Social Theory - Political Economy Sociology of Islam and Muslims Societies Sociology of Africa

ISLAMIC MOVEMENTS - WINTER 2012

2011-10-22T03:45:00.000-07:00

ISLAMIC MOVEMENTS WINTER 2012 MONDAY AND WEDNESDAY2:00-3:50 PMREQUIRED BOOKS:Augustus Richard Norton. 2007. Hezbollah: A Short History. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Khaled Hroub. 2006. Hamas: A Beginner's Guide. Pluto Press. Humeira Iqtidar. 2011. Secularizing Islamists? Jama'at-e-Islami and Jama'at-ud-Da'wa in Urban Pakistan. The University of Chicago Press. Asef Bayat. 2007. Making Islam Democratic: Social Movements and the Post-Islamist Turn. Stanford University Press.Tugrul Keskin, 2011. The Sociology of Islam: Secularism, Economy and Politics. Ithaca Press, 2011.

A New book: Secular State and Religious Society Two Forces in Play in Turkey, edited by Berna Turam

2011-10-15T20:32:00.000-07:00

Secular State and Religious SocietyTwo Forces in Play in TurkeyEdited by Berna TuramJanuary 2012 Palgrave Macmillan Introduction: Secular State and Pious Muslims: Neither Rivals nor Allies for Life; B.Turam The Dynamic Nature of Educational Policies and Turkish Nation-Building: Where Does Religion Fit In?; Y.Bayar Islam, Nation-State, and the Military: A Discussion of Secularism in Turkey; S.Gurbey Secularists as the Saviors of Islam: Rearticulation of Secularism and the Freedom of Conscience in Turkey (1950); U.Azak Does Secularism Face a Serious Threat in Turkey?; M.Heper Christian and Turkish: Secularist Fears of a Converted Nation; E.OzyurekMarket Oriented Post-Islamism in Turkey; Tugrul Keskin Conflict, Democratic Reform and Big Business: Factors Shaping the Economic Elite's Position for Change; D.Yavuz Toward Conceptual Integration of Religious Actors in Democracy and Civil Society; A.Rubin Afterword; M.G.Tezcur

Study Abroad Course to Qatar: March 24 — April 1, 2012

2011-10-15T20:26:00.000-07:00

Qatar: Society, Religion and EconomyInternational Field ExperienceLed by: Tugrul Keskin, PSU—International Studies, Ctr. for Turkish StudiesSpring Term 2012Travel: March 24 — April 1, 2012

Manuscript of Sughrat (Socrates) belongs to a 13th century Seljuk illustrator. It is currently kept at Topkapi Palace Library, Istanbul, Turkey.

2011-10-15T08:47:00.001-07:00

A New Book: Sociology and Human Rights A Bill of Rights for the Twenty-First Century

2011-10-11T12:01:00.000-07:00

Sociology and Human RightsA Bill of Rights for the Twenty-First Century Judith Blau The University of North Carolina at Chapel HillMark Frezzo University of Mississippi May 2011 Pine Forge Press Series: Sociology for a New Century Series ISBN: 9781412991384A unique volume designed to provoke an ongoing dialogue about fundamental human rights in our societyEdited by renowned scholars, Judith Blau and Mark Frezzo, this groundbreaking anthology examines the implications that human rights have for the social sciences. The book provides readers with a wide-ranging collection of articles, each written by experts in their fields who argue for an expansion of fundamental human rights in the United States. To provide an international context, the volume covers the human rights treaties that have been incorporated into the constitutions of many countries throughout the world, including wealthy nations such as Spain and Sweden and impoverished countries such as Bolivia and Croatia.

Contents:Part I. What Are Universal Human Rights? Chapter 1. Introduction Mark FrezzoChapter 2. Deepening Civil and Political Rights Mark FrezzoChapter 3. Ensuring Economic and Social Rights Louis Edgar EsparzaChapter 4. Promoting Cultural Rights Laura ToussaintChapter 5. Globalizing the Human Rights Perspective Bruce K. FriesenChapter 6. Cooperating Around Environmental Rights Rebecca ClausenChapter 7. Comparing Constitutions Judith BlauPart II. Citizenship, Identity, and Human Rights Chapter 8. Arizona’s SB 1070: Setting Conditions for Violations of Human Rights Here and Beyond 8. Rogelio Sáenz, Cecilia Menjívar, San Juanita Edilia GarciaChapter 9. Beyond Two Identities: Turkish Immigrants in Germany Tugrul KeskinPart III. Vulnerability and Human Rights Chapter 10: The Rights of Age: On Human Vulnerability Bryan S. TurnerChapter 11. Children’s Rights Brian Gran and Rachel BryantPart IV. The Global and the Local Chapter 12. Growing and Learning Human Rights Judith BlauChapter 13. Going Forward Judith BlauPromoting Cultural Rights Globalizing the Human Rights Perspective Linking Human Rights and the Environment Arizona's SB 1070: Setting Conditions for Violations of Human Rights Here and Beyond Beyond Two Identities: Turkish Immigrants in Germany The Rights of Age Children's Rights Ensuring Economic and Social Rights Foreword Shulamith KoenigReviews:“The high level of scholarship is evident in the prospectus. I was impressed by both scope and its detailed examples. This text has pedagogical value. It can be used to teach critical thinking.”Jonathan ReaderDrew University"It has an explicit sociological approach that is lacking in so many of the books that address some of these issues."Elizabeth D. ScheelSaint Cloud State University

Saudi National Day: Portland State University - October 6, 2011

2011-10-11T11:55:00.001-07:00

Libya: Democracy Promotion for Oil

2011-08-22T02:08:00.000-07:00

The Sociology of Islam: Secularism, Economy and Politics Edited by Tugrul Keskin

2011-06-13T20:11:00.000-07:00

The Sociology of Islam: Secularism, Economy and Politics

Edited by Tugrul Keskin

Hardback, 520pp, 235 x 155mm
Ithaca Press
ISBN: 978-0-86372-371-1

June 2011

About this book

The contribution of Islam to world civilization is undeniable, however in the last one hundred years, Muslims have been faced with all the effects and ramifications of modernity, caused by the emergence of global capitalism. What does modernity ultimately mean for Muslims, and how will the historical precepts of Islam meet with changes in our globalized world?

To date, most scholars on Islam have tried to understand Muslim societies from historical observation alone; however, this simplistic academic approach does not allow us to understand the entire transformation that has taken place in Muslim societies. Sociological scholarship, on the other hand, argues that it would be difficult to understand Islam without first understanding the theoretical and practical underpinnings of the social structure of Muslim societies which are embedded in the relationship between religion, the economy, politics and society.

This book, therefore, will attempt to make a connection between the economic system and its social and political consequences within Muslim societies. To do this, it will examine the role of Islam within Muslim societies in the context of ongoing and increasingly powerful neoliberal economic processes in a globalized world. The Muslim understanding of secularism, modernity, the state, collective identity, immigration, and Islamic political thought and economic life are all shaped by forces of globalization and new market conditions. However, this is a mutually constitutive process, as Islam also influences the West and its perceptions of Islam because of the interdependent relations brought about by the global economy. These interdependencies create social and political transformation on both sides.

REVIEWS

Tugrul Keskin brings wisdom and a deep cosmopolitan commitment to his scholarship. This may be the first book ever published that clarifies the social, political and economic context of Islam and the complex relations between Muslim and predominately non-Muslim societies. The Sociology of Islam will open up new inquires. It is an important book.
Judith Blau
Department of Sociology - University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

In recent years the sociological study of Islam has emerged as a distinct forum. In this collection, Tugrul Keskin and his contributors exemplify some of the most useful approaches in this vibrant field. They explore how Islam is employed in several contemporary areas of sociological concern, including globalization, economic conditions, immigration, civic cultures, diversity, and public philosophy. As such, this volume should be of great interest to the students and scholars of Islam alike.
Mohammed Bamyeh
Department of Sociology - University of Pittsburgh

This book is a must read for individuals in the policy and academic worlds who want to gain insight into complexities of Muslim societies. Contributors cover a large geographic area and provide profound analysis of relations between economics and socio-political development in several Muslim societies.
Birol Yesilada
Contemporary Turkish Studies Endowed Chair - Hatfield School of Government, Portland State University

Middle East Studies - FALL 2011

2011-05-25T10:30:00.001-07:00

Middle East Studies

INTL 247C (CRN: 11691) and
Global Perspectives (Mid East) UNST 233 (CRN: 14144)

FALL 2010

INSTRUCTOR: TUGRUL KESKIN

Monday and Wednesday -17:30 - 18:45 PM

This course provides a foundation for upper level Islam and Middle East Studies courses at Portland State University. The “Middle East” as a region did not exist as such according to “Middle Easterners” such as Turks, Kurds, Arabs, Jews, Iranians, and other groups native to the area. The term “Middle East” is an artificial and fabricated concept, which was created by European and American imperialist powers in order to divide, conquer and exploit natural resources in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The objective of this course is to understand the basic social and political aspects of the Modern “Middle East” from the insider perspective, using the Non-Orientalist Approach. It is difficult to understand Middle Eastern societies and political actors without first exploring the fundamental principles and facts regarding the history of the region because events today are a continuation of the past. I will therefore introduce you to topics such as Orientalism, economic underdevelopment, the emergence of the nation-state, European and American occupations, and the revitalization of religious fundamentalism in the Middle East. The destruction of religious and ethnic harmony between the Jews, Muslims and Christians in the Middle East as a consequence of imperialist policies and occupations will also be explored.

Required Reading:
Mehran Kamrava. The Modern Middle East: A Political History since the First World War. University of California Press, 2011. ISBN: 9780520241503
Tugrul Keskin, The Sociology of Islam: Secularism, Economy and Politics.
Ithaca Press, 2011. ISBN: 978-0-86372-371-1

For more information: tugrulkeskin@pdx.edu
or visit the Sociology of Islam and Muslim Societies http://www.pdx.edu/sociologyofislam

Sociology of the Middle East - Fall 2011 Portland State University

2011-05-24T21:05:00.001-07:00

Sociology of the Middle East

FALL 2011
INTL/SOC 483U
CRN: 13440

INSTRUCTOR: TUGRUL KESKIN

Monday, Wednesday - 2:00 - 3:50 PM – CH 221

Sociology of the Middle East seeks to understand the transformation of society, politics and the economy in the modern Middle East. It is divided into three sections; the goal of the first section is to critically analyze Middle Eastern societies and cultures in the context of nationalism, and the concepts of tradition/modernity, ethnicity, religion and gender/sexuality. Section two covers the State and politics, and examines the formation and structure of the nation-state, the military, political parties and religious groups, bureaucracy, and the consequences of colonialism and imperialism. The last section looks at economic development – or under-development across the region, as the source of major current social and political changes. In this course, we examine these changes based upon sociological observation in the context of four societies; Turkish, Iranian, Arab, and Israeli.

Required Readings:

1.Ali Gheissari, Contemporary Iran: Economy, Society, Politics. Oxford University Press, 2009.
2.Ersin Kalaycioglu, Turkish Dynamics: Bridge Across Troubled Lands. Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
3.Colin Shindler, A History of Modern Israel. Cambridge University Press, 2008.
4.Ibrahim Albadawi and Samir Makdisi (Eds.), Democracy in the Arab World. Routledge, 2011.
5.Tugrul Keskin, The Sociology of Islam: Secularism, Economy and Politics. Ithaca Press, 2011.

For more information: tugrulkeskin@pdx.edu
or The Sociology of Islam and Muslim Societies

Study Abroad in Istanbul: Politics, Religion and Globalization in Modern Turkish Society - July 4-29 Portland State University

2011-02-24T21:32:00.000-08:00

CALL FOR PAPERS Panel – Middle East Studies in the Post September 11 Era

2010-12-21T22:10:00.000-08:00

CALL FOR PAPERS

Panel – Middle East Studies in the Post September 11 Era

45th Annual Meeting of the Middle East Studies Association Conference
MESA 2011

December 1-4, 2011 Washington DC
http://www.mesa.arizona.edu/

Dear all,

We are in the process of organizing a panel entitled: Middle East Studies in
the Post September 11 Era. The panel is intended as a contemporary
exploration of Edward Said’s thesis, first laid out in Orientalism, that
Middle Eastern Studies produces not value-free knowledge but policy-oriented
knowledge and, moreover, is tied to the culture of colonialism. In the post
September 11 era, we have witnessed an increasing tendency to build closer,
more explicit and more multifaceted relationship between universities and
the state, which in the case of Middle East Studies may be approached as
“Neo-Orientalism.” Several examples may be identified within US academic
study of the Middle East and Islam, especially where the field is most
connected to the work of think-tanks, governmental and non-governmental
organizations.

We are seeking submissions related to Neo-Orientalism and Middle East
Studies in the Post-September 11 Era. Possible areas of research and study
include but are not limited to:

Orientalism, Neo-Orientalism and Middle East Studies
Middle East Studies, Think-Tanks and NGOs
"Moderate" Islam and Neo-Orientalism
Orientalism, Neo-Orientalism, and C. Wright Mills’ conception of the
sociological imagination
The Role of Semi-governmental organizations such as NED, NDI, the Woodrow
Wilson Center and others in financing Middle East and Islamic Studies
Comparisons of Orientalism and Neo-Orientalism across US and European
Academic cultures, or elsewhere
The Role of the State in Middle East Studies in the Post-September 11 era,

Deadline: January 30, 2011

Please send abstract to: tugrulkeskin@pdx.edu and mab205@pitt.edu

Organizers:
Mohammed Bamyeh, University of Pittsburg
Tugrul Keskin, Portland State University

Samih Farsoun (1937-2005) A Palestinian Sociologist

2010-11-13T22:08:00.001-08:00

Islamophobia: A different face of racism

2010-10-24T20:15:00.000-07:00

An Islamic woman goes to the Al-Farooq Islamic Center on Fourth Avenue South to pray. Vandals had inscribed “Muslims Go Home” on the wall near the entrance.
JOHN PARTIPILO / FILE / THE TENNESSEAN

Call for papers: Social Transformations in South/Southeast Asia: Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh

2010-06-23T11:11:00.001-07:00

Mirza Sultan-Galiev: One of the first representative of the Socialism in the Global South

2010-05-01T12:36:00.000-07:00

Happy Workers Day!

Sponsor of the World Islamic Economic Forum: Islamic Way of Capitalism

2010-04-04T10:41:00.000-07:00

6th World Islamic Economic Forum

The 6th World Islamic Economic Forum is back in Kuala Lumpur and is scheduled to be held at the Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre on 18-20 May 2010. Purportedly one of the most important business forums scheduled for the year 2010, at least one that focuses on a niche market of the emerging economies of the Muslim world, the 6th WIEF is expected to attract an estimated 2000 participants based on the past record of 1728 participants at the 5th WIEF in Jakarta in March 2009. The Forum, a platform where world leaders in government and business converge to discuss trade and economic issues affecting the globe, is poised to be the ultimate meeting place for investors, fund managers, entrepreneurs, bankers, and other stakeholders of the business community.

Market (Pazaryeri) in Istanbul

2010-03-10T02:28:00.000-08:00

Sociology of Islam and Muslim Societies at Portland State University

2010-02-21T21:49:00.000-08:00

Dear all,

We have created the Sociology of Islam and Muslim Societies homepage at Portland State University and this has been transferred from Virginia Tech. You will find detailed information at the following web address: http://www.pdx.edu/sociologyofislam/

We have also updated our academic advisory and editorial board.

Academic Advisory Board:
http://www.pdx.edu/sociologyofislam/advisory-board

Editorial Board:
http://www.pdx.edu/sociologyofislam/editorial-board

We would like to post your Islam and Muslim Societies related syllabi on our website, if you would like to send them to us as a word document. You will see other syllabi in the syllabus section of the homepage. This homepage will also help our students to select Islam and Muslim Societies related courses.

Please also visit the new Religious Studies website at Portland State University:
http://www.pdx.edu/religiousstudies/

Dr. Jennifer Schubert from the Religious Studies program is presenting the Religious Studies Program's first public event. You will find this lecture information on our website: http://www.pdx.edu/sociologyofislam/lectures

Peace and salaam to all,

--
Tugrul Keskin

Assistant Professor of International and Middle Eastern Studies
And Center for Turkish Studies
Portland State University
International Studies-INTL
East Hall 309
632 SW Hall Street
Portland, OR 97201 - USA
Office: 503-725-3495

Editor of Sociology of Islam and Muslim Societies
Book Editor of Societies Without Borders

Civilized us, uncivilized them: The Dichotomoy of Imperialism

2010-01-09T16:31:00.000-08:00

Turkish Immigrant Cruelly Beaten by the Norway Police As His Mother was Left to Die by the Norway Doctors.

Sociology of Islam and Muslim Societies: SUMMER 2009

2009-07-11T21:14:00.001-07:00

Classical Social Theory: 9th European Sociological Association Conference

2009-06-26T13:19:00.000-07:00

9th European Sociological Association Conference
European Society or European Societies?
September 2 - 5, 2009
Lisbon, Portugal

Friday, September 4, 2009

5A Classical Social Theory: The Classical Canon, Mannheim and Troeltsch

Chair: Henning Bech

Robert Fine: Marx and the Radical Critique of Antisemitism
WARWICK UNIVERSITY

Tugrul Keskin: Sociology of Islam and Muslim Societies in Neoliberal Globalization
PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY

Isabelle Darmon: The notions of 'type of man' and 'personality' in early German
social and cultural sciences: lessons from a selective comparison between Ernst
Troeltsch and Max Weber
THE UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER

Richard Simon: Scientific Specialization as Utopian Practice

The Lion of the Desert: Omar Muhtar

2009-06-11T00:34:00.000-07:00

The Lion of the desert: Omar Muhtar

The Most Strange of Creatures by Nazim Hikmet

2009-06-03T11:37:00.001-07:00

The Most Strange of Creatures

Like the scorpion, my brother,
You are like the scorpion
In a terror-stricken night,
Like the sparrow, my brother,
You are like the sparrow
In inconsiderable restlessness.
Like the mussel, my brother,
You are like the mussel
Closed tight and tranquil.
You are terrible, my brother,
Like the mouth of an extinguished volcano.
And you are not one, alas,
you are not five
you are some millions.
You are like the sheep, my brother,
When the butcher dressed in your wool
when the butcher lifts his Staff
you hurry yourself to get back in the flock
and you go to the slaughterhouse running, almost proud.
You are the most strange of creatures, in short,
More strange than the fish
who lives in the sea without knowing the sea,
And if there is so much misery on the earth
it is thanks to you, my brother,
If we are starved, worn out,
If we are flayed till the blood flows,
Pressed like a bunch of grapes to yield our wine,
Will I go so far as to say that it is your fault, no,
But for many it is so, my brother.

Nazim Hikmet Ran
1901 Selanik -1963 Moscow

The United States of Corporation

2009-06-01T08:35:00.000-07:00

Madrassas in India

2009-04-29T07:21:00.000-07:00

If you are interested in Madrassas in India and Pakistan, please visit the following website that is updated by a colleague of mine, Yogi Skand:

http://www.madrasareforms.blogspot.com/

or Islam in India

http://www.islampeaceandjustice.blogspot.com/

Australian Aboriginal Genocide

2009-04-26T11:55:00.000-07:00

Forgotten People of our planet: Australian Aboriginal Genocide

Australian Aboriginal Genocide

Public Lecture on the US Foreign Policy and Afghanistan at Virginia Tech

2009-02-09T14:49:00.000-08:00

Movie Marathon: Imperialism, Oil, and Religion: American Foreign Policy and Islam, Virginia Tech

2009-01-16T11:10:00.000-08:00

Nazım Hikmet - Akrep Gibisin Kardeşim

2008-12-18T01:50:00.000-08:00

American Presidential Election

2008-11-02T20:58:00.001-08:00

A Public Lecture: A New Voice of Islam for World Peace and Hope: The Gulen Movement by Dr. Hasan Ali Yurtsever

2008-10-29T17:57:00.000-07:00

African Movies at Virginia Tech

2008-09-09T16:15:00.000-07:00

Panel: American Foreign Policy and Neo-Imperialism in Central Asia

2008-09-08T16:11:00.000-07:00

Dear all,

This year, CESS (Central Eurasian Studies Society) conference will take place at Georgetown University and Gary Wood and I have organized a panel on American Foreign Policy and Neo-Imperialism in Central Asia. Dr. Kemal Silay will be a discussant in the panel. You are very welcome to come. Please share and distribute widely, apologies for cross-posting.

You will find the panel information below.

Central Eurasian Studies Society
Ninth Annual Conference, September 18-21, 2008
Georgetown University, Washington, DC
http://www.cess.muohio.edu/

American Foreign Policy and Neo-Imperialism in Central Asia
Friday, September 19, 2:00-3:45

Organizer: Gary Wood (Virginia Tech. University)

Chair: Tugrul Keskin (Virginia Tech. University)

Discussant: Kemal Silay (Indiana University)

1) Ajay Kumar Patnaik (Jawaharlal Nehru University), “Export of Democracy: US Geopolitical Moves in Central Asia”

2) Azeem Ibrahim (University of Cambridge), “Motivational Drivers of US Policy in Post Soviet Era”

3) Tugrul Keskin (Sociology-Virginia Tech University) and Gary Wood (Sociology-Virginia Tech University) “New-Imperialism and Promotion of Democracy in Central Asia: Case of NED and NDI”

4) Reed Taylor (ASPECT-Virginia Tech. University), “Hizb Ut-Tahrir in Uzbekistan: a Post-Colonial Critique”

Peace to you all,

Tugrul

Palestinian poet Darwish dies

2008-08-10T08:41:00.000-07:00

http://www.mahmouddarwish.com/english/index.htm

I Come From There

Mahmoud Darwish

I come from there and I have memories
Born as mortals are, I have a mother
And a house with many windows,
I have brothers, friends,
And a prison cell with a cold window.
Mine is the wave, snatched by sea-gulls,
I have my own view,
And an extra blade of grass.
Mine is the moon at the far edge of the words,
And the bounty of birds,
And the immortal olive tree.
I walked this land before the swords
Turned its living body into a laden table.

I come from there. I render the sky unto her mother,
When the sky weeps for her mother.
And I weep to make myself known
To a returning cloud.
I learnt all the words worthy of the court of blood,
So that I could break the rule.
I learnt all the words and broke them up,
To make a single word: Homeland....

Mao to Neoliberaism: Beijing 2008

2008-08-08T06:33:00.001-07:00

Rudyard Kipling's The White Man's Burden in China

China is an amazing place to see the transformation that has been embedded in global economic structures. Today, the Beijing 2008 Olympics began; however, the Olympics remind me of Moscow in 1980, when unfortunately, politics could not be separated from sports.

Peace,

Tugrul Keskin

Sociology of Islam and Muslim Societies Newsletter

2008-05-20T02:31:00.000-07:00

SOCIOLOGY OF ISLAM & Muslim societies
SPRING 2008 Newsletter No. 1

The Sociology of Africa: Fall 2008

2008-04-21T08:38:00.000-07:00

AFST-4354 Index No. 97048 (AFST)
Issues in Africana Studies
Sociology of Africa
Fall 2008

INSTRUCTOR: TUGRUL KESKIN

Tuesday and Thursday - 3:30 PM - 4:45PM - Surge 107

The Sociology of Africa course will explore the relationship and ongoing dynamics between colonizers and the colonized in 20th century Africa in the context of post-colonial studies. Nationalist, socialist, anti-colonialist, and Apartheid movements in Africa are each a direct consequence of imperialism and its legacy. In this course, we will try to understand the social, political and economic implications and dimensions of imperialism in the 20th century. Ethnic tensions in Kenya, Apartheid racism in South Africa, the Darfur conflict in Sudan, Christian and Muslim religious misunderstanding in Nigeria, and the 1994 Genocide in Rwanda are each related with exploitation and a product of colonialization. In this course, we will also attempt to understand the positions of African leaders from an inside as opposed to an Orientalist perspective, such as the anti-colonialist Julius Nyerere (Tanzania), Pan-Africanist Kwame Nkrumah (Ghana), conservative African Jomo Kenyatta (Kenya), Idi Amin Dada (Uganda), the pro-African Nationalist Nnamdi Azikiwe (Nigeria), and South African leader, Nelson Mandela.

One of the main objectives of this course is to build a website which will consist of as many as possible of the Nationalist, Anti-Colonialist and Socialist Movements and leaders in 20th century Africa. All of your final papers will be used in this website as a direct contribution to African civilization.

For more information: tugrulk@vt.edu or http://www.africanastudies.vt.edu/

Lecture: Islamist Imaginations of Turkey Ottoman's Past by Prof. Kemal Silay

2008-03-16T11:02:00.000-07:00

Virginia Tech Presents

A Free Public Lecture

by

Professor Kemal Silay
Professor of Central Eurasian Studies,
Ottoman and Modern Turkish Studies Chair Professor,
Director of the Turkish Studies Program at
Indiana University, Bloomington
http://php.indiana.edu/~ksilay/

ISLAMIST IMAGINATIONS OF TURKEY’S OTTOMAN PAST:
COUNTER-REVOLUTION THROUGH
CULTURE AND POLITICS

Thursday, April 10, 2008 at 5:00–7:00 pm
655 McBryde Hall

Sponsored by the Sociological Association at VT (SAV) with the support of the Department of Sociology; the Turkish Student Association at Virginia Tech; the Religious Studies Program; the Department of Science and Technology in Society; the Alliance for Social, Political, Ethical, and Cultural Thought (ASPECT); IDST; the International Studies Program; the Middle East Working Group, the Department of Political Science, the Institute of Turkish Studies at Georgetown University, and the Africana Studies Program

For more information:
Tugrul Keskin, tugrulk@vt.edu
Gary Wood, garywood@vt.edu

Kemal Silay is a leading scholar of Turkish Studies. Among his numerous publications are Nedim and the Poetics of the Ottoman Court: Medieval Inheritance and the Need for Change (Indiana, 1994); An Anthology of Turkish Literature (Indiana, 1996); Ahmedi’s History of the Kings of the Ottoman Lineage and Their Holy Raids against the Infidels (Harvard, 2004); On the Book of Handsome Ones: Same-Sex Discourse in Ottoman Court Literature (forthcoming); and Anatomy of a Folk Manuscript: The Hagiography of Abu al-Wafa (forthcoming).

the “Facebookiﬁcation” of our lives

2008-02-27T20:10:00.000-08:00

American Sociological Association

Contexts Magazine

Volume 7, Number 1, Winter 2008

Social networking Internet sites might
be doing more to drive us apart than
bring us together. At least that’s what
the Washington Post suggested as sum-
mer wound down and it took a look at
the “Facebookiﬁcation” of our lives.
From the 1954 work of J.A. Barnes
to Columbia’s Duncan Watts’ Six Degrees:
The Science of a Connected Age, the
report spanned the sociological trajectory
behind the actual and electronic
networks that, throughout history, have
done everything from help us ﬁnd jobs
and homes to read about the minutia of
our lives that we post to the Internet.
Perhaps, interviews with sociologists
suggested, these sites miss the
mark because we’re busy adding
“friends” to our network and not busy
networking with friends.
In the end, the Post asked how we
“prevent social networking sites from
becoming the death of social networking”
perhaps the fundamental question
of this new cultural form.

Call for Papers: Sociology of Islam and Muslims Societies, April 11-14, 2008 Richmond

2007-10-02T19:15:00.000-07:00

Panel – Sociology of Islam and Muslims Societies

The 2008 Annual Meeting of the Southern Sociological Society

http://www.southernsociologicalsociety.org/

April 9-12, 2008, Richmond, Virginia - USA

Invitation for Panel Papers

Dear all,

At the Southern Sociological Society annual meeting last year there were five panels with 20 presentations on Islam, the Sociology of Islam, and Islamist Movements. This coming year, the annual meeting will take place on April 9-12, 2008 in Richmond, Virginia and we will be organizing panels on Sociology of Islam and Muslim Societies.

Islam and Muslim societies are being increasingly studied by sociologists, particularly by those interested in how different Islamic groups are responding to globalization. In the current political, social and economic conflict between the West and Muslim Societies, Islam has entered the political arena as a manifestation of Muslims against Western-based capitalism and hegemony. In this context, religion has transformed from a belief system to an ideology of political resistance in both the mind and within the actions of Muslims. From Turkey to Indonesia, this conflict may be creating the unified Muslim identity—the Muslim Ummah— Islamist and social thinkers such as Sayyid Qutb and Abul A’la Mawdudi were promoting nearly a half a century ago. From the Danish and Swedish cartoon crisis to Islamophia, Muslims appear to be crafting a collective identity that transcends the old categories of tribe, community and nation-state. This ‘new’ identity now exists beyond the nation-state, both in the West and in Muslim-populated countries, and is reshaping the understanding of globalization by Muslims.

We are organizing two panels entitled, "Sociology of Islam and Muslims Societies," and welcome submissions related to but not limited to the following subjects:

• Islam, Modernity and Secularism
• Islamist Movements and Collective identity,
• Islam and Muslims in Europe and US
• The Middle Eastern Politics

The deadline for abstract paper submissions is: DECEMBER 12, 2007

Please send abstract to: sociologyofislam@vt.edu

Tugrul Keskin
tugrulk@vt.edu
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Stephen Poulson
poulsosc@jmu.edu
James Madison University

Kemal Silay
ksilay@indiana.edu
Indiana University

On Living by Nazim Hikmet

2007-09-12T22:51:00.000-07:00

ON LIVING

Living is no laughing matter:
you must live with great seriousness
like a squirrel, for example-
I mean without looking for something beyond and above living,
I mean living must be your whole occupation.

Nazim Hikmet (RAN)
(1902, Selanic - June 3, 1963, Moscow)
Poet, playwright, novelist

THERE MUST BE SOMETHING

Is the sea as beautiful as this every day?
Does the sky look like this all the time?
Is this furniture, this window
always as lovely as this?

No
by God no,
There must be something behind this somewhere.

Orhan Veli Kanik

Translated by Bernard Lewis (1982)

War on Democracy Showing in UK cinemas

2007-08-08T23:51:00.001-07:00

War on Democracy Showing in UK cinemas

'The War on Democracy' is John Pilger's first major film for the cinema - in a career that has produced more than 55 television documentaries. Set in Latin America and the US, it explores the historic and current relationship of Washington with countries such as Venezuela, Bolivia and Chile.

"The film tells a universal story," says Pilger, "analysing and revealing, through vivid testimony, the story of great power behind its venerable myths. It allows us to understand the true nature of the so-called war on terror".

If you are in UK or around London, you must see this film, I think you will enjoy watching this documentary.

http://warondemocracy.net/

The Sociology of Islam discussion list at Virginia Tech University

2007-07-13T19:14:00.000-07:00

Dear all,

I have created a listserve for scholars who may be interested in exchanging academic information related with Islam. You will find the information necessary to be a subscriber to this list. Please circulate this information widely.

The Sociology of Islam discussion list at Virginia Tech University is a new free professional and academic networking tool to encourage interaction between individuals & organizations involved in Islam/Sociology of Islam/Islamist Movements and related fields worldwide. Members and subscribers are encouraged to dialogue and share resources on books, articles, conferences, teaching, and other related purposes.

If you want to subscribe to the list, please send me an email:

tugrulk@vt.edu

Best to all,
--
Tugrul Keskin

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Department of Sociology
560 McBryde Hall
Blacksburg, VA 24061
http://www.vt.edu

Virginia Tech. Massacre

2007-04-17T14:59:00.000-07:00

We will continue to invent the future through our blood and tears and through all our sadness ... We will prevail ...

-- Nikki Giovanni, University Distinguished Professor, poet, activist

I want to extend my deepest, sincerest, and most profound sympathies to the families of these victims ...

-- Virginia Tech President Charles W. Steger

We are sad today, and we will be sad for quite a while. We are not moving on. We are embracing our mourning. We are Virginia Tech ...

-- Nikki Giovanni, University Distinguished Professor, poet, activist

Panel - Central Asian Studies in light of Imperialism: A Neo-Orientalist Approach within Western Academia

2007-02-08T11:35:00.000-08:00

Panel - Central Asian Studies in light of Imperialism: A Neo-Orientalist Approach within Western Academia

The 2007 CESS conference at the University of Washington
October 18-21, 2007 in Seattle, Washington
http://cess.fas.harvard.edu/CESS_Conference.html

Dear all,

We are in the process of organizing a panel entitled: Central Asian Studies in light of Imperialism: A Neo-Orientalist Approach within Western Academia

In the work, Orientalism, Edward W. Said elaborates on the idea behind Middle Eastern studies in Western academia. Said is interested in questioning the discourse of Orientalists, and furthermore, claims that the actual purpose of Middle Eastern Studies is not academic, but rather a policy-oriented approach that facilitates imperialism and colonialism. In this context Said argues that Europeans referred to the Eastern world as the ‘Orient’, a term that has only a vague meaning. Today, the region historically known as Turkistan has similarly been renamed ‘Central Asia’ in the context of the Neo-Orientalist process in policy oriented academia. In this field, some of the so-called “scholars,” working with policy-based institutions such as think-tanks, governmental and “non governmental” entities are the forefront of this approach, within the framework of imperialism and exploitation. These institutions, including think-tanks and non-governmental interest groups operate as a bridge between academia and the policy-oriented world. Additionally, academia has become a facilitator of an exploitative process towards Turkistan. The same process has been observed in Middle Eastern Studies for over a half century.

Today, the best example of this Neo-Orientalist or Colonialist approach can be found within the discipline of Central Asian studies within the U.S., and its relation with think-tanks, governmental, and non-governmental organizations. Thus, academia has been losing its objectivity, transforming from C. Wright Mills’ conception of the sociological imagination, to a facilitator of imperialism. This is occurring through its implicit representation of political interests. We can see this destructive trend taking place within Uyghur, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Uzbek, and Turkmen studies.

We welcome submissions related to Neo-Orientalism and Central Asian Studies, and also including the following:

• Neo-Orientalism and Central Asian Studies,
• Imperialism, think-tanks and Central Asia,
• Role of SOROS, National Democratic Institute, the Woodrow Wilson Center, Carnegie Endowment and US Helsinki Commission on Central Asia,
• Colorful revolutions and imperialism/exploitation of the market,
• Sultan Galiev and Imperialism in Turkistan

Deadline: APRIL 3, 2007

Please send abstract to: tugrulk@vt.edu or rhaija@vt.edu

Tugrul Keskin

Rammy Haija

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Department of Sociology

SSS 2007 Annual Meeting- Islam, the Sociology of Islam, and Islamist Movements

2007-01-25T06:25:00.000-08:00

The 2007 Annual Meeting of the Southern Sociological Society

http://www.msstate.edu/org/sss/07Meet/Publish/

April 11-14, 2007, Atlanta, GA

"Islam, the Sociology of Islam, and Islamist Movements"

Organizers:

Tugrul Keskin keskintx@jmu.edu Virginia Tech. University
or
Dr. Dale Wimberley dale.wimberley@vt.edu Virginia Tech. University

FIRST PANEL: ISLAM, IMPERIALISM AND COLONIALISM

CHAIR -Dr. Dale Wimberley -Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Discussant -Dr. Kemal Silay -Indiana University, Bloomington

(1) Islam and Terrorism: Reason and Assessment

Dr. Mohamed El-Attar -Department of Sociology - Mississippi State University - USA

(2) The Traditional Islam versus Western Based Islam in the Framework of Transnational Movement: As a case of Fethullah Gulen “Islamist” Movement in Turkey

Tugrul Keskin -Sociology - Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University - USA

(3) Uncivilized Christianity, Decolonized Islam: Evading Conflict through Dialogue

Darrell Ezell -Graduate Institute for Theology & Religion - University of Birmingham - England

(4) The Local Contexts of Islam

Dr. Ejder Okumus - Dicle University - Divinity Faculty - Turkey

SECOND PANEL: ISLAM. MODERNITY AND CIVIL SOCIETY

CHAIR - Tugrul Keskin -Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Discussant - Dr. Stephen Poulson -James Madison University

(1) The Liberation Theology of Ali Shariati

David L. Reznik -Department of Sociology - University of Florida - USA

2) Possibilities of a more Plural Society

Salim Cevik - Political Science - Bilkent University - Turkey

(3) Islamic Civil Society

Jeremy Walton -Department of Anthropology - University of Chicago - USA

(4) Islam and the Problem of Participation in the Contemporary Situation

Dr. Ejder Okumus -Dicle University - Divinity Faculty - Turkey

THIRD PANEL: ISLAM THE MIDDLE EAST AND EURASIA

CHAIR - Dr. Dale Wimberley -Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Discussant - Dr. Birol Yesilada -Portland State University

(1) Islamic Dissent De/Remobilization: Egypt and Syria

Feriha PEREKLI -Department of Near Eastern Languages and Cultures - Indiana university-Bloomington USA

(2) Bedouin issues in both Israel/Palestine and in Egypt

Dr. Jesse Benjamin -Department of Sociology - Kennesaw State University - USA

(3) Reviving of Social Justice Concept in the Post-Modern World: An Islamic Alternative

Fuad Aliyev -Center of Economic Reforms - Baku, Azerbaijan Republic Azerbaijan

(4) Towards a Sociological Understanding of Islamophobia

Robert Heck -Sociology - University of Florida

FOURTH PANEL: ISLAM AND ISLAMIST MOVEMENTS

CHAIR - Dr. Michael Hughes - Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Discussant - Dr. Stephen Poulson -James Madison University

(1) Islam and Modernity: Islamist Movements and the Politics of Position

Dr. Said Mentak -Department of English, Oujda - Morocco

(2) The Nation of Islam and Womanhood

Dr. Toni Y. Sims -Assistant Professor -Sociology & Anthropology Department - University of Louisiana Lafayette - USA

(3) Islamic Sociology in Iran

Dr. Taghi Azadarmaki -Department of Sociology - The University of Tehran - Iran

(4) Cartoons of Prophet Muhammad and the need for an Islamic “Protestantism”

Dr. Fadil Maloku -Globalization and Civilizations - University of Kosovo - Kosova

FIFTH PANEL : ISLAM AND POLITICS

CHAIR - Dr. Judith Blau -University of North Carolina Chapel Hill

Discussant - Dr. Dale Wimberley -Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

(1) Student Engagement with Contemporary Islamic Social Movements through Existentialist Thought

Dylan Wittkower -Department of Philosophy - Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University - USA

(2) Islamic Authority and Knowledge in Europe: The case of Revolutionary Islamist Kaplan Community

Dr. Ahmet Yukleyen -Sociology and Anthropology Dept - University of Mississippi - USA

(3) The Use of Strategic Violence among Social Movements in Middle East:

Examples from Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine

Dr. Stephen Poulson -Department of Sociology & Anthropology - James Madison University - USA

(4) Headscarf: As a Political Symbol or As a Demand of Freedom?

Meryem Atlas and Merve Kutuk -Political Science - Bilgi University - Istanbul/Turkey

Panel – Islam, Sociology of Islam and Islamist Movements

2006-09-20T09:36:00.000-07:00

The 2007 Annual Meeting of the Southern Sociological Society

http://www.msstate.edu/org/sss/07Meet/Publish/

April 11-14, 2007, Atlanta, GA

Invitation for Panel Papers

Today, Islam is a belief system that represents one-fifth
of the World’s population located from Morocco to Indonesia,
and one of the world’s fastest growing religions. The
contribution of Islam to world civilization is undeniable,
however in the last one hundreds years, Muslims have been
faced with economic underdevelopment, dictatorship and
antidemocratic regimes, and most importantly, modernity.
What does modernity mean for Muslims? Will there be an
Islamic renaissance? How about an Islamic reformation?

On the other hand, Islam is not just a religion, it is also
likely to manifest itself as a social, economic and political
structure; therefore, one must understand the socio-historical
background and origin of the Islamic belief system, as well as
its underpinning theoretical thinkers and Islamist Social Movements.

We would like to organize a panel entitled, "Islam, the Sociology
of Islam, and Islamist Movements" and we welcome submissions
related to the subject, but not limited to the following:

Islam and Modernity,
De-secularization Process in the Muslim Populated Countries,
Islamist Movements and Collective identity,
Islam/Alternative Globalization versus Western Based Weberian Capitalist Globalization
Islam and Imperialism/Colonialism/Orientalism

Deadline: DECEMBER 12, 2006

Please send abstract to:

Tugrul Keskin keskintx@jmu.edu James Madison University
or
Dr. Dale Wimberley dale.wimberley@vt.edu Virginia Tech. University

Central Eurasian Studies Society Seventh Annual Conference (2006)

2006-09-12T00:10:00.000-07:00

Central Eurasian Studies Society

Seventh Annual Conference (2006)
September 28-October 1, 2006
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.

Friday, September 29, 9:00-10:45

Domestic Politics in the South Caucasus

CESS 2006 Program

Harutyunyan Arus Organizer Domestic Politics in the South Caucasus

Keskingoren Tugrul (Chair)
Virginia Polytechnic Institute &
State University and James Madison University, Virginia tugrulk(at)vt.edu

Ledsky C. Nelson (Discussant)
National Democratic Institute for
International Affairs Nelson(at)ndi.org

Harutyunyan Arus
Western Michigan University arus.harutyunyan(at)wmich.edu
Estimating National Identity via Positional Method: Comparing Party Manifestos and Policy Positions in Armenia from 1994-2005

Tuite Kevin
University of Montreal kj.tuite(at)umontreal.ca The Georgian banquet as sociopolitical microcosm

Bravo E. Karen
Indiana University kbravo(at)iupui.edu
Smoke, Mirrors and the Joker in the Pack? On Transitioning to Democracy and the Rule of Law in Post-Soviet Armenia

Khachatrian Haroutiun
Noyan Tapan Information and Analysis Center har(at)noyan-tapan.am
Economic Policy of South Caucasus Countries:Differences of Strategy

Saturday, September 30, 11:00-12:45
The Future of Uyghur Nationalism in Turkistan/Central Asia

Keskingoren Tugrul (Organizer)
Virginia Tech. University tugrulk(at)vt.edu
The Future of Uyghur Nationalism in Turkistan/Central Asia

Keskingoren Tugrul (Chair)
Virginia Tech. Univesity tugrulk(at)vt.edu

Wimberley Dale (Discussant)
Virginia Tech. University dale.wimberley(at)vt.edu

Dwyer Arienne M.
University of Kansas anthlinguist(at)ku.edu
Nationalism one word at a time: language purification in the Uyghur exile community

Thwaites Dilber Kahraman
The Australian National University dilber(at)thwaites.com.au or Women of Power in Uyghur Arts and Literature

Klimes Ondrej
Charles University ondrejklimes(at)email.cz
Creating Modern Uyghur Identity - Adoption of Soviet Ethnic Policy

Thum Rian R.
Harvard University thum(at)fas.harvard.edu
The Apaq Khoja Shrine in Uyghur Historical Discourse

Qana Massacre July 30, 2006

2006-08-01T08:43:00.000-07:00

"Those that know the "real" history of the Middle East are not shocked with the recent tragic deaths of so many innocent people. They know that this episode, along with so many other atrocities will soon be forgotten. It is the nature of things that it is always the winners and the powerful that write the history. The weak and the conquered are always the ones that are blamed for all the misfortune that has befallen them."

"The Day after Qana Massacre: Who Cares?"

By Dr. Abbas Bakhtiar

Marxism and Gramsci

2006-06-04T11:29:00.000-07:00

Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937)

Tugrul Keskin

Gramsci’s most notable contribution to Marxist theory is his conceptualization of hegemony. While he borrowed the term from Lenin and a number of other Russian Marxists, he formed it into a theoretical framework for examining and explaining relations of power in society. He conceptualized hegemony as domination by a combination of permission and coercion through ideological and political leadership, existing within the relationship between classes and other autonomous social forces. By autonomous social forces, he means the social forces that exist autonomously of economic relations, which is one of the fundamental divergent points from Marx.

For Gramsci, history can not simply be reduced to ‘economism’, which is term he used in reference to Marx’s economic determinism, or historical materialism. Marx’s reductionist argument systematic removes the socio-cultural, or national-popular, sphere of relations that exist outside of the realm of production. That is, the social forces that are related fundamentally to freedom, human rights, democracy, such as nationalism, patriotism, race, ethnic, and gender relations. These autonomous social relations can not be incorporated into ‘economism’ unless they are reduced to mere products of the economic, which should be apparent to most as an oversimplification. Rather, Gramsci suggests these cultural elements lie outside the realm of economic relations and, therefore, must be examined as an autonomous sphere of social relations. Whereas Marx examines exploitation, Gramsci examines coercion and consent as relations of power, which is engrained in everyday life.

A historic bloc arises when the hegemonic class creates strong alliances within and among different classes and social forces, i.e. a bloc of society. History can be observed through the transition of historic blocs, the rise and fall of hegemonic classes.

Hegemony, through relations of power, produces a hegemonic class. Once it becomes hegemonic, culminating in a historic bloc, it must strive to maintain its position. At different historical stages, the hegemony of the capitalist class can become unstable due to contradictions in the economic structure and/or loss its ideological influence among its alliances, which leads to, what Gramsci called, an organic crisis.

Gramsci makes a distinction between civil society, political society, and the State. The State is simply an apparatus of power, not necessarily the source of power. He appears to refer to the anatomical apparatus, that is, a group or system of organs that work together to perform a specific function. The State is not simply political society; rather it is the embodiment of political society. Civil society is the sphere of all social relations; where classes organize consent and hegemony; and the sphere where class and national-popular struggles take place.

In short, Gramsci dealt with hegemonic power and cultural theory within historical bloc. His emphasis is less materialistic than Marx argued in his theory. Exploring Gramsci’s conception of hegemony, civil society, and ideology provides an approach for examining the State as fundamentally unstable structure; therefore, civil society plays the vital role in history and social change should come bottom to top.

If you are interested in Gramsci's Marxist theory, please take a look at the following homepage International Gramsci Society

War in Iraq is a continuation of the past

2006-03-26T09:56:00.000-08:00

War in Iraq is a continuation of the past

Tugrul Keskin

The Raging Liberal

In his article, the last exit from Iraq(1), Joel Rayburn argues that the US is not the first country who occupied Iraq and suggests that the US should take a lesson from the British experience. In the context of his analogy, unfortunately it is accurate information; however, he forgets to include a historical analysis of British colonialism at the beginning of this century and its relationship with the American occupation of Iraq. The American occupation of Iraq is a continuation of British colonialism and today is a reflection of the past. Iraq is an artificial state; it has an artificial national identity based on territoriality, as established under British imperialism. However, if we look at the other countries in the region, most of these countries are not different than Iraq. There is no difference between Iraq and Syria, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Lebanon. The differences between these countries are very similar to differences between Georgia and South Carolina or New York and Washington DC.

What are the causes of British colonialism and American occupation in Iraq? To me, there is a very simple answer to this question: divide and conquer; and exploit them as much as you can; make ethnic groups enemies to each other so that they can be used against each other and further exploited for Western-based capitalism.

The British occupied Iraq in order to weaken and divide the Ottoman Empire and to control its natural resources. Unfortunately, like everywhere else, some Arabs such as Sheik of Mecca and Medina, grand father of King Abdullah II of Jordan, Sharif Hussein Bin Ali(2) collaborated with the occupation forces and fought against their own people, like Iyad Allawi, the president of Iraq today. Lawrence of Arabia and the American colonel Noel were good friends of Hussein. However the first revolt against the Ottomans started in 1916 before the end of WWI, supported and financed by the British. There are many other small revolts that took place in the region between the late 1800 and 1938, such as the Kurdish revolts in 1886, 1924, 1929, 1936 and 1938; and other revolts such as that of the Greeks, Assyrians, Caldenians and Armenians (Christian minorities in the Ottoman territory) revolts.

Britain formed the Iraqi state in 1919 as a part of the League of Nations established under the British Mandate in 1920. Rayburn claims that the British occupation ended in 1932. Actually, the British occupation ended in 1947. In 1957, long before Saddam came to the power, General Kassim claimed that Kuwait is a part of Iraq as Saddam claimed in 1991; however, the British government warned General Kassim not to invade Kuwait. Soon after General Kassim’s claim, two important revolts erupted in Iraq, Kurdish revolt led by Molla Mustafa Barzani, the father of the current Kurdish leader Massoud Barzani, between 1961-63 and 1968-70. These two revolts were also supported and financed by the US and British governments. In 1979, Molla Mustafa Barzani died at the Georgetown hospital. His personal doctor stayed in the US and became a member of the Iraqi National Council led by Chalabi. Today, they are playing a big role in the current puppet government in Iraq.

Occupation is a simple method of imperialism and puppet governments play a key role in the process. Today, the American occupation of Iraq destabilizes the entire region as the British did at the beginning of this century. This process of war is in this sense a continuation of the past. What they have done in Africa and South East Asia is not different than what they are doing in Iraq today. Unfortunately today they have power, but the future will not be bright for all of us in the Middle East. According to American politics, I don’t see any difference between Kerry and Bush, Democrats or Republicans; they are both supportive of the Iraqi occupation in different way, they both want to remove Saddam from power. We should remember Joseph Lieberman who is very progressive “according to some people.” He also supported the war in Iraq. Additionally, presidential candidate John Kerry said that I have a plan for Iraq. One must ask the question of Kerry, regarding what this plan is and involves; killing less people, or using more oil?

Some people argue that the Bush administration has no plan before the occupation of Iraq; therefore, these people are against the Bush administration and criticize him for this reason. If George W. Bush had a plan then does this legitimize the occupation? It is a silly argument; we are talking about the exploitation and enslavement of people in Iraq and they are talking about a strategic plan. I think we live in different dimensions.

Today, to answer the question of why the US is in Iraq, the answer is simple: the exploitation of the Middle East. They use beautiful words, such as democracy, freedom, and human rights; but to me, a person who is coming from the region, I cannot take their definitions of these concepts seriously. To me, democracy, freedom and human rights are equal to exploitation and colonialism, because their understanding and definition of these terms are different than what these terms really mean. In short, Rayburn claims that the US should stay longer In Iraq in order build a stable government and society In comparison to this perspective, I would say quit Mesopotamia, quit Iraq, quit the Middle East, and leave the people alone.

In order to understand the occupation of Iraq today, I would rather suggest to you that you read two articles rather than wasting your time with Joel Rayburn’s argument. The first one is Graham Fuller’s article, Redrawing the World’s Borders(3). And the second article is Daniel Byman’s article, Let Iraq Collapse(4). Imagination is a projection of imperialism. In short, the best description of this war is hidden in Nayna Jhaveri’s article, Petroimperialism: US Oil interests and the Iraq War(5). You will likely enjoy reading the articles, and will find clear examples with which to observe imperialism.

1)Joel Rayburn, The last exit from Iraq, Foreign Affairs, New York: Mar/Apr 2006.Vol.85, Iss. 2; pg. 29.

2)http://www.kingabdullah.jo/homepage.php

3)Graham Fuller, Redrawing the World’s Borders, The World Policy Journal, Spring 1997.

4)Daniel Byman, Let Iraq Collapse, The National Interest, Fall 1996.

5)Nayna Jhaveri, Petroimperialism: US Oil interests and the Iraq War, Antipode, 2004.

Panel-The Future of Uyghur Nationalism in Turkistan/Central Asia

2006-03-12T18:08:00.000-08:00

The 2006 CESS conference at the University of Michigan http://cess.fas.harvard.edu/

Dear all,

We would like to organize a panel "The Future of Uyghur Nationalism in Turkistan (or Central Asia)" and we welcome submissions related to Uyghur Nationalism, but not limited to, the following:

1) Uyghur Nationalism in "Xinjiang" and China, 20th century,
2) Historical foundations of Uyghur Nationalism and Identity,
3) Uyghur Diaspora in Turkey, Europe and North America,
4) Future of Uyghur Nationalism and its impact on the US-China relations.

Deadline: APRIL 5, 2006

Please send abstract to:

Panel Organizer and moderator
Dr. Dale Wimberley and Tugrul Keskin

Department of Sociology
Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University
560 McBryde Hall
Blacksburg, VA 24061-0137
(202)378-8606
Email: tugrulk@vt.edu

2nd International Conference on Business, Management and Economics

2006-02-14T09:35:00.000-08:00

2nd International Conference on Business, Management and Economics
June 15-18, 2006
Yasar University
http://www.yasar.edu.tr

Altinyunus Resort Hotel/Convention Center
Cesme, Izmir/Turkey
http://www.altinyunus.com.tr/

Transnational Corporations (TNCs)

I invite your paper proposals on:

*Transnational Corporations
*Management systems of TNCs
* Global Political Economy
* Social and economic implications of TNCs
*The relation between developing countries and TNCs

I am organizing paper sessions on these topics for the upcoming 2nd International Conference on Business, Management and Economics in Cesme, Turkey, June 15-18, 2006.

Please send your abstract to tugrulk@vt.edu no later than April 23. Full paper submission May 15.

The conference website: http://conference2006.yasar.edu.tr/

You are cordially invited to the 2nd International Conference on Business, Management and Economics, which is going to be held in Izmir, Turkey between 15-18 June 2006.

We are honored to announce that Nobel Prize Winner in Economic Sciences, distinguished professor Thomas C. Schelling is going to present a special keynote address at the Second International Conference on Business, Management and Economics.

Seventh Annual International Social Theory Consortium (ISTC) Conference

2006-02-04T10:21:00.000-08:00

Theorizing Power in the post 9/11 World

May 18 – 21, 2006
The Hotel Roanoke & Conference Center
Roanoke, Virginia

Call for Papers

The Alliance of Social, Political, Ethical, and Cultural Thought (ASPECT) at Virginia Tech in partnership with the International Social Theory Consortium, (ISTC) will host the 7th Annual ISTC Conference May 18—21, 2006, in Roanoke, Virginia at The Hotel Roanoke & Conference Center.

The objective of this annual conference is to provide a forum for multidisciplinary dialogue between social theorists of all disciplines and occupations. The conference organizers invite paper and panel proposals from a variety of theoretical perspectives and intellectual traditions, and especially welcomes proposals that continue the Consortium’s dialogue among theorists working in the Global South and North. This conference also explicitly welcomes social activists engaged in transforming power relationships at various scales. As this year’s host, ASPECT is particularly interested in inviting panels that embrace in equal measure social, political, ethical and cultural theory in relationship to the conference theme.

Previous ISTC conferences have been hosted in Singapore, Toronto, Tampa, Dubrovnik, Sussex and Lexington, Kentucky.

Possible sub-themes to be addressed may include, but are not limited to the following.

1. New theorizations of power post 9/11
2. Classic theories of political, cultural, and social power
3. Geographical theorizations of power
4. Empire and its discontents
5. National and comparative perspectives on“race,” racialization, ethnicity and nativism
6. Cultural forms of neo-liberalism
7. Non-corporate and corporate models of globalization
8. Islam, Christianity and Judaism as forces for social justice
9. Technology, Science and Democracy
10. Analytic approaches to power and justice
11. Visualilty, media and representation
12. Memory and mourning
13. Theories and practices of civil society
14. Mediations of post 9/11 power: Race, Gender, Class
15. Militarism, war, and the disciplining of national bodies
16. Patriotism and class
17. Discourses on Inter-civilizational dialogues
18. Terror, torture, and human rights
19. Gender, sexuality and Critical Theory
20. Postcoloniality in an (ongoing) age of imperialism
21. Theorizing development and anti-development
22. Varieties of capitalism and anti-capitalisms
23. Global civil society and the ethics of place
24. Transnational social movements
25. Governance and governmentality
26. Radical, plural, and other varieties of democracy
27. Techno-nature
28. Health: Bio-ethics and bio-power
29. Demographies and cartographies of power
30. Immigration, citizenship and imagined national communities
31. Contemporary and historical perspectives on civic nationalism and patriotism
32. Constitutionalism and its institutions

Submission

Abstracts (between 150 and 200 words in length) for paper and panel
proposal should be submitted by February 15, 2006 to:

Professor Wolfgang Natter
E-MAIL: wnatter@vt.edu
Phone: 540.231.5342
FAX: 540-231-6078

MAIL:

7th ISTC Conference
ASPECT
531 Major Williams Hall (0130)
Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA 24061

For further inquiry, please contact:

Karen Jenkins
E-mail: karenjen@vt.edu
Telephone: 540-231-2839

All conference papers will receive consideration for inclusion in a publication containing the proceedings.

Registration*

Conference registration will be open early February 2006.

*Further registration information and web links will be made on this web-site prior to February 8, 2006.

Organized by the ASPECT Program, with the generous support of the College of Liberal Arts and Human Sciences, Virginia Tech

How About a War on Poverty, Mr. President?

2006-01-19T16:24:00.000-08:00

The Raging Liberal

Tugrul Keskin

In 1962, Edward Michael Harrington, an intellectual and activist, wrote an astonishing book, The Other America: Poverty in the US and his findings in this book shaped the views of American President Lyndon Johnson on poverty. On January 8, 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson declared a War on Poverty in his State of the Union address. Johnson knew that the War on Poverty was the one of the key elements in the fight against radicalism and extremism, therefore, he made it very clear that the war was unconditional. Between 1964 and 1968, America attempted to eliminate poverty and used economic and political tactics and strategies to gain the support of the people and to rescue them from the most extreme poverty. However, these socio-economic and political strategies have not continued after he left the Presidency and ultimately the war on poverty has failed in urban and rural America, because another war mongering President came to the power in the White House; Richard Nixon. Unfortunately, today is not different than the past.

According to the Census Bureau report entitled, “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2003,” the percentage of Americans who live below the poverty level is 12.5% and the socio-economic gap between races and ethnic groups is stronger than ever. In the same report, there was a significant relationship shown between people’s ethnic origin and poverty levels. In 2002, the percentage of people who lived below the poverty level was 12.1%, but the poverty level for the total population in the US increased to 12.5% soon afterwards, in 2003. In the same Census Bureau report, it was recorded that 13.2 million people of Hispanic origin and 7.3 million African-Americans were living without health insurance. In total, 44.9 million people did not have health insurance in the US in 2003.

Poverty in the World may have different ways that it shows itself and more challenges to come. For instance, according to Global Policy Forum, Most African nations suffer from military dictatorships, corruption, civil unrest and war, underdevelopment and deep poverty. The UN Development Program report 2005 indicates that 34.8 million children will die in the next ten years and the same report also shows that poverty and inequality all over the world is a trend that has increased. The inequality level in Brazil is 59.3%, in Namibia it is 70.7%, Egypt 34.4%. In Pakistan, only 38% of all children will complete their primary education, because of poverty and the socio-economic depression.

Poverty is the cause of many of the social and political challenges that we face today. The social and political consequences are related with the economic gap that exists both between nations and within American society. The essence of the elimination of poverty from the socio-economic sphere is a key factor to shortening the gap between the rich and poor. However, as long as there is a wide gap between the upper and working classes, the Capitalist economy and America will continue to face ever-more challenges and crisis. As a result of poverty and the continuation of Colonialism because the power of trans-national corporations by the powerful West, developing nations will face new challenges such as religious fundamentalism; because the people and political stakeholders have nothing to lose but their identity.

Today, we have a different president and a different war than the one undertaken by President Johnson’s under his broad perspective. President Bush believes the war on terror will eliminate or at least minimize radicalism and this will prevent future attacks on America. It is absolutely wrong. As long as there is a gap between the rich and poor, and the socio-economic gap continues to exist between nations and within nations, and the idea of colonialization continues, unfortunately terrorism will survive; therefore, we must understand that terrorism is another ugly face and a further reflection of poverty.

Behind Closed Doors: Elite Politics, Think Tanks, and U.S. Foreign Policy

2005-10-25T08:31:00.000-07:00

Tuğrul Keskin & Patrick R. Halpern

Insight Turkey

In the April-June 2005 Issue

Published by the Ankara Center for Turkish Policy Studies (ANKAM)

This paper aims to illuminate the role played by think tanks in the development of public policy and planning. Employing the framework provided by William G. Domhoff and Elite Theory, this paper explores the role of elites in the formulation of public policy in the United States through an understanding of the interplay between foundations, think tanks, and policy discussion groups. Using the current U.S. foreign policy agenda as an example, we will examine how think tanks are, ultimately, the mouthpiece for the promotion of elite interests in the policy planning process...

You will find the entire article at the following homepage: Insight Turkey

The Philosophy of History, G.W. F. Hegel

2005-09-10T17:44:00.000-07:00

Review of The Philosophy of History by Tugrul Keskin

Hegel attempts to elucidate his theory regarding the historical development of the human spirit. Hegel uses two levels of explanation for his approach; the level of individual self-consciousness, and the global level of human freedom. Hegel views reason as equal to God. He furthermore defines reason as “the infinite content, the very stuff of all essence and truth.” His lemmatic explanation of truth is based upon theological philosophy, and as such he believes there exists only one truth. On the other hand, some philosophers claim that there are multiple truths. One can argue that the truth may change from time to time, or from one condition to another. The truth of the oppressor and the truth of oppressed will represent different realities; they are different. The consciousness of freedom is the ultimate goal in the development of human freedom. Hegel implied that one cannot be free without God. However, he does not talk directly about God, he elaborates on the idea of reason, instead of God. For Hegel, God is reason, and spirit is the freedom of man or thought. According to Hegel, reason is an infinite power that represents God; therefore, reason has ruled the world. Hegel attempts to establish a link between the ‘final goal’ and reason, and ultimately finds the relationship between these two phenomenons within religious message.

Hegel writes that, “I am free when I exist independently, all by my self.” In this issue regarding the independence of human beings from despotic thought, Hegel is in conflict with himself, because on the one hand, what he desires is to free man from his dependences, on the other hand he brings man into the different dogmatic structure that is called religion. Religion is a dogmatic structure and conflicts with freedom.

Hegel employs a very conservative thought process in his approach to social action and structure. Accordingly, the realm of spirit is placed within a religious framework.

In the first chapter in the book, The Methods of History, Hegel employs the methodology of historical approach to the problem of human development. In “Reason in History,” he provides a definition for his basic argument regarding reason and its relationship to both infinite power and God. This analysis also involves spirit and its development in the context of human freedom, and the individual and his/her relationship to the state structure. In the chapter titled, “History in its development,” Hegel focuses on the larger picture, in which change is what leads to the perfectibility of human development. World history corresponds to the development of self-consciousness that brings with it “the development of Spirit’s consciousness of its freedom.” In Chapter 5, “The Geographical basis of history,” Hegel holds an ethnocentric perspective, which can be seen through his division of the world between the old and new world. In the last chapter, titled “The Division of history,” Hegel defines Europe as representing the absolute end of world history, in comparison to the East. In the Hegelian view, the East is only a relative term.

In short, the secularization process in Western Christian World cannot be understood without first examining Hegel’s argument regarding reason and spirit. Hegel’s ideas have influenced and shaped conservative social structures and philosophies. In the book, Hegel reminds us of the Weberian perspective of ethno-Christian centrism, in which religion is the center of reason and spirit. Hegel claims that man cannot be free unless he employs God’s will in his own life and freedom. It is interesting to see that in the Enlightenment of Europe, religion was a dominant factor even in the philosophical sense. For Hegel, universal truth is reason, more clearly it is God. On the other hand, perhaps a more useful perspective might view man as unable to be truly free, unless he dismisses God from public life, because religion is in fact a creation of the human mind. Humankind shouldn’t act as a slave of his own creation as is the case today. On the other hand, Hegelian philosphy is very similar to Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, Islamic thinker who lived in the 12th century.

Islamism as a reactionary identity

2005-07-13T00:02:00.000-07:00

Tugrul Keskin

The Raging Liberal

September 13, 2005

The purpose of this article is to achieve an understanding of the cultural, economic, and political roots of the increasing trend of religious movements. Particularly one must reach an understanding of Islamic revivalism after the 1980's. There is a direct correlation between religious movements and poverty. Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Algeria, Turkey, Indonesia, and Egypt have been faced with extremist religious violence since the end of the 1980s. All of these countries also confront economic problems. Economic difficulties have created the gap between rich and poor in these specific countries. Moreover, the unemployment rate has increased dramatically in the last ten years. Education levels have decreased, and foreign investments eliminated the local and traditional work force.

Additionally, globalization has produced a public sphere in which people encounter other cultures. People in these countries are beginning to define their identity by looking at the cultures of the West. This environment has shaped and formed their identity. On the subject Huntington wrote, "while Asians became increasingly assertive as a result of economic development, Muslims in massive numbers were simultaneously turning toward Islam as a source of identity, meaning, stability, legitimacy, development, power, and hope, hope epitomized in the slogan "Islam is the solution." (Huntington, 1997)

People tried to create a cultural, economic and political ideology within the Islamic sphere in reaction to these forces of globalization. As a result of this, Islam becomes an ideology not a religion. Religious fundamentalism is benefiting from this trend. On the other side of this issue, are Western values conflicting with Islam? The question is whether Islam is compatible with democracy. Islam becomes the cultural defense mechanism. Today, in these countries cultural changes are taking place rapidly. But these rapid changes are forming a reactive type of cultural change rather than natural way. Inglehart claims, "cultural change seems to be path dependent. Economic development tends to bring pervasive cultural changes, but the fact that a society was historically shaped by Protestantism, Confucianism or Islam leaves a cultural heritage with enduring effects that influence subsequent development". (Inglehart and Baker, 2000)

The discourse of the conflict is not just based on economic and political differences, but also on cultural differences. Cultural imperialism has also influenced this conflict, because cultural imperialism is a result of the global capitalism. Moreover, Ritzer asserts that "…McDonaldization affects not only the restaurant business, but also education, work, health care, travel, leisure, dieting, politics, the family, and virtually every other aspect of society. McDonaldization has shown every sign of being an exorable process by sweeping through seemingly impervious institutions and parts of the world. (Ritzer, 1996). Tomlinson point out that cultural imperialism is a critique of global capitalism. (Tomlinson, 1992)

According to M. Hakan Yavuz, in his book, Islamic Political Identity in Turkey, the rise of Islamic social movements since the 1980's can be attributed to the tension created by neo-liberal economic policies. Yavuz describes this politicization as a rise of network communities that arose in reaction to and in order to cope with the modern urban conditions of fragmentation and anomie. As the secular nation state created systems of control and standardization, there was an ideological vacuum that was left. Muslims sought to carve out Islamic niches in the public sphere, free from secular state control. Social groups have also used Islam in order to make identity claims and justify entry into political and economic spheres as a result of the politicization of Islamic identity.

The most famous critical author of globalization, Edward Said sees cultural imperialism as an Orientalism that Western countries use to colonize the East and dominate them culturally. He later claims that this environment will have a huge impact on the Eastern societies. There will not only be an economic effect, but also cultural and political consequences will occur in the long term. (Said, 1993)

According to author Jan Nederven Pieterse, there are four currents or forms of collective action that relate specifically to globalization. First there is anti-globalization, then alternative globalization, global reform, and quiet encroachment. For the purpose of this study, his definition of anti-globalization is relevant to the current topic. In particular, Pieterse explores the effects of rapid globalization on populations that are exposed to new global forces, which result in insecurity in people's livelihoods and social realities. Some populations are unprepared to be exposed fully to the effects of globalization and react to it as an enemy force. The author describes this in the following way, "In anti-globalization discourse, globalization is portrayed as an alien juggernaut, a hostile, uncontrolled force" (Pieterse, 31). This view is fed mainly be fear and uncertainty, and its proponents often also hold strong views in opposition to imperialism, neocolonialism and Western capitalism.

Political Islam may be considered as one expression of anti-globalization. Political Islam represents an entire world-view that exists in opposition to globalization with its own historical and geographic arena, its own law, economics, and social policy, science and culture/identity. Political Islam has arisen in reaction to forces of globalization, and created its own structures of meaning in direct opposition to those of globalization and homogeneity. This has taken place according to Pieterse, as a result of anger in the Islamic world over Western double standards and political and social hegemony.

In short, the classical social theorist Mead claims "people's minds and their conceptions of themselves are shaped by their social experiences." (Ritzer, 1996). The social experience has changed dramatically in the Islamic world for the last 20 years. Therefore, religious fanaticism is a result of economic, cultural and political domination by the powerful West.

References:

Huntington, Samuel. 1997.The Clash of Civilizations: Remaking of World Order. New York, NY: Touchstone.

Inglehart, Ronald and Wayne E. Baker. Modernization's Challenge to Traditional Values: Who's Afraid of Ronald McDonald? The Futurist (Magazine/Journal), March 1, 2001.

Pierre Hamel, Henri Lustiger-Thaler and Jan Nederveen Pieterse, eds., 2001. Globalizationad and Social Movements. New York, NY: Palgrave.

Ritzer, George. 1996. Classical Sociological Theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Said, Edward W.1993. Culture and Imperialism. New York, NY: Vintage.

Tomlinson, John. 1992. Cultural Imperialism. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Yavuz, Hakan M. 2003. Islamic Political Identity in Turkey. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

AUTHORITARIAN DEMOCRACY

2005-06-14T19:05:00.000-07:00

Armenian News Network / Groong

http://www.groong.com/

Review & Outlook - 06/14/2005

AUTHORITARIAN DEMOCRACY

Armenian News Network / Groong
June 14, 2005

By Tugrul Keskin

We have been experiencing so-called democratic revolutions
around the world today. These opposition movements from the
Caucasus to Central Asia, from Iraq to Ukraine, are toppling
the old regimes and their state structures. Inexperienced
opposition movements and their leaders are taking over the
state and have continued to control the entire society on behalf
of democracy in the Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, Iraq,
Lebanon and many more countries both now, and more to come[1].
However, no one questions the social nature of the democratic
ideas contained in these opposition movements. Where are they
emerging from,and what exactly do they attempt to achieve? Is
the problem in these countries really democracy, or perhaps
instead the exploitation of the market and natural resources
through the use of these so-called democratic movements. The
purpose of these movements is not really democracy, but use of
political goals to achieve economic means.

The process of colonialization involves many different stages
that take place within different historical time periods. As
part of this, both political and economic methods are used as
tools in these stages of its development. For instance, the
cultural, political and economic occupation of Sri Lanka and
India in the 18th century, or similarly the method of `divide
and rule' in Africa was undoubtedly similar to today's tragedy
in Central Asia and the Middle East. As Franz Fanon points out
in his book describing this dynamic, titled `Blacks Skin, White
Masks,' [2] democracy is a mask used as exploitation by the
powerful. We have been witnessing the neo-colonialization process
by colonialist powers and Trans National Corporations (TNC) in
the context of the so-called democratic structure and movements.
The meaning and the real notion of democracy have changed, and
today democracy and civil society are part and parcel in a
process that serves the interests of the powerful, rather than
creating freedom and equality within modern society. Freedom,
free speech and civil society are the true nature and
characteristics of a democracy; however replacing dictators
with puppets will not bring democracy and solve the
socio-economic issues for these underdeveloped and developing
nations, but will only serve to sustain further relationships
of exploitation.

The recent cases of the Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, and Iraq
have shown us that old and corrupt, anti-democratic regimes
cannot survive by disregarding the people's democratic demands
and sustaining economic equality. On the other hand, the
opposition movements of Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, and Iraq
stepped up and demanded more democracy supported by other
exploiters. A dichotomous situation for a so-called democracy.

In contrast to the argument of some scholars, democracy is
actually a very vague term that is defined in the context of
cultural parameters rather than within a universal pop-culture.
Democracy in Iran may be exercised differently than that of
Western Europe, because there exists in Iran a unique cultural
and historical development of democratic structure and
institutions and socio-economic paradigms that are specific to
the Iranian context. Therefore, we must define and understand
the democratic ideal within its appropriate cultural context.
Democracy does not serve the interests of TNCs, but that of the
people in these countries. Yet, today some neo-liberal scholars
argue that the meaning of `democratic' openness has transformed
into a description of democracy as a political approach that is
unable to survive without the free market. However, the state
structure in developing countries has become dispersed and
polarized by NGOs and their financiers, the TNCs. The state has
been weakened in this way and has lost control over the society
in favor of the interests of the elite or petit bourgeois. For
the TNCs, in order to sell more products, the state structure
should be weakened and tariffs should be abolished for their
own good, not for the good of the people of these countries.
This was the beginning of the decreasing power of the nation
state regarding the neo-liberal capitalist policies. According
to some views, such as those of Thomas Friedman, foreign direct
investment (FDI) and free market capitalism bring more
opportunities and democracy to the underdeveloped and
developing nations. In reality, FDI has not brought freedom to
the developing nations, but has produced an environment
in which there results cheap labor, the existence
of workers without unions, socio-economic chaos, more debt
to the IMF and World Bank, and last but not least, meaningless
independence and sovereignty. There has been an increase in the
power of the nation-state and national borders in the developed
nations, whereas the economic, cultural and political borders of
developing countries have been weakened. Moreover, invisible
borders and the diminishing power of nation state in the
developing nations have generated socio-economic anarchy and
chaos for these nations.

In the context of imperialism and neocolonialism, democracy
cannot be imposed on nations from the `outside.' In his book,
`Democracy in America [3]' Alexis DeTocqueville argues that
American democracy has been developed and constructed within
a democratic societal and state structure, which is by the
people for the people. It took a long time to build and
construct American democracy and the free institutions and
democratic behavior that support this. This was influenced
by the ideas of freedom and equality. Some other scholars
argue that American democracy has developed just within the
last two hundred years. If this is the case for the development
of the democratic process in America, then one must argue that
it will take a long time to build democracy and to shape a
civil society in countries such as Iraq or Kyrgyzstan. Most
importantly, Americans built their democratic state after they
received their independence from England. Democracy was not
begun under British colonialist rule because democracy cannot
be exercised under military or `civil' occupation. Each is
examples of the occupation of both mind and culture and
prevents democratic political organization and idea of civil
society.

It is important to note that the next colorful revolution may
take place in the Caucasus region. The case of Azerbaijan in
the context of democratic struggle is also a good example of
and reflects the power struggle between the puppets of
colonialism (so-called democratic opposition movements) and
the authoritarian state structure. This conflict will have a
considerable impact on the region, because colonialists do not
discriminate between the exploitation of either Armenia or
Azerbaijan. How do you define democracy within this class
of power struggle?

Democracy is neither a product of pop-culture nor exercised by
colonialist powers. Colonialism cannot be the watchdog for any
democratic structure and ideas, because the power holders'
economic interests overlap with anti-democratic movements and
paramilitary organizations, as we have seen in Latin and Central
America. In this sense, how can colonialism protect the real
nature of a democracy, when the `black skin white masks'
attempt to sell their products or to exploit the countries they
have occupied? It is a dichotomic process. We are within a
certain historical stage of human development; therefore in order
to improve our society and to continue along this path of social
and economic achievement, we cannot live without democracy.

NOTES:

1 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/05/20050527.html
2 Franz Fanon, Black Skin White Masks
3 Alexis DeTocqueville, Democracy in America

--
Tugrul Keskingoren is a Ph.D. Candidate and Graduate
Teaching Assistant at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University, Department of Sociology. He may be reached at
tugrulk@vt.edu

Redistribution of Groong articles, such as this one,
to any other media, including but not limited to other
mailing lists and Usenet bulletin boards, is strictly
prohibited without prior written consent from Groong's
Administrator.
© Copyright 2005 Armenian News Network/Groong.
All Rights Reserved.

Book Review: Irving M. Zeitlin, Ideology and the Development of Sociological Theory

2005-06-13T07:04:00.000-07:00

Irving M. Zeitlin, Ideology and the Development of Sociological Theory(6th Ed.)

Tugrul Keskin

In this article, I will review Irving M. Zeitlin’s work of Sociological Theory. Zeitlin is a sociologist from University of Toronto. His book, Ideology and the Development of Sociological Theory, has been published 7 times. His approach is clearly unique and unlike that of other Sociological theory text books in American universities. The book has a much stronger social theory approach, than the more limited perspectives based just on theory. This book reminds us of the European viewpoint of Sociological theory; therefore Zeitlin uses the term “Enlightenment” as the starting point of his approach to social theory, because he refers to Enlightenment as “the intellectual movement that developed within the hundred-year span beginning with English Revolution and culminating with the French Revolution.” Enlightenment is a departure point in the origin of sociological theory. Many Sociologists agree with Zetlin’s view.

Zeitlin intends to explain Sociological Theory from the Marxist perspective and he sees Sociological theory as a combination of both Political and Social Theory. He did not have clear definition of social theory as its own field of inquiry in an independent sense; and does not distinguish between sociological ad political theories. Zeitlin attempted to combine Enlightenment with the Marxian legacy in the context of Social theory. At the time of the Enlightenment, Europe was under the influence and largely the control of religious fanatics in Europe, and Zeitlin traces Sociological theory from the philosophical foundation provided by the Enlightenment. According to him, sociology is science of critique. He makes reference often to British and French social thinkers, and hence, began his book with theoretical points from Montesquieu, Rousseau and Saint Simon.

During the last decade, there have been many publications on Sociological theory, and most of them have their own unique perspective. Each scholar who works and writes on Sociological theory tries to put his or her own ideological background and perspective into his or her writings. Zeitlin’s methodology is also different than the methodology contained in other social theory textbooks, specifically his historical methodology.

The book contains four main Chapters, and each of them supports and expands further on his approach to social theory. Marxist theory is the central argument and starting point of the book, and most of the social theorists that are referenced are either Marxist or socialist thinkers. Zeitlin uses Marxist theory to construct his sociological ideas. There are four different categories of sociological theory; Enlightenment, Post-Revolutionary Thought, The Marxian Watershed, and The Debate with Marx’s Ghost.

One of the most important points of this book is that Zeitlin gave great attention in his work to the thoughts of women social theorists, unlike most other writers. It is not common in the social theory literature to find such as attention to women theorists and social thinkers and in many cases women are not referred to at all.

In the first Chapter, he refers to Mary Wollstonecraft as “a true child of the Enlightenment.” Mary Wollstonecraft’s work is also important in the context of women rights in the 17th century so it is significant that he takes the work into account, within its historical context.

The other central figures in his book include Saint Simon, the utopian French Socialist and social thinker. Zeitlin views Marx’s theory as originating from the influence of Simon’s work. Thinkers and philosophers in Zeitlin’s book, such as Montesquieu, Rousseau, Saint Simon, Alexis de Tocqueville, Pareto and Mosca are more related with political theory than with sociological theory but are given strong preference in Zeitlin’s theoretical framework. As we have mentioned before, he does not have clear definition of sociological theory, therefore combines the works of both political and social theorists. Another key thinker made reference to in Zetlin’s book is Saint Simon. If we compare Zetlin’s work with that of other social theory textbooks, we would not be able to see much influence from Saint Simon’s theories in their work. However, Zeitlin provided an entire chapter on Simon’s ideas, and the part his work played in influencing Enlightenment thinkers in the 19th century.

For Zeitlin, the philosophy of intellectual movements is one ideological foundation of Marxism. Enlightenment created an environment that resulted in a change in the social structure of Europe. There was a revolution in human thought, which at the time was the most important factor that contributed towards moving forward in human history and the development of intellectual thought.

In Zeitlin’s view, the reaction against Enlightenment, particularly in reference to the revolution is a conservative and non-progressive event in history. These conservative thinkers that were against the revolution, sought to discontinue the secularization process in Europe. According to Zeitlin, secularization was an inevitable event of ‘bridge’ in human history which worked towards the collective good. In c7, Zeitlin provides historical details of the secularization process in Europe. He perceives the process as an escape from the darkness of religious authorities. In the same Chapter, Zeitlin concludes that there are two different types of philosophy and sociology; the conservative and the revolutionist types or strains. He categorizes Burke, Hegel, Bonald and Maistre as conservative thinkers.

In Chapter 8, Zeitlin introduces both Saint Simon and Comte as official founders of sociology. In most of the book, he distinguishes between conservative and progressive social thinkers. Zeitlin obviously shows that he takes the side of the Marxist view, and regards this as the progressive strain of social thought. From the beginning of the book to the end, he provides a Marxist perspective, and then throughout tries to find support for these view from many different social thinkers.

According to Zeitlin, Alexis de Tocqueville is “one of the most important social and political theorists of the nineteenth century,” because Tocqueville emphasizes two important revolutions and he wrote of them as critical factors of social transformation. The first one is a democratic revolution and the other an industrial revolution.

Zeitlin argues that John Stuart Mill, English philosopher, was greatly influenced by Harriet Taylor who was “one of the major figures who shaped the thinking of the later Victorian era.” According to Zeitlin, in Chapter 12, John Stuart Mill’s concern was the relationship of government to liberty.

In Chapter 13, Zeitlin talks about Marx and his philosophical orientation and in Chapter 14, continues on to have a discussion about Marx’s relation with Hegel and Feuerbach, and the way that both thinkers influenced Marxist theory. Zeitlin states that Marx’s dialectic method is different than the Hegelian one, however, in that he did not clearly define the Marxian dialectic. Zeitlin also highlights the importance of historical sociology in Marx’s work. Another important thinker/philosopher and businessman in Zeitlin’s book, Frederick Engels has a whole Chapter devoted to the discussion of his theories. It is unlikely to have a whole chapter dedicated to Engels in any other sociological theory book.

In the last main chapter, The Debate with Marx’s Ghost, Zeitlin covers Weber, Pareto, Mosca, Durkheim and Karl Manheim. Mosca and Pareto, both Italian sociologists and political scientists, are rather more political theorists than sociologists. Zeitlin introduces them as “the New Machiavellians.” It seems to be that theories of Mosca and Pareto are more state-related than society-related; therefore it is not often that we find both theorists discussed in sociological theory textbooks.

Zeitlin always uses Marxian theory as the center argument of the book. He compares other theorists with Marx, and critiques them using the Marxist methodology and perspective. The book is historically very well organized, in the way that it contains different social thinkers and sociologists starting from the early 17th century to the early 20th century. The last sociologist he mentions in the book is Karl Manheim. He analyses Karl Manheim’s famous work, Ideology and Utopia, and links Manheim’s work with Marx. Zeitlin stresses that in Manheim’s sociology of knowledge “Manheim considered political, legal, philosophical, religious, and other ideas in their relationship with economic and social changes.”
Zeitlin’s Approach

His approach to sociological theory is based on Marxist view and Marxist theory is always present at the core of the book. Consequently, he accomplished his goal. To me, Zeitlin’s book is more history of social theory book rather than just a sociological theory textbook.

In short, Zeitlin’s stated goal was to explain sociological theory as an evolutionary idea with a historical process and trajectory that begun with the Enlightenment. Irving Zeitlin certainly achieved his goal, because his methodology shows us that the intellectual foundation of sociological theory follows the historical process of evolution.

Book Review: Discipline and Punish:The Birth of the Prison , Michel Foucault

2005-04-09T16:36:00.000-07:00

Michel Foucault

Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Michel Foucault

Tugrul Keskin

Foucault argues that criminal behavior and activity comes from the increase in surveillance on members of society, and the increase in coercive (forced) discipline. In other words, illegal activity is being based on very subtle forms of criminal behavior that has been defined as 'criminal' through this newly strengthened surveillance and discipline. The activity is not in and of itself criminal, except as it is defined to be so. The definition of criminal activities are created in the context of a social system in which society is under surveillance and discipline not just in the case of criminal prosecution and incarceration, but in every aspect of social life. According to Foucalt, modern society itself is caught in prison, because every single behavior of human being is in watched by the system. This new societal environment has influenced human behavior and has social and political ramifications in the context of discipline and punishment.

According to Foucault, more discipline in a society creates more delinquency. He furthermore discusses that in order to control society, the political power elite uses discipline, and the disciplinary environment that is created by power elite produces obedient masses. Again, justice is regarded as distinct from punishment; punishment and discipline are mechanisms that are independent from justice and used more for purposes of societal control. Justice does not justify crime, but it does serve more or less as a tool of imaginary punishment that does not match the crime that is committed. Therefore, justice has a new meaning in Foucault’s understanding of it. In discipline and punishment, justice is not the main achievement; instead, control of society is the key element in the penal system.

In Foucault’s view, discipline and punishment are not used for a main goal for justice. In this sense of punishment, the core argument of Foucault is that control over society is the vital element of punishment and discipline. Therefore, he later discusses the torture to body has transformed into torture to soul in 19 and 20th century. Foucault also puts power in the center of discipline and punishment, because these terms are the tool of power. Power is exercised through the justice system. The different forms of this power can be observed in diverse aspects of social life and its institutions.

The legitimation of power that takes place through the penal system is a new phenomenon in which the social and political environment is constructed through the use of punishment and discipline. Therefore, the new system of punishment has more complex power relations. Repression, rejection, exclusion, and marginalization are some of the different forms of punishment used in modern society. However, these new methods of punishment are not enough to describe the discourse of punishment in the modern sense. Foucault argues that this type of increase in discipline will result in an increase in the incarceration of the masses, and this actually results in the incarceration of an entire society. We can see Foucault’s understanding of modern society is described in his references to the carceral city. In this way, he basically distinguishes between the old penal systems, in which the body was the center of punishment, and “the carceral city, with its imaginary geo-politics, is governed by quite different principles.” (Foucault, 307)

It seems to be that Foucault sees the system as a machine that operates by itself perfectly, much like forces in nature operate. But on the other hand, if a system works perfectly, there should not be any crime or deviant behavior. Therefore, Foucault does not specify how deviant behavior occurs in modern society. According to him, there is no outside influence on the system. The system is a self-producing machine that basically reproduces itself and has control over society. There are no agents in this social structure, unlike the definition provided by Giddens. According to Foucault, power is the key element of the argument. Accordingly, we try to normalize society and individuals through the market economy, school and penal systems. In the sense of normalization, punishment and discipline are extreme cases in modern society.

My understanding of Foucault is that he sees capitalism as a machine. He also attempts to distinguish himself from Marx and Marxist structuralism. His definition of power is that power is not real, but is more likely to be an imaginary phenomenon. But at the same time, this definition of imaginary power has influenced every aspect of social and political life. The power he describes is very much real, and is used by the power elite similar to the process described by Wright Mills. Foucault claims that our consciousness has changed. He also implies that the target of punishment has transformed from the body to the soul. In modern society, the soul of society is under the control of a machine he refers to as capitalism. However, today the system is more complex than ever and historical processes have acted upon and further strengthened the system/machine. Foucault claims that a person can only be an individual up to a certain level, because after this point, their behavior is under the control of this system.

The establishment of the carceral system is the new form of discipline and punishment. This new process or system is based upon the redefinition of criminal behavior in modern society. This definition describes criminality as the surveillance of an entire society. Exclusion, marginalization, rejection and repression occur in the carceral system. The new system has stronger limitations on human freedom and behavior. It creates artificial identities and defines artificial criminal behaviors. Foucault stresses that there have been enormous changes in the penal system, and that this represents a humanization in the treatment of criminals. His perspective on the normalization of the penal system, from torture of the body to torture of the soul, provides a new system of the rationalization of punishment.
Foucault clearly describes the existence of a resemblance between prisons and modern institutions. “Foucault asks rhetorically, it is surprising that prisons resemble factories, schools, barracks, hospitals, which all resemble prisons? In the end, Foucault sees the development of carceral system in which discipline is transported from the penal institutions to the entire social body.”

Foucault uses the term ‘Panacticon’, that is a technological observation of prisoners. The idea of Panacticon in the modern society involves an observation that there exists an entire society as prison guards that monitor prisoners in cells. Technological advancements maintain an environment in which Panacticon is an imaginary observation for the entire society. Cameras, radars, and metal detectors at Airports are the some of form of Panacticons. The key role of the Panacticon is to control and discipline society. Therefore, according to Foucault, earlier societies had more inherent freedom than modern societies, because every aspect of life is under the control and observation of Panacticon.

In short, according to Foucault, there exist common elements in today’s society to that of the 17 and 18th centuries. Today’s modern societies are under the control and rule of the power elite. Besides the acts of prison sentencing and jail, the individual is controlled in every aspect of his social life; in the school environment, through the work environment and even the football game. He does not pay attention to the role of power elite. Power is instead viewed as an imaginary mechanism that is not used by any group or institution, but is more likely to exist as a self-controlled mechanism. Basically, Foucault disregards the role of the elite in modern society. In his book, Discipline Punishment, Foucault provides an explanation and historical overview of punishment in the context of the power relations that are used to control society.

Interview with Prof. Robert Jensen

2005-03-21T08:58:00.000-08:00

By Tugrul Keskin

Robert Jensen is a tenure Professor at University of Texas. He finished his Ph.D. in media law and ethics at the University of Minnesota. Prior to his academic career, he worked as a professional journalist for a decade. In addition to teaching and research, Jensen writes for popular media, both alternative and mainstream. His opinion and analytic pieces on such subjects as foreign policy, politics, and race have appeared in papers around the country. He also is involved in a number of activist groups working against U.S. military and economic domination of the rest of the world. Jensen is the author of Citizens of the Empire: The Struggle to Claim Our Humanity, Freeing the First Amendment: Critical Perspectives on Freedom of Expression, and many other books and articles.

http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~rjensen/home.htm

Prof. Robert Jensen

Tugrul Keskin: Do you think US foreign policy toward the Islamic World or the Third World has changed especially after Bush administration came to the White House. Or has US foreign policy never changed and basically has always been like this toward the Third World countries-that reminds me the British colonialist policies in the 18 and 19th century.

Robert Jensen: The broad outlines of U.S. foreign policy since WWII have remained unchanged: A desire to deepen and extend U.S. power around the world, especially in the most strategically crucial regions such as the energy-rich Middle East; always with an eye on derailing the attempts of any Third World society to pursue a course of independent development outside the U.S. sphere; and containing the possibility of challenges to U.S. hegemony from other powerful states. The Bush administration policy is a departure from recent policy in terms of strategy and tactics, and perhaps also in the intensity of ideological fanaticism. The Bush National Security Strategy outlined in 2002 is breathtaking in its assertion of U.S. dominance and rejection of any possible challenge. The post 9/11 attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq show the willingness of the administration to use large-scale violence to achieve that. None of this is unprecedented; all of it is dangerous and disturbing.

Keskin: If the policy has not been different from the past, then who is actually responsible for forming US foreign policy; the past and current administrations, the Pentagon, corporate America, neo-cons, or others?

Jensen: U.S. foreign policy is shaped by a variety of interests: Politicians with certain ideological commitments, military leadership with certain interests in preserving their power, and corporations with the always-central goal of maximizing profit. Those groups are not monolithic. Sometimes they will have conflicts, internally and among the groups. Sometimes ideologically fanatical civilian leadership will want to pursue wars that military leaders don't want (such as a possible U.S. attack on Iran). Sometimes the interests of one sector of the corporate world might clash with another sector. But in general, U.S. foreign policy serves the goal of allowing corporations, primarily U.S.-based corporations, to make the most profit through domination of the Third World and containment of challenges from other power centers (Europe, Japan, China). That means securing markets with the most favorable terms, allowing corporations to exploit labor abroad, and shoring up the dollar.

Keskin: Since the November 2000 election there have been negative changes in the American Universities. Free speech and freedom of thought are ignored; and academicians are frightened to speak out against the anti-democratic political structure. If I remember correctly, you are the first academician to face some difficulties of this kind, and more recently Ward Churchill from the University of Colorado is facing the same type of freedom of speech issues. Could you please tell us about your experience regarding academic ‘freedom’, and do you think that American academia is loosing its values of free speech?

Jensen: After 9/11 I was sharply criticized by administrators at my university. It had no effect on my conduct; I continued to speak out. But it no doubt did scare some people into silence. That's the tactic these days: We have extensive legal guarantees of free speech in the United States, but the people in power try to create a climate of fear to keep people quiet. There are some current threats to the system of tenure in the universities and academic freedom, but most of the threat to free speech is more subtle, in terms of the social pressures.

Keskin: Dr. Jensen, a foremost conservative Pat Buchanan wrote an article, entitled "Whose War," and in the article he criticizes the Bush administration. What are the main differences between the neoconservatives such as Wolfowitz and Perle; and conservatives such as Pat Buchanan? What is happening in the conservative ideology?

Jensen: Pat Buchanan is often referred to as a "paleo-conservative," someone harking back to an earlier view of the world that is isolationist and reactionary. Buchanan opposed the Iraq war, but on very different grounds than leftists. His disagreements with the neoconservatives are mostly about tactics and strategy. Both groups agree that the U.S. should dominate the world, though they disagree about how to go about it.

Keskin: What do you think about how the US media has handled or covered the Iraq War?

Jensen: In a word, it is horrible, this is a failure of US journalism. Before, during and after the war, mainstream commercial journalists have failed to provide the critical analysis, independent reporting, and the diverse range of opinions necessary for the American public to evaluate the Bush administration’s claims about the war. After the hunt for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction came up empty, Bush was forced to appoint a commission to study the "intelligence failures" in the run-up to war. As journalists pursued that story, some argued that the press had finally stepped into its role as the proverbial watchdog on power. But journalists continue to allow officials to define and shape the news in ways that keep US readers and viewers in the dark, just as they were before and during the war. The paradox of US journalism is that a press which operates free of direct governmental control produces news that routinely reproduces the conventional wisdom of a narrow power elite. Coverage of the Iraq war highlights two of the key reasons. First, the majority of US journalists are unable to transcend the limiting effects of the ideology of American exceptionalism - the notion that the United States is the ultimate embodiment of democracy and goes forward in the world as a benevolent champion of freedom, not as another great power looking to expand its influence around the world. Uncritical acceptance of this ideology permeates mainstream US coverage; even 'critical' reporting usually tends to take it as a given. Second, journalists are trapped by the routines of "objective journalism", the most central of which is the slavish reliance on "official sources". Unfortunately, most US journalists continue to read from the Bush administration’s script.

Interview with Ruzi Nazar - Turkish

2005-03-12T22:13:00.000-08:00

Ruzi Nazar Ile Turkistan Uzerine Sohbet

Tugrul Keskin

8 Mart 2005

Ruzi Nazar

Falls Church
Virginia

Herhalde Ruzi Nazar ismi Turkiye Orta Asya ve bilhassa soguk savas donemi icinde onemli cagrisimlar yaptirir. Bu cagrisim Ruzi beyin yasayan bir tarih olmasindan kaynaklandigida soylenebilir. Ikinci dunya savasinda Nazi Almanyasinin yaninda Sovyetlere karsi savasan Turkistan lejyonundan New York’a uzanan, 1955 yilinda Amerikan vatandasi olmasi ile birlikte Washington’a cagrilan ve CIA’de calismaya baslayan Nazar, daha sonra 1959 yilindan 1969 yilina kadar Turkiye’de Amerikan elciginde calismaya baslar. Nazar Turkiye ve Amerika tarihinin Turk Amerikan iliskileri acisindan onemli asamalarinda gorev yapmis olmasi acisinda ayri bir onem arzeder. Ruzi Nazar 1917 yilinda Uzbekistan’in Mergilan sehrinde dunyaya geldi, daha sonra ilk, orta lise egitimini Uzbekistan’da aldiktan sonra, Taskent’e universite egitim icin gider. Universiteyi bitirdikten sonra Sovyet sistemi geregi calismak icin Ukrayna’nin Odessa sehrine gider ve boylece kendi deyimi ile degisik bir dunyaya yani siyaset dunyasina girmis olur. Ruzi bey kendi hatiralarini kaleme aldigi 300 sayfalik bir kitabinin yakinda yayinlanacaginida soyledi.

Keskin: Ruzi bey o donem itibari, sizinde bildiginiz gibi Sovyetlerde yasanan Ekim devrimi ile baglantili olarak Turkistan’daki bagimsizlik mucadelesini nasil degerlendiriyorsunuz, yani sizin tecrubelerinize gore Turkistan bagimsizlik tarihi aslinda Sovyetleri ve devrimi darbelemek icin mi ortaya cikarildi yoksa gercekten Turkistan’in bagimsizligi icin mucadele veren insanlar samimi olarak Turan davasina inanan insanlarmiydi?

Ruzi Nazar: Turkistan’in bagimsizligi dusuncesi ne Ekim devrimi ile ne de ona karsi cikti, aslinda Carlik Rusyasinda da, Sovyetler doneminde de ezilenler yine Turkistanlilardir. Bu dusuncenin kokleri daha eskilere dayanir. Mesela Basmacilar hareketinin ortaya cikisi 1917 yilinin Aralik ayinda olmustur. Turkistanlilar bir hukumet kurmak icin biraraya gelmislerdir. Bunlarin bir kismi Sovyet ordusunun yollari kesmesi uzerine Kazaklar haricindeki Turkistanlilar Uzbekistan’da bulunan Fergana vadisindaki Kokand sehrinde Turkistan Muhtariyet Hukumetini kurmuslardir. Kazaklar ise Orenburg sehrinde Alasor Muhtariyet hukumetini 6 Aralik 1917 yilinda kurdular. Bu iki hukumette ayri yerlerde kurulmasina ragmen ayni amaclar icin benzer dusunceye sahip insanlar tarafindan kuruldu. Bu iki kuruktayinda amaci bagimsiz Turkistan’i olusturmakti. Iste bu yuzden her iki kurultayinda disisleri bakani Mustafa Cokay’di. Uzbekistan’da o yillarda Carlik Rusyasina ait iki Ermeni taburu vardi. Bu Ermeni taburlari ve bir kisim Kizilordu askerleri bu iki kurultayi duzenleyen kisilerin uzerine gonderildi ve cok kanli catismalar yasandi. Iste siyasi baglamda Basmacilik hareketi bu olaylar neticesinde Kucuk Erges liderliginde baslatildi. Kucuk Erges Fergana vadisinde Turkistanlilari orgutleyerek bu hareketi baslatti, daha sonra yerine agbisi geldi.

Keskin: Peki Sovyet devrimi sonrasi Sultan Galiyev’in etkili olmasi ile Turkistan’da bir degisim beklenmiyormuydu?

Ruzi Nazar: Sultan Galiyev marksistti, ilk onceleri milliyetciligi reddediyordu fakat daha sonra Sovyetlerde Milliyetler komitesinden Stalin’in yardimcisi oldu. Hukumette bulundugu donemde Turkistanlilari korumaya basladigi andan itibaren yonetim ve bilhassa Lenin’in vefati ve Stalin’in iktidari ile arasi bozuldu. Galiyev Tatar’di ve Carlik Rusyasina karsi Lenin’le birlikte hareket etmisti, fakat daha sonralari bilhassa Stalin doneminde dus kirikligi yasamasi O’nun yonetimden uzaklastirdi.

Keskin: O yillarda Turkistan milli mucadalesi sadece Orta Asya’da mi vardi yoksa baska Turk illerinde de bagimsizlik ve ozgurluk mucadeleleri olusmaktamiydi?

Ruzi Nazar: Turkistan milli mucadelesi sadece Turkistan’da degil fakat butun Turk toplumlarinda baslamisti, Azerbaycan, Tataristan, Kuzey kafkaslarda kisacasi heryerde baslamisti. Bu sirada Kafkaslarda dort ayri milli devlet kuruldu, bunlar Azerbaycan Kuzey Kafkas, Gurcistan veErmernistan. Bu devletler mustakil devletlerdi. 1917 yilinda kurulan bu devletler uc sene ayakta kalabildi ve akabinde Sovyet isgaline ugradi. Ermeniler kendisi Sovyetler ile birlesti. 1930 yillarinda biz kucukken Kokand Turkistan Cumhuriyetine karsi Sovyet rejimi tarafindan yazilmis yazilari ben orta okul ve lisede iken okurduk ve bunlari anne ve babamiza sorardik, acaba dogru mu diye.
Ben Teknikom adli meslek lisesinde talebe iken, Turkistan adli gizli bir mecmua elden ele dolasirdi ve bizde bu mecmuayi okurduk. Bu mecmua Berlin’de basiliyordu, Turkiye’ye getiriliyordu daha sonra ise Afganistan’a daha sonra ise Dogu Turkistan uzerinden Uzbekistan’a ulastiriliyordu. Sonradan ogrendik ki bu dergiyi Afganistan’daki Turkler sisenin icine koyuyorlar uzerini mumla kapatiyorlar, akabinde Amu Derya nehrine atiyorlardi, cunku bu nehir Afganistan uzerinde Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan ve Kazakistan’a akiyordu, bu derginin dagitim usullerinden birisiydi.

Keskin: Ruzi bey peki bu dergiyi o donem itibari ile kim fianse ediyordu, yani derginin arkasinda Sovyetler ve devrim karsiti bir gucmu vardi?

Ruzi Nazar: Hayir, bu dergi tamamen Almanya’da ogrenci olarak bulunan Turkistanli ogrenciler tarafindan cikariliyor ve finansmani onlar tarafindan saglaniyordu. Amerika’nin o donemde Turkistan ile ilgili yoktu. Basmacilik hareketi 1930 senesine kadar devam etti. Aralik 1917’ide Mustafa Cokay, Kokand Muhtariyeti dustukten sonra, Kazak collerine kacti, daha sonra buyuk zorluklar cekerek Kafkaslara gecti, Gurcustan’in merkezi Tiblis’e geldi ve oraya yerlesti. Cokay Tiblis’te bir azadlik dergisi cikarmaya basladi. 1920 yilinda Sovyetler Gurcistan’i isgal ettiginde, Gurcustan hukumeti ile birlikte Turkiye uzerinden gecerek Fransa’da Paris’e yerlestiler. Biz Turkistanlilar Avrupa’da o yillarda cok azdik. Buhara emirligi 1922 yilinda yikildi ve Buhara Halk Cumhuriyeti teskil oldu. Bu Cumhuriyetin egitim bakani Fitrat bey’in tesebbusu ile Turkistan’dan 100’e yakin kabiliyetli, egitimli gencler 1923 yilinda Almanya okumaya gonderildi.Bu talebeler Almanya’nin cesitli universitelerine yerlestiler. Buhara Cumhuriyeti bu ogrencilerin harcamalari icin Alman Reich bankasina altin paralar verdi. 1933 yilina kadar ogrenciler rahat bir sekilde okudular. Bu talebelerin yardimi ile Mustafa Cokay Berlin’de Yas (Genc) Turkistan dergisini cikartmaya basladi. Bu derginin Turkistan’da milliyetciligin gelismesinde buyuk rolu oldu. Bazen Mustafa Cokay ve ogrenciler kucuk brosurler basarak bunlarida Turkistan’a gonderiyorlardi. Ogrencilerin bir kismi maddi acidan zor duruma dusunce Polonya hukumeti bu ogrencilere Prometeus vasitasi ile yardim etmeye basladi. 1939 yilinda Almanya, Polonya’ya hucum etti. Bu ogrencilerin buyuk bir cogunlugu Turkiye’ye goc etmek zorunda kaldilar. 1941 yilinda Almanya ile Sovyetler savasa basladigi sirada Avrupa’da iki Turkistanli vardi, birisi Mustafa Cokay Paris’te ve digeri ise Turkiye’ye gitmeyen Uzbekistan’li ogrenci Veli Kayim, O’da Berlin’deydi. Bizim liderimiz o donemde Mustafa Cokay’di. Ben o zamanlar Ukrayna’nin Odessa sehrindeydim. Sovyetler ile Almanlar savasirken Sovyet ordusu icinde bulunan Turkistanlilar Almanlarin tarafina savasmadan gecmekteydiler. Birinci dunya savasinda Almanya ve Turk subaylari Turkistan taburu kurdular. Buna benzer bir sekilde ikinci dunya savasinda Almanlar Mustafa Cokay’i Paris’ten Berlin’e getirdiler ki Sovyetler ile savaslarinda yeni bir Turkistan taburu kurmak icin bir girisim baslattilar. Veli Kayim, Mustafa Cokay’in sekreteri oldu. Fakat Mustafa Cokay Aralik 1941 yilinda tifo hastaligindan 53 yasinda Berlin’de vefat etti ve Berlin’e defnedildi. Mustafa Cokay Turkistan lejyonu kurulusunu gormedi. Cokay’in yerine Veli Kayim geldi. Mustafa Cokay’in butun gayesi Turkistan’in bagimsizligini yaratmakti.

Ruzi Nazar

Keskin: Peki siz Turkistan lejyonu calismalarin anasil katildiniz?

Ruzi Nazar: Uzbekistan’da Universiteyi bitirdikten sonra Odesa’ya geldim, 1941 yilinda trenle Romanya uzerinden Almanya’ya gectim. Bu seyahata Almanlar yardim etti. 1943 yilinin basinda Turkistan lejyonunda calismaya basladim. Iki yerde Turkistan lejyonu vardi, birincisi Polonyan’nin Legyonava sehrinde, ikincisi Praskruf adli Ukrayna sehrinde kuruldu. Ben Praskruf sehrindeki lejyonda kampanya baskani olarak calismaya basladim. Daha sonra cepheye gittim, Ruslara karsi carpistik ve orada yaralandim.Agir yaralandigim icin cepheden ayrilmak zorunda kaldim. Almanlarin kurdugu lejyonlar icinde Azerbaycan, Tatar, Gurcistan, Kuzey kafkas lejyonlari vardi. Almanya ile Fransa sinirinda kurulu bulunan lejyoner okulunda calismaya basladim. Beni bu okula Alman Kara kuvvetleri gondermisti. 1944 senesinde beni Berlin’e cagirdilar ve Alman Kara Kuvvetlerinde lejyon birliklerinin irtibat subayi oldum. Ikinci dunya savasinin bitimi ile 1945 yilinin Mayis ayinda Rosenheim sehrine geldim ve orada kaldim. Biz saklanmak zorundaydik cunku Yalta antlasmasi geregi Sovyetlere geri vermeleri gerekiyordu. Antlasmaya gore 1939 yilinin Eylul ayindan sonra Sovyetlerden cikanlarin Sovyetlere geri verilmesi gerekiyordu.

Keskin: Amerika Hukumetinde ne zaman calismaya basladiniz, yani ilk iliskiniz ne zaman ve hangi surecte gerceklesti?

Ruzi Nazar: 1951 yilinda Amerikalilar bana kendileri ile calismami teklif ettiler. Fakat daha onceden de kendileri ile iletisimim vardi zaten, cunku yazdigim yazilari okuyorlardi. Kasim 1951 yilinda Amerika’ya New York’a geldim. 1946 yilinda evlenmistim ve kizim Sylvia Nazar 1947 yilinda dogdu ve hep birlikte Amerika’ya yerlestik. O yillarda Columbia Universitesinde Rus ve Ortadogu enstitusunde dersler vermeye basladim, henuz vatandas degildim.Amerikan vatandasi oldugum zaman beni derhal Washington’a cagirdilar ve devlet gorevinde calismaya basladim. Ilk defa 1955 yilinda devlet memuru olarak calismaya basladim. Altemur Kilic, 1954 yilinda Washignton Turk elciliginde basin atasesi idi, Alpaslan Turkes ise NATO’nun Standing gurubunun Turk Silahli Kuvvetlerinin kara temscilsici olarak Washington’da bulunyordu. Turkes’de o zaman kurmay binbasiydi. Havaci atese yardimcisi Agasi Sen’de beni Turkes ile tanistirmisti ve O’na dikkat etmemi soylemisti. Turkes belli oclutler icinde pek Amerikan yanlisi degildi.

Keskin: Ruzi bey, son yilarda, bilhassa Turk Amerikan iliskilerinin geldigi nokta pek ic acici bir seyir takip etmiyor. Bilhassa neocon iktidari ve etnik lobilerin Amerika’yi yonlendirmesi ile Amerika insan haklari ve demokrasi soyleminden 18 ve 19’uncu yuzyillardaki Ingiliz emperyalist politikalarina kayiyor, tabi buda Turk Amerikan iliskilerinide etkiliyor, siz bu konuda ne dusunuyorsunuz?

Ruzi Nazar: Sizinde soylediginiz gibi Turk Amerikan iliskilerinde gelinen nokta pek ic acici degil. Turkiye’nin cevresinde hic dostu yok. Turkiye cevresindeki bu dusmanlardan cok etkileniyor. Turkiyedeki bazi kesimler bu etkiyi bir talimat gibi algilayip hareket ediyorlar. Turkiye icindeki Kurd guruplarinin Turkiye icinde ve hukumetinde bir hayli etkisi oldugu soylenebilir. 1 Mart tezkeresinin gecmemesinde TBMM’deki bazi etnik guruplarin rolu cok buyuk. Tayyip Erdogan’i beyi yakindan tanidim, ve kendisini vatansever bir kisi olarak gordum. Fakat bu bir sahistir, bir sahisin cemiyete etkisi buyuktur, fakat bu cemiyet icinde dusman gayelerin calismasi bazen daha etkili olur. Belli bir muddet icin kotu bir tesiride olabilir. Vatanperver Turk yurttaslarin disaridan gelecek yabanci etkilere cok dikkat emeleri gerekir. Turkiye’de basinda hatalar yapiyor ve yaptigi hatalari kabul etmesi gerekir.

Keskin: Sizce Turkiye Dis Turkler ile nicin ilgilenmedi veya ilgilenmek istemiyor veya isteksiz duruyor?

Ruzi Nazar: Sizinde soylediginiz gibi Turkiye dis Turkler meselesi ile pek ilgilenmedi. Fakat Alpaslan Turkes’in tesebbusu ile Turk disisleri bakanliginda Kibris ve Dis Turkler bolumu kuruldu. Daha sonra yine Turkes’in yardimlari ile Turk Kulturunu Arastirma Enstitusu kurduruldu. 1960 ihtilali sonrasi Ismet Inonu basbakan olmasi sonrasinda bu enstitu kaldirilmaya calisildi. Fakat rahmetli Gursel bu enstitunun Milli Birlik komitesinin gayesi ile kuruldugundan kalmasinin daha uygun oldugu gorusune Ismet Inonu’u inandirip, kalmasini sagladi. Enstitu daha sonra MIT’e yakin bir kurulus olarak calismaya basladi ve hatta MIT’in kontrolune gectigide soylenebilir.

Keskin: Sizce Amerika bagimsiz Kurt devletini destekliyor mu?

Ruzi Nazar: Amerika kesinlikle bagimsiz bir Kurd devletini desteklemiyor en azindan benim bildigim kadari iel desteklemiyor dersek daha uygun olur. Kurtlerin jeopolitik konumlari cok kotu, bu yuzden bir devlet kurmalarinin pek bir imkanlarinin oldugunu soylemek pek dogru gibi gelmiyor bana. Amerika her zaman guclu bir Turkiye’yi destekliyor. Fakat Kurdler yaklasik on seneye yakin bir zamandir Amerika ve Avrupa ulkelerinde guclu lobiler olusturdular ve genis iliskiler agi olusturdular. Amerika’nin da yaptigi hatalar var, eger siz insan haklarini savunuyorsaniz bunu devam ettirmeniz gerekir. Amerika’ninda bunu devam ettirmesi gerekir, hatta bu yuzden bir cok subay yargilandi hala da yargilaniyor. Bu tip istenmeyen hareketler Amerika’ya daha fazla zarar veriyor.

Keskin: Peki sizin Turkiye’nin son karmasik siyasi ve toplumsal yapisi icin, Turkiye’nin bu geldigi nokta acisindan soyleyeceginiz bir sey varmi?

Ruzi Nazar: Uzbeklerde bir soz var, baska memleketin kirali olacagina, kendi memleketinin fakiri ol, derler. Bunun anlami kendi memleketini daha fazla sev. Ben isterdim ki butun Turkiye Turkleri veya kendisini Turk bilenler memleketini sevsinler, Turkiye’yi sevsinler, yurtlarinin yukselmesi icin calissinlar veya calismalarini ben sahsi olarak temenni ediyorum. Turk halkinin unutmamasi gereken en onemli nokta Turk dunyasinda bir tek bagimsiz devlet var o da Turkiye’dir. Eger Turkiye parcalanirsa Turklukte dagilir. Bunun icinde ben her zaman Turkiye’nin bagimsiz olmasini istemisimdir. Hic unutmam, Uzbekistan’da 1930’lu yillarda ortaokuldayken, bize ogretmenlerimiz Ataturk marsini okuturlardi, “Ataturk gelse bizi kurtarsa” adli marsi ben orada ogrendim. Turkiye’nin Atatturk’un yolunda bagimsiz olmasi benim temennimdir.

Analysis of the Marxist Commodity Value

2005-03-10T21:23:00.000-08:00

Karl Marx

by Tugrul Keskingoren

Marx wrote that commodities used in earlier times had only what he described as ‘use value,’ but following the historical process of capitalism, commodities have exchange value. Marx points out that an immense accumulation of commodities is the central characteristic and unit of the capitalist mode of production. “A commodity is, in the first place, an object outside us, a thing that by its properties satisfies human wants of some sort of another”. According to Marx, we can look at every useful thing from one of two points of view; according to quantity, or quality. In his analysis, commodities or the products of labor are intended for both use and exchange. Some scholars believe that Marx’s understanding of the commodity is based upon his materialist perspective.

Use-Value

‘The utility of a thing makes it a use value.” The utility can’t be separated from the commodity, and without the commodity the utility does not have value. Marx asserts that the commodity does have value, because of its usefulness. In the case of the use-value of the commodity, quantity is the key factor to determine use-value, such as a dozen flowers, or a half-pound of oranges. “Use- values become a reality only by use or consumption.” Without use or consumption of a commodity, the use value does not have an actual value in the capitalist system. Objects are the product of the human labor; therefore they do not have independent existence without the human actor and are controlled by the actors.

Exchange-Value

In Marx’s view, the exchange value of a commodity is the second viewpoint of the capitalist mode of production, and in this context, quantity is the main determinant of the value. The exchange value is also purely relative. According to Ritzer, Marx views the exchange value in terms of the way that “instead of being used immediately, they are exchanged the open market for money which is used ultimately to acquire other use values.”

According to some social theorists, in today’s world, we commodify everything from information to the newspaper, labor to the car. This is the nature of the modern capitalist system. Today, given the commodification of objects, things or utilities are all part of the global capitalist system. We produce them and have control over these commodities.

Welcome to Kizkulesi

2005-03-01T13:01:00.000-08:00

Sundown from Kizkulesi

Dear Friends and Visitors,

My homepage will be shown here very soon and you will find some articles and pictures that are related with politics, life and social issues.

Whether you like politics or not, politics has been shaping our life and culture since the begining of human history.

About life, I don't think we can say much, the real meaning of life always fascinates me as well as other scholars. I always question why we are here or what is the meaning of life? Have ever question our existince in this universe, if you have not, I believe that you should start to question, beacuse life in this planet is not just based on economic, cultural and political competition, but it should be based on more tolerance, human freedom, and more importantly freedom of thought.

To social issues, as long as there is a gap between rich and poor, powerless and powerful; there will be the inequality and conflict, that we face today.

If you want to find out more come back soon, but I don't want you to forget Kizkulesi is the place where I was born and that I belong to.

My best wishes to everyone.

tugrul keskingoren

The Future of Uyghur Nationalism and Its Impact on US-China Relations

2005-02-20T13:26:00.000-08:00

Uygur Culture

The Future of Uyghur Nationalism and Its Impact on US-China Relations

Tugrul Keskin(1)

The aim of my project is to provide a historical overview of Uyghur nationalism in China after the occupation of the Eastern Turkistan Republic, and to provide insight into future ramifications for US-China relations. Furthermore, I will analyze the elements that have caused the rise in the Uyghur nationalist movement. In regards to international relations and politics today, nationalist movements throughout the world have been undergoing a period of transformation following the break-up of the Soviet Union. The trend has been that micro-nationalist and separatist movements from Iraq to East Timor have been steadily on the increase. These new emerging ethnic and nationalist movements challenge the nature of the state and cause a confrontation with state authority. More democratic demands by ethnic and nationalist movements also create more lawlessness and chaos in the developing countries. Regardless of the condition of the economy, culture, and politics, this new challenge by the separatist nationalist movements maintains a pervasive state of destabilization for these countries, which are also dealing with ethnic conflict.

Moreover, the globalization and rise of Islamic Movements bring a new and more complex structure to the ethnic and nationalist movements. Ethno-nationalist movements have been one of the key elements in International Relations today. Following September 11, US national security and its interests cannot ignore the importance of the geographical location of Central Asia and the Xinjiang region. Xinjiang, historically known as Eastern Turkistan, is one of the largest provinces of China, and the size of the region is larger than Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Turkmenistan. In Uyghur nationalism, religion has always been a key factor of their social structure. Today, Uyghurs are predominantly Muslim, and use Arabic scripts. After the invasion of Afghanistan by the US military, a little more than a hundred Uyghurs were captured in Afghanistan, and placed in Taliban training camps, and most of them were later released by the US authorities. However, twenty-two Uyghurs were put into the prison in Guantanamo. This was the beginning of a new foreign policy challenge to the US and is one that has badly influenced relations between the US and China. Today, Uyghur nationalism consists of religious elements and a secular structure. Unfortunately, the religious components in Uyghur nationalism are overwhelmingly dominant. The current conflict among Uyghur associations outside of China is a good example of the position of Uyghurs, who are at the beginning of this split. If the current conflict continues, then the Uyghur Nationalist movement will be divided.

According to the theory of nationalism and ethnicity, and with some exceptions, nationalist movements usually have a secular structure under normal circumstances. For instance, modern Kurdish and Turkish nationalisms are important examples of secular movements. However, there is always a diverse structure within nationalist movements, therefore religion and nationalism go together. They overlap on many subjects; consequently in some instances it is hard to separate religion from nationalism. Uyghur nationalism is one of the important examples of nationalism that exists as a combination between religion and secular nationalistic ideas, especially in the last decade.

Uyghurs are an indigenous population of Central Asia and the West part of China, called Xinjiang in Chinese. Uyghurs have called their homeland Eastern Turkistan. China has many different ethnic and religious groups, but the Uyghur case is very unique, because Uyghurs are ethnically and religiously very distinctive from the Chinese. There are many other Muslim minorities in China, but the Uyghur is the dominant ethnic group, among Muslims with a population of approximately 20 million people.(2) We have no exact number, because after the Cultural Revolution there has been domestic migration that has taken place within the last thirty years and the demographic structure in Eastern Turkistan has changed to the detriment of the Uyghur population. Within the next ten to fifteen years, Uighurs will be a minority group in their homeland.

The history of the Chinese invasion of Eastern Turkistan goes back to the 18th century. The Chinese renamed the region to Xinjiang in 1884, a name that means ‘new land.’ In 1946, the Eastern Turkistan Republic was established, and Isa Yusuf Alptekin became the president of the Republic until another Chinese invasion took place in 1949. Finally, the leaders of the Eastern Turkistan republic escaped from the region through Pakistan and India. The USSR and China agreed to control the border between Xinjiang and the neighboring region, Central Asia. Central Asia was now entirely under the control of the USSR, and the Communist party tried to create a different identity, because of the influence of so-called “separatist movements” such as the Uyghurs.

The Uyghurs in China and other Central Asian ethnic groups in the USSR such as the Uzbek, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Turkmen as well as other small tribal and ethnic groups, also have very similar cultural, ethnic, and religious backgrounds. For the Uyghurs, in terms of the similarities of their language, it is very easy to communicate with the other Central Asian nations; therefore, in order to prevent separatism, between 1949 and 1991, the USSR and China suppressed the minorities groups in Central Asia. They had been somehow successful until the collapse of the USSR regime. The new global political environment instead helps the new ethnic and nationalist movements to flourish in Central Asia. In 1991, five Central Asian countries achieved independence from Russia. This is another factor that influenced the Uighur movement in Xinjiang.

After the collapse of the USSR, religion and religious movements in Central Asia have revitalized from underground. The Taliban came to power in Afghanistan in 1996. In Pakistan, Cemaal-ul Islamiye became stronger among traditional Muslims. In Uzbekistan, a neighbor to Xinjiang, the IMU -Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan also was another important factor that influenced the radicalization of the Uighur movement. The IMU is closely affiliated with Al-Qaida, and is under the leadership of Tohir Yoldashev, who had close relations with the Uighur movement. In Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan, Hizb-ut Tahrir has been popular among youngsters who speak the same dialect with Uyghurs. In large part, these are the regional political changes that influence the Uighur movement.

In summary, in March of this year, the World Uighur Congress was formed, and many different Uighur groups came to the conclusion that a united Uyghur movement is a more effective way to fight against and obtain independence from China. Separate and in opposition to the united Uighur movement, other Uighur groups formed an exile Uighur government in September 14 of this year. This second group contains more religious elements than the World Uighur Congress. Therefore, the Uighur movement is made up of the split of these two elements. Today, China’s growing economy has changed Chinese social and political structure. Between the US and China, there used to be two important political factors, Taiwan and Tibet. However today, there is a third and perhaps more important political subject that has emerged, and that is Uyghur Nationalism.

1)Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Department of Sociology-560 McBryde Hall, Blacksburg, VA 24061-USA. tugrulk@vt.edu

2)According to Fredrick Starr’s recent Book “Xinjiang: Chinese Muslim Borderland,” the total Xinjiang population was 15 million in 1990.

Interview with Karen Kwiatkowski

2004-11-08T09:16:00.000-08:00

Aydinlik Newspaper and Ulusal Kanal TV

Tugrul Keskin

Washington
November 8, 2004

Karen Kwiatkowski, Lt. Col. USAF (ret.)

Karen Kwiatkowski recently retired from the active duty USAF as a Lieutenant Colonel. Her final assignment was as a political-military affairs officer in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Under Secretary for Policy, in the Sub-Saharan Africa and Near East South Asia (NESA) Policy directorates. During Col. Kwiatkowski's time at NESA, she worked the North Africa desk, in the sister office to the Office of Special Plans. Prior to the Office of Secretary of Defense assignment, she served on the Air Force Staff, Operations Directorate at the Pentagon, the staff of the Director of the National Security Agency (NSA) at Fort Meade, Maryland, and served tours in Alaska, Massachusetts, Spain and Italy. Col. Kwiatkowski has an MA in Government from Harvard, and MS in Science Management from the University of Alaska, and has completed both Air Command and Staff College and the Naval War College seminar programs. She is currently a Ph.D. candidate at Catholic University in World Politics (ABD), pursuing a dissertation on Overt/Covert War In Angola: A Case Study of the Implementation of the Reagan Doctrine. Col. Kwiatkowski has authored two recent books on African issues, African Crisis Response Initiative: Past Present and Future (US Army Peacekeeping Institute, 2000) and Expeditionary Air Operations in Africa: Challenges and Solutions (Air University Press, 2001) and several papers. She teaches online classes with the University of Maryland University College and American Public University System, and is an adjunct faculty in Political Science with James Madison University. Col. Kwiatkowski lives on a small farm in western Virginia with the husband and four children. She is a regular contributor to LewRockwell.com and Militaryweek.com, and has had articles about her work with the Department of Defense published in the American Conservative and Salon.com, among others.

Keskin: Do you think neoconservatives have a different political agenda than the agenda held in the American interest?

Karen Kwiatkowski: Yes, I do. American interests, in terms of foreign policy were last democratically polled in November 2000. At that time, they were evenly split between the trade and peaceful interventionism of candidate Al Gore and the trade and humble non-interventionism offered by candidate George W. Bush. After 9-11, Americans were fearful and many sought retaliation against the perpetrators, considered to be Osama bin Laden, his al Qaeda terrorist network around the world, and the Taliban who were offering bin Laden safe harbor. Initially, George Bush pursued this route, supported and desired by most Americans – while simultaneously listening to his neoconservative advisors insisting that now was the time to strike – not Osma bin Laden, but Saddam Hussein. False statements that made no distinction between 9-11, terrorism against America and Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship were pumped unrelentingly into the mainstream American media by Bush, Cheney, neoconservatives in government, neoconservative thinktanks and a very lazy and unaccountable American media.
Neoconservatives envision a Middle East that is politically divided, ethnically aroused and U.S.-compliant. This kind of Middle East is most susceptible to outside economic and political manipulation, and is thought to pose less of a military or political threat to Israel. On the other hand, most Americans just want to buy oil on competitive market prices (and lots of it), improve our own border security, and to have the worlds’ nations do a better job of policing their own backyards and reducing terrorism. But most Americans are not making American foreign policy. Neoconservatives are, and thus we see a policy that is inconsistent with broader American interests. This inconsistency is part of what is fueling growing political divisiveness in this country, as more and more average American’s realize we have a problem in the path the neoconservatives have chosen.

Keskin: I personally believe that there was no relation between the Al Qaeda terrorist network and Saddam Hussein. One is a religious network, the other one is a repressive secular dictatorship. Neoconservatives in Washington disregard American national security interests, and mislead the American people. Can we say that neoconservatives had a plan to invade Iraq long before September 11?

Karen Kwiatkowski: I agree – al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq logically would have had nothing but wariness for each other, to put it mildly. The neoconservative agenda for many years has been marked by a desire for military resolution of international problems. It was this way during the Cold War years, with the Senator Scoop Jackson acolytes, and it is this way now with the same older but no wiser crowd, now associated with the American Enterprise Institute, Center for Security Policy, and the Project for a New American Century, and in the current administration. Neoconservatives have had a serious desire to deal in a substantive (regime changing) way with both Iran and Iraq, and also Syria, but not necessarily a serious plan to do it, in my opinion. Richard Perle and Doug Feith’s “A Clean Break” strategy paper, written by key Bush administration neoconservatives in 1996 for Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud campaign, lays out the neoconservative desires pretty clearly. But they did not have a “plan” to invade Iraq until they arrived in the Bush administration, and were able to access and manipulate intelligence, and mobilize the American military machine as well as mobilize the all too willing George W. Bush.

9-11 did provide a sense of urgency and fear in America that made it easy for the neocons and the President to sell the invasion of Iraq. I do think without 9-11, they would have still pursued this option, because it was about geo-strategic military basing, oil control, and Saddam’s decision to sell oil on the Euro instead of the dollar, as well as a way of shifting US resources more in line with Israeli interests in the region.. 9-11 just made the propaganda campaign at home easier to conduct.

Keskin: Most of the pro Iraq war think-tanks in Washington are also pro-Jewish think-tanks, such as JINSA and Washington Institute for Near East Policy. In these think-tanks, Wolfowitz, Feith, Perle and other influential neoconsrevatives were either fellows or on the board of trustees. Do you think this neoconservative political elite played a crucial role in the Iraq War, and misled American national interests in the Middle East?

Karen Kwiatkowski: It is clear that this group of people played a critical role. Those think tanks, and also the neoconservative Project for a New American Century led by Bill Kristol and Gary Schmitt, had long written about the need for a U.S. friendly Iraq, a toppled Saddam Hussein, and using US military force to do it.. It is interesting to me that the Jewish political elite represented in the Bush Administration seem, to a man, to be pro-Likud, and I think that defines them more than any particular religious adherence. I wonder if we would be talking about this at all, or be in Iraq occupying that country, if they were all pro-Labor Party. Certainly the actions of the Office of Special Plans and guys like former Defense Policy Board Chairman Richard Perle, promulgating lies and exaggerating of Saddam’s capabilities to threaten the US, were purposely done to get the invasion. But Bush himself had his own reasons to want to go after Saddam, and there was indeed some kind of magic between his ambiguity about his father’s own decision to leave Saddam in place in 1991 and the neocon strategic goal.
Did they mislead Americans as to American national interests in the Middle East? I believe they lied and promoted lies (and liars like Ahmad Chalabi) to get their war. But I think for many of these guys truly believe that what is good for Likud is good for America. This is wrong factually, and wrong philosophically, and is probably very close to being treason. But I don’t think many of them really understand that putting the wishes or interests of another country before your own is wrong, as they are so wrapped up in what they perceive to be the needs of Israel, economically, territorially, militarily and in terms of regional security. This is why most of them are still angry and emotional about the Jonathan Pollard case – they really don’t see that his espionage and selling of US secrets to Israel in the late 1980s was criminal.

Keskin: Do you think that the recent spy case in the Pentagon opens the old files, such as the Pollard case in 1985, or do you think this is a message to the neoconservatives by the American intelligence community? (No one has been arrested so far, and the American intelligence community basically warned the neoconservative political elite)

Karen Kwiatkowski: The spy case is a complicated set of multiple investigations into the role of key neoconservatives in transferring secrets to third parties, and the examination of Israel’s active work to influence American actions and foreign policies both through lobbying representatives and through contacts with administration officials and employees. It does relate and refer back to old cases of Israeli espionage, and the publicity of the current case reminds people that Israel continues to conduct operations against the United States, and use U.S. officials to further its own aims. The fact that there is an investigation at all (for two years) has already served as a warning of sorts to neoconservatives who may be putting another county’s politics before our own. It is not clear why Larry Franklin’s name was leaked now. I initially thought it was done by a neoconservative who knew about Larry’s cooperation with the FBI as a way of disrupting the investigation, and warning others that arrests were coming soon. It could have been done to send a message of seriousness to the neoconservatives by the security agencies. I have recently read that Attorney General Ashcroft has been less than aggressive in prosecuting the possibly treasonous influence peddling going on in the Pentagon and elsewhere in the administration. It is possible that the leak of Larry’s name was designed to send a message from security agencies -- not to administration appointees who certainly have know about the investigation for months, even years – but to the Bush/Cheney/Ashcroft power center to push it along.

Keskin: It is very interesting that most of the people in the recent spy case in the Pentagon are also related with the Turkish lobby in Washington, with people such as Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith and Harold Rhode. As far as I remember, in 1992, Perle and Feith opened a lobby firm in Washington and they received $850.000 dolars for lobbying on behalf of Turkey. Do you think neocons manipulate ethnic lobbies in Washington for "third parties," interests as they have been doing for American Foreign Policy?

Karen Kwiatkowski: This is an interesting observation, and my impression of the link to Turkish lobbying was that any work done was on behalf of or in relation to Israel as much as directly Turkish-United States. My assumption reflects my own observations that many of those named (Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith) seem to have merged in their own minds loyalty to Israel with loyalty to the United States. I don’t know if these particular people make a habit of manipulating ethnic or other national lobbies for third party interests – but I believe that when a lobby or a country (like Turkey) hires one of these politically connected people, they are hiring the existing network – and for these particular names, that network centers on Israel.

Keskin: Today, Anti-Americanism is an increasing trend all over the world. I was in Turkey last June, and many people, from shcolars to journalists, ordinary citizens to military officials asked me the same question: "Does the US have a secret policy to divide Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria?" How do you answer this question as a retired government offical?

Karen Kwiatkowski: I am aware of no official secret U.S. policy to divide Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria. Officially, such a policy would be contrary to the published statements and national security strategy of the current American President, George W. Bush. However, the neoconservative position regarding the Middle East includes weakening and destabilizing Israel’s more hostile neighbors militarily, economically, and politically – these hostile countries would include Syria, Iraq and Iran. Various neoconservative thinktanks and pundits have written for many years openly about their goals for the Middle East, using terms like liberation and democracy with simultaneous objectives of creating countries friendly to the United States and Israel. A neoconservative foreign policy could in theory satisfy both aims by lending support to Kurdish independence under a democracy and liberation auspice, and also enjoying the domestic and regional reaction which would consume regional political and possibly military energy from Iran, Iraq and Turkey. Another problem is that “Democracy” and “U.S./Israel-friendly” may not go hand in hand, given past behavior of the United States and Israel which is seen throughout the region as hypocritical and exploitative. It’s clear that democracy, for example the Turkish democracy, in rejecting the request by Washington to utilize Turkish territory to launch the preemptive war on Saddam Hussein, has angered key neoconservatives like Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith and Dick Cheney. Yet these same players have been very pleased with the cooperative but non-democratic countries of Pakistan, Uzbekistan, and Saudi Arabia.

Keskin: Additionally, how can we reverse the increasing trend of Anti-Americanism in the Islamic world and regain those people?

Karen Kwiatkowski: I think the Islamic world as well as the rest of the world would appreciate a bit more honesty from America, a bit more of us living up to our own professed values. American values are based on individual liberty, rule of law, freedom of religious expression and a prohibition of a state religion, and constitutional restraints on governmental power. In my opinion, we have betrayed these values at home as well as abroad, with our domestic Patriot Act, the vast increase in the power of the American government to arrest and detain citizens on little evidence, the role of Christian evangelical theory to superficially justify our actions in the Middle East. We have conducted a military adventure in Iraq that was based on false and manufactured evidence (although it was conducted for real geostrategic reasons that had little to do with the professed rationale) and the executive was not restrained by the legislative or judicial parts of our government, effectively setting aside our own Constitution. Until America can behave as a member of a community of nations, guided by the words of Thomas Jefferson, seeking “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none,” then we Americans will not be seen as role models or as trusted friends. It cannot be only sweet words, it must be lived. I believe that George W. Bush squandered a huge opportunity to lead the world by example. Instead he has served as a well-publicized example of ignorance, impulsiveness and arrogance that is not a true part of our national character. Our Founding Fathers certainly warned repeatedly against all three characteristics.

Interview with Michael Rubin

2004-09-20T09:20:00.000-07:00

Aydinlik Newspaper

Tugrul Keskin

Washington

Michael Rubin

Michael Rubin is one of the youngest neoconservative figures to gain prominence within the George W. Bush administration. A Yale graduate whose dissertation focused on modern Iran, Rubin has traveled extensively in Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Sudan. Rubin has written one book, Into the Shadows: Radical Vigilantes in Khatami's Iran (2001), and has published numerous articles in such neoconservative publications as the New Republic, Wall Street Journal, Jerusalem Post, Commentary, and Middle East Quarterly. Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, having recently served 18 months in the Office of the Secretary of Defense as an Iraq and Iran advisor, during which time he was also seconded to the Coalition Provisional Authority [CPA] governance team. After his work with OSP and the Provisional Authority, Rubin has returned to the neocon think tank community, resuming his associations with AEI, Middle East Forum, and the Washington Institute for Near East Affairs. He is part of the speakers’ bureau of the neocon public relations agency, Benador Associates, which says that Rubin “speaks widely to both military and non-military audiences in the United States, Europe, and the Middle East.” Rubin sits on the three-member advisory board of the Middle East Quarterly, which is copublished by the Middle East Forum and the U.S. Committee for a Free Lebanon. He holds Ph.D. from Yale University.

Aydinlik: There is a public perception (from Government officials to ordinary citizens) in Turkey that the majority of the Turkish population believes the Jewish lobby and/or Israel supports an independent Kurdish State in Northern Iraq. Do you think this is a reality or a fallacy/conspiracy?

Michael Rubin: The public perception in Turkey is simply wrong. It is based more on
conspiracy and deliberate spin from a few politicians than on fact. The Israelis keep aloof from the Kurds because they value their relations with Turkey too much. The Kurds on the other hand, are so thoroughly infiltrated by Iranian agents that they could not host Israelis without serious consequence. The irony is that the Turkish press, by perpetuating the false rumor, risks creating a self-fulfilling prophecy, driving Israel
away from Turkey and toward other partners.

Aydinlik: As far as I understand from your response, if I am wrong please correct
me, you are saying the Turkish media is responsible for the tension between Turkey and Israel. How about the American media, such as journalist Seymour Hersh who wrote an article, Plan B on June 30th in the New Yorker Magazine. He says: "Turkish sources confidentially report that the Turks are increasingly concerned by the expanding Israeli presence in Kurdistan and alleged encouragement of Kurdish ambitions to create an independent state." The source of this "confidential report" is Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul.

Michael Rubin: I am saying that the mainstream Turkish media picked up unfounded
allegations that simply were not true. According to the June 24 issue of Cumhuriyet, Gul was the source for Hersh's claim. Most American papers did not follow Hersh's allegations seriously because he did not name sources. When sources insist on annymity, usually they have something to hide. Hersh does not have the credibility in the United
States that he has in Turkey. Most journalists and politicians realize that Hersh makes allegations first, and then tries to find evidence.

Aydinlik: In your article, “Talking Turkey,” you mentioned that, "one prominent AKP member told me, we are a Muslim party and Powell called us a Muslim democracy. We know he chooses his words carefully." Do you think Powell chooses his words carefully? or is this another case of mincing words? Is Turkey an Islamic democracy or is the majority of the population Muslim?

Michael Rubin: In this case, Powell did not choose his words carefully. Powell doesn't
know a lot about Turkey; he depends on State Department speechwriters. Many don't know Turkey either, and try to infuse Powell's speeches with well-meaning platitudes. They simply didn't understand the sensitivity. I've both lived outside the United States, and worked at the heart of the American government. Many non-Americans believe that the U.S. is organized and has a plan, but the reality is that, on a day-to-day level, the U.S.
government is chaotic. This is especially true with this administration because National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice doesn't make sure that the President's policy is carried out. Some National Security Council staffers openly criticize the President.

Aydinlik: Basically, you are saying that the American government does not have an
organized national security structure, and it is very chaotic. I believe that National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice is a cold war policy maker and she cannot understand the globalization process and national security. This is also the case with other neocons/cold war policy makers. Do you agree that these policy makers see the Islamic world as an enemy of the US?

Michael Rubin: No, it's two different things. From the inside, the American government is always chaotic. The Senate does one thing, the State epartment another, and the Defense Department a third. Not every word is scripted. However, the problem gets worse when the National Security Council doesn't adequately coordinate. Condoleezza Rice is a very smart woman and, while I sometimes thinks she has poor instincts, that doesn't mean she doesn't understand issues. I absolutely disagree that neo-conservative sor other policy makers see the Islamic World as enemies of the United States. If you actually look at what neo-conservatives say, rather than what Yeni Safak says they say, then you'd find that they tend to believe much more in human rights having a role inf oreign policy. But, at the same time, I'd argue that many so-called political Islamists aren't representative of the Islamic World, but more representative of Saudi Arabia.

Aydinlik: You said that neocons tend to believe much more in human rights having a role in foreign policy. In that case, why does the Bush administration support Islam Kerimov(Uzbekistan) or Ilhan Aliyev (Azerbaijan) governments? I think they are the most repressive governments in the world and they have terrible human rights record according to the state department.

Michael Rubin: Why are you assuming that neo-conservatives are on top in the Bush administration?

Aydinlik: Last year in March, the Turkish parliament rejected the US deployment of
troops in Turkey, just before the Iraq War started. After this decision, there was no relation or contact between Pentagon and Turkish General staff for over six months. The 60 year steady relationship/friendship between Turkey and the US was damaged. Since then, Turkey has been looking for another political partner/country to built a military relationship with? (I am not talking about the EU) Do you think the friendship is over or how can it be repaired?

Michael Rubin: First of all, there was a great deal of contact between the Turkish General Staff and the U.S. Defense Department following the vote. I was at the Pentagon at the time and participated in some of the contacts. Most certainly, the friendship between Turkey and the United States continues. Our friendship is based on common notions of democracy, and not conditional on the purchase of airplanes or other commercial deals. I worry, however, that, especially in Turkey, some politicians are attacking the relationship for short-term political gain. The problem is that it takes a lot longer to build relationships than to break them down.

Interview with Dr. Cehreganli, the leader of Southern Azerbaijan Awakening Movement - Turkish

2004-08-02T09:27:00.000-07:00

Dr. Mahmudali Cehreganli ile roportaj

Mahmudali Cehreganli

Guney Azerbaycan Milli Uyanis Hareketi

www.gamoh.org

Tugrul Keskin

Washington

2 Agustos 2004

Mahmudali Cehreganli 1958 yilinda Guney Azerbaycan’in (Iran) Tebriz sehrine bagli Sebuster kasabasinda dogdu. Tebriz Universitesinde Fars dili ve edebiyati bolumunden 1987 yilinda mezun oldu. 1991 yilinda Tahran Universitesinden Dilbilim uzerine “Fars dilinde Turkceden Gelen Kelimeler tezi ile doktorasini aldi. Daha sonra Tahran ve El Zehra Universitelerinde dersler verdi, ogretim uyeliginde bulundu. Kendisine yapilan siyasi baskilar sonucu 1994 yilinda Tebriz’e donmek zorunda kaldi. Tebriz’de Pedagoji Universitesinde ugretim uyeligi ve rektor yardimciliginda bulundu. Dr Mahmudali Cehreganli evli ve dort cocuk sahibi olup Guney Azerbaycan Milli Uyanis Hareketinin liderligini yapmaktadir.

Keskin: Iran’da Turklerin siyasi acidan uyanis hareketlerinin tarihsel kokenleri neler ve ne zaman basladi?

Dr. Cehreganli : 1905 yilinda Iran’da demokratik acilim devrimi siyasi baglamda basladi. Bu hareket Tebriz sehrinden basladi. Tebriz sehri buildiginiz uzere Guney Azerbaycan’in baskenti konumunda olup, butun Tebriz bu demokratiklesme hareketine tam destek oldu. Bu demokratik devrim sureci 1911 yilina kadar surdu. Bunun sonucunda Kacar siyasi rejimi yikildi. Iran’da demokrasiyi destekleyen Azerbaycan Turklerin siyasi iktidari ele gecirebileceginden suphelenen Ruslar ve Ingilizler Iran’I isgal etmeye basladilar. Ruslar Iran’in Kuzey’inden ve Ingilizler ise Guney’den Iran’a girerek Turkler Iran’da iktidara gelmesinler diye demokratik devrimi baslatan Turkleri ve onlarin liderleri olan Settarhan’i oldurduler. Iran’da Gazneliler ile baslayan Turk hakimiyeti 970 yil sonra Rus ve Ingilizlerin bolgeye girmesi ile sona erdi. Resmi olarak Iran’da Turk hakimiyeti 1924 yilinda bitti. Rejimin adi Pahlavi ve Fars siyasi rejimi olarak degistirildi. Bugun yuzyil evvel meydana gelen demokratik devrim hareketine baktigimizda keske Iran’da diktator Kacar rejimi iktidarda kalsaydi da Turkler Iran’da iktidari kaybetmeselerdi diyebiliyoruz.Cunku 1924 yilindan itibaren Iran’da Turkler buyuk bir asimilasyona ve baskiya maruz kaldilar. Riza Sah Pehlevi’nin butun etnik azinliklari yok etme politikalari her ne kadar rejimin adi degisse de ayni politikalar bugun Humeyni ve Mollalar rejimi ile de devam etmektedir.

Keskin: Yani 1979 Iran Islam devrimi ile Sah Riza Pehlevi’nin Turkleri asimile etme politikalari arasinda pek fark olmadigini ve hatta benzer oldugunu soyluyorsunuz. Sizce Iran’da Turkleri asimile etme politikalari ile Bulgaristan’da Jivkov rejiminin 1980’lerde Turklere uyguladigi baskilar arasinda bir benzerlik var mi?

Dr. Cehreganli : Hic bir fark yok. Turkce ad koymak yasak, Turk musikisi yasak, Turkce egitimi yasak. Turk kulturu yasaklandi. Gunumuzde bile bu tip siyasi baskilar devam etmekte olup buna direnen Turkler, baski, hapis ve iskence ile yildirilmaya calisilmakta olup, Iran’da bir millet yok edilmeye calisilmaktadir. 1920 yilinda Sah Riza Pehlevi savunma bakanidir. Biz Turkler olarak Iran’da daha demokratik bir yapi bekliyorduk. Fakat fiziki gucu tukenen Azerbaycan Rus ve Ingiliz askeri gucu onunde savunmaya imkan bulamadi. Guney Azerbaycan’da Turkler 1911’den 1920 yilina kadar savastilar. 1920 yilindan itibaren Iran’da ikinci devrim sureci basladi. 1911-1920 arasi gucunu siyasi askeri mucadelede zayiflayan Azerbaycan Turkleri 1920’den itibaren olumsuz gelismeler bekliyordu. 1920 yilinda Azerbaycan milli hareketi basladi. Bu hareketin iki istegi vardi: Iran’da demokratiklesme ve Azerbaycan’da ise ozerk yapi. 1920 yilinda alti ay sureyle Guney Azerbaycan bagimsizligini kazandi. Fakat Sah Riza Pehlevi, Ingiliz ve Ruslar ile isbirligi yaparak Tebriz’e hucum ettiler ve Guney Azerbaycan Turklerinin liderleri konumunda bulunan Seyh Mehmet Hiyabani’yi katlettiler. Bunun sonucu olarak Iran’da Turkler liderlerinin kaybi ile milli hareketler duraksama donemine girdi. 25 yil sure ile Iran’da Turkler susma zorunda kaldilar cunku baskilar cok ileri safhaya ulasmisti. Fakat 1945 yilinda Cafer Pishaveri liderliginde yeni bir milli uyanis hareketi basladi.Istekler yine ayniydi, yani demokratiklesme ve ozerk federal bir yapi. Bu siyasi hareket daha cok sosyalist bir yapi arz ediyordu. 1945 yilinda Turkler Iran’da ozerk bir siyasi yapi ilan ettiler. Turk dili resmi dil oldu. Bu hukumetin arkasinda Rus destegi de vardi. Fakat Ruslar ile anlasan Iran bolgeye Iran ordulari girdi ve 35’ine yakin Turk soykirima maruz kaldi. 300 bine yakin insan ise surgune gonderildi. Bu Ingiliz destekli diktator rejimi 1979 yilinda Islam devrimi iktidara gelene kadar surdu.

Keskin: Peki 1979 yilinda gerceklesen Iran Islam devriminde Turklerin rolu varmiydi?

Dr. Cehreganli : Iran Islam devriminde Turklerin cok buyuk rolu oldu. Pehlevi rejimine karsi en buyuk darbe Guney Azerbaycan’in baskenti Tebriz’de vuruldu. Daha sonra ise bu hareket Iran’in butun bolgelerine yayildi. Turklerin Iran Islam devrimine katilmalarinin ve destek vermelerinin en buyuk nedeni dictator rejimine karsi demokratik Islam devrimini desteklemekti. Fakat devrim sonrasi Iran’da siyasi yapi yine Turklerin isteklerini reddetti, ve Turklerin lideri olan Seriat Madari Humeyni rejimi tarafindan olduruldu. Ve Madari yanlisi binlerce insane Molla rejimi tarafindan olduruldu bir cok insane surgune gonderildi.

Keskin: Sayin Cehreganli siz siyasi olarak Guney Azerbaycan’da demokratiklesme hareketlerine ne zaman basladiniz?

Dr. Cehreganli : Benim dedem ve babam, her ikiside Guney Azerbaycan milli uyanis hareketine destek olmuslar ve faal olarak bu hareketlerin icinde bulunmuslardir. Boyle siyasi ve milli bir aileden geldigimiz icin bizde kucuklugumuzden beri Guney Azerbaycan milli hareketleri icinde yer aldik. Benim amacim ilk baslarda Iran’da demokratik bir yapinin olusturulmasi ve Guney Azerbaycan milli hareketine katkida bulunulmasidiydi. Bu 1995 yilina kadar boyleydi. 1995 yilinda Iran parlemantosu 5’ince devre secimlerine katildim. Secimler iki asamali olarak yapildi. Bu donem zarfinda secmenler ile konusup kendimizi tanitmak icin iki ay zaman bulduk. Bunun sonucunda Tebriz vilayetinden 600 bin oy aldik ve milletvekili secildik. Fakat Iran rejimi bizi istifa etmeye cagirdi ve bizim parlemantoda bulunmamizin tehlike olacagini soyledi. Istifa etmemiz karsiliginda bize cesitli rusvet ve benzeri makanlar tekif edildi. Biz bunu kabul etmedik. Akabinde toplumda eminiyeti bozmak ve boluculuk sucundan tutuklandik. 6 yil zindanda ve ev hapsinde tutuldum. Cesitli iskenceler sonucu iki kere beyin kanamasi gecirdim. Ikincisi Tebriz hapishanesinde oldu. Ev hapsinde bulundugum 1996 yilindan Guney Azerbaycan Milli Uyanis teskilatini kurduk ve Guney Azerbaycan Turklerinin haklarini savunan bu teskilati halkimiza tanitmak icin faaliyetlere basladik. Iran’daki en guclu muhalefet hareketi olan teskilatimiz Iran Molla rejimi tarafindan tehlikeli goruldugu icin yasaklandi. Bunlarin sonucu olarak universitedeki isimide kaybettim.

Keskin: Peki Mahmudali bey yurt disina cikisiniz nasil oldu ve nicin Turkiye’ye geldiniz?

Dr. Cehreganli : Sahsim hakkinda Birlesmis Milletlerin insan haklari komitesi ve uluslararasi af orgutu benim ugradigim iskence ve haksiz tutuklanmamdan dolayi Iran’i kinamis ve mahkum etmisti. Kofi Annan’in Iran dini liderine Hamaney ve Iran basbakani Hatemi’ye mektup yazarak yurt disina cikisimiza izin vermemizi istedi. Dolayisi ile 2001 yilinin Aralik ayindan Isvec’e cikisimiza izin verildi. Ben cikarken iki secenek oldugunu dusundum; ya yurt disina cikip seyahet edip, tedavi olup Iran’a doneyim, ya da Guney Azerbaycan milli uyanis hareketinin mucadlesine devam edeyim. Ben ikinci yolu yani milli mucadele ve demokrasi haretetine katkida bulunmayi sectim. Avrupa’ya gittikten sonra uc ay icinde Isvec, Danimarka, Almanya ve Fransa’da bulundum. Cesitli medya ve Avrupa parlementerleri ile cesitli gorusmelerde bulunduk. Avrupa Birligi donem baskani ile baska bir gorusmemis oldu. Daha sonra Azerbaycan’a ve sonrasi Turkiye’ye geldim. Turkiye’ye geldigimde Guney Azerbaycan mucadelesine cok buyuk bir ilgi oldugunu gordum ve burada da bir cok basin mensuplari ve milletvekilleri ile iyi bir iletisimimiz oldu.

Keskin: Amerika’ya nasil geldiniz?

Dr. Cehreganli : Amerika’ya CSIS’in yani stratejik arastirmalar merkezinin davetlisi olarak geldim. Yaklasik iki yila yakin zaman oldu. Washington’da cok onemli kisi ve kuruluslar ile gorusmelerde bulunduk. CSIS, Johns Hopkins Universitesinde, ABD kongresi ve senatosunda konferanslarimiz oldu.

Keskin: Sayin Cehreganli Turkiye’den nicin ayrildiniz ve ayrilmak zorunda birakildiniz?

Dr. Cehreganli: Turkiye bize vatani vatanimiz gibi, milleti kardesimiz gibidir. Ama maalesef hakimiyette olan zihniyet Turk dunyasina sicak bakan bir goruste degil. Turkiye’de bize sahip cikan olmadi, bizi destekleyen kisi ve kurumlar bulunmadi. Bizim calismamizdan bazilari rahatsiz oldular. Iran hukumetinin baskisi sonucu biz Turkiye’den cikarildik. Oysa Iran’I bolucu ve terorize eden bir faaliyetin icinde olmadik. Tek amacimiz Iran’in demokratiklestirilmesi idi. Iran’da Turklerin kendi kulturel ve siyasi haklarinin alinmasi icin hep mucadele verdik ve vermeye devam edecegiz. Yurt disinda su an 24 temsiligimiz bulunmakta olup, binlerce uyemiz mevcut. Fakat Iran’da bizim hareketimizi destekleyen yuzbinlerce destekleyicimiz bulunmaktadir. Her yil Temmuz’un ilk haftasi Babek kalesi denilen bizim icin kutsal olan bolgede 1 milyona yakin kisi toplanir ve biz Guney Azerbaycan Turkleride buradayiz mesajini veriyor. Umut ediyoruz yakin gelecekte Guney Azerbaycan Turk milleti amaclarina ulasip, kendi mukadderatini elde edip istedigi sekilde yasayacaktir.

Interview with Abdurrahim Polat, the Leader of Birlik Movement in Uzbekistan - Turkish

2004-07-30T09:23:00.000-07:00

Uzbekistan Birlik Partisi Baskani Abdurrahim Polat ile Roportaj

Abdurrahim Polat

Tugrul Keskin

Washington-30 Temmuz 2004

Abdurrahim Polat 1945 yilinda Uzbekistan’in baskenti Taskent’te dogdu. 1968 yilinda Moskova Yuksek Enerji Enstitusu’nin bilgisayar muhendisligi bolumunu bitirdi. Daha sonra Uzbekistan’a geri dondu ve 1990 yilina kadar Uzbekistan Bilimler Akademisinde calisti. Bu yillar icinde doktorasini bitirdi ve ayni akademide profesor oldu. Akademide yapay zeka (Artifical Intelligence) uzerine calismalar yapti. 1988 yilinda Uzbekistan Birlik Halk Hareketi kuruculari arasinda yer aldi, daha sonra ayni hareketin ilk baskani olarak secildi. Birlik hareketinin temel amaclari arasinda Uzbekistan’in bagimsizligini almasi ve akabinde demokrasinin yerlesmesi olarak algiladi. 1991 Agustos ayinda Uzbekistan’in bagimsizliginin ardindan iktidarda bulunan Islam Kerimov yonetimi, bagimsizlik ve demokrasi yanlisi muhalefete baski uyguladi. 29 Temmuz 1992 gunu Kerimov’un emri ile KGB ajanlari Polat’a suikast duzenlediler. Bu suikast denemesi sonucu agir yaralanan Polat ilk once Baku’de daha sonra Istanbul’da tedavi gordu ve tekrar Uzbekistan’a dondu. Fakat, muhalefete uygulanan baskilarin bu donem sonrasi iyice artmasi ile Abdurrahim Polat ve arkadaslari Uzbekistan’i terk etmek zorunda kaldilar. 1993 Nisan ayinda Turkiye’ye geldi ve 1998 yilinda Uzbekistan’in Turkiye’ye uyguladigi siyasi baskilar sonucu Amerika’ya gitmek zorunda kaldi. Amerika’da surgunde halen Uzbekistan Birlik partisi baskanligini yurutumekte olup, 2004 yilinin Aralik ayinda yapilacak Uzbekistan secimleri icin calismalar yapmaktadir.

Keskin: Sayin Polat 1993 yilinda Islam Kermiov’un uyguladigi baskilar sonucu muhalefet hareketleri ve liderleri ulkeyi terk etmek zorunda kaldilar. Sizce Uzbekistan’da muhalefet hareketleri bitti mi?

Abdurrrahim Polat: Kesinlikle hayir. Uzbekistan’da pek cok arkadaslarimiz baski sonucu siyaseti birakmak zorunda kalsalarda, kucuk olsa da hala ozgurluk ve demokrasi fikrini savunan arkadaslarimiz mevcut. Bu arkadaslar siyasi muhalefet partileri yasaklandiktan sonra bagimsiz gazeteci ve insane haklari savunucusu olarak calistilar, ve calismak zorunda birakildilar. Fakat Kerimov’un uyguladigi baskilar sonucu demokrasi konusunda umutsuzluga dusen insanlar dini akimlara yonelmek zorunda kaldilar. Cunku Uzbekistan’da baska secenekleri kalmamisti. Ayni donem icinde Afganistan’da Taliban 1996 yilinda iktidara geldi, Uzbekistan’da ise Tahir Yoldasov ve Cuma Namangani onderliginde Uzbekistan Islami hareketi orgutlendi ve guclendi.

Keskin: Abdurrahim bey kisacasi Uzbekistan’da Islami hareketin guclenmesini Islam Kerimov’un uyguladigi anti demokratik baski politikalarinin bir sonucu olarak mi goruyorsunuz?

Abdurrrahim Polat: Elbette, bu uygulamalar Uzbekistan’da kanli olaylara neden oldu. 1999 Subay ayinda Taskent’te ilk defa bombali patlamalar gerceklestirildi. 20’ye yakin insan hayatini kaybetti. Bu olaylardan sonra sadece Islami akimlara degil demokratik muhalefet uzerindeki baski daha da artti. Yine 1999 yilinda Uzbekistan hapishanelerinde Birlik hareketinin Namangan sehir orgutu baskani Ahmadhan Turakhan, Andican vilayeti Birlik hareketi liderlerinden Zhurahon Azimov ve 2001 yilinda ise Birlig’in Kashkadarya vilayet baskani eski Uzbekistan milletvekili Shovruh Rozimurad olduruldu.

Keskin: 11 Eylul 2001’de Amerika’ya El-Kaida’nin saldirisi sonucu Amerika Afganistan’i isgal etti. Bu isgal sirasinda Uzbekistan ve Kerimov yonetimi ile ABD yonetimi arasinda yakin iliski meydana geldi. Bunun Uzbekistan muhalefet hareketleri uzerindeki etkisi ne oldu?

Abdurrrahim Polat: ABD’nin Orta Asya’ya gelmesi Uzbekistan’da siyasi atmosferi kokten degistirdi. Uzbekistan hukumeti muhalefet hareketi uzerindeki baskilari azaltmak zorunda kaldi. Bundan sonra ise Uzbekistan’da Birlik hareketi toparlanmaya basladi. 2002 yili icinde butun vilayetlerde yerel kongreler yapildi ve 2003 yilinin Mayis ayi icinde, son onbir yildan beri ilk defa Birlik hareketinin genel kurultayi Taskent’te yapildi.
Bu kurultayda demokrasinin gelismesi icin mucadelenin devam ettirilmesi ve Birlik hareketinin partilesmesi yolunda karar alindi. Boylece Birlik Halk Hareket partisi adini aldi, Uzbekistan’da en guclu muhalefet hareketi oldugunu kanitladi. Ben Vasington’da bulunmak mecburiyetinde birakilsam da Birlik hareketinin toparlanmasi ve kongresinin yapilmasinda liderlik rolunu ustlendim ve parti arkadaslarim beni baskan sectiler.

Keskin: Peki Uzbekistan’da ki diger muhalefet hareketlerinin durumlari nasil, calismalari devam ediyormu? Ornegin Erk hareketinin durumu nasil?

Abdurrrahim Polat: Birlik hareketinin 2003 yili kongresinden sonra Erk partiside toparlanmaya calisti. 2003 yili Ekim ayinda da Erk Partisi kongresini tamamladi. Fakat Erk partisinin Birlik hareketinden ayrilip bagimsiz bir parti oldugu gunden itibaren Islam Kerimov hukumeti ile yakin iliskiler kurmasi, ilerleyen yillarda hukumet ile aralarinin bozulmasinin ardindan Kerimov’u guc ile devirme islerine karismalari sonrasinda ise Uzbekistan Islami Hareketi ile ortak calisma yapilmasi Erk partisi kurultayinda buyuk tartismalar yasanmasina neden oldu. Bunun neticesinde Erk Partisi bolundu. Bolunmus iki gurupta kendisini Erk Partisinin devami olarak tanitiyor. Bu guruplardan birisinin baskanligina eski genel sekreter Samat Murat secildi, ikinci gurubun baskani ise Muhammad Salih’tir. Fakat bu tartismalarin devami sonucu Muhammad Salih’in liderligindeki gurupta da bolunmeler yasandi. Muhammad Salih baskanliktan uzaklastirildi ve baskan olarak eski milletvekili Aygul Mahmatova secildi. Simdi Samat Murat ile Aygul Mahmatova Erk partisini yeniden birlestirmek icin bir caba sarfediyorlar.

Keskin: Sayin Polat, bahsettiginiz uzere Uzbekistan’da demokratik muhalefet hareketi bir hayli bolunmus durumda, bu tabi ki Islam Kerimov’un lehine bir durum arz ediyor. Peki muhalefet hareketleri bunu asmak icin neler yapiyor, yani demokratik muhalefetin birlesmesi ve ortak hareket etmesi soz konusu mu?

Abdurrrahim Polat: Biz Birlik olarak muhalefetin parcalanma noktasi yani Erk’in Birlik’ten ayrilmasindan itibaren hic bir zaman bu hareketin tekrar ortak hareket etmesi icin kapimizi kapamadik ve bilakis caba sarfettik. Erk partisinin yeni liderleri bu meseleye daha olumlu yaklasiyorlar. Cunku onlarda Uzbekistan muhalefetinin ortak hareket etmesinin anti demokratik uygulamalari degistirebilecegini anlamaya basladilar.
Bu gunlerde Birlik, Erk ve yeni kurulmus iki parti ortak calisma icin bir konsey olusturdular. Bu konsey daha ilk adimlarini atiyor ve Uzbekistan demokratik muhalefetine olumlu katkilarda bulunacagina inaniyorum. Aralik 2004 yilinda yapilacak parlemento secimlerine hazirlik icin bu konseyin cok faydali calismalar yapacagini dusunuyorum.

Keskin: Secimlere Birlik Partisinin hazirliklari nasil devam ediyor, ne gibi calismalar yapiyorsunuz?

Abdurrrahim Polat: Burada bir kac yonelimimiz soz konusudur. Birincisi sizinde bildiginiz uzere partimizi Adalet bakanligina kayit ettirme calismalarimiz var. 2003 Eylul’unde ilk defa Birlik partisini resmi olarak kayit ettirmek icin basvurduk, fakat Uzbekistan rejimi bizi kayit ve dolayisi ile secimlere istirak ettirmemek icin cesitli bahaneler uyduruyorlar. Ornegin parti tuzugunde, tuzuk kelimesi yerine Rusca ‘Ustav’ kullanmamizi talep ettiler. Bize zaman kayp ettirmek icin uygulanan zorluklara ragmen bu istenilen degisikliklerin hepsini yaptik. Fakat bakanlik yeni bahaneler uygulamaya devam etti. Bakanlikla yaklasik alti aylik mucadelemiz sonucu Uzbekistan Yuksek Mahkemesine basvurduk. Sunu anlamak gerek ki Uzbekistan gibi diktatorluk rejiminde Adalet bakanligi ve Yuksek mahkeme ile mucadele etmek aslinda kahramanlik gibi bir sey. Uygulamak istedigimiz ikinci calismamiz, kendimizi milletimize daha iyi tanitmak ve demokrasiyi anlatmak icin ozgur ve daha demokratik gorsel ve yazili basini yaratma faaliyetlerimizdir. Uzbek dilinde yapilan en guclu internet sitesi yine Birlik Partisinin sayfasidir. Bunun disinda Hareket adli iki aylik siyasi, ekonomik ve hukuk konularinda yazilar yayinladigimiz dergimizi cikariyoruz. Tabi baskilar sonucu bu dergiyide yurt disinda basiyoruz. Fakat Uzbekistan’da dagitiyoruz. Ucuncu ve en onemli calismamis ise Birlik partisi olarak ulke capinda orgutlenme faaliyetimizdir. Cunku yere teskilatlarimizin gucu ve etkisi ile secimlerde basari kazanmamiz soz konusu.

Keskin: Bildigim kadari ile 24 Haziran’da Amerikan Kongresinde Avrupa’da Guvenlik ve Isbirligi komisyonunda Uzbekistan’da demokrasi ve insan haklari ile ilgili bir toplantiya katildiniz, bu toplantida neler soylediniz?

Abdurrrahim Polat: Burada cok ilginc bir nokta var, buda toplantinin adi; ‘Uzbekistan’da bogulmus demokrasi ve ayak altina alinan insan haklari’ydi. Buda gosteriyor ki Amerikalilar Uzbekistan’daki mevcut durumdan memnun degiller. Toplantiya katilan yuksek seviyedeki Amerikan Disisleri bakanligi yetkilileri ve uzmanlar ‘2001 Eylul’unden sonra Uzbekistan’da demokrasi ve insan haklari konularinda bazi ilerlemeler olsa da son aylarda bunun yerinde saydigini’ soylediler. Ben kendi konusmamda ise Uzbekistan’da demokrasinin gelismesi icin en onemli noktanin muhalefet partilerinin Adalet bakanligina kayit edilmesi ve secimlere katilmasi oldugunu, bugunku sartlar altinda ise Birlig’in buna hazir oldugunu berlittim. Bu toplantinin da katkisi ile Amerikan hukumeti Uzbekistan’a verilecek 18 milyon dolarlik yardimi durdurdu. Buda gosteriyor ki Amerika’nin Uzbekistan politikasinin degisme rotasina girmistir. Inaniyorum ki, bundan sonra Amerika Uzbekistan’da demokrasinin gelismesi icin daha olumlu yaptirimlarda bulunacaktir.

Keskin: Turkiye’nin Uzbekistan’da demokrasinin gelismesine sizce bir katkisi var mi?

Abdurrrahim Polat: Oncelikle sunu belirtmek gerekir ki Turkiye’nin Orta Asya ve bilhassa Uzbekistan’da sadece demokrasinin gelismesi hususunda degil, genel olarak da ilgilenmesi ve cesitli meselelerde katkisinin olmasi lazim. Turkiye kendisini Orta Asya’dan dislayarak politika yapamaz. Ama ne yazik ki bugun durum boyle degil. Turkiye Uzbekistan gibi AGIT uyesi, bu yuzden Turkiye’nin Uzbekistan’da demokrasinin gelismesi icin caba sarf etmek mecburiyetinde. Turkiye’de dis politikayi yonlendirenler butun enerjilerini sadece Avrupa Birligine degil Orta Asya’daki Turk Cumhuriyetlerine de sarf etmeleri daha iyi olur diye dusunuyorum.

Interview with Ercument Kilic, president of ATAA - Turkish

2004-07-26T09:31:00.000-07:00

Ercument Kilic ile Roportaj

Ercument Kilic

Aydinlik and Ulusal Kanal TV

Tugrul Keskin

Washington-26 Temmuz 2004

Ercument Kilic 1958 yilinda Ankara'da dogdu. 1977'de egitim amaci ile Amerika'nin Miami sehrine geldi, daha sonra Teksas'in Dallas sehrinde Ekonnomi ogrenimin devam etti. Ogrenciliginin bitmesi ile is hayatina atildi. Tum ogrencilik yillarinda da Turkiye’nin tanitimi amaci ile Amerika’nin 50 eyaletinin tumunde, bir cok Avrupa ulkesinde, Tayvan’da Cin’de Japonya’da ve Hong Kong’da uzun yillar Turk Kulturu ve Turk Dunyasi tanitimi yapti. Dallas'ta bulunan TURANT (Turkish American Asssociation of Northern Texas)'da uc kez baskan olarak gore aldi.Yaklasik 15 senedir ATAA'de cesitli gorevlerde bulundu. 1990 ve 1996 yillarinda baskan yardimcilikari yapti. 2002 Aralik ayindan itibaren ise ATAA'de genel baskanlik gorevini yurutmektedir.

Aydinlik: Ne zaman ve hangi amac ile Amerika'ya geldiniz?

Ercument Kilic: Turkiye acisindan cok zor bir donemde ve genc bir yasta Amerika'ya, Jimmy Carter'in ABD baskani oldugu donemde Miami'ye ogrenim gormek uzere geldim O yillarda Iran'da Amerikalilarin rehine olarak alindigi, faizlerin cok yuksek oldugu, Turk amerikan iliskilerinde bilhassa 1974 Kibris harekati sonrasi iliskilerin gergin oldugu bir donemdi.

Aydinlik: Geldiginiz yillar itibari ile Amerika'da pek fazla Turk yoktu sanirim.

Ercument Kilic: Elbette, ilk Miami'ye geldigimde Amerika'da pek Turk yoktu. Zaten bulunan Turklerin buyuk bir cogunlugu ise, bilhassa Miami'de Turkiye'de belli bir kesimi temsil eden zengin cocuklarindan olusmaktaydi. Simdi ki Amerika’ya gelebilmek pek kolay degil, gercekten bir hayal ulkesi idi. Bir cok Turkiye'li zengin o donemlerde kendi cocuklarini Amerika'ya gonderiyorlardi. Daha sonra Teksas'a tasindim. Teksas'a tasinma nedenim tamamen maddi imkansizlikara dayaniyordu. Cunku Miami daha pahaliydi, oysa Teksas'ta egitim ve hayat daha ucuzdu. Ilk yillarda herkes gibi bende turkist misali buradaki Turk lobisi, Turkler ve siyaset hakinda fazla bir bilgim yoktu. Cunku Amerika'ya her gelen Turk gibi bizimde Turkiye'de egitim sisteminin hatalarindan dolayi buraya hazirliksiz gelmistik. Turkiye siyasetini ve Turkiye'nin politikasini tanimam burada yani Amerika'da oldu.

Aydinlik: O Yillarda Turk dernekleri icindeki faaliyetler nasildi, siz neler yaptiniz bu tanima asamasindan sonra?

Ercument Kilic: Dallas'ta bulundugumuz yillarda PBS (Amerikan Halk Radyosu) araciligi ile bir cok canli yayin calismalari yaptik. Devamli olarak Turk Tarihi konusunda ehil bilim adamlarini Teksas’a davet edip konferanslar verirdik. Turkiye'nin tanitilmasi icin sadece Dallas'ta degil TURANT adli dernek vasitasi ile Amerika'nin genelinde bir Turkiye'yi tanitim calismamiz oldu. Turkler ABD'de Amerikan toplumunun dokusundan farkli bir hayat tarsi icindeler, dokunun bir parcasi degiller. Turkleri Amerikan polisinde, itfaiyesinde, ordusunda, sivil toplum orgutlerinde parmakla sayabilirsiniz. Buyuk oranla da bir niceligimden dolayi tabi ki kilise de Turk yoktur. Dolayisi ile Turklerin genel de Amerikan sosyal dokusu ile iliskisi sadece is yerlerinden ibarettir. O yillarda ise bugune nazaran Turkler cok daha fazla dokunun disindaydilar. Dolayisi ile “Biz Turklerde buradadir” mesajini vermek icin fakir doyurma, kan bagislama kampanyalari yaptik ve Amerikan basininda bunlarin duyurulmasini sagladik.Sayisiz Amerikali politikacinin secim kampanyalarinda yillarca gonullu hizmetler verdik. Bu amacla burada bizim Turkler olarak basarili olmamiz icin bu dokunun icinde mucadele vermemiz gerekiyor. Bizde Turkler olarak bu toplumun bir parcasi oldugumuz mesajini vermeye calistik. Baskanligim sirasinda TURANT uyelikleri uc kat artti. Yine o donem itibari ile Kirim ve Azerbaycan Turklerine yonelik destek faaliyetleride yaptik. Ilk defa bir Amerikan milletvekilini, Jim Moody’yi Azerbaycan ve Kirim’a, oradaki soydaslarimizin en cetin gunlerinde goturduk.

Aydinlik: Peki Vasington'a yani politikanin merkezine gelisiniz nasil oldu, hangi zorluklar ile karsilastiniz, kisacasi ne bekliyordunuz ne buldunuz?

Ercument Kilic: Turk derneklerinde uzun suredir aktif olarak calismama ragmen o zamana kadar Vasington'i hic tanimiyordum. 1990 senesinde ATAA'dan DR. Tamer Acikalin aradi, birlikte calisma ve baskan yardimciligi teklif etti. New York'ta bulunan ve Dr. Ata Erim'in kurulusunda buyuk rol aldigi Amerikan Turk Dernekleri Federasyonu en eski dernek olmakla birlikte, ATAA Amerika'daki en buyuk Turk kurulusu konumundaydi ve politikanin merkezi Vasington'daydi.Daha sonra ise herkesin bildigi gibi 2002 yilinda yapilan secimle birlikte ATAA baskani oldum ve EVIMI Washington'a tasidim. Bu tamamen gonullu bir gorevdi, bundan ATAA BASKANLARI herhangi bir maas almiyor, sadece Turkiye'yi ve Turkleri tanitmak icin gonullu baglamda baskanlik yapiyorum.

Aydinlik: Bildigimiz kadari ile ilk defa bir baskan Vasington'a butun isini gucunu birakarak geliyor ve evini Teksas'tan buraya tasiyor. Bu baglamda cesitli zorluklar ile karsilastinizmi?

Ercument Kilic: Evet ilk defa bir baskan olarak Vasington'a butun evimi ve isimi tasidim ve bunu gonullu olarak yaptim. Bizim yonetim kurulumuz Amerika’nin her yerine yayilmistir ve genel de bulundugumuz yerlerden baskanlik yapariz, ama ben baskan olarak Vashington'da bulunmamin ATAA icin daha yararli olacagini dusundum ve Vasington'a tasindim. Sebep 27 senelik bir Amerikan egitimim ve birikimim vardi Turkler olarak bazi konulara yaklasimlarin farkli yapilabilecegini dusunup onlari yeni yontemler kullanarak ilk elden yapmanin, Turkce deyimle tasi taragi toplayip Vasington'a tasinmanin daha yararli olacagini dusundum. Bu tasinmanin ve bazi yeniden yapilanma calismalarinin meyvelerini ise soyle gorduk. ATAA'in Amerikan kongresi ile daha yakin temaslari olmaya basladi. Amerikan milletvekillerini Turk dostluk gurubuna katmaya ikna ettik. ATAA'nin yapilan en son yillik genel kurultayi son yillarin en kalabaligi oldu. Uye sayimiz artti, calisan yani isci kesimini ve ogrencilerimizi daha fazla kapsayan calismalar yaptik.

Aydinlik: Butun bu soyledikleriniz icinde ATAA'nin onemi nereden kaynaklaniyor?

Ercument Kilic: ATAA Turklerin Amerikan toplumunundaki bir meclisi olarak Turk Amerikan iliskilerini olumlu etkileyebilecek ve gucunu buradaki Turklerden alan bir kurum. ATAA'in diger bir onemi ise Amerika'da Turk toplumunu sivil baglamda temsil eden en buyuk Turk orgutu olmasindan kaynaklaniyor.

Aydinlik: Bunlarlar birlikte Vasington'da bir hayli sIkIntIli olan Turk lobiciligi var bunun ATAA ile ilsikileri nasil ve hangi asamada?

Ercument Kilic:Turk lobiciligi iki bacakli bir masa. Bacaklardan birisi tanitim ve lobicilik calismalari yerine getiren Turkiye Cumhuriyeti, ikincisi ise Amerika'da yasayan Turk toplumu. Ve bu masa kendi dengesini zor sagliyor. Demek ki kendisine ucuncu veya durduncu bacaklar bulunmasi lazim. Ucuncu bacak benim iki yildir devamli olarak mesajini verdigim: Turk ozel sektoru. Ozel sektorumuz mutlaka ve mutlaka ATAA gibi bir kuruma maddi destek vererek katkida bulunmali. Amerika ile ticaret yapan Turk sirketlerinin yatirimlarinin gelecekte saglikli korunmasi, Turk mallarina konulan kotalarin kaldirilmasi, Turkiye'nin parasini verdigi helikopterlerin teslim alabilmesi, Turkiye'nin Amerika tarafindan en favori ticari iliskiler listesine alinmasi her zaman lobi ile olur.Bu listeye Cin bile girdi, Turkiye hala yok! Bu yuzden ozel sektorun destegi cok onemli. Bahsini ettigim zorluklarin nedeni ikili iliskilerin hukumetler arasinda kotu olmasindan degil, diger etnik lobilerin Amerikan kongresinde daha kuvvetli olmalarindan kaynaklaniyor. Bugun Turk Dostluk Gurubunda bulunan Amerikan milletvekilleri sayisi Turkiye’ye kota koymak kimin haddine? Bu masaya bir de gozumuzun onunde durup simdiye kadar el atmadigimiz bir dorduncu bacagida ekliyebiliriz. Bu da Turk dunyasi. Cunku Amerika'da 400 bin Turkiye'li varken 1 milyonun uzerinde Turk dunyasindan Turk var. Bu insanlarin dertlerine ses olmak, onlardan da guc kazanmak yolu ile bu dorduncu bacak kolaylikla lobiciligimizin saglam temeller uzeirne oturmasini sagliyabiliriz.

Aydinlik: Demokratik ilkeler baglaminda ATAA'nin iyi isledigini dusunuyormusunuz?

Ercument Kilic: Bu soylediklerim ATAA icin degil, Amerika’daki tum Turkler ve onlarin Dernekleri ile ilgilidir. Yillar icinde bir cok seyi devletten bekleyen bir zihniyet olusmus. Lobicilik yapilacak, devlet yapsin, Turevi acilacak devlet acsin, festival yapilacak devlet yardim yapsin. Biz geldigimizde Turkiye'den maddi yardim almak yerine Turkiye'yemize katkida bulunalim ve kendi yagimiz ile kavrulalim dedik. Yalniz bunlari basarabilmek icin herseyi devletten veya Turkiye cumhuriyetiden beklemek yerine, bu iside devlet baba yapsin zihniyetinden uzaklasip, buradaki Turk halkinin bilinclenmesi ile yapmaya calistik. Bu amacla kuafor, kasap, terzi, mermer iscisi doktor, universite ogretim gorevlisi gibi degisik kesimlerden insanlari dernegimizin calismalarin adavet ettik. Ama buna ragmen Turk halkini bilinclendirmenin vazifesi ATAA gibi kurumlara dusmektedir. Bagimsiz ,saydam, demokratik ve halkinin tumunu kapsayici calismalar ile gerekli mesajlari veren dernekler bilinclendirme calismasinda halkimizdan destek goreceklerdir. ATAA bu konularda onemli bir mesafeleri gecmisinde almistir. Turkiye'nin ic polikasi ile degil Turklerin ortak sorunlarina ses olan bir organizasyon olmaya calistik.

Aydinlik: Yaptiginiz calismalardan da bahsedermisiniz?

Ercument Kilic: Turkiye'yi tanitmada ATAA olarak cesitli yayinlarimiz oldu. Ilk once Turkish Times gazetesini iki haftada bir olarak cikariyorduk, daha sonra icinde bulundugumuz internet cagina gerekli ihtiyaca cevap vermemesi nedeni ile son bir yildir yeni calisma ile derginin adini daha kapsayici bicimde Turk Dunyasi olarak degistirdik. Aynen internet sayfamizda baslattigimiz gibi dergimiz hem Ingilizce hemde Turkce cikmaktadir. Amerika’ya 40, 50 yil evvel gelenler, doktorlar, muhendislermis, simdi her kesimden insanimiz var. Bunlarin hepsi ingilizceyi iki gunde ogrenmek zorunda degil ki. 1970'li yillardan beri Ermeni lobisinin yaptigi Amerikan kongresinde milletvekillerinin yaninda stajyer ogrenci calistirma isini baslattik. Amerika'da bulunan ve sayilari binlerle ifade edilen Turk ogrencileri ile iletisim kurarak onlari Amerikan politik surecini ogrenmesini ve Turk derneklerini tanimasini sagladik. Cunku Yunan ve Ermeni dernekleri bu metodlar ile calisiyorlar. Icinde bulundugumuz Amerikan baskanligi secim yilinda bu yilin onuzmudeki uc ayi icinde bir bir eforla Turkleri secim kutuklerine kayit ettirme ve oy kullanmaya yoneltici bir proje baslattik.

Aydinlik: Son olarak sizce gelinen nokta nedir, basari mi yoksa Amerika'da bile Turkun Turkle mucadelesi mi?

Ercument Kilic: ATAA'ya baskan oldugum gunden itibaren bir vizyon ve misyon gelistirmek, tanitimimizin uzun suredir var olan sistemini gelistirmek ve toplumun genelinin katilimini saglamak istedik. ATAA her zaman herkese acikti ama elitlerimizin yaninda daha halkci bir yapiya toplumun butun kesimlerini kapsar bicime gelmesi icinde calistik.Bu arada tabi ki maddi ve manevi sikintilar cektik ve cektirildik. Mucadelemizin ana nedeni hic bir sey icin olmasa bile Dumlupinar sehitliginde su anda yatan, sekiz yasinda bu millet icin sehit olmus Konyali Omer Oglu Husnu ve onun gibiler icindir (Hemen O’nun yaninda 11 yasinda bir cocugun mezari da vardir). Bu insanlar bir hic ugruna, bos yere sehit olmadilar, ve unutturmayacagiz! Amerika'da Turk toplumu icin calismaliyiz ve burada bulunan Turklerin Turk toplumuna hizmet etmeleri lazim veya kendisi hizmet edemiyorsa bunu saglayan guvendikleri kisi ve derneklere yardim etmesi gerekiyor. Ayriyi gayriyi unutup, ortaklari bulmamiz lazim.

Interview with Savas Suzal, a journalist in Washington - Turkish

2004-07-13T09:46:00.000-07:00

Gazeteci Savas Suzal Ile Roportaj

Savas Suzal

Tugrul Keskin

Washington-Aydinlik

Temmuz 13 2004

Savas Suzal 1944 yilinda istanbul’da dogdu. Kuleli Askeri lisesini bitirdikten sonra, Kara Harp okuluna devam ederken, 1963 yilinda 21 Mayis olaylarindan dolayi okuldan cikarildi. Daha sonra Ankara Devlet Mimarlik ve Muhendislik akademisini bitirdi ve Ankara Universitesi Insaat dairesinde calismaya basladi. Bu sirada TRT’nin actigi redaktor spiker sinavini kazanarak 1974 yilinda basin hayatina girdi. Muhendislik tahsilinin gazetecilik icin yeterli olmadigina inanarak Siyasal Bilgiler fakultesine bagli Sevk ve Idare yuksek okulunu bitirdi. TRT’de ilk haber programi olan “Bir Konu ve Bir Konuk” programinin yapimcisi ve sunucusu oldu. 1980 Aralik ayinda Amerikanin Sesi Radyosunda calismak uzere Vasington’a geldi. 1986 yilinda Sabah gazetesinin ve ATV televizyonunun Vasington temsilciligine basladi ve 2002 yilina kadar bu gorevini surdurdu. Suzal halen Vatan gazetesinin Vasington temsilcigini yapmaktadir.

Aydinlik: Amerika’nin Sesi Radyosuna ve dolayisi ile Amerika’ya nasil geldiniz?

Savas Suzal: Amerika’nin sesi radyosunda (VOA) calisan bir arkadasim radyoda Turkce bir spikere ihtiyac oldugunu soyledi. Bu nedenden dolayi Amerika maceramiz basladi. Daha sonra 1986 yilinda radyo yonetimi aleyhinde sikayette bulunan bir Amerikaliya taniklik ettigim icin sozlesmem feshedildi. Ben o tarihte Sabah gazetesinin Vasington temsilcigini aldim ve Amerika’nin Sesi Radyosunu haksiz isten cikarildigim icin mahkemeye verdim. VOA tarihinde radyoyu dava edip mahkemeyi kazanan ve tazminat alan ilk yabanciyim.

Aydinlik: Sizi uzun suredir radyo ve televizyonda calistiniz, peki yazili basina yani Sabah gazetesi temsilciligini aldiktan sonra gorsel ile yazili basin arasindaki fark neydi? Sizin yazili basina gecmeniz Turgut Ozal’in basbakanligi ile ayni tarihe denk gelmesi acisindan da ilgi cekici bir donemdir.

Savas Suzal: O Yillarda Turk basini Turgut Ozal basbakanliga gelmesi ile birlikte Amerika’yi kesfetti. Ozal hemen hemen her uc ayda bir Amerika’ya geliyordu. Iste bu tarihlerde Hurriyet gazetesi, Cumhuriyet’ten Sedat Ergin’i transfer ederek Vasington’a temsilci olarak yolladi. Cumhuriyetin o zaman ki genel yayin muduru Hasan Cemal’da ekonomik zorluklara ragmen Ufuk Guldemir’i temsilci olarak Vasington’a gonderince tatli bir rekabet gundeme geldi. Ayni tarihlerde Milliyet’ten Turan Yavuz ve Tercuman’dan Yilmaz Polat’ta olmak uzere Vasington’da Turk gazetecilerin sayisi bese yukseldi.Bu gazeteciler arasinda gercekten gazetecilik baglaminda kiran kirana tatli bir rekabet ortaya cikti. Isin en ilgi cekici tarafi ise Turgut Ozal Turkiye’de kendisine yoneltilen sorularin Vasington’da ki ziyaretlerinde tam tersi ile karsilasiyordu.

Aydinlik: Peki Turgut Ozal Amerika’ya nicin yogun olarak geliyordu ve Amerika ile iliskileri hangi duzeydeydi?

Savas Suzal: Gercek amaci Amerika’nin gundeminde kalmakti, fakat bunu saglik sorunlari ile maskelemeyi iyi beceriyordu. Ornegin Reagan yonetiminde kimsenin ilgilenmedigi baskan yardimcisi George Bush’u oval ofisten sonra ziyaret ederek O’na onem verdi. Hic unutmuyorum, su an CNN’de program sunan unlu gazeteci Wolf Blitzer ile birlikte Ozal’in o tarihlerde Beyaz Saray’in idari binasindan ayrilisini (Executive Building) merdivenlerde izlerken arkamizdan gelen George Bush bize bu adama dikkat edin ileride cok onemli rol oynayacak sozunu soyledigini unutmuyorum. Nitekim hatirlayacaginiz gibi Irak savasi oncesi Turgut Ozal’da kendisinden talepte bulunmadan evvel Irak petrol boru hattini kapatarak George Bush’a ve Vasington’a ne kadar yakin oldugunu kanitlamaya calismisti. Turgut Ozal devletlerarasi iliskileri liderler arasi iletisim ile ozdesletigine inaniyordu, belki de en buyuk yanlisi buydu. Cunku devletlerarasi ulusal cikar celiskileri olduguna inanmiyordu. Bunun boyle oldugunu Ozal’in en yakin dostu Bush tarafindan Demirel’e soyledigi “beni ozal’a yakin olarak tanittilar, benim O’na yakinligim Turkiye’nin basinda olmasindan kaynaklaniyordu ve su an Turkiye’nin yonetiminin basinda siz varsiniz ve size de ayni yakinligi gostermeye hazirim ” sozu ile aslinda ulusal cikarlari vurguluyordu.

Aydinlik: Turgut Ozal donemi itibari ile Amerika’da Turk lobisinin baslangici olarak O’nu gostermek mumkun mu ve Turk lobisi nasil basladi, basarili oldu mu?

Savas Suzal: Turk lobisi elbette Ozal ile birlikte basladi, amac o yillarda cok yogun bir bicimde kongredeki Ermeni Soykirim tasarisini engellemekti.Ancak Ozal doneminde cok yogun olan herseyden komisyon alma Turk lobisinin Vasington ayaginda da kendini gosterdi. O yillardaki Turkiye ile calisan lobi sirketinin basinda bir Ermeni’nin bulundugu bile dikkate alinmamisti, bunu da Milliyet gazetesinden Turan Yavuz ortaya cikararak iyi bir gazetecilik ornegi sergiledi. Daha sonra ise lobi sirketleri komisyon oranina gore kiralanir duruma gelerek Turk lobisinin nasil calistigini veya calismadigini gozler onune serdi. Karanliklar prensi olarak adlandirilan ABD savunma bakan yardimciligindan ayrilan Richard Perle bir lobi sirketi kurdu ve basina su an ABD savunma bakanliginda calisan mustesar yardimcisi Douglas Feith’i gecirdi. Bu sirket International Advisers Inc. adli sirketti ve Turkiye ile iki yilligina 875 bin dolarak bir antlasma imzaladi. Ozal yonetiminin savunma ihalelerinden aldigi komisyonlardaki ara bulucu rolunu ustlendi.

Aydinlik: Siz Vasington’da uzun bir suredir bulunuyorsunuz ve bu sure icinde bir cok Turk elcisi ile birlikte oldunuz, Vasington’da bulunan Turk elcilerinin calismalarini yakindan takip ettiniz. Bunun bir degerlendirmesini yapabilirsiniz?

Savas Suzal: Turk buyukelcileri genelde Turk dis politikasinin disinda hareket edemezlerler. Ancak Vasington’a atananlarin cogunlugu emekliligi yaklasmis ve meslekteki en deneyimli burokratlardir, bu nedenden dolayi Vasington elcileri bu gorevden sonra gidebilecekleri baska bir gorev olmadigi icin ya siyasete veya ticarete soyunurlar. Ornegin eski Vasington elcisi Sukru Elekdag emekli olduktan sonra Alexander Haig’in basinda oldugu savunma ile ilgili sirketin Turkiye temsilcisi, yine Nuzhet Kandemir ise bildiginiz gibi Dogru Yol partisinde baskan yardimcisi olmustur. Daha sonra Sukru Elekdag Cumhuriyet Halk partisinden milletvekili oldu.

Aydinlik: Peki bu baglamda Turkiye’deki iktidardan biraz daha bagimsiz gibi gozukmuyorlar mi veya diger bir deyisle ikitdar ile elciler arasinda bir sorun olusmaz mi?

Savas Suzal: Siyasetciler veya siyasi iktidarlar her zaman kendilerinden once atanan buyukelcilere kuskuyla bakarlar. Bunun en guzel ornegi Turgut Ozal’in Vasington’a atadigi Turk elcisi Nuzhet Kandemir’den Mesut Yilmaz hic bir zaman hoslanmadi. Kandemir’in kaderimidir bilinmez, Tansu Ciller’de basbakanligi doneminde Nuzhet beye pek olumlu bakmadi ve gorevden almak icin elinden geleni yapti. Son olarak buyukelci Faruk Logoglu’nun yerine AKP iktidari basbakan Erdogan’in danismanlarindan bir tanesini Vasington’a buyukelci olarak atamak istiyor, fakat burada da engel Cumhurbaskani Sezer olarak goruluyor.

Aydinlik: 25 Yildir Vasington’da diplomasi muhabirligi yapiyorsunuz, sizce Turkiye’ye aktarilan haberler ne kadar gercekci ve tarafsiz, Turk basini gorevini yapiyormu?

Savas Suzal: Bence yapmiyor. Ozellikle Vasington’a yapilan resmi ve ozel ziyaretlere katilan gazetecilerin secimi siyasi liderler tarafindan yapildigindan tarafsizlik ilkesi cignenmis oluyor. Ornegin Ozal zamaninda da iktidara yakin gibi gozuken basin mensuplari olmasina ragmen cogunluk muhalefet yaptigi icin bir yerlerde gercek yayinlanabiliyordu. Ama zamanimizda basinin ekonomik bagimliligi dogrudan haberleri etkilemeyi surduruyor. Siyasetciler sunu unutmamali Ozal’in tek parti iktidarinin uzun sureli olmasinin altinda yatan neden bu elestirilerdi. Ozal boylelikle kamuoyunun nabzini tutabiliyordu. Cevresinde sadece dalkavuk zihniyetli kisileri dinleyen liderler halkin gercek nabzini tutmaktan uzak kaliyorlar.

Aydinlik: Kendilerini Amerika uzmani olarak tanitan ve Amerika’da yonetime yakin gibi gosteren bazi basin mensuplari var. Sizce bunlar gercekten Amerikan yonetimine yakinlarmi, yoksa bu gazeteciler kendilerini Turkiye’de bu sekilde gosterek cikar mi sagliyorlar?

Savas Suzal: Bunlar her donemde hepimizin bildigi malum isimler kendilerini hem Amerika’dakilere hem de ondan daha cok Turkiye’deki siyasetcilere pazarliyorlar. Halbuki Amerika’da hic bir itibarlari yok, sadece cesitli vesileler ile kullanilan insanlar. Bu gazetecilerin simdiye kadar Turk-Amerikan iliskilerinde soyledigi hic bir sey dogru cikmadi. Zaman zaman bunlarin kimin sesi oldugunu Amerikalilarda merak ederler.

Aydinlik: Son olarak Amerika’da cok cekismeli olacaga benzeyen sadece Amerika’yi degil, bununla birlikte Turkiye ve dunyayi ilgilendiren bir baskanlik secimi olacak. Farkli sonuclari dusundugumuzde bunun Turkiye’ye yansimasi ve Turk Amerikan iliskileri acisindan degerlendirmesi ne olabilir?

Savas Suzal: 4 Kasim’da Amerika’da yapilacak olan baskanlik secimleri sadece Amerika icin degil, Turkiye’deki iktidar icinde bir donum noktasi olacak. Zaten Amerika’daki Cumhuriyetci iktidar ile AKP arasinda iliskiler gerileme donemine girdi. Uc onemli konuda basbakan Ankara’da ABD baskanindan bekledigi hic bir yaniti alamadi. Eger Kasim secimleri sonrasi Kerry ve Edwards ikilisinden olusan Demokratlar iktidara gelirse Amerikan dis politikasinda koklu degisiklikler yapacaklar. Ornegin Cumhuriyetcilerin savundugu Buyuk Orta Dogu projesinin bir demokrat iktidarinda fazla bir gelecegi olmadigi soylenebilir. Halen AKP iktidari bu projenin en buyuk avukati rolunu ustleniyor. Dolayisi ile Turkiye Aralik ayinda AB’den olumlu bir yanit alamaz ve Amerika’da da demokratlar secimi kazanirsa hem bolgesinde hemde dunyada bir yalnizlik icine girecek. Zaten ekonomik acidan her ne kadar Turk basini gormezden geliyorsa da AKP iktidari zor durumda, dolayisiyla ampul tamamen sonebilir.

Interview with Yilmaz Polat, a journalist in Washington - Turkish

2004-01-06T10:04:00.000-08:00

Gazeteci Yilmaz Polat Ile Roportaj

Tugrul Keskin

6 Ocak 2004

Gazeteci Yilmaz Polat ile son kitabi olan Amerikan Sahinleri
Amerikan kargalari hakkinda ve Amerikan politikasi uzerine konustuk.

1970 yilindan TRT yurt disi yayinlar dairesinde gazetecilige
baslayan Polat, 10 yil sureyle Turkce ve yabanci dillerde haber ve
program yapti. 1980 yilinda Amerika'nin baskenti Vasington'a
gazeteci olarak geldi. 23 yildir ABD Vasington'da gazeteci olarak
bulunmaktadir. Vasington'da en uzun donem gazetecilik yapan tek Turk
gazetecisi. Bu donem icinde Vasington Entrikalari, Vasington Ankara
Hatti, Alo Vasington isimli uc kitap yayinlayan Polat, 2003 yili
icinde yayinlanan son kitabi ise Amerikan Sahinleri-Amerikan
Kargalari.

Keskin: Kitabinizi 1970 Kibris Baris harekati sirasinda 28.
Tumen komutani olan ve emir dinlemeyerek Maras bolgesini alan
rahmetli babaniz Osman Fazil Polat'a atfediyorsunuz.Kibris konusu su
an gundemde olduguna gore babaniz sizce Maras bolgesini nicin emir
dinlemeden aldi?

Yilmaz Polat: Benim ayrica Ates Altinda Kibris diye tamamen harp
gunluklerinden (ceridelerinden) belgeli Kibris baris harekatinin
askeri yonunu anlatan bir kitabim daha var. Maras o donem itibari
ile hareketin sinirlari icinde degildi. babam o bolgeyi turistik
bolge icin degil, Magosa'nin Turk kesiminin guvenligini saglamak
icin aldi. Yani Kenan Evren'in dedigi gibi ileride vermek icin degil.

Keskin: Son gunlerde Kibris sorunu gundemi isgal
etmektedir, sizce Amerika'dan ve ozellikle Vasington'dan Kibris
gorusmeleri Annan plani cercevesinde nasil gozukuyor?

Yilmaz Polat: Gecmiste Kibris ile ilgili planlar sunan Birlesmis
Milletler genel sekreterlerinin kisiliklerini ele aldigimiz zaman bu
planlari kimin yaptigini daha iyi gorebiliriz. Ornegin, Birlesmis
Milletler eski genel sekreteri Perez Decuellar bir escinseldi.
Birlesmis MIlletler gorevinden ayrildiktan sonra Kibris ile ilgili
bir kitapta yazdi. Ve bu kitapta Denktas'i kuvette raki icmeyi seven
bir lider olarak tanimladi.Bunun kendisine yanlis oldugu
soylendiginde oylemi yazmisim diye Kibris konusuna ne kadar ilgisiz
oldugunu gostermis oldu. Diger bir genel sekreter olan Butros
Gali eski Rum yonetimi baskani Vasilliou'nun, genel sekreter olmadan
once Misir'daki sirketinin basindaydi. Bu garip iliskiler agi icinde
bu insanlarin tarafsiz ve hakca bir plan uretmesi mumkun degil.
Vasington'dan Kibris politikasina bakinca Amerikan yonetimleri icin
Kibris bir amac mi yoksa arac midir sorusunun yanitinin bulunmasi
gerekir.

Keskin: Vasington'un Kibris politiklarini amac mi yoksa
arac mi olarak gordugunu sordunuz bunu biraz daha acarmisiniz.

Yilmaz Polat: Amerika'nin Avrupa Birligi ile iliskileri dikkate
alindiginda birlesmis bir Kibris'in Avrupa Birligine uyeligi Amerika
icin avantaj midir yoksa dezavantajmidir.

Keskin: Kitabinizda Turkler Turk gecinenler bir de
Turklerden gecinenler seklinde bir tanimlama yapmissiniz. Bu tanimin
icine hangi guruplarin girdigini anlatabilirmisiniz? Baska bir
deyisle kim Amerikan Sahini kim karga?

Yilmaz Polat: Kim karga kim sahin diye bir ayirim yapmadim. Olaylar
var, kahramanlari var, kimin sahin kimin karga olduguna okuyucaya
biraktim. Ama 23 yildir, Vasington'da bir cok insan tanidim.
Gercekten Turkiye'yi seven Turk dostu bir cok Amerikali tanidim.
Bunun yani sira Turk dusmanligi yapmasa siradan bir kisi bile
olmayacak Amerikalilar gordum. Ama en acisi bunlara alet olan Rum ve
Ermeni lobisinin direkt veya dolayli piyonu olmus Turkler tanidim.
En aci olanida bu olsa gerek.

Keskin: Peki bu konuda isimlerden bahsedebilirmisiniz?

Yilmaz Polat: Bence kitabin en begenedigim bolumu Ataturk ile
roportaj yapan Clarance Straight isimli Amerikali gazeteci ile
yaptigim roportajdir. Ben bir Ameriklai gazetecinin Ataturk ile
ilgili bu kadar guzel dusunce ve tanimlamasini kendi basinimizda
bile az rastladigimiz icin cok etkilendim. Bizim Turkiye ve Ataturk
ile ilgili bu guzellikleride ortaya cikarmak ve bunlari da duyurmak
zorundayiz. Yani Amerika'da herkeste Turkiye aleytari degil.

Keskin: Peki Turk isim de verecekmisiniz?

Yilmaz Polat: 23 yilda bir cok Turk siyasetci, gazeteci ve isadami
cesitli vesileler ile Amerikaya geldi. Izlediklerimi kitapta
aktardim.

Keskin:Sizin geldiginiz 1980'den bu yana Amerika alti donem
baskan degisti, sizce en etkili Turk devlet baskani hangisiydi?

Yilmaz Polat: Ozalli yillar Turk Amerikan iliskilerinde cok onemli
donemdir. Demirel donemi daha farkliydi. Ciller donemi ise daha
degisik bir boyutta gelisti. Ecevit ve Dervis iktidari ayri bir
inceleme konusu. Burada beni en cok etkileyen her Turk liderin
kendisini Amerika'nin kendilerine cok onem verdigi seklinde
Turkiye'ye satmalari olmustur. Halbuki her lider Amerikan
dis politikasinda liderlerin disaridaki gucu Amerika'daki itibarlari
arkadaslik esasina degil, o liderin ulkedeki gucu ile dogru
orantilidir. Yani lider kendi ulkesinde guclu ise Amerika'da da
gucludur. Kendi ulkesinde kan kaybeden bir lider Amerika tarafindan
da kolaylikla terk edilir. Ornek olarakda Iran sahi ve Filipinlerden
Marcos ornek gosterilebilir. Demirel basbakan olarak ilk beyaz
sarayi ziyaret ettiginde baskan Bush'un Demirel'e Ozal ile
iliskilerimiz iyiydi, ama su anda Turkiye'nin basbakani sizsiniz
bundan sonrada muhatabim sizsiniz dedigini hatirliyorum.

Keskin: Bildiginiz uzere basbakan Recep tayyip Erdogan bu
ay sonu Amerika'ya Baskan Bush ile bulusmak icin geliyor. Bu
ziyaretin bir politik analizini Turk Amerikan iliskileri acisindan
yapabilirmisiniz?

Yilmaz Polat: Bence devletler arasi iliskilerde kiraldan cok
kiralcilara firsat verilmemeli. Maalesef bizde bu cok yaygin.
Ornegin bazi yazarlar simdiden kendi gorusleri dogrultusunda
nasihatta bulunurlar. Bazi kendisini danisman olarak satan hic bir
yetkisi olmayan kisilerde liderlerin adini kullanarak temaslar
yapar. Bunlar her donemde yasanan olaylardir ve hem ulkeye hem de
ikili iliskilere buyuk zarari olmaktadir. Ornegin ikinci tezkere
sirasinda Tayyip ERdogan'a yakin oldugunu soyleyen bazi kose
yazarlari ile yetkisiz danismanlarin ne yaptigini daha sonra nasil
zarar verdiklerini biliyoruz. Isterseniz bu ziyaretin
degerlendirmesini ziyaretten sonra yapabiliriz.

Interview with Osman Ertug, Republic of Northern Cypress Representative - Turkish

2002-09-29T09:36:00.000-07:00

KKTC Vasington temsilcisi Osman Ertug ile Roportaj

Tugrul Keskin

Aydinlik

29 Eylul 2002
Vasington

Aydinlik: Sayin Ertug Kibris'ta dunyada yasanan hizli degisimler isiginda son gelinen nokta nedir?

Osman Ertug: Kibris konusunda iki lider, Denktas ve Klerides, arasinda dogrudan gorusmeler devam etmektedir. Onkosulsuz bir cozum bulunana kadar taraflar arasinda Birlesmis Milletler Temsilcisi, De Soto’nun da hazir bulundugu ortamda gorusmeler yapilmaktadir. 6 Eylul'de BM Genel Sekreteri Paris'te iki lider ile gorustu. Bu gorusme sonrasinda ortaya cikan sonuclardan birisi de; 3-4 Ekim tarihlerinde iki lideri New York’ta yeniden bir araya getirmek olmustur. Bu gorusme icin her iki lider de New York'a geliyorlar. Hatirlanacagi uzere, yuz yuze gorusmeler Sayin Cumhurbaskanimiz Rauf Denktas'in insiyatifi ve girisimi ile baslatilmistir.

Aydinlik: Bu gorusmelerden amaclanan nedir?

Osman Ertug: Maksat diplomatik incelikleri bir kenara birakarak Guney Kibris Rum yonetiminin yaklasmakta olan Avrupa Birligi uyeliginin dogurmasi kacinilmaz olan bir krize karsi neler yapilmasi ve nasil bir cikis yolu bulunabilcegini arastirmaktir. Bu baglamda gorusmeler AB surecinin golgesinde surduruluyor denilebilir.

Aydinlik: Peki Rum tarafinin veya Kibris Rum kesiminin bu gorusmelerde planlari neler olabilir veya karsi tezleri nelerdir?

Osman Ertug: Rum tarafinin taktigi AB'ye uyelik konusunda yolu kendisi icin acik tutmak ve Turk tarafini uzlasmaz gostererek Kibris'ta bir uzlasiya varilmadan Avrupa Biriligi uyeliginin gerceklesmesini saglamaktir. Boyle bir taktik basariya ulastigi taktirde sozde "Kibris Cumhuriyeti" adi altinda AB'ye uye olacaklar ve Avrupa Birlige'ne donup “Kibris'in butununu uye kabul ettiniz” diyecekler ve sonrasinda da "halbuki adaninin bir bolumu Turkiye'nin isgali altindadir" iddiasini yineleyerek AB'den sozde isgali kaldirmasini isteyecekler. Boyle bir haleti ruhiye icinde hareket ettikleri soylenebilir. AB de kendilerine “uyelige hazirsiniz” dedikce Turk tarafi ile anlasmak icin herhangi bir neden gormuyorlar.

Aydinlik: Bu gune kadar karsilikli gorusmelerde yasanan en onemli sorun nedir?

Osman Ertug: Gorusmelerde yolu tikayan en onemli sorun ortak vizyon meselesidir. Kibris'in bir butun olarak geleceginin ne olacagi konusunda iki taraf arasinda taban tabana zit gorusler mevcuttur.Kibris Rum tarafini dunya haksiz yere 1960 antlasmalarina aykiri olarak sozde "Kibris Hukumeti" olarak taniyor. Halbuki, bu sifati 1963'te silah zoruyla ve gayri yasal olarak Rumlar gaspetmistir. Gerek hukuki ve gerekse ahlaki ve fiili gecerliligi bulunmayan bir sifattir. Rum tarafinin butun politikasi bastan beri bu sifatini devam ettirmek ve guclendirmekten ibaret olmustur. Dolayisiyla simdiki egzersize, yani gorusmeler surecine "var olan Kibris Cumhuriyetine yeni bir anayasa hazirlamak” olarak bakmaktadirlar. Onlara gore her sartta sozde "Kibris Cumhuriyetinin" devamliligi esastir.
Kibris Turk tarafi ise 1963 yilinda Rumlar tarafindan silah zoruyla yikilmis bulunan iki uluslu ortaklik cumhuriyetinin nerede ise kirk yildir var olmadigini, bu sure zarfinda her iki halkin da kendi kendilerini ayri olarak yonettiklerini, bir uzlasiya varilacaksa bunun mevcut iki bagimsiz ve egemen devletin yetkilerinin bir bolumunu merkezi bir otoriteye vermek sureti ile yepyeni bir ortaklik yaratmakla mumkun olabilecegini, boyle bir uzlasinin iki tarafin egemen esitligine dayanmasi gerektigini savunuyor.

Aydinlik: Iki tarafin egemen esitligi meselesine tarihsel olarak baktigimizda da cesitli sorunlar yokmuydu?

Osman Ertug: Taraflar 1960’ta dahi self-determinasyon hakkina sahip esitler olarak bir ortaklik Cumhuriyeti kurdular. Egemenlik sadece bir tarafa degil her ikisine de devredildi. Rumlar bunu 1963’te yikti. Simdi ise Rum yonetimi ne diyor? "Cumhuriyetin devami fakat yeni bir anayasa", Turk tarafi ise “bu devlet yikildi, isim gasp edildi” diyor ve bunu tarihsel baglamda soyle acikliyor: Makarios'un 1960'ta soyledigi "Kibris'ta tek bir millet yoktur Turk Turk'tur Rum'da Rumdur.” Siz Kibris'in millet bazinda butunlugunu bastan red etmissiniz. Guney Kibris'ta dinin kilise bazinda Rum toplumu uzerinde cok buyuk bir etkisi mevcuttur. Kibris'ta mal varligi olan en buyuk kurulus kilisedir. Rum Milliyetciliginin amaci olan Enosis Rum ortodoks kilisesi icinde dogmus ve gelismistir. Gecmiste 1960 anayasasi uzerinde 13 maddelik bir degisiklik onerisi ile Kibris Turklerine esitlik ve etkili katilim hakki ongeren maddeleri ortadan kaldirmaya calistilar. Buna Kibris Turku 1963 yilinda direnince 21 Aralik 1963'te Kanli Noel adi verilen saldirilar Turklere karsi baslatildi. 103 koyden Turkler kovuldu, 107 camimiz yikildi, yuzlerce Turk kayboldu ve sehit edildi. Kibris'ta Turkler butun yonetimden atildilar. Kibris'in genelinde ozel mulkiyetin %33'une sahip olan Turkler ada sathinin %3'u gibi dar bir alana sIkIstIrildilar. 11 yil gayri insani sartlarda 1974'e kadar yasamaya mahkum edildiler. Makarios'un tabiri ile Enosis'e en yakin noktaya gelindi. Fakat Turkiye'nin tepkisi karsisinda son adimi atmaktan cekindiler. Bu sirada Yunanistan'da is basinda bulunan askeri cunta bunu Makarios'un bir zaafi ve isteksizligi olarak yorumladi ve Enosis'i suratlendirmek icin Makarios'a karsi darbe yapti. Yunanistan destekli bu darbede Turk Rum ayrimi gozetilmeksizin herkes zarar gordu. Bu sirada binlerce Rum'da olduruldu.

Aydinlik: Peki Sayin Ertug Turk tarafi icinde demokratik baglamda Kibris konusunda ceistli gorus ayriliklari mevcut acaba Rum kesiminde de ilimli ve Turk tarafi ile baris yanlisi gorusler, kisiler ve guruplar mevcut mu?

Osman Ertug: Kisiler bazinda ayriliklar olabilir, fakat kurumsal bazda Rum kesiminde gorus farkliligi oldugu soylenemez. Soyle bir ornek vermek gerekirse Liberal parti baskani Nikos Rolandis, Turkler ile uzlasmadan yana olan bir adamdi. Kipriyanu zamaninda disisleri bakani oldu, daha sonra Kipriyanu'yu suclayarak Kipriyanu'nun hic bir zaman federasyon istemedigini acikladi ve istifa etti. Turk tarafina gececek her Rum'un cok tehlikeli “bir yanardag”olabilecegini soyledi. Daha sonra Klerides yonetiminde Turizm Bakani oldu. Simdi ise farkli telden caliyor. Kisacasi Kibris Rum kesiminde butun parti ve kuruluslar ulusal konuda hemfikirler. Rum kilisesi ve egitim sistemi tarafindan cizilmis ve Turk dusmanligina dayali bu ulusal cizgiye karsi olan partilerin politik olarak yalnizliga itilicekleri de bir gercektir. Cunku Rum toplumu Rum egitim sisteminin yetistirdigi insanlarin urunudur, bu egitim sistemi ise Turkleri Kibris'a sonradan gelen ve her zaman gitmeye hazir olmasi gereken, yabancilar olarak addettiginden bu sekilde aktarilmaktadir.

Aydinlik: Turkiye'nin Kuzey Kibris Turk Cumhuriyeti uzerinde etkisinin cok fazla olduguna isaret ediyorlar, acaba benzer olarak Kibris Rum kesimi uzerinde bir Yunanistan'in etkisinden soz edilebilir mi?

Osman Ertug: Yunanistan disinda Yunan milli marsinin calindigi tek yer Kibris Rum kesimidir, bu durumda bagimsizliktan soz edilebilirmi veya 1960 Anayasasi cercevesinde soz de Kibris Cumhuriyetinden bahsedilebilirmi? Elbette hayir. Bu konu o kadar buyuk bir tabudur ki Vassiliou'nun bu konuda Yunan milli marsinin kaldirilmasi ile ilgili bazi beyanlari Rum halkindan buyuk tepki cekmistir.

Aydinlik: 1974 Baris harekati sonrasi Turkiye'den gelen gocmenlerin durumu nedir?

Osman Ertug: Turkiye'den gelen gocmenler artik gocmen statusunde degil, topluma entegre olmus durumdadirlar. Sayilari 30 ile 40 bin arasinda bulunan bu gocmenler artik yerel evlilikler ve dogumlar ile Kibris'in birer yerlisi konumuna gelmislerdir. Herseyden evvel ABD'nin bu gocmen meselesini kendi olusumu acisindan daha iyi anlamasi gerekiyor cunku burasi bir gocmenler ulkesidir. Rum tarafi da cesitli gocmen topluluklari nufusunu arttirmistir. Yunanistan'dan 60'larda getirdikleri askerlere vatanadaslik vermisler, Lubnan'da ki savastan kacan 65 bin civarinda gocmen Kibris Rum kesmine gelmislerdir, son zamanlarda adaya goc eden cok sayida Rus, Sirp ve Pontuslular bulundugunu da eklemekte fayda var.

Aydinlik: Amerika kendisini Kibris sorunundan uzak tutmaya calissa da bir o derece Kibris ile ilgileniyor, bunu nasil acikliyorsunuz ve sizce Amerika bu sorunun ne tarafinda?

Osman Ertug: Amerika'nin Kibris'a olan ilgisi adanin kendisinden ziyade ABD'nin iki muttefiki olan Turkiye ve Yunanistan'in iliskilerinin oneminden kaynaklanmaktadir.
ABD yonetimleri kendi acilarindan denge politikasi gutmeye calismis olmakla beraber Rum ve Yunan lobilerinin etkisi altinda olan kongre ve senato Rum ve Yunan yanlisi tutum izlemislerdir. Bunun en son ornegini kongre ve senatonun ilgili komiteleri onunde bulunan sozde “Kibris Cumhuriyeti'nin" Avrupa Birligi’ne uyeligine destek veren karar tasarilari olusturmaktadir. Bu tasarilar tamamen ic siyasete yonelik tasarilardir ve Yunan asilli milletvekili ve senatorlerle digerlerinin ABD'de ki Yunan asilli oylari almasina yoneliktir. Amerika aslinda 1964'te Birlesmis Milletler Guvenlik Konseyinde alinan 186 sayili (Rum'a hukumet sifatini veren) karara destek verdi, daha yakin donemde 541 ve 550 sayili kararlari (KKTC"nin taninmamasi cagrisinda bulunan kararlar) konseyden gecirmekle tarafsizliktan uzaklasmis ve cozum cabalarina darbe vurmustur.

Aydinlik: Amerika'nin Kibris Baris harekati sonrasi Turkiye'ye uyguladigi ambargo ile bu politikalar arasinda bir benzerlik soz konusu mu, yani ABD zaten bu konuda tarafti gibi bir yaklasim sizce nasil degerlendirilir?

Osman Ertug: Turkiye'de ulusal silah sanayi calismalari Kibris savasi sonrasi baslatildi, fakat ABD yonetiminde de bazen farkli gorusler ortaya cikabiliyor. Ornegin Jimmy Carter Kibris'tan Turkleri cikaracagi sozu ile Rum oylarini kazandi. Fakat daha sonra Turkiye'ye silah ambargosunu da yine Carter kaldirdi. Sunu acikca da belirtmekte fayda var eger Yunan ve Rum lobisi olmasaydi Amerikan yonetimi KKTC konusunda daha tarafsiz ve gercekci davranabildi: Rumlar, zamaninda koskoca bir halki yok etmeye calistilar, Washington Post gazetesi 17 subat 1964'teki sayisinda soykirim tabirini kullandi. ABD Disisleri Bakanligindan George Ball Makarios icin Kibris'i bir kasaphaneye cevirmek istiyor diye soz etti. Amerika'nin bu baglamda kendi ulusal cikarlari geregi tek amaci soguk savas doneminde bir Turk Yunan savasini onlemek oldugundan bu duzlemde bir politika takip etti.

Aydinlik: Turkiye'de bazi cevreler KKTC'nin Turkiye'ye bir yuk oldugunu ve Avrupa Birliginde buyuk bir sorun yaratacagini iddia ederek Kibris Turk'unu yalnizliga itiyorlar, sizin bu konuda gorusleriniz neler?

Osman Ertug: Birde su acidan bakmakta fayda var, acaba Kibris kaybediliginde ortaya cikacak sorunlar ve yuk ne olacaktir? Turkiye'nin guvenligi ne durumda bulunacaktir? Kibris Turkiye icin bir yuk degildir. Yuk olarak gosterilmeye calisiliyor.

Aydinlik: Islam ve Arap dunyasinin Kibris sorununa bakisi nasildir ve iliskiler ne duzeydedir?

Osman Ertug: Islam konferansi orgutu Kibris Turklerinin davasina siyasi destek vermektedirler. Bizler gozlemci uye olarak 1976 yilinda kabul edildik. Temsilcilik bazinda Azerbaycan'da bir temsilciligimiz vardir. Pakistan'da da bir temsilcilik bulunmaktadir. Abu Dabi'de de bir ticaret burosu mevcuttur, ama tabiati ile Arap ve Islam ulkeleri acisindan KKTC'nin taninmamasi izahi imkansiz bir tutumdur. Cunku bugun Filistin devletini ilan edilse tanimayacaklar mi? Simdiden taniyorlar. Kibris Turku de buyuk badireler atlatarak bu gunlere gelmistir ve taninmak O'nun hakkidir. Bu konuda onderligi islam ulkeleri yapmalidir.

Aydinlik: Sayin Ertug son olarak Turkiye ile entegre dusuncesine nasil bakiyorsunuz?

Osman Ertug: Eger Guney Kibris Rum kesimi AB'ye uye olursa, onlarin entegre oldugu olcude biz de Turkiye'ye entegre olacagiz, bu bizim icin sadece bir hak degil, ayni zamanda yasamsal bir gereksinimdir. Akdeniz'in ortasinda yalnizliga itilmis ve anavatani ile dahi istedigi iliskileri kuramayan bir halk olarak varligimizi surduremeyiz.

Interview with Orhan Ketene, Turkmen Front Representative in Washington - Turkish

2002-08-27T09:41:00.000-07:00

Turkmen Cephesi Vasington Temsilcisi Orhan Ketene ile mulakat

Orhan Ketene

Turkmen Cephesi

Aydinlik
Washington

27 Agustos 2002

Tugrul Keskin:Irak’ta gunumuzde Turkmenlerin durumu ve Turkmen probleminin ozu nedir?

Orhan Ketene: Turklerin Irak’ta bulunusu millattan once 3500-4000 sene oncesiki Sumerlere kadar dayanir. Sonra Turklerin ozellikle Irak’in Orta ve Guneyinde bulunmalari Islami Fetihler doneminde vardi. Sasan imparatorlugunun ordularinda buyuk miktarda Turklerin bulundugu gorulmustur. Arap ordularina karsi Bozboru ve Baysoluhan Banuklu ve Batuklu prensliklerinin basindaydilar. Bu tarihi kisilikler Arap ordularina karsi siddetli bir sekilde savastilar. O zaman Turklerin bu savasci ruhlari Araplarin dikkatini cekmisti. Dolayisyla Emevi ve Abbasi imparatorluklari devamli bir sekilde Turkistan’dan asker getirmeye basladilar. Irak’a olan bu askeri goclerin en buyugu annesi Turk olan Halife Mu’tasim doneminde oldu. Turkistan’dan kirk bin savasci getirildi. Aileleri ile birlikte getirilen bu savascilar Kerkuk’un Guneydogusunda bulunan Samara (Dicle uzerinde olan sehir) sehrine yerlestirildiler. Mu’tasim Turklerin yerlesmesi ile Samara’yi baskent yapti. Boylece Abbasi ordusu Turklerin kontrolune gecti. 1055’te Selcuklu beyi Tugrul bey’den yardim isteyen Abbasi halifesi O’na Bagdat’a girisi ile birlikte Sultanlik rutbesi Verdi.
Bu donemden itibaren 1918 yilina kadar Turkler Irak’in tek hakimi oldu. Bu donem icinde Irak’ta alti devlet kuran Turkler- Selcuklular, Atabekler, Ilhanlilar, Celayirliler, Karakoyunlu ve Akkoyunlular. Bu devletleri daha sonra Safevi ve Osmanli donemleri takip eder. Ingilizlerin 9 Kasim 1918’de Irak’da Musul’a isgali ile Turkler Irak’ta devlet yonetiminden uzaklastirildilar. Ve Ingilizleri takip eden gelen arap yonetimlerinin genel politikasi Turkleri devamli bir sekilde yonetimden uzak tutmak seklinde gerceklesti. Ingiliz politikasin ana amaci Irak’ta Turkleri diger turk topluluklarindan ve Turkiye’den koparmak icin Turkmen kelimesini uydurdular. Bunun nedeni Irak’ta Ingiliz isgalinden sonra ilk ayaklananlarin Musul ve Telafer Turklerinin olmasidir. Bu ayaklanma daha sonra butun Irak’a yayildi, fakat kanli bir sekilde bastirildi. 4 Mayis 1924’te Ingiliz ordusunda lejyoner Asuriler Kerkuk’te ilk Turkmen katliamini yaptilar.
Irak’ta daha sonra Turkmenlere karsi yapilan ikinci buyuk katliam 14 Temmuz 1959’da oldu. 1959 Turkmen katliaminin yapilmasi lider kadrosuna yonelikti ve basarilida oldu. Daha sonra 16 Ocak 1980’de dort Turkmen liderinin asilmasi ile baslayan idam kampanyasi benzer bir sekilde yien lider kadrosuna yonelikti. Korfez savasi sonrasi ise Turkmenlerin yuzde doksani cizilen sinirin disinda kaldi, yani Saddam yonetiminde bulunmak zorunda kaldilar. Guvenli bolgede Turkmen nufusu gunumuz icin yuzde ondur. Irak’in genelinde Turkmen nufusu uc milyona yakindir.

Keskin:Turkmen Cephesi ile Barzani gurubu arasindaki iliski nasil ve ne duzeydedir?

Orhan Ketene: 1991 ile 1996 arasinda Kuzey Irak’taki ozgurlukten faydalanan Turkmenler siyasi kurumlarini kurmayi basardilar. 24 Nisan 1995’te alti siyasi Turkmen kurulusunu iceren Turkmen Cephesi kuruldu. Ancak 31 Agustos 1996’da Barzani’nin Saddam’dan yardim istemesi ile Erbil’e giren Irak ordusu Turkmen kuruluslarini basip 56 Turkmen liderini tutuklayip 17’sini idam etti.

Son alti senedir Kuzey Irak’ta KDP ile Turkmen Cephesi arasinda surekli bir anlasmazlik ve cekisme yasaniyor. 1998 ve 2000 senesinde Turkmen Cephesine KDP pesmergeleri tarafindan yapilan saldirilar bunun en canli ornegidir.

Irak hukumetlerinin politikasi Turkmenleri yonetimden mumkun oldugunca uzaklastirmaktir. 1980 senesinden itibaren ise Kerkuk planli bir sekilde Araplastirma politikasina maruz kalmistir. Bu politikalarda yardimci guruplar ise Yunanli firmalar tarafindan yapilmaktadir. Nedeni ise Turkmenlere sayet Irak yonetiminde rol verilirse Turkiye’nin Kerkuk’u ikinci Kibris’a cevirecegi korkusu hakimdir.

KDP kendi bolgesinde koydugu anti demokratik kurallar cercevesinde Barzani guruna karsi gelen her gurubu baski yolu ile sindirmeye calismaktadir. Bu sindirme politikalari Turkmenlere karsi oldugu gibi digger Kurd guruplarina karsida uygulanmaktadir. Bu baskilara karsi direnen tek gurup Turkmen Cephesidir. KDP bolgede devlet gibi hareket ederek Saddam ile yakin ticari iliskiler kurmus bunun yaninda ABD’ye de goz kirparak kendi statukosunu devam ettirmeye calismaktadir. Ayrica Barzani Bagdat’ta zayif bir hukumetin basa gelmesinden yana oldugunu da belirtmekte fayda var. Federal bir sistem ile statukolarinin devamini istiyorlar. Ve en onemlisi de bu federal sistem icinde Kerkuk’u de icerecek Feredal Kurdistan devletini kurmayi amac ediniyorlar.

Keskinn:Peki Irak muhafeletinin Turkmenlere bakisi nasildir?

Orhan Ketene:Irak muhalefet partileri genellikle Turkmenleri dislama politikasi takip etmektedir. Kurd partileri ise Kerkuk’u baskentleri ilan edip petrol bolgelerini iceren Bagimsiz Kurdistan’i kurmak istiyorlar. Ve bununda en buyuk ispati surekli olarak Turkmenlerin Irak icinde rolunu kucultmeye yonelik bir propaganda yapmalardir. Turkmenleri %6 gibi cok kucuk bir rakamla temsil edilmesine izin veriyorlar. Halbuki Kurd guruplarini %25 gibi asiri bir ornala gostermeleri gercek nufus yapilanmasindaki dengesizligi gostermektedir.

Dis ulkelerin bolgeye bakisi ise bilhassa Avrupa’nin Turkmenleri hemen hemen hic tanimamasi ve onlara ile ilgilenmemesi yani yani Osmanli’yi cokerten Ingiliz politikasinin takibi niteligindedir.

ABD ise bolgede kendine yandas bulmak icin Kurdleri, Sii guruplari ve bazi sunni Araplari iceren INC (Iraqi National Congress) baskanlik konseyini olusturan bu guruplari desteklemekte ve ozel ilgi gostermektedir. Bizim surekli olarak ABD yonetimine Turkmenlerin bir guc merkezi olduklarini, yasadiklari bolgelerin Irak’in %70 petrolune hakim oldugunu, nufuslarininda Irak nufusunun 15’ine tekabul ettigini ve nufuslarina oranla egitim seviyelerinin digger guruplara nazaran daha yuksek oldugu ve Irak’ta cok uzun bir tarihlerinin oldugu goz onune alinirsa Turkmenlere verilen onem ve rolun buyuk bir dengesizlik yarattigi anlatilmistir.

2002 senesi icinde ABD tarafindan Irak muhalefeti ile ilgili uc tane buyuk toplanti yapilmis fakat hic birisine Turkmenler davet edilmemistir. Turkmenlerin Irak muhalefeti toplantilarina davet edilmemesinin nedeni ise INC icinde bazi guruplarin Turkmenlere rol verilmesini engellemek istemelerinden kaynaklanmaktadir.

Keskin:Niye engellemek istiyorlar?

Orhan Ketene: Turkmenleri Turkiye’nin masasi olduklarini iddia etmeleri ve dolayisiyla Turkiye’nin Irak’ta onemli bir rol almasini engellemektir.

Keskingoren:Sizce Turkmenler bir butun olarak hareket ediyorlar mi?

Orhan Ketene:Genel olarak Turkmenler ulusal bir cizgide aynidir. Ancak bazi dinsel guruplarin ayri bir teskilat altinda bulundugu dogrudur. Fakat Turkmenlerin temel haklari konusunda butun guruplar hem fikirdir. Bugun Turkmen Cephesi Turkmenlerin en guclu ve yaygin kurulusudur. Merkezi Erbil’de olmak uzere Ankara, Berlin, Londra ve Vasington’da resmi temsilcilikleri faaliyet gostermektedir. Bu temsilcilikler o ulkelerdeki Turkmen dernekleri ve orgutleri ile yakin iliskiler icinde bulunmaktadir. Ve Turkmen mucadelesini dunya hukumet ve medyasina tanitmaktadir.

Keskin:Turkmenlerin Turkiye’ye bakisi nasil ve Turkmenler Turkiye’den ne bekliyorlar?

Orhan Ketene:Turkiye resmi olarak 5 Haziran 1926 Ankara antlasmasindan itibaren 1991 yilina kadar Turkmenler ile ilgilenmedi. 1991’den sonra buyuk bir ilgi basladi ve devlet olarak Turkmenlerin Irak’in toprak butunlugu icinde haklarini almalari icin destek olundu. Ozellikle Kuzey Irak’ta son yillarda Turkmenlere karsi yapilan saldirilari engellemede Turkiye buyuk rol oynadi. Devlet yetkililerinin son demeclerinde Kibris Turku ile Irak Turku arasinda bir farkin olmadigi aciga cikmis oldu. Su ana kadar Turkmenleri dunyada tek destekleyen ulke sadece Turkiye’dir. Turkiye’de basin ve yayin organlari bu son derece onemli meseleyi Turk toplumuna mal edememektedir.

Keskin:Sizce bunun nedeni nedir?

Orhan Ketene:Irak konusu gundeme geldiginde devamli olarak Saddam, Kurtler ve petrol konulari islendiginden Turk toplumu Turkmen meselesinin ozunu tam olarak algiliyamamaktadir.

Keskin:Bu asamada Turkmenler acisindan cozum nedir?

Orhan Ketene: Hic bir toplumun hakki baskalari tarafindan kolaylikla verilmez. Haklari icin mucadele eden toplumlar her zaman dikkati cekmistir. Burada Turkmenlerin askeri gucunun zayifligi onlara bir uluslararasi arenada dezavantaj olmaktadir. Bugun Irak’ta Siilerin ver Kuzey’deki Kurtlerin ABD tarafindan taninmasinin en buyuk sebebi silahli guclerinin olmasidir. Bu yuzden Turkmenlerin kendilerini savunacak ve emniyet altina alacak bir slihali gucunun ousmasi gerekmektedir.

Keskin:Vasington’da toplanan son Irak muhalefeti toplantilarini nasil degerlendiriyorsunuz?

Orhan Ketene:9 Agustos’da ABD’nin baskenti Vasington’da yapilan ABD destekli INC (Irak Ulusal Konseyi) toplantisinda baskanlik konseyi uyeleri ki bunlar silahli gucu olan Sii ve Kurt guruplar diger guruplarin bu toplantilara katilmasini istemiyorlar. Turkmenlerin toplantilardan dislanmasinin en buyuk nedeni Turkiye’nin bolgede onemli bir rol oynamasina izin vermemektir.