1 I

' f ' ·. c.!<

· When :Greeks -Thillk About Turks ·The view fromAnthropology

Edited by Dimitrios Theodossopoulos

ll floutledge. . ~ Taylot &f.tands Group

LONDON AND NEW YORK

. I

i' ,, • .

I

Writing about Turks and Powerful Others: Journalistic Heteroglossia in Western Thrace Fotini Tsibiridou

For orientals and orientalizers local and foreign inmates.

Diomedes Kronidis, Antiphonitis 1 October 2002

The aim of this article is to ~ake a theoretical point about the use and abuse of the Other, as this becomes apparent in elite discourses in Western Thrace, by reference to the journal Antiphonitis, published in Komotini since September 1998. In this marginal region of the Greek state, 1 a form of heteroglossia-literally, 'other language'-appears to represent the idiomatic character of a multicultural and multi­ethnic society. Two kinds of elite public discourses developed in this region in the last ten years of the twentieth century: written public discourses, which are mostly nationalistic; and cultural events aiming at multiculturalism and the political management of cultural, religious and ethnic differences. In line with Bahktin's

130 F. Tsibiridou

analysis (Todorov 1989 [1939]), I argue that this discursive two-sidedness could determine, in this particular time period, a kind of heteroglossia of the heterogeneaus Thracian culture.Z I will also take into account the earlier state of affairs, that of non­discourse or silence, which constituted the main genre of elite and non-elite discourse throughout most of the twentieth century, from 1920 to 1990.

The articles published in Antiphonitis are of another, rnore recent type of discourse, one that draws upon nationalistic ideals and a populist-leftist critique. It combines the radicalism of questioning the authority of those in power with views that reflect a strong attachment to the Greek nation and its history. This paradoxical combination constitutes a kind of heteroglossia per se, which probably reflects, as a metonymy-a figure of speech, which symbolizes the part instead of the whole-other conflicting ideas and practices within the dominant Christian population in Thrace at the turn of the twenty-first century. The significance ofthistype of discourselies in its ability to argue for ethno-nationalist positions from a new angle that facilitates the presentation of certain segments of the local population as victims of more powerful players in the national and international political arena.

The particular interpretation of political affairs promoted by Antiphonitis reflects the dissatisfaction of its authors with previous discourses about politics and ethnic identity in northern Greece, i.e. the pure nationalistic discourse of the early 1990s and the 'multicultural' practices that have emerged much more recently (see Yiakoumaki, this volume). In the last 15 years, these different discourses, nationalistic and multiculturalist-and their interaction (Tsibiridou 1996a; 1997)-have affected the way cultural difference is experienced by local actors in relation to interethnic contact, the broader sociopolitical context and the politics of 'culture'. Antiphonitis, with its radical, fairly unconventional but simultaneously nationalist per.spective, engages with thesewider processes in an idiosyncratic manner. The positions upheld by its authors, and in particular their opinion about the Turks, the subject matter of this chapter, provide some evidence of the complexity of available views in the Thracian, multi­ethnic context. In the sections that follow, I examine the image of the Turk and its construction in terms of the arguments presented in the pages of the journal Antiphonitis. I argue that the views of the journal's editors on domestic and world issues attest to a critical stand against forrns of power and hegernony, on the basis of a Marxist critique 'from below';3 yet, at the same time, they reproduce conventional and unconventional nationalism, mistrust, and conspiracy theories.4

Antiphonitis and the 'Turks'

Antiphonitis is a semi-monthly newspaper funded to some extent by a well-known businessman from northern Greece, who is sensitive to 'Greek national issues'. It was first published in September 1998. The editors, as weil as the contributors, are well educated-high school te~chers or individuals holding university degrees-and there is some expectation, expressed in interviews with rnembers of the editorial board, that the readers of the journal, or at least a significant percentage among them, should

...

When Greeks Think About Turks 131

ideally be highly educated. The newspaper was sent to me regularly, as an acknowledgement of my position in the Greek university, a common practice in Greece.5

The authors of Antiphonitis are conscious of their over-patriotic and nationalistic attitude, but are also ready to acknowledge their leftist leaning. Representatives of the editorial board maintain that living with Turks is not the main issue. Their critique focuses instead on what they perceive as 'anti-Greek' practices instigated by powerful members of the Muslim minority, and in particular those members of the minority who uphold ideals inspired by Turkish nationalism. Similarly, the principles of Antiphonitis with respect to Greek-Turkish relations are in conflict with · those of prominent Greek politicians6 who have been trying, in recent years, to foster a new Greco-Turkish friendship.

The editors of Antiphonitis approach the currently promoted Greek-Turkish friendship with suspicion and compare it to previous 'national betrayals' in the past. They draw extensively from history to highlight previous perceived 'mistakes' of Greek foreign policy, examples that are introduced in their commentary to facilitate

.· arguments about the present (Sutton 1998; Brown & Theodossopoulos 2003). They approach in a critical spirit the 'Greek-Turkish friendship' consolidated by Eleftherios Venizelos and Kemal Atatürk in the 1930s, only a few years after the exchange of

.. Christian and Muslim populations that followed the defeat of the Greek army in . Anatolia, a traumatic event for Greek national consciousness, which is also frequently referred to in Greece as the 'Asia Minor Catastrophe' (see Hirschon 1989). The editors of the journal also allude to the events of 1955 in Istanbul, which resulted in the shrinking of the Greek minority from 100,000 to a mere 3,000; and the Turkish invasion of Cyprus, in 197 4. They are outspoken on the issue of the legal and human rights of the smaller Muslim minority groups of the area (Pomaks and Gypsies), but they do not favour the dominant minority using its language (Turkish) in its everyday contact with the state. On the other hand, they support the right of the Pomaks and Gypsies to learn and speak their native language in schools. Their politics lie in the broader Greek nationalist policy, which attempts to separate the Muslim minority of Thrace into three ethnic categories-Pomak, Gypsy and Turk-aiming to avert the perceived 'Turkification' of the first two categories.

Unlike the traditional nationalist discourse in Greece, Antiphonitis pays less attention to stereotypical representations of the Turks per se and focuses instead on Turkish politics on the other side of the frontier, especially those examples of Turkish politics that support and reinforce the positions maintained by its authors. Within Thrace the policy of Antiphonitis is to refer to Muslims who declare themselves to be ethnic Turks simply as 'Turks', contrary to the usual nationalist discourse which traditionally categorizes them as tourkogeneis ( ethnic Turks) or tourkophonoi (Turkish­speaking). Information about political developments in Turkey is usually provided by a Turkish journalist, a political refugee in Greece, who is regularly employed by Antiphonitis, and whose subversive ideas against authority and power in Turkey are shaping the main political line of the newspaper concerning the Other. He signs his

132 F Tsibiridou

articles using the Greek nickname Zinon (alluding to the ancient philosopher with the same name, the father of dialectics).

In this context the contributing authors of Antiphonitis are purportedly trying to articulate a different kind of voice, focusing on a critique of power practices that is seen as emanating from all sides (both minority Ieaders and local Christian authorities). Let me note that Antiphonitis literally means 'the one who voices the opposite side', 'the rebuttal'. Besides the fact that most authors of Antiphonitis try to base their arguments on factual information, an apparent obsession with 'the corruption of power' appears to shape their texts. This idea of the 'corruption of power' often results in a homogenization of the people in power, both those inside and those outside Thrace. In terms of the broader politics of the articles of Antiphonitis, 'Kemalist Turks' (a convenient labe! for Turkish nationalists) and the 'state of Athens' are considered as two sources of outside power, both of them equally dangerous and corruptive for the fragile situation in Thrace. They are seen as being represented inside Thrace, by people both in the Muslim minority and in the local municipality.

This critical, and at the sametime obsessive, approach vis-a-vis the 'powerful' goes hand-in-band with stereotypical, homogenizing and essentializing opinions about the Other, and with an overestimation of the influence of Greek culture, language and history, in line with radical Greek nationalism. This ernerging discourse attempts to criticize certain powerful Others, without challenging the nationalistic fundamentals of the Self. The controversial result of this attempt reveals something about the insecurity and ambivalence of the authors themselves. Despite the fact that Antiphonitis sells no more than 2,000 copies, recent ethnographic data7 lead us to the detection of similar ideas concerning power politics in off-the-record statements expressed by the Greek- and non-Greek-speaking population of Thrace.8 This is perfectly understood as a defensive mechanism to locally perceived processes of stigmatization enforced by the greater Greek society at large, or, as several Christian Thracians put it, 'the other Greeks tend to face us as half-caste; we have felt it in our skin'. Suchstatements that refer to the 'body' (ofThracian people) become testimonies of'place' (Greek Thrace). They thus resonate with other ideas derived from dominant discourses, which posit different representations of the Other in society, such as the notions of the 'Greek', the 'Turk', the 'Pomak', the 'Gypsy' (for internal use) and the 'Christian' or the 'Muslim' (for official, external use).

Local Social Context

The redrawing of the Balkan political map during the first quarter of the twentieth century-resulting from nationalistic claims and the clash of international interesb­has led to the formation of a particular society in the Greek part of Thrace, in which Christians and Muslims live side by side, facing the common, everyday problems of living in one of the most underdeveloped regions of the European Union. The final international agreement settling the legal status of Thrace's inhabitants was the Lausanne Treaty in 1923 (see Hirsebon 2003). It enforced a general exchange of

~ ~r

\

When Greeks Think About Turks 133

populations, as a result of which the following ethnic groups have had to cohabit the region: an indigenous Christian population of Greek origin, Jews, Armenians, Muslims ( of Turkish origin, but also of Pomak and Gypsy origin) and refugees of Greek origin from Eastern and Northern Thrace and from Asia Minor. The Treaty accorded full rights of religion, education, and use of their own language to the non­exchangeable population, that is, the Muslims of Western Thrace and the Rum (Christian Turkish citizens) of Istanbul, Imvros and Tenedos (see Ors, this volume)_

The modus vivendi of the minority and majority groups in Western Thrace has been directly influenced by the course of Greek-Turkish relations and, in particular, by issues concerning the minorities in question. Indicative of these are not only the riots of 1955 in Istanbul, the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974 and the riots of 1988 in Komotini, but also inter-governmental agreements between Greece and Turkey, such as the Davos Agreement of 1987. As a result oflong-lasting hegemonic practices on the part of both the Greek and the Turkish states, most of the local Muslims have adopted a Turkish identity, with the exception of some members of the Pomak minority (see Tsibiridou 2000). Similarly, the Greek-speaking local inhabitants, as well as the incoming Christian refugees, have adopted a Greek national identity.

Equally decisive for the fate of the majority and minority groups in Western Thrace has been the political situation in Greece after the Second World War, and mainly the Greek Civil War (1946-49), which led to the political dominance of conservative forces, the formation of right-wing terrorist organizations on the fringes of the state, and the colonels' regime ( 1967 -74). The overall political situation in the country drew a dividing line between 'conservative' and 'progressive' citizens, a division that persists today and which originated in the so-called 'national schism' of the pre-war years. 9

The local variation of this division was expressed in Thrace and in other northern Greek provinces through the 'refugee idioms' of differentiation, which encompassed these political positions (Tsibiridou 1996b; Karakasidou 1997). Refugee consciousness seems to have been on the rise since the restoration of democracy in 197 4, especially in the urban areas of Western Thrace (Tsibiridou 1996c). It is no wonder that the late nationalism of the 1990s-which became apparent in debates about 'the Macedonian question' (see Danforth 1995)-was instigated in northern Greece by several refugee and immigrant associations that were based in metropolitan centres, such as Thessaloniki, or in the diaspora (US, Australia), but claimed to represent their distant or close relatives in the border regions. The latter, once again, emerge as the loci of identification of Greek national identity. 10

In the case of Thrace, these practices seem to be the result of a reaction to the mechanism of 'minoritization' ( see Cowan et al. 2001) promoted by both local and non-local authorities, and by some residents of the area. 11 Throughout the twentieth century, the attitude of Greek authorities vis-a-vis Thrace can bebest characterized as ambivalent: on the one hand, Thrace was viewed as a national frontier bastion facing primarily the northern (communist Bulgaria) foe and to a lesser degree the eastern (Turkey) foe; on the other hand, Thrace's demographic composition posed problems for the desired 'purity of the nation'. In every case, as happened in the rest of Greece,

134 F. Tsibiridou

the social movements that promoted a more critical position on the coexistence of different citizens irrespective of language and religion, constituted a threat to the established order and were subsequently persecuted. A direct consequence of these long-standing practices is the distancing of the inhabitants ofThrace from attempts to resist or to criticize power, as weil as from certain forms of nationalism that remained unpopular in Thrace for the greater part of the twentieth century.

Since the 1950s, foilowing a more widespread national trend, Thrace has been

described as a region trying to modernize itself, with one-third of its population living a 'traditional' life style (Zolotas 1995). However, the deficiencies caused by its position in the periphery have been aggravated in recent years, when European Union development funds have been absorbed mainly by the privileged centre (Athens). This Ieads to the proliferation of existing divisions between the centre and the periphery, the 'Athenian' state and the countryside, the 'powerful' and the 'weak'. Without resorting to causal explanations, the historical and political context presented above helps us understand the articulated positions and the mentality of the collectivities living in the area (Williams 1994).

In 1989, when, for the first time, the Muslim minority of Thrace was represented independently of mainstream Greek political parties in the Greek parliament, and a series of provocative speeches were delivered by its representatives, reactions on the part of the (dominant) Christian group emerged and became noticeable. Those reactions were twofold: strong politics of divergence and production of nationalistic ideology from the side of the 'pan-refugee' associations (and other primarily conservative associations or individuals); and politics of convergence pursued by social and cultural milieux, such as musicians' associations, women's associations and progressive political parties. The latter have been encouraged by the state since 1990, when the government declared 'an end to administrative restrictions and illegitimate discrimination against minorities' (Jas tis Eleftherotypias, 14 July 2001). In any case, all of these elite discourses are closely dependent upon developments in Greek-Turkish relations; as has also been the fate of the Muslim minority.

In addition, a number of recent dramatic events in the Balkans, and especially the intervention of Western powers in neighbouring Yugoslavia, have resulted in the cultivation of a new kind of nationalistic/patriotic feeling against the imperialistic hegemony of the West (cf. Sutton 1998; Brown & Theodossopoulos 2000; 2003), a reaction that has become particularly evident in northern Greece in the last decade. In the context of these events, the traditionalleft sometimes found itself conversing with supporters of nationalism. This has become apparent in the cooperation of KKE ( the Communist Party of Greece) with nationalist intellectuals and journalists such as Kostas Zouraris12 and Liana Kaneli, 13 as weil as in the cooperation of DIKKI (Democratic Social Movement) and the Regional Democratic Union14 with a number of other intellectuals and politicians (such as Giannaras, Saris, Karabelias, Charalampidis and Kipouros) who promote a combination of Orthodox Christianity with nationalist and anti-globalization ideas, expressed with somewhat leftist/populist overtones.15 This ideological framework is based once again-and more evidently

i _,

When Greeks Think About Turks 135

since the division of Cyprus in 197 4-on the image of the 'age-old enemy of the state', the Turks. The constructed parameters of this image of the Other are now defined according to perceived expansionist policies and positions in the Other's own country, the Kurdish, Pontic Greek and Armenian issues being the favourite cases employed in narratives about the so-called 'undemocratic' nature of Kemalist power. In any case, the image of the Turk is reduced and homogenized in terms of the Kemalist prototype of the Turkish democracy and this image directly shapes local Greek vkws on the autocratic, oppressive and dogmatic character of the generic Turk (cf. Theodosso­poulos 2004).

This stereotypical representation of the Other is similarly demonstrated in the discourse adopted by several politicians, journalists, political scientists and all those other actors who narrate their fragmented versions of reality as the 'only truth', thus reproducing national stereotypes about the Other and the Greek national Self. Homogenizing the Other and the Self in the frame of the national ideal is a result of the work of nation-state ideologies in the era of modernity (Anderson 1983; Gellner 1983). Nevertheless, homogenization often becomes a nationalistic obsession, a paranoid projection, which attributes to Others all those undesirable characteristics that one consciously or unconsciously recognizes in the Self. It is not accidental that this type of nationalistic discourse, which promotes an anti-Western, and somewhat 'Oriental' identity, 16 is also found, with similar parameters, on the other side of the Greek frontier, i.e. in Turkey, hence proving that nationalism is an ideology spread and reproduced as part of an interactive and interdependent process (Millas 2001).

It should be noted here that, before attempting to articulate its own distinctive voice about the Other, Thracian society experienced a long period of silence. This ended with the political changeover in 197 4, when the Turkish Other was objectified in line with specific stereotypes, as a result of the political events in Cyprus. 17 Later, in the 1990s, and with the encouragement of the European Union, the relationship with the Other was put under a different perspective with the staging of communal scenes of symbiosis emblematic of a multicultural ideology (Yiakoumaki, this volume). In the very last years of the 1990s, dissatisfaction with local practices of multiculturalism led to the demystification of the Other and the Other's perceived (power'. The discourse unravelled in Antiphonitis provides us with a very good example of this recent development. In the remaining part of this chapter I will examine how this demystification rejects but also reproduces older stereotypes and well-established nationalist preoccupations.

Demystifying Powerful Others

The association of ethnic Others with an image of power is common practice among the writers of Antiphonitis and reflects the ideological position of these authors, who situate themselves between an approach that is severely critical of power and. a parallel approach formed by strong patriotic sentiment and nationalist stereotypes. In lim: with the orientation of this special issue, the emphasis in the examples provided is

136 F. Tsibiridou

placed on the emergence and construction of the image of the Other (in our case, Turkey and the generalized, undifferentiated Turk) and on the Other's entanglement with mechanisms of power.

The image of the Turk in the discourse of Antiphonitis is a reflection of the Turk in power, i.e. the 'Kemalist' persona. The newspaper refers to 'the followers of Kemalism', who are either the local Kemalists of the minority elite, or the 'elite of Kemalism' in Turkey. Its authors seem to be unaware of the fact that Kemalism represents only one of the many different faces of Turkish political power in Turkey ( Shankland 1999). The actions of the Kemalists within Thrace are described as producing 'victims' in Greek Thrace, such as the Pomaks and the Roma/Gypsies. According to this perspective, the dealings of the Kemalists with local authorities in the pursuit of votes andin the framework of the Greek-Turkish friendship have proved detrimental to the smaller minorities, since these dealings are presented as serving primarily the Kemalist expansionist ideology and the dictums of the new world order.

Antiphoniris is particularly concerned with what its authors call 'the two faces of Kemalism'; the first, in Turkey, the second, in Greek Thrace. In a column entitled 'Turkish Democracy Here' there appear frequent discussions of what is considered to be the autocratic, undemocratic regime in Turkey and its persecution of democratic forces and minorities. There is also mention of alleged paramilitary actions of Turkish nationalists-such as the 'Grey Wolves'-against the interests of Greek Thrace. Hereis a typical example:

Following the attempted murder of the president of the Human Rights Commission of Turkey, Akin Birtal, investigations have brought to light evidence . . . that the leader of the attack and member of the Grey Wolves, Chasan Chasanoglou, was a resident of Greek Thrace (Medousa Xanthis). (Antiphonitis, 12 November 1998)

Here again, selective information in the form of journalistic reportage is employed as evidence of the threatening nature ofTurkish nationalism or expansionism, which is in turn taken for granted, since it is based on previously presented, but equally fragmented and selective factual information (see Bryant 2002; Theodossopoulos, this volume).

Attention is also frequently paid to the activities of Turkish nationalists-often referred to as 'Kemalists' or 'the agents of Kemalism'-against the smalkr Muslim minorities in Thrace (the Pomaks and the Roma). The authors ofthe newspaper note that multiculturalism policies have functioned so far in favour of the assimilation of the marginal Pomaks and Roma by the dominant Turkish minority. They acknowledge that stereotypical views regarding the behaviour of the Other can function hegemonically over marginal minorities, and they employ the same stereotypes to produce, through irony, a criticism of multicultural processes. The column entitkd 'A Turk from Kalkantza' (a Gypsy neighbourhood in Komotini) offers two typical examples:

How does a Gypsy become a Turk? It's simple. He frequents Turkish coffee shops, he carries the ideology from there back to his neighbourhood and, if he is lucky, he is

~ 1

; .

When Greeks Think About Turks 137

invited by the Turkish consul to dine, and then becomes 'as proud as a Gypsy adze' [kamaronei san gyftiko skerparni-a Greek proverb]. But surely let's not forget our traditions. If we find ourselves amongst Greeks, it's good to have an open door there too; who knows what might happen. Mr Emphietzoglou [ the rich businessmau and a co-sponsor of Antiphonitis] is a good man too, especially if he has helped one of our children. Truly, Thrace is a wonderful region. One is a Gypsy in his neighbourhood in the morning, a Turk at the market in the afternoon, and a Greek in the evening. Identity auction: whoever offers the highest bid. (Antiphonitis, 19 July 2001)

It's unheard of for me, a Gypsy, to fly on ari airplane to London to participate in an international Turl<.ish conference! What an honour! What fame! The doubters back in the neighbourhood should see me now. They're just dirty Gypsies who will always remain tramps and they even have the nerve to accuse me ofbeing a seil-out, a fool [karaghi6zis]. I am advancing their cause, elevating them, making them Turks. What is preferable after all? To say, following Kemal, 'what happiness to be a Turk' or rather to say 'what happiness to be a Gypsy'? [The latter category is associated with a heavy load of negative significance in contemporary Greek society.] (Antiphonitis, 19 July 2001)

By use of metaphor and irony, as these typical examples demonstrate, the authors of Antiphoniris attempt to produce a commentary about the unequal power relationship between minority and majority identities, on the one hand, and the weaker and

dominant minority identities, on the other. At the level of metalanguage, irony and humour are used to discuss real facts, in line with the genre adopted by the newspaper: thus, power as exercised by all sides-minority and majority equally-is critidzed, and at the same time the substance of existing stereotypes is taken for granted and further reproduced. This is the same genre ofliminal discourse, functioning between criticisrn and substance, which is adopted by the so-called 'Neo-Orthodox' intelleduals, 18 such

as Giannaras (cf. Heraclides 2001, pp. 85-89; Argyrou, this volume).

A local figure currently criticized as the 'representative of Kemalism' and a frequent

target ofthe newspaper is the so-called mufti (Muslim religious Ieader), Mehmet Emin Aga. During the last 15 years a sharp dispute has taken place between the Greek and Turkish governments regarding the election process for the mufti of Thrace. The Greek government insists on recognizing only those mufti who are deded in accordance with the established legal process ( which is itself subject to different interpretations), following the Treaty ofLausanne. Mehmet Emin Aga, a candidate for this particular position, expressed his pro-Turkish views openly during the election process. His views were considered insulting to the Greek authorities and his profile

was drawn accordingly in the pages of Antiphonitis:

The person about whom we are speaking is the one who presents hirnself as the mufti of Xanthi. A Turkified Pomak, son of the former mufti of Xanthi, he acted a5 mufti hirnself for some time, and, in this way, he controls a large majority of cleric:1 in the prefecture of Xanthi .. A father of three children-his two daughters studied in Turkey (where they drive araund in a Mercedes with diplomatic licence plates) änd

his son, Mustafa, is Mayor of Miki, where he is infamous for his anti-Pomak

138 F. Tsibiridou

position. So what does Mr Aga discuss with the top leaders of Turkey?. . . the autonomy of Thrace. (Antiphonitis, 10 January 2002)

Commentary like this, which reflects upon the situation of the Pomaks and Roma/Gypsies-the so-called 'local victims of Kemalism'-condemns particular practices of the minority elite which aim towards the promotion of a homogeneaus 'Turkish' identity and the concealment of differences within the Muslim minority. The theme of uneavering 'Kemalist' strategies in Pomak villages recurs regularly in the articles of the newspaper. Its authors and reporters are not merely concerned with this process, but attempt to unravel, through interviews, articles and editorials, the subtle workings of Pomak 'Turkification'. Here is a representative extract from an interview entitled 'Two Friends from Echinos' (a Pomak village in Xanthi):

S.: If you 'are not in' [ the game], you can barely do anything. Not to mention political activity; this is prohibited by the bunch we call NATO. It is the same people who meet every evening at the same table of a well-known coffee-house and decide whatever they want. It is they, for instance, who distribute money to teachers from the special Teaching Academy of Thessaloniki who have refused textbooks offered by the Greek State in order to cause problems. Their sole preoccupation today is to present themselves in court as defence witnesses for the so-called 'mufti: or to assist in the electoral campaign of candidates who have been appointed by you-know-who. A.: What are the possibilities for someone to react or to follow a different course? S.: They will call him a traitor, a supporter of Greek policy; he will receive threats against his child, who is studying in Turkey, against a relative who is on the payroll of the Consulate and who will stop getting his salary, against his house in Turkey which will be confiscated by the Turkish State. A.: What is the attitude of simple folk towards Turkey, or towards the 'mufti Aga?' S.: Many realize that we are being used by Turkey, but they don't dare spell it out publicly. Still, people are fed up with hearing about 'Turkification', human rights, and the rest. (Antiphonitis, 7 March 2002)

Other frequent targets of Antiphonitis are local Christian politicians: prefects,

mayors, MPs, but also top editors and owners of the regional press. They are suspected of vote gathering and of participation in various kinds of political intrigue. A usual charge is the appropriation of the idea of 'Greek-Turkish friendship' for their own personal political benefit. They are similarly condemned for engaging in dialogue with local 'Kemalists' and other perceived supporters ofTurkish interests, or for not taking action against the alleged 'premeditated Turkification' of the local Pomak minority_ This sustained critique is often delivered in terms of irony and attempts to uncover non-transparent interests and individual motivations; this practice is, as several other anthropological accounts testify, very common in the Greek context (see Herzfeld

1985; 1992; Sutton 1998; 2003; Brown & Theodossopoulos 2000 2003). Take, for example, an article entitled 'Treatise on Minority Yote: In:>tructiom for Wii>~, Non­

Muslim Vote-Hunters':

Always bear in mind that the [Turkish] consulate [situated in Komctini, th~ l"!lpit!ll of Greek Thrace] has an agent who watches over the political rallies and whose hidden miniatme tape recorder can destroy your politi~ill urnbitiom 1 1 1 It so~i:i

~I

When Creeks Think About Turks 139

without saying that events focusing on Greek- Turkish friendship, on internationalism ( even at the level of the coffee-houses in the square), are to be preferred, as they enhance your appeal to the Muslim minority. In these political rallies, usually massively attended by agents of the consulate, you can set yourselves free, let your feelings of love towards your Muslim fellow-countryman be openly expressed, you can talk about the warmth of the Turkish people. or your own recollections of your friendship with your old neighbour Mehmet. (Antiphonitis, 3 September 1998)

In a similar manner, central political authority in Greece has equally been blamed for cooperating with, or facilitating, the objectives of 'Kemalism'. Titles such as 'The Kemalization of Greek Policy' (Antiphonitis, 6 September 2001) are commonplace in the pages of Antiphonitis and capture the spirit of the newspaper's critical, but heavily nationalist, perspective. Not surprisingly, Antiphonitis denounces whatever initiative comes from the so-called 'socialist modernizers', the advocates of Western multiculturalism, and ridicules proposals for a cross-cultural education, such as the programme run by the Ministry of Education. The authors of Antiphonitis see initiatives ofthat kind as 'policies of de-Hellenization' and maintain that the policies of cultural assimilation of the minorities by the 'superior' Greek culture will be preferable to multiculturalist policies, since the latter provide opportunities to the powerful Turkish minority to absorb the smaller Muslim minorities (Pomaks, Gypsies, etc.).

From what we have seen so far it is apparent that the columns of Antiphonitis

present us with the basic principles of an idiosyncratic nationalism combined with the constitutive elements of conspiracy theory. The persuasiveness of this combination often relies on an unquestioned faith in the primacy of ancient Greek civilization and the appeal of conspiratorial plots among actors located in the periphery of power (cf. Brown & Theodossopoulos 2003; Papadakis 2004). The following extra~t from Antiphonitis illustrates how the figure of Alexander the Great provides inspiration for comparisons between ancient Greek 'high' civilization and Zionist 'corruption'. The resulting synthesis is indicative of a nationalist ideology of a new 'Orientar type, as the title of the particular article suggests: 'For Orientals and Orientalizers Local and Foreign Inmates'. With confidence, and an impeccably scholarly style, the author of Antiphonitis maintains that,

Besides overseeing the transformation of the city-state into a nation, Alexandcr succeeded in the greatest syncretism ever produced in human history, the fmion of Greek and Egyptian religions, expressed in a belief in the resurrection of Christ, Dionysus' mask, which gradually overwhelmed humanity itself. Nietzsche has every right to call modern civilization an 'Alexandrian civilization with Socrates as its forefather'. Sadly, the laughing and joyful Greek Dionysus, the God of fun, of joy, and of sorrow, was replaced by the blood-thirsty, vicious, vengeful, racist, plutocrat and domineering Jehovah, God of the desert people. The perversion of the natural, the 'faults of creation', and murder, have since taken the place of the 'healthy' and the 'correct'. And, as Nietzsche puts it, 'formen who lust for power (Zionists)l decadence

is the medium, and diese people are primarily interested in undermining humanity and overthrowing in their own dangeraus and downgrading way the not1om of good and evil, the real and fake'. (Diomedes Kronidis, Antiphonhis 10 January 2002)

140 F. Tsibiridou

The idea that the Western world and the Zionist centres in it are conspiring against Greece is a recurrent theme in the pages of Antiphonitis. Further conspiratorial views are expressed in terms of an identification of Turkish policies with Israeli ones, with regard to discrimination against minorities, the Kurcis and the Palestinians, respectively. Titles such as 'Turkish- Israeli Relations and Other Things' (Antiphonitis, 3 May 2001) and 'Jewish-American Elite and Israel: One Body, One Sour (Antiphonitis, 4 April 2002) are typical of this approach. In articles like these, the authors of Antiphonitis effortlessly extend their anti-globalization critique to encompass conspiracy theory and an extended critique of the powerful in the world. Turks, Jews, Americans and 'Western hegemony' are juxtaposed to innocent Muslim minorities such as the Kurds and the Palestinians who, like the Roma and the Pomaks at home, are victims of greater machinations in the international world order.

Condusion

Antiphonitis represents the voice of an elite, that of journalists and other local intellectuals in Komotini. Their views are not, by any means, representative of the majority of the local Christian population, but are to some degree indicative of the positions held by some individuals threatened by the new discourse and politics of multiculturalism, or disappointed by the elites in charge of the local multicultural reality. The thematic repertoire of the newspaper devotes particular attention to the corruption of political power and its · effect on the smaller local minorities, i.e. the Pomaks and the Gypsies/Roma. On the other hand, the idea of the 'supremacy' of Greek culture is treated as a factual axiom that overshadows the relation of th~ Christian majority with the Muslim minority.

These contradictions are not merely apparent in the discourse of Antiphonitis, but are also realized in everyday sociallife. Yet, while in the case of Antiphonitis we have a resonant and well-artiCulated written expression of a number of ideological positions, in everyday sociallife we see a marked lack of articulate expression and, in many cases, no expression at all. The majority of Christian inhabitants of Western Thrace avoid verbalizing their perceived problems, engaging thus in a vicious circle that further assists their perceived minoritization, which in turn leads to stigmatization and silence. Detached and alienated from the centres of decision-making power (Athem and the European Union), some members of the local educated elite-such as the column writers of Antiphonitis-resort to conspiracy theories and the reinvention of new heroes in the narrative of nationalism. This perceived alienation from central power structures encourages an identification with the informal aspect of Greek identity-that of the Romios instead of the Hellenas (Hertzfeld 1987)-and with its Oriental, rather than Western, ideological orientation.

In this respect, it is indeed significant that the nationalistic discourse of Antiphoniti~ is not established on tlie glorious past of classical Greece, but on the hgure of

Alexander the Great, who came from neighbouring Macedonia, and was alle0edly s~~n

by the peoples of Anatolia not as a conqueror, but as a liberator. Subsequently,

When Creeks Think About Turks 141

Alexander the Great is reinvented as the hero for all the peoples of Anatolia, and his enforced assimilation of other Oriental civilizations is understood as an achievement of the Oriental Romios against Western hegemony in this particular historical concurrence of globalization. This is obviously an attempt towards transcending the perceived peril of globalization and the alleged 'pan-Turkist' expansionist policies of Turkish nationalism by which the authors of Antiphonitis feel immediately threatened. Such ideological innovations-of this 'Oriental type'­did not emerge by chance in the 1990s. They developed as a reaction to the pro­Western modernizing approach adopted by the Greek socialist government in that period. One of the new local political parties that subsequently emerged, the Democratic Regional Union, was founded by local dissenters from the governing (at the time) socialist party (PASOK), and clearly adopted the ideological stand described above. Their attitude towards minorities paid lip service to the right of differentiation, but at the same time promoted minority assimilation into a seemingly 'superior' Greek culture.

The passionate criticism of Antiphonitis towards every particular act of the powerful-the Greek government, the Turkish nationalist establishment, the Western nations-seems to constitute a kind of revolutionary act against the status quo, i.e. the silencing of peripheral views, the uneasiness of the local inhabitants towards ethnicity issues, the absence of an established movement of the left in the region ( which is blamed on the non-politicization of its Muslim inhabitants). The 'leftist/socialist' ideals of the Democratic Regional Union party, which the newspaper seems to support, are clearly expressed through a critique of the exercise of power at a national level. They are articulated in terms of a demand for the redistribution of economic and symbolic capital, and a systematic challenge of the imbalam;e of power between the centre and the periphery. Not surprisingly, similar kinds of Marxist critique have emerged in other peripheral (with respect to power) societies that have been subjected in the past to a monopoly of power, such as in former African colonies (Desjeux 1987).

Antiphonitis may not enjoy the official approval and support that other, pro­government local newspapers do, and people in Thrace may never massively vote for the Democratic Regional Union, but, ultimately, and for all the above-mentioned

reasons, Antiphonitis can be seen as a metonymy for the way many Christian people in Thrace have to deal with contradictory and controversial truths. The members of the Christian majority in Western Thrace certainly do not always share the polideal viewpoint of the newspaper. This is not because they do not feel suspicious about processes that involve power, but rather because they lack an ideological framework or possibly because they also feel immobilized by the minoritization mechanism (that is, blaming the 'minority issue' for all the troublcs of thc Chrbtia.n popula.tion). fut in this context, the discourse of Antiphonitis seems to Yerbalize, through old cmd reshaped stereotypes, and as a metonymy, the subversive unexpressed heteroglossia of the Christian population in Western Thrace, with respect to the power ot the Othen;, and subconscious feelings about the Turks.

142 F. Tsibiridou

Notes

[ 1] In this chapter, and for reasons of economy, I refer to the Greek part of Thrace as 'Thrace' or 'Western Thrace'. 'Thrace' is also the term used in Greece to refer to this region (see Yiakoumaki, this volume).

[2] Although 'culture' is not the issue in this chapter, I am here trying to problematize, rather than homogenize, the notion.

[ 3] See similar cases in former colanies in Africa, where Marxist ideas have been used to generate a widespread popular resistance to those in power, in the context of a redistribution of traditional power (Desjeux 1987).

[ 4] Forafirst critique of this issue in its 'black' or 'red' version see 'Conspiracy Theories, in a Greek Version', Ios tis Eleftherotypias, 1 April 200 l.

(5] It is quite common in Thrace for local intellectuals to try to make their point of view known to the academics of the local university. Sometimes they also try to interfere in academic life, a practice that I also experienced during my academic career at the Democritus University of Thrace. For a critique of this practice, see 'The National Abolition of the Asylum', Ios tis Eleftherotypias, 15 April 2002.

[6] Such as Kostas Karamanlis, the current prime minister ofGreece, and George Papandreou, the leader of the opposition (who actively promoted Greco-Turkish relations during his service as foreign minister in the period before the elections of 2004).

[7] Forthelast ten years I have been running a research programme with some of my students in the urban areas of Thrace; it has been supported by the University of Thrace and it focuses on the 'social discourse of public events'.

[8] In private conversation, a great nurober of the Christian inhabitants of Thrace denounce 'the politics of the powerful' and emphasize the latter's role in the manipulation of the local 'minority issue'; they are less willing, however, to articulate the same criticisms in front of outsiders. Despite the fact that they do not share the monolithic image of Antiphonitis about the 'Turks' and the powerful, they also employ, unofficially, dassie Greek stereotypes about the Turks.

[9] Ethnikos dichasmos is an idiom of Greek modern history, connoting the struggle between progressive and conservative citizens in Greek political life. The term was first introduced during the First World War to refer to the clash between Prime Minister Venizelos, a supporter of the Entente, and the pro-German King Constantine.

[10] This is the basic idea put forward by F. Barth in his seminal discussion of the shaping and reshaping of identities in the dialectic of ethnic boundaries (1969). For the construction of Greek national identity, see Herzfeld (1986; 1987).

[11] I borrow the term from J. Cowan, M. Dembour and R. Wilson (2001). It is an i:lllalytical tcrm that encapsulates the reduction of a social discourse an a 'minority' level, including every deficient/derogative meaning of the latter. Minorities and majorities, elite and dominated people, inside and outside Thrace construct their discourse, their practices, but aho their emotions with reference to the category of 'minority', with a lot of different nuances that depend on the socio-cultural place of the interlocutor. I further discuss the minoratization issue

in Greek Thrace in Tsibiridou (2002). [ 12] Kostas Zouraris is an intellectual of the left promoting a new nationalistic narrative combining

'the glorious ancient Greek past' with 'the Christian Orthodox tradition'. [13] Liana Kaneli is a competent journalist and elected MP ofthe Communigt P:trty. Sh~ 1~ th~ ~ditM

of Nemesis, a political magazine that describes itself as displaying some sensitivity on national issues. She, along with Zouraris and other intellectuals and journalists, belOllßS to the new type of 'Oriental' nationalists, the so-called 'Neo-Orthodox'. This is a trend against modernization and globalization, calling for a return 'to the roots' and to Orthodoxy as a means of safeguarding the 'East' from the hegemony of the 'West' (see Argyrou, this volume, n. 5).

r I

When Creeks Think About Turks 143

[14] Political party founded by a former member ofPASOK ofPontic Greek origin, who argued that the afflictions ofthe Pontic Greeks in the 1920s should be recognized as a 'genocide' (enacted by 'Turks' against 'Greeks').

[ 15] Already in the second issue of Antiphonitis, we see an interview on all relevant issues with Kostas Zouraris, and later a permanent collaboration with Giannaras. Similarly, Liana Kaneli's ideas are frequently quoted and treated as factual and flawless. For more information on Giannaras and some of his ideological positions, see Argyrou (this volume).

[ 16] This identity best corresponds to the other face of the Greek, that of Romios, according to the analysis of Michael Herzfeld ( 1987). In its terms we cannot fail to note the importance of disemia in the construction of Greek national identity, as weil as in the development of heteroglossia in Western Thrace.

[ 17] For another interesting case of the objectification process, in Israel this time, see the ethnography ofVirginia Dominguez (1989).

[18] See also note 13.

References

Anderson, B. (1983) Imagined Communities: Reflections an the Origins and Spread of Nationalism, Verso, London.

Barth, E (1969) 'Introduction', in Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organisation of Culture Difference, ed. F. Barth, Waveland Press, Illinois, pp. 9-38.

Brown, K. & Theodossopoulos, D. (2000) 'The performance of anxiety: Greek narratives ofthe war at Kosovo', Anthropology Today, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 3-8.

Brown, K. & Theodossopoulos, D. (2003) 'Rearranging solidarity: conspiracy and the world order in Greek and Macedonian commentaries of Kosovo', Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 315-335.

Bryant, R. (2002) 'The purity of spirit and the power ofblood: a comparative perspective on nation, gender and kinship in Cyprus', Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, vol. 8, pp. 509-530.

Cowan, J., Dembour, M. & Wilson, R. (eds) (2001) Culture and Rights: Anthropological Perspectives, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

Danforth, L. M. (1995) The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

Desjeux, D. (1987) Strategies paysannes en Afrique noire (Le Conga, essay sur la gestion de l'incertitude), L'Harmattan, Paris.

Dominguez, V. (1989) People as Subject, People as Object: Selfhood and Peoplehood in Contemporary Israel, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.

Gellner, E. (1983) Nationsand Nationalism, Basil Blackwell, Oxford. Heraclides, A. (2001) H EAAaoa KaLo 'Eg AvaToAwv K{vovvoc;' [Greece and the 'Threat from the

East'], Polis, Athens. Herzfeld, M. (1985) The Poetics of Manhood: Gontest and Identity tn a Cretan Mountain Villafe,

Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. Herzfeld, M. (1986) Ours Once More: Folklore, Ideology, and the Making of Mad2rn Gr22~2, Pella,

New York. Herzfeld, M. (1987) Anthropology through the Looking-Glass: Critical EthnoJ[raJJhY in thl! MnrJ[tn~ oJ

Europe, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. Herzfeld, M. (1992) The Social Production of Indifference: Exploring the Symbolic Roots of Western

Bureaucracy, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

144 F. Tsibiridou

Hirschon, R. ( 1989) Heirs of the Greek Catastrophe: The Social Life of Asia Minor Refugees in Piraeus, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Hirschon, R. (2003) "'Unmixing peoples" in the Aegean region', in Crossing the Aegean: an Appraisal of the 1923 Compulsory Population Exchange between Greece and Turkey, ed. R. Hirschon, Berghahn, Oxford, pp. 3-12.

Karakasidou, A. N. ( 1997) Fields ofWheat, Hills of Blood: Passages to Nationhood in Greek Macedonia 1870-1990, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Millas, H. (2001) ELK6ve~ E.A.Afivwv KaL TovpKwv. ExoALKa ßtß.Ata, turopwypmpta, .Aoyorexvta Kat eßvLKa urepe671nra [Images ofthe Greeks and the Turks, Schoolbooks, Historiography, Literature and National Stereotypes], Alexandreia, Athens.

Papadakis, Y. (2004) 'Discourses of "the Balkans" in Cyprus: tactics, strategies and constructions of "Others"', History & Anthropology, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 15-28.

Shankland, D. (1999) Islam and Society in Turkey, Eothen Press, Hemingford Grey, England. Sutton, D. (1998) Memories Cast in Stone: The Relevance of the Pastin Everyday Life, Berg, Oxford. Sutton, D. (2003) 'Poked by the "foreign finger" in Greece: conspiracy theory or the hermeneutics of

suspicion?', in The Usable Past: Greek Metahistories, eds K. S. Brown & Y. Hamilakis, Lexington Books, Lanham, MD.

Theodossopoulos, D. (2004) 'The Turks and their nation in the worldview of Greeks in Patras', History & Anthropology, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 29-45.

Todorov, T. [1939] (1989) M. Bachtin: The Dialogical Principle, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.

Tsibiridou, F. (1996a) 'Nationalist ideology in collective representations: gender roles and sexuality through the language of cultural organisations in a rural border town', in Nationalism and Sexuality: Crises of Identity, eds Y. Kalogeras & D. Pastourmatzi, Hellenie Association of American Studies, Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, pp. 299-321.

Tsibiridou, F. (1996b) 'De l'identite ethnique a l'identite politique: Rapports de collectivite et d'individualite dans un village de refugies en Thrace occidentale 1920-1990', Revue des Etudes Sud-Est Europeennes, vols 1-2, pp. 79-95.

Tsibiridou, F. (1996c) 'Between Nation and state, the inner frontiers: mechanisms of identity and alterity in the collectivities of a multi-cultural society', paper presented at the 4th Biennia1 EASA Conference, 'Culture and Economy: Conflicting Interests and Divided Loyalties·, Barcelona, 12-15 July

Tsibiridou, F. (1997) 'Nationalist ideology and policies of convergence in a rnulti-cultural society'. paper presented at the 2nd meeting of the Association for Balkan Anthropology, Identity, Migration and Boundaries in the Balkans, Bucharest, 4-7 September.

Tsibiridou, F. (2000) Les Pomak dans la Thrace grecque. Discours ethnique ct pratiques socioculturelles. L'Harmattan, Paris.

Tsibiridou, F. (2002) 'The nuances of a minority situation: the case ofThrace', in Minorities in Greece, Mora"itis, Athens, pp. 101-118.

Williams, R. (1994) IloALTLUJ.Lo<; Kat Iuropta [Culture and History], Gnossi, Athms. Zolotas, K., Agelopoulos, A. & Pesmazoglou, I. (eds) (1995) in H ava'lf'TV~'IJ rr7Jc; (8)pfii(7Jt;!

IlpoKAi;ueL<; KO'L 7Tp007T"TLKic; [The Developrnent of Thrace: Challenges and Prospects],

National Academy of Athens, Centre for the Study of Greek Society, Athens.