Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-pfhbr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T19:25:46.287Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Historicizing the Present and Problematizing the Future of the Kurdish Problem: A Critique of the TOBB Report on the Eastern Question

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2015

Ümit Cizre Sakallıoğlu
Ümit Cizre Sakallıoğlu*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Bilkent University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The role of conflict has been integral to the state and nation formation in Turkey since the inception of the Republic in 1923. Faced with the twin tasks of democratic legitimacy and maintaining control, or security and civil-centered politics, the state has historically opted for authority and control. Ironically enough, while Republican politics has emphasized unity and uniformity to limit diversity and conflict caused by class, ethnicity and Islam, the result has been the opposite. So much so that the present conflict between the state and the Kurdish Workers' Party (PKK), which has cost nearly fourteen thousand lives since 1984, has reached an abysmal point: “in the end Turkey's victory may be a Pyrrhic one. If the conflict continues without exploration of other avenues, it will most likely jeopardize Turkey's relations with Europe and the United States” (Brown 1995, p. 128). Moreover, it has become increasingly clear that Kurdish nationalism is not just a simple expression of discontent and opposition but also a challenge to the very premises on which the Turkish nation-state has been built. In that sense, the resolution of the Kurdish “problem” is of concern not only to the Kurdish population of the Republic, but involves the future shape and substance of the Turkish state and society in their entirety as well.

Type
Articles
Information
New Perspectives on Turkey , Volume 14 , Spring 1996 , pp. 1 - 22
Copyright
Copyright © New Perspectives on Turkey 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, Benedict. 1983, revised 1991. Imagined Communities-Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Brown, James. 1995. “The Turkish Imbroglio: Its Kurds”, Annals, AAPSS, No. 541, September, p. 128.Google Scholar
Connor, Walker. 1973. “The Politics of Ethnonationalism”, Journal of International Affairs, vol. 27, January, pp. 1–21.Google Scholar
Elçi, Şerafettin. 1995. “Turkey is Ours”, in Hürriyet (Istanbul daily), 26 March, p. 19.Google Scholar
Gaborieau, Marcet al. 1990. Naqshbandi, 3rd ed. Istanbul: ISIS Yayımcılık.Google Scholar
Greenfield, Liah. 1992. Nationalism- Five Roads to Modernity”. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, p. 12.Google Scholar
Hechter, Michael. 1975. Internal Colonialism: the Celtic Fringe in British National Development 1536-1966. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Kymlicka, Will. 1995. “Misunderstanding Nationalism”, Dissent, Winter, p. 5.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Hans. 1944. The Idea of Nationalism. New York: Mac Millan.Google Scholar
McDowell, David. The Kurds, The Minority Rights Group Report No: 23.Google Scholar
Newman, Saul. 1991. “Does Modernization Breed Ethnic Political Conflict?”, World Politics, vol. 34, No. 3, April.Google Scholar
Öcalan, Abdullah. 1993. Din Sorununa Devrimci Yaklaşım, Istanbul.Google Scholar
Raporu, Özel Araştırma, 1995. Stratejik Araştırmalar Dizisi. Doğu Sorunu, Teşhisler ve Tespitler. July.Google Scholar
Smith, Anthony D. 1995. “Gastronomy or Geology? The Role of Nationalism in the Reconstruction of Nations”, Nations and Nationalism, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Anthony D. 1991. National Identity. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Sullivan, Noel. 1993. “Political Integration, the Limited State, and the Philosophy of Post-Modernism”, Political Studies, Special Issue, the End of Isms?, vol. XLI, pp. 21–42.Google Scholar
Tamir, Yael. 1995. “The Enigma of Nationalism”, World Politics, vol. 47, April, pp. 433-34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Richard. 1989. Theories of Ethnicity-A Critical Appraisal. New York: Greenwood Press, p. 62.Google Scholar
Van Bruinessen, Martin. 1990. “The Naqshbandi Order in 17th Century Kurdistan”, in Gaborieau, Marc, et al, Nakqshbandis, ed. 3, Istanbul: ISIS Yayımcılık, pp. 337–340.Google Scholar
Van Bruinessen, Martin. 1992. “Türkiye Kürtleri” in Bruinessen, Martin Van, Kurdistan Üzerine Yazılar. İstanbul: İletişim, p. 338.Google Scholar
Van Bruinessen, Martin. 1996. “Multiple Shifting Identities: the Kurds, Turkey, and Europe”, paper presented at the Conference on “Redefining the Nation, State and the Citizen”, held in Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey, March 28-29.Google Scholar