Alle wegen leiden naar Istanbul

Orientalisme of occidentalisme? Rijk of arm? Conservatief of progressief? Deze melancholische stad van Orhan Pamuk heeft me tot nu toe een bitterzoete gevoel bezorgd vol contradicties. De vraag of ik hier thuis hoor blijft eeuwig onbeantwoord. Tussen alle bruggen, wateren, moskeeën, paleizen en massa's mensen wijken mijn ogen ongewild naar de vissers op de Galata-brug, naar de straatverkopers, naar de heen en weer lopende verpauperde gezichten, stressvolle buschauffeurs, naar journalisten die hun loon niet kunnen krijgen, naar zwervers met kinderen op schoot. In deze historische stad wijken mijn ogen naar de vele wanhopige toekomsten, en naar de vele toekomstloze verwachtingen. Wie zal hun geschiedenis schrijven?




Van de Romeinse Keizer via de Sultan naar de president. Wat veranderen de keerpunten van de geschiedenis voor diegenen die moeten overleven? De migratie stroomt opeens van Oost naar West, opeens leiden alle wegen naar Istanbul. De grote stad waar men voor alle problemen een oplossing heeft. De stad met grote villa´s aan de Bosphorus. Maar een kleine stap in de slome explosie en de beelden waargenomen door twee verbaasde ogen tonen iets anders dan de gecreëerde beelden in het onbewuste. De eeuwige strijd schijnt zich voort te zetten.


Van het feodale naar het kapitalistische. Een oppervlakkige acceptatie van de grote woorden in bewegingen naar water en brood. In het diepe een haat, geworteld in de aarde der wanhoop, geuit in de eeuwige leugens der machthebbers. Het onzichtbare feit wordt de andere kant van het verhaal wanneer het woord Istanbul valt in het verre. In de stad zelf is er geen kant noch verhaal. De stad, bedekt door een dunne deken, een deken met de mooiste geschiedenis weerspiegelt in haar lijnen en kreukels.

The Never Ending War

On 12 April 2007, the Turkish police invaded the offices of Nokta, a magazine on politics and society, on the behest of the Turkish military. Shortly before, Nokta had published the diary of a Turkish general, in which plans for a coup against the current government were discussed. The police confiscated all computers and documents and copied all information. It started an interrogation in connection with article 318 and 319 of the Turkish Penal Law; these laws forbid every negative act against the Turkish Army. Owing to this, magazine Nokta ended publishing.

I had a conversation with a student about this event. His name is O.

O: The Army did a good job.
C: Huh?!
O: Publishing a general's diary, that's stupid.
C: But that means that there is no freedom of the press in this country?
O: Yes, there is, but some times you've to watch out. It can become dangerous for the country.
C: Why?
O: Some things are secret!
C: But this is a democratic country, isn't it? Haven't you the right to know what they know?
O: Yes, that's right. It isn't a problem if I shall know it. But there are not just Turks in this country. There are Germans, Englishmen...
C: (...)

Yes, indeed, I kept silence. A few seconds. Then... I looked around me, I acted as if I didn’t want anyone to hear me, I felt like in a mafia scene and in a manner similar to Godfather Don Corleone, I said: 'They already know'. Now, it was his turn to be quiet.





It appeared to me that he is still living in the First World War. England, France, Italy... they all still want to attack Turkey, to occupy Turkey. They're still enemies. The situation is deplorable, because it looks like tens of millions in Turkey are O's.

Top Secret Files

Last sentences of a murdered man: “Yes, I see myself in a pigeon's apprehensiveness, but I know the people in this country don't do anything against pigeons. Pigeons sustain themselves in the innermost of cities, even among human crowds. Yes, a little anxiously, but at least that much in freedom”.1

His name: Hrant Dink. Charged three and a half years ago, because he said: “I am not a Turk. I'm a Turkish citizen. But I'm Armenian”. This was seen as 'insulting Turkishness', which is forbidden according to Article 301 of the Turkish Criminal Law

Hrant Dink: killed in Istanbul, three and a half months ago.
The reason: he passed some borders with his ideas.
The killer: a seventeen years old boy.
Behind the assassination: deep state, or... just the state.

The murderer and some figures around the assasination were put on trial. But today, some documents and evidences about the assasination, maybe the most important ones, were destroyed by the prosecutor, because it contained top secret files.

Maybe it sounds normal to many, but isn't 'top secret files' actually a very strange term?

The Turkish state's definition for this term is: 'Knowledge and documents, which could be dangerous for state's security, national existence and unity, constitutional order and international relations, when owned and known by those who are not competent for it.'

Who are not competent for it? Who are they? Those who chose the top? Those who elected the government? If we hold the most simple definition of democracy, there should be no place for 'top secret files'. Containing 'top secret files' means a lack of democracy.

Finally, who trusts those who know and own these 'top secret files'? Maybe these 'top secret files' are the key for those who are behind the assassination, the deep state, or... just the state.

1http://www.bbc.co.uk/turkish/europe/story/2007/01/070119_agos.shtml

1 May Square

1 May 1977, Turkey: 34 people were killed during Labour Day celebrations at Taksim Square, which is the most famous square of Istanbul. While after 1977 many events were held at this square, the Labour Day celebration was forbidden. This was a painful decision for political Left in Turkey. Despite the prohibition, every year some stubborn leftist groups attempt to go to the square, but every time they are being blocked by a strong police force.


Thirty years after the incident, several leftist groups decided to go to Taksim Square once again, even if they would not get a permission. Their desire was decreasing the pain of thirty years and commemorating the 34 killed people. Unfortunately, going to Taksim Square was not allowed. Actually, the Interior Minister was responsible for this decision, but Istanbul's governor held a prominent place. However, for leftist groups, it was not possible anymore to change their decision; they had to go to Taksim Square.




1 May 2007, Turkey: between 600 and 900 people were arrested and kept in custody. Every street that led to Taksim Square was closed by the police. A police force of 17,000 was raised. Ferries couldn't cross to Istanbul's European side. Many people who came from outside Istanbul were not allowed to enter the big city. The disordered traffic became more chaotic. Finally, 5,000 people arrived with difficulty at Taksim Square, made their press statement, laid a carnation to commemorate the victims of the ‘77 May Day incident. A little victory for socialists.


Unexpectedly, according to the governor, people were allowed to commemorate the 34 killed people, but they were not allowed to go to Taksim Square with ten or hundred thousands of people. According to the Law, it is allowed to hold a commemoration at Taksim Square, but it doesn't say anything about the number of the people attending it.


Why was it forbidden to celebrate May Day at Taksim Square? The answer is very simple: because it is not allowed to be a socialist in Turkey. A small group, consisting of leftist-nationalist supporters of the state, celebrated May Day at another place, without any problems. This was a trump for the governor to say “the troubled 1 May was not our fault”.


What will happen now? The governor and the police chief will be charged. They will be punished or dismissed. The next national elections, the next presidential candidate will be the main subject. The headlines of almost every newspaper on the second of May was about the Constitutional Court's decision on the question whether the parliament needs two thirds of the votes for choosing a new president. The struggle between seculars and Islamists will be the most important topic of the country. What won't happen? Socialists still won't get any place in Turkey.

Flags and Mosques

Two things you can't miss when walking on the streets of Turkey are Turkish flags and mosques, those are actually summarizing the state. These rapidly expanding flags and mosques reflect the Turkish state, what on its turn has influence on the population. You are either an islamist or a nationalist; a third way does not exist. If this is the case, to what extent can we consider Turkey a democratic country?


The current prime minister is an Islamist; two thirds of the parliament is Islamist; the parliament's chairman is an Islamist; the presidential candidate, who will be chosen by parliament, is an Islamist. These Islamists are known as economically neo-liberal and culturally conservative. The other group, the secularists and the nationalists, is on the one hand made up of the other big political parties and on the other hand of the Army, which carried out three coups in 1960, 1971 and 1980. In 1997 it intervened to bring down Turkey's first Islamist Prime Minister, which can be seen as a post-modern coup. A second post-modern coup took place four days ago, on 29 April 2007. The Army gave a political note to the ruling party – Justice and Development Party, AKP – in connection with the presidential candidate, because he is an Islamist. The note can be summarized as: “watch out AKP, you're going too far!”. In addition, the Army was behind the organization of the demonstrations in the capital Ankara and the biggest city Istanbul, in which hundred thousands of people participated, against the ruling party and in favor of secularism. Turkish flags and Atatürk's portraits raised in the air. The message: “we will save the country from islamists”.


Turkey's democracy has a very strange system. To participate into the parliament a political party has to get at least ten percent of the votes. Consequently, because just two parties surpassed this political threshold in the last elections, AKP possesses two thirds of the parliament seats, while they had only won one third of the votes. The other seats are owned by the Republican Peoples Party, CHP. A small number of seats belong to parliamentarians who are independent or changed over to another political party. Because the president will be chosen by parliament, and he needs two thirds of the votes, it was possible for the Islamist candidate to become the next president. On the other side, the Army did not accept an islamist president, because otherwise islamists would become too powerful and therefore the Army gave a political note. The Secular opposition party CHP did not accept this president either and charged the ruling party, because during the presidential election the parliament was populated by less than two thirds. According to parliament's chairman, who is an Islamist, the number of the present parliamentarians was not important, but according to the Constitutional Court the number does matter: it must be two thirds, so, the president could not be chosen. As a result, national elections will be sooner.


After Turkey's establishment in 1923, the state's course was decided by Turkish-Sunni elites. The power swings between Turks and Sunni's. Sometimes little more nationalistic, sometimes little more religious. The Army, one of the main players of the Turkish secularist camp, does not want to lose any power. It intervenes at times, when there is a risk of losing any power. On the other side, after their coup in 1980, it gave more freedom to Islamists to islamize the country, because the Army was the ruling party and islamists were not a threat. Nowadays, Islamists have become too powerful, so the Army want to decrease their power.


In sum: it is possible to make some changes in Turkey, to make an improvement, or a deterioration. However, these alterations should conform to the Army's will. The three, or five, coups shows that the Army has the last word. So, it seems that democracy in Turkey exists only within the boundaries of the Army.