Tarik Ziya Ekinci

THE REALITY OF TURKEY AND THE CHANCE TO FIND A RESOLUTION TO THE KURDISH QUESTION
         
Tarik Ziya Ekinci

The refusal of Turkey’s bid for EU membership would halt the democratisation of the country. Such a refusal would reinstate denialist, oppressive and assimilationist policies and hence the Kurdish question would not be resolved. This is due to the internal dynamics of Turkey being disorganised, weak and ineffective. It has no talent for protecting and continuing the democratic values that it has gained.

This is why I support Turkish EU membership with all my heart and I call upon all those committed to democracy and human rights to make an effort to this end.

1. Definition of Turkey

The Republic of Turkey is a state which has been established through the leadership of a military-civilian bureaucracy. Turkey fits into the category of a developing country although it is not economically developed enough in terms of industry. 40% of the population still makes a living from the agricultural sector. Hence, religious dogmatism is still widespread.

There has been no renaissance in Turkey nor a democratic revolution based on internal dynamics. The modernisation movement did not succeed in transforming the infra-structure and hence it is a superficial renewal project comprising of super structural values transported from the West. These values are enforced by the state power, however they are not digested by the society. For example, as secularism has not become a social value it is sustained by the force of state.

2. State Ideology 

The country is run by political parties who are loyal to the system and committed to the state ideology and are co-operating with the military. The state ideology has been defined by the 2nd President of the General Staff Yasar Buyukanit:

“The only acceptable common denominator is the ATATURKIST SYSTEM OF THOUGHT. Everyone should know that any political movement who does not unify at this common denominator is ‘an enemy of this nation and this homeland’” .

When political parties are committed to this ideology, it is impossible to establish and sustain a democracy in accordance with EU norms or to resolve the Kurdish question.

3. State Nationalism

The only type of nationalism that is allowed in Turkey is a homogenic, monocultured Turkish nationalism, which is also known as the Ataturk Nationalism. A definition has been given by Ismet Inonu - founder of the state in 1925 and the second most powerful man of the regime:

“Nationality is our only instrument for unity. Other elements have no effect against the Turkish majority. Our duty is to, no matter what, Turkify all the others who live within the Turkish land. We shall get rid off all elements who will oppose Turks or Turkishness. The attributes for those who want to serve the motherland above all is for that man to be a Turk and a Turkist.” .

Hence, it cannot be expected that such an insistent nationalistic understanding, which aims to make everyone a Turk, recognise minority rights defined according to EU norms or can resolve the Kurdish question.

4. Militarism

The defender of the state ideology and nationalism in Turkey is the military, who has taken it upon themselves to supervise and inspect fundamental political and social issues. Because of the ineffectiveness of the military it is not possible to establish a contemporary democracy in Turkey or to resolve the Kurdish question in accordance with universal standards. Despite some of the changes made to the National Security Council at the request of the EU Commission, the military continues to be the determining factor. If a strong democratic movement based on internal dynamics does not develop in Turkey, it is not possible to overcome the status quo and the retrogressive militarism.

5. The Question of the Constitution

It is not possible to establish a democracy in accordance with contemporary norms considering the present 1982 Constitution, which has the philosophy of “everything for the interest of the state” and that protects the state against the individual. It is impossible to make this constitution more open to democracy, human rights and minority rights or to transform it into a pluralist, participative, multicultural constitution through amendments and alterations. In order to establish a democratic state in accordance with universal values and resolving the Kurdish question on the basis of equal righted citizenship, it is absolutely necessary that a new and a contemporary constitution is created.

6. The Society has been Conditioned Through State Ideology

At the end of the 1990’s, the Prime Minister’s Office made a public survey where 64% of the population approved of the implementation of the oppressive, denialist and assimilationist Kurdish policy in order to form a single-cultured, homogenic Turkish nation. It is therefore clear that there is a need for a new political body, independent of the state and in accordance with EU norms, in order to break this prevalent ideology and instead spread the understanding of a multi-cultural equal righted citizenship within public opinion.

7. Turkey follows a Double Standard and Irredentist Policy

The Republic of Turkey follows a dualist policy when it comes to minority rights. Whilst it defends the identity, language, cultural and educational rights of Turks who are citizens of other countries in the framework of ‘same race rights’, it is violently against the very same demands from Kurds who are Turkish citizens and treat them as criminals. The best example of this double standard policy with irredentist aim is when the ex-President Suleyman Demirel, along with the retired President of the General Staff Huseyin Kivrikoglu went to Kosovo and gave a speech to a small group of Turks:

“Differences should be seen as the source of richness. For there is a need for a commitment to democracy and democratic values. In its essence, democracy is the only way in which people with different language, religion and ethnic origin can live together in the absence of fear and oppression. If there is no democracy it is not possible to keep peace. It is possible to be unified around common aims if differences are respected. (..) Giving importance to education, developing your culture and the protection of and trying to increase the number of your media organs are of utmost importance if you are to continue your existence. A nation which has no language and no voice is doomed to vanish. Turkey will always be on your side in your efforts for protecting your identity and developing your culture” .

Two months later, the same Demirel stated to the Milliyet Newspaper: 

“In Turkey there is no other first language other than the official language. The fundamental condition for being a unitary state is to protect the official language unity. This is why it would not be appropriate to have education, broadcast TV and radio programs in languages other than Turkish. I repeat, we do agree with all democratic rights...however this should not be of quality where it destabilises Turkey” .

He is in fact against national democratic rights for Kurds of Turkey whereas he saw the same values appropriate for the Turks of Kosovo.

8. There is a Need for a New Party in Order to Overcome Problems in Turkey

Within the political scene in Turkey, the place for a political party that aims to establish a contemporary democratic system in accordance with the EU is still empty. It is possible to fill this place through the unification of democratic forces. There is a need for a new and popular DEMOCRACY PARTY led by Turkish and Kurdish democrats that will fight for democracy in Turkey in accordance with EU standards and which are committed to universal democratic norms. This party should be the force that puts the internal dynamics in motion and overcomes the prevalent distrust against the Kurds. The party should prepare a new constitution that should replace the current constitution of 1982 and should aim to create a system which is respectful to human rights, freedom and minority rights – a system which is pluralist, participant, committed to the superiority of law, multi-cultural and democratic.

There is now a need for the pro EU Turkish and Kurdish democrats, along with human rights activists to unify around a common democracy programme and form a new political party in order to overcome problems. Without the effective participation of such a political party, a push by the EU can neither establish democracy nor resolve the Kurdish question in Turkey.

9. The Kurdish Movement Cannot Produce Results Alone

Kurdish national democratic movements cannot alone transform and establish a contemporary democracy on the basis of changing the constitution and making rooted changes to the understanding of nationality, the state and minority rights. These problems can only be resolved through the common movement of Turkish and Kurdish democrats.

If the Turkish and Kurdish democrats do not form a common democracy movement with a common programme it is not possible to transform Turkey into a democracy in accordance with EU norms.

The Solution is to Overcome the Problem of Trust Amongst Peoples

One of the most important elements that impede the formation of a political movement that will fight for a contemporary democracy and recognition of minority rights in accordance with universal norms is the reciprocal distrust that has developed. The reason for such distrust is the assimilationist, oppressive policies based on rejection and denial that has been present since the formation of the republic. Despite this unlawful practice in the name of the state, no reaction has come from Turkish intellectuals, and due to the fact that separatism is viewed a crime there is widespread animosity against Kurds. Kurds who have been marginalised and not respected as citizens have also lost their trust and become strangers to the society. In order for this reciprocal distrust to be overcome and for the formation
of a mutual political movement for democracy, the leadership role falls on the Kurdish intellectuals as those who really need democracy are the Kurds. Above all public opinion should be shaped to acknowledge how Kurds are a determining factor of Turkey’s democratic movement. It should be shown through concrete evidence that without a resolution to the Kurdish question, democracy in Turkey cannot be formed and hence no-one can be free in this country. To pave the way for democracy, the persistent prejudices and animosities must be overcome, and the Kurdish people’s national democratic rights must be recognised.

10. External Dynamics (EU) are not Determining Factors for a Resolution

It is not possible to form a contemporary democracy and resolve the Kurdish question in Turkey solely through the insistence of the EU. Turkey may convince the EU through superficial measures - and it has. Turkey’s allowance for language courses and 20 minute TV broadcasts seems to have satisfied the EU Commission. It looks as if the Kurdish question has lost its importance when one observes the EU Commission’s suggestions for Turkey.

11.  Democracy and the Kurdish Question is a Whole

Without the creation of a democracy in accordance with EU norms, the Kurdish
Question cannot be resolved. At the same time, without the resolution of the Kurdish question there can be no formation of democracy. One should handle democracy and the Kurdish question together, as a whole.

The Kurdish question can be further divided into four parts within itself. These are; the political, social, cultural and economic dimensions.

The Kurdish question must be resolved along with democratisation - handled as a whole and all its dimensions must be resolved in parallel as well. Without the ability to handle the political, social, cultural and economic dimensions of the question all together and developing deep rooted solution methods which will encompass them all, it is not possible to resolve the Kurdish question and sustain an atmosphere of peace.

 EU, Minority Rights and Turkey

There was a document, later called the Copenhagen Criteria, prepared at the Copenhagen Summit of the EU Council in June 1993, which outlined conditions for full membership of candidate states. In the political criteria section there is such a maelstrom in relation to minority rights: “It is a pre-condition of democratic stability that measures are taken so that minority groups can unite with the society as a whole. This is why ‘the Framework Convention on Minorities Protection’ in accordance with all other documents that foresee the protection of minorities and procurement of these rights is a compulsory pre-condition of membership” .

The main documents, which determine minority rights and require acceptance of candidate states by the EU are:

1. UN Convention for Individual and Political Rights
2. UN Convention for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
3. UNESCO Convention against Discrimination in Education
4. UN Convention on Children’s Rights
5. Council of Europe Human Rights Convention
6. Council of Europe Framework Convention on the Protection of National Minorities
7. Council of Europe Convention on European, Regional and Minority Languages
8. European Council Copenhagen Document dated 1990
9. Helsinky Sonuc Belgesi
10. Paris Convention
11. OSCE Geneva Convention
12. OSCE Moscow Human Dimension Convention
13. EU Copenhagen Political Criterion
14. EU-Turkey Accession Document
15. Yearly EU Development Reports for Candidate Member Turkey

Turkey has only signed the UN documents and the Paris Convention, however it has not signed any of the other above-mentioned important documents. We request and expect that the EU demand Turkey to sign and implement all the documents above as a pre-requisite for membership.