nikos sigalas and alexandre toumarkine

Download Nikos Sigalas and Alexandre Toumarkine

Post on 01-Dec-2014




0 download

Embed Size (px)


Nikos Sigalas and Alexandre Toumarkine Demographic 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The file on ' Demographic Engineering ' took an unpublished largeness which drove us in envisage a new number to come of revue.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 place in 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 (ktem 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 `minorits'; 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 `majorit'. 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 `dterritorialiser', 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 (Petrovi 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