By Ali Aziz:

Summary: The succession of crises in Turkey reflects its shaky foundations. Ataturkian ideology[1] holds that there is no such thing as a distinct Kurdish people, but this ideology undermines the strength of the state and its true philosophy from the beginning.

In his 1991 book Turkey and the Middle East, Philip Robbins called Turkey the “anxious” state. Turkey’s biggest anxiety comes from its geography. When the Ottoman Empire collapsed in 1923, Turkey found itself on the margins of both Europe and Asia.

Since Kemal Ataturk founded the Republic of Turkey in 29 October 1923, many  crises have arisen, which, over time, remain unresolved. Among the most dangerous of these crises is the ongoing Kurdish issue in both Turkey and in the Middle East. Ataturk established an ideological approach towards the Kurdish people, their identity, and their culture that sought no less than the abolition of the Kurdish identity, culture, and language.

This policy has turned into a well-established historical and social conundrum for the Turks. Disengagement has become almost unthinkable over time. In 1923-1927, Ataturk and thus the Turkish state unambiguously declared that there is no such thing as the Kurdish people or the Kurdish language. Instead, it described the Kurds as the “Mountain Turks.” It is true that this policy is no longer official or constitutional, as it had been in the past, but it is easy to see its deep effects within Turkish culture. These play out in the sentiment Turks manifest towards the Kurds and their identity.

The Kurds unsurprisingly rejected this Ataturkian policy, and they began to oppose and pressure the new republic with massive armed revolts since 1922. In an ever-intensifying tug-of-war that included armed conflict, Kurdish pressure began to consolidate against the state of Turkey. Because of the Kurdish response, the Turkish policy towards them became the focal point of the state’s Kurdish policy around which other policies revolve.

The series of Kurdish revolutions and uprisings that began in 1920 ended completely by the end of the 1930s. Consequently, the weight of official procedures ultimately fell onto the shoulders of the Kurdish people, turning northern Kurdistan (eastern Turkey) into a silent hell. The consequences of the state’s policy ruined the life of the Kurds. It denied their rights. It was the Kurds, not the Turks who were affected by the policy and practice of the state. The Kurdish language was banned, Kurdish culture became taboo: listening to Kurdish songs led to the Kurds being imprisoned and tortured, political activists and intellectuals were imprisoned for many years, and many of them were executed or assassinated. The Turkish state also destroyed thousands of Kurdish villages and towns and displaced millions of them to western Turkey in order to eradicate their identity.

Parallel to this untenable Kurdish state of affairs, Turkey’s official and popular culture treating the Kurds as strangers and enemies of both the Republic and the Turkish people became entrenched. This view began to take form at the beginning of the twentieth century. It continues to the present day.