A major source of the discrimination existing against Armenians and other groups in Turkey is the current Constitution of the Republic of Turkey. As expressed by the participants, the perspective, language and wording with regard to the people living in these lands in the Constitution and particularly in the citizenship definition reflect a discriminatory mentality. The participants also expressed that the new proposed Constitution should have a more inclusive citizenship definition and language that stands at an equal distance to all ethnic groups. This new Constitution should be a text that is based on fundamental rights and freedoms, that broadens them as much as possible, that does not limit freedoms on grounds such as state security, in contrast to the existing Constitution; that has adopted the principle of “state for the society”, and that takes under guarantee the accountability
mechanism against politicians and bureaucrats.
Turkey’s multi-cultural social fabric should find its voice in the new Constitution. A legal text which does not correspond to the social reality it aims to represent would not be effective in the name of establishing a just society. In other words, the new Constitution should include provisions that will guarantee the survival and existence of different cultural groups. These do not mean special provisions and arrangements for each ethnic or religious group, but general provisions conforming to universal principles of law and placing the existence of all cultures under the guarantee of the state. In addition to including all these elements, the new Constitution should be “simple”, concise and easy to understand, as much as possible. When preparing the Constitution, special effort should be made to ensure the broadest possible social participation, and the process should include exchange of ideas with NGOs and different social segments.
In addition to the new Constitution, there are other actions that can be implemented by the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. For example, some
31 work towards creating a social environment where
different cultures can live equally and freely.
Organizing events and activities which render all cultures of Turkey equally visible would be a remedy against the dominance of the Turkish and Islamic cultures in the public. The legitimacy of the existence of these cultures in Turkey needs to be spread as a public message. It is especially important to underline “introduction” here, because one of the reasons that Armenians are identified as foreigners by a large segment of the society is the lack of adequate knowledge on the Armenian culture and the history of Armenians in Turkey. As the level of knowledge on these matters increases, the Armenian existence will become “normalized” in the eyes of people.
The media should be considered as a key
component of the future social campaigns organized against discrimination. As mentioned before, the media has played a big role in establishing and normalizing the discriminatory language.33 Media-focused works should be carried out to eliminate this negative role of the media. Studies such as media literacy or identification of hate speech in the media can set examples. It may also be beneficial to make
33 In addition to the media, the role of some Muslim clergymen in the establishment of the discriminatory language should also be mentioned. These people have been seen to use anti-Christian/Armenian expressions like
“Do not befriend Christians”, “Do not do business with Armenians” etc. The most recent example to this also came on the public agenda. An individual, known as Cüppeli Ahmet Hoca, in his vaaz [sermon] in April 2011, said it is “infidelity” to say that Christians and Jews will also go to the same heaven, and that the so-called dialogue between religions is nothing but “trouble”. The mentalities and approaches of those who encounter such individuals during their daily prayers or in the printed and visual media are also likely to take shape in line with these expressions. Hence, in addition to the education provided in schools, the vaaz [sermons] given in mosques should also be addressed, and use of discriminating and hate speech in these places should be prevented. For said speech by Cüppeli Ahmet Hoca, please see; Milliyet [online web site] 2011, http://video.milliyet.com.tr/
video-izle/Cubbeli---Dansoz-izleyin-daha-iyi---D34md4IQrbn2.html.
in the parliament and hence the presence of such a representative in the parliament would be nothing but a “make up” or “staving off prohibitions”. Moreover, as mentioned above, having only one Armenian/
non-Muslim representing all Armenians, even in MP status, could be problematic as it would pose a “risk of standardizing the Armenian identity”. On the other hand, having a few non-Muslim deputies in the Parliament is important in a symbolic sense. Hence, at least, the rest of the society could be given the message that the non-Muslims are also “constitutive and legitimate” elements of this society, which can help in shattering the negative image and prejudices of non-Muslims in general and Armenians in
particular. A participant from Hatay explains his local experience on this matter as follows:
There is always someone from our community (cemaat) at protocols. What does it achieve? You don’t see anyone saying “What are these Armenians doing here?” When people see an Armenian in the protocol, when they see Armenian representation, they say “these are our Armenians”, they do not ask
“where did they come from?”, and so there is recognition. And I think I need that recognition for my survival there.
All these anecdotes show that the source of discrimination against Armenians and other different identities does not come from only the legislation and the state practices. Though shaped by state policies of decades, the discriminating mentality performed by the social fabric has an important role on its own. As reiterated by some participants, even if the practices of the state are rectified, and if a more democratic and liberal Constitution is instituted, it would be impossible to totally eliminate discrimination as long as this mentality remains unchanged. Therefore, legislative and institutional arrangements are necessary but insufficient for prevention of discrimination.
In addition, it is also important to give the society the message that differences are legitimate and they can exist together. Politicians, those with
administrative powers and also the NGOs should
32
country should be among the primary duties of the state. On the other hand, in the case of cultures in
“danger of clear and imminent threat of extinction”, like the Armenian identity and culture in Turkey, it should not be seen as abnormal for the state to give
“urgent” support, through “positive discrimination” if necessary. As such, from the Armenian perspective, such positive discrimination practices would be partial reparations for the destruction caused by the state in the past.
Through additional channels, Armenians can fight against the discrimination they are exposed to.
Besides seeking legal remedy, it is also important to be incorporated into the general struggle of democracy going on in the country. This includes taking part in, contacting, or engaging in dialogue with political parties or non-governmental
organizations (İnsan Hakları Derneği (Human Rights Foundation, İHD], “Irkçılığa ve Milliyetçiliğe Dur! De”
Girişimi [“Say Stop to Racism and Nationalism”
Initiative], Genç Siviller [Young Civilians] etc.) and fighting for broadening the domain of rights and freedoms in Turkey. The Armenian society should not be a ‘closed’ community; it should explain itself to the rest of the society and should also listen to the other social groups which face similar problems of discrimination.
Armenians’ participation into the struggle for democracy would not be sufficient on its own. It is crucial that the democratic circles of Turkey should pay attention and be involved in the problems that Turkish-Armenians have been living with in Turkey for decades. One participant emphasizes this necessity as follows:
We are talking among ourselves, but the academici-ans or the prominent intellectuals of the country, whoever they might be, should also discuss these topics; they should inform the public, explain them the fact that the Armenians are not bad people. I do not see any movement to erase this perception. In deed I want this to happen … Sometimes we are left with no power to encourage us…
legal arrangements and conduct trainings that will stop media organs from using this hate speech. For example, both the relevant state institutions (Ministry of National Education, Ministry of Culture and Radio and Television Supreme Council) and the non-governmental organizations can administer trainings and organize workshops on hate speech and
discriminatory expressions for reporters and
journalists. In this way, there can be more awareness amongst the members of media against this negative language and approach.34 In addition, recalling what we have said above with regard to the lack of
recognition and visibility of the cultures, religions and lifestyles of the “others”, media organs can be used to introduce and increase the visibility of the histories of different cultures.
Besides discrimination, assimilation is also a serious problem for the Armenians of Turkey. In addition to the state practices, sociological dynamics such as modernization, individualization and globalization also work for the total destruction of the Armenian culture and identity in Turkey. What the government and the bureaucracy should do in order to eliminate these concerns is put equal citizenship into practice with all its institutions and rules, and to make a conscious effort in the domain of both the legislature and the executive. Giving material support to Armenian schools and cultural institutions (theatres, periodicals etc.), preparing projects to raise Armenian language teachers in cooperation with Armenian schools, and fully eliminating the obstacles that prevent foundations from acquiring property and engaging in international cooperation can be examples of such efforts. In fact, the existence and protection of all languages, cultures and lifestyles of a
34 For a study of this type, please see: International Hrant Dink Foundation 2010, Nefret Suçları ve Nefret Söylemi [Hate Crimes and Hate Speech]. Also, the “hate speech”
website of the Foundation (www.nefretsoylemi.org) periodically scans the media for articles and news stories containing discrimination and hostility in the national press, and publishes them. İHD’s studies with İstanbul Bilgi University Sociology and Education Studies Unit (www.secbir.org) may also provide guidance.
33 situations that make you uncomfortable. When
Armenians are shown tolerance, it is implicitly accepted that even their existence is an annoyance.
A discourse aiming to prevent discrimination should be built on universal concepts such as equal citizenship, justice, freedom and human rights.