1

THE PLANNED GENOCIDE OF THE TURKS

OF WESTERN THRACE

Prof. Dr Ata ATUN

Near East University and SAMTAY FOUNDATION

Key words

Western Thrace, West, Thrace, Greece, Turkish Minority, Turkish, Minority, Genocide, Ethnic Cleansing,

Human Rights, IKSAREN, International Crime, History

Introduction

When the Lausanne Agreement was signed the Turkish population, including the Pomak Turks were more

in number proportionally than the Greek, Bulgarian, Armenian and Jewish population. The Turkish

population numbered around 129,120 in the area, and was 67% of the population. Today is 40% of the

population. Despite the fact that the rate of population increase was around 2.8%, due to constant

emigration the population did not increase and the result of this is that they became a minority in the area.

The land ownership in Western Thrace has also dramatically changed. Whilst in 1923 the land ownership

by Turks was 84%, they now only own between 20 and 40%. Throughout the years the area has been

subjected to a ruthless genocide by Greece.

The place of western Thrace in history

During the period around two thousand years before Christ the first inhabitants of Thrace were the (1)

Indo-European Traks (Thracians). (2)

After the end of the 8th century BC to the start of the 7th century BC the area was under the sovereignty of

the Peni, Ancient Greeks and Macedonians, and until 355 BC was ruled by the Kingdom of Thrace. After

that, coming under the rule of the Empires of Rome(5) and Byzantine,(6) Western Thrace was first included

in the boundaries of the Roman (7) and after that the Byzantine Empires. (8)

After the conquest of these lands by The Ottoman Empire in 1354 the lands came within the boundaries of

the Ottoman Empire (9), who ruled there for 559 years. Between the years of 1913 – 1920 Western Thrace

came under the occupation of the allies. In 1923, in accordance with the Lausanne Agreement (10) it was left

to Greece.

The first presence of Turks in Western Thrace began with the „Western front‟ who emigrated there from

Central Asia and the İskit Turks who arrived there in the 2nd Century. (11) It continued with the Hun

Turks in the 4th Century, (12) The Avar Turks in the 5th Century, (13) the Patzinak Turks in the 9th Century

(14) and continued with the Kuman

(Cuman) Turks (15) in the 11th Century.

During the 560 years that Western Thrace was part of the sovereign land of the Turks from the 1360s till it

was handed over to the Greeks by the main / big European countries after many machinations and without

firing one shot in the area, in May 1920, no other nation was sovereign over the lands and they stayed

Turkish. Western Thrace is so Turkish that the first Independent State (16) was founded on these lands in

1913.

On the 25th /26th January 1990, under the crescent and moon and star decorated ceiling in the building

where the Western Thrace Turkish State was declared (17)on 31st August 1913, Sadık Ahmet (18) and

İbrahim Şerif (19) were arrested , tried and sentenced to 18 months in prison because they said they were „

Turks‟(20).

For centuries, as the land of Western Europe and especially Western Thrace is very

productive, many tribes have poured into the area. Due to this productivity Western Thrace has changed

hands many times throughout the centuries. However it is the Turks who have lived and developed the area

the longest .Today if we take into account the Turks living in Western Thrace, we will see that the Turks

have lived on these lands continually for about 2100 years. (21)

Greece, as it does everywhere and claiming that the whole world is of the „Hellenic „ race, also rejects the

ethnic identity of the Turks of Western Thrace, and claims that there is a „‟Muslim Minority‟‟ as stated in the

Lausanne Agreement . However, the title of the migration agreement, signed in addition to the treaty is „The

Exchange of the Turkish and Greek population‟‟. Furthermore, the report prepared by the League of

Nations (22) (the United Nations of the period) on 5th March 1925 in Genève is entitled „‟ Minority in

2

Western Thrace of Turkish Race „‟ (23)

Turkish states founded in western Thrace

With a surface area of 15.000 km2 the population dispersion in Western Thrace in 1910 was as follows.

325.000 Turkish, 56.000 Bulgarian, 30.000 Greek, 11.000 Muslim Gagavuzian (Gagavuz) Turks, 3.500

Jewish, 4.000 Romanies, 1.600 of whom were Muslim and 850 Armenians, making a total of 430.350

people.

With this population concentration the Turks first founded the Rodop Turkish “Hükümet-i Muvakkate (24)

(Temporary Government) in the town of Çirmen in 1878. This government lasted for eight years till 1886.

Secondly on 31st August 1913 the independent „Western Thrace (25) „State was founded. The Western

Thrace Independent State was first named ته كومت موق یا ح راق ی ت سی غرب in Ottoman script and pronounced

“Garbî Trakya Hükûmet-i Muvakkatesi (in modern Turkish this means Western Thrace Temporary

Government), it later became له ق ت س كومت م یا ح راق ی ت سیغرب , Garbî Trakya Hükûmet-i Müstakilesi (in

today‟s Turkish Western Thrace Independent Government). Nowadays it is described by some sectors as

„‟Western Thrace Turkish Republic‟. The „‟ Western Thrace Turkish Republic „‟founded on 31st August

1913 is the first Republic in which the word Turkish is found. This Turkish Republic also known as Garbi

Trakya Müstakil Hükümet, (Western Thrace Independent Government) was recognised by both Greece and

Bulgaria.

The National Anthem of the Western Thrace Turkish Republic declared by Chief of General Staff Infantry

Division, Major Süleyman Askeri Bey in Dedeağaç on 3rd September 1913 .

National Anthem of the Western Thrace Turkish Republic

O Western Thracian child of Turkish descent how happy for you

You gave life to the national freedom fight with your blood

Noble Hero imprinted all around the universe

The nation stands in attention to this your national flag

Here where you stand is full of your illustrious martyrs

The enemy cannot harass the spirit of these honourable heroes‟s

Illustrious martyrs enveloped in the flag of freedom

What a divine honour it is to be buried in ancestral land.

The wind of freedom and liberty is blowing in the Land

The brave fighters are overthrowing this awful slavery

We can never turn back from this great National struggle

Even if armies of steel challenge us we will not be scared!

We have crossed Meriç and Karasu for national liberty (TN)

We have reached our goal by crushing all armies

We have opened a great path to a Republic in the Balkans

For the first time it was us who lit the torch of freedom

This flag will fly, this Republic will live!

The enemies opposite us will be scared and run away from us!

We are the grandchildren of a nation which has lived free for thousands of years

We are the wolves of these steppes, the lions, and the eagle of the skies

The attack of fighters is always like a storm

In war the enemy faints at the grander of our majesty

Western Thrace Republic will live, will live!

Nations will be amazed at out progress

O, sweet Western Thrace!..... See how at last you have been freed of slavery

O, enemies! …. Don‟t think this nation is tired from wars.

The illustrious flag of the Republic will fly at all times over this land

All these Western Thracians will live in freedom till doomsday

3

On 29th September 1913 in accordance with the İstanbul Treaty signed between the Ottoman State and

Bulgaria, in return for Eastern Thrace and Edirne being given to the Ottoman State, Western Thrace was

left to the Bulgarians. The „‟Western Thrace Temporary Government‟‟ disputed this situation and declared

that it did not recognise the treaty.

In the period which followed, The Thrace Temporary Government set up its governance organs in all its

areas and founded a 30.000 strong defence force. The government administration declaring its

independence, first of all set out its borders, hung the symbol of the independent state, the moon and star,

green and white flag on all government offices and institutions, founded its 29,170 strong army, prepared its

budget, printed postage stamps and started passport formalities. In the meantime, accepting the Ottoman

charter the Garabi Thrace court of justice started to rule on cases. Emanuel Karasu (Carasso) a Jew born in

Salonica, set up a news agency and a newspaper named Müstakil-Indépendant was published in both French

and Turkish.

Following these developments Bulgaria started to mass in the area. However, in those days The

Ottoman State, with foreign pressure did not look favourably upon the newly formed Republic. In addition to

this the political fighting and chaos in İstanbul eradicated the chance of dealing with an independent state in

Western Thrace. Due to this the government of Sadrazam Sait Halim Paşa provided for the emptying of the

area by putting pressure on the Western Thrace Temporary Government. Finally, with the signing of the

İstanbul Treaty on 29th October 1913, the Ottoman State left the whole of Western Thrace to Bulgaria.

On 30th October 1913 under the command of General Lazarof the lands of the „Western Thrace

Independent Government „are completely occupied and this Government comes to an end. In this way the

struggle for freedom which had started with great hopes during the first days of August 1913, ended just

three months later in October with bitter disappointment. These lands where Turks were in the majority, and

which had been under Turkish administration for hundreds of years, like Macedonia were left outside the

boundaries.

The Ottoman State made its last treaty in relation to the Balkan War with Serbia on 13th March 1914. As

there were no longer any common borders more emphasis was given to the situation of the Turks in Serbia

and the „‟Western Thrace Temporary Government‟‟ was founded. However it only lasted for 3 months.

This big fight which started in October 1912, later with the participation of Romania affected the whole of

the Balkans, ended in August 1913, which is a period as short as 10 months. From the outcome of this great

fight Greece took the biggest part of the spoils.

The gains from the sharing of the Ottoman States, 5 Balkan States, Salonika Monastery, Kosovo, Yanya

and İşkodra is as follows ;

Greece: 50.000 km2, land and 1.600.000 population;

Serbia: 30.000 km2, land and 1.200.00 population;

Bulgaria: 18.000 km2, land and 1.000.000 population;

Karadağ: 5.000 km2‟, land and 150.000 population

Moreover, Albania declared independence and added İşkodora to its lands. The other Balkan states whilst

sharing this great inheritance and literally swallowing Macedonia, the real owners, the Macedonian people

were not mentioned at all. The big nations made the observation about the Aegean Islands: Italy would keep

all the islands it had occupied. Except for Meis, the rest except for İmroz and Bozcaada would stay in

Greece‟s hands. However before this decision could be made legally binding, the First World War broke out.

The „Western Thrace Public Centre‟ (26) founded under the auspices of the French on 15th October 1919

was destroyed on 23rd May 1920.

It is very difficult to get hold of numbers of minority groups in Western Thrace. Greece has always shied

away from giving out this information.

According to the numbers given by the Turkish delegation at the Lausanne Peace Conference the total

population of Western Thrace in 1923 was 191.699. Of these 129.120 (67%) Turks, 33.910 (18%) Greeks,

the remaining 28.699 consisted of mainly Bulgarians with a small number of Jews and Armenians. Therefore

the Turks were in a majority of four to one compared to the Greeks. (27)

Today the situation is different. The total population of Western Thrace is 360.000.

As the Greek authorities shy away from giving figures about minorities it is not possible to give exact

numbers for Turks living in Western Thrace. Despite this, around 120.000 – 150.000 (33 – 42%) are of

Turkish origin. This is an estimated figure. From these figures it can be seen that rather than there being an

increase in the Turkish population there is a decline.

4

According to the census of 1951 the number stating that their mother tongue was Turkish and that

they were Muslim is almost twice as high. The population was recorded as 7.632.801. Whilst 112.665

(1.4%) of the population stated they were Muslim, 179.895 stated their mother tongue was Turkish. This

equates to 2.4%.

Attempts to eradicate the Turkish population in western Thrace

When the Lausanne Agreement was signed in 1923, the Turkish population, including the Pomak Turks

was in comparison larger than the Greeks, Bulgarians, Armenians and Jews. When the Treaty was signed the

number of Turks in the area numbered about 129.120 and made up 67% of the total population, today it

makes up 40% of the population. Whilst it is known that the rate of increase in the Turkish population is

2.8%, due to constant emigration the population has not increased and has now been reduced to a minority in

the area. (28)

Greece by engineering emigration and assimilation polices has used the following

strategies to completely eradicate the Muslim Turkish minority in Western Thrace.

- Laying the foundations for the splitting up of the minority group by stating that the Turks, Pomaks and

Gypsies are not composed of a homogenous community.

- Weakening the links between Turkey by emphasising and recognising religious identity rather than

ethnic identity and therefore realising the aim above.

- By encouraging emigration through the prevention of economic development and by disrupting social

security and togetherness.

1- The problem of loss of land

Land property ownership in Western Thrace has also dramatically changed. (29) According to records,

in 1920, 86% of the movable and immovable property belonged to the Turks, 7% belonged to the Bulgarians,

6% belonged to the Greeks and the remaining 1% to others; as for animals and farm equipment 86%

belonged to the Turks, 8% to Bulgarians, 6% to Greeks. (30) The Turks who then owned 84% of the land,

today only own 20 to 4o % of the land.

Utilising the fact that Turks are loyal to their land, Greek governments have used various excuses to

expropriate or have made it compulsory to combine lands or have got possession of them using underhand

methods in this way they have estranged the Turks from the area. Alongside this policy they have in a co

coordinated way, by introducing certain policies, made it attractive for those of Greek descent to want to buy

up the land of the minority .If we look at the agreement signed by Greek Central Bank and the Ziraat Bank

(Agricultural Bank) on 22nd

November 1966 whereby it would encourage Greek citizens and those of the

Christian population to purchase land and farm land belonging to Thracian Muslims‟ it is very easy to

understand the situation. In recent years suitable and long term credit opportunities have been used to

persuade people to buy land belonging to the Turks. As well as this, after the break up of the USSR, so called

Pontus Greeks have been brought to the area to settle.

2- Expatriation

The most important method used to dilute the Turkish minority is the 19th Article of Greek Nationality

Law which came into force in 1955. The law has been used to keep the Turkish minority to an „acceptable

„level. Due to this law the nationality of around 60.000 Turks of Western Thrace was ended.

This practice uses the 19th Article of the Nationality Law, (32) and is as follows:

‘Any person not of Greek descent who leaves Greece, whether or not they intend to return can be stripped

of their Greek citizenship. This decision can also be applied to those born and living abroad who are not of

Greek decent .A child who is not of age, living abroad and whose parents or the parent alive has had their

citizenship revoked may also have their citizenship revoked.’ The Minister of the Interior makes the

judgement if the Citizenship Council takes such a decision. The main aim of revoking the citizenship of

citizens, who are non Greek ethnically when they go abroad, is to reduce the Turkish population in Western

Thrace.

Thus due to this Article in 1988, 122, as of June 1990, 66, and in February 1991 544 Turks from Western

Thrace had their citizenships revoked without their knowledge or consent. The majority of these citizens are

students who had gone to Turkey, USA and Germany to study. Despite this ruling the number of Turks who

have had their citizenship revoked is kept secret. (33) This Article used to revoke the citizenship of the Turks

5

of Western Thrace, by taking the „ethnic decent „of Greek citizens as criterion, discriminates between „‟those

who are of Greek descent and those who are not „‟Those who had their citizenships revoked in accordance

with this Article, were not given any notice and had their citizenships revoked by arbitrary decisions. These

citizens found out about the ruling at the border and were not even given permission to enter Greece to

appeal against the decision. It is estimated that around 60.000 Turks have had their Greek citizenship

revoked in this way.

Even though on 11th June 1998, the Citizenship Law‟s 19th Article was lifted by a law, as no provision

was made for the return of the 60.000 Turks of Western Thrace they are still without a nation. The 19th

article has been lifted, however its negative and discriminatory effects will mean the Turks of Western

Thrace will experience the negative effects of it for many years to come.

3- Forbidden zone implementation

Starting from 1936 till recent years a quarter of the Turks of Western Thrace were forced to live in the

region declared „ Forbidden Zone „ by Greece in İskeçe and Gümülcine on the northern border of

Bulgaria . (34) (Picture 1). The majority of the Turks in the „forbidden zone‟ are Pomak Turks and have been

forced to live under heavy pressure from the police and army. (36) To gain entry and exit to Pomak villages a

special document is needed.

Another important example of the Greeks attempts to assimilate minorities, is the

„Forbidden Zone‟‟ policy, which although lifted in 1995, shows the mentality of the Greeks towards ethnic

minorities, in not allowing minorities the right to survive and to limit their thinking. However, alongside this

policy, implemented in order to break up the Turkish minority of Western Thrace, the policy of denying

that the minority living in the mountainous areas are not Turks continues.

The Minister of Defence at the time Arsenis, announced during his visit to Western Thrace in 1995 that the

military no go zone was to be lifted. Even though the military control points were to be lifted, and Greek

citizens living outside the area would no longer need permission to enter or leave the area, Arsenis however

did not follow this announcement with the necessary legal order. It is still necessary for non - Greek citizens

to get permission to enter, from the local security forces.

The forbidden zone implementation was actualised with the aim of not only leaving the Turks of Western

Thrace without information from each other but also alienating them from each other. The minority known

as the Pomak Turks, lived in the area declared a forbidden area in 1936, and the aforementioned long lasting

prohibition meant that they formed closer links with the small number of Bulgarians living in the area, and

the Bulgarians living on the other side of the border. During the 59 years the prohibition continued the

Pomaks were socially and culturally affected by the Bulgarians and therefore alienation occurred.

Whilst after pressure from the EU in lifting the forbidden zone implementation an alternative method of

dividing the Turks from within was implemented. The aim of the Government was to reduce to a minimum

the numbers of those who felt Turkish and those regarded as Turkish and thereby initiating nationalism and

division between them in the future.

Greece‟s activities in accordance with the policy of spoiling the solidarity between the Turks of Western

Thrace include the claim that the Pomaks are „Muslims of Greek origin‟ and use propaganda campaigns to

prove this. It has been discovered that Konstantin Mitçotakis in 1991, for the first time used the terminology

„The Muslim Minority in Western Thrace „‟, „‟ Pomaks and Gypsies of Turkish descent „‟. (37) Efforts in the

same vein saw the production of a „Reading Book‟ with a Pomak Alphabet on 12th June in Athens after a

presentation. (38) This was followed with the launch of a newspaper named Zagalisa in 1998.

The announcement by the Greek Corps Commander „‟ we undertake the mission of the Pomaks „‟ is

without doubt very important. During his speech the officer calling the Pomaks „ Helen Pomaks „ said that

the Pomak language would be promoted to University status, and that they were also considering the

creation of a university professorship as well. The commander continued by stating that work had started on

a Pomak dictionary and grammar, as well as this he said that the Pomak language should be taught at the

Academy of Education in Salonika and added that such activities would not affect the activities of the army.

Whilst speaking at another meeting in Şapçı in 1998, the District General Secretary of East Macedonia and

Thrace, Stavros Kabelidis, stated that a 10 year plan was needed in order for the development of the area and

in the video prepared by Desine Pantazi , entitled „ Pomaks of Thrace‟ it is said that the Pomak Turks in the

Eastern area of Thrace had been forced into Islam, whereas their lifestyle included such actions that were

more the style of Christians, and in accordance with the Lausanne Agreement these villages should be

educated in Pomak. ( 39 )

6

Once again due to these policies followed by Greece which are contradictory to the policy of emphasising

the existence of minorities and ethnic identity, it has been proved that the primary aim of the policy followed

is aimed at dividing the Turkish minority. Greece in accordance to a strategy determined after 1995, as well

as putting great pressure on the Pomak Turks in terms of culture and starting moves to change history,

attempted to prove that the Pomak Turks were from a separate race and so that the Pomaks would believe

this went as far as giving government support for the publishing of the Pomak alphabet and newspaper. They

also do not shy away from using other persuasive methods, such as improving living standards and utilising

EU funds for the Pomaks who describe themselves as Turks. The most interesting development in

terms of Greek policy is the closing of organisations with the word Turk in their names, not giving

permission for new ones to be founded, but the founding by the Government of the Hronos Pomak Society in

İskeçe. Firstly whereas it is clearly discrimination that whilst associations with „Turk‟ ,‟ Macedonia‟ and

„Minority‟ in their names are being closed down, associations where the word „Pomak‟ is found are getting

high level support, more importantly the fact that the Forbidden Zone implementation is continuing is more

important

The Greek Government acting on the knowledge that their long term aim of banning the word „Turk‟

would not be able to be continued for much longer, due to the norms of the EU, has since the 1923 Lausanne

Agreement been referring to the minority as „Muslim‟ and has put forward that the Muslim minority is not

all Turkish but is made up of Turks, Gypsies and Pomaks.

Pomak settlement in western Thrace

Starting in the 15th Century the Anatolian Nomads came to the Balkans in droves and bonded with the

"Kıpczak-Kuman Turks‟ who had arrived there hundreds of years previously. When Aydınoğlu Gazi Umur

Bey started the conquest of Thrace the noble Turkish groups, volunteered to take on the duty of outpost and

advanced guard.

The nomads who came in waves to Western Thrace under the guidance of Süleyman Paşa, Timurtaş Paşa,

Lala Şahin Paşa, Doğan Bey, Hacı İlbey, Evranos Bey, Deli Balaban Bey ve Akçakocaoğlu were helped by

the Pomak Turks who were already there to settle and gave them monetary and moral support.

The term „‟Pomak‟‟ only started to be seen in Balkan and Western sources in the 1830s. This word used as

an adjective was given to the Pomak Turks, part of the areas Turks, by the Balkan Slovak people of the area.

In the Balkan Slovak dialect it means „Helper‟.

The term which in the Slovak dialect is pronounced „‟pomağa‟‟ and „‟pomagadic‟‟ over time started to be

pronounced „‟pomak‟‟. The source for the giving of the word as a name to the Turks of the area is the fact

the Anatolian nomads who had been coming to the Ottoman Balkans to settle in droves in the 14th Century

and were helped by these Kıpczak – Cuman groups.

The science of history science shows that the Pomak Turks are the grandchildren of the Cuman (41) Turks

who settled in the area from Rodop in the 11th Century. The Pomak Turks carry all the characteristics,

language, hand crafts, dress and folkloric characteristics and still live in the same way as the Middle Asia

Turks.

Despite all of these facts, Greece has never given up its endeavours to divide the Pomak Turks from other

Turks and declare them as having Greek ancestry. Many propaganda books on this subject are being written

claiming that the Pomak Turks were “forcibly converted Greek Thracians” and “Muslims of Hellenic

ancestry”.

4- the prevention of the political rights of the minority

Parallel to Turco-Greek relations, since 1999 changes in the attitude towards the Western Thrace Turkish

Minority (W T T M) have begun to be seen. However, despite this change it is not possible to say that the

administration has changed in its attitude or is more favourable towards the WTTM in terms of bringing

them up to the same status in bilateral agreements and international treaties, having a say in traditional

organs or finding a comprehensive solution for the problems of minorities in education.

Yet The WTTM‟ s steps in fighting for their rights is really because of the Greek administrations

discriminatory practices in not allowing citizenship rights in other words it is linked to their fundamental

rights and freedoms .

The restrictions faced by the WTTM, with regards to elect and be elected rights also restricts the possibility

of the minority when it comes to taking the problems to Greek politics. A change in the election laws in

1990, so that the threshold for election is 3% nationwide (to reach the threshold 200 thousand votes are

needed) and the implementation also being valid for independent candidates, means that the WTTM has

7

literally had the chance of forming a party or having an independent representative in the Greek Parliament

taken way from them. In this way for members of the WTTM to be elected as members of parliament they

need to be nominated as candidates by other parties.

The Greek Governments implementation in recent years of a step in regards to the right to elect and be

elected, is aimed at the prevention of minorities getting into the Greek Parliament is a new step one which is

very striking. In order to split possible uniting of votes by minorities the Greek government has started a

geographical order. To reduce the political effectiveness of minorities, the Law in question, known as the

Kapodistrias Plan, has united the provinces, municipalities and sub districts. By changing the boundaries of

the polling stations and changing the election districts of the areas where Turks live, on paper, they have

created super provinces, and because these areas, where there is a high concentration of Turks, were divided

between districts with a higher number and concentration of Greeks, the opportunity of completely

combining the votes of the Turkish minority was avoided, thereby the opportunity of Turks being elected to

parliament was prevented. With the „Kapodistrias Plan‟, Athens, in order to keep the Turks as a minority

permanently, have incorporated the Turkish minority into Greek towns, reduces the municipalities from 7 big

ones to 3 even bigger ones. In this way, by founding widened district provinces they prevented the chance of

the Turks governing themselves by electing their own Governor. (42)

5- The prevention of the right to associate

The intensified suppression policy started during the Coup (of the Colonels), continued after 1974 with the

closing down of all civil society organisation containing the word ‟Turk „and continued with the word

„‟Turk‟‟ being erased from school signs. (43). Associations such as the Western Thrace Turkish Teachers

Association, the Gümülcine Turkish Youth Association and the İskeçe were closed because the word „Turk‟

in was aimed at creating minorities.

Associations like the Thrace Turkish Teachers Association, the Gümülcine Turkish Youth Association and

the İskeçe Turkish Association were closed down as it was said they were intending to create minorities.

Also permission was not granted for the foundation of the District of Rodop Turkish Women‟s Culture

Association, because it contained the word „Turk‟. The newest and most interesting ruling on this

matter is the appeal case (44) which has continued since 2003 when the case was brought by the Evros

(Meriç) Minority Youth Association whose application for recognition had been rejected. The Court of

Appeal, after it reiterated the official state line that „there were Greek citizens in Thrace who were of the

Muslim religion‟, rejected the appeal on the grounds that the name was illegal (45)and that „Minority Youth‟,

had not been used in a way which was clear and did not give rise for suspicion, because the confusion as to

whether the name represented a religious or ethnic identity was contrary to public order. (46) The Court of

Appeal did not only reject the application for registration, it also set a precedent against Minorities, that any

minority term used in the name of an Association without a clear definition could „hide offences‟.

Following a law suit brought against Greece in 2005, by The Iskeçe Turkish Association because it had the

name Turk in it, and as it refused permission for the Rodop Turkish Women‟s Cultural Organisation to be

formed for the same reason, The ECHR on 27th March 2008 came to the decision that Greece had violated

the „‟right to associate and form associations‟‟ when it banned the groups.

The law suit which was brought after Galip Galip and the other seven people applied to the ECHR, against

the closure of The Iskeçe Turkish Association and the Western Thrace Minority Higher Education

Association, had lasted more than 21 years. Due to this the court ruled that Greece „had not fairly executed

justice in a reasonable time‟ and had therefore violated the rights of the associations and fined Greece 8.000

Euros as damages.

“The Lausanne Peace Agreement does not recognises that in Western Thrace there is a Turkish minority

but rather a Muslim Minority‟‟ and that “ due to the nationality of the associations founders the public

could be influenced in the wrong way” the suit against Greece brought by Hülya Emin and six other people

at the ECHR ruled that in the Emin et al case the persons who had applied to the court had had their

damages issues addressed that they were satisfied that “ justice had been served” and therefore there was no

need for compensation.

Greek Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyanni announced that Greece would appeal against the decision of the

ECHR in the unanimous decision they took in the „‟ Iskeçe Turkish Association v Greece " (application

No: 26698 /05) and "Emin et al v. Greece” (application No.34144/05) cases, that Greece had violated the

„‟right to associate and form associations‟‟ when it closed down the groups.

During a press conference on 19th June 2008, Bakoyanni was asked „‟Exactly what had been discussed on

the issue of minorities in the dialogue between Ankara and Athens during talks about the complications over

8

the issue of minorities‟‟, to which she answered „‟ that the subject of the protection of human rights was no

longer on the agenda because respect for minority rights and the formation of related policies is the duty

of all democratic governments‟‟. Foreign Minister Bakoyanni stating that this decision had been taken

after much deliberation but did not give any information about exactly which Article the Greek state was to

appeal against.

Speaking at the press meeting Bakoyanni said that Greece was carrying out its duties as regards the Muslim

minority of Thrace. By saying that Greece was respectful to equal rights and in the face of the law, was not

only carrying out its duties but deepening them too, however whenever issues regarding the Muslim minority

was brought up they faced problems due to Turkeys own policies, and in doing so she indicated that the

problems were still continuing and that they would continue because of the Greek government.

The decision by the Greek Government to take the court decision of the ECHR to appeal naturally caused

amazement in the Western Thrace Turkish Minority, in the EU and in Turkey. In the rightful struggle of the

Western Thrace Turkish Minority, the „‟Minority‟‟ was found to be justified and Greece was convicted. The

decision given by the ECHR literally ordered that freedom to assemble and forming of associations could in

no way be prevented.

The Law Suits dealing with this issue were opened in 2005 by the İskeçe Turkish Association and

by The Rodop Area Turkish Women‟s Cultural Society. The court was of the opinion that Greece with its

decision to close down the Associations of Greece‟s minorities was in breach of the 11th Article of the

European Human Rights Agreement.

The İskeçe Turkish Association was founded in 1927 and after functioning under this name till 1983,

claiming that they were carrying out Turkish identity propaganda and claiming that this was not in

accordance with the Lausanne Treaty, the Greek authorities took them to court. The Association ,which in

the 60 years since it has been formed had carried out its activities lawfully, in 1986 , with the decision of

the İskeçe Court was ordered to close , as the Governor of İskeçe claimed that „‟ there are no Turks in

Western Thrace‟‟.

The İskeçe Turkish Association had taken the case to the ECHR after around 20 years of struggle in the

internal courts resulted in a ruling against them

The European Court of Human Rights in its decision in this matter decreed, that the closing down of an

Association just because it uses the term Turk is an unnecessary practice in a democratic community. It

announced that, even if the Association did claim that there was an ethnic minority in Greece, that on its

own, this was not on its own a threat for a democratic community.

It was decreed that in closing the Association Greece had violated the related Articles of the European

Human Rights Convention, which allows for freedom of assembly and association and fair trial. It was

decreed that Athens pay the Association which had been closed 8 thousand Euros in compensation.

In the other case, it refused Athens argument that „there are no ethnic minorities in Greece only religious

minorities‟. The court came to the conclusion that the refusal of the court in 2001 to register the Turkish

Women‟s Cultural Association because it had Turk in its name, contravened the European Human Rights

Conventions, right to freedom of assembly and association.

This decision in accordance with the European Council standards, carries with it direct sanctions. Under

normal standards Greece should revise its Laws and allow for the formation of Associations with the name

Turk in them. The European Council Committee of Ministers is responsible for the implementation of this

decision and the path it follows will determine the future and will create stability in the area. No matter what

happens the ECHR will not change the decision they took regarding associations with the name „Turk‟ in

them.

With the announcement on this issue the head of the Western Thrace Turkish Federation (WTTA)

Halit Habiboğlu by saying ‘’ the just struggle the Minority has been staging for many years has been

strengthened by the ruling of the ECHR. It is difficult to understand why our country Greece has taken the

decision to appeal despite the fact that the courts Greek members also voted in favour of this decision.

Greece is determined to see the Minority which is bound to its country with loyalty as a threat. In relation to

Minority rights in my heart neither did we want to take the case to the ECH nor did we wish that our country

Greece would appeal the decision. It is the aim of the minority to establish dialogue between the majority

and minority. The real aim of the minority is to establish this for our country on a democratic platform.

However due to the Greek state and the Governments politics the minority has been forced to defend its

rights outside of its own country. We have complete faith that the decision by the ECHR will not change. The

minority has the right to form associations with the name ‘Turk’ in them , and this will not change’’ has

enunciated that the Turkish Minority living in area wish to live on Western Thrace soil in friendship with the

Greek Government.

9

On the other hand, in 2005 after the Greek High Court upheld the decision of the lower courts in

2001 not to allow the formation of the „Rodop Turkish Women‟s Cultural Association‟ because of the word

Turk the case was taken to the ECHR after being ratified by Arios Pagos.

In the meantime the Rodop Governor had for the same reason had taken The Gümülcine Turkish Youth

Association and the Western Thrace Turkish Teachers Association to court in order to have them closed

down. After a long court battle with the decision to close the associations of the lower court being ratified by

the High Court, in 1988, all signs with the word „Turk‟ in them were torn down and the activities of the

associations stopped.

It became clear that all the problems were reaching the same result, and that the biggest problem of

the Turks of Western Thrace was the fact that they were unable to get their „identity‟ to be recognised. In

Western Thrace official departments were defining the Turks as „Greek Muslims‟ and the prohibition against

the associations was in fact the result of the policy of denying that „Turk‟ is an identity.

6. Restrictions in the right to education

The Western Thrace Turkish community which according to the Lausanne Treaty had the right to found its

own educational establishments and appoint its own teachers is today face to face with provisions which will

„leave them uneducated‟. The Western Thrace minority schools were not the property of the Greek state. The

schools were administered by elected committees, and the salaries of the teachers were paid by the parents.

An end has been put to this and by slowly and methodically transferring the schools to the property of the

Greek state, by lowering the standards of education, the students are faced with the situation of not being

able to learn Turkish.

The restrictions in bringing teachers and Turkish books on education from Turkey, insufficient quality of

teaching, the implementation of a thousand to 5 limit for Turks for entry to university, and despite this not

recognising the parity of diplomas received from Turkey, and despite it being compulsory to go to nursery

school, not giving permission for Turks to open nursery schools which are of vital importance, are today

being experienced in a very explicit way. (47)

As well as the problems explained under the main headings, problems such as , the prevention of

Foundation administrators being elected and appointed and having the right to own land and being appointed

directly by the Greek authorities; the fact that the Head Müftü position to deal with matters of religion and

conscience is still empty, the fact that the Müftüs elected by the Muslim Turks is not appointed by the

Orthodox Governor , are a few of the other practices which are every day pushing to the limit the patience

and endurance of the Turks

At the start of the 90s, the Greek Justice Minster Athanassios Kanelopulos, by saying in a statement

published by the “Cumhuriyet” (Republic) newspaper on 7th June 1990, that there were 150.000 Greek

citizens who were members of the Islamic religion living in Western Thrace, for the first time gave a clue

about the distribution of population during those years. Today‟s Turkish minority population brings into the

open one truth. That the number of Turks living in these areas should be around 235,958 when compared to

the Greek population increase curve, and 667,784, when compared to the Turkish population increase curve,

but that however, due to assimilation and the result of emigrations this number has fallen to around the

120.000 mark.

Today‟s concentration of the Turkish population is in İskeçe, Central Gümülcine and the forest villages

around these cities. Due to assimilation policies the number of Turks found around the Dedeağaç region, is

so small that it is hardly worth noting. It is estimated that today around 150.00 Turks live in Greece and

make up 1.5% of the general population. The Turks live mainly in Gümülcine, İskeçe and Dedeağaç. As well

as this there are many Turks living in Dimotoka and Sofu.

A certain number of Turks living outside of Western Thrace in Rhodes and the 12 Isles can be found. Other

than this in the Western Thrace area of Rodop there are around 40.000 Turks.

When carefully studied, the census results for Greece and Turkey show that there is a birth rate percentage

for both countries, and that when the present population increase curve is applied to Western Thrace the

results of the inhuman policies, in politics and the pressures encountered in every area of life can be seen.

Whilst a certain increase in birth rate can be seen in all areas of Greece, there have been dramatic

reductions in the population of the Turks of Western Thrace. No one living a happy free life will leave the

lands they are living on. However in Western Thrace due to the Greek Governments relentless inhuman

policies, the opposite has happened.

10

Results of the 1821- 2007 censuses in Greece . (48)

1821 938,765 1848 986,731 1940 7,344,860

1828 753,400 1853 1,035,527 1951 7,632,801

1834 693,592 1856 1,062,627 1961 8,388,553

1838 752,077 1861 1,096,810 1971 8,768,641

1840 850,246 1870 1,457,894 1981 9,740,417

1841 861,019 1879 1,679,470 1991 10,258,364

1842 853,005 1889 2,433,806 2001 10,964,020

1843 915,059 1907 2,631,952 2005 11,244,118

1844 930,925 1920 5,531,474 2007 11,338,624

1845 960,236 1928 6,204,684

Due to sudden change in population numbers in Turkey and Greece in 1923 – 4 and in 1925, due to a

mutual exchange of population, the population increase curve in both countries has been established with

information gained after 1925.

1928 – 2007 Greece census results and population increase curve

Results of the 1927 – 2007

Censuses in Turkey (48)

1927 13,648,270 1970 35,605,176

1935 16,158,018 1975 40,347,719

1940 17,820,950 1980 44,736,957

1945 18,790,174 1985 50,664,458

1950 20,947,188 1990 56,473,035

1955 24,064,763 1997 62,865,574

1960 27,754,820 2000 67,803,927

1965 31,391,421 2007 70,586,256

1928 – 2007 Turkey census results and

population increase curve

1932

1933

1934

1935

1936

1937

1938

11

Even though the population increase curve for Turkey and Greece is not parallel it still shows a tendency

for increase.

The population of Greece which was 6.204.684 in 1928 increased to 11.338.624 in 2007, an increase of

5.133.940 or eighty two percent in 79 years and the birth-rate percentage was about 1.03.

The population of Turkey which was 13.648.270 in 1927 increased to 70.586.256 in 2007, an increase in

80 years of 56.937.986 or a hundred and seven percent increase with a birth-rate of 5.21 percent.

The population increase of the Turks of Western Thrace is not parallel to either the general 82% increase

in Greece, or the 417% increase in Turkey. The inhuman practices of the Greek government for years and

because, despite being in the EU, the clear infringement of human rights has meant that instead of an

increase in population there has been a decrease.

If the 129.120 Turks living in Western Thrace had been able to live a normal life free from pressure, they

would have at the least had a population increase parallel to that of Greece and their numbers today should

be 235.958.

If they had been able to continue their lives in a Turkish style of living and family makeup, the

population increase graph should be parallel to that of Turkey‟s population increase and therefore the

population today should be 667.784.

Comparitive population increase curve for western Thrace Turks

The table above shows the population increase of Turks in Western Thrace between 1910 – 2007 with the

population increase in Turkey and Greece, parallel to what the population should be today.

The pressures and inhuman treatment that our Western Thrace Brethren have been subjected to, the

genocide they have encountered, their being ousted from the Greek Parliament, the „Forbidden Zone‟

implementation declared in 1936, which literally sentenced them to live in an open air prison, and

restrictions regarding property, can clearly be seen as „forced emigration „‟ and „‟withdrawal of citizenship

„‟.The population which should have shown an increase in the last 80 years has in fact shown the complete

opposite, a decrease of 8%.

In conclusion despite years of attempts to assimilate them, depriving them of their basic human rights and

freedoms, they have managed to protect their national solidarity and culture, and despite the fact that Greece

12

is a member of the EU the Western Thrace Turkish minority is still in danger and has many difficult days

ahead of them. One of the three main principles upon which the European Union has been built, human

rights, has unfortunately not become a reality for the Turks. Including EU human rights, it can be argued

how much importance the E U has given to minority rights, but it is crystal clear what Greece‟s attitude

towards the Turkish minority is.

References

1 Traklar , “Giriş Sayfası”

http://www.trakarastirma.com.tr.tc/ 2 Traklar Genel Tarih, “Traklar Genel Tarih”

http://www.trakarastirma.com.tr.tc/ 3

Trakya‟ya İsmini veren Kavim Traklar, “Ana Giriş Sayfası”

http://www.harbiforum.org/dunya-kulturu-ve-tarihi/906-trakyanin-adini-veren-millet-traklar.html 4 Michael Köhler, Unutulmuş güneydoğu Avrupa uygarlığı: Traklar

29.07.2004, http://www.abhaber.com/haber.php?id=129 5 İsmail Hakkı Küpçü, Roma İmparatorluğu ve Hıristiyanlığı kabulü, 02.07.2005

http://www.ihkupcu.com/makale/romaimparatorlu%C4%9Fu.htm 6 Bizans İmparatorluğu Hakkında Bilgi, “Bizans İmparatorluğu”

http://www.turkcebilgi.com/Bizans+%C4%B0mparatorlu%C4%9Fu 7 Roma İmparatorluğu hakkında bilgi, Roma Tarihinin Dönemleri

http://ansiklopedi.turkcebilgi.com/Roma_%C4%B0mparatorlu%C4%9Fu 8 Bizans İmparatorluğu Dünya Kültürü ve Tarihi, Bizans imparatorluğu

21 Tem 2006, http://www.turkforum.net/showthread.php?t=157829 9 E-Tarih.org, Edirne’nin Fethi http://www.e-tarih.org/sayfa.php?sayfa=1252797.1228026.

3565338.0.0.php&Edirne%27nin%20Fethi 10

Seha L. Meray, Lozan Barış Konferansı, Tutanaklar-Belgeler, Madde 16, T.B.M.M. Kavanin Mecmuası,

Devre: II, İçtima: 1, Cilt 2, İkinci Basılış, 1942, Ankara, T.B.M.M. Matbaası 11

Türkler Online, İskitler Kimlerdir

http://www.turkleronline.com/diger/persler/iskitler/iskitler_kimdir.htm 12

İsmail Hakkı Küpçü, Büyük Hun İmparatorluğu, 20.02.2005

http://www.ihkupcu.com/makale/tarihsahnesi.htm 13

Türk Tarihi, Avarlar (Avar İmparatorluğu), 2004

http://dallog.net/devletler/avar.htm 14

Prof. Dr. Erol Güngör, Tarihte Türkler, Peçenekler, Uzlar ve Kuman-Kıpçaklar, 2004

http://www.turktarih.net/t-94-pecenekler-uzlar-ve-kuman-kipcaklar.html 15

Basri Zilabid, Rodopların Müslüman Halkı, İlkadım Dergisi, Ekim 2008

http://www.ilkadimdergisi.com/149/arastirma-basrizilabit.htm 16

Gündağ, Nevzat, 1913 Garbi Trakya Hükümet-i Müstakilesi, Ankara, Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı

Yayınları: 789, Kültür Eserleri Dizisi: 87, 1987 17

Cihan, Süleyman Sefer, Balkan Savaşı ve 1913 Batı Trakya Türk Cumhuriyeti, İstanbul, Yeni Batı Trakya

Dergisi Yayınları, Seri No.8, 2008 18

Kim Kimdir, Dr. Sadık Ahmet (1947 - 1995), http://www.kimkimdir.gen.tr/kimkimdir.php?id=7 19

Private Sözlük, İbrahim Şerif, 26.07.2007,

http://www.privatesozluk.com/show.asp?m=ibrahim%20serif 20

Batı Trakya Birliği Bonn, Sadık Ahmet, http://www.westtrakien.com/batitrakya/sadikahmet/index.html 21

Trakya-Net, Batı Trakya Tarihi, Sayfa 1-6,

http://www.trakya-net.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=12 22

Çağdaş Türk ve Dünya Tarihi, Milletler Cemiyeti, 18/10/2008,

http://ctdt.blogcu.com/milletler-cemiyeti_26534101.html 23

Alp, İlker (Doç. Dr.), Batı Trakya Türkleri, Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi, Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi

Başkanlığı, sayı 33, cilt: xi, Kasım 1995, Ankara,

http://www.atam.gov.tr/index.php?Page=DergiIcerik&IcerikNo=770 24

Batı Trakya Tarihi, Rodop'ta Hükümet-i Muvakkate'nin Kurulması, 22.05.2007

http://www.genc-trakya.net/board/thread.php?threadid=5486&sid=69abe02021e46e24ef8fa52c91db8b03 25

Cihan, Süleyman Sefer, Balkan Savaşı ve 1913 Batı Trakya Türk Cumhuriyeti, 26

Batı Trakya Kronolojosi, Türk Kurtuluş Savaşı - Batı Trakya'da Mücadele Hazırlıkları, Batı Trakya Umumi

Merkezi'nin kurulması, http://www.batitrakyalilar.com/dev/kronoloji/hazirliklar.asp

13

27 Alp, İlker (Doç. Dr.), Batı Trakya Türkleri, Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi, Paragraf 1.b

28 Tekoğlu, İhsan (araştırmacı-Yazar), Ezilmiş, Asimile Edilmiş Balkan Milletleri ve Batı Trakya’nın

Müslüman Türklerine Sesleniş, 1-14 Yeni Trakya Aktüel, Tarih ve Kültür Dergisi, Sayılar 180-194,

İstanbul, Yeni Batı Trakya, 2006 29

Sami, Şemseddin, Kâmûs‟ül Âlâm, İstanbul, 1896 30

Alp, İlker (Doç. Dr.), Batı Trakya Türkleri, Paragraf 1.a. 31

Gürsel, Mustafa, “Batı Trakya‟da Bugünkü Durum”, Milliyet, 21 Ekim 1978 32

The Minority Rights Group, Minorities in Balkans, Report No. 82, London 1989, s. 33 33

Batı Trakya Sorunu, Batı Trakyalıların Sorunları ve Çözüm Yolları, (21 Mart 1994 tarihinde İstanbul‟da

düzenlenen panel), Batı Trakya‟nın Sesi, Yıl: 7, Sayı: 60, İstanbul, Mart 1994, s. 6-7 34

Başar, Cem, Türk –Yunan İlişkilerinde Batı Trakya Türkleri Sorunu, İstanbul, İNAF Uluslar arası İlişkiler

Ajansı, 1992, s.28 35

Memişoğlu, Hüseyin, Balkanlarda Pomak Türkleri, Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Vakfı Yayınları; İstanbul,

1999 36

Alp, İlker (Doç. Dr.), Batı Trakya Türkleri, Paragraf 3.b.3 37

Anadolu Ajansı; 31 Temmuz 1999 38

Batı Trakya Türkleri Dayanışma Derneği; Batı Trakya‟nın Sesi, Haziran-Temmuz 1997, sayı 83 39

Batı Trakya Türkleri Dayanışma Derneği; Batı Trakya‟nın Sesi, Ocak 1998, Sayı 86, Makedonya‟nın

Yörük Tükleri, Raltar, http://www.tarihportali.net/tarih/makedonyanin_yoruk_turkleri-t5776.0.html;imode 40

Vikipedi, özgür ansiklopedi, Kumanlar, http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuman 41

Gözde K.Yaşın, Batı Trakya‟da Seçim Heyecanı, Cumhuriyet Strateji, S.119, 9 Ekim 2006, s.18-19 42

1972 tarihli ve 1109 sayılı kanun-kararname ile "Türk Okulları" ismi, "Azınlık Okulları" olarak

değiştirilmiş tir. 43

Talep sırasıyla Dedeağaç Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi‟nin 58/1996 sayılı kararıyla ardından Trakya Temyiz

Mahkemesi tarafından 423/1998 sayılı kararla ve nihayet Yargıtay‟ın mahkeme kararını onayan 58/2006

sayılı kararıyla reddedildi. 44

Stamatis Sakellion, Yunanistan, Avgi gazetesi, 5 Kasim 2006, çev. Erol Bekir 45

Gözde Kılıç Yaşın, “Batı Trakya‟da Bizans Oyunları”, Cumhuriyet Strateji, S. 135, 29 Ocak 2007 46

Gözde Kılıç Yaşın, agm 47

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Demographic history of Modern Greece

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Modern_Greece 48

Belge Net, Türkiye‟de Nüfus Sayımları (DİE), http://www.belgenet.com/arsiv/nufus.html

According the „forbidden zone‟ law brough out in 1936, an area 10 – 25 km deep along western Thraces

border with Bulgaria, was declared a „forbidden zone‟. The 35 -40 thousand Turks living in 133 villages in

this area had their travel and social activities controlled by the Greek authorities who restricted all activities

and turned the area, literally into a prison camp. Entry into or out of the forbidden area was by a special

14

document.