OPEN LETTER TO H.E. ANTÓNIO GUTERRES
Secretary-General of the United Nations
Subject: Acceptance of the “Atatürk International Peace Prize” – A Fundamental Contradiction of UN Principles and Western Values
Your Excellency,
We address you with the utmost respect for your office and for the principles of peace, justice, and international law that the United Nations exists to uphold. It is precisely out of this respect that we express our profound dismay and disappointment at your recent acceptance of the “Atatürk International Peace Prize” in Ankara, presented by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.
This action, at a time of global instability and regional conflict, sends a troubling message—not only to the peoples who have suffered under Ottoman and Turkish policies, but to all who believe in the integrity of the United Nations and the moral foundations of Western civilization. Our concern is not rooted in national sentiment alone, but in the broader implications that such an act carries for the credibility of international institutions and the universal principles they are meant to uphold.
I. The Historical Reality: A Civilization 3,500 Years Unbroken
Before addressing the political implications, we must state a fundamental truth that transcends diplomacy: the Greek nation is the bearer of the oldest continuously living language and culture in Europe, if not the world. For 3,500 years, the Greek language has been spoken without interruption—a living bridge from Homer to the present, and a foundational gift of reason, philosophy, democracy, and art to all humanity.
The Greek Revolution of 1821 was not merely a war of independence; it was the rebirth of the Western spirit after centuries of Ottoman occupation. It reminded Europe and the world that freedom is the natural condition of civilized peoples, and that no empire, however powerful, can extinguish a culture rooted in reason, memory, and faith.
This is the civilization that the ancestors of modern Turkey—the Seljuk and Ottoman invaders—sought to erase from Asia Minor, Pontus, Thrace, and the Aegean islands. They did not succeed entirely, but the cost was genocide.
II. The Legacy of Atatürk: Not Peace, but Genocide
The name “Atatürk” is promoted internationally as a symbol of modernization and peace. For the peoples who experienced the dramatic developments of the period 1915–1923, its significance remains profoundly different and is linked to a traumatic historical experience. While the mass persecutions and exterminations of Armenians and Assyrians began during the late Ottoman period under the Young Turk regime, the conflicts and displacements continued during the nationalist movements of Kemal Atatürk that led to the formation of the Turkish state. In this context, the Greek populations of Asia Minor, Pontus, and Eastern Thrace suffered widespread persecution, violent displacement, and heavy human losses—events that have been the subject of extensive historical research and, in certain cases, have been recognized as genocides by national parliaments and institutional bodies.These developments are connected with the transition from the Ottoman Empire to a new nation-state, during which forces of the nationalist movement, including the Kemalists, played a decisive role in processes of violent transformation of the region’s demographic and cultural landscape
The Ionian coast, Smyrna, Trebizond, Caesarea—these were not “Ottoman” lands. They were Greek lands, Hellenic in language, memory, and soul, long before the arrival of Turkic tribes from the steppes of Central Asia. The burning of Smyrna in 1922, the expulsion of 1.5 million Greeks from their ancestral homes, the destruction of churches, schools, and libraries—these are not acts of peace. They are acts of conquest.
To award a prize in the name of Atatürk is to whitewash this history. It is to honor one of the 20th century’s architects of ethnic cleansing with the title “peacemaker.” Your decision to accept this award constitutes not only a political misjudgment, but a moral one.
III. The Present Threat: Expansionism Dressed as Diplomacy
The Turkey of today, under President Erdoğan, has revived the expansionist ideology of its Ottoman past. This is not speculation—it is documented policy:
– Casus belli declared against Greece, threatening war if Greece exercises its lawful right to extend its territorial waters.
– Systematic questioning of Greek sovereignty over Aegean islands that have been Greek for thousands of years, now falsely claimed as “Turkish” or “disputed.”
– Ongoing occupation of Cyprus since 1974, in flagrant violation of multiple UN Security Council resolutions.
– Military incursions into Syria and Iraq, support for extremist factions, and threats against Kurdish populations.
– Weaponization of migration, using desperate people as tools of political blackmail against Europe.
– Conversion of Hagia Sophia—a monument of universal civilization and a symbol of Christian Hellenism—into a mosque, erasing its Greek and Christian identity.
These are not isolated incidents, nor are they the actions of a nation committed to peace. They form part of a consistent pattern of conduct that has raised serious concern across the international community, from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Middle East and beyond. They are the actions of a state that still sees itself as an empire, entitled to dominate its neighbors and rewrite history to suit its ambitions.
The Turkic tribes that emerged from Central Asia centuries ago conquered Greek lands by the sword. Today’s leaders, dressed in suits and seated at diplomatic tables, pursue the same goal through different means: gradual revisionism, historical distortion, and territorial claims dressed as negotiation.
IV. A Global Pattern of Violations
Beyond the Hellenic context, these concerns reflect a broader, well-documented pattern of actions by Turkey that conflict with international law, human rights norms, and the principles of peaceful coexistence.
The Kurdish issue remains one of the most pressing humanitarian and political challenges of our time. Military operations conducted by Turkey in Syria and Iraq, as well as domestic repression, have drawn sustained international criticism regarding the treatment of Kurdish populations and the denial of fundamental rights.
The Cyprus issue, which persists unresolved since 1974, continues to represent a clear violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions. The ongoing military presence of Turkish forces on the territory of a UN member state constitutes one of the longest-standing cases of occupation in the modern international system.
Furthermore, the Armenian Genocide, recognized by numerous states and parliaments worldwide—including the United States Congress on multiple occasions—remains a defining moral and historical issue. Turkey’s continued denial of this genocide undermines reconciliation and stands in contradiction to the universal values of historical truth and accountability.
These issues are not regional grievances. They are matters of global concern that directly challenge the international legal order and the credibility of institutions committed to justice and peace.
Your acceptance of this prize, Your Excellency, lends legitimacy to this project.
V. A Cunning Policy: The Strategic Use of Prizes
Your Excellency, you are not the first UN Secretary-General to accept this award. Kofi Annan received it in 2000, and his acceptance was also met with criticism from those who understood its implications. By contrast, Nelson Mandela, who was selected for the award in 1992, declined it, a decision widely understood as a principled stand in response to human rights concerns, particularly regarding Turkey’s treatment of the Kurds. The repeated selection of high-profile figures for this award is part of a long-standing and calculated policy of modern Turkey—a strategy that deploys prestigious awards as instruments of soft power to mask the reality of a state whose hands remain stained with blood and whose ambitions threaten its neighbors.
This is the essence of the Neo-Turkish diplomatic method: to project an image of peacemaker while preparing for expansion; to embrace international leaders while rejecting international law; to honor the dead while denying the genocide they suffered. The Atatürk Prize is not a genuine recognition of peace—it is a tool of manipulation, designed to secure legitimacy from the very institutions Turkey continues to defy.
For a Secretary-General of the United Nations to accept such an award is to fall into a carefully laid trap. It allows Ankara to claim: “Even the UN leader honors us. Even he acknowledges our commitment to peace.” Meanwhile, Turkish troops remain in Cyprus, Turkish jets violate Greek airspace daily, and Turkish officials openly challenge the sovereignty of Hellenic territories that have been Greek for three millennia.
We must say clearly: nations that have built empiresthrough conquest are not, by that fact alone, incapable of civilization. But civilization requires a break with the past—a recognition of crimes, a renunciation of expansionism, a commitment to equality among nations. Modern Turkey has made no such break. It continues to claim Greek islands, occupy Cyprus, and deny the very existence of the peoples it exterminated. Until that changes, prizes bearing the name of its founder should be refused by every defender of international law, historical truth, and human dignity.
VI. A Call to Action: “Forget Me Not”
The Greek people carry a memory 3,500 years old. We remember Homer, Pericles, and the Church Fathers. We also remember the death marches of Pontus, the burning of Smyrna, and the graves of Asia Minor that still call out for recognition. Our motto, inscribed on monuments across the Hellenic world, is simple: “Forget Me Not.”
We ask you, Your Excellency, not to forget.
– Do not forget that the soil of Ionia and Pontus is soaked with Greek blood.
– Do not forget that the islands Turkey now claims have been Greek since before the Turkish language existed.
– Do not forget that the UN itself has condemned Turkey’s actions in Cyprus and called for withdrawal.
– Do not forget that accepting honors from a state that defies these resolutions undermines your moral authority and that of the institution you lead.
– Do not forget that Kofi Annan’s acceptance did not change Turkey’s behavior—it only provided Ankara with a diplomatic trophy. Do not allow your legacy to be used in the same way.
VII. Our Expectations
We therefore call upon you to:
1. Publicly clarify that your acceptance of the Atatürk prize does not imply endorsement of Turkey’s domestic or foreign policies, nor of the historical actions of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk.
2. Reaffirm your full commitment to the implementation of UN Security Council resolutions on Cyprus and to the territorial integrity of Greece.
3. Consider returning the prize as an act of conscience, demonstrating that the office of Secretary-General cannot be associated with honors bestowed by states that violate UN principles.
4. Ensure that future engagements with Turkey explicitly address its expansionist rhetoric, human rights record, and ongoing violations of international law.
5. Establish a clear protocol that prevents future Secretaries-General from accepting honors from states under active UN Security Council scrutiny for aggression or occupation.
6. Clarify your position on the historical and contemporary issues directly associated with the legacy of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and the modern Turkish state, including:
• The recognition of the Armenian Genocide, as acknowledged by numerous states and legislative bodies, including the United States Congress, most recently under President Biden
• The continued occupation of Cyprus in violation of UN Security Council resolutions
• The treatment and rights of Kurdish populations
• The persistent pattern of revisionist rhetoric and policies directed against multiple neighboring states and regions historically associated with former Ottoman expansion, including, in the case of Greece, the formal casus belliand repeated challenges to established sovereignty in the Aegean.
In this context, we respectfully ask whether your acceptance of a peace prize bearing Atatürk’s name implies endorsement, neutrality, or distancing from these internationally documented realities.
VIII. Copies to Allied Institutions
We are sending copies of this letter to:
– The European Union – as the political community of which Greece is a member, and which is directly threatened by Turkish revisionism and hybrid warfare.
– The US Secretary of State – the US is a key ally of Greece and Cyprus and a nation whose support was instrumental in your rise to your current position. Your acceptance of this prize, in defiance of the very Western alliance that elevated you, is not only a personal misstep—it is a geopolitical contradiction.
– The UN Security Council – which has passed multiple resolutions on Cyprus that Turkey continues to ignore.
– UNESCO – as guardian of world heritage, including the endangered Hellenic legacy of Asia Minor and the Christian monuments of Constantinople and Cappadocia
– The International Criminal Court – for its interest in crimes against humanity and genocide denial.
– Congressional Caucus on Hellenic Issues
– Senate Foreign Relations Committee leadership
– House Foreign Affairs Committee leadership
– Greek-American Senators and Representatives
– AHEPA Headquarters USA
Conclusion
Your Excellency, the Greek nation has given the world philosophy, democracy, science, and art. It has survived conquest, genocide, and displacement—and it still speaks the language of Homer. It asks now only for what is just: that its history be respected, its sufferings acknowledged, and its rights under international law upheld.
We do not expect Turkey to change overnight. But we do expect the Secretary-General of the United Nations to stand on the side of truth, not convenience; on the side of the victims, not the perpetrators; on the side of the civilized world, not those who still dream of empire.
We emphasize that this appeal is not a national protest, but a call grounded in universally recognized principles—human rights, historical truth, and respect for international law. The issues raised herein concern not only Greece, but all peoples affected by conflict, displacement, and the denial of justice.
In light of the above, we invite you to clarify how your acceptance of this award is reconciled with the United Nations’ positions on Cyprus, minority rights, and historical accountability for mass atrocities, including those recognized internationally as genocide.
Even if the acceptance of this award is not reversed, the absence of clear distancing from the issues outlined above risks being perceived as tacit endorsement. Such a perception would be inconsistent with the moral authority entrusted to your office.
We await your response with hope and vigilance.
Respectfully,
