United States Sports Academy - "America's Sports University"

A Brief Evaluation of Development of Turkish Sport from 1839 to 1923

Although the modern Turkish Republic was officially established in 1923, the liberalization, secularization and the democratization process of the Republic was initiated in 1839. All of these three phases occurred in conjunction with the Tanzimat reforms, which granted partial constitutional rights to the Turkish people.

After the Tanzimat, the Turkish people reorganized their lives and established organizations on voluntary and constitutional principles. The formation of such organizations also provided leadership for sports activities within the country. Eventually, the sport movement gained momentum. According to Fisek, "Despite the discouragement of government, the popularity and enthusiasm for sports were manifested" (p. 270). However, Turkish sport had not yet set national objectives nor defined goals.

Prior to the Republican Period, between the 1650's and the 1920's, the Ottoman Empire was constantly at war with one or more of her enemies, weakening the economic and political strength of the nation. During this period of crisis, it was only natural that the issue of sport escaped the attention of officials. Nevertheless, it was also "...handed over to the protection of a few rich individuals called Agas, and of sport Tekkes (an ancient form of sport clubs) which provided shelter and management for sport" (Fisek, 251). According to Fisek, "The largest of all tekkes was in Istanbul and sheltered approximately 300 athletes, mostly wrestlers" (p. 257). In some instances, services for the sports were also provided by the Sultan's Palace.

In the history of Turkish sport this period is remembered as the "Period of Protectionism" (Fisek, 250). Furthermore, under the protectionist system, entire services enhanced the athletic performance of Turkish athletes, yet no effort was advanced for the development of the institution of sport per se. According to Hicyilmaz, "...there was not any attempt or any suitable approach to the problems connected with the issues of sport" (P. 55).

Specific issues regarding sport in Turkiye gained some attention only around the beginning of the twentieth century when some European-educated Turkish sportsmen returned with a Western view of sports. With the help and the experience of these sportsmen "...the system of sport began to organize and a few national objectives" were stated (Atabeyoglu, 11).

Around the turn of the century, the Ottoman Empire had been suffering from severe economic and political conditions and was on the verge of collapse. Finally, soon after WWI, the Empire was invaded and occupied by the Allied nations of Europe. During this period of invasion, several "Anglo-Saxon" sports entered into Turkiye.

According to Fisek, "In the cities of Izmir and Istanbul, by using their diplomatic immunity, the staff of Embassies of England and France were organizing athletic competitions: cricket, rugby, hockey and soccer" (p. 249). Ertug reported that, "In 1913, in Istanbul, the staff of the British Embassy organized a soccer tournament for the honor of the British commander General Harrington" (p. 8). Moreover, according to Hicyilmaz, "...by using their diplomatic privileges, the British merchants and the staff of the British Embassy not only organized sports competitions but also formed several sports clubs and societies" (p. 29). It is very important to point out that prior to this period the occurrence of such events would have been immediately banned by the government. However, due to prevailing conditions of the occupation, the Ottoman government was forced to remove the restrictions that blocked the formation of athletic clubs or associations in the country. According to Howard, "Under the terms of the Istanbul treaty, during the invasion, the Allied nations were taking no orders from the Ottoman government" (pp. 136-137). Taking advantage of the Ottoman government's vulnerability, a significant number of athletic clubs were formed, especially by the British. We cannot interpret England's initiative as a favor to the Turks, however, England was not ever concerned with the physical health of the Turkish youth. Rather, it was a very common British policy that had been used successfully, in India and in some African nations, to develop sports facilities in order to restrict nationalism and curb political activity. In fact, in the early years of the occupation, the British established two soccer clubs., "The Strugglers" and the "The Progress." Although there is no clear evidence, the meanings of the names of the clubs exactly coincided with the political conditions of both England, which was "progressive," and the Ottoman Empire, which was "struggling" at the time. According to Fisek, "The purpose of the formation and the orchestration of sport clubs in Turkiye by England were entirely imperialistic" (p. 268).

It is relevant to stress how external factors influenced the internal creativity in every area of life in the country. In this regard, the condition and the subsequent development of sport was not different-from, and were heavily influenced by, the existing cultural systems in Western Europe and America. For instance, programs in physical education were modeled after the calisthenics of Germany and the Scandinavian countries and resembled the sports and games from England and America. The military and civil colleges also promoted other gymnastics programs. The first sport clubs and societies to be organized in Turkiye, however, were those overseen by the British in soccer and rugby.

British influence on Turkish sport was noticeable, specifically in soccer. According to Ertug, "The first soccer and rugby club (Moda Futbol ve Ragby Kulubu) was formed in Moda, Istanbul in 1896' (p. 6). Although the British introduced the majority of modern sports such as soccer, rugby, and hockey, the Americans introduced the game of basketball. During the occupation "...several nationalist groups were seeking an American Mandate to protect the country from an English occupation" (Hicyilmaz, 9). According to Fisek, "In 1919, with the financial and technical assistance of the American government via the Chester Project in Istanbul, a branch of the YMCA was opened and basketball was introduced to the Turkish youth" (p. 249).

In the 1890's Turks were not permitted to participate in modern sport events against the newly formed British sports clubs, yet some Turks hoped to have their own sport clubs and club memberships. At the turn of the century, the Turks' persistence paid off and they organized their own athletic clubs. The first clubs to be organized were "The Black Stockings in 1899, Besiktas in 1903, Galatasaray in 1905 and Fenerbahce in 1907" (Fisek 256). Despite the fact that the sports clubs were formed back to back, however, their actual organized athletics were not begun until after the declaration of the second Mesrutiyet (adoption of constitution) in 1908, which granted more personal freedoms to citizens.

For a while, however, participation in sport activities evolved rather slowly because, "Most of the societies and clubs were initially concerned with merely the game of soccer. Sports such as athletics or track and field, wrestling and basketball, that attracted more attention from the public, were added only later" (Haluk San, 12).

In the first quarter of the twentieth century, participation in sport activities increased overwhelmingly, "...and at one point there were so many sports clubs that for the first time the Turkish sport felt the need for federation" (Aksin, 316). From 1903 to 1914 patterned along the British style, a few soccer leagues such as Istanbul Futbol Birligi (IFB) and Istanbul Futbol-Kulupleri Ligi (IFKL) were organized. Under the British authority and with the participation of such clubs as the Moda, Union Club, Elips and the Imogene Club, the IFB was formed in 1903.

After a series of problems the IFB dissolved in 1910 however; but In the same year by adding a couple of Turkish clubs the former members of the IFB reformed the IFB and established the IFKL which was dissolved in 1914 (Fisek 284).

The objectives of the IFB and the IFKL were: scheduling and officiating the league games according to the British system.

Since 1839, after the declaration of Tanzimat, strong nationalistic sentiments were evoked, and Turks aspired toward increased participation in political, cultural and educational fields. Unfortunately, such developments, including participation in sports, were frequently discouraged and suppressed by the Ottoman Sultans. During the reign of A. Hamit II (1876-1906) "...most of the cultural and intellectual organizations were shut down" (Eliot, 124). According to San, Unsi and Var, "The Black Stockings club was closed because the club organized a soccer tournament which gathered an unexpected number of spectators" (p. 67).

Despite the fact that the Sultan A. Hamit II was determined to dismantle the functions of most of the social, cultural and intellectual societies or clubs, "There were a few privileged athletic clubs that functioned regularly and freely with the help of their members who were either high-ranked military generals or rich friends of the Sultan" (San, et. all, 30). The Besiktas Gymnastic Club (Besiktas Jimnastik Kulubu) was one of these privileged clubs that was formed by the special decree of the Sultan in 1903.

The Turkish sport system was never completely able to free itself from the outmoded, pan-Islamic political views of the Ottoman Sultans. It is important to remember that during the pre-Republican period, most people were barred from joining sport clubs or any other type of social and intellectual organizations. Fortunately, with the support of the nationalistic movements, and by the turn of the twentieth century, the sport movement gradually gained momentum and became the main source of recreation and pastime for the Turkish youth. The enthusiasm for sports was especially manifested by outdoor events such as soccer, grease-wrestling and running, and by indoor calisthenics. According to Apak, "Whereas the game of soccer was practiced during the weekends, running and wrestling competitions were conducted at public gatherings and at festivals" (p. 352).

Such recreationally innocent gatherings actually played a decisive role in the rise and development of Turkish nationalism in the 1910's. Initially, sport crowds gathered solely for the sporting event, but such gatherings soon became a symbolic protest against the Sultanate. Sporting events contributed to the politization of many people, and eventually the sporting events served as a political arena.

The Connection of Sports with Physical Education

Turkiye's sporting and physical education heritage owes a great deal to the reformists of Tanzimat who "...adopted and applied the general principles of the French revolution in Turkiye" (Fisek, 262). Modern sports were completely unknown in Turkiye prior to 1860, but by 1863 school gymnastics were an esteemed component of urban high school student life. In almost all of these educational institutions, the "French system of physical education and sport was practiced and instructed" (Okan,6). According to Fisek, "The first recorded reference to a person teaching track and field was a French gymnastics teacher, Curel, at Istanbul's Mekteb-i Sultani High School in 1870" (p. 262).

The birth of nationally oriented school sports was a natural result of the introduction of western physical educational systems in Turkiye. In addition, Turkiye's first taste of contemporary sports was made possible by the practice of French calisthenics on school campuses. According to Somali, "The first high school to practice calisthenics was Istanbul's Kuleli Idadisi in 1863" (p. 10). At that time, the French gymnastics program was a combination of "fencing, free-style or floor gymnastics and shot put (Okan, 6). According to San, "By 1869 there were several schools interested in physical education programs in their curriculum" (p. 12). Those schools were "Kuleli Idadisi, Mekteb-i Sultani or Galatasaray Lisesi, Mektebi Bahriye and Mektebi Harbiye' (San, 12), the last two of which were military academies.

The physical education classes were not designed to enhance or improve the physical well-being of students. Rather the PE classes were designed with such difficult program figures that allowed only the students who had skills to perform. Therefore) most of the students were discouraged and did not participate In physical education classes any more (P. 263).

Around the turn of the twentieth century, physical education was not designed to teach the basic fundamentals of physical and mental health. Even though sports in Turkish schools were electives, the more prestigious schools gained much status by offering them, since sports instruction was not available elsewhere, and its "Western" nature was fashionable, generating new excitement among the students. It is not surprising that, from the beginning, the formation and development of modern sports clubs were initiated on the high school campuses.

Concurrently, there was a growth of in-service teaching in physical education and coaching from Europe. "Sports and gymnastics became expensive yet popular" (Okan, 10). Athletic clubs and associations sprung up all over campuses with a subsequent increase in journalistic coverage of sports, fired by readers interest at a time when sports events made even headlines news. Fisek indicates that, "For over forty years from 1860 to 1903 the development of Turkish sport was affected negatively by various economic and political conditions" (p. 262). Despite the fact that most of the modern sports in Turkiye are over a century-old, very few of them fully developed and reached the level of their European counterparts, nor were the standards of physical education for students satisfactory. Basically an elitist system, it remained geared for the physically gifted.

Development of Sport in Turkiye since 1923

After the war of independence in 1923, through the restoration of full national and political independence and under the leadership of Ataturk, the founder of the Republic of Turkiye, the Turks eagerly decided to liberate themselves from any form of out-moded, pan-Islamic Ottomanist concepts. Ataturk introduced several reforms ranging from education to religion. The fundamental aim of these reforms was to break the centuries-old traditions, to modernize and to elevate Turkiye to the level of Western nations. Ataturk's liberal and far-reaching reforms also created expanding opportunities for the young and mostly European-educated sportsmen to revolutionize and revive Turkish sport.

After 1923, opportunities for sports participation were broadened through leadership provided by the formation of numerous non-government sponsored sports clubs and associations such as the TICI, (the United Sport Clubs Association), making possible mass participation. According to Caglar, "There was a gradual increase in the numbers of people involved in various sports clubs and organizations on both the competitive and the recreational level" (p. 3).

Prior to the Republican period, there were no stated national objectives for Turkish sport. Most of the organized sports activities, even if not forbidden, were realistically out of the common citizen's reach. In this respect, the status quo of Turkish sport greatly differed from sport as it was overtly focused in the industrialized world. During the Ottoman Empire, sport was basically a form of amusement for the Sultan's palace. However, with the establishment of the new, democratic and politically more stable Republic of Turkiye, a new organizational framework for sport was formulated. With its theoretical premises geared toward mass participation, the envisioned programs promised renewed popular interest and vitality. This situation, along with the prospects of a revolutionary and improved way of life, prompted a number of sportsmen to emphasize now aspects of sport.

Modern Turkiye's sporting legacy owes a great deal to those European educated sportsmen: Selim Sirri Tarcan, Ali Sami Yen, Burhanettin Felek, Nasuhi Baydar and Yusuf Ziya Onis who are considered the "...pioneers of modern Turkish sport" (Sumer, 26). With their help, "Sport and physical activity has undergone continuous expansion throughout this half of the century' (San, et al, 69-70). The establishment of numerous athletic clubs, the formation of sport leagues such as 'Cuma Ligi', and the development of voluntary sport associations like the United Sports Clubs Association were all efforts of these far-sighted men.

A number of trends were occurring simultaneously in Turkish sport during the early years of the Republic. On one hand, while most of the major, modern sports were spreading throughout the nation, major national sports federations were continuously expanding the number and the type of sporting events held, including long range goals for energizing efforts and further plans. There was also a growing awareness of the political importance of sport so that sport started to be used to foster national pride.

On the other hand, and, "...due to the lack of sufficient finances, there was great difficulty in improving the existing conditions of sport" (Fisek, 310). Moreover, and perhaps most importantly of all, the traditional, indigenous Turkish sports such as Cirit, Grease-Wrestling, Archery and other activities were declining and becoming part of "history.' These traditional Turkish sports declined for several reasons; cirit, for example, were expensive to maintain. But a more significant fact was that they were seen as old-fashioned and not progressive, partly due to specific British propaganda that presented Western sports to the younger Turks.

As the modern Turkish Republic was developing rapidly, the traditional life styles of the Turkish people were also changing. According to Ceki, "Many young people were

looking around for things to do and to replace traditional ways of living" (p. 9). It was during this transition that modern sports received the most ardent attention.

The young generations spent their free time playing various ball games such as basketball; volleyball and soccer, and running or doing calisthenics. The noblemen and the townspeople had other sporting activities such as chess; backgammon, and various card games (Lewis, 89).

The "Halk Evleri" (folk or public houses) were formed and financed by the government in order to fulfill the great hunger for sports and to gratify the general public's desire for intramural sports.

Development of Institutional Sport (1922-1992)

The organizational and administrative development of Turkish sport in the Republican period can be divided into four periods.

I- Turkiye Idman Cemiyetleri Ittifak 1922-1936
II-Turk Spor Kurumu 1936-1936
III-Beden Terbiyesi Genel Mudurlugu 1938-1992
IV-Genclik ve Spor Bakanligi 1969-1992

I- (Turkiye Idman Cemiyetleri Ittifaki)

After the war of independence a national central organization of sport, the TICI (Turkiye Idman Cemiyetleri Ittifaki) was formed in 1922 in order to improve the chaotic, unsatisfactory state of Turkish sport and the poor performance of Turkish athletes. By the joint efforts of "Selim Sirri Tarcan, Ali Sami Yen, Burhanettin Felek and Yusuf Ziya Onis, the major figures of Turkish sport movement, the first congress of TICI took place" (Fisek, 255 and Sumer, 25). The TICI was the very first independently organized, volunteer, multi-sports association, which represented Turkish sport both nationally and internationally. The basic principles of TICI were adopted from the Swiss sport model, the "Reglements Sportifs de l'Union Suisse' (Sumer, 30). The purposes of TICI were:

to direct, coordinate and advance the activities of all sport organizations; to represent Turkish sport In international events; to Identify and stabilize the principles of amateur and professional sport; to organize sport competitions on a national scale; to canalize the free time of youth for sport and to discover the new athletes, coaches and officials; to Identify and direct the qualifications for the Olympic Games in accordance with the National Olympic Committee; to establish and register the national sport federations to the International sport federations, to make sport publications (Fisek, 354-365).

For sixteen years, the Turkish sport movement was directed and controlled by this truly democratic sport institution. Because of its populist status, the TICI was able to develop and grow at a very fast pace. Sport clubs, federations and societies were assembled within the various individual national sport federations that became forming members of TICI Individual sport federations assembled under TICI. Examples are:

• Track & Field Federation 1922
• Soccer Federation 1922
• Bicycle Federation 1923
• Fencing Federation 1923
• Weight Lifting Federation 1923
• Swimming & Water Sports Federation 1924
• Skiing & Winter Sports Federation 1924
• Horse Riding and Trap & Shooting Federation 1926
• Basketball Federation 1934
• Volleyball Federation 1934

Prior to the TICI, no sport organization was completely independent and almost all of them had some political or religious linkage. With the development of TICI, the issue of sport was temporarily freed from the touch of politics and religion. In TIOX every form of ethnic and religious discrimination, divisive politics and religious activities were strictly prohibited. TICI became the sole representative and defender of Turkish sport at every level of athletics. TICI was also "...an official office for the National Olympic Committee [NOCI" (Ertug, 68). Fisek reported that, "When Selim Sirri Tarcan officially established the NOC in 1924, he was also an executive member of the TICI' (pp. 361-362). In fact, "In the 1924 Paris Olympic Games, the national teams were financed and represented by TICI" (San, 6).

The 1930's were a period of reforms, opportunities, freedom, and national development. During this renaissance it was possible to introduce innovations, now ideas and various experiments. On the other hand, it was also a period of economic difficulties left over from the Great Depression. This situation negatively affected the financial status of TICI.

During the mid-1930's, there was a general scarcity of financial support for TICI. Due to this lack of finances, there was great difficulty in improving the existing conditions of Turkish sport. In 1936, in a congressional meeting of TICI, the members and the administrative leaders of the association voted that "The total movement of sport and physical culture should be government supported, and made a state program" (Fisek, 266-269). It followed that, "...the Turkish government was pushed to involve (itself) in the issues of Turkish sport more actively" (Hicyilmaz, 22).

The aim of this decision was to prepare for life both the athletes in clubs and the students in classrooms. Clearly this could not have been accomplished without the permanent financial support of the government. During those years of financial concerns, the TICI was also suffering politically and there were several disputes among the members of the TICI that practically forced the organization to seek government support. "In 1936 at its eighth and final congress, the TICI first changed its name and status and then dissolved itself forever" (Sumer, 28). With this decision, the semi-government controlled organ of sport, known as Department of Sport (Turk Spor Kurumu [TSK] was officially established in 1936.

2- (Turk Spor Kurumu) 1936-1938)

Due to the general economic situation, during the era of TICI, the efforts to improve the overall status of sport and the general fitness of the population in Turkiye met with limited success because of the lack of sufficient resources, such as inadequate sport and recreational facilities and expertise. Hence, in addition to the lack of resources, "The main objectives of TICI's member clubs were beyond the development of mass athletics" (Fisek, 374).

Apak reports that, "'The sport authorities of 'TICI were making a visible effort to maintain a certain balance between competitive sports and mass participation" (p. 229). However, the former was frequently sacrificed for the latter. Pressure to obtain and improve the success level of Turkish sport in international arenas, especially in soccer where the national team suffered heavy defeats, was one of the key factors in placing the competitive sports ahead of mass sports. In the 1930's, this situation surfaced as a riveting concern for proponents of the nation's only political party of Republican Populist Party (RPP). A close relationship was temporarily established between sport and party leaders. According to Fisek, "The politicians promised to rescue Turkish sport from its present conditions, by offering the invaluable goods and services of RPP' (p. 373).

Such promises created a working relationship between sport leaders and the leaders of the RPP. Eventually, in order to alleviate the existing conditions of sport, in 1936 in the eighth and last general congress of TICI, the delegates voted convincingly and overwhelmingly, to abolish itself and to establish the TSK [Turk Spor Kurumu (National Sport Association)]. In this transaction, a system parallel to the Soviet organization of sport was created. The TSK was registered under the jurisdiction and the office of the General Secretary of the (RPP). Sumer writes that, "With the establishment of TSK the Turkish government began to directly and officially involve itself in the matters of Turkish sport" (p. 29).

The TSK was presented as a hope and as a long awaited cure for the ills of Turkish sport. According to Fisek, "It was this hope and the assurances from the media and sport analysts that made the TICI close its doors and hand over the association and sports to the control of the government (p. 376).

This was the beginning of an autocratic, centrally administrated, government controlled sport management period in Turkish sport. There were living examples of this model in Stalin's Soviet Union and in Hitler's Germany, both of which were working successfully. In fact, "The government hired a German sport planner and organizer to help Turkish sport develop" (Fisek, 377). For a time, this arrangement appeared to be successful. For instance, the TSK was able to use and benefit from the various resources of RPP such as the youth clubs, camps, folk houses, dormitories, hostels, etc.

However, soon it was understood that the TSK was very far from being a cure for Turkish sport. In fact, with the TSK, Turkish sport lost its most important heritage, its legacy from the TICI as an independent, democratic volunteer sport organization whose officers, unlike the TSK, "...were not appointed by a higher authority but were elected' (Sumer, 29). The TSK could not guard the independent democratic sporting heritage of TICI, and the further development of modern competitive sport program in Turkiye was unsuccessfully cultivated.

Despite the slow progress under TICI, there had been indications of growing interest among the Turkish leaders concerning the possible significance of physical activities and sport within the context of national development. Yet during the TSK, this essential concern was vanquished by political ambitions of the TSK leaders. With power politics of key interest, sport and physical education were regarded as highly valuable tools for underlining both national health and national defense programs. Despite the fact that these uses of sport were praiseworthy, and possibly because of politization, Turkish sports stagnated. According to Sumer, "The battle for leadership was the most important factor that paralyzed the functioning capacity of the system of sport in the nation" (p. 33). Therefore, the period of TSK "...was no more than a period of transition of sport from an independent volunteer system to a completely controlled and centralized system of sport administration" (Fisek, 373). The primary goal of TSK was: "To enhance the mental and the physical health of the citizens through organizing and developing sports and physical activities in revolutionary and nationalistic directions" (Records of BTGM, p. 657).

3-(Beden Terbiyesi Genel Mudurlugu 1938-1992)

The attempts of TSK to centralize sport were unsuccessful. In 1938 a special law (3530) the "Beden Terbiyesi Kanunu," was established in order to "...assist and promote culture and national development in Turkiye by creating a militant youth with a nationalistic spirit to defend Turkiye's national sovereignty" (Fisek, 367-386). With this law, the centralization of Turkish sport was accomplished.

Sport and physical education were considered by the government as capable of supporting the political struggle through disciplined training of the masses. They were further regarded as vehicles through which national unity and national integration and national defense might be strengthened. It was this idea that led to the establishment of the The National General Directorate of Sport (Beden Terbiyesi Genel Mudurlugu) (BTGM) in 1936. The directorate subsidized the hiring of coaches, the formation of sport federations, the building and equipping of sport facilities, and the opening of regional administration offices in the major cities. Fostering the development of sport in general the BTGM has both major and minor departments for all areas of athletic endeavor, as well as departments which "...plan, conduct and supervise the training of specialists in the building of sport facilities, international sport relations, sport politics, budgeting, Sport Lottery' (TBMM Zabit Ceridesi, in Fisek, pp 2-3).

The BTGM was originally signed under the authority of the Prime Ministry but, as the governments were changed, the responsibilities and the official administrative location of the BTGM were changed and registered under the authority of various sport ministries. For instance, in 1969, when the Ministry of Youth and Sport was established, the BTGM was automatically located under this ministry:

When sport became an Issue of education, the BTGM was located under the authority of Ministry of Education. When It became an issue of youth then the BTGM was located under the administration of Ministry of Youth and Sport, and when sport became a national issue then the office of the BTGM was registered under the authority of the Prime Ministry (Fisek, 418).

BTGM was under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport.

The BTGM was responsible for the development of sport in Turkiye and "...worked in close co-operation with the various sport federations and practically supervised their work" (Beden Terbiyesi Kanunu, madde 14, in Fisek, 367).

Since 1936 the Turkish system of sport has been a highly centralized and controlled bureaucracy that is administrated by the supervision and guidance of BTGM which currently uses the title or the name Genclik Spor Genel Mudurlugu (GSGM) or the Directorate of Youth and Sport. The objectives of the GSGM are:

to develop a bodily and mentally fit, united) revolutionist, nationalist youth; to fertilize and spread out the sport and physical education nation- wide; to free the citizens of Turkiye from habits of drinking alcohol, smoking, and gambling; to develop strong and able-bodied citizens and national soldiers for the national defense; to open new horizons for the national youth, to organize, administer and prepare sport competitions and represent the Turkish sport Internationally; to create opportunities for both amateur and professional athletes to go abroad and compete and represent the Turkish Republic In International arenas (Fisek, 386).

The underlying, nationalistic principles of sport policy of GSGM have been centered in the principle of a sound mind in a sound body ("Saglam Kafa Saglam Vucutta Olur"), a slogan adopted by Ataturk. A holistic physical, mental and social development of the individual is emphasized to prepare people for personal well-being and for potential defense of the nation. The strengthening of the masses is considered to be of central importance for the regime. From its inception, the most important concern of the GSGM has been to use sport for the demonstration of national pride. The achievements of Turkish athletes in international competitions have provided an impetus for the rise of Turkish sport and to bring international recognition to the nation.

4-(Genclik Spor Bakanlinligi)

The Ministry of Youth and Sport (Genclik ve Spor Bakanligi) was established in 1969, during the government of the late Prime Minister Suleyman Demirel, in order to bring the state and Turkish sport closer together and to give the governing body of sport more political authority. The GSB was an attempt to reshape Turkish sport and reemphasize its role in national development by fostering and equipping children and youth organizations, by contributing both to physical fitness and sport-for-all programs and by contributing to competitive sports. The duties of GSB were to "...direct sport in the country, to work out a legislative policy, put sport programs into effect, and to coordinate the practical and theoretical connections or works of federations and different physical cultural organizations" (Fisek 413).

However, several critics reported that the objectives of GSB were part of the objectives and the duties of several other ministries such as the ministry of education, ministry of health and social services, ministry of labor, ministry of village affairs, ministry of tourism and the ministry of culture. But there was little co-operation among these various ministries for sharing authority and responsibility. Although the GSB was granted official responsibility, this ministry gained very little respect governmental role in sport.

For instance, starting in 1963 Turkiye entered into the period of a five-year development plan. According to Sumer, "In the first five-year development plan (1963-1968) the topic of sport was not taken up" (p.106). In the second five-year plan, sport was mentioned in but a single line, the "Sport-for-all program should be encouraged" (Sumer, 106-107).

Moreover, during the GSB no effort was generated to close the gap between the opportunities for city and rural youth in sport. Contrary to the objectives and the expectations of both GSGM and GSB, sport and physical education had been considered to be of little value in national and economic development. Consequently, the expectations and the objectives of both the GSB and the GSGM have not been accomplished.

As a final forfeiture, the dissolution of the GSB cost Turkish sport a drastic budget reduction from the government. Turkish sport was left with a low priority and sought "...technical assistance and aid from the private sectors." Another blow, along with the dissolution of GSB, was the loss of the country's best sport science and education institutions such as the sport academies.

REFERENCES

1. Adedeji, A. J. "Social and Cultural Conflict in Sport and Games in Developing Countries," International Review of Sport Sociology. 14, 1, pp. 81-88, 1979.
2. Adivar, Halide Edip. Turkey Faces West: A Turkish View of Recent Changes and Their Origin. New Haven, Yale University Press, 1930.
3. Aksin, Sina. Istanbul Hukumetleri ve Milli Mucadele. Cem Yayinevi, Istanbul, 1976.
4. And, Metin. Culture, Performance and Communication in Turkiye. Performance in Culture, #4, Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, 1987.
5. Andrews, John C. "Problems of Physical Education in the Third-World." FIEP Bulletin, Vol. 52. No. l, p.7, 1982.
6. Andrews, John C. "Physical Education, Sport and Recreation in Developing Countries." FIEP Bulletin. Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 5-15, 1985.
7. Apak, Rahmi "Turk Sporunun Yeni Hukumleri." Ulku No. 11166, Agustos, pp. 229-348, 1936.
8. Armstrong, C. Harold. Gray Wolf, Mustafa Kemal: An Intimate Study of a Dictator. 14th edition, London, 1947.
9. Ayda, Alide. "'Turk' Kelimesinin Mensei Hakkinda Bir Nazariye." Belleten, Sayi, 40, pp. 239-247, 1982.
10. Baker, B. Granville. The Passing of the Turkish Empire in Europe. Seeley Service and Corporation Limited, London, 1913.
11. Baker, James. Turkey. Henry Holt and Company, New York, 1877.
12. Berkes, Niyazi. The Development of Secularism in Turkey. McGill University Press, Montreal, 1964.
13. Blaug, Mark. North South: A Programme for Survival. Pan, London and Sidney, 1970.
14. Blocking, John. Games and Sport in Pre-Colonial African Societies. In Baker, J. William and Mangan, A.J (Eds.), Sport in Africa pp. 3-23. Africana Publishing Company, New York, New York, 1987.
15. Caglar, B. Kemal. "Sekizinci Spor Kongresi." Acik Soz, 26 Nisan, pp. 3-7, 1936.
16. Cahen, Claude. Pre-Ottoman Turkey: 1071-1330. Taplinger Publishing Company, Incorporated, New York, 1968.
17. Calhoun, Donald B. Sport Culture and Personality. Human Kinetics, Campaign, Illinois. pp. 157-161, 1986.
18. Ceki, Gultekin. "Devlet Butunlugu ve Spor Yonetimi Uzerine." Bayrak, Cilt 23, No. 746, Mart, 1976.
19. Celebi, Evliya. Evliya Celebi Seyahatnamesi. Ucdal Nesriyat, Ankara, 1987.
20. Cheska, Alyce. Revival, Survival and Revisal: Ethnic Identity Through Traditional Games. Human Kinetics Publishers, Champaign, IL, 1987.
21. Coghlan, F. John. "Sport-for-all in Developing Countries." FIEP Bulletin, Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 27-31, 1985.
22. Cumhuriyet, Subat, 28. p. 13, 1992.
23. Cumhuriyet, Nisan, 27. p. 16, 1992.
24. Davison, H. Roderic. Reform in the Ottoman Empire 1856-1876. Gordion Press, New York, 1973.
25. DeTott, Baron. Memories of Baron De Tott. G. G. and Robinson, London, 1785. 1.
26. Dubberke, Harold. Critical Remarks Regarding Sports aid for Developina Countries.
27. Jordanhill Collage of Education. London, 1966.
28. Eichberg, Henning. "Force Againist Force: Configurations of Martial Art in Europe and in Indonesian Cultures." Interternational Review of Sport, Sociology."18: 2., pp.33-66, 1963.
29. Eichberg, Henning. "Olympic Sport-Neocolonization and Alternatives." International Review of Sociology of Sport. 19:2., pp. 96-105, 1964.
30. Eliot, Charles. Turkey in Europe. London, 1662. Encyclopedia Americana. Vol.26, 1968.
31. Ertug, Ali Riza. "Turkiye Futbol Tarihi." BTGM Ankara Bolge Mudurluqu 'Yayini, Ankara, 1973.
32. Eton, Williams. A Survey of the Turkish Empire. Luke Hansard, Great Turnstile, Lincoln's-Inn Field, London, 1801.
33. Ferriman, Z. Duckett. Turkey and the Turks. Mills and Boon, Limited, London, 1911.
34. Fisek, Kurthan. Devlet Politikasi ve Toplumsal Yapiyla Iliskileri Acisindan;
35. Spor Yonetimi-Dunyada ve Turkiyede.'Siyasal Bilgiler Facultesi, Ankara, Turkiye, 1963.
36. Freeman, M. William. Physical Education in a Changing Society. Houghtan Mifflin Company, Boston, London, 1977.
37. Fu, Frank H. "A Comparison of Athletes from Different Regions of China."
38. Journal of Comparative Physical Education and Sport. 9 (2): pp.17-16, 1987.
39. Funakoshi, Gichin. Karete-Do My Way of Life. Kodansha International, Tokyo and New 'York, 1990.
40. Galbraith, John K. The Nature of Mass Poverty. Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1979.
41. Garnett, M. J. Lucy. Turkish Life in Town and Country. William Clowes and Sons, Limited, London and Beccles, 1951.
42. Geyikdagi, M. Yazar. Political Parties in Turkey: The Role of Islam. Preager Publishers, New York, 1964.
43. Gokalp, Ziya. Turk Medeniyeti Tarihi: Islamiyetten Evvel Turk Medeniyeti, Islamiyetten Evvel Turk Dini. Turk Kultur Yayini, Beyazit, Istanbul, Turkiye, 1974.
44. Grimm, J. William. "The Third World." America. May 5, Vol. 162, No. 17, pp. 449-451, 1990.
45. Gurun, Kamuran. Turkler ve Turk Devletleri. Karacan Yayinlari, Birinci Cilt, 1981.
46. Harrison, Paul. The Third-World Tomorrow. Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1960.
47. Heinemann, Klaus. "Sport and Sociology of Body." International Review of Sport Sociology. 14, 1, pp. 41-53, 1979.
48. Heinila, Kalevi. "Sport and International Understanding a Contradiction in Terms." Sociology of Sport Journal. 2, pp. 240-246, 1985.
49. Hicyilmaz, Ergun. Turk Spor Tarihi. Demet Ofset, Istanbul, 1984.
50. Hietanen, Aki. "Towards a New International Sport Order." Current Research on Peace and Violance. Vol. 5, No.4, pp. 159-175, 1982.
51. Hoberman, John M. "Sport and Social Change: The Transformation of Maoist Sport." Sociology of Sport Journal. 4 (2): pp. 156-170, 1988.
52. Howard, Harry N. The Partition of Turkey: A Diplomatic History; 1913-1923. Howard Fertig Inc. The University of Oklahoma Press. NY, 1966.
53. Huddleston, John. The Search for a Just Society. George Ronald, Publisher, Oxford, 1989.
54. Huizinga, John. (1944) Homo Ludens, published in German, in Swiss F.C. Hull trans., London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1949.
55. Hubbart, G.E. The Day of the Crescent: Glimpses of Old Turkey University Press, Cambridge, 1820.
56. Inalcik, Halil. The Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age 1300-1600. Ebenezer Baylis and Son Limited. Worchoster and London, 1973.
57. Kafesoglu, Ibrahim. Tarihte Turk Adi #. 2. Arastirma Enstitusu, Ankara, 1966.
58. Keyder, Caglar. The Political Economy of Turkish Democracy: Turkey in Transition. Editor's Irvin C. Schick and Ertugrul Ahmet Tonak. Oxford University Press, NY. Oxford, 1987.
59. Kibsy, Russ. 'Sport-for-All and the working population." FIEP Bulletin. Vol. 51, No.3, pp. 27-31, 1986.
60. Kiyokowa, Masaji. "The International Olympic Committee and International Co-operation." FIEP Bulletin. Vol. 52, No.3/4, pp. 17-21, 1982.
61. Krotee, March L. 'The Rise and Demise of Sport: A Reflection of Uruguayan Society." Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences. 445: pp. 141-154, 1979.
62. Landes, David. "Rich Country Poor Country, How Do Nations Develop?" Current. March, 11-16, 1990.
63. Lengyel, Emil. Turkey. Random House, H. Wolff. Inc., Now York, 1941.
64. Lewis, Gooffery. Modern Turkey. Praeger Publishers, Inc., New York, 1974.
65. Lewis, Raphasla. Everyday Life in Ottoman Turkey. Batsford Limited. London, 1971.
66. Lister, R.P. Turkey Observed. Eyre and Spottiswoode Publishers Ltd. London, 1967.
67. Mardin Sherif. Din ve Ideoloji. Ankara Universitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakultesi Yayinlari. No. 275. Sevinc Matbaasi, Ankara, Turkiye, 1969.
68. Mathys, A.Micheal. “The Next Generation: Who Invented The Third World ?” National Review, September 3., p.1087, 1982.
69. McHenry, E. Dean. "The Use of Sport in Policy Implementation: The Case of Tanzania." The Journal of Modern African Studies. 18 (2): pp. 237-256 1980.
70. McIntyre, Thomas Duano."Sport in German Democratic Republic and the People's Republic of China: A Socio-political Analysis.” Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 56 (1): pp. 108-111, 1985.
71. Menzies, Sutherland. Turkey Old and New. Vol. 1, W.H.Allen and Corporation, London, 1882.
72. Menzies, Sutherland. Turkey Old and New. Vol. 2, W.H.Allon and Corporation, London, 1882.
73. Monroe, W.S. Turkey and the Turks. Colonial Press. Boston, 1907.
74. Newman, Barnard. Turkey and the Turks. Herbert Jenkins Ltd., London, 1968.
75. New Columbia Encyclopedia. (4976).
76. Nalle, Wilfreid. "Turkistan Tarihinin Yaziminda Karsilasilan Sorunlar." Belleten, Cilt, 4411 Sayi, 184. pp. 347-369, 1982.
77. Ojeme, E. 0. "Problems in the Development of Sport in Nigerian Universities."
78. International Rowiev for the Sociology of Sport, 20 (3): pp. 189-202, 1985.
79. Okan Kenan. Turk Spor Tarihi. MOM yayini Ankara, Turkiye. pp. 132-156, 1989.
80. Orga, Irfan. Portait of a Turkish Family. The Macmillan Company, Now York, 1950.
81. Pallis, Alexander. In the Days of the Janissaries. Hutchinson and Corporation. Publishers Ltd., Now York, 1951.
82. Porter, James. Turkey its History and Progress. Hurts and Blackett, Publishers. London, 1854.
83. Reid, John. Turkey and the Turks. Robert Tyas Publishing Inc., London, 1840.
84. Reinhart, Robert. Turkey a Country Study. Federal Research Division, Library of Congress. USA, 1986.
85. Rice, Emmett A. A Brief History of Physical Education. 3rd Edition, London, 1962.
86. Riiskjer, Soren. "Alterations in the Sport Involvement." Scandinavian Journal of Sport Science. 8(3): pp. 117-122, 1966.
87. Robinson, D. Richard. 'The first Turkish Republic. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachussetts, 1963.
88. Ross, Saul. "Canadian Research Into Physical Education and Sport Development Assistance; A Pledging Enterprise." Canadian Journal of Development Studies. Vol. 7, No.1 pp. 95-103, 1986.
89. San, Haluk., Unsi, Tevfik., and Var, Samim. Futbol Ansiklopedisi, Ticaret Postasi Matbaasi, Istanbul, 1963
90. Seppaenon, A. Paavo. Sport Achievement and Type of Culture. Proceeding of the First International Seminar on the History of Physical Education and Sport. Wignate Institute for Physical Education. Nethanya, Israel. April, 9,11, 1968.
91. Seton, Lloyd. Ancient Turkey. Stevenson Publishers. London, 1989.
92. Shaw, Stanford. History of the Ottoman Empire and Turkey. Cambridge University Press. London, NY, 1976.
93. Shaw, Stanford. History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, London, 1977.
94. Sirman, Nukhet and Finkel,Andrew. Turkish State, Turkish Society. Billing and Sons Ltd. Worcester, England, 1990.
95. Snyder, E. Eldon, and Spritzer, Elmer. 'Social Aspect of Sport. Prentice-Hall Incorporation, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1978.
96. Somali, Vala. Besiktas Tarihi, Istanbul, 1978.
97. Soundrs, E. John. "Sport and Physical Education in the UNESCO Region of Asia and Pacific." FIEP Bulletin. Vol.55, No.1, pp. 17-26, 1985.
98. Speakman-Yerta, A. Moureen. "Cross-Cultural Comparisons of Physical Education Purposes." Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 6, pp. 252-268, 1987.
99. Stoddart, Brian. "Sport in the Social Construct of the Lesser Developed World: A Contemporary." Sociology of Sport Journal.. 6, pp.125-135, 1989.
100. Sumer, Riza. Sporda Democrasi: Belgeler/Yorumlar. 2. Baski, Safak Matbaasi, Ankara, 1969.
101. Tachau, Frank. Turkey, the Politics of Authority, Democracy, and Development. New York, 1984.
102. Turkey a Country Study: Federal Research Division. Library of Congress, 1988.
103. Vasquez, Felix Moya. "Solutions for Physical Education in Developing Countries: The Cuban Experience. FIEP Bulletin. Vol. 54, No. 2, pp.19-27, 1984.
104. Vucinich, S. Wayne. The Ottoman Empire Legacy. Shoe String Press Incorporated, Connecticut, 1910.
105. Wagner, A. Eric. "Sport in Asia and Africa: Americanization or Mundialization ?" Sociology of Sport Journal. 7, pp. 399-402, 1990.
106. Ward, Barbara. Turkey. Oxford University Press, London, Great Britain, 1942.
107. Williams, F. Jesse. "The Physical as Experience." Journal of Higher Education. Vol.22, No.9, pp. 463-69. 603-604, 1939.
108. Zachariah, Mathew. "Can the Rich and Poor Nations Co-operate to Internationalize the Curriculum?" Compare, Vol.9, No. 1, pp. 65-69, 1979.