İsmail Küçükkılınç
Beyond being a one-man, Mustafa Kemal was a man who pushed the limits in getting his ownway. In a conversation about language at the table, he made Kazım Nami Duru, who couldnot answer a question, stand in front of the blackboard for minutes like a primary school childand used harsh words. It would be useful to look at the wrestling competitions in Çankaya from this perspective. We do not know whether a sultan or a head of state has ever remembered such a wrestling match in a presidential mansion or palace.
On November 10, the car I was in to go to the airport stopped at 09.05 and almost all thepassengers in it stood up and paid their respects. Almost all the vehicles on the road had thesame scene. There has been a noticeable increase in the rhetoric of Mustafa Kemal after theJuly 15 coup attempt, which was the most despicable and treacherous coup attempt not onlyin the Republic of Türkiye but perhaps in Turkish history, and which, unlike the others, thistime targeted not only a mentality, a caste or a political party, but the average Turkish person, that is, the nation, pointing guns at it, shooting bullets at it. Even some bureaucrats andindividuals who are not in a position of representation have made a special effort to refer tohim inappropriately. The sad fact is that the abundance of references to Mustafa Kemal andhis name serves to perpetuate his existence and influence not as a historical figure andcharacter but as a holy man. Previously, in the last years of the One-Party rule, Mustafa Kemal had lost some of his sanctity and his historical personality and founder of the republiccame to the forefront, but with the efforts, encouragement and drive of Celal Bayar, who sawthe love of Mustafa Kemal as a form of worship, many squares, schools, streets andinstitutions were named “Atatürk” during the DP era; Mustafa Kemal became almost a moresacred figure than he was during the One-Party era.
Mustafa Kemal’s uni-manliness was unique. His might and power were not limited to anyone. Even most of his bodyguards were armed MPs. He was so reckless that he would hangwithout blinking an eye the Unionist chiefs that Talat Pasha and Enver Pasha could not afford. Any objection to him was subject only to his permission. Otherwise, someone like Ahmet Ağaoğlu could immediately be labeled as a “refugee” and someone like Sadri Maksudî Arsal could be subjected to the insult of “you are not a professor”. Especially someone like Sakallı Nureddin Pasha, who violated the boundaries assigned to him in the National Struggle andclaimed his rights, could have been subjected to the harshest accusations from the rostrum of the parliament. The Progressive Republican Party was dissolved not because of itsinvolvement in the Sheikh Said Rebellion, as almost everyone agrees today, but becausealmost all of its founders and leaders were heroes of the National Struggle and would havebeen favored by the people in a free election. Because they were also claiming their rights in the National Struggle and this was recognized by the nation and even the army. Similarly, theSCF, which was a party of collusion, was dissolved because in a free election, it would havebeen favored by the people, it would have come to power and another party, not the CHF, of which it was the leader, would have deemed Mustafa Kemal worthy of this office, and it could not digest this in itself.
Mustafa Kemal’s uncontrolled authority caused him to be seen as a dictator by the outsideworld, and he did not object to this description (See Ali Fethi Okyar, Üç Devirde Bir Adam, Tercüman Yay., İstanbul: 1980, p.393-394).
Exaggerated references to Mustafa Kemal are no longer in line with historical facts. It is a foregone conclusion that the National Struggle was a cadre movement and was organized bythe Unionists. What needs to be done now is to bring everyone back to normal humanboundaries. Serving the cult of the one-man does nothing for the nation and the country.
The wrestling in Çankaya, which we will discuss in this article, is actually an “ancestralsport” that will offend the pride of most people who are wrestled on the carpet and make themridiculous in the eyes of history.
In Çankaya, not only active soldiers and cooks on duty at the mansion, but also the top bureaucrat of the Presidency, state officials with doctorates, and even ministers were wrestled. Cemal Granda’s memoirs reveal that Mustafa Kemal had many guests wrestle with soldiers. Wrestling is, of course, an ancestral sport that should be loved, supported and popularized, but it is debatable how accurate it is that those who wrestled in the building of the Riyaset-i Cumhur, where the Republic of Türkiye, which was founded as the heir of an empire, wasadministered, and often in front of the invited guests, were thrown into the ring without eventaking into account that they were in a representative position.
Some of the reports on Çankaya wrestling competitions are as follows:
1-A. According to what Süheyl Ünver heard from historian Lieutenant General Cevdet Çulpan in 1965, Mustafa Kemal was walking around Çankaya Mansion one day when he sawa soldier with a wrestler’s build. He asked the soldier “do you wrestle?” and received theanswer “yes”. Another day, when he went to the kitchen to see the food being prepared, he saw a chef with a wrestler’s build. When he asked him “do you wrestle?”, he received theanswer “yes”. Mustafa Kemal made the soldier and the cook wrestle. The soldier and the cookagree that “it would be a shame in the presence of our pasha, let’s not beat each other”. However, the cook breaks his promise and defeats the soldier. The soldier then starts to cry. He tells the story to the pasha who asks why he is crying. The pasha turns to his companionsand friends and says, “You see, they have always defeated the Turks by deceiving them likethis.” (Istanbul Municipality City Theater Magazine, Atatürk 100 Years Old, Special Issue)
2-Hâmit Zübeyir Koşay of Kazan origin, who has a distinguished and exceptional position in Turkish Folklore Research and Museology, told the following about the wrestling competitionin Çankaya: “One evening, we were having a conversation in Çankaya, and the subject of oldTurkish sports came up alongside some scholarly discussions. Atatürk suddenly turned to me and asked if I would wrestle with Hikmet Bayur, his Chief of Staff. I couldn’t say ‘no‘ in frontof Atatürk, and I didn’t want to embarrass Hikmet Bayur. We wrestled on the carpets. Afterwrestling for a while, I was inevitably defeated. Ata was smiling and saying ‘being defeated in sports is as honorable as being defeated‘” (Turkish Culture Research, Phil.Dr.Hâmit ZübeyrKoşay’ın Hâtırına Armağan, Year XXIV/2, 1986, p.12). Hikmet Bayur was a bureaucrat-foreign minister-legislator-representative historian who did not object to being wrestled in front of dozens of people in Çankaya. Although his 10-volume History of the TurkishRevolution is proof of his diligence and diligence, his pen has been proud of spewing bloodagainst Abdülhamid II and the Unionists in the shadow of Çankaya. He tried to avenge theBâb-ıâli Raid and his grandfather Grand Vizier Kâmil Pasha by distorting historical facts. Hamit Zübeyir Koşay, on the other hand, was a man of fiery intellect whose devotion andaffection for the Caliph Abdülhamid, like that of all the faithful Kazanites, was so great thathis grandfather named him “Abdülhamid” in homage to the Caliph. With the patronage of his uncle Rızaeddin b. Fahreddin, he was sent to Istanbul at a young age to study and enrolled as a boarder at the Thessaloniki Rüşdiyesi. While he was in school, with the declaration of theConstitutional Monarchy II, non-Muslim children who insulted Abdülhamid II made fun of him because of the similarity of his name with the sultan’s, and when this was heard by theschool teachers, he started to use only the name Hamit on their advice.
3- According to Cemal Granda’s memoirs, Mustafa Kemal and Reşit Galip had an argument at the dinner table in Dolmabahçe because of Esat Bey, the Deputy Minister of Education. Mustafa Kemal says that Mr. Esat had educated him and that he was a valuable person. ReşidGalip, on the other hand, according to the memoirs, makes a harshoutburst by saying, “Thisman would not be the Deputy Minister of Education even if he had your God educated, let alone you”. Mustafa Kemal then tellsReşid Galip , “Please leave the table!” Reşit Galip, who was in a drunken frenzy, said, “Thisis not your table, it is the table of thenation. I have as much right to sit here as you do. Although we are in the palace, yourteacher is not Hace-i Sultanî. Criticism is free in the Republic…” Mustafa Kemal thensays,“Then, if you allow me, I will leave.” After a while, Reşit Galip is pardoned andeven becomes the deputy minister of education. The place is Çankaya again. Let’s read fromGranda: “That night the table was quite crowded. Reşit Galip was overflowing with joy. At the climax of the meeting, Atatürk called two of the soldiers standing at the door and startedto wrestle them. This was what most people did, whether on his trips or at the mansion, he would call a few of the valiant Mehmetçiks to wrestle with him, and he wanted to see with his own eyes what Turkish power was capable of. He would even get his beloved ones towrestle with these Mehmetçiks, even if they did not want to, and he would watch withpleasure as they were beaten. On a few occasions, he invited the Mehmetçiks to wrestlewith him, but none of them wanted to wrestle with him, saying , “The seven nations couldnot break your back, but we can ”. The wrestling was very sweet. When Reşit Galip’scuriosity had reached its limit, Atatürk signaled to the soldiers and ordered them to make thenew minister ‘six okka’. We were all surprised, and so was the minister. Before ourastonishment wore off, those two paternalistic soldiers embraced Reşit Galip in a crow’s nest. The minister, who was in the air, first tried to struggle a little, but to no avail. It wasimpossible to move in the steel claw-like hands of the giant guards. The excitement of thepeople in the meeting had reached its limit. They were wondering what would happen, almostafraid to breathe. Atatürk, on the other hand, seemed calm and natural. The soldiers liftedReşit Galip into the air two or three times. Just as they were about to hit the ground, theystopped at a signal from Atatürk and swung him up into the air again at full speed. After a fewrepetitions of this delightful game (we used to play it a lot when we were children), Atatürk told the Mehmetçiks ‘enough‘. Then he turned to those at the table. Laughing, he said: ‘We can act like this if we want to‘ “ (Cemal Granda, Atatürk’ün Uşağı İdim, p.76-83).
There were three people at Mustafa Kemal’s table who spoke out of the ordinary. One of themwas his childhood friend Nuri Conker. Conker used to speak this way based on priorpermission. However, Reşit Galip and Kel Ali had made the speech that would be subjectedto reprimand and criticism under the influence of alcohol. The common characteristic of theselast two was that they were members of the Independence Courts. If it were not for thesequalities, we believe that alcohol would not have prompted them to speak in this way.
Mustafa Kemal, beyond being a one-man, was someone who pushed the limits in getting his will done. In a conversation about language at the table, he made Kazım Nami Duru, whocould not answer a question, stand in front of the blackboard for minutes like a primaryschool child and used harsh words. It is useful to look at the wrestling competitions in Çankaya from this perspective. We do not know whether a sultan or a head of state has ever remembered such a wrestling match in a presidential mansion or palace.