Rethinking Turkish-Balkan Relations

Yesterday afternoon, we held a very useful and important meeting where many topics were discussed. I have reviewed my speech to avoid repeating what was said. In my speech, I will try not to repeat what was previously stated and to express new ideas.

The development of Turkey's political, economic, and cultural relations with the Balkan countries is undoubtedly an important factor that will contribute to the establishment of an atmosphere of peace and understanding in the Balkans. Today, we are pleased to see that an atmosphere of peace and cooperation is taking root in the Balkans. However, research indicates that this atmosphere of peace and cooperation could be reversed by a small spark, and the unresolved problems in the Balkans could revive many deep-rooted disagreements.

Undoubtedly, the Turks lost the Balkans in a very unpleasant way. As emphasized by renowned contemporary historians Yılmaz Öztuna and İlber Ortaylı, the Balkans are a homeland for us Turks. Yılmaz Öztuna emphasized the importance of the Balkans for us by saying that the Balkans are our second homeland after Anatolia.

Unfortunately, after leaving our second homeland, we have only remembered the Balkans from time to time during events and the responsibilities that came with them. During periods of stability and peace, the Balkans have not received sufficient attention from the Turkish public and international relations experts.

I still remember what the Bulgarian diplomat and historian Nikolaj Todorov told me in early September 1985, before the UNESCO General Conference in Sofia, during a time of extreme tension in Turkish-Bulgarian relations: "The most important aspect of your relations with Europe is the Balkans. If you cannot develop your work on the Balkans, if you cannot demonstrate your political, economic, and cultural influence over the Balkans, your relations with Europe will weaken and you will face difficulties."

I agree with Todorov's view. I believe that Turkey's establishment of an effective network of relations with the Balkans is also very important for Turkey-European Union relations. Therefore, it is necessary to rethink Turkey's relations with the Balkans. As we saw in yesterday's meetings, the issues we are still discussing regarding the Balkans can raise certain sensitivities. Can we perhaps rise above these sensitivities and develop a new way of thinking?

First and foremost, we must resist the attempt to erase the Balkans, a region with a distinct geographical, historical, and cultural identity, by using the term "Southeast Europe." Because the Balkans, as homo-balkanicus, represent a distinct identity existing within Europe for centuries. We must strive to ensure that the Balkans are respected.

According to Western authors, the Balkans are described as "another Europe, both very close and very far away" or "an island in the middle of the European Union." While Europe tends to respect the distinct identity of the Balkans, the use of the term "Southeast Europe" by some countries in the region, aimed at currying favor with the European Union, is not met with enthusiasm by the EU. Furthermore, in newly published books, we see that European Balkan experts specifically emphasize the need for Balkan peoples to reconcile with their former Ottoman past.

We must love the Balkans. In order to ensure peace and stability in this region, and to prevent the resurgence of prejudice and animosity between people, we must put forward a series of proposals. Recognizing that the Balkans are the name of a shared civilization, we must strive to find common ground among Balkan countries and peoples. In this context, as an example, I would like to refer to a study we attempted to conduct in Yugoslavia in 1996, during my time as Head of Mission between 1994 and 1996, together with the renowned Yugoslav historian and Turkologist Dr. Dušanka Bojanić Lukac. In this study, we sought to uncover shared cultural values ​​and similarities between the Turkish and Serbian peoples.

Dr. Lukac has made interesting observations regarding the elements that have brought the two nations closer together as a result of centuries of shared life between Serbs and Turks. According to Lukac, there are many common elements in terms of material culture in the fields of agriculture, urban planning, architecture and fine arts, clothing, cuisine, and market life. Later, the relationships and factors influencing Turkish and Serbian cultures were investigated. Common points exist in folk literature, shared proverbs and idioms, shared story themes, folk beliefs, music, folk epics, the influence of the Turkish language on the Serbian language, the influence of the Serbian language on the Turkish language, and the perspectives of the two peoples on their spiritual value systems. When examining interpersonal relationships, it is seen that themes such as love, affection, marriage, family life, hospitality, respect for the right of sharing, neighborliness, fellow citizenship, camaraderie, guarantee, spiritual kinship through hair-cutting, blood brotherhood, religious brotherhood, and foster brotherhood are present in both cultures. The conclusion to be drawn from this is that the centuries-long coexistence of Turks and Serbs contains elements that have brought the two peoples closer together, and these elements have laid the foundation for very important relations between them. Based on this, it can be understood that establishing good relations between these two peoples may be easier than imagined. However, we must emphasize that, unfortunately, the Balkan peoples are either unaware of these shared values ​​or, for their own political purposes, do not want the truth to be revealed.

Supporting studies like the one above, which can bring to light our shared values ​​with the Balkan peoples, will help to mitigate, even if only slightly, the animosity, hostility, and disagreements that occasionally resurface in the Balkans.

We must not forget that alongside the elements that unite the Balkan peoples, there are also factors that divide them. In this context, we need to draw attention to the division and coldness created by religious differences in the Balkans. Is it possible to ensure that a shared Balkan identity transcends religious divisions? Is it possible to explain and gain acceptance for such an understanding among the Balkan peoples?

I believe this is a very difficult task. However, we know of a period in the Balkans where religious differences were tolerated under a strong state authority. Such a period is needed again today. Could the Balkans reach such a period within the framework of the European Union? And could historical problems be forgotten within this union? In other words, based on the shared civilizational values ​​of Balkan peoples with similar subcultural backgrounds, could it be possible to transform the Balkans into a model place for socio-economic cooperation in the 21st century with a new understanding? For this to happen, as Todorova also points out, Balkan politicians and intellectuals must first stop using Turkey as a scapegoat for the problems in their own countries.

Undoubtedly, we observe a partial reduction in the problems in the Balkans. At the beginning of the 21st century, the ideal of Balkan countries joining the European Union constitutes an effective mechanism for controlling their problems and hostilities, and the ethnic and religious conflicts stemming from their history. The history of the Balkan countries needs to be written realistically and professionally, free from the nationalist values ​​of the past, and the church needs to look more to the future than to the past. An approach that prioritizes efforts to establish peaceful and cooperative relations based on understanding in the relations between Balkan countries would be a very beneficial step for all Balkan countries.

In this context, I believe that establishing a university in Istanbul, with a particular focus on Balkan languages, history, and culture, would be a very appropriate initiative to foster academic and intellectual rapprochement among Balkan countries. This university, where Balkan youth and academics come together to research the region's history, languages, and cultures, discuss regional problems, and collaborate with other universities and intellectuals in the Balkan countries, would be an important initiative contributing to the beginning of a new era in the Balkans.

The new approach I mentioned above in the Balkans will help overcome culturally and historically rooted problems and strengthen peace and stability in the region. As a Balkan country, Turkey wishes to establish closer relations with the countries of the region. Removing the culturally and historically rooted obstacles that hinder this rapprochement from the perspective of Balkan countries could also positively influence the Balkan peoples' views of Turkey.

I believe that in order to address Turkish-Balkan relations in an unbiased manner and further develop them, the necessary importance should be given to Balkan studies in our country. The interest shown by Turkish intellectuals, international relations experts, and media members in the problems of this region will lead to the formation of a more informed public opinion and ensure that we do not forget a region in which we have lived for more than five centuries.

References

Dérens, J. A., & Geslin, L. (2007). Comprendre les Balkans: Histoire, sociétés, perspectives (p. 9). Paris: La Découverte.

Dérens, J. A. (2008). Balkans: La mosaïque brisée (p. 9). Paris: Éditions du Cygne.

Lukac, D. B. (n.d.). Preparatory paper for a planned work [Unpublished manuscript].

OBA, A. E. (2009). Is peace and stability in the Balkans a dream? In C. Sancaktar (Ed.), International Balkan Congress: Interaction among Balkan nations (pp. 123–129). Istanbul.

Öztuna, Y. (2006). Our loss of European Turkey: The loss of Rumelia (p. 10). Istanbul.

Todorov, N. (n.d.). La ville balkanique aux XVe–XIXe siècles: Développement socio-économique et démographique.

Todorova, M. (1997). Imagining the Balkans (p. 197). New York: Oxford University Press.