The Self-Identity Construction of Bulgarian Turkish Immigrant Women

Yıl 2019, , 150 - 162, 17.06.2019

Gizem Kılıçlı

https://doi.org/10.32600/huefd.432523

Öz

This research is based on the fieldwork that was conducted with nineteen Bulgarian Turkish immigrant women in the
Kardzhali district of Bulgaria. These women were born in Bulgaria, exposed to similar oppressions by the communist
regime between 1984 and 1989, migrated to Turkey, experienced the life in Turkey for a while, and, then,
returned/forced to return to Bulgaria. The aim of the research is to analyze the effects of Bulgarian Turkish immigrant
women’s experiences on the two sides of the border on their self-identity construction. Firstly, I will focus on their
working experiences with respect to compulsory labor under the communist regime, as well as on whether or not they
were exposed to “double burden” as workers, wives, and mothers. Secondly, the differences in their migration
experiences in Turkey depending on their being perceived by the Turkish state as soydaş, legal immigrant, or illegal
immigrant will be elaborated. Lastly, Bulgarian Turkish immigrant women’s return experiences to Bulgaria, which
were shaped by the nature of their return, i.e. voluntarily or not, will be explicated. Their voluntary or involuntary
return experiences will highlight how they perceive themselves in Bulgaria. The results of the fieldwork show that when the individuals’ perception of homeland is taken into consideration, it is impossible to give an exact and
unchanging definition of homeland. This impossibility is closely related to whether those women who returned to
Bulgaria after migrating to Turkey returned to Bulgaria voluntarily or not. While those who returned to Bulgaria
voluntarily see Bulgaria as their homeland, Turkey is the homeland for those who returned to Bulgaria involuntarily.
To conclude, there is no permanent conception of the Bulgarian Turkish immigrant nor the permanent identity of
Bulgarian Turkish immigrant women. There are many different identities that were assigned to them depending on the
political conditions of where they were born, as well as on the changing attitude of the Turkish-state towards its
immigrants, their voluntary or involuntary return to Bulgaria, and how they perceived themselves in the country where
they are currently living. This research reveals the impossibility of making generalizations about Bulgarian Turkish
immigrant women. Accordingly, this research also shows the importance of ethnography of particular for the discipline
of anthropology.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Bulgarian Turks, self-identity construction, double burden, illegal migration, involuntary migration, homeland perception

Bulgaristan Türkü Göçmen Kadınlarının Öz-Kimlik İnşası

Öz

Bu çalışma, Bulgaristan’da doğmuş, 1984 ile 1989 yılları arasında komünist rejim tarafından uygulanan benzer
baskılara maruz kalmış, Türkiye’ye göç etmiş, bir süre Türkiye’deki yaşamı deneyimlemiş ve daha sonra Bulgaristan’a
geri göç etmiş/etmek zorunda kalmış on dokuz Bulgaristan Türkü göçmen kadın ile Bulgaristan’ın Kırcaali şehrinde
yapılan saha çalışmasına dayanmaktadır. Çalışmanın amacı, Bulgaristan Türkü göçmen kadınlarının sınırın iki
yakasındaki deneyimlerinin öz-kimlik oluşumları üzerindeki etkisini araştırmaktır. Sınırın iki yakasındaki deneyimler
adı altında, ilk olarak, Bulgaristan Türkü göçmen kadınlarının, komünist rejimin zorunlu çalışma politikası ile
şekillenen iş deneyimlerine ve çalışan, eş veya anne olarak çifte yüke maruz kalıp kalmadıklarına da odaklanılacaktır.
İkinci olarak, Türkiye Devleti tarafından söz konusu göçmenlerin soydaş, yasal göçmen veya yasadışı göçmen olarak
görülmeleri üzerinden şekillenen farklı göç deneyimleri üzerinde durulacaktır. Son olarak ise, Bulgaristan Türkü
göçmen kadınlarının Bulgaristan’a geri dönüş deneyimleri istemli göç/istemsiz göç ayrımı üzerinden
detaylandırılacaktır. Bulgaristan Türkü göçmen kadınlarının istemli ya da istemsiz geri dönüş deneyimleri, onların
Bulgaristan’da kendi kimliklerini nasıl algıladıklarını ortaya çıkaracaktır. Saha çalışmasının sonuçları göstermiştir ki,
bireylerin anavatan algıları göz önünde bulundurulduğunda, anavatanın kesin ve değişmez bir tanımı olması
imkânsızdır. Bu imkânsızlık, Türkiye’ye göç ettikten sonra Bulgaristan’a geri dönüş yapan kadınların, bu dönüşü
istemleri doğrultusunda yapıp yapmadıkları ile yakından ilişkilidir. Bulgaristan’a istemli olarak dönenler Bulgaristan’ı
anavatanları olarak görürken, istemleri dışında geri dönüş yapanlar için ise anavatan Türkiye’dir. Sonuç olarak, sabit
bir Bulgaristan Türkü göçmenliği ve kadınlığı olmadığı gibi, söz konusu kadınların sabit bir kimlikleri de yoktur.
Bulgaristan Türkü göçmen kadınlarının, doğdukları ülkenin politik yapısına, Türkiye Devleti’nin göçmenlere karşı
değişen tutumuna, bahsi geçen kadınların Bulgaristan’a istemli/istemsiz geri dönüş yapmış olmalarına ve son olarak
da şu an yaşadıkları ülkede, yani Bulgaristan’da, kendilerini nasıl algıladıklarına bağlı olarak değişiklik gösteren birçok
farklı kimlikleri vardır. Bu çalışma, Bulgaristan Türkü göçmen kadınları hakkında herhangi bir genelleme yapmanın
imkânsızlığını gözler önüne sererek antropoloji disiplininde tikel etnografyanın önemini göstermiş olacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

çifte yük, yasadışı göç, istemsiz göç, anavatan algısı, Bulgaristan Türkleri, öz-kimlik inşası, anavatan algısı

Kaynakça

• Abu-Lughod, L. (1990). Can There be a Feminist Ethnography. Women and Performance: A Journal of Feminist Theory, 5 (1), 7-27.
• Abu-Lughod, L. (1991). Writing Against Culture. R. G. Fox (Ed.), Recapturing Anthropology: Working in the Present içinde (ss. 137-162). New Mexico: School of American Research Press.
• Amnesty International Report. (1986). Bulgaria. (ss. 272-275). London: Amnesty International Publications.
• Black, R., Koser, K., Munk, K., Atfield, G., D’Onofrio, L. ve Tiemoko, R. (2004). Understanding Voluntary Return. Home Office Online Report, 50/04: Home Office, UK.
• Blitz, B.K., Sales, R. ve Marzano, L. (2005) “Non- Voluntary Return? The Politics of Return to Afghanistan”. Political Studies, 53, 182-200.
• Cassarino, J. P. (2004). Theorising Return Migration: The Conceptual Approach to Return Migrants Revisited. International Journal on Multicultural Societies, UNESCO, 6 (2), 253-279.
• Chimni, B. S. (2004). “From Resettlement to Involuntary Repatriation: Towards a Critical History of Durable Solutions to Refugee Problems”. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 23 (3), 55-73.
• Clifford, J. (1986). Introduction: Partial Truths. J. Clifford, G. E. Marcus (Eds.), Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography içinde (ss. 1-26). Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Clifford, J. (1994). Diasporas. Cultural Anthropology, 9 (3), 302-338.
• Crampton, R. J. (1997). A Concise History of Bulgaria. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Danış, D. ve Parla, A. (2009). Nafile Soydaşlık: Irak ve Bulgaristan Türkleri Örneğinde Göçmen, Dernek ve Devlet. Toplum ve Bilim, 114, 131-158.
• De Genova, N. (2002). Migrant “Illegality” and Deportability in Everyday Life. Annual Review of Anthropology, 31, 419-447
• Dimitrov, V. (2000). In a Search of a Homogenous Nation: The Assimilation of Bulgaria’s Turkish Minority, 1984-1985. Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe, 1 (4), 1-22.
• Elchinova, M. (2005). Alien by Default: The Identity of the Turks of Bulgaria at home and in Immigration. R. Detrez, P. Plas (Eds.), Developing Cultural Identity in the Balkans: Convergence vs. Divergence içinde (ss. 87-110). Brussels: P.I.E.-Peter Lang.
• Eminov, A. (1990). There are No Turks in Bulgaria: Rewriting History by Administrative Fiat. K. H. Karpat (Ed.), The Turks of Bulgaria: The History, Culture, and Political Fate of a Minority içinde (ss. 203-222). Istanbul: The Isis Press.
• Eminov, A. (1997). Turkish and other Muslim Minorities of Bulgaria. London: Hurst & Company.
• Eminov, A. (1999). “The Turks in Bulgaria: Post-1989 Developments”. Nationalities Papers, 27 (1), 31-55.
• Ghodsee, K. (2004). Red Nostalgia? Communism, Women’s Emancipation and Economic Transformation in Bulgaria. L’Homme: Zeitschrift fur Feministische Geschichtswissenschaft (Journal for Feminist History), 15 (1), 23-36.
• Gmelch, G. (1980). Return Migration. Annual Review of Anthropology, 9, 135-159.
• Hochschild, A. ve Machung, A. (2012). The Second Shift: Working Families and the Revolution at Home. New York: Penguin Books.
• Höpken, W. (1997). From Ethnic Identity to Ethnic Mobilisation: The Turks of Bulgaria Before, Under and Since Communism. H. Poulton, S. Taji-Farouki (Eds.), Muslim Identity and the Balkan State içinde (ss. 54-81). London: Hurst & Company.
• Karademir, A. (2017). Non-Chauvinist Multiculturalism: A Critical Encounter Between Butler and Kymlicka on the Way to the Emancipationist Model of Minority Rights. The Philosophical Forum: A Quarterly, 48 (4), 423-448.
• Karpat, K. H. (1990). By Way of Introducing This Issue: Bulgaria’s Methods of Nation Building – The Annihilation of Minorities. K. H. Karpat (Ed.), The Turks of Bulgaria içinde (ss. 1-22). Istanbul: The Isis Press.
• Kasli, Z. ve Parla, A. (2009). Broken Lines of Il/legality and the Reproduction of State Sovereignty: The Impact of Visa Policies on Turkish Immigrant from Bulgaria. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, 34 (2), 203-227.
• Kleist, N. (2017). Disrupted Migration Projects: The Moral Economy of Involuntary Return to Ghana from Libya. The Journal of the International African Institute, 87 (2), 322-342.
• Kymlicka, W. (1995). Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Laber, J. (1987). Destroying Ethnic Identity: The Turks of Bulgaria (A Helsinki Watch Report). New York: Human Rights Watch.
• Mahon, M. (1999). The Turkish Minority under Communist Bulgaria – Politics of Ethnicity and Power. Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans Online, 1 (2), 149-162.
• Nitzova, P. (1997). “Bulgaria: Minorities, Democratization, and National Sentiments”. Nationalities Papers, 25 (4), 729-739.
• Parla, A. (2003). “Marking Time along the Bulgarian-Turkish Border”. Ethnography, 4 (4), 561-575.
• Parla, A. (2009). “Remembering across the Border: Postsocialist Nostalgia among Turkish Immigrants from Bulgaria”. American Ethnologist, 36 (4), 750-767.
• Poulton, H. (1991). The Balkans – Minorities and States in Conflict. London: Minority Rights Publications.
• Safran, W. (1991). Diasporas in Modern Societies: Myths of Homeland and Return. Diaspora, 1 (1), 83-99.
• Schreuder, Y. (1996). Report of the Salzburg Seminar Session, “Involuntary Migration,” Held in Salzburg, Austria, July 8-15, 1995. The International Migration Review, 30 (3), 803-808.
• Skrbiš, Z. (1999). Long-distance Nationalism: Diasporas, Homelands and Identities. Sydney: Ashgate.
• Şimşir, B. (1990). The Turkish Minority in Bulgaria: History and Culture. K. H. Karpat (Ed.), The Turks of Bulgaria içinde (ss. 159-178). Istanbul: The Isis Press.
• Van Hear, N. (1995) “The Impact of the Involuntary Mass ‘Return’ to Jordan in the Wake of the Gulf Crisis”. International Migration Review, 29 (2), 352- 374.
• Vasileva, D. (1992). Bulgarian Turkish Emigration and Return. International Migration Review, 26 (2), 342-352
• Webber, F. (2011). “How Voluntary are Voluntary Returns?” Race and Class, 52 (4), 98-107.
• Zhelyazkova, A. (2001). Bulgaria in Transition: The Muslim Minorities. Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations, 12 (3), 283-301.