The Perception of the Army by Armenian Minorities Living in Turkey

The survey consists of four parts. This article deals with analyzing the data and observations on Armenians that constitute the first step of the fourth part of the survey. The fourth part of the survey also includes other non-Muslim minorities of Turkey, including the Jews, Assyrians, and Greeks.

In many developing countries, the soldiers, as one of the social groups that founded the new regime, have not only functioned as political elites but also emerged as a symbol of modernization. For social and political roles of soldiers, see S. P. Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1969); S. P. Huntington, The Soldier and The State (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1957); S. E. Finer, The Man on Horseback: The Role of Military in Politics (Middlesex, UK: Penguin, 19); S. E. Finer, "State and Nation-building in Europe: The Role of the Military," in The Formation of National States in Western Europe, ed. Charles Tilly (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1975); Henry Bienen, "Armed Forces and National Modernization: Continuing the Debate," Comparative Politics 16, 1 (1983): 1-16; Ejub Kucuk, "The Socio-class Determinants of Militarism," in Problems of Contemporary Militarism, ed. Asbjorn Eide and Marek Thee (London: Croom Helm, 1980); Ahmet Taner Kışlalı, "Türk Ordusunun Toplumsal Kökeni Üzerine Bir Araşt ırma," A. Ü. SBF Dergisi 29, 3-4 (1974): 89-105.

Amos Perlmutter, The Military and Politics in Modern Times: On Professionals, Praetorians and Revolutionary Soldiers (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1977), 29; Eric A. Nordlinger, Soldiers in Politics: Military Coups and Governments (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1977), 2-3; David Rapaport, "A Comparative Theory of Military and Political Types," in Changing Patterns of Military Politics, ed. S. P. Huntington (New York: Free Press, 1962).

For details on the processes and the results of the interventions, see William Hale, Turkish Politics and the Military (London: Routledge, 1994); Lucille W. Pevsner, Turkey’s Political Crisis: Background, Perspectives, Prospects (Washington, DC: Praeger, 1984); C. H. Dodd, The Crisis of Turkish Democracy (London: Eothen Press, 1983); Tanel Demirel, "Lessons of Military Regimes and Democracy: The Turkish Case in a Comparative Perspective," Armed Forces & Society 31, 2 (2005): 245-71; Birsen Örs, Türkiye’de Askeri Müdahaleler: Bir Aç ıklama Modeli (Istanbul: Der Yay., 1996).

For institutionalization of military regimes and the legal status of the Army in Turkey, see Gareth Jenkins, "Continuity and Change: Prospects for Civil -military Relations in Turkey," International Affairs 83, 2 (2007): 339-55; Ilter Turan, "Unstable Stability: Turkish Politics at the Crossroads?" International Affairs 83, 2 (2007): 319-38; Metin Heper, "The Justice and Development Party Government and the Military in Turkey," Turkish Studies 6, 2 (2005): 215-31; Metin Heper and Aylin Güney, "The Military and the Consolidation of Democracy: The Recent Turkish Experience," Armed Forces & Society 26, 4 (2000): 635-57.

See http://www.tsk.mil.tr/10_ARSIV/10_1_Basin_Yayin_Faaliyetleri/10_1_Basin (date of e-declaration of the Army: April 27, 2007) (accessed October 4, 2009).

For changing patterns in civil-military relations in Turkey after 1983, see Demirel, "Lessons of Military Regimes and Democracy"; Tanel Demirel, "Soldiers and Civilians: The Dilemma of Turkish Democracy," Middle Eastern Studies 40, 1 (2004): 127-50; Heper, "Justice and Development."

See, e.g., Ilter Turan, "Unstable Stability," 331-32; see, e.g., Metin Heper and Aylin Güney, "The Military and Democracy in the Third Turkish Republic," Armed Forces & Society 22, 4 (1996): 619-42.

Özkan Duman and Dimitris Tsarouhas, "‘Civilianization’ in Greece versus ‘Demilitarization’ in Turkey: A Comparative Study of Civil-military Relations and the Impact of the European Union," Armed Forces & Society 32, 3 (2006): 405-23; Ümit Cizre Sakallıoğlu, "The Military and Politics: A Turkish Dilemma," in Armed Forces in the Middle East: Politics and Strategy, ed. Barry Rubin and Thomas A. Keaney (London: Frank Coss, 2002); Aylin Güney and Petek Karatekelioğlu, "Turkey’s EU Candidacy and Civil-military Relations: Challenges and Prospects," Armed Forces & Society 31, 3 (2005): 439-62; Heper and Güney, "Military and Democracy"; Turan, "Unstable Stability"; Jenkins, "Continuity and Change"; Demirel, "Soldiers and Civilians"; Demirel, "Lessons of Military Regimes and Democracy."

For typologies of praetorian regimes, see Nordlinger, Soldiers in Politics; Amos Perlmutter, "The Praetorian State and the Praetorian Army: Toward a Taxonomy of Civilian-military Relations in Developing Countries," Comparative Politics 1 (1969): 383-404. For a typology of praetorian periods in Turkey, see Metin Heper and Joshua R. Itzkowitz-Shifrinson, "Civil -military Relations in Israel and Turkey," Journal of Political and Military Sociology 33, 2 (2005): 231-48, 240; and Heper and Güney, "Military and Democracy," 620.

Yılmaz Esmer , Devrim, Evrim , Statüko: Türkiye’de Sosyal , Siyasal, Ekonomik Değerler ( Istanbul: Tesev Yayınları, 1999), 41-43; and http://www.agarastirma.com.tr/arastirmalar/kurumlara_guven.pdf (access December 17, 2008).

For the historical, social, cultural, and political origins of popular support toward the Army in Turkey, see Tanel Demirel, "Türk Silahlı Kuvvetleri’nin Toplumsal Meşruiyeti Üzerine," Toplum ve Bilim 93 (2002): 29-54; Kemal H. Karpat, "Structural Change, Historical Stages of Modernization, and Role of Social Groups in Turkish Politics," in Social Change and Politics in Turkey: A Structural-historical Analysis, ed. K. Karpat (Leiden, Netherlands: E.J. Brill, 1973); Frederick Frey, "Patterns of Elite Politics in Turkey," in Political Elites in the Middle East, ed. George Lenczowski (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1975), 41-82; Ilter Turan, "The Evolution of Political Culture in Turkey," in Modern Turkey: Continuity and Change, ed. Ahmet Evin (Opladen, Germany: Leske Verlag und Budrich, 1984); Heper and Itzkowitz-Shifrinson, "Civil -military Relations in Israel and Turkey"; Birsen Örs, Türkiye’de Askeri Müdahaleler; Jenkins, "Continuity and Change"; Ümit Cizre Sakall ıoğlu, "Demythologizing the National Security Concept: The Case of Turkey," Middle East Journal 57, 2 (2003): 213-29.

Today, the estimated population for Armenians is 40,000 to 80,000, for Jews is 20,000 to 25,000, for Assyrians is 15,000 to 20,000, and for Greeks is 1,000 to 2,000. More than 95 percent of Armenians live in Istanbul. The rest of the Armenian population is scattered in Anatolia. For the population of ethnic and religious groups in Turkey, see Peter Alford Andrews, Ethnic Groups in the Republic of Turkey (Wiesbaden, Germany: Reichert, 1989). For settlement policy of the new Republic and migration and immigration of non-Muslim groups, see Soner Çağaptay, "Kemalist Dönem’de Göç ve İskan Politikaları: Türk Kimliği Üzerine Bir Çalışma," Toplum-Bilim 93 (2002): 218-41; Kemal Kirişçi, "Disaggregating Turkish Citizenship and Immigration Practices," Middle Eastern Studies 36, 3 (2000): 1-22; M. Çağatay Okutan, Tek Parti Döneminde Azınlık Politikaları (Istanbul: Bilgi Üniversitesi Yay., 2004).

Levent Ürer , Azınlıklar ve Lozan Tartışmalaıı (Istanbul: Derin Yay., 2003), 252-58. The Assyrians were not defined as a minority in the treaty.

Seha L. Meray , Lozan Barış Konferansı: Tutanaklar ve Belgeler, vol. 2 (Ankara, Turkey: Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Yay., 1973), 12-14.

During the survey, 59 of 228 interviewees defined themselves as "Armenian" when asked to describe their identity. For details on their definition of identity, see H. Birsen Örs and Ayşegül Komsuoğlu, "Turkey’s Armenians: A Research Note on Armenian Identity," Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 13, 3 (2007): 405-29.

For the composition and settlement of the population, arrangements for the lifestyles of different ethnic and religious groups and relations among them, and Ottoman identity, see Ercan Yavuz, Osmanlı Yönetiminde Gayrimüslimler: Kuruluştan Tanzimata Kadar Sosyal, Ekonomik ve Hukuki Durumları (Ankara, Turkey: Turhan Kitabevi, 2001); Halil İnalcık, "The ‘Ottoman Civilization’ and Palace Patronage," in Ottoman Civilization, ed. Halil İnalc ık and Günsel Renda (Istanbul: Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Culture, 2002), 12-27; İnalcık and Günsel Renda (Istanbul: Republic of Turkey Ministry of Culture, 2002), 12-27; Halil İnalcık, "Periods in Ottoman History: State, Society, Economy," in Ottoman Civilization, ed. Halil İnalcık and Günsel Renda (Istanbul: Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Culture, 2002), 31-239; Namık Sinan Turan, "16. Yüzyıldan 19. Yüzyıl Sonuna Dek Osmanlı Devleti’nde Gayri Müslimlerin Kılık Kıyafetlerine Dair Düzenlemeler," Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi 60, 4 (2005): 239-67.

For some examples of the latest works on the formation of Turkish national identity, see Taner Akçam, Türk Ulusal Kimliği ve Ermeni Sorunu (Istanbul: Su Yayınları, 2001); Nergis Canefe, "Turkish Nationalism and Ethno-symbolic Analysis: The Rules of Exception," Nations and Nationalism 8, 2 (2002): 133-55; Soner Cağaptay, "Reconfiguring the Turkish Nation in the 1930s," Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 8, 2 (Summer 2002): 67-82; Soner Cağaptay, "Race, Assimilation and Kemalism: Turkish Nationalism and the Minorities in the 1930s," Middle Eastern Studies 40, 3 (May 2004): 86-101; Sule Toktaş, "Citizenship and Minorities: A Historical Overview of Turkey’s Jewish Minority," Journal of Historical Sociology 18, 4 (December 2005): 394-429; Bora İşyar, "The Origins of Turkish Republican Citizenship: The Birth of Race," Nations and Nationalism 11, 3 (2005): 343-60.

Turkish Constitution of 1924, article 88 ( Istanbul: Filiz Kitabevi, 1999).

For the policies toward non-Muslim citizens during the early decades of the Republic, see Okutan, Tek Parti Döneminde Azınlık Politikaları; Rifat Bali, Cumhuriyet Yıllarında Türkiye Yahudileri: Bir Türkleştirme Serüveni 1923 -1945 (Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2000).

Dustur (Code of Laws), Third Set, 7: 667.

Rifat Bali , "Yirmi Kur’a İhtiyatlar Olayı ," Tarih ve Toplum 179 (November 1998): 260-74.

Ayhan Aktar , Varlık Vergisi ve Türkleştirme Politikaları ( Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları , 2000).

Ali Tuna Kuyucu , "Ethno-religious ‘unmixing’ of ‘Turkey’: 6-7 September Riots as a case in Turkish Nationalism," Nations and Nationalism 11, 3 (2005): 371; Dilek Güven , Cumhuriyet Dönemi Azınlık Politikaları Bağlamında 6-7 Eylül Olayları (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları , 2005).

For the migration of Anatolian Armenians, who preferred to live in Turkey, to Istanbul, see Ayşegül Komsuoğlu, "Anadolu’dan İstanbul’a Bir Göç Hikayesi," Türkoloji Kültürü 1, 1 (Kış 2008): 89-104.

For the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative and qualitative models, see Alan Bryman, Quantity and Quality in Social Research (London: Unwin Hyman, 1988). Data extracted from quantitative research are often considered as accurate, reliable, and thus more persuasive since the data are collected by systematic procedures and can be checked by other researchers. However, in the quantitative method, the contact with the participant is too limited to penetrate the feelings and social life of the participant. Data extracted from a qualitative survey are not considered as reliable as data from a quantitative survey, and hence the generalizability of findings is considered as questionable. However, the qualitative method enables the researcher to attain richer and deeper data since this method requires much closer contact with the participants. The combination of the two methods may help fill the gaps in each method.

The neighborhoods are Bakırköy-Merkez, Bakırköy-Ataköy, Bakırköy-Yeşilköy, Bahçelievler, Sirinevler, Samatya, Kumkapı, Şişli, Beyoğlu-Taksim, Üsküdar (Bağlarbaşı), and Kadıköy.

Today, the Armenian population in Turkey is estimated to be within the wide range of 40,000 to 80,000, the great majority of whom live in Istanbul. The second city is Ankara, with an Armenian population of around 1,000. The participants we interviewed spoke of an Armenian population of 1,000 to 1,500 scattered around Anatolia.

A large number of male Armenians engage in the work of silversmith and goldsmith.

For the term perception, see R. D. Laing, H. Phillipson, and A. R. Lee, Interpersonal Perception: A Theory and a Method of Research, 2nd ed. (New York: Springer, 1969), 3-48; Marshall H. Segall, Donald T. Campbell, and Melville J. Herskovits, The Influence of Culture on Visual Perception (New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1966), 23-69; John W. Berry, Ypa H. Poortinga, Marshall H. Segall, and Pierre R. Dasen, Cross-cultural Psychology: Research and Applications (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 131-60.

By this question, it is intended to understand how they perceive the duty of the Turkish Army. During in-depth interviews, it was understood that most of the interviewees’ perception of the Army’s duty included both "what the Army actually does" and "what they wish the Army should do."

See note 31.

All Turkish citizens have the legal right to apply for officer status in the Turkish Army. But non-Muslim citizens are eliminated during the entrance exams for national security reasons.

These six interviewees made reference to their grandparents who served as officers in the Army during the last decades of the Ottoman Empire or the early decades of the Republican period, when non-Muslims were recruited for the Army.

In Turkey, every Turkish male citizen is recruited for military service in the Army for a designated period of time.

Esmer, Devrim, Evrim, Statüko, 42. One of the points to be noted here is that, in this survey, "trust in institutions" is treated as one of the dimensions of political culture as well as an indicator of legitimacy. In the report of the survey, it is noted that the relation among political culture, legitimacy, and trust is very complicated and that "no one argues that there is a direct relation between trust in institutions and legitimacy, however it is not easy to completely disregard the assumption that trust could be considered as an indicator of legitimacy." Ibid., 41. Another point worth mentioning here is that religious institutions are not placed among fifteen institutions that are classified in the four dimensions for factor analysis, and the Army, together with the police and the legal system, is placed in the dimension of legal-order institutions. One might wonder if the results of the survey would be somewhat different if religious institutions were not excluded.

See http://www.agarastirma.com.tr/arastirmalar/kurumlara_guven.pdf (accessed December 17, 2008). According to this survey, the Turkish Army scored the highest rating as the most trustworthy institution among the others in Turkey, with 91.1 percent in 2000, 85.0 percent in 2001, 89.6 percent in 2006, 89.6 percent in January 2008, 78.6 percent in August 2008, and finally 81.6 percent in November 2008.

It is not easy to understand if they figured out the fact that secularism does not mean democracy, and they do not necessarily always go together. However, it seems that they prefer secularism and law and order rather than "true" democracy. This reveals that the Army is considered as the "lesser of two evils" by a significant majority of Armenians.