‘Nefes’ causes debate on militarism and nationalism

The main theme of the film is based on the struggle -- quite a personal one -- between the chief of a group of militants and the commander of a border post on the southeastern Anatolian mountains. The dialogue between the militant leader and the soldier provides the audience with a relatively clear opportunity to see the contradicting arguments of the soldiers who believe they are defending the country and the terrorists who believe they are fighting for the independence of the Kurdish people. While the film can be regarded as an instructive documentary on the tough conditions soldiers must face for the sake of the nation, it fails to be impartial and objective in indicating the genuine motives of the terrorists fighting on the mountains.

Nedim Hazar, a columnist for the Zaman daily, stated that it is wrong to shoot a film about an ongoing war. “Blood is still being shed. Ambushes, raids and attacks are going on; therefore it is impossible to raise criticism, make a comprehensive analysis or sum up the fight with a film about a bloody process in which there are thousands of victims and slain soldiers with their families.”

Hazar pointed out the complicated state of the fight against terrorism and the difficulty of criticizing the film. “If you criticize the film, you will be an enemy of the nation and the army; in contrast, when you praise the film and its context, you will be labeled as fascist.”

The film successfully presents relationships among the soldiers, Hazar noted, recalling the unfortunate death of four soldiers after a lieutenant gave one of them a hand grenade after pulling the pin out to punish him after he had slept while on duty. He said one of the most sensational scenes of the film is when a commander shouts at a soldier in front of his friends, saying, “If you sleep, you will die.”

Commenting on the controversy over whether the film is militaristic or antimilitaristic, Hazar underlined that the film has a stance favoring militarism and encourages young Turkish men to die for their nation. He said the film fails to push the audience to question the basic causes of the armed conflict between the separatist terrorists and the Turkish army. “Furthermore, it serves to cover up the genuine factors that are still instrumental to the war,” he added.

Agreeing with Hazar on the militaristic stance of the film, Emre Aköz, a Sabah daily columnist, raised the question of how a film can be deemed antimilitaristic despite containing most of the elements of militarism.

“The producers of the film, Levent Semerci, Hakan Evrensel and Mehmet İlker Altınay, have used all the symbols of Turkey’s dominant nationalist ideology: Atatürk’s sculpture on the mountain at a height of 2,365 meters, the slogan of ‘Vatan Sağolsun’ (may the country survive), a compassionate big-hearted Turkish soldier who treats a PKK militant rather than killing her, the city dwellers who do not care about the young men defending the country. After using all these symbols, how can this film not be a nationalist militarist one?”

Meanwhile, Hakan Evrensel, who worked at the public relations department of the National Security Council (MGK), carried out military duties in the southeastern cities of Bitlis, Bingöl, Van and Şırnak when the terrorist activities were at their peak.

Hazar stated that the timing of the film is perfect for commercial purposes, arguing, “Amid the debates on the democratic initiative, the film has attracted great interest from the public.” He added that the leader of the Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the chief of general staff, Gen. İlker Başbuğ, watching the movie is part of the advertisement of the film.

In contrast with Hazar and Aköz, the executive editor of the Radikal daily, İsmet Berkan, considered the film a masterpiece with its realist characteristics. He wrote in his column: “I can claim that it is the most beautiful and meaningful Turkish movie I have ever watched. It is a real masterpiece with its perfect technical and aesthetic aspects as well as its theme. The film displays the naked realities of the war. … Thank you, Levent Semerci.”