Kurdish People's Leader Abdullah Öcalan made a "Call for Peace and Democratic Society" on 27 February. In the call, he pointed to the historical development of the "Kurdish-Turkish" alliance and emphasised its updating on the basis of "equal citizenship and democratisation". Abdullah Öcalan pointed to the "nation-state" system as the main source of conflicts today and underlined that this situation can be solved with a supranational model. 

 

When and how did the historical Kurdish-Turkish alliance Abdullah Öcalan pointed out begin, under what conditions did it begin, how did it evolve, and how was this alliance drawn to the ground of conflict? What were the historical developments, the nation-based intervention in the socio-cultural structure of the society, and what was the impact of this alliance on the transformation of this alliance into a conflict? Historian and author Erdoğan Aydın evaluated the historical development of this alliance, its phases and transformation, and whether it is possible for this alliance to return to its historical track.

 

Reminding that the Turks came to Anatolia between 900-1000, Aydın said that there was no fight between them because the rulers of both peoples were Muslims. Stating that there was a conflict between Shiism and Sunnism at that time, Aydın said, "Kurdish beys and Turkish beys, who are both Muslim and Sunni, are experiencing a more peaceful relationship, integration and intertwining in this current environment. The first historically important union took place at the Battle of Malazgirt. However, after the Seljuks won this war, instead of ensuring the continuation of the Kurdish principalities, especially the Marwanis, and making an alliance on this axis, they chose to have their lands ruled by the loyal princes of the Seljuk Empire. Therefore, winning the Battle of Malazgirt with an alliance actually eliminated the possibility for the Kurds to continue on their way as separate states, separate principalities. If we take into account the factors of Muslim identity and the fact that national consciousness had not yet been formed in this period, this first relationship is a mirror for all subsequent relationships. And this mirror requires us to approach the issue of the thousand-year alliance of the Kurds with the Turks, which is expressed by Kurdish politicians and intellectuals today, with one side yes; but with the other side scepticism."

 

 

Noting that a similar situation occurred in the Battle of Çaldıran in 1514, Aydın said that the Ottomans defeated the Safavids thanks to the Kurds. Noting that the Ottoman Empire gave autonomy to Sunni Kurdish beys after this war, Aydın said, "In other words, it did not allow statehood, but gave autonomy. Especially through the relationship between Idris-i Bitlis-i, a Kurdish intellectual and politician, and Yavuz, an agreement known as the Amasya Agreement took place. With this agreement, Kurdish beys were excluded from what we call the classical Ottoman fief system. They remained as property owners in the lands they dominated. They continued to exist as dynasties and principalities, and in return they paid a regular tax to the Ottoman state. In times of war, they participate in the Ottoman Empire as soldiers. There is a status here. In other words, in the period from 1514 to the 1820s, Kurds lived as principalities dependent on the Ottoman Empire, but autonomous in their internal affairs."

 

KURDISH NATIONAL UNITY

 

Stating that this status started to deteriorate unilaterally with Mahmut II, Aydın said that Mahmut II's steps to centralise the state made the Kurds pay a price. Stating that the resistance was weak in this period due to the Kurds' lack of unity among themselves and the lack of national consciousness, Aydın said that lessons should be learnt from this period. Stating that if these lessons were learnt, today could be very different, Aydın said: "When we look at history, Kurds have always been in a disadvantageous position against the Ottomans, Seljuks, Umayyads, Abbasids and Safavids. Therefore, their inability to develop a political vision that ensures their cooperation and integrity has crippled the map of the Middle East today. While the right to establish a state is the fundamental right of nations in the age of nationalism in general, and as a result, Turks, Arabs and Pharisees have created a historical accumulation that can establish their own states, the Kurds have missed the age of nations despite having a very large population and geography because they have adopted a dependency-oriented stance in their historical accumulation."

 

Adding that the biggest lesson to be learnt from this is that the Kurds must ensure a unity with a national axis, Aydın added, "In this way, a national rise of the Kurds in all four parts, which is capable of integrating with each other, will be realised spontaneously. In fact, the Kurdish movement in Turkey and Rojava has developed a new formula. A breakthrough that begins with a national integration with Iraqi Kurdistan may well make the realisation of this formula shorter and easier that previously thought. For this reason, Kurdish national unity must be defended as a necessity of the struggle for democracy and rights. Nowadays, there are strong indications that a solution process is possible and steps are being taken in Turkey, even if it is not yet officially recognised by the outside world. However, there is still no basic data that Turkish politics recognise the rights of the Kurds as equals on an equal axis. The federated state in Iraqi Kurdistan is the most advanced in this regard. But there is also a serious deficiency and weakness in embracing other Kurdish regions, and there is a Kurdish problem, so to speak, centred solely on the interests of the rulers. Therefore, if the Kurds can discuss among themselves in a healthier way and achieve a reconciliation with the ruling powers in the countries where they are located, a solution to the Kurdish question in accordance with the new conditions is possible in the near future."

 

'EQUAL CITIZENSHIP BRINGS SOLUTION'

 

Noting that peace can develop on the basis of equal citizenship where no one oppresses or exploits the other, Aydın continued as follows: "The current solution of the Kurdish question can be solved without completely abolishing the existing borders, but from a place where Kurds can have equal rights and freedoms with Turks, Arabs and Pharisees. This solution is more appropriate to both the current international conjuncture and the reality of the region. Moreover, this solution can be based on solving the basic problems of the Kurdish people, producers, labourers and women, instead of a national state formula that only coincides with the interests of the rulers. In other words, steps such as the elimination of prohibitions on the mother tongue, the recognition of the right to self-government by all the sovereigns of the region, the flexibility of the borders, not barbed wire, can ensure the rapid development of the region, the solution of the Kurdish question, the end of the war as soon as possible and the independence of the region from the imperialists. In fact, I think the Turkish, Arab and Persian ruling classes are obliged to do so. Because their heavy war budgets and their constant tendency to distort history and politics in order to deny the Kurds are poisoning the whole region. For this reason, the acceptance of the solution of the Kurdish question, which is a lesson to be learnt from this history, actually brings about the solution of a series of problems one after the other, from Turkey's economic crisis to foreign relations and the economic problems of the region."

 

MA / Tolga Güney