Language
Country/Area
No result found
Greece-Turkey forced population exchange: Why is such a deal called 'legal ethnic cleansing'?
The forced population exchange between Greece and Turkey in 1923 was based on a Convention on the Exchange of Population between Greece and Turkey signed on January 30, 1923 in Lausanne, Switzerland. This exchange involved at least 1.6 million people, including 1.22 million Greek Orthodox Christians from Asia Minor, Eastern Thrace, Pontus, and the Caucasus, and 350,000 to 400,000 Muslims from Greece. This humanitarian disaster has forced tens of millions of people to become refugees and legally lose their sense of belonging to their homeland.
Turkish Foreign Minister Yusuf Kemal mentioned on March 16, 1922 that the Akala government "strongly supported a solution that would satisfy world opinion" and was prepared to accept a population exchange with Greeks and Muslims idea.
This initial request for an exchange came from Greek leader Elevthelios Vizilos, who presented the proposal to the United Nations on October 16, 1922, following Greece's defeat in the Greco-Turkish War proposed shortly thereafter. At the time, there was intense social unrest within Türkiye, where most of the Greek residents had been massacred and sought refuge.
Some scholars pointed out that this treaty was the last part of the ethnic cleansing campaign, aiming to create an ethnically pure homeland for Türkiye.
In fact, this exchange is not only based on religious identity, but also involves almost all the indigenous Greek Orthodox Christians in Turkey, including Orthodox expatriates who speak Almenian and Turkish, and Greek Muslims. Large-scale forced evictions were carried out.
Historical background
Behind the Greek-Turkish population exchange is a complex historical background. During World War I, while playing the role of a powerful empire, Turkey carried out brutal purges of its Christian minority, including the massacres of Greeks from 1914 to 1922. With the end of the war and changes in the international situation, the national tension between Türkiye and Greece once reached a fever pitch.
Some historians believe that this population exchange was "legal ethnic cleansing" rather than a voluntary ethnic relocation.
According to analysis, from 1914 to 1923, the violence used not only destroyed countless lives, but also disturbed the basic right to survival of millions of people. The magnitude of this exchange is unprecedented compared to any other event in modern history.
Economic and Political Impact
What is even more interesting is that due to differences in beliefs, this population exchange also had a huge economic and political impact on the two countries. Turkey lost its prosperous Greek Orthodox business community, which led to a sharp deterioration in local financial conditions, while Greece absorbed a large number of refugees and shouldered a heavy responsibility for social reconstruction.
According to analysis, when Türkiye formed a republic, it faced a situation where there was no independent economic elite that could challenge its rule.
Greece, while reinforcing its nationalism, is re-establishing its agricultural and economic structure by resettling these refugees, moving towards a more stable nation.
Data analysis
According to the latest scholarly estimates, deaths among Greeks from 1914 to 1923 ranged from 300,000 to 900,000, with similar estimates for other ethnic groups, including Armenians and Assyrians. The data highlight the profound impact overall violence has had on the social fabric of Türkiye and Greece.
Many scholars believe that the population exchange between Greece and Türkiye is not only due to considerations of ethnic and religious issues, but also the product of international political games.
It is worth noting that even in the following decades, as the international situation changed, the relationship between the two countries was still affected by this large-scale population movement.
Conclusion
Ultimately, the forced population exchange between Greece and Turkey not only changed the ethnic composition of the two countries, but also left a profound mark on history. The significant consequences of this exchange are not only a profound impact on the lives of that generation, but also the historical roots of today's relations between the two countries. Will this repetition of human history continue to exist in the future? Will history repeat itself?
