Reading the Organisation of Turkic States in the Context of ‘Unity in Language, Idea and Work’
Gaspıralı Ismail Bey is one of the thinkers who created a consciousness of resurrection (Renaissance/judidism) by producing solutions to the socio-political problems experienced by the Turkic World. Gökalp sees the principle of Gaspıralı, who emphasised the necessity of a language understood by all Northern, Eastern and Western Turks, as a ‘moral horizon’.
The establishment of the Organisation of Turkic States with the participation of Turkey, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan is important in terms of activating the routes of the Silk Road, which is the ancient civilisation axis. In addition, the announcement of the cultural continuity of Inner Asia/Turkistan- Pre-Asia-Turkey to the whole world is a great development in terms of putting into practice the Turan ideal / dream of the Turkic world ‘Unity in idea, language, feeling and business’. Because it is now the official registration of unity in ideas and feelings, or unity of heart and common mind.
I am currently reading about the contributions of Gaspıralı Ismail Bey and Ziya Gökalp in reaching this point. I find it important to analyse TDT in terms of its teachings that the Turkic World should firstly unite in terms of culture (heritage) and then make common decisions in terms of economy-politics.
Gaspıralı Ismail Bey is one of the thinkers who created a consciousness of resurrection (Renaissance/judidism) by producing solutions to the socio-political problems experienced by the Turkic World. Gökalp sees the principle of Gaspıralı, who emphasised the necessity of a language that is understood by all Northern, Eastern and Western Turks, as a ‘moral horizon’.
Gökalp's vision of the ‘Great Oghuz Union’ was aimed at the realisation of the establishment of the Republic of Turkey in Anatolia, the Oghuz/Turkmen stage, Syria, Iraq, South Azerbaijan, the cultural / racial unity extending from Central Asia to Central Asia, and the creation of a consciousness that would act in common with Turan and the whole Turkish World.
Similarly, Gaspıralı, who pioneered the organisation of ‘Muslim Congresses’ in Novgorot and Petersburg in 1905-1906, asked for a larger-scale meeting to be held in Egypt and worked for the resurrection in the Turkish geography to be in the Arab world.
This is the purpose of reading the organisation of the Turkic World, which was established to develop cooperation and solidarity between Turkic States within the framework of the common history, language and cultural heritage of the Turkic World and in a multilateral framework, in the context of Gökalp. Turkish cooperation mechanisms such as the International Organisation of Turkic Culture (TURKSOY), Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic Speaking Countries (TURKPA), International Turkic Academy, Turkic Culture and Heritage Foundation, Turkic Chamber of Commerce and Industry (TTSO), Turkic Investment Fund, etc., as related institutions, are the practical realisation of the ideal/ideal that Gaspıralı called ‘Unity in Language, Idea, Work’. This is the deep feeling and formation of national consciousness and spirituality.
The Importance of the Organisation of Turkic States for Today
The study on the theoretical structure of the CSTO will contribute to the political economy of the states that make up the Organisation of Turkic States, considering that the ancient silk roads have emerged as the economic axis of today's Belt and Road Initiative and Imec projects.
Considering that trade and energy production-supply centres are tried to be created by global powers in the context of these projects, the participation of Hungary, Turkmenistan, Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) as observer countries in the CIS has increased the increasing geo-political importance of the Turkish World.
In our opinion, it is Gökalp's ‘Turan’ and ‘Great Oghuz Integration’, Gaspıralı's ‘Russian Muslims/Turks/Northern Turks’ and ‘Unity in language, idea and work’ that constitute the substructure of this ‘collective consciousness’.
(A Partial) Criticism of Gaspıralı and Gökalp
From a philosophical point of view, we are grateful to whoever brings whatever they bring about the truth, but this does not mean that we accept what they say exactly, we analytically question what they say today and what their dilemmas may be when producing solutions to today's problems.
In this context, the drawbacks of the two thinkers' identical view of Turkishness and Islam in terms of CIS today (the fact that the Turkic states that gained their independence have Russian, German, Belarusian, Armenian citizens, and Hungary (Hungary), which forms a different religion and language, has observer status) will be emphasised. When we consider the autonomous republics in Russia, China, Mongolia and the Turks living all over the world (diaspora), it shows that Gaspıralı and Gökalp were the founding leaders of the unity of the Turkic world, but some of their views need to be revised.
In this framework, it will be emphasised (with criticisms against Gaspıralı and Gökalp) that the ‘Northern Turkism’, which was created based on Gaspıralı, can form its epistemic basis (with criticisms against Gaspıralı and Gökalp) with the Eastern Turkism (Kazakhstan-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan-Turkmenistan-Azerbaijan), which gained its independence with the dissolution of the USSR, and the Western Turkic, that is, the Republic of Turkey (and the Seljuk-Ottoman State it inherited) under the umbrella of the concept of Turan and Turkistanism. In this respect, it will be aimed to contribute to the economic and cultural commonality of the Turkic World without falling into the dilemmas of ‘Russian Eurasianism’.
