Kurds and Turks [Turkish Editorial]

Milliyet ^ | 4/11/2003 | Taha Akyol

[a_Turk]

Kurds and Turks

Deceased Iranian Kurdish Leader Abdurrahman Qasýmlu wrote in his book "Iranian Kurdistan" that historiacally the Kurds are mountain nomads, that for that reason they were able to protect their personalities and migrant clan systems, but that they for the same reason were unable to evolve socially.

This is the reason that the Kurds have no country.

Claude Cahen the historian writes in his book "Turks in Anatolia" that the Turks have historically been plains nomads, that they had therefore been able to span vast geographical extents in an organized fashion, that they were able to make the transition to urban life with greate ease. This is the reason why the Turks have been able to found state after state.. That one had a mountain character and the other plains, had prevented clashes throughout history and has made it easier for them to cooperate.

Ziya Gökalp had written that the Turks and Kurds had found it easy to turn towards each other, yet lacking the "desert" character had made it difficult for them to mix with the Arabs. Enter today's Irak.

***

The term KURDISTAN had first been used by the Selcuk Turks (1040 - 1408). It referred to a vast mountinous area in the east of Iran (yes, east). That's the original land of the Kurds. Later, in the shared geography of Islam, the clans mixed for centuries. The armies of Salahaddin Eyyubi were predominantly Turkish and Kurdish.

North of the Van lake was predominantly Armenian before the Turks entered Anatolia. Also according to Cahen, while the Turks were conquering Anatolia, the Kurds, along with their Oghuz (that's us, the Turks of Anatolia are Oghuz Turks) brethren spread across the plateaus east of the Euphrates. The plains further west, namely in inner and Aegean Anatolia did not inspire the Kurds as much as they did the Turks.

Graham Fuller, and even anti-Turk authors such as John Bulloc wrote that the Kurds were integrated in Turkey like they were no where else, and that Turks and Kurds were today by and large fully intermixed. The root cause of this is explained in the short recap of history I just provided.

The integration of Turk and Kurd became permanent with the large scale urbanization witnessed in Turkey which started in the 50s and gained serious momentum in the 80s.

***

To draw internal borders in a country such as Turkey where the children of an empire are integrated to such an extent is now impossible. Therefore the subject of Kurdish ethnicity in Turkey can not be seen as that of a seperate nation, but as a subject of democracy. Needles to say, to be a nation does not require ethnic singularity. Mutual historic and social integration, as well as concepts such as country and citizenship are far more important.

I don't feel foreign at all in Diyarbakir, but how about when I visit Tashkent (ancient Turkic)? Just like Turkish Kurds don't feel like strangers in Izmir, but how about when they visit Dohuk?

Therefore there are things more important than ethnicity. Why can Barzani (KDP) and Talabani (PUK) not integrate? When threatened by Talabani's occupation of Kirkuk, did Barzani not ask Turkey for help?!

In his book "The Kurds", David McDowal explains that Barzani is "Kirmanch" and that Talabani is "Sorani," and that these two dialects can never get along, and that the problem there is not a "party" problem, but that it is an enmity between two different ethnic clans..

Thus: Naturally ethnic identity is important, but concepts like country, citizenship, historic togetherness, social integration and shared fate are more important.

Irak is Irak, and Turkey is Turkey!

Certainly, as a realist, what is in Turkeys interest is in the interest of her 70 million. I look at everything in Irak fromthat perspective.

[a_Turk]

Here's an opinion/ historical recap with references..

[a_Turk]

Thought you might find this interesting.

[Support Free Republic]

---

	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[MEG33]

I do .

[Andy from Beaverton]

I'm getting the impression that Turks look down at Kurds as inferior. Do Kurds equal Armenians in Turkish eyes?

[Illbay]

This is the reason that the Kurds have no country.

Then how do you explain Switzerland? Nepal? Tibet? Peru?

[Illbay]

I thought the main problem with Armenians was that they were Christian.

Is that not so?

[aristotleman]

Oh-oh.

You posted something that contradicts the view that Kurds are an opressed people conquered by the bloodthirsty Turks and made to work as slaves, killed and ostracized.

In five minutes, the whole of the Greek/Balkan troll lobby on FR will be on your case regurgitating the crap they learned in elementary school.

[a_Turk]

>> I'm getting the impression that Turks look down at Kurds as inferior.

The author summed up a few books by foreigners.

We had a Kurdish president.

Folks in Switzerand weren't nomads.

According to the Turkish constitution all citizens are equal, no matter what their ethnic background.

[truth_seeker]

Like France, Turkey opted to play a risky game with the US/British war planning.

Kurds are looking pretty good, at present. Wise choices, well planned strategies & tactics, well executed.

If the USSR, Yugoslavia and Chzechoslovakia can be successfully broken into ethnic nations, why not Kurdistan?

What right does Turkey, Syria or Iran have, to administer lands, at the expense of a minority ethnic group?

[a_Turk]

>> I thought the main problem with Armenians was that they were Christian.

That's not true. Armenians did very well in all parts of life until they were seduced by the Russians. Religion was the tool the Russians used..

[a_Turk]

Everyone with k9 teeth is a meateater

:^ /

[Dog Gone]

I've got a serious question for you. The Turks are poised at the border of Iraq threatening to intervene if the Kurdish forces remain in Kirkuk and Mosul. Fortunately, it appears that they are withdrawing as US troops enter.

But, as long as the Kurds aren't threatening to declare an independent country (which they aren't, at least yet), how long can Turkey insist that Kurds NOT go into Iraqi cities? The Kurds are Iraqis, after all, and if they want to move to Baghdad, Basra, or Mosul, I really don't think it's any of Turkey's business.

[aristotleman]

If the Kurds stop supporting those amongst them who favor terror and destruction, they will be immediately better off. In the long run, they may even gain an independant territory, if Turkey starts thinking in "cantons" some day.

It's possible. Only if the extremists lay down their arms.

Regular Turks and Regular Kurds have nothing against each other.

[a_Turk]

Turkey, like the US can determine what her business is and is not..

??

The order given by the PUK commander a few nights ago to enter Kirkuk w/o US go ahead nor knowledge was a test for both the US and Turkey. What they are doing now, in fact, what the US is having them do now, is a direct result of Turkish sabre rattling.

Te part about them being Irakis remains to be enforced and then proven. Right now it's wise to live in the moment, rather than romantically living in the distant and dreamy future..

[Little Bill]

I was under the impression that the Kurds were of IndoEuropean language group, it seems that I was wrong.

[a_Turk]

>> Regular Turks and Regular Kurds have nothing against each other.

Not only that, but they are hopelessly intermixed..

[aristotleman]

You don't learn that in Greek school propaganda.

[tomahawk]

Can Kurdish be taught in Turkish schools?