A Question About Hatay
 

I was surfing the net today and i came across a map of Syria.
This map included the Turkish province of Hatay.
http://img34.exs.cx/img34/4557/map11we.jpg

And here is one more from the Syrian Ministry of Tourism's webpage:
http://img78.exs.cx/img78/6500/syriasmall0do.jpg
http://www.syriatourism.org/new/


Thinking that it might be a mistake, I searched the net for more maps and guess what? Apparently, Syrian government and some civil organizations still include the province of Hatay in their maps. I just don't understand the reasoning behind it. I know that no one gives a fart that """""OUR SWEET NEIGHBOUR TO THE SOUTH :kiss:""""" includes Hatay in its map since Hatay has been internationally recognised as part of Turkey for decades.
But why do they still include Hatay in their maps despite the fact that Hatay belongs to Turkey?
Jealousy?

1) Perhaps those lands "historically belong to Arabs" that is why Syria as an Arab country claims them.
2) Historical Syrian lands stolen by Turkish imperialists.
3) Arabs in that region (especially if they are majority) are sympathetic to Syria.

Hatay is a province of southern Turkey, situated between the Mediterranean Sea to the west and Syria to the south and east.

Its capital is Antakya, formerly Antioch. Alexandretta is also located within the province, but is now known by its Turkish name, İskenderun. The province has an area of 5,545 km² (2,141 mi²) and a population of 1,002,252 in the 1990 census.

Hatay was originally the sanjak (or governorate) of Alexandretta, part of the Ottoman Empire. Following the empire's demise after World War I, it became part of the French mandate of Syria. The area was a multi-ethnic melting pot of Turks, Arabs, Maronites, Armenians, Jews, and Greeks.

In 1936, it became the subject of a complaint to the League of Nations by the Turkish government under Mustafa Kemal Atatürk concerning alleged mistreatment of the area's Turkish populations. Atatürk demanded that it become part of Turkey, claiming that the majority of its inhabitants were Turks. The sanjak was given autonomy in 1937 in an arrangement brokered by the League. However, in 1938 rioting broke out between Turks and Arabs, prompting the creation of a temporary "Republic of Hatay" for one year under joint French and Turkish military control. The election for the parliamentary seats was monitored by the Turkish Army and many Turks from the provinces Adana and Gaziantep were registered as voters. The name "Hatay" itself was proposed by Atatürk and the government was under Turkish control. The president Tayfur Sökmen was also a member of Turkish parliament. In 1939, majority Turkish MPs voted for unification with Turkey, following which the former sanjak became a Turkish province. France's willingness to accede to Turkish demands was at least partly influenced by its government's wariness of getting involved in a potential overseas conflict while Germany posed a clear military threat on its immediate borders.

Syria does not recognize the incorporation of Hatay within Turkey and the issue has been a source of some tension between the two countries.

We are used to this. Our neighbours like to live in a dream world. Syria thinks Hatay is their. Kurds think south east is a part of their Kurdistan, Armenians think eastern part belongs to them. Greeks think Istanbul is their.

The problem is we don't care what they think or dream...

im sure ppl from hatay want to live in syria:D :lol:

Hatay is a very modern city in south east of Turkey. and i heard, alot of illegal immigrants(mostly women) come to Hatay/Turkey from syria

Hatay is an official state of Turkish Republic and will always stay that way...this is the truth, and rest is history....

^ Well said Wanton :okay:

Have you seen Indiana Jones 3rd movie? It is set in ther province of Hatay in 1938. Rather typically and stupidly (for a hollywood movie) it is incorrectly portrayed. The governor, rather than being a Turk in secular dress, is an arab caricature in full oriental garb.

Y'know Turkey is just a big source of confusion to many people. It can actually be quite amusing!

"Never underestimate the power of denial" - American Beauty

They can believe what they want to believe in Syria, Hatay is a province of Turkey as the whole world acknowledges.

I believe Ataturk’s government also laid claim to the province of Mosul, which today roughly equates to the ‘Kurdish’ zone in northern Iraq. The idea, from what i read in an Ataturk biography by Andrew Mango, is that, after WW1 Turkish and Kurdish people would form a nation together with the Arabs to the south (under the ‘guidance’ of Britain and France) determining their own future. The British would not comply with Turkish wishes however, and demanded that the region be tied to Iraq. The reason: Britain was aware of the oil reserves present in Kirkuk and the surrouning region.

Ataturk eventually accepted that the British would not change their mind, despite the rationality behind Turkish claims (ethnically and linguistically, northern Iraq is closer to Turkey than it is to the rest of Iraq).

An interesting hypothesis would be to imagine that Turkey actually did successfuly absorb the Mosul province into its territories. If that had happened then the eastern part of Turkey may not have been the economic hellhole it became. The Kurdish insurgence may never have happened and Western Turkey may not have seen an influx of migrants in the way it has. Germany and Europe may also have been starved of its migrant Turkish workers.

I’m not trying to suggest Turkey has rights in this area, or should attempt to reclaim it today: I’m just speculating. A whimsical exercise maybe but I’m sure most people would accept that the region’s current borders were drawn by people with poor knowledge of the area and their actions have led to much of the problems which trouble the m iddle east today.

ps. Great book about Turkey called A fez of the Heart - it’s travel writing at its best. The author visits Iskenderun - it sounds like a fascinating place!

@space invader

Actually I don't think that Turkey really wanted to tie Northern Iraq to herself. Because that area was/is, dominantly, inhabitated by Kurds. Annexion of that region would change the ethnical composition and balance of Turkey. Kurdish population would increase. And consequently it would fuel the Kurdish nationalism.

@Allan

Bildiğim kadarıyla, Suriye Fransız kolonisiydi o devirde. Hatay'ın Türkiye'ye katılım memorandumu da Fransa'nın gözeteminde gerçekleştirildi.
Suriyeliler bu memorandum kendi ulusal idareleri ile alınmış bir karar olduğunu düşünmüyorlar. Fransa ile Türkiye arasında gizli bir anlaşma sonucu Hatay'ın kendilerinden koparıldığına inanıyorlar. Bu yüzden hala kendi toprakları olarak sayıyorlar Hatay'ı.

There was no need for this cheap shot against Greeks, istanbullu. The difference is that Greeks do not draw maps showing Istanbul as being part of Greece. You and i both know this.

On a side note, now you know how we Greeks feel when the Slav Macedonians of FYROM draw their maps showing their lands spreading all the way south into Greece, over Thessaloniki and as far south as Mount Olympus!!! It sucks, doesn't it? :)

Come on man i've seen many Greeks that dream about invading western Turkey.

Not majority ofcourse but every nation has some fools unforunately...

On the macedonian issue, you should just laugh if they claim some lands from Greece, on the other hand i believe that nations are free to choose their own name.

btw why should you and i be worried about these claims? Our nations are strong. If Syria or Macedonia tries to invade our lands then it will be good reason for us to invade theirs! :D

I can't believe what our governments do, why they are in touch with Syria. They supported the terror againts Turkey for years, they always show Hatay as thier own land. And I don't understand why our governents establishes connection with them.

I think our government wants to play a major role in the shaping of Mid east Kuvvaci. We were always in trouble with our neighbours(not mainly our fault) and this harmed our nation in many ways. I don't want my country to be buddy with Syria(we are not anyway) but we should keep our relations with them...

@Fronxie

I accept your point but according to my sources (Atarturk by Andrew Mango) it is a historical truth that until the mid 1930s Turkey laid claims upon the province of Mosul.

I beleive that many Turkic peoples also live in the northern iraq region, not just kurds, although I accept the Kurds are the dominant ethnic group.

I am also aware that Ataturk's policies were against Turkish expansionism and that today Turkey adheres to these policies very strictly.

On a side note, in the UK (and much of Europe) John Major (UK's most boring ever prime minister?) is credited with creating the safe zone for the Kurds in Northern Iraq. This is in fact wrong. It was Turgut Ozal's idea.

Wasn't it?

I have never personally seen a map or verbiage expressing the desire for Greeks to invade Western Turkey, and if there are, then yes, they are just dreaming.

Anyway, you talk about a country's or region's right to name itself whatever it wants to. Ok, let me ask you something: what if the Syrians started to call, or actually lobby world governments to have the region of Hatay called Syria or a name of a Syrian province/territory and, on top of that, claim it as theirs? What would you think then? :) I hope you see our point now.

:cheers:

But your situation is vice versa. FRRY tries to get a name same to one of your regions Macedonia. If Syria wanted to name herself as Hatay, it would be hell stupid and funny :lol:

This thread is long dead.
First opened:
December 12th, 2004, 12:39 AM