"Ottoman-Turkish Interpretation of Islam on Ethnicity"
Interview with FM Cem by French Daily l'Express (Translated from French)
Ankara, 15.12.1998

How would you define the "Kurdish issue" ? In what perspective do you see it ?

I believe one section of the European public opinion has an insufficient knowledge of Turkish history. This leads to a wrong vision and some preconceived ideas which are far from the truth.

Allow me to get down to the specifics on this because I believe it is crucial:

One should not use any ethnic or racial perspective when analyzing the fabric of Turkish society. Such an approach can only serve to tolerate or even justify violence. Ethnicity has some meaning in Western European tradition. It led to the darkest pages of its recent history. It still disturbs the moral and political scene, where racism and racist political parties are on the rise.

In Turkey, it is fortunate that nobody is interested in the ethnic origin of fellow citizens. I hope that with contradictory messages coming from our European colleagues, we will not depart from this. As a country with a thousand year long history and located at the crossroads of many civilizations, ethnic origins of our fellow citizens are multiple. This cultural diversity contributes to the wealth of our country. If we were to ask our parliamentarians what their ethnic origin are, we would end up with many different answers. They would include Caucasian, Balkanic or Kurdish etc. I reject the attitude of most of Western European countries when they suggest one should stress the ethnic origin of our people. As I said at the beginning, this approach is characteristic of Western Europe and is alien to our realities and perceptions.

The concept of race as a main and distinctive factor which would lead to the notion of minority is also typical of Western European culture and history. In Turkey, the Ottoman interpretation and practice of Islam was the main feature of the cultural identity and a multitude of ethnic groups were allowed to exist. Ethnicity or "race" was not an element of political or social differentiation. The most distinctive element was religion and the concept of minority stemmed from that factor, making two categories of citizens: Moslem and non-Moslem. Tolerance was largely wide-spread and was seen as an example to follow in Europe for many centuries. When some of our European colleagues apply their understanding of social analysis and their socio-cultural experience to a country such as Turkey, they end up with too much importance given to ethnicity as a factor of differentiation and consider wrongly some people as minority. It is for this reason that their analysis lead to wrong conclusions and all they achieve is to astonish Turks of Kurdish, Caucasian or Balkanic origin by claiming that they form minorities.

What is the essence of the "Kurdish issue" ? Terrorism ? "Independantism" ? Aspiration to the recognition of their cultural identity ?

First, we must recognize that only a small proportion of Turkish citizens of Kurdish origin have resorted to terrorism and separatist violence. Terrorists number no more than 4-5 thousand, not all Turkish nationals, some of them being Iraqis, Syrians or Iranians.

Secondly, there is a relation between the terrorist organisation and the anachronistic feudal system that unfortunately continues to prevail in the Southeast. As they use the same concepts, it is only natural that they collude and become allies. They both need to glorify a concept of common identity such as race, blood ties or clan. Ethno-nationalist terrorism is racist in essence. Landlords can not ignore terrorists activity in the region that uses similar glorification tools. Otherwise they would put their own system of power at risk. The feudal system constitutes therefore a social, natural and obligatory ally for ethno-nationalist terrorism. (This is another matter. It is most unfortunate that on the eve of the third millennium, feudalism is still present in the region. This flaw has to be addressed).

On the other hand, it is worth mentioning that these terrorists also deal with organized crime, drug trafficking, extortion of money, child kidnapping. This has been mentioned many times in the Turkish and international press.

Thirdly, with the important change in the balance of power witnessed in the post Cold-War era (disappearance of two opposite blocs), people pay more attention to their ethnic roots. Concepts such as cultural identity, sub-culture, cultural plurality, minority language have become popular. I share what President Chirac said on 4th December 1998 in Rennes and I quote "it is important to transform cultural differences into a means of integration".

You mentioned the word "independantism". This is neologism. You were surely mentioning separatism. As you know, respect of the territorial integrity of states is a fundamental principle of international law. All states as well as individuals and groups should abide by this principle. All states in the world have national laws protecting themselves from separatism.

Some say the right to have education in his/her mother tongue or broadcast in these languages should be given in Turkey. I would like to say that we have studied these possibilities. But you would recognize that when thousand of people lose their lives to terrorism, it is not easy to reach a consensus on such issues. We may have some deficiencies but this should not lead some in the West to condone terrorism, which has taken the life of thousands of people in Turkey. Moreover the actual situation is not as bad as sometimes described. There are a dozen of newspapers and magazines published in Kurdish, as well as radios broadcasting in this language. Songs in Kurdish are often aired on several TV networks.

I would like to stress something more important. Turkey, like France, is an unitary state. Our constitutional system says that all citizens are equal before law. This is why there is no room for concepts such as autonomy or minority based on ethnicity. Allow me to make one more comparison with France. This is what Mr. Moscovici, Minister of State, said in his capacity of Chairman-in-office of the Committee of Ministers during a Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe meeting held in September 1997 concerning the reluctance shown by France vis-à-vis the two Council of Europe conventions dealing with minorities (the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and the Charter of Local and Minority Languages): "The concept of minority is alien to the basic legal principles of the French Republic. As a result of the tradition and heritage of the Revolution, all citizens have the same rights, which is opposite to minority rights. We prefer the notion of sovereignty rather than regional autonomy. France is not a federal state."

Ill intentions or double standards make it illegitimate for Turkey to adopt concepts which are legitimately used and advocated by France. I believe there is no legal basis to any criticism addressed to Turkey on this matter. While a country such as Turkey where people of all various ethnic origin hold official responsibilities including - and I stress this - high-rank posts at the direction of the State, more than in other European countries, criticism becomes not only void of legal basis but is also far from being a serious attitude.

Beside the combat led against violent actions of the PKK ...

Allow me to stress a crucial point. I am totally against any concept of politics based on race or religion. Policies based in the past on these concepts have led to events in world history which constitute the shame of mankind. I cannot understand how these concepts are still advocated by some people. This is the shame of our times.

Spokespersons of a "pro-ethnic" policy make their voice heard in Turkey and find some sympathy as it can be expected in a democratic society. What could not happen however, is to witness pro-ethnic policies being dragged into open cooperation with the terrorist organisation. Incitement to hatred and violence based on ethnic differentiation was not allowed either. I believe such restrictions are not peculiar to Turkey. Some political parties or some MP were convicted in the past. This was due to their links with the terrorist organisation and to their inciting one ethnic group to commit hostile actions against another group (incitement to violence as a means of action).

National laws, in line with the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) do not authorize separatism, not even to advocate it.

In other words, propaganda praising the separation of one part of the country and its attachment to another or its transformation is restricted by law in Turkey. According to article 10 of the ECHR, the right of expression can be restricted in order to preserve the territorial integrity of a state. We are committed to continue to act with determination and in respect of international law. This is particularly difficult in an environment characterized by the realities of the Middle East. It has also to do with the consequences of protecting the eastern wing of the Alliance for forty years. It is sometimes difficult for a country which has lost thousands of lives to terrorism, to draw the line between the freedom of expression and incitement to hatred. We sometimes have witnessed contradictory events on this matter. As the financial means of terrorism is being eradicated, I consider these events as behind us. I have the impression that terrorism will be history in a near future.

What policy does the Government pursue concerning problems stemming from the Kurdish issue ?

Our priority has been to eradicate the external support of terrorism. We made good progress in this regard. The recent agreement with Syria concerning cooperation in the fight against terrorism has put an end to the main logistic support of terrorism and its leadership. At the same time, progress has also been made in a certain extend concerning support emanating from Europe, Greece for example.

Support given to PKK terrorism has been portrayed widely and brought to the attention of the whole international opinion. This made it possible to see several public opinion reaction to PKK terrorism.

We have started to implement an ambitious economic programme in the Southeast region in order to improve the difficult situation. The terrorist organisation has been attempting to exploit the economic crisis prevailing in the region. Positives results have already been recorded from the economic programme.

Finally, with the resolute determination of the security forces, and after several years of efforts, impact made by the terrorist organisation has been brought under control to a large extend. Also, our Government has tackled some of the issues which were exploited by the terrorist organisation and stemmed mainly from administrative practices, and has succeeded in settling them.

This gives hope for the future.

What is your opinion concerning the European reactions to the Öcalan issue ?

There are several different reactions. Globally, one can state the following: in Western Europe, some have gone as far as supporting the head of the terrorist organisation and its deeds. So far, only Greece lies in this category. Some others have spoken about an international tribunal (although we do not often hear it anymore). Efforts in order to politicize the issue continue unabated.

European public opinion has evolved. The focus given in the media to this issue has brought realities to the attention of a large audience and made them build an opinion about it. Some coverage was objective. They have rightfully addressed the fact that the terrorist organisation has dealt with drug smuggling and contributing to the poisoning of European youth. Reporting has also been made on INTERPOL reports concerning the terrorist organisation. France has come forward and is investigating scores of money extortion. Sweden has shown the role of the terrorist organisation in child kidnapping as a means of recruiting. The German daily Frankfurter Allgemeine has just published an article on a child which had had that experience. I highly recommend that you read it (7th December 1998 issue). To sum up, some media which were wrong in the past have started to explain and reflect more accurately realities.