Author: Kajoyan Gevork

The Washington Quarterly

Article | Summer 2012
Turkey’s Strategic Vision and Syria

Editor’s Note: This article originally appeared in Summer 2012 issue of The
Washington Quarterly
.

INTRODUCTION

For most of the 20th century, Turkey chose not to get involved in Middle
Eastern affairs. During the past decade, however, in a remarkable departure
from this Kemalist tradition (based on the ideology of the republic’s
founder, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk), Ankara has become a very active and
important player in the region. Under the Justice and Development Party
(AKP) government since 2002, Turkey has established closer ties with Syria,
Iran, and Iraq, assumed a leadership position in the Organization of the
Islamic Conference (OIC), attended Arab League conferences, and contributed
to UN forces in Lebanon. It has also mediated in the Syrian – Israeli
conflict as well as the nuclear standoff with Iran. Ankara’s diplomatic
engagements with Iran and Hamas have led to differences with the United
States and Israel, leaving many wondering if Turkey has been turning away
from its Western orientation or if it was just a long overdue shift east to
complete Turkey’s full circle of relations.

Fundamentally, analysts make a major mistake in analyzing Turkish foreign
policy when they speak of a “pro-Western” versus “Islamic” divide in
Ankara’s strategic choices. This is an understandable fallacy. Turkey’s
population is almost fully Muslim, and the AKP, a political party with
Islamic roots, has won consecutive election victories. Many policymakers,
analysts, and scholars thus equate the notion of Turkish divergence from
the West or the fear of “losing Turkey” with the idea of an Islamic
revival. Moreover, this is exactly how some members within Turkey’s
Kemalist establishment the military, the Republican People’s Party (CHP)
founded by Atatuürk, and the judiciary describe some AKP policies in the
Middle East. While the growing importance of religion in Turkey should not
be dismissed, such an analysis gives superficial credibility to the fallacy
of an “Islamist” foreign policy in Turkey.

But how then should Turkey’s current foreign policy be characterized and
understood? To answer this question, one has to look first at the three
grand strategic visions that have driven Turkish foreign policy:
Neo-Ottomanism, Kemalism, and more recently, Turkish Gaullism. The common
denominator of these strategic visions is that they transcend the erroneous
narrative prevalent in Western media focusing almost exclusively on the
dichotomy between Turkey’s Islamic and secular factions. In particular, the
way in which Turkey has handled the continuing implications of the 2011
Arab awakening helps to clarify Turkish grand strategy, or its continuing
balancing act among these three strategic visions, as Ankara has faced a
more challenging strategic environment, most specifically in its estranged
relations with Bashar Assad’s Syria.

Download » (PDF)

Turkish PM to visit Azerbaijan

Thu 09 August 2012 09:57 GMT | 10:57 Local Time

Recep Tayyip Erdogan
A preliminary date of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s
visit to Azerbaijan has been announced.
The visit of the Turkish prime minister is scheduled for September
11-12, diplomatic sources told Trend on Thursday.

The purpose of the visit is to attend the regular meeting of the
Azerbaijan-Turkey strategic cooperation Council.

Work is ongoing to prepare the relevant documents for the meeting.

On August 16, 2010, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Turkish
President Abdullah Gul signed in Istanbul an agreement between
Azerbaijan and Turkey on strategic partnership and mutual assistance.

News.Az

Expert: Homeland-Diaspora relations to benefit Armenian-Ukrainian ties

August 11, 2012 – 16:37 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net – A senior fellow at the Institute of Political and
Social Studies of the Black Sea and Caspian region commented on
Azerbaijani media attempts to draw the Ukraine into anti-Armenian
propaganda campaign.

`Azeri publications proved that a struggle is waged also for material
resources,’ Andrei Areshev said in interview with Analitika.at.ua.

`Diaspora-building artificial measures by governmental resources are
doomed to failure. As far as I understand such a situation is not
exclusive to the Ukraine,’ he said.

`However, Armenians can boast a developed culture and social life in
Ukraine. Inclusion of Armenian in the list of regional languages and
Ukraine’s minority languages is linked to the fact,’ he said.

According to the expert, effective motherland-Diaspora ties may
positively affect Armenian-Ukrainian relations, considering Kiev’s
interest in Azerbaijan’s energy resources and transit function. In
this context, Mr. Areshev stressed Ukraine as one of the leading arms
supplier to Azerbaijan.

`NGOs’ active operation fosters intensification of ties on
governmental level. Catholicos of All Armenians Karekin II’s August 11
visit to the Ukraine reaffirms the cultural complementarily between
the two nations,’ he said, adding that the number of Azerbaijanis in
the Ukraine ranges from `official’ 45 thous. to unofficial 250 thous.

`Migration is a common trend in post-Soviet states, regardless of
their oil and gas deposits, as well as political and ideological
models,’ the expert said.

Hraparak: Armenia – a country of kickbacks

tert.am
09:50 – 11.08.12

In all the post-Soviet states `kickbacks’ sometimes reach a ridiculous
level – up to 70%. The point is that the people `in charge of the
results’ of various programs set their kickback rates. The practice is
sometimes almost legalized.

For instance, a foreign company would apply for construction of a
monumental complex, and the Yerevan Municipality official in charge
openly offers the company to arrange about the kickback before it gets
permission. Or Armenia’s Ministry of Culture does not allow a company
that wins a contest for renovating a historical and cultural monument
to start working as it has not got its `share.’

The newspaper is surprised at a statement by one of Armenian
ministers, who said that his protégé company’s failure to win the
contest was `a personal insult’ to him and did his utmost for the
program, which was of high importance for Armenia, to fail. After the
organizers had the problem resolved at the presidential level, the
minister shamelessly announced his intention to inform the president
that the program was sponsored by the opposition.

Two Syrian Armenians interested in doing business in Armenia

11:13, 11 August, 2012

Yerevan, August 11, ARMENPRESS: Two Syrian Armenians applied the
Armenian Employers’Union for doing business in Armenia. As the
president of the Employers’ Union Gagik Makaryan noted in the
interview with `Armenpress’ that both of them chose the services
sector. `The Syrian Armenians want to be engaged in the import and
repair works of motor spare parts at first in Yerevan, then in the
regions’, he stated.

In order to do business in Armenia a group of Syrian Armenians will in
a near future also apply to the union. Earlier the Employers’ Union
spread a statement expressing willingness to provide free advice to
the Syrian Armenians for doing business in Armenia.

As the president of the Employers’ Union Gagik Makaryan briefed
`Armenpress’ jobs in spheres of services, fast food, small industries,
such as eastern confectionery, in which the Syrian Armenians are
master and other spheres will be offered to the Syrian Armenians.

Because of the ongoing clashes in Syria since March 2011 tens of
thousands people were killed including Armenians. The Syrian Armenians
still continue to leave the country. The Armenian Ministries of
Diaspora and Education and public institutions are taking measures to
provide the necessary accommodation and education for the Syrian
Armenians arrived in homeland. The issues on granting the Syrian
Armenians citizenship status are discussed in an accelerated
procedure.

Haute Living
Aug 10 2012

Haute Event: Mikayel Israyelyan Hosts an Elegant Fundraising Dinner
for California Congressman Adam Schiff

by Laura Schreffler

Mikayel Israyelyan showed his support for Adam Schiff by throwing the
Congressman a fundraising dinner at his Romanov Restaurant & Lounge in
Studio City on Thursday night.

The Muse Lifestyle Group CEO organized the private dinner and even
gave a speech during the event.

He said: `Adam Schiff has been our voice in Congress over the years in
attempts to get the Armenian Genocide recognized as that – Genocide.
We need to support his upcoming campaign because of all the great work
he has done for Armenians over the years.’

In his own speech, Schiff said: `I am deeply indebted to the Armenian
community and have a great love and admiration to its people because
they have welcomed me as a family member. I have been so fortunate to
have a great relationship with the Armenian community even before my
first days in office.

`Frankly, I have such a connection because my community has so many
parallels with the Armenian community. I am Jewish. I come from a
community like the Armenian community that has had its own Genocide,
and one who has hostile neighbors that impose difficult challenges.’

Other supporters at the dinner included Los Angeles City Controller
Wendy Greuel, Jacklin Boyadjian, Executive Director at the Armenian
Bar Association, Robert Vinokur and Israyelyan’s Business Partner at
Muse Lifestyle Group.

Athens News Agency- Greece
Aug 8 2012

Sailing Boat With Illegal Migrants Intercepted Near Zakynthos; Arrests
in Western Greece

A sailing boat with 79 illegal migrants on board (77 men and 2 women)
was intercepted by a Coastguard patrol vessel off the western coasts
of the Ionian Sea island of Zakynthos, it was announced on Wednesday
[8 August].

The sailing boat was led to the port of Zakynthos and the illegal
migrants, of various nationalities, are being temporarily held at the
island’s municipal stadium. Police have launched a manhunt for the
arrest of the migrant smugglers who managed to flee.

Meanwhile, dozens of illegal migrants were arrested over the past
month in the western part of the country while attempting to enter or
exit Greece illegally.

A total of 251 individuals were arrested in western Greece in July for
entering the country illegally, while other two were arrested on
migrant smuggling charges.

Seven Eritrea nationals and one Sudanese, all in their 30s, were
arrested at Aktio Airport when they attempted to exit the country
using fake travel documents, police announced on Wednesday. Roughly 20
illegal migrants were arrested at the airports of Araxos and Aktio in
the month of July when they attempted to leave the country using fake
passports.

Other 15 illegal migrants from Armenia, Morocco, Moldavia, Syria, Iraq
and Ghana, aged 19-42, were arrested at the Port of Patras [Patrai] in
the past few days when they attempted to board ferryboats to Italy
using fake travel documents.

Four Norwegians, a Pakistani and an Afghan were arrested in the same
period at the Port of Patras accused of facilitating four illegal
migrants to travel to Italy.

MUNICIPALITY TO RESTORE GREEN AREAS IN YEREVAN IN PREVIOUS VOLUMES

Mediamax
Aug 9 2012
Armenia

Yerevan/Mediamax/. An environmental commission subordinate to the
Urban Development Council has been set up by the instruction of
Yerevan Mayor Taron Margaryan.

The commission involves representatives of 19 environmental NGOs,
scientists and members of civic initiatives, Mediamax reports.

Addressing the first session today, Taron Margaryan pointed out that
works aimed at the restoration and expansion of previous volumes of
green areas in the capital are currently underway.

“I assure you that the opinion of the commission will be taken
into consideration during the discussion of large urban development
projects,” said Taron Margaryan.

The chairwoman of the commission, Karine Danielyan, said that the
establishment of the commission will have a vital significance for
the comprehensive discussion and settlement of environmental and
other issues.

PRESIDENT PUTIN’S STATEMENTS & ANSWERS TO JOURNALISTS’ QUESTIONS FOLLOWING MEETING WTH PRESIDENT OF ARMENIA SERZH SARGSYAN

Kremlin.ru
Office of the President of the Russian Federation
Russia
Aug 8 2012

PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA VLADIMIR PUTIN : Good afternoon, ladies and
gentlemen,

We have finished our talks with the President of Armenia. I want to
start by thanking Mr Sargsyan for accepting our invitation and coming
to Moscow today and giving us this opportunity, which we will continue
informally now, to discuss the full spectrum of our relations.

I mentioned at the start of our meeting that we are celebrating
two symbolic dates this year: 20 years since our two countries
established diplomatic relations, and 15 years since we signed the
Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance. In this
respect it gives me particular pleasure to speak of our achievements
so far this year, and we do have results to show.

In the economy, we have practically come back to the pre-crisis level
of around $1 billion in trade turnover. I agree with Mr Sargsyan that
this is not enough for our two countries and that we can and must go
even further.

I hope that the Intergovernmental Commission, which will start work
very soon (with the Transport Minister [Maxim Sokolov] as co-chairman
on the Russian side), will draft the cooperation programme for our
economic relations through to 2020. This will be something like a
roadmap for our trade and economic ties.

We place a lot of importance on developing interregional ties. In this
respect, I note that more than 70 Russian regions are involved in such
ties. Interregional cooperation is developing specific organisational
forms now too: the first Interregional Forum took place in Yerevan
in April 2011, and the second such forum is scheduled for November
this year.

I am sure you will agree with me that direct contacts between our
regions are extremely important. They help to reduce red tape in
economic relations and make them more vibrant, concrete and effective.

We discussed today the prospects for increasing our cooperation within
the CIS, CSTO and other international organisations. We spoke more
broadly about the integration projects underway in the post-Soviet
area and reflected on what we need to do to make use of the latest
integration agreements. We agreed to establish a joint commission to
look at how we can make use of the latest Customs Union cooperation
agreements between Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus with regard to
Armenia and its specific situation. Armenia does not have any common
borders with us after all, but we can reflect on ways to use some of
the instruments the three countries have agreed on.

Of course, we also devoted considerable attention to the Nagorno
Karabakh issue and exchanged our views on the situation with
negotiations. I stress in this respect Russia’s continued commitment
to playing an active part as a mediator through its role as co-chair
of the OSCE’s Minsk Group.

I am happy with the meeting’s results and once more I want to thank
Mr Sargsyan for finding the time and accepting our invitation to come
to Moscow.

Thank you for your attention.

PRESIDENT OF ARMENIA SERZH SARGSYAN : Thank you, Mr President. It is
a genuine pleasure to meet with you again.

I am happy to see that the Armenian-Russian strategic partnership,
based on the time-tested friendship between our peoples, continues
its steady growth. Our countries have reached a complete mutual
understanding on foreign and domestic policy matters.

The regular political dialogue at all levels and active contacts
between our parliaments and at the regional level play a big part in
strengthening our partnership.

We looked at how to strengthen the institutions underpinning our
bilateral cooperation today and discussed the need for more frequent
exchanges and consultations at every level, including at the higher
levels.

Armenia has always strived for peace and stability in the Caucasus.

This is the goal of our policy to reach a peaceful and lasting
settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. We think that Russia plays
a key part in security issues in the South Caucasus. This applies too,
to Russia’s constructive efforts to settle the Nagorno Karabakh issue,
which are extremely important for Armenia. Mr President, we thank
you for Russia’s constant attention and effective efforts in this area.

We seek to continue our effective cooperation, based on mutual
consideration for each other’s interests, within international and
regional organisations. We will continue our efforts to make our
foreign policy coordination in international forums more effective.

Armenia is a strong supporter of reinforcing the CSTO and we will
continue to make the necessary efforts to develop this organisation.

Armenia will host the CSTO Rapid Reaction Force’s military exercises
in September.

Our military and military technical cooperation continue to develop
well. We discussed today new possibilities for expanding our
cooperation in the defence industry and in training for military
personnel.

We extended the lease of the Russian military base in Armenia in 2010.

Our position is that having the military base on our soil is in the
interests of our country’s security. The protocol that we signed also
expands possibilities for using the base in the event of a threat to
Armenia’s security.

Russia’s economic presence in Armenia is in the strategic interests
of both countries. Russia is Armenia’s main trade partner and accounts
for more than half of all foreign investment in our country.

The joint implementation of a number of big projects such as
construction of new units at the Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant and
possible Russian participation in infrastructure projects in Armenia
are evidence of our long-term economic ties.

Of course, we also discussed today the important matter of prices for
natural gas supplies to Armenia. I think that we have reached a common
understanding on the price: it will be based on the real market price
multiplied or divided (as you wish) by Armenia’s natural gas supply
needs at costs comparable to regional prices and that can ensure the
Armenian economy remains effective.

Mr Putin confirmed that Russia wants to see a strong, competitive
and developed Armenia. This is the approach of a true ally. I thank
the Russian President for his clear position on all of the issues on
our agenda.

I took the opportunity to invite President Putin to make a state
visit to Armenia at any convenient time for him.

Thank you very much.

QUESTION : Mr Sargsyan, Mr Putin, what do you think of the performance
of Armenian and Russian athletes at London Olympics? An ethnic
Armenian Arsen Galstyan won Russia’s first gold medal, and we were
all enthralled by boxer Mikhail Aloyan’s performance, and wish him
good luck on August 10.

VLADIMIR PUTIN : We congratulate all the athletes on their great
success at the Olympics, whatever their ethnic background. As I said
to your Russian colleagues yesterday, in some events we hoped for
better results, and in other events we have achieved some completely
unexpected results. Sport is sport. Whatever the case, we are proud
of our athletes. The Games are not over yet and it is still early
to sum up the results. We will analyse the results and make our
conclusions later. Right now, I want to congratulate those who have
achieved outstanding results, and I stress that Russia will continue
its unfailing support for the Olympic movement and its principles.

SERZH SARGSYAN : I think you already said everything in your question.

Of course, Galstyan’s victory is a valuable symbol for everyone who
treasures Armenian-Russian cooperation, and it just goes to show
that together we are stronger. By the way, Armenia’s Olympic team
includes athletes who were born in Russia. I think our team has done
quite well overall and I wish them success over the remaining days
of the Olympics.

QUESTION : Let me apologise straight away for asking a question that
is not about Russian-Armenian relations, but today is August 8 – the
fourth anniversary of the conflict in South Ossetia, and so I wanted
to ask you about your personal involvement in the events of those
days. I asked you yesterday about the film that our South Ossetian
colleagues made about those events. The film asserts, in particular,
that you telephoned from Beijing, where you were at that moment, on
August 8. Did you really call from Beijing? And is it true that Russia
did not have an action plan ready in the event of Georgian military
aggression against South Ossetia? Could you answer these questions?

Thank you.

VLADIMIR PUTIN : There was a plan in place, and I think it is no secret
that Russia’s forces acted in accordance with this plan. I have spoken
about this publicly before, and as I say, it is no secret. The General
Staff drew up this plan somewhere in late 2006 or early 2007.

I approved it. Furthermore, this plan was used as the basis
for training South Ossetian volunteer forces. True, our military
specialists, to be honest, did not place much hope in this work, given
that resisting any country’s regular armed forces, even those of a
small country like Georgia, is impossible. But these volunteer forces
nevertheless played a much-needed part in the end and courageously
defended their homeland. Over the three days before the Russian armed
forces arrived, it was essentially just they and our peacekeepers who
were holding off the Georgian forces. So, they did play their part. We
mobilised military equipment and arms and so on in accordance with the
plan. There is no secret here. We have already discussed all of this.

As for telephone calls, I called Mr Medvedev twice, on August 7 and 8,
and I called the Defence Minister. We discussed the situation.

By Katrina Stanislaw
TUFTS’ INA BAGHDIANTZ MCCABE EXPLORES HERITAGE

MEDFORD, Mass. – The following is an interview with Ina Baghdiantz
McCabe, Tufts Professor of History and Darakjian and Jafarian Chair in
Armenian History, regarding her studies of diasporas and her insight
on the formation of identities. It appeared in the newsletter of The
Fletcher School’s Fares Center for Eastern Mediterranean Studies.

Katrina Stanislaw: Your childhood was uniquely international: raised
in eight countries and educated in six languages before the age of 18.

How did this exposure influence your passion for history?

Ina Baghdiantz McCabe: Living in many cultures makes you realize that

most people are the same despite their cultural differences. Pain
and suffering are universal, as is the hope people hold for happiness
and a better future. Revolutions have happened on the force of this
promise for happiness and equality, but they always fail because some
people never believe it should be allowed. To put it simplistically,
people believe they are better than “other” people. The idea that
some people are better than others, taken to its extreme logic,
is what led to the Holocaust.

Of all the places I have lived I feel most at home here in the
United States; it remains the best democratic experiment, despite
some scary episodes. Unfortunately, that experiment also has a very
painful beginning with the annihilation of many native groups. As a
historian it helps you avoid the trap of exceptionalism; you realize
that many problems are universal.

KS: Did any of the countries and cultures you experienced in your
childhood have a particularly profound impact on the development of
your academic interests?

IM: My passion for history stems from the many cultures that I have
made my own and to me they are all profoundly connected. I have
read most deeply in French and so the ideas of some very interesting
thinkers such as Bourdieu, Bataille and the very old-fashioned Fernand
Braudel have marked me. As a historian I shy away from jargon and
theory but I have read a lot of theory, as most of it started in
France. Only in the United States could I have become a historian,
so of all of the cultures I know, the largest impact has been that
of the place I have had the privilege of choosing as my country. I
consider the state of Vermont, where my family lives, my home.

My own travels have forged a strong interest in cross-cultural
exchanges, in travel writing, in diasporas, in trade and in
intellectual exchanges. My Flemish mother and my Armenian father were
both born in strong patriarchal cultures that were not inclined to
accept women as intellectual or artists. Although there have been
some, including my mother, they succeeded with great difficulty. I
was born with a strong personality and a lot of drive, but even in
the countries where I have lived in Europe I certainly would have
not had the opportunities I have had here in the United States.

KS: In your writing, research and teaching you focus on the role of
diasporas, specifically the Armenian diaspora, and merchant networks.

What is it about diasporas that piques your academic interest?

IM: In a film by Bertrand Tavernier a history teacher enters his
high school class, opens a suitcase and takes out a knife and a
large sausage, which he proceeds to hack into pieces as he exclaims,
“this is history.”

History departments are cut up into national histories – we have
inherited this artificial classification from 19th-century nationalist
views. The worlds was not always made up of nation-states, nor
will it be in the future. In this national classification, diaspora
communities were an invisible group. Luckily, things are changing
and many departments are now designated in terms of regions or in
transregional terms, but most hiring is still done according to
national histories.

I have worked on the global silk and silver trade of a small group
of Armenians – the New Julfans – since 1987 and wrote my first book
about their trade in 1999. They were the same group Philip Curtin
used to define the terms “trade diaspora” in 1984 and his work on
cross- cultural trade sparked my own. My native Armenian and my
knowledge of Persian were important to this research, as the New
Julfans lived in Iran after 1604. I wanted to look at theoretical
problems and definitions of a deported, wealthy diaspora community,
as well as into the actual trade of the Armenians. I collaborated
with many people interested in the same issues.

Phillip Curtin was also a pioneer in a second issue that fascinates me;
in his discussion of trade networks in 1984 he includes the European
militarized diaspora in the same category as the Armenians, the Jews,
the Banians and the Fukein Chinese. This remains a contested issue
as the term diaspora has rarely been applied to Europeans abroad. I
agree with Curtin that his classifications offers a clearer picture
of reality. It is very hard to reconstruct the past – all honest
historians will accept that – but if networks, cross cultural contacts
and exchanges, travel and movement, cosmopolitanism and transnational
histories are not part of the quest, the quest will not yield fruitful
results.

KS: Your work estimates the importance of understanding the
intersection of material and intellectual exchanges and how these
two elements of history viewed together can create a more complete
historical pictures. Can you describe the link between these two
elements and provide an example of how they can be viewed together?

IM: A striking example is the creation of the cafe, a public
space in 17th-century Paris, in imitation of the coffee houses in
Constantinople, Cairo or Isfahan. I have three chapters on the arrival
of coffee in France in my latest book. According to several French
sources, the Armenians opened the first five Parisian cafes.

The transfer of ideas is often linked to goods, although few historians
study it that way. Many ideas about health, digestion and even morality
were transferred with imported coffee, a commodity.

Views about coffee vary tremendously and could fluctuate within
the same decade. Today the cafe is seen as a Parisian institution,
a marker of French identity, and the French think of coffee as
a national drink, its “oriental” roots forgotten. This very slow
cycle of cultural integration would also be the fate of many luxury
goods imported from Asia. Initially viewed as foreign or exotic, the
same product some few years later is viewed as representing France
and French habits. This transformation fascinates me. Most people
imagine that there are some objective properties that are intrinsic
to the nature of things. In the case of coffee I could show how views
about coffee changed according to who was importing it and whether
it profited France or not at that point in history. Views regarding
its properties varied from nefarious enough to cause impotence to
excellent for your health. I also showed how a glorious heroic tale
about the arrival of coffee in Martinique – due to one French officer
– served to create total silence about the use of slaves on French
plantations, making France the main European exporter of coffee to the
rest of Europe by the 18th century. In analyzing the discourse about
goods you can find variations in the discourse about the same good
that prove how fickle and changing our perception of reality can be.

We constantly construct categories and change them to suit our
interests. As Louis XIV used the sale of coffee to raise money
for his wars, court doctors advocated that coffee was better for
your health than wine. Because an object or good is inanimate, it
is easier to show how terribly subjective we are according to our
self-interests. A social scientist can study material goods to show
that values are not intrinsic to objects themselves, but rather are
projected onto goods by society. This goes against objectivism, a view
that there is one reality that exists independent of the human mind,
a truth with a big T.

KS: History is an essential part of understanding contemporary
culture. Are there any dynam- ics or patterns you have found in
your research that you feel are particularly relevant when looking
at current and future interactions between different countries and
cultures?

IM: A study of constantly changing ideas about the “foreign,”
the “exotic,” diaspora, refugees and cross-cultural exchanges and
encounters permeates my work. Our false categories can be a huge
obstacle to peace and mutual understanding. Categorizing something as
foreign or exotic leads to an “us and them” view of the world. The
same holds true of the traditional view of diaspora; it is seen
as a group that does not really belong to its host country. I have
argued for a different view in my work. This “us and them” view is
very politically potent. I can give you a vivid example to clarify:
when you hear someone argue that our current president is a foreigner
and was not born in the United States, despite ample proof that he
was, he is being described as “exotic,” and you are encountering
this phenomenon of arbitrary “othering.” History is supposed to
be about facts; our president’s American birth certificate is the
kind of document historians use, but what people do with facts makes
the historian’s job complex. My concern with the past gives me hope
that we can understand that we built this world both materially and
ideologically and that we are responsible for the many skewed systems
of beliefs that cause us so much trouble.