Tweet
Gunaysu: Neither Yes, Nor No
By Ayse Gunaysu - on September 24, 2009
http://www.hairenik.com/weekly/2009/09/24/gu naysu-neither-yes-nor-no/
really cannot remember how many times I wrote that Turkey is a country
full of paradoxes, where there is an unusually high number of
questions you can neither say yes, nor no to. Furthermore, it
generates paradoxes constantly.
For example, the government's initiative to resolve the `Kurdish
issue,' in its present form, is both acceptable and unacceptable. It
is right and acceptable in aiming at peace, but unacceptable in its
vagueness and the government's contradictory practices.
The Ergenekon case, against the suspects charged of plotting against
the government, is both approvable and disapprovable; it is deserves
support for challenging the militaristic state tradition in Turkey,
but it's objectionable because of its doubtful final objective and
lack of determination to really put an end to illegal formations
within the state apparatus.
I support Islamic intellectuals in their struggle for democracy and
their demand for true civilian rule, but I can't possibly stand with
them side by side as long as they continue with their anti-Semitism,
using Israeli government policies and practices as a pretext.
I didn't sign the famous `apology' petition initiated by a group of
Turkish intellectuals, but would by no means campaign against the
petition, knowing that thousands of people signed it with total
sincerity in their protest against denialism and that the petition
would, despite its drawbacks and deficiencies, ultimately serve as a
step towards recognition of the genocide.
I can mention many more instances where one, in the very chaotic
environment of Turkey, can say both yes and no to an initiative, a
practice, or an undertaking of a political nature.
The detailed reasons for this inability to take an unconditional stand
in major questions, the sociological, economic, cultural, historical
factors playing part in this state of being always paradoxical, is a
subject to be studied by academics. But looking at the big picture, it
is easy to see that the change Turkey has been undergoing is
generating a potential to move the foundation stones of the already-
poorly built structure of the establishment, leading to shifts in
certain balances and turning the traditional positioning of political
wings upside down.
The signals of a normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia
is one of such questions that I feel myself saying neither no, nor
yes, to, or saying both yes and no at the same time.
The matter has many dimensions and many levels to discuss. It has many
facets, all of which bear different significance and meaning. It is
certainly not the same if you are an activist who has devoted his/her
life to the recognition of the Armenian Genocide; or if you are a
citizen of Armenia who desperately needs the border to be opened to
earn a living; or if you are an Armenian but a Turkish citizen who has
given all of his/her life to maintain and promote Armenian language,
culture and educational, social and religious institutions in Turkey,
a country where ethnic, religious, and cultural uniformity is
constantly upheld; and it is surely a different case if you are a
person in Turkey who sees his/her meaning of life in contributing - no
matter how tiny the contribution might be - to the democratization of
the country and to the defeat of a denialist culture.
On my part, I say yes to the normalization process because we in
Turkey, who refuse Turkish nationalism, are desperately in need of
anything that would weaken Turkey's deeply rooted traditional way of
seeing Armenia as a hostile country. I say yes because we cannot lead
a decent life when our Armenian friends here are continuously harassed
by such nationalism. I say yes because Turkish nationalism sees the
protocols signed between the two countries as a threat to their
existence. I say yes because erasing the name of Armenia from the maps
at schools, including the Armenian schools, was among the first
practices of the military dictatorship of 1980. I say yes because
Delal Dink said if the border is opened, her father would rise from
the sidewalk where he has been lying since the moment he was shot
dead.
But at the same time, I say no to the protocols because the
organizations of the Armenian Diaspora, the children and grandchildren
of the genocide victims, were excluded from the process as a whole. In
this way, the protocols, regardless of whether or not it was done
intentionally, play in the hands of the Turkish public's widespread
`good Armenian' (Armenians of Turkey and to some extent Armenia) and
`bad Armenian' (Armenians of the diaspora) pattern of thinking. I
can't applaud the signing of the protocols as long as the textbooks
with which children in Turkey are raised contain expressions
instigating feelings of animosity and hatred towards Armenians. I
can't possibly be happy with the so-called `normalization process ` as
long as the websites of not only government institutions, but also
semi-official and non-official organizations still embody a
historiography full of lies and anti-Armenian propaganda, and as long
as well-known academics, retired ambassadors, and popular opinion
makers audaciously express views dishonoring the memory of genocide
victims and damaging the dignity and honor of their grandchildren
living in Turkey and elsewhere. I can't support the protocols because
it does not include a commitment on the part of Turkey to put an end
to all of these and other manifestations of denial, not only of the
genocide but also of the all-round suffering inflicted in this country
on Armenians in the past and at present as well.
But I can't possibly - even if I wanted - campaign against the
protocols because I see this initiative as part of the process of
change presently underway in Turkey. The official ideology has been
for generations reinforcing the anti-Armenian feelings in Turkey. Even
the declaration of a will to establish friendly relations with Armenia
is in total contradiction with this ideology that has been
internalized by the Turkish public. So it feels good to see the
mainstream press publishing news items and articles in favor of the
normalization process. But it still hurts and infuriates to know that
the culture of denialism is as strong as ever.
By Ayse Gunaysu - on September 24, 2009
http://www.hairenik.com/weekly/2009/09/24/gu naysu-neither-yes-nor-no/
really cannot remember how many times I wrote that Turkey is a country
full of paradoxes, where there is an unusually high number of
questions you can neither say yes, nor no to. Furthermore, it
generates paradoxes constantly.
For example, the government's initiative to resolve the `Kurdish
issue,' in its present form, is both acceptable and unacceptable. It
is right and acceptable in aiming at peace, but unacceptable in its
vagueness and the government's contradictory practices.
The Ergenekon case, against the suspects charged of plotting against
the government, is both approvable and disapprovable; it is deserves
support for challenging the militaristic state tradition in Turkey,
but it's objectionable because of its doubtful final objective and
lack of determination to really put an end to illegal formations
within the state apparatus.
I support Islamic intellectuals in their struggle for democracy and
their demand for true civilian rule, but I can't possibly stand with
them side by side as long as they continue with their anti-Semitism,
using Israeli government policies and practices as a pretext.
I didn't sign the famous `apology' petition initiated by a group of
Turkish intellectuals, but would by no means campaign against the
petition, knowing that thousands of people signed it with total
sincerity in their protest against denialism and that the petition
would, despite its drawbacks and deficiencies, ultimately serve as a
step towards recognition of the genocide.
I can mention many more instances where one, in the very chaotic
environment of Turkey, can say both yes and no to an initiative, a
practice, or an undertaking of a political nature.
The detailed reasons for this inability to take an unconditional stand
in major questions, the sociological, economic, cultural, historical
factors playing part in this state of being always paradoxical, is a
subject to be studied by academics. But looking at the big picture, it
is easy to see that the change Turkey has been undergoing is
generating a potential to move the foundation stones of the already-
poorly built structure of the establishment, leading to shifts in
certain balances and turning the traditional positioning of political
wings upside down.
The signals of a normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia
is one of such questions that I feel myself saying neither no, nor
yes, to, or saying both yes and no at the same time.
The matter has many dimensions and many levels to discuss. It has many
facets, all of which bear different significance and meaning. It is
certainly not the same if you are an activist who has devoted his/her
life to the recognition of the Armenian Genocide; or if you are a
citizen of Armenia who desperately needs the border to be opened to
earn a living; or if you are an Armenian but a Turkish citizen who has
given all of his/her life to maintain and promote Armenian language,
culture and educational, social and religious institutions in Turkey,
a country where ethnic, religious, and cultural uniformity is
constantly upheld; and it is surely a different case if you are a
person in Turkey who sees his/her meaning of life in contributing - no
matter how tiny the contribution might be - to the democratization of
the country and to the defeat of a denialist culture.
On my part, I say yes to the normalization process because we in
Turkey, who refuse Turkish nationalism, are desperately in need of
anything that would weaken Turkey's deeply rooted traditional way of
seeing Armenia as a hostile country. I say yes because we cannot lead
a decent life when our Armenian friends here are continuously harassed
by such nationalism. I say yes because Turkish nationalism sees the
protocols signed between the two countries as a threat to their
existence. I say yes because erasing the name of Armenia from the maps
at schools, including the Armenian schools, was among the first
practices of the military dictatorship of 1980. I say yes because
Delal Dink said if the border is opened, her father would rise from
the sidewalk where he has been lying since the moment he was shot
dead.
But at the same time, I say no to the protocols because the
organizations of the Armenian Diaspora, the children and grandchildren
of the genocide victims, were excluded from the process as a whole. In
this way, the protocols, regardless of whether or not it was done
intentionally, play in the hands of the Turkish public's widespread
`good Armenian' (Armenians of Turkey and to some extent Armenia) and
`bad Armenian' (Armenians of the diaspora) pattern of thinking. I
can't applaud the signing of the protocols as long as the textbooks
with which children in Turkey are raised contain expressions
instigating feelings of animosity and hatred towards Armenians. I
can't possibly be happy with the so-called `normalization process ` as
long as the websites of not only government institutions, but also
semi-official and non-official organizations still embody a
historiography full of lies and anti-Armenian propaganda, and as long
as well-known academics, retired ambassadors, and popular opinion
makers audaciously express views dishonoring the memory of genocide
victims and damaging the dignity and honor of their grandchildren
living in Turkey and elsewhere. I can't support the protocols because
it does not include a commitment on the part of Turkey to put an end
to all of these and other manifestations of denial, not only of the
genocide but also of the all-round suffering inflicted in this country
on Armenians in the past and at present as well.
But I can't possibly - even if I wanted - campaign against the
protocols because I see this initiative as part of the process of
change presently underway in Turkey. The official ideology has been
for generations reinforcing the anti-Armenian feelings in Turkey. Even
the declaration of a will to establish friendly relations with Armenia
is in total contradiction with this ideology that has been
internalized by the Turkish public. So it feels good to see the
mainstream press publishing news items and articles in favor of the
normalization process. But it still hurts and infuriates to know that
the culture of denialism is as strong as ever.