Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Turkic Peoples

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 6>
Author
Sarmat View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
  Quote Sarmat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Turkic Peoples
    Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 14:31
 Nursultan Nazarbaev, meant "Turkic" in that speech.
 
You should distinct between Turkic and Turkish. While Kazakhs, Uzbeks, Kyrgyzs, Turkmens, Tatars etc. all are Turkic ethnicities, they are not TURKISH.
 
It's just a liguistic confusion, because the word Turk in English could mean Turk as an inhabitant of the Republic of Turkey as well as Turk as Turkic i.e. a larger linguistic and cultural group which includes many ethnicities including Turkish people and Kazakh people.
 
He clearly didn't mean that Kazakhs are Turkish, he meant that Kazakhs are Turkic. In fact, Kazakhs perhaps even more closer resemble the original ancient Turks than modern Turkish people.
 
Nevertheless, the culture of modern Turkic ehtinicities is similar to some extent. But it would be a stretch to call them "one nation". All these ethinicities clearly have their own cultural, historical, religious and  linguistical distinctiveness.
 
If you say that all the Turkic nations are one nation then Swedes, Dutch and Germans are one nation. Russians, Poles and Bulgarians are one nation, French, Spanish and Italians are also one nations. This is definetely wrong.
 
 

 



Edited by Sarmat12 - 07-Aug-2007 at 14:39
Σαυρομάτης
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 14:41
Perfect example. He says he is a Turk, but says people of Turkey are not real Turks. And that's what I mean, no Kazakh would call himself a Turk, as in Turkish
 
Whatever anybody says your just going to try and manipulate it to suit your perspective.
 
Your putting words in the leader of Kazakistans mouth, he did not say what you wrote, you don't know what he "thinks", your just making it up.
 
Sultan Nazarbayev says, "I am a Turk", why can't you accept this.
What have you got against Central Asian Turks and Turks outside Turkey, Turkiye doesn't have a monopoly on Turks.
 
Beylerbeyi
and I say that no Kazakh (except for a crazy fringe)would say that she is a Turk.
 
So Sultan Nazarbayev is a crazy fringe Confused
 
I wonder, where do you think Turks are from? do you think they landed off a space-ship...
Turks as a nation are from Central Asia.
 
Beylerbeyi
I know the Kazakhs well, most speak Russian at home
 
You know "mankurts", not Kazaks, I know many Kazak and members of Kazak organisations who know their mother-tongue and use it at home.
 
Today Kazakistan is becomming one of the powerfull countries in the Turkic world and pushing for a "Union of Turkic States" especially in Central Asia.
And the official language Kazak Turkic is now promoted and regaining its ground.
 
Beylerbeyi
Turkicness and Turkishness are not the same.
 
Turkicness and Turkishness exist in the English language.
Among Turks, there is "Turk", in Iran non-Turks say "Tork"(Turk), in Afganistan non-Turks say Turks, Tajiks call Turkic groups they live next to "Turk".
 
I'm not saying all Turks are identical, there are different groups and branches of Turks with their own unique aspects.
Just like Arabs in Syria arn't identical to those in Yemen or Egypt but they're still Arabs.
 
 


Edited by Bulldog - 07-Aug-2007 at 14:44
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 14:59
Sarmat
Nursultan Nazarbaev, meant "Turkic" in that speech.
 
No he meant what he said, "Turk", you cannot say he meant this or meant that nobody hear is phychic having the ability to mind read.
 
Sarmat
Nevertheless, the culture of modern Turkic ehtinicities is similar to some extent. But it would be a stretch to call them "one nation". All these ethinicities clearly have their own cultural, historical, religious and  linguistical distinctiveness.
 
There is no Turk Turkic distinction among Turks, Turks are a large nation with many sub-groups.
 
There are is not a clear cultural, linguistic etc distinctiveness between Uygur-Ozbek-Afgan Turks.
The Oghuz Turks have high mutual intellegiblity and ties to each other.
 
The main groups are.
 
Oghuz Turks
Karluk-Chaghtay Turks
Kipchak Turks
 
They have their differences but also common factors.
 
Sarmat
If you say that all the Turkic nations are one nation then Swedes, Dutch and Germans are one nation.
 
How? what is the common factor? when did they have a common identity? they are all neighbours but have distinct languages today.
But if they among themselves view themselves as being part of a broader nation than that's for them to decide, nobody can tell them what they can and can't do.
 
 
 
 
 
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Sarmat View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
  Quote Sarmat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 15:48
Right.
 
Let Kazakhs decide, who they are. You can't decide for them. Kazakhs do not consider themselves Turkish.
 
Dutch, Scandinavian and German people all originate from ancient Germanic tribes. They had one language and religion about some time more then millenium ago.
 
So, according to your principle you also can classify them as one nation.
 
I don't see Kazakh people calling themselves Turkish here. I see that for some reasons Turkish people want to make them Turkish.
 
You should show me the original speech of Nursultan Nazarbaev, to prove your point. Do you think he said this in English?
 
There are 2 different words for Turkic and Turkish in Kazakh.
 
Turkish is Turik.
 
 Turkic is Turki.
 
I am sure he used Turki in this speach not Turik.
 
Although some Turkic ethnicities indeed do not have a lot troubles understanding each other, some of them do.
 
As a Turk you might easily understand an Azeri, but you can hardly understand Yakut, Dolgan or Chuvash.
 
The cultural differences between those ethnicities are also very hard to neglect.
 
They are too big. Chuvash would feel closer affinity to a Russian than to a Turk from Turkey. Tuvinian would feel closer to a Mongol than to a Kazakh.
 
For the similar reasons Balkan Muslims would prefer Turks to Russians, because they feel closer ties to them because of the religion and culture, although they have a common origin and similar language with Russians.


Edited by Sarmat12 - 07-Aug-2007 at 15:59
Σαυρομάτης
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 16:17
Sarmat
Let Kazakhs decide, who they are. You can't decide for them. Kazakhs do not consider themselves Turkish.
 
Exactly, let them decide.
 
Kazaks are not "Turkish" as in from Turkey.
 
Kazaks are Turks, as their President said. Today Kazakistan is leading the initiative towards building a union among Turkic states (also non-Turkic regional states like Tajikistan).
 
Sarmat
I am sure he used Turki in this speach not Turik.
 
Its down to you to prove.
In the book it writes "Turk", if Nazarbayev had a problem with the content it wouldn't have been published.
 
 
Sarmat
As a Turk you might easily understand an Azeri, but you can hardly understand Yakut, Dolgan or Chuvash.
 
Regarding Yakut, Dolgan, Chuvash your correct, I don't understand them to a high degree.
Outside the main Turkic, Chaghtai-Karluk, Oghuz and some Kipchak the other Turkic groups do not have high mutual intellegiblity.
 
The muslim Turks have most in common be that linguistically, historically or culturally.
 
I agree that the groups you mentioned have distinctive features and are not too similar to the muslim Turks, except for Gagauz due to the Ottoman influence.
 
It is interesting, there are some racist Turks who claim that Islam did nothing but ruin Turks.
However, after Turks became muslim they became world-super powers, their civillisation became one of the richest and their language spread.
Infact, it seems that becomming muslim bought unity among Turks themselves. When people are referring to Turks and those with an identity based around Turk-Turkicness it is the muslim Turks.
 
 
 
 


Edited by Bulldog - 07-Aug-2007 at 16:45
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Sarmat View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
  Quote Sarmat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 16:34
Well, again.
 
Turk in English has 2 meanings a native of Turkey or a member of any of the peoples speaking Turkic languages.
 
Which meaning do you thing Nazarbaev used in his speech ?
 
I just can't support the version that he meant Turk as a native of Turkey. He meant it "as a member of a Turkic ethnicity"
 
For the same reasons, Polish and Russian leader can claim "We are Slavics", Dutch and Swedish leader can claim "we are Germanics"
 
But it's a very big stretch to say that all the Turkic ethnicities are one nation.
 
They are different nations. They can treat other Turkic speakers as brothers, but it doesn't mean that they consider them as the people of the same nationality.
 
Russians can call Yugoslavian people Slavic brothers, but they remain Russians and Yugoslavs remain Yugoslavs.
Σαυρομάτης
Back to Top
Lmprs View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke


Joined: 30-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1869
  Quote Lmprs Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 16:46
Originally posted by Bulldog

I'm not saying all Turks are identical, there are different groups and branches of Turks with their own unique aspects. Just like Arabs in Syria arn't identical to those in Yemen or Egypt but they're still Arabs.

You are manipulative as usual. All Arabs were subjects of the Ottoman Empire just a century ago, whereas the romantic / nostalgic connection between Turkey and Central Asia is thousand years old. The only valid thing is language. As I said before, Turkish nation is based on Ottoman identity and Westernization. If you ask 'How many Turks are living in Kazakhistan?' to an ordinary Turkish citizen, he will give the number of the ones with Turkish passport, not the total population. This relation is more similar to the one between the British and the German, if you ask me.

Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 17:08
Sarmat
Which meaning do you thing Nazarbaev used in his speech ?
 
He meant what he said.
 
Turk, as in the Turk nation which stretches beyond the borders of modern day Turkey.
Those Turks from Central Asia, rode to Anatolia and bought the Turk nation with them.
 
 
 
Sarmat
But it's a very big stretch to say that all the Turkic ethnicities are one nation.
 
Its not.
Turks are from Central Asia.
The reason there are Turks in the Near East and Anatolia is because of these Turks migrations.
 
If the Turkic countries today wish to form more ties together and work towards some pollitical unions that is up to them if they use the broader Turk nation.
 
Officially Turkic countries leaders refer to each other as belonging to the same nation.
 
 
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 17:19
Feanor
All Arabs were subjects of the Ottoman Empire just a century ago, whereas the romantic / nostalgic connection between Turkey and Central Asia is thousand years old.
 
No, this is historically inaccurate. 
It has already been established countless times on this forum that Turks continuosly migrated to their newly conquered Western lands.
This idea that Turks came once 1000 years ago and that's it is nothing but a myth.
 
Turks have been migrating from Central Asia continuosly, reachinig mass-migration levels during the Selcuk, Mongol and Timurid era's.
 
Today in this era of globalisation, the geographic distance between Turkic groups has ceased to be a big problem. They will get closer and closer to each other due to the increase in tele-communications, travel, education and so on.
Already Azerbaycan and Turkey are on a path where they are becomming very close. The other Turkic countries are building stronger ties, joint universities, cultural projects, economic projects and so on.
 
The only valid thing is language. As I said before, Turkish nation is based on Ottoman identity and Westernization.
 
Where does your "Turk" identity derive?
It isn't the Ottomans who invented "Turk" or "Westernization" policies.
Its from Central Asia, whether you like it or not there is this connection. This is a historic bond, it is the origins of the identity and language, there is no need to deny this. The Selcuks were from Central Asia, so where Ottomans, so were the Beyliks, the Karakoyunlu the Akkoyunlu and so on, this is the reason why anyone in Turkey is a Turk. 
 

 


Edited by Bulldog - 07-Aug-2007 at 17:24
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Beylerbeyi View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355
  Quote Beylerbeyi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 17:25
He clearly didn't mean that Kazakhs are Turkish, he meant that Kazakhs are Turkic. In fact, Kazakhs perhaps even more closer resemble the original ancient Turks than modern Turkish people.
 
Indeed, that's what he meant.
 
Your putting words in the leader of Kazakistans mouth, he did not say what you wrote, you don't know what he "thinks", your just making it up.
 
This is what you wrote he said: 'They married the local population, and now they are called Turkey. But the real Turks are still here in Central Asia, and it's us.'
 
He clearly says that Central Asian Turkics are the real Turks and western ones are different. So what's your problem? Can't you read? Or can't you understand?
 
You know "mankurts", not Kazaks, I know many Kazak and members of Kazak organisations who know their mother-tongue and use it at home.
 
The Kazakhs I know speak Kazakh better than you speak Turkish. But it does not stop them from speaking Russian in most circles.
 
I warned you about lecturing people about their identity, but it seems your skull is armoured. 'Mankurt', on the other hand, seems to be a good name for wiki-nationalists like you who can't even speak Turkish...
 
There is no Turk Turkic distinction among Turks, Turks are a large nation with many sub-groups.
 
Turk means Turk and 'Turki' means Turkic in the Turkish language. While sometimes Turk is used instead of Turki in a historic context, it is not correct usage, and is not used for modern Turkic peoples. Modern Turkic groups are referred to with their proper names.  
 
Turks and Kazakhs are not members of the same nation. That is ridiculous.
 
As a Turk you might easily understand an Azeri, but you can hardly understand Yakut, Dolgan or Chuvash.
 
Bulldog is not Turkish, so he can't even understand Turkish. I am Turkish and Turks cannot readily understand Tatar, Ozbek, etc., let alone Yakut. Turks can only understand other Oguz languages/dialects.
 
Let Kazakhs decide, who they are.
 
We have Central Asian Turkics in this forum. Read what they write.
Back to Top
omergun View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 24-Sep-2006
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 106
  Quote omergun Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 17:51
Originally posted by Sarmat12

 Nursultan Nazarbaev, meant "Turkic" in that speech.
 
You should distinct between Turkic and Turkish. While Kazakhs, Uzbeks, Kyrgyzs, Turkmens, Tatars etc. all are Turkic ethnicities, they are not TURKISH.
 
It's just a liguistic confusion, because the word Turk in English could mean Turk as an inhabitant of the Republic of Turkey as well as Turk as Turkic i.e. a larger linguistic and cultural group which includes many ethnicities including Turkish people and Kazakh people.
 
He clearly didn't mean that Kazakhs are Turkish, he meant that Kazakhs are Turkic. In fact, Kazakhs perhaps even more closer resemble the original ancient Turks than modern Turkish people.
 
Nevertheless, the culture of modern Turkic ehtinicities is similar to some extent. But it would be a stretch to call them "one nation". All these ethinicities clearly have their own cultural, historical, religious and  linguistical distinctiveness.
 
If you say that all the Turkic nations are one nation then Swedes, Dutch and Germans are one nation. Russians, Poles and Bulgarians are one nation, French, Spanish and Italians are also one nations. This is definetely wrong.
 
 

 




Originally posted by Sarmat12

Right.
 
Let Kazakhs decide, who they are. You can't decide for them. Kazakhs do not consider themselves Turkish.
 
Dutch, Scandinavian and German people all originate from ancient Germanic tribes. They had one language and religion about some time more then millenium ago.
 
So, according to your principle you also can classify them as one nation.
 
I don't see Kazakh people calling themselves Turkish here. I see that for some reasons Turkish people want to make them Turkish.
 
You should show me the original speech of Nursultan Nazarbaev, to prove your point. Do you think he said this in English?
 
There are 2 different words for Turkic and Turkish in Kazakh.
 
Turkish is Turik.
 
 Turkic is Turki.
 
I am sure he used Turki in this speach not Turik.
 
Although some Turkic ethnicities indeed do not have a lot troubles understanding each other, some of them do.
 
As a Turk you might easily understand an Azeri, but you can hardly understand Yakut, Dolgan or Chuvash.
 
The cultural differences between those ethnicities are also very hard to neglect.
 
They are too big. Chuvash would feel closer affinity to a Russian than to a Turk from Turkey. Tuvinian would feel closer to a Mongol than to a Kazakh.
 
For the similar reasons Balkan Muslims would prefer Turks to Russians, because they feel closer ties to them because of the religion and culture, although they have a common origin and similar language with Russians.


You, saying that Sultan Nazarbayev meant Trkic, is enough to see that you have a problem with Trks. You are making things up, you are the one who should give a source which shows your argument is true, Bulldog already came with his source, your mind is so full with hate, you are asking for a source while he gave a source already. http://www.sonsoftheconquerors.com/17001.html

Do you know what the problem of people like you are? You hate Trks, thats why you will try to change everything that is getting his way in favour of Trks. Thats why our culture has nothing in common with other cultures. We dont know the meaning of falsification or nonhonoust(a new word lol)

Where are you from? Are you Persian? How would you feel if someone will try to terrorize your race, if he is wrong, and he knows that? Or maybe, the reason why people like you act like this, is because in your culture you dont have value like the love Trks have for their nation/race.

Thats why you are saying yourself that Dutch and German are from same origin, but you, and these people themselves dont consider themselves as same. Because i dont have much information or interest in their historical bonds i dont state an argument about them, by just creating it with help of your hateful feelings.

On internet there are many sites whom show the historical events of The Trks with their times. The facts are very open and clear, kinds like you cant change history or the thoughts of all Trks.

How do you know Kazaks dont consider themselves as Trks? Are there any Kazaks in this forum, if there are, could you please give your thoughts?

The only thing you could do, is giving people like me stress. I dont even talk about facts anymore, because there is nothing more to talk. Everything is open and clear!


ATTİLA
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 18:08
Beylerbeyi
Indeed, that's what he meant.
 
Oh yeah he meant this, no he meant that, I can read his mind he meant this...
 
I never knew you were a mindreader LOL
 
He meant what he wrote, end of story, stop trying to invent your own alternative stories.
 
Beylerbeyi
He clearly says that Central Asian Turkics are the real Turks and western ones are different.
 
No, he said Turks are from Central Asia.
Turks conquered Anatolians, migrated there, mixed with the locals but are still Turks.
However, Turks originally are from Central Asia, why do you have such a big problem with this or any mention of some common heritage and identity?
The way you carry on is as if somebody is breaking a "taboo" or comitting some unimaginable crime.
Is it really terrible that Turks are building stronger ties with each other? persuing joint education ventures? improving economic relations?
 
A few decades ago when you told a person that in Azerbaycan and Iran there are millions of Turks who speak Turkish people would think you were making it up.
However, today, Azerbaycan and Turkey are moving ever closer together, there is much more awareness of one-another, tele-communications are broadcast to each other's populations, cultural ventures, economic co-operation etc
 
The Turkic world will naturally move closer together especially due to the ever advancing technological environment which is breaking boundries and making the world a much smaller place. 
 
Beylerbeyi
The Kazakhs I know speak Kazakh better than you speak Turkish. But it does not stop them from speaking Russian in most circles.
 
Make up your mind, one minute they don't know their language enough to even speak it at home, the next their experts...
 
You have never heard me speak any form of Turkish so again your making it all up.  
 
 
Beylerbeyi
I warned you about lecturing people about their identity, but it seems your skull is armoured. 'Mankurt', on the other hand, seems to be a good name for wiki-nationalists like you who can't even speak Turkish...
 
Yet more assumptions, I can speak, read, write in Turkish don't worry.
 
Have you read "Gn Uzar Yzyıl Olur" by Chingiz Aytamov?
 
Beylerbeyi
Turks and Kazakhs are not members of the same nation. That is ridiculous.
 
Tell that to Sultan Nazarbayev and the ruling elite, its not ridiculous at all.
 
 
Beylerbeyi
so he can't even understand Turkish.
 
Even more assumptions
 
 
 
 


Edited by Bulldog - 07-Aug-2007 at 18:19
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Sarmat View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
  Quote Sarmat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 18:12
In fact, Nazarbaev even didn't said that sentence about Turks.
 
I didn't find any sources for that.
 
In the article which is posted here, American author writes: "If you ask Nazarbaev, then he would say..." But Nazarbaev, actually didn't say anything like that.
 
Even if he said that he would refer to Turkic not to Turkish meaning of the word Turk. He didn't say it anyway.
 
There is no any scientific proof for the existence of this gigantic "Turk" nation. Nobody denies the existence of various ties between different Turkic ethnicities, but it doesn't make them one nation.
 
Turkologosts and antropologists know about the existence of many ethnicities which speak Turkic languages, they do not have any idea about this mythical "one Turk nation"
 
All this claims about "One Turk nation" actually seem to be the propaganda of Panturkism.
 
Panturkism appeared in the Ottoman empire as a reaction to the Panslavism promoted by the Imperial Russia.
 
Both ideologies have a lot flaws and were used for the realization of imperialistic goals of the named empires.
 
I don't think Central Asian countries would very much like to be a part of the Great Turan, run from Istanbul.
 
People in Turkey should understand that Central Asians consider themselves separate ethnicities. They don't need the big Turkish brother to remind them who they are.
 
Respect the national identity of the others, do not consider them "minor brothers" and you won't have the following:
 
 

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

The Tengiz Riots: What is at the Heart of the Tension between Turks and Kazakhs?

Photobucket%20-%20Video%20and%20Image%20HostingPhotobucket%20-%20Video%20and%20Image%20HostingPhotobucket%20-%20Video%20and%20Image%20Hosting
Former Turkish President Turgut Ozal, Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev, and Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan

The riots between Kazakhs and Turks that took place in Tengiz a week ago last Friday have generated much discussion and interest around the world. Filipino authorities have expressed concern for their workers in Kazakhstan, and the Turkish embassy in Kazakhstan initially reacted to the event with a certain degree of outrage. Finally, Kazakh commentators have examined the event with an eye to what it says about their own country and its problems.

It is significant, however, that the event occurred between Kazakhs and Turks and that it is not the first such violence to erupt between the two groups in recent memory. The presence of such violence directed against Turks in Kazakhstan demonstrates the degree to which Turkey has fallen from grace in the region since the early 1990s.

In the early 1990s, under then president of Turkey Turgut Ozal, the Turkish presence in Kazakhstan was seen as a sign of friendship and common interest in a Turkic world that had suddenly expanded with the fall of the U.S.S.R. At that time, for example, the Turkish government sponsored a television station in Kazakhstan producing programs in Turkic languages after years of Russian linguistic dominance, and numerous other cultural exchange programs promoted the new found alliance between the two countries. While some people in Kazakhstan even in the early 1990s felt that Turks came to the region with too much arrogance, expecting to replace Russia as Central Asians big brother, Turkey was generally viewed positively and as a counterweight to dependence on Moscow. It was also at this time that the idea of the Baku-Tblisi-Cheyan pipeline first emerged.

With Ozals death, however, Turkeys role in the region decreased. If Turkey began to show less political and cultural interest in Kazakhstan, it continued to be active economically. As a result, Kazakhs became increasingly cynical of their Turkic brothers, feeling as if they had only been interested in economic gains from the start. Furthermore, Turks in Kazakhstan (like many foreigner businessmen) generally behaved arrogantly towards local employees and local citizens throughout the 1990s.

Today, the situation is quickly changing as Kazakhstans economy continues to grow. Kazakhstanis now find it difficult to view the Turks as more advanced big brothers who deserve higher wages than local workers. Furthermore, many Kazakhs perceive of the Turks position in their country as facilitated by the United States. A recent article from a Kazakhstani website suggests, for example, that Turkeys economic successes in Kazakhstan would not have been as significant if not for the active lobbying and support of America. While this may be an overstatement, the fact remains that many Kazakhs see the BTC pipeline, Turkey, and the United States as one united foreign interest that is in economic and political competition with Russia in their country. In this context, what could represent Kazakhs distrust of the BTC, Turkey, and the U.S. better than a riot against Turkish managers at a construction site in Tengiz?

Interestingly, this all comes at a time when Turkey is once again expressing increased political interest in Kazakhstan and Central Asia as a whole. It has been said that Turkeys present prime minister Tayyip Erdogan is displaying an interest in Central Asia not seen since Ozals death. Furthermore, Erdogans interest in the region is viewed suspiciously by Moscow, especially given the threat that Russia sees in the establishment of the BTC pipeline. Such a trend also serves the interests of Kazakhstan in ensuring its independence from Russia and China, between which it is sandwiched. With Kazakhstans participation in the BTC pipeline and its recent announcement that it will adopt a Latin alphabet in favor of Cyrillic, it would seem that the leadership of Kazakhstan understands those advantages.

The question remains, however, if this most recent event could significantly detract from the trend of Turkeys increased involvement in Kazakhstan. A youtube video of a Turkish television report (below) shows the drama with which the event is being portrayed to the Turkish public, while the comments by Turks and Kazakhs alike to the video show how much animosity has been built up on both sides.

< =http://www.youtube.com/v/qA4tyuTKwUI width=425 height=350 =application/x-shockwave-flash wmode="transparent">

In general, it would seem that the Tengiz riots should be seen as a warning sign to Turkey that it cannot take its relationship with Kazakhstan and the Kazakhs for granted. Interestingly, at least one recent editorial in the Turkish newspaper Zaman reflects an empathetic understanding of the animosity with which Kazakhs have begun to view the Turks. Turkey will need to reflect on this more if the country is to retain its favored economic status with Kazakhstan. More specifically, Turkey likely needs to reconsider its role as big brother in the Turkic world and engage countries like Kazakhstan as equals.

posted by Sean R. Roberts, PhD at 4:08 AM   

 


Edited by Sarmat12 - 07-Aug-2007 at 18:30
Σαυρομάτης
Back to Top
Lmprs View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke


Joined: 30-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1869
  Quote Lmprs Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 18:21
I am not expert on anything, but I know how Central Asian Turkic people, especially Kazakhs, perceive Anatolian Turks more than any Turanist freak here. The concept of nation has more to do with politics than culture and if you think Kazakhs and Turks are parts of one nation, you need serious medical treatment. By the way, we can clearly observe typical symptoms of Turanism like paranoia and megalomania in some posts.
Back to Top
Sarmat View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
  Quote Sarmat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 18:29

Those who write here anything about Kazakhstan, should at least have some respect for its leader and know that his name is NURSULTAN.



Edited by Sarmat12 - 07-Aug-2007 at 18:44
Σαυρομάτης
Back to Top
omergun View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 24-Sep-2006
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 106
  Quote omergun Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 18:39
Originally posted by Feanor

Originally posted by Bulldog

I'm not saying all Turks are identical, there are different groups and branches of Turks with their own unique aspects. Just like Arabs in Syria arn't identical to those in Yemen or Egypt but they're still Arabs.

You are manipulative as usual. All Arabs were subjects of the Ottoman Empire just a century ago, whereas the romantic / nostalgic connection between Turkey and Central Asia is thousand years old. The only valid thing is language. As I said before, Turkish nation is based on Ottoman identity and Westernization. If you ask 'How many Turks are living in Kazakhistan?' to an ordinary Turkish citizen, he will give the number of the ones with Turkish passport, not the total population. This relation is more similar to the one between the British and the German, if you ask me.






Dont let me laugh dude. I want to ask you something, if Trkish nation is based on Ottoman identity, then on what is Ottoman Identity based on? More questions=> How and when did Ottoman Empire appear, who is Osman Bey and what is his Origin, who are Oguz Trks and were did they come from and whos descendents are they of, how was the situation of Trks in Ottoman Period in Anadolu(Anatolia), do you know the meaning beyliks and what they count for? Ottoman Beyligi was a state of the earlier Trk Selcuk Empire. In Anatolia the Beyliks were like states. A  Beylik gets his name of the famillies/tribes who settled in that state, just like the name Trks were the main population in all these Beyliks.

Like i said in my other post, if there are 10 million people in T
rkiye around 1900, how many people were there before going to further time? Im trying to say there werent many people in those times, l

ets use our logics=> lets create a complot which can give a view to understand the subject. For example: there are 1 million French people in France at the moment. A Kazak Army goes in France and conquers the area, and in 100 years 5 million Kazak T
rks migrates into France and 500.000 French people leave their country and go to England. Most Kazak Trks marry Kazak Trks, and a couple mary French. This goes on for 500 years. Now, after 500 years, in 2607, will it then mean that The Kazaks who stayed in Central Asia and The Kazaks who settled in French are not the same?Of course not!
ATTİLA
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 18:50
Sarmat
In fact Nazarbaev even didn't said that sentence about Turks.
 
Oh yeah, so now we've moved from being phychic, putting words into his mouth to now pretending he never ever said it Confused
 
It would be wise if you read the book before making such comments, why is "Hugh Pope" going to lie, don't tell me its a conspiracy.
 
Sarmat
There is no any scientific proof for the existence of this gigantic "Turk" nation. Nobody denies the existence of various ties between different Turkic ethnicities, but it doesn't make them one nation.
 
Its not a science, this isn't a mathmatical equation.
 
Turks exist, a Turk can use this identity if he/she likes and not use it if they don't, however a non-Turk can't tell Turks who they can and can't be.
 
I wonder, why non-Turks would call their area, "Turkiston", land of the Turks...
 
 
Sarmat
All this claims about "One Turk nation" actually seem to be the propaganda of Panturkism.
 
And claims trying to "rule and divide" Turks are propanda of Soviets to control the area with more ease.
 
 
Sarmat
I don't think Central Asian countries would very much like to be a part of the Great Turan, run from Istanbul.
 
Turanism is ridiculous, it includes non-Turks like Hungarians, Fins, Mongols etc. Pan-Turanianism and other such warped, ridiculous ideas are nothing but a joke, an ill thought silly idea.
 
However, there are Turkic independant states today, if they wish to get closer together that is up to them and only them, Russia can't bully them and arrest all leaders, intellects, activists and kill them on charges of Pan-Turkism for it.
 
If its in Turkic countries interests to build stronger ties they will and they are.
 
Nazarbayevs proposal is a Turkic Union, countries remain as they are but form a economic union like the EU.
There is no need for your "scaremongering".
 
 
 
 
 


Edited by Bulldog - 07-Aug-2007 at 19:05
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 19:02
Oh and your "blog", it has nothing to do with the post, turning a brawl among disgrunted workers into some ethnic super war is a joke.
 
You want the official policies, what is really happening, instead of making propoganda out of a petty brawl.
 
Here.
 
 

SPIRIT OF COOPERATION DOMINATES TURKIC SUMMIT
Mevlut Katik 11/20/06

Print this article   Email this article

The results of the November 17 summit of the leaders of Turkic-speaking nations exceeded the expectations of many diplomats and political analysts. The presidents of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Turkey took the first steps toward the creation of a Turkic commonwealth, giving an enthusiastic endorsement to efforts aimed at strengthening energy and security ties.

The four leaders, along with Turkmenistans envoy to Turkey, gathered at the Turkish Mediterranean resort city of Antalya for the summit, the eighth such gathering of its kind, but the first held in five years. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Officials from Uzbekistan, who had been slated to attend, ended up boycotting the event due to a breakdown in relations with Turkey.

The participants signed a declaration committing the Turkic states to strengthen economic and transport ties, while stressing "the importance of the joint fight against terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, drug smuggling, weapons smuggling, human smuggling and other organize crimes." The statement also endorsed the concepts of Turkeys accession to the European Union, and a peace settlement to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict that leaves the territory under Azerbaijans control.

"We declare that we support peaceful solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in accordance with the principle of territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, and that we will further support fraternal Azerbaijan in this dispute," Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer said. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

The four leaders underlined both the "increasing importance of the Caspian Basin for the energy security of Europe" and the "strategic importance of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan [BTC] oil pipeline opening and the [expected] completion of the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum [BTE] natural gas pipeline." They also stressed the importance of the possible addition of trans-Caspian transportation routes to both the BTC and the BTE. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Sezer stressed in his opening speech the importance of involving energy-rich Turkmenistan in the summit process, and vowed that Ankara would work to facilitate energy exports from the Caspian Basin to Europe via Turkey. Turkic leaders underlined in the Antalya declaration that "increasing energy cooperation would positively and directly contribute to economic and political stability" in Eurasia.

Kazakshtani President Nursultan Nazarbayev took observers, and even many participants, by surprise by proposing the creation of a Turkic parliamentary assembly. Nazarbayev went on to nominate former Turkish president and prime minister Suleyman Demirel to serve as the proposed assemblys first chairman.

Nazarbayevs proposal was indicative of his interest in exploring the feasibility of a full-blown Turkic commonwealth. "We have to discuss it," Kazakshtani Foreign Minister Foreign Minister Kasymzhomart Tokayev told EurasiaNet, referring to the commonwealth possibility.

It would appear that Nazarbayev, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Kyrgyzstani leader Kurmanbek Bakiyev now see closer cooperation as a way to leverage the collective influence of "200 million Turks," as Nazarbayev put it, in pursit of specific policy aims.

"The problem of one Turkic speaking nation must be the problem of other Turkic speaking nations," the Anatolia news agency quoted Aliyev as saying. Observers interpreted his comments as meaning Turkic states should collectively push for results in Turkeys EU accession process and Azerbaijans Karabakh peace talks that are satisfactory to Ankara and Baku respectively.

If the Turkic states actually opted to coordinate diplomatic action, they might have the collective muscle to alter the existing equilibrium in many geopolitical matters. In the case of Turkeys troubled drive to join the EU, for example, a Turkic commonwealth could influence Brussels decision-making calculus by playing the energy card, letting it be known that a rebuff of Ankara could hinder the EUs access to Central Asian energy supplies.

Kyrgyzstani diplomats also stressed that closer cooperation would enhance Bishkeks international profile. Kanat Tursunkulov, a top Kyrgyz Foreign Ministry official, said President Bakiyevs attendance at the summit, despite the "recent troubles" in Bishkek, underscored the Kyrgyz governments position that closer cooperation among Turkic states is a top political priority. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Commenting on the outcome of the summit, a top Turkish diplomat said, "The era of romantic embracing has ended; the era of concrete cooperation has started." Nazarbayev, Aliyev and Bakiyev all quietly expressed a desire for their respective countries to host to the next Turkic summit. At the same time, participants emphasized a need to proceed cautiously, seeking to dispel any impression that they are rushing toward institutionalizing the group.

Beyond the steps toward closer cooperation, the Turkic summit will be remembered for the public airing of a diplomatic feud between Turkey and Uzbekistan. Some news reports claimed that Uzbek officials stayed away from the gathering to protest the final declarations wording on the Karabakh settlement. However, a senior Turkish official said the reason for Tashkents displeasure was Turkeys decision to join the United States in supporting a draft measure in UN General Assemblys Human Rights Council that would condemn human rights violations in Uzbekistan.

The official was outspoken in his criticism of both Uzbekistans rights behavior and Tashkents reaction to Ankaras vote. "It is time that some countries learned that democracy and human rights are essential to integrate into the global system," he said. "Turkey will persistently work to promote democracy and human rights for the region`s own benefit."

Turkeys decision to vote for the draft Human Rights Council resolution was "a reflection of our ideals and understanding of the importance of democracy and respect for human rights," the official continued. "Turkey has been criticized for similar reasons [human rights violations] in the past, but we never turned it into a bilateral issue, and chose to make improvemenst in our [democracy and human right] records instead."

Such blunt talk would appear to mark a significant shift in Turkish policy, as Turkish officials had unitl now avoided open criticism of Uzbek government action. It may be that Turkeys desire to meet EU accession criteria, especially the need to bolster its human rights credentials, is playing a role in the adoption of a toughter line toward Tashkent. The official also indicated that Ankara is growing tired of Uzbek President Islam Karimovs demands. "They [Uzbek officials] also accuse us of supporting the Uzbek opposition, citing [the fact that] opposition leader Mohammad Solih freely travels to and lives in Turkey. Mr. Solih is free to travel anywhere he wants to go, and travels to Norway, Britain and the United States. Why is Turkey being singled out?" the official said.

http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/eav112006.shtml

 
 


Edited by Bulldog - 07-Aug-2007 at 19:06
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 19:07
25.07.2007 17:26:32

Workshop for Representatives of Turkic Speaking Countries Education Ministries Underway in Istanbul

Azerbaijan, Baku / Тrend corr E. Huseynli / An international workshop on Turkic Culture and National Education Systems began in Istanbul, Turkey. The workshop is attended by representatives of education ministries from sixteen countries, Azerbaijani Consul General to Istanbul, Sayad Aran, reported to Trend on 25 July.

According to Aran, the experience of national education systems was discussed at the meeting attended by the fifteen members of the Azerbaijani delegation. The Consul General noted that a viewpoint exchange on the importance of establishing a common Turkic language had been held.

The workshop, organized by the Turkish Education Ministry, is hosting Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Kosovo, Tatarstan, Albania, and other countries.

The workshop will come to a close on 10 August

 
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Seko View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Spammer

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8595
  Quote Seko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2007 at 19:08
Politics included there has been a growing interest in Central Asia since the dmeise of the Soviet Union. Some of you have touched upon a yearning for cultural exchange between long lost brothers. The current realities also include business practices that have left a mark on potential partnerships. Turkey, Russia, Iran, China, and Kazakhistan inevitably will look after her own self interests. Pleasant or not these are opportunities that exist.
 
On the other hand the usage of the label, Turk, has historical and political roots. In the past the Turks went by many names: Hsing nu, Hun, Gok Turuk, Mogol, Bulgar, Onogur, Seljuk, Altin Ordu, Osmanli, etc. etc. down to Turkiye Turks. The Kazakhs partially came from some of this history yet carved her own way along the road. One that has many cultural and linguistic similarities yet diverse and fully independant. 
 
With this in mind civility among AE forumers is the best way to debate. Omergun, a slight reminder to respect those who differ with you. This is not the way to do it:  Do you know what the problem of people like you are? You hate Trks, thats why you will try to change everything that is getting his way in favour of Trks.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 6>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.172 seconds.