Online publications by Filiz T Aydin
Turkish Cultural Legacy in the Balkans, 2023
After the annexation of Crimea in 1783, the Crimean Tatar exodus from Crimea continued for more t... more After the annexation of Crimea in 1783, the Crimean Tatar exodus from Crimea continued for more than a century. Dobruca as a part of the Ottoman Empire became one of the major and most compact places of settlement for the Crimean Tatars. The Crimean Tatars in both Dobruca and Anatolia developed their local diasporic nationalist movements, the latter mostly generated by the exiled Cafer Seydahmet (Kırımer), the War Minister of the Crimean Tatar republic of 1917.
Cafer Seydahmet Kırımer, while settling in Turkey, formed political ties with the diasporic nationalists in Dobruca, represented by Dobrujan community leader Müstecip Hacı Fazıl (later Ülküsal)’s Emel, prominent national poet and teacher Mehmet Niyazi and graduates of Mecidiye Muslim Seminary. Emel became to official media organ of the Crimean Tatar National Center. We already knew Cafer Seydahmet Kırımer and other members of the National Center from Turkey and Poland visited Dobruca every year in the 1930s and stayed for extended periods. Only recently, we discovered archival material and photographs related to these visits, vividly representing the daily itinerary of the particular visit in 1935, in a private archive. Our archival material includes information about the customs, appearances, and daily life of the populations of 80 Crimean Tatar villages, which the political emigres visited. It also includes conferences and meetings in cities such as Constanta and Pazarcık (Dobrich), a folkloric tepreş festival and other activities. Most importantly, it includes the ceremony of placing a monument with the Crimean Tatar symbol Tarak Tamga to Mehmet Niyazi’s tomb, the first example of such a national tradition.
In this article, we describe and analyze the important national activities and several meetings that were conducted during this visit in order to understand the purposes of Cafer Seydahmet Kırımer’s emigre movement and how inter-diasporic relations influenced the ethnic identities of diasporic Crimean Tatars in Dobruca. We try to answer to the following questions: Why did Cafer Seydahmet Kırımer and political emigres choose the diaspora in Romania as a target of his nationalist mobilization while not attempting such activity in Turkey? What role did the Crimean Tatar diaspora in Dobruca play in the maintenance and development of the Crimean Tatar national movement at a time when it was repressed in Crimea and strictly controlled in Turkey? How was Crimean Tatar's national identity was shaped in the triangle of Dobruca, Turkey, and Crimea in the inter-war period?
Europe-Asia Studies , 2023
Baltic Rim Economies , 2022
To receive a free copy, register at www.utu.fi/pei (responsible for writer invitations)
Ukrainian Policymaker , 2021
The Crimean Tatar diaspora has supported Ukrainian sovereignty since 1991 and contributed to conf... more The Crimean Tatar diaspora has supported Ukrainian sovereignty since 1991 and contributed to conflict resolution among Crimean Tatars and Ukraine and homeland Crimean Tatars' well-being. They also advocated for the Turkish strategic alliance with Ukraine due to their traumatic historical experiences with Russia. In this article, we investigate the relations between the Crimean Tatar diaspora and Ukraine, based on our long-term comparative historical analysis of Crimean Tatar historical transnationalism and by drawing up some comparisons with Ukrainian and other diaspora communities. We suggest that Ukraine cannot take the Crimean Tatar diaspora for granted and must engage with it as it constitutes its political and legal diaspora. Ukraine does not sufficiently 'tap' or 'embrace' its diasporas, but more importantly, it needs to develop an approach of 'governance' in which Crimean Tatar home and diaspora organizations, nation-state institutions of Ukraine, and host-states such as Turkey and Romania and international organizations take part.
2/15 these relations go far back. My major field of study is ethnicity, nationalism, minorities a... more 2/15 these relations go far back. My major field of study is ethnicity, nationalism, minorities and diasporas in a postSoviet comparative politics context, and in particular on the Crimean Tatars, therefore today in order to contribute to the topic of the conference, I will ask the question what has been the role of Crimea and the Crimean Tatars for the TurkishUkrainian relations in the last 25 years. I will particularly focus on the recent occupation of Crimea, which has a significance for international relations because it overthrew established norms of international law and order. But, how did the occupation of Crimea change the security environment for Turkey and Ukraine, and for the Black Sea region in general?
Books by Filiz T Aydin
Ukrayna , 2024
To whom Crimea belongs? The Normativr Evaluation of Crimean Tatar demand to be recognized as inid... more To whom Crimea belongs? The Normativr Evaluation of Crimean Tatar demand to be recognized as inidigenous people of Crimea
Once Upon a Time in Dobruja: The Crimean Tatar National Movement in the Interwar Era, 2023
Émigré, Exile, Diaspora, and Transnational Movements of the Crimean Tatars Preserving the Eternal Flame of Crimea, 2021
CRIMEA FROM REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES, 2023
She received her Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Toronto in 2012 and-taught the... more She received her Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Toronto in 2012 and-taught there. She returned to Turkey under TUBITAK returning scholars program in 2014. She has a book titled "Émigré, Exile, Diaspora and Transnational Movements of Crimean Tatars: Preserving the Eternal Flame" published byPalgrave. She has published in Communist and Post-Communist Studies and several journals in Turkey and Ukraine. She has several book chapters, published in English, Romanian and Crimean Tatar. She completed a researchproject titled "Protection and enforcement of minority rights in the post-Soviet space between 1991-2014: Comparing the cases of Tatarstan, Chechnia in Russia and Crimean Tatars and Russians in Ukraine" funded by TUBITAK. Ms. Aydın is amember of the Crimean Tatar diaspora from Ankara, Turkey. She contributed the letter of "Statement of Concerned Scholars on the Current Predicament of the Crimean Tatars" to protest the Russian annexation of Crimea and participated in the Second World Crimean Tatar Congress in July 2015.
UN DESTIN LA MAREA NEAGRE. Tatarii din Dobrogea (2017). Cluj-Napoca : Editura Institutului pentru Studierea Problemelor Minorit??ilor Na?ionale, Editör:Omer, Metin and Cupcea, Adriana., 2017
UN DESTIN LA MAREA NEAGRE?, Tatarii din Dobrogea, "Identitatea etnonational a diasporei tatare cr... more UN DESTIN LA MAREA NEAGRE?, Tatarii din Dobrogea, "Identitatea etnonational a diasporei tatare crimeen in România, în perioada comunist?" (2017), Cluj-Napoca : Editura Institutului pentru Studierea Problemelor Minoritilor Nationale, Editör:Omer, Metin. Cupcea, Adriana
Journal Articles by Filiz T Aydin
Communist and Post Communist Studies , 2019
This paper examines the process of how Crimean Tatars strived to attain group-differentiated righ... more This paper examines the process of how Crimean Tatars strived to attain group-differentiated rights since they have returned to their homeland in the early 1990s. Whereas the politics of minority rights were viewed through security lens in earlier literature, we emphasize the significance of cultural constructs in influencing the minority policies, based on qualitative content analysis of “speech acts” of elites, and movement and policy documents. Focusing on the interaction of the framing processes of Crimean Tatars with the Crimean regional government, Ukraine, and Russia, we argue that the “neo-Stalinist frame” has played a major role in denying the rights of Crimean Tatars for self-determination and preservation of their ethnic identity in both pre and post annexation Crimea. The Crimean Tatars counter-framed against neo-Stalinist frame both in the pre and post-annexation period by demanding their rights as “indigenous people”. Ukraine experienced a frame transformation after the Euromaidan protests, by shifting from a neo-Stalinist frame into a “multiculturalist frame”, which became evident in recognition of the Crimean Tatar status as indigenous people of Crimea.
http://aesc-online.eu/news/newsletter-1-2017
Uploads
Online publications by Filiz T Aydin
Cafer Seydahmet Kırımer, while settling in Turkey, formed political ties with the diasporic nationalists in Dobruca, represented by Dobrujan community leader Müstecip Hacı Fazıl (later Ülküsal)’s Emel, prominent national poet and teacher Mehmet Niyazi and graduates of Mecidiye Muslim Seminary. Emel became to official media organ of the Crimean Tatar National Center. We already knew Cafer Seydahmet Kırımer and other members of the National Center from Turkey and Poland visited Dobruca every year in the 1930s and stayed for extended periods. Only recently, we discovered archival material and photographs related to these visits, vividly representing the daily itinerary of the particular visit in 1935, in a private archive. Our archival material includes information about the customs, appearances, and daily life of the populations of 80 Crimean Tatar villages, which the political emigres visited. It also includes conferences and meetings in cities such as Constanta and Pazarcık (Dobrich), a folkloric tepreş festival and other activities. Most importantly, it includes the ceremony of placing a monument with the Crimean Tatar symbol Tarak Tamga to Mehmet Niyazi’s tomb, the first example of such a national tradition.
In this article, we describe and analyze the important national activities and several meetings that were conducted during this visit in order to understand the purposes of Cafer Seydahmet Kırımer’s emigre movement and how inter-diasporic relations influenced the ethnic identities of diasporic Crimean Tatars in Dobruca. We try to answer to the following questions: Why did Cafer Seydahmet Kırımer and political emigres choose the diaspora in Romania as a target of his nationalist mobilization while not attempting such activity in Turkey? What role did the Crimean Tatar diaspora in Dobruca play in the maintenance and development of the Crimean Tatar national movement at a time when it was repressed in Crimea and strictly controlled in Turkey? How was Crimean Tatar's national identity was shaped in the triangle of Dobruca, Turkey, and Crimea in the inter-war period?
Books by Filiz T Aydin
Journal Articles by Filiz T Aydin
Cafer Seydahmet Kırımer, while settling in Turkey, formed political ties with the diasporic nationalists in Dobruca, represented by Dobrujan community leader Müstecip Hacı Fazıl (later Ülküsal)’s Emel, prominent national poet and teacher Mehmet Niyazi and graduates of Mecidiye Muslim Seminary. Emel became to official media organ of the Crimean Tatar National Center. We already knew Cafer Seydahmet Kırımer and other members of the National Center from Turkey and Poland visited Dobruca every year in the 1930s and stayed for extended periods. Only recently, we discovered archival material and photographs related to these visits, vividly representing the daily itinerary of the particular visit in 1935, in a private archive. Our archival material includes information about the customs, appearances, and daily life of the populations of 80 Crimean Tatar villages, which the political emigres visited. It also includes conferences and meetings in cities such as Constanta and Pazarcık (Dobrich), a folkloric tepreş festival and other activities. Most importantly, it includes the ceremony of placing a monument with the Crimean Tatar symbol Tarak Tamga to Mehmet Niyazi’s tomb, the first example of such a national tradition.
In this article, we describe and analyze the important national activities and several meetings that were conducted during this visit in order to understand the purposes of Cafer Seydahmet Kırımer’s emigre movement and how inter-diasporic relations influenced the ethnic identities of diasporic Crimean Tatars in Dobruca. We try to answer to the following questions: Why did Cafer Seydahmet Kırımer and political emigres choose the diaspora in Romania as a target of his nationalist mobilization while not attempting such activity in Turkey? What role did the Crimean Tatar diaspora in Dobruca play in the maintenance and development of the Crimean Tatar national movement at a time when it was repressed in Crimea and strictly controlled in Turkey? How was Crimean Tatar's national identity was shaped in the triangle of Dobruca, Turkey, and Crimea in the inter-war period?