Once again we have realized that the most important and critical issue for Turkey is the Kurdish issue. Although this fact has been trying to catch our attention for the past 25 years, we cannot say that sufficient effort is being made to deal with the issue. Moreover, there are some who refuse to acknowledge the existence of this issue. And among those who confess to the existence of the problem, profound discrepancies arise when dealing with its definition, scope, complexity and ultimate solution. Many people regard the issue as consisting purely as a problem of “terrorism and security.” In particular, the number of those who equate the issue with terror and their effectiveness increases as one goes higher up the pyramid-like structure of state. For some, the Kurdish issue is the result of a clan structure in the region that we have been unable to eliminate; thus, as Turkey progress further in its efforts towards modernization, this obstacle will be eliminated. For instance, as urbanization, commercialization, education and the provision of welfare increase and integration with the West improves, this issue will be solved as the clan structure and the web of traditional social and cultural relations are destroyed. What enslaves the Kurdish nation is the clan leaders, the “feudal chiefs,” or “the sheiks who lull them with false promises,” in rigid traditional structures.
A progressive and pro-enlightenment perspective fails to acknowledge that the “issue of identity” and its often-related separatist demands can also be seen also in welfare societies. Cases in Italy, Belgium, Spain, France and Canada amply show that such a thesis is archaic. Sometimes the rich and “developed” segments of society want to secede from the poor or the underdeveloped. Demands for secession by Flemish people in the Flanders region of Belgium and Italians in the north of Italy show this process in action. What can be said about it is that the issue of identity is that it is a basic problem not simply of traditional societies, but also of modernity and modern societies.
Partially connected to this is another perspective which treats the issue as a purely “economic” one. Compared to other regions, the regions where Kurds live are characterized by poverty. Lack of sufficient production, the region’s low share in national income, a higher birthrate, unemployment, falling employment rates and several other factors have rendered the region economically weak. Terror is dealing a further blow to the human and economic geography of the region. People here can live only through subsistence. The thinking goes that a person who is not hungry and who can earn money will not become a terrorist. Thus sending aid in kind, such as coal or foodstuffs and money to the region will solve the problem. One could suggest that this “solution” is especially favored by the current government. While it is obvious that the economic factor has a great part to play in explaining the problem, the preceding examples are sufficient to show that this is not a full-fledged explanation to the problem. A deep examination will reveal that this perspective is just a little bit humiliating.
There are some who think that the Kurdish issue has emerged because of a weakening of religious sentiment and that “Islamic fraternity” can solve this problem. It is no doubt that religion is a useful factor to understand and to solve the problem, but tackling it in an abstract framework may mislead us. Indeed, a conceptualization of fraternity which is not well defined through legal norms and which is generally only able to be used by one side will not work. If the legitimate demands of every group are fulfilled, then Islamic fraternity may provide a sound common denominator.
Finally, there are those who claim that the issue is basically an “ethnic” one and that problems arise as Kurds face obstacles in their identity-related demands. While we may not like this perspective, it is the one that is closest to reality. It has a historical background and has tenable threads that could be woven together into the philosophy of the nation-state, and has economic, socio-psychological, international and regional particulars. Security is only one of these aspects. Each one of these factors is decisive, but only when all of them are taken into consideration can the whole picture be seen.
