Turkish military and the Kurdish question

At the heart of the Kurdish question lies an "imagined Turkish nation" which is assumed to be ethnically homogenous and politically equal. Such an imagined nation came out of a concern that without a unified and homogenous nation, territorial and political integrity of the new republic could not be sustained. Viewing differences as potentially disruptive to unity, the Kurds were assumed to be part of the Turkish nation, and their distinct language, culture and history were denied.
This has not occurred only to the Kurds. The republican regime has always had problems with identities, be it ethnic or religious, or even ideological. Allegiances to entities rather than the state were always viewed with great suspicion, giving the impression that the state was fearful of competing with other social and political entities for the loyalty of its citizens. This sense of insecurity, prompted by a top-down authoritarian modernization project, has resulted in a deep distrust of people who are considered potentially anti-republican or anti-Turkish nation-state. The problem was in fact not modernization, nation building or even secularization, but the exclusionary manner in which the Kemalist state elite conducted these processes. Denying representation to different ethnic and religious groups at the center with their own distinct identities only served to exclude and alienate Islamic/conservative groups and the Kurds, which in turn added to the insecurity of the Kemalist regime.
The way to break this vicious cycle is to broaden avenues of representation for these historically excluded identity groups and abandon the Kemalist policy of imposing an official identity/ideology for the people, be it Turks or Kurds. Though the Turkish military continues to imagine Turkey/Turkish nation/Turkish nation-state as homogenous, the founding myths of the Turkish nation-state have proved to be fallacious. Turkey needs to generate a new social consensus for coexistence among its diverse ethnic groups. One of the grounds for a renewed consensus is a constitution with liberal, democratic and pluralistic elements that will recognize the Kurds as being included. The second ground on which a new consensus can be built is to secure EU membership. These two areas, a new constitution and EU membership, are in fact mutually supportive objectives.
What is the position of the military on these broad objectives as the grounds to address the Kurdish question? There hasn't been a public statement by the military on the new constitution. But it is known that the military views political reforms that further democratization and improve human rights very critically. Democracy and human rights are considered fallacies, as reflected recently in the statement of Gen. [İlker] Başbuğ when he took up the job of chief of general staff. Recognition of the Kurds as an ethno-political group is strongly opposed by Başbuğ.
Concerning EU membership, we know how skeptical the top military brass are. The EU is viewed as a post-modern political project that will destroy the Turkish nation-state. Apart from supranational characteristics of the EU that threaten the Turkish nation-state, the military does not have favorable views on individual European states either. Almost all are depicted as "Turkey's so-called friends and allies," most of whom support the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK).
The military wants to fight against PKK terrorism but not to address the root cause of the problem, the Kurdish question. In its public statements the military points to the need for non-military measures to overcome the PKK terror. By such discourse it implies that political leadership is not doing enough to eliminate social and political circumstances that enable the PKK to recruit new militants. Thus, in a way, responsibility for the continuation of PKK terror is placed on political leadership, which does not deal with the roots of terror. However, it is the military that blocks addressing the root cause. The military does not only reduce the problem to the fight against terror but also constantly draws "red lines" to obstruct a political solution. Pluralism is questioned, broadcasting in Kurdish is obstructed, amnesty is opposed, transfer of power to local governments is blocked, and the Democratic Society Party (DTP) is stigmatized. Within such "red lines" drawn so effectively by the military there can be no political solution to the Kurdish question.
Finally, we should keep in mind that the Kurdish question is not only a challenge for the Turkish military but also an opportunity to establish and sustain its hegemonic position in Turkish politics. Through the Kurdish question that social and political space in Turkey is secured, placing the military at the top.

20.10.2008