Bulletin de liaison et d'information - Institut kurde de Paris

REVUE DE PRESSE-PRESS REVIEW-BERHEVOKA ÇAPÊ-RWISTA STAMPA-DENTRO DE LA PRENSA-BASlN ÖZETi
Friday, June 3,1994
By Uitur Akmel
, Turkish Daily News
WASHINGTON- American, Turkish, Israeli,
Egyptian, Iranian and Kurdish scholars and journalists
f.OèuSed on Turkey's role in the Middle East at a two-day
conference that started today. The conference, "A
Reluctant Neighbor: Analyzing Turkey' Role in the
Middle East," attended by an audience of over 350 registered
g1!ests,is'organized by the United States Institute of
Peace. TON editor Ismet Imset was among the panelists
that discussed the Kurdish issue.
If there was a single overall result that most of the
speakers and commentators agreed on, it was the fact that
none of the compe6ng and contending nation states in the
Middle East, Turkey meluded, had anything to gain from
a change of the borders of its neighbors. A second and
related consensus evolved around the thesis that Turkey
,and its nei2hbors had more reasons and issues to cooperate
for in tIte future than to fight for. Despite the senous
risks such explosive issues as water and the Kurdish
problem poscil for all the countries involved, the panelists
agreed that forces of regional cooperation had a
good chance of winning out in the end.
In the first panel, "The History and Geopolitics of the
Region," SelIm Deringil of Bogaziçi University and
Henri Barkey of Lehigh University portrayed the general
historical frameworK within which Turkey's role has
changed in the region. Paul Wolfowitz, dean of the' Paul
H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies of
John Hopkins University (and a former undersecretary of
defence), in his opening remarks listed the new arguments
for increased strategic importance of Turkey as
follows: 1) The volatile Balkans 2) New conflicts along
the Black Sea and Ukraine. "Some say Crimea is the
location of the next world war. I hope that's not a good
prediction," he added. 3) Its role as bridge to Central
Asia. 4) New strategic relations developed m the Middle
East. Wolfowitz pointed out that Turkey had changed
quite a bit from the days of the inner-oriented policies of
Ataturk. who "refused to take Salonika back, althou~ he
could have, because he said it was not a Turkish city. '
The mode~tor. Al~in Rubenstein, of the .University of
Pennsylvama highlIghted Amencans' Ignorance of
Turkey despite its growing importance in the region.
"Due to the American national Alzheimer' s, interest in
Turkey declined," he lamented. He emphasized that, surrounded
by seven neighbors none of whom was friendly
fA 'f]r~ey, ~ll!i~ rt:Jl}ained a real an4 top ag~ndaitelll
for Tudœy. Selim Denngil ~inted out that history and
the legacy of the Ottoman Empire was still alive for
Turks and continued to shape the nature of many arguments
on Turkey's emerging role in the Middle East. He
recalled-President Demirel's recent comment that "history
is tugging at our sleeves" as an apt characterization.
Referring to Eric Hobsbawn's concept of the "twili2ht
zone of historical consciousness" that shaped the era tftat
came after it, Deringil defined the period between 1880
and the 1900s as the "twilight zone" of the present day
Middle East He went on to comment that the Palestinian
as well as the Kurdish issues were still conditioned in
sorne ways by Abdülhamid D's policies. The parallels he
drew between Abdülhamid' s Hamidiye regiments and the
present day village guards in the Southeast drew energized
questions from the audience. The shadow of the
Ottoman regime continues today through the Welfare
Party's refeiral to an "Ottoman style" municipal 'system
as well as Cengiz çandar's referrals to the Ottoman times
in his comments on the possible deployment of Turkish
troops to Bosnia. Even Jhirinovski and government
turkish daily news
spokesman YI1dmm Aktuna use Ottoman imagery to
analyze situations. Aktuna explained the malaise of the
Turkish civil society by claiming that the Kemalist
regime dismantled the Empire so fast that "the people did
not ~ave the pro~r ti.me to. mourn the pas.smg of the
Empire. Thus certam CITelesm Turkeyare still nostalgic
for the Ottoman' Empire." Henri Barkey reviewed
Turkey's ne~ regional. role in relation to four dynamics:
1) The Kurdish rebellIon, 2) Water problems with Iraq
and Syria, 3) The new geopolitical balance that emerged
after the Israeli-Arab ~ce agreement, and 4) Some Gulf
War countries' belief ID Turkey as a new force of stability
in the region to balance Iran and Irag.
Barkey saw the Kurdish and water Issues as the major
sources of risk for Turkey in the region. After the sigrnng
of the Sept. 13, 1993 JX:3ceaccord between Israel and the
Palestinians, Syria might withdraw its Il divisions from
the Israeli, border and redeploy them in the north, giving
Damascus a stronger leverage vis-a-vis Turkey on the
water issue. Barkey said that although from an economic
point of view, Turkey's main commitment is to Europe,
the K~dish and.water issues will conti.nue to pull Turkey
back mto the Middle East and occupy Its resources in the
foreseeable future.
Commentator Heath Lowry of Princeton University
said that '1'urkey has lost the ability to see itself with the
eyes of her neighbors." He said miscommunication, as
well as lack of communication, was the source of common
misconce~tions between Turks and Arabs. "For
example," he Said, "although they have shared a common
history of 400 years, Arabs focus on the Young Turk
period and their linguistic Turkification project that lasted
only five years. On the basis of that short period Arabs
e1aim that Turks tried to destroy their language. Turks, in
turn, believe that Arabs stabbed them in the back during
World War I when they needed the Arabs most against
colonial powers." Another commentator, Ahmed Abdel
Halim of the National Center for Middle East Studies of
Cairo, Egypt, emphasized that Egypt was' willing to
cooperate with Turkey for increased stability in the
region. HaIim, in contrast to Barkey, proposed that a new
alliance for regional peace in the Middle East should
include, not only sud} major players as Turkey, Israel,
and Egypt, but Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Syria as well
for lastmg peace and stability. He added that Turkey can
play an important role in arms control issues and help
establish a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East.
In the afternoon session' on the KUrdish issue, TON' s
Ismet Imset said that although Turkish authorities did not
accept the existence of a "Kurdish problem," Kurds in
TurKey have now started to say that they are living a
'1'urkish problem" in Turkey. Giving a nutshell history
of the PKK, Imset said that the reason the PKK grew
from 3,000 fighters in 1990 to a force of 10,000 men in
1992 was the decision of Turkey to solve' theproblem
through force. Referring to an imagery used by President
Demirel, he said: "The boot is now stepping on the serpent.
But how long will it be able to press it down? It is
costing Turkey$? billion a year."
After citing the number of politicians and writers who
went to jail for voicing pro-Kurdish opinions, Imset said,
"The main reason for the fighting and bloodshed is not
the PKK but Ankara's indexing of everything to the
PKK.," which he characterized as a ruthless terror organization
like Sendero Luminoso of Peru. 'The hard-liners
in Turkey use the. PKK. as an excuse to legitimize the
blocking of all moves that lead to further democratization,"
he.said.
23