Tweet
BESIKCI: OFFICIAL IDEOLOGY MOST IMPORTANT INSTITUTION IN POLITICAL SYSTEM
Today's Zaman
Sept 30 2012
Turkey
A prominent sociologist, historian and the most recent recipient of
the International Hrant Dink Award has said that the official ideology
hinders freedom of thought and research as information produced by
the official ideology is still dominant in Turkey.
"The official ideology is the most important institution in the Turkish
political system, Turkish political regime. The official ideology
is not any ideology, but an ideology that has been protected and
watched over through the administrative and punitive sanctions of the
state. When you are critical of the official ideology, you can face
heavy administrative and punitive sanctions," Ä°smail BeÅ~_ikci, who
received his award on Sept. 15, the late journalist Dink's birthday,
told Monday Talk.
Dink was shot dead by an ultranationalist teenager outside the offices
of the Turkish-Armenian Agos newspaper in Ä°stanbul in January 2007.
The investigation into his murder has stalled even though the suspected
perpetrator and his immediate accomplices have been put on trial;
but those who masterminded the plot to kill him have yet to be exposed
and punished.
The Hrant Dink Foundation, established in 2007 after the Jan. 19, 2007
assassination of Dink, organizes several events to raise awareness
of human rights issues.
BeÅ~_ikci, known to be the first non-Kurdish person in Turkey to
speak out loud about the rights of Kurds, answered our questions in
regards to the Kurdish issue and said that the problem can be solved
only by giving the Kurds their "seized natural rights" back.
You are the domestic recipient of this year's International Hrant
Dink Award. It's been written that you have not accepted any other
international awards before. Is that true? And what is the significance
of the Hrant Dink award for you?
Yes, it is true. I abandoned this attitude when it was the Hrant Dink
Award. Hrant Dink and the Agos newspaper have been instrumental in
bringing the Armenian issue to the public agenda; they made public
a very deeply rooted taboo.
At the night of the award ceremony, you said: "Kurds who took shares
of the seized Armenian properties said 'Yes' to the views of the
state. That's why the problem related to the Armenians is related
to the Kurds, and the problem related to the Kurds is related to
the Armenians. They have a cause and effect relationship. The only
way to overcome such problems is not to issue an apology but to
have research and study." You said that the state should provide an
appropriate environment for independent research instead of issuing
an apology about the tragedies of the past. What do you think the
benefits would be from such research? And do you think there are
independent researchers?
Of course, there are [independent researchers]. There have been quite
effective imperial policies on the autóctono, indigenous people of
the Near East. Those policies were destructive for the Greek-Pontus,
Armenians, Kurds and Assyrians. Those policies have caused those
people to develop hatred for each other. Studying what happened --
for example, in the 10-year period after World War I -- with a lot of
rich and factual support would help to raise people's consciousness of
history and the society [that they live in]. People would understand
each other better in this process, [and also] a positive environment
for understanding each other would develop. But nation-states in
the region hamper such a research-study process with bans on freedom
of thought. However, researchers should be aware of such government
policies. They should be insistent on this. They should be careful
about the fact that free critiquing is indispensable.
Your speech at the award ceremony was like a history class. What
deficiencies do you think Turkish society has when it comes to
knowledge of history?
Official ideology is the most important institution of the Turkish
political system -- the Turkish political regime. The official ideology
is not any ideology, but an ideology that has been protected and
watched by the administrative and punitive sanctions of the state.
When you are critical of the official ideology, you can face heavy
administrative and punitive sanctions. The official ideology not only
oversees political life but also intellectual and scientific life.
Today, what is dominant is information from the official ideology. The
official ideology and information coming out of the official ideology
should be criticized by concepts of science and politics. This is
the way to obtain true information and truth.
'Kurds' gains heavier [than their losses] in last 30 years'
When you make an evaluation of the Kurdish problem, especially
considering the 1990s, what comments would you make?
Let's look at the 1960s and 2010s -- a period of 50 years. There
are big gains. There is quite a lot of evidence for that. But when
you consider the struggle for the last 30 years, you can see that a
very heavy price has been paid, and we can also say that despite that
heavy price, the gains are not much. Personally, I can say that the
gains are heavier [than losses].
What are those gains in your opinion?
If the 1960s and 2010s are compared, those gains would come clearly
into the picture.
What is your evaluation of the government's "Kurdish opening" in the
2009-2010 period? And how much are the PKK [outlawed Kurdistan Workers'
Party] and the Kurdish problem related?
The Kurdish problem and the PKK have organic ties. Let's not forget
this: Why has the struggle started? Together with the beginning of
the republic, the denial of Kurds' and Kurdish started. There was
intense assimilation. The practice of assimilation still continues;
the reason for the start of an armed struggle in 1984 is this. In
2005 in Diyarbakır, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said,
"The Kurdish problem is my problem; it will be solved by providing
wide ranging democratic rights." In 2009, the "program for opening"
was announced but steps back have been taken since then. Therefore,
it is important to call on the government: "Recognize and give back
the Kurds their seized, natural rights."
What are the sine qua non rights?
Self-determination, self-governance and mandatory education in Kurdish
are the sine qua non.
What is your opinion on autonomous Kurdish rule? Do you think such
an administrative structure would solve the Kurdish problem?
A federative structure can be thought of as a minimum. Guerillas
should be able to provide security and police services [in that
structure]. This is the only way for the guerilla to lay down arms.
A pro-Kurdish party in Syria's north is believed to be dominant
[pro-Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) based in Syria] there. Do
you see autonomous Kurdish rule, similar to the one in Northern Iraq,
possible in the region?
After [Syrian President] Bashar al-Assad withdrew his soldiers from
such Kurdish cities as Kobani, Amude, Derik, Serekaniye, Efrin and
QamıÅ~_lı, these places started to be run by Kurds. It is possible to
observe intense activity to establish autonomous rule. It is possible
to have autonomous regions in western Kurdistan as there is now in
southern Kurdistan.
Haluk Koc, deputy chairman of the main opposition CHP [Republican
People's Party], has made public the alleged text of the protocol
allegedly signed by members of the PKK and representatives of the
Turkish government at the disclosed negotiations in Oslo. Considering
that the text is true, do you think it would solve the Kurdish problem?
CHP's Haluk Koc's attitude is quite wrong. It is wrong to be critical
of the government because it was talking with the PKK. What should
be important is recognizing and giving back the Kurds' rights, which
are natural rights that come out of merely being a Kurdish society,
Kurdish nation.
'What kind of 'peace' do state, government want?'
Do you think the PKK has sabotaged the government's peace initiatives?
What kind of "peace" does the state, the government want? To sanctify
the state's views on Kurds, to make sure that Kurds do not speak
up. ...
This is what the state means when it says "peace." Why should the
Kurds accept it?
Does the PKK want peace? What steps would make the PKK lay down arms?
It is indispensable that the natural rights of the Kurds should be
recognized and given back.
Parliament Speaker Cemil Cicek suggested recently that even if the
PKK wants to lay down arms, it cannot because other states make plans
against Turkey and they use the PKK in those plans. What do you think
of this idea?
It is important to look at relations in your own society. It is
the government's duty to create appropriate political and societal
relations and find solutions to problems so other states cannot
interfere.
International relations analysts think that the civil war in Syria,
Iran's increased support to the PKK and the Baghdad government's
close relations with Damascus and Tehran have had an effect on the
PKK's decision to cut off the Oslo peace process. Do you agree?
Kurds are now an important power in the Middle East. So is the PKK. In
the analysis regarding the Middle East, the Kurdish dynamic comes out
as an important factor. Turkey tries to get financial, political and
diplomatic support from the whole world, especially the United States
and the European Union, in its fight with the PKK. And there is quite
a lot of support for Turkey in this regard. It is normal for the PKK
and the Kurds to seek similar support. If any power provides this
support for this and that reason, it is not meaningful to reject it.
Do you think the PKK will lay down arms if it is getting all that
support from Syria, Iran and others as alleged? And don't you think
such support for the PKK leads to the dominance of hawks in the PKK?
Why has the armed fight started? We should not ignore the roots of the
problem. Kurds' natural rights have been seized. This is the reason
for an armed struggle. Rather than talking about what the PKK will do,
we should be concerned about what the state, the government will do
about the problem, and why it does not take healthy steps. For example,
what does the government say about the rights of the Palestinians? Why
is there not a fraction of a similar expression of warmth, decisiveness
for the Kurds and the PKK? The government talks about self-rule for
Palestinians. Why can't the Kurds rule themselves?
Kurds are aware of the fact that the views of the government, the state
are quite in contrast in relation to the Turkish Republic of Northern
Cyprus [KKTC] and the Kurds. When the subject is the PKK and Kurds,
the analysis of such relations carries a lot of importance.
'BDP should be more responsible, audacious'
Where do you think the war between the state and the PKK will go? Do
you think a solution to the Kurdish problem will be further delayed
because of the increased violence?
What hinders a solution to the problem is the state's rigid stance.
The view that ignores the Kurds is still dominant. Acts like preventing
Kurds from speaking Kurdish in courts and reacting to the letters of
"x, q, w" in the Kurdish alphabet by saying that "They do not exist in
the Turkish alphabet" are indicators of denying Kurds and the Kurdish
language. Those signs point out that the state still hopes for help
from policies of assimilation.
Turkey has been discussing making a new constitution. What kind of
constitution do you think would be most beneficial to the solution
of the Kurdish problem?
Kurds should be able to self-rule. Education in mother tongue, in other
words, mandatory education in mother tongue Kurdish is of course an
important requirement. But the minimum requirement is a federation.
A constitution that does not provide those rights to Kurds would not be
"a new constitution."
What is your opinion about the Kurdish politics? Do you think it's
free?
Kurdish politics is free. Kurdish politics is made by considering
the basic dynamics of Kurdish society.
Do you think the BDP [Peace and Democracy Party] is a free party?
The BDP should be more at the front, audacious and responsible in
discussions of the issues related to the Kurds.
Do you think the BDP can declare the PKK a "terrorist" organization
as the Turkish state demands from the BDP?
This question is incorrect. It is the state that employs terrorism in
the Kurdish/Kurdistan problem. A very intense state terrorism has been
escalated against Kurds. Are "extrajudicial killings" [thousands of
forced disappearances are believed to have been committed by JÄ°TEM
-- an illegal network inside the gendarmerie -- forces in the mostly
Kurdish southeast mainly in the 1990s] going to be forgotten? It is
a well-known fact that the perpetrator of these crimes was the state.
Leyla Zana [an independent pro-Kurdish deputy from Diyarbakır]
said recently that PM Erdogan can solve the Kurdish problem, but she
has kept silent since. Is it possible that the PKK wanted her to not
speak up on this issue?
It is not possible for a single person to solve the problem. What
is important is to establish an environment of mutual understanding
between Turkish and Kurdish people. Such an environment can be provided
by the state, the government. Recep Tayyip Erdogan is responsible
for providing such an environment as a prime minister.
What is your opinion about the politics of Abdullah Ocalan [imprisoned
leader of the PKK]? There is an impression that he has fought for a
solution to the Kurdish problem from prison, but he was angry about
the PKK's escalation of violence...
The BDP should be more upfront and audacious in relation to the
Kurdish problem.
What is the ideology of the PKK today? Do you think it needs
modernization and reform? And do you think the factions in the PKK
might lead to division in the future?
The PKK is a big organization, but its demands are small. It should
make bigger demands by looking at the developments in the world and
the Middle East.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Untouchables are touched: turning point in Turkish politics'
You've suffered a lot from the military coup administrations. There
is a recent development that the Sledgehammer trial, which began in
2010, was concluded, and the court convicted more than 300 military
officers, including the former air force and navy chiefs [related to
a suspected coup plot believed to have been devised in 2003 with the
aim of unseating the ruling Justice and Development Party government
through violent acts; the military has denied the existence of such
a plan]. What is your comment about the verdict?
It is a turning point in Turkish political life that the generals and
officers who have been totally untouchable and not been criticized by
anybody under any circumstances are now tried and received sentences
for "an attempt to plan a coup against the government."
PROFILE
Ä°smail BeÅ~_ikci
Born in 1939 to a middle class family in Ä°skilip, Corum, he attended
primary school, middle school and high school in the same city. In
1962, he graduated from the faculty of political science at Ankara
University. He did his military service in 1962-1964. He began his
career as assistant sociology professor at the faculty of science and
letters at Erzurum Ataturk University at the end of 1964. In 1968,
an administrative investigation was opened against him because of his
course books, writings and subjects he mentioned in his lectures. At
the end of the investigation in July 1970 he was dismissed from the
university. On June 19, 1971, he was detained, taken to Diyarbakır
and faced court cases against him.
His book, "The Order of Eastern Anatolia: Social-Economic and Ethnic
Foundations," first published in 1969, in which he sought to adapt and
apply Marxist concepts to the analysis of Kurdish society and to the
processes of socio-economic and political change taking place, made
him a public enemy. He was detained and put on trial for communist
and anti-national propaganda in which he was sentenced to 13 years
imprisonment for violating the indivisibility of the Turkish nation.
In 2010, he was again prosecuted, this time for "PKK propaganda"
on account of an article on "The rights of the nations to
self-determination and the Kurds" that he wrote for the Association
of Contemporary Lawyers. In March 2011 he was sentenced to 15 months
in prison. Before being released from prison in September 1999 under
an amnesty law for writers and journalists, he had been sentenced to
over 100 years.
He remained in prison a total of 17 years and two months in martial
law detention centers and prisons. Now a free man, he is a member of
the board of directors and board of trustees of the Ä°smail BeÅ~_ikci
Foundation. He is from a Sunni Muslim and Turkish family, but he
has studied Kurdish society and language, which were taboo subjects
in Turkey.
Today's Zaman
Sept 30 2012
Turkey
A prominent sociologist, historian and the most recent recipient of
the International Hrant Dink Award has said that the official ideology
hinders freedom of thought and research as information produced by
the official ideology is still dominant in Turkey.
"The official ideology is the most important institution in the Turkish
political system, Turkish political regime. The official ideology
is not any ideology, but an ideology that has been protected and
watched over through the administrative and punitive sanctions of the
state. When you are critical of the official ideology, you can face
heavy administrative and punitive sanctions," Ä°smail BeÅ~_ikci, who
received his award on Sept. 15, the late journalist Dink's birthday,
told Monday Talk.
Dink was shot dead by an ultranationalist teenager outside the offices
of the Turkish-Armenian Agos newspaper in Ä°stanbul in January 2007.
The investigation into his murder has stalled even though the suspected
perpetrator and his immediate accomplices have been put on trial;
but those who masterminded the plot to kill him have yet to be exposed
and punished.
The Hrant Dink Foundation, established in 2007 after the Jan. 19, 2007
assassination of Dink, organizes several events to raise awareness
of human rights issues.
BeÅ~_ikci, known to be the first non-Kurdish person in Turkey to
speak out loud about the rights of Kurds, answered our questions in
regards to the Kurdish issue and said that the problem can be solved
only by giving the Kurds their "seized natural rights" back.
You are the domestic recipient of this year's International Hrant
Dink Award. It's been written that you have not accepted any other
international awards before. Is that true? And what is the significance
of the Hrant Dink award for you?
Yes, it is true. I abandoned this attitude when it was the Hrant Dink
Award. Hrant Dink and the Agos newspaper have been instrumental in
bringing the Armenian issue to the public agenda; they made public
a very deeply rooted taboo.
At the night of the award ceremony, you said: "Kurds who took shares
of the seized Armenian properties said 'Yes' to the views of the
state. That's why the problem related to the Armenians is related
to the Kurds, and the problem related to the Kurds is related to
the Armenians. They have a cause and effect relationship. The only
way to overcome such problems is not to issue an apology but to
have research and study." You said that the state should provide an
appropriate environment for independent research instead of issuing
an apology about the tragedies of the past. What do you think the
benefits would be from such research? And do you think there are
independent researchers?
Of course, there are [independent researchers]. There have been quite
effective imperial policies on the autóctono, indigenous people of
the Near East. Those policies were destructive for the Greek-Pontus,
Armenians, Kurds and Assyrians. Those policies have caused those
people to develop hatred for each other. Studying what happened --
for example, in the 10-year period after World War I -- with a lot of
rich and factual support would help to raise people's consciousness of
history and the society [that they live in]. People would understand
each other better in this process, [and also] a positive environment
for understanding each other would develop. But nation-states in
the region hamper such a research-study process with bans on freedom
of thought. However, researchers should be aware of such government
policies. They should be insistent on this. They should be careful
about the fact that free critiquing is indispensable.
Your speech at the award ceremony was like a history class. What
deficiencies do you think Turkish society has when it comes to
knowledge of history?
Official ideology is the most important institution of the Turkish
political system -- the Turkish political regime. The official ideology
is not any ideology, but an ideology that has been protected and
watched by the administrative and punitive sanctions of the state.
When you are critical of the official ideology, you can face heavy
administrative and punitive sanctions. The official ideology not only
oversees political life but also intellectual and scientific life.
Today, what is dominant is information from the official ideology. The
official ideology and information coming out of the official ideology
should be criticized by concepts of science and politics. This is
the way to obtain true information and truth.
'Kurds' gains heavier [than their losses] in last 30 years'
When you make an evaluation of the Kurdish problem, especially
considering the 1990s, what comments would you make?
Let's look at the 1960s and 2010s -- a period of 50 years. There
are big gains. There is quite a lot of evidence for that. But when
you consider the struggle for the last 30 years, you can see that a
very heavy price has been paid, and we can also say that despite that
heavy price, the gains are not much. Personally, I can say that the
gains are heavier [than losses].
What are those gains in your opinion?
If the 1960s and 2010s are compared, those gains would come clearly
into the picture.
What is your evaluation of the government's "Kurdish opening" in the
2009-2010 period? And how much are the PKK [outlawed Kurdistan Workers'
Party] and the Kurdish problem related?
The Kurdish problem and the PKK have organic ties. Let's not forget
this: Why has the struggle started? Together with the beginning of
the republic, the denial of Kurds' and Kurdish started. There was
intense assimilation. The practice of assimilation still continues;
the reason for the start of an armed struggle in 1984 is this. In
2005 in Diyarbakır, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said,
"The Kurdish problem is my problem; it will be solved by providing
wide ranging democratic rights." In 2009, the "program for opening"
was announced but steps back have been taken since then. Therefore,
it is important to call on the government: "Recognize and give back
the Kurds their seized, natural rights."
What are the sine qua non rights?
Self-determination, self-governance and mandatory education in Kurdish
are the sine qua non.
What is your opinion on autonomous Kurdish rule? Do you think such
an administrative structure would solve the Kurdish problem?
A federative structure can be thought of as a minimum. Guerillas
should be able to provide security and police services [in that
structure]. This is the only way for the guerilla to lay down arms.
A pro-Kurdish party in Syria's north is believed to be dominant
[pro-Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) based in Syria] there. Do
you see autonomous Kurdish rule, similar to the one in Northern Iraq,
possible in the region?
After [Syrian President] Bashar al-Assad withdrew his soldiers from
such Kurdish cities as Kobani, Amude, Derik, Serekaniye, Efrin and
QamıÅ~_lı, these places started to be run by Kurds. It is possible to
observe intense activity to establish autonomous rule. It is possible
to have autonomous regions in western Kurdistan as there is now in
southern Kurdistan.
Haluk Koc, deputy chairman of the main opposition CHP [Republican
People's Party], has made public the alleged text of the protocol
allegedly signed by members of the PKK and representatives of the
Turkish government at the disclosed negotiations in Oslo. Considering
that the text is true, do you think it would solve the Kurdish problem?
CHP's Haluk Koc's attitude is quite wrong. It is wrong to be critical
of the government because it was talking with the PKK. What should
be important is recognizing and giving back the Kurds' rights, which
are natural rights that come out of merely being a Kurdish society,
Kurdish nation.
'What kind of 'peace' do state, government want?'
Do you think the PKK has sabotaged the government's peace initiatives?
What kind of "peace" does the state, the government want? To sanctify
the state's views on Kurds, to make sure that Kurds do not speak
up. ...
This is what the state means when it says "peace." Why should the
Kurds accept it?
Does the PKK want peace? What steps would make the PKK lay down arms?
It is indispensable that the natural rights of the Kurds should be
recognized and given back.
Parliament Speaker Cemil Cicek suggested recently that even if the
PKK wants to lay down arms, it cannot because other states make plans
against Turkey and they use the PKK in those plans. What do you think
of this idea?
It is important to look at relations in your own society. It is
the government's duty to create appropriate political and societal
relations and find solutions to problems so other states cannot
interfere.
International relations analysts think that the civil war in Syria,
Iran's increased support to the PKK and the Baghdad government's
close relations with Damascus and Tehran have had an effect on the
PKK's decision to cut off the Oslo peace process. Do you agree?
Kurds are now an important power in the Middle East. So is the PKK. In
the analysis regarding the Middle East, the Kurdish dynamic comes out
as an important factor. Turkey tries to get financial, political and
diplomatic support from the whole world, especially the United States
and the European Union, in its fight with the PKK. And there is quite
a lot of support for Turkey in this regard. It is normal for the PKK
and the Kurds to seek similar support. If any power provides this
support for this and that reason, it is not meaningful to reject it.
Do you think the PKK will lay down arms if it is getting all that
support from Syria, Iran and others as alleged? And don't you think
such support for the PKK leads to the dominance of hawks in the PKK?
Why has the armed fight started? We should not ignore the roots of the
problem. Kurds' natural rights have been seized. This is the reason
for an armed struggle. Rather than talking about what the PKK will do,
we should be concerned about what the state, the government will do
about the problem, and why it does not take healthy steps. For example,
what does the government say about the rights of the Palestinians? Why
is there not a fraction of a similar expression of warmth, decisiveness
for the Kurds and the PKK? The government talks about self-rule for
Palestinians. Why can't the Kurds rule themselves?
Kurds are aware of the fact that the views of the government, the state
are quite in contrast in relation to the Turkish Republic of Northern
Cyprus [KKTC] and the Kurds. When the subject is the PKK and Kurds,
the analysis of such relations carries a lot of importance.
'BDP should be more responsible, audacious'
Where do you think the war between the state and the PKK will go? Do
you think a solution to the Kurdish problem will be further delayed
because of the increased violence?
What hinders a solution to the problem is the state's rigid stance.
The view that ignores the Kurds is still dominant. Acts like preventing
Kurds from speaking Kurdish in courts and reacting to the letters of
"x, q, w" in the Kurdish alphabet by saying that "They do not exist in
the Turkish alphabet" are indicators of denying Kurds and the Kurdish
language. Those signs point out that the state still hopes for help
from policies of assimilation.
Turkey has been discussing making a new constitution. What kind of
constitution do you think would be most beneficial to the solution
of the Kurdish problem?
Kurds should be able to self-rule. Education in mother tongue, in other
words, mandatory education in mother tongue Kurdish is of course an
important requirement. But the minimum requirement is a federation.
A constitution that does not provide those rights to Kurds would not be
"a new constitution."
What is your opinion about the Kurdish politics? Do you think it's
free?
Kurdish politics is free. Kurdish politics is made by considering
the basic dynamics of Kurdish society.
Do you think the BDP [Peace and Democracy Party] is a free party?
The BDP should be more at the front, audacious and responsible in
discussions of the issues related to the Kurds.
Do you think the BDP can declare the PKK a "terrorist" organization
as the Turkish state demands from the BDP?
This question is incorrect. It is the state that employs terrorism in
the Kurdish/Kurdistan problem. A very intense state terrorism has been
escalated against Kurds. Are "extrajudicial killings" [thousands of
forced disappearances are believed to have been committed by JÄ°TEM
-- an illegal network inside the gendarmerie -- forces in the mostly
Kurdish southeast mainly in the 1990s] going to be forgotten? It is
a well-known fact that the perpetrator of these crimes was the state.
Leyla Zana [an independent pro-Kurdish deputy from Diyarbakır]
said recently that PM Erdogan can solve the Kurdish problem, but she
has kept silent since. Is it possible that the PKK wanted her to not
speak up on this issue?
It is not possible for a single person to solve the problem. What
is important is to establish an environment of mutual understanding
between Turkish and Kurdish people. Such an environment can be provided
by the state, the government. Recep Tayyip Erdogan is responsible
for providing such an environment as a prime minister.
What is your opinion about the politics of Abdullah Ocalan [imprisoned
leader of the PKK]? There is an impression that he has fought for a
solution to the Kurdish problem from prison, but he was angry about
the PKK's escalation of violence...
The BDP should be more upfront and audacious in relation to the
Kurdish problem.
What is the ideology of the PKK today? Do you think it needs
modernization and reform? And do you think the factions in the PKK
might lead to division in the future?
The PKK is a big organization, but its demands are small. It should
make bigger demands by looking at the developments in the world and
the Middle East.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Untouchables are touched: turning point in Turkish politics'
You've suffered a lot from the military coup administrations. There
is a recent development that the Sledgehammer trial, which began in
2010, was concluded, and the court convicted more than 300 military
officers, including the former air force and navy chiefs [related to
a suspected coup plot believed to have been devised in 2003 with the
aim of unseating the ruling Justice and Development Party government
through violent acts; the military has denied the existence of such
a plan]. What is your comment about the verdict?
It is a turning point in Turkish political life that the generals and
officers who have been totally untouchable and not been criticized by
anybody under any circumstances are now tried and received sentences
for "an attempt to plan a coup against the government."
PROFILE
Ä°smail BeÅ~_ikci
Born in 1939 to a middle class family in Ä°skilip, Corum, he attended
primary school, middle school and high school in the same city. In
1962, he graduated from the faculty of political science at Ankara
University. He did his military service in 1962-1964. He began his
career as assistant sociology professor at the faculty of science and
letters at Erzurum Ataturk University at the end of 1964. In 1968,
an administrative investigation was opened against him because of his
course books, writings and subjects he mentioned in his lectures. At
the end of the investigation in July 1970 he was dismissed from the
university. On June 19, 1971, he was detained, taken to Diyarbakır
and faced court cases against him.
His book, "The Order of Eastern Anatolia: Social-Economic and Ethnic
Foundations," first published in 1969, in which he sought to adapt and
apply Marxist concepts to the analysis of Kurdish society and to the
processes of socio-economic and political change taking place, made
him a public enemy. He was detained and put on trial for communist
and anti-national propaganda in which he was sentenced to 13 years
imprisonment for violating the indivisibility of the Turkish nation.
In 2010, he was again prosecuted, this time for "PKK propaganda"
on account of an article on "The rights of the nations to
self-determination and the Kurds" that he wrote for the Association
of Contemporary Lawyers. In March 2011 he was sentenced to 15 months
in prison. Before being released from prison in September 1999 under
an amnesty law for writers and journalists, he had been sentenced to
over 100 years.
He remained in prison a total of 17 years and two months in martial
law detention centers and prisons. Now a free man, he is a member of
the board of directors and board of trustees of the Ä°smail BeÅ~_ikci
Foundation. He is from a Sunni Muslim and Turkish family, but he
has studied Kurdish society and language, which were taboo subjects
in Turkey.