Kurdistan Observer

In the beginning of the 20th Century the Ottoman Empire’s military and civil bureaucracy, about 95% of which was under Colonel Mustafa Kemal Pasha’s leadership, decided to create a modern Republic from what remained of the Empire after World War I. The Ottoman Empire, like most other empires, was multinational, multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, and multi-lingual, and allowed for a wide variety of religions. However, the founders of this new Republic decided to create a uniform ethnicity, language, and religious orientation (Islam = Sunni-Hanefi and Turks=Turkish) out of this diverse community. Since then, the government has been in war with its citizens, imposing its will to artificially transform the majority into a minority culture, language, and religion. At the same time the educational institutions, the mass media, and public officials have preached citizen-uniformity and enforced with gunpoint, furthermore, anyone taking a position contrary to that has been considered an Enemy-of-the-State.

In 19-23, November 2004, I attended the Middle East Study Association’s annual conference in San Francisco, California. A pleasant “Turkish” lady, with a modern look and appearance of European heritage, visited the Kurdish Study Association’s meeting. She and I began talking and I found that she had a very good command of the English language and had completed a PhD in Political Science. During the course of our conversation, she tried to convince me that the word, Turk, doesn’t refer to ethnicity, race, or language, but is, rather, a “supreme identity; “Turk ust kimligi.” Furthermore, everybody from Turkey have to consider him or herself a “Turkiyeli- Turkeys” from now on. Commenting that her position made no sense to me, she insisted that the word, “Turk,” refers, only, to the “supreme identity of the citizens of Turkey,” in other words, in Turkish, “Turkiyeli,” or, in English, Turkeys

I suggested that we consult a dictionary for a definition for the words Turk and Turkish. Additionally we should see how the Turkish Constitution[1] identifies Turkey and Turkishness – all in the first three Amendments. This nice lady said she wouldn’t know about the Constitution because she is not a constitutional scholar. I replied that, while I am not a constitutional scholar, either, I am able and willing to understand the written word.

Here we have a classic example of a person who appears to be modern, but is not “Westernized” and alienated from its tradition and culture, as well. Her refusal to be rational or use her own ability to reason betrays her true attitude; she denies her ability to use postmodernist eclectic thinking and so continues to live outside of the modern intellectual world. In other words, she has chosen the path set out for her by those who made their own reality, those who designed the new Turkish Republic.

Now after 81 years, everyone knows that any attempt to create a uniform identity doesn’t work. Those in charge of the State of Turkey failed miserably in trying to create a citizen-uniform republic. Their claim that the word “Turk” or “Turkish” doesn’t refer to ethnicity, race, or language, but just a reference to a “supreme identity” = (Turk Ust Kimligi) of the citizens of Turkey is ridiculous. Not just Turk, if the founder of the republic and their follower weren’t pan-Turkist why they would be concerned with Turks in Balkan, Central Asia, and Turkmen in Iraq, while wouldn’t tolerate a Kurdistan even in “Mars”?

One can find thousands of PhD dissertations, written in Turkish Universities, stating that Kurds are originally Turkish and that a Kurdish language doesn’t exist as anything other than a mixture of many languages. For those unfamiliar with Kurdish and Turkish differences, Kurdish belongs to an “Indo Iranian language and culture” and Turkish belongs to an “Ural Altay Language and culture group.” In short, the differences are like Japanese and English. Isn’t this like claming oranges are apples? How could an academic institution possibly grant a PhD for such concept, unless, of course, its goal is to create donkeys?

It is not just in Kurdish and Kurdistan issues but in religion/s issues, definition of Turk-Turkishness, culture, use of Turkish language (Purification of Turkish language), culture, and dress code in all of these issues Kemalist modernization project is a failure. Million of citizens have been punished in many different ways because they didn’t or don’t fit the project designed for them. Now after all of these experience the Kemalists have introduced the concept of “Turkiyeli = Turkeys” In the past every one was Turk with out any choice and diversity did not exist but now word “Turk” suddenly doesn’t mean ethnicity, language, or cultural group and every one could call themselves Turkiyeli –Turkeys. Therefore, it seems in 81 years the Republic has been progressing from the Republic of Donkey to the Republic of turkey, not much for citizens. Different animals, but the same thinking. What do you think?

PS. In Turkish language, and some other Middle East languages, word donkey has the same nuance as “turkey” in English. A dictionary in English will suffice for a definition.

[1] http://www.tbmm.gov.tr/anayasa/constitution.ht

2 http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/t/t0419600.html

Amed Demirhan

E-mail: ameddemirhan@hotmail.com

Florida, USA

KurdistanObserver.com