Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kurds Making A Difference Vis-A-Vis The Wrath Of Adversaries

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Kurds Making A Difference Vis-A-Vis The Wrath Of Adversaries

    KURDS MAKING A DIFFERENCE VIS-A-VIS THE WRATH OF ADVERSARIES
    By Eamad Mazouri

    KurdishMedia, UK
    May 31 2006

    I, along with many other anxious observers have been following
    the column; both Onder Aytac and Emre Uslu are sharing in "The New
    Anatolian" daily.

    What I found, is that many of their articles, while based on
    sheer imagination and irrational analysis, are also, startling and
    unsettling.

    They shock many onlookers who righteously anticipate impartiality
    not only from the authors, but also from the moderate Anatolian
    English language daily, especially the articles titled "The Problems
    of Kurdish Intellectuals"; Segments I, II, III published May 3rd,
    8th and 15th respectively.

    In these three articles, the authors are trying desperately to
    portray themselves as credible, trustworthy and unbiased journalists
    in pursuit of the naked truth, nothing else, alluding to leave the
    false impression that they are employing merely scientific methodology
    and analysis in their research, trying from the goodness of the bottom
    of their bleeding hearts to steer away the Kurdish intellectuals from
    the wrong path of thinking, as they call it".

    Any perceptive spectator can readily deduce from the content of these
    malevolent articles, the authors' real rationale in routing Kurdish
    intellectuals towards desperation, frustration and disenchantment
    with their legitimate cause not only in Turkey, but in Iraqi Kurdistan
    and beyond as well. In their futile attempt, and whereas endeavoring
    to present themselves not only as the true custodians of the Kurdish
    intellectuals' strategic thought, but also as the proper guardians
    of the Kurdish people's rights, they are lambasting on every Kurdish
    leader, organization and even condemning Kurdistan Regional Government
    and it's nascent democratic experience without sparing anything
    Kurdish out of this chaos and confusion they are trying in vain to
    create among the Kurds.

    The Kurdish intellectuals on the other hand, should not be surprised
    or fall an easy prey to these chauvinistic views, poorly shrouded
    in neutrality coming from these two authors, especially if they
    have followed some of their previous writings, such as "Civil War
    and Kurds in Iraq" 7 March, 2006, where both are trying to provoke
    Arabs and Turkmen's denizens of Kirkuk city in an imaginary tale of
    a civil war of their own making.

    If this is the way moderate and professional Turkish journalism reports
    the news, then I would have difficulty understanding how the partial
    making-news approach functions in this industry in contrast to that
    of the objective one, which I am sure the Turkish media in general is
    not immune from; If this is a sample of a moderate liberal thinking
    in today's Turkey, it would be troubling distinguishing that from
    the loathsome viewpoints and attitudes the Turkish Ultra-Nationalists
    express towards Kurds and their just plight on daily basis.

    At any rate, let's take a closer look at some of the highlights
    that were underscored in all three phases of these unreliable and
    misleading articles.

    Their whole concept is hovering around the globalization process,
    its impact on nation states, the power corporations are or will
    command and the relations between the two, washing it down all the
    way to the Kurdish great effort for freedom and liberty in relation
    to the Turkish state.

    Any savoir-faire observer, with good grace, could smell the stench
    of the (Turkish Kurd-phobia) from the very start, the disease
    that decision makers in Turkey should cure themselves from if they
    need to have a new beginning to build a democratic society based on
    recognition instead of denial and forbearance instead of intolerance
    towards others.

    In segment I of their article, both authors state and I quote "that the
    foremost problem that bedevils the Kurdish intellectuals (and for that
    matter the Turkish nationalists too)" here the readers need to notice
    the insertion of the latter sentence is only a pathetic attempt by
    the authors to vie for some credibility of course" is their inability
    to misread" I believe this is an error and should be inability to
    read" the globalization process." The article goes on "they argue"
    meaning Kurdish intellectuals" that since the globalization process
    undermines the autonomy of nation states, the Turkish State.. will
    also be weakened. "Hence "The declining autonomy of the state will
    enable the Kurdish people to establish an independent Kurdistan." In
    their views "here lies the problem." Why?

    They answer, because "states. will not be the sole actors but agents
    which regulate the global economy rules, and implement the rules
    to stabilize the territory." The article further states that "The
    purpose of this defined role of agency is to create an available
    environment within which the global economy can be maintained and
    order provided." According to their misleading message, therefore,"
    .how the Kurdish intellectuals read globalization and hope to gain
    from it is simply a misreading of the nature of the process."

    Clearly, they are misreading the present and future as they have
    misread the past. They are trying to feed the Turkish public flawed
    information in an attempt to incite them against Kurdish population,
    instead of trying to explore some decent options on how to resolve
    this conflict as true intellectuals ought to do.

    Naturally, they don't forget to refer to the very {evil} source of this
    misreading. They claim that "The biggest source of this misreading is
    the situation in northern Iraq." Explaining that" globalization pushes
    nation states toward democracy" but "if democracy won't sustain the
    stability of a strategically important state, then the international
    corporations would support family dictatorships".

    By narrating this whole fabricated and unsubstantiated story, the
    authors finally come to this amusing conclusion, to quote them"
    .Due to the oil.

    importance of Iraqi Kurdistan region. the international corporations
    are forced to work with Massoud Barzani dictatorship." as if Mr.

    Barzani was created yesterday by international corporations and he
    is not the upshot of decades of oppression, sufferings and constant
    struggle of the Kurdish people and their continuous legendary
    leadership. Kurds don't think they need Turks to judge their leaders
    whom they have chosen over a long odyssey of struggle and sufferings.

    In this comic article, the two authors who combined their efforts
    to absurdly entertain their readers, wind up saying "The Kurdish
    intelligentsia is misreading the process, and they will be eventually
    disappointed when they finally realize that they got nothing of what
    they have hoped for."

    As it cannot escape our attention, the authors are building this
    entire fictitious scenario of globalization process to convey to the
    Kurdish intellectuals a couple of messages.

    First, they are seeking an independent state. Second, this is an
    impossible dream, without even providing them with any other viable
    option.

    I would like to make a few clear statements here. On the first hand,
    the Kurds are not a minority and they do not see themselves in that
    light, but rather a divided nation against its will. This vulnerable
    nation, like any other nation, and much smaller ones, and according
    to UN chapters, international laws and treaties and every decent
    norm have the right to determine its own fate. That includes having
    a homeland. Whereas Kurds in other parts of Kurdistan are coerced
    into involuntary unions with the respective states of Turkey, Iran
    and Syria and deprived of their rights, especially those concerning
    the true participation in the political process, in Iraqi Kurdistan,
    the Kurdish people have spoken through their parliament since 1992
    and decided that the best available option for them is to enter into
    a voluntary union with Iraqi Arabs and minorities within a framework
    of a democratic federation. As a realistic approach, this option
    while allowing them to enjoy most of their rights, it provides them
    with the protection of a sovereign state. The safeguard they need to
    breathe freely, build and prosper.

    Obviously, Turkish nationalists and those who think like them are not
    buying this legitimate argument despite the repeated assurances from
    the Kurdish leadership.

    In phase II of their article, the authors are focusing on Kurdish
    intellectuals efforts to draw attention from the international
    community to their just cause in order to gain sympathy and support in
    their quest for a homeland. Surprisingly, they admit that this strategy
    is effective and has been successful. However, they claim, despite
    that, the Kurdish argument in this regard is riddled with three flaws:

    1) "Kurdish intellectuals don't seem to understand that states do not
    act based on Romantic fantasies in the international arena. They act
    as rational actors which calculate the cost and benefits. Moreover,
    once regional states initiate democratic rules, such as Turkey
    and hopefully Iraq in the future, the Kurdish intellectuals' claim
    (of, and I am using their own terminology, living under tyrannical
    governments, being victimized, suppressed and deceived)loses its base
    in the international arena".

    Once again, they are trying to portray the Kurdish objective as no more
    than an unachievable dream or fantasia. At the same time insinuating
    that Kurds have not been deprived, victimized and subjected to ethnic
    cleansing. According to them, the Kurds' entire tragedy is no more
    than fabrication woven and staged by Kurdish intellectuals on behest
    of foreign powers. They describe Turkey as full fledged democracy
    while Iraq might catch up, forgetting that Iraq today and even at its
    current circumstances is more democratic than Turkey in every field,
    especially in political participation, representation, minority rights,
    and freedom of expression.

    It is worth mentioning that regional governments have finally
    realized the impact of the contribution of the Kurdish intellectuals
    in influencing the world public opinion regarding Kurds and Kurdistan
    and they are devising ways to counter that. It wasn't long ago, that
    I came across an article on a Syrian site written in Arabic that tried
    to convey the same message as these two are trying, but in a different
    way or more straight forward. The given article was focused on many
    articles written by various Kurdish writers, among them one of my own
    "The Kurds: The Orphans of the World", specifically those written in
    English, implying that Kurds are merely emulating Jews by exaggerating
    their tragedies (in their views the whole thing is as fabricated as
    Holocausts) to make the world feel guilty and earn their sympathy. This
    is the second time I come across such writings by Kurds' adversaries,
    which basically means, Kurds are on the right path and they are
    actually making a change, therefore they should continue to do so.

    2) "The victimization argument has been overused to the point that
    it has lost some of its value for the international community. The
    victimization argument has been used too many times since the
    Holocaust. For example, even in the worst cases, like Chechnya in
    Russia, East Turkistan in China, or Kashmir in India, the international
    community tends not hear the victimized communities' screams."

    Here, the authors basically are claiming that Holocaust, genocides,
    ethnic cleansing and the use of WMD, are no longer enough to catch
    the attention of the international community. That, dictatorships and
    corrupt governments are free to massacre and deprive people without
    slightest chance of any intervention, simply because the world is
    worn-out as a result of a steady increase of such events. Therefore,
    the destitute victims of such atrocities should bring their futile
    screams to an end; the world is not hearing their shouts and has
    turned a blind eye to their wretchedness.

    "The Kurdish people, especially those in Turkey, are almost "perfect"
    when compared to those mentioned above."

    We can leave the world through its human rights organizations to be the
    judge of that based on the facts on the ground and especially those
    in charge of Turkey's accession talks to EU, and their periodical
    evaluations.

    (There is a distressing paragraph, I would like also to quote)" They
    (Kurdish Intellectuals) should also realize that in Middle Eastern
    culture, however wrong it may be, as a matter of fact problems are
    solved within family. Whenever one calls on outside help, they are
    treated as if they've committed an act of betrayal. Thus tinkering
    with the international intervention game could only help to increase
    the hatred of other ethnic groups. Therefore, it's highly likely that
    Kurds would be considered as betrayers."

    I believe this particular paragraph leaves no room for any doubt
    concerning what the authors are maliciously referring to here. It
    is crystal clear, that they not only are referring to the Armenian
    Genocide by the Ottomans during the WWI, but they are justifying that,
    at the same time, forewarning Kurds as well that the same fate is
    waiting them as they would be considered traitors, if they persist
    on demanding their legitimate rights. When one finds such disturbing
    mentality in today's Turkey, he/she is compelled to wonder not only
    about its prospect to join EU, but also about the whole democratic
    reform process.

    3) "The tyrannical reign of Massoud Barzani in the de facto Kurdish
    state in northern Iraq weakens Kurdish intellectuals' argument. The
    Kurds in northern Iraq don't live under a better democratic regime
    than the Kurds in Turkey."

    Here, let's make room for a neutral individual, a well known scholar
    and academician to respond to these baseless accusations. In "Informed
    Comment" under "Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion,
    published Tuesday, May 09, 2006 "Mr. Juan Cole, a Professor of History
    at the University of Michigan says; "The New Anatolian article on
    "western romantic liberal" support for Kurdish independence was
    quite chilling. It pretty clearly states that if the Kurds appeal
    to the West for protection (against Turkey, Iran, Syria or perhaps a
    central government in Iraq), they will be considered as betraying their
    neighbors, and under the doctrine of self-interest, the neighboring
    states can feel justified to punish them just short of a Bosnia or
    Darfur-style campaign of ethnic cleansing, because then, and only
    then, will the West respond. Onder Aytac is probably right about
    that, but this kind of mindset explains why the Turkish government
    is so hated by its own Kurdish population. I spend a lot of time in
    SE Turkey, and although many people oppose the excesses of the PKK,
    the undercurrent of anger and cynicism toward the Turkish government
    is far greater." he further states" However, what Rubin (He means
    Michael Rubin) and Aytac Both neglect to mention is that Kamel Sayed
    Qadir was rapidly released from prison after his "conviction". To call
    Barzani's KDP the equivalent of a "fascist regime", as some have done,
    is perhaps hyperbole. I see a lot more similarities with Jordan, to
    be honest. In Jordan, you mess with the King's financial interests
    and tribal patronage network at your peril.

    However, in both Jordan and Kurdistan, there is a relatively wide
    latitude for criticism within certain bounds, and considerable press
    freedom.

    Certainly Iraqi Kurdistan has a far more open press and civil society
    than across the border in SE Turkey, or Ankara for that matter,
    which makes Aytac's article a bit ironic".

    While Mr. Cole lent some criticism regardless of its nature to
    the Kurdish Administration, he continues furthermore to say that"
    I'm not a "Western romantic liberal" who sees KRG with unvarnished
    admiration. However, I would gladly settle for a similar degree
    of personal freedom and human services in any of the neighboring
    countries. I'm neutral on eventual independence, although Turkey
    would do well to look at the situation of Kosovo when thinking about
    the future of Iraqi Kurdistan. There is no more hope of forcing the
    Kurds back into a nation dominated by Muqtada al-Sadr (who seems to
    be gradually winning out over SCIRI) than there is of forcing the
    Kosovars back into Yugoslavia. Turkey and the West are better advised
    to take no extreme actions, and invest while pretending that Kurdistan
    doesn't exist. Give the Kurds another 15 years of ambiguous self-rule,
    and maybe they will work it out."

    I believe this is the best response to their reference to Iraqi
    Kurdistan and KRG and it would suffice our purpose here.

    In segment III of their article, these two stooges talk about an irony,
    claiming that "Despite the fact that Kurdish Intellectuals shape
    the Kurdish nationalism mostly in reaction to Turkish nationalism,
    they at the same time imitate Turkish nationalism as a model for
    Kurdish nationalism."

    They shamelessly continue to admit to atrocities committed when
    building the new Turkey by Attaturk "In fact it is true that the
    early republican's elites attempted to engineer Turkish nationalism
    as the glue to keep the multi-ethnic community of the Anatolians
    together. To a large extent it was a successful project in that
    more than 30 different ethnic communities of Anatolia today define
    themselves as Turks. However, this attempt failed to bring the Kurdish
    community into the boundaries of the designed civic nationalism."

    Here, the authors and to a great extent are trying to explore the
    reasons behind this imitation while failing to give any for the
    failure of Turkey to Turkify the Kurds when it succeeded with other
    Anatolian minorities. In their abortive attempt, they fail to come
    up with any, while mentioning the Nuri Dersimi manifesto called
    "Discourse to Kurdish Youth" which they claim is an imitation of
    Attaturk's "Discourse to Turkish Youth." We have no choice but to
    re-print it here for readers to do the comparison themselves:

    "O young Kurd! O son of a brave nation that has for centuries despised
    Usurpation! Listen to me! From the Indian Ocean to the Caucasus,
    in The high mountains and sunny valleys of Asia Minor and Central
    Asia, The light of humanity has brightened the proud foreheads of the
    Sublime race that gave birth to you, at its very dawn. Your history
    is The history of an unending legend .You are a child of a nation
    that ha Fought tirelessly for centuries to live in honor and freedom.

    Thousands Of offerings made to the Goddess of Liberty seek a grave;
    they ask us

    To build a memorial in their honor. This memorial is a free independent
    Kurdistan."

    As they reach the conclusion of their iniquitous article, they
    cannot help but to lash out one more time on Iraqi Kurdistan and
    its leaders." When the moves and rhetoric of Iraqi Kurdish leaders
    Massoud Barzani and Jalal Talabani are analyzed together, it can be
    clearly seen that they try to follow the path of the early Turkish
    republican elites. For example, in Turkey, in order to show him the
    nation's respect, Atwater's pictures are present in all government
    buildings. This Turkish vision of showing respect was imitated by the
    Kurds in northern Iraq in a funny way." The problem here is not just
    the ironic position of the Kurdish intellectuals.

    They fail to offer an alternative to promote nationalism other than
    imitating the Turkish model of nationalism. The Kurdish intellectuals
    seem unaware of the fact that conditions have changed since the Turks
    successfully implemented Turkish nationalism. What they are trying
    to advocate today under the name of Kurdish nationalism are outdated
    arguments that were valid when nationalism was rising. In the era of
    globalization, advocating ethnic nationalism is running against the
    current or like selling Ayran (a yogurt drink) in nightclubs."

    What kind of a double standard and hypocrisy is this? I cannot
    understand why and how the presence of Attaturk's images everywhere
    in Turkey is considered a sign of respect, while that of the Kurdish
    leaders is a peccadillo and only a "funny" imitation of the Turks,
    forgetting that the phenomenon is world-wide spread, and everywhere is
    considered the expression of respect and admiration by the people for
    their leaders, unless the authors think the experience was originally
    invented in Turkey and then imported to the rest of the world as it
    is the case with the most recent silly squabble between Turkey and
    Greece on who was the original inventor of Baklawa.

    The authors claim to have studied the history of their country.

    However, they fail to remember that even the Turkish nationalism was
    theorized by Kurds such as the Ziya Gokalp who came from Amed city,
    who is deemed by majority of Kurds as a turn-coat, or should we let the
    Wikipedia Encyclopedia tell us who he was? It goes that Ziya Gokalp"
    was a prominent Turkish ideologue of Pan-Turkism or Turanism.

    His origin is Kurdish. But he said there is no difference between
    Kurdish and Turkish people and they are one nation". A concept that
    can only be described as absurd and ridiculous as the time has shown
    to both Turks and Kurds alike.

    It is obvious that these contemptible writings do not serve the country
    of Turkey in her attempt to free itself from the complicated past and
    build a real democracy where all the ethnic and religious elements
    are recognized.

    And they definitely do not help to seal the gap between Kurds and
    Turks in their search to find a better tomorrow peacefully for their
    new generations.
Working...
X