This paper examines the September 6-7, 1955 Pogrom in Istanbul. It explores the pathways to repair and redress what happened in 1955 for the survivors, their descendants, and the people of Turkey. I take an intersectional approach to the pogrom by considering a reparations model based on the 1921 Tulsa Massacres in the US. Through analyzing Tulsa’s model as applied to 1955, I offer a roadmap for repair and a way of thinking of other historical incidents with lasting effects. The 1955 pogrom targeted non-Muslim minorities in Istanbul who had stayed in post-independence Turkey: the Armenians, who survived the Genocide; the Jews, and the Constantinopolitan Greek Orthodox, who were allowed to stay in Istanbul as part of the 1923 Lausanne Treaty. On that fateful night, 100,000 Turkish civilians spread across Istanbul, shattering glass windows and destroying over 4000 Armenian, Jewish, and Greek Orthodox businesses, as well as homes, schools, and religious sites. At least thirty-seven minorities were killed, over 1000 were injured, and over 200 women were raped. It was later revealed that the Turkish government had planned and orchestrated the event. The horrors of 1955 continue to occupy the survivors and their descendants. Having been forced out of Turkey, members of the Greek Orthodox community now turn to the UN’s Commission on Minority Rights for redress. As recently as December 2023, they demanded the Turkish government to allow their children to repatriate to Turkey, and, importantly, they cited both 1955 (and 1964 deportations) as the reasons for their displacement. Their numbers dwindled from 120,000 in 1927 to less than 2000 today. Subsequently, the paper analyzes and applies reparations strategies from Tulsa, where, in 1921, white mobs burned shops and murdered members of the black community, effectively destroying its thriving business center. The Tulsa reparation strategies include centering the voices of survivors and their demands for justice first, participating in a multi-pronged, multi-stakeholder process, engaging in placemaking as peacemaking, and challenging underlying worldviews that persist beyond the incident. While these massacres are very different, I suggest that applying this model might begin a ‘peacebuilding process’ in the Turkish context of the 1955 victims. This paper draws on sociological research on riots, theories on repair and reparations as they intersect with trauma and healing theories, historiography, and ethnographic research on those who stayed behind in Turkey. While focusing on Turkey, the paper has important repercussions for Palestinian, Armenian, Assyrian, and Balkan Muslim contexts.