Press "Enter" to skip to content

Denials of Kurds’ Right to be Kurds

Ismail Besikci

It is very clear that future Kürd generations will bring up, criticize and condemn these relations. Despite these severe conditions, a Kurrd’ , ‘Defending the identity of the Kurrd tires me very much, i’m the best to shout that I am Turkish, let me do the need for this relationship…’ can he say?

Today, some of the Kurds began to criticize their ancestors. In particular, the chief of the Kurd tribe, sheikhs, large landowners are heavily criticised: you have always struggled with each other. You killed each other. You considered killing each other more glorious. But in the face of the main forces hostile to the Kurds. You did nothing to protect Kurdistan.

Even in the 1920s, when all nations were trying to determine their own future, you tried to destroy each other and de-power each other under the name of ven lawsuits. In fact, by cooperating with an anti-Kurdistan, anti-Kurdistan state, you have tried to destroy an ascensyte against you.  But you didn’t care to understand what was going on in the world. You’ve gone away with the Kurds, doing nothing on the basic issues of Kurdistan. You left all the burden of the problems to our children.

Today, all the burden of these problems is on our lap. At the time, the problems piled up in our laps in a more aggravated way, as there were no serious initiatives on the fundamental issues… Today, it is important to carry out a much more intense, widespread, altruistic and deed struggle to solve these fundamental issues.

There is a sense of history in these criticisms. In these criticisms, there is awareness of the negative positions of Kurdistan, Kurdistan, in the Near East and in the Middle East, against Turks, Arabs and Persians.  In these criticisms, The Kurds are conscious of making them a member of the family of nations of the world, making them an equal member of the family of nations of the world. In these criticisms, Kurd is conscious of understanding that Kurdistan problems are not a bread problem, but a question of freedom, a question of honor.

It is clear that future Kurd generations will also criticize today’s generations, their ancestors. October 16, 2017 this is a very important date for Kurdistan, for Kurdistan. This is an attempt to refute the positive results of the 25 September 2017 Independence Referendum. The September 25th Independence Referendum is, of course, a deed for the Kurds. This deed is always valid for The Kurdler. But on the morning of October 16, 2017, it is obvious that this has been greatly disrupted.  It is also known that this very negative attitude, a betrayal, is not just the work of politics, but a situation that many Kurd politics cook and co-cook.

It is very clear that future Kürd generations will bring up, criticize and condemn these relations. Despite these severe conditions, a Kurrd’ , ‘Defending the identity of the Kurrd tires me very much, i’m the best to shout that I am Turkish, let me do the need for this relationship…’ can he say? Can a conscientious Kurd say that? It’s not easy to say under these circumstances. It should also be pointed out that future Kurd generations will criticize these relationships and condemn their ancestors.

Today, Turkey’s non-futuristic operations, under the pretext of the PKK, take its main strength from the fact that the Kurdistans, Kurdistan, Kurdistan have not been united for purposes.

***

When it comes to ances ancestors’ criticism, it should be important to reach out to Sheikh Mahmoud Berzenci and the leading Kurd families of the time. At a time when even Hussein, the Sheriff of Mecca, was collaborating with the British to rid the Ottomans, Sheikh Mahmoud Berzenci fought an intense battle with the British to save Islam, to save the Caliph and the reign. Mustafa Kemal encouraged Sheikh Mahmoud to fight the British, even though he had made under-the-table agreements with the British. He also helped Sheikh Mahmoud with weapons. In the 1920s, when all nations, especially Arabs, were in the process of determining their own future, I think this was the main process that blocked the Kurds.

***

Let’s get to the present day: August 2014 and later… It’s the time when the Kurds fought an intense war with ISIS. Even at a time like this, the Kurds were walking in Sulaimaniye, Aleppo, ‘salary, salary’, taking action. Duhok had moves in this direction.

Nowadays, it is clear that Turkish operations in southern Kurdistan threaten the freedom of the Kurdistans and the status of the Kurdistan Regional Government. The PKK/KCK is also known to consciously lay the groundwork for these operations. Despite all this, why can’t kurdler protest this process of operations, marches, demonstrations? In areas like Sulaimaniye, Aleppo, Hewler, Duhok, isn’t it surprising that there is no movement in this regard? As Turkey’s operations increased, the directors of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan issued a statement that ‘Turkey must be given a good answer’.  What better answer than the protests and marches in Sulaimaniye, Hewler?

***

Here, I want to address an issue about ‘being a Democrat’. Criticizing anti-democratic events in other countries, other states, for example, criticizing the United States for the George Floyd incident, and criticizing Israel over Palestinian Arabs… Anti-democratic events in other countries, oppression, democratic cuts in the face of atrocities… That’s not the criterion for you to be a Democrat. The criterion for being a Democrat is to criticize your own state in the face of atrocities against the oppression that is developing in your own country. His oppression against other peoples is to criticize his own state for atrocities. Ali Fikri Işık,’Why does not work for Turks, Kurds?’ is very important in this regard.

In this context, every day, there are words to be said to Muslim Kurds who march and act for Palestinian Arabs: Don’t you have a word for the Kurds against the state that constantly says ‘we are like meat-nails’, but that the Kurds never lack the persecution of oppression?

***

The murder of George Floyd has caused huge changes in American society, cultural and political relations. There are major tremors in moral and political values. The democratization of American society is taking place. Being a Democrat shows all the dimensions of it. The People of the United States are working hard to criticize their own state. A very effective consciousness is developing in this regard

***                                              

‘Blacks can be equal to whites. But they can’t be Black anymore’

This is the title of ibrahim Khalil Baran’s article published on June 21, 2020, in Kurdistan24.

As a person, I used to think that Malcolm X (1925-1965) and Martin Luther King (1929-1968) were fighting for the same purposes. I learned from this article that they are fighting for many different purposes. It is well known that both were assassinated.

Martin Luther King struggles to join the American political system, to be treated equally with white supremacists. Malcolm X, on the other hand, is fighting for black people to establish a separate country in the United States or to return to Africa. Malcom X (Malcolm Little)’s struggle is somewhere likened to the struggle of the Prophet Moses.  The Prophet Moses did not fight for the Jews to remain in Egypt and to correct the conditions.  He removed the Jews from Egypt and tried to establish a separate dormitory for Jews in the land of Kenan.

Malcolm X likens Martin Luther King’s situation to Uncle Tom’s. Uncle Tom’s Hut is a novel written by Harriet Beecher Stove (1811-1896) in 1852. This is a novel that is heavily critical of the system of slavery. But, ultimately, he’s trying to get black people into the American system.  Uncle Tom, like dogs, lives in a separate hut, but he call the white house ‘our home’. It says ‘our state’ to the United States. In this context, Malcolm X criticizes both Uncle Tom and Martin Luther King, who he says behaves like Uncle Tom.

Malcolm X is trying to explain the process in african american form with a new concept. In this regard, he is careful not to use the concepts used by white supremacists.

Malcolm X’s turn to Islam is about his understanding of removing black people from the outside of my US political system. This is an example of Ireland. Although the Southern Irish, who were Catholics, gained independence from the Protestant British, the Northern Irish, who were Protestants, remained under British rule.

Malcolm X criticises Martin Luther King as the following: Martin Luther King says in his famous rhetoric, I have a dream that one day, all four of my children will live in a country where they will be judged by their personalities and not by the color of their skin. Malcolm said, Who are you? Don’t call me nigger! That’s not him. Who were you before the white man told you you were black? And where were you? And what did you have? What was wrong with you? What language did you speak before? What’s your name again? It can’t be Smith or Jhones, Burch or Powel. That wasn’t your name. What language did you speak? What have they done to keep you so ignorant?

Within this framework, Ibrahim Halil Baran tries to evaluate The Kurd-Turkish relations in Turkey. Says:

What black people in America are going through tells us something about the fate of the north of Kurdistan today. Kürtlerin sorununa dair kendimize şunu sormalıyız: Bizim sorunumuz Türkiye’deki sivil haklar, demokratikleşme veya Türklerle eşitlenmeyle mi ilgilidir yoksa müstakil bir devletimizin olmayışıyla mı?

In this network of all relations, it should also be important to compared racist policies against blacks in the United States and racist policies against Kurds in Turkey. Ismail Besiktas’ article titled ‘On Racism’ (June 15, 2020) can be viewed.

Comments are closed.