The shame
 
 
  |  
  |  
  |  
  |  
RSS
  |  
  |  
  |  
25 May 2013 Saturday
 
 
 
 
 
 
Columnists 23 August 2010, Monday 0 0 0 0
İHSAN DAĞI
i.dagi@todayszaman.com

The shame

Hrant Dink was murdered on Jan. 19, 2007. Three days after his death my second column article appeared in Today’s Zaman, titled “Hrant Dink: the victim of the nation state.” There I explained how the murder of Dink was linked to the idea of a homogenized nation-state erected by expelling or silencing ethnic, religious and ideological “others.”

The same understanding of the nation state that is incapable of apologizing for the wrongs it has committed, as put by Orhan Kemal Cengiz last week, continues to hurt Hrant Dink’s memory. In a defense submitted to the European Court of Human Rights, Dink was compared to a Nazi leader and it was argued that restrictions on his writings could not be regarded as a breach of freedom of expression, since they contain “hate speech.” As if this embarrassing comparison was not enough, the defense of Turkish government also implied that Dink’s murderers were justified: It was Dink who was to blame for his own murder because he was found guilty of insulting Turkishness by the Turkish judiciary.

This shameful “defense” was prepared and sent to the European court by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs without the knowledge of the foreign minister himself. Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu expressed his shock and sadness about the language used in the defense prepared in his own ministry, noting that he was not aware of such content. President Abdullah Gül received Dink’s family and tried to heal their renewed sorrow, while the Minister of Justice expressed his disapproval of the defense submitted to the European court.

All of this tells us something: Those who write the opinions of the government in ministry offices do not care what the government feels, thinks or does on this issue. The reason for such an attitude is simple: They regard themselves as above the government, representing something “deeper.”

Thus the explanation from the Foreign Ministry that came after all these statements was no different. It stood behind its shame, describing the defense as consisting of “merely legal and technical elements.”

This incident reveals that the Foreign Ministry bureaucracy is a state within a state independent of the people and their representative government. They feel accountable not to the people and government but to something “deeper.” What they are not aware of is that the circles they owe their allegiance to have lost their power vis-à-vis the people through the process of democratization. Once the “modernizers” of Turkey, diplomats have for some time been unable to read the transformation of modern Turkey and the spirit of the time that reigns in Turkey.

I think time has come to look into the structure of the Foreign Ministry and the mindset of its diplomats. It is an institution that has remained untouched by the process of democratization.

One should tell them that they are not above the people and their representative government. The defense sent to the European court reflects the logic of the “old state elite” whose time has passed. We are sick and tired of this understanding of the state, interest of the state and defense of the state.

Defending the so-called interests of the state, whatever they are and whoever defines them, at the expense of citizens’ rights is no longer acceptable. This has to be conveyed to the bureaucrats in the Foreign Ministry who seem to have missed the changes taking place in Turkey recently.

Yes, the government has done a great job in many foreign policy issues, and Foreign Minister Davutoğlu is among the most successful members of the cabinet. Yet the need to face the old habits and mindset in the Foreign Ministry is obvious. Diplomats are not untouchables. The government should not work with those who embarrass the nation.

The Turkish Foreign Ministry should withdraw this shameful “defense.” It is not a “defense” of Turkey but a text that leaves Turkey “defenseless” before the eyes of the world.

Columnists Previous articles of the columnist
12 May 2013
What can Turkey do about Syria?
5 May 2013
Imprisoned by the state
28 April 2013
The PKK's gain
21 April 2013
The state and society in post-Kemalist Turkey
14 April 2013
Is the PKK resisting Öcalan's directive?
7 April 2013
To build a ‘greater Turkey' with the Kurds
1 April 2013
Are Turkish people ready for Kurdish peace?
24 March 2013
Pax-Ottomana for the Kurds
17 March 2013
A state in the making: Kurdistan
10 March 2013
Who can survive without the state?
3 March 2013
An oriental way to solve the Kurdish problem
24 February 2013
Greatest obstacle for a Kurdish solution
17 February 2013
Who will topple Assad, and when?
10 February 2013
Is Turkey immune to international criticism?
3 February 2013
Hierarchy of nations: Turks and others
27 January 2013
Turkey's quest for a Eurasian Union
20 January 2013
Kurdish initiatives compared: any difference?
13 January 2013
Competing strategies in the Kurdish question
6 January 2013
Is a Kurdish solution in sight?
30 December 2012
Why Turkey's liberals criticize the AK Party
23 December 2012
Imagining an AK Party society
16 December 2012
Will the Arab Spring be hijacked?
9 December 2012
Pursuing Islamism with democracy
2 December 2012
TV soaps: People's choices vs. state's choice
25 November 2012
A ‘revisionist power' that needs NATO's protection!
18 November 2012
From Nasser to Erdoğan: unfulfilled promises
11 November 2012
Friends who don't care about human rights
4 November 2012
Turkey's Kurdish conflict: pathways to progress
28 October 2012
Kurdish question and Turkish opposition
21 October 2012
What's wrong with the zero problems policy?
14 October 2012
Why the AK Party does not need the EU
7 October 2012
Ready for a war, but who will be the warriors?
30 September 2012
Talking to the PKK
24 September 2012
The end of a myth
16 September 2012
The new ‘other': the Kurdish political opposition
9 September 2012
The changing identity of the AK Party
2 September 2012
Can Turkey pursue an imperial foreign policy?
26 August 2012
What is the PKK trying to do?
14 August 2012
Re-securitization of Turkish politics?
5 August 2012
The future of the Kurds: democracy or partition?
29 July 2012
Good for the Kurds, bad for the Turks?
22 July 2012
Emergence of the ‘new AK Party'
8 July 2012
Who can solve the Kurdish question?
1 July 2012
Egypt and Turkey, military and democracy
17 June 2012
Kurdish solution by offering gifts
10 June 2012
The Kurds of the AK Party
3 June 2012
What is wrong with the AK Party?
27 May 2012
Turkish foreign policy: Time for a re-evaluation
20 May 2012
Changing positions in Turkish politics
13 May 2012
Public perception of coup trials
6 May 2012
Post-Kemalist tutelage
29 April 2012
What do the Kurds want?
22 April 2012
Can Barzani be a mediator?
15 April 2012
The end of military tutelage in Turkey?
8 April 2012
The fall of the generals
1 April 2012
Islam and the nuclear issue
25 March 2012
Resolving or managing the Kurdish question?
11 March 2012
Annexing Cyprus
4 March 2012
Is Kemalism an alternative to the AK Party?
26 February 2012
The paradox of the Assad regime
19 February 2012
Lessons for the AK Party and MİT
12 February 2012
Whose war is it anyway?
5 February 2012
AK Party’s new mission
29 January 2012
Europe: a Christian continent?
22 January 2012
Murder as a collective crime
15 January 2012
Racism, immigrants and the state in Germany
8 January 2012
General Başbuğ: Who was he?
1 January 2012
A difficult period for the AK Party
25 December 2011
The French disconnection
18 December 2011
A war America lost
11 December 2011
Reforming Europe, abandoning Turkey
4 December 2011
Why Turkey is for ‘regime change’ in Syria
27 November 2011
Dersim massacre as a civilizing project
20 November 2011
Abandoning the old paradigm in the Cyprus dispute
13 November 2011
Was Atatürk a dictator? Ask him
30 October 2011
Are the Islamists ready to govern?
23 October 2011
A burden for all Kurds
16 October 2011
New constitution: Is it possible?
2 October 2011
A post-Kemalist constitution for Turkey
25 September 2011
Are we ever closer to a Kurdish solution amid violence?
18 September 2011
Secularism for Arabs and Turks
11 September 2011
Israel’s missed opportunity
5 September 2011
Who will decide the future of Turkish-Israeli relations?
28 August 2011
Military as a national security problem
21 August 2011
Towards a Kurdish solution without the PKK
14 August 2011
The AK Party, 10 years later
7 August 2011
Has the military lost?
17 July 2011
What's next for Kurdish politics?
3 July 2011
What is the opposition doing?
26 June 2011
Judicial sabotage
19 June 2011
Why do people vote for the AK Party?
12 June 2011
Turkey the day after elections
5 June 2011
Why is The Economist afraid of democracy?
29 May 2011
Will the military come to rescue the secularists?
22 May 2011
Politics of elections, politics of change
15 May 2011
What people think of bin Laden and Assad
8 May 2011
Sacrificing the ‘Kurdish solution’ to the elections
1 May 2011
A constitution without an official ideology
25 April 2011
Towards normalization of Turkish politics?
18 April 2011
Central bank governor and the poverty of White Turks
...