Introduction

I will talk about the concept of "border", those who determine it, and those who are considered inside or outside. Border is at times permeable, at times much more tightly built. Sometimes borders may overlap with each other, and become clusters.

Border is a geographical end point, frontier, which provides the administrative and political separation of a state or a country from the others. It provides the separation of geographically smaller regions such as neighboring provinces, districts, neighborhoods, villages and settlements.

Marshall defines "boundary maintenance" in his Dictionary of Sociology as the ways in which societies or social systems make distinctions between themselves and others. In psychology, the concept of border provides a physical and emotional distinction between the individual and their environment. Although I do not focus on this in my presentation, personal borders and state borders can somehow be analogically related.

While thinking about this concept, I would like to emphasize that it also includes spatial division, and that there are gatherings and separations within the framework of these divisions.

2. Insiders and Outsiders

The division of states by borders make people living in those lands and "citizens" of that state individuals living within the borders. The duties, responsibilities and obligations of people living within the borders are also determined as the borders are. A legal system is a condition for individuals to live peacefully and together. Citizens within the borders of the state are assumed to be a nation, i.e., nation-state form that has a strong emphasis on a common language, common culture and common values. Since the country we live in was built in the form of a nation-state, it is worth examining who is inside and who is outside the borders of Turkey.

The nation-state mechanism works in such a way that some groups of people are ignored by the state and some others are under severe scrutiny. As in the lyrics of Yeni Türkü’s song "The Circle” go, it is all about being inside or outside. Every individual has the potential to be excluded from that circle from time to time. The curricula of national education system continues even at the university level, and it makes individuals to reproduce this circle drawn by the state. The boundaries of this circle are strangely flexible.

Füsun Üstel, in her book Makbul Vatandaş’ın Peşinde: II. Meşruiyetten Bu Yana Vatandaşlık Eğitimi [In Search of the Acceptable Citizen] examines this in detail both in Turkey from the Ottoman period to the present and in Continental Europe after the French Revolution. There is a quote at the beginning of the book, which I would like to share with you. This is a text hung on the ferryboats by the Maritime Administration in celebration of the 75th anniversary of the Republic: "Don't throw your thrash away. Don't spit on the ground! Don't cut the seats! (Don't shout on your mobile phone) Don't smoke… Keep your environment clean to BECOME A GOOD CITIZEN s imagined 75 years ago by the founding father of the Republic.”

Today, what is the definition of an acceptable citizen? Here is another national address written bye myself: “Introduction to the Epic of the National Struggle: Even if the Turkish currency depreciates, do not exchange it. Whether you are hungry or not, be abstemious! Be patient, and believe that good days will come soon. See how far we are ahead of other nations! Europe is bleeding. Protect your children! Be a good citizen with faith in one mind, one will, one conscience!”

Thousands of similar claims can be found in the statements of politicians, media figures, spokespersons of the state and the government. Some of these claims may well conflict with laws, rights and freedoms. National laws can even conflict with international conventions. Despite the regulation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, one of the oldest contracts signed by the Republic of Turkey, a 16-year-old child can be married today with the consent of his parent, for example. The boundaries of the legal system can change very quickly, depending on the political orientations of the current government. As such, the boundaries of the definition of an acceptable citizen may become ambiguous.

Some individuals, groups and subcultures are excluded. Some of them are considered as “guests" and some others as marginalized groups. The exclusion, stigmatization and labeling of people living within the same borders, who should be considered as “home folks”, make them unable to reach their rights and be exposed to violence by those in power. Moreover, this exclusion is fueled by the scrutiny on the outsiders. Discrimination and violence perpetrated by the state, and the society also contributes as they do not want to see them.

Those who are not considered as proper citizens are always disadvantaged groups: Those who are not a member of a nuclear family -which is a profile that the state accepts as normal-, children, women, LGBTI+s, the insane, the elderly, the poor, the needy, the unemployed, the homeless, conscientious objectors, etc.

For example, Turkey signed the children's rights declaration in 1928. However, if it is legally possible to marry a 16-year-old child with the signature of his guardian, it would not be appropriate to say that children are always protected in the country. For example, there is a legal situation that we missed while discussing the refugee problem: According to Article 13 of the Municipality Law, “Everyone is a citizen of the town in which they reside. Citizens have the right to participate in municipal decisions and services, to be informed about municipal activities and to benefit from the assistance of the municipal administration. It is obligatory to provide aid in such ways that do not harm human dignity.” This definition is much more inclusive than the definition of citizen. Regardless of their legal status, everyone living within the borders of a town should be treated with the law of citizenship. However, this is not how things work in institutions that are representative of the law or are expected to comply with it, nor in the social sphere.

3. In Limbo: The Refugee Experience

The “refugee problem” is one of the frequently discussed topics on the country's agenda today. There are claims in the media that immigrants and refugees live comfortably in Turkey, have rights and receive salaries. However, life in Turkey and in the world is not very pleasant for refugees of various races, statuses and vulnerabilities, who should be under state protection. They neither have access to services and rights, nor receive state aid, nor will they vote (contrary to popular belief) in the upcoming elections.

First, the refugee is always in limbo, emotionally, financially, geographically, and legally. Imagine that you are a citizen of one country and you have to take refuge in another country because you are persecuted there. To apply for asylum, you must be a citizen of a country. Even if you are an undocumented immigrant, you must go there with an ID. You will be asked where you are from, by the officials of the country where you want to seek asylum. You will also need to document the persecution, violence, rape, threat of death due to sexual orientation, religious discrimination, violence due to being a minority you have suffer. First of all, the country of refuge gives you the very limited rights of refugee law. It is also possible to be sent from the country of asylum to a third country, but it is more likely that you are not, because this is not among the basic rights. So if you are a refugee, you are always in limbo. Your legal identity does not grant you all the rights available to citizens of that country.

The biased news in the mainstream media conflict with legal facts. Statistics and numbers shared by institutions do not reflect the experiences of so many people in this society. Critical interpretation of both news and numbers can bring us closer to the truth, to real stories.

With the address investigation that started in January 2022, all refugees have to move to the specified addresses. Currently, major neighborhoods and provinces in Turkey are closed for refugee residence. But it is not easy to move to available neighborhoods as rents are rising. The purpose of this application is to determine the place where refugees live, to control the population and to prevent possible conflicts. Although not in Eskişehir, the number of neighborhoods closed to residence is higher and the number of open neighborhoods is less in provinces with a dense refugee population, such as Mersin, Adana and Gaziantep, close to the Syrian border. People are forced to move from neighborhoods closed to refugee residence to available neighborhoods. And they have to suffer a lot for that.

Refugees are always in limbo not only in the population planning of the neighborhoods but also in the popular political discourse. Both those in power and those in opposition produce discourses about refugees and borders without referring to any legal or political plan. These are mostly exclusionary, discriminating discourses.

For example, in a poster published in the Provincial Immigration Administration magazine, the following is written under the image of a smiling kid in a refugee camp: “In these lands, where compassion and humanity are the last stronghold, we preferred to manage migration rather than prevent it, and shared our bread with them. On this rough path, we set out by saying #GreatTürkiye: IF YOU KNEW THEM, YOU’D LOVE THEM.” This kid may well be Kurdish or Armenian. Do we only love those we know? If boundaries are built on familiarity, who will know and love whom?

The gaze of the state makes this decision for us. The state operates a blinding mechanism to make us selectively see, and to prevent others from being seen. We can all be seen as dissenters at any time. “Some marginal groups” include people say and do what the state does not like. As potential nomads, we can all fall into the blind spot of the state at any time. For this, the legal body of the state takes its precautions with new laws:

THE LAW ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE PRESS LAW AND CERTAIN LAWS

ARTICLE 29- The following article has been added to the Turkish Penal Code dated 26/9/2004 and numbered 5237, following article 217.

“On dissemination of misleading information.

ARTICLE 217/A- (1) A person who publicly disseminates false information regarding the internal and external security, public order and general health of the country in a way disturbs the public peace, for the purpose of creating anxiety, fear or panic among the public, is liable for a period of one year to three years imprisonment.

(2) If the perpetrator commits the crime by concealing their true identity or within the framework of the activities of an organization, the penalty imposed according to the first paragraph is increased by half.”

Because of this open-ended article, anyone who is considered as an opponent can be excluded at any time. And here is the limbo again.

4. To See or Not to See

Let’s go back to the acceptable citizen and the question that Butler asked in her book, Precarious Life. For those who are and are not considered as citizens, even human beings, for those who are not allowed to be grieved over, Butler asks: “Whose life counts as a human life, and for whom are we allowed to mourn?” Butler claims that US prevented the public to reach the real images of Iraq war (she calls this censorship as “state dramaturgy”). People detained in Abu Ghraib Prison after the Iraq War were subjected to torture; war criminals in the Guantanamo camp were not protected by international law.

This story is familiar to us, as well. Saturday Mothers, who lost their relatives in unsolved murders, have been gathering in Galatasaray Square every Saturday since May 27, 1995. Feray Salman, who was a guest at Eskişehir School last week, stated in her presentation on human rights that Turkish state has stubbornly been avoiding to sign the international convention on enforced disappearance for many years.

Enemy soldiers, regime opponents, refugees are among the excluded groups. There is another group that the state ignores and abuses for popular politics at the same time: Excluded sexualities and gender. In biopolitics, the domination is twofold: Domination over the body and domination on society. Phrases such as “the border is a matter of honor,” which politicians love so much, can be considered as referring to the boundaries of the body. There is a group that is shamed, booed and declared as marginal. The members of this group are insiders and outsiders at the same time. No doubt that they are not seen as proper citizens. In an article entitled “Queer Intersections: Sexuality and Gender in Migration Studies” published in KAOS Q+ journal on “Borders” in 2016, Martin F. Manalansan emphasizes that sexuality is not limited to reproductive sex, abstinence, abuse, and rape, but also encompasses the maintenance of normatively gendered family life and affections. Let's recall the slogan used in the promotion of the recently held anti-LGBT rally: “Mom, dad and the children: Always happy as a family.” Here, too, a border has been drawn with the heteronormative myth of family with children, and those who fall outside of this are unwanted, condemned, and declared as deviant.

In the aforementioned article, Manalansan points out that in migration studies, sexuality also points to the founding role in the formation and definition of citizenship and nation. In migration studies and conceptualizations, sexuality should be considered together with social, economic and cultural practices. Centering the nuclear and biological family perception is problematic.

5. Nomadic Resistance

Those in limbo in terms of sexuality and citizenship put their own tactics and resistance into practice when they encounter the gaze and powers of the state. Pride Parades and LGBTI actions are banned every year. Every year, the members of the community give examples of creative, and cheerful (with “gullüm” in the language of the community) resistance in solidarity to carry out these actions. For example, when the protests in Taksim were banned last year, the activist group disseminated the following message online: “We will inform you about the location, lubunya; stay tuned.” They decentralized action; and they chanted slogans and danced wherever they could, continued online meetings, sought and found ways to come together. I think this attitude is an exemplary one.

HANDE ÇEVİK

She was born in Bursa in 1990. She had her bachelor’s degree in sociology from Anadolu University, and her master's degree in sociology from Ankara University. She worked as a teacher for a while. She has been working in the field of humanitarian aid in non-governmental organizations for the last five years. Her literary works were published in Sözcükler Magazine, Rağmen Magazine and KulturaLitera.