Nation-states that desire a pure and homogenous nation have historically engaged in policies of cleansing the national boundaries of the ‘others’ to whom the state may have granted citizenship to but whose loyalty would always be questioned.Things were no different in Turkey where the state has always displayed unwillingness to understand the richness of diverse ethnic and religious identities. Instead, their presence has been viewed as potential threat. Thus, the “others” have been excluded, intimidated and oppressed while the kin of the state have been mobilized against them as the 6-7 September, 1955 mob attacks against the Greek minority in Istanbul and Izmir remind us.
Hrant was a victim of a hysterical nationalism determined to cleanse the “national” space from the “others”. This murder occurred on the fertile ground of “rising” nationalism encouraged by various political, bureaucratic and civilian actors who oppose the EU, globalization, democratization and reform, and use people’s disappointment with the EU over Cyprus, Kurdish or Armenian issues as vehicle for a come-back.
After the murder of Dink we immediately started to speak of provocations. Let’s assume that Dink was murdered by some provocateurs plotting against Turkish democracy, stability and international standing as explained by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. But how did Dink, a patriotic Turkish citizen of Armenian origin, turn into a target for those provocateurs? Whoever is behind the attack and whatever their objectives are, the fact of the matter is that nationalist paranoia played a role in turning Dink into a target. It is not the hysteria of the mob in the streets alone but also of those who occupy higher echelons of power in Turkish establishments. Let’s remember last year when a group of academics organized a conference on the Armenian issue to discuss the matter with a non-conventional approach. The Minister of Justice Cicek accused them of stabbing the Turkish nation in the back. Just recently the Court of Appeals has approved the lower court’s verdict indicating Dink had insulted Turkishness, a crime punished by article 301 of the Turkish penal code.
The murder of Dink will be a turning point for rolling back the power, legitimacy and popularity of ultra nationalism in this country. A new wave of social determination to live with all ethnic, religious or cultural differences in unity will be demonstrated. I have a strong belief that this country has the tradition of living together despite its differences. This deep tradition has been torpedoed since the Union and Progress came to power in 1908, which gradually brought with it the idea of forming a national homeland populated by the Turks alone deporting the Greeks and Armenians out of Anatolia. It is time to go back to this old tradition transcending the premises of the old fashioned Turkish national state and embrace diversity, respect for difference and tolerance. It is time to rediscover the richness of diversity in this land and challenge coercive homogenizations of diversities. Surely this will require a greater democracy and un-installation of a state-centric political culture which prevails.
What can be done next? An arrest of the murderer is certainly welcome. But it is not enough. The Government should speed up the implementation of new political reforms sending a strong signal that such acts of violence would not prevent it from continuing reforms to further democratizing the regime. And the first thing to do is to remove article 301 from the penal code. Remove it now, otherwise any person who has been tried or will be tried of insulting Turkishness may become a target of such horrible acts.
Just three days ago I had written in this column: “it is better not to underestimate the power of anti-globalization forces in this country, and better not to fail in understanding their determination to go along with their cause at all costs”.
