442

THE DEPICTION OF THE AMERICAN IMAGE IN POST-WAR TURKEY: AMERICANIZATION AND ANTI-AMERICANIZATION IN TURKISH PERIODICALS (1946-1950)

This study aims to reveal how the image of America was depicted in the early post-war (1946-1950) Turkish periodicals in terms of ideological and cultural contexts. The mainstream Turkish press became a vital legitimation tool to convince the public about the Turkish-American relations in the developing Cold War circumstances. In this context, the depiction of the United States and the Soviet Union with certain political and cultural stereotypes played an essential role in forming the Cold War perception in public. While this led to Americanization in the language of the mainstream Turkish press, the Turkish-American relations also had social and cultural repercussions in the periodicals. Another phenomenon was that left-wing political humor effectively formed an alternative discourse to the Turkish press’ consensus on the Turkish-American relations. In this period, humor emerged as an effective means of opposition and anti-Americanization by criticizing the political power, Turkish-American relations, and the Americanization in the socio-cultural field.
Keywords: Turkish Press, Early Post-War Period, Cultural Cold War, Americanization, Anti-Americanization
v
ÖZ
ERKEN SAVAŞ SONRASI DÖNEMDE AMERİKAN İMGESİNİN TASVİRİ: TÜRK SÜRELİ YAYINLARINDA AMERİKANLAŞMA VE ANTİ-AMERİKANLAŞMA (1946-1950)

Bu çalışma, erken savaş sonrası dönemde (1946-1950) Türkiye’deki süreli yayınlarda Amerikan imgesinin ideolojik ve kültürel bağlamlarda nasıl tasvir edildiğini ortaya koymayı hedeflemektedir. Ana akım Türk basını, gelişen Soğuk Savaş koşullarında Türk-Amerikan ilişkilerinin seyri doğrultusunda halkı ikna etmek için önemli bir meşrulaştırma aracı olmuştur. Birleşik Devletler ve Sovyetler Birliği’nin politik ve kültürel bağlamda belli stereotiplerle temsil edilmeleri ise kamuoyundaki Soğuk Savaş algısının oluşmasında esas bir rol oynamıştır. Bu durum, ana akım basınının söyleminde politik olarak bir Amerikanlaşmaya neden olurken, gelişen Türk-Amerikan ilişkilerinin süreli yayınlarda sosyal ve kültürel yansımaları da ortaya çıkmıştır. Bu bağlamda bir diğer önemli olgu ise sol politik mizahın bu sürece karşıt bir alternatif söylem oluşturmasıdır. Bu dönemde, mizah; siyasi iktidarı, Türk-Amerikan ilişkilerini ve sosyo-kültürel alandaki Amerikanlaşmayı eleştirerek etkili bir muhalefet ve anti-Amerikanlaşma aracı olarak ortaya çıkmıştır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Türk Basını, Erken Savaş Sonrası Dönem, Kültürel Soğuk Savaş, Amerikanlaşma, Anti-Amerikanlaşma
vi
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. Bahar Gürsel for her encouragement, kindness, and meticulous criticisms during the writing process of this thesis. I am also grateful to Prof. Dr. Recep Boztemur and Assist. Prof. Dr. Gül Karagöz Kızılca for their valuable contributions and constructive criticisms for the improvement of my thesis. I also thank for all the faculty members of my department for their contributions so far.
Finally, I would like to express my profound gratitude to my family for their support, trust, and encouragement throughout my education life and during the writing process of the thesis.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PLAGIARISM ............................................................................................................ iii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................ iv
ÖZ .............................................................................................................................. iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .......................................................................................... vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................... vii
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................... x
CHAPTERS
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Literature Review ............................................................................................. 3
1.2. The Historical Context, Aim and Methodology ............................................. 11
1.3. Blueprint of the Chapters ............................................................................... 19
2. THE REFLECTIONS FROM AMERICANIZATION IN THE TURKISH PRESS: FORMING A COLD WAR DISCOURSE IN ULUS AND VATAN ....................... 21
2.1. Historical Background for Ulus and Falih Rıfkı Atay .................................. 21
2.2. Ahmet Emin Yalman As an Oppositional Figure in the Single Party Era .... 26
2.3. Internal Politics and the Turkish Press in the Early Post-War Period........... 30
2.4. The Missouri's Visit: Turning Point in Post-War Turkish-American Alliance.. .................................................................................................................... 34
2.5. The Depiction of American Image in Ulus and Vatan: The Blueprint of the Arguments .................................................................................................................. 36
2.6. Falih Rıfkı Atay and Ahmet Emin Yalman's Depiction of the United
States ..................................................................................................................... 39
viii
2.7. Depicting the Cold War with Images: Ratip Tahir Burak’s Cartoons in Ulus ................................................................................................................... 54
2.8. America-Related Political Serials and Translated Articles ........................... 69
2.8.1. Forming a Cold War Discourse through the Americans and the American Sources ...................................................................................................... 70
2.8.2. Promoting America in Other Contents: Dramatic Increase in America-Related Daily News in Ulus' Sunday Issue ................................................................ 76
2.9. Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 82
3. HUMOR AS A WAY OF OPPOSING TO AMERICANIZATION IN POST-WAR TURKEY: THE EXAMPLES OF MARKOPAŞA AND NUH’UN GEMİSİ ...................................................................................................................... 84
3.1. Markopaşa's Opposition to the Turkish-American Alliance ......................... 91
3.2. Developing an Anti-Imperialist Discourse: Mehmet Ali Aybar's
Editorials in Nuh'un Gemisi ................................................................................ 100
3.3. The Depiction of the Marshall Plan ........................................................... 104
3.4. The American Presence in Turkey ............................................................. 109
3.5. The Depiction of Americanization ............................................................. 112
3.6. Conclusion .................................................................................................. 115
4. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................... 118
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................... 123
APPENDICES
C. TURKISH SUMMARY / TÜRKÇE ÖZET ........................................................ 140
D. THESIS PERMISSION FORM / TEZ İZİN FORMU ........................................ 150
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: “Yeni İngiliz-Amerikan İşbirliği” ............................................................ 55
Figure 2: “Komünistler Birleşik Amerika Düşmanı Tanınacak” ............................. 56
Figure 3: “Moskova Konferansı Başlarken” ............................................................ 57
Figure 4: “Amerika 400 Milyonluk Kanun Çıkmadan 100 Milyon Gönderiyor” ... 58
Figure 5: “Komşu Çatlatan” ..................................................................................... 59
Figure 6: “Sayı Hesabıyla Galip!” ........................................................................... 60
Figure 7: “Parladıkça Lekelerini Daha İyi Görüyorum” .......................................... 61
Figure 8: .................................................................................................................. 62
Figure 9: “Demokrasinin Tarifi” .............................................................................. 63
Figure 10: “Avrupa için Fidye-i Necat” ................................................................... 64
Figure 11: “Yardan mı Geçsem, Serden mi?” .......................................................... 65
Figure 12: “Amerika ve İngiltere Avrupa’yı Kalkındırıyorlar” ............................... 66
Figure 13: “Teknenin Selameti Uğruna…”.............................................................. 67
Figure 14: “Kıyamet Alameti” ................................................................................. 68
Figure 15: “Hollywood’un En Şanslı Kadını: Jeanne Crane” .................................. 79
Figure 16: “Amerika’da Bir Moda Yeniliği: Şapka Yerini Tutan Eşarp” ............... 80
Figure 17: “Mr. Unity” ........................................................................................... 104
Figure 18: “Buyurun Cenaze Namazına” ............................................................... 105
Figure 19: “Marşal Planı Size Hava Aldırır” ......................................................... 106
Figure 20: “Whatever the Weather We Only Reach Welfare Together” ............... 106
Figure 21: “İlan” .................................................................................................... 107
Figure 22: “Kendisi Muhtacı Himmet Bir Dede” .................................................. 107
Figure 23: ............................................................................................................... 110
Figure 24: “Kel Başa Naylon Tarak” ..................................................................... 112
x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CCF The Congress for Cultural Freedom
CIA The Central Intelligence Agency
CPT The Communist Party of Turkey
DP The Democrat Party
ECA The Economic Cooperation Administration
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
OEEC The Organization for the European Economic Cooperation
RPP The Republican People’s Party
SLPPT The Socialist Laborers’ and Peasants’ Party of Turkey
SPT The Socialist Party of Turkey
UN The United Nations
US The United States
USIA The United States Information Agency
USIS The United States Information Service
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
In October 1957, Turkish President Celal Bayar proclaimed that Turkey would follow the American ideal with its fifty million population and would become a “little America.”1 In November 1963, during his remarks on the 25th anniversary of the death of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, American president John F. Kennedy pointed out the close alliance between Turkey and the United States, which could be traced back to the firm base prepared by Mustafa Kemal.2 When Kennedy saluted the founder of the Turkish Republic on the anniversary of his death, Kennedy’s portraits began to be hung next to Atatürk’s portraits in many public places in Turkey, and Kennedy had almost been declared a national hero in the early 1960s.3 All these demonstrated the political and social context of the enhancement of Turkish-American relations and the increasing prominence of American image in Turkey’s social sphere.
During his visit to the United States in 1954, Celal Bayar emphasized what the Turkish-American friendship, “little America,” and the American ideal meant for Turkey. He labeled the United States as the leading military and economic partner and emphasized the American way of life built on liberal and capitalist standards. The American system, as Bayar expressed, was mainly marked by private enterprise and the capitalist model of development, and he presented it as the best form of
1 “Bayar, 30 Yıl Sonra Küçük bir Amerika Olacağız Dedi,” Cumhuriyet, 21 October 1957.
2 John F. Kennedy, ‘Remarks on the 25th Anniversary of the Death of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’ <https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/JFKWHA/1963/JFKWHA-237-001/JFKWHA-237-001>.
3 Murat Belge, ‘Günlük Hayat’, Cumhuriyet Dönemi Türkiye Ansiklopedisi (İletişim Yayınları, 1983), 871.
2
modernization for Turkey, “which was an economically backward country” during that period.4
The discourses that reflected the Turkish-American friendship and the standards that defined becoming “little America” were prevalent among the political authorities and the mainstream Turkish journalists during the 1950s. However, Celal Bayar’s prominent word “little America” was articulated firstly in 1949 by Nihat Erim, who was one of the well-known Republican figures of the era.5 The Americanization process of the discourses of the politicians and the mainstream Turkish journalists had essentially started between 1945 and 1950. This period also coincided with the fact that Turkey adapted itself to the developing Cold War circumstances. The visit of the American Missouri battleship in 1946, the declaration of the Truman Doctrine in 1947, and Turkey’s participation in the Marshall Plan in 1948 were critical steps in this direction. In a political environment where the Soviet Union was declared as the evil enemy, both the socio-cultural representation of the Turkish-American alliance and the depiction of the Soviet Union would serve to create a cult in which there could be no other alternative to get closer with the United States in the face of the Soviet hostility. The mainstream periodicals of that time like Ulus and Vatan became the means where unprecedented Turkish-American friendship vs. cruel Soviet hostility were mythicized. While the mainstream Turkish press became the most significant instrument that represented the Turkish-American friendship in the socio-cultural sphere, the Turkish journalists played a fundamental role in disseminating the official view. Apart from representing the United States as the savior of the Turkish people, the mainstream Turkish press also depicted it as a structural role model that Turkey would have to follow.
One of the main goals of this study is to reveal how Turkish-American friendship vs. the Soviet hostility was represented in Turkish periodicals during the early post-World War II period. While examining this, particular importance will be given to the writings of the mainstream Turkish journalists that played a crucial role in
4 Celal Bayar, Celal Bayar’ın Söylev ve Demeçleri - Dış Politika (1933-1954) (İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Yayınları, 1999), 121.
5 John M. VanderLippe, The Politics of Turkish Democracy: Ismet Inonu and the Formation of the Multi-Party System, 1938-19T50 (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2005), 179.
3
disseminating the official opinion. Furthermore, it will be argued that the spread of American popular culture in the mainstream Turkish press had a principal role in forming the American image in Turkish society. Consequently, the mainstream Turkish press’ depiction of the United States in the Cold War context and the prominence of American culture led to the Americanization of the Turkish press’ language considerably in the early post-war period. However, political humor that opposed both the policies of the ruling party and Turkish-American alliance emerged as an effective form of opposition during this period.
To clarify the above-mentioned arguments, this study will focus on two popular periodicals of the period, the pro-Republican Ulus (Nation), and pro-Democrat Vatan (Homeland). Furthermore, Markopaşa and Nuh’un Gemisi (Noah’s Ark), the political humor magazines of that time, will also be discussed in the context of how they formed alternative language within the scope of the hegemonic discourse of Turkish-American friendship.
Primary sources will provide this study an alternative narrative that focuses on the role of the media and culture as possible means of examining the enhancement of Turkish-American alliance. Such a perspective not only allows to reveal the social and cultural dynamics of the Turkish-American alliance, but it also emphasizes that the opposing opinions, discourses, and practices could be found even in times of extreme oppression.
1.1. Literature Review
The end of the single-party era, the return to multi-party politics and Turkey’s western orientation are some popular terms in academic literature that are utilized to define early post-World War II period. When the phrase “Turkey’s western orientation” is specifically analyzed, “high politics” or the traditional approach formed by state centric and diplomacy-dominated perspective is still popular in those approaches.6 Furthermore, one common point of these studies is that they extensively focus on the works or memories of the statesmen and diplomats. By putting Turkey’s
6 Tolgahan Akdan, Soğuk Savaş ve Türkiye’nin Batıya Yönelişi (İstanbul: Yordam Kitap, 2020), 92.
4
security at the forefront, these approaches interpret “the Soviet threat” as the only or the most significant factor that led to Turkey’s western orientation.
The statements and academic studies of senior government officials, newspapers and magazines, and other academic studies contributed to the formation of popular Cold War discourse in Turkey.7 Falih Rıfkı Atay, Ahmet Emin Yalman, Hüseyin Cahit Yalçın and Nadir Nadi were some prominent newspaper writers who helped the official Cold War discourse to reach the public during the early post-World War II period. Furthermore, the government officials working in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs like Feridun Cemal Erkin, Cevat Açıkalın, Necmettin Sadak, Kamuran Gürün and Zeki Kuneralp contributed with their memoirs and academic studies to the formation of high politics-oriented Cold War historiography.8 Feridun Cemal Erkin’s Türk-Sovyet İlişkileri ve Boğazlar Meselesi deserves special attention because this study is significant for providing first-hand information to later academic studies. The official series which the Ministry of Foreign Affairs published in 1973 also significantly contributed to the Cold War historiography.9 The faculty members of Ankara University’s Political Science Department also contributed to the conventional Cold War historiography. Ahmet Şükrü Esmer, Rıfkı Salim Burçak, Mehmet Gönlübol, Haluk Ülman, Oral Sander, Fahir Armaoğlu are some scholars who studied Turkish political history, and they were mostly consistent with the official position related to Turkey’s post-World War II Western orientation.10
7 Ibid., 91.
8 Necmettin Sadak, ‘Turkey Faces the Soviets’, Foreign Affairs, Vol.27, No.3 (1949), 449–61; Cevat Açıkalın, ‘Turkey’s International Relations’, International Affairs, Vol.23, No.4 (1947), 477–91; Feridun Cemal Erkin, Türk-Sovyet İlişkileri ve Boğazlar Meselesi (Ankara, 1968); Kamuran Gürün, Dış İlişkiler ve Türk Politikası: 1930’dan Günümüze Kadar (Ankara: AÜ SBF Yayınları, 1983); Kamuran Gürün, Türk-Sovyet İlişkileri: 1920-1953 (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1991).
9 Türk Dış Politikasında 50 Yıl: İkinci Dünya Savaşı Yılları (1939-1946) (Ankara: T.C. Dışişleri Bakanlığı Araştırma ve Siyaset Planlama Genel Müdürlüğü, 1973).
10 For instance, see A. Haluk Ülman, İkinci Dünya Savaşı’nın Başından Truman Doktrini’ne Kadar Türk-Amerikan Diplomatik Münasebetleri (1939-1947) (Ankara: Sevinç Matbaası, 1961); A. Suat Bilge, Güç Komşuluk: Türkiye-Sovyetler Birliği İlişkileri, 1920-1964 (Ankara: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 1992); Mehmet Gönlübol and A. Haluk Ülman, ‘Türk Dış Politikasının Yirmi Yılı 1945-1965’, Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, Vol.21, No.2 (1966); Oral Sander, Türk-Amerikan İlişkileri, 1947-1964 (Ankara: İmge Kitabevi Yayınları, 2016).
5
Although these studies interpret the Soviet threat as the key determinant, they also focus on some internal push factors that paved the way for Turkey’s post-war western orientation. For instance, Mehmet Gönlübol and Haluk Ülman interpret the economic reasons and the previous “Westernization efforts” as other significant factors that pushed Turkey to develop relations with the West. However, although they interpret the foreign aid opportunity offered by the Western block as another factor of Turkey’s pro-western attitude, the American influence on the Turkish economy is only analyzed through its effects on Turkish security.11
Şaban Halis Çalıs’ Turkey’s Cold War: Foreign Policy and Western Alignment in the Modern Republic12 could also be examined in the category of traditional approaches. Like Gönlübol and Ülman’s interpretation, this study maintains the main rhetoric related to the Turkish-Soviet Cold War relations. It interprets the Cold War circumstances as an opportunity for the Kemalist elites to maintain their longstanding Westernization efforts. The interpretation that linked Turkey’s pro-western orientation in the post-war period with the Westernism of the republican elites could also be found in the works of Turkish diplomats.13
11 Gönlübol and Ülman, ‘Türk Dış Politikasının Yirmi Yılı 1945-1965’, 153-156.
12 Şaban Halis Çalış, Turkey’s Cold War: Foreign Policy and the Western Alignment in the Modern Republic (London: I.B. Tauris, 2017).
13 Sadak, ‘Turkey Faces the Soviets’; Açıkalın, ‘Turkey’s International Relations’.
*Açıkalın’s and Sadak’s studies are significant in terms of how the official position reflected Turkey’s post-war western orientation in the developing Cold War circumstances. According to the official interpretation, Turkey was defined as a country which always looked out for stability in its relations with the Soviet Union. Furthermore, according to these statesmen, Turkey was tied to the Western values from the establishment of the republic, and it was depicted as a country which was historically deserving to take its place in the Western Block. On the contrary, the Soviet Union was depicted as a country which always pursued its own expansionist ambitions on Turkey. In return, as a principal member of the Western camp, Turkey’s path intersected with the Western countries’ in the defense of peace and freedom against the Soviet expansionism. Another significant point which can be clearly observed in Açıkalın’s study is that the memories of close relations with Germany during the Second World War were attempted to be eliminated by emphasizing the heroic moves of Turkey in favor of the Allies. The discursive attempt to associate Turkey with the Western Block and the Western values, as can be observed in these interpretations, had actually shown continuity with the political moves in internal politics both during and after the Second World War. For instance, the Turkist-Turanist group which was known with its open support to Germany during the Second World War, firstly was disfavored by the government officials with the advance of the Allies forces in the battlefield, and then its members were sentenced to prison at the time of Allied victory. Apart from this symbolic gesture, the pro-German government officials such as Numan Menemencioğlu who was the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Fevzi Çakmak who was the Chief of General Staff, were dismissed from their duties to show Turkey’s sympathy for the Allies. Hence, the approaches that reduce Turkey’s post-war orientation to the historical westernist position of the early republic require a detailed examination.
6
On the other hand, some studies that conflict with traditional approaches have become popular in the literature. A revisionist challenge to the traditional approaches, for instance, interprets the Turkish-Soviet conflict through mutual security concerns. It evaluates that the Soviet demands on the Straits actually originated from the Soviet’s post-war security concerns about the protection and control of the Black Sea.14 They oppose the popular opinion related to Soviet expansionism, which was mostly legitimized with a perception that evaluates it as the continuation of historical Czarist ambitions about the Mediterranean.15 Post-revisionist accounts that opposed the traditional interpretations of the post-war Turkish-Soviet relations have also recently become popular.16
A radical stance on Turkey’s western orientation is also a common interpretation in leftist intellectual circles.17 These approaches specifically focus on the dependency relationship between Turkey and the United States, and the economic relations between these two countries. Turkey’s NATO membership and the American military bases in Turkey are some other points where the radical approach establishes its dependency narrative. According to the radical interpretations, the Turkish-Soviet conflict was consciously manipulated and overemphasized by the statesmen and intellectuals to legitimize Turkey’s orientation to the post-war international capitalist order. Behlül Özkan’s “The 1945 Turkish-Soviet Crisis: Devising a Foundational
14 Akdan, Soğuk Savaş ve Türkiye’nin Batı’ya Yönelişi, 96.
15 Case study for revisionist approach: Türk Dış Politikası: Kurtuluş Savaşı’ndan Bugüne Olgular, Belgeler,Yorumlar, Cilt I: 1919-1980, ed. by Baskın Oran (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2012). For another study similar to Oran’s approach, see M. P. Leffler, ‘Strategy, Diplomacy, and the Cold War: The United States, Turkey, and NATO, 1945-1952’, The Journal of American History, Vol. 71, No.4 (1985). In this study, Leffler mainly states that the Soviet’s post-war policy on Turkey was “defensive” rather than “expansionist.”
16 For a constructivist foreign policy approach that examine the transformation of the Soviet Union from a “sincere friend” to a “historical foe” discursively, see Kıvanç Coş and Pınar Bilgin, ‘Stalin’s Demands: Constructions of the “Soviet Other” in Turkey’s Foreign Policy, 1919-1945’, Foreign Policy Analysis, Vol. 6, No. 5, (2010), 43–60.
17 Case studies for radical approach: Türkkaya Ataöv, Amerika, NATO ve Türkiye (Ankara: Aydınlık Yayınevi, 1969); Yalçın Küçük, Türkiye Üzerine Tezler (İstanbul: Tekin Yayınevi, 1978). For a comprehensive interpretation about Yalçın Küçük’s thesis, see Cemil Koçak, Türkiye’de İki Partili Sistemin Kuruluş Yılları (1945-1950): İkinci Parti (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2010), 335-342. For some main debates of the Turkish leftist intellectuals, see, Tolgahan Akdan, Soğuk Savaş ve Türkiye’nin Batıya Yönelişi, 158-231.
7
Myth for Turkish Foreign Policy” is one of the recent radical interpretations.18 Özkan mainly argues that the Soviet Union never demanded any territory from Turkey, and the indicated territories and bases were “proposals” made by the Soviet Union as a response to “Turkey’s request for a treaty of alliance with the USSR.”19 According to Özkan, the Soviet threat was invented by the İnönü government to “overcome its foreign policy isolation and build an alliance with the West”, and to “ manufacture its own political opposition and control the domestic political climate in its transition to multi-party system.”20
Apart from the above-mentioned diplomacy-based mainstream approaches, several studies focus on the socio-cultural and ideological dimensions of Turkey’s western orientation or “Turkey’s Cold War.” In this context, firstly, it will be important to mention how these ideational concepts have recently become popular in international Cold War literature. Over the last two decades, culture and ideology has attracted great deal of attention from the Cold War scholars. In this context, the cultural turn of the 1980s had a direct impact on the scholars’ growing interest on the cultural aspects of the Cold War.21 The formation of the Cultural Cold War studies as a well-established research area is the most clear manifestation in this direction. Emerged as a reaction to diplomacy and high-politics oriented traditional (orthodox), revisionist, and post-revisionist approaches in the Cold War historiography, the Cultural Cold War studies has enabled the documentation of the socio-cultural aspect of the Cold War that was often underestimated by the previous Cold War approaches.22
18 Behlül Özkan, ‘The 1945 Turkish-Soviet Crisis: Devising a Foundational Meet for Turkish Foreign Policy’, Russia in Global Affairs, Vol.18, No.2 (2020), 156–87.
19 Ibid., 182.
20 Ibid., 159.
21 Gordon Johnston, ‘Revisiting the Cultural Cold War’, Social History, Vol.35, No.3 (2010), 294.
22 For some reviews on the cultural turn in the historiography of the Cold War, see Johnston, ‘Revisiting the Cultural Cold War’, 290–307; Patrick Major and Rana Mitter, ‘Culture’, in Palgrave Advances in Cold War History, ed. by Saki R. Dockrill and Geraint Hughes (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006); Patrick Major and Rana Mitter, ‘East Is East and West Is West? Towards a Comparative Socio-Cultural History of the Cold War’, in Accross the Blocs: Cold War Cultural and Social History, ed. by Rana Mitter and Patrick Major (London and Portland: Frank Cass, 2004); Hugh Wilford, ‘The Cold War: Recent Scholarship and Future Directions’, Cahiers Charles, No.28 (2000); Divided Dreamworlds: The Cultural Cold War in East and West, ed. by Peter Romjin, Giles Scott-Smith, and Joes Segal (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2012).
8
The originator of the term “Cultural Cold War” is Christopher Lasch, and he first used this phrase in “The Cultural Cold War: A Short History of the Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF).”23 Focusing firstly on the United States’ psychological warfare and propaganda activities in the early Cold War period, the Cultural Cold War studies have expanded its research areas from popular culture to media, from architecture to literature, and from cinema to visual arts.24 These studies did not only reveal how the Cold War was represented in the cultural sphere and how the Cold War actors used culture as a tool in the Cold War struggles, but also mentioned how ordinary people had experienced the Cold War in everyday life. Another area of discussion that can be interpreted within the context of the Cultural Cold War literature is Americanization studies. Aiming to reveal how the American way of life,
23 Christopher Lasch, ‘The Cultural Cold War: A Short History of the Congress for Cultural Freedom’, in The Agony of American Left (New York: Alfred. A. Knopf, 1969). This article was first published with a slightly different format in Nation in September 1967.
*This organization set its manifesto with a meeting that was held in West Berlin on 26 June 1950. Many prominent intellectuals like Arthur Koestler, Bertrand Russel, Melvin J. Lasky, and Sidney Hook attended this meeting. In its manifesto, the ideal cultural freedom of the Cold War period was determined along a liberal line that could not be dominated by any class, race, religion, or economic and political theory. The CCF was later institutionalized with its office in Paris, and it also expanded its organization to the outside of Western Europe, such as Latin America and the Middle East. The CCF’s activities were funded by the United States through some legitimate institutions, and the procedures were undertaken by the CIA’s International Organizations Divisions.
** In addition to the mainstream studies focusing on the ideological and cultural struggles between the superpowers, there are also some major works that examined the peripheral powers of the Cold War within the context of cultural and ideological matters. For instance, see Malcolm Kerr, The Arab Cold War: A Study of Ideology in Politics (London, New York and Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1967). In this study, Kerr generally focused on the relations between Egypt and Syria from the establishment of United Arab Republic in 1958 to the Arab Summit Conference in 1964. Relating the context changes in pan-Arabist ideology with the internal dynamics of Arabian countries and the shifts in world politics, Kerr’s work influenced the later de-colonization studies by turning its focus to peripheral powers. For a recent de-colonization study which directed its focus to the ideological and cultural matters between the peripheral Cold War actors, see De-Centering Cold War Historiography: Local and Global Change, ed. by Jadwiga E. Pieper Mooney and Fabio Lanza (London and New York: Routledge, 2012).
24 Divided Dreamworlds: The Cultural Cold War in East and West, ed. by Peter Romjin, Giles Scott-Smith, and Joes Segal (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2012), 4.
*The US’ psychological warfare and propaganda activities in the Cold War period have become one of the major areas of discussion in the Cultural Cold War studies. For some important studies in this context, see Frances Stonor Saunders Saunders, Who Paid the Piper: The CIA and the Cultural Cold War (London: Granta, 1999); Giles Scott-Smith, The Politics of Apolitical Culture: The Congress for Cultural Freedom, the CIA and Post-War American Hegemony (London and New York: Routledge, 2002); Giles Scott-Smith, ‘Transatlantic Cultural Relations, Soft Power, and the Role of US Cultural Diplomacy in Europe’, European Foreign Affairs Review, No. 24 (2019); Hugh Wilford, The CIA, The British Left and the Cold War: Calling the Tune (London and New York: Routledge, 2003); W. Scott Lucas, ‘Beyond Freedom, Beyond Control: Approaches to Culture and the State-Private Network in the Cold War’, in The Cultural Cold War in Western Europe, 1945-60, ed. by Hans Krabbendam and Scott-SmithGiles (London and Portland: Routledge, 2004).
9
culture, propaganda, ideas had been received in foreign countries, this research area also provides insights into the cultural dimensions of the Cold War.25
In parallel with these developments in international literature, there are some major works revealing Turkey’s Cold War within the scope of Cultural Cold War studies. For instance, Turkey in the Cold War: Ideology and Culture26 by Cangül Örnek and Çağdaş Üngör reveals how the ideological foundations of the Cold War formed in Turkey, and how Cold War ideology was reflected in the cultural institutions. In this study, anti-communism and American influence are interpreted as the two main issues that determine the socio-cultural relations of Turkey’s Cold War. However, this study also shifts its attention from the Turkish-American-Soviet triangle to the relation between Turkey and the “Soviet-led Eastern countries.” Furthermore, from the ideological conflict between the Soviet Union and the United States at the Izmir International Fair to the relation between the religious sermons and anti-communism, this study includes a wide variety of topics.
Türkiye’nin Soğuk Savaş Düşünce Hayatı: Antikomünizm ve Amerikan Etkisi27 by Cangül Örnek is another study which examines how the American system and institutions influenced the Turkish intellectual and public life. From the historical point of view, this study is valuable in terms of its emphasis on the late Ottoman and early Republican intellectuals’ opinions about western civilization, and how their intellectual opinions influenced the Cold War intellectual environment. In the following chapters, Hüseyin Cahit Yalçın’s Fikir Hareketleri journal, Ali Fuat Başgil’s and Ahmet Emin Yalman’s Hür Fikirler, and Forum, which was the popular periodical of the 1950s and the 1960s, are the three periodicals which Cangül Örnek examines when evaluating the attitudes of the Turkish intellectuals in the Cold War intellectual environment. Another significant feature of this study is the examination of the American influence on the Turkish education system which is made by focusing specifically on how the modernization program for foreign countries was
25 Lucas, ‘Beyond Freedom, Beyond Control’, 61.
26 Turkey in the Cold War: Ideology and Culture, ed. by Cangül Örnek and Çağdaş Üngör (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013).
27 Cangül Örnek, Türkiye’nin Soğuk Savaş Düşünce Hayatı: Antikomünizm ve Amerikan Etkisi (İstanbul: Can Sanat Yayınları, 2015).
10
formed in the United States, and how it influenced the Turkish education system. All in all, Cangük Örnek’s study is a valuable contribution to the Cultural Cold War literature in Turkey.
Furthermore, The American-Turkish Encounters: Politics and Culture 1830-198928 by Nur Bilge Criss, Selçuk Esenbel, Tony Greenwood, and Louis Mazzari focuses on how the Turkish-American relations have been represented in the political, diplomatic, and cultural spheres. The transfer of American models for education in business and public administration to Turkey between 1950 and 1970, how Jazz music was perceived by the Turkish people in the Cold War era, the representation of the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan in Cold War humor magazines such as Şaka and Akbaba are some of the topics which this study examines.
Another valuable study that focuses on the post-war Turkish-American relations from the cultural perspective is the unpublished PhD thesis titled “Close Encounters Between Turkey and the US: American Indirect Influences on Turkey’s Political and Socio-Cultural Life During the 1950s” by İbrahim Yorgun.29 While interpreting the Americanization process of Turkey’s socio-cultural sphere by mostly focusing on the Democrat Party era, Yorgun’s study analyzes the American influence on Turkey with concepts like socio-cultural imperialism and cultural hegemony. By focusing on a wide range of areas such as education, music, literature, movies, and cartoons, Yorgun presents a highly comprehensive analysis of the American impact on Turkish culture in the 1950s.
As the above-mentioned major works show, the Cultural Cold War studies are on the way to becoming a well-established research approach for analyzing Turkey’s Cold War. This thesis aims to contribute the Cultural Cold War studies by focusing how the Turkish press formed the image of America in the context of ideological and cultural representations during the early post-war period. As the Cultural Cold War
28 American Turkish Encounters: Politics and Culture, 1830-1989, ed. by Nur Bilge Criss, et. al. (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011).
29 İbrahim Yorgun, ‘Close Encounters Between Turkey and the US: American Indirect Influences on Turkey’s Political and Socio-Cultural Life During the 1950s’ (Middle East Technical University, Unpublished PhD Thesis, 2017).
11
studies in Turkey have generally focused on the 1950s and later periods, the analysis of socio-cultural and ideological representation of Turkey’s Cold War in the early post-war period can make important contribution to these studies. This study also interprets the early post-war period Turkish press as a field of struggle in which the opposing ideas were represented, unlike the previous Cultural Cold War studies that tended to treat Turkey’s cultural sphere as a field that was shaped by the unidimensional American influence.
1.2. The Historical Context, Aim and Methodology
The early post-war era was a period of transition for Turkey in many ways and this was driven by both internal dynamics and the shifts in world politics. In this context, one of the critical factors that pushed post-war liberalization in internal politics was the wartime unrest among different social groups against the RPP rule. For instance, the commercial groups were dissatisfied with the war-time economic measures such as the Wealth Tax of 194230 and they also sought more liberal policies against the RPP’s statist policies. Furthermore, the peasants and urban salaried people were dissatisfied with the RPP administration due to economic problems caused by the government’s extra taxes, the decrease in real wages, and food shortages in the war-time period.31 On the other hand, the reactions of large landowners to the Land Reform Bill of 1945, which was enacted to reduce the small landowners and landless peasant’s dissatisfaction with the government, became another essential incident that paved the way for post-war shifts in Turkish politics.32 These internal dynamics brought the opposition to the RPP to its peak in the post-war period and accelerated
30 In response to the economic problems in Turkey during the war years, the political authority was blamed the fast-growing war time profiteers and, the Capital Levy Law was enacted to prevent unfair gain with the extra taxes. However, non-Muslims fell victim to this law and many lost their companies. The Capital Levy did not resolve the problems in economy, even it increased the unrest in the market and among the commercial classes. See, Berch Berberoğlu, ‘State Capitalism and National Industrialization in Turkey’, Development and Change, Vol.11, No.1 (1980), 105-106; Ayşe Buğra, State and Business in Modern Turkey: A Comparative Study (New York: State University of New York Press, 1994), 113-116.
31 M. Asım Karaömerlioğlu, ‘Turkey’s Return to Multi-Party Politics: A Social Interpretation’, East European Quarterly, Vol.40, No.1 (2006), 94-98.
32 Vanderlippe, Politics of Turkish Democracy, 115.
12
Turkey’s transition to the multi-party system and the adaption to the capitalist world economy.
In this context, the opposition within the Turkish parliament against the Land Reform Bill of 1945 turned into the growing desire for democracy in many areas and the opposition started to demand for multi-party system, free elections, single-degree electoral system, university reform etc.33 This opposition paved the way for multi-party politics and the formation of new actors in the Turkish political scene. While the first opposition party in the transition to multi-party system was founded by businessman Nuri Demirağ in the name of National Salvation Party (Milli Kalkınma Partisi) on 18 July 1945, the establishment of Democrat Party on 7 January 1946 signified a new beginning for Turkey’s future years. There were also changes in the direction of liberalization in the RPP cadres and organizations. At the RPP Congress held in May 1946, President İsmet İnönü’s title of permanent chairman (değişmez genel başkan) was abolished, class-based associations were allowed, and single-degree election system was accepted.34 Furthermore, the liberal measures were taken regarding the restrictive press laws, and universities gained autonomous character in the subsequent periods.35 This period also marked the beginning of single-degree elections. Having achieved a significant success in the general elections on 21 July 1946, the DP gained considerable number of parliamentarian representation in the Turkish Assembly.36
The developing Turkish-American relations in the context of Cold War rhetoric and Turkey’s adaptation to the western bloc were other important elements in the early post-war period. While the post-war bi-polarization in world politics and the deteriorating relationships between Turkey and the Soviet Union led Turkey’s adaption to the Cold War circumstances and the rise of anti-communist politics, these shifts also consolidated Turkey’s integration to the western bloc.37 This also led
33 Koçak, Türkiye’de İki Partili Sistemin Kuruluş Yılları (1945-1950): İkinci Parti, 313-330.
34 Taner Timur, Türkiye’de Çok Partili Hayata Geçiş (Ankara: İmge Kitabevi Yayınları, 2003), 69.
35 Ibid., 69-70.
36 Ibid., 70-73.
13
that the United States became one of the main pillars of Turkish foreign policy in the context of the Cold War rhetoric. While Turkey’s integration to the western bloc had repercussions in Turkey’s domestic politics, economy, and society, this became another essential factor determining Turkey’s post-war liberalization.
In this context, post-war Turkish press was one of the fundamental areas that was influenced by the rhetoric of transition and change. In addition to the internally motivated debates on democracy within the context of multi-party politics, the most essential factor that made liberal themes prominent in the Turkish press was the depiction of the United States according to the Cold War circumstances. While concepts like freedom, peace and democracy were the most common words to depict the United States in the Cold War context, the prominence of America led to the Americanization of the Turkish press’ language. Both pro-RPP and oppositional mainstream newspapers became important tools in disseminating the information about the Cold War to the Turkish public and creating positive images of America in the face of Soviet Union.
In this context, pro-RPP journalist-MPs played a critical role in forming the official foreign policy discourse. Falih Rıfkı Atay, a prominent journalist-MP and the editor-in-chief of the newspaper Ulus, was one of the most influential figures in disseminating the dominant republican discourse and the government’s foreign policy orientation. Furthermore, Necmettin Sadak, who served as a member of parliament between 1927 and 1950 and the Minister of Foreign Affairs between 1947 and 1950, was another prominent journalist-MP of the period. As the editor-in-chief
37 In this context, it is significant to state that Turkish-Soviet relations were tense even before the Second World War. In particular, the pre-war diplomatic issues such as the fact that the Straits issue was not resolved exactly as Moscow desired at the Montreux Conference in 1936 and the Soviet wartime agreement with Germany about the Turkish Straits should be considered as the backgrounds of disputed relations between Turkey and the Soviet Union in the post-war period. The core of Turkey’s alliance with the western bloc countries can also be traced back to Turkey’s friendship agreement with Britain and France in 1939. In this context, it is significant to emphasize that Turkey’s pursuit of close diplomatic relations with the western countries stemmed from its wartime neutrality. Furthermore, the fact that Turkey was deprived of the unequivocal support western states against the Soviet Union in the superpower conferences held during the wartime and post-war period should also be evaluated in this context. Apart from the diplomatic issues, it is also significant to emphasize the social and economic driving factors that paved the way for Turkey’s integration to western world. For a comprehensive analysis of these issues, see Bülent Gökay, Soviet Eastern Policy and Turkey, 1920-1991: Soviet Foreign Policy, Turkey and Communism (London and New York: Routledge, 2006), 60-61; Çalış, Turkey’s Cold War, 13, 58-64; Koçak, Türkiye’de İki Partili Sistemin Kuruluş Yılları (1945-1950): İkinci Parti, 51-52, 335-342.
14
of Akşam (Evening) newspaper for many years, Sadak played an important role in legitimizing the official foreign policy discourse in both the early republican and the early post-war period. He defended pro-Allies opinions during the Second World War, and continued to write pro-western block articles in line with the government’s foreign policy orientation in the post-war period.38 Ahmet Şükrü Esmer39 was another well-known journalist-MP who wrote pro-American articles in government-affiliated newspapers such as Ulus, Tanin and Vakit (Time). Asım Us, the editor-in-chief of Vakit, was another effective figure in forming the official foreign policy discourse as a both journalist and member of parliament.40
On the other hand, Ahmet Emin Yalman was the most influential oppositional figure who was prominent with his important position in the DP and his pro-American opinions in Vatan newspaper. Nadir Nadi and Abidin Daver were other popular pro-American figures from Cumhuriyet (Republic), one of the significant oppositional newspapers in the early post-war mainstream press.41 To conclude, both pro-RPP and
38 While the emphasis on friendship and alliance with the United States came to the fore in Sadak’s articles after the Missouri’s visit to Turkey, he depicted the Truman Doctrine as “the century’s essential turning point in world politics (dünya siyasetinde yüzyılın en ehemmiyetli dönüm noktası).” For some of Sadak’s articles on the Missouri’s visit to Turkey and the Truman Doctrine, see Necmettin Sadak, “Aziz Dostlarımız Hoş Geldiniz,” Akşam, 5 April 1946; “Truman’ın Nutku Münasebetiyle Dostlarımızı Uğurlarken,” Akşam, 9 April 1946; “Dünya Siyasetinde Yüzyılın En Ehemmiyetli Dönüm Noktası,” Akşam, 14 March 1947; “Sebepler ve Neticeler,” Akşam, 15 March 1947; “Amerika Siyasetinin İlk Neticelerini Moskova Konferansında Göreceğiz,” Akşam, 18 March 1947.
39 Esmer served as a member of the Turkish parliament from 1939 to 1946. During his early career, Esmer received a PhD degree in Law from Columbia University in New York and then served as the university lecturer in Turkey. While he also wrote foreign policy articles for many newspapers, his participation to the San Francisco Conference as the consultant of the Turkish delegation shows his prominent position in official foreign policy orientation. Esmer later pioneered the establishment of Turkish Information Office in New York in 1948. He returned to Turkey in 1949 and assumed the role of the General Director of Press and Publication Bureau.
40 Asım Us served as a member of the Turkish National Assembly between 1927 and 1950. Foreign policy issues constituted one of the essential parts of his articles. In this context, the Cold War and the enhancement of Turkish-American relations dominated his writings in the post-war period. On the return of the Missouri battleship’s visit from Turkey, while Vakit bid farewell to the ship with the English headline “Farewell Dear Friends! And Take Our Deft Regards to America”, Asım Us stated that American power would establish world peace.” Asım Us, “Sulhu Amerika’nın Kuvveti Kuracaktır”, Vakit, 10 April 1946.
41 Nadir Nadi was a Turkish journalist who firstly wrote articles for Cumhuriyet in the early Republican period. After the death of Yunus Nadi, his father and the owner of Cumhuriyet, Nadir Nadi became the head of the newspaper in 1945. While advocating pro-German stance during the early republican period and the Second World War, Nadi later became the firm supporter of the United States in the post-war period. For this reason, he was severely criticized by the left-wing press.
15
oppositional mainstream newspapers adapted themselves to the changing dynamics in world politics and Turkey’s foreign policy orientation, and the prominent figures in these periodicals played essential role in providing information to the Turkish society about the United States and the Cold War.
Furthermore, one of the significant developments in the early post-war Turkish press was the dominance of American popular culture and lifestyle in the content of periodicals. While the increase in the number of articles and contents about American culture signified the tabloidization of the mainstream newspapers, there were also many new periodicals similar to the popular American family and tabloid magazines both in content and form.42 For instance, Reader’s Digest contents dominated Aile (Family) and Bütün Dünya (Whole World) magazines, which were started to be published in 1947 and 1948 respectively.43 On the other hand, entertainment and movie magazines like Hollywood Dünyası (The World of Hollywood), Prenses (Princess), Yıldız (Star), Yeni Holivud Magazin (New Hollywood Magazine) were some prominent publications that popularized Hollywood in the early post-war Turkey.44
At the same time, Cumhuriyet started to support the Democrat Party and Nadi wrote many articles praising foreign capital at this period. On the other hand, Abidin Daver was prominent with both his pro-American opinions and his maritime writings. Known also as “civil admiral” due to his contributions to Turkish maritime literature, Daver was frequently criticized for his exaggerated and eulogistic articles on the American fleet and sailor. For Daver’s articles on the Missouri’s visit and the American sailors see, Abidin Daver, “Eski Dostluğun Yeni ve Parlak Bir Tezahürü, Cumhuriyet, 6 April 1946; “Deniz Devi Missouri’de Neler Gördüm I,” Cumhuriyet, 7 April 1946; “Deniz Devi Missouri’de Neler Gördüm II,” Cumhuriyet, 9 April 1946.
42 Orhan Koloğlu, Osmanlı’dan Günümüze Türkiye’de Basın (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1992), 73.
43 Bütün Dünya was published by Osman Nebioğlu, who was the founder of Neboğlu Yayınevi in 1943. This publishing house played an important role in promoting America, American culture, and literature to the Turkish public with the translated books it published in the 1940s and 1950s. For instance, see Benjamin P. Thomas, Abraham Lincoln (İstanbul: Nebioğlu Yayınevi, 1952); Maud & Miska Petersham, Amerika Cumhurbaşkanlarının Hikayesi (İstanbul: Nebioğlu Yayınevi, 1953); Rachel Field, Unutulmaz Hatıralar (İstanbul: Nebioğlu Yayınevi, ?). On the other hand, Aile was published between 1947 and 1952 by Şevket Rado and Vedat Nedim Tör, who were two prominent figures in the Turkish press who criticized the spread of American popular culture in the Turkish society on the grounds that it disrupted the fabric of society. Influenced mostly by American family magazines, Bütün Dünya and Aile had a conservative publishing policy and placed special emphasis on the family institution. The prominent characteristics that consolidated the conservative policies of these magazines was the articles that translated from popular American magazines like Reader’s Digest. For a review on the content of Bütün Dünya magazine, see Ahmet Oktay, Türkiye’de Popüler Kültür (İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 1995), 79-98. For an examination about Şevket Rado and Vedat Nedim Tör's conservative articles, see Levent Cantek, Cumhuriyetin Büluğ Çağı, Gündelik Yaşama Dair Tartışmalar (1945-1950) (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2013).
16
In the light of the above-mentioned background information about the early post-war Turkish politics, foreign policy, and press, this study firstly aims to reveal how the Turkish press depicted the United States with cultural and ideological concepts in the developing Cold War circumstances. This analysis also gives clues about how the public opinion experienced the Turkey’s Cold War. In this context, by adhering to discourse analysis, this study focuses on Ulus and Vatan, two popular media outlets of that time. While examining these periodicals, the editorials of Falih Rıfkı Atay and Ahmet Emin Yalman, the editor-in-chief of Ulus and Vatan respectively, will become main research areas due to these writers’ potential to reach wider segments of reader groups from two different political base. Thus, the fact that these two newspapers and figures had different political backgrounds and this presents a comparative analysis are the important criteria in my focus on them. In this context, while the political and intellectual backgrounds of pro-RPP Falih Rıfkı Atay and pro-DP Ahmet Emin Yalman were the influential factors in their depictions of America, these two figures agreed on the official foreign policy orientation. Moreover, this discussion mainly covers the period from the Missouri’s visit to Turkey in April 1946 and Atay’s resignation from Ulus in November 1947. In this context, it is important to draw the limitations of this discussion. One of the main difficulties encountered in the text analysis process was that Ahmet Emin, who frequently went abroad, could not send articles to the newspaper regularly. This meant that Ahmet Emin did not comment on some major of the events that Falih Rıfkı interpreted. It is also important to point out that this study’s focus on the writers’ perceptions of America covered a limited period so their perspectives might have change in the subsequent periods.
Another area where the Cold War and the United States were depicted in the mainstream Turkish press was cartoons. Representing the Cold War actors with specific images, cartoons had been one of the most effective instruments in disseminating the positive images of the United States in the Cold War context. The exclusive example of this was Ratip Tahir Burak’s cartoons that effectively
44 Burçak Evren, Başlangıçtan Günümüze Türkiye’De Sinema Dergileri (İstanbul: Korsan, 1993), 39-45.
17
legitimized the official Cold War discourse in Ulus. By making descriptive analysis of these cartoons this study also aims to reveal how the stereotyped images of Cold War actors contributed these powers’ prominence in Ulus’ readers.
Furthermore, another phenomenon that manifested the increasing Cold War rhetoric and the prominence of America in Turkish periodicals was the increase in the number of America-sourced translations. The most prominent example of this was the translated political serials (siyasi tefrika), that were written by prominent American statesmen and diplomats, in Ulus newspaper. Reflecting the American official foreign policy orientation, these articles played essential role in the Americanization of Ulus’ language. In this context, another significant element manifesting the Americanization of Ulus was the prominence of translated articles about American popular culture and everyday life in the United States. While examining the political serials, this study only makes interpretations on some of these articles and provides introductory information on the remaining articles. The first main reason is that the irregular and prolonged publication periods of some articles did not allow for a comprehensive analysis. Secondly, this study gives special emphasis on the articles that directly reflected the American foreign policy orientation so it prefers more to comment on these articles. In the context of the articles about American culture and lifestyle, this study only reflects dominant themes by focusing on Ulus’ Sunday issue.
The second part of this study aims to examine the contexts in which anti-American opinions formed in the political humor magazines of the period. Although the Turkish-American alliance in the early Cold War period became hegemonic in public opinion, political humor magazines created a unique way of opposition to this hegemonic discourse.45 Humor, which had also been one of the most typical ways of resistance to the west and its cultural infiltration in the Ottoman Empire and the early republican period, led to the dissemination of anti-American sentiments in Turkish society. In this context, the increasing political and legal pressures on the leftist
45 Apart from humor publications, the leftist publications such as Hür and Zincirli Hürriyet directed serious political criticisms against Americanization. Moreover, some conservative criticisms could be seen in the right-wing publications. Most of these articles criticized the “misbehavior” of American sailors visiting Turkey. For a detailed examination, see Tuba Ünlü Bilgiç, ‘The Roots of Anti-Americanism in Turkey, 1945-1960’, Bilig / Türk Dünyası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, No. 72 (2015).
18
political organizations and left-wing mainstream press had been effective in the emergence of political humor as a unique way of opposition tool.
Two left-wing political humor magazines used as primary sources in this study are Markopaşa (1947-49) and Nuh’un Gemisi (1949-1950). While this study interprets the aforementioned magazines’ texts with a discourse analysis and cartoons with a descriptive analysis, it also aims to relate these interpretations with the writers’ ideological backgrounds and the magazines’ social effects. In this context, significant literary figures of the era like Sabahattin Ali and Rıfat Ilgaz, and the most prominent representatives of Turkish political humor tradition such as Aziz Nesin and Mustafa Mim Uykusuz became the pioneers in the dissemination of anti-governmental and anti-American ideas in Turkish society. Nuh’un Gemisi, on the other hand, was published or supported by the illegally organized Communist Party of Turkey (CPT). Significant political and intellectual figures like Mehmet Ali Aybar, Zeki Baştımar, Abidin Dino, and Rasih Güran contributed to Nuh’un Gemisi. 46 The analysis of Markopaşa in this study is only limited to the text analysis and the cartoons of Mustafa Mim Uykusuz will be excluded. The main reason for this is the presence of available material on the secondary literature due to previous studies’ interest on these cartoons.47 On the other hand, the text analysis of Markopaşa will be briefly analyzed in terms of its formal and discursive legacy left to Nuh’un Gemisi. Thus, Nuh’un Gemisi will become the main focus of this chapter.
In terms of periodization, this study puts special emphasis on the visit of the Missouri battleship to Turkey in 1946 and the end of the RPP government in 1950. The Missouri battleship’s visit in April 1946 redefined the political and cultural relations between the United States and Turkey. The Turkish-American relations intensified more with the continuous visits of American warships and economic
46 Levent Cantek, ‘TKP’nin Desteklediği Mizah Gazetesi: Nuh’un Gemisi (1949-1950)’, Toplumsal Tarih, No. 154 (2006), 40.
47 See Mehmet Saydur, Markopaşa Gerçeği (İstanbul: Çınar Yayınları, 2013); Levent Cantek, Markopaşa Bir Mizah ve Muhalefet Efsanesi (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2020); Dilan Korkmaz, ‘İkinci Dünya Savaşı Sonrası Türk Basınında Emperyalizm Eleştirileri: Markopaşa Örneği’ (Ankara University, MA Thesis, 2020); Semra Kahraman Vurucu, ‘Türkiye’nin Değişim Yıllarında Siyasi Mizahla Muhalefet Örneği: Markopaşa Gazetesi’ (Marmara University, Unpublished PhD Thesis, 2013).
19
experts. The Truman Doctrine and the Marshal Plan also paved the way for this process. In terms of the enhancement of Turkish-American relations, although there was no clear rupture between the RPP and the Democrat Party (DP) governments, the Turkish-American relations in the DP era began to be defined more with its military aspect due to the Korean War (1950), and the Turkish entrance to NATO (1952). In relation to those developments, anti-Americanism began to focus more on the military aspect of Turkish-American relations. This phenomenon was expectedly visible in the CPT’s policies. Nuh’un Gemisi was closed simultaneously with the initiation of the DP government, and Turkish communists began to express their opinions in a more politicized periodical, Barış. Apart from focusing on the campaign of the release of the Turkish poet Nazım Hikmet from prison, the most significant reason for the policy change was the adoption of an anti-militarist discourse that directly focused on opposing American militarism. The preference for the name Barış, which means “peace” in English, was directly related to this effort.
1.3. Blueprint of the Chapters
Chapter 2 will analyze how Ulus and Vatan depicted the United States in the increasing Cold War tensions. In this context, first of all, these newspapers’ and ideological motivations, reader profiles, scope of influences in Turkish society will be provided in order to put discussion in the context and to measure their social projections. Then, it will focus on how Falih Rıfkı Atay and Ahmet Emin Yalman depicted the United States with certain themes and values in a cultural and ideological context. Furthermore, Ratip Tahir Burak’s cartoons in Ulus will be utilized to show how the Turkish government’s official Cold War view was legitimized via images. Finally, this chapter will analyze how US-sourced translated articles consolidated the Cold War rhetoric and the prominence of America in Ulus. In conclusion, it will be argued that the Cold War discourse developed in these periodicals contributed to the positive images of the United States and the institutionalization of the Turkish-American alliance in the Turkish public.
Chapter 3 reveals how political humor magazines criticized the Turkish-American alliance and Americanization in Turkish society. This chapter firstly gives
20
background information about political environment in which these magazines emerged and interprets also their ideological motivations. In the text analysis, the editorials of Sabahattin Ali and Mehmet Ali Aybar will be utilized to reveal the political context of these magazines’ anti-American and patriotic rhetoric. These magazines’ depictions of the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan, American private capital, American presence in Turkey, and cultural Americanization are other significant themes that will be scrutinized in this chapter.
21
CHAPTER 2
THE REFLECTIONS FROM AMERICANIZATION IN THE TURKISH PRESS: FORMING A COLD WAR DISCOURSE IN ULUS AND VATAN
2.1. Historical Background for Ulus and Falih Rıfkı Atay
Ulus was first published under the name İrade-i Milliye (Will of the Nation) in 1920 to carry out propaganda activities during the War of Independence period and its name was changed to Hakimiyet-i Milliye (Sovereignty of the Nation) in the same year.48 It undertook a significant mission in organizing the national struggle in Anatolia and received the title of "semi-official publication of the Assembly."49 In the following periods, Hakimiyet-i Milliye functioned as an official publication organ to disseminate and legitimize the government’s policies and continued its publications under the name Ulus in 1934.50 While the newspaper’s circulation was five thousand five hundred in 1931, this number reached twelve thousand during the World War II years.51 If we speculate that Ulus was also read in the People’s Houses and the RPP’s organizations, it can be concluded that the total number of its readers was higher than its circulation. Functioning as an opinion and party newspaper, the target and reader group of Ulus mainly formed by “educated Kemalist elites,
48 A. Elif Emre, ‘Ankara Gazeteciliğinin İlkokulu: Hakimiyet-i Milliye’, in Kitle İletişimi: Dün, Bugün, Yarın (Ankara: Gazeteciler Cemiyeti, 2017), 52
49 Enver Behnan Şapolyo, Türk Gazetecilik Tarihi ve Her Yönüyle Basın (İstanbul: Güven Matbaası, 1969), 195.
50 Hürriyet Konyar, ‘Türkiye’de Tek Parti Döneminden Çok Partili Hayata Geçişte Kemalist İdeolojinin Değişimi ve Ulus Gazetesi’, (İstanbul University, Unpublished PhD Thesis, 1993), 2-13.
51 Rifat N. Bali, ‘Tek Parti Döneminde Gazete Tirajları’, Tarih ve Toplum, No. 221 (2002), 18-19; Tevfik Çavdar, Türkiye’nin Demokrasi Tarihi, 1839-1950 (Ankara: İmge Kitabevi Yayınları, 2013), 443; Edward Weisband, Turkish Foreign Policy, 1943-1945: Small State Diplomacy and Great Power Politics (NJ: Princeton University Press, 2015), 74.
22
composed essentially of bureaucrats, military personnel, and other civil servants like teachers, that supported the regime’s ideological programs.”52 Even though the RPP significantly lost the bureaucrats and intellectuals’ support during the transition to multi-party politics,53 it continued to disseminate the party policies and tried to consolidate its base.
Ulus’ commitment to the Kemalist principles54 were the most essential factor determining its ideological orientation in the single-party period.55 While the Turkish press had become essential tool in disseminating the Kemalist principles by the beginning of 1930s, the government control over the press gradually increased with series of press laws in this period.56 The first Press Congress convened in 1935 under the leadership of Vedat Nedim Tör, an ex-Kadro member and the General Director
52 Hürriyet Konyar, ‘Türkiye’de Tek Parti Döneminden Çok Partili Hayata Geçişte Kemalist İdeolojinin Değişimi ve Ulus Gazetesi’ (İstanbul University, Unpublished Phd Thesis, 1993), 18.; Adam B. McConnel, ‘The CHP, the U.S., and Ulus: The Portrayal of the United States in Ulus Gazetesi During WWII’ (Sabancı University, Unpublished MA Thesis, 2008), 34.
53 VanderLippe, The Politics of Turkish Democracy, 139.
54 The disappointment of the Free Party (Serbest Fırka) experiment in 1930 and the outbreak of counter-revolutionary Islamic revolt, known as the Menemen Incident, were two significant steps that pushed the political authorities to question its policies in general. After these incidents, the RPP’s political authorities concluded that revolutionary reforms and ideals were not adopted by large segments of society. Apart from the internal factors, the transformation of international political atmosphere in post-1929 period was also influential in the RPP’s ideological position. The decline of liberal democracies and the rise of authoritarian governments marked the 1930s. The RPP Convention of 1931 was one of the most important turning points in the attempt to institutionalize the Kemalist ideology. The principles symbolized by Six Arrows (Altı Ok), the party emblem of the RPP, were included in the party program of 1931. The revolutionary principles began to be known as Kemalism from 1936 and were included in the constitution in 1937. For a more detailed analysis of the RPP’s ideological direction, see Kemal H. Karpat, ‘The Republican People’s Party, 1923-1945’, in Political Parties and Democracy in Turkey, ed. by Metin Heper and Jacob M. Landau (London and New York: I.B. Tauris, 2016).
55 Tevfik Çavdar, ‘Hakimiyet-i Milliye ve Ulus’ta Demokrasi Yaklaşımı’, Bilim ve Sanat, No. 31, 1983.
56 Under the Press Law of 1931, a person who would open a printing house or publish a periodical had to notify the government about their intentions. Also, those who would engage in the press activities had to have a higher education diploma and fulfill some legal principles such as not committing any crimes against the government and the Turkish Revolution. In 1934, the General Directorate of Press and Information (Basın Yayın Genel Müdürlüğü) acquired the authority to monitor whether the publications in the press comply with the reformism principle and national policies. Those who would publish a political newspaper were also forced to pay a large sum to the government, making difficult to publish a newspaper. See Esra Ercan Bilgiç, ‘Kemalist İktidar ve Basın: 1919’dan 1950’ye’, in Medya ve İktidar: Hegemonya, Statüko, Direniş, ed. by Esra Arsan and Savaş Çoban (Evrensel Basım Yayın, 2014); Gavin D. Brockett, How Happy to Call Oneself a Turk: Provincial Newspapers and the Negotiation of a Muslim National Identity (Texas: University of Texas Press, 2011).
23
of the Press of this period, was significant in terms of reflecting the press atmosphere of the 1930s. The representatives of the mainstream and local newspapers including the editors of Ulus and Cumhuriyet participated in the congress.57 During his speech, Vedat Nedim characterized the function and role of the press in Kemalist Turkey from the perspective of an official point of view. Accordingly, the newspapers in Kemalist Turkey undertook the mission of :
1. Making influential propaganda for the dissemination of the principles and ideals of the Turkish Revolution among the masses.
2. Protecting the gains of the Turkish Revolution against the reactionaries
3. Becoming the assistant and stimulus for the government
4. Educating the people on political, economic, and cultural issues.58
Ulus was the most prominent publication in the context of political orientation specified by Vedat Nedim Tör. In this context, Falih Rıfkı Atay, as the editor-in-chief of Hakimiyet-i Milliye and Ulus from 1931 to 1947, became one of the most significant actors in disseminating the Kemalist vision of Ulus. Funda Selçuk argues that two main phenomena were prevailed in Atay’s writings during the 1930s: “to theorize and systematize Kemalism, and to determine the methods that would enable Kemalism to be adopted by the public.”59 Before elaborating on this topic, it will be significant to examine Falih Rıfkı’s journalism career and his relationship with the political authorities.
Falih Rıfkı’s journalism career started in the late Ottoman period. His political writings in the pro-Unionist Tanin newspaper were one of the turning points of his career.60 Atay later served on official duties to the high Unionist officials like Talat Paşa and Cemal Paşa. After the departure of the Unionist rulers due to the Ottoman
57 Bilgiç, “Kemalist İktidar ve Basın: 1919’dan 1950’ye”, 64.
58 Ibid., 65.
59 Funda Selçuk Şirin, ‘Ulus Devlet İnşasında Bir Aydın: Falih Rıfkı Atay’, Journal of Turkish World Studies, Vol.10, No.1 (2010).
60 Funda Selçuk Şirin, ‘Falih Rıfkı Atay’, in Kitle İletişimi: Dün, Bugün, Yarın (Ankara: Gazeteciler Cemiyeti, 2017), 257-258.
24
defeat in World War I, Falih Rıfkı founded Akşam newspaper with his close friends in 1918. In his Young Turk period years, the theme of nationalism dominated Falih Rıfkı’s writings and he was mostly influenced by Ziya Gökalp’s61 thoughts.62 Falih Rıfkı attended Gökalp’s seminars during his education in the Committee of Union and Progress’ (CUP) organizations and maintained his dialogue with Gökalp during the Yeni Mecmua years.63 In the national struggle period, Falih Rıfkı contributed to the resistance movement with his writings in Akşam and he frequently got into argument with the journalists who opposed the national struggle.64 Falih Rıfkı’s active support for national independence enabled him to enter Mustafa Kemal’s close circle and he started to write in Hakimiyet-i Milliye at Atatürk’s request.65 Falih Rıfkı’s parliamentary career, which would continue until 1950, also began in 1923 with Mustafa Kemal’s initiatives. Falih Rıfkı became the most prominent figure of the journalist-MPs, whose number was quite high during the single-party period.66 In addition to his articles in Hakimiyet-i Milliye, Atay also wrote in Kadro and Ülkü during the 1930s.67 In these articles, Atay mostly emphasized the disciplined and authoritarian party-state organization, and he attempted to systematize Kemalism.68
61 Ziya Gökalp was a prominent intellectual of the Young Turk period who advocated nationalist, positivist, and populist ideas. Gökalp's understanding of Turkish nationalism which reconciled Turkishness, Islam, and civilization, and his understanding of populism based on Durkheimian solidaristic corporatism deeply affected the Young Turk period and the Republican regime. Gökalp made important intellectual contributions especially in Genç Kalemler, Türk Yurdu, Halka Doğru, and Yeni Mecmua magazines and he was recognized as "the father of Turkish nationalism.” He also worked as a sociology professor at Istanbul University between 1915 and 1919. For a detailed analysis about Gökalp’s ideological orientation and his political influence on the Ottoman and the republican periods, see Taha Parla, Ziya Gökalp, Kemalizm ve Türkiye’de Korporatizm (İstanbul: Deniz Yayınları, 2009); Zafer Toprak, ‘Aydın, Ulus-Devlet ve Popülizm’, in Türk Aydını ve Kimlik Sorunu, ed. by Sabahattin Şen (İstanbul: Bağlam Yayıncılık, 1995); Umut Uzer, An Intellectual History of Turkish Nationalism: Between Turkish Ethnicity and Islamic Identity (Salt Lake: The University of Utah Press, 2016).
62 Funda Selçuk Şirin, ‘Ulus Devlet İnşasında Bir Aydın: Falih Rıfkı Atay’, 137-138.
63 Ibid.
64 Funda Selçuk Şirin, ‘Falih Rıfkı Atay’, in Kitle İletişimi: Dün, Bugün, Yarın, 260.
65 Funda Selçuk Şirin, ‘Ulus Devlet İnşasında Bir Aydın: Falih Rıfkı Atay’, 138.
66 Brockett, How Happy to Call Oneself a Turk, 67.
67 Funda Selçuk Şirin, ‘Ulus Devlet İnşasında Bir Aydın: Falih Rıfkı Atay’, 140.
68 Funda Selçuk Şirin, ‘Falih Rıfkı Atay (1893-1950)’ (Ankara University, Unpublished PhD Thesis, 2009), 315-139.
25
One of the significant factors shaping Atay’s perception of the Turkish Revolution and Kemalism was his impressions from the official visits to foreign countries. For instance, in Denizaşırı, Falih Rıfkı conveyed his impressions from the Americas in 1927.69 This visit also played significant role in shaping Atay’s perception of the United States in the later periods. In this study, Atay compared the development level of the United States with the European countries and depicted the former as a role model civilization for the new Turkey.70 However, it is important to note that Atay’s visit to the United States was pre-1929 phenomenon and Atay’s opinions on liberal governments had changed in post-1929 period due to the decline in liberal democracies.
In this context, it will be important to mention Atay’s depiction of the Soviet Union and Italy. The Turkish political authorities made various official visits to Italy and the Soviet Union between 1930 and 1932.71 Except the political authorities, various journalists also attended these visits and conveyed their thoughts about these countries in their articles. Falih Rıfkı was one of them and he expressed his opinions about these countries not only with the articles in Hakimiyet-i Milliye but also with three travel books.72 One of the most important implications of Atay in his writings was that liberal democracies had lost their popularity all around the world. Atay emphasized the necessity of using shortcuts to progress Turkey in these circumstances.73 Examining the authoritarian, disciplined and top-down state-society relations of the Soviet Union and Italy, Atay stated that these countries’ strategy of centrist economic development would enable to progress Turkey more rapidly.74 Atay’s prominent role in these official visits and his writings in Hakimiyet-i Miliye
69 Falih Rıfkı Atay, Denizaşırı (İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 1938).
70 Sevinç Girgin, ‘Falih Rıfkı Atay’ın Gezi Yazılarında Avrupa’ (East Mediterranean University, Unpublished MA Thesis, 2012).
71 Funda Selçuk Şirin, ‘Sovyet Rusya ve İtalya Gezilerinin Türk Siyasal Yaşamına Etkisi’, Folklor/Edebiyat, Vol.19, No.73 (2013).
72 Falih Rıfkı Atay, Faşist Roma, Kemalist Tiran, Kaybolmuş Makedonya, (Ankara: Hakimiyeti Milliye Matbaası, 1931); Yeni Rusya, (Ankara: 1931); Moskova-Roma, (Ankara: 1932).
73 Funda Selçuk Şirin, ‘Ulus Devlet İnşasında Bir Aydın: Falih Rıfkı Atay’, 142.
74 Ibid.
26
also showed that he was an influential figure in disseminating the government’s foreign policy orientation.
While Atay’s depictions from these countries contributed his own vision of Kemalism, it is important to note that his writings directly paralleled to the official foreign policy orientation and showed pragmatic character in this context. This was also evident in Atay’s articles during the World War II period. Atay’s opinions towards the Allied and the Axis powers in the war-time period had changed in line with the transformations in Turkish foreign policy. Atay strictly relied on the government’s war-time neutrality and his opinions about the war actors had transformed from pro-Axis orientation to the pro-Allies stance parallelly to the Germany’s decline at the end of 1942.75
Up to this point, this sub-chapter attempted to show Ulus’ ideological orientation and Falih Rıfkı’s political profile in the single-party period. In this context, when Atay’s parliamentarian and journalism duties are considered, it can be concluded that Atay played significant role in disseminating the official opinion during the single-party period. Moreover, it can be argued that Atay’s depictions of foreign countries showed a historically specific and pragmatic characteristics. The shifts in world politics and the government’s foreign policy orientations were the main factors that shaped Atay’s vision of foreign countries. In the following sections, these arguments will be elaborated on the analysis of the transformation in multi-party politics. Before moving on this topic, however, the journalism career of Ahmet Emin Yalman will be considered.
2.2. Ahmet Emin Yalman as an Oppositional Figure in the Single-Party Era
Ahmet Emin Yalman’s journalism career started with his translation articles in Sabah newspaper in 1907.76 After the Young Turk Revolution, Yalman became the editor-in-chief of Yeni Gazete and got into contact with the Unionist figures and
75 Funda Selçuk Şirin, ‘Falih Rıfkı Atay (1893-1950)’ (Ankara University, Unpublished PhD Thesis, 2009), 424-456.
76 Asuman Tezcan, ‘Ahmet Emin Yalman’, in Kitle İletişimi: Dün, Bugün, Yarın (Ankara: Gazeteciler Cemiyeti, 2017), 104-105.
27
organizations. One of the turning points of Yalman’s career was his education of sociology and history at Columbia University in 1911. During his education in the United States, Yalman continued his journalism career and graduated from the university with the PhD thesis titled “The Development of Modern Turkey as Measured by its Press.”77 After completing his education, Yalman returned to Istanbul and became the assistant of Ziya Gökalp in Istanbul University. He also started to write for the Unionist publication, Tanin. During the World War I years, Ahmet Emin worked as a war correspondent and later became the editor-in-chief of Sabah and Vakit, the most popular newspapers of the period.78 When it became clear that the Ottoman Empire would lose the World War I, a group of Ottoman intellectuals founded the Wilson Principles Society in 1918.79 Ahmet Emin was one of its members and these intellectuals mainly argued that the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire could be prevented by a political order which would be established under the guidance of the United States.80 During this period, Ahmet Emin also adopted an anti-Unionist stance and wrote articles that defended Prince Sabahattin’s81 decentralized and liberal state structure.82 Ahmet Emin also opposed
77 Ibid., 106.
78 Asuman Tezcan, ‘Ahmet Emin Yalman: Dönemi ve Gazeteciliği (1918-1938)’ (Ankara University, Unpublished PhD Thesis, 2007), 5.
*During his Young Turk career, Yalman was mostly influenced by the dominant discourse of the period, and his writings displayed a highly pragmatic character. For instance, in the context of the developing relations between the Ottoman Empire and Germany during that period, Yalman had an important German connection and played a significant role in the establishment of Ottoman-German alliance in the public. For a comprehensive study that reveals these links and demonstrates how Yalman’s pro-German writings contributed to the understanding of Turkish nationalism, see Sevil Özçalık, Promoting an Alliance, Furthering Nationalism: Ernst Jäckh and Ahmed Emin in the Time of the First World War (Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 2018).
79 Ibid., 75.
80 After Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteenth Principles were announced in 1918, the Ottoman public opinion responded quickly. The main reasons why the Ottoman intellectuals defended a new rule under the guidance of the United States were that it did not have a colonial past, it was geographically far from the Ottoman Empire and it had extensive economic opportunities. The Society had close contacts with the King & Crane Commission which was appointed by the United States government to examine the current situation in Anatolia in 1919. Halide Edip, one of the leading figures of the society and the most prominent women figure of the Anatolian resistance movement, described the United States as “the best of the bad (ehven-i şer)” and the discussions on “the American mandate on the Turkish territories” constituted one of the most important agendas of the Erzurum and Sivas Congress which were convened by the leaders of the Anatolian resistance movement in 1919. For a detailed analysis of Yalman’s articles about the guidance of the United States, see Asuman Tezcan, ‘Ahmet Emin Yalman: Dönemi ve Gazeteciliği (1918-1938)’, 69-84.
28
the Turkist policies of the CUP and suggested an Ottomanist citizenship principle by establishing an analogy with inclusive American citizenship that embraced different ethnicities.83
After Istanbul’s occupation in 1920, Ahmet Emin was exiled to Malta with the leading Unionists. After two years of exile, he moved to Anatolia and supported the Anatolian resistance movement. However, after Ahmet Emin started to publish Vatan in March 1923, he would soon contradict with the policies of the political authorities. Ahmet Emin positioned against the political authorities because of the way the People’s Party was founded, the declaration of the republic, the centralist policies of the government, and his indirect support to the Progressive Republican Party (Terakkiperver Cumhuriyet Fırkası).84 After the Law for the Maintenance of Order was enacted in 1925, Vatan could continue its publication for another six
81 Prince Sabahattin was one of the prominent Ottoman intellectuals and politicians who left their mark on the late Ottoman period. Influenced by French conservatives like Edmund Demolins and Frederic Le Play, he advocated Anglo-Saxon state and society model for the Ottoman Empire. He established the League for Private Initiative and Decentralization (Teşbbüs-i Şahsi ve Adem-i Merkeziyet Cemiyeti) in 1906 and led the Osmanlı Ahrar Fırkası in the later periods. Sabahattin opposed centralist state model and communitarian society structure, and he advocated decentralization, liberalism, and individualism instead. For a detailed analysis about Sabahattin’s ideological motivations, see Kaan Durukan, ‘Türk Liberalizminin Kökenleri’, Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce 1, Cumhuriyet’e Devreden Düşünce Mirası (İletişim Yayınları, 2009); Doğan Özlem, ‘Türkiye’de Pozitivizm ve Siyaset’, Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce: Modernleşme ve Batıcılık (İletişim Yayınları, 2007); Aykut Kansu, ‘Prens Sabahattin’in Düşünsel Kaynakları ve Aşırı-Muhafazakar Düşüncenin İthali’, Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce 1, Cumhuriyet’e Devreden Düşünce Mirası (İletişim Yayınları, 2009).
82 Ahmet Emin, “Sabahattin Bey”, Vakit, 4 December 1919 in Asuman Tezcan, ‘Ahmet Emin Yalman: Dönemi ve Gazeteciliği (1918-1938)’, 94.
*After the Unionist leaders left the Ottoman Empire, Ahmet Emin advocated the deputyship campaign for Prince Sabahattin. After returning from the Malta exile, Ahmet Emin also frequently visited Sabahattin at his home in Istanbul. He continued his contact with Sabahattin in the following periods. Sabahattin’s influence on Yalman was most evident in Yalman’s criticism of Kemalism’s red-tape (kırtasiyecilik) and its centralist practices in the study of Gerçekleşen Rüya, For a detailed review about this topic, see Buğra Kalkan, Ahmet Emin Yalman: Entellektüel Bir Biyografi (Ankara: Liberte Yayınları, 2018), 47-71.
83Asuman Tezcan, ‘Ahmet Emin Yalman: Dönemi ve Gazeteciliği (1918-1938), 56-61.
84 Asuman Tezcan, ‘Ahmet Emin Yalman’, in Kitle İletişimi, 110.
* The Progressive Republican Party was established in 1924 by Mustafa Kemal’s wartime comrades, Ali Fuat Cebesoy, Kazım Karabekir, Refet Bele, Rauf Orbay and Adnan Adıvar. The PRP mainly opposed the centralist, radical and authoritarian policies of the Mustafa Kemal government. While the PRP advocated an evolutionist change rather than radical change, many liberal and decentralist terms could be found in the party program. For more information about the PRP, see Feroz Ahmad, ‘The Progressive Republican Party, 1924-1925’, in Political Parties and Democracy in Turkey, ed. by Metin Heper and Jacob M. Landau (London and New York: I.B. Tauris, 1991); Erik Jan Zürcher, Modern Türkiye’nin Tarihi (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2010), 246.
29
months but it was closed by the government in the following period.85 Ahmet Emin was tried in the Independence Tribunals but he was acquitted.86
Yalman was the representative of different American companies in Turkey during the period he was excluded from the press.87 According to his statement, Ahmet Emin could return his journalism career only in 1936 with Atatürk’s permission.88 During this period, Ahmet Emin became the sales representative of many American companies in Turkey.89 After returning to journalism in 1936, Yalman wrote for Tan and the most significant characteristics of his articles were their anti-fascist and anti-Nazi orientation.90 However, Tan was closed down by the government for three months in 1938 due to Yalman’s article unveiling Atatürk’s health problems.91 After this incident, Yalman left Tan newspaper and started to publish Vatan in 1940. Following a pro-Allies publishing policy during the war-time period, Vatan was closed nine times both for this reason and its anti-governmental publishing policy.92 Vatan’s circulation in the war-time period was around seven thousand and it had not yet become a mass publication.
Up to this point, Yalman can be considered as a dissident figure who excluded from the mainstream politics. Furthermore, it is important to note that many phenomena contributed to Yalman’s perception of America during these years. Yalman’s direct experience of the United States during his doctorate education, his advocacy of American guidance in the Ottoman Empire, and his commitment to Prince
85 Koloğlu, Osmanlı’dan Günümüze Türkiye’de Basın, 64.
86 Nuri M. İnuğur, ‘1923-1950 Döneminde Vatan-Tan Gazeteleri ve Ahmet Emin Yalman’, Marmara İletişim Dergisi, No.1 (1992).
87 Ahmet Emin Yalman, Yakın Tarihte Gördüklerim ve Geçirdiklerim (İstanbul: Pera Turizm ve Ticaret, 1997), 1032-1037.
88 Ibid., 1053-1058.
89 Asuman Tezcan, ‘Ahmet Emin Yalman’, in Kitle İletişimi, 111.
90 Ibid., 111.
91 İnuğur, ‘1923-1950 Döneminde Vatan-Tan Gazeteleri ve Ahmet Emin Yalman’, 258.
92 Cemil Koçak, Türkiye’de Milli Şef Dönemi (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2003). 138-139.
*During the war-time period, Vatan was closed for two months because it published Charlie Chaplin’s speech that satirized Hitler.
30
Sabahattin’s ideas on Anglo-Saxon state and society model were critical elements in this context. Moreover, his opposition to authoritarian European countries and his advocacy of the Western liberal democracies during his single-party period journalism career should be considered. On the other hand, post-war developments in internal politics and international relations would bring both Ahmet Emin Yalman and Vatan newspaper to an important position in Turkish politics. It will now be significant to analyze the main trends in the internal politics and in the Turkish press during the early post-war era.
2.3. Internal Politics and the Turkish Press in the Early Post-war Period
The transition to multi-party politics and the internal strife within the RPP were two of the most significant phenomena that dominated internal politics in the early post-war period. The Democrat Party, one of the essential actors of multi-party politics, was established on 7 January 1946 by Celal Bayar, Adnan Menderes, Fuat Köprülü, and Refik Koraltan who were among the former RPP deputies. Embracing the motto of restoring democracy in the country, this party united the reactions of large masses against the RPP government and formed a vast organizational network in the country for a short time.93 Adopting “liberal statism” in its economic policy, the DP’s program also advocated the gradual transformation from state enterprises to the private sector and the reduction of state control over trade.94 Having the support of “private merchants and manufacturers, government employees, intellectuals, workers, and landowners in Western Anatolia,” the DP win the elections of 1950, and replaced the RPP government.95
Another significant development of the early post-war period was the internal strife within the RPP. In the multi-party politics, the RPP’s “hardliner” group, led by Prime Minister Recep Peker, advocated for maintaining the status quo and opposed every step that would challenge the RPP’s strong authority in society.96 Peker, who
93 Vanderlippe, Politics of Turkish Democracy, 139.
94 Ibid.; Cem Eroğul, Demokrat Parti Tarihi ve İdeolojisi (İstanbul: Yordam Kitap, 2014), 17-18.
95 Vanderlippe, Politics of Turkish Democracy, 139.
31
came to power in 1946 with the hope of relieving the unrest and maintaining “law and order” in Turkish society, conflicted with President İsmet İnönü’s policies very soon. Contrary to İnönü, who had no hesitation about political change towards a more liberal direction in internal politics, Peker advocated for “internal stability and strong cabinet.”97 Therefore, Peker rejected İnönü’s 12th July Declaration, the official announcement of the president’s neutrality towards all political parties. Whereas “the thirty-five” group in the RPP, which was also defined as “the moderates”, was supported by İsmet İnönü, and these group advocated for the party to take a more liberal position. The moderates were led by the younger generation of the RPP and, Nihat Erim, Memduh Şevket Esendal, Kasım Gülek and Tahsin Banguoğlu were among the popular figures.98 As a result, the moderates prevailed over Peker’s hardliner group, and Recep Peker resigned after the second vote of confidence in the Party group.99 This transformation had been highly effective in taking decisive steps to adopt a more liberal policy both in economic terms and domestic policy. In the following period, the newly established Hasan Saka100 government would take many measures to bring Turkey to a more liberal position.
The multi-party politics and relative political liberalization also left their mark on the Turkish press. In this direction, one of the significant developments was that the government allowed the re-publication of Vatan, Tan (Dawn), Tasvir-i Efkar (Description of Ideas) newspapers, which were closed during the wartime period due to their anti-governmental publications.101 Tan had been published by Zekeriya and Sabiha Sertel,102 two prominent left-wing figures of the early republican period.
96 Ibid., 166.
97 Ibid.
98 Ibid.
99 Ibid., 166-67.
100 Hasan Saka served as the Minister of Economy and the Minister of Foreign Affairs before becoming the president. He replaced Peker on 10 September 1947. While the Saka government adopted liberal policies such as import incentives and the support to private sector, this transformation in Turkish politics was also parallel to the development of close relations with the United States.
101 Koçak, Türkiye’de İki Partili Sistemin Kuruluş Yılları, 137.
102 Zekeriya and Sabiha Sertel were two left-wing prominent figures in the early republican Turkish press. While they completed their education at Columbia University, Zekeriya Sertel studied
32
Vatan and Tan played significant roles in the emergence of the Democrat Party opposition.103 After the Statement of the Four (Dörtlü Takrir)104 was submitted to the RPP’s parliamentary group by the prospective founders of the Democrat Party, Vatan became the media organ of the DP opposition.105 Adnan Menderes and Fuat Köprülü started to write for Vatan and they were expelled from the RPP due to their oppositional articles.106 On the other hand, Ahmet Emin supported the transition to multi-party politics with his editorials and played important role in the party’s establishment process.107 Increasing its popularity as the voice of the DP opposition, Vatan’s circulations reached to forty and fifty thousand in the early post-war period.108 In this context, it can be argued that Vatan’s target group consisted primarily of pro-DP citizens who enjoyed a certain level of income, such as bureaucrats, private merchants, intellectuals, other civil servants like teachers, etc. In his study analyzing the democracy perception in the reader letters sent to Yalman
journalism and Sabiha Sertel studied social service. After returning Turkey, they published Resimli Ay magazine between 1924 and 1931. Being one of the most popular magazines of the early republican period, it gained a left-wing character with Nazım Hikmet’s participation in 1931. They later started to publish Tan in 1936 and adopted an anti-fascist and leftist editorial policy until the end of WWII. After the disintegration of Vatan-Tan front in the post-war period due to the Tan incident, they had to go abroad due to the increasing political pressure. For a comprehensive analysis of the Tan incident and the Sertels’ attempts to seek asylum in the US, see Korkmaz Alemdar, ‘Tan Olayı ve Serteller’in ABD’ye İltica Girişimi’, in Kitle İletişimi: Dün, Bugün, Yarın (Ankara: Gazeteciler Cemiyeti, 2017).
103 Ibid., 770-772.
104 The Statement of the Four is interpreted as one of the critical stages that paved the way for the DP’s formation. This proposal demanded and offered some changes in internal politics such as “the transition to multi-party system, free elections, single-degree electoral system, university reform, etc. It also laid the ground for the dismissal or resignation of future DP founders from the RPP. The democratic demands that were expressed in this statement also constituted the essence of democracy discussions voiced by the oppositional mainstream press. For a study on democracy debates between pro-RPP and pro-DP newspapers, see Neşe Yeşilçayır, ‘Çok Partili Yaşama Geçiş Sürecinde Türk Basını’, Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi, Vol. 27, No.79 (2011).
105 Yeşilçayır, ‘Çok Partili Yaşama Geçiş Sürecinde Türk Basını’, 139; Taner Timur, Türkiye’de Çok Partili Hayata Geçiş (Ankara: İmge Kitabevi Yayınları, 2003); Koçak, Türkiye’de İki Partili Sistemin Kuruluş Yılları, 641-674.
106 Eroğul, Demokrat Parti Tarihi ve İdeolojisi, 15.
107 In his memoirs, Ahmet Emin stated that Vatan was the only struggle front for the prospective founders of the DP. He also labeled himself as the fifth of the party’s four founders (Ben de Dörtler’in beşincisi konumuna geldim ve yıllarca öyle kaldım). Yalman also attended the meetings in the Democrat Party’s establishment process and he claimed that he was the originator of the party’s name.
108 Hıfzı Topuz, 100 Soruda Başlangıçtan Günümüze Türk Basın Tarihi (İstanbul: Gerçek Yayınevi, 1996), 102.
33
between 1945 and 1960, Candaş Ayan also emphasized that the Yalman and Vatan’s readers were mostly formed by urban middle-class citizens.109
Furthermore, during this transition period, mainstream metropolitan newspapers split into two major camps as pro-RPP and pro-DP publications.110 Ulus, Tanin, Vakit, Akşam, and Son Posta (Final Post) were some major pro-RPP metropolitan newspapers in this period. On the other hand, apart from Vatan; Cumhuriyet, Tasvir (Description), and Zafer (Victory) followed a pro-Democrat editorial policy. Cumhuriyet’s circulations very similar to Vatan.111 Pro-RPP newspapers, on the other hand, could not reach these numbers, and they maintained their publications only with the advertising revenues provided by the government.112 On the other hand, the liberalization within the RPP manifested itself most clearly in the changes in Ulus.113 Opposing the rise of moderate wing within the RPP, Falih Rıfkı Atay left Ulus newspaper on 4 November 1947 before the RPP’s Congress on 17 November 1947.114 He mainly argued that the moderate clique led by Nihat Erim had compromised the essential principles of Kemalism.115 Atay later started to write in the column “Sunday Talks (Pazar Sohbetleri) in Cumhuriyet and Yeni Istanbul newspapers.116 From this date on, Nihat Erim one of the prominent moderate figures, assumed the role of editor-in-chief of Ulus.
To conclude, the early post-war era was a period of transformation in every sense, and the most clear manifestation of this was the transition to multi-party politics and
109 Candaş Ayan, ‘Perception of Democracy in Turkey in the Period 1945-1960: An Analysis of Letters Sent to Ahmet Emin Yalman By Urban Middle-Class Readers’ (Middle East Technical University, Unpublished MA Thesis, 2020), 61-64.
110 Topuz, 100 Soruda Başlangıçtan Günümüze Türk Basın Tarihi, 101-102.
111 Ibid., 102.
112 Orhan Koloğlu, Osmanlı’dan Günümüze Türkiye’de Basın (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1992), 70.
113 For a comprehensive analysis examining the post-war transformation within the RPP’s structure and its repercussions in Ulus newspaper, see Hürriyet Konyar, ‘Türkiye’de Tek Parti Döneminden Çok Partili Hayata Geçişte Kemalist İdeolojinin Değişimi ve Ulus Gazetesi’.
114 “B. Falih Rıfkı Atay Ulus’tan Ayrıldı,” Ulus, 4 November 1947.
115 Funda Selçuk Şirin, ‘Falih Rıfkı Atay’, in Kitle İletişimi: Dün, Bugün, Yarın, 257.
116 Ibid.
34
the liberalization within the RPP. On the other hand, the ongoing debates on democracy in the Turkish press was the most prominent reflection of these transitions. Parallel to the transformation of Turkey, another important phenomenon that made the concepts of democracy, freedom, liberalism more prominent in the Turkish press was the enhancement of Turkish-American relations and the depiction of the United States in the Cold War circumstances. In this context, the Missouri’s visit to Turkey should be considered as an important phenomenon that symbolized the increasing prominence of America in the Turkish public opinion.
2.4. The Missouri’s Visit: A Turning Point in Post-war Turkish-American Alliance
The visit of Missouri battleship on 5 April 1946 signified the US’ open support for Turkey in its conflict with the Soviet Union. This visit also marked the beginning of a new period in which the United States became more prominent in Turkey’s socio-cultural sphere. According to Vatan newspaper, Turkish officials held a public organization with broad participation in Dolmabahçe, and the Turkish public was in a state of mobilization that had never been experienced.117 From the first light of the morning, many people from urban slums and other residents flocked to Dolmabahçe, and the coasts of Istanbul were invaded by “an apocalyptic crowd.”118 After the ceremony, high-level American diplomats moved to Ankara to meet with President İsmet İnönü. Simultaneously, the American marine corps stayed in İstanbul, and the municipality organized some social activities to increase the bonds between the American military officers and the Turkish people.119
The visit of the Missouri became so popular in the Turkish public that the name “Missouri” turned into a cultural myth. For instance, in honor of the visit, special Missouri cigarettes -with Turkish and American flags on the cover- were
117 “Missouri’nin Yarattığı Heyecan ve Cenaze Töreni,” Vatan, 6 April 1946.
118Ibid.
119 “Missouri’yi Karşılarken,” Ulus, 6 April 1946; “Misafirlerimiz Halkın Sevgi Tezahürleri ile Karşılandı”; “Misafir Amerikan Denizcileri Sevgi ile Ağırlanıyor,” Ulus, 7 April 1946.
35
manufactured by the Turkish Tekel administration.120 The Turkish Post, on the other hand, procured Missouri postage stamps with an image of the Missouri battleship.121 Two short movies about the Missouri visit were screened in Turkish movie theaters, and Turkish people living outside of Istanbul could have a visual experience about the visit.122 It was possible to see the famous ship’s name even in restaurants. For instance, a restaurant located on Sakarya Street in Ankara was named “Missouri Family Restaurant, Patisserie and Beer House.”123 Fazıl Hüsnü Dağlarca, one of the prominent Turkish poets, also wrote a poem titled “Missouri” on April 12 in Vatan newspaper to greet the visit of Missouri battleship.124
In the subsequent periods, the prominence of the United States in Turkey gradually increased with the intensification of the Cold War circumstances. In this context, the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan were two significant phenomena in post-war Turkish-American relations. In his speech in the US Congress on 12 March 1947, President Truman laid the foundations of the Truman Doctrine. Revealing the increasing Cold War rhetoric in all its aspects, Truman’s speech paved the way for an economic aid package of hundred and fifty million dollars to Turkey, and two hundred and fifty million dollars to Greece.125 Aiming to increase the military capacity of Greece and Turkey, the Truman Doctrine became the first comprehensive policy action against the Soviet Union.126 Another significant development was the declaration of the Marshall Plan on June 5, 1947. Aiming to reconstruct the war-torn European economy and prevent the spread of socialism in these countries, the United States allocated eighteen billion dollars to Europe between 1948 and 1952.127
120 “Missouri Sigaraları,” Ulus, 19 April 1946.
121 “Missouri Bu Sabah 8’de İstanbul’da,” Ulus, 5 April 1946.
122 “Missouri’nin İstanbul’u Ziyaretinin İkinci Kısmı,” Ulus, 20 April 1946.
123 Ulus, 8 August 1946.
124 Vatan, 12 April 1946.
125 Şuhnaz Yılmaz, Turkish American Relations, 1800-1952: Between Stars, Stripes and the Crescent (New York and London: Routledge, 2015), 123.
126 Ibid.
127 Ibid., 124.
36
Although Turkey did not involve the Marshall Plan first, it participated in March 1948 by bargaining its strategic position against the Soviet Union.128
2.5. The Depiction of American Image in Ulus and Vatan: The Blueprint of the Arguments
While Turkish periodicals reflected all these developments in their columns, they also became essential tools to disseminate the developing Cold War and to convince the Turkish public about the course of Turkish-American relations. The depiction of the United States by the Turkish journalists, the way America was reflected in other contents like the translation articles, and the increasing anti-communist theme contributed to creating a positive American image in the Turkish public. The following sub-chapters aim to examine these characteristics by focusing on Ulus and Vatan.
The Turkish journalists’ depiction of the United States will be revealed in the articles of Falih Rıfkı Atay and Ahmet Emin Yalman. This interpretation will not be a chronological listing of these journalists’ reactions to specific incidents related to Turkish-American relations, but it will be an interpretation that focuses on how they depicted the United States within the scope of particular themes and values. By making a contextual analysis of their depictions, the following sub-chapter interprets how their discourses form favorable images of the United States. The years 1946 and 1947 were foundational in the institutionalization of positive American image in the Turkish public since the Turkish press initiated and developed a Cold War terminology during these years. In this context, particular importance will be given to this period while examining these journalists’ interpretations of the United States. On the other hand, American global responsibility, the superiority of the American military power, and American exceptionalism129 were some common themes that
128 Senem Üstün, ‘Turkey and the Marshall Plan: Strive for Aid’, The Turkish Yearbook of International Relations, No.27 (1997).
129 It is an idea that the United States, with all the superior values it represents, inherently different from other nations and had a special mission to transform the world through these values. Since the establishment of the US, while this concept discursively reproduced by different expressions, it has become one of the most important ideological tools that justifies the universalist foreign policy actions of the United States. While legitimizing the American official foreign policy in the Cold War era, this
37
these journalists employed to depict the United States amidst the increasing Cold War tensions.
In this context, it will be important to reconsider the background information about Ulus, Vatan, Falih Rıfkı Atay, and Ahmet Emin Yalman. This interpretation is significant for contextualizing their motivations about the US and revealing which groups receive their depictions. First of all, as a publication organ of the RPP, Ulus reflected the official opinion about the developing Cold War circumstances and its target group was mostly the educated RPP members. Falih Rıfkı Atay, as an editor-in-chief of Ulus, was the key figure in transmitting the official foreign policy orientation. His leading role in the dissemination and legitimization in foreign policy orientation was most evident in his depictions from official foreign trips in the single-party era and his writings in the World War II period. In this context, when compared to Ahmet Emin’s perception of America, it can be argued that the main factor determining Atay’s perception was not ideological motivations. While Atay firmly committed to the government’s foreign policy, the main factor shaping his perception of America was pragmatic interpretation of its position in the Cold War.
On the other hand, Yalman’s perception of America was driven by more fundamental ideological motivations. His education in the United States, his advocacy of Prince Sabahattin ideas in his early journalism career, his activities in the Wilson Principles Society were main factors shaping Atay’s perception of America and maturing his liberal opinions. In this context, Yalman’s ideological orientation had been influential in his writings, that represented the United States as an exemplary role model and a vital actor in the development of Turkish economy. Furthermore, it is significant to note that the DP’s complete adoption of the official foreign policy orientation was another important issue that made Yalman as a prominent figure who legitimized the official opinion. Yalman’s and Vatan’s prominent position in the DP’s opposition significantly increased the newspaper’s circulation and this led to dissemination of Yalman’s ideas to the wider segments. In
concept emphasized the American historical and global responsibility to defend the democratic, libertarian, and peaceful values of the free world against the Soviet expansionism. On the other hand, emphasizing the global responsibility of the United States in the increasing Cold War atmosphere, Turkish journalists also took several references from this concept.
38
this context, Yalman’s readers were mostly comprised of pro-DP urban middle-class citizens.
Another area where the positive images of the United States were depicted in the Cold War circumstances was Ratip Tahir Burak’s anti-communist and pro-American cartoons that started to be published on the cover page of Ulus on 1 January 1947. Ratip Tahir, as a prominent Republican and well-known figure of Turkish political humor tradition, legitimized and promoted the official foreign policy of the Turkish government by using the stereotyped images of the Cold War actors. While these cartoons depicted the Soviet Union negatively, the positive images of the United States contributed significantly to the legitimization of Turkish-American friendship in both the press and the Turkish public. By making descriptive interpretations of these cartoons, this chapter also examines how the United States and the Soviet Union were represented with visual stereotypes in the developing Cold War tensions.
Furthermore, one of the prominent elements demonstrating the American impact on Turkish periodicals was the increase in the number of translated articles from prominent American politicians and diplomats. While reflecting the development of the Cold War circumstances from the American perspective, these translation series contributed to the Cold War perception in early post-war Turkey. Furthermore, espionage stories' prominence and the increasing discursive rhetoric on an atomic war between the Soviet Union and the United States showed how the Turkish periodicals developed a Cold War language in the early post-war period. These articles were often extracted from prominent American magazines and consolidated the positive images of America. The translated texts that depicted the Soviet Union negatively also contributed to disseminating anti-communism via Turkish periodicals. These translated texts were usually published in Ulus on Sundays, and demonstrated how the Turkish press developed a Cold War discourse through the American magazines.
39
2.6. Falih Rıfkı Atay and Ahmet Emin Yalman’s Depiction of the United States
When Missouri harbored in the Bosphorus waters on 5 April 1946, it harmoniously became the main agenda of Turkish journalists.130 Falih Rıfkı Atay stated that Missouri started a bond of friendship between Turkey and the United States from the moment it entered the Turkish territorial waters.131 Although Missouri’s flag represented “the highest military might in the world,” the Turkish people saluted Missouri as a symbol of liberty and peace.132 In this article, Atay also interpreted the main dynamics of American foreign policy. According to Atay, the United States sought for “a world that would be based on the collective security of free, equal, and sovereign nations; and a world without wars, without aggressions, where only morality and legal agreements would prevail.”133 He also stated that the primary aim of American foreign policy was to prevent any hostile attacks and bring nations peace and security. According to Atay, Turkey adopted the peaceful and liberal principles of the United States in its foreign policy, and the Turkish ideal (Türk Ülküsü) was no different from American humanism.134
Ahmet Emin Yalman, on the other hand, wrote many articles about Missouri’s visit.135 For instance, in “The Impressions from Missouri (Missouri’den İntibalar),” he firstly conveyed his impressions about the interior parts of the ship.136 Yalman compared Missouri’s tremendous assault force with a mobile fort. He also expressed that its destructive weapons did not frighten him, but instead, he was at peace because this mobile fort was not the enemy but the friend of those who sought peace and security. According to Yalman, Missouri was “a source of peace to instill
130 Ayın Tarihi, April 1946, 52-71.
131 Falih Rıfkı Atay, “Missouri,” Ulus, 5 April 1946.
132 Ibid.
133 Ibid.
134 Ibid.
135 Ahmet Emin Yalman, “Çelikten Bir Barış Elçisi,” Vatan, 4 April 1946; “Hoş Geldin Ey Ertegün,” Vatan, 5 April 1946; “Missouri’den İntibalar,” Vatan, 6 April 1946; “Neden Coştuk?,” Vatan, 8 April 1946.
136 Yalman, “Missouri’den İntibalar,” Vatan, , 6 April 1946.
40
comfort and confidence in all people” because “its primary objective was to maintain the world order.”137
Furthermore, he commented on world politics and stated that the Western states used every possible means to establish friendship with the Soviet Union but “the single-party government in Russia prevented that.”138 To maintain its repressive regimes, the Soviet single-party government perpetuated bigotry and hatred towards other states. Yalman stated that free countries had to unite under certain principles to prevent the Soviet Union. In this context, the American battleship’s visit to Turkey was “an auspicious step forward” in ensuring safety.139
In his article on 8 April 1946, Atay mentioned President Truman’s Army Day speech that was given in Chicago on April 6.140 This speech is significant for providing first-hand information about the post-war transformation of American foreign policy, and it was made public in Turkey through Atay’s article.141 One of the most significant points in Truman’s speech, according to Atay, was the US’ determination to maintain its military preparedness to prevent a possible war in the post-war period. Quoting from Truman’s speech, Atay emphasized that the United States had a responsibility as the world's most powerful nation, and its military power had to be fully preserved for peace and international harmony to prevail.142 In the last paragraph of the article, he expressed his opinions about Truman’s speech and stated that the speech determined the course of American policy and the fate of the whole world. He also noted that the policies declared in this speech were the main principles of world humanism (dünya insaniyetçiliği), and Turkey could rely strongly on their realization.143
137 Ibid.
138 Ibid.
139 Ibid.
140 The full text of this speech is available on, https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/library/public-papers/76/address-chicago-army-day
141 Atay, “Amerika Artık Yolunu Bulmuştur,” Ulus, 8 April 1946.
142 Ibid.
41
On 9 April 1946, Falih Rıfkı Atay sent a message from Turkey to the United States.144 Atay firstly questioned the primary motivations for the bonds of friendship and amity between the Turkish people and Americans that reached a high point during the Missouri’s visit. According to Atay, Turkey relied on the US’ spiritual strength and the American principles of peace and liberty, not its military superiority.145 The main factor determining the firmness of Turkish-American friendship was that the Americans were friends of all peaceful and libertarian nations, and Turkey was one of them. Atay stated that the inspiration for the “love of America” in all freedom-loving countries was that the United States became the guarantee of international peace and the warless and ideal world.146
On 9 May 1946, he referred to the agreement between Turkey and the United States on the reimbursement of Lend and Lease aids that Turkey had received from the United States during World War II.147 In this article, Atay also commented about the main determinants of the escalating alliance between Turkey and the United States. According to Atay, the United States was not an aggressor state, and it favored a peaceful and secured world order. All these features made the United States the staunchest ally. He also emphasized that the United States was the symbol of material power and led other nations in the search for international justice. The alliance with the United States was synonymous with participating in a noble war to open a new era in human history.148
Another article of Atay, in which he emphasized the American global responsibility in the increasing Cold War tensions, was about the American elections of 1946. After the elections, Atay mentioned the internal atmosphere in the United States and
143 Ibid.
144 Atay, “Türkiye’den Amerika’ya,” Ulus, 9 April 1946.
145 Ibid
146 Ibid.
147 Atay, “Mecliste Bir Dostluk Gösterisi,” Ulus, 9 May 1946.
148 Ibid.
42
emphasized that both the Democrats and the Republicans agreed on an active foreign policy agenda. 149 According to Atay, the American global leadership was so decisive that an active American foreign policy would have global repercussions that would even reach remote Chinese villages.150 He also stated that all peaceful nations agreed on the American responsibility in the post-war world order and favored maintaining its active foreign policy.151
After Missori’s visit, many American battleships came to Turkey, and these visits also received attention in Turkish periodicals. For instance, Ulus mentioned the American fleet that visited İzmir on 24 November 1946 and the English welcome texts in İzmir’s local newspapers. For example, Anadolu newspaper titled “Welcome you gallant sailors of America.” Millet, on the other hand, titled “Welcome seamen of Randulph.” 152 On 25 November 1946, Atay also mentioned this visit and emphasized that Turkish people welcomed the American military superiority as “a noble symbol of the peaceful and humanitarian ideals.”153 From Atay’s perspective, although the United States possessed the most potent air, land, and naval forces globally, these did not frighten non-aggressor nations. He stated that “the freedom of nations is the foundation of the American cause of peace.”154 Atay also greeted the American sailors who visited Izmir as “the idealists who love freedom, international rights, and justice.”155
On the other hand, Ahmet Emin Yalman’s impressions about the United States were among the important aspects that shaped his depiction of America in the early post-war period. Between 9 and 12 January 1947, Yalman attended “the Report from the
149 Atay, “Amerikan Seçimlerinden Sonra,” Ulus, 9 November 1946.
150 Ibid.
151 Ibid.
152 “Dost Amerikan Filosu İzmir’de,” Ulus, 24 November 1946.
153 Atay, “Bir Amerikan Filosu İzmir’de,” Ulus, 25 November 1946.
154 Ibid.
155 Ibid.
43
World” meeting in Cleveland.156 His impressions about this meeting and the United States were published in Vatan via the telegram texts that he sent. This meeting was organized by Henry R. Luce and Brooks Emeny, who were the editor of Time magazine and the chairman of the Cleveland Council on World Affairs’ Twentieth First Century Annual Institute respectively.157 This meeting aimed to answer the following questions: “What does the rest of the world expect of the United States?” and “What is the US going to do about it?”158 Thirteen people, including diplomats, journalists, and politicians from different countries, were invited to this meeting as debaters. On the other hand, nine American statesmen and diplomats, including James V. Forrestal, Arthur M. Vandenberg, and Sumner Welles, discussed the official American view about post-war world politics. 159
Before going to the United States for this meeting, Ahmet Emin Yalman wrote his “Bitter Medicine (Acı İlaç)” article.160 In this article, Yalman drew an analogy between “bitter medicine” and criticism. He stated that even if the taste of a drug is bitter, it is beneficial to the body in the last instance. Similarly, he emphasized that although criticism reveals weaknesses and mistakes, it is an ultimately useful action to fix them. According to Yalman, although the Americans knew that criticism was a “bitter medicine,” they valued it and called thirteen people from all over the world to criticize them. Yalman aimed to emphasize the necessity of criticism as a blessing of American democracy. He compared American democracy with the developments in Turkish politics, and stated that the RPP government ignored the importance of criticism in multi-party politics. Against the RPP’s ignorance of criticism, Yalman proposed American democracy as a model.
On the other hand, one of the essential points that Yalman emphasized in his conference speech was his belief that “the power of initiative and action would come
156 Yalman, Yakın Tarihte Gördüklerim ve Geçirdiklerim, 1376.
157 For the speeches made at the meeting, see “Report from the World,” Time, 20 January 1947.
158 Ibid.
159 Ibid.
160 To read a passage from this article, see Yalman, Yakın Tarihte Gördüklerim ve Geçirdiklerim, 1378.
44
from America” that would change the ill fate of the world.161 Yalman based his view on two main principles: First of all, he stated that America was a brand-new entity created with brand new ideals by the chosen people who dare to cross the oceans. The second factor that made America exceptional for Yalman was that these chosen people had established a development path based on the authority of the local government and a system established on freedom. He later reiterated his arguments about American exceptionalism to justify American global responsibility in the Cold War period. Referring to the increasing Cold War tensions, Yalman wished the United States to be more active against the Soviet Union. Accordingly, by possessing the role as “the defender of freedom and democracy in world politics,” “America would save both the world and itself.”162
Apart from the emphasis on the American global responsibility in the developing Cold War circumstances, Yalman focused on the post-war transformation of the Turkish economy and the economic relations with the United States. For instance, Yalman interpreted the post-war transformation of the Turkish economy in “How Does Foreign Capital Reach Us? (Ecnebi Sermayesi Bize Nasıl Gelir?).”163 According to Yalman, a short time before he wrote that article, an ordinary citizen who talked about foreign capital in Turkey was accused of treason. However, he stated that the encouragement of foreign and private capital at that moment formed one of the primary national objectives of the Turkish government. In this article, Yalman conveyed his further recommendations to attract foreign capital to the Turkish market. In this context, the development of relations with the United States was closely related to the liberalization of the Turkish economy and the encouragement of foreign capital in Turkey. It may also be important to mention Yalman’s another article in which he referred to the suggestions made by American businessmen about the problems in the Turkish foreign market. During his stay in the US due to “the Report from the World” meeting, Yalman also gave lectures about Turkey at other events and met with prominent American businessmen. He published his impressions of these experiences in Vatan. For instance, he mentioned the
161 Ibid.
162 Ibid.
163 Yalman, “Ecnebi Sermayesi Bize Nasıl Gelir?,” Vatan, 4 December 1946.
45
American businessmen’s complaints about the Turkish economy in “Americans Are Having Troubles About Our Economic Affairs (İktisadi İşlerimizle İlgili Amerikalılar Dert Yanıyorlar).”164 Yalman emphasized that the American businessmen complained mostly about Turkish foreign exchange policies and economic mistrust in the Turkish economy.165 He also stated that the money that would flow from America to Turkey was abundant, and the production in the United States was returning to the average level. By providing trust in the Turkish economy for American foreign capital, Turkey could benefit from these material opportunities of the American capital.166
During his visit to the US, Yalman also met with Max Weston Thornburg,167 the research director of the Twentieth Century Fund’s mission in Turkey. In his memoirs, Yalman described his acquaintance with Thornburg as the most enjoyable part of his US journey.168 He also stated that Thornburg’s report “introduced Turkey to the world objectively.”169 In “America Prepares to Get to Know Turkey Closer”, Yalman also emphasized that Thornburg’s surveys in Turkey would contribute to the Turkish economy and society.170 According to Yalman, Thornburg’s mission also meant that the Americans intended to know more about Turkey.171 Since then, Thornburg made numerous visits to Turkey, and Yalman frequently referred to
164 Yalman, “İktisadi İşlerimizle İlgili Amerikalılar Dert Yanıyorlar,” Vatan, 27 January 1947.
165 Ibid.
166 Ibid.
167 In the post-war period, many American economic experts conducted research on the Turkish economy and they presented their reports to Turkish government. In this context, Thornburg came to Turkey in February 1947 with a group of American researchers and they presented their policy recommendations to the Turkish government. In this report, Thornburg mainly recommended that the Turkish government had to abandon statist policies, dissolve state-controlled industrialization, encourage private enterprise and modernize Turkish agriculture as a periphery of European countries. The sections from Thornburg’s report were published in Vatan under the title “A Great Economic Analysis: How Turkey Rises?” This report was also published as a book format, see Max Weston Thornburg, Graham Spry and George Soule, Turkey: An Economic Appraisal, (NY: Lord Baltimore Press, 1949).
168 Yalman, Yakın Tarihte Gördüklerim ve Geçirdiklerim, 1389.
169 Ibid.
170 Yalman, “Amerika Türkiye’yi Yakından Tanımaya Hazırlanıyor,” Vatan, 9 February 1947.
171 Ibid.
46
Thornburg’s recommendations in his articles. For instance, on 28 March 1947, after Thornburg arrived in Turkey, it was stated that he would identify the problems of Turkey and conduct investigations to raise Turkey’s average level.172 In February 1949, on the other hand, Thornburg’s another visit to Turkey was announced in Vatan with the headline “Thornburg, Friend of Our Country, Arrived.”173 Ahmet Emin Yalman depicted Thornburg as a “magic-minded man” and the savior of troubled countries.174 In another article, Yalman stated that the American advisory committees were spreading Turkey to heal its weaknesses, like a doctor heals its patient.175
On the other hand, Ahmet Emin Yalman’s comments about the Moscow Conference176, held between 10 March and 24 April 1947, were parallel to his speech in “the Report from the World” meeting in Cleveland. According to Yalman, before the Moscow Conference, the news coming from Washington and London was auspicious for Turkey.177 Accordingly, the United States, which returned to its isolationist policy after World War II, abandoned its isolationism and “was prepared to take broad responsibilities for the safety and well-being of the world.”178 In another article about the Moscow Conference, Yalman stated that war-torn Britain had no longer the capacity to “carry the heavy burdens in world affairs” and that the United States would take Britain’s responsibility in the Near East.179
172 “Türkiye’de Tetkikler: Bir Amerikan Mümessili Memleketimize Geldi,” Vatan, 28 March 1947.
173 “Memleketimizin Candan Dostu Max Thornburg Geldi,” Vatan, 17 February 1949.
174 Yalman, “Dr. Thornburg’un Görüşü ile Türkiye.,” Vatan, 17 February 1949.
175 Yalman, “Yeni Ufuklara Doğru,” Vatan, 6 July 1947.
176 In the post-war period, the Moscow Conference was one of the critical incidents that manifested the irreparable disruption of international harmony. The Soviet Union Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov, the United States Secretary of State George C. Marshall, the British Foreign Minister Ernest Bevin and French Foreign Minister Georges Bidault participated in this meeting to discuss the current world affairs. After forty-five days of discussions, the Big Four could not reach a definite result. Marshall and Molotov accused each other of failing the conference.
177 Yalman, “Nelere Mal Oluyorlar,” Vatan, 5 March 1947.
178 Ibid.
179 Yalman, “İngiliz-Amerikan Ortaklığı,” Vatan, 6 March 1947.
47
As the Cold War tensions intensified, the anti-communist theme in Yalman’s writings also increased. For instance, he depicted communists as people “who aim to destroy freedom and establish tyranny on behalf of the foreigners.”180 In another article, Yalman described communism as an epidemic and depicted the Soviet Union as “a customary dictatorship and tyranny system (mutad diktatörlük ve istibdat rejimi)” that “violates freedoms and does not recognize human rights.”181 Both the increasing Cold War tensions and the RPP’s association of the Democrat Party with communism made the anti-communist themes in Yalman’s articles become clearer.182 As a result of the RPP’s ongoing accusations against the Democrat Party, the members of the DP emphasized their anti-communist rhetoric more,183 and this manifested itself most clearly in Yalman’s articles.
After Missouri’s visit, another critical incident in Turkish-American relations was the Truman Doctrine, and it set the main agenda of Turkish journalists for a long time. In “Our Cooperation with America (Amerika ile İşbirliğimiz),” Ahmet Emin Yalman stated that Turkey, which formerly resisted the expansionist ambitions of the Soviet Union alone, preserved the peace and security front so far.184 The United States, responsible for protecting democracy and freedom, had awakened from its slumber, and taken actions against the Soviet Union. Referring to the US’ support for Turkey with the Truman Doctrine, Yalman stated: “While the whole world is chasing after America and asking for help, the United States has reached out to us with its initiative.”185
180 Yalman, “Bir İhmalin Neticeleri,” Vatan, 7 March 1947.
181 Yalman, “Bir Dünya Salgını,” Vatan, 9 March 1947.
182 One of the main reasons for the association of the DP with communism was the fact that it had close relations with the left-wing journal, Görüşler, during the establishment process of the party. In the following periods, these accusations were consolidated by the different statements of the government. This ultimately resulted in the increase of anti-communist rhetoric among the DP members. For a detailed analysis of the RPP’s anti-communist policies and its accusations against the DP, see Koçak, Türkiye’de İki Partili Sistemin Kuruluş Yılları: Rejim Krizi, 305-413.
183 For instance, see Fuat Köprülü, “Son Beyanatın Asıl Mana ve Hedefi,” Kuvvet, 3 February 1947; “Türk Demokrasisi ve Hürriyet Düşmanı Komünistler,” Vatan, 3 March 1947.
184 Yalman, “Amerika ile İşbirliğimiz,” Vatan, 11 March 1947.
185 Ibid.
48
In “Peacemaker America (Barış Kurucu Amerika),” on the other hand, Falih Rıfkı Atay referred to Truman’s historic speech in the Congress. According to Atay, the United States was a peaceful state and sought a world order based on freedom and law.186 He also depicted Turkey and Greece as the two idealist countries that the United States could rely on in the Mediterranean. Thus, the US’ aids to these countries would naturally contribute to world peace. Atay also stated that “Peacemaker America” would always find Turkey by its side while doing “its historical and humanitarian duty” to bring peace to all nations.187 On 24 March 1947, Atay interpreted Truman’s speech in another article. He first stated that the world was divided between “the order of freedom” and “the order of dictatorship.”188 In this context, he noted that it was the United States that would ensure the integrity of the peace front, and its foreign policy had to remain active. According to Atay, the United States had to deliver aids to every corner of the world to maintain world peace. He compared the importance of American global responsibility in the post-war period with the discovery of the Americas and emphasized that both events were significant for human history.189 Ensuring peace and freedom in the post-war world depended on the realization of the US’ historical responsibility. Atay stated that Truman’s historical speech was an essential step taken on that path.190
After the US economic aid package to Greece and Turkey was approved in the US House of the Representatives, Atay interpreted this development as “the most important step taken on the path of peace.”191 According to Atay, Turkey was pleased to see its protection in the peaceful foreign policy of the United States. Atay summarized the US’ friendly foreign policy with the following passage: “Wherever America comes closer, war will go away.”192 Contrary to the peaceful foreign policy
186 Atay, “Barış Kurucu Amerika,” Ulus, 15 March 1947.
187 Ibid.
188 Atay, “Hürriyet Nizamının Yolu,” Ulus, 24 March 1947.
189 Ibid.
190 Ibid.
191 Atay, “Barış Yolunda Büyük Bir Adım,” Ulus, 24 April 1947.
192 Ibid.
49
of the United States, Atay stated that the Soviet Union lost the opportunity to become the cornerstone of the world peace order because of its doctrinist and unilateral foreign policy.193
Another important issue that was referred in Ulus was the visit of the American fleet on 2 May 1947.194 After greeting the American marines who visited Turkey, Falih Rıfkı Atay commented on the post-war foreign policy of the United States and the Turkish-American friendship. According to Atay, the security of the United States had been the central pillar of all free nations.195 Atay interpreted that the American sailors who visited Turkey were the representatives of a country determined to establish world peace. He further stated that the Turkish people treated the banners of the American navy as “the harbinger of peace and freedom.”196 The Turkish people would also make the American marines feel the friendship of Turkey closely, according to Atay. He stated that “there are two slogans” for the Turkish people who would consolidate the Turkish-American friendship: “peace and freedom.”197
On 5 June 1947, after the US Secretary of State George Marshall delivered a speech at Harvard University about the American plan to recover the war-thorn European countries,198 the Turkish press immediately reacted to this event, and Marshall’s speech received comprehensive coverage in the media.199 In this context, the diplomatic meeting held in Paris in June 1947 between the British Foreign Minister Ernest Bevin, the French Foreign Minister Georges Bidault, and Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov to discuss the implementation of the Marshall Plan was another significant development. On 2 July 1947, Molotov rejected the Marshall
193 Ibid.
194 Atay, “Amerikan Denizcileri İstanbul’da,” Ulus, 2 May 1947.
195 Ibid.
196 Ibid.
197 Ibid.
198 Yilmaz, Turkish-American Relations, 124.
199 For the Turkish press coverage of the case, see Ayın Tarihi, June 1947, 158-174.
50
Plan assistance, and this development signified one of the critical incidents in which the Cold War tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union intensified.200
On 7 July 1947, Falih Rıfkı Atay interpreted the Marshall Plan-related developments in “The Split of the World in Two (Dünyanın İkiye Bölünüşü). According to Atay, the stubborn foreign policy of the Soviet Union had then brought the diplomatic relations to “a turning point.”201 He stated that the Paris Conference was the clear demonstration of the split of the world into two. The Soviet Union could not defeat the peace front with war, and it aimed to damage this front “by using all the blessings of democracy” in diplomatic talks. He emphasized that “world peace depends on the disappointment of the hopes of the Soviet Union” and “America would play a historical role in this war.”202 Apart from “the stubbornness of the Soviet Union in foreign policy,” another factor mentioned by Atay was about the destructive activities of “parties, organs, and agents of international communism.”203 According to Atay, it was impossible to struggle with the Soviet Union unless these activities could not be prevented.
It is significant to emphasize that more articles about the bipolar world atmosphere and “destructive activities” of the Soviet Union could be found in Atay’s writings from that date on. In other words, the depiction of the Soviet Union was more prominent in his later articles. On 17 July 1947, for instance, Atay depicted “international communism” through the attacks of the Greek communist forces in Athens during the ongoing Greek Civil War.204 According to Atay, these attacks aimed to incorporate Greece in “the totalitarian Slavic bloc” and “to open a crucial breach in the democracy front.”205 He also stated that the communists from all around the world were mobilized to materialize a world revolution. They used the
200 Ibid.
201 Atay, “Dünyanın İkiye Bölünüşü,” Ulus, 7 July 1947.
202 Ibid.
203 Ibid.
204 Atay, “Kızıl Partiler ve Demokrasi,” Ulus, 16 July 1947.
205 Ibid.
51
rights and freedoms of democracy, which they would undermine later, in their destructive activities. In this interpretation, Atay referred to the mass-based communist parties in Italy and France, and recommended taking concrete measures against their momentum.206
One of the important events that occurred in the bipolar global atmosphere that the Turkish periodicals depicted was the United Nations General Assembly meetings. The fierce debates between the Western and Eastern Bloc countries marked these meetings and this constituted one of the main agendas of Turkish journalists.207 For instance, Atay commented on the United Nations General Assembly held on 17 September 1947. According to Atay, this meeting “would lead to the new encounters between the dictatorial Slavic bloc and the liberal-peaceful democratic bloc.”208 He also supported the US’ proposal about the alliance between countries that were subjected to aggression from an external nation. Atay stated that this was not an offensive front against the Soviet Union because the offensive front was first opened by “the dictatorial Slavic bloc.”209 It was crucial to protect all free nations from “the fears and dangers created by this front.”210
In the UN General Assembly, the Soviet representative Andrey Vyshinsky stated that the Turkish press made false news about the Soviet Union, and these provoked the Turkish people to war. Vyshinsky’s comments received widespread coverage in the Turkish press. For instance, in his article “Nobody Has Deceived Anymore (Artık Kimse Aldanmıyor),” Falih Rıfkı Atay strongly opposed Vyshinsky’s claims. He stated that all free nations, including Turkey, aimed to establish “a system of peace and international trust.”211 In this meeting, the discussions between the Turkish representative Selim Sarper and Vyshinsky also received attention from the Turkish
206 Ibid.
207 For instance, see Ayın Tarihi, September 1947, 101-116.
208 Atay, “Çıkar Yollardan Biri,” Ulus, 20 September 1947.
209 Ibid.
210 Ibid.
211 Atay, “Artık Kimse Aldanmıyor,” Ulus, 22 September 1947.
52
press. On October 26, Ulus announced these discussions with the title “Vyshinsky Demanded Kars and Ardahan.”212 On 27 October, Falih Rıfkı opposed “Vyshinsky’s demands” and openly rejected his claims that the United States, Turkey, and Greece were preparing to wage a war against the Soviet Union.213
After the Soviet objections to the Marshall Plan in the Paris Conference, the Cominform214 was established on 5 October 1947 by the Soviet Union to coordinate European communist parties.215 Falih Rıfkı Atay interpreted this development as the resurrection of the Comintern in his article “World Provocation (Dünya Tahrikçiliği).”216 According to Atay, the communists in every country “were the red minority under the command of the Comintern (Komintern’in emri altındaki kızıl azınlık).”217 He stated that free nations had to take joint measures against this organization's institutionalization, armament, and economic empowerment. He also noted that the Comintern became the central organ of interference of the state’s internal affairs and the infringement of national sovereignty rights. Accordingly, the joint action against the danger of the Comintern would serve to establish world peace.218
As reviewed above, from the Missouri’s visit to his resignation, Falih Rıfkı contributed significantly to the formation of Cold War discourse in Ulus. While reflecting the official point of view, Atay’s interpretations consolidated the favorable
212 “Vişinski Kars ve Ardahan’ı İstedi”, Ulus, 26 October 1947.
213 Atay, “Sarper ve Vişinski Arasında”, Ulus, 27 October 1947.
214 The Comintern, that was formed to establish “world communism” under the Soviet Union’s leadership in 1919, played an essential role in the organization of the European communist movements, especially in the countries like Germany and Hungary. In 1943, it was dissolved by Stalin not to antagonize the Soviet’s wartime allies. In the post-war period, however, in response to the Marshall Plan, it was reorganized as the Cominform by incorporating the leading communist parties of Europe.
215 Heinz Timmermann, ‘The Cominform Effects on Soviet Foreign Policy’, Studies in Comparative Communism, Vol.18, No.1 (1985), 5.
216 Atay, “Dünya Tahrikçiliği,” Ulus, 16 October 1947.
217 Ibid.
218 Ibid.
53
images of the United States in the Cold War context and pioneered the legitimization of Turkish-American relations in the Turkish press.
Ahmet Emin Yalman, on the other hand, took part in the establishment process of the Worlds Liberal Union, and devoted a lot of time to its organizational process after the declaration of the Truman Doctrine. Founded to disseminate liberal ideas among the world nations, the first meeting of this organization was held at Oxford University between 9 and 14 April 1947.219 Ahmet Emin was elected as the principal member of the organization committee and went abroad many times for the organization activities of the union. For instance, in July 1947, Yalman attended the meeting of the Worlds Liberal Union in London.220 After this meeting, Yalman visited Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Germany, and Italy for the organization activities of the union and shared his impressions from these countries in Vatan. The Worlds Liberal Union was represented in Turkey by the Society for Disseminating Free Ideas (Hür Fikirleri Yayma Cemiyeti) that was established in October 1947.221 After its establishment, Yalman continued to be a pioneer in disseminating liberal ideas via the society’s periodicals and conferences.222
To summarize Yalman’s articles reviewed in this section, it can be stated that his articles also played an important role in the legitimization of the government’s official foreign policy about the Cold War. Although he was a prominent pro-Democrat figure and conflicted with Atay on other issues in internal politics, Yalman largely agreed with him in foreign policy interpretations. Their depictions of the United States in the increasing Cold War tensions were similar like the RPP and the DP’s agreement on this topic. In this context, however, it is significant to point out
219 Yalman, Yakın Tarihte Gördüklerim ve Geçirdiklerim, 1397.
220 Ibid., 1404-1405.
221 M. Kürşat Birinci, ‘Erken Dönem Türk Demokrasisinde (1946-1950) Liberal Arayışlar’ (Gazi University, Unpublished MA Thesis, 2007), 75.
*Two prominent figures of the society were Ahmet Emin Yalman and Ali Fuat Başgil, who was another Vatan writer. In November 1948, this society started to publish Hür Fikirler journal. By adopting an anti-communist and liberal policy orientation, this journal became the most important voice of pro-American opinions under the increasing Cold War tensions. Başgil stated that Vatan also functioned as the publication organ of the Society for Disseminating Free Ideas, see Birinci, ‘Erken Dönem Türk Demokrasisinde (1946-1950) Liberal Arayışlar’, 78.
222 Birinci, ‘Erken Dönem Türk Demokrasisinde (1946-1950) Liberal Arayışlar’, 92-102.
54
some contextual differences between Yalman’s and Atay’s articles. In his articles on economics, Yalman, firstly, emphasized that American private capital could provide many advantages for the Turkish economy. Moreover, he also advocated for the supervision of the Turkish economy under the leadership of the United States. His articles depicting the United States as a liberal and democratic role model for Turkey can also be viewed in this context. These interpretations differed Yalman from Atay, who wrote mainly about the US leadership in the developing Cold War circumstances. While Yalman’s liberal political profile was at the forefront in this context, Atay’s depiction of the United States was limited to defending its liberal and democratic values only in the Cold War context.
2.7. Depicting the Cold War with Images: Ratip Tahir Burak’s Cartoons in Ulus
On 30 December 1946, Ulus announced that it would enter the new year with a new policy orientation.223 One of the changes in Ulus was Ratip Tahir Burak’s224 cartoons on the cover page of the newspaper. Ratip Tahir was a well-known figure of Turkish political humor tradition and drew caricatures for popular humor magazines of the early republican period like Aydede, Zümrüd-ü Anka, Karagöz, Karikatür, and Akbaba.225 Burak had close relations with the political authorities of the single-party period, so his cartoons remained within the boundaries drawn by the republican regime and could not gain an oppositional character in the RPP period.226 Moreover,
223 “Yılbaşından İtibaren Ulus’ta Yenilikler,” Ulus, 30 December 1946.
224 Ratip Tahir studied painting in Paris between 1926 and 1928 with the support of İsmet İnönü. After returning to Turkey, he drew many nationalist paintings and portayals of Atatürk, and these paintings made him popular among the Kemalist elites. In 1936, he began to draw cartoons, mostly apolitical, for Ulus.
225 Ahmet Mehmetefendioğlu and Yasin Kayış, ‘Siyasi Halk Gazetesi ve Ratip Tahir Burak’, Toplumsal Tarih, No.179 (2008).
*Ratip Tahir Burak was one of the prominent Republican oppositional figures in the Democrat Party era (1950-1960). His cartoons in Siyasi Halk Gazetesi, which were started to be published in 1956, drew harsh criticisms against the DP government. He was also imprisoned by the political authority in 1957 due to his oppositional cartoons. For a comprehensive study analyzing the political humor in the Democrat Party era and Ratip Tahir’s oppositional activities during this period, see Yasin Kayış, "Demokrat Parti İktidarı Döneminde Siyasi Karikatür" (Dokuz Eylül University, Unpublished MA Thesis, 2004).
226 Ibid.
55
Burak’s cartoons aimed to respond Markopaşa, which created a counter-hegemonic discourse against the official Cold War policy. While reflecting the official foreign policy orientation in the early post-war period, Ratip Tahir’s cartoons in Ulus contributed to the development of several positive images of America in the developing Cold War circumstances.
Figure 1: Ratip Tahir Burak, “Yeni İngiliz-Amerikan İşbirliği (New Anglo-American Cooperation),” Ulus, 7 January 1947
For instance, Figure 1 depicts the deteriorating relations between the Western countries and the Soviet Union at the onset of the Cold War. Ratip Tahir aims to indicate that the United States and Great Britain, which tried to develop close relations with the Soviet Union following the end of World War II, soon realized the evil intentions of the Soviet Union. As the globe is falling into a glowing and intense fire, Uncle Sam and John Bull, representing the US and Britain respectively, stop the globe’s roll with all their strengths. Ratip Tahir described the US and Britain’s move with the following passage: “We were about to be late.”
56
Figure 2: Burak, “Komünistler Birleşik Amerika Düşmanı Tanınacak (Communists Will Be Recognized as Enemy of the United States),” Ulus, 14 February 1947.
In Figure 2, the Soviet Union is depicted with a figure who Uncle Sam locks out. Ratip Tahir presented this cartoon with “Communism: I was waiting for the future at this door.” However, the angry demon-like Soviet figure holding a hammer and sickle, the symbols of communism, is disillusioned even by the lower part of gigantic Uncle Sam’s leg whose trousers and shoes symbolize the United States flag.
57
Figure 3: Burak, “Moskova Konferansı Başlarken (While the Moscow Conference is Opening),” Ulus, 14 March 1947.
In Figure 3, Ratip Tahir refers to President Truman’s speech that he gave to the Congress on 12 March 1947. During the negotiations of the Moscow Conference, President Truman’s declaration of the economic aid package to Greece and Turkey is depicted with the illustrations of Truman and Stalin figures who play card games. In front of the confused Stalin figure, who has a small amount of money on his hand, wealthy and happy Truman figure puts his four hundred million dollars of package on the table and says: “A Tiny bob!”. In this cartoon, Ratip Tahir states that the United States gained the upper hand in the Moscow Conference negotiations thanks to the declaration of the Truman Doctrine.
58
Figure 4: Burak, “Amerika 400 Milyonluk Kanun Çıkmadan 100 Milyon Gönderiyor (America Sends 100 Million Dollars Before the 400 Millions Dollars of Aid Bill),” Ulus, 20 March 1947.
Another reflection of the Truman Doctrine in Ratip Tahir’s cartoons is about the amount and method of aid to be given to Turkey. Before the enactment of the Truman Doctrine in the United States, it was announced that a hundred million dollars aid would be sent to Turkey. Ratip Tahir expresses this development with a widely used Turkish proverb called “Let the steam come after us!”227 In figure 4, the economic aid that would be sent to Turkey is depicted on a ship reminiscent of the
227 The origin of this proverb is based on a story that took place between the Ottoman sultan Mehmet Reşat and his captain who were preparing to cruise on the Bosphorus. The Ottoman sultan, who was impatient for the cruise, said to the captain “Let’s go now!”. The captain said “Steam has not come yet! (İstim Henüz Gelmedi!)”. The captain tried to express that the steam power that was required to move the boat had not yet arrived. However, Mehmet Reşat who did not know that the boat works with steam, said “Let the steam come after us! (İstim Arkadan Gelsin!)” This passage is later used to refer to the “duties or works whose legal requirements have not yet been met, but which had been practically fulfilled.” It is actually used to indicate that Turkish people do not pay great attention to legal/bureaucratic procedures.
59
depictions of the expeditionary vessels of Christopher Colombus, with the American-flagged sail and a hundred million dollars purse on its deck. Iconic genuine American figures like skyscrapers and the Statue of Liberty stand out behind the ship, which is on its way to Turkey. While emphasizing the economic superiority of the United States in this cartoon, Ratip Tahir also tried to indicate how Turkey was important for American foreign policy. Sending some amount of aid before the law on the Truman Doctrine was enacted in the Congress emphasizes the urgency of Turkey-Soviet conflict and Turkey’s key role against the Soviet Union.
Figure 5: Burak, “Komşu Çatlatan (The Neighbor-Envier),” Ulus, 25 April 1947.
In another cartoon (Figure 5), the United States is depicted as Uncle Sam as usual, who holds a gift box and flowers. The gift package represents the economic aid that would be given to Turkey under the Truman Doctrine. With his surprises in his hand, Uncle Sam rings the doorbell of a house, which symbolizes the Republic of Turkey. On the other hand, the male neighbor figure representing the Soviet Union watches
60
this scene with envy. While this cartoon emphasizes the US’ strategic superiority over the Soviet Union, it also implies that the Soviet ambitions on Turkey falls through.
Figure 6: Burak, “Sayı Hesabıyla Galip! (Win on Numbers),” Ulus, 11 May 1947.
In Figure 6, the ratification of the Truman Doctrine in the House of Representatives was depicted by Ratip Tahir with a victorious boxing Truman figure. Uncle Sam representing the US Senate and a male figure representing the House of Representatives raise Truman’s hands and celebrate his victory. By referring to the vote numbers in favor of the Truman Doctrine, Ratip Tahir presents this cartoon with the boxing term “Win on numbers.”
61
Figure 7: Burak, “Parladıkça Lekelerini Daha İyi Görüyorum (As It Shines I See Its Spots Better),” Ulus, 25 March 1947.
In Figure 7, on the other hand, Ratip Tahir features an Uncle Sam figure observing the sky with a telescope. A remote shining star in the sky with sickle and hammer symbolizes the Soviet Union, and Uncle Sam figure says that “As it shines, I see its spots better!”. Ratip Tahir mainly implies that the United States, which supposed that it could maintain its good relations with the Soviet Union after the war, gradually understood the evil intentions of the Soviet Union as well as the vast distance between the two countries.
62
Figure 8: Burak, Ulus, 9 June 1947.
Uncle Sam and John Bull are depicted in a cemetery in Figure 8, representing the deteriorating relations between the Western Block countries and the Soviet Union. In this depiction, Uncle Sam and John Bull dig the last empty place in the cemetery. Ratip Tahir presents this image with the following passage: “There is only one room for a friend here; let’s prepare its place while our pickax and shover are at hand.” The phrases “fascist, racist, national socialist, follower of sharia, imperialist” are the inscriptions at the back. They represent the forces previously buried by John Bull and Uncle Sam. Ratip Tahir mainly implies that communism would be buried in the empty place in the cemetery as the last enemy of the global order based on freedom and democracy.
63
Figure 9: Burak, “Demokrasinin Tarifi (Description of Democracy),” Ulus, 18 June 1947.
Another cartoon of Ratip Tahir (Figure 9) focuses on the definition of democracy. In this depiction, an elephant figure guided by Uncle Sam and John Bull represents democracy. Ratip Tahir establishes an analogy with a well-known story of Mevlana Celaleddin Rumi.228 In this cartoon, the blindfolded figures, representing the Soviet Union and its allies, try to describe the elephant by touching its different limbs. However, since they are blindfolded, none of them can accurately identify it. While the United States and Great Britain were depicted as the leaders of democracy, the Soviet Union and its allies were represented as totalitarian countries far from the experience of democracy. Because they touch the animal, they feel it yet they cannot
228 Rumi is a prominent Islamic thinker who lived in the thirteenth century and known for his literary works. Ratip Tahir refers to an Indian story in Rumi’s Masnavi. In this story, the Indian villagers who have never seen an elephant try to identify it in a dark room. Each of them touch its different limbs and define it according to the limb they touch. However, none of them thought to turn on the light in the room. Thus, no one in the room can accurately describe the elephant.
64
see it because their eyes are closed with their hats which are also symbols of their ideological inclinations.
Figure 10: Burak, “Avrupa için Fidye-i Necat (Salvation Ransom for Europe),” Ulus, 5 July 1947.
After the Soviet Union rejected the Marshall Plan on 2 July 1947, Ratip Tahir’s cartoons primarily focuses on the depictions of the United States that liberates Europe from the oppression of the Soviet Union. In these depictions, Europe is usually represented female figure captured by the Soviet Union. Tahir’s feminization of Europe probably takes its inspiration from Europa, the female mythological character who gave the European continent its name. For instance, in “Salvation Ransom for Europe (Avrupa için Fidye-i Necat), Uncle Sam negotiates with the guard figure representing the Soviet Union. With his bag of dollars, Uncle Sam tries to bail the female figure out of jail. Yet the guard presumably asks for more money
65
by indicating that the amount that Uncle Sam offers could be an adequate amount only for her dowry (drahoma). By emphasizing dowry here, Ratip Tahir may also have wanted to imply that the United States, which had historical ties with the Old Continent, has a marriage relationship with European countries.
Figure 11: Burak, “Yardan mı Geçsem, Serden mi? (I Am Faced with An Impossible Choice),” Ulus, 7 July 1947.
In Figure 11, Ratip Tahir depicts the indecisiveness of the Soviet Union. While the bear figure shown on the tree represents the Soviet Union, the female figure in the bear’s claw symbolizes Europe. This tree’s trunk is depicted as larger than its root, and the tree is in danger of falling. The bear is stuck in a dilemma. It would either survive by sacrificing Europe, or it would not leave Europe, causing the tree to fall and be hunted by the armed Uncle Sam. In both options, Uncle Sam would gain. In
66
this depiction, Ratip Tahir tried to indicate that the Marshall Plan had driven the Soviet Union into the corner.
Figure 12: Burak, “Amerika ve İngiltere Avrupa’yı Kalkındırıyorlar (America and England Are Reconstructing Europe),” Ulus, 27 July 1947.
In Figure 12, Ratip Tahir responds to the newspapers’ headline “America and England Are Reconstructing Europe.” In this cartoon, Uncle Sam and John Bull are trying to raise on feet a female figure crouching on the ground due to the chain ball handcuffed around her neck. The female figure representing Europe, on the other hand, says, “You take off the chain ball, I will reconstruct myself.” Tahir states here that the main target of the United States and Britain was to prevent Soviet expansionism.
67
Figure 13: Burak, “Teknenin Selameti Uğruna… (For the Sake of the Boat)”, Ulus, 26 September 1947.
Furthermore, Ratip Tahir reflects the tensions in the United Nations meetings in his cartoons. For instance, in one cartoon (Figure 13), the world countries traveling on the rough sea are depicted when they throw a male figure and a large barrel from the ship. While the male figure thrown from the boat symbolizes the Soviet Union, the large barrel, which is too big for the ship to carry, represents its veto power in the United Nations. In this cartoon, Ratip Tahir interprets the Soviet Union as a troublemaker and concludes that its elimination from the United Nations is a measure of safety for the sake of the world.
68
Figure 14: Burak, “Kıyamet Alameti (A Sign of Doomsday),” Ulus, 9 October 1947.
Like Falih Rıfkı’s interpretations, Ratip Tahir depicts the emergence of the Cominform as the resurrection of the Comintern. In this cartoon, Ratip Tahir symbolizes the Comintern with a skeletal figure carrying a sword in its mouth, and it comes out of its grave with the help of a male figure illustrating the Soviet Union. Ratip Tahir also interprets the formation of the Cominform as “a sign of Doomsday” in the caption below.
All in all, the depiction of the Cold War actors in Ratip Tahir’s cartoons contributed to form stereotypical images of these actors in Ulus. These depictions also consolidated the perception that the United States was an ideal partner of Turkey in the developing Cold War tensions and the increasing Soviet threat against Turkey. Apart from Turkey’s position in the Cold War, Tahir also paid attention to the recent developments in world politics, especially in Europe. While these depictions
69
consolidated the American global leadership in the Cold War context, they also manifested how the Turkish press developed a Cold War discourse by closely following the developments of world politics.
2.8. America-Related Political Serials (Siyasi Tefrika) and Translated Articles
One of the most important factors reflecting the Americanization of Ulus and Vatan was the increase in the number of translated articles from the works and memoirs of American politicians, diplomats, and senior military officers. While most of these articles reflected the developing Cold War circumstances from an American point of view, they also contributed to the consolidation of pro-American stance in these periodicals. Furthermore, the increasing number of translated articles about American statesmen's political careers and American everyday life also contributed to the construction of positive images of the United States in the early post-World War II period. In addition to that, the prominence of American popular culture and the American way of life in Turkish periodicals became another significant characteristic of Americanization in the early post-war period. In this context, the format change in Ulus was an important step in disseminating the American way of life. On 30 December 1946, it was announced that Ulus would be published as twelve pages on Sundays.229 While this announcement meant the tabloidization of Ulus on Sundays, there was significant increase in news and articles about American popular culture and daily life practices in the United States.
Examining how the Cold War was depicted in the provincial Turkish newspapers, Gavin Brockett states that there was a dramatic increase in the number of translated news depicting the United States in the early post-war period thanks to the activities of the United States Information Service (USIS) in Turkey.230 Aiming to promote the positive images of the United States in foreign countries, USIS formed daily news bulletins and articles for the local press.231 In this context, the sources of Ulus and
229 “Yılbaşından İtibaren Ulus’ta Yenilikler,” Ulus, 30 December 1946.
230 Gavin D. Brockett, How Happy to Call Oneself a Turk: Provincial Newspapers and the Negotiation of a Muslim National Identity (Texas: University of Texas Press, 2011), 153.
231 Ibid.
70
Vatan’s translated articles, which increased significantly since 1947, may have been taken from the bulletins and articles prepared by USIS.
2.8.1. Forming A Cold War Discourse Through the Americans and the American Sources
The publication of Harry C. Butcher's My Three Years with Eisenhower on 9 September 1946 in Ulus was a pioneer in this regard.232 Butcher had served as the Naval Aide to General Dwight D. Eisenhower from 1942 to 1945, and this translation series focused on the wartime memoirs of Butcher. In an introductory article about this translation series on September 7, it was stated that Butcher, as a close friend of General Eisenhower, was appointed as Eisenhower’s adjutant to write this work.233 This translation series was published in Ulus for a long time, and it did not only give significant information about Eisenhower’s personal life but it also presented the American military presence and foreign policy in World War II.
Another translation series was “Nereye Gidiyoruz?” that was based on Sumner Welles’ Where Are We Heading?. Welles served as the Under Secretary of State and became President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s closest advisers in foreign policy between 1936 and 1943. In Where Are We Heading, he mainly interpreted the recent developments in the post-war world order and made predictions about these developments and the direction of American foreign policy. “Shadows Over the Near East,” the fifth chapter of the book, was first published on 16 December 1946 in Ulus, and other chapters were published in the following periods.234
One of the most important article series that reflected the developing Cold War circumstances from an American point of view was the translation of John Foster Dulles’ “Thoughts on Soviet Foreign Policy and What to Do about It” from Life magazine.235 Starting on 1 May 1947, this article was published in seven serials,
232 Harry C. Butcher, “Eisenhower’la Üç Yıl,” Ulus, 9 September 1946.
233 “Pazartesi Başlıyoruz: Eisenhower’la Üç Yıl,” Ulus, 7 September 1946.
234 Sumner Welles, “Yakın Doğu Üzerinde Bulutlar,” Ulus, 16 December 1946.
71
under the title of “On the Road to Peace (Barış Yolunda).236 In the introductory part of this article, Dulles was identified as “a person who spent most of his life on the path of peace.”237 This article had a fundamental role in reflecting and shaping Dulles’ perception of the Soviet Union in the post-war period.238 He firstly focused on the formation of “the Soviet threat” and stated that the Soviet Union aimed to establish “Pax Sovietica.” Dulles described the Soviet Union and its foreign policy as hostile to the democratic and liberal values of the American system.239 He also interpreted that the Soviet Union’s foreign policy was inelastic, centrally dominated, and ideological.240 Dulles, secondly, focused on how the United States had to develop a solid foreign policy against Soviet expansionism. Dulles first emphasized religious revival and democratic-economic freedoms as the crucial elements that would unite US citizens against the Soviet threat. He also stated that military preparedness and economic aids to other countries had to be an indispensable part of American foreign policy.241
William C. Bullitt was another prominent American diplomat whose articles appeared in Ulus in the post-war period. Bullitt was well-known by many Turkish people because of his stay in Istanbul in 1923. Bullitt came to Turkey with the prominent American journalist and his prospective partner Loise Bryant to follow the
235 John Foster Dulles, “Thoughts on Soviet Foreign Policy and What to Do About It ?,” Life, 3 June 1946.
*Dulles was the foreign policy adviser of the Republican presidential candidate John E. Dewey between 1944 and 1948. He also played an important role in the San Francisco Conference where the United Nations was formed. After this conference, Dulles served as the American delegate to the United Nations. From 1953 to 1959, Dulles became the United States Secretary of State. Dulles was also one of the American officials frequently criticized by the Turkish left, as will be mentioned in the next chapter. For instance, the prominent Turkish poet Nazım Hikmet wrote the poem “23 Sentlik Asker (Soldier for 23 Cents) in response to Dulles’ statement that “we supply the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s cheapest soldiers from Turkey” during the Korean War. This poem became one of the significant symbols of anti-imperialist though in Turkey.
236 John Foster Dulles, “Barış Yolunda,” Ulus, 1 May 1947.
237 Ibid.
238 Mark G. Toulouse, ‘The Development of a Cold Warrior: John Foster Dulles and the Soviet Union, 1945-1952’, American Presbyterians, Vol.63, No.3 (1985).
239 Dulles, “Barış Yolunda I,” Ulus, 1 May 1947.
240 Dulles, “Barış Yolunda III,” Ulus, 3 May 1947.
241 Dulles, “Barış Yolunda VI,” Ulus, 6 May 1947.
72
recent developments in Turkey during this period.242 He later served as the United States ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1933 to 1936, and France from 1936 to 1940. Bullitt became a staunch anti-communist in the post-World War II period and published articles and books on foreign policy. Bullitt’s studies were published in different printing houses in Turkey and contributed to disseminating anti-communist ideas in the post-war period.243 “The Power of American Policy (Amerikan Dış Siyasetinin Kuvveti)” that was published in Ulus on 14 September 1947 also reflected Bullitt’s foreign policy studies.244 In this article, Bullitt mainly recommended that the United States had to adopt harsher policies against the Soviet Union, and increase its aids given to the countries that were exposed to the Soviet threat. He also stated that the United States did not only have to lead the free countries with its economic and military superiority, but it also had to also lead intellectually. According to Bullitt, the determinants of this intellectual leadership could be found in the Bible, the Constitution of the United States, and President Abraham Lincoln’s Address in the Independence Hall. Citing from Lincoln’s speech, Bullitt emphasized the idea that “the Declaration of Independence which gave liberty, not alone to the people of this country, but, to the world.”245
Another translation series of Ulus started to be published on 1 November 1947 under the name “Açık Konuşalım (Speaking Frankly).”246 This series based on the summary of important passages from the memoirs of James F. Byrnes, who served as the US Secretary of State between 1945 and 1947.247 Byrnes’ memoirs reflected the first-hand information about the conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union, and it was based on Byrnes’ impressions from the key diplomatic talks with the Soviet Union, such as Yalta, Potsdam, and Moscow Conferences. In the
242 Howard E. Reed, ‘Turkey and Her Nationalist Leaders as Seen in the 1923 Reports of Louise Bryant’, in Studies in Atatürk’s Turkey:The American Dimension, ed. by George S. Harris and Nur Bilge Criss (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2009).
243 William C. Bullitt, Sovyetler, (Samsun: İl Matbaası, 1947); Kızıl Rusya: Tek Başına Bir Dünya, (İstanbul: Tanin Matbaası, 1948); Asıl Büyük Dünya, (İstanbul: Nebioğlu, 1960).
244 William C. Bullitt, “Amerikan Dış Siyasetinin Kuvveti”, Ulus, 14 September 1947.
245Ibid.
246 James F . Byrnes, “Açık Konuşalım,” Ulus, 1 November 1947.
247 Byrnes, Speaking Frankly (London and Toronto: William Heinemann, 1947).
73
introductory passage about this series, Byrnes was defined as a critical figure who “defended American principle of peace against the Soviet Union with the utmost merit.”248 It was also stated that the secret aspects of the American-Soviet conflict were illuminated in Byrnes’ memoirs.
Another translation series published in Ulus was the memoirs of Cordell Hull, who served as the Secretary of State between 1933 and 1944. On 23 January 1948, it was reported that Hull’s memoirs “that revealed the inner face of important events regarding Europe and Orient” were going to be published simultaneously in the New York Times and Ulus.249 In this case, it can be argued that Ulus, which published many translated articles at that time, collaborated with the New York Times. Furthermore, it was emphasized that Hull’s memoirs had a crucial role in understanding the tense political atmosphere of the post-war period. These serial translations, which appeared in Ulus on Sunday and Thursday, continued to be published for a long time and reflected the critical incidents of the war and post-war period from an American perspective.
Apart from these articles reflecting the American position in the developing Cold War circumstances, informative articles about American politicians became one of the popular topics of Ulus. On Sundays, one page of Ulus was usually reserved for these translated articles. For instance, the headline of a translated article about George Marshall included the following passage: “For Marshall, President Truman said he was the man who would build the future of the United States. Today, these words about General Marshall, who will establish the future of not only America but the whole world, are very pertinent.”250 Apart from that, there were informative articles about Republican Senator Arthur Vandenberg,251 decedent President Franklin
248 Byrnes, “Açık Konuşalım,” Ulus, 1 November 1947.
249 “Pazartesi Günü Başlıyoruz: Cordell Hull’ün Hatıraları,” Ulus, 23 January 1948.
250 “Asker ve Devlet Adamı George Marshall,” Ulus, 13 April 1947.
251 Arthur M. Vandenberg was a Republican Senator who served as the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations between 1947 and 1949. As a defender of internationalist foreign policy in the post-war period, he played an important role in the formation of bilateral relations between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party by giving full support to the internationalist initiatives like the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan, etc.,
74
Roosevelt’s family, the political profiles of candidates who participated in the American presidential elections.252 To conclude, the articles about American foreign policy and politics did not only contribute to the formation of Cold War discourse in Ulus, but they also led American domestic politics to enter the agenda of Turkey in the post-war period.
Furthermore, the translated articles that depicted the Soviet Union negatively also contributed to the construction of positive images of America in Ulus and Vatan. While most of these articles were about espionage stories, some of them focused on “totalitarian practices” and the economic problems in the Soviet Union. Although espionage stories published in the early post-war period concentrated predominantly on the espionage activities of the Axis countries, Soviet espionage stories later replaced them.253 Popular American magazines like Reader’s Digest were often the sources from which these stories were translated.
The most important of them was “How Do Communist Agents Work?: Truths Arrived in Canada,” which was the political serial (siyasi tefrika) issued by Altemur Kılıç254 in Vatan newspaper.255 In the introductory part of this serial, it was stated that “the peace and security of all nations are under the threat of communists agents working under various cloaks.”256 This serial included information about the Soviet spies that obtained information about the atomic bomb from Canadian sources. It was reported that this espionage story, based on the hundreds of pages of documents belonging to the Canadian state delegation, were going to be published in fifteen
252 “Amerikan Ayan Meclisinin En Nüfuzlu Şahsiyeti Arthur Vandenberg,” Ulus, 21 September 1947; “Roosevelt Ailesi Şimdi Ne Yapıyor,” Ulus, 28 September 1947; “Birleşik Amerika’da Cumhurbaşkanlığı Seçimlerini Kim Kazanacak,” Ulus, 21 September 1947.
253 “Casuslarla Nasıl Savaştık?,” Ulus, 6 December 1946; “Bir Casusluk Şaheseri,” Ulus, 12 January 1947; “Casuslar Arasında: Harpten Önce Doğu’da Alman Casusluğu,” Ulus, 8 June 1947.
254 Altemur Kılıç was a Turkish journalist who graduated from Robert College and then studied political science at the New School for Social Search in New York. As a staunch anti-communist, Kılıç translated many articles for Vatan and conveys his impressions from his visits to the United States in the early post-war period. Kılıç later served in the United States as the official press attache between 1954 and 1959.
255 “Komünist Ajanları Nasıl Çalışıyorlar? : Kanada’da Varılan Hakikatler,” Vatan, 6 March 1947.
256 Ibid.
75
series in Vatan.257 On 24 August, on the other hand, Thomas M. Johnson’s article was published in Ulus with the title “Red Spy Network in America (Amerika’daki Kızıl Casusluk Şebekesi).”258 Johnson stated that “the Soviet spies, the largest and most terrible intelligence service in the history of espionage, were more active in America than anyone could imagine.”259
Apart from espionage stories, anti-communist reactions to Hollywood movies were also on the agenda of Turkish periodicals. For instance, a translated article in Vatan targeted Counter Attack movie,260 starring Paul Muni and Margaret Chapman.261 While this article interpreted Counter Attack as a product of Russian communist propaganda, it emphasized the necessity of movie censorship to prevent the release of such movies.262 In another article, Vatan mentioned Alfred Menjou’s statements on the communist activities in Hollywood to the House Committee on Un-American Activities.263 In this period, many prominent Hollywood figures were blacklisted firstly by the American press because they were communists.264 Therefore, these incidents in Hollywood had a broad repercussion in the Turkish press.
Moreover, the translated articles about totalitarian practices in the Soviet Union consolidated the negative perception of this country. For instance, a Reader’s Digest review of David J. Dallin and Boris I. Nicolaevsky’s Forced Labor in Russia was published on 20 July 1947 with the title of “There Are Fourteen Million Prisoners in
257 Ibid.
258 Thomas M. Johnson, “Amerika’daki Kızıl Casus Şebekesi,” Ulus, 24 August 1947.
259 Ibid.
260 Counter Attack was released in 1945 and directed by Zoltan Korda. Focusing on the Soviet-German conflict in the Eastern front of the Second World War, this movie tells the story of two-Soviet partisans and seven German soldiers which were trapped in a damaged building. It was one of the first movies to be targeted in Hollywood with the rise of anti-communism in American internal politics.
261 “Rus Propagandası Yapan Bir Film: Karşı Hücum,” Vatan, 6 March 1947.
262 On 6 March 1947, while Counter Attack was accused of making communist propaganda, interestingly, this movie was shown in Turkish movie theaters in those days. See “Bu Hafta İpek Sinemasında Karşı Hücum,” Akşam, 1 March 1947.
263 “Hollywood Bir Siyaset Yatağı Haline Mi Geldi,” Vatan, 23 October 1947.
264 Reynold Humphries, Hollywood’s Blacklists: A Political and Cultural History (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2008).
76
Russia.”265 In this review, it was stated that fourteen millions of prisoners living under difficult conditions in prison camps were forced to work in terrible jobs such as mines and road construction. This was interpreted as the re-enactment of human captivity in modern times.
On the other hand, one of the most important themes reflecting the developing Cold War discourse in Ulus was about a possible atomic war between the United States and the Soviet Union. In “The Might of Atom is at the Command of Peace (Atomun Kudreti Barış Emrinde),” for instance, the scientific developments in the atom industry were covered and the United States was depicted as the superior country in this industry.266 Furthermore, it was stated that the atomic energy of the United States was in the service of peace and humanity. In “America Builds an Atomic Army Against a Possibility of War (Bir Harp İhtimaline Karşı Amerika bir Atom Ordusu Kuruyor), on the other hand, it was mentioned that an atomic war with the Soviet Union was not a remote possibility.267 However, United States, which “was immensely striving to expand the new atomic industry,” was prepared for this war.268 Furthermore, this article mentioned the defensive measures taken by the US government in a possible atomic war. It was reported that all defense facilities had been mobilized at the behest of President Truman.
2.8.2. Promoting America in Other Contents: Dramatic Increase in America-Related Daily News in Ulus’ Sunday Issue
While most of the America-related translated articles in in Ulus’ Sunday issue depicted the economic superiority of the United States; exciting and popular topics were also on the agenda. In an article promoting the American economic supremacy, for instance, the United States was depicted as “a place where the streets are paved with gold,” and post-war American century was described as “an era of
265 “Rusya’da 14 Milyon Esir Var,” Ulus, 20 July 1947.
266 “Atom Kudreti Barışın Emrinde,” Ulus, 17 August 1947.
267 “Bir Harp İhtimaline Karşı Amerika Bir Atom Ordusu Kuruyor,” Ulus, 28 September 1947.
268 Ibid.
77
unprecedented prosperity.”269 On the other hand, an article written by Eric Johnson, President of the United States Chamber of Commerce, was titled “America’s Vast Economic Opportunities to Achieve Secure World Peace.”270 One could also read an article about the fifty million of economically prosperous Americans who were looking forward to traveling to Europe in the post-war period. 271
On the other hand, the daily news translated from the American sources were usually signed by İzzet Tarhan.272 His translations in Ulus reflected snapshots from everyday life in America. These articles sometimes focused on a dialogue between customer and waiter in a restaurant in New York, sometimes the life story of an ordinary American cargo pilot.273 Science articles were one of the important topics in Tarhan’s translations. While one of Tarhan’s translations promoted Seven Reasons Why a Scientist Believes in God by A. Cressy Morrison, president of the New York Academy of Sciences, another article featured the recent observations made by Charles Mohr, a professor at the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences.274
There were also other America-related daily news and articles that Tarhan did not sign. However, it can be speculated that these news and articles were also sourced from American news bulletins. For instance, one article focused on American teenagers exercising in the Muscle Beach in California, the birthplace of the bodybuilding boom in the United States.275 Another article promoted the city of
269 “Korkunç Bir Para Bolluğu İçinde Yüzen Bir Memleket: Birleşik Amerika,” Ulus, 22 September 1947.
270 Eric Johntson, “Teminatlı Bir Dünya Barışına Ulaşmak İçin Amerika’nın Geniş Ekonomik İmkanları,” Ulus, 6 May 1947.
271 “Amerikalı Turist: Bütün Avrupa, Daha Şimdiden Bu Kıymetli Avın Peşindedir,” Ulus, 9 March 1947.
272 He also published translated serials of many novels in Ulus and would later establish Tarhan Kitabevi in Ankara in 1951. Thanks to this bookstore, many foreign publications, mostly American magazines, and novels, were introduced to the Turkish people.
273 “Başgarson Hazretleri,” Ulus, 2 February 1947; “Uçuşa Dair”, Ulus, 9 March 1947.
274 “Bir Yaradanın Var Olduğuna İnanmak İçin Yedi Sebep,” Ulus, 13 April 1947; “Bir Yolculuğun Hikayesi: Kan Emen Yarasalar,” Ulus, 3 August 1947.
275 “Amerika’da Bir Adale Plajı,” Ulus, 5 January 1947.
78
Reno as “the biggest little city in the world and as a gambling wonder.”276 In Ulus, one could also read a long article about the wedding renewal ceremony of the American Klueger couple, two ordinary American citizens.277
Moreover, the articles about Hollywood artists published in Ulus on Sundays also contributed to the prominence of Hollywood in Turkish society. Written by screenwriter and film critic Melih Başar,278 these articles were always taken from popular American magazines. For instance, in an article about the nightlife of Hollywood artists, Başar sourced from American journalist Paul Denis’ article from Pic magazine.279 Başar’s articles usually focused on the life story of a different Hollywood actress each week, but he also provided information about recent magazine news in Hollywood.280 Moreover, these articles always featured a large size photograph of a Hollywood actress, and this contributed to form idealized images of Western-style female beauty in Turkish periodicals.
276 “Birleşik Amerika’da Bir Kumar Şaheseri,” Ulus, 10 August 1947.
277 “Tam 24 Yıl Sonra Amerikalı Bir Karı Koca Yeni Baştan Evlendiler,” Ulus, 21 September 1947.
278 Melih Başar firstly started writing film critics for Ulus in 1940 and worked as screenwriter and actor in the 1950s. He is known for movies such as Karacaoğlan, Cinci Hoca, Dümbüllü Tarzan. In the following years, Başar and his wife Refia Başar founded Başar Sineması, one of the popular movie theaters in Ankara. Refia Başar started to publish Sinemagazin in 1951 and most of the magazine’s contents dominated by Hollywood related entertainment news. See Gülseren Mungan Yavuztürk, ‘Ankara’da Yayımlanmış Sinema Dergilerinin Kısa Tarihçesi’, Ankara Araştırmaları Dergisi, Vol.1, No.2 (2013).
279 “Hollywood Dünyası: Sinema Yıldızları Kendi Alemlerinde Nasıl Eğleniyorlar,” Ulus, 5 January 1947.
280 “Sinema Aleminin En Cazip Kadını: Jane Russell,” Ulus, 12 January 1947; “Kızıl Saçlı Güzel Rita Hayworth’un Bilinmeyen Tarafları,” Ulus, 16 February 1947; “Hollywood’da Dedikodular,” Ulus, 9 March 1947; “Sinema Dünyası: Bir Yıldız Doğuyor,” 30 March 1947; “Mükafat Kazanan Genç Bir Yıldız: Olivia de Havilland,” 15 June 1947; “Hollywood’un En Şanslı Kadını: Jeanne Crane,” Ulus, 27 July 1947; “Miss Dinamiti Tanır mısınız?,” Ulus, 3 August 1947; “Hollywood’da Bir Sinema Yıldızı Nasıl İmal Edilir?,” Ulus, 24 August 1947; “Hollywood Dünyası: Maria Montez,” Ulus, 28 September 1947.
79
Figure 15: “Hollywood’un En Şanslı Kadını: Jeanne Crane (Hollywood’s Luckiest Woman: Jeanne Crane),” Ulus, 27 July 1947.
Another area where the American way of life was depicted in Ulus’ Sunday issue was fashion. As noted above, Hollywood actresses contributed to the formation of idealized images of female beauty in Turkish periodicals. Except this, the United States also led the latest trends in fashion along with London and Parisian fashions. For instance, it was mentioned that the waterproof raincoats produced by the nylon fabricators of New York were popular and set the fashion in 1947.281 “What Makes a Woman Beautiful”, on the other hand, focused on the beauty tips of “a prominent model agency in America.”282 Another article in Ulus focused on the manufacturing of a practical scarf called “Natch” by John Frederic, one of the prominent fashion designers of New York. 283 Another popular topic was hemlines discussed by popular fashion magazines. In “Should Hemlines be Long or Not?”, for instance, the opinions of Arlene Wekefield and Jeanne Goeber, two ordinary American citizens
281 “Yeni Moda Muşambaları,” Ulus, 16 February 1947.
282 “Kadını Güzel Yapan Nedir,” Ulus, 16 February 1947.
283 “Amerika’da Bir Moda Yeniliği: Şapka Yerini Tutan Eşarp,” Ulus, 20 April 1947.
80
from Los Angeles, were referred.284 Another article mentioned the popularity of feed sack dresses in the United States.285 All these America-related fashion news promoted American consumer culture to the readers of Ulus.
Figure 16: “Amerika’da Bir Moda Yeniliği: Şapka Yerini Tutan Eşarp (A Fashion Innovation in America: The Scarf That Compensated the Hat),” Ulus, 20 April 1947.
2.9. Conclusion
In the early post-war period, the Turkish press played an essential role in transmitting the developing Cold War atmosphere to the Turkish public. In this context, the depiction of the Cold War actors ensured the consolidation of their stereotyped images in the Turkish public. Since the Missouri’s visit to Turkey, the positive images of the United States in the Turkish press considerably increased. While this
284 “Etekler Uzasın mı Uzamasın mı,” Ulus, 10 August 1947.
285 “Birleşik Amerika’da Torbadan Yapılan Zarif Elbiseler,” Ulus, 3 August 1947.
81
contributed to the legitimization of the Turkish-American alliance in the developing Cold War circumstances, the increasing anti-communist rhetoric accompanied it.
In this context, this chapter firstly demonstrates how Falih Rıfkı Atay and Ahmet Emin Yalman, the editors-in-chief of Ulus and Vatan respectively, developed a Cold War discourse in their columns. One of the essential emphases of their Cold War perceptions was that the United States took responsibility to preserve democratic, libertarian, and peaceful principles threatened by Soviet expansionism and aggression. Many of their articles also pointed out that the United States had a historic responsibility to uphold these values. In this context, the American military preparedness and its presence in Turkey was interpreted as appropriate actions taken to preserve these fundamental values. The writers’ depictions of the Soviet Union as a totalitarian and aggressive country that disrupted the post-war stability also consolidated the constructed positive images of the United States in their articles. In this context, they interpreted the Truman Doctrine as the US response to Soviet expansionism and as the determinant action to protect the world's free nations. Furthermore, it is also significant to point out that Atay’s advocacy for US liberal principles were limited within the boundaries of existing Cold War rhetoric and failed to form a coherent ideological basis. Unlike Atay, however, Yalman’s articles had a more consistent liberal theme, and this was most evident in his articles propounding the liberal and democratic principles of the United States as a model for Turkey.
Another topic in this chapter focused on how the developing Cold War circumstances and the Turkish-American friendship were depicted in Ratip Tahir’s cartoons. While forming certain visual stereotypes in public, these cartoons were perhaps the most effective method in transmitting the official Cold War policy. The most dominant theme of these cartoons was that the United States took responsibility to save the world on the road to disaster. On the other hand, totalitarianism, expansionism, and aggression were the most prominent themes used to depict the Soviet Union. Another central theme of these cartoons was that the United States’ policy actions in the Cold War outmaneuvered the Soviet Union. In this context, the
82
depiction of the Truman Doctrine clearly emphasized American political and economic superiority over the Soviet Union.
Other prominent elements that revealed the development of Cold War language in these periodicals were the translation series about the articles or studies of prominent American officials. While reflecting the official American view about the Cold War, these articles consolidated the pro-American opinions in the Turkish press. The translation series about espionage stories and a future atomic war were other prominent topics that showed the development of Cold War language in these newspapers.
As the main topics of this chapter revealed, the Cold War discourse in the examined periodicals gradually increased with the Missouri’s visit to Turkey. Legitimizing the official Cold War policy of the Turkish government, this developing Cold War discourse played an essential role in the establishment of the Turkish-American alliance in the eyes of the Turkish public. Apart from the increase in the number of articles reflecting the official American position in the developing Cold War circumstances, Turkish journalists’ political discourses concerning the liberal values of the United States also constituted the critical element of Americanization in the Turkish press.
Apart from the dominant Cold War theme, the America-related translated articles, especially viewed in Ulus’ Sunday issue also strengthened the positive images of the United States in this newspaper. Favoring the American way of life and its popular culture, these articles always represented the United States as economically superior and prosperous. Furthermore, the prominence of the United States in Ulus also consolidated by the daily news from this country and interesting articles indirectly favoring the American way of life. On the other hand, Hollywood became the most prominent element promoting American popular culture to Ulus’ readers. These articles did not only influence the entertainment habits of its readers, but they also consolidated standardized images of Western-style female beauty. Moreover, the depiction of the United States in world fashion also contributed its positive images by emphasizing the superiority of American consumer and material culture. In this
83
context, the tabloidization of Ulus with America-related news and articles proceeded simultaneously with the image of the United States in the Cold War conditions.
84
CHAPTER 3
HUMOR AS A WAY OF OPPOSING TO AMERICANIZATION IN THE POST-WAR TURKEY: THE EXAMPLES OF MARKOPAŞA AND NUH’UN GEMİSİ
Although the Turkish political authorities allowed the publication of Tan newspaper in the early post-war era, the relative freedom atmosphere for the left-wing press was transient. In this context, the destruction of Tan's printing house by the anti-communist protesters on 4 December 1945, and the suspension of Tan’s publications subsequently symbolized the rise of anti-communist politics in post-war Turkey. It also signified that left-wing intellectuals were going to be excluded from mainstream press in this period.286 After this incident, other left-wing publications like, Görüşler, Yeni Dünya, and La Turquie, also had to suspend their publications.287 Although the transition to multi-party politics allowed the establishment of socialist and left-wing parties in the following periods, the relative liberalization in Turkish politics did not last long. Two major socialist parties of this period were the Socialist Party of Turkey (SPT) and the Socialist Laborers’ and Peasants’ Party of Turkey (SLPPT). By embracing the motto of “national independence,” the SPT, led by Esat Adil Müstecablıoğlu, advocated for socialism unique to Turkey’s political circumstances.288 On the other hand, the SLPPT was the legal version of the Communist Party of Turkey (CPT), and had a pro-Soviet stance.289 However, in parallel to the increasing anti-communist atmosphere in the Cold War circumstances,
286 Koçak, Türkiye’de İki Partili Sistemin Kuruluş Yılları, 793-816.
287 Topuz, 100 Soruda Başlangıçtan Günümüze Türk Basın Tarihi, 98.
288 Özgür Gökmen, ‘Çok Partili Rejime Geçerken Sol: Türkiye Sosyalizminin Unutulmuş Partisi’, Toplum ve Bilim, No. 78 (1998), 174.
289 Ibid.
85
these parties were closed down on 16 December 1946 by the decree of the Martial Law Authority.290 Gün, Yığın, Gerçek, and Sendika, the magazines of these socialist parties, simultaneously closed with the parties’ liquidations.291
In a political environment of increasing pressure against the left-wing political parties and publications, humor emerged as an effective means of opposition during the early post-war period. Published firstly by former Tan writers Sabahattin Ali and Aziz Nesin, Markopaşa became pioneer in this regard. When the first issue of Markopaşa was published on 25 November 1946, this heralded a new era for Turkish political humor tradition in many ways. The humor magazines of the single-party era were either the supporters of the political power like Akbaba, or they were entertainment-oriented and apolitical magazines like Şaka and Karikatür.292 Markopaşa, on the other hand, became one of the important voices of left-wing opposition to the policies of the political power in transition to multi-party politics. Its satirical discourse undoubtedly played an essential role in Markopaşa’s success, and it attained a circulation of eighty thousand in its initial periods.293 Apart from Sabahattin Ali, and Aziz Nesin; Rıfat Ilgaz and Mustafa Mim Uykusuz were other prominent figures in its publication and content. Since it started to be published, Markopaşa was heavily oppressed by the political power, and it was frequently closed by the legal authorities. The columnists were also arrested due to their critical articles. For these reasons, in the following periods, the magazine had to be published under different names such as Malumpaşa, Merhumpaşa, and Ali Baba.
The analysis of Markopaşa writers’ intellectual and political backgrounds is significant in terms of understanding the magazine’s editorial policy and target groups. In this context, since Sabahattin Ali and Rıfat Ilgaz were the prominent literary figures who adopted the socialist-realist (toplumcu gerçekçi) perspective in
290 “Komünist Tahrikatına Karşı Alınan Tedbirler: Sıkı Yönetim Komutanlığının Tebliği,” Vatan, 17 December 1946.
291 Ibid.
292 Levent Cantek, Markopaşa: Bir Mizah ve Muhalefet Efsanesi (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2020), 60.
293 Ibid., 55.
86
their novels and poems, this background became one of the significant intellectual motivation in forming Markopaşa’s left-wing discourse.294 Ali was mostly influenced by socialist-realist poet Nazım Hikmet in his Resimli Ay years (1929-1931) and he wrote many socialist-realist literary works in this magazine.295 Ilgaz was also influenced by Nazım Hikmet and wrote poems with simple forms and populist discourses.296 On the other hand, the critical and satirical discourse of Aziz Nesin, who did not have a literary background like Ali and Ilgaz, firstly developed in his articles in Tan newspaper.297 In this context, Levent Cantek’s emphasis on populism (halkçılık), peasantism (köycülük), and patriotism (memleketçilik) as the most significant characteristics of Markopaşa’s political identity had formed within the framework of this intellectual background.298 In the light of these ideational impetus, Markopaşa voiced the daily problems of ordinary Turkish people and adapted their spoken language in the magazine, and this was the most influential factor in the success of the magazine.
On the other hand, revealing the organic relationship that Markopaşa writers established with the prominent left-wing figures and parties of the time enables us to contextualize their political backgrounds. In this context, it should be firstly reminded that Nesin and Ali were former Tan writers and had close contacts with Sabiha and Zekeriya Sertel. Furthermore, after the SPT was established on 14 May 1946, Ali, Ilgaz, and Nesin contributed to the publication of Gerçek, the party’s media organ.299 Nesin and Ilgaz also had short-term SPT membership. Even though Markopaşa was published as a periodical that had no organic ties with any political party, these relations reveal that Markopaşa writers had even adopted a socialist political perspective in the pre-Markopaşa period. In this context, the writers’
294 Esra Aras, ‘Türkiye’nin 1946-1950 Dönemi Toplumsal İlişkilerine Toplumcu Gerçekçi Bir Yergi: Halk Kürsüsü Sıfatıyla Markopaşa’ (Kocaeli University, Unpublished PhD Thesis, 2020), 48-50.
295 Mehmet Fatih Uslu, ‘Resimli Ay Magazine (1929-1931): The Emergence of An Oppositional Focus Between Socialism and Avant-Gardism’ (Boğaziçi University, Unpublished MA Thesis, 2004), 106, 118-19.
296 Aras, ‘Türkiye’nin 1946-1950 Dönemi Toplumsal İlişkilerine Toplumcu Gerçekçi Bir Yergi’, 50.
297 Zekeriya Sertel, Hatırladıklarım" (İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 2001), 245-246.
298 Cantek, Markopaşa: Bir Mizah ve Muhalefet Efsanesi, 30.
299 Ibid., 48.
87
socialist political orientation, together with their socialist-realist literary backgrounds, drove these intellectuals to use Markopaşa to transform society. To this end, populist discourse became the essential tool they used.
On the other hand, Markopaşa’s socialist orientation and patriotic discourse was most evident in the discussions on American imperialism. Targeting the post-war Turkish-American alliance, Markopaşa’s patriotism mainly emphasized the anti-imperialist struggle in the War of Independence. This anti-imperialist discourse was most evident in Sabahattin Ali’s editorials that was written in a profound and political tone. By stating that Turkey gradually became dependent on the United States in terms of its politics, economy, and military, Ali emphasized the preservation of national independence in this context. Satirical articles and cartoons also consolidated Markopaşa’s anti-imperialist rhetoric. These articles and cartoons mostly satirized the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan, American foreign capital, the American military and personnel presence in Turkey, and cultural Americanization. Maintaining these policies throughout its publication period, Markopaşa opposed the political and cultural Americanization in the post-war period. In this context, it will be important to examine the main periods in Markopaşa’s publication life and the magazine’s circulation for revealing its influence on Turkish society.
The publication life of Markopaşa is generally examined in three different periods.300 The first period began with the magazine's first issue and ended with the publication of the last issue of Ali Baba on 16 December 1947. In this period, while Sabahattin Ali wrote editorials in a political and critical style, Aziz Nesin was responsible for other magazine content, primarily satirical articles. Mustafa Mim Uykusuz, on the other hand, contributed with cartoons. Markopaşa could not be published regularly in this period due to political pressures and the arrests of its writers. Both for this reason and the frequent changes in the name of the magazine, its circulation which reached eighty thousand in its initial periods, significantly declined at the end of the first period.301 On the other hand, Sabahattin Ali’s murder was one of the critical
300 Saydur, Markopaşa Gerçeği.
88
incidents affecting the publication life of Markopaşa. Ali fell victim to an unsolved murder on 2 April 1948 when he attempted to leave the country due to political and legal pressures. The magazine could not be published until 29 October 1948. On this date, it was republished by Rıfat Ilgaz and Aziz Nesin under the name Markopaşa. Ilgaz was the owner and editor of the magazine, and Nesin contributed to his articles as the leader. During the second period, Markopaşa could be published sixteen issues until 14 February 1949. In this period, Markopaşa gained popularity again and reached a circulation of forty thousand.302 In the third period, on the other hand, the magazine was published under the names Yedi Sekiz Paşa and Hür Markopaşa. This period was marked by the disagreement between Rıfat Ilgaz and Aziz Nesin. According to Levent Cantek, this conflict stemmed from political strife and personal disputes.303 While Rıfat Ilgaz published Hür Markopaşa as a CPT-oriented magazine, Aziz Nesin was not included in Hür Markopaşa and continued to be close to the SPT-oriented political line at that time. The magazine lost its popularity in the third period and had almost a circulation of five thousand to ten thousand around.304
Nuh’un Gemisi was another political humor magazine that adopted critical tongue against the Turkish-American alliance in the early post-war period. It was published or supported by the Communist Party of Turkey (CPT) and can be considered as a follower of Markopaşa both in content and form.305 After the closure of Hür Markopaşa on 12 September 1949, Nuh’un Gemisi was started to be published on 2 November 1949. By publishing thirty-one issues, it ended its publications on 31 May 1950. Mehmet Ali Aybar306, Abidin Dino307, Zeki Baştımar, and Rasih Güran308
301 Aras, ‘Türkiye’nin 1946-1950 Dönemi Toplumsal İlişkilerine Toplumcu Gerçekçi Bir Yergi’, 73.
302 Ibid., 74.
303 Saydur, Markopaşa Gerçeği, 186-191.
304 Ibid.
305 Levent Cantek, ‘TKP’nin Desteklediği Mizah Gazetesi: Nuh’un Gemisi (1949-1950)’, Toplumsal Tarih, No. 154 (2006).
306 Before his Nuh’un Gemisi career, Aybar wrote articles for Vatan and Tan newspapers, and became the owner and editor-in-chief of two left-wing periodicals Hür and Zincirli Hürriyet. The latter was prominent with its opposition to the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan and Aybar wrote acrimonious anti-imperialist articles in these periodicals. Aybar also wrote articles for Geveze, a pro-CPT humor magazine, and he sent articles to Nuh’un Gemisi from prison. The editorials of Nuh’un Gemisi were written by Aybar in a severe and political tone and Aybar later published these articles in
89
were the most prominent figures who contributed the magazine. Levent Cantek’s article in Toplumsal Tarih is the only study that examines the publication life of Nuh’un Gemisi. In this study, Cantek presumptively states that Zeki Baştımar could have been the main director of the magazine.309 Accordingly, Baştımar, who assumed the role of party’s secretary due to the imprisonment of Dr. Şefik Hüsnü and Reşat Fuat Baraner, the leaders of the Communist Party of Turkey, also directed the publication of the magazine. Apart from Baştımar’s primary role in its publication, Dino and Aybar were other prominent figures, according to Cantek. However, in his memoirs, Şükran Kurdakul, who was pro-CPT literary writer and wrote for the party’s publications during this period, states that Nuh’un Gemisi was published by Rasih Güran.310 In his memoirs, Aziz Nesin also agrees with Kurdakul.311 According to these statements, it is understood that Rasih Güran was one of the active figures in Nuh’un Gemisi.
Nuh’un Gemisi showed parallelism with Markopaşa in many ways. In this context, it can be firstly stated that Mehmet Ali Aybar’s editorials have similar characteristics with Sabahattin Ali’s articles. National independence and anti-imperialism are Aybar’s most important emphases. Moreover, the criticism of the Marshall Plan dominated the content of Nuh’un Gemisi; and the American presence in Turkey, American foreign capital, and cultural Americanization were also on the agenda. However, it is significant to state that, compared to Markopaşa, a severe political
his collected works. Aybar would later become the leader of the Workers Party of Turkey (Türkiye İşçi Partisi) which would mark Turkish politics in the 1960s.
307 Dino contributed to Nuh’un Gemisi mostly with his cartoons. He was one of the pioneers of modern painting in Turkey and he was also prominent with literary works. Due to his political thoughts, he lived in exile for a long time in Turkey. In 1952, he permanently settled in Paris.
308 Güran was a close friend of the communist poet Nazım Hikmet and became a member of the Communist Party of Turkey thanks to him. Güran ran an effective campaign for the release of Nazım Hikmet, who was imprisoned at that time, and this campaign was also featured in Nuh’un Gemisi. Güran also contributed to Markopaşa with his articles. He is also prominent with his literary translations like John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath and In Dubious Battle.
309 Cantek, “TKP’nin Desteklediği Mizah Gazetesi”, 40-41.
310 Şükran Kurdakul, Cezaevinden Babıali’ye, Babıali’den TİP’e: Anılar (İstanbul: Evrensel Basım Yayın, 2003), 39.
311 Aziz Nesin, Birlikte Yaşadıklarım, Birlikte Öldüklerim: Anılar, Belgeler, Denemeler, Mektuplar (İstanbul: Nesin Yayıncılık, 2019), 298.
90
tone predominated the content of Nuh’un Gemisi. The most important reason for this difference is that Nuh’un Gemisi concerned to reflect the line of a certain political party. Moreover, although there is no clear evidence about the circulation numbers of Nuh’un Gemisi, it can be estimated that it could not reach the circulation numbers of Markopaşa’s first period. While the first issue of Nuh’un Gemisi coincided with the last period of Markopaşa, political humor started to lose its social effects during this period.312 In this context, even if the impact of this magazine was limited to certain circles, the intellectual value of discussions on imperialism and the originality of the magazines’ political humorous discourse make Nuh’un Gemisi an important research material.
In the following parts, how the United States was depicted in these political humor magazines will be examined by focusing on the most pronounced incidents and themes. For that purpose, Markopaşa and Nuh’un Gemisi will be analyzed under separate parts. American foreign capital and American presence in Turkey, the depiction of the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan, the depiction of pro-American Turkish politicians and journalists, and the criticism of socio-cultural Americanization are some prominent topics in this context. The following arguments will focus not only on satirical texts and cartoons, but also on Sabahattin Ali and Mehmet Ali Aybar’s articles written in a severe and political tone. The above-mentioned concepts will not be interpreted under separate sections in the analysis of Markopaşa. Instead, the issues of Markopaşa are going to be examined chronologically. The reason for this is to correlate the significant external incidents that affected the publication life of Markopaşa with its content chronologically. On the contrary, the analysis of Nuh’un Gemisi is going to be based on the examination of some of the above-mentioned concepts under separate parts. The reason for this is that Nuh’un Gemisi had a concise publication life and offers a rich material that will allow the analysis of these contents separately.
312 Cantek, “TKP’nin Desteklediği Mizah Gazetesi”, 42.
91
3.1. Markopaşa’s Opposition to the Turkish-American Alliance
Until the declaration of the Truman Doctrine, Markopaşa’s depictions of the United States primarily focused on the American military presence in Turkey, and the increasing influence of American private capital in Turkish economy. In this context, Sabahattin Ali’s editorials are important reference points that demonstrated the anti-imperialist discourse of Markopaşa. For instance, in the first issue of Markopaşa, Sabahattin Ali severely criticized the post-war Turkish-American alliance in “İstiklal (Independence)” article.313 Ali wrote this article after the Turkish delegate in the United Nations General Assembly proposed Jordan’s membership to the UN. As an ex-British mandate, Jordan gained its independence in May 1946 but it was still under the influence of Great Britain politically, economically, and militarily.314 Ali compared the case of Jordan with Turkey and revealed his point of view about the post-war Turkish-American friendship. According to Sabahattin Ali, “the units belonging to the army of a foreign state cannot be on the permanent duty on the territory of an independent country, whether they wear uniforms or they were civilians.”315 In this article, he openly criticized the increasing American military presence in Turkey and made an analogy with the British influence in Jordan. In this context, he associated the American presence in Turkey with colonialism. As in Ali’s other articles, the most important emphasis was the preservation of the national independence gained by the anti-imperialist struggle of Mustafa Kemal and Turkish nationalists. In “Ne İstiyoruz (What Do We Want),” for instance, after stating that Turkey relied heavily on American foreign policy, Ali argued that Turkey should follow an independent foreign policy that would preserve its national interests.316
Like Sabahattin Ali’s “İstiklal” article, a satirical text, “Hoş Geldin Victory (Welcome Victory),” criticized the American military presence in Turkey.317
313 Sabahattin Ali, “İstiklal,” Markopaşa, 25 November 1946.
314 Philip Robins, A History of Jordan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019), 59-60.
315 Ali, “İstiklal,” Markopaşa, 25 November 1946.
316 Ali, “Ne İstiyoruz,” Markopaşa, 10 February 1946.
317 “Hoşgeldin Victory,” Markopaşa, 25 November 1946.
92
Although this text told the story of an imaginary British ship that visited the Ottoman capital Istanbul, it depicted precisely what happened during the visit of the Missouri to Turkey. Two officials, Ottoman şehremini (city governor) and zaptiye nazırı (city guard), prepared for the British sailors' entertainment. Similar to the brothels which were ready for the American sailors during the visit of Missouri,318 şehremini and zaptiye nazırı prepared the Ottoman brothels for the British sailors in this imaginary interpretation. In this story, all these preparations are displayed in a satirical way, and Markopaşa criticized the Turkish government’s actions for welcoming the American soldiers.
Other important themes of Markopaşa were related to the transformation of the Turkish economy and American foreign capital incentives in the post-war period. In “Yabancı Sermaye (Foreign Capital),” for example, Sabahattin Ali directly criticized the presence of American foreign capital in Turkey.319 Like Ahmet Emin Yalman’s articles reviewed in the former chapters, many Turkish journalists wrote about the advantages of foreign capital investments in Turkish economy. Sabahattin Ali firstly opposed those who thought Turkey would be a place where its streets are paved with gold thanks to the increase in foreign investments. Apart from this concern, the most important point in this article was that Sabahattin Ali established an analogy with the foreign capital investments in the Ottoman Empire and post-war Turkey. Accordingly, he stated that the increase in foreign capital investments signified the indirect loss of Turkey’s independence like the tragic experiences of the Ottoman Empire in the past. He further argued that it was more challenging to drive foreign capital out of the country than to expel invading military forces. Sabahattin Ali also interpreted the post-war liberalization policies in Turkish economy as a collaboration with “the imperialist capital trying to surround the word like an octopus.”320
318 Besides the favorable depictions of the Missouri’s visit in metropolitan newspapers, the different dimensions of this visit mostly voiced by left-wing writers and journalists. For instance, in his prominent novel Amerikan Sargısı, Fakir Baykurt depicted how Turkish brothels were prepared for American sailors during this visit. On the other hand, by giving other examples from the left-wing and other oppositional Turkish periodicals, Tuba Ünlü Bilgiç states that the disturbance generated by the sailors and the humiliating actions of the Turkish government during the visit of Missouri became one of the important issues of anti-Americanism in Turkey. In this context, Markopaşa also interpreted the Turkish government’s preparations as humiliating.
319 Ali, “Yabancı Sermaye”, Markopaşa, 2 December 1946.
93
Cemil Sait Barlas, a Turkish deputy prominent with his pro-American ideas, was one of the most criticized politicians in Markopaşa. Barlas made a speech in the Turkish parliament on 4 December 1946, and he used the expression “kökü dışarıda (its root is at the outside),” referring to Markopaşa.321 After this speech, both Sabahattin Ali and Aziz Nesin responded to Barlas in a very harsh tone. The most prominent characteristic of their articles was their anti-imperialist discourse. Sabahattin Ali asked whether they were labeled as “kökü dışarıda” because they were against “the exploitative foreign capital that aimed to turn Turkey a semi-colonial state.”322 On the other hand, Nesin stated: “You have become a slave by opening doors to foreign capital.”323 While Barlas’ speech starkly revealed the increasing anti-communist rhetoric in Turkey, he became one of the prominent figures that Markopaşa redefined its anti-imperialist discourse in the following issues. After these articles, Sabahattin Ali was taken into custody, and he was released only after seventeen days of detention.324
Twelve days after Barlas’ speech, the SPT and the SPPT, and their publications Gün (Day), Yığın (Masses), Sendika (Union), Ses (Voice), Noror, and Dost (Friend) were closed with the decree of the Martial Law Command.325 Markopaşa was exempt from these liquidations. Another critical development manifesting the increasing anti-communist rhetoric in Turkey was that Interior Minister Şükrü Sökmensüer presented his report entitled “the communist activities in Turkey” to the Turkish parliament. While Sökmensüer’s speech was published in full-text in Turkish
320 Ibid.
321 Cemil Koçak, Türkiye’de İki Partili Sistemin Kuruluş Yılları: Rejim Krizi (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2013), 244
*In the post-war period, the effort to associate Markopaşa and the left opposition with the Soviet Union was most clearly expressed with this rhetoric.
322 Ali, “Ayıp,” Markopaşa, 16 December 1946.
323 Aziz Nesin, “Topunuzun Köküne Kibrit Suyu,” 16 December 1946.
324 Saydur, Markopaşa Gerçeği, 47.
325 “Komünist Tahrikatına Karşı Alınan Tedbirler: Sıkı Yönetim Komutanlığının Tebliği,” Vatan, 17 December 1946.
94
newspapers, many prominent left-wing figures were marginalized.326 Markopaşa was also indirectly affected by this campaign.
Moreover, political and legal pressures on Markopaşa increased in a political atmosphere where there were public debates about a possible American aid to Turkey. In addition to many lawsuits filed against Markopaşa writers, there was an important incident in Ankara that targeted Markopaşa. At a public protest against the left-wing faculty members of Ankara University, the posters of Markopaşa were removed from the walls and were trampled on. While the demonstrators were chanting “Down with Reds, Down With Communists”, Vatan announced this protest with the headline “Excitement of University Students in Ankara (Ankara’da Yüksek Tahsil Gençliğinin Heyacanı).”327 While this incident revealed the social repercussions of the increasing anti-communist discourse in Turkey in its entirety, Markopaşa suspended its publication two weeks after this protest. The reason for this was Aziz Nesin’s attempt to publish a booklet called “Whither Are We Going (Nereye Gidiyoruz)” that criticized the Truman Doctrine. Nesin was sentenced to ten months in prison due to this booklet that was confiscated while it was at the typeset in the printing house.328 Markopaşa could not publish its two issues but later continued its publications. Aziz Nesin, on the other hand, secretly sent articles from prison to be published in Markopaşa.329 While all these incidents revealed the political atmosphere in which Markopaşa had to struggle with, its criticism of Turkish-American relations continued in its following issues.
In this context, the American economic and military aid to Turkey and the American technical experts coming to Turkey within the scope of these aids became the most important topics that determined Markopaşa’s depiction of the United States. For instance, in a fictitious survey titled “What Shall We Do with 150 Million Dollars to be Received from the United States”, the following answer was given: “Oh, Don’t
326 “Türkiye’de Komünist Faaliyetleri ve Sıkıyönetim Kararları,” Vatan, 30 January 1947.
327 “Ankara’da Yüksek Tahsil Gençliğinin Heyacanı: Dün Solcular Aleyhine Bir Nümayiş Yapıldı,” Vatan, 7 March 1947.
328 Bilgiç, ‘The Roots of Anti-Americanism in Turkey', 257.
329 Saydur, Markopaşa Gerçeği, 86.
95
ask me! … His Excellency Truman ordered what to do with 150 million….”330 Markopaşa criticized the United States’ authority and power over how the economic aids would be used. In this issue of Markopaşa, Sabahattin Ali involved in a public discussion about the Truman Doctrine. In this article, he focused on the marginalization of Henry Wallace by the Turkish press.331 From the 1930s, Wallace became one of the prominent politicians in the United States. In the war-time period, he served as the Vice President of the United States and then took the duty of Secretary of Commerce. However, after the war, he became one of the opponents of the Truman government’s foreign policy. He opposed the aggressive policies towards the Soviet Union on the grounds that it would disrupt the post-war stability.332 In this context, he was also against the Truman Doctrine. His opposition to the Truman Doctrine received widespread coverage in the Turkish press. Ali criticized this and labeled Wallace as “a hero who fought against America’s imperialist politics.”333 Referring to the critical headlines against Wallace in the Turkish press, Ali stated that the press was against Henry Wallace like it was against the national independence policies of Markopaşa. Ali opposed the marginalization of Wallace by stating that Markopaşa was completely in line with his criticisms.
On the other hand, the Americanization in the socio-cultural sphere was criticized most prominently in the “Radio Program” text that satirized the daily programs of radio broadcasts in Turkey. Accordingly, “theoretical naval drills (nazari donanma talimleri) and American imitation (Amerikanca taklit)” were broadcasted in the lunch program.334 Some of the radio programs that broadcasted in the evening are as follows: “ I Love You 150 Milyon: By Recep Peker”, “British-esque, Americanish, German-like agency news (İngilizvari, Amerikanımtrak ve Almanımsı Ajans Haberleri)”, “You are always in my cüzdan (wallet): By Mister Yalman”, “From soup to nuts, information about American navy that would anchor İstanbul: By
330 “Amerika’dan Alınacak 150 Milyonu Ne Yapalım,” Markopaşa, 28 April 1947.
331 Ali, “Hangi Cepheden Gelirse Gelsin Emperyalizmin Aleyhindeyiz,” Markopaşa, 28 April 1947.
332 John C. Culver and John Hyde, American Dreamer: A Life of Henry A. Wallace (New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company, 2000), 409-418.
333 Ali, “Hangi Cepheden Gelirse Gelsin Emperyalizmin Aleyhindeyiz”.
334 “Radyo Programı,” Markopaşa, 28 April 1947.
96
Freshwater Admiral Abidin Daver.”335 In “It’s Coming (Geliyor)”, Markopaşa satirized the increasing American personnel presence in Turkey after the Truman Doctrine.336 This passage included the following statements: “American capital is coming. American specialists are coming. American intelligence personnel are coming. What’s left? A Democracy? Let the steam come after us….”337
Another text titled “Anglo-American-Türkiş Limited Partnership Agreement” satirized the presence of American private capital in Turkey and its supporters.338 The partners of the company were listed as:
Rockefeller, Jr., oil tycoon, American, Florida; Hearst, media tycoon, American, New York; Parkins, British, Times’ former editorial writer, British, London; A.Kapar, building contractor, secret capitalist, inventor of all kinds of tricks, Turkish, Monaco; Mr. Ahmet Emin Yalman, “Vatan” seller339 and its editor-in-chief, volunteer American, İstanbul”. The activities of the partnership were stated as follows: “Ransacking Turkey. Building skyscrapers and factories top of it, impaling it.340
“How Foreign Capital Flows?”, an article written by Nadir Nadi, the editor-in-chief of Cumhuriyet, was also mocked and severely criticized by Markopaşa writers. Sabahattin Ali attacked Nadir Nadi in “A Dastard (Bir Alçak)” article and it was perhaps his most severe criticism among his articles.341 Markopaşa writers, on the other hand, depicted the flow of foreign capital as follows:
335 Ibid.
336 “Geliyor”, Markopaşa, 5 May 1947.
337 Ibid.
338 “Anglo-Amerikan-Türkiş Limited Ortaklığı Mukavelanamesi,” Merhumpaşa, 26 May 1947.
339 The term “Vatan(Homeland)” seller was often used for Ahmet Emin Yalman in Markopaşa. By using a terminological relation in Turkish language, Markopaşa labeled Yalman with treason.
340 “Anglo-Amerikan-Türkiş Limited Ortaklığı Mukavelanamesi,” Merhumpaşa, 26 May 1947.
*Two days after the publication of Merhumpaşa’s first issue, Sabahattin Ali was arrested because of an article published in Markopaşa. On the other hand, there were many anti-Markopaşa protests in different parts of the county in the following days. In mid-June, Mustafa Mim Uykusuz was also sentenced to prison due to an article in Markopaşa and the magazine was also closed down. After Sabahattin Ali’s release from prison, Markopaşa would only be republished on 8 September 1947 under the name Malumpaşa.
341 Ali, “Bir Alçak,” Malumpaşa, 29 September 1947.
*In Markopaşa, pro-American journalists were often identified with dollars or sterling. They were sometimes depicted as the “servants of dollars” and sometimes it was stated that they seek the
97
Let’s explain how foreign capital flowed, if Nadi did not understand. First, ‘Hello Johny, My Darling, Yes. Okey’342, and it flows. American battleships and American sailor flow. Afterwards, the advisory boards, the control boards, and the supervisory councils flow. After that, there are news and promises that a loan will be given in case of necessity. Meanwhile, some journalists get into the hole, some of them labeled Turkey as a state of America…343
In a satirical text titled “New Budget”, Markopaşa criticized American personnel and economic presence in Turkey in a fictitiously presented budget proposal to the government.344 In this text, while a large part of the expenditure was allocated to the American personnel in Turkey, other allocations reserved for the entertainment expenses of the Turkish people going to the United States, and old stocks to be purchased from America. The income budget, on the other hand, consisted of taxes from Turkish citizens and loans from American banks. In another passage satirizing the American experts in Turkey and the Turkish technical delegations in the United States, the following statements included: “… If this shuttling continues, it is estimated that these two countries will soon change places on the map.”345 Another text also satirized the American presence in Turkey by forming a fictitious weekly program for those who would come from the United States and those who would leave Turkey. While each day of the week was reserved for a different American delegation in the “Weekly Turkish-American Departure-Arrival Program,” it was planned to increase to a week to eight days, since seven days were not enough for those.346
In “The Spirit of Serving (Uşaklık Ruhu),” Sabahattin Ali criticized Turkey’s close relationship with foreign countries from a historical perspective. Ali mainly stated
independence of the country in dollars. Apart from Ahmet Emin Yalman and Nadir Nadi, the most prominent journalists criticized by Markopaşa was Falih Rıfkı Atay and Abidin Daver. See, “Sterling, Dolar and Ruble,” Markopaşa, 27 January 1947; “Dolar Marşı,” Markopaşa, 19 May 1947.
342 This part is also written in English in the original text.
343 “Nasıl Girer,” Malumpaşa, 19 September 1947.
344 “Yeni Bütçe,” Markopaşa, 10 October 1947.
345 “Haritada Yer Değiştireceğiz,” Markopaşa, 6 October 1947.
346 “Türk-Amerikan Gidiş-Geliş Programı,” Alibaba, 2 Aralık 1947.
98
that those who were pro-German during the Second World War had changed their stances and become pro-American. Instead of German movies, songs, and artists, they had now admired “American ships, journalists, albums, arts, goods, and American officers.”347 According to Sabahattin Ali, “these [were] servant-spirited people,” and stated “let’s get laws from America. Will we think better than America? Let’s adapt everything to this country.”348 Sabahattin Ali’s severe criticism against pro-American politicians and journalists was his last article in Markopaşa publications.
In the second and third periods of Markopaşa, the criticism of Americanization continued to become one of the most prominent topics. For instance, in a satirical text, “in honor of the America’s deception of Turkey,” Markopaşa writers conveyed the following message to Truman and American billionaires: “… We do not doubt that Turkey will be relocated to America very soon, either by floating with a ship’s screw or by flying with a propeller.”349 On the other hand, in all areas of social life, “the Turkish people chew the democracy cud (demokrasi gevişi getirmek) with the Cowboy gums that you have produced from war-surplus automobile tires….”350 They don’t have time to talk because they chew these democratic gums. “On behalf of our government, we would like to thank you for not giving our people to speak.”351 This text did not only criticize the prominence of the term democracy in daily life and but also satirized the popularity of American consumer products in Turkey.
In “A Chef Wanted,” Markopaşa writers satirized Americanization and the increasing role of religion in Turkish politics.352 According to this fictitious ad,
347 Ali, “Uşaklık Ruhu,” Alibaba, 16 December 1947.
* Ali was put in prison two days after the publication of this article because another article in Markopaşa constituted a crime. On the other hand, Aziz Nesin was already in prison. Ali was released on 31 December 1947 but he was considering fleeing abroad due to the ongoing lawsuits and political pressures.
348 Ibid.
349 “Markopaşa’nın Amerikan Milyarderlerine Mesajı,” Markopaşa, 5 November 1948.
350 Ibid.
351 Ibid.
352 “Bir Ahçı Aranıyor,” Markopaşa, 14 January 1949.
99
Markopaşa was looking for a chef who can cook both alaturka iftar and sahur meals, and alafranga meals for American guests. It was also stated that appropriate candidates could apply to “Şeyhülbakan Hazreti Şemseddin Günaltay.”353 In a satirical text about the American committee that visited to Turkey to conduct a research on fisheries, Markopaşa criticized the consistent visits of American committees as follows: “We had everything researched. We only had our fish. They caught it and researched it. There is nothing left to research, it’s out of stock….”354 In “Visit and Feast,” on the other hand, the abundance of American products in Turkey and the consistent visits of American sailors to Turkey were satirized as follows: “With seventeen pins, five cufflinks thirty-one watch springs, eight eyeglasses, three meters of cable and seven donkey shoes, many American sailors also came from the United States. In honor of the arriving sailors and supplies, Istanbul Governor Lütfü Kırdar throws a dinner party for a thousand people in the Pembe Köşk.”355
All in all, one of the most important themes in Markopaşa’s publications was the criticism of the post-war Turkish-American alliance. While the national independence rhetoric and the emphasis on the achievements of the early republican period were the main motivations for Markopaşa’s criticism against Turkish-American relations, its satirical discourse played an essential role in creating public opinion against this alliance. The success of Markopaşa encouraged the CPT to use political humor as a propaganda tool. Thus, it is significant to consider Nuh’un Gemisi as a follower of Markopaşa. In this context, the opposition to the Turkish-American alliance and the criticism of Americanization would also become the most prominent themes of Nuh’un Gemisi.
353 Apart from the criticism of Americanization, one of the most prominent topics in Markopaşa was the transformation of the ruling party’s policy on religion. In this ad, Şemseddin Günaltay, who was prominent with his Islamic thoughts and became prime minister, was satirized. It is also significant to state that the RPP’s transformation in terms of favoring more religious policies and the Turkish-American friendship were always discussed together in Markopaşa. For instance, in “Yeşil Sarık (Green Turban),” Sabahattin Ali satirized both the government’s policy on religion and Americanization with the following passage: “Morals is based on religion in both America and Britain… There are many sects in America. Then, let’s reopen dervish lodges immediately.”
354 “Şehir ve Yurt Haberleri,” Yedi-Sekiz Paşa, 13 May 1949.
355 “Ziyaret ve Ziyafet,” Yedi-Sekiz Paşa, 20 May 1949.
100
3.2. Developing an Anti-Imperialist Discourse: Mehmet Ali Aybar’s Editorials in Nuh’un Gemisi
The first issue of Nuh’un Gemisi was published on 2 November 1949, four days after the Republic Day. Although Mehmet Ali Aybar’s article was titled “Celebrating the Republic Day”, it interpreted the development of Turkish-American relations in the post-war period.356 He emphasized almost the same points as Sabahattin Ali’s anti-imperialist articles in Markopaşa. According to Aybar, the political atmosphere of the period allowed “imperialism to exploit an independent country without mobilizing its armed forces.”357 “While American imperialism was colonizing an independent country,” it asserted excuses like “friendship and aids.”358 Like Ali’s explanations, he also mentioned the Ottoman Empire’s tragic experiences with foreign countries and foreign capital. According to Aybar, the most important factors that paved the way for the collapse of the Ottoman Empire were capitulations and its dependence on foreign money and foreign goods. As an alternative to the thwarted Ottoman legacy, Aybar emphasized the anti-imperialist struggle in the War of Independence and the economic independence gained afterwards. He also put forward the anti-imperialism of the national independence struggle as the policy that Turkey had to follow in post-war period.
Trade liberalization policy was another important element that formed Aybar’s anti-imperialist discourse in his later articles. In 1949, the Organization for the European Economic Cooperation (OEEC) encouraged the Marshall Plan countries to reduce or remove the import restrictions.359 By the end of 1949, fifty percent of custom tariffs had been eliminated in trades between the Marshall Plan countries.360 Aybar interpreted this as a threat to national independence and the country’s economy.361
356 Mehmet Ali Aybar, “Cumhuriyet Bayramını Kutlarken,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 2 November 1949.
357 Ibid.
358 Ibid.
359 M.A.G. van Meerhaeghe, A Handbook of International Economic Institutions (Boston and London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1980), 203-205.
360 Ibid.
101
According to Aybar, this economic policy was formed by Paul G. Hoffman, the Economic Cooperation Administration (ECA) director, to unite the Marshall Plan countries in a single American market. 362 After stating that the American economy was on the verge of bankruptcy, Aybar interpreted the aim of import liberalization as the US’ effort to overcome its own economic crisis.363 In another article, he criticized Turkish Foreign Minister Necmettin Sadak on this issue. Returning from an official meeting in Paris, Sadak made a statement to the Turkish press. He emphasized that the US’ import liberalization policy had created more difficulties for Turkey than any other European country because its economy was not developed as they were.364 However, according to Aybar, despite of these statements, Sadak “desperately complied with Hoffman’s orders” and signed the document on import liberalization by compromising the country’s independence.365 In another article, Aybar emphasized that “the first victim of import liberalization” would be the Turkish workers because their bosses were going to cut their wages to reduce their costs.366 He also stated that import liberalization and the dominance of American products in Turkish markets were the main factors that paved the way for the deficits in foreign trade and balance-of-payments in the Turkish economy.367 All in all, emphasizing that the economic realm was the sine qua non for Turkey’s independence, Aybar’s articles strongly criticized the increasing American influence in the Turkish economy. These criticisms played an important role in the development of an anti-imperialist discourse in Nuh’un Gemisi.
Furthermore, another important theme of Aybar’s articles was that “the United States was dragging Turkey into a world war.”368 According to Aybar, the economic
361 Aybar, “Sömürgeleşmeye Doğru,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 16 November 1949.
362 Aybar, “İflasın Eşiğinde,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 1 February 1950.
363 Ibid.
364 Aybar, “Sadak’ın İtirafları,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 15 February 1950.
365 Ibid.
366 Aybar, “İthalat Serbestisi ve Türk İşçisi,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 22 February 1950.
367 Aybar,”Kısa Bir Hesaplaşma,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 9 December 1949.
368 Ibid.
102
depression in the United States and the dominance of the American war capital in the United States’ policies were the main reasons why the United States desired a world war.369 He stated that: “the truth is that American imperialism is dragging the world nations to war in the hope of eliminating its economic crisis and turning the world into an American market.”370 In this context, the failure of the Marshall Plan was interpreted as one of the significant factors that led to economic crisis in the United States.371 Secondly, he indicated that the internal developments in the United States were another reason for its economic depression. Referring to a statement of President Truman, Aybar stated that a budget deficit of five billion, the decrease in production and foreign trade rate, and unemployment were some internal reasons that engendered the US’ bankrupt economy.372 Moreover, he argued that the establishment of a communist government in China in 1949 and the Soviet Union’s possession of atomic weapons manifested that the US was dragged into a crisis in world politics.373
In this context, another significant point emphasized by Aybar was that the warmongering American capital374 was interested in another world war and was making war preparations in this direction. This emphasis was most prominent in his criticism of Necmettin Sadak’s statement that “the world lives in fear of war.”375 Aybar argued that “American monopoly capital and their partners, who made a profit
369 Ibid.
370 Aybar, “Amerikan Diplomatlarının Toplantısı,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 30 November 1949.
371 Aybar, “Bilanço,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 4 January 1950.
372 Aybar, “İflasın Eşiğinde,” 1 February 1950.
373 Aybar, “Bilanço,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 4 January 1950; “Amerikan Halkının Korkusu”, Nuh’un Gemisi, 8 March 1950.
374 Arms trade and the increasing armament were two of the most emphasized issues in Nuh’un Gemisi. In this context, the summary of Death Pays a Divident by Fennick Brockway and Frederic Mullay had been published in seven issues of the magazine. This study analyzed the increasing armament among the world nations from the First World War to the midst of the Second World War. Moreover, this study highlighted the role of American private weapon industry in increasing armament. In this context, the activities of the American weapon industry was one of the topics consistently emphasized in Nuh’un Gemisi.
375 Aybar, “Bay Sadak Latife Ediyorsunuz,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 28 December 1949.
103
of fifty-three billion dollars in the last war,” was responsible for that fear.376 He also claimed that “John Foster Dulles, who is one of the dominant politicians in Washington and one of the directors of International Nickel Company,” was at the head of the American war capital.377 He also blamed Dulles for the increasing armament and the war preparations in the post-war period. On the other hand, according to Aybar, Turkey, as “the outpost of the United States,” had its share of armament and war preparations.378 The American strategic interests in the Near and Middle East led to the militarization of Turkey.379 In this context, Aybar also opposed the American military and personnel presence in Turkey. He depicted the American influence in Turkey’s politics as follows:
There are two American committees in our capital Ankara. One is concerned with the defense of our country. It is headed by General Mc Bride.380 Another committee supervised everything, from our budget to road affairs. It is directed by American Mister Dorr381. Our policy is directed from Washington…382
Aybar also criticized the depiction of the United States in the Turkish press. According to Aybar, America was depicted in the Turkish press as “peaceful, just, and humanitarian country making sacrifices for the advantages of the Near and Middle Eastern countries.”383 He also established an analogy between the political behaviors of Ottoman intellectuals in the First World War period and pro-American Turkish intellectuals in the post-World War II period. By pointing out to pro-
376 Ibid.
377 Aybar, “Bir Daha SOS,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 21 December 1949.
378 Aybar, “Kısa Bir Hesaplaşma,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 9 December 1949.
379 Aybar, “Amerikan Diplomatlarının Toplantısı,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 30 November 1949.
380 General Horace L. McBride was the first leading military officer of the Joint American Military Mission for Aid to Turkey (JAMMAT) and served between 1947 and 1950. JAMMAT was one of the official organizations that was harshly criticized by the left-wing groups at that time, as it symbolized the increasing American influence on in the Turkish army.
381 Russel H. Dorr was the American mission chef who was sent to Turkey in 1948 to supervise the Marshall Plan aids. He was the most frequently criticized figure in Nuh’un Gemisi on the grounds that his influence in Turkey’s economic policies.
382 Aybar, “1919-1950,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 11 January 1950.
383 Aybar, “Amerikan Diplomatlarının Toplantısı,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 30 November 1949.
104
American intellectuals in the post-war period, he labeled their behaviors as “the same defeatist spirit, and the same acquiescence.”384 He stated that: “the defeatist pro-mandates (bozguncu mandacılar) of the Armistice years are on the scene again. Here are Rauf Bey (Orbay), Dr. Adnan (Adıvar), Ahmet Emin Yalman, Mrs. Halide Edip.”385 Aybar depicted them as figures who conflicted with national independence, that was the essential principle of the country. In this context, Aybar’s metaphor of mandate is similar to Sabahattin Ali’s and Markopaşa’s depictions of Turkish politicians and journalists as “traitors.”
All in all, Aybar’s articles played a significant role in forming an anti-imperialist discourse in Nuh’un Gemisi. In this context, Aybar’s writings can be associated with Sabahattin Ali’s political articles in Markopaşa. The emphasis on political and economic independence was the primary motivation for Aybar’s anti-imperialist articles, like Sabahattin Ali's.
3.3. The Depiction of the Marshall Plan:
One of the prominent themes in Nuh’un Gemisi was the satire of the Marshall Plan. For instance, in “Thanks America, Thank God,” Nuh’un Gemisi writers criticized the US’ authority over the use of economic aids granted under the Marshall Plan.386 This satirical text mentioned a turkey (bird) that the United States sent to the Turkish president on the Thanksgiving Day. The chef of Turkey’s presidential mansion wanted to cook a roast stuffed turkey. However, two Americans, the aides of Russel Dorr and General Mc Bride, suddenly entered the kitchen and opposed the chef. Referring to the aid agreements of the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan, they said: “We determine how American aid is going to be used. Turkeys are roasted on Thanksgivings.”387 After that, the chef had to obey the recipes of the Americans. After the people of the presidential mansion ate the turkey with pleasure, they said: “ Thanks to America, Thank God.”
384 Aybar, “1919-1950,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 11 January 1950
385 Ibid.
386 “Amerika’ya Teşekkür, Tanrı’ya Şükür,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 30 November 1949.
387 Ibid.
105
On the other hand, in “the Great Guest,” Nuh’un Gemisi made up a story of this turkey’s journey to Turkey.388 Named as “Mr. Unity,” this turkey represented the Turkish-American unification. Nuh’un Gemisi firstly satirized the Turkish media’s rave about the American aid. Referring to the news and radio broadcast on this topic, it stated that Mr. Unity was traveling on the VIP service of Pan American Airways, and it was welcomed as the most prominent representative that the United States had ever sent to Turkey. On the other hand, in another passage in this satirical text, theatrical welcoming ceremonies for American officials were criticized. Welcomed by a large crowd carrying English “Welcome Turkey” signs, Mr. Unity responded to the public with “Glu Glu” in Turkish. In a cartoon, on the other hand, Mr. Unity was also depicted with a bespectacled turkey which is likened to Truman. It wears Uncle Sam’s hat with a dollar sign on it (Figure 17).
Figure 17: “Mr. Unity,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 30 November 1949
The most remarkable satire about the Marshall Plan was the depiction that it endangered Turkey’s domestic industry. Nuh’un Gemisi announced the Marshall Plan’s impact on domestic industry with the following passage: “defeated by the Marshall Plan disease; the domestic industry passed away at a young age. Desirous Americans are requested to attend the funeral. Wreath expenses will be paid on
388 “Büyük Misafir,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 30 November 1949.
106
American credit.”389 I. Athenagoras390, Mr. Russell Dorr, the RPP and DP officials, and black marketeers were attended its funeral ceremony.
Figure 18: “Buyurun Cenaze Namazına (Come to Funeral Prayer),” Nuh’un Gemisi, 15 February 1950.
A poster competition that was organized to show the success of the Marshall Plan in Turkey was also satirized.391 According to Nuh’un Gemisi, the poster competition winners would be awarded with five hundred liras and Elaine Shephard’s kiss.392 The Turkish-American Women’s Association, on the other hand, would teach Boogie Woogie dance at no charge. Surprised by these awards, Nuh’un Gemisi painters decided to participate in this competition. A poster drawn by its painters was titled “the Marshall Plan Make You Get Air” (Figure 19). This cartoon satirizes a Marshall Plan propaganda poster (Figure 20) published by ECA. While the flags of European countries benefiting from the Marshall Plan are located on the blades of a windmill, the flag of the United States places on the tail. This poster mainly implies that the
389 “Buyurun Cenaze Namazına,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 15 February 1950.
390 In the Cold War period, the Orthodox Church became an area of struggle between the United States and the Soviet Union. Aiming to increase its influence on the Orthodox nations, the Soviet Union used the Orthodox church as an effective political tool. The United States, on the other hand, played an important role in the election of I. Athenagoras as the patriarch of Greek Orthodox Patriarch in İstanbul in 1948. I. Athenagoras, an American citizen, came to Turkey with Truman’s private plane and his patriarchate were criticized for the US’ interference in Turkey’s internal affairs. In Figure 18, while I. Athenagoras is at the forefront with the image of dollar in his hand, other funeral attendants who were labeled as the supporters of America, carry the symbolic coffin of the domestic industry.
391 “Marşal Afiş Müsabakası,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 15 March 1950.
392 Elaine Shephard was an American actress whose name was frequently mentioned in Nuh’un Gemisi. Shephard came to Turkey frequently in these years due to her husband’s military duty in Turkey. Thus, she received widespread media attention. For instance, Shephard visited the slums of Ankara with a journalist from Zafer newspaper in 1949, and a photograph of Shephard while chatting with Turkish women appeared in the newspaper. For an article mentioning Shephard’s visit and her photo, see Semih Gökatalay, ‘Erken Soğuk Savaş Ankara’sında Sinema Kültürü’, Ankara Araştırmaları Dergisi, Vol.7, No.1 (2019), 154-155.
107
solidarity between the United States and European countries is going to lead to welfare. Mocking this poster with the depiction of a ventilator, Nuh’un Gemisi stated that the Marshall Plan had no gains other than disappointment.
Figure 19: “Marşal Planı Size Hava Aldırır (The Marshall Plan Make You Get Air)”, Nuh’un Gemisi, 15 March 1950.
Figure 20: “Whatever the Weather We Only Reach Welfare Together,” The Marshall Plan Poster, accessed 26 July 2021 on https://www.marshallfoundation.org/library/posters/whatever-weather-reach-welfare-together/
108
In another satire (Figure 21), it was argued that the Marshall Plan propaganda movies did not reflect the realities of Turkey. According to the fictitious advertisement in Nuh’un Gemisi, “decent-looking, healthy, and cleaned-dressed extras are needed for the Marshall Plan movie to be released soon. The applicants can apply to Mr. Dorr in Ankara.”
Figure 21: “İlan (Announcement),” Nuh’un Gemisi, 28 March 1950
Figure 22: Kendisi Muhtacı Himmet Bir Dede (You Can’t Expect Any Help from Him Since He’s in Need of Help Himself),” Nuh’un Gemisi, 26 April 1950.
109
In a cartoon titled “You Can’t Expect Any Help from Him Since He’s in Need of Help Himself” (Figure 22), on the other hand, referring to the Marshall aids, Nuh’un Gemisi depicted that the United States could not help other nations since it was in economic crisis. Accordingly, Uncle Sam, who is depicted on a sinking American flagged ship, hung a rope ladder to three people in another boat.
3.4. The American Presence in Turkey
American administrators and experts, American military officials, and American private capital were three essential factors that were criticized within the context of the American presence in Turkey. Although the satirical discourse often prevailed in these criticisms, there were also political articles written in a critical political tone. In this context, Russel H. Dorr was the most criticized figure in Nuh’un Gemisi. “Representative of American interests in Turkey”, “Dictator of the Marshall Plan,” “Dictator of the Economy” were some prominent expressions that were used to label Dorr.393 In a satirical text about Dorr, his prominence in Turkey was depicted as follows: “There is a man living in Ankara. His language and religion differ from ours’. All newspapers give special attention to him. Even the most trivial incident about him has a broad repercussion. They repose in his most trivial words. This great person is Russel Dorr, the administrator of the Marshall Plan.”394 He was acting like “a member of the Turkish government and as “the most potent authority that determined Turkey’s economic and commercial policies.”395 Furthermore, Dorr’s statement that “more American experts and agricultural engineers will be served for Turkey’s economic development” was satirized in Nuh’un Gemisi as follows:
Are we training our agricultural specialists to be the figureheads? Why don’t we close all agricultural schools, faculties, and institutes, and why don’t we hang a ‘House for Rent’ in their doors? Dissatisfied with the work and
393 “Şu İyi Kalpli Amerika”, Nuh’un Gemisi, 14 December 1949; “Mr. Russell Dorr’un Yeni Buyrukları”, Nuh’un Gemisi, 5 April 1950.
394 “Şu İyi Kalpli Amerika”, Nuh’un Gemisi, 14 December 1949.
395 “Mr. Russell Dorr’un Yeni Buyrukları”, Nuh’un Gemisi, 5 April 1950.
110
knowledge of the Turkish peasants, the Marshall Plan dictator can settle the American peasants in Turkish villages soon.396
Furthermore, the increasing prominence of American private capital in Turkey was frequently criticized in Nuh’un Gemisi. While depicting the Turkish government’s encouragement for foreign capital as the institutionalization of “semi-colonial laws (yarı-müstemleke kanunları)”, it blamed the imperialist expansion of American capital as the main reason for this transformation.397 This analysis was evident in different articles in Nuh’un Gemisi. For instance, in its response to an American enterpriser’s statement about free-market incentives in Turkey, Nuh’un Gemisi writers opposed the expansion of American private capital in Turkey. During his visit to Turkey, William H. Draper, the Chairman of the Board of Dillon, Read & Company, made statements about Turkey's foreign capital incentive laws. After stating that the Turkish government showed great interest in American private capital, he said: “I have learned, however, that essential laws on this issue have not been passed by the parliament yet.”398 In this context, he also argued that: “If the plan prepared by Johnson and Barker399 is realized, American capital will flow to Turkey.”400 After interpreting Draper’s statements as a political directive to the Turkish government, Nuh’un Gemisi stated that the American experts’ reports about the Turkish economy resembled semi-colonial laws.401 Moreover, Draper’s statements were satirized with the following headline: “Good News! American Capital Will Flow to Our Country.”
396 Ibid.
397 “Müjdeler Olsun Memleketimize Sel Gibi Amerikan Sermayesi Akacakmış,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 18 January 1950.
398 Ibid.
399 In 1949, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) collaborated with the Turkish government on the economic development program on Turkish economy and commissioned James M. Barker, a prominent American banker, to conduct a research in Turkish economy. Barker’s report was published in the name The Economy of Turkey: An Analysis and Recommendations for A Development Program in 1951. Barker mainly recommended more support for the Turkish private sector and the expansion of agriculture.
400 “Müjdeler Olsun Memleketimize Sel Gibi Amerikan Sermayesi Akacakmış,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 18 January 1950.
401 Ibid.
111
Figure 23: Nuh’un Gemisi, 9 November 1949.
Responding to the decree about the fifty percent reduction in custom tariffs among the Marshall Plan countries, an untitled cartoon (Figure 23) emphasized the negative influences of trade liberalization in the Turkish economy. The figures in this depiction represent the American private capital and domestic actors in the Turkish economy. This depiction emphasized that after trade liberalization, strong American private capital would dominate the Turkish market, and weak Turkish domestic capital would not respond its expansion.
The prominence of American soldiers in social life and the consistent visits of American politicians were other significant topics that were satirized in Nuh’un Gemisi. “In Dolmabahçe without Americans,” for instance, Nuh’un Gemisi criticized the huge numbers of American sailors in Istanbul with a humorous language.402 A Nuh’un Gemisi writer, who took a walk in Dolmabahçe, seemed quite surprised when s/he could not encounter with any American soldiers. Along with the Americans, there were no “(English Speaking), (Welcome Our Great Friends), (Hello Sailors)” signs on the restaurants and pubs in Dolmabahçe. S/he later said: “Thank God, Dolmabahçe has never been left without Americans, since our involvement in the Marshall Plan.”403
402 “Amerikansız Dolmabahçe,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 9 November 1949.
112
3.5. The Depiction of Americanization
Americanization in the socio-cultural sphere was one of the most emphasized topics in Nuh’un Gemisi. As examined in the previous chapters, the Turkish press became an important tool in transmitting the American culture to Turkish society. In this context, the Americanization in the Turkish media was one of the important areas criticized by Nuh’un Gemisi. Moreover, the popularity of American magazines was also criticized. Apart from these, the criticism towards the prominence of American consumer products, Americanization in the Turkish language, American cowboy movies and American music were other significant issues. In addition to the humorous style of the articles, a nationalist rhetoric, that aimed to preserve the essence of Turkish culture against the penetrating influence of American culture, was also at the forefront.
“Ask Noah” column was one of the areas where the criticisms of Americanization were prominent. The imaginary readers of the magazine send information about the periodicals they read, the party they were a member of, the movies, plays, and novels they like. In the light of this information, Nuh made character analysis of his readers. Alafranga (Western style) characters were the most prominent figures satirized in this column, and their most distinctive features was their fascination with American culture. For instance, an alafranga woman who read tabloids like Yıldız and Karikatür, subscribed to Life magazine, and whose favorite movie was Gilda, in which Rita Hayworth is the leading role was mentioned.404
Nuh’un Gemisi also criticized the popularity of American products in Turkey. Nylon textile products and plastics were two popular American products in post-war Turkey. In one cartoon (Figure 24), Nuh’un Gemisi criticized their prominence in Turkish society. It related their reputation with a Turkish proverb “Kel Başa Şimşir Tarak”405 and criticized both the nylon products and the Marshall Plan. It firstly
403 Ibid.
404 “Nuh’a Sorun,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 9 November 1949.
113
emphasized that the Marshall Plan did not solve the world’s problems. In an atmosphere where the world nations were struggling with economic issues, it interpreted the popularity of American products as conspicuous consumption.
Figure 24: “Kel Başa Naylon Tarak (He Wears a Ten-Dollar Hat on a Five-Cent Head),” Nuh’un Gemisi, 23 November 1949.
The Americanization of Turkish media was also one of the topics that Nuh’un Gemisi satirized. In a humorous text, for instance, it was stated that Ankara Radio was going to continue its broadcasts in English soon. A sample news bulletin that was created by mixing Turkish and English words was as follows:
Dis iz Ankara konuşuyor. Mister Günaltay iz going Zonguldak’a. Makal iz in kodes, bikoz komünistlikten… Tru söyleyen yedi köyden expeld. Marşal Plan iz giving mangiz, ister inan or not… (Ankara Radio is speaking. Mr. Günaltay is going to Zonguldak. (Mahmut) Makal is imprisoned due to the accusations of being a communist. All truth is not always to be told. The Marshall Plan pays, believe it or not…)406
405 Its synonym in English is “he wears a ten-dollar hat on a five-cent head.”
406 “Ankara Radyosu İngilizce Konuşuyor,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 19 April 1950.
114
In another text, both the Americanization of Turkish radio programs and the prominence of American consumer products were criticized. It depicted a routine radio program in Turkey as follows:
We turn on the radio. Domestic news last only two minutes (mostly about the Turkish-American relations). Foreign news last fifteen minutes and the word ‘America’ repeated over again… Music: American jazz. America, America, and Americans… Wherever you look, whatever you listen to. When you say: ‘I have enough of it’ and you go to the street, you see American nylon, American chewing gum… If you want to go to the cinema, an American movie… 407
Another critique of Americanization focused on the prominence of American cowboy movies and songs in Turkey. The name symbolized by this criticism was Gene Autry. He was prominent for cowboy music and musical cowboy movies in the 1930s and 1940s, and he became also popular in Turkey. The most significant symbol that showed the prominence of Autry in Turkey was the song “ American Cowboys, Lion Gene Autry (Amerikan Kovboyları, Aslan Cinotri).” His prominence was criticized in a depiction entitled “A Mathematics Lesson in 1955.”408 A student holding two revolvers in front of his teacher sings “Long Live Cinotri, Lion Cinotri.” In another text, it was stated that the City Children’s Theaters in Turkey were making American propaganda. According to Nuh’un Gemisi, Turkish children who grew up with “I Love You America,” “American Cowboys,” and “Lion Cinotri” songs lost their love for their homeland.409
The magazine focused on the prominence of American tabloids in Turkey in another issue.410 Nuh’un Gemisi writers firstly asked why conservatives, who previously opposed a nude sculpture at an exhibition in Istanbul, did not speak about the popularity of tabloids. It was stated that they could not resist these magazines because they were American. According to Nuh’un Gemisi, these magazines diffused in every corner of the country but they were not the only popular American products.
407 “Amerika, Amerika İllallah,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 22 March 1950.
408 “1955’te Bir Matematik Dersi,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 5 April 1950.
409 “Tiyatro,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 30 November 1949.
410 “İstanbul Sergisi Kapanırken,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 2 November 1949.
115
American chewing gums, swing music, the fashion of blinking also penetrated into the Turkish society. The magazine satirized this popularity and gave a social message:
“- The capitulations are coming again!
- Do you want chewing gum?
- Foreign capital will take what it wants!
- Why are you so upset? Take forty new poses of forty American pretties.”411
All in all, as expressed in these depictions, the reaction to the dissemination of American culture in Turkish society was one of the dominant themes in Nuh’un Gemisi. This was mainly interpreted as the expansion of American imperialism in the socio-cultural field. A nationalist discourse aiming at the preservation of Turkish culture was also a prominent feature of these criticisms.
3.6. Conclusion
As the examples of Markopaşa and Nuh’un Gemisi showed, left-wing political humor formed an alternative discourse to the Americanization in Turkish society and to the Turkish press’ discursive consensus on the Turkish-American alliance. Embracing the anti-imperialist struggle of the War of Independence period and the national independence motto of the early republican period, these magazines criticized post-war Turkish-American relations on the grounds that it led to Turkey’s dependency on the United States. These themes were evident both in the articles written in a severe and critical tone, and in the satirical texts and cartoons. In this context, the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan, American private capital, American military, and personnel presence in Turkey formed their anti-imperialist rhetoric's political and economic context. On the other hand, the diffusion of American popular culture, the appeal of American consumer products in Turkish society, and the Americanization in the Turkish media’s language formed the cultural context of their criticisms.
411 Ibid.
116
In terms of their influences in Turkish society, although Markopaşa had a significant social base in its initial periods and partially in its second period, it can be stated that political humor’s social effects decreased in the following periods. The arrests of their columnists, unstable publication periods, and the emergence of imitation publications bearing the name Markopaşa were the most significant factors leading its marginalization in Turkish society.412 In this context, Nuh’un Gemisi can also be considered marginal in terms of its social effects. On the other hand, when we consider that the leading CPT cadres were in prison in the publication period of Nuh’un Gemisi, it can also be assumed that the remaining CPT cadres’ range of actions was very limited in the pressure atmosphere. This phenomenon might have also led Nuh’un Gemisi to become an underground publication.
Regarding the interpretations above, it is also significant to note that the emergence of political humor as an original form of resistance was an early post-war period phenomenon. In this period, a vast majority of the Turkish public opposed the RPP government, and political satire effectively channeled this opposition into its reading matter. The RPP government was replaced with the DP in 1950, and this meant that the essential actor that political humor opposed left the major political scene. This transition also significantly affected the popularity of political humor in the Turkish society. Another important development was that the increasing militarist discourse in world politics pushed the CPT to revise its policies. As stated in the last issue of Nuh’un Gemisi, the CPT had decided to publish a severe political journal by terminating Nuh’un Gemisi.413 Instead, it started to publish Barış, a political magazine. One of the essential policies of this magazine was the opposition to the increasing militarism in the world, and Turkey’s position in the militarist world atmosphere. While this transformation was closely related to the changes in domestic and foreign policy, it also symbolized the withdrawal of left-wing political humor from the opposition scene for a certain period of time.
All in all, political humor’s anti-Americanism in the early post-war period developed an alternative discourse to the mainstream Turkish press but this opposition never
412 Cantek, ‘TKP’nin Desteklediği Mizah Gazetesi: Nuh’un Gemisi (1949-1950)’.
413 “Sayın Okuyucularımıza,” Nuh’un Gemisi, 31 May 1950.
117
formed or turned into a large-scale anti-American social movement. The growing anti-communist paranoia, the liquidation of organized left-wing political structures, and legal and political pressures were some main reasons why an effective social base was not formed. On the other hand, despite all these, the anti-imperialist rhetoric formed in these publications left an important intellectual legacy to the organized anti-imperialist and leftist struggle, which have been generally associated with the 1960s.
118
CHAPTER 4
CONCLUSION
This study aimed to examine how the image of America was depicted in ideological and cultural contexts in the early post-war Turkey that undergone fundamental changes in many aspects. In this context, this study adhered to the Cultural Cold War approach, which has become increasingly popular in academia in recent years. I aimed to contribute to the existing body of Cultural Cold War literature by focusing on the foundational years of the Turkish-American alliance, which has not been analyzed much in the Cultural Cold War context before. For this purpose, I used periodicals belonging to different political spectrums to reveal how different political backgrounds depicted America and signified it to the different segments of Turkish society. This approach both reveals how the United States was depicted in an intellectual context and how the public experienced the Cold War via certain ideological and cultural concepts.
At this point, it is important to reiterate the dynamics of the early post-war Turkey to contextualize the concluding remarks about the chapters examined in this study. In this context, it should firstly be stated that Turkey’s integration to the western world and the capitalist economy accelerated with the developing Cold War circumstances. Secondly, parallel to the context change in foreign policy, and the pushing influences of the social-political factors, Turkey experienced the transition to multi-party politics. Political liberalization also manifested itself in the ruling party, and the latter’s political cadres adapted to the changing dynamics. On the other hand, the economic problems experienced in the war-time period united larger segments of Turkish society against in opposition to the RPP. While these dynamics also showed their influences in the Turkish press, the mainstream newspapers divided into two
119
camps as pro-RPP and pro-DP newspapers. In this context, the main discussions in the mainstream media mostly focused on the democracy debates in the context of transition to multi-party politics. Apart from the influence of this factor, the mainstream press’ language considerably liberalized simultaneously with the enhancement of Turkish-American relations. On the other hand, while the early post-war period allowed the left-wing groups to organize in political parties and periodicals, the relative political liberalization for left-wing groups was short-lived, and they were excluded from mainstream politics and the press. In this context, even under pressure, left-wing political humor emerged as a unique way of opposition by channeling the anger of anti-RPP and dissatisfied public groups into its reading matter. Besides the populist language, the most distinctive features of the early post-war left-wing political humor were anti-imperialism and national independence rhetoric. In the light of these remarks, the ongoing analyses include the main discussions in the periodicals examined in this study.
The second chapter of this thesis examined the pro-RPP Ulus and pro-DP Vatan, two popular periodicals of the early post-war period, to reveal the Americanization of the press’ language. This chapter firstly scrutinized the editorials of Falih Rıfkı Atay and Ahmet Emin Yalman, who had more influence on the newspapers’ readers due to their editorships. Atay and Yalman’s reader groups were educated-urban RPP members and middle-class urban DP members, respectively. Accordingly, Falih Rıfkı Atay, as a prominent Kemalist elite who strictly relied on the government’s foreign policy orientation, interpreted the US global leadership in the Cold War context mostly because of the pragmatic reasons. On the other hand, the ideological motivations were also evident in Ahmet Emin Yalman’s perception of America, apart from his agreement with Atay on official foreign policy orientation. While these figures always depicted the United States as the historical protector of democratic, libertarian, and peaceful standards of the free world, their discourses also showed how much they adopted the liberal values of the United States. In this context, labeling Turkey as a principal member of the free world, these writers interpreted the American presence in Turkey as a precaution to protect the core values of the free world against the Soviet aggression and expansionism. Reiterating specific concepts such as democracy, peace, and freedom in their articles, and
120
idealizing the United States with these values, Atay and Yalman built the Turkish-American alliance on these values and were also defining the standards of “little America” image in the eyes of their readers.
Another topic scrutinized in the second chapter was how the United States and other Cold War actors were represented in the cartoon image. In this context, I focused on Ratip Tahir Burak’s cartoons that were published on the cover page of Ulus and became the most effective way of transmitting the developing Cold War atmosphere to the newspaper’s readers. While the analyzed cartoons were chronologically parallel to Atay and Yalman’s articles, Burak almost pointed out the same points as these writers’ depiction of the Cold War circumstances. These cartoons were descriptively analyzed in terms of what messages Burak might have sent to the signifier. In this context, Burak’s cartoons did not only reinforce the image of the United States as a world hegemon that took responsibility to save the free world on the way to disaster but also emphasized its political, military and economic superiority over the Soviet Union. To conclude, while these cartoons were in line with the official foreign policy orientation and played vital role in legitimizing this orientation in the eyes of educated RPP members, they were also the clear manifestation of how the Turkish press discourse was Americanized in the Cold War context.
The America-sourced translated articles, which increased in parallel with the enhancement of Turkish-American relations, was another prominent topic interpreted in the second chapter. While most of these articles were intended to legitimize the American foreign policy orientation in the early Cold War period, they consolidated the pro-American discourse of Ulus. Furthermore, the increase in the number of America-sourced translated articles related to American popular culture and everyday life practices in the United States were interpreted as another important factor that made America prominent in Ulus.
The third chapter of the thesis analyzed how left-wing political humor became an arena where the anti-imperialist discourse was formed and disseminated. Accordingly, this chapter focused on Markopaşa and Nuh’un Gemisi periodicals. It
121
firstly provided preliminary information about the political context in which these magazines emerged, and the intellectual and political backgrounds of the prominent figures in the magazines’ publications. Then, this chapter attempted to illuminate their social influences. In this context, it was stated that Markopaşa’s populist discourse, and anti-RPP policy orientation were two important factors in the magazine’s success in initial periods. However, political humor lost its social effects and became marginalized in the subsequent periods. The publication of Nuh’un Gemisi coincided with the period when left-wing political humor lost its popularity so this magazine’s social repercussions limited only to certain circles.
This chapter attached particular importance to Sabahattin Ali and Mehmet Ali Aybar’s editorials that were considered as essential elements determining the anti-imperialist rhetoric of these magazines. In this context, contrary to the depiction of American image in the mainstream newspapers analyzed in the first chapter, these writers interpreted the United States’ position in the Cold War as imperialist expansionism, and the American presence in Turkey in the context of the dependency relationship. Furthermore, the most prominent feature of their articles was that they interpreted Turkish-American alliance as a concession from the national and economic independence that they associated with the War of Independence and the gains of early republican period. In this context, it is possible to characterize these politically mature articles as the intellectual cores of the leftist anti-imperialism of the 1960s.
On the other hand, this chapter interpreted satirical discourse as the critical factor determining the originality of these magazines’ anti-imperialist rhetoric. By effectively using the humorous language both in texts and cartoons, these magazines challenged mainstream Turkish press’ discursive consensus on the Turkish-American alliance. While these satirical articles and cartoons were in line with the political line specified by Sabahattin Ali and Mehmet Ali Aybar, the most reiterated issues in these articles and cartoons were the American military and economic presence in the country, the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan, and the Americanization of Turkish society and the Turkish media’s language.
122
To conclude, contrary to the studies that examine cultural and ideological issues in Turkey’s Cold War in a unidimensional way and within the framework of America’s influence in the intellectual field and the rise of anti-communist rhetoric, this study presented the post-war Turkish press as an arena where the ongoing discussions over the image of America continued. Despite political pressures and their marginalization in society, left-wing groups retained their publications and attempted to challenge the hegemonic discourse in the mainstream press. On the other hand, it should also be noted that the political figures and periodicals examined in the two chapters depicted the United States in very subjective terms and through the lenses of ideological and political spectrums. In this context, by signifying their own visions of America to the newspapers’ readers, Ulus and Vatan consolidated the positive public image of the Turkish-American alliance. On the other hand, although post-war political humor magazines became important anti-imperialist focus, they never formed a grassroots movement and lost their social repercussions in the subsequent periods of the early post-war era.
123
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Primary Sources
1. Periodicals
Ulus
a. Falih Rıfkı Atay’s Articles
“Amerika Artık Yolunu Bulmuştur,” 8 April 1946.
“Amerika Seçimlerinden Sonra,” 9 November 1946.
“Amerikan Denizcileri İstanbul’da,” 2 May 1947.
“Artık Kimse Aldanmıyor,” 22 September 1947.
“Barış Kurucu Amerika,” 15 March 1947.
“Barış Yolunda Büyük Bir Adım,” 24 April 1947.
“Çıkar Yollardan Biri,” 20 September 1947.
“Dost Amerikan Filosu İzmir’de,” 25 November 1947.
“Dünya Tahrikçiliği,” 16 October 1947.
“Dünya’nın İkiye Bölünüşü,” 7 July 1947.
“Hürriyet Nizamının Yolu,” 24 March 1947.
“Kızıl Partiler ve Demokrasi,” 16 July 1947.
“Mecliste Bir Dostluk Gösterisi,” 9 May 1946.
“Missori,” 5 April 1946.
124
“Sarper ve Vişinski Arasında,” 27 October 1947.
“Türkiye’den Amerika’ya,” 9 April 1946.
b. Ratip Tahir’s Cartoons
“Amerika ile İngiltere Avrupa’yı Kalkındırıyorlar,” 27 July 1947.
“Amerika 400 Milyonluk Kanun Çıkmadan 100 Milyon Gönderiyor,” 20 March 1947.
“Avrupa İçin Fidye-i Necat,” 5 July 1947.
“Demokrasinin Tarifi,” 18 June 1947.
“Kıyamet Alameti,” 9 October 1947.
“Komünistler Birleşik Amerika Düşmanı Tanınacak,” 14 February 1947.
“Komşu Çatlatan,” 25 April 1947.
“Moskova Konferansı Başlarken,” 14 March 1947.
“Parladıkça Lekeleri Daha İyi Görüyorum,” 25 March 1947.
“Sayı Hesabıyla Galip!,” 11 May 1947.
“Teknenin Selameti Uğruna,” 26 September 1947.
“Yardan mı Geçsem Serden mi?,” 7 July 1947.
“Yeni İngiliz-Amerikan İşbirliği,” 7 January 1947.
c. Other Articles
“Amerika’da Bir Adale Plajı,” 5 January 1947.
“Amerika’da Bir Moda Yeniliği: Şapka Yerini Tutan Eşarp,” 20 April 1947.
“Amerikan Ayan Meclisinin En Nüfuzlu Şahsiyeti Arthur Vandenberg”, 21 September 1947.
“Amerikalı Turist: Bütün Avrupa, Daha Şimdiden Bu Kıymetli Avın Peşindedir,” 9 March 1947.
125
“Asker ve Devlet Adamı George Marshall,” 13 April 1947.
“Atom Kudreti Barışın Emrinde,” 17 August 1947.
“Başgarson Hazretleri,” 2 February 1947”
“Bir Casusluk Şaheseri,” 12 January 1947.
“Bir Harp İhtimaline Karşı Amerika Bir Atom Ordusu Kuruyor,” 28 September 1947.
“Bir Yaradanın Var Olduğuna İnanmak İçin Yedi Sebep,” 13 April 1947
“Birleşik Amerika’da Torbadan Yapılan Zarif Elbiseler,” Ulus, 3 August 1947.
“Birleşik Amerika’da Bir Kumar Şaheseri,” 10 August 1947.
“Birleşik Amerika’da Cumhurbaşkanlığı Seçimlerini Kim Kazanacak,” 21 September 1947.
“Casuslar Arasında: Harpten Önce Doğu’da Alman Casusluğu,” 8 June 1947.
“Casuslarla Nasıl Savaştık?,” 6 December 1946.
Eric Johntson, “Teminatlı Bir Dünya Barışına Ulaşmak İçin Amerika’nın Geniş Ekonomik İmkanları,” 6 May 1947.
“Etekler Uzasın mı Uzamasın mı,” 10 August 1947.
Harry C. Butcher, “Eisenhower’la Üç Yıl,” 9 September 1946.
“Hollywood’da Bir Sinema Yıldızı Nasıl İmal Edilir?,” 24 August 1947.
“Hollywood’da Dedikodular,” 9 March 1947.
“Hollywood Dünyası: Maria Montez,” 28 September 1947.
“Hollywood Dünyası: Sinema Yıldızları Kendi Alemlerinde Nasıl Eğleniyorlar,” 5 January 1947.
James F. Byrnes, “Açık Konuşalım,” 1 November 1947.
John Foster Dulles, “Barış Yolunda I,” 1 May 1947.
“Kadını Güzel Yapan Nedir,” 16 February 1947.
“Kızıl Saçlı Güzel Rita Hayworth’un Bilinmeyen Tarafları,” 16 February 1947.
126
“Korkunç Bir Para Bolluğu İçinde Yüzen Bir Memleket: Birleşik Amerika,” 22 September 1947.
“Misafir Amerikan Denizcileri Sevgi İle Ağırlanıyor,” 7 April 1946.
“Misafirlerimiz Halkın Sevgi Tezahürleri ile Karşılandı,” 7 April 1946.
“Missouri Bu Sabah 8’de İstanbul’da,” 5 April 1946.
“Missori’yi Karşılarken,” 6 April 1946.
“Missouri Sigaraları,” 7 April 1946.
“Pazartesi Başlıyoruz: Eisenhower’la Üç Yıl,” 7 September 1946.
“Pazartesi Günü Başlıyoruz: Cordell Hull’ün Hatıraları,” 23 January 1948.
“Rusya’da 14 Milyon Esir Var,” 20 July 1947.
“Sinema Aleminin En Cazip Kadını: Jane Russell,” 12 January 1947.
“Sinema Dünyası: Bir Yıldız Doğuyor,” 30 March 1947.
Sumner Welles, “Yakın Doğu Üzerinde Bulutlar,” 16 December 1946.
“Tam 24 Yıl Sonra Amerikalı Bir Karı Koca Yeni Baştan Evlendiler,” 21 September 1947.
Thomas M. Johnson, “Amerika’daki Kızıl Casus Şebekesi,” 24 August 1947.
William C. Bullitt, “Amerikan Dış Siyasetinin Kuvveti,” 14 September 1947.
“Yeni Moda Muşambaları,” 16 February 1947.
“Yılbaşından İtibaren Ulus’ta Yenilikler,” 30 December 1946.
Vatan
a. Ahmet Emin Yalman’s Articles
“Amerika ile İşbirliğimiz,” 11 March 1947.
“Amerika Türkiye’yi Yakından Tanımaya Hazırlanıyor,” 9 February 1947.
127
“Bir Dünya Salgını,” 9 March 1947.
“Bir İhmalin Neticeleri,” 7 March 1947.
“Çelikten Bir Barış Elçisi,” 4 April 1946.
“Dr. Thornburg’un Görüşü İle Türkiye,” 17 February 1947.
“Ecnebi Sermayesi Bize Nasıl Gelir,” 4 December 1946.
“Hoşgeldin Ey Ertegün,” 5 April 1946.
“İktisadi İşlerimizle İlgili Amerikalılar Dert Yanıyorlar”,
“İngiliz-Amerika Ortaklığı,” 6 March 1947.
“Missori’den İntibalar,” 6 April 1946.
“Neden Coçtuk,” 8 April 1946.
“Nelere Mal Oluyorlar,” 5 March 1947.
“Yeni Ufuklara Doğru,” 6 July 1947.
b. Other Articles
Fuat Köprülü, “Türk Demokrasisi ve Hürriyet Düşmanı Komünistler,” 3 March 1947.
“Hollywood Bir Siyaset Yatağı Haline Mi Geldi”, 23 October 1947.
“Komünist Ajanları Nasıl Çalışıyorlar? : Kanada’da Varılan Hakikatler,” 6 March 1947.
“Komünist Tahrikatına Karşı Alınan Tedbirler: Sıkı Yönetim Komutanlığının Tebliği,” 16 December 1946.
“Memleketimizin Candan Dostu Max Thornburg Geldi,” 17 February 1949.
“Missori’nin Yarattığı Heyecan ve Cenaze Töreni,” 6 April 1946.
“Rus Propagandası Yapan Bir Film: Karşı Hücum,” 6 March 1947.
“Türkiye’de Tetkikler: Bir Amerikan Mümessili Memleketimize Geldi,” 28 March 1947.
128
Markopaşa
a. Sabahattin Ali’s Articles
“Ayıp,” 16 December 1946.
“Bir Alçak,” 29 September 1947.
“Hangi Cepheden Gelirse Gelsin Emperyalizmin Aleyhindeyiz,” 28 April 1947.
“İstiklal,” 25 November 1946.
“Ne İstiyoruz,” 10 February 1946.
“Uşaklık Ruhu,” 16 December 1947.
“Yabancı Sermaye,” 2 December 1946.
b. Other Articles
Aziz Nesin, “Topunuzun Köküne Kibrit Suyu,” 16 December 1946.
“Amerika’dan Alınacak 150 Milyonu Ne Yapalım,” 28 April 1947.
“Anglo-Amerikan-Türkiş Limited Ortaklığı Mukavelanamesi,” 26 May 1947.
“Bir Ahçı Aranıyor,” 14 January 1949.
“Dolar Marşı,” 19 May 1947.
“Geliyor,” 5 May 1947.
“Haritada Yer Değiştireceğiz,” 6 October 1947.
“Hoşgeldin Victory,” 25 November 1946.
“Markopaşa’nın Amerikan Milyarderlerine Mesajı,” 5 November 1948.
“Nasıl Girer,” 19 September 1947.
“Radyo Programı,” 28 April 1947.
“Sterling, Dolar and Ruble,” 27 January 1947.
“Şehir ve Yurt Haberleri,” 13 May 1949.
129
“Türk-Amerikan Gidiş-Geliş Programı,” 2 Aralık 1947.
“Yeni Bütçe,” 10 October 1947.
“Ziyaret ve Ziyafet,” 20 May 1949.
Nuh’un Gemisi
Accessed 12 March 2020 on
https://www.tustav.org/sureli-yayinlar-arsivi/nuhun-g(emisi/
a. Mehmet Ali Aybar’s Articles
“1919-1950,” 11 January 1950.
“Amerikan Diplomatlarının Toplantısı,” 30 November 1949.
“Amerikan Halkının Korkusu,” 8 March 1950.
“Bay Sadak Latife Ediyorsunuz,” 28 December 1949.
“Bilanço,” 4 January 1950.
“Bir Daha SOS,” 21 December 1949.
“Cumhuriyet Bayramını Kutlarken,” 2 November 1949
“İflasın Eşiğinde,” 1 February 1950.
“İthalat Serbestisi ve Türk İşçisi,” 22 February 1950.
”Kısa Bir Hesaplaşma,” 9 December 1949.
“Sadak’ın İtirafları,” 15 February 1950.
“Sömürgeleşmeye Doğru,” 16 November 1949.
b. Other Articles
“1955’te Bir Matematik Dersi,” 5 April 1950.
“Amerika, Amerika İllallah,”, 22 March 1950.
130
“Amerika’ya Teşekkür, Tanrı’ya Şükür,” 30 November 1949.
“Amerikansız Dolmabahçe,” 9 November 1949.
“Ankara Radyosu İngilizce Konuşuyor,” 19 April 1950.
“Buyurun Cenaze Namazına,”, 15 February 1950.
“Büyük Misafir,”,30 November 1949.
“İstanbul Sergisi Kapanırken,” 2 November 1949.
“Marşal Afiş Müsabakası,” 15 March 1950.
“Mr. Russell Dorr’un Yeni Buyrukları,” 5 April 1950.
“Müjdeler Olsun Memleketimize Sel Gibi Amerikan Sermayesi Akacakmış,” 18 January 1950.
“Nuh’a Sorun,” 9 November 1949.
“Sayın Okuyucularımıza,” 31 May 1950.
“Şu İyi Kalpli Amerika,” 14 December 1949.
“Tiyatro,” 30 November 1949.
c. Cartoons and Images
“Buyurun Cenaze Namazına,” 15 February 1950.
“İlan,” 28 March 1950.
“Marşal Planı Size Hava Aldırır,” 15 March 1950.
“Kel Başa Naylon Tarak,” 23 November 1949.
“Kendisi Muhtacı Himmet Bir Dede,” 26 April 1950.
“Mr. Unity,” 30 November 1949.
Akşam
Necmettin Sadak, “Aziz Dostlarımız Hoş Geldiniz,” 5 April 1946.
Sadak, “Truman’ın Nutku Münasebetiyle Dostlarımızı Uğurlarken,” 9 April 1946.
131
Sadak, “Dünya Siyasetinde Yüzyılın En Ehemmiyetli Dönüm Noktası,” 15 March 1947.
Sadak, “Amerika Siyasetinin İlk Neticelerini Moskova Konferansında Göreceğiz,”18 March 1947.
Cumhuriyet
Abidin Daver, “Eski Dostluğun Yeni ve Parlak Bir Tezahürü,” 10 April 1946.
Daver, “ Deniz Devi Missouri’de Neler Gördüm I,” 7 April 1946.
Daver, “Deniz Devi Missouri’de Neler Gördüm II,” 9 April 1946
“Celal Bayar: “Bayar, 30 Yıl Sonra Küçük bir Amerika Olacağız Dedi”, 21 October 1957.
Vakit
Asım Us, “Sulhü Amerika’nın Kuvveti Kuracaktır,” 10 April 1946.
Time
“Report from the World,” Time, 20 January 1947.
Life
John Foster Dulles, “Thoughts on Soviet Foreign Policy and What to Do About It I”, Life, 3 June 1946.
2. Poster
“Whatever the Weather We Only Reach Welfare Together”, The Marshall Plan Poster, accessed 26 July 2021 on
https://www.marshallfoundation.org/library/posters/whatever-weather-reach-welfare-together/
132
3. Public Speech
John F. Kennedy, ‘Remarks on the 25th Anniversary of the Death of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’, accessed 26 July 2021 on
https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/JFKWHA/1963/JFKWHA-237-001/JFKWHA-237-001
Secondary Sources
Açıkalın, Cevat, ‘Turkey’s International Relations’, International Affairs, 23.4, 477–91
Ahmad, Feroz, ‘The Progressive Republican Party, 1924-1925’, in Political Parties and Democracy in Turkey, ed. by Metin Heper and Jacob M. Landau (London and New York: I.B. Tauris, 1991)
Akdan, Tolgahan, Soğuk Savaş ve Türkiye’nin Batıya Yönelişi (İstanbul: Yordam Kitap, 2020)
Alemdar, Korkmaz, ‘Tan Olayı ve Serteller’in ABD’ye İltica Girişimi’, in Kitle İletişimi: Dün, Bugün, Yarın (Ankara: Gazeteciler Cemiyeti, 2017)
Aras, Esra, ‘Türkiye’nin 1946-1950 Dönemi Toplumsal İlişkilerine Toplumcu Gerçekçi Bir Yergi: Halk Kürsüsü Sıfatıyla Markopaşa’ (Kocaeli University, 2020)
Ayan, Candaş, ‘Perception of Democracy in Turkey in the Period 1945-1960: An Analysis of Letters Sent to Ahmet Emin Yalman By Urban Middle-Class Readers’ (Middle East Technical University, 2020)
Bali, Rifat N., ‘Tek Parti Döneminde Gazete Tirajları’, Tarih ve Toplum, 221, 2002
Bayar, Celal, Celal Bayar’ın Söylev ve Demeçleri - Dış Politika (1933-1954) (İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Yayınları, 1999)
Belge, Murat, ‘Günlük Hayat’, Cumhuriyet Dönemi Türkiye Ansiklopedisi (İletişim Yayınları, 1983)
Berberoğlu, Berch, ‘State Capitalism and National Industrialization in Turkey’, Development and Change, 11.1 (1980), 97–121
Bilge, A. Suat, Güç Komşuluk: Türkiye-Sovyetler Birliği İlişkileri, 1920-1964 (Ankara: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 1992)
Bilgiç, Tuba Ünlü, ‘The Roots of Anti-Americanism in Turkey, 1945-1960’, Bilig / Türk Dünyası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 72, 2015
133
Birinci, M. Kürşat, ‘Erken Dönem Türk Demokrasisinde (1946-1950) Liberal Arayışlar’ (Gazi University, 2007)
Brockett, Gavin D., How Happy to Call Oneself a Turk: Provincial Newspapers and the Negotiation of a Muslim National Identity (Texas: University of Texas Press, 2011)
Buğra, Ayşe, State and Business in Modern Turkey: A Comparative Study (New York: State University of New York Press, 1994)
Byrnes, James F., Speaking Friendly (London and Toronto: William Heinemann, 1948)
Çalış, Şaban Halis, Turkey’s Cold War: Foreign Policy and the Western Alignment in the Modern Republic (London: I.B. Tauris, 2017)
Cantek, Levent, Cumhuriyetin Büluğ Çağı, Gündelik Yaşama Dair Tartışmalar (1945-1950) (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2013)
———, Markopaşa Bir Mizah ve Muhalefet Efsanesi (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2020)
———, ‘TKP’nin Desteklediği Mizah Gazetesi: Nuh’un Gemisi (1949-1950)’, Toplumsal Tarih, 154
Çavdar, Tevfik, Türkiye’nin Demokrasi Tarihi, 1839-1950 (Ankara: İmge Kitabevi Yayınları, 2013)
Coş, Kıvanç, and Pınar Bilgin, ‘Stalin’s Demands: Constructions of the “Soviet Other” in Turkey’s Foreign Policy, 1919-1945’, Foreign Policy Analysis, 6 (2010), 43–60
Criss, Nur Bilge, Selçuk Esenbel, Tony Greenwood, and Louis Mazzari, eds., American Turkish Encounters: Politics and Culture, 1830-1989 (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011)
Culver, John C., and John Hyde, American Dreamer: A Life of Henry A. Wallace (New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company, 2000)
Durukan, Kaan, ‘Türk Liberalizminin Kökenleri’, Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce 1, Cumhuriyet’e Devreden Düşünce Mirası (İletişim Yayınları, 2009)
Emre, A. Elif, ‘Ankara Gazeteciliğinin İlkokulu: Hakimiyet-i Milliye’, in Kitle İletişimi: Dün, Bugün, Yarın (Ankara: Gazeteciler Cemiyeti, 2017)
Ercan Bilgiç, Esra, ‘Kemalist İktidar ve Basın: 1919’dan 1950’ye’, in Medya ve İktidar: Hegemonya, Statüko, Direniş, ed. by Esra Arsan and Savaş Çoban (Evrensel Basım Yayın, 2014)
134
Erkin, Feridun Cemal, Türk-Sovyet İlişkileri ve Boğazlar Meselesi (Ankara, 1968)
Eroğul, Cem, Demokrat Parti Tarihi ve İdeolojisi (İstanbul: Yordam Kitap, 2014)
Evren, Burçak, Başlangıçtan Günümüze Türkiye’De Sinema Dergileri (İstanbul: Korsan, 1993)
Field, Rachel, Unutulmaz Hatıralar (İstanbul: Nebioğlu Yayınevi)
Girgin, Sevinç, ‘Falih Rıfkı Atay’ın Gezi Yazılarında Avrupa’ (East Mediterranean University, 2012)
Gökatalay, Semih, ‘Erken Soğuk Savaş Ankara’sında Sinema Kültürü’, Ankara Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7.1 (2019)
Gökay, Bülent, Soviet Eastern Policy and Turkey, 1920-1991: Soviet Foreign Policy, Turkey and Communism (London and New York: Routledge, 2006)
Gökmen, Özgür, ‘Çok Partili Rejime Geçerken Sol: Türkiye Sosyalizminin Unutulmuş Partisi’, Toplum ve Bilim, 78, 1998
Gönlübol, Mehmet, and A. Haluk Ülman, ‘Türk Dış Politikasının Yirmi Yılı 1945-1965’, Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 21.2 (1966)
Gürün, Kamuran, Dış İlişkiler ve Türk Politikası: 1930’dan Günümüze Kadar (Ankara: AÜ SBF Yayınları, 1983)
———, Türk-Sovyet İlişkileri: 1920-1953 (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1991)
Humphries, Reynold, Hollywood’s Blacklists: A Political and Cultural History (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2008)
İnuğur, Nuri M., ‘1923-1950 Döneminde Vatan-Tan Gazeteleri ve Ahmet Emin Yalman’, Marmara İletişim Dergisi, 1, 1992
Johnston, Gordon, ‘Revisiting the Cultural Cold War’, Social History, 35.3 (2010), 290–307
Kalkan, Buğra, Ahmet Emin Yalman: Entellektüel Bir Biyografi (Ankara: Liberte Yayınları, 2018)
Kansu, Aykut, ‘Prens Sabahattin’in Düşünsel Kaynakları ve Aşırı-Muhafazakar Düşüncenin İthali’, Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce 1, Cumhuriyet’e Devreden Düşünce Mirası (İletişim Yayınları, 2009)
Karaömerlioğlu, M. Asım, ‘Turkey’s Return to Multi-Party Politics: A Social Interpretation’, East European Quarterly, 40.1
Karpat, Kemal H., ‘The Republican People’s Party, 1923-1945’, in Political Parties
135
and Democracy in Turkey, ed. by Metin Heper and Jacob M. Landau (London and New York: I.B. Tauris, 2016), pp. 1–225 <https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315628516>
Kayış, Yasin, ‘Demokrat Parti İktidarı Döneminde Siyasi Karikatür’ (Dokuz Eylül University, 2004)
Kennedy, John F., ‘Remarks on the 25th Anniversary of the Death of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’ <https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/JFKWHA/1963/JFKWHA-237-001/JFKWHA-237-001>
Kerr, Malcolm, The Arab Cold War: A Study of Ideology in Politics (London, New York and Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1967)
Koçak, Cemil, Türkiye’de İki Partili Sistemin Kuruluş Yılları: Rejim Krizi (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2013)
———, Türkiye’de İki Partili Sistemin Kuruluş Yılları (1945-1950): İkinci Parti (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2010)
———, Türkiye’de Milli Şef Dönemi (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2003)
Koloğlu, Orhan, Osmanlı’dan Günümüze Türkiye’de Basın (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1992)
Konyar, Hürriyet, ‘Türkiye’de Tek Parti Döneminden Çok Partili Hayata Geçişte Kemalist İdeolojinin Değişimi ve Ulus Gazetesi’ (İstanbul University, 1993)
Korkmaz, Dilan, ‘İkinci Dünya Savaşı Sonrası Türk Basınında Emperyalizm Eleştirileri: Markopaşa Örneği’ (Ankara University, 2020)
Küçük, Yalçın, Türkiye Üzerine Tezler (İstanbul: Tekin Yayınevi, 1978)
Kurdakul, Şükran, Cezaevinden Babıali’ye, Babıali’den TİP’e: Anılar (İstanbul: Evrensel Basım Yayın, 2003)
Lasch, Christopher, ‘The Cultural Cold War: A Short History of the Congress for Cultural Freedom’, in The Agony of American Left (New York: Alfred. A. Knopf, 1969)
Leffler, M. P., ‘Strategy, Diplomacy, and the Cold War: The United States, Turkey, and NATO, 1945-1952’, The Journal of American History, 71.4 (1985)
Lucas, W. Scott, ‘Beyond Freedom, Beyond Control: Approaches to Culture and the State-Private Network in the Cold War’, in The Cultural Cold War in Western Europe, 1945-60, ed. by Hans Krabbendam and Scott-SmithGiles (London and Portland: Routledge, 2004)
Major, Patrick, and Rana Mitter, ‘Culture’, in Palgrave Advances in Cold War History, ed. by Saki R. Dockrill and Geraint Hughes (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006)
136
———, ‘East Is East and West Is West? Towards a Comparative Socio-Cultural History of the Cold War’, in Accross the Blocs: Cold War Cultural and Social History, ed. by Rana Mitter and Patrick Major (London and Portland: Frank Cass, 2004)
McConnel, Adam B., ‘The CHP, the U.S., and Ulus: The Portrayal of the United States in Ulus Gazetesi During WWII’ (Sabancı University, 2008)
van Meerhaeghe, M.A.G., A Handbook of International Economic Institutions (Boston and London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1980)
Mehmetefendioğlu, Ahmet, and Yasin Kayış, ‘Siyasi Halk Gazetesi ve Ratip Tahir Burak’, Toplumsal Tarih, 179, 2008
Mooney, Jadwiga E. Pieper, and Fabio Lanza, eds., De-Centering Cold War Historiography: Local and Global Change (London and New York: Routledge, 2012)
Nesin, Aziz, Birlikte Yaşadıklarım, Birlikte Öldüklerim: Anılar, Belgeler, Denemeler, Mektuplar (İstanbul: Nesin Yayıncılık, 2019)
Oktay, Ahmet, Türkiye’de Popüler Kültür (İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 1995)
Oran, Baskın, ed., Türk Dış Politikası: Kurtuluş Savaşı’ndan Bugüne Olgular, Belgeler,Yorumlar, Cilt I: 1919-1980 (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2021)
Örnek, Cangül, Türkiye’nin Soğuk Savaş Düşünce Hayatı: Antikomünizm ve Amerikan Etkisi (İstanbul: Can Sanat Yayınları, 2015)
Örnek, Cangül, and Çağdaş Üngör, eds., Turkey in the Cold War: Ideology and Culture (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013)
Özçalık, Sevil, Promoting an Alliance, Furthering Nationalism: Ernst Jäckh and Ahmed Emin in the Time of the First World War (Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 2018)
Özkan, Behlül, ‘The 1945 Turkish-Soviet Crisis: Devising a Foundational Meet for Turkish Foreign Policy’, Russia in Global Affairs, 18.2 (2020), 156–87
Özlem, Doğan, ‘Türkiye’de Pozitivizm ve Siyaset’, Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce: Modernleşme ve Batıcılık (İletişim Yayınları, 2007)
Parla, Taha, Ziya Gökalp, Kemalizm ve Türkiye’de Korporatizm (İstanbul: Deniz Yayınları, 2009)
Petersham, Maud & Miska, Amerika Cumhurbaşkanlarının Hikayesi (İstanbul: Nebioğlu Yayınevi, 1953)
Reed, Howard E., ‘Turkey and Her Nationalist Leaders as Seen in the 1923 Reports
137
of Louise Bryant’, in Studies in Atatürk’s Turkey:The American Dimension, ed. by George S. Harris and Nur Bilge Criss (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2009)
Robins, Philip, A History of Jordan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019)
Romjin, Peter, Giles Scott-Smith, and Joes Segal, eds., Divided Dreamworlds: The Cultural Cold War in East and West (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2012)
Sadak, Necmettin, ‘Turkey Faces the Soviets’, Foreign Affairs, 27.3, 449–61
Sander, Oral, Türk-Amerikan İlişkileri, 1947-1964 (Ankara: İmge Kitabevi Yayınları, 2016)
Şapolyo, Enver Behnan, Türk Gazetecilik Tarihi ve Her Yönüyle Basın (İstanbul: Güven Matbaası, 1969)
Saunders, Frances Stonor Saunders, Who Paid the Piper: The CIA and the Cultural Cold War (London: Granta, 1999)
Saydur, Mehmet, Markopaşa Gerçeği (İstanbul: Çınar Yayınları, 2013)
Scott-Smith, Giles, The Politics of Apolitical Culture: The Congress for Cultural Freedom, the CIA and Post-War American Hegemony (London and New York: Routledge, 2002)
———, ‘Transatlantic Cultural Relations, Soft Power, and the Role of US Cultural Diplomacy in Europe’, European Foreign Affairs Review, 24 (2019)
Sertel, Zekeriya, Hatırladıklarım" (İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 2001)
Şirin, Funda Selçuk, ‘Falih Rıfkı Atay’, in Kitle İletişimi: Dün, Bugün, Yarın (Ankara: Gazeteciler Cemiyeti, 2017)
———, ‘Falih Rıfkı Atay (1893-1950)’ (Ankara University, 2009)
———, ‘Sovyet Rusya ve İtalya Gezilerinin Türk Siyasal Yaşamına Etkisi’, Folklor/Edebiyat, 19.73 (2013)
———, ‘Ulus Devlet İnşasında Bir Aydın: Falih Rıfkı Atay’, Journal of Turkish World Studies, 10.1 (2010)
Tezcan, Asuman, ‘Ahmet Emin Yalman: Dönemi ve Gazeteciliği (1918-1938)’ (Ankara University, 2007)
———, ‘Ahmet Emin Yalman’, in Kitle İletişimi: Dün, Bugün, Yarın (Ankara: Gazeteciler Cemiyeti, 2017)
Thomas, Benjamin P., Abraham Lincoln (İstanbul: Nebioğlu Yayınevi, 1952)
Timmermann, Heinz, ‘The Cominform Effects on Soviet Foreign Policy’, Studies in Comparative Communism, 18.1 (1985)
Timur, Taner, Türkiye’de Çok Partili Hayata Geçiş (Ankara: İmge Kitabevi
138
Yayınları, 2003)
Toprak, Zafer, ‘Aydın, Ulus-Devlet ve Popülizm’, in Türk Aydını ve Kimlik Sorunu, ed. by Sabahattin Şen (İstanbul: Bağlam Yayıncılık, 1995)
Topuz, Hıfzı, 100 Soruda Başlangıçtan Günümüze Türk Basın Tarihi (İstanbul: Gerçek Yayınevi, 1996)
Toulouse, Mark G., ‘The Development of a Cold Warrior: John Foster Dulles and the Soviet Union, 1945-1952’, American Presbyterians, 63.3 (1985)
Türk Dış Politikasında 50 Yıl: İkinci Dünya Savaşı Yılları (1939-1946) (Ankara: T.C. Dışişleri Bakanlığı Araştırma ve Siyaset Planlama Genel Müdürlüğü, 1973)
Ülman, A. Haluk, İkinci Dünya Savaşı’nın Başından Truman Doktrini’ne Kadar Türk-Amerikan Diplomatik Münasebetleri (1939-1947) (Ankara: Sevinç Matbaası, 1961)
Uslu, Mehmet Fatih, ‘Resimli Ay Magazine (1929-1931): The Emergence of An Oppositional Focus Between Socialism and Avant-Gardism’ (Boğaziçi University, 2004)
Üstün, Senem, ‘Turkey and the Marshall Plan: Strive for Aid’, The Turkish Yearbook of International Relations, 27, 1997
Uzer, Umut, An Intellectual History of Turkish Nationalism: Between Turkish Ethnicity and Islamic Identity (Salt Lake: The University of Utah Press, 2016)
VanderLippe, John M., The Politics of Turkish Democracy: Ismet Inonu and the Formation of the Multi-Party System, 1938-1950 (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2005)
Vurucu, Semra Kahraman, ‘Türkiye’nin Değişim Yıllarında Siyasi Mizahla Muhalefet Örneği: Markopaşa Gazetesi’ (Marmara University, 2013)
Weisband, Edward, Turkish Foreign Policy, 1943-1945: Small State Diplomacy and Great Power Politics (NJ: Princeton University Press, 2015)
Wilford, Hugh, The CIA, The British Left and the Cold War: Calling the Tune (London and New York: Routledge, 2003)
———, ‘The Cold War: Recent Scholarship and Future Directions’, Cahiers Charles, 28, 2000
Yalman, Ahmet Emin, Yakın Tarihte Gördüklerim ve Geçirdiklerim (İstanbul: Pera Turizm ve Ticaret, 1997)
Yavuztürk, Gülseren Mungan, ‘Ankara’da Yayımlanmış Sinema Dergilerinin Kısa Tarihçesi’, Ankara Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1.2 (2013)
139
Yeşilçayır, Neşe, ‘Çok Partili Yaşama Geçiş Sürecinde Türk Basını’, Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi, 27.79 (2011)
Yılmaz, Şuhnaz, Turkish American Relations, 1800-1952: Between Stars, Stripes and the Crescent (New York and London: Routledge, 2015)
Yorgun, İbrahim, ‘Close Encounters Between Turkey and the US: American Indirect Influences on Turkey’s Political and Socio-Cultural Life During the 1950s’ (Middle East Technical University, 2017)
Zürcher, Erik Jan, Modern Türkiye’nin Tarihi (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2010)
140
APPENDICES
A. TURKISH SUMMARY / TÜRKÇE ÖZET
Bu tezde İkinci Dünya Savaşı sonrası erken dönemde Amerikan imgesinin Türk süreli yayınlarında politik, ideolojik ve kültürel bağlamlarda nasıl tasvir edildiği incelenmiştir. İkinci Dünya Savaşı sonrası erken dönem, Türkiye’nin gelişen Soğuk Savaş koşullarına uyum sağladığı, kapitalist dünya ekonomisine entegre olduğu ve Türk-Amerikan ittifakının bu bağlamlar içerisinde kurumsallaştığı yıllar olmuştur. Bu dış gelişmelere paralel olarak ve sosyal-politik iç itici faktörlerin de etkisiyle, erken savaş sonrası Türkiye’si çok partili yaşama geçiş sürecine tanıklık etmiştir. Göreli politik liberalleşmeyle yeni gruplar politika sahnesine çıkmış, siyasi iktidar kadroları da liberalleşmiştir. Çok partili yaşamın basındaki yansıması ise ana akım medyanın CHP yanlısı ve DP yanlısı iki ana kampa bölünmesi olmuştur. Çok partili yaşama geçiş süreciyle yürütülen demokrasi tartışmalarının dışında, gelişen Soğuk Savaş koşullarına paralel olarak kamuoyunda kurumsallaşan Türk-Amerikan ilişkileri, basında liberal düşünce ve değerlerin popülerleşmesini sağlamış, Soğuk Savaş bağlamı içerisindeki Amerika tasviri ana akım basının dilini önemli ölçüde Amerikanlaştırmıştır. Öte yandan, Birleşik Devletler ve Sovyetler Birliği’nin Türk basınında belli stereotip ve söylemlerle temsil edilmeleri ise kamuoyundaki Soğuk Savaş algısının oluşmasında kilit bir rol oynamıştır. Türk basınının geliştirdiği Soğuk Savaş dili, referansını çoğunlukla Birleşik Devletler’in politik sistemini olumlayan ve bu devletin Soğuk Savaş’a dair resmi görüşüne paralel olan bir ideolojik söylemsel bütünlükten almaktadır.
Erken savaş sonrasındaki göreli politik liberalleşme aynı zamanda sol grupların sosyalist partilerde ve süreli yayınlarda örgütlenmelerine tanıklık etmiştir. İlk olarak, Tan gazetesinin yayınına izin verilmesiyle başlayan bu özgürlük ortamı sol gruplar
141
için uzun soluklu olmamış 4 Aralık 1945’te Tan Baskını’ndan sonra sol figürler ana akım politika ve basından dışlanmışlardır. Çok partili yaşama geçiş süreciyle birlikte Türkiye Sosyalist Emekçi ve Köylü Partisi ve Türkiye Sosyalist Partisi gibi iki sol yönelimli parti kurulurken, bu dergilerin de ömrü uzun olmamış ve 16 Aralık 1946’da yayınlanan bir Sıkıyönetim Bildirisi ile bu partiler ile birlikte partilerin Gün, Gerçek, Sendika gibi süreli yayınları da kapatılmıştır. Sosyalist grupların siyaset sahnesinden ve ana akım basından dışlandığı bir atmosferde politik mizah önemli bir muhalefet aracı olarak ortaya çıkmış, bu kapsamda geliştirilen hicvi söylem bu muhalefetin etkili bir kamuoyu oluşturmasında önemli bir rol oynamıştır. Erken savaş sonrası Türk basınındaki bir diğer önemli fenomen ise siyasi iktidar karşıtlığıyla ön plana çıkan sol politik mizahın Türk-Amerikan ittifakına ve kültürel Amerikanlaşma’ya karşıt bir etkili ve alternatif söylem oluşturmasıdır. Aynı zamanda, bu mizah dergilerinde ciddi ve politik tonda yazılmış makaleler de Türkiye’de genellikle 1960’lı yıllarla ilişkilendirilen anti-Amerikancı ve anti-emperyalist hareketin ideolojik arka planına önemli bir materyal sağlamıştır.
Yukarıda ana akım basın hakkında öne sürülen argümanları ortaya koyabilmek için bu çalışmada kullanılan birincil kaynaklar CHP’nin yayın organı olan Ulus ve DP yanlısı bir politik oryantasyona sahip olan Vatan gazeteleri olmuştur. Politik mizaha yönelik tartışmalar ise Markopaşa ve Nuh’un Gemisi adlı süreli yayınlar üzerinden yürütülmüştür.
Belirtilen süreli yayınları kullanarak savaş sonrası erken dönem Türkiyesi’nde Amerikan imgesinin nasıl tasvir edildiğini incelemeyi hedefleyen bu çalışmaya son yıllarda giderek popülerleşen Kültürel Soğuk Savaş çalışmaları yol gösterici olmuştur. Diplomasi odaklı ortodoks, revizyonist ve post-revizyonist Soğuk Savaş yorumlamalarına bir tepki olarak ortaya çıkan Kültürel Soğuk Savaş çalışmaları ilk olarak Birleşik Devletler’in Soğuk Savaş’ta yürüttüğü psikolojik savaş ve propaganda faaliyetlerine odaklanırken daha sonrasında araştırma alanlarına medya, sinema, popüler kültür, vb., alanları da katarak Soğuk Savaş’a dair geniş bir literatür oluşturmuştur. Soğuk Savaş’ın sosyo-kültürel bağlamda sıradan insanlar tarafından nasıl deneyimlendiğini inceleyen bu yaklaşımda süreli yayınlar Soğuk Savaş’ın
142
temsil edildiği ve alımlandığı alanlar olarak önemli bir araştırma alanı olarak öne çıkmaktadır.
Bu çalışma, Soğuk Savaş koşulları içerisinde tasvir edilen Amerikan imgesini yorumlayabilmek için ilk olarak Ulus ve Vatan gazetelerine odaklanmıştır. Bu bağlamda, sırasıyla Ulus ve Vatan gazetelerinin başyazarları olan Falih Rıfkı Atay ve Ahmet Emin Yalman’ın köşelerinde nasıl bir Soğuk Savaş söylemi geliştirdiği incelenmiştir. İncelenen dönem Missori zırhlısının 5 Nisan 1946’da Türkiye’yi ziyaretinden Falih Rıfkı Atay’ın Kasım 1947’de Ulus gazetesindeki görevinden ayrılmasına kadar olan süreçtir. Söylem analizine dayanan bu incelemede gazetecilerin Türk-Amerikan ilişkileri veya Soğuk Savaş ile ilgili belli başlı olaylara gösterdikleri reaksiyonların kronolojik olarak yorumlanmasının aksine bu yazarların ABD'yi belirli temalar ve değerler üzerinden nasıl tasvir ettiklerine odaklanılmıştır.
Tartışmayı bağlama oturtabilmek için ilk olarak Ulus gazetesi ve Falih Rıfkı Atay’ın ideolojik motivasyonları ve sosyal etki alanlarının kısa bir yorumuna değinmek önemli olacaktır. CHP’nin resmi yayın organı olan Ulus gazetesi ilk olarak İrade-i Milliye adında 1920 yılında kurulurken, aynı yıl ismini Hakimiyet-i Milliye olarak değiştirmiş ve Ulusal Bağımsızlık Mücadelesi’nin propagandasında önemli bir rol oynamıştır. 1930’lu yılların başından itibaren hakim Kemalist söylemin oluşturulmasında ve yayılmasında önemli bir araç olan gazete fikir ve parti gazetesi işlevi görmekte, hedef kitlesini ise orta sınıf, eğitimli, Kemalist elitler oluşturmaktadır. Gazetenin İkinci Dünya Savaşı yıllarındaki tiraj bilgisi on iki bin civarındayken, toplam okuyucu kitlesinin Halkevleri ve CHP parti organizasyonları sayesinde daha fazla olduğunu belirtmek yanlış olmayacaktır.
Ulus gazetesinde 1931’den 1947’ye kadar başyazarlık görevini yürüten Falih Rıfkı Atay ise gazetenin en öne çıkan figürüdür. Atay Osmanlı geç dönemde başlayan gazetecilik kariyerinden itibaren yönetici elitler arasında popüler bir figür olmaya başlamış, Cumhuriyet döneminde de uzun yıllar hem milletvekilliği hem de gazetecilik yaparak hakim politika görüşünün meşrulaştırılmasında önemli bir figür olmuştur. Falih Rıfkı’nın 1930’lu yılların başlarında Sovyetler Birliği ve İtalya resmi ziyaretleri ve buradan izlenimleri, onun resmi dış politika yönelimini meşrulaştırmada kilit bir pozisyonda olduğunu gösteren önemli olaylardandır. Aynı
143
zamanda, Falih Rıfkı Atay’ın İkinci Dünya Savaşı’nda savaşın gidişatına ve hükümetin dış politikasındaki dönüşümlere paralel olarak geliştirdiği farklı söylemler onun hükümetin dış politika görüşüne bağlılığını ve pragmatik yönelimini açığa çıkaran diğer unsurlardandır.
Ahmet Emin Yalman ve Vatan gazetesi hakkında yürütülecek olan politik-ideolojik arka plan ve sosyal etki tartışması da gelecek bölümdeki değerlendirmeler için önem kazanmaktadır. Atay gibi gazeteciliğe Osmanlı geç dönemde başlayan Yalman’ın kariyerindeki en önemli dönüm noktalarından biri Columbia Üniversitesi’nde Tarih ve Sosyoloji okumak için Birleşik Devletler’e gitmesidir. “Modern Türkiye’nin Gelişim Sürecinde Basın, 1831-1913” teziyle doktora derecesi alan Yalman buradaki eğitimi boyunca Amerika’yı yakından deneyimleme imkanı bulmuş ve Birleşik Devletler hakkındaki ilk kapsamlı görüşleri burada olgunlaşmıştır. Yalman’ın sonraki kariyerinde Anglo-Sakson devlet ve toplum modelini savunan Prens Sabahattin’i desteklemesi, Wilson Prensipleri Cemiyeti’nin bir üyesi olarak Amerikan denetimini savunması, erken Cumhuriyet döneminde dolaylı olarak Terakkiperver Cumhuriyet Fırkası’nı desteklemesi gibi detaylar Yalman’ın liberal görüşlerini açığa çıkaran diğer önemli unsurlardır.
Ahmet Emin Yalman, çok partili yaşama geçiş süreciyle birlikte Demokrat Parti muhalefetinin önemli bir sesi olurken Vatan gazetesi de DP’nin yayın organı olarak işlev görmüştür. Vatan’ın bu işlevi erken savaş sonrası dönemde kırk-elli bin tiraja ulaşmasını sağlamış, ve gazete dönemin en popüler yayınlarından olmuştur. Bu bağlamda, Vatan’ın okuyucu kitlesini CHP yönetiminden rahatsız olan orta sınıf DP’li seçmenler oluşturmuştur. Yalman’ın çok partili yaşama geçiş bağlamında yürüttüğü demokrasi tartışmalarının yanı sıra Soğuk Savaş’a ve Türk-Amerikan ittifakına dair olan başyazıları da liberal temaların yazınındaki önemini vurgulayan diğer önemli etmen olmuştur.
Atay ve Yalman’ın Soğuk Savaş algılarının temel vurgularından biri, ABD'nin Sovyet yayılmacılığı ve saldırganlığı tarafından tehdit edilen demokratik, özgürlükçü ve barışçıl ilkeleri özü itibariyle koruma sorumluluğuna sahip olmasıdır. “Demokrasi, özgürlük ve barış” bu yazarlar tarafından ABD’yi tasvir etmek için kullanılan en yaygın temalar olmuştur. Makalelerin büyük bir kısmı, ABD’nin bu
144
değerleri korumak için tarihi bir sorumluluğu olduğuna dikkat çekmiştir. Amerika’nın askeri hazırlığı ve Türkiye'deki varlığı da, bu temel değerleri korumak için atılan adımlar olarak yorumlanmıştır. Amerikan istisnacılığı gibi Amerikan siyasi kültürünün yapıtaşlarından biri olan kavramın de bu yazarların makalelerine ideolojik bir motivasyon sağladığı öne sürülebilir. Ayrıca, Sovyetler Birliği'ni savaş sonrası düzenini bozan totaliter ve saldırgan bir ülke olarak tasvir etmeleri, makalelerinde Birleşik Devletler’in olumlu imajını pekiştirmiştir. Bu yazarlar Truman Doktrini'ni, ABD'nin Sovyet yayılmacılığına bir tepkisi ve dünyanın özgür uluslarını korumaya yönelik atılan belirleyici bir eylem olarak yorumlamışlardır. Aynı zamanda, Atay'ın ABD’nin özgürlükçü ilkelerini savunmasının mevcut Soğuk Savaş söyleminin sınırları içinde kaldığını ve bu yorumlamaların tutarlı bir ideolojik bütünlük oluşturamadığını belirtmek de önemlidir. Ancak Atay'dan farklı olarak, Yalman'ın makaleleri daha tutarlı bir liberal temaya sahiptir ve bu en çok onun ABD'nin liberal ve demokratik ilkelerini Türkiye için bir model olarak öne süren makalelerinde belirgindir. Sonuç olarak, Falih Rıfkı Atay ve Ahmet Emin Yalman’ın başyazıları savaş sonrası erken dönemde basının geliştirdiği Soğuk Savaş diline dair önemli ipuçları sunmuştur. Bu yazarların referanslarının önemli bir kısmını Amerikan politik kültürüne ait temel kavramlardan almaları ise basının dilindeki Amerikanlaşmayı açığa çıkaran bir diğer önemli unsur olmuştur.
Türk basınında Amerika’nın Soğuk Savaş koşulları içerisindeki tasvirini ortaya koyabilmek için bu çalışmanın kullandığı bir diğer önemli materyal ise Ulus gazetesinde 1 Ocak 1947 itibariyle yayınlanmaya başlanan Ratip Tahir Burak imzalı karikatürler olmuştur. Betimsel yorumlamaya dayanılarak incelenen bu karikatürler kamuoyunda Soğuk Savaş aktörlerine dair belirli görsel kalıp yargılar oluştururken belki de hükümetin resmi Soğuk Savaş politikasının halka aktarılmasında en etkili yöntem olmuştur. Bu karikatürlerin en baskın teması, ABD'nin felakete giden yolda dünyayı kurtarma sorumluluğunu üstlenmesidir. Öte yandan, totaliterlik, yayılmacılık ve saldırganlık, Sovyetler Birliği'ni tasvir etmek için kullanılan en belirgin temalardır. Bu karikatürlerin bir diğer önemli vurgusu, ABD'nin Soğuk Savaş'taki politik, diplomatik ve ekonomik eylemlerinin Sovyetler Birliği'ne karşı her zaman üstünlük sağlar boyutta tasvir edilmesidir. Bu bağlamda, Truman Doktrini'nin tasviri, Amerika'nın Sovyetler Birliği üzerindeki siyasi ve ekonomik
145
üstünlüğünü açıkça vurgulamıştır. Sonuç olarak, Türk basınının nasıl bir Soğuk Savaş söylemi geliştirdiğini ve Amerika’nın süreli yayınlardaki belirginliğini ortaya koyan bu karikatürler Birleşik Devletler’in kamuoyundaki olumlu imgesini güçlendirmiştir.
Ayrıca Türk süreli yayınlarının Amerikanlaşmasını gösteren en önemli unsurlardan biri de önde gelen Amerikalı politikacı ve diplomatlara ait tercüme makale serilerinin sayısındaki artıştır. Ulus’taki çeviri dizileri Soğuk Savaş koşullarının gelişimini Amerikan resmi dış politika görüşüne paralel olarak ortaya koyarken, savaş sonrası erken dönem Türkiyesi’nde kamuoyundaki Soğuk Savaş algısına katkıda bulunmuştur. Sumner Welles, James F. Byrnes, John Foster Dulles Soğuk Savaş’ın gelişimi konusunda çalışmaları yayınlanan bazı önemli Amerikalı diplomatlardır. Ayrıca, Türk süreli yayınlarının savaş sonrası erken dönemde nasıl bir Soğuk Savaş dili geliştirdiğini gösteren en önemli etmenlerden ikisi anti-komünist casusluk hikayeleri ve Sovyetler Birliği ile Birleşik Devletler arasında gerçekleşmesi muhtemel olan bir atom savaşına dair yazıların sayısındaki çarpıcı artıştır. Bu yazılar genellikle önde gelen Amerikan dergilerinden çevrilirken Amerika'nın basındaki olumlu imajını pekiştirmiştir. Bu bağlamda, Sovyetler Birliği'ni olumsuz betimleyen çeviri metinler de, anti-komünizmin Türk süreli yayınları aracılığıyla yaygınlaşmasına da katkıda bulunmuştur. Bu tercüme metinler genellikle Ulus’un Pazar ekinde yayınlanırken Türk basınının Amerikan kaynaklarından alınmış yazılar aracılığıyla nasıl bir Soğuk Savaş söylemi geliştirdiğini gösterirmiştir.
Ulus gazetesi, aynı zamanda, Amerikan yaşam tarzının ve popüler kültürünün kamuoyuna tanıtılmasında son derece etkili olmuştur. Ulus’un 1 Ocak 1947 itibariyle Pazar günleri 12 sayfa olarak yayınlanmaya başlaması gazetenin önemli oranda magazinleşmesini simgelerken aynı zamanda Amerika’yı olumlu yönde tasvir eden birçok çeviri makalenin de gazetenin içeriğinde ön plana çıkmasına ön ayak oluyordu. Amerikan kaynaklarından tercüme edilen bu makalelerde Birleşik Devletler genellikle ekonomik olarak üstün ve müreffeh imgelerle tasvir edilmiştir. Ayrıca Amerika'nın Ulus'taki artan belirginliği, bu ülkeden gelen günlük haberler ve dolaylı olarak Amerikan yaşam tarzını olumlayan ilgi çekici yazılarla da pekiştirilmiştir. Öte yandan Hollywood tasvirleri, erken savaş sonrası dönemde Amerikan popüler kültürünün Türk kamuoyuna tanıtılmasında önemli bir alan olarak
146
göze çarpmaktadır. Ulus gazetesinin Pazar ekinde Melih Başar imzasıyla yayınlanmaya başlanan ve her hafta farklı bir Hollywood yıldızına odaklanan yazılar gazetenin magazinleşmesindeki en büyük etmenlerden biri olmuştur. Hollywood aktrislerinin büyük boy fotoğrafını da içeren bu magazin haberleri, aynı zamanda toplumdaki standartlaştırılmış güzellik algılarının bu figürler aracılığıyla oluşmasına da katkıda bulunmuştur. Bu bağlamda, süreli yayınlarda öne çıkan bir diğer önemli özellik de Amerika’nın dünya modasına yön veren lider ülke olarak tasvir edildiği moda haberlerinin sayısındaki artış olmuştur.
Tezin üçüncü bölümünün odaklandığı temel araştırma konusu ise politik mizahın savaş sonrası erken dönemde Türk-Amerikan ittifakı hakkında kamuoyunda var olan hakim görüşe ve toplumdaki Amerikanlaşmaya karşı nasıl bir karşıt alternatif söylem ortaya koyduğudur. Bu kapsamda incelenen mizah dergileri Markopaşa ve Nuh’un Gemisi olmuştur. Markopaşa bu bölümde yalnızca bir alt başlıkta incelenmiş Nuh’un Gemisi’ndeki Amerika tasvirlerine daha çok ağırlık verilmiştir. Bunun ilk temel gerekçesi Markopaşa hakkında daha önce yürütülen akademik çalışmaların bolluğundan ötürü tartışmayı sınırlı tutmaktır. İkinci olarak, bu bölümde Markopaşa’ya yer verilmesinin temel nedeni Nuh’un Gemisi’nin içerik, biçim ve söylem olarak Markopaşa’ya paralel özellikler taşıması dolayısıyla iki dergi arasında bir bağlamsal bütünlük ve karşılaştırma imkanı kurabilme arayışıdır.
Sol grupların örgütlü politik mücadeleden ve ana akım medyadan dışlandığı bir atmosferde politik mizah bu dönemde etkili bir muhalefet aracı olarak ortaya çıkmış, Markopaşa’nın Kasım 1946’da yayınlanan ilk sayısı ise Türk mizah geleneği açısından birçok değişimi de beraberinde getirmiştir. O dönemde yayınlanan mizah dergileri ya Akbaba gibi iktidar destekçisidir ya da Şaka ve Karikatür gibi eğlence içerikli ve apolitik özelliklere sahiptir. Markopaşa ise halkçı, memleketçi ve köycü söylemiyle siyasi iktidara karşı çıkarken aynı zamanda mizahın yeniden muhalif bir karakter kazanmasına da ön ayak olmuştur. Siyasi baskılar nedeniyle sık sık kapatmalara maruz kalan Markopaşa; ilerleyen dönemlerde Merhumpaşa, Malumpaşa, Ali Baba, Yedi Sekiz Paşa, Hür Markopaşa gibi farklı adlarla da yayınlamıştır. Gazetenin ilk dönemlerinde yakalanan tiraj sayısı ilerleyen dönemlerde düşmüş ve politik mizah sosyal etkilerini yitirmeye başlamıştır.
147
Markopaşa’nın etkisini yitirmesinde var olan politik ve legal baskılar, yazarların sık sık hapse girmeleri nedeniyle derginin kesintili olarak yayınlanması, Markopaşa ismini taşıyan birçok taklitçi gazetenin çıkması etkili olmuştur. Sabahattin Ali, Aziz Nesin, Rıfat Ilgaz ve Mustafa Mim Uykusuz derginin içeriğinde ön planda olan bazı isimlerdir.
Markopaşa’nın entelektüel ve ideolojik motivasyonlarını açığa çıkarmamızı sağlayan en önemli etmenlerden biri Sabahattin Ali ve Rıfat Ilgaz’ın toplumcu gerçekçi edebi kimliğe sahip olmalarıdır. Eserlerinde toplumsal sorunları basit dillerle işleyen bu yazarların edebi geçmişleri Markopaşa’nın halkçı söyleminin oluşmasında önemli rol oynamıştır. Markopaşa’nın politik kimliğini belirleyen en önemli unsur ise yazarlarının sol yayınlar ve partilerle kurdukları ilişkilerdir. Sabahattin Ali ve Aziz Nesin Markopaşa’dan önce Zekeriya ve Sabiha Sertel tarafından çıkarılan Tan’da yazılar yazarken Nesin’in mizahi söyleminin geliştiği yer bu gazete olmuştur. Öte yandan, Sabahattin Ali, Rıfat Ilgaz ve Aziz Nesin, Türkiye Sosyalist Partisi kurulduktan sonra partinin faaliyetlerine katılmışlar ve parti lideri Esat Adil Müstecablıoğlu ile sürekli irtibatta bulunmuşlardır. Markopaşa, hiçbir parti ile organik bağı olmayan bir yayın olsa bile bu ilişkiler yazarların politik yönelimini açığa çıkaran unsurlardır.
Tezin üçüncü bölümünde, Markopaşa’daki Amerika tasvirleri incelenirken kronolojik bir şekilde ilerlenmiş; bundaki temel gerekçe ise Markopaşa’nın yayın hayatını etkileyen tutuklamalar, kapatmalar vb., gibi önemli dış olayları Markopaşa’nın yayın hayatıyla ilişkilendirmek olmuştur. Aynı zamanda, yalnızca mizahi metinlere odaklanılmamış Markopaşa’daki anti-emperyalist söyleminin oluşmasında ön planda olan Sabahattin Ali tarafından yazılmış ciddi ve politik tondaki makaleler de incelenmiştir. Bu kapsamda, ulusal bağımsızlıkçılık ve anti-emperyalizm Markopaşa’daki Amerika tasvirlerini belirleyen en önemli ideolojik motivasyonlar olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Bu kavramların en önemli referans noktaları ise Kurtuluş Savaşı’nda yürütülen anti-emperyalist mücadele ve ardından kazanılan milli-ekonomik bağımsızlık olmuştur. Türk-Amerikan ittifakını Türkiye’nin Amerika’ya bağımlılığı veya Amerika’nın Türkiye’yi kolonileştirmesi
148
olarak yorumlayan Markopaşa Kurtuluş Savaşı’nda kazanılan ulusal bağımsızlıktan ödün verildiğini düşünmektedir.
Bu temel ideolojik motivasyonların dışında, Markopaşa’nın Amerika tasvirlerinde ön planda olan mizahi dil onun söylemini etkili kılan en önemli unsurdur. Markopaşa’da Amerika tasvirleri bağlamında incelenen hiciv metinlerindeki bazı önemli konseptler ve olaylar; Türkiye’deki Amerikan askeri ve personel varlığı, Amerikan özel sermayesi, Truman Doktrini, Marshall Planı, Amerikan yanlısı olarak görülen politikacı ve gazeteciler, ve kültürel Amerikanlaşma olmuştur.
Markopaşa’nın yarattığı etkili muhalefet illegal olarak faaliyet gösteren Türkiye Komünist Partisi’nin ilerleyen yıllarda mizahı bir araç olarak kullanmasında önemli rol oynamıştır. Bu bağlamda, TKP kadroları savaş sonrası erken dönemde yayınlanan Geveze ve Nuh’un Gemisi adlı mizah dergilerine katkı sağlamıştır. Nuh’un Gemisi 2 Kasım 1949 ve 31 Mayıs 1950 tarihleri arasında 31 sayı yayınlanabilmiştir. Bu dergi biçim ve içerik olarak Markopaşa’nın takipçisi sayılırken Mehmet Ali Aybar, Zeki Baştımar, Abidin Dino ve Rasih Güran dergide öne çıkan bazı önemli isimler olmuştur. Bu derginin sosyal etkileri gözetildiğinde Markopaşa’nın ilk dönemindeki kadar bir başarı yakalayamadığı söylenebilir. Ancak, sol politik mizahın marjinalleştiği bir dönemin yayını olan Nuh’un Gemisi’nde özellikle Mehmet Ali Aybar tarafından yürütülen tartışmalar önemli bir entelektüel materyal sunmaktadır.
Mehmet Ali Aybar’ın dergide yayınlanan politik makaleleri Sabahattin Ali’nin Markopaşa’daki başyazılarıyla benzer özellikler taşımaktadır. Ulusal bağımsızlık vurgusu Ali gibi Aybar’ın da Türk-Amerikan ittifakına bakış açısını belirleyen temel etmen olmuştur. Ancak, Aybar’ın makaleleri Ali’nin makalelerine göre daha sol bir karakter göstermekte ve daha sağlam politik argümanlar taşımaktadır. Marshall Planı’na dahil olan ülkelerde gümrük vergilerinin kademeli olarak kaldırılarak ticaretin serbestleştirilmesi ve uluslararası ilişkilerde artan militaristleşme Aybar’ın Amerika tasvirlerini belirleyen temel konseptler olmuştur.
Nuh’un Gemisi’ndeki mizahi ögeler büyük oranda Marshall Planı ve bu kapsamda Türkiye’de görevli bulunan Amerikalı yetkililerin hicvine ayrılmıştır. Bunun dışında; Amerikan dergilerinin ve tüketim ürünlerinin Türkiye’deki popülerliği, Amerikan
149
kovboy filmleri ve müziklerine yönelik eleştiriler, medya dilinde Amerika ve İngilizcenin artan belirginliği kültürel Amerikanlaşma kapsamında hicvedilen bazı öne çıkan konseptlerdir.
Sonuç olarak, bu tezin üçüncü bölümünde incelenen mizah dergilerindeki anti-Amerikancı muhalif söylem erken savaş sonrası dönemde süreli yayınların dilindeki Amerikanlaşmanın tek boyutlu olmadığını, ve muhalif grupların politik baskı ortamında mizahı kullanarak kendilerine bir kanal yarattıklarını göstermiştir. Bu noktada siyasi mizahın anti-Amerikancı söyleminin savaş sonrası erken dönem fenomeni olduğunu belirtmek de önemlidir. Bu dönemde toplumun geniş kesimlerine yayılan CHP karşıtlığını politik mizahın etkili bir şekilde içeriğine taşıması başarıya ulaşmasındaki en önemli etmenlerdendir. Ancak, Mayıs 1950'de CHP iktidarının yerini DP’nin alması siyasi mizahın karşı çıktığı temel siyasi aktörün siyaset sahnesini terk etmesi anlamına geliyordu. Bu geçiş, siyasi mizahın Türk toplumundaki popülaritesini önemli ölçüde etkilemiştir. Bir diğer önemli gelişme de dünya siyasetinde artan militarist havanın TKP’yi politikalarını gözden geçirmeye zorlamasıdır. Nuh'un Gemisi'nin 14 Mayıs 1950’deki son sayısında da belirtildiği gibi TKP kadroları, Nuh'un Gemisi'nin yayınlarını sonlandırarak ciddi bir yayın politikasına sahip Barış adlı siyasi bir dergi çıkarmaya karar vermiştir. Bu derginin temel hedeflerinden biri, dünyada artan militarizme ve Türkiye'nin militarist dünya atmosferindeki konumuna karşı çıkmak olmuştur. Bu geçiş sol politik mizahın DP iktidarıyla birlikte görece etkisini yitirdiğinin de bir habercisi olmuştur.
150
D. THESIS PERMISSION FORM / TEZ İZİN FORMU
(Please fill out this form on computer. Double click on the boxes to fill them)
ENSTİTÜ / INSTITUTE
Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü / Graduate School of Natural andAppliedSciences
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü/ Graduate School of Social Sciences
Uygulamalı Matematik Enstitüsü/ Graduate School of Applied Mathematics
Enformatik Enstitüsü/ Graduate School of Informatics
Deniz Bilimleri Enstitüsü/ Graduate School of Marine Sciences
YAZARIN / AUTHOR
Soyadı/ Surname : Yılmaz
Adı / Name : Atakan
Bölümü / Department : Tarih / History
TEZİN ADI / TITLE OF THE THESIS (İngilizce / English): The Depiction of American Image in Post-War Turkey: Americanization and anti-Americanization in Turkish Periodicals (1946-1950)
TEZİN TÜRÜ/ DEGREE: Yüksek Lisans/ Master Doktora / PhD
1. Tezin tamamı dünya çapında erişime açılacaktır. / Release the entire work immediately for access worldwide.
2. Tez iki yıl süreyle erişime kapalı olacaktır. / Secure the entire work for patent and/or proprietary purposes for a period of two years. *
3. Tez altı ay süreyle erişime kapalı olacaktır. / Secure the entire work for period of six months.*
* Enstitü Yönetim Kurulu kararının basılı kopyası tezle birlikte kütüphaneye teslim edilecektir. /
A copy of the decision of the Institute Administrative Committee will be delivered to the library together with the printed thesis.
Yazarın imzası / Signature............................ Tarih/ Date............................
(Kütüphaneye teslim ettiğiniz tarih. Elle doldurulacaktır.)
(Library submission date. Please fill out by hand.)
Tezin son sayfasıdır. / This is the last page of the thesis/dissertation.