HRANT DINK: DISCUSSION WITH USCIRF ON RELIGIOUS

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ISTANBUL 000066

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SE

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/29/2017
TAGS: PHUM PGOV TU
SUBJECT: HRANT DINK: DISCUSSION WITH USCIRF ON RELIGIOUS
FREEDOM IN TURKEY

REF: A. ISTANBUL 0044

B. 06 ISTANBUL 2104

C. 06 ANKARA 6529

D. ISTANBUL 0061

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


1. (C) The tragic murder of Armenian Turkish human rights
advocate Hrant Dink on January 19 was a tremendous loss for
Turkey (ref A). Embassy and Consulate staff had frequent
contact with Dink over the years, most recently on November
14, 2006 when he met with the United States Commission on
International Religious Freedom in Istanbul (ref B). The
following excerpts are taken from his responses to the
Commissioners' questions. The last statement in particular
resonates given the circumstances associated with his
assassination: "Historically, negative moments are not based
on religion but rather nationalism."

-------------- --------------
On the Status of Religious Freedom and Minorities in Turkey
-------------- --------------


2. (C) "On the surface there is religious freedom --
churches, schools and ability to worship are unrestricted;
but this type of freedom is misleading. It is like a bird
which in theory is free to fly, except that it has broken
wings."


3. (C) "I am slightly against the idea of considering
minority communities as religious minorities. Armenians have
been living in this land for 4000 years; now, unfortunately,
they have been 'downsized' to a religious community -- this
is not acceptable. Turkey is secular and doesn't consider
its own Turkish majority a religious community but considers
minority groups as a religious minority; this creates
problems. Since the beginning of the Republic, Turkey has
never considered minorities as its own citizens, despite the
Lausanne Treaty and Constitutional protections of equality of
citizens. Sixty thousand Armenians remain as second class
citizens. The State has always approached them as a security
threat but numbers are so small today that they are no longer
considered a threat and can be viewed as antiquity. Turkey
is trying to capitalize on this. Even today the community is
not provided with real rights."

--------------
On the new Foundations Law and EU Accession
--------------


4. (C) "There has been some discussion about property being
returned (to minority foundations) by the State (ref C). The
Opposition has equated this with a return to (the Treaty of)
Sevres. The State broke the wings of our birds by taking
away our properties, which we depended on for income.
Minority groups are treated as foreigners in the new law.
The problem in Turkey is not the quality of legislation but
rather, the manner in which it is enforced. The EU accession
process is based on fear, not willingness, which explains why
it is going so slowly."

-------------- --------------
On Islamic Extremism, Islam-oriented Democracy and Kemalism
-------------- --------------


5. (C) "Extremism of any kind can be controlled by the 'deep
state.' There is a very big difference between the Turkey of
30 years ago and now. Thirty years ago, (former PM) Erbakan
was the main actor who portrayed Christianity as an enemy and
Westerners as non-believers but today we have a party with
roots in Islam that has strengthened ties with the West. At
the same time, some extremists do exist but have only a small
role."


6. (C) "We have witnessed throughout history that secularism
has used religion to its own benefit. The rise of
Islam-oriented freedom/democracy is an opportunity for
religious minorities. Real secularism in Turkey could be
achieved through the various religions exercising their
freedoms. We are moving towards real secularism through
democratization. Kemalists are still afraid. Turkey could
be a good model for neighbors."


7. (C) When asked which political party in Turkey embodied
"true secularism," Dink responded, "AKP." When asked if he
was afraid, as a religious minority member, of the rising
power of an Islam-oriented party, he responded, "No."


ISTANBUL 00000066 002 OF 002



8. (C) When asked what comfort he had that givig up
Kemalism wouldn't lead to Sharia Law, Dink eplied, "I don't
believe it will lead to Sharia Lw, but rather (it will lead
to) democracy." Askd why he believed this, Dink responded,
"Kemaliss are not democratic. I was tried by a Kemalistgovernment for stating
that I was Armenian. I hav never had
such an experience with Islamic leaderhip."


9. (C) When asked why he didn't think poitical Islam would
lead to Sharia Law in Turkey s it had in other parts of the
world, Dink answeed, "The Western world is just starting to
undertand multi-cultural coexistence. It is a new
devlopment in the West that different cultures co-exit. It
started in the U.S. 80 years ago and in te EU 40 years ago.
The Western world is challengd by this. I can honestly say
that as a Christin living in the Muslim world I am very luck
in coparison. Historically, negative moments are not bsed
on religion but rather nationalism."


10. (C) Comment: Underscoring the complexities and fludity
of Turkey's religious minorities' situation, we learned from
Armenian Patriarchate officialsthat both Dink and his wife
Rakel, who made an eoquent plea for reconciliation at the
commencemet of his funeral cortege (ref D),are
evangelica/protestant Christians -- not Armenian orthodox --
the Patriarchate funeral notwithstanding. Patriachate
officials attributed Rakel's eloquence to er experience as a
lay "house preacher," adding hat she has a large
congregation of female adhernts. End comment.
JONES