- Aidat ve bağışlarınızı Akbank Beşyüzevler Şubesi, TR89 0004 6006 4388 8000 1013 15 nolu hesaba yatırabilirsiniz.
Duyurular

3 Mayıs saat 19:30-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda   "3 Mayis Ruhu " konulu konferans olacakdır.

Konuşmacı: Arkeolog-Tarihci Sayın Adil YILMAZ


Ural Eğitim Kültür ve Stratejik Araştırmalar Derneği tarafından 29-eylül 2016-cı yılında saat 19-da Hoca Ahmet Yasevi anlamak koferası olacakdır.Konuşmacı Erdoğan Aslıyücel Ahmet Yasevi Vakfı başkanı .Her kes davetlidir.

 


Ural Eğitim Kültür ve Stratejik Araştırmalar Derneği tarafından 22-ağustos 2016-cı yılında saat 18-de Ebulfez Elçibeyin ölüm yıldönümu ilgili toplantı olacakdır.Her kes davetlidir.


6-Ekim saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda GAGAUZ (GÖKOĞUZ) Türkleri  Dünü-Bügünü - Yarını konferansı olacakdır.

Konuşmacı: Gazeteci - Akademisyen Sayın. Ağası Hun Mammadli


20-Ekim saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda TÜRKLÜĞÜMÜZ, KİMLİĞİMİZ: TARİHİ VE EDEBİ BELGELERDE konferansı olacakdır.

Konuşmacı: Akademisyen Sayın. Doç.Dr. Rövşen Alizade

İstanbul Aydın Universitetisi Öğretim Üyesi

Her Kes Davetlidir


27-Ekim saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda Türk Tarihinin Arkeolojik  Kaynakları konferansı olacakdır.

Konuşmacı: - Akademisyen Sayın. Arkeolog-Tarihçi Adil Yılmaz 


3-Kasım saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda  "25. Yılında Azerbaycan Bağımsızlık Mücadelesi ve Güney Azerbaycan'a Etkileri" konulu konferansımıza teşriflerinizi rica ederiz.

Konuşmacılar Bütöv Azerbaycan Birliği  Başkanı Sn. Agil SAMEDBEYLİ ve GAMOH Yönetim Kurulu Üyesi Sn. Bulut ALEMDAR"ın 


10-Kasım  saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda ÖLÜÖNE- ile baştan sona sibirya toprakları - halkları - inanışları konferansı olacakdır.

Konferansımıza teşriflerinizi rica ederiz.


24-Kasım  saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda ATATÜRK VE TÜRK DÜNYASI konferansı olacakdır.

Konuşmacı: Doç.Dr. Ercan Karakoç

Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi oğretim üyesi

Konferansımıza teşriflerinizi rica ederiz.

 


26-Kasım  saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneği tarafından düzenlenecek 

"Kıbrıs Müzakerelerinde Son Durum" konulu konferans olcakdır.

Konuşmacı: Prof. Dr. Sayın. Erhan ARIKLI

KKTC - Yeniden Doğuş Partisi Genel Başkan

Yer

Yenidoğan Mahallesi Yayla Sokak No:2\ B Bayrampaşa

Bayrampaşa Belediyesi Kültür Merkezi 

Konferansımıza teşriflerinizi rica ederiz.


1-Aralık saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda  "Kırgızistan'da 10 Gün - Gezi İzlenimleri" konulu konferansı olacakdır.

Konuşmacı: Dr. Baki Dökmeci 

Yer

Yenidoğan Mahallesi Rüzgar Sokak No:3\ B Bayrampaşa

Konferansımıza teşriflerinizi rica ederiz.

 

 

 


8-Aralık saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda "Osmanlı'dan Türkiye Cumhuriyetine Geçiş Süreci" konulu konferans olacakdır.

Konuşmacı:Sayın Doç. Dr.  Ahmet Zeki İZGÖER

Yer

Yenidoğan Mahallesi Rüzgar Sokak No:3\ B Bayrampaşa

Konferansımıza teşriflerinizi rica ederiz.


22-Aralık  saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda  "Tarih Perspektifinden İran Türklüğü" konulu konferans olacakdır.

Konuşmacı: Yrd.Doç. Dr. Babek CAVANŞİR

Yeditepe Üniversitesi Öğretim Üyesi


12- Ocak saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda "Ölüm Kampı: Belene" konulu konferans olacakdır.

Konuşmacı: Belene Zulmünün canlı şahidi ve zulmün mağduru Sn. Sabri İskender 


19- Ocak saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda  "20 Ocak Katliamı" konulu  konferans olacakdır.

Konuşmacılar: Yeditepe Üniversitesi bölüm başkan yardımcısı Yrd.Doç.Dr. sayın Arıf Acaloğlu,Gazeteci-Yazar sayın Ağasi Hun MAMMADLİ ve GMOH-yönetim kurulu üyesi sayın Bulut Alemdar.


2-Şubat saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda  "Irak Türkmenleri (Dünü-Bugünü-Yarını)"  konferans olacakdır.

Konuşmacı: Türkmeneli İnsan Hakları Derneği Başkanı Sayın Savaş AVCI.

 


9-Mart saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda "Sultan Galiyev ve Sovyetler Dönemi Turancılık Hareketi konferans olacakdır.

Konuşmacı: Araştırmacı - Yazar Sayın Erol CİHANGİR

Yer

Yenidoğan Mahallesi Rüzgar Sokak No:3\ B Bayrampaşa

Konferansımıza teşriflerinizi rica ederiz.

Saygıyla

Ural Eğitim Kültür ve Stratejik Araştırmaları Derneği


26-Şubat  saat 12:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneği tarafından düzenlenecek 

Tarihin Kara Lekesi "HOCALI SOYKIRIMI"  konulu konferans olcakdır.

Konuşmacılar: Yrd.Doç.Dr. Arif Acaloğlu- Yeditepe Üniversitesi Öğretim Üyesi

 Doç.Dr. Rövşen Alizade- İstanbul Aydın Üniversitesi Öğretim Üyesi

 Agil Samedbeyli- Bütov Azerbaycan Birliyi Yönetim Kurulu başkanı

Yer

Yenidoğan Mahallesi Yayla Sokak No:2\ B Bayrampaşa

Bayrampaşa Belediyesi Kültür Merkezi 


23-Mart saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda   "Doğu Türkistan Ekseninde Türkiye-Çin İlişkileri konulu konferans olacakdır.

Konuşmacı:  Sayın Yrd. Doç.Dr. Ömer KUL

İstanbul Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Merkezi Müdür Yardımcısı


30-Mart saat 19:00-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda   "1.Dünya Savaşında İzmir Savunması" konulu konferans olacakdır.

Konuşmacı:  Sayın Araştırmacı-Yazar Celal Öcal


13-Nisan  saat 19:30-da Ural Kültür Eğitim ve Strateji Araştırmalar Derneğinin Ferit Tunca Önder konferans salonunda   "Küresel Para Savaşları " konulu konferans olacakdır.

Konuşmacı:  Doç.Dr. Ramazan Kağan Kurtoğlu

- İstanbul Aydın Üniversitesi İİBF – Uluslararası Ticaret Bölüm Başkanı


İstanbul Hava Durumu
Etkinlik Takvimi
Anket
Derneğimizin Çalışmalarını Nasıl Buluyorsunuz?


 
Döviz Bilgieri
Merkez Bankası Döviz Kuru
  ALIŞ   SATIŞ
USD 3,7523   3,7591
EURO 4,6967   4,7052
       
Özlü Sözler
Bir insana yapılacak en büyük kötülük, ona umut verip sonra hiçbir şey olmamış gibi gitmektir. Friends
Sponsorlarımız
Sitemizi Tavsiye Ediniz
Sitemizi arkadaşlarınıza tavsiye ederseniz memnun kalırız.
 
  
Ziyaretçi Bilgileri
Bugün: 52
Dün: 140
Toplam: 472788
 

The Turks and the Azerbaijani Turks have the same roots. The relations between the two societies are based on centuries ago, but the relations at the state level are about a century old. Azerbaijan was first established as an independent state in 1918 and in 1920 it became under Russian sovereignty. Azerbaijan faced the Nagorno-Karabakh problem during the period of two years independence. The problem was frozen over the Soviet Russia dominance. There was no hot relationship between the Turks and Azerbaijan in the years of the Independence War. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, however, sent a secret letter to the army in February 1920, demanding that Nagorno-Karabakh, the majority of the Turks, be Azerbaijani land, and that the necessary work be done to connect Azerbaijan. After Turkey's joining of Azerbaijan to Soviet Russia, Azerbaijan was not involved in any intervention, but remained faithful to all the treaties and maintained relations with Soviet Russia. In the process of the collapse of the USSR, Turkey's attitude was obvious. Ambassador Sanberk revealed the attitude of Turkish foreign policy by saying "Ankara-Moscow relations are more important than Ankara and new independent republics" (Ülkü, 2000: 20). When the Turkish republics gained their independence, Turkey did not stop reporting that they were at equal footing with Armenia and Azerbaijan. With the independence of the republics, Turkey did not want to ignore its economic and political gains with Russia. He did not leave a lot of prudence. Turkey should be a party to regional policies, support of Azerbaijan, foreign Turks, Pan-Islamism, It can be explained by attacking Armenia's Nagorno-Karabakh territories except for reasons such as panturkism. Despite the fact that Turkey took the first step towards good neighborliness by recognizing Armenia's independence, Armenia's occupation of the Karabakh region had upset everything. The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is the first concrete reflection of Armenia's genocide allegations and the new territory of the Armenian anti-Turkish policy. Therefore, it is related to the history of the Republic of Turkey. This historic bond and common enemy has made Turkish-Azerbaijani relations even stronger. From now on, Turkey and Azerbaijan will be referred to as nation-states and natural allies (Mesimov, 2001: 274-285). The issue of the recognition of Azerbaijan in Turkey has been negotiated for a long time. After he declared Azerbaijan independence on August 30, 1991, national leader Ebulfez Elçibey sent a message to Turkey saying that he did not recognize Azerbaijan and that it means that he considered Azaz Muttalibov, the man of Moscow, to be legitimate and would cause the Azerbaijani people to be angry. Here, in this turbulent environment, Turkey has been spontaneously involved in the process without understanding what a healthy political environment exists in the Soviet Union and Azerbaijan (Attar, 2005: 124). Turkey recognized Azerbaijan a month before the other Soviet republics on 9 November 1991. However, the fact that Azerbaijan is struggling with internal and external problems prevented the rapid development of bilateral relations in this period (Aydın, 2002: 402). The independence of the Turkish republics had to be won and the definition of these provoked great excitement in the region. Hürriyet Newspaper correspondent reported the air in Azerbaijan as follows: "We were the first country to recognize Azerbaijan. This is important because we have much different ties to Azerbaijan than all the other countries in the world. I experienced the enthusiasm of Azerbaijan's capital city Baku's Azatlık (Freedom) five months ago. My fur was stingy. The enthusiasm flowing from the Aztecs to the Black Sea was the sign of the reintegration of the Turks living in this geographical region to the world rather than the world of Turkishness. "The same reporter is about recognizing Azerbaijan:" The big countries stay away from diplomas based on their shape like "recognition" In other words, America, Britain, France, Azerbaijan, they did not know that they are bad. You will see that Azerbaijan will do the greatest work for those countries. "(Hurriyet, November 10, 1991, p.14). With the independence of the Turkish republics gaining independence, more democratization began than with panturkism. Prime Minister Süleyman Demirel, who is at home with the facts of the country and knows him best, explained that the Turkish Union is not in conformity with the real politics: "Panturkism, Panislamism is not the way to go. While I am in distress for the unity of today's Turkey, a phenomenon of Panturkism dissolves me, and it also takes a number of trumps. "(Milliyet, 6 September 1990, page 11). The Nagorno-Karabakh problem emerged at a time when political stability in Turkey and Azerbaijan did not exist. Especially in Azerbaijan, the intensity of internal turbulence has also prevented the healthy operation of Turkish-Azerbaijani relations. On the other hand, with the support of the Azerbaijani view in general, Turkey avoided military assistance to Azerbaijan by making significant arms assistance or conflict between the two countries. Demirel, who said "I will not do the work (intervene in Nakhchivan) unless I take the world back" (Cumhuriyet, 21 May 1992, p.16). In the beginning, Turkey wanted to be an intermediary between Armenia and Azerbaijan by remaining neutral in the conflict. At the very least, the Turkish Armenians and foreign minister Hikmet Cetin, especially the period foreign ministers, carried out diplomatic missions between the European capitals in the region and especially influenced by the OSCE. On the other hand, Çetin, Prime Minister Süleyman Demirel had been more attentive to the policy of Azerbaijan, while the Western Prime Minister Süleyman Demirel was in favor of a more careful policy, and stated that there was no legal basis for Turkey's intervention and Azerbaijan did not demand it anyway. Meanwhile, in response to the request of Armenia in November 1991, the message sent by the Azerbaijani prime minister Hasan Hasanov to ask them to "refrain from provoking tensions in the region" was perceived as an attempt to mediate in this country, and two weeks later Hasanov said " will be satisfied with the mediation initiative ", the ministry of foreign affairs had to explain that Turkey was not intending to mediate. Behind, President Mutallibov, who arrived in Ankara on 23-24 January 1992, was said to be mediating with the approval of both sides this time. Azebaycan President Muttalibov said that "Karabagh is our domestic problem", saying that no country, including Turkey, wants mediation (Hurriyet, 29 January 1992, p.12). Turkey's efforts to "neutral mediate" did not last long. Despite the inverse of Demirel, Turkey's role as the neutral mediator role (Aydin, 2002: 404) was one of the most important assistance the Turkish authorities made to Azerbaijan, especially Turgut Ozal's statements in various places that Armenians should be "a little scared" , helping Azerbaijan's new President Aliyev in helping him secure his exit to the West. The visit of Aliyev to Paris took place in 1993 with the mediation of Süleyman Demirel. This was the first visit of the President of Azerbaijan to the West. Afterwards, Aliyev's visits to European capitals followed each other (Gürbüz, 2003: 85). Relevant transformation began in February 1994 when Aliyev made an official visit to Ankara, ending mutual alienation. As we mentioned earlier, this visit was in fact a concrete indication of Aliyev's gradual abandonment of Russia's rapprochement policy and of the rapprochement between Turkey and the West (Gürbüz, 2003: 85). In the meantime, the Turkish Republic of Turkey in the region, especially with Azerbaijan Karabagh belongs to develop cultural ties, a common alphabet, the successful completion of television broadcasts for the region and the consummation of a consortium on Azerbaijani oil is a very positive step towards the long term of Turkish politics. These positive elements should also include the economic initiatives of Turkish businessmen and Turkish companies towards the region. However, relations with Azerbaijan and other regional republics, especially Karabagh, and the emerging developments necessitate not only cultural and economic relations but also political and military development of Turkey (Taşkıran, 1994: 164). Because, the independence of Azerbaijan is a matter of Turkey and the Turkish world rather than Azerbaijan (Andican, 1996: 273)."(Armenians) need to be a little scared" (T.Ozal)Turgut Ozal left deep traces in Turkish political life in the period of 1981-93, he served as prime minister between 1981-989, and as president during 1989-1993 (AAM, 2002: 638). Özal Dağlık Karabagh issue is the President in the process that is no longer "from within". Nevertheless, during the presidency period, he has taken steps to guide the foreign policy of the country and the event continued after Yıldırım Akbulut became prime minister. So much so that Turkish people believed that the government was governed by President Turgut Özal. There was even a questionnaire on the newspapers. In the questionnaire published in the Hürriyet Gazette in September 1990, the question "Who runs Turkey" was reflected in the survey as 78% Ozal and 7% with Yıldırım Akbulut (Hürriyet, 3 September 1990, p. Being aware of the power of his own, Özal has also made extraordinary speeches which will be discussed in his country and on international platforms. Özal has traveled extensively, especially the US and the USSR have visited every year. He has made special efforts to develop relationships with these countries. Then, with the ease of establishing close ties with US President Bush and USSR leader Gorbachev, the reputation both inside and outside has increased. During his visit to Moscow in July 1986, Prime Minister Turgut Ozal Gorbachev had not accepted Ozal because of problems with Bulgaria. But five years later, Özal, who visited Moscow on March 12, 1991 with the title of president, warmly welcomed by Gorbachev and signed three important co-operation agreements with the USSR (Tellal, 2005: 165). At the beginning of 1990s, He was aware of the strategic value expressed by Turkey for the US because of the Gulf War. In this period, he noticed that there is an important relaxation in Turkish foreign policy. Ozal saw little of the assertions expressed by Armenia and Armenians (Attar, 2005: 146). For the Armenian business which has been heated and heated in front of Turkey for years, The words "Make a shot, let go of it" reflects the reactions of the journalists to the words "The wheel of Özal in the Armenian business". This promise of Özal attracted the reaction of political circles and was evaluated as a return from Armenian politics (Hürriyet, 31 January 1989, p.13). Ozal, Hürriyet Gazetesine evaluating it, "This has come to the front of Turkey continuously". We are coming. So the job needs to be a little bit thoughtful. So you have to think about a new definition that is not in the traditional line. Sometimes they say, "It's a single-shot weapon. Your attack is over, it goes away. But it is always necessary to get out of blackmail stories, 'I will kill you, but I will do something.' But we can, can not, weigh this "(Hürriyet, 31 January 1989, p.13). Regarding the events of the year 1915, Ozal's "I invite historians. Come and find the truth "promise has been the subject of the 1915 incidents of Turkey. Turkey's approach to the events of 1915 has been carried out for many years on this basis. Accordingly, the matter was a historical matter; so the solution in this business was falling into history. After Özal, all of the prime ministers will move in the same direction, that a historical issue will be reflected objectively to the world, they hope that it will be solved in the light of science in the world. However, political (shifting political) events are not solved by scientific arguments. Protecting the vitality of the issue has also flared up with the Karabakh events. Turkey has not succeeded in trying to prove the justice of the world public as mentioned above, and has not been able to get ahead of the developments. To be right on the point is not enough in today's world. The issue is to convince the world public opinion in every way. This is also an effective and smart policy. As for the Armenians, the events are not part of the historians, but they work for the demands of political rights. The issue has been so pumped and updated that it has not been solved by the work of historians, just as Özal expressed it. After the Gulf War, Even the Constitution and even the distribution of the duties of the law are often overlooked. Ozal has taken many decisions and practices without knowing from the bureaucracy or from the ministry (Laciner, 2003: 25). Turkey's foreign policy in the first years of Ataturk's period in Turkey has been very successful and even though the population is very small, even though the Republic is young, Turkey has become a country that is consulted in the world and known as a promise. But then there was a stalemate. A kind of stiffness similar to that of a kind of atherosclerosis has dominated Turkish foreign policy: inactivity ... because there is only one sure direction of inactivity. The error handling margin is very low (İnan, 1995: 95). Turgut Ozal did not follow this pesky foreign policy. But Özal, who is pushing the bureaucratic practices of the state in foreign politics, After he became president, he shared his thoughts about foreign politics with the public in spite of the sentence. The evaluations of the Azerbaijani-Armenian events or the Nagorno-Karabakh war also support these considerations. During his speech at the International Club on the second day of his visit to the US, President Turgut Özal said: "Is it possible for Turkey to be drawn into the Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict? If Azerbaijani Turkish and other Turkish-born groups in the Soviet Union demand independence, what will be the attitude of Turkey? What is Turkey's assessment of this issue? " President Özal said "Very simple": "Above all, Azerbaijan is a Soviet Republic. There is a very short border between us. We are closer to Soviet Armenia. Our border with Azerbaijan is not directly with Azerbaijan, but with Nakhchivan attached to Azerbaijan. The length of this border is only 6-7 km. Azerbaijanis are closer to Iranian Azeris than to Turkish people in Anatolia. Similar languages ​​are spoken, our dialects are different. There is another difference. Our sects are separate. They are Shia, we are Sunni. We do not want to interfere with Turkish-speaking or Muslim groups in the Soviet Union. We would like the policies implemented by Gorbachev to be implemented on a regular basis. Ozal, however, noted that Turkey did not want to interfere with the internal affairs of the Soviets (Milliyet, 19 January 1990, p.13). After these speeches, thousands of people in the cities of Turkey, like Kars and Kayseri, reacted by shouting "Ozal resignation" and slogans supporting Azerbaijan were being rallied. These statements of Özal deeply affected Turkish domestic politics and Özal received a great response from the party leaders. Prime Minister Mesut Yilmaz stated that he "closely resembles the Azerbaijan" and expressed the fact that he followed the events sensitively. (Milliyet, 19 January 1990, p.13) .Solaman Demirel, the leader of the DYP, Claiming that Özal went to seek constitutionality. Ozal's commitments in America would not bind the Turkish nation and its governments. In addition, he did not stand back from the explanation that he was against the President and his actions with the words "the record played in Turkey will also play in America". On the words of Süleyman Demirel Ozal about the Azerbaijanis: "Our compatriots in Azerbaijan have no problems with their belief in Turkey. The important thing is to have the same culture. Our Azerbaijani societies and our citizens are bruised and broken. Ozal's words do not link to Turkey. These words are not the words of someone who represents Turkey "(Milliyet, 19 January 1990, p.13). DSP President Bülent Ecevit said that the president should apologize to Alevis citizens, The whole of Turkey's population as a Sunni, the national unity and the secular nature of the republic. These reactions show that the problems caused by the emergence of such big differences between the system and the opposition Prime Minister and the President when the foreign policies of Ozal politics are addressed can be mentioned. Ozal's self-assertive attitude from almost ignoring other actors has harmed the legitimacy of politics while harming institutionalization. Moreover, Ozal's self-confidence has led to exaggerated expectations about Turkey in the external world (Laciner, 2003: 25). Turgut Ozal after the massacre of Hodja on February 26, 1992 saw the dimension of the Azerbaijan-Armenian problem and changed his policy and started to find harsh discourses in the presidential office. Speaking of the necessity of military measures, Ozal also expressed a clear dictation that he could "mistakenly drop a few bombs" on Erivan, relying on Turkey's existing relations with the United States (Milliyet, 19 January 1990, p.13). In addition, President Turgut Ozal said in his speech at the Manisa Young Businessmen Association that Turkey should be pursued a more active and daring policy by stating that the world and western countries are in double standards against the events in Nagorno-Karabakh (Hurriyet, 5 March 1992, p. 13). Ecevit, who stands out with his radical outbreaks, says that Turkey can not go out with a bucket of water in the face of those who go to the fire, and RP President Erbakan suggests that military intervention should be done and that the intervention should be like an intervention in Cyprus. ANAP leader Mesut Yilmaz said that if necessary, the soldiers could be moved. While the opposition wing emphasized that the only option is the military solution, the ruling wing and its foreign minister Hikmet Çetin underlined that war was not the solution and that Turkey was not a war-seeking country. Political conflicts were left behind, and the Hodja Massacre was moved to the agenda of the parliament and there were hard debates. Kumbaracıbaşı said, "It is not our country to go to Karabağ but Azerbaijan is the problem." He spoke, saying, "Karabağ went to Karabağ while he was producing the words." He criticized the proposal of the sword-shielded solution about the foreign affairs vice president Onur Kumbaracıbaşı Karabakh. Kumbaracıbaşı later explained that he was misunderstood, but this sentence revealed how sensitized the subject was from the mouth of a competent person (Hürriyet, 5 March 1992, p. While these discussions were going on in the parliament, many things about President Özal Karabağ could be done, stating that "(Armenia) Need to scare a little" and made a hard start (Cumhuriyet, 6 March 1992, page 11). Süleyman Demirel's reaction to the president's president has not been delayed. In March 1992, following the massacre of Hodja, the government that put the Nagorno-Karabakh crisis at the table, Özal's "Armenian" must be scared. The government should be more active, "he said in response to the words," What does it mean to stop the blood flowing, putting practice into trouble ". Foreign Minister Hikmet Cetin's response is "Peaceful roads will surely find a solution. It will not be scary by saying that I will scare you "(Hürriyet, 9 March 1992, p. Turkish foreign policy is determined by taking military precautions to solve the problems of Hatay, Cyprus, Aegean (continental scenery) as Turkey has wanted. Evaluating Özal's words as "If Armenians are not afraid," the foreign minister thought that Turkey had to be shy about Armenia and encouraged Armenian people. Former foreign minister and diplomat Coşkun Kırca made a thorough explanation of these reactions: "If Turkey does not come to Armenia, it would of course be preferable to resort to military methods to achieve its strategic aim. If Armenia is not afraid! If Armenia does not smell from the Turkish mass, why will it scare? Is the foreign minister aware of the fact that Armenia on the one hand, and the opposing forces of Azerbaijan and Turkey on the other side denied him? 1963-1964 İnönü, Demirel in 1967, 1974 Ecevit had thought like himself and the foreign minister did not know that Turkishness had ended in Cyprus? And this foreign minister's word, if Armenia does not fear, The idea that Turkey will have to be shy about Armenia is also becoming insignificant, which is both a challenge for Turkey itself and for encouraging Armenia to continue its attack (Cumhuriyet, 17 March 1992, p. It is said that 'if Turkey takes military deterrence measures against Armenia, then the Western world and Russia will be behind Russia and Yerevan.' So you are supposed to say: Yes! Armenia is not afraid; because the whole world supports it and Turkey must be afraid of such a situation! The examples we gave above do not show that such a possibility is very weak. If Turkey does the mass we talk about, the West and Russia will certainly not say good meat to Turkey. In addition, they will not be willing to go back to Armenia. Özal, who was in the opposition to the presidency of the DYP General President Süleyman Demirel, was appointed to establish the government in November 1991 and Özal's death until the death of the prime minister. The two leaders of Turkish politics are always opposed to each other when they feed on the same ground. This situation has not been preceded by political controversies at the summit of the country which has been an example for the later politicians. Political rival leaders do this in governance, in the country This situation has not been preceded by political controversies at the summit of the country which has been an example for the later politicians. Political rival leaders do this in governance, in the country This situation has not been preceded by political controversies at the summit of the country which has been an example for the later politicians. Political rival leaders do this in governance, in the country

instability. Turgut Özal pointed out that on 18 January 1990 Azerbaijan was not interested in the Armenian-Azerbaijani problem, the historical Turkish-Armenian question, and that Turkey did not want to interfere with the Soviets' internal affairs after the words "They are Shi'i, we are Sunni" Milliyet, 19 January 1990, p.13). DYP President Süleyman Demirel's reaction to President Ozal was very harsh because of his words. Ozal went to the US to seek a constitutional court, saying "the record stolen in Turkey will also play in America" ​​was found. Evaluating Özal's visit to the Soviet Union with the words "He went to save the Sankets of Çankaya", Demirel said: "As regards Özal's visit to America:" Our compatriots in Azerbaijan

There is no problem with the beliefs of the Turks (Hürriyet, 15 May 1992, p.11).

The important thing is to have the same culture. Our Azerbaijani societies and our citizens are bruised and broken. Ozal's words do not link to Turkey These words are not the words of someone who represents Turkey "(Milliyet, 19 January 1990, p.13). In addition, Prime Minister Süleyman Demirel described the words of President Özal as "totally irresponsible" ("Republican, 6 March 1992, p.9). The name Süleyman Demirel is often associated with Özal. These two Turkish statesmen who have never reconciled in politics have not stopped from opposing each other even in the most urgent matters. Even during the most critical periods of the Nagorno-Karabakh war, President Özal and Prime Minister Demirel could not establish a common policy. Although this seems to be a characteristic of only two lids, it is possible to see the same behavior in other leaders. Özal-Yilmaz, Özal-Demirel, Demirel-Ciller and Yılmaz-Ciller. Leaders at the top of the state did not see it necessary to form a plan of action, even in the most sensitive issues such as the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in foreign policy. In fact, almost all of them have spoken similar things. For example, none of them found it appropriate to produce policies despite the US or the USSR, to intervene in Armenia, or to make arms aid to Azerbaijan. They all demand that their affairs be resolved peacefully or used until the end of international diplomatic channels. So much so that in the beginning Leaders at the top of the state did not see it necessary to form a plan of action, even in the most sensitive issues such as the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in foreign policy. In fact, almost all of them have spoken similar things. For example, none of them found it appropriate to produce policies despite the US or the USSR, to intervene in Armenia, or to make arms aid to Azerbaijan. They all demand that their affairs be resolved peacefully or used until the end of international diplomatic channels. So much so that in the beginning Leaders at the top of the state did not see it necessary to form a plan of action, even in the most sensitive issues such as the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in foreign policy. In fact, almost all of them have spoken similar things. For example, none of them found it appropriate to produce policies despite the US or the USSR, to intervene in Armenia, or to make arms aid to Azerbaijan. They all demand that their affairs be resolved peacefully or used until the end of international diplomatic channels. So much so that in the beginning He did not find it appropriate to intervene in Armenia or to make arms aid to Azerbaijan. They all demand that their affairs be resolved peacefully or used until the end of international diplomatic channels. So much so that in the beginning He did not find it appropriate to intervene in Armenia or to make arms aid to Azerbaijan. They all demand that their affairs be resolved peacefully or used until the end of international diplomatic channels. So much so that in the beginning

although they did not harm the national interests of the war, they did not stop at making peace calls. This disconnect in the political life of Turkey in the nineties

it has been a barrier to healthy steps in politics. Demirel was aware of the economic power of his country and did not hesitate to speak it out, but he also knew that Turkey would not be able to direct regional policies as a dominant force in the Caucasus. Of course Uğur Mumcu's comment, "Demirel's only difference from Ozal is not bald head". But we can clearly say that Solomon is more influential in the future of Azerbaijan than Demirel Ozal.

 "War is not a solution Turkey is not a war-seeking country" (Hikmet Çetin)

Hikmet Çetin was appointed as foreign minister in the coalition government founded on November 20, 1991 under the presidency of Süleyman Demirel. The second DYP-SHP, established in June 1993 by Tansu Ciller, retained this position in the coalition government. He resigned from the foreign ministry on July 27, 1994. Hikmet Çetin Ten days before he was Foreign Minister, Azerbaijan was recognized by the previous government. Hikmet Çetin was no longer able to carry out his policy that the events were internal business of Soviet Russia. There was the independent Azerbaijan Republic and the Nagorno-Karabakh problem it fell into. When Cetin was foreign minister, the attacks of the Armenians on Azerbaijani territory continued in Nagorno-Karabakh. Bloody conflicts became increasingly grave (Hurriyet, 27 November 1991, p.13). On November 28, Nagorno-Karabakh's autonomy status was abolished by Azerbaijan. The Armenian side regarded this as a declaration of war against them (Hurriyet, 27 November 1991, p.13). Cetin first found the US and Russia to be neutral about the conflicts in Karabakh, in the war that would give more impression of Armenian support. Demirel said that during the most frenzied period of the Karabakh War, Foreign Minister Cetin was "cautious" when he said he would not be impartial. While the opposition accused the government of being passive, Hikmet Çetin from the wing of the government said that it was Turkey that opened the way for the membership of the United Nations and the OSCE in Azerbaijan and that it was not the case that Azerbaijan was accustomed to being accustomed to international peace (Cumhuriyet, 6 March 1992, . Continuing the massacres of the Armenians put Cetin in a new quest and demanded that NATO power be sent to Karabakh to avoid having to intervene alone. The situation in Karabakh in March 1992 was entirely in favor of the Armenians. Foreign Minister Hikmet Cetin knew that Karabakh was emptied by Azerbaijani Turks and that Upper Karabakh was actually in the hands of Armenians. Every time the developments were worrying, there was no solution in the shadow of the guns and the guns had to be silenced first (Hürriyet, 1 March 1992, p.12). After the events of the brutal massacres of the Armenians, the approach of the responsibility authority of the opposition leaders in Turkey to the intervention requests showed that "War is not a solution but a country that wants war". Turkey, When Azerbaijan-Armenian conflicts intensified, it was decided to recognize Armenia. Following this decision, the opposition parties reacted; ANAP Istanbul Deputy Adnan Kahveci answered "Unilateral declaration of political will" in response to the question "Why Armenia is unconditionally recognized?" Cetin also stated that while diplomatic relations are being established, respect for territorial integrity and adhering to the principles of invariance of borders will be taken into consideration.

"When I touch a point of the Nakhchivan, I immediately go to the parliament,

I get it out. "(Tansu Ciller).

Between June 25, 1993 - March 6, 1996, the Prime Minister of the Republic of Turkey

Tansu Ciller, who had done so, came up with a new dimension when the Armenian attacks exceeded the Karabakh border. After the fall of Ebulfeyz Elchibey in Azerbaijan, Haydar Aliyev came to his place instead. Aliyev had left Ciller in the shadow of Demirel in bilateral relations with Azerbaijan, which is a very good friend to President Süleyman Demirel. In Azerbaijan, thousands of Azerbaijanis are forced to abandon their lands and homes, to be refugees in their homeland, to get rid of the Armenian attacks, (Hürriyet, 6 September 1993, p.16). A summit was held in Çankaya on 2 September 1993 under the chairmanship of President Demirel on these developments in Karabakh, the summit was linked to "taking additional measures in terms of ensuring peace and stability in the region" and the instruction of the Turkish Armed Forces to take a more active position was given. With the initiative of the Turkish government to stop the attacks and this initiative was inconclusive, Turkey-Armenia relations were cut again and Azerbaijan As the losses on the front increased, the attitude of Turkey became harder. Even when the possibility of Armenian forces entering Nakhchivan territory in September 1993, Prime Minister Ciller explained that if Armenia violates Kars Treaty and invaded Nakhichevan, he would ask for authority to enter the war (Oran, 2002: 405). Then Ciller informed that the army was waiting for a political decision and that the army was ready when the political decision was taken (Hürriyet 4 September 1993, p.27). MHP Chairman Alparslan called Turkes to his office and negotiated the developments in Karabakh and received his support. He came from Azerbaijan's former President Ebulfeyz Elcheibey. Elchibey Nahcivan's headquarters in the village of Ordubat and Keleki said that if the Armenians attacked Naçıvan, Turkey would use the guarantor, saying that Prime Minister Tansu Ciller's words "I put a knot on Nakhichevan point to make an immediate decision to war against parliament" (Hurriyet September 6 1993, p.16). Tansu Çiller, who made a visit to Moscow on September 8, They declared that the developments in the region will determine how to take common steps if the developments are in the direction of peace, but if there is a reverse, if the region needs a peace power, the two countries will be able to deal with this between the two countries by expressing their unity with the Russian administration regarding the Armenian actions in Azerbaijan as an aggression Hürriyet 10 September 1993, p. "You are female," Celer told Yeltsin: "First we need to get Armenia out of Azerbaijan. Then we look to the creation of peace "(Hurriyet 10 September 1993, p. , Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrd gave the message that Turkey should follow impartial and balanced policies (Hurriyet 9 September 1993, p.28)."We need to solve this (Nagorno-Karabakh). Turkey and Armenia should be friendly. "" If the border opens, the wind will turn. "(A.Turkey)

Nationalist Leader Alparslan Türkeş'in Turkish politics as well as in the Turkish republics have had a considerable place. Being a nationalist and hard-tempered, he thought he would show a brutal and violent policy against Armenia. But it is not what they thought it was. Contrary to popular belief, Turkes has been in favor of peace, dialogue and provocation. Alparslan Türkeş is the first Turkish politicians who passed the dialogue with Armenia. At the time of the Moscow ambassador Özden Sanberk 1992-93'da Turkes'in looking for themselves and 'We need to solve this work. Turkey and Armenia should be friends'. Sanberk also said that Turkes also said that if the border opens, the wind will turn. Özden Sanberk also had a claim that this problem had already been over if Türkeş was alive (Star, 28 January 2007, p.10). Prime Minister Demirel, Foreign Minister Hikmet Cetin and Erdal İnönü's support to Azerbaijan could not go beyond "limited" support. He has not yet set up a strategy for Azerbaijan and other Turkic republics that have achieved independence. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Demirel and the government were putting a semi-secret semi-open policy to be summarized in the form of persuading Armenia to withdraw from occupied Azerbaijani territories by establishing good relations with it (Ülkü, 2000: 123). MHP President Türkeş met with Armenian President Levon Ter Petrosyan secretly at the Turkish Embassy in Paris. Before meeting, Demirel had said, "I persuade Ter Petrosyan, if you let me, I will meet him." According to some allegations, the prime minister, He even sent gifts to Petrosyan through Türkeş. Turkes told Elçibey, who was unaware of all these developments, by telephone when he went to Paris. The president of Azerbaijan said helpless "Yes" to this negotiating initiative. The Turkes-Petrosyan meeting was held, but there was no concrete development. Turkes returned to Paris with Foreign Affairs officials, Demirel and Cetin. For the first time in Turkey, he found supporters in the state for the first time to establish diplomatic relations with Armenia and to open the Armenian border while Azerbaijani lands were occupied. In the meantime, prominent names of Armenian lenders in the US and Europe have often come to the fore in Ankara. As Ankara's initiatives accelerated, Armenian attacks on Azerbaijani lands were gaining momentum. Because Ter Petrosyan ' ın strategy was to take Turkey out of the Azerbaijani side and neutralize it, thus bringing Ankara's support to Baku into a debate position (Ülkü, 2000: 121). It was not publicly believable that Turkes wanted to open the border with Armenia at the most critical time of the Karabagh war. But before the government opened the border, Armenia was carrying wagons full of wagons. Now the US initiated the initiative. MHP leader Alparslan Türkeş said that the government's Armenian policy was correct. Türkeş: "There are people who want to fish in turbulent water. A small spark could drown the region into the blood. The Turkish government needs to be careful, "he said. Turkes described the Nagorno-Karabakh city of Shusha as being grave and said: "Under the Armenian operation, There are also those who do not want the independence of Turkish communities. There are those who want to fish in cloudy water by providing war to the region. Our government is trying to solve the problem with the UN channel to disrupt this game. It is a movement of righteousness. "He pointed out that the war would not be in favor of the Turks. The Turkes Nagorno-Karabakh issue has never been in power, but it has been influential in the policies of the current rulings regarding the Turkish world.

"The government's policy is to stay away from conflict and to run diplomatic channels to stop conflicts"(Süleyman Demirel).

Süleyman Demirel, like Turgut Özal, also served as prime minister and presidency. Süleyman Demirel is the prime minister of the Republic of Turkey during the most critical periods of the Nagorno-Karabakh War. SHP Lideri Erdal İnönü formed a coalition government on November 20, 1991, because he could not find the number that would constitute the government alone. After Mesut Yilmaz's government, Süleyman Demirel, who had been the prime minister many times before, sat in his prime minister's seat again. He has found the current political and regional problems of Turkey together with the establishment of the government. The newly established Turkic Republics, the terrorist workers, the Gulf Crisis, the Bosnian War, and finally domestic political contests and the weak economy were the most serious problems that Demirel's coalition government faced. The evil Azerbaijani-Armenian strife was rekindled with independence, and the Armenian issue of Karabakh was moved to the world agenda again. On one hand, "We were caught unprepared for the collapse of the USSR!" Demirel, who is in charge of establishing a new government from the other side, asked M. Yılmaz "not to take a recognition decision (recognition of Azerbaijan's independence") that will disrupt Moscow with Moscow "(Ülkü, 2000: 19). Demirel was able to reveal this with open heart, saying, "We should take our steps very well when the big states go to that direction (recognition)" in order to recognize Azerbaijan, who has shown special care not to oppose the movements of the great states in the world while determining Demirel's foreign policy (Hürriyet, 4 November 1994, 7). During the first months of Azerbaijani independence, Moscow's Ambassador Özden Sanberk emphasized that the state is cold for recognition, saying "Ankara-Moscow relations are more important than Ankara-new independent republican relations, Turkey is not willing to compete in recognizing republics that declared independence" (Ülkü, 2000: 19). Demirel, whose task was to establish the government, was to show the attitude that would lead to conflict with the Soviets in the biggest draw against independent Azerbaijan. However, Prime Minister Mesut Yilmaz, who will hand over the government to Demirel, was also determined to recognize Azerbaijan. As Demirel is the prime minister, there is an independent Azerbaijan Republic, which is recognized by Turkey plus. Demirel knows Armenia too soon. The fact that Armenia and Azerbaijan, who gained their independence newly, were in the fierce confrontation due to the Karabakh conflict, were the most important external problems facing Demirel. During his time as prime minister, Demirel, who repeatedly faced the Armenian issue, was cautiously approaching the Karabakh issue, which was considered to be his extension. In fact, Demirel was one of the few politicians who knew Turkey was a century old Armenian problem. Ozal, Armenia and Armenians allegedly expressed small claims, while Demirel, the President was constantly denigrating these exits. Ozal's military intervention requests by Prime Minister Demirel may lead to a Muslim-Christian conflict. This was rejected on the grounds that Turkey could move beyond the region and back 20 years (Hürriyet 13 March 1992, p.12). The most important card in the process of Turkey's Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is the "active diplomacy" policy. Süleyman Demirel tried diplomatic till the end, sometimes even in the diplomatic relations in order not to be contrary to big states such as the USA, even the limits of sovereignty were forced. "Winter 1992" planned exercise on the border of Armenia in February 1992

President Turgut Özal, Prime Minister Süleyman Demirel and Prime Minister Erdal İnönü. Whereas the drill in such a critical period needs to be used as a means of diplomatic pressure, the Demirel government has shown, with unnecessary precision. "It declared that there was no political purpose. However, no sound could be made or a more political and persuasive explanation could be made, such as "to make sense". This was not done, and it was the effect of this extreme vulnerability of Turkey under Armenia's aggression to attack Agdam "(Hürriyet, 13 March 1992, p. This exercise has encouraged them because of the attitude of the government as it did not step back to Armenia even during the most fervent period of the Karabagh war. So much so that the Hocali massacre took place during this period. Kamuran Belan, a former diplomat, described this disease in foreign policy as "everyone else in Turkey is aware of Turkey's power". (Inan, 1995: 95) ... Azerbaijan President Ayaz Muttalibov declared that he had made three-day mourning in Azerbaijan after declaring that the Armenians were massacred in Karabakh and that at least one thousand Azerbaijanis were killed in Hocali village. Prime Minister Süleyman Demirel said that Turkey would not stand still in the face of developments in instability in the region, Turkey's problem is that the problem is to the world and that it tries to make no mistake and that a wrong step will pass the world behind Armenia. (Date of the Month, 9 March 1992). Prime Minister Demirel has been confirmed by Foreign Minister Hikmet Cetin as saying that the military intervention will not be a matter of discussion while military intervention option is discussed intensively after the Hodja massacre. In fact, these words have also touched on the option of Turkey as a deterrent (Hurriyet, 6 March 1992, p.10). Demirel Frequently Turkey's most important card in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is the "active diplomacy" policy. Süleyman Demirel tried diplomatic till the end, sometimes even in the diplomatic relations in order not to be contrary to big states such as the USA, even the limits of sovereignty were forced. "In February 1992, the" Winter 92 "planned exercise on the Armenian border is attended by President Turgut Özal, Prime Minister Süleyman Demirel and Prime Minister Erdal İnönü. Whereas the drill in such a critical period needs to be used as a means of diplomatic pressure, the Demirel government has shown, with unnecessary precision. "It declared that there was no political purpose. However, no sound could be made or a more political and persuasive explanation could be made, such as "to make sense". This was not done, and it was the effect of this extreme vulnerability of Turkey under Armenia's aggression to attack until Agdam "(Hurriyet, 13 March 1992, p. This exercise has encouraged them because of the attitude of the government as it did not step back to Armenia even during the most fervent period of the Karabagh war. So much so that the Hocali massacre took place during this period. Kamuran Belan, a former diplomat, "Everybody is aware of the power of Turkey except Turkey." (Inan, 1995: 95) ... Azerbaijani President Ayaz Muttalibov declared that he was 3 days old in Azerbaijan after declaring that the Armenians were massacred in Karabakh and that at least one thousand Azerbaijani Turks were killed in Hocali village. Prime Minister Süleyman Demirel said that Turkey would not stand still in the face of developments in instability in the region, Turkey's problem is that the problem is to the world and that it tries to make no mistake and that a wrong step will pass the world behind Armenia. (Date of the Month, 9 March 1992). Prime Minister Süleyman Demirel, who saw that the Nagorno Karabakh issue was knotted, was rightly connected to the internal structure of Azerbaijan for a reason of not carrying out very healthy policies. Demirel "The whole event depends on the internal stability of Azerbaijan. The fact that this incident is coming from the internal stability of Azerbaijan. "If the presidency in the country changes 4-5 times in 3-5 months, it can not be called stability" (Cumhuriyet, 24 May 1992, p.12). "What if Azerbaijan wants military aid?" Demirel said: "There is no such demand, no possibility. The world has come to possess it. But if the bloodshed continues, we will agree when the democratic world decides to use force. This is not the power of Turkey. It wants to move with the world.

 



Doç.Dr. Dilaver Ezimli Bakü Devlet Üniversitesi öğretim üyesi      22.10.2017   Okunma Sayısı: 98


Yazdır

 

Yazarın Diğer Yazıları





Üye Giriş Paneli
E-posta:      
Şifre:        
Şifremi unutum
Başkan'ın Mesajı
Aidat Borcu Sorgulama
   
 
Köşe Yazıları
Doç.Dr. Dilaver Ezimli Bakü Devlet Üniversitesi öğretim üyesi
...

Doç.Dr. Dilaver Ezimli Bakü Devlet Üniversitesi öğretim üyesi
...

Son Ziyaretçi Yorumları
Akın Sezer
Saygı değer dernek yöneticileri ve hemşerilerim yaklaşan yeni yılınızı kutlar, yeni yıl Kırşehirin kaderini kırarak göç veren bir il değil kendi kendine yeten, eğitimde geleceğine güvenle bakan bir il statüsünde görmek dileğiyle tüm Kırşehirlilerin yeni yıllarını kutlar saygılar sunarım

Ersoy Gezer
Sayın başkanım ve değerli üyeler çalışmalarınızda başarılar dilerim bir kırşehirli sanatçınız olarak yanınızda oldugumu belirtir tüm kırşehirli hemşerilerime sevgi ve saygılar sunarım

Gürsel Tek
Siteniz çok güzel olmuş emeği geçen herkese çok teşekkür ederim.


Tüm ziyaretçi yorumları için tıklayınız.
Günlük Gazeteler
Sponsorlarımız