Archive for DTP

WOMEN IN TURKISH POLITICS

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , on October 29, 2009 by Mizgîn
“We take action both for the woman raped in Istanbul or the woman stoned to death for adultery in Iran. But this is not enough. For this is not simply women’s problem, the source of this politics is the male mentality.”
~ Sebahat Tuncel.

Hürriyet’s English news is moaning over the lack of women politicians in Turkey:

The lack of political representation for Turkish women is the heaviest factor dragging on Turkey’s quest for gender equality, according to a global index that puts the country in 129th place out of 134.

The World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index 2009 comes as a disappointment, with Turkey falling two places compared to last year’s ranking.

For a country whose NGOs, women’s groups and government are constantly launching initiatives in an attempt to close the gap, the poor ranking shows that Turkey lags desperately behind due to its lack of political empowerment and participation of women in Parliament.

The article quotes an AKP female parliamentarian, Özlem Türköne, and some other non-governmental Turkish women, but it completely ignores the one party with the largest number of women politicians for its size in Turkey: the DTP.

In the local elections of 29 March, DTP’s women mayors took 14 cities (See: http://www.firatnews.com/index.php?rupel=nuce&nuceID=5302 ) and it has 8 women parliamentarians: Ayla Akad Ata, Aysel Tuğluk, Gülten Kışanak, Pervin Buldan, Emine Ayna, Sevahir Bayındır, Fatma Kurtulan, and Sebahat Tuncel. Why did the Horrible Hürriyet ignore these women politicians? Was it because they’re Kurds?

What does this say about the differences between Kurdish men and Turkish men, if so many Kurdish women are able to run for public office and and succeed? Moreover, what does this say about the influence of the PKK’s emphasis on gender equality on the Kurdish people?

Part of the reason for the success of Kurdish women politicians in Turkey is the fact that the DTP has a quota for women:

Gabriela Cretu (PES, RO) asked which Turkish political parties supported women’s rights most. In reply, Yesim Arat pointed to the Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP), which has a quota for women and thus more elected women politicians than in “developed” regions of Turkey.

The idea of a quota for all Turkish parties was not addressed at all by the Horrible Hürriyet, even though the DTP parliamentarians have made proposals to impose a 40% quota for women on political parties in Turkey.

Of course the situation of Kurdish women in Turkey is still difficult. Many families still forbid girls from going to school, which is an unacceptable situation, as is the reality of “honor” suicides or “honor” murder. Living situations in the villages continues to be extremely difficult for women. Still, the Kurdish women politicians are proof that good education for girls can make a huge difference for all Kurdish women.

And I’m willing to bet that all of our women politicians had parents that supported and, perhaps, sacrificed for their educations. Not only are these women the models for all Kurdish girls, but their parents are the models for all Kurdish parents.

In the meantime, a Turkish judge has convicted Aysel Tuğluk for “spread[ing] the propaganda of a terrorist organization” for a speech she gave in 2006, in which she praised the signature campaign for Öcalan. Tuğluk’s lawyer will be preparing an appeal.

PEACE DAY IN THE CAPITAL OF KURDISTAN

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , on September 1, 2009 by Mizgîn
“If someone tried to assimilate you for years, if your language was forbidden, if the names of your hometown were changed, what would do you but revolt.”
~ Osman Baydemir.
Özgür Gündem has hundreds of photos from Peace Day in Kurdistan’s capital, starting here. Below is a sampling:

“We want our road map.”
Aysel Tuğluk, pressing the flesh.
Ahmet Türk, addressing the crowds.
Mini-Apocular.

Emine Ayna, greeting the crowds with victory.
Osman Baydemir, speaking to his city.
Kawa’s fire.
Serok Apo and Aram Tigran.
“Free Leadership, Free Identity, Democratic Autonomy.”
“PKK for solution.”


INTERIOR MINISTER CLAIMS HUGE SUCCESS; DTP CLAIMS HUGE DISAPPOINTMENT

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , on August 31, 2009 by Mizgîn
“[T]o solve the Kurdish question, Öcalan must be contacted, must be talked with. There is no one in Turkey, with the exception of him [Öcalan] to solve this problem. There is no one with the exception of him that can contribute as much as him to solve this problem.”
~ Avni Özgürel.

If you stayed up until almost 0300 hours Pacific Daylight Time to listen to the comments of Turkish Interior Minister Beşir Atalay’s news conference on the Kurdish “initiative”, you were probably as angry as I was. Or as Ahmet Türk was, from Hürriyet:

DTP leader Türk, accompanied by DTP deputies Selahattin Demirtaş, Osman Özçelik, Hasip Kaplan, Gültan Kışanak, Akın Birdal, İbrahim Binici, Nezir Karabaş and Nuri Yaman, watched the minister’s remarks on TV carefully, with often taking notes. Türk was reluctant to comment on Atalay”s words, citing the rally on Tuesday organized by his party in Diyarbakır.

“The minister did not announce any solid plans, and we will tell the public our thoughts at [Tuesday’s] rally,” Türk told reporters, but he was hopeful about the current situation.

“The people expect the Kurdish issue to be solved in a peaceful, democratic way,” he said. “As politicians, we must carry hope. We must lead the people; it is our duty to do so.”

[ . . . ]

Later in the day, DTP leader and deputies joined hundreds of party members in Diyarbakır”s Sümer Park, who were to spend the night at the park for the “Sept. 1 Peace Watch.”

Having spent some time to think over the minister’s remarks, and buoyed by the support at the park, the DTP leader was much harsher.

The remarks of the minister have created surprise and despair,” Türk told his audience. “The remarks did not include the democratic initiative and completely ignored the Kurds.”

According to Türk, the government did not take the opinions of the NGOs and Kurds into account, but instead “valued the opinions of those it could not even meet.”

Everybody should know that this is not the way to solve the Kurdish issue,” he said.

One of the Kurdish demands mentioned specifically was a rewriting of the Turkish constitution, something which Atalay said is “not currently on the table”. This is a point on which the DTP has insisted. Neither has there been any indication that Öcalan’s perspective for a political solution have been included in this Kurdish “initiative”.

Last week, Öcalan conveyed his long-awaited road map to the Ankara regime through prison officials. Over the weekend, not a word was spoken or written about the contents of Öcalan’s road map. Perhaps that’s because the Ankara regime nixed the road map even before it had been given to the regime.

During Atalay’s press conference, not a word was mentioned about the contents of Öcalan’s statement. Another Hürriyet article referenced “abundant common points” and declared the government initiative a huge success:

After meeting with political leaders, NGOs and vocational groups, Interior Minister Atalay says the government’s “Kurdish move” is a success. ‘The common points we heard were abundant, which shows that we have reached our goal. Everybody wants to put a stop to the terror. Everybody wants better democratic standards. No one is against these points,” Atalay says.

The government’s Kurdish move has proved to be a success with clear public support and a will for a resolution to the country’s terror problem, Interior Minister Beşir Atalay said Monday. Atalay also called on the opposition to get passed their fear that the move might divide the country.

Well, perhaps some day, Sayın Atalay will be so kind as to let the Kurdish people know exactly what those abundant “common points” are now that the regime has achieved an incomparably stunning success in solving the Kurdish question.

Meanwhile, Ahmet Türk and the rest of DTP, and I are not the only ones awaiting the details of the stunning success of AKP’s Kurdish “initiative”; Avni Özgürel, featured last October on Rastî, is also waiting:

What do you think is not going to happen according to the messages coming from the top level?

We understand from these messages that the official language of Turkey, which is Turkish, cannot be changed, and the unitary structure of Turkey cannot be changed. The opposition’s reactions have mellowed since these points have been clearly voiced. But we still do not know the content of the project which will be prepared by the end of the year, as the prime minister said.

What do you think it will consist of?

It will probably consist of granting cultural rights — like establishing Kurdology departments at universities, expanding opportunities for Kurdish broadcasting, providing Kurdish translations at courts and official places if there is a need — also demanded by international agreements approved by Turkey. There is also another issue, which is addressing the terrorism dimension of the problem.

Özgürel knows that cultural rights are not enough, but a discussion of establishing Kurdology departments or increasing Kurdish broadcasts a la TRT 6 are already failed attempts and, after the results of the 29 March elections, have been rejected by the Kurdish people.

But here’s a talking point from Özgürel that ought to be all over the Turkish media:

What do you see when you look at the issue from Turkey’s point of view? Why is Turkey at the end of the road to solve the Kurdish problem?

Turkey has seen that terrorism will never end. Several chiefs of general staff said several times that the terrorism problem in Turkey was finished. However, it never ended, and it does not seem likely to end. Each dead person is a loss for Turkey even if they are from the PKK. They are citizens of Turkey. And they are people who should normally be carrying the hopes for their future on Turkey.

It’s too bad no one in the AKP has half the brains of this guy.

We shall see what DTP’s official response is tomorrow, at the Peace Day rally in Amed, at which one million Kurds are expected to gather. Hürriyet seems to believe that this is going to be a rally by the Kurdish people to thank the regime. But, given Ahmet Türk’s reaction–and I completely empathize with him because the Atalay press conference was so . . . lame–I think there’s going to be a lot more said tomorrow than a nice, meek “Thank you”.

Expect a statement from HPG tomorrow, too, since it will be the expiration date of the current ceasefire.

ATATÜRK AND THE K WORD

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , on July 30, 2009 by Mizgîn
“I offer the Turkish society a simple solution. We demand a democratic nation. We are not opposed to the unitary state and republic. We accept the republic, its unitary structure and laicism. However, we believe, that it must be redefined as a democratic state respecting peoples, cultures and rights.”
~ Abdullah Öcalan.

Did Mustafa Kemal every say the word “Kurdistan”? It appears that he may have done so and on more than one occasion. At the very least, before 1922, it was very clear to Turkish officials that Kurdistan existed. But what about autonomy for the Kurds? Here’s some food for thought from Özgür Gündem:

Why Aren’t the Transcripts There?

In recent days, when debates over the Kurdish question have intensified, “recognizing autonomy for the Kurds” still keeps its important place in the daily agenda. It has been mentioned that the “recognition of autonomy for the Kurds” law was legislated on 10 February 1922 in the Parliament. However, although there are transcripts for the 9th and 11th of February 1922, the transcript dated for 10 February 1922 cannot be found. Former Muş Parliamentarian Mehmet Emin Sever said that he could not get any result for the application he made in 1993 to the Parliament’s president.

It has been stated that on 10 February 1922 a law that recognized autonomy for Kurds was legislated. This subject was first mentioned in Robert Olson’s book, The Emergence of Kurdish Nationalism and the Sheikh Said Rebellion. Olson is an expert on the Middle East at the University of Texas. Using the British Foreign Ministry’s documents, Olson bases his writing on a report that was sent by the British High Commissioner Horace Rumbold to British Foreign Minister Lord Curzon, that the [Turkish] Parliament legislated the law of “Autonomy Law of Kurdistan”. In the report sent to Lord Curzon, it is stated that the law, with 18 articles, was legislated in the Parliament by 373 votes for the law and 64 against.

According to Olson’s document, the first article of the law is as follows: “The Grand National Assembly undertakes the creation of an Autonomous Government for the Kurdish nation that is harmonious with its national traditions for the goal of the improvement of the Turkish nation with the necessities of civilization.”

Meanwhile, such a document does not exist only in the British Foreign Ministry archives. In his book called, With French Documents: Kurdistan in the Triangle of Sevres-Lausanne-Mosul, Hasan Yıldız, too, mentions about the session in the Parliament about the “recognition of autonomy for the Kurds” based on the French Foreign Ministry archives.

However, the session that both Olson and Yıldız based their argument on from British and French Foreign Ministry archives cannot be found in the [Turkish] parliament. In 1993, then Muş Parliamentarian Mehmet Emin Sever said he made several attempts to obtain information about both the transcripts regarding the recognition of autonomy for the Kurds and his grandfather Cibranlı Hamit Bey’s and Sheikh Said’s situation. However, Sever said he could not get what he wanted on either subject. Sever stated that he was told that it was impossible to obtain the transcripts on 10 February 1922.

Meanwhile it is remarkable that one is able to obtain the transcripts of the 9 and 11 of February 1922 while not being able to obtaın the ones for 10 February 1922.

Historian Ayşe Hür said that legislation of the law of “recognition of autonomy for the Kurds” is not clear. Mentioning that there are transcripts for the dates of 9 and 11 February, but not on 10 February, Hür underscored the following: “There might have been a secret session on 10 February and the transcript might have been hidden. Or, such a session never occured and Turkey mentioned about the law of “recognition of autonomy for the Kurds” in order to alleviate British pressure. In this case, then, there wouldn’t be such a law but only Turkey might have deceived the British.”

In addition, Hür pointed out the following possibility: “The 10 of February [1922] fell on Friday. In those days February was considered a holiday and there might not have been any session.” However, Hür noted several statements of Atatürk regarding granting Kurds autonomy, such as his İzmit speech and in the telegram he sent to El Cezir Command. Hür also pointed out how Atatürk’s many statements regarding this issue were censored in later years.

We know from the experiences of Armenian historians that Ottoman documents can go “missing” at any time, particularly when such documents touch on those subjects that the status quo considers controversial.

We also know that from the summer of 1924 on, the regime began to erase all references to Kurdistan from official records. It may have been at this time that the transcripts of the BMM assembly of 10 February 1922 went “missing” For more on those days, in English, check David McDowall’s A Modern History of the Kurds and Ahmet Kahraman’s Uprising, Suppression, Retribution: The Kurdish Struggle in Turkey in the Twentieth Century.

The reason that there is a discussion now about Kurdish autonomy and its history is that Öcalan will issue his roadmap for peace for 15 August, the twenty-fifth anniversary of the first attacks by PKK against Turkish repression. The fact that Hürriyet’s Ertuğrul Özkök has said, “The fact that Turkey so far has not tried to create a realistic relationship with Öcalan has been, in my view, an historic mistake . . . I believe that he can play a very important role in solving the Kurdish conflict,” is an indication that the idea of creating a dialog with Öcalan has fairly well permeated intellectual quarters in Turkey.

Hevallo has something on that here.

In the meantime, the AKP is struggling to create a “Kurdish initiative” and reveal it before 15 August. Or, in other words, they want to beat Öcalan to the punch. Hevallo also has a post with more on that.

However, given the actions of the regime against DTP in the recent elections and given the endless drivel we’ve heard from AKP on the Kurdish issue–especially since August 2005 in Amed–I would not place any value on yet more words. It’s time to see action instead.

Aysel Tuğluk recently aired her opinion on the current efforts:

Tuğluk described the recent government efforts to resolve the Kurdish problem as a “last chance,” adding that if the current process ended in disappointment, the clashes would be more violent than before.

I’m afraid she’s right on target.

THROWING STONES FROM GLASS HOUSES

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on July 20, 2009 by Mizgîn
“People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.”
~ English idiom.

It appears that Katil Erdoğan has characterized the killing of some 180 people in China’s Xinjiang province–historically the homeland of Turkic Uighurs–earlier this month as “genocide”. There’s no word in official state propaganda organs as to how many of those 180 were Han Chinese but, aside from that, I wonder how Katil Erdoğan would characterize the Ottoman Turks’ killing of 1.5 million Armenians? But we all know the answer to that, don’t we? We also know that Katil Erdoğan would not characterize his state’s approach to its official attempts to destroy the Kurdish people and their culture as cultural genocide, although it is.

The official propaganda organs here in the US have been reporting somewhat on the situation in Xinjiang and they have done so in a manner that tends to emphasize China’s dirty laundry. Naturally, this is just as hypocritical as Katil Erdoğan’s “genocide” remark. Eric Walberg at Counterpunch noted the hypocrisy earlier this week:

However, Chinese colonialism — veni, vidi, vici — pales in comparison to the US/ British variant in nearby Afghanistan — We come, destroy, and murder in the name of freedom. It is repulsively hypocritical for the Western press to take such delight in exposing China’s dirty linen, as it slavishly hails US neo-imperial ventures in Iraq and Afghanistan. As Uighurs riot, US drones massacre hundreds of innocent Afghans and Pakistanis, and Obama sends thousands more troops to Afghanistan in a mission that makes China’s arrogant encroachment on Eastern Turkistan look like an act of selfless generosity.

With huge new bases in Afghanistan and 90,000 troops, the death toll on both sides is skyrocketing as Afghans prepare to “elect” the hated — by both Afghans and Americans — Hamid Karzai on August 20. The new US strategy is designed to reduce civilian casualties, according to General Stanley McChrystal, the new commander of NATO forces in the country, though “a price worth paying”, he assures us.

Walberg draws a comparison between the Kurds, Uighurs, and Tibetans and independence struggle:

The Uighurs and Tibetans have old and unique cultures which the Chinese would do well to respect and nurture within greater China. But supporting the independence struggle is part of a cynical geopolitical chess game, and merely worsens the Uighurs’ plight. We are reminded of Britain’s scheming there in the 19th century. If Britain had stood by the Uighurs then, there would probably be an Uighuristan today. Instead, the destruction of Urumqi and the Old City in Kashgar continue. The latter will soon be a theme park where Uighurs will dress up and sell Han tourists plastic souvenirs.

China should “respect and nurture” its distinct cultures just as Turkey “would do well to respect and nurture” the Kurdish people and culture within Turkey, actions which would, without doubt, be supported by both DTP and the PKK. However, as Walburg points out, support for Uighur independence really is “part of a cynical geopolitical chess game.” But don’t rely on official state propaganda organs to fill you in on the details. Let’s look a little further north, to Canada, for an explanation of this game of chess:

After the tragic events of July 5 in Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region in China, it would be useful to look more closely into the actual role of the US Government’s ”independent“ NGO, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). All indications are that the US Government, once more acting through its “private” Non-Governmental Organization, the NED, is massively intervening into the internal politics of China.

The reasons for Washington’s intervention into Xinjiang affairs seems to have little to do with concerns over alleged human rights abuses by Beijing authorities against Uyghur people. It seems rather to have very much to do with the strategic geopolitical location of Xinjiang on the Eurasian landmass and its strategic importance for China’s future economic and energy cooperation with Russia, Kazakhastan and other Central Asia states of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

The major organization internationally calling for protests in front of Chinese embassies around the world is the Washington, D.C.-based World Uyghur Congress (WUC).

The WUC manages to finance a staff, a very fancy website in English, and has a very close relation to the US Congress-funded NED. According to published reports by the NED itself, the World Uyghur Congress receives $215,000.00 annually from the National Endowment for Democracy for “human rights research and advocacy projects.” The president of the WUC is an exile Uyghur who describes herself as a “laundress turned millionaire,” Rebiya Kadeer, who also serves as president of the Washington D.C.-based Uyghur American Association, another Uyghur human rights organization which receives significant funding from the US Government via the National Endowment for Democracy.

The NED was intimately involved in financial support to various organizations behind the Lhasa ”Crimson Revolution“ in March 2008, as well as the Saffron Revolution in Burma/Myanmar and virtually every regime change destabilization in eastern Europe over the past years from Serbia to Georgia to Ukraine to Kyrgystan to Teheran in the aftermath of the recent elections.

Allen Weinstein, who helped draft the legislation establishing NED, was quite candid when he said in a published interview in 1991: “A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.”

You can find more on the NED at SourceWatch and a description of its links to the neoconservatives, including PNAC, at RightWeb. These days, the president of NED is Richard Gephardt, former Armenian Genocide supporter turned lobbyist for Turkey. Listed as a director of the NED is the guy who brought genocide to East Timor in the 1970s, and who now appears to be doing the same in Pakistan and Afghanistan–Richard Holbrooke.

And what would be the purpose of the chessgame? The same as usual:

Over the past few years, in the face of what is seen as an increasingly hostile and incalculable United States foreign policy, the major nations of Eurasia—China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan have increasingly sought ways of direct and more effective cooperation in economic as well as security areas. In addition, formal Observer status within SCO has been given to Iran, Pakistan, India and Mongolia. The SCO defense ministers are in regular and growing consultation on mutual defense needs, as NATO and the US military command continue provocatively to expand across the region wherever it can.

[ . . ]

There is another reason for the nations of the SCO, a vital national security element, to having peace and stability in China’s Xinjiang region. Some of China’s most important oil and gas pipeline routes pass directly through Xinjiang province. Energy relations between Kazkhstan and China are of enormous strategic importance for both countries, and allow China to become less dependent on oil supply sources that can be cut off by possible US interdiction should relations deteriorate to such a point.

This is the reason why the US is in Afghanistan and Iraq in the first place; it’s all because of the Mega-Lie. It is in Central Asia that NATO and the SCO collide and we know that Turkey is one of the NATO players. Therefore it should come as no surprise to learn that, just days before trouble erupted in Xinjiang, Turkish President Abdullah Gül made his first visit to Xinjiang. Gül has also called for a “transparent investigation” into events in Xinjiang. Coming from Gül, this might sound more credible if there were a transparent investigation into his state’s Dirty War against the Kurdish people, which resulted in tens of thousands dead, millions forcibly displaced, and thousands of villages destroyed. It might sound more credible if, for example, Gül’s state had actually carried out a transparent investigation of the Şemdinli bombing. After all, now that Büyükanıt is retired, he’s ripe to be plucked from the Ergenekon tree along with all the other retired paşas.

DTP parliamentarian Selahattin Demirtaş was among those who accompanied Gül on his China visit:

Two deputies, who accompanied Gül in his visit, said no sign of an extensive uproar was apparent during a Turkish committee’s visit. But, Selahattin Demirtaş, the head of the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party, or DTP, parliamentary group said Uighurs spoke about the government’s oppression to the committee and said that they were anxious to talk.

So the question is, did members of Gül’s entourage carry a message from the NED to the Uighurs? Is Gül acting on behalf of his American allies in Xinjiang as Turkey is doing throughout the rest of Central Asia?

As noted in the Christian Science Monitor, Turkey better walk the fine line:

Turkey has, in recent years, been working to raise its foreign policy profile and establish itself as a regional political and economic power. Turkey’s president, Abdullah Gul, actually visited Urumqi as part of a recent state visit shortly before the violence broke out there. Turkey signed a reported $1.5 billion worth of trade deals during the visit.

But analysts say Ankara’s criticism could lead to a rupture with Beijing.

“The Turks really have a tough decision to make, whether they keep this going or back off. This is a major test for Turkey’s new foreign policy,” says Bulent Aliriza, director of the Turkey Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “This is a serious problem for the Turks from every angle.”

Ankara now also needs to decide if it will grant a possible request to visit Turkey by Rebiya Kadeer, a Uighur diaspora activist based in the United States whom China has accused of being behind the violence in Xinjiang.

“All hell is going to break loose if she shows up in Turkey, especially after the comment that Erdogan made,” Mr. Aliriza says.

Turkey’s hypocrisy is not lost on the Chinese:

One netizen wrote, “First of all, the July 5 riot in Urumqi is China’s internal affair, with which Turkey has no right to interfere, let alone distort the facts and criticize unscrupulously. Secondly, since Turkey itself does not have a “clean record” in its own affairs, should it be allowed to blame China?

A netizen with the IP 202.108.251.xxx wrote: The Chinese government has simply been preserving the integrity of the country, ethnic unity and property of its people. The Chinese government is facing a group of terrorists. The Kurdish massacres in Turkey were a kind of genocide and Nazism. Linking China to genocide is like a thief shouting “stop thief!”

A netizen with the IP 121.14.234.xxx wrote: What Turkey did to the Kurdish people was bloody genocide. With all sense and reason, China should support the Kurdish people’s pursuit of independence.

[ . . . ]

A netizen under the name “genuine knowledge and profound view” wrote: Look at how Turkey treated its ethnic minorities: the Kurdish language is banned in schools and congress, and the use of non-Turkish languages is deemed as undermining the country’s unity.

Nor is it lost on the Armenians:

Doubtless, the events in China should be condemned. Yet, there is another factor at play here, which reminds us of the saying, “People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.”

Turkey has its own legacy of genocide and denial, as the killing of 1.5 million Armenians remains unrecognized. It also has Kurdish blood on its hands.

For the Turkish prime minister to have the audacity to compare the killing of a few dozen Uighurs to genocide while it continues to spend millions to deny the killing of a million and a half Armenians is—if we must put it mildly—ridiculous.

But it also begs the following: Would the prime minister—who seems quick to use the term genocide to refer to the Uighurs or, before that, the atrocities in Eastern Europe and the Palestinian territories—refer to the “events of 1915” as genocidal?

After all, even by the official Turkish account, there were more than 150 people who were killed in 1915…

Of course, China has always opposed separatism:

One of the basic components of post-Mao China’s policy, domestic and international, is opposition to separatism. This policy reflects China’s uncompromising adherence to the maintenance of territorial integrity at all costs—primarily with regard to Taiwan, but also to Tibet, Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia. Similarly, the Chinese are fundamentally and officially opposed to separatist movements elsewhere, suggesting recently that self-determination should not necessarily involve national independence and that stateless nations should not necessarily form, or be given, states.

These rules also apply to the Kurds. To be sure, Chinese scholars deplore the Kurdish “tragedy:” the fact that a nation with such a long history could never set up its own country; the refusal of any country to seriously help the Kurds; and the use of force by host governments (primarily Turkey) to suppress Kurdish nationalism. Nevertheless, the Chinese ultimately admit that the Kurds’ demand for independence endangers these countries’ territorial integrity and national security. They claim that Kurdish legal rights should be respected and protected, but only within an autonomous arrangement in an existing state. Separatism will only lead to war, engender terrorism, and will ultimately be rejected by the international community.

But this means, in the final analysis, that China should have absolutely no problem backing the Kurdish people in Turkey because PKK’s policy is to find a political solution within the borders of Turkey. “We would like as a movement to emphasize once again that the right solution is a democratic autonomy within the borders of Turkey. We believe that a solution in the unity of Turkey will be for the benefit of firstly the Kurdish people and all the people of the region.”

American hypocrisy regarding Uighurs–aside from the whole energy resources thing mentioned above–takes on a whole new meaning when you realize that the Bush administration allowed Chinese agents to question Uighur prisoners at Gitmo.

IMPUNITY, CORRUPTION, AND A JOB OPPORTUNITY

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on June 25, 2009 by Mizgîn
“Power corrupts. Knowledge is power. Study hard. Be evil.”
~ Anonymous.

I’d like to point out a few things for you to read, just in case you missed them.

First, at Children of the Sun there’s a recent post updating us about the status of the trial of the state assassins who murdered Uğur Kaymaz and his father, Ahmet:

On 18 June 2009, the High Trubinal Court ruled that the police who shot Ugur from his back together with his father have acted in self defense. How is it acting in self defense, let alone being justifiable by any means, to shoot a child from behind at close range with 13 bullets? What kind of “law” would allow and tolerate such abomination?

Unfortunately, it’s not surprising because the name of the game in Turkey always has been IMPUNITY:

Impunity means “exemption from punishment or loss”.[1] In the international law of human rights, it refers to the failure to bring perpetrators of human rights violations to justice and, as such, itself constitutes a denial of the victims’ right to justice and redress. Impunity is especially common in countries that lack a tradition of the rule of law, suffer from corruption or that have entrenched systems of patronage, or where the judiciary is weak or members of the security forces are protected by special jurisdictions or immunities.

Mmm, yeah, that’s Turkey. For more, see Amnesty.

The second item is from Zerkesorg and is an interview with DTP’s Emine Ayna. Comrade Emine is eminently Rastî-ful:

People don’t change overnight. It’s not like the Prime Minister and the President [of Turkey], while they were in denial yesterday, have changed overnight and said “okay let’s accept it today”. This is not about the Prime Minister and the President either. This is about the system.

I couldn’t have said it better myself. Read the whole interview.

The third item I have for your consideration is a little something about government-narcotics relationships and how the MSM facilitates the cover-up of the truth about those relationships. If you don’t know how this works, check Sibel Edmonds, another Rastî-ful woman who goes into the relationships of the CIA with the Latin American narcotics industry, the KLA and the narcotics industry,and Afghanistan and the narcotics industry. You’ll find it all here.

Finally, with the global economic situation being what it is–thanks to the Wall Street vermin–many people are out of work with no prospects in the immediate future. Fear not, however, because it would appear that the US State Department has an opening . . . for a “viable” candidate for Iran. You can find a list of candidate qualifications and benefits here.

A couple of examples of past “viable” include one that most Rastî readers are familiar with–Tansu Çiller:

Former Prime Minister of Turkey, Ms. Tansu Ciller is a perfect example of a Middle Eastern leader who was selected, declared ‘viable,’ supported, promoted, installed, and protected by the United States. As can be seen Ms. Ciller met many if not all of the qualifications criteria listed above:

1. Ms. Ciller completed her advanced degrees in the United States – M.S. from the University of New Hampshire and PhD from the University of Connecticut. During this extended period while she resided in the US we had ample time and opportunity to train and mold her for the leadership position in Turkey.

2. Ms. Ciller was granted citizenship in the United States. In order to keep this fact from tarnishing her image during her candidacy campaign in Turkey and afterwards, we designated her US citizenship status ‘Classified and Top Secret’ on the grounds of Sensitive Diplomatic Relations. To this date, despite all attempts, Turkish authorities have been unable to have these files opened.

3. Ms. Ciller and her husband Ozer Ciller were closely involved with certain CIA operations prior to and after her return to Turkey, and their intimate relationship continued throughout her tenure as Prime Minister of the Republic of Turkey. In fact, the CIA’s Roger Tamraz (see BCCI) was their partner in two front companies: ‘Emperyal’, which acquired and operated six (6) Casinos in Turkmenistan, and, ‘Lapis,’ involved with the oil pipeline project.

4. Ms. Ciller and her husband, before being considered ‘viable’ by us, already had an established shady financial past, including involvement in an embezzlement scandal connected to the collapse of ‘Istanbul Bankasi’, one of Turkey’s largest private banks. This along with involvements fortified Ms. Ciller’s qualification criteria when compared to competing applicants.

5. Ms. Ciller understood and participated in Turkey’s important strategic and operational role in the supply and transportation of heroin. She skillfully and very aggressively combined and furthered the marriage between the state military-police-intelligence and the underground heroin industry. Her notoriety even reached the German Courts, where she was accused of supporting and protecting the drug mafia – active not only in Turkey but elsewhere, including Europe and Central Asia.

6. Ms. Ciller played a direct role in scandals involving corruption, embezzlement, and state sponsored terrorism and narcotics operations. The best known scandal, one of her masterpieces, is known as ‘Susurluk’. Ciller and her husband – who is known for his mafia links and dealings, were directly implicated in Susurluk. The high profile kept by Ms. And Mr. Ciller during these scandals and their handling of them afterwards significantly bolstered their ‘value’ and ‘viability’ for us.

7. Ms. Ciller’s ‘known’ wealth is confirmed to be over $50 million, all of which was gained after she became a ‘’viable’ candidate supported directly by the US. A large portion of her investments and accounts are in the United States. We will not list the exact amount at this point, however, the selected candidate will be given an opportunity to see the ‘real’ dollar amount, and even consult with Ms. Ciller directly.

We can list many other desirable qualities of former Prime Minister Ciller, however for this appendix the above points should suffice. Interested candidates can conduct their own research and compare their qualifications to Ms. Ciller to get a better understanding of our ‘viability’ criteria for those candidates we select, support, promote, install, and sustain in ‘that’ part of the world. As you can see, we helped Ms. Ciller weather all accusations, investigations, and official charges, whether in Turkey or internationally. We made sure she and her government continuously received our military aid, development funds, and of course IMF funds. How she chose to spend, divert, or ‘lose’ these funds were left completely up to her, with no questions asked. Today she enjoys her incredible, almost fairytale like lifestyle, made possible with the enormous wealth accumulated through her official position, gained and sustained by our backing. We are pleased to take full credit for this. We will guarantee similar benefits for our candidate of choice in Iran.

So dear reader, if you’re one of the millions out of work with no future prospects in view, you too can apply to become the “candidate of choice for Iran”. The benefits package alone will enable you to view the Wall Street vermin as indistinguishable from the unwashed masses.

MORE POSSIBILITIES

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on June 9, 2009 by Mizgîn
“Any man can make mistakes, but only an idiot persists in his error.”
~ Cicero.

Oh, oh, oh . . . What Aysel Tuğluk said:

Answering questions from the audience, Tuğluk said, “People have to realise that the 2.5 million votes received by the DTP are by people who sympathise with the PKK. The PKK is not just 5-7,000 people in the Kandil mountains.”

You go, girlfriend, you go! I don’t think it could be any clearer than that.

Comrade Aysel also spoke about the three possibilities for a solution to the Kurdish situation in The Southeast:

She said that there were three possible paths to take towards a solution of the Kurdish question. The first, leading to a “quick solution”, would be for state representatives to speak with imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan. She said that Öcalan was influential both “in the organisation and with the people.”

The second path would be for the state to define the problem without contacting anyone, but asking international actors to act as mediators. She argued that this was the path being followed at the moment. She warned however, that this process would fail if “the DTP, the PKK and Öcalan are not considered as partners” in the dialogue.

The third path, and the one advised by Tuğluk, was to build a dialogue with the DTP, which would mean an indirect dialogue with the PKK and Öcalan.

She reiterated the suggestion of current PKK leader Murat Karayılan, who had called for intellectuals to be integrated in the process, arguing that this would stop the process from stalling.

I’m glad she spelled it all out. I don’t think there’s any need to look for any explanation of what she said or to have it interpreted by someone because it’s crystal clear just the way she said it and it’s the same thing that’s been said for years, anyway.

Of course it’s all theoretical at the moment because no concrete steps have been taken by the Ankara regime, which just goes to show that the country is run by a pack of greedy idiots.

Think about how the Middle East would change if Turkey would finally come to its senses and come to a genuine political solution for Kurds. It would dominate the region. Let’s imagine that it didn’t come up with some half-assed Kurdology department in the universities but implemented mother language education starting from the very first day of a Kurdish child’s education that also included Turkish language as a mandatory subject. Those kids would be ready for classes taught exclusively in Turkish language by the time they hit high school, maybe before. Not only would they become fluent in Turkish, they’d be fluent in Kurdish and they would have absorbed the basic knowledge of all other subjects because the foundations of those subjects would have been taught in their mother language.

If such a thing were to happen, Turkey would actually play an important role in the standardization of Kurmanci.

If Turkey were to do these things on top of solving it’s most pressing problem, it could feasibly become a magnet for the higher education of Kurds throughout the region and, thus, spread it’s influence within the societies of the neighboring countries, and abroad, in a positive way.

But, no, this is just imagination, remember? The reality is that, under the AKP, Turkey remains no better than any other lame-ass, tin-pot totalitarian state. Turkey is the finest example of a group of people who have cut off their noses to spite their faces and the AKP is nothing more than a club for the criminally idiotic.