sign in sign up
<<
Home , Bulgarian Turks, Turkish people

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of for The Immıgrants From

THE IMAGE OF TURKEY FOR THE TURKISH IMMIGRANTS FROM BULGARIA

Seda ÇAKAR MENGÜ∗

Abstract The Turkish minorities who came to Turkey after the immigration in 1989 form the corpus of this study. In the same way, their impressions about Turkey, whether they suffered alienation after that immigration and probable reasons for it are the main issues in this study. The questionnaire formulated accordingly is intended to find out the problems that these immigrants encountered in Bulgaria along with their reasons for immigration, as well as social, economic and political situations that they have experienced in Turkey. The aim of this study is also to analyze whether there was a change in the impressions of the immigrants about Turkey before and during the immigration and, if there were, any probable causes of it. By the same token, the feelings of Bulgarian about belonging to the Turkish land, society and as well as their level of consciousness with regard to national identity as a community suffered from otherness and assimilation has been studied. The respective questionnaire consisting of 42 items were implemented to 70 of the members of Balkan Migrants Society, who immigrated to Turkey between 1989 and 1992. The questionnaires were evaluated with SPSS program. According to the findings, the immigrants feel themselves belonging to the Turkish society with respect to history, culture and even language; nevertheless, consider themselves different from social point of view. The government has to develop strategies to improve the consciousness of , to make people sensitive about the problems of a society and also support all these with public relations activities. Key words: Immigration, image, national identity.

Öz: Türkiye’nin Bulgaristan Göçmenlerindeki İmajı Türk azınlıklardan 1989 göçünden sonra Türkiye’ye gelenlerin Türkiye ile ilgili nasıl bir izlenime sahip olduklarının araştırılması, göçten sonra ikinci bir yabancılaşma yaşayıp yaşamadıkları ve buna neden olan etkenler bu çalışmanın amacını oluşturmaktadır. Bu amaca yönelik oluşturulan sormaca, Türk göçmenlerin Bulgaristan’da karşılaştıkları sorunları ve göç nedenlerini, Türkiye’de karşılaştıkları sosyal, ekonomik ve politik durumları ve tüm bunların etkisine bağlı olarak göç öncesi ve sonrası Tür‐ kiye’ye yönelik bir izlenim değişikliğinin olup olmadığını; varsa bunun nedenlerini sorgulamayı amaç‐ lamıştır. Bu bağlamda, Bulgaristan Türkleri’nin Türk toprağına ve Türk toplumuna, ulusa yönelik aidiyetlik duyguları, ulus‐kimlik bilinçlerinin düzeyi ve bunu etkileyen faktörler incelenmiştir. 42 sorudan oluşan anket, Bulgaristan Göçmenleri Derneği’nin 1989‐1992 yılları arasında Türkiye’ye göç etmiş olan 72 üyesine uygulanmıştır. Anket sonuçları SPSS programı ile değerlendirilmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre, göçmenler tarih, kültür ve hatta dil açısından kendilerini Türk toplumuna ait hissetmekte, ancak sosyal açıdan kendilerini farklı olarak görmektedirler. Bu farklılıklar bakış açıları, yaşam felsefeleri ve yaşam tarzları bağlamında farkedilmektedir. Genel olarak hükümet kurumlarına karşı güvensizlik duymaktadırlar. Burada medyanın oynadığı rol ve devletin kamusal iletişim strateji‐

∗Doç.Dr. Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi, [email protected].

103

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

leri önemlidir. Devletin yurttaşlık bilincini geliştirici ve yurttaşları toplumun sorunlarına duyarlı duruma getirmesi konusunda stratejiler geliştirmesi ve bunu halkla ilişkiler çalışmalarıyla destekleme‐ si gerekmektedir. Anahtar sözcükler: Göç, imge, ulusal kimlik ……………………….

INTRODUCTION Beginning form the 1877‐1878 Ottoman‐ Turkey. Moreover, with respect to the results Russian War, Bulgaria tried to make the of all these, the aim of this study is also to Turkish minorities give up their real analyze whether there was a change in the identities and adopt Bulgarian identities impressions of the immigrants about Turkey especially during and after the before and during the immigration and, if nationalization process by exposing them to there were, probable reasons for it. social, economic, political and psychological pressures. Although the ratio of the Turkish The attempts of the Bulgarian Government minorities in Bulgarian population was not to eliminate the customs, traditions, beliefs, high, the real number was not declared and language, educational opportunities etc. of they were considered to be nonexistent. the Turkish minorities were a wanton attack Therefore, being treated as others in their against Turkish . People can homeland, the Turkish minorities faced the experience welfare only when certain rights danger of losing their all their contact with and freedoms are granted. National Turkey. “Such a situation usually emerges sovereignty and the power of the state can due to the fact that cultures are defined in be achieved with such a system that is mutual relation with neighboring cultures provided for the citizens. The question at considered to be radically different as well as this point is that against all oppressions that so called otherness leads to an exclusion deprive them of their freedom of existence, which quickly turns to an as how the Turks living there with communal a logical result” (Bayart, 1997: 47). spirit could express and realize themselves when they came to Turkey and what kind of Regarding themselves as the descendants of an impression was created in their minds. the Ottoman State and adopting attitudes Whether or not they have also exercised the suitable to their real identities, the Turkish common feelings and expectations in Turkey minorities who came to Turkey after the that they used to experience in Bulgaria is immigration in 1989 are the corpus of this also questioned. By the same token, the study. In the same way, their impressions feelings of about belonging about Turkey, whether they suffered to the Turkish land, society and nation as alienation after that immigration and well as their level of consciousness with probable reasons of it are the main issues in regard to national identity as a community this study. The questionnaire formulated suffered from otherness and assimilation has accordingly is intended to find out the been studied. Meanwhile, the sense of problems that these immigrants encountered belonging of the Bulgarian Turks to Turkey in Bulgaria along with their reasons for along with the Turkish society, the level of immigration, as well as social, economic and nation‐state consciousness and the factors political situations that they experienced in affecting it have been analyzed. A

104

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

questionnaire consisting of 42 items have between the idea that public media should been implemented to 72 members of the function as a public sphere and the fact of Bulgarian Immigrants Society, who private ownership” (Golding and Murdoch, immigrated to Turkey between 1989 and 2002: 77). Therefore, information flow should 1992. The results have been evaluated with be maintained. An increase in entropy the SPSS program. denotes a regression in development (Mattelart and Mattelart, 2003: 53‐54). Here, the role the media play and the public Although the activities pertaining to creating communication strategies of the state are public opinion continue, the public sphere important. In fact, the public opinion limits loses its meaning. In this sense, public and directs the actions of individuals. Hence, relations may contribute to the re‐creation of “the institutions and the techniques the public sphere away from the commercial influencing public opinion have concerns. According to Touraine, when the importance…the source of the values that citizens of a country regard the public public relations depends on are generally the problems alien to their interests, they do not traditions and customs. Although public have a reason to deal with those problems; opinion has a certain effect on law, it usually therefore, they easily accept the partial remains behind the changes in law” relations by passively conceding to (Bottomore, 1970: 261). In the same way, the oppression. The factors causing the mainstream media in Turkey has a immigrants to experience alienation usually noticeable domination. “The mass media appear in social, economic and political continuously increases the amount of areas. Besides, these issues are also indicated information that individuals receive about as the general problems of the society. the happenings in society. However, their Exposing the reasons for social and political ability to transform this information to alienation, the due improvements should be action is harshly prevented” (Sennet, 1996: introduced (determining the problems 352). encountered while using some public services, such as health and education as According to Murdoch and Golding, in most well increasing the interest political general sense, citizenship is the formation of participation) and these activities should not the conditions that make the individuals in only be announced to the public correctly all levels become full members of a society. and continuously but also supported by The purpose of the communication systems public relations activities. Thus, the is to enable individuals to be aware of their perceptions and views of the immigrants rights and responsibilities as citizens. In the towards Turkey would be improved same way, individuals should have the regarding the social life and political rational and critical discussion arena for participation in addition to their historic and information, participation in political cultural allegiance. decisions and personal choices. However, as a result of the economic and technological Bulgarian Turks developments, individuals have arisen with After the Ottoman‐Russian War, the Turks their identities as consumers rather than that used to be the Ottoman subjects before citizens. “The theorists of democracy have suddenly became Bulgarian vassals. observed a fundamental contradiction Consequently, the Turkish communities

105

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

began to live under Bulgarian administration schools were united with Bulgarian schools and obey the imposed rules as a minority. In and practically no Turkish educational the following period, the efforts of the institutions could continue their existence Turkish minority to keep their national anymore. Likewise, all courses started to be identity under a foreign administration, the given in Bulgarian. They were just the initial policies of Bulgarian administration against steps of the assimilation policy. Turks and migrations to took place. In the 1920s, Bulgarian Turks underwent the Communist Bulgarian administrators process of being a conscious and organized continued the policy of the previous national minority. “Education has a vital governments to force the Turks to emigrate. importance for a minority to keep their There happened to be two major migrations identity alive. Bulgarian Turks literally between 1950 and 1951 and between 1969‐ hugged the education in Turkish and 1978. As a result of those migrations 286.000 Bulgarian government monitored it closely” people immigrated to Turkey…In 1960 (Şimşir, 1986: 11). Nevertheless, the military Bulgarian citizens who were not native coup in Bulgaria in 1934 also brought about were obliged to take Bulgarian a ten‐year oppression policy over the Turks. names (Şimşir, 1986: 12).

Turkish schools were closed and many of Later, from 1984 to 1985 the Turks were them were converted to Bulgarian schools. forced to change their names by force of Turkish students had to be contended with arms. It is an interesting fact that giving the courses teaching Koran in mosques…In Bulgarian names to the Turkish communities the schools that were not closed yet; some took place during the period that the preparations were made to introduce the relations between Turkey and Bulgaria was Arabic alphabet again. The purpose behind supposed to be the best on presidential level. that attempt was to break the ties between Although Turkey did not recognize those the Turkish and the new names and criticized that practice, it . Turkish teachers were was not enough to prevent the bloodshed investigated and even imprisoned as against the Turks. As for the economic status Kemalists. Furthermore, local Turkish of the Turkish minorities in Bulgaria; newspaper offices publishing issues with between 1879 and 1949, 80% of them were new Turkish (Latin) alphabet were closed; farmers while the ration the Turks who however, those their newspapers were industrialists, merchants and with Arabic alphabet were allowed for a businessmen was only 1%. It can be seen that while. Turkish intellectuals were beaten and the majority of the Turks were in agricultural even killed (Şimşir, 1986: 12). sector. The Turks were reduced to second‐ class citizenship with the collectivization of During those years of oppressions, lands between 1949 and1956. They were also migrations from Bulgaria to Turkey began to required to work more than the others; take place. There were attempts to weaken however, with the consciousness of being a the Turkish minority by forcing them to minority, they were trying to keep their emigrate. In the same way, the Turkish traditional lifestyle. On other words, they schools in the socialist systems were were trying to keep their own beliefs, nationalized in 1944. Consequently, Turkish customs, traditions and cultures alive with a

106

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

communal consciousness. “The distinctive the Turks, as a result of their devotion to characteristic of ‘Gemeinschaft’ is that the their consciousness of national identity and relations among individuals should depend national origin, the Turks seem to have put on an emotional basis. Relations should be up determined opposition. The number of established naturally and continued; they the Turks, who were beaten, tortured, should not be maintained to attain a imprisoned, exiled and raped in Bulgaria particular objective… In ‘Gesselschaft’ until the beginning of March 1985 was, relations are established with rationalistic estimated around 800 to 2500. According to reasons. Here the human actions are Şimşir (1986), the thoughts of the Bulgarian purposeful and objective” (Van Derloo and Turks about Turkey and the Reijen, 2003: 18). Having and cultivating a considerably helped them adapt themselves land is essential for a community. While to their situations in Bulgaria. ‘Gemeinschaft’ is associated with tradition, ‘Gesselschaft’ is related to modernity. Turkish government allowed the Bulgarian Turks to immigrate to Turkey in 1985 and Nevertheless, the melting and merging required the Bulgarian Government to do so. policy of the regime was consolidated as it Nevertheless, the only step that Turkey took was expanded even to the remotest villages. was to open the border instead of pursuing a Consequently, the unique social life of the sound migration policy. Approximately Turks almost disappeared. Their rights 300.000 Turks immigrated to Turkey until pertaining to election and decision‐making the end of August 1989. After 1989; however, were taken away and their needs were a reverse‐migration took place and nearly neglected. 130.000 Turks went back to Bulgaria. Those people noticed that their houses were ruined That situation was obviously intended to and they had to leave their properties, suppress the desires of the Turks to families and the places where they were emigrate. Those who wanted to migrate living once as minorities. After Jivkof were considered to be the enemies of administration, some initiatives were administration of Bulgarian Public exercised between and for Sovereignty. The Turkish media reflected a taking the names of the minorities back; repercussion of the negative conditions that however, the issue about rights of the Turks those people were experiencing in Bulgaria. to use their language on the radio, television However, ineffectiveness of the Turkish and in education was not taken into media to be sensitive enough over this issue consideration (Şimşir, 1986). Thus, as the while the Turkish identity was gradually most important aspect to form national eliminated took the Turkish minorities into a identity, the use of the difficult situation and unavoidably makes could not be achieved. them experience a tow‐dimensional alienation. The problem of Bulgarian Turks Calling each other with real Turkish names should be considered within the context of in a community and speaking Turkish were the rights, authority and responsibilities of considered to be crimes. Circumcision, not only the Bulgarian but also the Turkish religious ceremonies, going to (to Government. In spite of the fact that perform the rites of pilgrimage), daily acts of Bulgarian government waived the rights of worship and funerals were discouraged and

107

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

even prevented. According to formal The Turks were not sent to military units, Bulgarian declarations there are no Turks in but employed in construction or some other that country and they have the right to take menial tasks. With respect to the assimilation Bulgarian names (Mandacı and Erdogan, of the Turks, , naming their 2001: 109). children and the traditions practiced in ceremonies were forbidden. In Similarly, in the field of education, it was addition, Turkish folk dances, songs and also stated that there was no place for ballads were prohibited; the Turks were Turkish schools in Bulgaria until 1999. In encouraged to learn the . 1991, some demonstrations were staged in Similarly, listening to the Turkish radio was order to prevent the education in Turkish at forbidden. Therefore, the aspects of Turkish the schools in Kırcaali and Razgard. national identity were gradually eliminated. “Political action is obviously a cultural one. “Changing names refers to leaving one’s Culture is a principle of uniqueness and language, religion, culture in addition to association; thus, it supports nationalism” relinquishing individual rights and (Bayart, 1997: 11). The attempt of the freedoms. Thus, it deprives them of the Bulgarian Government to rule out customs, rights and the aspects forming an traditions, beliefs, language and education of individual’s identity” (Bulgaristan’da Türk the Turkish minority was an attack against Varlığı, 1992: 17). Moreover, impossibility for . the Turks to work anywhere they wanted, but the factories and fields can be given as Consciousness of National Identity and another example for discriminatory Assimilation of the Bulgarian Turks attitudes. The right of education was granted The pressure over our kinsmen in Bulgaria only to the small group who joined the and the attempts to assimilate them are communist party. Besides, the Turkish mainly targeted on national identity. Before minorities could not work in the offices of prohibiting speaking Turkish, customs and ministers and the armed forces. “From a traditions were prevented. liberal democratic perspective, an individual has the right to be recognized as equal. Considering the prohibitions against attire, While acquiring that right, individuals will Turkish women were forced to wear jacket initially depend on human identity and the and trousers instead of wearing (traditional) power of being human” (Yıldırım, 2002). baggy trousers. Another issue was the Hence, the Turks felt the obligation to nationalization of the lands owned by the immigrate to Turkey in 1989 under such a Turks. The majority of the Turkish constraint. That situation was a return to population lives in the country and makes their real identity and culture. their living with tobacco and wheat Nationalization also means likeness in production. During the great migration culture. before 1989, this sector was affected negatively and the Turkish minority The process of nationalization includes the seriously suffered that (Kamil, 1989: 57). acquisition of national culture and achieving harmony with it. However, the The Turkish minorities were subjected to social reality that those who share a common culture form is a nation. Thus, discrimination in military service as well.

108

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

national culture is a harmonious whole of arranging this organization. This instrument a nation’s religion, ethics, reason, aesthetic, is the state and the types of state. Hence, language and economic life. In the same culture is ‘the state ideology’ (Lefebvre qtd. way, the source of national culture is the in Ergun, 2000: 126). Social and political people and national culture is the value identities are shaped by the state. In other system that people create (Türkdoğan, 1999: 117‐118). words, the state shapes, defines and limits the identities. According to Tonnies, while identity acquisition is strong in communities, it is It is valid particularly for national and ethnic rather weak in societies. This situation identities that are located in a different way explains how nation consciousness of than the borders, which are the less Bulgarian Turks was created before their peripheral areas of state…if they do not have immigration to Turkey. The main issue at a country; they are the politicized ethnic this point is to display the nation groups pursuing their goals related to consciousness of Bulgarian Turks and the autonomy and political independence. image of Turkey with regard to the cultural, Therefore, not considering how we consider economic and social conditions in Turkey in the ethnic or national groups without land, 1989. After the 1980s, atomization of Turkish every national identity includes unique and social structure as well as the emergence of firm opinions related to the fact that there is ethnic groups and sub‐cultures is regarded a strong link between a nation and land as corrosive factors for national identity. For (Donnan & Wilson, 2002: 116). the formation of a national state, all individuals in a society should consider When oppressed, people usually find solace themselves as the members of that state. in religious or secular rituals in order to Only then, responsibilities, rights and duties maintain their will to resist. Rituals bring can be realized with regard to national those who have authority and those who do problems. “Being a power in political and not together. Such relations make a notable economic areas and as a comparison contribution when a state tries to build a between cultures, identity shows nation from different cultures by means of equivalence with the process of a nation’s media and social sciences, education and displaying own power” (Ergun, 2000: 111). political socialization programs. Here the powerful part is the one who defines; the weak part is the one who is Despite everything, anthropologists have been trying to prove at least for ten years defined. Within the context of this definition, that people have to re‐consider the the actors of both parts internalize the roles relations among culture, identity and place attributed to them. The Turkish minorities in by integrating themselves with the Bulgaria were forced to assume the deficiencies, contradictions and paradoxes language, culture and history of the defining of wherever they are living in. Therefore, it part as the defined ones. is not proper to consider leaving one’s homeland and crossing the border as “In classed societies, culture is the culture of integration by leaving one’s roots’ organizing social structure. Organizing (Sorensen, 1997: 146) and a semi‐limited experience. Because the identity and social structure necessitates an instrument culture of individuals is just an occurrence

109

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

both in the new world they are entering others’ or in ‘ghettos’. Whatever their ethnic and also the one they have left. In addition identity, language, religion, gender is, all to identity and sense of community, arrangements should be worked out in order belonging is an infinite historical project to let each and even all Turkish and it should be studied accordingly (Do‐ speaking communities lead a humanly life. nan & Wilson, 2002: 205). The third problem is to protect and keep the

Ottoman‐Turkish cultural heritage alive. Belonging to a nation is the uniting Unfortunately, Ottoman‐Turkish works of consequence of the confidence in the art in the are destroyed and historic institutions of the state, the desire of sharing bridges; caravanserais, baths, mosques and without any conflicts and the consciousness fountains are not protected properly. The of expressing and realizing oneself in all fourth problem is the establishment of TV situations. and radio stations, Turkish teaching centers,

special museums, theatres, libraries, banks, After 1993, Bulgarian Turks began to be hospitals culture centers for the Turkish represented by The Rights and Freedoms minority, the number of whom has risen up Party in the Bulgarian Parliament and this to 12 million (Karayerli, p. 2). Consequently, party became the third political power with the migration of the Bulgarian Turks has 15 members of parliament. At present, there begun in order to escape from all these are 27 Turkish mayors and 653 village problems and live in the land that they headmen. The state controls the religious belong to. institutions and directs the religious affairs.

Bulgarian Turks became a considerable RESEARCH AND METHODOLOGY political power with 30 members of A questionnaire consisting of 42 items were parliament after the elections in 2001 (Kutlu, implemented with random sampling 2003:4). method through face‐to‐face interview

technique to 70 of the members of Balkan Very complicated ethnic, religious and Migrants Society, who immigrated to Turkey cultural structure in the Balkans and the between 1989 and 1992. The questionnaires multi‐lingual, multi‐cultural, multi‐religious were evaluated with SPSS program. aspects of peoples along with their belonging to different ethnicities makes the FINDINGS solution of the problems very difficult. As a 72 % of the participants live in Yeni Bosna, result of declining in working out 10% in Günesli. 64% of the subjects international treaties and giving the due emigrated from Bulgaria in 1989 and 30% of importance to the minorities in their them came to Turkey in 1992. 100% of the countries along with pursuing erroneous immigrants feel themselves belonging to the policies and failure in protecting their Turkish society culturally and historically. In cultural heritages problems cannot be the same way, 66% of the participants think solved. that they belong to the Turkish society

historically, while 34% of them consider Another problem in the Balkans is language as a uniting factor. 90% of the unwillingness in participating in political subjects stated that the most important prob‐ activities, social life and living like ‘the

110

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

lem that they had in Bulgaria was the change Even if they were exposed to persecution for of names. the use of Turkish, they criticize the educational system in Turkey. It appears While they were living in Bulgaria, 92% of quite obvious that not only the language, but the subjects managed to obtain knowledge also the broadness, quality and publicity of about the Turkish culture; however, 8% of education are considered to be important. them could not have that opportunity. 90% of the participants obtained knowledge As for the health care service in Turkey, 70 % about the Turkish history and culture from of the participants think that the health senior members in their families. 2% of them sector is a major problem. Similarly, 30 % of had that information from archives, books them believe that they cannot benefit from and the visitors from Turkey. health service sufficiently. They expressed that before the persecutions against them 66% of the immigrants think that the life began they did not have any health style in their quarters is suitable to the problems, the government provided all Turkish customs and traditions. On the other kinds of health facilities, each household was hand, for 32 % of them, there is a rather mo‐ provided with a doctor and they were given dern life style. regular checkups in Bulgaria. Therefore, the health problem they encountered in Turkey 76 % of the participants in this study prefer seriously disappointed them. Their low‐ to socialize with their neighbors. While 12% income level along with the inefficiency to of the participants neither know nor trust locate them after they immigrated to Turkey any of theirs neighbors, equally 12% of them disabled them to benefit from private health know most of their neighbors and rely on service. them. As the biggest minority from political point of view, the Turks were settled in the On the other hand, 16% of them did not north eastern and southwestern parts of have that problem. Bulgaria. Leading a communal life made has enabled the Turks to lead a rather According to a declaration of the homogeneous and solitary life as well as Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 258,000 of protect their ethnic consciousness (Özgür, Bulgarian Turks who were forced to 2002: 2). immigrate between 1989‐1990 were conferred the right of citizenship

between 1989‐2001 according to the Related to the educational institutions in Article 2510 of Residence Turkey, 50 % of the participants think that Regulations…Moreover, 20,139 of them the educational opportunities are limited were transferred to Turkish citizenship due to their level of income in the society. 24 (Göçmenlere Yardımcı Oluyoruz, 2004: 1). % of them consider the private education in Turkey as a negative factor. Likewise, 22 % Bureaucratic problems arising in of the participants think that they cannot get employment, acquiring property, settling quality education in Turkey. They state that down as well as education and health are the although Turkish was not used in education factors causing alienation of the immigrants. during the time they were in Bulgaria, the quality of education was much higher there.

111

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

70% of the participants expressed that they involved within the political sphere; there is had problems about settling down. For 44% an indirect effect of political power relations of them, it is employment and for 10%; on it. Power relations invest in body; they acquiring property and education. balance, train, torture and force it to execute the assigned tasks and display ceremonies” While 78% of them stated that they might (Rabinow qtd. in Donnan & Wilson, 2002: immigrate to another country if they had a 225). chance, 22% of the participants expressed that they would not leave Turkey. Even if the immigrants are an isolated and powerful community within themselves, 96 As a reason for immigrating to Turkey, 54% % of them voted in the elections in Turkey. of the participants indicated the obligation to Voting is the most important indicator of the escape from the persecutions in Bulgaria. On resolution in public sphere. Confirming the other hand, 32% stated that they felt decisions refers to self‐expression through themselves belonging to Turkey as the sharing. Thus, the concern of the immigrants descendant of the Ottoman State and 10% about voting denotes that they give wanted to live with their Turkish identities. importance to participation in politics. In the same way, it is also possible to infer that 74% of the participants feel that the Turkish they are in fact involved and interested in flag represents independence for them. For social issues. 24% of them, it is the representation of national unity; 2% think that it symbolizes All of the participants (100%) stated that liberty. they were exposed to prejudice against them right after they immigrated to Turkey. 76% of them think that the immigrants lead a united but isolated life from the rest of the The replies to the question about the society, which denotes that they meet their category they find the most suitable for economic and social requirements with the themselves are as follows: 54 % secular, 10 % help of the other immigrants. Thus, it seems modern, 6 % traditional and 4% conser‐ that the communal consciousness they vative. As seen, most of the immigrants exercised in Bulgaria still continues. 16% of regard themselves as secular and modern. the participants expressed that they were They consider the majority of the Turkish uninterested in the political and social society as conservative and traditionalist. activities in Turkey because they believed While most of the immigrants see that they could not make any changes about themselves as the descendants of the them. Only 8% of the participants monitor Ottoman State, they also indicate that they the social and political activities in Turkey are different from the Turkish society. They very closely and they also stated that they explain the reason why they are closer to the could express themselves. These ratios other immigrants as the conflict with their indicate that they are usually away from the social environment. Such conflicts usually problems in society. The most important arise from the prejudice of the local people reason for that they are distant from the against them as well as the psychological institutions in which the social and political state of the immigrants. Migration is an practices take place. “Body is directly important risk factor, which may produce

112

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

adverse effects on mental health. Therefore, identity is the flag. Similarly, for 82% of the immigrants or those who were forced to them, it is the language. Only for 4% of the immigrate form a serious risk group. There participants, this factor is religion. are many research studies on migration and mental health. According to those studies, it For the prevailing problems in Turkey, 58% has been determined that particularly some of the participants indicated the slums and abnormalities, emotional disturbances and 54% of them denoted the lack of a anxiety are more frequently observed in consciousness of history. As for the rest, immigrants with regard to the population in %46; degeneration in language, 44%; general. Going through orientation in a poverty, 22%; over consumption, 12%; society, having a new identity, in other diversification in education. While the ration words integration and assimilation is a hard of those who state that these factors and long‐term process (Özgür, 2002: 1). influence the nationalization process negatively is 50% those think just the 68% of the participants consider themselves opposite are 18%. In addition, 18% of the different from the Turkish society from participants assume that they produce no social point of view, whereas 38% of them do effect at all. Here the majority stated that not state such a difference. those factors produced unpleasant consequences, whereas a noticeably high The ratio of those who think that there are ratio of them thought that those factors insufficiencies in education, health, practically had no or a little influence. These employment, housing and participation in results might be considered as the political activities is 76%. More specifically; indications of unawareness or indifference. 10% of them think that there are problems in housing, for 8%, participation in political As for the problems they encountered after activities is insufficient and for 6%, there are the immigration to Turkey, 58% of the problems pertaining to employment. The participants stated the trouble they had for majority of the immigrants expressed that as equivalence formalities. In the same way, for the requisites of civil rights, the institutions 28%; the high fees for residence license, 6%; for education, health service and transfer of social rights from Bulgaria to employment are not efficient in Turkey. In Turkey and equally 4% for social security, fact, belonging to a nation necessitates that housing, employment and inability to get the state meet the requirements of the residence license for those who immigrated citizens the best way possible. Poverty, to Turkey illegally. As a result of the unemployment, slums or shantytowns are bureaucratic problems they encountered in the problems, which distort the Turkey, the immigrants became alienated consciousness national identity. form government institutions. During the interviews with them, it was noticed that According to 78% of the participants, the they usually try to solve the problems most important problem they encounter in among themselves by aiding each other. In Turkey is unemployment. It is economy for the quarters they live, the residents know 20% and national esteem of Turkey abroad each other very well and a foreigner is easily for 2%. Moreover, 94% of them assume that noticed. The problems they faced with when the most important factor for national they first came to Turkey and the inability to

113

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

have assistance from the institutions together with other immigrants and display individually brought them close to each a lifestyle rather close to the overall society, other. Although it is quite desirable with which have arisen from the fact that the respect to solidarity, their being away and persecutions before the immigration brought alienating themselves from the other them closer and also made them retire into segments of the society and thinking that themselves. they are unable to change the undesirable things they have to experience affect their Although 84% of the participants think that sense of belonging to a nation negatively. the problems in Turkey are common to the After all, what is important for them now is majority of society, 16% of them do not living in their homeland as well as exercise believe that. It is quite obvious that their own culture and use their own consciousness of citizenship necessitates language. diversity in the ways to express political, ethnic and religious ideas. Hence, a radical 86% of the participants had a conflict with solution to the national and ethical problem the people around them after they in Bulgaria involves the rights and freedoms immigrated to Turkey. In addition, 12% of of cultural communities in Bulgaria. them felt pessimism and hopelessness. Likewise, 10% of them experienced a sense 42% of the immigrants do not believe the of loneliness and lack of confidence. 8% of policy of the parties in Turkey. The ratio of the participants found solace in alcohol, those who partly believe their policy is 36%. drugs, smoking and gambling. It is only 20% for those who completely believe their policies. Even though the 42% of the participant trust the government participants partly trust the government institutions, 38% partly trust, 18% do not institutions, they do not count on the have confidence in them. It should be noted political parties. Similarly they do not find that the ratio of those who trust these the politicians reliable and sensitive enough. institutions and those who do not are almost equal. On the other hand, the problem that 92% of the participants indicated that the the immigrants suffered most was the medium of education should be a foreign conflict and disaccord with the people language other than Turkish in (Turkish) around them. As the major reason for that, schools while 6% of them stated that it they indicate the prejudice of the Turks should partly be used. Although they denote against the immigrants. This prejudice stems that the problem they suffered most in form their coming from a different cultural Bulgaria was the change of their names and structure, lifestyle, system and even a the prohibition against the use of Turkish, different psychological state. they want foreign languages to be taught at the schools in Turkey. Considering the fact While 62% of the immigrants believe the that language is one of the most significant existence of the sense of integration and factors for national consciousness, the unity in the Turkish society, 20% of them acceptance of such a practice includes the believe it partly and %18 do not think that it risk of alienation, misuse and corruption of a exists at all. They seem to find social unity language. Language, education and history credible; however, they also tend to live were instruments of state to legitimize its

114

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

governance in modern society. Nationalism gal immigrants back to Bulgaria. through mass education and language gave Expiration of their visas was shown as a rise to shared identities and a feeling of justification or rather a legal ground for belonging to the same community and that action (Mandacı & Erdoğan, 2001: 121). nation. Thus, instrumentalism assumes that nationalism leads to the existence of . Consequently, the immigrants wreaked Gellner, as the prophet of instrumentalism, under heavy economic conditions and emphasizes mostly the high culture during unemployment. “In the case of the the nation formation process. The high assimilation and mandatory emigration of culture is tied to the state. He formulates it the Turks between 1984 and 1989, no as state‐one culture. Gellner adds that every improvement was observed” (qtd. in Man‐ state is legitimized by its role as a protector dacı & Erdoğan, 2001: 111). Although the of the high culture (Ekiz, 2004: 2). Bulgarian Constitution prohibits the

establishment of other parties, the Turks It is an undeniable fact that the Turkish attempted to protect the rights of minorities language in the reality of Turkey will lead by forming the Rights and Freedoms Party. the people to better social interests. Thus, The activities of Turkish mass media have whatever their mother languages other than noticeably improved since 1989. The Turkish are, teaching Turkish to all newspaper called Yeni Işık supports the individuals without exception for having thesis about the membership of Bulgaria to more social interests emerges as a necessity. NATO and EU as well as maintaining good This issue appears as a national priority. It relations with Turkey. Turkey did not care has already been discussed that bilingualism the requirements of the Bulgarian Turks should be evaluated with regard to the along with educational, cultural and social function of social interests. It can be realized conditions that were imposed when they quite easily that such an evaluation has a were still in Bulgaria. Moreover, their sociological characteristic apart form the aptitudes, limits and potentials were not linguistic reality of language; in other words evaluated. Therefore, those who immigrated it is an evaluation the reason of which is to Turkey were unable to receive the sociological. welcome they had expected; they were

somehow left alone. Besides, they

encountered occupational, edu‐cational and DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION economic problems and they tried to cope Considering the Bulgarian Turks as ‘the with them individually. Inability of others’ took a different shape after the individuals to get into a real interaction with migration. The Turkish immigrants simply their social environment and experiencing experienced an alienation, whereas, this lack of communication is directly related to situation stemmed from the political and the existence of bureaucratic organizations. social attitude of Turkey. The relations of individuals with these

organizations are formal. Metaphorically Ironically, one of the most offensive attitudes towards the Bulgarian Turks speaking, Turkey took action by leaving the came from Turkey. Ankara (the door ajar depending on the migration government) decided to send 400,000 ille‐ agreements to those who wanted to

115

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

immigrate or were forced to immigrate. controlled and directed. This process should While the Turks were trying to survive in be controlled according to not only the Bulgaria, a negative one unfortunately requirements of the markets but also the replaced the positive image of Turkey in realization of human rights. As the their minds. repercussion of the destroying effect globalization in developing countries and According to Geray, it was thought that favoring individualism instead of socialism, scattering the majority of the immigrants in the process experienced after 1980s and later cities, towns and villages would be less in Turkey prevented the integration of the disadvantageous with regard to their immigrants with the society. Nevertheless, adaptation and assimilation to the society. they keep on their co‐operation and For the purpose of offering employment integration among themselves with opportunities to the immigrants and communal spirit. improving their work conditions, real and pecuniary aids were provided. Therefore, This study is intended to find out how the farmers were given credit for lands, seed and Bulgarian Turks who immigrated in 1989 equipment. In the same way, those who could express and realize themselves when were craftsmen were provided with credits they first came to Turkey, what kind of an from the funds apart from the estates impressions they gained accordingly and (Doğanay, n.d.: 6). whether they found the common feelings and expectations in Turkey as well after In addition to the conflicts with the local having been deprived of their freedom of people, inability to solve their housing and existence in Bulgaria and surviving with a employment problems somehow obliged communal spirit despite all persecutions. them to migrate again within Turkey. A new Hence, their sense of belonging to the approach particularly to the settling and Turkish land, society and society along with housing problems of the immigrants was their level of national identity and the factors observed starting from the 1980s. It was affecting it has been analyzed in this study. noticed that current regulations for settlement were far from meeting the The impression of Turkey for the immigrants requirements of the immigrants. Despite the can be summarized as follows: They positive consequences of globalization with consider themselves belonging to the regard to securing human rights, the Turkish society with respect to history, dimension of its deterioration particularly on culture and also language; however they social rights is really great. Without consider themselves different from social guaranteeing the social rights, it is point of view. These differences are impossible to enable everyone to benefit perceived within the context of their form human rights effectively and equally. perspective, philosophy of life and lifestyle. Therefore, plausible solutions are needed to Generally speaking they feel mistrust against get rid of the undesirable consequences of government institutions. However, they do globalization. The first condition for a not appear to be against neither privatization solution is the through analysis of the as one of the consequences of globalization current process. It is true that globalization is nor the activities of multinational companies an unstoppable process, whereas it can be in Turkey. The majority of them state that

116

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

they can partly exercise their cultural and Turkey more as well as to be more powerful religious activities freely. Furthermore, the and concerned in realization of social, participants in this study express that people political and all kinds of practices in Turkey are not sensitive enough to each other. as the community who experienced and Again, most of them consider acquiring the suffered the oppression of another country citizenship of a developed country. They for a long time. Bureaucratic problems also think that unemployment and economic arising in employment, acquiring property, troubles are the major problems of Turkey. It settling down as well as education and seems that they are generally happy about health are the factors causing alienation of living in Turkey, where they can speak their the immigrants. own language freely, they are not forced to assume different names and capitalist Thus, the perceptions and views of the systems and free enterprise provide immigrants towards Turkey would be opportunities for individuals to win. improved regarding the social life and political participation in addition to their Another important point here is that these historic and cultural allegiance. While the people feel themselves belonging to the culture of a country affects the public Turkish society historically and culturally. relations activities in that country, the public However, the difficulties they encounter due relations activities also affect the culture of to the social, economic and political that country. The policies towards the conditions have caused them to exercise immigrants are also the parts of culture alienation. This alienation brings about policies. In fact, the culture policies are negative consequences with respect to shaped and generalized with public relations national identity and consciousness. activities. Although the immigrants generally have allegiance and loyalty to the Turkish culture Culture policy is the creation of the as a result of their historic background or convenient conditions to enable people to past, inefficiency of daily social and political participate in the cultural life. The practices to meet their requirements causes measures taken to let each individual to put forth and improve his or her creativity, them to experience meaninglessness, the organizations established for these alienation from the problems and lead a purposes as well as the economic and rather secluded life together with other social facilities compose the culture immigrants. Furthermore, it is possible to policy…Maheu states that ‘one day in the infer that the Turkish society has created the future, people will understand that real sense of ‘we’ in these immigrants with its democratic policies depend on culture and values, traditions, culture and lifestyle. What they will also realize the superiority of is important is to spread this feeling to the culture in development’ (Topuz, 1998: 8‐ society in general. It can be achieved by 10). spreading the feelings of unity and Cultural democracy is needed for providing integration to the whole society. Alleviating opportunity for everyone In a society to the sufferings they had in Bulgaria has taken obtain culture and experience the freedom of some time. From now on, as the citizens of communication In order to realize this, Turkey, the immigrants are expected to get democratization of a society is necessary. involved in and monitor the realities of

117

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

According to Topuz, culture democracy is to public. Consequently, it gets more difficult enable people to participate in the creation for people to understand and fulfill the rules cultural products and also to benefit from all introduced by the administration. In fact, the those products. In this context, our degree of immigrants who can contribute to the vision defining our needs also indicates how free of the society they live in will not isolate we are. By assuming the conception of the themselves intellectually and physically social state, the government should from the rest of the society as long as their introduce the projects to obviate the citizenship consciousness improves. negativities of bureaucracy and also Therefore, their perspective related to generalize and develop these projects Turkey will positively change. through public communication strategies. The purpose of public relations is to prepare Culture shapes public relations and public the due interaction areas to meet the relations help change culture .By directing requirements. For the purpose of directing the public policy, public relations shapes the the masses by persuading them, the society. Public relations culturally expectations should be known and the strengthens present values or shapes the methods should be determined accordingly. new ones through persuasion instead of The expectations of human beings from the obligation. Culture is related to public life and the future form an important part of relations activities. Culture has direct and their ideology (Kongar, 2000: 369). indirect effects on the public relations practiceses. Culture is the ideas and modes The immigrants already feel themselves of thought that are made public to the self belonging to the Turkish society historically, and others through various forms of culturally and traditionally. Moreover, they externalization, including the mass media. follow the mass media regularly. Regulation This leads to social distribution of the ways of the social and political conditions of the in which the collective cultural inventory of immigrants and their defining their needs meanings and meaningful external forms are respectively and expressing themselves spread over a population and its social freely in the society that they feel themselves relationships.As a last word, the government belonged to will also improve their has to develop strategies to improve the citizenship consciousness. Inability to consciousness of citizenship, to make people criticize and express oneself as well as lack sensitive about the problems of a society, to of confidence and knowledge posit a serious reshape its image and also support all these burden between the administration and the with public relations activities.

118

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

REFERENCES Bayart, J. F. (1999). Kimlik Yanılsaması. M. Moralı (Translated by). İstanbul: Metis.

Bulgaristan’da Türk Varlığı. (1985) Ankara: Atatürk Kültür, Dil ve Tarih Yüksek Kurumu Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları.

Bottomore, T.B. (1970). Toplumbilim. U. Oskay (Translated by). İstanbul: Der.

Doğanay, F. (n.d.). Türkiye’ye Göçmen Olarak Gelenlerin Yerleşimi. September. 15, 2004, http://genet.sitemynet.com/tarih34.htm,

Donnan, H. & Wilson, T. M. (2002). Sınırlar. Z. Yas (Translated by). Ankara: Ütopya.

Ekiz, V. (2004). Turkish Nationalism: State vs. People. August 20, 2006 http://f27.parsimony.net/forum67368/messages/1279.htm.

Ergun, D. (2000). Kimlikler Kıskacında Ulusal Kişilik. Ankara: İmge.

Göçmenlere Yardımcı Oluyoruz. (2004). Türkiye İçişleri Bakanlığı, Eylül 6, 2004, http://rumeliturk.tripod.com/haber/kimlik.htm.

Golding, P. and Murdoch, G. (2002). Kültür, İletişim ve Ekonomi‐Politik. B. Kejanlıoğlu (Translated by). S. İrvan (Edited by). Ankara: Alp Yayınevi

Kamil, I. (1989). Bulgaristan’daki Türklerin Hakları. Ankara: Yüksek Öğretim Kurulu Matbaası.

Karayerli, M. (2004). Balkanlar’da Barış, İstikrar, Güvenlik ve Demokrasi. August 25, 2006, http://www.aygazete.com/yazarlar/?yazarid=22&yaziid=1033.

Kongar, E. (2002). Toplumsal Değişme Kuramları ve Türkiye Gerçeği. İstanbul: Remzi Kitapevi

Kutlu, A. (2003). Türk Topluluklar. Eylül 10, 2005, http://kutlualtay81.sitemynet.com/t_rk_topluluklar_.htm,

Manço, U. (2003). ’yı Korkutan Din: , August 23, 2004, http://www.turkstudent.net/art/3032.

Mandacı, N. & Erdoğan, B. (2001). Balkanlarda Azınlık Sorunu: Yunanistan, Arnavutluk, Make‐ donya ve Bulgaristan’daki Azınlıklara Bir Bakıs, SAEMK Stratejik Araştırmalar ve Etüdler Milli Komitesi Araştırma Projeleri Dizisi, 5, 109.

Mattelart, A. & Mattelart, M. (2003). İletişim Kuramları Tarihi. M. Zıllıoğlu (translated by). İstan‐ bul: İletişim Yayınları.

Özgür, H. (2002). Bulgaristan Göçmenlerinde Ruhsal Durum Değerlendirmesi. I.U. Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Psychiatrical Nursery, İstanbul: Unpublished Mas‐ ters Thesis.

119

İLETİŞİM FAKÜLTESİ DERGİSİ / The Image of Turkey for The Turkish Immıgrants From Bulgaria

Sennett, R. (1996). Kamusal İnsanın Çöküşü. S. Durak ve A. Yılmaz. (Translated by). Ayrıntı, İstan‐ bul.

Şimşir, B. (1986). Bulgaristan Türkleri. İstanbul: Bilgi.

Türkdoğan, O. (1999). Milli Kimliğin Yükselişi. İstanbul: Alfa.

Topuz, H. (1998). Dünyada ve Türkiye’de Kültür Politikaları., İstanbul: Adam Yayınları.

Uygun, O. (n.d.). Kuresellesme ve Degisen Egemenlik Anlayısının Sosyal Haklara Etkisi. August 31, 2006, www.anayasa.gov.tr/anyarg20/uygun.pdf

Van Derloo, H. & Van Reijen W. (2003). Modernleşmenin Paradoksları. K. Canatan (translated by). İstanbul: İnsan.

Yıldırım, H. (2002). Kimliğini Arayan Türk Devrimi. August 8, 2004 http://historicalsense.com/Archive/Turk_kim_3.htm

120