The Kurdish Struggle to Establish an Autonomous State within Turkey - Essay Example

?The Kurdish Struggle to Establish an Autonomous within Turkey Kurdistan is an area in the Middle East where the ethno-cultural group known as the Kurds form the majority population. Kurdistan as a geographical area comprises parts on Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria (Houston, 2008). Most of these countries (particularly Turkey) have issues with the formation of an autonomous Kurdish region for several reasons which will be discussed within this paper. The Kurds have their own unique culture, language and religious beliefs that set them apart from the general population of the countries in which Kurdistan is currently politically part of, and have been persecuted by these nations throughout history. One of the main issues in Kurdistan is the struggle to form an autonomous nation that recognizes the rights and rich history of these people. Interestingly, the Iraqi government recognized the state as early as 1970 (Houston, 2008), giving the Kurdish people within Iraq autonomous rule, but the other governments, in particular Turkey, have not recognized the area as separate and autonomous and this is a constant source of tension within the area today. Within Turkey, the Kurds are the largest non-Turkish ethnic group (Barkey & Fuller, 1998), a fact which the Turkish people perceive as the main reason why the Kurds are the biggest threat to Turkish national identity and perhaps why these people struggle within Turkey. This essay will focus primarily on the Kurdish people within Turkey and identify some of the key issues and solutions in this situation. Current events will be utilized to show the troubles within the area and highlight the positives and negatives of being a Kurd in modern Turkey. History of Kurdistan To properly understand the struggles of the Kurdish people in Turkey, it is necessary to have a complete historical background of the area and discuss how the language and culture of these people has developed over time. Not only is this an interesting standalone topic, it highlights some of the differences between the people of Kurdistan and the Turkish population, a source of great tension between the two cultures. Kurdish culture can be traced back to ancient history. It has been suggested that the ancient Kingdom of Corduene is analagous to the modern-day Kurdistan (Houston, 2008), and may of the ancient districts of this area correspond well to modern district. The first reference to Kurdistan (or Land of the Kurds) is found in a Christian document which describes the Christian Saints of the area, people who were driven out of the area by Pagans (Barkey & Fuller, 1998). The Kurdish language is believed to have developed from a dialect of Iran in the early centuries of the Common Era (Houston, 2008). From here on, there is a clearer history of the area. The Middle Ages saw the development of several Kurdish provinces such as Shaddadid, Marwanid and Rawadid (Meiselas & Bruinessen, 1997), all fairly autonomous regions which can be likened to modern-day emirates. They were under religious and political control of Khalifs, but this was indirect and not particularly forceful, allowing the Kurdish culture to begin to develop into something recognizable today. Islam was first brought to the area in 641CE by an Arab leader known as Utba ibn farqad (Meiselas & Bruinessen, 1997), and was followed by a number of uprisings, revolutions and conquests by Muslim leaders. It was the loss of power from the Byzantine and Sasanian empire by these Muslim caliphates that led to the Kurdish people being allowed to identify mountain administrators and set up independent states in the eastern Taurus mountain ranges, where Kurdish people can still be found today (Meiselas & Bruinessen, 1997). The modern history of Kurdistan is also fascinating. The 16th century brought many wars to the area and eventually the modern area of Kurdistan was split between the Safavid and Ottoman empires. Most Kurds lived in the Ottoman empire until World War I, when the Allied troops tried to split the area into several distinct countries, something which never took place (Houston, 2008). The area was then conquered by the army of Kemal Ataturk, and the Allies were forced to accept that the area would be mostly within modern-day Turkey, leaving the Kurdish people without the autonomous region that they so desired (White, 2000). The People of Kurdistan As previously mentioned, the Kurdish people have their own distinct culture and language. The language itself is similar to Iranian, developing as part of the Indo-European branch of languages (White, 2000). It is spoken by around 30 million people, most of whom live in the Caucasus region of the Middle East (Gunter, 2000). Kurdish is recognized by Iraq as a national language, and in Armenia as a minority language, but recognition is still forthcoming by the Turkish and Iranian governments who rule over people of Kurdish culture (Olsen, 1996). Kurdish people are generally considered to be followers of Sunni Islam (Gunter, 2000), and many follow the mystical practices of Sufi. There are also several minority religions that can be attributed to the Kurdish people, such as Alevi, Yarsan and Yazidi (Mutlu, 1996). There are also Kurdish adherents of other religions, such as Christianity. Interestingly, Kurdish women do not generally adhere to the segregation rules of Islam and do not wear the face veil (McDowall, 1992), separating them from the surrounding Islamic nations which do generally practice this (White, 2000). Women and men are allowed to fraternize in public and it has been suggested that Kurdish culture is more similar to that of Eastern Europe than the Middle East (Ergil, 1997). Kurdish culture also encompasses certain distinct types of music. Like many areas in Eastern Europe, there are three types of traditional performers in Kurdish culture; storytellers, bards and minstrels, each of which have a distinct position (McDowall, 1992). These are generally performed at night in gatherings of Kurdish people. Music is performed by both men and women and enjoyed by all, and include several types of dance traditional to the area. It is interesting that there are also types of religious music that do not directly correspond to the traditional Islamic faith, perhaps a hangover from when the area was mostly inhabited by Pagans (Houston, 2008). Modern Issues in Kurdistan As previously discussed, the main trouble in Kurdistan is that the Kurdish people occupy a considerable proportion of the population in Turkey, being the second largest ethnic group after native Turks (Olsen, 1996). From 1984, the Turkish government have tried to assimilate the Kurds into Turkish culture, trying to eradicate any threat that they pose on the Turkish national identity (Houston, 2008). Interestingly, more Turks believe that the Kurds want a separate autonomous nation than Kurds do, illustrating that the Turks think this is more of an issue than the Kurdish people do (Gunter, 2000). Obviously, speaking an Indo-European language rather than Turkish means that the Kurds are easily separated from the majority of Turkish. It is however notable that most Kurds living in Turkey can speak both languages (Beattie, 2006), again suggesting that the Kurdish people are more willing to assimilate into the Turkish way of life than it is generally accepted. The culture is different between the two ethnic groups, but there is no defining line that makes either group particularly separate from each other; both cultures openly practice Islam in fairly similar ways, for example (Yavuz, 1999). One of the most famous groups fighting for the independence of Kurdistan is the Kurdistan Workers Party. The party is controversial worldwide, with Iran, Syria, Greece and Russia supplying weapons to the group, either outwardly supporting the Kurdish people's right to autonomy or simply not listing the organization as a terrorist group (Beattie, 2006). There are also many countries that have attempted to ban the group on the grounds that it is a terrorist group; the United Kingdom, France and Belgium being among those that ban activity of the group on their soil (Radu, 2001). The Kurdistan Workers Party The Kurdistan Workers Party was founded on the 27th November, 1978 by Abdullah Ocalan; originally to promote socialism and Kurdish nationalism in the area. The organization has been armed since the early 1980s, and has since featured heavily in warfare and debates about the desire of the Kurds to establish their own state. Many countries classify the organization as terrorist for its use of military tactics against civilian and the military living in Turkey. The Kurdistan Workers Party primarily operates out of Iraq, where Kurdish people are recognized as a separate culture and identity. The Kurdish Workers Party uses many techniques to recruit members and train them for combat against the Turks. As the organization supports Marxist principles, there is a great equality between the two genders when it comes to recruiting, with over 30% of the members being female (Houston, 2008). Recruiting is done by the method of propaganda, like many other organizations. There are also a number of training camps in which people are trained to use weaponry and how to identify targets (Beattie, 2006). The Kurdish Workers Party is also associated with a TV channel known as MED TV, which is an internationally broadcast channel with programming in 6 languages (Dixon & Ergin, 2010). The TV channel is banned in several countries worldwide for encouraging terrorist activities (Radu, 2001). Current Events in Kurdistan It is interesting to contrast the struggles of the people in Kurdistan to their rich cultural history. In modern times, the people of Kurdistan are often found in the media with reference to their struggle for autonomy in Turkey, often coming from their state in Iraq. There are so many events that could be used to give an overview of what life is like for the Kurdish people in Turkey, illustrating the struggles of life in the area.. One event that is typical is an event that occurred on 30th August, 2011 (Arsu, 2011). The Turkish military announced that it had killed 150 people who were fighting for Kurdish separatism. The argument was that these people had been rebels and the attack by the Turkish military was in retaliation to a continuation of the cross-border warfare going on in the region. The Kurdish rebels were part of the Kurdistan Workers Party (P.KK.), a group that is continually fighting for a separate Kurdish nation across Turkey (Barkey & Fuller, 1998) and the other countries which encompass part of the geo-cultural nation. It is hard to ascertain which group of people are right in a situation like this, with Kurdish people posing a threat to Turkish national identity but the Turkish military responding with a force that is not available to most Kurdish people (Barkey & Fuller, 1998). Continuing cross-national tension is not exactly an excuse for an outright attack on the rebels of Kurdistan. Another event that can be used to illustrate the troubles in the area was again the work of the Kurdistan Workers Party (the dominant military organization that is fighting for Kurdistan's independence), who seem to be implicated in many of the struggles that Kurdistan has. Just this month, over 24 Turkish soldiers were killed on the border of Iraq by a military attack by the party. The Turkish military retaliated by bombing the Iraqi territory of Kurdistan from the air, killing numerous more people (Arsu, 2011). Simply by looking at the numbers involved in this, it is hard to sympathize with the Turkish military who have soldiers in much larger numbers and are able to bring such devastation to large numbers of people in the area. Contrasting the first attack in August to this recent October attack, it seems that the Turkish military are capable of murdering citizens in the hundreds, whereas the Kurdistan Workers Party rarely kill people in this magnitude. Numbers alone, however, cannot tell us who is in the right in a situation like this. It must not be assumed that the underdog (Kurdistan) should be sympathized with simply for this reason. It is when the rich cultural ethnic history of the Kurdish people is examined (as discussed above) that sympathy can really be felt for these people who just wish for autonomy in a region in which they have resided for many years. It is interesting that these events are common between the people of Kurdistan and the people of Turkey. Almost on a weekly basis, one can open the newspaper and find some sort of military trouble between the two cultures, and it is not entirely clear why. There are cultural differences between the two nations, and Turkey is reluctant to give up the land which they see as theirs. Kurdish people pose a threat to Turkish national identity, but it is hard to see what exactly Turkish identity is worth in the context of the killing of hundreds of people on a monthly basis. Turkey is a country with a rich cultural history itself (Barkey & Fuller, 1998), and it is hard to see how eliminating the Kurdish people will benefit a country which is itself composed of several cultural groups practicing many different religions already. Proposed Solutions for Kurdistan In a situation which has garnered such controversy as the independence of Kurdistan, is is obvious that there will have been many theories put forward as to how the situation and the violence should be resolved. There are two main schools of thought in this case. One refers to Kurdistan as 'the Kurdish problem' and suggests that Kurdistan should remain as part of Turkey and the other nations in which it is found (Dixon & Ergin, 2010). The other school refers to Kurdistan as the future of the Middle East and suggests that all areas of Kurdistan should, where possible, be allowed to have complete autonomy and be able to practice their own culture in this private setting (Fernandes & Skutnabb, 2011a). As with most political situations, there are many shades of gray inbetween, which involve giving the various Kurdish states varying degrees of autonomy. Even when considering all of the information above, it is hard to say definitively which side is right. The fighting looks likely to continue as long as Kurdistan remains part of Turkey (Barkey & Fuller, 1998), even with the efforts on Turkey's part to get the Kurdistan Workers Party recognized globally as a terrorist organization and with retaliation to the 'terrorist' attacks on Turkey by the organization. Trying to turn all ethnic Kurds into Turkish people will not work whilst people still identify as part of this ethnic group, as even a blanket ban on Kurdish identification and activities will just push the people underground. Similarly, it is difficult to solve the problem by giving the Kurdish people their own nation. Kurdistan has long been an area that is not politically recognized, and there will be a struggle to establish this independent state. There may be a continuation of the violence as the Turkish military struggle to adapt to the loss of this area and a significant amount of their population, although the violence will likely slow down and eventually stop as the Kurdish Workers Party will have achieved the goal. It is always interesting to consider the problems of how exactly to establish the nation state, and fledgeling nations have long had problems establishing peace in the first years. Conclusion To conclude, there are many different aspects to the Kurdish situation in Turkey and further afield. The language and culture differences may account for the problems within each nation, with military reactions compounding the problem. It is difficult not to feel sorry for the Kurdish people with such continuing persection from Turkey over the last half-century, but some of the actions of the Kurdish Workers Party are less than commendable and have probably reduced some of the support that would otherwise be available to Kurdish Nationalists. Another difficulty is establishing exactly how to resolve the problem with the violence and the alienation of the Kurdish people. As previously mentioned, there are two main resolutions with shades of gray in between, and no proper solution has been found as of yet. It seems likely that the best situation will eventually be to give the Kurdish people the nation that they so desire, because only then will the violence from the Kurdistan Workers Party finally cease, although there are several problems associated with this solution. As with many places in the Middle East, is will be interesting to watch the events unfold and hopefully resolve themselves in a way that promotes peace and good lifestyles for all involved. Works Cited Arsu, Sebnem. “Iraq: Turks Report Kurdish Deaths.” The New York Times 30 Aug. 2011. Web. 20 Oct. 2011. Barkey, Henri J., and Graham E. Fuller. Turkey’s Kurdish question. Rowman & Littlefield, 1998. Print. Beattie, Meriel. “Local guards divide Turkish Kurds.” BBC News (2006): n. pag. Dixon, J.C., and M. Ergin. “Explaining Anti-Kurdish Beliefs in Turkey: Group Competition, Identity, and Globalization*.” Social Science Quarterly 91.5 (2010): 1329–1348. Print. Ergil, D. “The Kurdish Question in Turkey.” Journal of Democracy 11.3 (2000): 122–135. Print. Fernandes, D., and T. Skutnabb-Kangas. “Kurds in Turkey and in (Iraqi) Kurdistan: A Comparison of Kurdish Educational Language Policy in Two Situations of Occupation.” Genocide Studies and Prevention 3.1 (2011): 43–73. Print. Gunter, M.M. “The continuing Kurdish problem in Turkey after O" calan’s capture.” Third World Quarterly 21.5 (2000): 849–869. Print. ---. The Kurds and the future of Turkey. Palgrave Macmillan, 1997. Print. Houston, Christopher. Kurdistan: crafting of national selves. Berg Publishers, 2008. Print. Icduygu, A., D. Romano, and I. Sirkeci. “The ethnic question in an environment of insecurity: the Kurds in Turkey.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 22.6 (1999): 991–1010. Print. Kirisci, K., and G.M. Winrow. The Kurdish question and Turkey: An example of a trans-state ethnic conflict. Routledge, 1997. Print. McDowall, D. The Kurds: a nation denied. Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center, 1992. Print. Meiselas, Susan, and Martin van Bruinessen. Kurdistan: in the shadow of history. Random House, 1997. Print. Mutlu, S. “Ethnic Kurds in Turkey: A demographic study.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 28.04 (1996): 517–541. Print. Olson, R.W. The Kurdish nationalist movement in the 1990s: its impact on Turkey and the Middle East. Univ Pr of Kentucky, 1996. Print. Radu, Michael, and Michael Radu. “The Rise and Fall of the PKK.” Orbis 45.1 (2001): 47–63. White, P.J. Primitive rebels or revolutionary modernizers?: the Kurdish national movement in Turkey. Zed Books, 2000. Print. Yavuz, M.H. “Search for a new social contract in Turkey: Fethullah Gulen, the Virtue Party and the Kurds.” SAIS review 19.1 (1999): 114–143. Print. Read More