Greeks, Serbians, Turks: whose nationalism is better ?

I do not want to offend anyone but I would like to be very straightforward: I see nationalism as a kind of disease that clouds the perceptions of the people who have it, which separates people from each other and which prompts every kind of double standard.

Nationalism has never brought any peace to any territory; it is the root cause of wars, massacres, and crimes against humanity. I strongly believe that when humanity overcomes this disease a brand new era will start for Homo sapiens. Nationalism has many different features, there is no doubt about that. I, however, find some of these features really amazing.

This virus makes people blind about their sins while opening wide their eyes to the sins of the others. Regular readers of this column know very well how critical I am of Turkish nationalism as well as Kurdish nationalism, both of which poison Anatolia, the womb of great civilizations. I am so critical toward Turkish nationalism because I am a Turk and I feel that this is my moral obligation. As a Turkish defender of human rights, I feel it is my utmost duty to criticize Turkey. But I am also very fed up with Greek nationalism and with Serbian nationalism. When I come across a Greek or Serbian nationalist (most of the time they are not aware at all of how nationalist they are) who presents himself as a person sensitive to human rights and democracy, and then comes out with his unique double standards I feel sick and abused. Let’s say we are talking about the Greek minorities’ situation in Turkey and the unacceptable limitations Turkey places on freedom of religion. We quickly reach an excited agreement and most of the time I am the one explaining in great detail Turkey’s unacceptable abuses of these vulnerable groups. However when we start to talk about the human rights abuses on the other side, then the atmosphere changes, and a strong resistance starts to rise.

Unbearable double standards

There are particular occasions when I have found these double standards unbearable. Some Greek diplomats especially do this a lot. They freely criticize Turkey (and I think everyone is entitled to do this) but when it comes to their own country in a blink of an eye they raise a wall of complete and blanket denial. I find this really amazing. If you look at the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights you can see that some chapters of this large encyclopedia of human rights violations are written particularly by some nations.

The torture chapter in this encyclopedia, for example, is undoubtedly written by Turkey, although Russia is on its way to seize the flag from Turkey. If you look at very large sections of other human rights violations, at freedom of religion, for example, we come across another author and it is Greece. Greece has been condemned by the European Court of Human Rights countless times because of its unacceptable behavior toward religious minorities including but not limited to its treatment of Muslims.

If I said almost all major jurisprudence of the ECHR with regard to violations of freedom of religion is basically founded on the cases coming from Greece, this would not be an exaggeration. In spite of this, when I see Greek diplomats talking as if they are champions and defenders of freedom of religion, I find it really unbearable. And I am amazed at the human mind’s capacity to distort apparent realities. Nationalism also creates a completely distorted view of others and their nationalisms.
The others’ nationalism is a backward, outdated attitude while one’s own nationalism seems to oneself to be a kind of “self awareness,” “patriotism,” a kind of “consciousness” about one’s own history.

Every nationalism is based on a lot of unreal events, on a glorious past which is somehow distorted completely. Serbians, for example, start their history at the Battle of Kosovo in which they were severely beaten by Ottoman forces. This masochistic understanding of history has remained complete mystery to me so far. Greeks and Turks make vague references to their past, “Hellenism,” “Ottoman Empire” and so on. But my understanding is that both Greek and Turkish nationalists are far from embracing the visions they refer to since their current mindsets do not allow them to understand the universal perspective in their past.

Alexander or Fatih most probably would feel a deep pity for the lack of vision and shallowness of those nationalists who refer to them. Finally, for me, the most amusing common denominator of these three nations is that they find each other “extremely nationalistic.” According to Greeks, Turks are very nationalistic. Turks find Greeks and Serbians extremely nationalistic. If you ask Serbians, Turks are the founding fathers of nationalism. The truth is that all these nations are still pathetically nationalistic and they do not show any sign of betterment. We should not forget of course the rise of the nationalism of the “oppressed.” The Kurds are the “rising star” in our region and I guess they will catch up and go beyond their elder brothers and sisters. And all these nationalisms somehow feed each other!

But one day we will rid our planet of this virus. Then we will attain the height of civilization in which we realize that we are all human beings and we do not have to hate or love someone just because he/she belongs to the same nation as us or to a different one! There are very good Turks, Greeks, and Serbians and there are also very bad ones. That’s it! It is that simple!