Home > Thematic Issues > 5 > Knowledge, ideology and power. (…) ____________________ (Submit) Search 5 | 2006 : Power, ideology, knowledge - deconstructing Kurdish Studies Knowledge, ideology and power. Deconstructing Kurdish Studies -- 2Our objective here is to propose a first ‘state of art’, with both epistemological and sociological perspectives. We will explore knowledge production about the Kurds – the conditions, stakes and actors involved in this knowledge production – and its transformation, if it occurs. Though we focus here on Turkey, our main field of research, we need to take into consideration the treatment of the question in Western countries as it influences, in diverse ways, the evolution of the Turkish field of research. We consider this present issue as a means of opening a debate and of offering a few first hypotheses and lines of research on this very wide question. Our issue includes articles dealing with production of knowledge about Kurds by different actors (the state, the Kurdish nationalists, the colonial powers) within different historical contexts. It also includes interviews with scholars who have worked on the question within different frameworks and contexts. We invited these scholars to consider the way they shaped their studies on Kurds, under which constraints and with which resources. They were also called upon to think about the possible transformations affecting in time and space what would be a field of Kurdish studies developing within and between different national frames. These interviews thus also contribute to give an evolving picture of the field both in European countries and in Turkey. -- 12The ‘Kurdish question’ was first explicitly formulated by the Kurds living outside Kurdistan, in Europe. The first mention of the ‘Kurdish question’ was made in a book signed by Dr. Bletch Chirguh (the pseudonym of Celadet Bedirkhan) published by the national organisation Khoybûn in 19305. This book aims at presenting the Kurdish nation to the ‘civilised world’ (Chirguh 1930: 3). The Kurdish question is constituted by ‘the struggles that have lasted for more than three centuries and that have always aimed at national independence’ (Chirguh 1930: 13). The Kurdish question is mainly considered by the Bedirkhan brothers in the context of Kurdish-Turkish antagonism which, according to Bedirkhan, goes back to 1847 (the date of the abolition of the last Kurdish emirate). Indeed, the Bedirkhan, at the head of the Khoybûn organisation, were coming from Turkey and the organisation was mainly concerned with Turkey’s Kurds and Kurdistan. Thirty years after the publication of Chirguh’s book, Kamuran Bedirkhan, in another book in French, La question kurde, defined the question in similar terms: ‘it is the fight of the Kurdish people since one century for its liberation. It is the natural and instinctive impetus of this people who wants to remain Kurd, to speak freely his language and preserve his national patrimony […] The Kurdish question consists in convincing the states that share Kurdistan to behave towards the Kurds in accordance with the juridical and moral principles universally acknowledged and inscribed in the United Nations Charter and in the Declaration of Human Rights’ (Bedirkhan 1958: 1). The booklet also provides details about the different steps that built the issue: the main one is the so called ‘second partition’ of Kurdistan at the end of the First World War, with the support of the Western powers (Bedirkhan 1958: 8-9). This period, with the Treaties of Sevres and Lausanne, then takes a fundamental place in Kurdish as well as in Turkish historiography: it symbolised the possibility of a Kurdish state and the threat of the division of the Turkish one. -- 37The object is not here to produce a sociology of the academia and intellectuals in Turkey, a sociology that has yet to be done. Few works deal with the Turkish university and its relationships to power: among them we can mention Ali Arslan (2004), and articles of the special issues of Birikim (2001) and Toplum ve Bilim (2003) on Turkish universities. Very good studies of nationalism – and its relationships with science and hence with the educational and academic world – have already been done (Copeaux 1997; Taşkın 2001). These works argue that the university, as other Turkish educational institutions, is an organ used to train good citizens and to spread national culture and even nationalism (Copeaux 1997: 83; Arslan 2004: 58-159). The absence of autonomy of these institutions, especially since the 1980 Coup26, has to be kept in mind. The Law 2547 of 1981 on higher education set out the aim of the university as the following: loyalty to Atatürk nationalism and to Atatürk’s reforms and principles, being in harmony with the national, ethical, human, spiritual and cultural values of the Turkish nation, putting the common good above the own personal interests and having full devotion to family, country and nation, etc. (Williamson 1987: 207-208). In the 1980s, compulsory courses on Atatürk’s principles and on the history of the Turkish Reforms were introduced. With no freedom of thought and expression, and seeped in nationalism, academic science cannot be far from dogma, as states İsmail Beşikçi in Bilim Yöntem (1991). -- 38Since the foundation of the Republican university, science has been used to serve ideological production, and academics are involved in ideology production. Shortly after its creation in 1933, the first Republican university, Istanbul University, and its scientific personal were to take their place in the consolidation of the newly-born Turkish Republic and nation, and the dissemination of its underlying ideology. Between 1935 and 1945, a series of conferences were held both at Istanbul University, with the active participation of professors from the Ankara Language and History-Geography faculty as well, and in the People Houses founded all over Turkey. The themes of these conferences were, as Biriz Berksöy (2000) argues, to conform to the ideological interests and policies pursued at that time by the single-party in power, the Republican People’s Party. The faculties were regularly reminded that ‘the high interests of the Turkish nation and the Turkish Republic rule all over the professorships of the University’ and scientific works in the Humanities would notably have to be ‘enlightened’ by the productions of the Turkish History and the Turkish Language societies27. These institutions, that have been created to cultivate the idea of Kemalism, are the promoters of the Turkish History Thesis and the Sun-Language Theory, which presented the Turks as the source of all great civilizations28. It is the first ‘scientific theory’ to be produced by the academics and appropriated by state ideology. Later on, the Turkish Islamic synthesis and all the theories stressing on the Turkishness of Kurds will emerge. -- 42The works of Kadri Kemal Kop (1935, 1938) are representative of the first period of the Republic. Today the historian Abdülhaluk Çay, professor at Hacettepe University, MHP (Nationalist Action Party [Milliyetçi Hareket Partisi]) member of Parliament (elected in 1999) and member of the party’s direction (elected in 1997), is well known, specifically to have emphasised the Turkish descent of the Newroz feast (Çay 1985)29. Çay and his works represent an important academic trend representative of the 1980s mainstream academic stance on the Kurds. This stance was represented by academics close to the power. Since there were no Kurds in Turkey, there was neither a Kurdish issue nor a Kurdish problem in Turkey. The only issue concerning Turkey was the issue of banditry and then, with the growing importance of PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party[Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan]), of terror and separatism [bölücülük], largely due to both an imperialist Western and a socialist Russian plot to divide the country. The separatists are defined as Kürtçü whose strategy is to convince the eastern Turkish citizens they are not Turks but Kurds30. Then the role of the researcher is to demonstrate scientifically that the Kurds, contrary to what the separatists argue, are real Turks. These researchers - among them very important academics - both feed and protect the official ideology on different issues and, among them, on the Kurdish one. We can call them, as Taşkın does, ‘missionary intellectuals’ (Taşkın 2001b). The mission these intellectuals fulfil is also given to them by the state. The first very concrete example, concerning the Kurdish issue, goes back to 1961. At this time, the Barzani movement in Iraq was strong and much influenced the Kurds in Turkey who, little by little, started to be receptive to national and particularistic discourses and started to organise themselves within organisations and later political parties. The Turkish state then -- 46Research produced within the academy often aimed at producing applied knowledge: indeed they produced knowledge on the region and its population both in order to reinforce the state ideology and to prepare a state intervention (concerning populating, modernisation, development and territorial integration). The political implications of scientific discourse is well observable in Turkey but is characteristic of a large part of the colonial (Said 1980) or Soviet knowledge (Roy 1997) as ethnographic and anthropologic researches ‘have a strictly political function and are manipulated by the powers’ (Donegani 2006: 13; see also Said 1980). The Russian Kurdology mentioned above as well as the paper of Jordi Tejel in this issue and the work of Fuat Dündar (2006) offer a comparative view of the use by the states (mandatory French in Levant and Ottoman Empire) of ethnology and science. In the Levant case, the ‘Kurdolog’ researched the Kurds in order to know and control them; in close relation with the Kurdish nationalists, they also participated in the building of a specific Kurdish national identity (Tejel 2006); on the other hand, Unionist ethnologists and sociologists studied a specific population perceived as such in order to integrate them, to make them same (Dündar 2006). -- 53While, in the 1960s, the country was undergoing rapid social and economic change, a progressive social scientists’ stand emerged. The early İsmail Beşikçi was in many ways representative of this group, strongly interested in searching for the causes of inequality and its solutions, notably by reforms from above. As Martin van Bruinessen underlines, ‘in the course of the decade, many of them came to adopt Marxism in one form or another as a framework for explanation’ (Van Bruinessen 2003-4). Looking at their readings of the region however, they were still – like the left movements at broad in the late 1960s Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan – very much ingrained in the Kemalist anti-feudal rhetoric. The Kurdish tribal and religious leaders’ power was then conceived as the main reason of the region backwardness, it being kept out of ‘modernity’. His work then rests on a developmentalist frame (as will do the studies on GAP later) that largely shared Kurds themselves at the time (Bozarslan 1966). The researchers then focused on the resources of the state and their unequal repartition, not on the ethnic or national issue. The issue Beşikçi deals with (the nomadic tribe) is also very representative of the developmentalist views according to which the tribe is an obstacle to development. It is interesting to note also that Beşikçi does not want his work to be considered as a monographer but as a work leading to theoretical progress. Moreover, Beşikçi states that he wants his research to have concrete application and to give elements to help to solve the problems of the region. -- 60It is not only among the supporters of fundamental rights and pluralism that the Kurdish question has been discussed; it also interested the economic sector early on. Amidst the growing conflict in the southeast, in the 1990s, Doğu Ergil, professor of political science at Ankara University, conceived it both his ‘civic duty’ and an ‘academic obligation’ to try to understand what was going on and therefore, he designed a research project which aimed at studying the ‘social conflict’ and proposing ‘solutions’ other than the use of military power and violence. He met the president of the Turkish Union of Chambers of Industry and Commerce ([Türkiye Odalar ve Borsalar Birliği], TOBB), himself a native of the eastern region, and interested in the opening of the region both to peace and business activities. The TOBB networks, including branches in the region but also close relations with the True Path Party ([Doğru Yol Partisi], DYP) party structure and government actors, made it quite easier for Ergil to conduct survey in the Southeast. The main support Ergil found in Turkey during the 1995 survey and after its publication came from businessmen. He found again the same kind of support for the 2005 survey (Ergil 2006a). In his report Eastern Question. Diagnoses and Facts, the relatively traditional idea that Kurdish nationalism is fed by the economic and social backwardness of the region coexists with the acknowledgement of ‘identity’ as one component of the ‘Eastern question’. Answering to an interview, he said he entitled his report ‘Eastern question’ and not ‘Kurdish question’ because it is a problem concerning Turkey as a whole50. According to Ergil, this report ‘made a taboo subject debatable’ and ‘challenged’ the official mentality that the Kurds are ‘separatist’. Ergil was most heavily criticized for the report by both some actors within the political sphere who accused him of being a ‘Kurd lover’ or a -- 69A working group has been founded within the public Boğaziçi University which was led by a political scientist, Zeynep Gambetti and by an economist, Şemsa Özar. Entitled ‘(Trans)formation of Conflict: Changing Power Configurations and Path to Democracy in South-eastern Turkey’ it was a two-years trans-disciplinary project funded by the university. At a period marked by the ceasefire, by the end of the military conflict and by the ‘democratisation studies’ (as represented by Ergil) and ‘conflict resolution studies’ (as in the lectures program at Sabanci University led by Ayşe Betül Çelik), the project aimed at providing new approaches to the definition and the study of the conflict. They focus more on the transformation than on the end of the conflict. Leaving mainstream political sciences’ works (as represented by Kirişçi and Winrow’s Kurdish Question), they decided to undertake in-depth sociological fieldworks on a small scale and about micro-phenomenon (Gambetti 2006). -- 78In fact, asking the question in terms of economic backwardness, poverty alleviation, social changes or migrations, as it is done today, is not so much a re-framing of the question in itself. It presents striking similarities with what has been done from the 1960s on in studies talking about Kurds without naming them, or avoiding to focus on ethnic or national issues to remain acceptable in a specific political and ideological environment. Kurdish intellectuals themselves were, in the 1960s and 1970s, very much influenced by the mainstream analytic frame of economic development and social inequality. These recent studies may thus not be very directly disturbing for the state ideology and they do accommodate the self-censorship many universities still practice, but they nonetheless often contribute to deconstruct power mechanisms there. The positions of these scholars towards public and political authorities are also interestingly diverse. While some of them strive to make themselves heard from these authorities, possibly sacrificing some academic demands in the name of the exigency of the question, many choose to combine socially-oriented studies with ‘civil’ activism on the field. These studies however globally keep appealing to public policy shaping, somewhat like the studies achieved in the 1960s and 1970s did. -- Blau, Joyce (2006) 'Une perspective historique sur les études kurdes. Entretien avec Joyce Blau', European Journal of Turkish Studies, Thematic Issue N°5 , Power, ideology, knowledge - deconstructing Kurdish Studies, URL : http://www.ejts.org/document797.html -- Bozarslan, Hamit (2006) ‘Rompre avec l’hypothèse d’une singularité kurde. Entretien avec Hamit Bozarslanʼ, European Journal of Turkish Studies, Thematic Issue N°5 , Power, ideology, knowledge - deconstructing Kurdish Studies, URL : http://www.ejts.org/document761.html -- Dorronsoro, Gilles (2006) ‘Les politiques ottomane et républicaine au Kurdistan à partir de la comparaison des milices Hamidiye et korucu : modèles institutionnels, retribalisation et dynamique des conflitsʼ, European Journal of Turkish Studies, Thematic Issue N°5 , Power, ideology, knowledge - deconstructing Kurdish Studies, URL : http://www.ejts.org/document778.html -- Ergil, Doğu (2006a) ‘ “Knowledge is a potent instrument for change”. Interview with Doğu Ergil', European Journal of Turkish Studies, Thematic Issue N°5 , Power, ideology, knowledge Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan – deconstructing Kurdish Studies, URL : http://www.ejts.org/document762.html Ergil, Doğu (2006) ‘Results of a survey conducted in 2005 on democracy in Turkeyʼ, European Journal of Turkish Studies, Thematic Issue N°5 , Power, ideology, knowledge Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan – deconstructing Kurdish Studies, URL : http://www.ejts.org/document769.html -- Foucault, Michel (1980) Power / knowledge: Selected Interviews and others writings (1972-1977), London, Harvester Press. -- Gambetti, Zeynep (2006) ‘The search for a new ground. Interview with Zeynep Gambettiʼ, European Journal of Turkish Studies, Thematic Issue N°5 , Power, ideology, knowledge Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan – deconstructing Kurdish Studies, URL : http://www.ejts.org/document784.html -- Scalbert-Yücel, Clémence (2006) ‘Comment la langue kurde est devenue turque. Linguistique et dialectologie dans les universités turquesʼ, European Journal of Turkish Studies, Thematic Issue N°5 , Power, ideology, knowledge Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan – deconstructing Kurdish Studies, URL : http://www.ejts.org/document771.html -- Şen, Leyla (2005) ‘Poverty Alleviation, Conflict and Power in Poor Displaced Households: a Study of the Views of Women in Diyarbakır’, New Perspectives on Turkey 32, pp. 113-135. -- Tejel, Jordi (2006) 'Les constructions de l’identité kurde sous l’influence de la ‘connexion kurdo-française’ au Levant (1930-1946)', European Journal of Turkish Studies, Thematic Issue N°5 , Power, ideology, knowledge Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan – deconstructing Kurdish Studies, URL : http://www.ejts.org/document751.html -- Van Bruinessen, Martin (2006) 'I Would be Sitting in the Village Room where People Gather Interview with Martin Bruinessen', European Journal of Turkish Studies, Thematic Issue N°5, Power, ideology, knowldege - deconstructing Kurdish Studies, URL: http://www.ejts.org/document775.html -- 26 Tuncay (1983) argues that university and university staff was controlled by the state from 1909 to 1946 and even more since the promulgation of the Higher Education Council (YÖK) [Yüksek Öğretim Kurulu] in 1981. The 1980 military coup was followed by an extreme re-centralization of the academic institutional system and the strict realignment of works on the official ideology, itself in redefinition (with the promotion of the Turkish Islam Synthesis). The YÖK received the powers and responsibilities to govern all Turkish universities. It also led to a policy of opening universities in the provinces with a mission of enlightenment, westernisation and modernisation (Aktay 2001: 94). It approves the creation of departments and sections within departments. It is responsible for the appointment of deans and faculty while the President of Turkey chooses the director of each university (elections are forbidden by the 1982 constitution). Amended more than 20 times from 1982 until today, this council has been regularly criticized regarding the lack of academic freedom in research and teaching and the fact that rectors and deans of faculties were no longer elected by the teaching staff but directly chosen by YÖK. -- Clémence Scalbert-Yücel and Marie Le Ray, « Knowledge, ideology and power. Deconstructing Kurdish Studies », European Journal of Turkish Studies [Online], 5 | 2006, Online since 11 décembre 2009, Connection on 09 janvier 2010. URL : http://ejts.revues.org/index777.html Top of page -- * 5 | 2006 Power, ideology, knowledge - deconstructing Kurdish Studies * 4 | 2006