“Unfortunately, the Russian invasion in 2014 prompted our magazine to shift its emphasis towards highlighting the detrimental aftermath of the Russian occupation and the efforts to oppose it” (QHA, 24.10.2020). With these remarks, journalist and translator Bülent Tanatar draws attention to the impact of the occupation on culture. However, he and his colleagues in Emel magazine had a distinctly divergent point of departure. “Our intention was to allocate a significant amount of space to the study of Crimean Tatar culture, literature, and history” (QHA, 24.10.2020). At this point, the magazine also serves the purpose of disseminating information around the globe regarding the developments taking place in occupied Crimea. At this juncture, I have been provided insight by Tanatar, who penned “An Early Example of Resistance in Crimea Against Upcoming Collectivization: ‘Alakat Rebellion’ ” (2019), “File: Reactions from Around the World to the Occupation of Crimea” (2014), and “The General Scenery in Crimea on the Turn of the Third Anniversary of the Occupation and the Tasks Awaiting Us” (2016), regarding President V. Zelensky’s proposed legislation on dual citizenship, the dissemination of Russian propaganda, and the potential impact of the forthcoming American elections on Washington’s policy towards Kiev.
ÖZELGÜN: How would you assess the dual citizenship legislation that Ukrainian President Zelensky presented to the parliament?
TANATAR: Even though I don’t know much about the details, I support Ukraine’s dual citizenship. The dual citizenship ban was already largely on paper. It has been long since Russia distributed Russian passports in Donbas, especially in Crimea. Moreover, even if we do not take into account the large number of diaspora members who had to migrate to the West before the Second World War era and who preserved their identities for better or worse in the post-Soviet period and in the period after 2014 and especially after February 2022, there are millions of Ukrainians who had to recently migrate to Western countries and, most importantly, whose hearts beat for Ukraine even if they will not return soon. This will mean no more headaches for them. A president like Zelensky, who is prone to populist discourse, must have calculated that this would win him votes in an eventual election. But what kind of blocking formula will they think of for those who also have Russian citizenship? Of course, on the other hand, reviewing the citizenship of those who have contributed to Russia’s war effort to one degree or another is naturally a must, but will be a difficult process. I wish the war would be won at any rate. Things will hopefully be easier later.
ÖZELGÜN: You worked as a book editor and translator. What role can literature play in combating Russian propaganda in the context of the current war?
TANATAR: Generally speaking, one of the strong assets of Russia is its well-deserved reputation in literary, aesthetic, plastic arts, sports, and even scientific fields. Undoubtedly, what constitutes the building blocks of this reputation, especially the Russian language, is not only ethnic Russians but also peoples such as Ukrainians, Volga Tatars, Kyrgyz, Georgians, Jews, Azerbaijanis, etc. who live on the piece of earth called Russia and contribute to the common life to the extent allowed. After making this constatation, I think we can say that literature proper does not have time to have an immediate and direct impact on the current war. However, today there are new (such as TV, film industry, and academic gatherings) and brand-new (such as Facebook, YouTube, X, and WhatsApp groups) channels whose products and results spread faster than literature and affect public opinion, and there is no other choice but to combat against Russian propaganda through these means. It is true that these channels are also used by the Russians, but their backing is based mostly on money, whereas most of those who support Ukraine are volunteers and do so as a moral duty.
ÖZELGÜN: What precise and practical effects may a prospective Republican election victory in the USA have on the existing American military strategy in the context of the war?
TANATAR: It seems that Trump will be elected again as the Republican candidate in the upcoming US presidential elections. Considering his past performance and rhetoric, it is very likely that his administration will return to the pre-Biden era and pursue a policy of forcing Ukraine into an unfavourable peace in order to preserve Russia utmost intact, as was done under former presidents. When the signal was given to Russia that one wants peace as soon as possible, of course this would mean inevitably accepting the shrinkage of Ukraine (perhaps in exchange for prompt EU membership) and that Russia would take over Ukraine’s important industrial zones, energy stations, water channels, etc., but most importantly, Russia would become almost the master of the Black Sea. This is the worst-case scenario. The next scenario, coming second in order, is to freeze the conflicts as a cold peace and leave the resolution to a future attack by Russia. This is plan B, which Russia pursued after being disappointe
d in plan A, which it miscalculated, underestimating Ukraine, and implemented through Blitzkrieg. If you pay attention, it is Russia that is pro-active in all these plans, not the West, USA, or NATO. These solutions will be temporary and will not bring permanent peace to any part of the world, especially Europe (including Turkey). Hence, in order to accomplish immediately and at all costs this crazy, bloody, dirty war started by Putin, eager to become a new-age Petro or Catherine the Great in favour of Ukraine and defeat Russia, it is essential that all states and peoples of the free, democratic world do their best.
ÖZELGÜN: What factors contribute to the inadequate response of the global south to the Russian invasion?
TANATAR: Unfortunately, after the Soviet Union withdrew from history, there was a long period of absurd euphoria—that history had supposedly ended, liberalism had won, etc. During this period, it became clear that those who thought they had won the race could not manage their time well, and instead of producing formulas that would eliminate conflicts between civilizations and minimize income differences, they recklessly took steps that would exacerbate them. The world is not made better than before. For this reason, countries that could not find what they expected from the Western world in general started or continued their pragmatic searches. Pretentious core or regional countries that want to stand out and have a say in the world or in their region have become a centre of attraction for the South’s search for alternatives. From another perspective, southern countries wanted to increase their bargaining share by using them against each other. That is why I think it is possible to say that occupier Russia received more approval than expected in the United Nations general assemblies (considering the absences and abstentions).
References
Weltschau 
Leave a comment