HISTORY IS WRITTEN BY DIFFERENCES; DIFFERENCES MAKE HISTORY
28.12.2007

 The Bulgarian Turks are often mentioned as part of brainstorming efforts to solve certain problems. Like the Basque model mentioned previously, the Bulgarian Turks could be considered a model, but this does require a close analysis of the Turks in Bulgaria. Otherwise, we would be imprisoned into a discussion devoid of information and based entirely on feelings.
Even though the phrase “Bulgarian Turks” refers to the Turks in Bulgaria, this does not quite correspond with the claimed thesis, because the Bulgarian Turks are not directly connected to Bulgarian culture, anthropology and sociology. There is nothing that separates the Bulgarian Turks from Turks in other Balkan countries or Anatolia. It is for this reason that the “Bulgarian” prefix is added simply to describe their country of residence and citizenship. In fact, the phrase “Turks” or “the Turks in Bulgaria” is perhaps more fitting. But this piece will use “Bulgarian Turks”, as it has become the widespread term.


The Bulgarian Turks are essentially a branch of the Turks that migrated from Anatolia and the Caspian-Black Sea regions to settle throughout the Balkan peninsula. They began to settle in the Balkans around 300 AD, giving them a history of nearly 1700 years in the region.


The entire Balkan peninsula was under Ottoman control from the Mohaç Victory in 1526 until the middle of the 19th century.

The Bulgarian Turks are descended from the Oğuz and Kıpçak. As one of Bulgaria’s settled peoples, they mostly came to this important part of the Empire from Anatolia, during the initial Ottoman conquest. This is apart from the Kıpçak, who travelled here from the north and the Black Sea. There were also a series of migrations from the Crimea.


They are largely unrelated to the Proto-Bulgarians, who have Turkish roots and settled here in the 6th century. This group were slowly assimilated into the Slav population during the 10th century, and later adopted Orthodoxy to complete their transformation.


There are around 800,000 Turks living in Bulgaria today, but this is in fact its lowest level for many centuries, as it comes after the commotion, wars and massacres that followed the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.


Principally they live in Kırcaali, Razgrad, Shumnu, Eski Cuma, Silistre, Burgaz, Ruschuk and Sofia. There is no difference in accent among the Bulgarian Turks; the two groups that live furthest from each other would have little trouble understanding one another. Likewise, Bulgarian Turks speak the same language as Turks living across the Balkan peninsula, Anatolia and many other Turkish communities.


They have produced a number of artists, politicians, intellectuals and sportsmen and women, some of which are recognised in Turkey.


One example would be Hulusi Kentmen and Şoray Uzun, both involved in cinema and the theatre. Other names include such poets and authors as Ahmet Şerif, Embiya Ulusoy, Besim Rasim Abdullah, Mehmet Türker, Muharrem Tahsin, Sabri Tata , Ömer Osman Erendoruk and İsmail Çavuş.


The educationalist İsmail Hakkı Tonguç, musician and mystic İsmail Fenni Ertuğrul, jazz performers Ömer Fahreddin Türkkan and Yıldız İbrahimova, artist Emiya Çavuş, religious man Basri Pehlivan, commander Ömer Fahreddin Türkkan and the sportsmen Ahmet Kara, Gürhan Gürsoy, Hakkı Yeten, Koca Yusuf, Kurtdereli Mehmet Pehlivan, Taner Sağır, Hergeleci İbrahim, Osman Durali, Halil Mutlu, Kel Aliço and Naim Süleymanoğlu are just a few leading figures from the Turkish community in Bulgaria.


In the same way, the poet and philosopher Rıza Tevfik Bölükbaşı, female pilot Nezihe Viranyalı and politicians Ahmet Fikri Tüzer, Ali Dinçer, Ayhan Mustafov Haşimov, Filiz Hüsmenova and Ahmet Doğan are some of the more noticeable names. As can be seen, the Bulgarian Turks have contributed intellectuals speaking in their mother tongues in just about every field, from literature to politics, and art and music to philosophy.


Bulgarian Turks have a long and painful history. Following the 1877-78 Ottoman-Russian war, which came as a result of ethnic conflict and rising nationalist sentiment in the 19th century, the Berlin agreement led to the establishment of the Bulgarian principality. This principality annexed eastern Rumelia in 1885, and became an independent kingdom in 1908. These were bloody times for the Bulgarian Turks.


The Turks constituted the majority of Bulgaria’s population at the start of the 19th century, living alongside other communities under the just, tolerant Ottoman administration. But their population fell from 1.1 million to 681,000, as more than a million Turks had to leave the region following the war with Russia. Many were killed in genocide. This tragic process led to the Turks rapidly losing their wealth; they had once held 70 percent of all farmland in the region.


In this period the Turks were massacred in groups and forced to migrate. 200,000 were forced to leave in 1883 alone, followed by 75,000 between 1886 and 1890, and 70,000 Turks between 1893 and 1902. But there was a reason why, despite the violence, the effort to remove all Turks from the region was unsuccessful: in 1875, there were 2,700 Turkish primary schools, 40 secondary schools and 150 madrasahs. This meant that the Turks had a firm national consciousness and social awareness, and an education system that fed it. This meant that, in spite of all the violence, there were still 1,284 primary schools and 16 secondary schools by 1894.


Many Turkish rights were usurped in Bulgaria during the 20th century. Schools were centralised, cultural rights were curbed, the local mufti was pressurised. The financial resources of Turkish schools were cut, and yet the Turks were still able to publish around 80 newspapers and magazines.


As Meşküre Yılmaz Börklü pointed out, 200,000 civilian Turks died during the 1912-1913 Balkan war, and 440,000 Turks were forced to migrate to Anatolia. Following the war, those Turks who remained had their names changed, forced to adopt Christianity, their mosques demolished and were forced to dress like Bulgarians. Certain measures were employed to push the Turks into poverty and reduce their numbers. As a result of these campaigns, 200,000 more Turks left Bulgaria for Anatolia. The migration continued every year in differing numbers.


The Turks who stayed were reduced to second class citizens. But still, after 1950, the number of Turks in Bulgaria numbered more than a million, dropping below only during the forced migrations of the 1950s and 1960s. But even in the 1980s, 40 percent of Bulgaria’s population was Turkish, and 1984 saw the start of invigorated military campaign to change names and religion. Gravestones were modified, and 500,000 Turks had their names changed in the last two months of 1984 alone. In the first three months of 1985, 2,500 Turks were killed for refusing to change their names. In 1989, 313,000 Turks were forced to leave for Turkey. There were concentration camps for Turks in Bulgaria at the time.


In 1989, the Jivkov regime was toppled, and the improvement in conditions gained momentum with a new constitution in 1991. Despite a few early difficulties, Turks reopened their schools, and entered politics with the Rights and Freedoms Movement, the Democratic Development Movement, the Democratic Justice Party and the Turkish Democratic Party. The Rights and Freedoms Movement had 23 MPs elected into the 400-seat parliament in the 1990 elections, and are partners in today’s coalition government with three ministries. They are also in the European Parliament, where they have four representatives. Today, there are eight Turkish daily newspapers in Bulgaria.


A 1992 census found there were around a million Turks living in the country, but this figure fell to 800,000 owing to harsh economic conditions. But when other relatives are added to the mix, it is thought the true figure is much higher.


The Bulgarian Turks and their most effective political institution, the Rights and Freedoms Movement, have certain characteristics:


Never did the Turks in Bulgaria – in spite of all the pressure, violence and genocide attempts – resort to arms. The Turks never established a terrorist organisation in Bulgaria, and always defended their rights by legal means. Nor did the cameras snap any pictures of Bulgarian Turks complaining about their poverty.


No-one armed the Bulgarian Turks. They never were a pawn or puppet either. They laid no mines, nor did they smuggle. Never did they serve those who invaded their country, nor did they harm their country. They did not form tribes to spill blood, invade villages and kill people.


Nor did the Bulgarian Turks burn schools and kill doctors only to complain later about a lack of schools and doctors. They did not burn factories, nor did they harbour those who did. They had a relatively low crime rate too, and had no concept of killing for tradition. Quite naturally, they were not associated with snatching or any other violent act.


Feudalism never existed among the Bulgarian Turks; in fact, they lived urban lives alongside their cultural heritage. They had absolutely no role in incidents of molestation involving tourists.


Bulgarian and global television has never carried stories of Bulgarian Turks stoning to death a bear cub that had gone for a refreshing drink from the river. Nor were there pictures of angry Bulgarian Turks, surprised to see a lake that freezes every year covered in ice yet again, trying to smash the ice in vain.


Agency reports have not carried stories of Bulgarian Turks pushing aside children in an attempt to claim an additional free watermelon from a distributing lorry. But there could have been photographs of a Turk slicing his own watermelon and sharing it with the children.


Instead of all this, the world listened to Yıldız İbrahiova, read Muharrem Tahsin and watched Naim Süleymanoğlu.

From the day it was founded, the Rights and Freedoms Movement kept itself at equal distance “from all Bulgaria and all the parts that constitute Bulgaria”. It does its politics for all of the country, and attempt to embrace all parts and layers, which is why the party is against any kind of segregation of ancestry, religion, language, race or cult, and has members from many other ethnic identities too. The Rights and Freedoms Movement never directly or indirectly supported terrorism either.

As the Rights and Freedoms Movement advanced in the knowledge that it is a party of Bulgaria, it always respected Bulgaria’s values and will continue to do so.


It is for this reason that in certain political discussions the Rights and Freedoms Movement and Bulgarian Turks should be taken not just as a model of civilisation, city culture and the concept of society, but as a model of national awareness and intellectual accumulation too.

Source: Diplomatic Observer