TURKEY’S ARMENIANS DEMAND RIGHTS, NOT TOLERANCE: NEW STUDY
epress.am
10.03.2011 13:05
A new study, which explores various issues faced by Turkey’s Armenians
in the republican period, asserts that Armenian citizens of the country
are demanding their rights, not tolerance, Today’s Zaman reports.
“When fighting with discrimination, one thing that should never be
used but which we frequently hear is the concept of ‘tolerance’ in
reference to Ottoman history and with the view that different religions
and cultures have lived ‘side-by-side in peace’ for centuries on these
lands,” said the report, “Hearing Out Turkey’s Armenians: Problems,
Demands, and Suggestions for Solution,” written by academics Gunay
Göksu Ozdogan and Ohannes Kılıcdagı for the Turkish Economic and
Social Studies Foundation (TESEV).
Kılıcdagı said “tolerance” implies a favor given from authorities
at the top levels to lower level citizens who are “not much liked.”
“Legitimacy should come from rights, not from tolerance,” he said and
added that making a new constitution which does not have any perceived
references to ethno-cultural identities is important in that regard.
“An understanding of equal citizenship is needed,” he also said.
Currently, Article 66 of the Constitution says, “Everyone bound to
the Turkish state through the bond of citizenship is a Turk.” By many
in Turkey, including Armenians, this — especially the emphasis on
“Turk” — is perceived as allowing a discriminatory mentality that
is against rights-based inclusiveness and equality.
The 170-page study was prepared in light of information and views
gathered during four workshops this and last year with participants
— Turkey’s Armenians, including teachers, journalists, heads of
foundations, academics and professionals — as well as discussions
between the participants.
The subheadings of the broad study are: Armenian Identity
and Discrimination, Education; The Patriarchate and the
Patriarchal Election; Violations of Freedom of Religion and
Religious Rights; Foundations and Associations: Legal Status and
Ownership-Management-Organization Issues; Confronting History; and
Armenia and Diaspora.
According to participants of the study, it is no longer enough
for the government to remove the barriers that make it difficult
for Armenians to keep their identities and cultures alive, or that
restrict educational opportunities; direct support of the government
is needed for the survival of the Armenian education and culture.
Kılıcdagı said all participants agree that Turkey has changed in
a positive way in the last 10 years but added that the “openings”
and initiatives of the governments are seen as “superficial” and
aimed at increasing the potential votes of the ruling Justice and
Development Party (AK Party) as well as that the whole process was
excessively dependent on the will and personality of Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
The study said some practices reinforces this perception. For example,
the historical Armenian church on Akhtamar Island in Turkey’s
eastern province of Van (pictured) was not returned to the Armenian
Patriarchate of Turkey but opened for worship for only one day a year.
In that regard, the following words on the Akhtamar Church by the
TESEV study participant are noteworthy:
“The Armenian community, which has avoided visibility in the Turkish
society and which has isolated itself throughout the republican history
due to discriminatory policies and attitudes, started to raise its
voice since the mid 1990s, and its demands for equal citizenship and
respect for the Armenian identity reverberated in the democratization
process starting in the 2000s.”
The participants of the study also said they were concerned about the
perception of Armenians; namely, that the word “Armenian” is used as
an insult.
“Whenever an Armenian becomes visible in the public domain, s/he
is perceived as the collective representative and spokesperson
of the Armenians of Turkey or even of all Armenians. For example,
an Armenian appearing on a discussion program on TV is perceived as
if speaking on behalf of all Armenians. In fact, this approach has,
to some extent, been accepted by Turkish Armenians; hence, Armenian
individuals pay extra attention to what they do and what they say,
so that ‘nothing bad is reflected on the Armenians’.”
The study points out that the word “Armenian” is used as an insult
from time to time either by bureaucrats and politicians or by the
people at large.
“In 1997, during the government of Tansu Ciller, then-Interior Minister
Meral AkÅ~_ener of the True Path Party [DYP] used the expression
‘Ermeni dölu’ [Armenian progeny] to insult Kurdistan Workers’ Party
[PKK] leader Abdullah Ocalan, an incident that is still remembered
to this day. Likewise, a few years ago, Republican People’s Party
[CHP] Ä°zmir deputy Canan Arıtman ‘accused’ President Abdullah Gul
of being Armenian. And Gul did indeed perceive it as an insult and
sued Arıtman.”
The study included suggestions to civil society organizations, media
and universities. One such suggestion is about “confronting 1915.”
This part of the study says: “The matter is confronting the dark
phenomenon that led to the mass annihilation of Armenians in the last
period of Ottoman history. Tangible steps should be taken not only
to reveal the facts but also to repair and indemnify what happened.”
There are also recommendations to the Armenian community of Turkey.
One is: “Instead of accepting a passive position within the ‘community’
and instead of sufficing with the mediation of the patriarchate,
voicing problems in the public realm and spreading civil citizenship
initiatives would be effective in reaching a solution.”
The study also has suggestions for parliament, political parties,
the government and the bureaucracy. Some highlights are:
The new constitution should contain a more inclusive definition of
citizenship that stands at an equal distance to all ethnic groups.
Recognition of and respect for cultural diversity and differences
should be adopted as a constitutional principle.
Article 216 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK) should be rearranged to
deter and punish hate speech, and hate crimes should be addressed
not only as acts that threaten “public order” or “public peace”
but as something that is wrong in principle.
Armenian schools, together with other minority schools, should be
granted a permanent special status and new legislation should include
the principle of positive discrimination.
New legislation is required pursuant to the principles of the UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child should be adopted so that
children from Armenia can receive an education in their native
language.
History textbooks should be free of narratives containing “hatred
and hostility” and a discriminatory discourse against Armenians.
Equality with Muslims should be observed in a large area ranging from
opening and maintaining places of worship to educating clergy.
The government should stand behind the circular (dated May 13,
2010) issued by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan with regard to
the elimination of problems encountered by non-Muslim minorities,
and negative and restrictive practices of the administration should
be investigated.
The Armenian Patriarchate of Ä°stanbul should be granted legal
personality.
Non-Muslim representatives should be included in the Minority Issues
Review Board, and/or a Minorities Department which will address the
problems of and advise non-Muslim minorities should be established.
The public authority should prepare the environment for the removal
of ideological boundaries in history-writing, clear the path for
academic studies, and remove the potential penal obstacles to
translation/publishing foreign-language publications in Turkish.
Putting into effect the protocols signed for the opening of borders
between Turkey and Armenia will contribute to the normalization of
relations between the two countries.
The parliamentary investigation into the murder of Hrant Dink should
be deepened to expose all the perpetrators and individuals responsible.