Turkish Forum

Category: Authors

  • Istanbul’s Harem-Gebze Minibus

    Istanbul’s Harem-Gebze Minibus

    One of my favorite activities in Istanbul is mentioned in very few guidebooks: riding the Harem-Gebze minibus.

    HAREMGEBZEMINI

    The Harem-Gebze is a semi-public bus seating about 15 people. I don’t know how many passengers fit in the bus if you include those standing, but during rush hour, drivers seem to always believe there is room for one more.

    The buses ply the D-100 highway, a busy road running about a mile inland from the Marmara Sea. One of the Harem-Gebze line’s terminals is in Harem, a major transportation hub on Istanbul’s Asian side, the other in Gebze, an industrial suburb east of the city.

    Much of the Harem-Gebze line is now served by a new commuter train, so the minibus activity is certain to dwindle in the years to come. However, the drivers stop wherever the passengers ask them to, so the minibuses can serve local traffic in a way a train never can.

    When I tell visitors this bus line is one of my favorite sights in all of Istanbul, residents look at me like I must be joking. Why on earth, they ask, would I recommend a tourist take a bumpy, uncomfortable, erratic, potentially dangerous bus ride through a particularly ugly, crowded, stinking part of the city?

    I recommend it because after three days of touring the Aya Sofya, the Blue Mosque, the Grand Bazaar, and maybe Istiklal and Ortakoy, visitors have seen Istanbul as it was, and maybe Istanbul as it likes to relax, but they haven’t seen Istanbul as it is.

    In just half a day’s time, the Harem-Gebze minibus will take them past the tall Unilever building standing between the neighborhoods of Icerenkoy and Bostanci, a reminder that one of the world’s largest consumer goods companies uses Istanbul as a center from which to conduct business throughout Central Asia, the Middle East, and Africa.

    After Bostanci, the bus passes an infantry training center located right in the middle of the city. The training center is little-used these days, leapfrogged by newer, larger bases further from the city, but it serves as a visible symbol of the military’s prominent, but decaying, role in Turkish political life.

    The bus also passes the squat, utilitarian headquarters of Efes Pilsen, a beer manufacturer supplying 85% of the beer consumed in Turkey. From its unassuming offices just off the highway, the company runs an empire that reaches into Central Asia and Eastern Europe. The company even owns breweries in Russia.

    Just across the highway from Efes Pilsen is a large satellite office for Turkcell, Turkey’s biggest provider of cell phone and wireless communication services.

    From this building the company runs many of its business operations, including almost all of its call center activity and some of its financial planning. Like Efes Pilsen, Turkcell is a major player not only in Turkey but throughout the region, and like Microsoft has in Seattle, Turkcell in Istanbul has spawned startups that bring the company’s technological and marketing prowess to markets throughout Asia, Europe, and northern Africa.

    As the bus draws closer to Gebze, it passes the shipyards of Tuzla and the automobile factories of Hyundai/Assan. They are certainly not as huge or as world-renowned as the shipyards and car factories of Korea or Japan, but they are a reminder nonetheless that Turkey maintains significant heavy manufacturing capacity and supplies ships, cars, and trucks to the Middle East, Central Asia, and the Mediterranean.

    When the bus makes its last stop in Gebze, there is little to do except have lunch and hop the same bus for the ride back to Istanbul. Gebze, like almost all of the sights passengers can see from the minibus, does not exist for visitors; it exists for residents, the people who work in the breweries and the call centers and the car factories.

    In less than one day, tourists will have seen not the Istanbul of museums, mosques, and retail shops but the Istanbul that distributes consumer goods to a billion of the world’s people, the Istanbul that makes ships and cars for Europe, and the Istanbul that helps farmers in Kazakhstan communicate with markets in Poland. They will see Istanbul at work, and that is why this bumpy, smelly, crowded minibus ride tops my list of things to do when you visit the city.

    Matt’s new book, “A Tight Wide-Open Space: Finding Love in a Muslim Land” is now available in Paperback and on Amazon Kindle. You can purchase it at his website, . Watch the trailer for the book below.

    Book trailer from Matt Krause on Vimeo.

    via Istanbul’s Harem-Gebze Minibus | JetSettlers Magazine.

    Source :

  • 96 Years Later, Turkey Still Pays A Price for Genocide Denial

    96 Years Later, Turkey Still Pays A Price for Genocide Denial

     sassounian33
    Almost a century after the fact, the Republic of Turkey continues to be disgraced for its persistent denial of the Armenian Genocide.
    During his visit to Armenia earlier this month, French President Nicolas Sarkozy condemned Turkey by declaring that 96 years is long enough for Ankara to come to terms with its genocidal crimes. He also threatened to pass a law punishing denial of the Armenian Genocide, unless Turkey recognized it in the near future.
    Rather than heeding Pres. Sarkozy’s sound advice, Turkish leaders retaliated by attacking him and insulting his country. Here are some of their rejectionist statements:
    — Prime Minister Erdogan: “He should first listen to his own advice. He is different in France, different in Armenia, and more different in Turkey. There cannot be a political leader with so many faces. Politics requires honesty…. You should know that Turkey is not an easy bite to swallow.”
    — Foreign Minister Davutoglu: “France should confront its own history. I consider such remarks as political opportunism.”
    — Turkey’s European Union Minister Egemen Bagis: “If Sarkozy worked on how his country could come out of economic turbulence instead of assuming the role of a historian, it would be more meaningful for France and Europe.”
    — Devlet Bahceli, leader of the opposition Nationalist Movement Party (MHP): The French President is a “rude and ill-mannered” man. “Our advice to Sarkozy is that if he wants to see an example of genocide, he should look back at his history. He will clearly see the atrocities committed in Algeria and will notice explicit or implicit massacres in North Africa.”
    The Turkish attacks on France included demonstrations in front of the French Consulate in Istanbul last week, where protesters carried portraits of Pres. Sarkozy with Adolph Hitler’s mustache and denounced alleged crimes committed by France in the Algerian war.
    Uncharacteristically, Turkish officials did not go beyond mere words to denounce Pres. Sarkozy’s statements on the Armenian Genocide. Missing were the customary recall of the Turkish Ambassador and threats to boycott French goods. There was no bite in their bark!
    The French President was unfazed by the Turkish outbursts. Upon returning to Paris, he sent a letter to Pres. Serzh Sargsyan reconfirming his earlier statements in Armenia: “Rest assured that France will not cease its commitment, as long as the massacres have not been properly recognized by the descendents of the perpetrators.” Pres. Sarkozy went on to state that he was “most of all deeply moved at the Genocide Memorial Monument while paying tribute to the memory of the victims of the death sentence carried out against your people on April 24, 1915.” When the French President learned of the angry Turkish reaction to his statements in Yerevan, he told his aides that he had no regrets: “The Turks have always hated me, so it’s no problem.”
    Some French Parliamentarians were incensed, however, upon hearing that Prime Minister Erdogan had accused Pres. Sarkozy of being two-faced. They greeted the Turkish leader’s insulting words with loud and derisive exclamations in the French Parliament.
    Former Ambassador Omer Engin Lutem expressed his concern that if France were to ban denial of the Armenian Genocide, it would trigger other European countries to follow suit. He cautioned the Turkish public that such a development on the eve of the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide would constitute a significant victory for Armenians.
    Murat Belge, an outspoken Turkish human rights activist, took issue with the negative reaction of his country’s leaders. He boldly condemned all those who claimed that “Turks are good people; we do not kill or commit genocide.” Such statements are “slanderous,” Belge stated.
    Another prominent scholar and columnist, Ahmet Insel, rebuked Prime Minister Erdogan for telling Pres. Sarkozy to look at France’s own colonial past. Insel wondered if Erdogan would indeed recognize the Armenian Genocide if France faced its own history? And what would Turkey do if the same suggestion came from a country that did not have dark pages in its history? Insel observed that this is the same Prime Minister who was claiming that all Ottoman archives are open, as his government was blocking the posting of these documents on the Internet.
    As an Iranian diplomat recently noted: “The Armenian Genocide is a Damoclean Sword hanging over Turkey’s head.” Sooner or later, a wise Turkish leader would come to realize that acknowledging the Armenian Genocide is more beneficial to Turkey than its continued denial.

     

  • Pres. Sarkozy Says ‘Tseghasbanoutyoun’ A Word Obama has yet to Utter

    Pres. Sarkozy Says ‘Tseghasbanoutyoun’ A Word Obama has yet to Utter

     sassounian32
    Flying to Armenia, French President Nicolas Sarkozy confided to his top aides last week: “I am going to toss a live grenade!” He was revealing his readiness to act firmly if Turkey continued to deny the Armenian Genocide.
    Shortly after arriving in Yerevan, Pres. Sarkozy courageously declared before journalists assembled at the Armenian Genocide Monument: “The Armenian Genocide is a historic reality that was recognized by France. Collective denial is even worse than individual denial.” When asked if France would adopt a law to prosecute those who deny the Genocide, the French President stated: “If Turkey revisited its history, faced its bright and dark sides, this recognition of the Genocide would be sufficient. But if Turkey will not do that, then without a doubt it would be necessary to go further.”
    As presidential candidate in 2007, Sarkozy promised to support the Senate’s adoption of a law criminalizing denial of the Armenian Genocide. The French Parliament had already approved such a bill in 2006. Yet, despite his pledge, Pres. Sarkozy’s ruling party blocked the bill’s adoption last May. While the French government banned denial of the Holocaust in 1990, it did take a similar action on the Armenian Genocide, even though France had recognized it in 2001.
    French-Armenians were incensed by Sarkozy’s betrayal. Singer Charles Aznavour publicly warned him that he would lose the support of 500,000 French-Armenians in next year’s presidential elections. Last month, the ARF of France endorsed the probable presidential candidacy of Socialist Francois Hollande after he promised that his party, which had recently gained majority of seats in the Senate, would vote for the bill banning denial of the Armenian Genocide. Hollande is currently far ahead of Sarkozy in opinion polls.
    During his visit to Armenia last week, Pres. Sarkozy conveyed several important messages: He reassured Armenians of his intent to keep his initial pledge on the Genocide denial bill; warned Turkey to stop denying the Armenian Genocide; and indicated his clear sympathy for the Armenian position on Artsakh (Nagorno Karabagh).
    The French President’s trip to the three Republics of the Caucasus was clearly lopsided in favor of Armenia — where he stayed overnight, while spending only three hours in Azerbaijan and Georgia. His brief stops in these two countries were simply an attempt to display a semblance of impartiality. Sarkozy’s first ever visit to Armenia was filled with festive events and dramatic gestures of friendship — planting a tree in memory of Armenian Genocide victims; laying a wreath at the Genocide Memorial, where he wrote in the Book of Remembrance — “France does not forget;” warning Turkey to acknowledge the Genocide by the year’s end; uttering the Armenian word “tseghasbanoutyoun” (genocide) which Pres. Obama has declined to use; lighting a candle in Etchmiadzin; rejecting Turkey’s membership in the European Union; opening the Aznavour Museum overlooking Mt. Ararat; and donating a priceless Rodin statue to the Republic of Armenia.
    Finally, a world leader has dared to put Turkey’s bullying rulers in their place! Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu reacted angrily by telling the French President to confront his country’s colonial past and not to teach Turkey a history lesson. Azerbaijan’s President, Ilham Aliyev, gave a cold shoulder to the French leader during his visit to Baku. An aide to Aliyev declared that his country does not share Sarkozy’s views on the Armenian Genocide. Davutoglu’s condescending words against France could well incite the French Senate into adopting the new Genocide law.
    French Armenians are now in a win-win situation. Both leading presidential candidates are committed to supporting not only the law criminalizing denial of the Armenian Genocide, but also backing other pro-Armenian initiatives. No matter which one of the two candidates wins in next year’s French presidential elections, Armenians stand to gain!
    However, given politicians’ long trail of broken promises, French-Armenians should not trust their word. They should make it clear to both candidates that Armenians would support whoever helps pass the genocide denial bill BEFORE next April’s presidential elections. It would be ideal if both candidates instructed their party’s Senators to vote for the bill now, leaving the French Armenian community with the pleasant dilemma of choosing between two supportive candidates in the presidential elections.
    French-Armenians and American-Armenians may want to reverse the long-established but failed approach of supporting candidates first by trusting their promises, hoping that they would come through after the election. The new strategy should be: Once the President is elected and carries out his promises, only then the community would reward him with its support.
  • Arab Spring Sees Turkish-Iranian Rivalry Take a New Turn

    Arab Spring Sees Turkish-Iranian Rivalry Take a New Turn

    Arab Spring Sees Turkish-Iranian Rivalry Take a New Turn

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 8 Issue: 186

    October 11, 2011

    By: Saban Kardas

    Turkey’s decision to host a NATO early warning radar in the US-led missile defense program continues to reverberate, especially for its relations with Iran. High ranking Iranian officials repeatedly criticize not only Turkey’s cooperation with the United States on the missile shield, but also Ankara’s recent foreign policy initiatives. These include the Turkish government’s efforts to set a model for the transformation of the regional countries in the wake of the Arab Spring, Ankara advocating a two-state solution for the Palestinian problem, or its increasingly assertive position on Syria.

    The decision on radar deployment apparently was a tipping point for Iranian officials, who now vocally criticize Turkey on a myriad of issues (EDM, September 20). Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said during a live TV interview that Iranian officials told their Turkish counterparts it was wrong to grant such permission and it would not benefit Turkey , October 5). Major-General Yahya Rahim-Safavi, the military advisor to the Iranian supreme religious leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, also maintained that Turkey had recently committed various strategic mistakes and would pay a heavy price if it failed to change course (Hurriyet, October 9). The Deputy Head of Iran’s Armed Forces’ Joint Chiefs of Staff Brigadier-General Massoud Jazayeri joined the wave of protest and urged Turkey to rethink its long-term strategic interests and side with Muslim nations instead of the West (www.presstv.ir, October 10).

    Iranian officials criticize Turkey on a range of issues of substantial importance. First, Iranian leaders increasingly label the missile shield as a project that is designed to boost Israel’s security against a counter-attack from Iran in case Israel strikes Iran’s nuclear facilities. However, considering that Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan repeatedly rebuff such claims, which were also raised by Turkish opposition parties, it appears that the Iranian campaign is driven by a concern to discredit Turkey in the eyes of regional countries.

    In order to contextualize Iran’s accusations against Turkey, it might be useful to recall Erdogan’s recent criticism of Israel’s nuclear program. As late as last week, Erdogan continued his recent criticism of Israel, going as far as arguing that he saw Israel as a threat to the region and surrounding countries, because it possessed the atomic bomb. Moreover, Erdogan raised a related criticism, when he pointed to the double standards of world powers: while Iran came under international scrutiny because of its nuclear program, there had been a lack of comparable debate on Israel’s nuclear weapons (Anadolu Ajansi, October 5). Iranian officials’ lambasting of Turkey through manipulative accounts, despite Erdogan’s staunch position on Israel at the expense of harming relations with the West, reveals their intent and approach toward Turkey.

    Iranian officials have recently expressed differences of opinion on the Palestine issue. Erdogan’s stance on Israel’s treatment of Palestinians has not necessarily contributed to forging common ground with Iran. Erdogan devoted a large portion of his address at the UN General Assembly last month to the rights of the Palestinians, supporting their bid for recognition. While Turkey has invested a great deal of political capital advocating a two-state solution in international venues, Khamenei, in a recent address at an international conference on the Palestinian Intifada, labeled this formula as tantamount to capitulation to the demands of “Zionists.” Rejecting the Palestinians’ bid for statehood at the UN, Khamenei argued that any solution based on the recognition of Israel’s right of existence would threaten the stability and security of the Middle East. Describing Iran as the greatest defender of the Palestinians, Khamenei criticized other regional powers that maintain close relations with Washington , October 1).

    Moreover, Turkish-Iranian divergence exists in an undeclared rivalry for regional leadership over the Arab Spring. For some time this rivalry was only evident in the realm of speculation by analysts. While Iran has been working to put its imprint on the regional transformation, by labeling the popular uprisings as an “Islamic awakening,” Turkish government sources or analysts close to the government have highlighted how Turkey’s democratic and capitalist model inspired the Arab revolutions. Perhaps in the first ever direct affirmation of this rivalry, Rahim-Safavi criticized Erdogan’s recent visit to the region. In Cairo, Erdogan stressed a secular-democratic form of government, which seems to have angered the Iranian leadership, sparking their more direct confrontation with Turkey.

    A related area of tension is over competing positions on the Syrian uprising. Faced with the continuation of the Baath regime’s violent campaign to suppress the popular uprising, Turkey has progressively downgraded its ties with Damascus, as well as providing shelter to the Syrian opposition. Turkey’s imposition of sanctions might also negatively affect Damascus’s direct ties to Tehran. Iran, viewing the maintenance of the current regime in Syria as vital to its penetration to Lebanon and Palestine, has grown anxious over Turkey’s policy on Syria, again reflected in Rahim-Safavi’s reactions.

    Some common themes are emerging in Iranian views on Turkey. First, there is a continuous and sustained reaction to Turkey, and it is worth noting that the mounting criticism of the country came from the religious leadership and the Revolutionary Guards. Second, Iranian officials work hard to present Ankara’s recent foreign policy initiatives as simply following the dictates of the US, in order to sustain their oft-repeated argument that they are the only genuine independent power in the region.

    Finally, there is a deliberate attempt to discipline Turkey by sending harsh messages as to how the country should behave. It is unclear whether this rhetoric reflects self-confidence on the part of the Iranian leadership or anxiety over Turkey taking an anti-Iranian position and siding with the US, which might lead to Iran’s isolation in the region. The Iranian side appears ready to exploit economic ties if necessary, in an effort to discipline Turkey. They daringly refer to Turkey’s gas purchase contracts with Iran as well as Ankara’s plans to boost the bilateral trade volume to $20 billion, going as far as sending veiled threats that Ankara might suffer if it fails to reverse its current position and accommodate Iranian concerns.

    https://jamestown.org/program/arab-spring-sees-turkish-iranian-rivalry-take-a-new-turn/

     

  • A Tight Wide-open Space: Finding love in a Muslim land

    A Tight Wide-open Space: Finding love in a Muslim land

    wide open spaceIn 2003, when the shockwaves of 9/11 still echoed through the US and the country was fighting two wars in Muslim countries, Matt met a beautiful woman on an airplane and decided to follow her to Turkey. This is the story of what happened there.

    BUY THE BOOK: Paperback

    Book trailer from Matt Krause on Vimeo.

  • Dr. Charny Deserves Much Credit Should Israel Recognize the Armenian Genocide

    Dr. Charny Deserves Much Credit Should Israel Recognize the Armenian Genocide

    sassounian31
      

    Armenians have good reason to be offended by the Israeli government’s failure to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide. It is unconscionable that some victims of the Holocaust can be so insensitive about those who have suffered a similar fate. Israel’s callous denial has been motivated by its unethical desire to appease Turkey — its “strategic ally.”

     

    Dr. Israel Charny, like so many Israeli citizens, vehemently opposes his government’s shameful stand on the Armenian Genocide. He is the longtime Director of the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Jerusalem and former president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars. On numerous occasions, Dr. Charny has taken a strong stand against Israeli officials, rebuking them for their deplorable position on the Armenian Genocide.

     

    Earlier this year, the President of Armenia awarded Dr. Charny a Presidential medal and a $10,000 prize for his lifelong efforts to champion recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

     

    Since Dr. Charny did not have the opportunity to make a speech during the award ceremony in Yerevan, I wish to present key excerpts from his prepared remarks:

     

    “Denials of genocide are very unfair, unjust and ugly. They are also extremely dangerous not only to the victim people, but to our human civilization. Denials of genocide are disgusting attempts to humiliate the victim people once more, and hurtful reopening of wounds of stigmatizing and persecuting the victim people once again.

     

    “Moreover, denials of genocide are also loud and clear affirmations of the legitimacy of violence; they are retroactive justifications of the specific violent killing that was done in the genocide; and they are warnings and calls for renewal of violence — whether towards the same victim people or to other peoples. In fact, it has become clear that denials of genocide often are messages from the deniers that they are already engaged in or preparing to be violent once again.

     

    “It is not at all by chance that [Turkish Prime Minister] Erdogan in the last year twice has threatened to expel 100,000 Armenians from Turkey; and it is not at all by chance that Erdogan’s Turkey — a regime that is bizarrely devoted to denials of the Armenian Genocide — continues to be violent towards the Kurdish people who have suffered thousands of destroyed villages, tens of thousands of dead, and who are frequently not allowed by the Turkish government to use their language or celebrate their culture.

     

    “Israel has been attempting to have a good relationship with Turkey very much at the expense of the truth of the Armenian Genocide. I am convinced this policy has been deeply wrong. Of course, I do not believe that nations — especially small ones — can afford not to evaluate political realities and security risks, but I think that in the long run there must be limits to the extent of realpolitik and that denials of the history of a genocide are beyond the limit that should be acceptable.

     

    “I cannot take leave without a further reference to the State of Israel’s recognition of the Armenian Genocide. Israel has been entirely wrong in not recognizing the Armenian Genocide. At the same time, thank heaven I have been able to say now for many years that we have won the battle for recognition of the Armenian Genocide in Israeli culture, our media, and in our public. When a few years ago a delegation of four of us — Prof. Yair Auron, Prof. Yehuda Bauer, Former Minister Yossi Sarid, and myself — came to lay wreaths at the Armenian Genocide Memorial [in Yerevan], we indeed represented our larger Israeli society.

     

    “At this very writing we have been informed that the Knesset will hold a major hearing on recognition of the Armenian Genocide. The overall Knesset has already voted — now for the third time in Israeli history — to hold hearings on possible recognition of the Armenian Genocide. Each of these votes has represented some progress towards our goal. In the Israeli system a proposal then has to be reviewed and decided by a major committee of the Knesset. Politics are not simple, as you know, and our opponents have succeeded in the past in defeating the recognition at this level.

     

    “This time the proposal will go to the Committee on Education where, unlike proceedings in the Committee on Foreign Affairs and Security where a proposal even can be buried without any discussion at all and no one knows what happened, discussion and voting in the Education Committee will be publicly known to us. My closest colleagues and I have not been too hopeful of success, but now there is more possibility of success than we previously estimated. In truth, the possibility of recognition is greater now that Turkey has shown its vicious side to Israel, and there are many of us who will be ashamed if we now achieve recognition for this reason rather than on the basis of a real correction of Israel’s error all these years.”

     

    As Israeli journalist Raphael Ahren accurately pointed out in a recent Haaretz article: “If Israel recognizes the Turkish genocide of over 1 million Armenians in the near future, it may be largely due to the decades long efforts of American-born scholar Israel Charny.”