Südosteuropa 61 (2013), H. 1, S. 1-24
YELIS EROLOVA
Labour Migrations of Bulgarian Turks to Turkey since 1990. A Case Study on Migrants from Svishtov, Bulgaria
Abstract. Most migrations from Bulgaria to Turkey during the last twenty years have been motivated by economic concerns, unlike previous migration flows caused by the policy of the socialist regime towards Turks and Muslims. This paper is based on ethnographic multi-sited research on migrants from the Bulgarian town of Svishtov who live and work in Istanbul. In the context of economic and co-ethnic migration studies, the paper focuses on the differences between the political and economic migrations. Furthermore, it explores the ways in which more recent migrations follow migration patterns applicable to both the Turkish community and to Bulgarian society more generally. It also seeks to deconstruct the idea of homogeneity between the migrants and the so-called “mother nation” through an analysis of ethnic and cultural (self-) concepts and stereotypes.
Yelis Erolova, PhD, is a research fellow at the Balkan Ethnology Department of the Institute of Ethnology and Folklore Studies with Ethnographic Museum at Bulgarian Academy of Science.
Introduction
This paper focuses on the contemporary migration of Turks from Bulgaria to Turkey over the last 20 years. Movement to Turkey is not a new process for Bulgarian citizens of Turkish origin, but unlike previous waves of migration, it is now driven by economic factors rather than political ones. This relatively recent wave of migration follows patterns that are specific to the Turkish com- munity, but which nonetheless fit the migration patterns of Bulgarian society more generally. The Turkish community in Bulgaria was particularly affected by migration flows during the 20th century, which offered different patterns of migration, adaptation and integration into Turkish society. Some of these mi- grants (mostly those who migrated prior to 1951) have been fully assimilated into the Turkish nation. However, others (mostly those who became migrants after 1978) have developed a mixed, or even contradictory, Bulgarian-Turkish identity centered around the notion of their Bulgarian homeland – where they were born – and an imagined perception of Turkey as their “ethnic homeland”. 2 Yelis Erolova
The economic migrants to Turkey originate and come from all regions of Bulgaria, especially from Northeastern and Southern Bulgaria. They have dif- ferent ethnic, social and professional characteristics, but, in general, it is mainly Bulgarian Turks who choose to go to work in Turkey. This paper is based on a study of a group of migrants from the Bulgarian town of Svishtov who live in the Istanbul area and who have social and family relations with one another. The main research questions are: how do the political and economic migra- tions differ? What is the difference between the migration of economic migrants and that of political ones? And how do the Bulgarian Turks (re)construct their ethnic identity with respect to the political and socio-economic conditions of their migration and the existing ethnic (self-) concepts and stereotypes prevalent in both countries? This study focuses upon the differences that Turkish economic migrants from Bulgaria found between themselves and the local people in Turkey, and on the deconstruction of the idea of homogeneity between these migrants and the so- called “mother nation”, their kin-state. For a better understanding of these issues they will be developed and generalized based on the stories of migrants and their families that I have researched as an “external” and “internal” observer. The chosen case study of one country is an example of net migration, which is widely discussed in the area of social sciences.
Research Design
According to Everett Lee, the decision to migrate depends on certain factors (region of origin, region of destination, distance, physical barriers, personal rea- sons, immigration laws, etc.) and seeks to establish itself in well-defined flows, from specific places of origin to specific places of destination. This encourages the flow of information from the places of origin to the points of destination and vice versa, which then facilitates potential future migration.1 That said, the majority of the migrants in this case are of Turkish ethnicity and their migrations to Turkey could be considered co-ethnic migrations, or ethnically privileged migrations.2 Migrations of this sort are associated with certain ethnic and cultural characteristics which distinguish them from purely economic migrations. Indeed, the most important issues for the new Turkish migrants are of an ethno-cultural nature because being a Turk in Bulgaria is a self-perception that is not equivalent to being a Turk in Turkey.
1 Everet S. Lee, A Theory of Migration, Demography 3 (1966), no. 1, 47-57. 2 Jasna Čapo et al. (eds.), Co-ethnic Migrations Compared. Central and Eastern European Contexts. München, Berlin 2010; Rainer Münz / Rainer Ohliger, Deutsche Minderheiten in Ostmittel- und Osteuropa, Aussiedler in Deutschland. Eine Analyse ethnisch privilegierter Migration. Berlin 1997 (Demographie aktuell, 9). Labour Migrations of Bulgarian Turks to Turkey 3
The research methodology involves an ethnological and a historical approach that combines ethnographic multi-sited research3 in Bulgaria and Turkey with the examination of basic historical studies on the immigration policy of Turkey; the migrant movements of Bulgarian Turks to Turkey during the 20th century; the economic migration from Bulgaria to the EU countries and Turkey; politi- cal decisions and bilateral agreements providing information on the migration policy of Bulgaria and Turkey; and demographic data. The time frame of the studied problems is set from the early 1990s to early 2012. The ethnographic material was collected through biographical narratives and interlocutions, as well as first-hand observation of Bulgarian Turks, former and contemporary migrants, their relatives and their friends.4 All of them are over 35 years old, with primary, secondary and higher education; some of them are single women and men, while others are married. Among the married migrants, some went to Turkey with their families and others did not. Despite the established understanding of the term “migrant” as a person who resides in another country for more than one year with the intention of temporary or permanent residence, we might call any individual residing and working in Turkey for more than three months “migrant” because foreigners are eligible to stay in Turkey without a permit for temporary residence for that period of time. Although economic mobility occurs within this period, most economic migrants intend from the start to settle in Turkey in order to work; they thus prolong their three-month stay and often become illegal immigrants if they fail to legalize their status.
3 According to George E. Marcus, Ethnography in/of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography, Annual Review of Anthropology 24 (1995), 95-117, 102 “in projects of multi-sited ethnographic research, de facto comparative dimensions develop instead as a function of the fractured, discontinuous plane of movement and discovery among sites as one maps an object of study and needs to posit logics of relationship, translation, and association among these sites. Thus, in multi-sited ethnography, comparison emerges from putting questions to an emergent object of study, whose contours, sites and relationships are not known beforehand, but are themselves a contribution of making an account that has different complexly connected real-world sites of investigation.” 4 The purpose of my stay among Bulgarian migrants in Turkey was known to them. They wished to remain anonymous (i.e. their names will not be given). Indeed, preliminary con- tacts with my interlocutors (before their migration to Turkey) helped me greatly to conduct research in Turkey and to gain their confidence. Some of the interlocutors did not worry that they were illegal workers (fieldwork has shown that the latter was the case with Bulgarian migrants working illegally in some EU countries). 4 Yelis Erolova The Historical and Political Context in Bulgaria and Turkey. Migration Patterns
The emigration of Bulgarian Turks in the last century was determined by the purposeful policies of Bulgaria and Turkey towards their community. With the establishment of an autonomous Bulgarian Principality in 1878, its Turkish population became an ethnic minority, towards which inconsistent policies of assimilation, exile, emancipation and integration were pursued from that point forward. Today Turkey’s image in Bulgaria is often associated with the negative stereotypes of the “Turkish enslaver”. About 350,000 Turks, Tatars, Pomaks and Circassians left Bulgaria between 1880 and 1911.5 Until 1944, migration from Bulgaria to Turkey was based on bilateral agreements and negotiations, and some 200,000 Turks emigrated.6 On 12 August 1950, the Bulgarian government announced plans to deport 250,000 Turks and managed to deport about 140,000 of them until the Turkish government closed its border in November 1951.7 In the period 1968-1978, those Turks in Bulgaria who had relatives among the émigrés of the 1949-1951 wave were entitled to immigrate to Turkey. The number of emigrants in that period was somewhere between 130,0008 and 156,000.9 The last political campaign of the socialist regime, which left deep scars on the country’s Turkish com- munity, was the notorious “Revival Process” (1984/85).10 As a result, between
5 Antonina Željazkova, Socialna i kulturna adaptacija na bălgarskite izselnici v Turcija, in: idem (ed.) Meždu adaptacijata i nostalgijata. Bălgarskite turci v Turcija. Sofija 1998, 11- 44, 11. For an English translation see Antonina Zhelyazkova [Željazkova], The Social and Cultural Adaptation of Bulgarian Immigrants in Turkey, in: idem (ed.), Between Adaptation and Nostalgia: the Bulgarian Turks in Turkey. Sofia 1998, available at
300,00011 to 369,83912 Bulgarian Turks went to Turkey with tourist visas from May to August 1989, a phenomenon that became known as the “Great Excur- sion”. About 214,000 of them remained, while approximately 154,000 returned to Bulgaria in 1990 and 1991. Most could not adapt to life in Turkey.13 The immigration policy of the Turkish state since its establishment as a re- public in 1923 has revolved around the desire to strengthen Turkish national identity and belonging, which is defined in terms of origin, language, culture and, in the religious sphere, through adherence to Sunni Islam. Some laws adopted in the 20th century are manifestations of this policy: –the Law for the Professions and Activities in Turkey that are reserved for Turk- ish Citizens from 1932, Law No. 2007. This law limited the right of foreigners to practice certain professions. –the Settlement Law from 1934, Law No. 2510. According to this law, people of Turkish origin and culture can settle in Turkey and thus immigration to Turkey was effectively limited to people of Turkish descent and culture. The Turkish state granted the right to settlement to the Sunni Muslims of the Balkans and the Caucasus, while neglecting the Christian Orthodox Gagauz Turks and Shiite Azeris. –the Law for Foreigners from 1950, Law No. 5683, which regulates the right of foreigners to stay and to work in Turkey. According to this law, foreigners must apply to the local police authority for a residence permit. –the Turkish Citizenship Act from 1928 (revised in 1964), Law No. 403, which regulates the acquisition of Turkish citizenship on the basis of ethnicity and religion.14 Foreigners and immigrants to Turkey were treated with ambivalence in respect to ethnicity and religious affiliation. The ratification of the Geneva Convention in 1951, which governs the status and protection of the refugees, defined three types of refugees in Turkey: 1) refugees who are treated under the Convention (European refugees); 2) non-European refugees, who are not treated under the Convention – Article 1 B. (1); and 3) “national refugees”. The final category consists of people of Turkish origin, also called “immigrants” (göçmen), and it is into this category that the Turks from Bulgaria fall. As refugees, they are either “independent” (i.e. Turkish citizens can guarantee for them, but the Turkish
11 Hugh Poulton, Turkey as Kin-State, in: idem / Suha Taji-Farouki (eds.), Muslim Identity and the Balkan State. London 1997, 194-213, 208. 12 Valeri Stojanov, Turskoto naselenie v Bulgaria meždu poljusite na ethničeskata politika. Sofia 1998, 213f.; Željazkova, Socialna i kulturna adaptacija (above fn. 5), 12. 13 Stojanov, Turskoto naselenie v Bulgaria (above fn. 12), 204-214. 14 Kemal Kirisçi, Disaggregating Turkish Citizenship and Immigration Policies, Middle Eastern Studies 35 (2000), no. 4, 187-208. 6 Yelis Erolova state does not provide material and financial support to them) or “resettled refugees” (those who receive support from the Turkish state).15 As a result of the migration policies of Bulgaria and Turkey from the late 19th century to the late 1980s, large numbers of Muslims living in Bulgaria (Turks, Tartars, Pomaks, Circassians, but not Gypsies) and the Balkans were encouraged to settle in Turkey and were subsequently integrated into the Turkish nation. The attitude of discrimination against them during the Bulgarian socialist regime and the influence of Turkish policy during the 20th century led to the consoli- dation of the Turkish community: even though its representatives considered Bulgaria their homeland, where they and their ancestors were born and where they owned property and land, some of them changed their ideas about their national belonging. The Bulgarian Turkish immigrants to Turkey of the 1970s and 1980s still had mixed feelings towards Bulgaria as their native land, as they felt they were being punished for being Turks. Turkey became the country where they had the right to settle. They considered it a holy land (ak toprak – white soil or earth) where they could practice their religion freely, and they often imagined their migra- tion as a symbolic “(ethnic) return”16 or “ethnic homecoming”.17 The Turkish authorities in general had a kind and responsible attitude towards the Turks from Bulgaria, who always relied on their support in conflict situations. According to Ulf Brunnbauer, many Bulgarians complain that Turks from Bulgaria could rely on help from Turkey in a situation of economic crisis.18 Although upon their arrival in Turkey the Bulgarian Turks legally were for- eigners and foreign citizens (immigrants and refugees), they were in a privileged position because of their ethnic origin as well as their cultural and religious affiliation. Thus, many of them considered themselves “ethnic kin” rather than foreigners. Nevertheless, many of the immigrants of 1989 “rediscovered” a country that was different from what they had expected, and returned back to their native country Bulgaria. But to date, most of the Bulgarian Turks who have remained in Turkey from the previous period have become Turkish citizens and are fully integrated into the Turkish state and society. The immigrants of
15 Idem, Refugee Movements and Turkey, International Migration 29 (1991), no. 4, 545-560; idem, Justice and Home Affairs Issues in EU-Turkish Relations. Istanbul 2002, 3-6, available at http://www.tesev.org.tr/Upload/Publication/2bb7dbe6-53b8-43db-998b-10d600ad33ac/ Justice%20and%20Home%20Affairs.pdf. 16 Ayşe Parla, Longing, Belonging, and Locations of Homeland Among Turkish Immi- grants from Bulgaria, Journal of Southeastern Europe and Black Sea Studies 6 (2006), no. 4, 543-557; 546-549; idem, Irregular Workers or Ethnic Kin? Post-1990s Labour Migration from Bulgaria to Turkey, International Migration 45 (2007), no. 3, 157-181, 159. 17 Jasna Čapo, Introduction, in: idem et al. (eds.), Co-ethnic Migrations Compared (above fn. 2), 9-36, 10. 18 Ulf Brunnbauer, The Perception of Muslims in Bulgaria and Greece: Between the “Self” and the “Other”, Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 21 (2001), no. 1, 39-61, 55. Labour Migrations of Bulgarian Turks to Turkey 7
1989 were entitled to keep their Bulgarian citizenship, and at present most of them have dual Bulgarian-Turkish citizenship. With the change of the political system in Bulgaria from socialism to parlia- mentary democracy in late 1989 and early 1990, a new stage of development began for the Turks in Bulgaria. In early 1991, more than 600,000 Muslims in Bulgaria resumed use of their old birth names.19 At the same time, a significant proportion of the Muslims – mostly Gypsies, but also some of the Turks – re- tained their Bulgarian names, as they believed the discrimination towards them on the basis of their name and origin would continue. According to the Bulgar- ian Constitution of 1991, all citizens of Bulgaria have equal rights, including the freedom to declare their ethnicity and origin, religion and mother tongue (Art. 6, Art. 13, Art. 37).20 The Turks in Bulgaria, like other ethnic communities, were de facto recognized as an ethnic minority with the ratification of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and the European Conven- tion on Human Rights by the Bulgarian Parliament in the 1990s. Although political factors no longer forced the Bulgarian Turks to migrate, they continued to move to Turkey under the influence of the economic crisis that affected Bulgarian society. According to the statistics,21 more than one million Bulgarian citizens have emigrated since 1990, mostly to EU countries and the U.S., Russia, Israel, etc. The mass exodus included mainly people with medium- or low-level education, as well as highly trained people, experts, scholars and artists.22 During the last 20 years in Bulgaria, low income and unemployment appeared to be the main factor that determined a constant level of individual, family or group (organized) migration, with peaks in 1993-1994 and 1997-1998 (during an economic crisis); in 2001 (when Bulgaria signed an agreement with the countries of the Schengen area, providing a visa-free regime for Bulgarian citizens); in 2004 (at the time of the EU enlargement with 10 new countries); and in 2007 (at the time of Bulgaria’s accession to the EU). The migration models
19 Wolfgang Höpken, From Religious Identity to Ethnic Mobilization: the Turks of Bulgaria Before, Under and Since Communism, in: Poulton / Taji-Farouki (eds.), Muslim Identity (above fn. 11), 54-81, 72. 20 Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria, available at
23 Anna Krăsteva, Introduction, in: idem / Kasabova / Karabinova (eds.), Migrations from and to Southeastern Europe (above fn. 22), 9-13, 11f. 24 National Statistical Institute of Bulgaria, available at
From Political to Economic Migration
Migration to Turkey since 1989 remains an understudied topic, and is con- nected with a various conventional topics. According to some observers from the Republic of Turkey, the Bulgarian Turks who migrated to Turkey did so because they still feel discriminated against in Bulgaria; therefore they are not economic migrants.31 Indeed, some of the Bulgarian Turks who were unable
27 Ahmet Içduygu, The Politics of Irregular Migratory Flows in the Mediterranean Basin: Economy, Mobility and “Illegality”, Mediterranean Politics 12 (2007), no. 2, 141-161. 28 In 2001, Turkey established a visa-free regime that allowed Bulgarian citizens to stay in Turkey for 3 months. 29 Dăržaven vestnik 43 (01.06.2007), no. 50, available at
Terms “discrimination” and “integration” are often incorrectly used by national and regional political actors and thus provoke interethnic tension in some regions in Bulgaria. 32 Julian Konstantinov, Patterns of Reinterpretation: Trader-Tourism in the Balkans (Bul- garia) as a Picaresque Metaphorical Enactment of Post-totalitarianism, American Ethnologist 23 (1996), no. 4, 762-782. 33 Douglas Massey et al., Theories of International Migration. A Review and Appraisal, Population and Development Review 19 (1993), no. 3, 431-466, available at
This is known as “network-mediated migration”.34 Between 30,000 and 60,000 persons have migrated from Bulgaria to Turkey in the period between 1990 and 1997,35 Their number has continued to increase in the following years. In the beginning of the 1990s mainly ethnic Turkish men migrated from Bul- garia to Turkey, where they were employed as unskilled workers in the tourist sector. Indeed, this type of migration repeats the familiar “Gurbet” pattern of the Balkan labour migration,36 where men worked temporarily abroad and invested their wages in their birthplace. A diversification of this type of migra- tion to Turkey is the female migration that began in the mid-1990s. Female migration has become a basic pattern in Bulgarian society. Bulgarian women who are unemployed, who have retired or who have a low income often seek work in domestic care as maids, attendants, nannies, caregivers for the elderly and the sick, cooks and cleaners in places such as Greece, Spain, Italy, England and the Netherlands.
Discussion of the Case Study
Turkey became one of the most popular destinations for Turks from the Bulgarian town of Svishtov. This case study shows how migration flows from and toward certain places where some migrants formed their own informal communities and/or became members of already established associations by providing information exchange. Svishtov is a small municipal centre in central Northern Bulgaria situated on the Danube River, 70 km from the Romanian capital Bucharest and about 80 km from the Bulgarian district centers of Veliko Tarnovo, Pleven and Ruse. The ethnic and religious structure of the population of Svishtov consists of three main communities: Bulgarians (Orthodox, Catholics and Protestants), Turks (Sunni Muslims), and Gypsies, who prefer a Turkish identity (Muslims). The ethnic minorities are well integrated in all social, educational and professional sectors in the town. Muslims are considered to be among the oldest inhabitants of the city, as evidenced by a population census in 1579, when Muslims (Turks, Gypsies and Tatars) accounted for 54 % of the total population of the town.37 According to the
34 Tamar Diana Wilson, What Determines Where Transnational Labor Migrants Go? Modifications in Migration Theories,Human Organization 53 (1994), no. 3, 269-278, 272. 35 Željazkova, Socialna i kulturna adaptacija (above fn. 5), 12. 36 Petko Hristov, Family and Migrations in the Balkans, in: Social Behavior and Family Strategies in the Balkans (16th–20th Centuries). Bucharest 2008, 273-295; idem (ed.), Migra- tion and Identity. Historical, Cultural and Linguistic Dimensions of Mobility in the Balkans. Sofia 2012. 37 Machiel Kiel, Svishtov i rajonăt prez ХV-ХІХ vek. Poselištna istorija, istoričeska de- mografija i posledici ot vojnite v edna ravninna oblast na Dunavska Bulgaria, in: Rosica 12 Yelis Erolova contemporary official population census, the total number of the inhabitants of the Svishtov municipality in 1992 was 50,177 persons, 4,049 of whom were Turks. In 2011, the total population was 37,596 persons, while the number of Turks had fallen to 2,233.38 The population decline is mainly due to migration processes. It should be noted that despite their small numbers the Turks in Svishtov strive to respect the tradition of marital endogamy, i.e. to establish marriage contacts within the Turkish community only. Intermarriage with Bulgarians and Gypsies is rare. The community preserves prohibitions on marriage between relatives to the 5th or 7th degree on the paternal side and to 3rd or 5th degree on the maternal side. This is based on the traditional beliefs of the community and on the influence of the Bulgarian society’s views about incest, which can lead to misery and can “sully” the marriage purity. Nowadays, most of the Turks in Svishtov are connected by kin ties; this has led many to look to the Turks from the neighbouring regions of Nikopol, Ruse, and Bjala for potential marriage partners. Unemployment rates in the town of Svishtov are among the lowest in the country. Nonethless, low income39 has forced many residents to migrate to big cities, such as Sofia, or abroad to Spain, Greece, Britain and Germany. The Turkish individuals or families tend to move to the Netherlands, Spain, Britain, Belgium, Germany and Turkey. There are no quantitative studies of their number, but it is a common feature between these divergent migrations that migrants prefer to use family and social contacts to settle compactly in the same cities, e.g. in Stuttgart (Germany), Ghent (Belgium) and in the capitals of Britain and the Netherlands. More than 40 people from Svishtov have migrated to Turkey for economic reasons, and a few of them have returned because of their families. I conducted research on current migrants from Svishtov living in the Istanbul area who have social and family relations. All of them have secondary and higher education. The first migrations to Turkey can be traced to the early 1990s. Turkish and Gypsy Muslim men from Svishtov migrated to Istanbul, where they began un-
Gradeva (ed.), Istorija na mjusjulmanskata kultura po bălgarskite zemi. Sofia 2001, 547-572, 563. 38 Source: Graždanska registracija i administrativno obslužvane (GRAO) – Civil Registra- tion and Administrative Services Municipality of Svishtov. The actual number of Turks liv- ing in Svishtov is lower. We have to consider that most Gypsies in Svishtov prefer to have a Turkish identity. They cannot be distinguished by external characteristics or cultural specifics. Only a thorough examination of the Muslim community shows that the Muslims of Svishtov are divided by ethnic and family ties. Most of the Turks are landowners, and the Turks limit their marital and social contacts to people within their community. 39 The average rate of unemployment in Svishtov was below 6 % in 2011 (the average rate for the country was 10.9 % for 2011). The average salary in the town of Svishtov for 2011 was € 260-310, but most people were employed on the minimum salary of € 120, which is regulated by the state and has been increased to 135 Euro as of January 2012. Labour Migrations of Bulgarian Turks to Turkey 13 skilled temporary work in the tourist and trade sectors. Their relatives, friends, and political migrants from the Svishtov region who were already there helped them to adapt and to find accommodation. These migrants mostly came back to Bulgaria in the late 1990s, when the first female migrations started, which continue until present. These women were typically retired, unemployed and elderly women over 40 years of age. Some went to Turkey having already found a job in advance while others found it on site in Istanbul. These women, many of whom work in domestic or child care, intend to return to Bulgaria although they often prolong the duration of their planned stay. Sometimes the women use the services of brokerage firms managed by local Turks, Bulgarian Turkish settlers or by other contemporary economic migrants. According to the interlocutors, some of these firms are legal and some illegal, and their fees for brokering a job are high (the Turkish family seeking a nanny or a housemaid must pay one month’s salary and the worker half a salary). The women live with the family of their employers and they have a day off once a week or once every other week. Their salaries vary between € 400-700, and they often invest most of their salary in Svishtov (e.g. for the renovation of their house, for education, appliances, the purchase of furniture or a car). For the migrants’ families, the incomes of the migrants are an additional income. Unlike male migrants, the women who work in Turkey very rarely rely on help from their relatives. In the case of retired women, the pensions they receive in Bulgaria also become an additional income or even the main financial source for their families. N.V. is 61 years old and she has been living in Turkey since 2006. She initially went to Turkey because she needed money to renovate her apartment. At first she planned to stay for 1-2 years, but she had to work for 3 years to earn enough money for the renovation of her flat. N.V. later decided to help her grandson by paying for his education at the Academy of Economy in Svishtov, for which she stayed another 5 years. Now she plans to stay for one more year because she needs to save money for kitchenware. N.V. added that her pension in Bulgaria would not be enough to pay for these things, which is why she has to stay and work in Turkey. Economic migrants from Svishtov have insight regarding the specifics of their employment in Turkey. During my field work respondents shared their observations: “Many women from Moldova, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan come here to work in do- mestic care as maids and nannies, but the Turks prefer to hire Turks from Bulgaria because we are hard-working.40 Fees vary between 900-1500 Turkish lira, but in
40 The same stereotypes have been recorded among Croatian migrants by Jasna Čapo, Strangers Either Way: The Lives of Croatian Refugees in Their New Home. New York 2007, 170. 14 Yelis Erolova
recent years, Turkish Gypsy women from Bulgaria come here to spend the winter for 400 lira, and their families in Bulgaria receive their pensions.” (R.Z. 55, S.T. 59) The economic migrants and some of the political Turkish migrants from Bulgaria noted cultural and moral differences between themselves and the local popula- tion. For example, they consider themselves to be more diligent than the local Turks who are, in their view, lazy. They perceive this as one explanation for why the Turks from Turkey prefer to employ them instead of other local Turks, an assumption which is complemented by examples given by the interlocutors about political migrants from Bulgaria who have risen to high professional positions in Turkey – as mayors, doctors, professors, lawyers, etc. Most of the interlocutors rate their working conditions positively and believe themselves to be treated as family members by their employers. Although payment for such work is lower in Turkey than in Western European countries (they have heard this from other female migrants from their hometown), the women commented that the attitude of Western European employers is bad and snobbish. Several Turkish families from Svishtov also migrated to Istanbul and Çorlu for economic reasons several years ago. These families are wealthy and had their own businesses in Bulgaria. Some of the family migrants are highly educated and they were involved in the local self-government of Svishtov as councillors. They migrated because they see more opportunities for financial prosperity for themselves and their children in Turkey. Some of these families rely on help from their relatives who are political migrants to find accommodation and jobs, but others do not. Unlike the aforementioned Turkish women who intend to return to Bulgaria, these families intend to live in Turkey permanently, as they have received Turkish citizenship as a result of the Legalization program of July 2011. The labour migration of Bulgarian Turks to Turkey therefore has general as well as specific characteristics. On the one hand, the labour migrants follow the pattern of the political migration from 1989, when Turkish families emigrated from Bulgaria to Turkey: they obtain Turkish citizenship but also retain the Bulgarian one, and they do not intend to return to Bulgaria. On the other hand, there are also male and female migration patterns that follow the general migra- tion processes of Bulgarian society. The female economic migrants are mostly oriented towards the Mediterranean countries, especially Greece, Spain and Italy. But many Turkish women migrate to Turkey because of their knowledge of the language, but also because this country is not alien to them; because they can choose a suitable job for themselves; and because there is a regular transport connection from Bulgaria to Turkey. Regardless of whether their intention is to work temporarily or to settle permanently, the Turkish economic migrants from Bulgaria feel that they have support from the Turkish state. Labour Migrations of Bulgarian Turks to Turkey 15 Basic Trends Regarding the Identity Processes in the Native Place and in Terms of Migration since 1990
The ethnic identity of the Turks from Bulgaria is a variable category that is formed, developed and nurtured in specific historical conditions and in opposi- tion to “others” (Bulgarians, Gypsies) through the creation and maintenance of ethnic markers that representatives of the community perceive as their specific and unique characteristics. The Turks in Bulgaria are a typical example of an ethnic minority with its own identity, constructed by a range of ethnic and cultural elements (language, religion, group consciousness of common origin and belonging to a community, marital endogamy and other cultural characteristics), self-notions and percep- tions of “others”. These elements function as ethnic markers that depend upon the situational context of the Bulgarian Turks’ interaction with other ethnic communities. In the new democratic reality, the Turks in Bulgaria continue to uphold their strong ethnic identity, as they did during the socialist period, and to maintain the “purity” of their ethnicity by marriage endogamy. One of the most important mechanisms in maintaining the Turkish ethnic identity is the Bulgarian Turks’ knowledge and self-perception of their ethnic origin. Although the scientific research has established that some of the Bulgar- ian Turks originate from Anatolia,41 it became clear during my field studies that members of the community in Svishtov believe that they originated from the region of Edirne. They thought this to be the case because they found common elements between themselves and people from Edirne, such as appearance and language. Their self-consciousness with respect to belonging to the Turkish nation is thus the key factor in the determination of their ethnicity.42 The influ- ence of the Republic of Turkey enhances this notion. Since 1989 it has entered the everyday and festive life of the Bulgarian Turks through education and the study of literary Turkish language. The media has also had a considerable impact via Turkish TV channels and series, as well as through news broadcasts in the Turkish language on Bulgarian National Television and on Bulgarian National Radio.
41 Şimşir, The Turks of Bulgaria (above fn. 6), 1-5; Kiel, Svishtov i raionat prez ХV-ХІХ vek (above fn. 37), 547-550; Ali Eminov, Turkish and Other Muslim Minorities in Bulgaria. London 1997, 27. 42 A similar process can be observed among the Crimean Tatars of the Dobrudzha, who live in Bulgaria and Romania, while migrants of this ethnic group live in Turkey. They consider themselves to be part of the Crimean Tatar nation on the Crimea. Although sometimes they are treated as Turks and they are also encouraged to migrate to Turkey, they still maintain a different ethnicity. They consider Turkey their second (spiritual) homeland. See Yеlis Еrolova, Crimea and / or Turkey in Self-identification of the Crimean Tatars in Dobrudzha, in: Mar- garita Karamihova (ed.), Readings in the History and Culture of the Balkans. In Support of University Teaching. Sofia 2010, 213-230. 16 Yelis Erolova
Although the Constitution of Bulgaria does not permit the establishment of parties on ethnic, racial and religious grounds (Art. 11, al. 4), several par- ties exist whose electorate mainly consist of certain ethnic communities. The participation of the Turkish ethnic community in the central government and in local governments, especially on the part of the Movement for Rights and Freedoms, creates conditions for equal participation and strengthens their citizen’s consciousness and their commitment to common state issues. Since 1989 there have been two major trends that characterize the Bulgarian Turks’ self-identification of their native place. First is the maintenance of their Turkish identity through ethno-cultural characteristics (language, religion, holidays, marriage endogamy, etc.) and their knowledge of the differences between Turkish and Bulgarian culture and ethnicity. This is centred around the memory of the so-called “Revival Process”, as well as around real or idealized notions of Turkey as their motherland. Even 20 years after the “Revival Process”, the emotional trauma is still often used in election campaigns of the Movement for Rights and Freedoms to consolidate the Turkish community, which naturally leads to an ethnicization of the vote of the community.43 The second trend in the self-identification of the ulgarianB Turks is also based on a strong consciousness of Turkish ethnicity and idealized notions of Turkey. New, parallel dimensions have appeared that are related to their identifica- tion as Bulgarian and European Union citizens. Bulgaria’s membership in the European Union established a new aspect of self-determination for Bulgarian Turks and Bulgarians alike – namely as European citizens who have the free- dom to travel, to work abroad, and who are entitled to assistance and support from European institutions. This new dimension of the identity of Bulgarian Turks can be observed in their non-governmental civic and cultural organiza- tions that have aimed to create a vision of the Turks in Bulgaria as a European ethno-national minority with its own cultural traditions and language within a multicultural Europe.44 As a socio-political aspect, some Bulgarian Turks have a diverse political orientation. For them, “Europeanization” is the most important value around which they rally. The memory of the “Revival Process” is treated as an unforgettable trauma, but one that belongs to the past rather than a major factor regarding their future. The stereotypical perceptions of the Turks in Bulgaria as the “Turkish threat” or “strongholds of radical Islam” are nowadays frequently spread by certain
43 Nadezh Ragaru / Antonela Kapelle-Pogadžijan, Malcinstvenite partii, partii “kato dru- gite”? Opităt na DPS v Bulgaria i na DSUR v Rumanija, in: Mirella Dečeva (ed.), Dinamika na nacionalnata identičnost i transnacionalnite identičnosti v procesa na evropejska integracija. Sofia 2008, 61-119. 44 One example for these organizations is EVET. Cf. their homepage, available at
Cultural Differences between the Turks from Bulgaria and Turkey as Ethnocultural Markers
The economic migrants with whom I spoke generally began their impressions of Turkey with a positive observation, primarily based on comparisons with Bulgaria. For example, according to the interlocutors, in Turkey “the people are more polite and delicate than in Bulgaria […] roads are paved, here it is clean and tidy […] here it is an ordered chaos […] there are many fruits and people here tend to consume healthy food, it is cheaper than Bulgaria […] the organization of social services is better.” (N.P. 58) On the other hand, consciously or not, the migrants identify themselves on the principle of ethnic purity, as they imagine the Bulgarian Turks’ community to be ethnically more pure. The Bulgarian Turks create a new image of the local Turks in Turkey. The migrants are faced with unknown traditions and habits that are different from their preliminary expectations. The cultural differences between the majority of the Bulgarian Turks (both the economic and the political
45 Aleksej Pamporov, Socialni distancii i etničeski stereotipi za malcinstvata v Bulgaria. Sofia 2009; Eugenia Ivanova, Obobšteni rezultati ot terennoto izsledvane “Izbirateljat na ‘Ataka’ – opit za portret”, available at
47 Mila Maeva, The Image of the Turks in the Republic of Turkey through the Eyes of the Bulgarian Turks who Have Moved to Turkey, Ethnologia Bulgarica 3 (2006), 103-112, 104. 48 Ibid., 105. 49 The word “baş” means “real”, “exact” in the dialect of the Bulgarian Turks, and “head” in modern Turkish. 20 Yelis Erolova lims by the local Turks, or even as unbelievers (Gavurs). In contrast, many of the Bulgarian Turkish political emigrants that emigrated before 1989 have by now integrated into Turkish society and have become more religious than they were previously in Bulgaria. The economic migrants, who are mostly women working in domestic care, sometimes find themselves in situations where their employers call attention to the fact that “they do not pray and they do not believe enough”. The assump- tions of Turks from Turkey about Bulgarian Turks who consume alcohol and pork meat reflect real differences between Bulgaria and Turkey. However, the Turks from Bulgaria are not affected by these notions and generally retain their community’s idea of faith and religion. With regard to food preferences, the Turkish immigrants from Bulgaria were amazed that certain foods they are used to eating in Bulgaria, such as chutney (ljutuenica) and sausages, are not consumed in Turkey despite its great culinary diversity. Another product that cannot be found in normal Turkish markets is grape brandy (rakija), which is preferred not only by Bulgarian Turks, but by local Turks as well. Although the transfer of home-made brandy is not allowed at the Bulgarian-Turkish border, many migrants import it illegally at their own risk. In many cases, these are goods sent from relatives in Bulgaria to the migrants for their own consumption or as gifts to their Turkish friends. The topic of culinary differences can be discussed in greater detail, but it is better to do this in the form of a separate study that compares the cultural differences between the Bulgarian Turkish migrants and Turks in Turkey. Despite the cultural differences and the feeling that they are not accepted as equals by the Turks from Turkey, the migrants from Bulgaria believe that the local population has a more positive attitude towards them than towards other Turkish immigrants, e.g. those from the former Soviet Union.
Interactions between Bulgarian Turks and Local Turks in Turkey
According to Jasna Čapo, co-ethnic immigrants feel “expatriated” from their homes and geographical locations, rather than repatriated to their “ethnic homeland”.50 In recent years, some of the contemporary Turkish migrants from Bulgaria have felt that Turkish society accepts them, but also distances itself from them, which is implied by the native Turks’ use of certain ethnic terms (Bulgaristan Turkleri, Bulgar Turkleri, Balkan Turkleri). Often migrants concluded that “we are Turks in Bulgaria, but here (in Turkey) we are Bulgarians”(G.T., 49). The most insulting names given to the Bulgarian Turks in Turkey are “Bulgarians” and Gavuri. Often migrants concluded that they are called Turks
50 Čapo, Introduction (above fn. 17), 25. Labour Migrations of Bulgarian Turks to Turkey 21 in Bulgaria (or “Gypsies”, a pejorative name sometimes given to the Turks by Bulgarians) and Bulgarians in Turkey. The Turkish migrants from Bulgaria identify themselves as Turks (when they are in Bulgaria or Turkey), as Turks from Bulgaria / Bulgarian Turks (when they are abroad or in Turkey) and as Bulgarian citizens (in situations related to oc- cupational mobility within the EU countries). Maeva’s study on the political exiles of 1989 gives data about the local population distancing itself from the immigrants by giving them ethnic names. “The local inhabitants call the Turks having arrived from Bulgaria ‘gavurlar’ or even worse – ‘Bulgarlar’.” “In Turkey they called us ‘gavurlar’, but if we were ‘gavurlar’, we would not have gone there.”51 The Turkish anthropologist Ayse Parla has made a similar observation about the economic migrants from Bulgaria, who also receive the same pejorative names – “nonbelievers” (gavurlar) and Bulgarians.52 Discussions of the topic in the Turkish printed and virtual media where Bulgarian Turks were called Bulgarians53 or discussions related to what to call the Turks from Bulgaria are perceived as being offensive by both political and economic Bulgarian Turkish migrants. The ethnic distancing by the Turkish media and society leads to the consolidation of the community of the Bulgarian Turks (again, both political and economic migrants) and to the construction of a self-image which distinguishes them and places them in a superior position in comparison to the Turks of Turkey. The self-description “Balkan Turks” is unknown to Turks from Bulgaria. But in Turkey, this term is used for them in the socio-political context, both by the Turkish media and in the names of migrant organizations. Something similar oc- curs to the Turks born in Germany. In the recent past the Turks from Turkey have had respect for labour migrants in Germany, but today the economic progress of Turkey has led to a change in their attitude. This can be detected in the use of ethnic names like almancı (Germans) or “lost” for the German-born Turks.54
51 Maeva, The Image of the Turks (above fn. 47), 109. 52 Parla, Irregular Workers or Ethnic Kin? (above fn. 16), 167-169. 53 Moldovalıların tahtına Bulgarlar oturdu, Milliyet, 28.03.2004, available at
The Turkish state supports the organizations of the Bulgarian Turks; in Is- tanbul alone there are more than 70 organizations whose members are Turkish political and economic migrants from Bulgaria. The migrant organizations ap- pear to be the instruments used for the popularization of certain political ideas among migrants, the identification of illegal migrants, and the examination of the general adjustment of Bulgarian migrants to Turkish society. Most of the immigrants, whether legal or illegal, are members of migrant associations that have been created by political migrants from Bulgaria. According to the interlocutors, the associations assist them in the legalization of their status in Turkey (for example, by helping them to obtain residence documents), organ- ize the votes of legal migrants during parliamentary and presidential elections, and arrange cultural events and festivals for the Bulgarian migrant community. Indeed, in Bulgarian parliamentary and presidential elections, the greatest number of votes from abroad comes from Turkey. For example, during the last presidential elections in Bulgaria, 22,418 Bulgarian citizens voted from Turkey (in 41 polling stations) in comparison to 6,752 from Spain, 2,071 from Cyprus and 2,040 from Germany.55 Most of the Turks with Bulgarian citizenship vote on conviction. Some economic migrants believe that the migrant associations will truly help them to legalize their status, but only in exchange for their vote for the Movement for Rights and Freedoms in Bulgaria. Other economic migrants decline participation in the migrant associations and believe that knowing the Turkish laws is all the “help” they need. The migrants’ organizations maintain links with the Bulgarian state, with Bulgarian parties and Bulgarian media outlets; they thus function as a bridge between the migrants and the Turkish and Bulgarian authorities. Generally, the Bulgarian Turks who are currently economic migrants in Tur- key have a strong nostalgic attitude towards their Bulgarian native country. Although they are very disappointed by the “Revival Process” and the lasting socio-economic crisis in Bulgaria, the majority of the economic migrants I spoke to intended to permanently return to Bulgaria. By “nostalgia”, the interlocutors mean being with their families and their friends, living in their neighbourhood, and being in their social environment as a whole. The sense of nostalgia is re- lated to existing social and kinship networks. Some of the interlocutors from Svishtov said that professional development was sufficient for their integration into Turkish society, but they still listen to Bulgarian radio and read Bulgarian news on the Internet every morning and often go home to see the Danube.
55 Central Election Commission of Bulgaria, available at
Other migrants perceive the connection with their native country in a different way. H.B. (female) is 53 years old and has lived in Turkey since 2007: “I have no living relatives in Bulgaria. My mother and my father died and my other relatives are in Turkey. But I miss Bulgaria, because the graves of my parents are there. One day I’ll be back in Bulgaria – where I have an apartment and a car.” (H.B., 53) The Turkish economic migrants from Svishtov maintain constant contact (e.g. by daily talking on the phone) among themselves, as well as between themselves and their relatives in Bulgaria and earlier political migrants in Turkey. They gather regularly in their off days. They celebrate birthdays and New Year’s Eve together. They exchange information about their status as well as all kinds of information about Bulgaria, their families, friends, and politicians. They also exchange gifts and help each other with loans. For example, during my visit in Turkey, I was invited to a gathering of 5 women in the house of one of their uncles, a political migrant from the 1970s. They prepared Bulgarian dishes and danced. G.T. (female) is 51 years old and arrived in Turkey in September 2011. She speaks of her feelings towards Bulgaria: “Here I miss family and friends, Bulgarian television. At the end of February I saw traders from Kardjali, who come with buses, to sell martenitsi (twined tasselled red and white thread, a symbol of spring and health). My eyes filled up with tears. I miss so much the sight of snowdrops.” (G.T., 51) I have observed a similar kind of nostalgia among the Turks and Tatars from Bulgaria who settled in Northern Cyprus at the time of the so-called “Great Excursion”.56
Concluding Remarks
The economic migration of Turks from Bulgaria to Turkey since 1990 has resulted from the interaction of several factors: the Turkish immigration policy that has traditionally tolerated the settlement of Turks within the Turkish state; the political migrations from Bulgaria to Turkey which led to the settlement of a large number of Bulgarian Turks in Turkey (which in turn facilitated the establishment of some of the contemporary economic migrants in Turkey who used their social and family contacts); and the economic situation, particularly the low incomes in Bulgaria. These three factors will determine the migration from Bulgaria to Turkey in the near future. Potential migrants are mainly those Bulgarian Turks who have family and social relations with the current migrants.
56 In 2011 I conducted an ethnographic study on Bulgarian citizens in the Republic of Cyprus. I also visited the northern part, where I met the representatives of the Bulgaristan Gocmenler Dernegi (Organisation of the Migrants from Bulgaria) in Lefkosa and Kyrenia. 24 Yelis Erolova
The migration policy of the Turkish state continues to tolerate the immigration of Turks from Bulgaria and their integration into the Turkish nation. As a result, most of the Turkish women from Bulgaria who are looking for a job in Turkey quickly find their place in the labour market, mainly in domestic care. When migrating to Turkey, both the political and the economic migrants had, and still have, a strong feeling that they were going to live and work in a country that is (ethnically) “close” to their own, but they differ in their intention to stay in Turkey and obtain Turkish citizenship or to return to Bulgaria. While political migrants intend to settle permanently in Turkey and can be defined as co-ethnic immigrants, some of the economic migrants plan to return to Bulgaria. While the political migrants consider Turkey to be the land of their “Mother nation” (anayurda) and develop a sense of strong national belonging, Turkey is primarily a labour destination for the majority of the economic migrants and they see the country they were born in, i.e. Bulgaria, as their “homeland”. The majority of the economic migrants continue to use their own dialect/language, organize themselves in informal networks, and participate in migrant associa- tions. They maintain strong social relations with their relatives and friends in Bulgaria and have a strong civil attitude towards Bulgarian public life, which can be seen especially during general and presidential elections. The cultural distance between the Turks from Bulgaria and those from Tur- key and the nostalgia of the former for “Bulgarianness” are causes for the reformulation of the idea of homogeneity between the Turkish migrants and the Turkish nation. Some of the contemporary Bulgarian Turkish economic migrants in Turkey – in addition to some of the returnees – reconstruct their ethnic identity around their language, appearance, food preferences, religious- ness and the self-notion of “ethnic purity” – a belief based upon their marriage endogamy. In Bulgaria, the self-determination as Muslim is sufficient to imply automatically a Turkish ethnicity. However, in Turkey migrants must “prove” their ethnicity by understanding Turkish culture, language and religion. If they fail, they remain Bulgarians or Nonbelievers (Giavuri). As a result, economic (co-ethnic) immigrants construct a mixed and conflicting identity – as “real and pure” Turks, with Bulgaria as their homeland.