Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05ISTANBUL1579
2005-09-15 09:46:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Consulate Istanbul
Cable title:  

INTROSPECTION AND SCUFFLES MARK 50TH ANNIVERSARY

Tags:  PGOV PHUM PREL TU 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 ISTANBUL 001579 

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SE

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/13/2015
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PREL TU
SUBJECT: INTROSPECTION AND SCUFFLES MARK 50TH ANNIVERSARY
OF MODERN ISTANBUL'S BLACKEST DAYS

Classified By: Consul General Deborah K. Jones for reasons 1.4 (b) and
(d).

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 ISTANBUL 001579

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SE

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/13/2015
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PREL TU
SUBJECT: INTROSPECTION AND SCUFFLES MARK 50TH ANNIVERSARY
OF MODERN ISTANBUL'S BLACKEST DAYS

Classified By: Consul General Deborah K. Jones for reasons 1.4 (b) and
(d).


1. (SBU) Summary: In contrast to its indifferent approach
to earlier anniversaries, Istanbul marked the 50th
anniversary of the infamous 1955 riots that sounded the death
knell for its once vibrant Greek Orthodox community with
exhibits, panels, and a flurry of media attention. Interest
focused particularly on a photo exhibit and accompanying book
produced by the independent, Istanbul-based History
Foundation (HF),based on materials collected by the chief
military judge investigating the incident. Most public and
media reaction has been introspective, seeking to understand
how and why the riots occurred, and trying to draw linkages
to current political and social conditions. On two
occasions, ugly incidents spurred by Turkish nationalist
elements marred anniversary events, but overall public
consideration of the 1955 events was respectful, scholarly
and mature. Commenting on those who attacked his
Foundation's photo exhibit, HF president Orhan Silier argued
that Turkey's progress over the last half century is
registered by the fact that in place of 100,000 raging
demonstrators, there were only 25 fringe extremists. End
summary.

Background
--------------


2. (U) The 1955 Istanbul riots followed an announcement that
a bomb had exploded at the house where Ataturk was born in
Thessaloniki, Greece. Within hours groups had gathered in
Istanbul's Taksim Square and soon began to break the windows
of non-Muslim shops in the adjacent pedestrian zone, Istiklal
Caddesi, and other near-by neighborhoods. Window-breaking
escalated into rioting, pillaging and looting as the night
progressed, with houses, shops, churches and schools
affiliated with minority - primarily Greek, but including
Armenian and Jewish - communities being totally destroyed.


3. (U) An estimated one hundred thousand people
participated in the riots. Official tallies record
destruction of 4,214 houses, 1,004 workplaces, 73 churches, 1
synagogue, 2 monasteries, 26 schools and 5,317 other
establishments (including factories, hotels, pubs, etc.)

Estimates of injured ranged from 300-600, while the Turkish
press reported that there were between 11 and 15 fatalities
(Turkish authorities never officially corroborated these
figures). Diplomats at the time estimated damage at
approximately 54 million US dollars, but only 29 million
dollars in compensation was eventually paid out. The
government initially placed the blame on "communists" and
other "provocateurs," and more than 5,000 people were
detained in the days following the events. Subsequently
scholars have argued that the riots were not a spontaneous
show of emotion, but a premeditated action organized by the
Democratic Party (DP) government in conjunction with security
forces and a student group called "Cyprus is Turkish" (CTA).

Hot Off the Presses
--------------


4. (SBU) Dr. Dilek Guven, in a book released in conjunction
with the 50th anniversary of the September 6-7 events, points
to DP involvement in the planning of the events, and
implicates the British as well, arguing that they sought to
encourage ethnic conflict in order to facilitate their Cyprus
policy at the time. In a September 9 meeting, Dr. Guven told
us that she had initiated the project several years ago as
she felt the theme had been addressed by scholars in other
countries, including Greece, but not adequately in Turkey
itself.


5. (SBU) Guven noted that several years ago in Istanbul,
she'd discovered the History Foundation's extensive archive
of photos and materials donated by Military Judge ADM Fahri
Coker, who'd served as the Chief Judge at the Beyoglu Region
Martial Law Court during the investigation and prosecution
that followed the riots. Concerned that justice had not been
done, he carefully preserved his investigative materials, and
later turned them over to the History Foundation, but asked
that they not be made public until after his death. (Note:
He died in 2001. End note.)


6. (C) Publication of Guven's book was delayed by funding
problems, which she now regards as a blessing in disguise, as
they enabled its appearance to coincide with the anniversary.
She told us she initially anticipated a negative reaction,
but has been pleased by the interest and support she has
received. She attributes this to two things: first, her
conclusion is that the 1955 events were not perpetrated
because Turks are barbarians, but because the Democratic
Party was consciously engaged in state-building and the
process of "Turkification" in all aspects of social life
(here Guven underscored that by explaining the events, she
was not attempting to excuse them); and second, her
implication of the British in some way makes her story more
palatable for Turkish readers as it was not exclusively the
Turks' fault.


7. (C) In her numerous press appearances, including a
number of call-in shows, Guven said most of her interlocutors
have been supportive and simply curious about the historical
facts. Those more critical have insisted she was diverting
attention from how tolerant the Ottoman Empire had been or
argued that Turkey was not unique in this experience; where,
they asked her, were the photo exhibits of the Turks
massacred in Cyprus? Overall, though, the criticism has been
less than anticipated.

The Riots in Photos
--------------


8. (SBU) In addition to publishing Guven's book, the
History Foundation -- in cooperation with the Karsi Art
Gallery, the Helsinki Citizens Committee and the Helsinki
Human Settlements Association -- used Coker's archive to
organize a photo exhibit to mark the anniversary of the 1955
events. Following Coker's 2001 death, the Foundation
discussed the possibility of holding an exhibit, but decided
the "political and technical conditions" were not right. In
light of the approaching 50th anniversary of the events, the
Foundation's board revisited the idea last spring, and
decided it was time to go forward. They especially relished
the symbolic value of holding the exhibit on the same street
where much of the violence had taken place.

Performance Art
--------------


9. (SBU) While most viewers passed through the exhibit
without incident, taking in the drama that befell Istanbul 50
years ago, two groups of protesters did mar the exhibit's
opening day on September 6. Most dramatically, a group of 10
individuals - including a 65-year-old woman - entered the
gallery and after unfurling a flag and shouting slogans,
ripped several photos from the wall and threw eggs at others.
(Note: In a comment on the irony of protesters attempting
to destroy photographs of riots that were themselves an orgy
of destruction, organizers left the broken eggshells on the
ground where they fell. End note.)


10. (C) Organizers had requested police support in advance,
following nationalist protests about their plans, but
complained that police support was inadequate. While present
in sufficient numbers, the police lacked training in dealing
with such groups and later wanted to play down the incident,
and "hush up the problem," claimed gallery volunteer Denizhan
Ozer. Gallery staff insisted on pursuing the case to show
that Turkey is "a real democracy," he said, adding, "this is
our country, too, and we have to fight for our ideas." Media
representatives were swarming the exhibit on September 7
while consulate officers visited, and the police presence had
clearly been reinforced.


11. (C) Dilek Guven's reaction to those who defaced the
exhibit was dismissive. "We expected them," she said, adding
that they were the same individuals who had interrupted a
presentation made by Murat Belge in Istanbul last year on
human rights. The individuals had originally been described
as ultra-nationalist "ulkucus" in the press, but even the
local leadership of the "Ulku Ocaklari" (Idealist Clubs)
denounced their action publicly on September 7. Silier
himself took a phlegmatic view of the incident, seeing
evidence of Turkey's progress towards greater tolerance in
the difference in scale between the 1955 and 2005 events.

Who's Punching Whom?
--------------


12. (U) Similar fisticuffs marred a September 12 panel on
the 1955 riots at Istanbul's Bilgi University. When a member
of the audience criticized members of the panel for
suggesting government involvement in planning the events, he
was attacked by a fellow member of the audience and struck in
the head. Police assisted the injured man out of the hall
and initially left his attacker in place (they reportedly
came back for him later). Panelists countered opponents to
their views stating that while Turks living in other
countries may be facing difficulties, "we have to clean our
hands first in order to have the right to criticize others."
They outlined Turkey's explosive political and social
conditions at the time of the riots and agreed there was
ample reason to believe the Democratic Party government was
involved in their planning, but suggested things simply
evolved out of the party's control. As for the real motive
behind the incidents, several claimed the events reflected
Turkey's minority policy, which was to "get rid of them" by
making life harder. Professor Ayhan Aktar cited figures from
the State Statistics Institute showing that in 1906, 20
percent of the population was non-Muslim, but that by the
late 1950's that figure was just 2.5 percent.


13. (C) Comment: Freedom of expression is not always
Turkey's strongest suit, but the 50th anniversary of the
events of September 6-7, 1955 demonstrated that citizens can
engage in public debate about "sensitive" historical events,
even painful ones, especially when there is credible archival
information and documentation to bolster the debate. There
is no denying what happened in September, 1955, and most
Turks consider it a shameful episode in their history, but
the question of "how" and "why" it happened has lingered.
The level of public discourse in response to those questions
during the past week was a welcome change from the usual dose
of defensiveness and obstreperousness encountered when Turks
contemplate historical events that reflect poorly on the
nation. Indeed, some columnists drew parallels between 1955
and today, warning against the dangers of harnessing the
hatred of the masses.


14. (C) Turks tend to cling to a national myth that their
country is, and has always been, a model of religious
tolerance. Coming to grips with events such as those of
September 1955 is a significant step that hopefully will lead
not only to greater historical awareness but also to
addressing the way in which lingering vestiges of such
ultra-nationalist attitudes have influenced the Turkish
state's approach toward its minority communities. End
comment.
JONES