Tweet
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/world/2014/03/01/Turkey-caught-in-the-Russia-Crimea-snowstorm.html
Turkey caught in the Russia-Crimea snowstorm
By Ceylan Ozbudak
Saturday, 1 March 2014
As I am writing this article, Turkish Foreign Minister Davutoglu is
still in Ukraine to discuss the situation in the Crimea region. The
persistent political disorder in Kiev following the collapse of
President Viktor Yanukovych's government ` and his subsequent flight
to Russia ` are creating broad repercussions in the Crimean Autonomous
Republic. After the Chairman of the Crimean Parliament Volodimir
Konstantinov's statement that they would seek to secede from Ukraine
if tensions grew worse, the situation has deteriorated swiftly,
including direct Russian military intervention in violation of
Ukraine's sovereignty. In an article in last week's Russian Pravda, it
was noted that if Ukraine was divided, then the status of the Crimean
Peninsula ` returned to Ukraine in 1954 by Nikita Kruschev, would be
open to discussion, and that would include Turkey having a say in the
future of Crimea.
Russia gains control over Crimea
The reference to this claim is the `Kucuk Kaynarca' (Karlowitz I)
signed 230 years ago. As per this agreement, signed by the Russian
Tsarina Catherine II on April 19, 1783, the Crimean Peninsula was
taken away from the dominion of the Ottomans and handed over to
Russia. However, one of the most important provisions of this treaty
was the debarment of independence for the Peninsula and outlawing its
submission to a third party: Should any such attempt be made, then
Crimea would automatically have to be returned to the sovereignty of
Turkey.
When Ukraine appeared as an independent nation following the
disintegration of the USSR in 1991, Turkey acquired the right to claim
the Peninsula back based on the Treaty of Kucuk Kaynarca; however,
this was not brought up by the Turgut Ozal administration of the time.
Turkey was content with advocating for the rights of the Tatar
minority living on the Crimean Peninsula.
That being the case, we may acknowledge that Crimea has always been a
particularly indispensable region for Turkey on account of the close
relations of the Ottoman State with the Crimean Khanate and the
presence of the Crimean Tatars there. In addition, Ukraine is one of
the foremost neighbors of Turkey, and in terms of the balance in the
Black Sea region, it is important. Just as the name `Crimea' implies
the largest Russian naval base at Sevastopol for Russia, the same
`Crimea' connotes brotherhood with Turkic Muslims from the Ottoman
times. For that reason, both Russia and Turkey have excluded the
Autonomous Republic of Crimea from their policies related with
Ukraine.
Stalin's genocide of Crimean Turks
On top of that, for the majority of Turkish people who are well-read
in history, the Crimean land has a distinct place when compared with
other Turkic Republics, because similar to Hitler's `holocaust'
against the Jews, Stalin carried out atrocities against the Crimean
Turks. Stalin's campaign of forced ethnic cleansing and the relocation
of the Crimean Turks is still well-remembered.
The Crimean Tatars and the Noghai were peoples of the Crimean Khanate
and amongst the largest groups who emigrated to the Ottoman State and
the Republic of Turkey. The settlement of hundreds of thousands of
Crimean Tatars and Noghai made dramatic changes in the demography of
the Ottoman State and its successor, the Republic of Turkey.
While the Turkish population in Crimea in 1783 was 98 percent,
following the Russian invasion this was reduced to 35 percent.
The Crimean People's Republic, which was founded following the
Bolshevik Revolution, was brought to an end with the martyrdom of the
president, Numan Celebi Cihan. The `Crimean Autonomous Soviet
Socialist Republic' established in 1921 under the supervision of
Moscow did not grant the Crimeans any freedom; the Crimean
intellectuals who opposed the propaganda of the Communists against
Islam and Turkish identity were deported to Siberia and the Ural
mountains (mostly to die in GULAG camps).
The period following WWII was perhaps the most difficult for the
Muslim ` Turk community in the region. When Crimea was seized by the
Russians, the entire Turkish population living in those lands for the
last 1,500 years was promptly exiled. By means of a decree issued in
1945 by the Soviet government, the `Crimean Autonomous Soviet
Socialist Republic' was abolished. The Crimean land attained the
status of a state which belonged first to Russia, and then under the
Kruschev government was transferred to Ukraine.
While a struggle for independence was going on for the Crimean Turks
who had been ruthlessly deported from their nation, the homeless
Russian population was made to settle in the very same land. The
nearly 40 years of exile of the Crimean Turks was partly ended in 1987
when their rally for independence in Red Square turned into a major
display of political power. The Soviet regime, unable to resist,
subsequently allowed the Crimeans to return to their homeland. While
about 20,000 Turks were living in Crimea in 1989, this figure
increased to 150,000 by 1991. Today, their population is estimated to
be around 300,000 and growing.
Today, the part of Crimea that strives for closer relations with
Russia - and even aspires to annexing itself to Russia once full
independence is achieved - is comprised of the ethnic Russians who
settled in the Crimea post-World War II.
What should Turkey do?
Obviously what Turkey needs to do at this point is to make efforts to
calm down both parties in order to preserve the unity of Ukraine and
help them find a solution to their disagreements. Despite the obvious
advantages for Ukraine in being a part of the European Union, there is
no point in being surprised at Russia's insistence that Ukraine should
be part of its Customs Union and planned Eurasian Union.
Under these conditions, what Turkey should do is strive to calm the
parties in order to protect the territorial integrity of Ukraine and
to help Ukraine remain a state that enjoys fruitful joint relations
both with the EU and with Russia by solving their domestic problems
through dialogue. It must not be forgotten that Ukraine is very
important for Russia in transferring its energy resources to Europe.
Turkey and Azerbaijan constitute the basic axis of the South Gas
Corridor (SGC). The possibility of Israel getting involved in the
energy business and getting connected to the SGC, not to mention
Iran's demand to join this energy axis raises the possibility of
Russia cutting off this south passages completely. Let us not also
forget that Russia attaches great importance to the Sevastopol naval
base and doesn't want to see it under any strategic threat.
How can Turkey set an example to Ukraine?
Crimea rests at the epicenter of all this and does not have the power
to resist, neither economically or sociologically, such strong
pressure. Under these conditions Turkey should get involved more
deeply and help the region by adopting a policy that embraces all
Ukrainians and all the Crimean population.
Just as Turkey has been able to maintain both internal and external
balances despite standing in what may well be the biggest intersection
in the world, Turkey should lead the way for Ukraine as well. Anatolia
sits at the junction of Europe, Asia and Africa, on prolific
agricultural lands that are simultaneously poor in energy resources;
yet ironically, Turkey is a hub of energy resources, as well as air
and sea transportation. Turkey is also a melting pot of various
ideologies and hostilities. She is the intersection of the European
understanding of modern democracy, the old leftist ideologies of
Russia and the Eastern Bloc, Arab nationalism and Islamic
denominations. She holds a position that has been able to establish
equal relations with Israel and Iran, Russia and the Gulf Countries,
and has still been able to peacefully harbor all these factors inside
the vastness of the Anatolian Steppes.
When we evaluate all these factors, it would be a grave mistake to
expect Turkey to adopt a policy that would harm the territorial
integrity of Ukraine by making a claim in Crimea. As I have stated
above, Turkey should help create a situation that would preserve
Ukraine's territorial integrity with Crimea, one that would see
Ukraine approach the European Union, yet not completely break away
from Russia. The situation should also finally help in establishing a
solid democracy with the norms of the European Union. We need a new
policy approach in Europe with a model which will leave the Twentieth
Century's bi-polar world behind and keep alliances on the back burner.
We need neighbors that can act in a more integrated manner by ridding
themselves of obsolete worldviews, leftovers from the era of the Cold
War. We need mature and wise statesmen who can hold the hands of
parties in conflict in order to make them meet in the middle and make
peace instead of picking sides or cowering behind barricades at the
slightest complication. Turkey has been able to hold on to its moral
values and has been able to stand tall and stand strong, even in the
perennially restless Middle East, and can thus set an example for
Ukraine.
Ceylan Ozbudak is a Turkish political analyst, television presenter,
and executive director of Building Bridges, an Istanbul-based NGO. As
a representative of Harun Yahya organization, she frequently cites
quotations from the author in her writings.
Turkey caught in the Russia-Crimea snowstorm
By Ceylan Ozbudak
Saturday, 1 March 2014
As I am writing this article, Turkish Foreign Minister Davutoglu is
still in Ukraine to discuss the situation in the Crimea region. The
persistent political disorder in Kiev following the collapse of
President Viktor Yanukovych's government ` and his subsequent flight
to Russia ` are creating broad repercussions in the Crimean Autonomous
Republic. After the Chairman of the Crimean Parliament Volodimir
Konstantinov's statement that they would seek to secede from Ukraine
if tensions grew worse, the situation has deteriorated swiftly,
including direct Russian military intervention in violation of
Ukraine's sovereignty. In an article in last week's Russian Pravda, it
was noted that if Ukraine was divided, then the status of the Crimean
Peninsula ` returned to Ukraine in 1954 by Nikita Kruschev, would be
open to discussion, and that would include Turkey having a say in the
future of Crimea.
Russia gains control over Crimea
The reference to this claim is the `Kucuk Kaynarca' (Karlowitz I)
signed 230 years ago. As per this agreement, signed by the Russian
Tsarina Catherine II on April 19, 1783, the Crimean Peninsula was
taken away from the dominion of the Ottomans and handed over to
Russia. However, one of the most important provisions of this treaty
was the debarment of independence for the Peninsula and outlawing its
submission to a third party: Should any such attempt be made, then
Crimea would automatically have to be returned to the sovereignty of
Turkey.
When Ukraine appeared as an independent nation following the
disintegration of the USSR in 1991, Turkey acquired the right to claim
the Peninsula back based on the Treaty of Kucuk Kaynarca; however,
this was not brought up by the Turgut Ozal administration of the time.
Turkey was content with advocating for the rights of the Tatar
minority living on the Crimean Peninsula.
That being the case, we may acknowledge that Crimea has always been a
particularly indispensable region for Turkey on account of the close
relations of the Ottoman State with the Crimean Khanate and the
presence of the Crimean Tatars there. In addition, Ukraine is one of
the foremost neighbors of Turkey, and in terms of the balance in the
Black Sea region, it is important. Just as the name `Crimea' implies
the largest Russian naval base at Sevastopol for Russia, the same
`Crimea' connotes brotherhood with Turkic Muslims from the Ottoman
times. For that reason, both Russia and Turkey have excluded the
Autonomous Republic of Crimea from their policies related with
Ukraine.
Stalin's genocide of Crimean Turks
On top of that, for the majority of Turkish people who are well-read
in history, the Crimean land has a distinct place when compared with
other Turkic Republics, because similar to Hitler's `holocaust'
against the Jews, Stalin carried out atrocities against the Crimean
Turks. Stalin's campaign of forced ethnic cleansing and the relocation
of the Crimean Turks is still well-remembered.
The Crimean Tatars and the Noghai were peoples of the Crimean Khanate
and amongst the largest groups who emigrated to the Ottoman State and
the Republic of Turkey. The settlement of hundreds of thousands of
Crimean Tatars and Noghai made dramatic changes in the demography of
the Ottoman State and its successor, the Republic of Turkey.
While the Turkish population in Crimea in 1783 was 98 percent,
following the Russian invasion this was reduced to 35 percent.
The Crimean People's Republic, which was founded following the
Bolshevik Revolution, was brought to an end with the martyrdom of the
president, Numan Celebi Cihan. The `Crimean Autonomous Soviet
Socialist Republic' established in 1921 under the supervision of
Moscow did not grant the Crimeans any freedom; the Crimean
intellectuals who opposed the propaganda of the Communists against
Islam and Turkish identity were deported to Siberia and the Ural
mountains (mostly to die in GULAG camps).
The period following WWII was perhaps the most difficult for the
Muslim ` Turk community in the region. When Crimea was seized by the
Russians, the entire Turkish population living in those lands for the
last 1,500 years was promptly exiled. By means of a decree issued in
1945 by the Soviet government, the `Crimean Autonomous Soviet
Socialist Republic' was abolished. The Crimean land attained the
status of a state which belonged first to Russia, and then under the
Kruschev government was transferred to Ukraine.
While a struggle for independence was going on for the Crimean Turks
who had been ruthlessly deported from their nation, the homeless
Russian population was made to settle in the very same land. The
nearly 40 years of exile of the Crimean Turks was partly ended in 1987
when their rally for independence in Red Square turned into a major
display of political power. The Soviet regime, unable to resist,
subsequently allowed the Crimeans to return to their homeland. While
about 20,000 Turks were living in Crimea in 1989, this figure
increased to 150,000 by 1991. Today, their population is estimated to
be around 300,000 and growing.
Today, the part of Crimea that strives for closer relations with
Russia - and even aspires to annexing itself to Russia once full
independence is achieved - is comprised of the ethnic Russians who
settled in the Crimea post-World War II.
What should Turkey do?
Obviously what Turkey needs to do at this point is to make efforts to
calm down both parties in order to preserve the unity of Ukraine and
help them find a solution to their disagreements. Despite the obvious
advantages for Ukraine in being a part of the European Union, there is
no point in being surprised at Russia's insistence that Ukraine should
be part of its Customs Union and planned Eurasian Union.
Under these conditions, what Turkey should do is strive to calm the
parties in order to protect the territorial integrity of Ukraine and
to help Ukraine remain a state that enjoys fruitful joint relations
both with the EU and with Russia by solving their domestic problems
through dialogue. It must not be forgotten that Ukraine is very
important for Russia in transferring its energy resources to Europe.
Turkey and Azerbaijan constitute the basic axis of the South Gas
Corridor (SGC). The possibility of Israel getting involved in the
energy business and getting connected to the SGC, not to mention
Iran's demand to join this energy axis raises the possibility of
Russia cutting off this south passages completely. Let us not also
forget that Russia attaches great importance to the Sevastopol naval
base and doesn't want to see it under any strategic threat.
How can Turkey set an example to Ukraine?
Crimea rests at the epicenter of all this and does not have the power
to resist, neither economically or sociologically, such strong
pressure. Under these conditions Turkey should get involved more
deeply and help the region by adopting a policy that embraces all
Ukrainians and all the Crimean population.
Just as Turkey has been able to maintain both internal and external
balances despite standing in what may well be the biggest intersection
in the world, Turkey should lead the way for Ukraine as well. Anatolia
sits at the junction of Europe, Asia and Africa, on prolific
agricultural lands that are simultaneously poor in energy resources;
yet ironically, Turkey is a hub of energy resources, as well as air
and sea transportation. Turkey is also a melting pot of various
ideologies and hostilities. She is the intersection of the European
understanding of modern democracy, the old leftist ideologies of
Russia and the Eastern Bloc, Arab nationalism and Islamic
denominations. She holds a position that has been able to establish
equal relations with Israel and Iran, Russia and the Gulf Countries,
and has still been able to peacefully harbor all these factors inside
the vastness of the Anatolian Steppes.
When we evaluate all these factors, it would be a grave mistake to
expect Turkey to adopt a policy that would harm the territorial
integrity of Ukraine by making a claim in Crimea. As I have stated
above, Turkey should help create a situation that would preserve
Ukraine's territorial integrity with Crimea, one that would see
Ukraine approach the European Union, yet not completely break away
from Russia. The situation should also finally help in establishing a
solid democracy with the norms of the European Union. We need a new
policy approach in Europe with a model which will leave the Twentieth
Century's bi-polar world behind and keep alliances on the back burner.
We need neighbors that can act in a more integrated manner by ridding
themselves of obsolete worldviews, leftovers from the era of the Cold
War. We need mature and wise statesmen who can hold the hands of
parties in conflict in order to make them meet in the middle and make
peace instead of picking sides or cowering behind barricades at the
slightest complication. Turkey has been able to hold on to its moral
values and has been able to stand tall and stand strong, even in the
perennially restless Middle East, and can thus set an example for
Ukraine.
Ceylan Ozbudak is a Turkish political analyst, television presenter,
and executive director of Building Bridges, an Istanbul-based NGO. As
a representative of Harun Yahya organization, she frequently cites
quotations from the author in her writings.