Search

Durant la Première Guerre Mondiale, la presse parisienne de l'arrière évoque abondamment le génocide des Arméniens, tant pour dénoncer les massacres que pour alimenter un discours propagandiste visant à la mobilisation de guerre de la société civile. Les journaux voient en l'Allemagne l'instigatrice du génocide, plaçant la souffrance arménienne dans la continuité des exactions commises à l'encontre des Belges. Certains journaux parisiens se servent également du génocide des Arméniens pour opposer musulmans et chrétiens dans un discours aux accents de guerre de religion tandis que la presse de droite fait occasionnellement preuve de xénophobie à l'encontre des réfugiés et des victimes. La situation s'inverse même à la fin du conflit; le génocide des Arméniens étant dénoncé comme « bourrage de crâne » dans le but de promouvoir le rapprochement Franco-Turc. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Selim III ruled the Ottoman Empire in the Age of Revolutions, but his rule did not reflect the vigorous, expansionist and aggressive spirit of this age. He more resembled a ruler forced to defend his empire from the turbulence of the age, an effort which also shaped his character and perception of rulership. During his years in royal confinement, he clung passionately to the revival of the warrior-sultan through charismatic leadership. While on the throne, there was a gradual transformation of his perception of rulership and he became satisfied with being the bureaucratic ruler of the empire. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Turkish foreign policy toward the Algerian War of Independence (1954–62) was construed as persistent Turkish endorsement of official French positions generating abiding resentment among the states of the Third World, especially Arab states, and understandably in Algeria, which was to elicit backlashes from the Third World states thereafter consequently causing substantial complications in Turkish foreign policy. Stressing the importance of incorporating nonmaterial and ideational factors in analyses of foreign policy, two arguments are put forward in this article for an accurate explanation of Turkish foreign policy toward Algerian War of Independence. First, it was the conception of the West, defined not only in strategic or military terms, but also in ideational and civilizational terms that induced Turkish policy-makers to adopt insular policies regarding Algeria. Second, a “temporal contextualization” of Turkish foreign policy during the Algerian War of Independence is required for a proper understanding of Turkish foreign policy toward the Algerian War of Independence. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article discusses the role of the Directorate of Religious Affairs in Turkey—the Diyanet—in the French Council for Muslim Religion (Conseil Francais du Culte Musulman or CFCM). The Diyanet-linked Cordination Committee of Muslim Turks in France (Comite de Coordination des Musulmans Turcs de France, or CCMTF) was one of the constitutive federations of the CFCM, confirming its status as 'the' interlocutor for the French state in its relations with the Turkish Muslim community. I argue in this paper that this is mainly for two reasons. First, the Turkish government uses the Diyanet as a foreign-policy instrument, promoting 'Turkish Islam' as a moderate and rational religion, compatible with modernity and as a model for 'European' or 'French Islam'. The Diyanet presents itself as the legitimate representative of Muslims of Turkish origin in France, excluding other organisations as radicals. Secondly, the Turkish Muslim community in France still displays loyalty to Turkey in terms of social organisation. The paternalistic attitude of the Turkish state, the immigrants' search for protection of the country of origin, nationality divisions within the CFCM and the long-standing habit of the French state to deal with its Muslim community through foreign governments help to explain the continuing importance of the Diyanet for the Turkish Muslim community and in the CFCM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]