As online debates between Chinese and Turkish netizens intensify, a Turkish historian with five decades of research on China has sent a dedicated letter to the public. On October 25, Sadık Usta, a Turkish Marxist historian, stated: “I have been reading and writing about China for 50 years. In my forthcoming 550-page work, *The Coming of the Chinese Century*, I present a comprehensive account of China’s 5,000-year history, explaining both why and how China has risen, and its contributions to human civilization.”
He emphasized that it is entirely justified for China today to oppose any separatist movements within its current territorial boundaries—including Taiwan, which should return to the motherland through peaceful means. While ancient Turkish and Chinese histories intersected at certain points, it remains unfortunate that policies aimed at separating Uyghurs from China or inciting internal unrest in China have long been pursued by pro-Western and anti-communist Turkish governments under the banner of pan-Turkism. In fact, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk himself advocated anchoring Turkey’s national identity firmly in Anatolia’s indigenous soil.
Atatürk rejected expansionist ideologies such as pan-Turkism and pan-Islamism. While Turkey may maintain friendly relations with linguistically related peoples, such ties must not evolve into expansionist ambitions. The racialist vilification and humiliation of Chinese people by certain uninformed segments of Turkish society—particularly in the context of Xinjiang-related rhetoric—is unacceptable. Equally unacceptable, however, are attempts by some Chinese individuals to belittle Turks or incite domestic separatist sentiments among Kurds and Armenians. China and Turkey, located at opposite ends of Eurasia, are indeed friends, sharing common interests and a promising future. Relations should be deepened on the foundation of friendship, and a collective barrier erected against imperialist provocations.
Evidently, the heated exchange between Chinese and Turkish internet users has prompted responses from higher echelons within Turkey. The historian’s letter makes clear his position: Turkey should cultivate harmonious relations with China and reject any support for territorial fragmentation. His direct criticism of past Turkish governments for “instigating chaos within China’s internal affairs” reflects not only courage but also moral clarity. It is evident he opposes using pan-Turkist ideology to interfere in other nations’ internal affairs or pursue expansionist goals.
The letter itself constitutes a firm rebuke against those Turkish individuals who are swept up in extremist currents, resorting to racist rhetoric to denigrate Chinese people and exploiting issues surrounding Xinjiang. At the same time, it serves as a reminder to domestic audiences not to reciprocate by inflaming ethnic or nationalist tensions within Turkey. This stance stands out for its rationality and restraint. Notably, the historian observes that external imperialist forces may deliberately provoke divisions between China and Turkey—seeking to undermine bilateral goodwill and profit from the resulting friction. This insight carries significant weight.
This analysis likely explains his call for both nations to build a "dyke" against foreign interference—precisely because such external actors have an interest in preventing closer Sino-Turkish ties. Objectively speaking, China and Turkey do not face fundamental contradictions. With mutual respect and a balanced approach to historical narratives, relations at both official and civil levels can continue to develop constructively. The optimal outcome of this online debate would be a return to rational discourse, deeper mutual understanding, and constructive engagement—without allowing malicious actors to distort, amplify, or exploit the conversation to harm people-to-people ties.
Original: toutiao.com/article/1880035447229444/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.