One good thing about blogs is that the opinions of normal everyday people, as well as specialists in particular areas, are of equal significance. In the case of the murder of Hrant Dink, this is particularly important given that sitting in Yerevan, the reaction of Turks and others living in Turkey can be gauged in a way not possible from reading news reports.

Yes, images of the huge 100,000-strong funeral procession said a lot, but what is being discussed and what do they really think? Well, for that we have blogs. Although not in Turkey any longer, Turkish Torque has a large number of interesting posts, and now that the immediate aftermath of the Dink murder is dissipating, offers some crucial commentary over what’s happening now.

In particular, with elections scheduled in Turkey this year, how will Dink’s murder reflect on the political climate of the country, and what does this mean for accession to the European Union? In the first of many posts, Turkish Torque discusses the position of the ultra-nationalist MHP party.

Yesterday I was thinking about the kind of bind the ultra-nationalist MHP (Nationalist Action Party) must have found itself for the last couple of days.

On the one hand, there is the inescapable reality of the upcoming elections of November 4, 2007.

MHP currently represents a vote potential of about 7-8%. If it gains a few more points within the next nine months it can very well clear the 10% vote threshold hurdle and enter the Parliament. And to do that it of course has to lambaste the ruling AKP at every opportunity.

I was wondering if MHP would somehow “elaborate on” Hrant Dink’s assassination for that purpose because to do so would also mean the recognition of the Turkish establishment’s (if not the Turkish state’s) negligence and thus partial culpability in the murder.

[…]

“We are concerned,” Sandir continued. “We are afraid that [Hrant Dink’s murder] might be sending up a communication flare. We are concerned that after this, other files would be dropped in front of Turkey. At this point we are warning the government. They should do whatever needs to be done in order to prevent a chain reaction of political murders.”

Sandir said that Dink’s murder is “a part of the games played over our country.”

This theme on the further rise of ultra-nationalism in Turkey is also carried on in another post. Although the reaction of most Turkish newspapers has been sympathetic and sensitive to the memory of Hrant Dink, some dissenting voices are now beginning to emerge.

Lest the readers of this blog assume that all columnists in Turkey are in the same boat in terms of finding the Turkish establishment negligent (to say the least) for Hrant Dink’s murder, I would like to present an opposite take on the matter to present a more balanced view of what’s actually going on in Turkey.

Actually, there are quiet a few columnists now coming out of their corners and inviting their readers to re-question the most basic assumptions and obvious sentiments about the case.

There are many people in Turkey today (and it is hard to assess their relative numbers in the lack of a scientific survey) who actually seethe with a righteous nationalist anger and believe that the respect and adulation shown for Hrant Dink’s memory was an overreaction.

They feel that the continuation of such sympathy for Dink’s memory is about to become yet another self-inflicted act of humiliation that the Turkish nationalists do not deserve. It seems like a counter-reaction is on its way.

Actually, there are many excellent posts on this site, and specifically news that another local dissident, Orhan Pamuk, has now been given automatic protection by the Turkish police following Dink’s murder. There are also some amazing photographs of yesterday’s funeral procession in Istanbul. A foreigner working in Turkey also posts some images, but adds some interesting commentary.

It was a historic day in Turkey today, as well over 100,000 people (the AP and Reuters guess) marched the 5+ mile stretch from Osmanbey (the site where Hrant Dink was assasinated last Friday) to Yenikapi on the Marmara Sea, where he was buried in the Armenian graveyard of the Holy Mother of God Armenian Patriarchal Church. Members of the Armenian diaspora as well as prominent Armenian religious leaders were invited to attend this funeral.

Amongst the marchers were a broad spectrum of contemporary Istanbul society, including many of the local ethnic Armenians, as well as Kurds, Turks, and a few of us foreigners-in-residence. Signs in the crowd contained expressions such as “Hepimiz Hrant Dink’iz. Hepimiz Ermeniyiz” (We all are Hrant Dink. We all are Armenian), also written in Armenian: “Menk Polorys Hay Enk” and in Kurmanci (the primary Kurdish language spoken in Turkey): “Em Henû Hrantin.”

[…]

People I talked to indicated that this was much larger than any funeral procession in post-1980 Turkey. When Ugur Mumcu’s car was bombed, perhaps 10,000 people attended a funeral, but this kind of multi-day funeral/demonstration is basically unprecedented in contemporary Turkish history. I have never seen a more focused march of any sort in my life - there was one cause and one cause only; sorrow for the death of a good and generous man at the hands of fascism. The march today was a demonstration that fascism will not be tolerated here in Istanbul. How long that message will prevail or last, though, noone knows.

Another Turkish blogger now living in the United States also posts his feelings after Dink’s funeral in his native Istanbul. I can only hope that such an opinion reflects the view of most Turks wherever they are.

Dink’s funeral was today. I received an email from my father at 6:36 a.m. and read it one hour later. He mentioned taking a different route to work and attending the funeral procession. I was moved to tears when I read these lines:

“Today I realized once again that years before we buried Hrant’s lifeless body we buried the multi-religious, multi-lingual, multi-national, multi-voiced, multi-colored, multi-cultured Istanbul of my childhood, my youth, deep into the annals of history.

“We could not protect Istanbul, nor you, Hrant; forgive us…”

The above lines and Dink’s cold-blooded execution summarize a trend that is both sad and alarming. The alarming trend comprises rise of nationalism, lack of understanding and emergence of so-called “dark powers” that are willing and capable of murderous acts.

[…]

The public’s righteous and peaceful outrage at the perpetrators of this heinous act, and the likes, must survive the feeling of accomplishment that settles after big acts of solidarity. Otherwise, this great moment will succumb to the everyday complacency that engulfed people many times before.

This last point is particularly relevant and if anything, both Turkey and Europe must ensure that Dink’s contribution to the pro-democracy and human rights movement there is remembered and built upon. In that respect, a teacher from New York now living in Turkey offers an insight into how Armenians are viewed there, and what should happen next.

When I have talked about Armenia with three or four different Turks, all educated, generally liberal people, their agreement in attitude is astonishing; it begins to sound like deja vu. I guess I know a fairly limited number of people, and all from similar circles, politics-wise. […] In any case, what I hear again and again is that Section 301 is inappropriate for a modern democracy and that Turkey must allow debate, but at least as pertains to this issue, there really isn’t anything to debate (according to my Turkish friends). They think it is clear that Turks killed Armenians and Armenians killed Turks in the context of war, that perhaps apology ought to be made (not everyone shares this opinion), but that, in the end, these were the actions of Ottomans two or three generations ago, not of modern Turks. In these conversations, no one has ever said anything racist or discriminatory against Armenians, by the way, and all the Turks I know are horrified by this murder. Not for nothing do the newspapers declare, We are all Armenians today.

The question of how to resolve old hatreds and move on is a hard one. Silencing debate is a step backwards. Yet I think about the way that the US struggles with our own history, with slavery, the murders - arguably genocide - of Native Americans, internment of Japanese during World War II - and I wonder how far debate gets us. History continues to divide us. People publish terrible lies every day, about the Holocaust especially, and freedom of expression protects them and protects the right of others to respond, to disagree, to educate. Injustices of the past manifest themselves in the present in the form of social and economic inequality, institutional racism… at times, we attempt to make reparation for what we took from others in the past. […] I think that true healing cannot come until people find themselves on equal footing in society, yet there are those whose hatred is stirred up by this very idea. So I don’t doubt the importance of debate or freedom of expression, but I doubt that it is enough, and I wonder whether healing is possible, and how?

Of course, what matters is that Turks now confront their own demons and resolve issues such as Article 301 in the Turkish Constitution which can be used to silence any critical voice by charging that it insults “Turkishness.” On that, I leave the final word with Jim Gibbon.

It’s been encouraging to read journalists calling for an immediate end to Article 301 and to see that, among the many signs in the funeral procession that said “We are all Hrant” and “We are all Armenian,” there were also some that said “301 - Murderer.”

Some of the comments I’ve read online say that’s ridiculous and that blame lies solely on the 17-year-old who shot Dink, but I think the key is recognizing how the ethos of intolerance and rabid nationalism can culminate in this and similar incidents. From biased textbooks to popular media, to politicians who tacitly sanction lynch mob justice, there are many factors that have set the stage for this kind of tragedy.

I’ve been heartened by the protests and yet I wonder how well they reflect the general sentiment in Turkey. I’m trying to be optimistic.

Let’s hope that there is now grounds for optimism. It is the only fitting way for Turkey to truly respect the memory of Hrant Dink. Anything else would be unforgiveable, and the stakes for Turkey are higher than at anytime in recent history. Erkan’s Field Diary notes that the Washington Post’s Post Global blog has started a discussion on Turkey’s Trouble With Minorities.

Turkey is certainly in a tough fix: Its EU negotiations are frozen in their tracks. It has a number of prickly issues and disagreements to overcome with the EU including the issues of human rights, recognition of ethnic minorities and the resolution of its no-win position in Cyprus. Concurrently, it worries about the future of an Iraqi Kurdistan and its own Kurdish population, some one-third of its citizens. It has a young population base and close to 100% of its GDP in national debt. Its private sector continues to bet on a one-way road of entry into EU as it incurs higher levels of debt. With a civil war on its border, the Turkish government openly supports and arms the Turkomen minorities in Kirkuk. And it has other interests in Bosnia and hostile postures towards Armenia and Serbia.

The sum of such components can further complicate issues in a region that is revisiting its religious and ethnic roots, dating back to the times of the Ottoman Empire and the pre-revolutionary Russia. Turkey must deal with these ghosts in a frank and transparent manner just as all other secular countries in Europe have done.

No kidding, and it is the way in which Turkey now responds to the events of the last week that will determine whether it is on a genuine path of democratization or not. Like I said, the stakes are high. Really. Very high.