Turkish Forum

Category: News

  • Soul-Searching in the CHP: Baykal’s “Chador Opening”

    Soul-Searching in the CHP: Baykal’s “Chador Opening”

    Soul-Searching in the CHP: Baykal’s “Chador Opening”

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 5 Issue: 236
    December 11, 2008
    By: Saban Kardas

    Deniz Baykal, the leader of the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), kindled a controversial debate in Turkish politics when he introduced his new project to reach out to conservative circles. During a party meeting, Baykal pinned party rosettes on women wearing black chadors (carsaf), welcoming them to the CHP (www.ntvmsnbc.com, November 17). Since then, Baykal’s “chador initiative” has sparked a major debate within the CHP as well as between the CHP and other parties.

    The initiative was surprising to many, because the CHP, like Turkey’s military and higher echelons of the judiciary, has presented itself as a major defender of Kemalist principles, in particular the narrow interpretation of secularism. After all, it was the CHP that brought the case before the Constitutional Court earlier this year, demanding the annulment of legislative changes that would have enabled girls with headscarves to attend universities. The court, sharing the same worldview as the CHP, annulled those changes in June (EDM, June 5).

    Given the party’s previous position on the headscarf issue, criticism was expressed across the political spectrum over Baykal’s latest political move. Pundits in conservative and secularist camps slammed Baykal’s move: for the former, it was insincere (Vakit, November 23); and for the latter it was a regression from the gains of the Kemalist revolution and a step toward Shari’a rule (Hurriyet, November 20). Both camps believe that Baykal is seeking to make inroads into conservative circles but that the effort will be futile. Others also noted the women Baykal met were not representative of conservative women; they joined the party only because of their husbands’ opportunistic hopes of gaining political positions (www.internethaber.com, November 20).

    Some of the CHP’s political opponents found this initiative a tactical move to attract conservative voters in the forthcoming local elections. Ironically, Culture and Tourism Minister Ertugrul Gunay, who is a former secretary-general of the CHP and a member of the governing Justice and Development Party (AKP) since 2007, sharply criticized the move. “This is mere vote hunting. Far from being a [libertarian] opening, I see this as abuse,” he said. Gunay, however, also fired a few shots at his own party’s supporters, by referring to the chador as outmoded apparel for women (Sabah, December 6). Gunay’s position contrasted with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s sympathetic response to his archenemy Baykal. Erdogan congratulated Baykal for this courageous move and encouraged him to be vigilant against criticism (www.ntvmsnbc.com, November 25).

    In response to charges of pragmatism, CHP officials stressed that this development was sincere and was demanded by the party’s grass-roots supporters. In defense of his position, Baykal said, “Turkey is going through a healthy debate. This is not a [political] opening, but rather completely humanitarian and ethical behavior.” Noting that 70 percent of Turkish women cover their hair, Baykal added that chador was a traditional outfit in Turkey, not a political symbol. Arguing that the CHP valued people for their opinion, not their appearance, he added that his party was open to those who did not have problems with secularism and the state. (ANKA, November 26).

    When criticism from within the secularist camp continued unabated, Baykal took further radical steps and argued that the CHP should engage in self-criticism and come to terms with the mistakes in its past, acknowledging that there might have been undue interference in people’s private lives. Viewing people’s clothing as a challenge to the state “is a mentality of a one-party regime. Everybody has to abandon that obsession.” Noting that Turkey was already socially fragmented, Baykal confronted his critics and maintained that the CHP could not afford the luxury of dividing the country further by judging people based on their appearance (Yeni Safak, December 3).

    Nonetheless, the “chador initiative” has provoked enmity within the CHP. Baykal’s call for a critical reflection on the party’s past angered more radical voices. Necla Arat, a parliamentary deputy from Istanbul and one of the fervent advocates of the headscarf ban, disparaged Baykal. She said that “criticizing practices during the era of Ataturk and Ismet Inonu [the second president of Turkey] because of ‘one-party-rule’ is unfortunate. My friends and I have started wondering whether the party is betraying its heritage [reddi miras].” Scores of other CHP deputies reportedly share Arat’s opinion (Hurriyet, December 4).

    A rather surprising attack on Baykal came from the leader of the Nationalist Action Party (MHP), Devlet Bahceli, who said that this issue was, in fact, a non-issue and did not correspond to the real problems of the people. He said, “As part of the Greater Middle East Project, there is an attempt to shape Turkish politics through moderate Islam… The Right pillar of moderate Islam is the AKP…Is there an attempt to erect a Left pillar of moderate Islam through this opening?” (Anadolu Ajansi, December 9).

    Baykal issued a written response to Bahceli, in which he drew a distinction between a legitimate right to certain religious freedoms and moderate Islam as a political project. Baykal attacked Bahceli by saying, “only those who either abuse religion or come from a tradition of setting political traps [referring to the MHP’s controversial role in urging the AKP to pass the constitutional amendments on headscarves] will dislike this [the CHP’s defense of religious freedom]” (ANKA, December 10).

    Baykal indeed took a bold step by opening one-party rule to debate and indicating that the CHP would defend religious freedom, but there are grounds for being skeptical about the prospects of the “chador initiative.” As political scientist Bekir Berat Ozipek says, having ruled the country singlehandedly during the one-party-era (1923-1950), the CHP has not been able to adapt itself to competitive electoral politics since Turkey moved to multi-party rule in the 1950s (Today’s Zaman, December 8). Indeed, the CHP’s critical distance from the masses and their lifestyles and its modernization project of transforming Turkish society have shaped the identity of the party’s core grassroots. Therefore, even if Baykal’s intentions were sincere, many analysts like Ozipek are skeptical about the CHP’s ability to transform itself from a statist party to a liberal party embracing human rights and religious fr
    eedom.

    Skeptics also refer to Baykal’s track record. He promised in the 1990s to develop a new platform that would be called the Liberal Left or the Anatolian Left and would represent the conservative people. For some, this project failed because of Baykal’s low credibility and unprincipled pragmatism (www.internethaber.com, November 20). Ozipek believes that those steps were never taken, because such a move would contradict the identity and the ideology of the CHP’s core secularist constituency. Ozipek put it sarcastically: “a party leader could experience such enlightenment all of a sudden, but expecting a change in party politics in such a brief period of time would be naïve.”

    https://jamestown.org/program/soul-searching-in-the-chp-baykals-chador-opening/

  • Azerbaijani MP: “Turkish government’s recent discussions with Armenia are very doubtful”

    Azerbaijani MP: “Turkish government’s recent discussions with Armenia are very doubtful”

    Baku. Elnur Mammadli – APA. “Turkish government’s recent discussions with Armenian leadership are very doubtful,” MP Elman Mammadov told APA. He said that Turkey had its own interests in the world policy, wants to cooperate with the European Union, Armenia in terms of the relations with the United States.
    “Finally it will turn out that the position of Turkish ruling Justice and Development Party is betrayal. Armenians have never been and will never be friends of Turks. It is impossible to make somebody forget something, or compromise with Armenians. Some men even apologized to Armenians for 1915 events. This is a betrayal,” he said.

  • Genocide becomes topic of study in UMA classroom

    Genocide becomes topic of study in UMA classroom

    BY MATTHEW STONE
    Staff Writer 12/11/2008

    AUGUSTA — Common threads unite each genocidal act, be it the Armenian genocide, the Holocaust or the genocide in Darfur. There are perpetrators, victims and bystanders. And each genocide involves key stages, including classification of people by their differences, dehumanization of the victims, organization of the campaign against the victims, and a denial of wrongdoing.

    Students in Abraham Peck’s “Genocide in Our Time” class at the University of Maine at Augusta have examined genocidal acts throughout the semester, in a first-of-its-kind course offering at the college.

    The course is one of a handful UMA students wishing to study genocide in depth will be able to take as part of a new academic concentration in Holocaust, Genocide and Human Rights Studies at the college. The new concentration is likely to begin next September.

    Students in Peck’s class Wednesday devoted their final session of the semester to discussing the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, in which militia members from the Hutu ethnic group killed 800,000 to 1 million members of the Tutsi ethnic group.

    Approximately 200,000 Hutus took part in the murders, according to Peck, director of the Academic Council for Jewish, Christian and Islamic Studies at the University of Southern Maine.

    By comparison, nearly 1 million Germans took part in the 6 million killings of Jews and others during the Holocaust, according to Peck, the son of Holocaust survivors.

    “It’s a groupthink kind of thing,” Peck said of genocidal acts.

    Peck set a lofty goal for the students in his UMA class.

    “I want to change you. I want to change your life and I want you to go out and change other people’s lives,” he said.

    Janet Martucci said she enrolled in Peck’s class in an attempt to better understand history. “Genocides continue and I keep trying to understand why,” she said.

    After taking the course, Martucci said, she has a better understanding of the syndrome.

    “We’ll now be cognizant of these threats in ourselves so they don’t take advantage of us,” said Martucci, of Washington.

    Karyn Dickey, of Richmond, said the class led her to take a different view of community service, which she said can be a way of preventing oneself from becoming a guilty bystander.

    “I never thought of the fact that being a bystander is actually making you be a guilty part in genocide,” Dickey said.

    Gayle Holden, a pastor at West Cumberland United Methodist Church, said a desire to better understand religion’s role in genocide led her to enroll in Peck’s course.

    Holden said she is now more conscious about American citizens’ part even in faraway conflicts.

    “Now that we know all this information, we can’t be bystanders,” she said.

    Matthew Stone — 623-3811, ext. 435

    mstone@centralmaine.com

  • The Turkey-IMF Stand-By Accord: a Never-Ending Symphony?

    The Turkey-IMF Stand-By Accord: a Never-Ending Symphony?

    The Turkey-IMF Stand-By Accord: a Never-Ending Symphony?

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 5 Issue: 235
    December 10, 2008 03:52 PM
    Category: Eurasia Daily Monitor, Turkey, Economics, Home Page, Featured
    By: Saban Kardas
    The Turkish government’s handling of the economic crisis continues to draw criticism. Business leaders and investors have been insisting that urgent measures are needed to protect the economy. An expert from Moody’s maintained that without a new IMF program, Turkey could face recession in one or two years (Today’s Zaman, December 2). Since the previous stand-by deal ended in May, the Turkish Industrialists’ and Businessmen’s Association (TUSIAD) has repeatedly called on the government to conclude a new accord with the IMF (Radikal, April 26). Referring to the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development’s November report, which noted that Turkish economic growth might decline in 2009 and that Turkey needed an injection of foreign capital to respond to the global crisis, TUSIAD Chairwoman Arzuhan Dogan-Yalcindag stated that Turkey was the only country that had failed to take effective measures against the crisis. She added, “In Turkey we only hear speculation about the repercussions of the global crisis. The inability of the political authorities to offer diagnoses and solutions based on a realistic, timely, and comprehensive approach has shaken confidence in the markets” (www.ntvmsnbc.com, December 1).

    In response, several press reports said that Turkey was close to sealing an agreement, even citing the total amount of IMF assistance. The Under-Secretariat for the Treasury issued a statement on December 5, however, asking people to trust only the information that came from official channels about “the content, timing, format, duration, and amount of the accord being discussed with the IMF” (www.cnnturk.com, December 5).

    The same day, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan told journalists that most of the remaining disagreements had been overcome and if the talks with the IMF continued at the same pace, the parties might reach an agreement by the end of the year. In response to mounting criticism, Erdogan said, “Some groups want an accord soon. It is easy for a bachelor to divorce a wife. They never negotiated with the IMF. We are driving a tough bargain with the IMF. We are telling the IMF not to put us in a situation [that would] shut down businesses” (www.ntvmsnbc.com, December 5).

    Minister of the Economy Mehmet Simsek said that Turkey-IMF talks had reached an advanced stage, yet Turkey would not formally apply to the IMF before concluding the discussions about the terms. He did not indicate whether the agreement would be precautionary—which is preferred by the Turkish government because it would give Turkey more flexibility about whether to use the funds—or a regular stand-by agreement, which would allow direct access yet impose more stringent rules on the government. Simsek said that the program should serve Turkey’s best interests, contributing to the solution of structural economic problems. He emphasized that “what is important for us here is for the deal with the IMF to increase confidence in these hard times while offering a chance to find foreign currency liquidity whenever it is needed” (Today’s Zaman, December 6).

    The government’s resistance to pressure and its hard bargaining with the IMF are driven mainly by two domestic political concerns.

    First, since coming to power in 2002 the government has made ending the IMF tutelage over the Turkish economy one of its primary goals. Having insisted that Turkey would not need another stand-by agreement with the IMF, the government is reluctant, for fear of harming its political reputation, to give in to the IMF’s demands (EDM, November 17). Since IMF stand-by arrangements usually impose a heavy burden on various social sectors, democratic governments are averse to structural adjustment programs. Given the approaching municipal elections, the AKP quite understandably is working to obtain an agreement with a minimum number of strings attached to government spending, in order to reduce the negative effects on society and preserve electoral support (EDM, December 3).

    This is where business circles are right to ask the government to sign the stand-by agreement to maintain macroeconomic stability and boost confidence in the markets. They also hope that in this way the government could be subjected to budgetary discipline and held back from excessive election spending. Dogan-Yalcindag is therefore seeking to convince the government that asking for the IMF’s support should not be seen as a sign of weakness (www.worldbulletin.net, October 17; Referans, November 11).

    Second, the AKP government demonstrates a certain degree of self-confidence that it can tackle the global crisis on its own. It views outside help as a last resort, accepting foreign assistance at a minimum level and only as part of its own program. Erdogan has claimed that several mini-projects initiated by the government were part of its economic package to deal with the crisis. Such projects include provision of interest-free loans to small and medium-sized enterprises, encouraging Turkish citizens to return their overseas investments to Turkey, and postponing tax payments (Radikal, December 5). Through these projects, the government is working to alleviate problems in sectors likely to be hit by the crisis, so that massive unemployment can be avoided.

    Commenting on a working meeting he held on December 7 with five ministers responsible for the economy, Erdogan claimed that Turkey would come out of the crisis as the least affected country. If all economic players acted in a spirit of solidarity, he said, they could turn the crisis into an opportunity for Turkey (Radikal, December 8).

    Although the government’s reluctance about the IMF deal and its optimism about Turkey’s potential to overcome the crisis might make sense in terms of boosting confidence in the economy, many analysts have grown extremely skeptical of Turkey’s prospects for escaping the crisis. Responding to Erdogan, a senior columnist, Osman Ulagay, maintained that “since the global crisis was not being taken seriously and it could not be managed correctly, production is falling, domestic and external markets are shrinking, liquidity problems cannot be overcome, and many firms have been pushed to the brink of closure.” Ulagay criticized the government’s horse-trading with the IMF and argued that by the time an agreement was reached, the horse might well be dead (Milliyet, December 7).

    The Erdogan government, rather than tying its hands with tighter fiscal rules set by a hasty IMF program, is seeking to obtain a better arrangement through a well-negotiated agreement and to use an IMF program as a tool to support its own priorities. It remains to be seen whether it will be able to have its cake and eat it too, when Turkish-IMF talks resume after the religious holidays.

    https://jamestown.org/program/the-turkey-imf-stand-by-accord-a-never-ending-symphony/
  • TURKEY’S FALTERING REFORM DRIVE

    TURKEY’S FALTERING REFORM DRIVE

     

    Erdogan Striking Nationalist Tones

    By Daniel Steinvorth in Istanbul

    Amid corruption scandals and stagnating reform, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, praised in Europe as a modernizer, is seeking refuge in nationalist rhetoric, adopting a tougher stance on the Kurds and moving closer to the country’s military leaders.

    The public prosecutor in Adana, a city in southern Turkey, has clear ideas on how the state ought to treat teenagers who protest by throwing stones. In his view, they should be arrested and locked away, preferably for life.

    Last week the prosecutor demanded up to 58 years in prison for six young Kurds between the ages of 13 and 16. During a demonstration in October, the students threw stones at police officers, shouted illegal slogans and unfurled posters touting the banned Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK).

     

    REUTERS

    Turkey’s Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan, seen here chairing the annual meeting of the High Military Council in Ankara on December 2,

    And because such teenagers, in his view, had to be the “children of terrorists,” the provincial governor recommended punishing the families and cancelling their claims for pension and social benefits.For months, trouble has been brewing once again in Turkey’s Kurdish regions, and both sides are reacting in the customary way. Adolescents incited by the PKK are setting car tires on fire and committing acts of violence. In response, the military has brought in tanks and the courts are threatening the demonstrators with increasingly grotesque punishments.

    Turkey, which is seeking entry to the European Union, is having trouble getting its most pressing problem under control. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who only six years ago was still making cocky promises to put an end to the frustrating, drawn-out conflict, and who in 2005 was his country’s first prime minister to speak out about the Kurdish conflict, is as helpless today as his predecessor was.

    Long praised in the West as a peacemaker and reformer, a man who has made great strides in bringing his country closer to Europe, Erdogan is now revealing reactionary tendencies.

    He has recently stopped calling for “cultural rights” for minorities, and is ignoring the human rights abuses being committed by Turkish police. Instead, he now prefers the language of the generals and nationalists. Turkey, Erdogan said excitedly in a recent speech to a Kurdish audience, is “one nation, one flag, one country.” He added: “whoever doesn’t like it can leave.”

    When Dengir Mir Mehmet Firat, the Kurdish-born deputy chairman of Erdogan’s conservative Islamic party, the AKP, resigned from his position, the premier replaced him with a hardliner who prefers military force over dialogue when it comes to the Kurdish question.

    Rapprochement With Military Leaders?

    What is happening with Erdogan? Has the ambitious modernizer had a change of heart? Has he lost his desire to drive his country toward the West? Or has the refined Islamist sought an alliance with the generals after all, after his party barely managed to escape a ban sought by the country’s military leaders this summer?

    Much points to a pact between the very different partners. Erdogan has been all too willing to support a campaign by military officers to curtail freedom of the press and opinion. In a dispute between the new Chief of the Turkish General Staff, Ilker Basbug, and Taraf, a small daily newspaper, the increasingly autocratic Erdogan threw his support behind the commander.

    Taraf, currently Turkey’s most courageous newspaper, had published documents suggesting that the general staff had learned in advance of an attack by the PKK on a military outpost near the Iraqi border. Seventeen soldiers were killed there in the Oct. 4 attack, and it has been suggested that they may have been sacrificed in an effort to spark public outrage.

    Anyone who publishes such reports, General Basbug said irately, is “partly responsible for the bloodshed.” He threatened to shut down the newspaper. “Be careful,” Erdogan said in a warning to the journalists, noting that the “public peace” is a greater good than the freedom of the press. In November, the prime minister himself took action against the press, ordering his press office to cancel the accreditation of seven journalists working for the Dogan media conglomerate.

    Hard Line On Press

    Erdogan had already recommended in September that the newspapers and television channels owned by Aydin Dogan, including such mass-circulation newspapers as Hürriyet, Milliyet and Posta, should be boycotted. By that point the premier and his adversary were already embroiled in a war of words. The powerful media czar had published detailed stories on the AKP’s possible involvement in a scandal over political contributions in faraway Germany.

    A Frankfurt court had convicted members of Deniz Feneri, a religious charity, of embezzling donations from Germans of Turkish descent worth €18 million ($23 million). The money, according to the prosecution, ended up in the “AKP environment.” The extent of Erdogan’s involvement in the case remains unclear, but his party’s reputation is tarnished. Ironically, it was the AKP that has consistently prided itself, as an Islamist party, in being free of corruption and of having distanced itself from the sleaze of former administrations.

    Erdogan, increasingly irritable and thin-skinned, appears to be running out of luck. Even the economy, previously the greatest plus in the AKP government’s six-year tenure, is slowing down. For weeks, cabinet ministers and even President Abdullah Gül had led the world to believe that Turkey would remain largely untouched by the global financial crisis. No one should be alarmed, they said, because the country had gone through its own severe crisis in 2001 and, after that, had taken decisive steps to prevent it from happening again.

    Economic Slowdown Could Hurt Prospects

    But since then Ankara has entered into surprise negotiations with the International Monetary Fund for billions of euros in new loans. Hundreds of thousands of job are in jeopardy, experts warn. Once economic growth declines, the government can expect to lose some of its support next year. Pollsters predict that the AKP will get only 34 percent of the vote in local elections in March, compared to 47 percent in the 2007 parliamentary election.

    “They are being exposed in the current crisis, the so-called reformers,” says Cengiz Aktar, a political scientist and well-known Erdogan critic, who accuses the government of incompetence and mediocrity. “In reality, the groundwork for most of the economic reforms was already laid before the AKP came into power.” And political reforms, says Aktar, were only implemented between 2002 and 2004 — in other words, until Turkey was granted candidate status for EU membership.

    Since then, the only attempts at reform have favored devout wearers of the headscarf. This, says Aktar, is why he is not surprised by Erdogan’s growing emphasis on nationalism and Islam. Instead, Aktar characterizes the changes taking place in Turkey as a “restoration” and, therefore, as a “normalization of Turkish conditions.” There have always been marriages of convenience between the mosque and the barracks in Turkey. This, says Aktar, is why it is all the more important that Europe does not abandon the country now.

    Aktar believes that unless Brussels applies pressure on Turkey to continue with reforms, Erdogan’s chauvinistic tendencies will only increase. And then, he warns, “we will soon be dealing with a Turkish Bonaparte.”

    Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan

    URL:

    • https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/turkey-s-faltering-reform-drive-erdogan-striking-nationalist-tones-a-595430.html

     

    __._,_.___

  • Iraq Turkmen Participated in Turkic Forum in United Kingdom

    Iraq Turkmen Participated in Turkic Forum in United Kingdom

    Iraq Turkmen Participated in Turkic Forum in United Kingdom

    By Mofak Salman Kerkuklu

    On the 6th of December, the Turkmens of Iraq have participated in the Turkic forum in United Kingdom that was held at the Azerbaijani House, London, United Kingdom.

    The event was commenced with an introduction, networking and refreshments of Turkish food and Turkish cuisine and then the opening speech was started by Dr. Ali Tekin Atalar the Chairman of Azerbaijan House in UK by welcoming the Turkish participants from different countries to the Azerbaijan House and congratulating all the participant for their dedication and enthusiasm that have shown by making the effort to attend this most important meeting.

    After that, Dr. Ali Atalar started by given a brief an introduction about the Azerbaijan House in the UK. The Azerbaijani centre was officially opened its doors on the 14th of November with the aim of severing the Azerbaijani community that are living in UK. The Azerbaijani House has been established by the initiative of individual intellectuals, professionals and student living in UK. The organisation and Turkic Forum are strictly non political non profit making organisation and aiming to serve as a community centre, promoting culture activities and friendship between Azerbaijanis and host community.

    Azerbaijan Hose aims to become a registered charity at the earliest time possible. Dr. Ali Atalar also kindly stated looking forward to the support of Azerbaijani members and friends towards achieving this goal. Moreover, he revealed that Azeri people feel privileged by being able to tackle the initiative and establish this centre which can be considered as a first permanent home that has been established by a Turkic community in the UK.

    He sincerely hoped that this will motivate Azeri’s friends and brothers from the Turkic communities to establish similar centres. If more cultural centres are established by the Turkic community it would lead without doubt to a stronger community link and as a result of this a better service could be provided to our community. In addition to, in recent years huge numbers of Turkic speaking people getting together in London  have been organizing cultural events and looking for  opportunities to meet and interact with each other and members to enhance the Turkic cultural from different groups.

    Furthermore he stated that he had many wonderful groups of people, Turkmens from Kerkuk, Tatars from Kazan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmen from Turkmenistan, Uzbek, Bulgarian Turks, Kazakhs, Uigurs and many more. All groups are very enthusiastic and anxious to meet regularly, support each other and express their culture. Finally he has expressed his gratitude and thanks to Mr Şener Sağlam, the President of the Federation of Turkish Associations UK. Who is one of the most active members in organizing this event in London, being one of the most diverse and multicultural cities in the world which is home to a huge variety of ethnic communities. Within this hustle and bustle these communities attempt to represent their culture and traditions and act as a platform to lobby for their respective countries of origin while trying to overcome many difficulties and problems this great city brings.

    Turkish Cypriot and Azerbaijani communities have identified needs amongst the various Turkic communities for raising cultural awareness and cultivating friendship and solidarity between different Turkic groups living in Britain. Our aim is to build a strong community in the UK by working on specific projects such as creating media organisations, opening cultural centres and  libraries, organising various events, meetings and forums so that common cultural traditions and languages can be shared and celebrated.

    It is a fact that a strong and organised community can contribute far more to society in Britain and as a result gain more support from local authorities and government. It would therefore make sense to unite our strength and abilities, to share our experiences and knowledge, to work together on various opportunities and thus obtain more successful results.

    When we take into account that there are many other Turkic communities like Kazakhs, Uzbeks, Turkmens from Turkmeneli, Turkmen from Turkmenistan, Kyrgyz but a few, we can identify a huge potential. If we can succeed in bringing together all these related groups into one big and powerful Turkic family then whenever necessary we can move and act together as one and be far more effective in achieving our aims within the UK.

    It is for this reason that we have come together to organize the “Cultural Forum of Turkic Communities in Britain” as the first step. We wish to meet and share ideas so as to find ways to direct our activities and that will lead us to become one of the most influential communities in Britain. Moreover, Mr Levent Hassan highly contributed in the translation into English language and the discussion that was held during the event in order to facilitate the understanding the meaning of the discussion to participatents who did not speak the Turkish language.

    Moreover, Mr Altan Ataturk, the representative of the Republic of South Azerbaijan gave an introduction Azeri population and he had revealed the suffering and oppression of the Azeri on the hand of the Iranian government and also explained the culture and language similarity between the Azeri population in the Republic of South Azerbaijan and other Turkic Estates.

    The meeting also has covered the discussion of the election of management committee, representative’s committees, Auit committee and Nevruz celebration committee. The Turkic Forum event was extremely fruitful and beneficial for all the participants and considered as a stepping stone for bring all Turkic spoken people together and working as team under one umbrella. The goal and the objective of the Turkic forum can be fully utilized for lobbying for the cultural and political right for Turkic people whom are residents in the United Kingdom.

    The established Turkic forum would greatly enhance the integration of the Turkish into the British society especially by contributing with a rich Turkish culture from various Turkic countries.

     

    Mofak Salman Kerkuklu

    ireland