THE JESTER IS NAKED
Today’s Zaman
Jan 19 2012
Turkey
How would a conscientious Christian living in Nazi Germany who sees
him or herself as a “true German” feel when s/he observed how Jews were
persecuted? Possibly, his or her overwhelming feeling would be shame.
She would feel shame for her human identity in general and for
her German identity in particular. Even if you are not a person
who feels attached to nationalist sentiments, you will still find
yourself feeling shame in such circumstances. While the Armenian
Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia (ASALA) was killing people,
many Armenians like me started to feel ashamed for their humanity,
as well as for their immutable Armenian identities. While the rage
the perpetrators felt may have rendered the events “humane,” this
only helps us peer into the world of the perpetrators. It does not
cancel out the severity and moral burden of the crime.
Yet, we find that humanity becomes corrupted when identity is
fixed upon an ideology. This is because the emotional backbone of
the identity will be destroyed and covered by a “covering” that is
generally manufactured by the state. Those who find themselves with an
ideologically based identity most of the time form the content of this
identity with the “enemies” that the state continuously manufactures
for them.
In countries filled with ideologically founded identities, no
emotion can be found behind murders committed with identity-centered
justifications. Thus, you may reason and perform the necessary
planning to kill a person for his or her identity as an Armenian,
and in order to pave the way for a coup, you may make someone who
knows nothing about that Armenian kill him or her. The reason for
the murder may appear to be the Armenian identity of the targeted
person, but perhaps the real cause of the murder is the “Turkish”
identity of the perpetrator. When you remove the Turkish identity
from its naturally hybrid and mediocre state, and transform it into
an identity that is synonymous with nationhood, then the identity of
the person before you loses its meaning. You won’t really be killing
that person for his or her Armenian identity. Rather, you will give
an Armenian identity to that person in your mind by killing him or her.
This was how Hrant Dink was killed, but it didn’t stay there. Dozens of
people from scores of public institutions including the gendarmerie,
the police department and the National Intelligence Organization
(MÄ°T) in Trabzon, Ä°stanbul and Ankara, saw this murder in advance,
but chose to keep silent. Perhaps many of them felt in some corner of
their hearts that it was an act that would hurt consciences, but in
the final analysis, the victim was just an Armenian — an Armenian
could be killed easily and without feeling any burden; also this
murder hinted at the underlying logic of the state and it was not
easy for the Turkish identity to exist outside that state reason.
That was not all. During the trial evidence was hidden, obscured
and distorted. Public authorities did not give any answer to the
court’s questions and they did their best to prevent truth from being
discovered. Those who knew something about this murder did not or
could not go to court, and the government did not want to flex its
muscles to make them go to the court.
Really, how were all these institutions able to act in such a harmony?
What were the common points of reference for all of these people
from such diverse institutions? Why did they feel so uneasy with the
possibility of the truth of this murder becoming known? Because they
were “Turks.” This was a quote-unquote: Turkish identity. It is a
Turkishness that has not come to being through the lived experiences
of people; rather, it is a Turkishness stuffed with ideological bias —
not with culture — used as a symbol declaring allegiance to the state.
Meanwhile, the Dink family insistently tried to shed light behind the
scenes of the murder. If they wanted to trumpet Armenian nationalism,
they would reject the court and leave the “Turkish state” to its fate.
But they did not do this. Instead, they chose a way that would make
living with together with Turks in their natural environments and their
own lands meaningful and precious. Knowing that this trial was a matter
of honor for Turkey, they gave Turkey the chance to uphold its honor.
But the court knew what it should protect. Saying that there was no
organization involved in the murder, it acquitted the organization
which everyone knows exists. Indeed, the organization involved was the
state itself and a Turkish court cannot inculpate the Turkish state.
But this decision tells us that the jester whom we took to be a king
is naked. This decision makes the whole Turkish state a partner in
the murder.
We are at the same point. It is Jan. 20, 2007. And there are still
two different types of Turks that have yet to confront each other. One
group carries the heart and wealth of this land and the other embodies
the inhuman quality of the mentality that corrupts this land.
This is an opportunity. Let this shell be crushed now. Let us be
content with saying there are true human beings in this land; let
us be able to say those same human beings are able to control their
own destinies.