Dink legacy flourishes two years after death
Güncelleme Tarihi:
by Vercihan Ziflioglu
Oluşturulma Tarihi: Ocak 17, 2009 00:00
ISTANBUL - The murder of Turkish Armenian journalist Hrant Dink two years ago, on Jan. 19, 2006, cut down a person who fought his whole life to eliminate barriers between Turks and Armenians. After the murder there emerged a need among the Turkish public to seek out and learn more about Dink and his convictions.
Dink, executive editor of the Agos newspaper, published in Turkish and Armenian, was killed in front of his paper’s offices, angering not only Turks but also groups within Armenian society.
The assassination was headline news not only in Turkey but also for the international press and citizenry. At his funeral, thousands of people screamed the slogan: "We are all Armenians; we are all Hrant Dink," as one voice.
This slogan that represented a common conscience was sharply criticized by some groups in Turkey, but despite this, the struggle for consensus between the two nations that cost Dink his life, created something extraordinary.
The Turkish public started to wonder about the Armenian people who they had been living side by side with for hundreds of years, and also to question the past. Football diplomacy in recent months began a rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia that is without doubt one of the most important results of the process.
From the literary perspective, the interest in the Armenian problem and Armenians in Turkey has increased since the year 2000. According to publishers with whom the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review spoke, the number of the books published on the issue grew in the period from 2000 to 2005.
The biggest boom in the number of published books happened in the year 2005, when the Armenian problem was often in the spotlight.
In the two year period following Dink’s assassination, more than 60 books have been published.
Ragıp Zarakolu, owner of Belge Publishing and founding member of the Human Rights Foundation, who published books on the events of 1915 for the first time in Turkey in the beginning of 1990s, for which Zarakolu was put on trial and attacked because of, said: "In 1993, we published the first book in Turkey on the matter of the Armenian Genocide: everybody considered us insane back then. Following this, there has been a notable increase in the number of books related to the Armenian problem and Armenian society in recent years." According to Zarakol, the acceleration within academia, especially during the coalition government of Ecevit and Bahçeli, to publish material denying the Armenian problem played a role in this increase. Zarakol said: "There was a great increase in the number of the books on that basis. The books followed the official policy: the documents they were based on were from official archives but their integrity was controversial."
Perception of Dink assassination
Dink almost became a bridge of peace between the two societies to re-establish dialogue after a period of 100 years by way of his unique discourse and attitude. For that reason, the Dink assassination will always be an important turning point in Turkish-Armenian dialogue, according to some circles.
Ara Sarafian, a historian of Armenian origin and director of the London-based Gomidas Institute, believes Dink received reaction for his progressive discourse from Armenian extremists as much as from Turkish ones. Sarafian said: "This circle alleged Hrant was an agent of the Turkish Government. They were happy when Dink was silenced: it is sufficient to check the newspapers published in the diaspora during those times. That is because both sides (of extremists) did not want a peaceful solution to the problem."
Just like Sarafian, Jean Claude Kebabdjian, founder of Centre de Reche rches sur la Diaspora Armenienne (Center of Research on the Armenian Diaspora), or CRDA, said he believed Dink was the key point for understanding between the two societies. According to Kebabdjian, the goal behind Dink’s murder was to prevent the actualization of dialogue between the two societies.
Kebabdjian said the protests that have been organized in Turkey, the slogan and attempts made toward the solution of the problem by the Turkish intelligentsia, are respected among French Armenians and continued: "Their old reactions are slowly changing. That is why the slogan ’We are all Armenians’ was so significant."
However, Kebabdjian said French Armenians have said they believe it is impossible for Turkey to become a democratic country and doubt the possibility of establishing dialogue between the two societies.
Dilipak: ’Power has been obtained by the blood of this country’s children’
According to Abdurrahman Dilipak, columnist at the conservative Vakit newspaper and a human rights activist who sets the agenda through his unique opinions, the aftermath of the assassination happened to be the exact opposite of what the dark powers wanted: "Instead of being a cause of a new hostility between the two societies, Hrant’s blood provided an opportunity to decipher the deep state. That is how the intelligentsia of Armenia realized that Turkish society is not their enemy."
Dilipak started to talk about Dink with a quotation from the Koran: "Allah says: Your hostility against a clan should not drive you to injustice. Whoever kills one person kills the whole of humanity."
Dilipak said he had first met Dink at a debate show on television and continued: "At the beginning of the show, I was expecting a different approach from Dink. I had thought the show would cause very heated discussions but it did not happen that way."
’There is no Armenian taboo in Turkey’
Hasan Celal Güzel, conservative columnist for Radikal newspaper, has made different statements on the Dink assassination and the process that followed. Former state minister Güzel did not agree with the idea of the Dink assassination being a breaking point for Turkey and said the assassination happened because of the provocation of gangs such as Ergenekon. Güzel said the Dink assassination lost Turkey points in the international arena and continued: "This murder was read in the international arena as if Turks were intolerant and anti-Armenian."
Güzel said the Armenian problem has never been a taboo in Turkey and Dink’s ethnic background did not disturb anyone: "There is no problem in Turkey with dialogue between Turkish and Armenian societies. If it is Armenia and Armenians of the diaspora who mention dialogue, the only problems in this matter are Armenian’s hostility toward Turks and labeling Turks as committers of genocide." Güzel said contrary to belief, there had never been a rising wave of nationalism and Turkish society had always been nationalist in terms of patriotism.
Is artificial nationalism being encouraged?
Sevan Nişanyan, an academic, agreed that there was no rising wave of nationalism in Turkey. Nişanyan said military and political circles were trying to encourage nationalism artificially because of a rapidly dissolving nationalist consensus: "I think this attempt is an act of panic and it is destined to fail. It is hard to continue this primitive discourse in this age of integration taking over the world with fantastic speed."
Nişanyan said that suspicion and distrust has been growing toward the Turkish state and its history proposals among commonsensical members of Turkish society and intelligentsia in recent years and said: "For many people, it was almost an experience of disengagement after the assassination. The feeling of ’enough of this’ was felt by more than the few hundred thousand people at the funeral."
’Orhan Pamuk and Elif Şafak no longer talk about the Armenian matter’
Ahmet Ümit, Turkey’s adept crime novelist drew attention to Orhan Pamuk, the Nobel prize winning Turkish novelist, and Elif Şafak, another novelist, who previously set the national agenda with statements on the Armenian issue, but who have recently been avoiding making comments on the subject. Ümit said: "Hrant was an honest defender of the matter and paid the price. I do not want anyone to be hurt because of their ideas but the blood spilt is the indicator of who are the honest ones and how much honesty they have."
Ece Temelkuran, columnist for the Milliyet newspaper, said: "The Armenian issue is about the foundations of Turkey and anybody who comments on that is at risk." Temelkuran added: "The Armenian matter is like an nerve ending in Turkey," and that the most important development following the assassination happened to be the Armenian problem turning into a personal issue for the Turkish intelligentsia. Temelkuran said this attitude would be an important milestone in the path for a solution to the problem.
The assassination was headline news not only in Turkey but also for the international press and citizenry. At his funeral, thousands of people screamed the slogan: "We are all Armenians; we are all Hrant Dink," as one voice.
This slogan that represented a common conscience was sharply criticized by some groups in Turkey, but despite this, the struggle for consensus between the two nations that cost Dink his life, created something extraordinary.
The Turkish public started to wonder about the Armenian people who they had been living side by side with for hundreds of years, and also to question the past. Football diplomacy in recent months began a rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia that is without doubt one of the most important results of the process.
From the literary perspective, the interest in the Armenian problem and Armenians in Turkey has increased since the year 2000. According to publishers with whom the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review spoke, the number of the books published on the issue grew in the period from 2000 to 2005.
The biggest boom in the number of published books happened in the year 2005, when the Armenian problem was often in the spotlight.
In the two year period following Dink’s assassination, more than 60 books have been published.
Ragıp Zarakolu, owner of Belge Publishing and founding member of the Human Rights Foundation, who published books on the events of 1915 for the first time in Turkey in the beginning of 1990s, for which Zarakolu was put on trial and attacked because of, said: "In 1993, we published the first book in Turkey on the matter of the Armenian Genocide: everybody considered us insane back then. Following this, there has been a notable increase in the number of books related to the Armenian problem and Armenian society in recent years." According to Zarakol, the acceleration within academia, especially during the coalition government of Ecevit and Bahçeli, to publish material denying the Armenian problem played a role in this increase. Zarakol said: "There was a great increase in the number of the books on that basis. The books followed the official policy: the documents they were based on were from official archives but their integrity was controversial."
Perception of Dink assassination
Dink almost became a bridge of peace between the two societies to re-establish dialogue after a period of 100 years by way of his unique discourse and attitude. For that reason, the Dink assassination will always be an important turning point in Turkish-Armenian dialogue, according to some circles.
Ara Sarafian, a historian of Armenian origin and director of the London-based Gomidas Institute, believes Dink received reaction for his progressive discourse from Armenian extremists as much as from Turkish ones. Sarafian said: "This circle alleged Hrant was an agent of the Turkish Government. They were happy when Dink was silenced: it is sufficient to check the newspapers published in the diaspora during those times. That is because both sides (of extremists) did not want a peaceful solution to the problem."
Just like Sarafian, Jean Claude Kebabdjian, founder of Centre de Reche rches sur la Diaspora Armenienne (Center of Research on the Armenian Diaspora), or CRDA, said he believed Dink was the key point for understanding between the two societies. According to Kebabdjian, the goal behind Dink’s murder was to prevent the actualization of dialogue between the two societies.
Kebabdjian said the protests that have been organized in Turkey, the slogan and attempts made toward the solution of the problem by the Turkish intelligentsia, are respected among French Armenians and continued: "Their old reactions are slowly changing. That is why the slogan ’We are all Armenians’ was so significant."
However, Kebabdjian said French Armenians have said they believe it is impossible for Turkey to become a democratic country and doubt the possibility of establishing dialogue between the two societies.
Dilipak: ’Power has been obtained by the blood of this country’s children’
According to Abdurrahman Dilipak, columnist at the conservative Vakit newspaper and a human rights activist who sets the agenda through his unique opinions, the aftermath of the assassination happened to be the exact opposite of what the dark powers wanted: "Instead of being a cause of a new hostility between the two societies, Hrant’s blood provided an opportunity to decipher the deep state. That is how the intelligentsia of Armenia realized that Turkish society is not their enemy."
Dilipak started to talk about Dink with a quotation from the Koran: "Allah says: Your hostility against a clan should not drive you to injustice. Whoever kills one person kills the whole of humanity."
Dilipak said he had first met Dink at a debate show on television and continued: "At the beginning of the show, I was expecting a different approach from Dink. I had thought the show would cause very heated discussions but it did not happen that way."
’There is no Armenian taboo in Turkey’
Hasan Celal Güzel, conservative columnist for Radikal newspaper, has made different statements on the Dink assassination and the process that followed. Former state minister Güzel did not agree with the idea of the Dink assassination being a breaking point for Turkey and said the assassination happened because of the provocation of gangs such as Ergenekon. Güzel said the Dink assassination lost Turkey points in the international arena and continued: "This murder was read in the international arena as if Turks were intolerant and anti-Armenian."
Güzel said the Armenian problem has never been a taboo in Turkey and Dink’s ethnic background did not disturb anyone: "There is no problem in Turkey with dialogue between Turkish and Armenian societies. If it is Armenia and Armenians of the diaspora who mention dialogue, the only problems in this matter are Armenian’s hostility toward Turks and labeling Turks as committers of genocide." Güzel said contrary to belief, there had never been a rising wave of nationalism and Turkish society had always been nationalist in terms of patriotism.
Is artificial nationalism being encouraged?
Sevan Nişanyan, an academic, agreed that there was no rising wave of nationalism in Turkey. Nişanyan said military and political circles were trying to encourage nationalism artificially because of a rapidly dissolving nationalist consensus: "I think this attempt is an act of panic and it is destined to fail. It is hard to continue this primitive discourse in this age of integration taking over the world with fantastic speed."
Nişanyan said that suspicion and distrust has been growing toward the Turkish state and its history proposals among commonsensical members of Turkish society and intelligentsia in recent years and said: "For many people, it was almost an experience of disengagement after the assassination. The feeling of ’enough of this’ was felt by more than the few hundred thousand people at the funeral."
’Orhan Pamuk and Elif Şafak no longer talk about the Armenian matter’
Ahmet Ümit, Turkey’s adept crime novelist drew attention to Orhan Pamuk, the Nobel prize winning Turkish novelist, and Elif Şafak, another novelist, who previously set the national agenda with statements on the Armenian issue, but who have recently been avoiding making comments on the subject. Ümit said: "Hrant was an honest defender of the matter and paid the price. I do not want anyone to be hurt because of their ideas but the blood spilt is the indicator of who are the honest ones and how much honesty they have."
Ece Temelkuran, columnist for the Milliyet newspaper, said: "The Armenian issue is about the foundations of Turkey and anybody who comments on that is at risk." Temelkuran added: "The Armenian matter is like an nerve ending in Turkey," and that the most important development following the assassination happened to be the Armenian problem turning into a personal issue for the Turkish intelligentsia. Temelkuran said this attitude would be an important milestone in the path for a solution to the problem.