipak said he had first met Dink at a debate show on television and
continued: "At the beginning of the show, I was expecting a different
approach from Dink. I had thought the show would cause very heated
discussions but it did not happen that way."
'There is no Armenian taboo in Turkey'
Hasan Celal Güzel, conservative columnist for Radikal
newspaper, has made different statements on the Dink assassination and
the process that followed. Former state minister Güzel did not
agree with the idea of the Dink assassination being a breaking point
for Turkey and said the assassination happened because of the
provocation of gangs such as Ergenekon. Güzel said the Dink
assassination lost Turkey points in the international arena and
continued: "This murder was read in the international arena as if
Turks were intolerant and anti-Armenian."
Güzel said the Armenian problem has never been a taboo in
Turkey and Dink's ethnic background did not disturb anyone: "There is
no problem in Turkey with dialogue between Turkish and Armenian
societies. If it is Armenia and Armenians of the diaspora who mention
dialogue, the only problems in this matter are Armenian's hostility
toward Turks and labeling Turks as committers of genocide."
Güzel said contrary to belief, there had never been a rising
wave of nationalism and Turkish society had always been nationalist in
terms of patriotism.
Is artificial nationalism being encouraged?
Sevan NiÅ?anyan, an academic, agreed that there was no rising
wave of nationalism in Turkey. NiÅ?anyan said military and
political circles were trying to encourage nationalism artificially
because of a rapidly dissolving nationalist consensus: "I think this
attempt is an act of panic and it is destined to fail. It is hard to
continue this primitive discourse in this age of integration taking
over the world with fantastic speed."
NiÅ?anyan said that suspicion and distrust has been growing
toward the Turkish state and its history proposals among
commonsensical members of Turkish society and intelligentsia in recent
years and said: "For many people, it was almost an experience of
disengagement after the assassination. The feeling of 'enough of this'
was felt by more than the few hundred thousand people at the funeral."
'Orhan Pamuk and Elif Å?afak no longer talk about the Armenian
matter' Ahmet Ã`mit, Turkey's adept crime novelist drew attention
to Orhan Pamuk, the Nobel prize winning Turkish novelist, and Elif
Å?afak, another novelist, who previously set the national agenda
with statements on the Armenian issue, but who have recently been
avoiding making comments on the subject. Ã`mit said: "Hrant was an
honest defender of the matter and paid the price. I do not want anyone
to be hurt because of their ideas but the blood spilt is the indicator
of who are the honest ones and how much honesty they have."
Ece Temelkuran, columnist for the Milliyet newspaper, said: "The
Armenian issue is about the foundations of Turkey and anybody who
comments on that is at risk." Temelkuran added: "The Armenian matter
is like an nerve ending in Turkey," and that the most important
development following the assassination happened to be the Armenian
problem turning into a personal issue for the Turkish
intelligentsia. Temelkuran said this attitude would be an important
milestone in the path for a solution to the problem.
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domes tic/10794361.asp?scr=1
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress