Scientific study based on Kurdish Question in Turkey & Solutions

Heval Sulaiman Miro- Turkey is experiencing serious difficulties in overcoming her systemic problems due to the bureaucratic nature of the political institutions that have been shaped since the creation of the Republic in 1923. As a result of these conditions, Turkey is increasing unable to keep up with the complex changing structure, needs, and demands of the Turkish society.

In addition, the persistence of the state-centered structure of the policy has become too centralized, restrictive, and authoritarian. Hence, neither individual, nor group expectations and demands (including cultural freedoms) are fully understood nor meet by the central authority (the state). The detachment of the"center" has led to the estrangement of society from the state. As a result, this has had an adverse effect on political unity and social solidarity.

Furthermore, there is an established belief that"Whatever the state does, gives, or decides is good; neither its motive nor the consequence of its needs can be questioned. "The state is sacred (this statement was in the preamble of the Turkish constitution until ....etc...) Its actions can not be criticized. Its mistakes can not be questioned and corrected. The perception of any popular demand or objection to politicies of the government represents an unjustified rebellion, undeserved demand, or outright subversion. The centralist system looks upon the emergence of new social power centres or alternative policy proposals as exteraordinary, subversive, and even deviant. As a result popular demands are addressed inadequately, tardily or are simply suppressed.

The fact that social expections are meet callously or simply suppressed causes violence in the society: The social fabric is seriously damaged when both the official method of problem-solving and the method of conveying popular demands to the central authority are both violent. Violence "from above" and from below" reinforces and legitimize each other.

At the root of this society´s problems lies the process of our nationbuilding which progressed not from the nation towards the creation of the state, but rather evolved as a process of building a nation with the initiative of the existing state apparatus and bureaucracy. In the Turkish example, the state preceded the nation.

At the root of this society´s problems lies the process of our nation-building which progressed not from the nation towards the creation of the state, but rather evolved as a process of building a nation with the initiative of the existing state apparatus and bureaucracy. In the Turkish example the state preceded the nation.

The forbearer of the Republic of Turkey, the Ottoman state, was not a nation-state . It was a cosmopolitan political union of diverse nationalities, ethnic and religious groups.

The Republic of Turkey was founded as a nation -state. However, the already existing state and powerful bureaucracy took on the mission of creating a new concept of nationhood which was created and sharped by the state . The state´s role as the creator, rather than the coordinator still persists. This phenomenon renders the state omnipotent and omnipresent vis-a-vis the society.

While a culturally rich and diverse society grow with both in size and complexity, the authoritarian state structure that was created to meet the needs of the early 1920s remained to great loyal to its policy of uniformity over unity which resulted in an increasingly incompatible relationship between the state and society.

Tension and conflict which arises between the tutelar central authority and the populace can be likened to the immature son(the populace)of the hous (the state)in which the latter induced the former to be rebellious. Further problems arise from the perception that the "son"- who is neither satisfied nor free in his father´s home wishes to leave. Morover, the Republic of Turkey has several children!. Some of whom believe that they are treated like stepchildren.

One of Turkey´s major political problems emanates from what we attribute to the nation of nationhood, a fundamental concept in our political culture. At the time of the declaration of  the republic, the pluralistic nature of the population and the multi-cultural richness of the society inherited from the Ottoman Empire was acceped by the republican elite. Disregarding their ethnic, cultural, religious, and linguistic heritage, the " nation" was deemed to be the political union of all groups living in Turkey.This unnderstanding  could have created a pluralistic political organization would inevitably be democratic. However, creating a nation based on pluralist principles out of a poor, backward, uneducated and cosmopolitan populace was not realized by the political elite of the time.

The urgent need to create a common political culture as the basis of the envisaged nation prompted the ruling elite to adopt the policy of uniformity (liquidating cultural differences) rather than unity (respecting and reconcelling differences). The perference led the republican elite to the acculturation of the "nation" with the qualities of the majority , namly Turkisness and Sunni, even Haneti branch of Islam.

Based on the decision to standardize the population, the political elite or the central authority took on the task of defining " Turkisness" and "Islam" as well as the qualities of a "Turk" and "Muslim".Once these qualities were determined, they became the arsenal of nationalist and secularist standardization. This intese effort of the last seventy odd years has been partly successful. However, it is becoming clearer this process is flawed because it emanates from a fictive reality rather than the existing realisties of the country/Society.

Failure to eliminate imbalances in life- styles due to differential development of regions(especially  North-Kurdistan= Eastern Anatolia, which still suffers from the yoke of tribalism and feudal landownership); the widening of inqualities among social strata; perception and treatment of cultural differenences as deviant (this policy exhibited itself as an exclusionist attitude against non-ethnic Turks and non Muslims and non-Sunnis among the Muslims) were combined with underdevelopment, unemployment and the insensitivity and infficiency of the state thereby giving rise to criticism of the system. Successive military interventions, the first of which was staged 1960, and authoritarian laws could not halt increasing opposition which from time to time took on a violent character. Violence, on the other hand, served as a dirty shawl concealing corruption and moral decadence.

Had the armed struggle been a conflict between security forces and Kurdish militants  on remote mounatain tops, then the society would not have been much affected by it, and the matter would not be regarded as a national security issue. But we are confronted with a widespread economic and aggravates inflation.

Furthermore, the bloody struggle going on for years has long ago become more than a mere conflict between two armed groups. It cause strike between the Turkish and Kurdish citizens of this country and damages social solidarity. On the other hand, this problem, which cannot be, or rather, is not solved domestically has become a regional (Middle- Eastern), and even international phenomenon which creates opportunities for outside Intervention.

This very fact makes the need to find a solution even more urgent.

Because the problem is seen merely as a security issue and not as a "political and socila conflict", we suffer from an unamed war fought on our own lands, amongst our own people in which citizens kill each other. Should this war not be controlled, it may migrate from the countryside to urban centers, further polarizing the society.

Every society may have its share of fanatics who choose violence a mean of political expression.

Effective police measures are needed to deter such people. However, when violence becomes a widespread method of protest involving thousands of armed people supported implicity or explicity by hunderds of thousands, then such a phenomenen is of a social character. Therefor,

the social and political dimensionof the conflict needs to be taken into considration and the roots of the conflict need to be examined.

Primarily and most importantly, the parties to the conflict should meet independent of the official institutions which are the creators of the conflict. These parties should work together to define the problem and formulate solutions. Their common assessment must be translated into policy proposals and presented to the public, the real....of the problem(s).

It is with this vision and aim that we, the citizens of Turkish and Kurdish origin of the Republic of Turkey, got together motivated by the belief that watching the enfeeblement of our society, like a patient with internal bleeding, is partaking in the historical irresponsibility. We discussed our mutual problem(s) at length in environments clear of external political influences. As a result of long and headed discussion free of prejudics and ready political menus, we agreed that:

1- Turks and Kurds of Turkey are not the citizens of two inimical states. They are members of the same state. The root cause of the existing conflict is not the two parties/communities, but the official institutions, practices, and ideology.

2- The official (political)institutions have lost their effectiveness. They have become unresponsive to local characteristic and exigencies of the people because of their ultra centralized and hierarchic structures.

3- Official practices so far have reflected an unresponsive attitude to the existence of Kurdish and other cultural and political realities.

4- The official ideology adopted as the driving force of nation-building, i.e.(Turkish) nationalism has turned out be perceived as exclusive rather than inclusive for non-ethnic Turksih citizens of state contrary to the intention of the founder of the Republican regime. Indeed, citizenship has been based on Turkishness.

The republican regime has restored sovereignty to the people. However due to inadquate democratization of the regime, the impact of people over the decisions concerning their own welfare has been minimal. The most important reasons behind the bottleneck in the system is that the state has never really transferred power to the people.

Despite official doubts, democratization of the regime is possible through the creation of a pluralist structure without hampering the unitary of the state. However, neither individual politicians nor political parties take responsibilty for realizing this outcome. Social as well as political conflict continues because of their opportunistic and irresponsible attitude.

The people of Turkey would have been able to solve their internal problems much more easily, we believe that if the political parties had not supported political factionalism and raised change. The people wish to live together and have the common-sense to produce practical solution to achieve this end through mutual consensus. Quarrels, lack of understanding, insensitivity, and resistance to popular demands stem from existing political structures and authoritarian mentality.

The presence of Kurds in Turkey, i.e. " the Kurdish reality", was unfortunately discovered after considerable bloodshed. Nevertheless, recognition of the Kurdish reality represents an achieve ment in itself. What does the recognition of the kurdish reality mean? It implies teh acknowledgement of the existence of cultural group (people), which includes millions of persons. The Kurds have been and are one of the main elementals of the Republican and the Ottoman states. They lay claim to unique cultural as well as political characteristics and are sensitive about conserving them. Such acknowledgment of cultural distinctiveness is bassed on not only a scientific observation, but also on political realities. The Kurds want official/legal acknowledgment of their existence as a unique cultural group(people). They would like this acknowledgment to extend beyond oral commitments to include legal warranties having effect on daily life including the free exercise of their cultural identity.

The Kurds do not want these rights in order to distance themselves from the state or to divide Turkey. Neither do they want to alter the basic qualities of the state. But rather, they want to be able to preserve their cultural heritage and still live in safety as equal and respected citizens of Turkey in spite of the fact that they are from an ethnic group other than the majority.

In Summary, agreat majority of the Kurds are as loyal to the Republic of Turkey as any other citizen , but they want their Kurdishness to be respected. Unlike democratic and civilized countries, Kurds feel rejected and victimized as the state and political institutions resist the needs of the Kurds. Feeling of victimhood and ensuring wounded self-perception(identity) are the basis of societal problems. It is impossible to establish stability and solidarity in a society which includes  a major group or people who feel politically excluded or victimized, even if such people are of the same race of religion with the majority. The two pillars of stability are justice and equality. Social peace and stability can be achieved only through a democratic state organization and constitutionally based rule of law which gurarantees equality of all social groups. Poverty and underdevelopment, while aggravating the situation, are not the primary cause of the problem. Citizenship and ethnic, religious, and cultural identity should not be confused. Citizenship is a legal phnomenon which includes existing diversities in the society.

Official authorities should not intervene in these domains because any intervention would make the state a proponent of one side as it already has. This harms social solidarity.

Freeing the private or cultural domain from intervention by the political domain/institutions is presumed in democratic society which preserves political equality. These conditions must be met if the feeling of " pluralist nationhood" is to be cultivated. A reductionist nationalism based on the ethnic identity of the majority or a privileged minority can not ensure stability. It carries, in itself, the seeds of exclusion and segregnation. Then what is to be done is obvious:

Institutionalizing of respect for all ethnic and religious values and strengthening democratic institutions which safeguard cultural diverssities and political freedoms are necessary steps.

We porpose the expeditious implementation of the following legal and institutional infrastructure:

a- To put into practice the requirements of all international agreement on human rights and basic freedom signed by (successive) government(s).

b-To put into practice the steps of localism; Autonomous in North-Kurdistan under State of Turkey.

c- To prepare the  new democratic and tolerance Constitutions.

d- To rapidly adopt more liberal laws concerning the election system, political parties, and freedom of expression and assembly ´, in order to widen the base of democracy and to open the way for pupolar will to influence the decision-making mechanisms. To prepare a new constitutionsafeguarding such laws based on the principles of multi-culturalism, pluralism, and participatory democracy.

e- To create systems for government accountability including the establishment of an Ombuds to oversee whether administrations  at all levels work in accordance with the law and are harmonized with their designated responsibilities.

f- To establish regional development administrations in which local representatives elected by regional councils and a body of experts carefully selected by the centeral government will work together.

g- To extend constitutional guaranteed of the country´s cultural richness including the rights of other cultural groups. to safeguard their traditional values. To this end, the Turkish Army  as well as Kurdish militants; guerilla have to stop their attacks and war against each other giving the real chance for peaceful solution.

And the Turkish goverment under AKP has to know that the Kurdish Federalism in Syria will be the real support for Turkish policy  in Fields of Economy as well as politics which could  enforce the Turkish role and policy in Europe and Middle East . The Kurdish federalism in Syria is not going to threat  the Turkish security or national unity! it is a key to find the real solution for the internal conflicts in Turkey without any kind of separatism! and going to meet the benefit of Turks , Arab and Kurds in future!.

German Kurdish Foundation Harman for Research and Democracy

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References:

1- Heval Sulaiman Miro"Kurds over History", p.12-16, Berlin 2004

2- Prof.Dr. V.Moraru"la Politices" Academy of Moldova, P.113 , Chisnau 2010

3- Prof.Dr. Frauke" From Tribalism to UAE" p.12-20, Abu Dahbi

4- Prof. Dr. Aqil "Transformation in United Arab Emirates, P.222-224, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

5- Prof. Dr. Ismet Wanli,"Iraqi Kurdish revolution" P.6-8, Lozane 1964