Nikos Sigalas and Alexandre ToumarkineDemographic engineering, genocide, ethnic cleaning. The predominant paradigms for the study of violence on the minority populations in Turkey and in Balkans

European Journal of Turkish Studies, Vol. 7 (2008)Demographic Engineering - Part I

The file on ' Demographic Engineering ' took an unpublished largeness which drove us in envisage a new number to come of revue. This introduction is aimed at summing upobjectives of the file and to introduce results, always interim, in which drives to us her preparation. But it is also for us opportunity to speak about changes of this file by report in our plan of origin. Finally, this introduction will be supplemented by the postface of the second number ' Demographic Engineering ', as part of which we shall deal more extensively of conceptual questions which are asked in this file, as well as methodological questions that it raises.[2] This file is dedicated to violence on the minority populations in the space Anatolian and Balkan. And, seen that a certain number of contributions which were envisaged in origin, concerning various Balkan countries, cannot, for practical reasons, take their placein the file, this one was transformed into a principally turco-Greek file, with one important contribution on the austro-Hungarian Bosnia (Freeze n.p.) and other one, also very important, on the racialisation of Jewry in the demography of the interwar period (Bertaux n.p.). [page 1]We however believe that the Balkan dimension of the file is, to a certain measurement, always present, owing to the fact that it there is on several occasions question of Albanian minorities, Macedonians, Bulgarian and Wallachian, but also owing to the fact that it is there frequently question of Bulgaria, of Serbia, of Albania and Macedonia. [3] The file is designed in the form of debate. Its primary goal is to stimulate the debate on the theoretical tools, even on the epistemological paradigms, which are mobilized for the analysis of violence on the minorities in this geographical surface. However, so that this debate is not limited at the purely theoretical level, one wanted to nourish it studies on concrete empirical objects. One wanted to include also there studies on various types of violence on the minority populations, including forms `douces' of violence, such violence symbolic system on the toponyms or the language (Öktem 2008), but also on the demographic practices which have contributed to circumscribe the minority populations, to build them like objects of policies of State (Bertaux n.p.; Freeze n.p.; Embiricos n.p.). Because our ambition was to also show the limits of various paradigms, as to call on prospects for research which are not defined compared to the paradigms which are dominant today, in the geographical surface which interests us, to analyze violence on the minority populations.

I. the construction of the minorities considered in his report/ratio with violence

[4] Some words on the term of minority which appears in the title of this introduction are necessary. Why choose this term instead of that of ethnos group or ethnicity, which however seem to have a broader significance? Because the concept of minority is present, since at least the beginning of the

1

XXe century, in the speech of the actors. Such is not the case of the concepts of ethnos group or ethnicity which enter the speech historiographic concerning the events which are treated in this file only well later, in the years 1980 and especially 1990. Our choice not to employ the concept of ethnicity in the definition of the subject of this file is thus related to the minimal requirement, as regards historiography, to take into account the speech of the actors and the subjectivity of their designs. To study the political construction of these designs and their inscription in relations of being able, we prefer to focus ourselves on[page 2]concepts of which the actors are useful themselves indeed and not on something that they do not say. [5] This concept of minority is likely of substantialisation, like d' elsewhere that of ethnicity. It however appears in the historical sources concerning the period taken in consideration in this file. The concept of minority (in Othoman Turkish ekaliyet) appears in the Ottoman Empire about at the same time as violences of mass against the civil populations which are studied in this file, and is diffused in the Empire during the second constitutional monarchy (1908-1918). In Greece, it appears during the Balkan wars, to diffuse itself after the end of the First World War. It is very little probable that one meets it in the other Balkan countries before the beginning of the XXe century. With regard to the Ottoman Empire and Balkan space, the construction of the national minorities is thus a contemporary historical phenomenon of the violence of mass which falls down on the populations considered as minority i.e like noncomparable to the nation; the latter being defined as a majority. [6] A parallel is established thus enters, on a side, a new design of the population - and by extension of sovereignty - based on the between majorities and minorities binomial and, other, a certain number of practices of violence precisely directed against the groups which this new design of the population separates from the body of the nation. It is thus legitimate to wonder about the report/ratio of this design to these practices: on the report/ratio of the construction of the minorities to the violence which is directed against those. Just like it would be also legitimate to wonder about the ethnicisation of the population of ex-Yugoslavia in the years 1980 and 1990 (cf will infra) and the ethnic violence of the years 1990 in this area. [7] The concept of minority does not have an analytical value here. It refers, as one has just mentioned it, with a historical context, that of the construction of the national minorities, which is also the context of violences (energy of violence symbolic system to massive violences like the massacres, expulsions, displacements, forced migrations, persecutions and pogroms) undergone by these populations considered as dangerous for the territorial safety of the States. Among these populations `dangereuses', some are expelled at the very moment of the integration of new territories in the national States, before thus becoming `minorités'; others are[page 3]massacred, moved or pushed to emigrate at the time of phases of war, notwithstanding engagements of the States concerning the protection of the minorities; others still, remained inside the State-nations, underwent practices discriminatrices of the States and different vague from more or less organized violences; finally some are comparable with the `majorité'. In other words, the construction of the minorities takes seat when the States do not have nor the possibility of to remove of these populations `dangereuses', the `déterritorialiser', nor that to assimilate them. It thus belongs to the same historical context as all the forms of violence which interest us in this file.

2

[8] Another point which must be specified relates to the types of violence of which it is question in this file. The first type is that of the violence of mass. By this term we understand any kind of physical violence against a civil population (or a group pertaining to one civil population) having destroying effects on the life, the health or the goods of its members, or modifying its demographic characteristics. The violence of mass has a character of exceptionnality; it defines a irregularity in the history of the report/ratio of a civil population, or a group pertaining to a civil population, with violence. It is in particular by sound exceptionnality which the violence of mass is distinguished from the administrative violence, which is here included/understood like regular violence of a capacity on a civil population, by means of the institutions controlled by this capacity. Administrative violence can be as well physical violence as violence symbolic system, i.e sublimated violence, which impose significances, reports/ratios of direction (Bourdieu 1980).

II. Geographical distribution of the dominant paradigms for the study of violence on minorities

[9] Two paradigms for the study of violence on the minority populations are today of decisive importance. The first is that of engineering demographic (demographic engineering), developed in years 1990 in the United States, the field of minority studies (Minority Studies) and of the studies on the genocides (Genocide Studies). second paradigm is formed compared to two concepts, the genocide and ethnic cleaning, who are related one to the other from their legal status. The legal status of the genocide was reconfirmed [page 4]and widened as for its legal use in the years 1990, the framework of the Penal Court International for ex-Yugoslavia (1993), of the International penal court for Rwanda (1994) and of the Treaty of Rome (July 17, 1998), which founded the International penal court aiming at founding a permanent legal framework for the penal crimes against humanity. In the same context ad hoc the legal status of ethnic cleaning, remained was formulated rather vague up to that point insofar as its legal definitions recut on several points that of the genocide (Petrović 1994). It is under the influence of these evolutions of the legal framework - and more particularly legal - international than the use of the concepts of genocide and of ethnic cleaning spread as from the years 1990 in the field of the minority studies. [10] These two paradigms are obviously far from being competitor, one often meets them in the texts of the same authors. The two paradigms develop within the same ones university pulpits on the studies of the minorities and the genocides, which multiplied, initially, in the years 1990, in the American universities, to then know a diffusion in Western Europe, towards the end of this same decade and more still in the years 2000. [11] However, it is that the geographical distribution of these two paradigms present sometimes dissymmetries, as in the case of the two geographical areas which are taken in consideration in this file, Turkey and Balkans. Thus, while the demographic paradigm of engineering for already ten years has been introduced into the Turkish and Othoman studies, where it gains today more and more ground, it remains practically unknown researchers specialized in the Balkan surface, where the concepts of genocide and especially of ethnic cleaning dominate. turcologists are in their turn little accustomed - besides some notable exceptions - to use the concepts of genocide and ethnic cleaning. These differences are explained mainly by the divergent recent experiments historical and political of

3

Turkey and other countries of Balkans. These differences are also explained by the international parameter, owing to the fact that events of the history, more or less close relations, some of these countries became of the international policy issues, of a nature symbolic system, diplomatic or strategic. However, while becoming international policy issues, these events became also objects of the right international; they were seized by the new concepts that the lawyers specialized in this field of the right had to forge to give an account of the new problems arising.[page 5][12] With regard to the Turkish and Othoman studies, one cannot miss to suggest that the reserve of the turcologists towards the use of the concepts of genocide and cleaning ethnic is undoubtedly related to the very distinct positions of the Turkish ideology of State in what relate to the Armenian question. The concept of engineering demographic can be thus seen like a way of speaking about events taboos for the ideology of State without naming them by the terms extremely politicized in Turkey, and finally very dangerous for those which make use of it, of genocide and of ethnic cleaning. The validity of this suggestion is however relativized owing to the fact that certain researchers make use of the analytical prism of demographic engineering without depriving itself for as much the use of the terms of genocide and ethnic cleaning. The success of the paradigm of demographic engineering in the Turkish studies and Othomans seems to us to have also one another reason: the great weight, policy and ideological, of the State, object of veneration for some and Tyrannical Léviathan for others, in the Turkish company. Dispute of the influence of the State on the company the meeting from several intellectuals Turkish with the liberal criticism of Étatplanificateur is resulting. And it is undoubtedly in the general context of this meeting that takes seat adoption by this Turkish liberal intellectual medium of the prism of the demographic engineering, which implies a design of violences against the minorities like effects of a planning of State (cf postface of this file). [13] Another reason, related to the latter, which the turcologists chose not concept of cleaning ethnic, but for that of demographic engineering, in spite of the pregnancy of the reference to the Yugoslav conflicts of the years 1990 and comparative literature produced on ethnic cleaning (for example Carmichael 2002; Naimark 2001), returns to the importance for liberal intellectuals Turkish of the thesis of the continuity of the repressive practices of the State, upstream and downstream from the central period of the Young Turks. If the concept of cleaning ethnic were not privileged, it is probably because it returned to certain types of practices on the population (most radical) and did not allow to put the question of continuity between the young period Turkish on the one hand and the periods which precede it or follow it, other (cf will infra). [14] The situation is different for the majority from the Balkan countries, which knew, directly or by rebound, violences against the minority populations of the wars of Yugoslavia. These violences were central in three fields: formation of a new framework[page 6]legal for the international law, the Re-confirmation and the widening of the uses of the concept of genocide within this legal framework, and finally the introduction of the concept of cleaning ethnic. It is however important to announce that employment, in the years 1990, of the concept of genocide for to qualify the crimes committed during the wars of Yugoslavia against the civil populations, must much with the virulent debates on the crimes against the civilians Second world war who have opposed in the years the 1980 historiographic schools of the various Yugoslav republics (Bougarel to

4

appear 20091). These debates have as a preamble the revival, on a worldwide scale, of the interest for the crimes against the civilians of the Second world war. This revival is marked by the lawsuit of Adolf Eichmann in 1961 and the appearance of the question of the imprescriptibility of the crimes against humanity (1964-1965). It is thus with the great repercussion that knew the Eichmann lawsuit in Yugoslavia qu' the new request is due which the Yugoslav federal authorities address, for this period, in the United States concerning the extradition of Andrija Artuković, former minister for the Interior of the State Indépendant of Croatia (Nezavisna Država Hrvatska) and indicated like person in charge of the deportation of its populations Jewish, Tzigane and Serb. This one was finally delivered to Yugoslavia only in 1986, to be judged the same year in Zagreb, in a lawsuit starting a strong polemic around the use of the concept of genocide. This polemic was doubled by the debate which caused in Yugoslavia `the Waldheim' business, bursting this same year 1986. In addition, the revival of the interest expressed in Yugoslavia for the civilian victims of the Second world war is also related to the question of the imprescriptibility of the crimes against humanity, and in particular with the d' possibility; a compensation by the FR of Germany, topic of the campaign conducted then by Belgrade. [15] Another preamble to the discussions animated around the uses of the concept of genocide in Yugoslavia is the formation, in 1966, of the `Russell' court, by intellectuals of international scale, such as Bertrand Russell or Jean-Paul Sartre for `juger' war crimes in Vietnam. The secretary, after 1966, of the `Russell' court - become, after the death of Sartre, its president -, who contributed the most to designation, in his `verdict', of the crimes committed by the American army in Vietnam like `genocide against the people vietnamien', was Vladimir Dedijer, old diplomatic, member of the Yugoslav delegation during the negotiations on the Convention of [page 7]UNO concerning the genocide (1948), historian and member of the Serb Academy of sciences and arts. However, it is Dedijer which has, at the same time, introduced in 1972 the concept of genocide into Yugoslav historiography, and more contributed to the diffusion of this concept in Yugoslavia in the years 1980. Thus the amplification of the uses of the term of genocide in the years 1980 in Yugoslavia follows - with a light shift - evolutions common `to the whole of the continent of Europe, such as the resumption of a legal category in the vocabulary historiographic or, more generally, increasing insistence on the massacres and the civilian victims of the Second War mondiale' (Bougarel to appear 2009). [16] The introduction of the concept of cleaning ethnic into the international law is resulting from internationalization, through its translation in a great number of languages, concept serbocroate of etničko čišćenje, formed in Yugoslavia with the beginning of the year 1990. However, as points it Dražen Petrović, the legal definition of the concept was very vague, in order to recut on several points that of the genocide, of which it is very difficult to distinguish it from a legal point of view (Petrović 1994). [17] The origins of this concept are to be sought in the speeches around the `purity ethnique', which developed in the context of the Yugoslav policies of the years 1980 on the ethnicities (Petrović 1994, Krieg-Cushy job 2003, Petrović 2007). The concepts of genocide and ethnic cleaning are thus anchored in the speech of the various quite front republics the internationalization of the Yugoslav

1 This is on this very innovative work, that the author had l' kindness to entrust to us before his publication, that the short talk rests which follows on the uses of the concept of genocide to communist Yugoslavia

5

crisis, which radicalized their local employment by registering them in a strongly mediatized context on a worldwide scale, and which transformed the local practice of the two concepts, become stakes of the international diplomacy and judiciables of justice international. This internationalization also influenced historiography concerning the countries of ex-Yugoslavia. It is under these conditions that the paradigm formed by the ethnic couple génocidenettoyage became impossible to circumvent for the study of violence on the groups minority in the countries having taken part directly or indirectly in the Yugoslav crisis of years 1990. Such is the case of Bosnia-Herzégovine where concepts of genocide and cleaning ethnic are retrospectively applied to the long story of the Muslim community, in even time that with the history of the Serb community. Such is also the case of Albania, where developed, in the years 1990, an abundant literature around the genocide of the Albanians of[page 8]Kosovo, but also of the Moslem Albanians of Epire Greek, Chams, driven out violently Greek territory in 1944 (Baltsiotis n.p.). [18] An analysis, very important from a point of view historiographic, concept of ethnic cleaning is proposed in a recent article of Vladimir Petrović (2007). According to Petrović, this concept is incompatible with that of guerrilla warfare, in particular because of the centrality which it grants to the role of the State and the substantialisation of the State inherent in his uses, which make impossible the catch in consideration of a configuration to multiple actors like that of the war of the bands milicians. We will further see than this stato-centrism from the concept of cleaning ethnic and of the analyses of the researchers who make some use is, in a very great measurement, parallel with the stato-centrism which characterizes the studies of the researchers who share the prospect demographic engineering.

III. Studies of violence on the minorities and forms of the international law

[19] As it comes out from this talk, taking into account the geographical area taken in consideration in our file, the theoretical debate around the epistemological paradigms privileged by the researchers for the analysis of violence on the minority populations should relate to the two dominant paradigms which we distinguished: the couple genocide-cleaning ethnic and demographic engineering. However, while this file includes/understands several papers treating of the concept of engineering demographic, it is not the same for the concepts of genocide and of ethnic cleaning. This shift is due to two reasons. [20] Firstly, this file, in the beginning, was designed in a more restricted form like a file primarily turcologic on demographic engineering. It is only after having wanted to widen on Balkans to free themselves from the turco-centrism - and in particular of the ottomanocentrism - and to give matter to comparison, always very useful, between the current trends turcologic research and those of research concerning the other countries of Balkans, that we could go up in general information and note the intrinsic report/ratio, the latent dialogue, so to speak, of demographic engineering with the ethnic couple genocide-cleaning. At this point in time we also noted that this dialogue, between the two paradigms in question, is[page 9]also present, but in hollow, turcology. Secondly, academic networks mobilized for this file were anchored in the medium of the Turkish and Othoman studies and the Greek studies, that in the specialists in the other countries of Balkans.

6

[21] Without having the ambition to mitigate, in the introduction, this gap which could not be filled in the file, we would like to refer here at a point concerning the use of the concepts of genocide and ethnic cleaning in the study of violence on the minority populations. In his article on the concept of genocide mentioned above, Xavier Bougarel insists on the articulation in the semantic field of this concept of legal logics and logics historiographic. We believe that this fact is also valid for the concept of cleaning ethnic insofar as it is him also taken in the legal language. Thus these two concepts contribute to the transfer in historiography of logics of the legal type, and more precisely of logics of the legal type, by giving to the historical writings the form d' an indictment. The historical writings which fall under this mobility (such those concerning the war crimes in ex- Yugoslavia or the Armenian genocide) are marked by the emphatic rhetoric of the court and often resemble lists of crimes through which it is a question of founding that such State, mode or government committed the crime of genocide or that - less serious, because less better founded in right - of cleaning ethnic. [22] However, the historiographic overlap of the speech and the legal speech is very characteristic of the historiography of violence on the minority populations, whose evolutions follow in a very significant way those of the international law (cf the postface of this file). This overlap is for example omnipresent in the books treating of the atrocities made by the Othomans against the Armenians or the Greeks, who were published in 1919 during the Conference of Paris - moment of the foundation of the Company of the Nations and the Permanent Court of Justice International, but especially moment when was going to be decided the division of the old Othoman territories. However, these are the texts which defined the structure rhetoric of the Armenian and Greek texts contemporaries aiming at `incriminer' the Young Turks for the genocide against the Armenians or the Greeks. And this structure rhetoric is to a certain extent also that of the studies on demographic engineering (see for example Dündar 2008).[page 10][23] A key question concerning the historiography of violence on the populations minority is thus that of the relationship between historiography and the legal speech. This question crosses until a certain measurement the debate on the role of the historians like witnesses, started in France around the question of the participation of certain historians in the lawsuit Papon (Ginzburg 1991, Hartog 2000), as well as that on the relationship between history and expertise (Noiriel 1999); but it goes beyond these two debates, because it presents the fundamental problems of the difference between a legal principle of truth and a principle of historical truth, replaçant the problem of the autonomy of the historical discipline in the set of themes foucaldienne of the report/ratio of the truth with legal forms (Foucault 1974). [24] From the point of view thus of the relationship between legal historiography and forms, it would be necessary to consider that the historiography of violence on the minority populations takes an importance decisive during one crisis period of the paradigm which dominated during all the cold war the right international: that of the `inviolability of the territorial integrity of États'. However, it is precisely this paradigm of the international law, announced to the beginning of the Second world war in Charter Atlantic and devoted by the Charter of UNO (chapter 1, article 2, paragraph 3), which enters in crisis, after the bursting of the great federated States, in particular of the USSR and the Federation Yugoslavian. This paradigm was not replaced in international law; on the other hand, consequently saw the day a certain number of speeches (the humane speech), diplomatic practices ( recognition of

7

Kosovo) and soldiers (bombardments in Yugoslavia) who gave one new life with the old question of the protection of the minorities, with the detriment of the principle of inviolability of the territorial integrity. Because the old diplomatic question of the protection of the minorities, whose various formulations are registered in filigree in all the stages of the evolution of the international law, was put to some extent at the wall cupboard after the Second world war - because of the instrumentalisation of the question of the German minorities by the Nazis, but also in a concern of preserving the sovereignty of the United Kingdom and Republic Frenchwoman on their colonies of any interrogation resulting from the international law. [25] It is thus with the réémergence of the old protectionism on the minorities, in form `humanitaire' that it revêt after the fall of l' The USSR, that as well develop a new international legal framework for the minorities as a certain number of scientific fields[page 11]concerning these last, like the minority studies, studies for the resolution of the ethnic conflicts and studies on the genocides. Here what explains mistrust, even the hostility with which the souverainists of right-hand side and left - which also made their appearance after the end of the year 1990 - look at these new academic objects and the public debates nourished by their popularization. [26] What we have just explained on the political conditions and legal the large one rise that known in the years 1990 and the 2000 studies on the minorities is far from professing a new determinism, which would make knowledge accumulated during two decades on minorities a simple effect `secondaire' of the new political tendencies and legal. On the contrary, we believe in the possibility for the knowledge of autonomiser of the legal conditions and policies which influenced their production. But so that the knowledge is autonomisent, it is necessary initially that their agents, the researchers, reflect on the political conditions and legal in which the knowledge is formed. As Gerard Noiriel in maintenance explains it that it granted to us for this file (Noiriel 2008), the autonomy of the scientific field does not mean a positioning in outside of the history or the policy, but it can exist only as a political requirement of the researchers, resulting from their will to keep control on the formation of the objects of research; a control that the politicians and the journalists will not cease theirs disputer2.

IV. Treatment of the question of violence on the minority populations in Greece

[27] The case of Greece, which occupies with the Ottoman Empire and Turkey, from the number articles which relate to it, a place privileged in this file, is different from the majority of the other Balkan countries. The studies concerning the violence of mass on the minorities in this country were rather rare before the publication of this file. This in spite of the development, since the years 1990, in Greece, of the minority studies, under the influence of the three significant events of the beginning of this decade: the pogrom against the Moslems of Komotini (in Turkish Gümulcine) of 1990 (Yannopoulos, Psaras 1990); emergence in 1991-1992 of the different macédono-Greek; and the beginning of[page 12]

2 The relationship between the principle of truth of the legal prospect and the principle for truth of the prospect historiographic is treated more amply in our postface where one discusses also his implicit weight on the paradigms now dominant to analyze violence on the minority populations - including that of demographic engineering.

8

great Albanian immigration in Greece, which changed gives it gréco-Albanian relations frozen during 40 years. It is the shock which these three events caused on a certain number of young researchers (still student with the beginning of the year 1990) which is at the origin of the foundation in 1996 of the Center of Study of the Minority groups (KEMO), center which gave important impulse being studied of the minorities in Greece. The members of the KEMO especially took as objects of study of the forms of administrative violence (rough or symbolic system), the such restriction of the minority rights, oppression even the prohibition of the expression in minority languages and the screening of the ethnoculturelle diversity of the Greek population, by largely leaving side the study of the violence of mass. The KEMO started to work on the questions of the violence of mass in organizing a conference at the University Panteion in 2008 on the subject, taboo in Greece, of the expulsion of Chams (Albanian Moslems of Épire). This conference raised a very great reaction of media Greek. [28] Why the historiography of violences of mass of first half of the century against the minority populations occupies it in Greece a relatively weak place, compared to Turkey and with the majority of the other countries of Balkans? The primary reason seems to be that these violences, occulted by the ideology of State, did not constitute, in the years 1990, a national or international policy issue important - as it was the case of the Armenian question and, in a way different from the Kurdish question, for Turkey; or of the massacres which had place during the wars of Yugoslavia, for the majority of the other Balkan countries. Because it is especially the internationalization of these questions which was the driving force of their constitution, initially in stakes of memory and policy issues, then in objects of study - bonds between the fields policy and academic proving very narrow. [29] Admittedly, the violence of mass against the minority populations interested in years 1990 and a 2000 certain number of researchers and intellectuals of left, who were with the origin leaning on the violence of the Greek State against the Communists. The references which impose themselves here are the central intellectual of the `left renouveau' Greek which was Angelos Elephandis, three historians close to this one (Giorgos Margaritis, Spyros Karavas and Léonidas Embiricos), medium of the Scholiastis review from which is resulting the journalist and Tassos historian[page 14]Kostopoulos, the lawyer and historian Lambros Baltsiotis, the anthropologist Georgia Kretsi and finally Dimitris Lithoxoou, discussed, but also very important character. [30] The d' role; Angelos Elephandis is central so much by its interventions in the press and in the Politis review that it directed, which owing to the fact that it supported the debate on violence against the minorities among the many intellectuals and historians who were close for him. The collection of articles on the Greek Jews and Albanian Chams of Épire that Margaritis published in 2005 was the first important book on the violence of mass against the minorities in Greece published by a Greek academic (Margaritis 2005). Spyros Karavas for its part published several important studies on demographic dimensions of the policy pursued by Greece in the Macedonian question and on the violences perpetrated by the Greek gangsters during the fight of the bands of 1904-1908 (Karavas 2002,2003). Léonidas Embiricos established the link between the intellectual medium gathered around Angelos Elephandis and the KEMO, of which it is one of the founding members. The long maintenance that it granted to us for this file (Embiricos n.p.), to which it annexed rich person materials of files, clarifies under angles different expulsion from the Slavic exarchists of the area of Kilkis, while giving again with this event occulted within Greek historiography - except notable for

9

Kostopoulos - a central place in the Greek history of the Balkan wars. Kostopoulos has, since the beginning of the years 1990, marked out the ground by its many articles on the minorities, including on the violence of mass perpetrated by the State on these last, in the daily newspaper Eleyterotypia. It was also one of the Greek journalists who most systematically covered the events of the wars of Yugoslavia and one of the principal agents of the diffusion of the concept of cleaning ethnic in Greece. However, its first academic work concerning minorities were devoted to the repression of the language slavo-Macedonian (Kostopoulos 2000) and to the stake of being able which the denomination of the Slavic Macedonians by the Greek governments constituted (Kostopoulos 2004). It is into 2007 that Kostopoulos published one Guerre entitled book and ethnic cleaning. The side forgotten of a national crusade ten years 1912-1922, which constitutes the first great Greek synthesis on ethnic violence (Kostopoulos 2007). Being pressed on rich person materials of files, this book clarifies the violences made by the Greek government and the army against the civil populations during the Balkan wars and the countryside of Asia Mineure. Its great merit is to replace the question of violence against the civil populations[page 15]as well in a Balkan context (the author having a good knowledge of the bibliography and Bulgarian files and Macedonians) as in an Othoman context. It thus stresses the dialectical one between the practices of violence of the various States implied in the Balkan wars, the First World War and the gréco-Turkish war of 1919-1922, while making it possible to leave the bulk-heading of the national historiographic prospects. Lambros Baltsiotis, founding member of the KEMO, undertook important research on the history of the albanophonie in Greece and currently work on the Moslem Albanians of Épire, Chams, violently expelled of the Greek territory in 1944 (Baltiosis n.p.). Very important for historiography on Chams, including for persecutions which they underwent after 1913 and their expulsion, are also the searchs for Georgia Kretsi (2003). Finally Dimitris Lithoxoou, marginalized even among intellectuals of left because of his political commitment in favour of an identity main road/minority Macedonian of the Slavic Macedonians of Greece (cf Embiricos n.p.), is the first to have put the accent as well on demographic and historiographic handling Greek at the subjects of the minorities (Lithoxoou 1991) as on violence which the Greek gangsters had exerted on the Slavic civil populations Macedonians during the conflict of bands that official Greek historiography calls `fight macédonienne' (Lithoxoou 1998). [31] These contributions did not influence the Greek academic medium much. This one was much more deeply marked by the polemic started in the years 2000 around the thesis of Stathis Kalyvas (Kalyvas 2006) on the violence of the left during the Greek civil war. As well Giorgos Margaritis as Tassos Kostopoulos, mentioned above, took an active share with this polemic. [32] Thus, by the richness as of its articles concerning Greece, this file could to renew the debate on the violence of mass against the minority populations and the ethnicities in this country. But the principal contribution of these articles within the framework of the file is that they contribute to decompartmentalize the debate on the ethnic violence, discusses which remains today, in Turkey as in Greece, limited within the frameworks of the national history. Because, on the one hand, they bring to this file a prospect specialist in comparative literature and, other, introduce there the very relevant problems of the transmission of the practices of violence through the conflict. Thus, certain

10

contributions of this file reconsider the centrality of the business Macedonian (cf Adanır 1979), not only for[page 16]Turkish young political culture, but also for the transmission of the practices of violence which are crystallized in Macedonia, through the fight of the bands Bulgarian, Greek, Serb, Turkish and Albanian (1904-1908), the Balkan wars (1912-1913) and the forced migrations which have them followed (Embiricos n.p., Sigalas n.p.). According to these authors, the long experience of violence in Macedonia contributes to maltreat the report/ratio of the policy to the population and generates practices of `déterritorialisation' populations `minoritaires' (such as the massacre, expulsion, forced displacement and exchange it populations) which are transferred then, on a scale admittedly much broader, in Anatolian space, through their adoption by the government of the Committee Union and Progress (CUP) and exchanges it gréco-Turkish of populations. The article of Tassos Kostopoulos in this file joint with that of Erol Ülker to explain that these policies do not stop after the end of the conflicts, after the expulsion or the exchange of the populations, but which they continue, while changing register, to take the form of projects of assimilation of the populations considered dangerous for the safety of the national territory; the average main thing of this assimilation being often establishment among these populations `dangereuses' of the refugees considered to be faithful to the State (Kostopoulos n.p.; Ülker 2008). While the manuscript of Lambros Baltsiotis on Chams shows how these projects, and the practices which result from this, prepare the ground for the réémergence of brutal violence under conditions of war (Baltsiotis n.p.). Finally the article of Yannis Bonos on the emigration of Moslems of Western Thrace in Turkey, analyzes the conditions of the passage under silence, within the minority group, of this significant event. It raises thus question - fundamental for the majority of the events which are studied in this file - political conditions of the memory and the lapse of memory (Bonos n.p.). [33] To return to the question of the paradigms historiographic, marginality, by report/ratio in the Greek academic medium, historiography concerning violence on the populations minority, like result the absence of conceptual debate around the question has. To judge some however d' after the contributions on Greece which are included/understood in this file, two d' between them make systematic use of the concept of cleaning ethnic (Kostopoulos n.p., Baltsiotis n.p.), which also appears in a third (Embiricos n.p.), while one only also discusses its object in terms of demographic engineering, which does not constitute for as much its principal prism of analysis (Bonos n.p.). In addition, Kostopoulos in the introduction of its book War and ethnic cleaning[page 17]mentioned above defends the utility of the concept of cleaning ethnic which expresses a degree of intermediate violence enters the war milician and the genocide (Kostopoulos 2007: 18-20). Greek researchers thus seem to be more laid out to employ the terms in which question of violence about the minority populations at summer posed in the Yugoslav conflict that the paradigm of demographic engineering. This paradigm remains thus, with regard to the surface geographical catch in consideration by this file, the characteristic of the field of the Turkish studies and Othomans and more precisely, as we will see low, of a specific slope of it field.

V. the transfer of demographic engineering in the Turkish and Othoman studies

11

[34] The concept of engineering demographic was introduced into the Turkish studies and Othomans a little more than one decade ago - shortly after its invention, in the years 1990, in the field of the resolution of the ethnic conflicts (Conflict Studies Resolution) in minority departments of studies (Minority Studies) and of studies on the genocides (Genocide Studies) of a certain number of universities of the United States. His/her American parents most known are Milica Zarkovic Bookman (Bookman 1997), John McGarry (McGarry 1998), Myron Weiner and Michael S. Teitelbaum (Weiner, Teitelbaum 2001). Pioneers of the transmission of the concept in turcology are Nesim Seker and Fuat Dündar and, with a small temporal shift, Uğur Üngör. A big role is also reserved to professor Eric Zürcher, who to some extent took under his aegis young historians claiming concept. [35] Hilmar Kaiser, historian of the Armenian genocide, in a short maintenance qu' it has us granted in December 200843 underlined qu' it had been the first to use the concept d' social engineering (social engineering) applied to the Young Turks, in a workshop organized in Atlanta in 1995 by l' American Historical Society. The same year, in a conference given in Turkey to l' association of rights of l' man (Đnsan Hakları Derneği - ĐHD), it had developed the concept, this time in front of a Turkish public. Lastly, in 1995 and 1996, at the time of its stay with l' Academic institute European of Florence, it had widely diffused it. Fuat Dündar would have been informed of it at the time of the conference with l' ĐHD. But one can note that the term is not used yet by Dündar in sound[page 18]work on the unionistic policies of establishment of the Moslems (Dündar 2001a) nor by Seker before his thesis of doctorate (Seker 2002). It in this work not published that Seker introduces the concept of demographic engineering and its definition, clearly is taken again of Milica Zarkovic Bookman: demographic engineering `increases the economic and political power off year ethnic group relative to others, and the method by which this is achieved entails the increase in the size off one population relative to others' (Bookman 1997: 1). It continues by referring to the work directed by John Mc Garry and Brendan O' Leary, and in particular to their introduction, with the idea that the methods (very varied) of demographic engineering are means of solving the ethnic conflicts: thus for example a policy natalist, the reimplantation of populations, religious conversion and linguistics, an immigration policy, are among the means available to the leaders of ethnicities to handle the demographic characteristics of an area or a country (Mc Garry, O' Leary 1993). He adds that the demographic composition of an area or a country can also be modified by the assimilation, the deportation or the modifications of the layout of the borders (Seker 2002: 8). Deportation and policy of establishment are the principal instruments of the demographic engineering of the Young Turks: `By deporting the Christian elements, the Greeks from the Aegean Coast in 1914 and the Armenians from Eastern Anatolia in 1915-1916, and by dispersing Muslim refugees including those from the Balkans and the Kurds escaping from the Russian invasion off Eastern Anatolia among the Turks54, they aimed to changes the demographic composition off Anatolia by forming manageable minorities. Needless to say, theses developments were accompanied by uses off violence by all groups involved in ethnic conflicts' (Seker 2002: 9). In the book published by Zürcher in 2005, this last uses well the term in the title of its introduction (`Giris: Demografi Mühendisliği ve Modern Türkiye'nin Doğusu'), but it is

3 Maintenance carried out with Hilmar Kaiser in Istanbul on December 18, 2008.4 Here Seker makes a reference with Dündar 2001.

12

Seker, in its contribution, which refers to Bookman. It is necessary to await the publication into 2007 of an article of Seker entitled `Demographic engineering in the Othoman Late Worsens and the Armenians' (Seker 2007) so that the reference to the work of Myron Weiner and Michael S. Teteilbaum (Weiner, Teteilbaum 2001) that is to say united with that of Bookman (Bookman 1997). Üngor, in its thesis of master on the CUP with Diyarbakır, does not use the concept yet, but evokes the ethnic homogenisation or the turquification (Üngor 2005). Finally Fuat Dündar defends, in its thesis, the idea that the term of `engineering ethnique'[page 19]is more suitable than those of `demographic warfare' 65, `social engineering' or `demographic engineering'; it would only be appropriate for the phenomenon studied for the Turkish young period, because it `includes all the operation of displacement and installation of populations with the assistance of the ethnography, the charts (especially ethnographic) and the census. In other words […] the term indicates fusion […] theoretical aspect and pratique' (Dündar 2007: 24).

VI. The workshop on the historiography of the migrations (IFEA, 2007): the point of view of the actors of a transfer historiographic

[36] In a workshop on the historiography of the migrations organized at the French Institute of Anatolian Studies (IFEA) of Istanbul in March 200776, Nesim Seker and Fuat Dündar, which introduced and popularized the concept of engineering in the Othoman studies, had explained the use which they made of the term and its heuristic virtue. Nesim Seker underlined the centrality of l' ethnicity, whereas Fuat Dündar, while taking it again on its account, insisted especially on accounting logic in the center of this handling of the population. Nesim Seker conceded that the ethnic conflicts of the years 1990 in Balkans and the debates then open on the purification or ethnic cleaning had played a part from the point of view which it had chosen. It was a question of examining how a Central state, the Ottoman Empire, in a phase of transformation of the Empire to the State-nation, thus committed in a `political of identité', had used a certain number of instruments of control of the population to reorganize it. The forms of this policy were variable: handling of statistics demographic (in particular after the Great War, from the point of view of the Conference for Paris of 1919), assimilation by the means of religious conversions, modifications of the layout of borders, etc But a particular place was to be of course reserved for the modifications of settlement: migration forced with extreme forms such as the ethnic purification, it genocide, while passing by the deportation or the exchange of populations. The subjacent ideology of this demographic engineering was, for Seker, the social-Darwinism, of which he recognized that the identification in the Othoman last decades returned more to one influence of designs imported of Germany, via the German military missions in Turkey, that with a local production 6 It[page 20]of a corpus of ideas and texts identified well. Macedonia, with the whole beginning of the century, would have been the first ground of test of these policies of engineering and the long period of war of

5 It returns to Pinson 1970.6 `Türkiye tarihine göçten bakmak (I). Yeni perspektifleri ve nufüs mühendisliği tartısmak' [to discuss new prospects of l' historiography of the migrations in Turkey and the concept d' demographic engineering], IFEA, Istanbul, March 31, 2007.

13

1912 to 1922, a final means into practice to put them for the States of the area, because a time of increased legitimation of the recourse to violence. [37] Fuat Dündar recognized that l' expression of `war démographique' (demographic warfare) could it also have been employed. Used per Mark Finch in the thesis which it had devoted to the migratory policies of the Empire Russian and Othoman finishing (Finch 1970), the term does not have known the fortune of that `of engineering démographique'. Dündar underlined moreover the presence in Turkish young engineering, not only of one accountancy, but beyond of a mechanics, of a mathematics, which seemed to him to take their roots in the thought positivist and its diffusion among the Young Turks. This obsession of the figure was symbolized by Talat Pasa, its accountancy migratory of entering and outgoing, its thresholds of minority population, its percentages. As for the ethnicity like policy, it had to be tracked in the tools with which the Young Turks had been equipped: charts, statistics and studies concerning of the ethnic and denominational communities. [38] Dündar as Seker insisted on the socio-economic dimension of engineering demographic. Seker underlined on this subject that one of the indirect goals of this engineering was the constitution of an economic power within the Muslim community, in agreement with policy of `economy nationale' (milli iktisat)7 impetus then by the Young Turks. Dündar drew as for him the attention to the individual scale: concerning several chiefs Young Turks who had played a central role in this operation, like Doctor Nazım or Rahmi Bey, it was necessary to put in before a sordid calculation of interest and benefit by men who intended to take, by alienating goods belonging to nonMoslems, a material revenge on what the loss of Macedonia at the time of the Balkan wars had caused. [39] It is the richness of this workshop which gave us the idea to require of the actors of it transfer of the concept d' engineering in the Turkish and Othoman studies to take part in this file by clarifying their point of view. They had all the kindness to accept our call. And it is interesting to note that each one of them gave us an article defining by a clean qualifier the form of engineering which it studies. Fuat Dündar gave us a contribution having[page 21]at the same time the statute of testimony and scientific contribution, summarizing the reasons which pushed it, in its work, to adopt the concept of ethnic engineering (Dündar article subjected to the drafting in progress d' edition). Nesim Seker, in its contribution, summarized its design of demographic engineering in the long story of the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish Republic (Seker n.p.). Uğur Üngör gave us an article on Turkish young social engineering (Üngör 2008). Hans-Lukas Kieser contributed with an article on the comparison between the destruction of the Othoman Armenians and the deportations of the American Indians, while launching a bridge between the Armenian studies and the genocide American studies (Kieser 2008). [40] This same workshop also gave us the idea to require of authors developing of different prospects for research to position compared to the concept of engineering demographic. The result was the discussion of the concept in several articles and talks which take seat in this file. Let us come now to l' examination in the way in which the prospect ingenierist fell under the configuration of the Turkish and Othoman studies.

VII. First stage: an new approach of the history of immigration

7 On the `economy nationale', cf Toprak (1995).

14

[41] The first scientific field in which work on engineering fitted in Turkey east without question that of the studies on the migrations. Thus Fuat Dündar like Nesim Seker started with a work on the policies of reception and establishment of the Moslem immigrants. That, not published, of Seker related, over the period 1923-1935, to the influence of establishment of exchanged Moslem of Greece on the social structure of the town of Bursa, at the time of the great exchange of population turco-Greek of 1923-19248. Dündar as for him had him led a research for its thesis of master on the policy of establishment of the Moslems by the Committee Union and Progress of 1913 to 1918. This work was published in 2001 in Turkish with the editions Đletisim (Dündar 2001a).[page 22][42] Work that Dündar and Seker started at the end from the 1990 is thus positioned compared to a literature published in Turkish in the years 199010, of which it is necessary here to point out the components for better including/understanding in what the searchs for Dündar and Seker - all like those of the younger researchers such as Uğur Üngör or Erol Ülker, which are recognized in their tradition - dissociated themselves from this production and in what they prolonged it. This literature especially related to the immigration of mass of the Muslim populations coming from the Crimea, the Caucasus and Balkans in the last decades of the Empire, and not the immigration of nonMoslem populations. In that, this work dissociated way traced in years 1980 by Kemal Karpat (Karpat 1985). They were centered on second the XIX century half, even over the period of Abdul Hamid, that on that of the second constitutional monarchy (1908-1918), i.e the Turkish young period. For the majority published in the editions of the Company of Turkish History (Türk Tarih Kurumu - TTK), at the time of the 75ème birthday of the foundation of Republic of Turkey, they incarnated the production of an official discourse on a question up to that point rather neglected by the Othoman studies, except for work of Kemal Karpat and Justin Mc Carthy admittedly established in the United States. [43] Which are the features characteristic of this work? By an anachronistic approach, the authors in question often projected a Turkish identity on the Moslem identity and the Othoman identity. They were not very inclined with the comparison with other geographical surfaces that the Ottoman Empire, unlike the work of Finch which had crossed Russian sources and Othomans (Finch 1970). This prospect could be explained by the nature of the documents which they examined, primarily drawn from the Othoman files of the Presidency of the Council (Basbakanlık), but also by will to supplement national historiographies which had not used these sources Othomans. Moreover, the exploitation of the sources showed a will of development of policy pursued by the Othoman State and of the generosity of its assistance to the immigrants, while recalling to the passage that it rested on a `tradition of tolérance', since the first refugees accomodated before the large posterior waves with the Crimean War had been the Poles and them Hungarian, fleeing the repression of the Spring of the people by the two other Empires of Europe[page 23]power station and Eastern. This speech on the Othoman tolerance towards the refugees amalgamated with that of the Othoman tolerance towards nonthe Moslems, developed at the same time. In addition these authors tend to present the migrations which they study like forced migrations, whereas some of the Muslim populations of which it is question in their work, such by example those established

8 For the thesis of Yüksek Lisans, cf Seker (1995). For a synthetic presentation, cf Seker (1999)

15

around the Black Sea or in Balkans, had not emigrated entirely, which implies the possibility of a choice on behalf of the immigrants. Concentrated on ideological, religious reasons like on the use of violence and oppression, this prospect neglected elements as important as the existence of traditions of migration of these areas towards certain centers of the Empire, the land question, the military service or the institutionalization of the Muslim communities after the annexation of the old territories Othomans by States chrétiens9. [44] In addition, the stato-centered, omnipresent prospect in this work, made immigrants of the passive objects of the Othoman migratory policy and not of the actors, whereas the called upon sources, even if they emanated from the Othoman bureaucracy, betrayed an actual negotiation, including in the case of the forced establishments. Thus the analysis was often limited at the institutional level, describing the many commissions of immigration and other bodies which had been implied in the management of the reception and the establishment of the immigrants. [45] The last point which it is necessary to reconsider is the approach programming science of the policy Othoman who characterizes this work. One understands by there the fact of granting to decisions, orders or official declarations a statute of event, before even examining whether they were applied and, in the affirmative, how they were it. This exposure of the facts implies an automation between decision and application, whereas in particular the dysfunctions of administrative management and the attitudes of the immigrants (of confrontation to the negotiation, while passing by the absence of taking into account of the instructions of the civils servant) implies a discontinuity between decision and application. This discontinuity bores in the speech of these authors only when it is question of the conflicts between immigrants and local population in the areas d' reception. By evoking these conflicts, they have tendency to criminaliser a whole group, as it is today the case in Europe in the perception of the illegal immigration of the South towards North and the East towards the Occident[page 24][46] Let us consider now how work of the authors who share the prospect engineering are distinguished from this generation of work. In a general way these authors are in a report/ratio of opposition with the school which we have just described (call schematically `school of the TTK'). They s' in distinguish first of all by a different chronological framing. Like one l' saw, the school of the TTK focused itself over second half of the XIXe century and the period of Abdul Hamid II, while the school of engineering is initially centered over the Turkish young period and, with less title, on the war of independence (1919-1922); this framing not preventing it from wondering about continuity, upstream, with the period hamidienne in particular, and downstream with the republican period, while maintaining for as much always the paradigmatic dimension of Turkish young period. But the sharpest difference relates to the design of the role of the State. While the school of the TTK had engaged on a defense of the policies of the State, the school of engineering launched out in a denunciation of the policies of the State. Where the first speak about tolerance, the others speak about discrimination, racism and violence. And if the historians of the TTK deal only with the Moslem immigrants to denounce the violence of the Christian States which pushed to emigrate, the historians who gather around the concept of engineering even denounce the way in which the Othoman State made use of these immigrants like means to homogenize, for turquifier population of the Empire. Lastly, the great

9 On these points cf Toumarkine (1995).

16

swing that the historians who study engineering operate compared to the school of the TTK is to move - after their first work relating to the immigration of the Moslems - the centre of gravity towards the repression of the State against nonthe Moslems, and more generally against those which were regarded as not Turks (there included/understood Kurds).

VIII. Second phase: violence against the minorities and the denunciation of the State-planner

[47] By doing this, these authors lie within the scope of work on official violence against the nonMoslem minority groups (initially) and Moslems (in the second place), work which knew an impressive increase in Turkey in the years 2000. Us let us refer here to work on persecutions against the Jews intervened in Thrace in 1934 (Bali 2008a), the income tax (Varlık vergisi) discriminatory of 1942 (Aktar 2000b), the anti-Rum pogroms of the night of the September 6, 1955 (Güven 2005), the waves of emigration (Bali 2003),[page 25]Kurd forced migration of south-east (Kurban 2006), discrimination against the Kurds (Üstel 1997 for the Hearths Turks). And would also be necessary to mention here the influence of work on Turkish nationalism such as those of Etienne Copeaux on the school handbooks Turkish - and especially their translation in Turkish by the Foundation for the History (Tarih Vakfı) (Chips 1998) -, work on the racialisation of Turkish nationalism in the years 1920-1930 (in particular Maksudyan 2005), the book of Herkül Milas on the image of the other in the Turkish and Greek literature (Milas 2000), to give only some examples. It is also necessary to mention the influence of the evolution of the Kurdish studies (cf the file of 5 of European Journal off Turkish Studies, `Knowledge, ideology and power. Deconstructing Kurdish Studies', 2006) as well as the tendency to the dispute of the ideology of State compared to the Armenian genocide; the culminating point of this tendency being the conference organized in 2005 at the University of Bilgi. This current which marked the intellectual production Turkish and more generally turcologic of years 2000 take part as well of the scientific institutions (in particular Tarih Vakfı and the private universities Bilgi and Sabancı), as of ONG (in particular TESEV, the Turkish Foundation social Economic studies and), thus qu' a great number of intellectuals and journalists, defending the democratization of Turkey, its European orientation, and while passing, the requirement of its tender to the European standards for the protection of the minorities. And it would be necessary to specify also that contrary to this current of the intellectuals `libéraux' (to employ here the term by which this mobility today is schematically indicated in Turkey) are located the `souverainistes' of right-hand side and left (ulusalcılık), of which associations, the activities and the media influence also multiplied in the years 2000 and whose certain emblematic figures were shown in 2008 by justice (within the Ergenekon lawsuit) to have taken part in criminal organizations (Berktay 2008). [48] With these intellectuals `libéraux', the researchers who work on engineering demographic share the denunciation of the violence of the State against certain fringes of population (in particular Armenians, Rums, Nestoriens, Jews, Alevis and Kurds) looked by this one with an extreme suspicion. They share as the idea as an ethnic project, an intention guides and animates the policy of the State: according to the formulation chosen, to homogenize, nationalize or turquifier population. The

17

collective work directed by Kieser in 2006, Turkey beyond nationalism, is probably the best example of convergence between work on[page 26]engineering and those pertaining to the general current of the discriminatory policies of the Turkish State, which we have just presented (Kieser 2006). Finally, they share the denunciation of the `State planificateur', towards the critic of which is directed all the liberal thought of the XXe century, of ordolibéraux German and Austrians of the inter-war period, whose several emigrated in the United States, to the American anarchist-liberals of Chicago, while passing by Popper and its criticism of the `social engineering utopique', in favour of what it calls `social engineering au coup par coup' (piecemeal social engineering) and by Habermas and its criticism of the technocratic thought (Habermas 1973). Because we believe that beyond the specific academic fields, the reception favorable reserved to the metaphor of engineering by the Turkish liberal medium that we described, strongly holds - although often in a latent way - with liberal criticism of the planning State. This medium was forced, to some extent, to adapt it to thwart the enormous weight of the State in the tradition of the Turkish political ideas, in the social representations, the official ideology and, with stronger reason among souverainists, in whom the liberal intellectuals saw their more frightening political enemies. In addition, the ground for the adoption of the concept of engineering demographic was already fertilized by the broad diffusion in Turkey of the years 1980 of the concept of social engineering, grace in particular to the important work of the sociologist Nilüfer Göle on engineers and the ideology of State, largely inspired by the work of Habermas on the thought technocratic and opposition of Popper to the `social engineering utopique' (Göle 1986).

IX. Scientific fields by report/ratio at which the transfer of engineering was demographic in the Turkish and Othoman studies

[49] It is now advisable to wonder about the scientific fields which allowed these researchers to develop their problems. These fields correspond to the minority studies (in particular its slope concerning the resolution of the ethnic conflicts), with the studies on genocides (especially for the Armenian genocide) and finally being studied revisionists on the Young people Turks. In the last both cases, the fields correspond at the same time to a production in English and in Turkish. [50] The thesis not published of Seker indicates the first mobility, thrives outreatlantic, that of the ethnic conflict resolution studies (Seker 2002: 4 and notes 4,5,6,8,11,13), in[page 27]being based in particular on work of Donald L. Horowitz (Horowitz 1985), Richard H. Schultz (Schultz 1995), John Mc Garry and Brendan O' Leary (Mc Garry, O' Leary 1993) and Victor J. Fortify It (Fortifies It 1997). From this last, it draws a typology of the three phases of the ethnic conflicts which it applies to the Othoman case: in the first phase, the conflict is maintained on a level where the parts can abstain from the use of violence (period 1839 - years 1880); in the second phase, the ethnic dispute develops with double national scales and international (years 1890 - 1913); finally, the third and ultimate phase are that of the climbing in violence where the conflict leaves any control (years 1914-1922). Richard Schultz, like other authors, advances that the multiethnic States in general did not know to integrate the ethnicities and the communities denominational and in addition saw, in

18

nationalisms, a threat for their own identity. As for Mc Garry, he is at the same time called upon like reference in the field of the regulation of the ethnic conflicts (Mc Garry, O' Leary 1993) and in that of the demographic engineering, which he precisely presents like a technique of regulation of the conflicts (Mc Garry 1998). The conflict ethnic in Turkey of the Empire to the Republic is precisely the title chosen for the collective work directed by Zürcher in 2005, which comprises a contribution of Seker (Zürcher 2005). [51] Armenian historians of the genocide - the lawyer Vahakn Dadrian, Levon Marashlian 10, Raymond Kevorkian and Ara Sarafian - or work of Hilmar Kaiser and Fikret Adanır (Adanır, Kaiser 2000; Adanır 2001), Donald Bloxham (Bloxham 2003,2005), are references power stations of certain work of Seker (Seker 2002; but not Seker 2007), or of Uğur Üngör on Diyarbakır (Üngör 2005). Dündar, for the thesis of doctorate in French (Dündar 2007) and his Turkish book drawn from this thesis (Dündar 2008) uses, more than the historians of the genocide, the frontier runner quasi single which became, since 1992, Taner Akçam (Akçam 1992,1999,2000,2008), pioneer in Turkey of the studies revisionists on the violence of the State and the Armenian genocide. The `passage' by the foreigner, who it corresponds to bibliographical loans, and especially with a formation or a university education, explains, through the biographies of the ones and of others, how what one still calls in Turkey today the `arménienne' question irrigated the studies on demographic engineering in the finishing Ottoman Empire. This remark is of course as valid for the studies on the Young Turks as we will evoke further. Admittedly there is[page 28]comprehensible differences between what is published and what is not it, between what published in Turkish and/or Turkey and the remainder; but it as should be remembered as the famous conference held in March 2005 in Istanbul at the Bilgi University, on the Armenian question, was animated inter alia by Dündar, Seker and Akçam. 2005 seem to have been a point of swing; Zürcher in one intervention in September 2008 in a conference held in Naples or it made a presentation entitled `The late Othoman Empire ace laboratory off demographic engineering' reminded that the collective book that it published in 2005 at Đletisim was the fruit of a workshop on the topic `Ethnic conflict in Empire and Republic' organized in 2003 in Leiden, the Netherlands. It continued as follows: [52] `The proceedings off this very interesting workshop were published in Istanbul two years later, goal because the Turkish Colleagues were afraid that it might ramming to their career prospective customers in Turkish Academy, they published it under my name and asked me to Write year introduction called “demographic engineering and the birth off modern Turkey' (Zürcher 2008). [53] Lastly, concerning work revisionists on the Young Turks, it is appropriate initially of to point out the centrality of the Turkish young period for holding of demographic engineering. The three fundamental references are three turcologists of reputation: Serif Mardin (1990 [1983]: 175- 207), Sükrü Hanioğlu (1981, 1995,2001) and especially Erik Zürcher (1984, 2005) which re-examined as of the publication of The Unionist Factor in 1984 disturbing it question of continuity between elites young person Turkish and kemalist and which one saw higher than it was an obstetrician of the prospect for the ingénierie11.

10 cf, inter alia, Marashlian (1991).11 Cf its introduction into Zürcher (2005).

19

[54] It is necessary to add to these benchmarks a set of themes around the German influence among Young Turks. So stakes had already been posed by the works of Đlber Ortaylı (1981) and Mustafa Gençer (2003), they are the articles of Orhan Koloğlu (1999) and Hassan Ünder (1999, 2001) published in the review Tarih ve Toplum which, by tracing the genealogy of Turkish militarism, underlined the central place for the Young Turks and Mustafa Kemal of the design of the nation out of weapons such as Colmar Freiher Von der Goltz, chief of the German military mission in Turkey of 1883 with 1995, had developed it. Hande Nezir and Fuat Dündar, in their theses of doctorate (Nezir 2001, Dündar 2007), returned on the heritage goltzien. Dündar explains thus that the first contribution of Goltz was to define a space and a territory military, justifiable, which corresponded to l' Anatolia and[page 29]part of Syria. In addition to this territorial strategy, c' is the translation in Othoman (1884) of the book of Goltz on the nation out of weapons, Das Volk in Waffen, translation of many republished times, which would have constituted the most important legacy. This translation, become a best-seller in l' Worsen, would have inspired the writings founders of Turkish young militarism, like l' work published in 1907 (and republished in 1909) by Ahmed Rıza, Asker. Serif Mardin with the beginning of the year 1980 had already indicated Goltz like the spiritual father of the intellectual matrix of the militarism and more largely of l' Turkish young ideology (Mardin 1990 [1983]). X. Specificity of the Turkish young period and historical continuity: a contradiction? [55] The specificity of Turkish young engineering is in the middle of work of the users of the concept. Extent of displacements of population, the degree of violence reached and especially genocidary singularity of l' extermination of the Armenians plead indeed for this exceptionnality. But the same authors defend also the idea of a continuity, or more often, of a historical heritage of the period 1908-1918 during the republican time - also fitting in the wake of the three great intellectual figures (Mardin, Hanioğlu, Zürcher) which we higher mentioned. [56] The specificity of the Turkish young experiment is very clearly posed, but its beginning is prone to discussion. More than the revolution of July 1908, considered as one brief moment of unanimity and political hope, the rupture is posed in 1909 (Dündar 2001a) with the beginning of a true policy of incentive with the immigration of Moslems of Balkans towards Macedonia; policy opposed to management hamidienne of the migratory waves, more reactive than proactive. But this policy, works of the unionistic leader Nazım, fails lamentably, especially by fault of average materials and candidates with immigration. The second time suggested is 1912-1913 which combine three moments: the management of flows of Moslem refugees caused by the first Balkan war; coup d'etat of January 23, 1913, knack young person Turkish on Sublime Door (Bab-ı `Ali) which brings Enver Pasa, hero of July 1908, and its assistants with the capacity; and finally, at the time of the second Balkan war, the recovery of the town of Edirne in July 1913 by irregular units which form the matrix of future and disastrous Special Organisation (Teskilat-ı Mahsusa). The third time can be suggested in 1914 with, in March, the beginning of the deportations of Rum[page 30]of Anatolia, in August 1914 the official creation of the Special Organization; and with the autumn, the entry in war of the Ottoman Empire. Years 1913 and 1914 are in general privileged like moment of

20

swing. In the passing the chronological reference marks mentioned seem to show that engineering is certainly related to time of war, but has a singular temporality. [57] This singularity would be based for some on the idea of a ingenierist project and its ideological bases. For a long time, the CUP is regarded in historiography as person in charge of the diffusion of a `culture of the violence' in the Turkish political life after 1908 (for example, Akçam 1992); the first sign being targeted assassinations journalists of opposition by sicaires (Kabacalı 1993). [58] Recent work on unionistic militarism and the German influence (cf supra) present one second explanation, more refined, and which has the merit to be pressed on actors clearly identified (cf Goltz) and of the texts presenting a relatively coherent ideology. The thesis of a German ideological importation however presents a defect: it gums the regional contributions (Caucasian - for the Armenian revolutionary organizations - and Macedonian) and despized the dynamic ones and local sequences of causality suitable for the Othoman political system. It in addition presents a clear risk of essentialisation which is not without pointing out analyses made on the culture of violence and formulated for the wars of Yugoslavia and the operations of ethnic cleaning of which they were the framework (Mazower 2000). [59] There exists finally a third level which returns to the pregnancy in the unionistic chiefs of a social-Darwinism, which would make it possible to explain their Turkish nationalism not, not very original in the regional landscape, but a quasi-racial design of the Turkish identity, with the source of their engineering. However if the term and the idea of social-Darwinism circulate today in the literature on the unionistic ones, that does not correspond initially to a clear definition of the theoretical contents and contours of the phenomenon. That is in addition for the moment, unlike the period republican (for example, Maksudyan 2005), little supported by references to texts, and returns especially to the interpretation of practices. The fundamental work published by Attila Doğan in 2006, the Othoman intellectuals and the social-Darwinism, show well how the theories of the evolution formulated by Darwin were relayed and diffused in the Ottoman Empire by intellectuals nourished by positivism (Doğan 2006: 145-238). However a link misses, that which is in[page 31]Occident incarnated for example by Chamberlain, and which inspires directly by the practical policies. In addition, several Othoman authors implied in this intellectual transfer remained neutral during the Second Constitutional monarchy or finally positioned against unionistic, like Rıza Tevfik or Abdullah Cevdet, of which Sükrü Hanioğlu, in its biography (Hanioğlu 1981), the reading of Gustave Lebon had already studied. Lastly, one still has little information on the reception and the diffusion of certain authors, more complex, like Âsaf Nefî or Bedi Nûri, `passeurs' of certain social-darwinisme12. [60] Ultimately, c' is probably l' poppérienne - Popper of the open Company and its enemies - of l' approaches very; ideology and of l' Turkish young Utopia by Serif Mardin (1990 [1983]) which continues to form the paradigm to which, consciously or not, return the majority of work on l' unionistic engineering. [61] In addition to the questions of intellectual heritage, the designation of unionistic like persons in charge of ethnic engineering or demographic installation a problem of identification: does one aim party CUP as a whole? Its only Central committee? Its click and customers around cacic of the party? Certain leaders in particular (with the first chief Talat, Enver, Dr. Nazım and Bahaddin Sakir)

12 On these two authors to see Doğan (2006: 294-303, 316-323).

21

particularly implied in the demographic operations? It is included/understood, there is always a risk of generalization that are it or the reification of the unionistic party facilitates. However, réifier institutions, as Gerard Noiriel in connection with the State in the interview underlines it which it gives in this file, conduit with a methodological dead end (Noiriel 2008). [62] We still know little about the operating processes of party CUP, in times of peace as in time of war, its wheels, its mechanisms of decision making, its relays in administration. From the prism of the Armenian question, some like Uğur Üngör, draw in the plethoric literature on the genocide Jewish, comparing machine Nazi and unionistic, but the many references mobilize little on the operation of the State Nazi, his dynamic, its internal conflicts moved by power struggles between institutions or clans, or of logics political, economic and military different. However the period 1912-1918 is characterized by a crisis of the operation of the State and by the multiplication of parallel networks and/or para-étatiques. Displacements of population and the violence of State could thus be read, not like[page 32]manifestation of the omnipotence of CUP a radicalized and only political actor after systematic elimination of its adversaries, but like the expression of a weak State, in evil of control, i.e. without means of acting on its company. Michael Mann thus explains the difference between the infrastructural power and the despotic capacity (Mann 1986). The choice of the ethnic prism, substituted for the demonstrations, always according to Mann (Mann 2005), by the unionistic capacity, choice which goes growing to to start from 1912, would be thus a consent of failure. [63] There is from the point of view ingenierist an obvious risk of diabolisation for the unionistic ones and, by generalization upstream of 1908, of the Young Turks, even, on an assumption of continuity on whom we will further return, of Turkey kemalist. The extermination of the Armenians is quite central from this point of view. However the `arménienne' question nourished these last years, in Turkey, a phenomenon of rehabilitation of unionistic in certain political circles, in private individual within mobility national-souverainiste (ulusalcı) and found his translation leading in several publications defending the founded good of forced displacements of populations not Moslem women by the unionistic ones, pourfendant those of the Moslems of the Empire and rehabilitating not only unionistic leaders, the Special Organization, its chefs13 and even some fedai and killers with the service of the CUP. The very ambiguous work published in 2001 by the journalist Soner Yalçın in is emblematic: Teskilat' ın iki Silhasoru poses a filiation between famous the fedai Yakup Cemil and a character introduced like his grandson, member of the secret services Turkish and engaged in fight against the ASALA. Beyond the question of the continuity of the institutions and men of the information between the finishing Empire and the Republic, question which remains, like recalled it in a recent article Cemil Koçak (2006), a true historiographic question in building site, the intention is different here: to rehabilitate unionistic political violence and its methods by justifying the recourse to extra-legal means. [64] In a climate of ideological mobilization official reinforced today around one device of commemoration of the battle of Dardanelles or Sarıkamıs in 1915, it is the same obsession which is essential: an anguish obsidionale of the dismemberment of Turkey fomented by occident and animated by Kurdish separatism or the international claims of recognition of the Armenian genocide. All that is declined on bottom of theory of plot.

13 Cf for example on Süleyman Askeri, Simsek (2008)

22

[page 33]unionistic period, and in particular the year 1915, are the occasion to define a new mode of historicity: present of the years 2000 on the one hand, and context of the First World War and that of the beginning of the catch in hand of the national liberation struggle by Mustafa Kemal (May 1919) in addition, do not amalgamate not to form any more but one. In this context, which weighs without any doubt on the scientific production, each one is destined for a national start. [65] This literature and writings criticizing l' unionistic demographic engineering thus form two parallel, antagonistic accounts. Both privilege l' idea d' a heritage of this period under the Republic jusqu' with our days, perceptible heritage in a policy but especially in nature d' a State and its operation. It face to face still makes more necessary one geographical decompartmentalization of the problems, exit of its purely Othoman or Turkish framework, for a salutary exercise of comparison which we wanted to facilitate in this file. [66] The thesis of continuity or the unionistic heritage as regards engineering is largely discussed in this file. The contribution of Nesim Seker raises the delicate question of the difference between demographic engineering and forced displacements of population - which existed already in the Ottoman Empire and of course in other civilizations since Antiquity - by stressing that the Turkish young rupture is perhaps more difficult to mark qu' it is not thought (Seker n.p.). L' article d' Alexandre Toumarkine in this file also reconsiders him second half of the XIXe century for to conclude with l' d' absence; a demographic engineering supported on forced displacements of population during this time, but also to question that of the Turkish young period starting from the drawn conclusions for the former period (Toumarkine n.p.). The period and the policy hamidienne were regarded a long time as purely ottomanist or panislamist. The biography d' Abdul Hamid II published by François Georgeon (2003) made the synthesis of work which, since two decades, reconsidered this idea to advance l' assumption d' a true policy, even d' a handling of the ethnic and denominational communities by the Sultan. Work d' Arsen Avagyan (2004) on the immigrants circassiens and their use by the capacity hamidien supplemented the table which l' provides; l' analyzes; use of certain Kurdish tribes by the imperial capacity. The ethnos groups and the communities, often in segmentary forms, were used well as resources with to be able, but like l' Nathalie Clayer in connection with the Albanians (Clayer 2007 underlined: 341-410), it is necessary to keep d' an excessive ethnicisation of this policy.[page 34][67] Selim Deringil, in The Well-Protected Domains, as for him emphasized the policy of conversion and its role in the legitimation of the capacity hamidien (Deringil 1999: 68-92). It has too underlined the role of the missionaries in these problems (Deringil 1999: 112-134). However the question conversions, parce qu' it can move the borders between the communities, returns well, like l' Nesim Seker (n.p.) noted, with the field covered by l' demographic engineering such qu' it was defined in the United States since the years 1990. That would thus mean that l' engineering demographic Othoman, included/understood in a broad spectrum including conversions, would start with l' era hamidienne. Several work on the orphans and the orphanages, in particular Armenian, as stake of fight between the Othoman communities for period 1908-1922 could to allow to draw these problems from conversion jusqu' at the end of l' Worsen. [68] Seker proposes a reading of the war d' independence in terms of ethnic conflict between the States of the area and the communities of l' Worsen, conflict supplied with l' implication of the European

23

great powers (Seker 2002). Continuity ingenierist would be also marked, according to l' revisionist of l' approaches; Exchange population of 1923-1924 (for example Aktar 2000a), in the cynical and coercive control of the States Turkish and Greek, constraining, behind the pretext humanitarian, of the whole populations with s' to exile. In a more general way, theses of the historians of the Armenian genocide on the recycling of the persons in charge of this one in l' administrative machinery of Republican Turkey or the analyses of Zürcher on the continuity of the personnel directing enters unionistic and kemalists (Zürcher 1984) pose also l' assumption d' a continuity. Work former d' Erol Ülker and its contribution to this file transfer this idea in the field from policies d' immigration and d' establishment of Turkey of the years 1920-1930. For Ülker, if them methods changed, l' objective (to homogenize, turquifier) remains the same one. L' article d' Uğur Üngör in this file, defining a going segment of 1913 in 1950, qu ' it qualifies, in its entirety, of period Turkish young person, s' registered voter him also in this direction (Üngör 2008). Years 1920-1930 provide naturally discursive matter of these theses. But within a republican framework where the speech on the necessary turquification holds, in l' public space, of l' imposed exercise, one can wonder, like l' Füsun Üstel in connection with the Hearths Turks (Üstel 1997) showed, if the speech and the practices go hand in hand. Rıfat Bali, in a recent book (Bali 2008a), discussed in an interview in this number, examine the pogroms antijuifs of 1934 in Thrace (Bali 2008b). With this occasion, it s' question on[page 35]turquification and logics sedentary, racial or economic, sometimes contradictory, which l' animate, whereas Dilek Güven, in another article of this file, devoted to the anti-Rum pogroms of September 1955, pleads for a continuity going well beyond the period founder of the years 1920-1930 (Güven n.p.). [69] In addition to the historiographic question of the Turkish young centrality and its employment like prism privileged to reinterpret the history of the finishing Empire and the Turkish republic, this file raised a certain number of criticisms, of a theoretical and methodological order, concept of engineering demographic, which more generally touch with the historiography of violence on the minority populations. These questions amply treated in several contributions of this file will be developed thoroughly in the postface with second number.

REFERENCES

[see pdf]

24