“Today, the Turkish nation faces the biggest threat in its history. Even though some people still struggle to understand this, the solidarity of the Turkish Republic has never been as endangered as it is now. Even when the death toll from the PKK was at its peak in the mid-1990s, society never seemed to be as polarized as it is today.” Yurter Ozcan discusses Kurdish problem and the founding principles of the republic.
- Two weeks ago, my family and I had lunch with some friends at our home in Washington. One of them, a Turkish-American citizen of Armenian descent who has been living in the U.S. for 40 years said: “Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was a great man. In 1923, he made everybody [in Turkey] equal.”
With that one short sentence, he was able to encapsulate the philosophy upon which the Republic of Turkey was founded: the creation of a modern state where being a Turk was based on citizenship instead of religion, race, class or ethnicity. Common denominators for citizenship were shared history, culture and language.
Has Turkey been perfect in its 87 year history? No.
Has it accomplished all of the goals that the founding fathers set for future generations? No.
Is the creation of the Republic of Turkey one of the best political achievements in the 20th century? Absolutely yes.
Despite all of its challenges, short-comings and mistakes, this Republic was born as a miracle. This miracle resulted not only from the Revolutionary Independence War that many at the time, including the Sultan, deemed impossible to win, but because it sought to create a country so far ahead of its time. A gift that at times served as a curse when people could not adjust to the speed of the revolution, or when successive administrations could not fill the shoes of the founding fathers.
In one speech, Ataturk emphasized that he was not leaving any taboos or dogmas behind. He said the world was changing so fast that even people’s definition of happiness constantly changed. He asked his nation to follow logic and science, and adapt to changes as needed. This is what people need to remember most: The revolution that was born in 1923 is an ongoing revolution. In other words, it is a revolution based on constant change, adaptation and improvement. This is why I find it so difficult to understand when people criticize Kemalism by claiming it is outdated. How can an ideology that demands ‘constant change’ be outdated? Since when following logic and science become a taboo or an outdated inspiration? Admittedly, the application of some policies may have been ineffective at times and not succeeded in solving some of the problems the country still faces.
However, such short-comings, including the Kurdish problem that I will further discuss, should not be used as a basis to attack the very birth of this nation.
***
Today, the Turkish nation faces the biggest threat in its history. Even though some people still struggle to understand this, the solidarity of the Turkish Republic has never been as endangered as it is now. Even when the death toll from the PKK was at its peak in the mid-1990s, society never seemed to be as polarized as it is today. We have come to a point where ethnicity is now factored into everyday decisions—while doing business, renting an apartment or even friendship. This horrifying trend is more dangerous to Turkey than any terrorist organization. Turkey is becoming a place where people cannot tolerate living with each other. During these challenging times, I understand the founding principles of Turkey even better— building a country free of any dogma and solely focused on constant change where different people could live under the umbrella of Turkish citizenship.
The Kurdish Opening announced by the AKP in the summer of 2009, a project understood by nobody, including the AKP officials, imposed a situation on the Turkish nation that is quite grave and in many ways underestimates the patriotism that runs so deep in this country’s veins. The debate became so absurd that the Turkish people are expected to tolerate terrorists and even discuss the territorial integrity of their country. This constant threat is usually mixed with debates on linguistic, cultural and traditional issues faced by Kurds in Turkey. I agree that Turkish citizens of different ethnicities should be entitled to their own language, culture and traditions. They should also be able to broadcast and receive education in their own language (as it is the case now in private institutions). The question that must really be answered is: what does the PKK want?
The terrorist organization has at times changed strategies and even altered its rhetoric depending on the situation. We should not be bogged down in jargon and forget the sight of the PKK’s true end-goal, which is dividing Turkey. The latest slogan they have is ‘democratic autonomy.’ What is that even supposed to mean? Kurds need to sincerely question what the PKK has ever done to improve their lives. What social, educational or economic initiatives has the PKK created? None. It is a rogue, corrupt terrorist organization financed through the drug trade, arms dealing and embezzlement. Several weeks ago, Sirri Sakik, a Kurdish Member of Parliament with the BDP, said that over 3 million Kurds signed a statement declaring Ocalan as their leader. This is the same person who refused to call on the PKK to give up their arms. So what about the remaining 70 million people who live in this country? Shall they be sidelined in this debate and accept everything the PKK seeks to impose?
The Kurdish problem will never be solved until peaceful Kurds who have no affiliation with PKK take the initiative. Unless they stand up and declare that the Republic of Turkey is where they want to live, establish political organizations that denounce PKK and stop referring to Southeastern Turkey as ‘Kurdistan,’ it will be impossible to solve this problem. The government should continue to enhance the rights of all ethnic groups in Turkey (not only the Kurds) and make Turkey a more democratic country. However, the following must be well-understood by everybody: The Turkish nation will continue to defend its territorial integrity despite all threats, will live up to the expectations set by its forefathers and protect its Republic at all costs. This country was created against all odds and its light will continue to shine for many generations to come.
* Yurter Ozcan was a researcher at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy between 2009 and 2010. In the fall, he will pursue an MSc in Middle East Politics at SOAS London as a British Government Chevening Scholar and HSBC Fellow.
