modernity and the linguistic genocide of kurds in turkey fernandez ilsl 2012 copy
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
1/25
E GRUYTER MOUTON
DOI10.1515/ijsl-2012-0050 IJSL2012; 217 : 7 5 -9 8
esmond Fernandes
Modernity and the linguistic genocide of
Kurds in Turkey
Abstract:
Zygmunt Bauman, Alexander Laban Hilton and Paul Havemann,
amongst others, have argued that genocide is intimately linked to modernity.
Modern d iscourses on developm ent, m odernization an d western science as well
as key me ta-narratives of mode rnity (advancing the teleological myth of progress
and civilization), gard ener 's vision s and the very categorization and stand ard-
ization of nation al lang uag es (crucial to the biopolitical formation of global pop -
ulations under the system of modern nation-states) have all legitimated and ef-
fected pohcies and practices that have been genocidal in their nature and scope.
This article exam ines an d details the ex tent to wh ich all these identified aspec ts
of modernity can be observed in the case of Turkey. The findings indicate that
linguistic/cultural and physical genocide of Kurds in Turkey has taken place
(over the pa st eight and a half de cades) a s a direct consequ ence of the Kemalist/
Ataturkist modernity project. Language policy - which has advocated linguistic
imperialism alongside hnguistic genocide - has been a critical tool for the cre-
ation of the modern Turkish nation-state.
Keywords: Kurds; m odern ity; ge nocide; triage
Desmond Fernandes:
The Campaign Against Criminalising Communities.
E-mail : desmond2222@gmail .com
Introduction
In recent years, a number of scholars, drawing upon a range of case studies and
wider structural analyses, have engaged in a number of debates and concluded
that genocid e - inclusive of linguistic genocide - and mo dernity are closely
interwoven (Hinton 2007 :420). They have argued that modern disco urses on de-
velopment, modernization and western science as well as key meta-narratives of
modernity (advancing the teleological myth of progress and civilization), the
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
2/25
7 6 D Fernandes DE GR UYT ER M O UT O N
legitimated and effected policies and practices that have been genocidal (inclu-
sive of linguistically geno cidal) in their natu re a nd scope.
These studies are of considerable relevance to linguists who are engaged in
linguistic human rights advocacy and who are seeking to analyze how and why
linguistically genocidal policies, educational programs and practices have been
conceptualized and implemented (and often legitimized) by nation states as part
of wider cultur al an d physically geno cidal plans to wes ternize, develop, m odern-
ize and civilize societies. This paper presents the key conceptual findings of
Visvanathan (1988), Solomon (2010) and Havemann (2005) and integrates them
for the first time into a case study analysis of the genocide of Kurds in modern
Turkey.
The findings of this study emphasize the manner in which genocidal (inclu-
sive of linguistically genocidal) processes in Turkey against the Kurdish Other
have not been accidental by-products of the state's modernity project: they have
been central aspec ts of the drive to transform society. Linguistic genocide, in this
sense, is analyzed within the wider context in which Kurds have been geno-
cidally targeted. The presentational style that has been adopted - which is used
in a number of journals, papers and academic publications by scholars such
as Bourke (2000), Ahmed (2003), Shoup (2006), Banerjee (2007), Laing (2008),
Zeydanlioglu (2008, 2009), Uçarlar (2009) and Skutnabb-Kangas (2010) -
extensively draw s up on selective and block quota tions to highlight key findings.
This study em phas izes the value and relevance of reflecting u po n the m ann er
in which the linguistic genocide (alongside other forms of cultural and physical
genocide) of Kurds in modern Turkey has taken place at a time when, all too
distressingly:
- The Turkish state still persists in bra nd ing such deb ate as thou ght crime
(Fernandes 2010a).
- Many visiting as well as residen t genocide scho lars, linguists, journ alists,
academics, MPs, editors, publishers and human rights analysts in Turkey
have been reluctant to even address the Kurdish modernity and/or genocide
(inclusive of the linguistic genocide) que stion due to the oppressive situa-
tion th at exists (Beçikçi 2009: 2; Fernan des 2007, 2010a).
- People who have dared to engage in such thou ght crime have found them-
selves being removed from their university posts in Turkey or (if they are
visiting Turkey) denied en try to the country or detain ed, depo rted an d
subjected to harrowing, lengthy and expensive court cases, criminalization,
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
3/25
DE G RU YT ER M O U TO N Linguistic genocide in Turkey
Several publishers in Turkey, fearful of criminalization, have exercised
self-censorship and mutilated a number of international texts (when
translating them into Turkish) that address these concern s, thereby
depriving reade rs (including linguists) from accessing key findings that
could be of use to their future work (Üngör
2007;
Fernandes 2010a).
Many Turkish universities, fearful of state targeting, have continued to stifle
academic deb ate in these areas and barred a num ber of stude nts from
researching these subject areas (Lofti
2007:1;
Fernan des 2010a).
The physical, linguistic, and cu ltural genocide com mitted by Turkey
against the Kurds is generally treated with silence an d/o r considered
controversial. The statu s of the Turkish governm ent in denying their actions
has created pressure on the United States and other Western Nations
governments, universities, and media organizations to treat this holocaust
as delusio ns of the Kurdish peo ple (Swartz 2007 :1).
Herman an d Peterson (2010: 88) have additionally identified a remarkably
deep
ideological bias but also a cons istent, even a rigid one over a long
period of
time
that ha s resulted in gen ocide not really being significantly
addressed or debated in mu ch of the
U
mainstream press, as far as
Turkey's treatm ent of its Kurds in the contem porary period is conce rned.
ey terms and definitions
Key terms need to be defined at the outset of the study. Modernity can best be
described as a set of interrelated proce sses tha t characteriz[ej the emergence
of 'modern society'. Politically, modernity involves the rise of secular forms
of government ... Economically, [it] refers to capitalist expansion and its
derivatives Socially, [it] entails the replacem ent of 'trad ition al' loyalties with
'mod ern' on es and culturally, it encom passes the m o v em en t. .. to an emphat-
ically secular and materialist worldview which , in man y way s , was epito-
mized by Enlightenm ent thou gh t (Hinton
2002: 7,
8). Social scientists , accord-
ing to the Encyclopedia of Science, Technology and Ethics (2005, cited in Book
Rags [2006:1]), describe modern ity as a particula r form of culture or society de-
pendent on and supportive of science and technology, with the process of creat-
ing such a society defined as m odern ization Modernization is a . . . term for a
concept known in the nineteenth century as the 'civilizing' process, and during
the first half of the twe ntieth century a s 'W esternization' .
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
4/25
7 8 D Fernandes DE GR UYTE R M O UT ON
By 'genocide' we mean the destruction of a nation or of an ethnic group Generally
speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, ex-
cept when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to
signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essen tial founda-
tions of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves
Genocide has two phases: one, destruction of the nationa l pa ttern of the oppressed g roup;
the other, the imposition of the national pattern of the oppressor. (Lemkin 1944: 80).
In sociolinguistic terms, Lemkin identified the following acts as genocidal when
assessing Nazi policies and practices:
In the incorporated areas ... local institutions of self-government were destroyed and a
German pattern of administration imposed. Every reminder of former national character
was obliterated. Even commercial signs and inscriptions on buildings, roads, and streets,
as well as names of communities and of localities, were changed to a German form
Nationals of Lu xe m bu rg ... were required to assume in lieu thereof the corresponding Ger-
man first nam es; or, if that is impossible, they must select German first names The de-
struction of the national pattern in the social field has been accomplished ... by German-
ization of the judicial language and of the bar The local population is forbidden to use
its own language in schools and in printing. According to the decree of August 6,1940, the
language of instruction in all Luxemburg schools was made exclusively German. (Lemkin
1944:
83,
85)
Linguistic genocide is 'prohibiting th e use of the langu age of the group in daily
intercourse or in schools, or the printing and circulation of pubhcations in the
language of the group'. This was how linguistic genocide was defined in Article
III(l) of the final draft of wha t becam e the [Genocide] Convention (Skutnabb-
Kangas 2000:1). Although this article was voted down for questionable political
reasons when the Convention was finally accepted, those states then mem bers
of the UN were in agreement that this was how the ph enom enon could be de-
fined (Skutnabb-Kangas 2000 :1). Policies of assim ilation - aim ed at eradication
of indig eno us/m inority educ ation - which linguistically, often also cultu rally
result in transference to the majority grou p , can also be held to be genocida l,
according to Articles II(e) and II(b) in the p resen t conv ention (Skutnabb-Kangas
2000:1) and Lemkin (Docker 2004:13).
Ethnocide, as defined by Lemkin (who coined the term alongside genocide)
and several other scholars, is often held to be synonymous with the term and
phen om eno n of genocide (Lemkin 1944; Lukunka 2007). Constructive gen ocide
is defined in the following m ann er:
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
5/25
DE GR UY TER M O U TO N Linguistic genocide in Turkey 9
R ac ism ... which denies the very existence of its victims, can safely be termed, in law, 'con-
structive genoc ide'. When a pe o p le .. . are not recognized as existing, when they are denied
their homeland , their national existence and identity, and the basic rights and fundamental
freedoms accorded to other peoples - wha t, in such circumstances, remains of them and for
them as a people? They become non-people and the individuals non-persons. Is this not in
ef fe ct ... constructive genocide? (Al-Qasem 1977:13)
Phillipson defines linguistic imperialism as:
... a theoretical construct, devised to account for linguistic hierarchization, to address
issues of why some languages come to be used m ore and others less, what structures and
ideologies come to be used more and others less, what structures and ideologies facilitate
such processes, and the role of language professionals Linguistic imperialism is a sub-
type of linguicism Linguistic imperialism takes p la c e .. . where language interlocks with
other dimensions, cultural (particularly in education, science and the media), economic
and political. (Phillipson
1997:
238-239)
Modernity and genocide: theoretical
considerations
Modernity is fundamentally about conquest, 'the imperial regulation of land,
the discipline of the sou l, and th e creation of tru th' (Turner 1990: 4), a discou rse
that enable d the large-scale regulation of hu m an iden tity - even in a linguistic
sense - both within Europe and its colon ies (Ashcroft et al. 200 0: 145). Such
regulation a nd s tand ardiz ation wa s often effected in the nam e of prom oting west-
ern science, the nation state, modern empires, civilization and progress. Alvares
(1988:
32) argues th at this app lication of reductionist science sought structur ally
to r e d u c e .. . diversity by eliminating it, and introducing more simplified, mech-
anized designs instead The process of elimination . . . [in] . . . the dom ain of
lang uag e w as, consequen tly, all too often rationalized and und ertak en to stan-
dardize the popular language and eliminate anarchy in the domain of the peo-
ple's speech an d the peo ple's use of 'other ' langu ages (Alvares 1988: 32). Most
significantly, all ord inary exper ience was to be recas t in the 'official lan gu age',
stam ped with official appro val, to be considered worthy of hu m an use (Alvares
1988: 32).
To Devy (2009: 46), the rhetoric of mo dernity an d the ideology of progress
boiled down to wh at Gandhi called violence . The resulting ethical framework
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
6/25
8 0 D Fernandes DE GR UY TER M O U TO N
an d belief systems - being routinely destroyed Modern civilization is base d
on unres tricted violence (Devy
2009:
46). For Visvanatha n:
Theories like racism in anthropology, orientalism in linguistics, IQ in psychology, social
Darwinism in political economy and biology, are bracketed off as 'pseudo-sciences' or as
distortions of normal [modern] science. I suggest an altemative explanation. The maraud-
ing genius of science needs these spaces - these 'pseudo-sciences' - for the free play of its
imagination. This collective unconsciousness of science constitutes an integral pa rt of the
scientific experiment. Marking it off saves science as a phenomenon but contributes little to
our understanding of it. t does not explain why these theories so often recur in science . One
can see the same trend in the modern discourse on development. Development should be
regarded as a [modern] scientific project. It represents the contemporary rituals of the labo-
ratory state. As a project, it is composed of four theses, ingrained in the logic of western
science, of modernity as technocracy. One can call them:
1. The Hobbesian project, the conception of a society based on the scientific method;
2.
The imperatives of progress, which legitimize the use of social engineering on all those
objects defined as backward or retarded;
3.
The vivisectional m andate, where the o ther becomes the object of experiment which in
essence is violence and in which pa in is inflicted in the name of science;
4. The idea of triage combining the concepts of rational experiment, the concept of obso-
lescence and of vivisection - whereby a society, a subculture or a species is labeled as
obsolete and condemned to death because rational judgment [by those overseeing the
modern nation-state] has deemed it incurab le.
Development as a [modern] technocratic project includes all four themes. (Visvanathan
1988:
258-259)
As he argues:
In fact, if concepts could ever be death warrants, the above glossary could be regarded
as genocidal Lurking quietly vnthin modernity-as-a-scientific-project is the idea of
triage
If progress dem ands the summ oning of the Other into modernity,
tri ge
is the
dispensing vsrith of the O th er ... . Societies and cultures are now being destroyed because
they are considered refractory to the scientific gaze The western encounter vnth the
other ends in its eventual logic as erasure Science [in this context] has no place for
the defeated except as objects of an experiment Social triage... is a deliberate decision
or act of a state to define a target group such as a minority within its territory as dispens-
able. The decision, however, m ust also be articulated on rational ground s. For, though
tri-
ge is genocide, it involves the rational imposition of death on those regarded as refractory
to the scientific gaze. It is in this sense tha t the term helps us to understand the particular
quality of violence of which scientific rationality is capable. (Visvanathan 1988: 259, 271,
272)
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
7/25
DE GR UY TER M O U TO N Linguistic genocide in Turkey 8
ture the idea of a ma ss society of equal a nd uniform individ uals. Modern society
wa s m ono cultu ral in more ways tha n o ne (Visvanathan 1988: 276). With the re-
alization of such projects , as May (1999:1, 2) ha s observed: Not surprisingly,
education - as a key institution of the nation-state - has played a central part
historically in the subjugation of indigenous languages and cultures and the re-
lated assim ilation of indigenous peop les into the dom inant or 'comm on' language
and culture of the nation-state . In the process, indigenous languages and cul-
tures were specifically proscribed, dem eane d and dim inish ed - ind eed, often
subjected to linguistic/constructive genocide and linguistic imperialism (Fer-
na nd es 2010a) - by the state via its edu cation system Consequently, indige-
nou s languag es - when acknowledged as existing , that is - and cultures
[often] came to be constructed as antediluvian and unnecessary in the modern
world - a vestige of 'prim itive' cultures bes t left in the past. In contras t, 'n atio na l'
languages and cultures - or, more specifically, the languages and cultures of
dom inant ethnic groups - were viewed as the apogee of modernity and progress
(May
1999:1,
2).
For Solomon (2010: 44): Historically-speaking, it goes with out saying th at
language poHcy has been a critical tool for the creation of the modern nation-
state and a con stant site of state interven tion . Indeed , in w hat has virtually
been a universal process , mo dern nation-states have established themselves
linguistically by the elimination of difference through standardization - along
with the concomitant displacement of minority populations and the appropria-
tion of minority land s (Solomon 2010: 44). And educa tion , as Alvarado (2010:
1) observes, is such that it plays a vital role in shap ing both lan guag e sta nda rd-
ization an d its primacy over alternative langu age us e .
For Solomon (2010: 45), looking at the history of modern linguistic trans -
formation, postcolonial writers have shown not only how the colonial and post-
colonial state mobilized language in the creation of 'invented traditions', but
also how the establishment of national literary and linguistic traditions ... in
metropolitan social formations originated as a technique of colonial governance
- in which other languages were often subjected to hnguistic imperialism and
linguistic/constructive genocide. To Havem ann (2005: 57, 59), colonization is a
key feature of mo dernity in which indigenous peoples:
. . . have been [perceived as chronic obstacles to modernization to be overcome by whatever
means - typically by violence concealed behind liberal legalities Modernity [in this
context] ... generates waste: both the physical detritus of industriahsation ... and those
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
8/25
8 2 D Fernandes DE GR UYT ER M O UT O N
Consequently, in its imp erial/paleo -im perial/co lonial con text, the law defines
both the citizen's bu nd le of rights and the exclu ded 's absen ce of rights [The
excluded] occupy a zone of exception wherein the sovereign suspends its law's
protection from them and their land or lives may be taken with impu nity (Have-
mann
2005:
59,60). Torture, incarceration (in camps and prisons), deculturation,
forced resettlement, forced cultural transfer of children through educational lan-
guage programmes, cleansing and/or disappearance within a genocidal context
become rationalizing instrum ents th at are used by m odern vivisectionist, labora-
tory states.
M odernity related discourse[s] deh um aniz e poten tial targets and con struct
them as enem ies of the state , terroris ts and traitors , effectively placing
them outside of the state's protection and denying them their citizenship rights
(Zeydanlioglu 2009: 5). Technologies tied in to the western, colonizing, moder-
nity project - railways, dams, telegraph systems, aircraft, poison gas - have also
been used to crucially advance quite specific genocidal agendas (Fernandes
2010a). To H inton:
European [modernity linked] expansion was largely driven by a desire for new lan ds, con-
verts,
wealth, slaves, and m arkets, [and] some scholars refer to the resulting ann ihilation
o
indigenous peoples as 'development' or 'utilitarian' genocides This devastation was le-
gitimated by contradictory discourses that simultaneously asserted that the colonizers had
the 'bu rden ' of 'civilizing' the 'savages' living on their newly conquered territories and that
their deaths mattered little since they were not fully hum an.
Metanarratives of modernity supplied the terms by which indigenous peoples were con-
structed as the inverted image of 'civilized' peoples. Discourse about these 'others' was fre-
quently structured by a series of value-laden binary oppositions (see also Bauman 1991;
Taussig
1987);
modernity/tradition, civilization/savagery, us/them, centre/margin, civilized/
wild, humanity/barbarity, progress/degeneration, advanced/backward, developed/
underdeveloped Maybury-Lev r̂is [2002] describes how the inhu mane and genocidal
treatm ent of indigenous peoples was often framed in meta-narratives of modernity, particu-
larly the notion of 'progress'. (Hinton
2002;
9,10)
Certainly, it need s to be recognized tha t, within these types of ideological frame-
works and planning contexts, cultural destruction even in the post-1945 period
has become an accepted key process that has often been advocated in par-
ticular modernization-linked development programmes. Escobar (1994: 4) has
revealed the way in wh ich one of the mo st influential doc um en ts of the post-
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
9/25
DE GR UY TER M O U TO N Linguistic genocide in Turkey 8
develo ped' societies . It clarified th at: There is a sense in which rapid economic
progress is impossible without painful adjustments. Ancient philosophies have
to be scrap ped. Old social institutio ns have to disinteg rate. Bonds of caste, creed
and race have to burst, and large numb ers of persons who canno t keep up with
progress have to have their expe ctation s of a comfortable life frustrated (Escobar
1994: 4).
As Visvan athan (1988: 277) has arg ued: Underlying mo dernization is a sub -
stratum of intolerance. The variegated traditions of .. . the nom adic, the tribal,
the pastoral and the pea san t conceptually and practically have to be bulldozed
into a flatland called mod ernity a nd there is little time for con sultation o the
laboratory state, these people are . . . ethnics practising styles of li fe .. . which are
refractory to science . Consequently:
According to the logic of development, they must either acculturate or disappear In the
process, [allegedly] peaceful developm ent [of this
kind]
has created more refugees What
we are in fact confronting here is developm ent as slow genocide Intrinsic to all such
technocratic projects is the idea . . . [that] a mechanical scheme [can b e ] . . . imposed on a
culture without any consideration for the traditions of the community.... [And with this]
. . . lcirge dams literally become experiments on the people The technology of most large
dams is basically vivisectional For the scientist-technocrat, the development of all land
is inevitable.... The movement from cultural destruction through obsolescence to triage
as-erasure is a short
step.
(Visvanathan
1988: 277,
278,279)
For Visvanathan (1988: 280), then , the exam ple of the elimination of the Ache
India ns in Paraguay has raised in a fundam ental way the problem of genocide
through development. The process of resettlement, involving slow death through
dec ultura tion, does fall within the clauses of the Genocide convention. Item three
of the Genocide convention of the UN includes: 'Deliberately inflicting on the
group co nditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole
or in par t' . Consequently, to remove tribal people from their na tur al hab itat
wou ld be cultur al ethno cide The fact [is] tha t the laboratory state now deems
certain cultures dispen sab le (Visvanathan 1988: 280) and , in this respect, the
notion of calculated dispensability, of erasing people from the commons of the
world (Visvanathan 1988: 280) becomes a rational, modernizing bu reaucratic/
accou nting c onsid eration (Neu an d Therrien 2003). Rojas (1996:1), in reviewing
Rostow's 1960 mo dernization th eory - wh ich ha s so influenced Turkey's Cold
and post-Cold War development-cum-counter-insurgency programme in the pre-
dom inantly K urdish East (Fernan des 2010a) - has observed the man ner in which
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
10/25
8 4 D Fernandes DE GR UY TER M O U TO N
be anti-progress an d inimical to the interests of the mod ern, western state. It
follows that crush ing hum an beings involved in these social distu rba nce s - even
in a genocidal sen se, if nee d be (Fernand es 2010a) - takes the form of 'hu m an i-
tarian actions' to preserve social order and social peace to maintain the balance
[ofthe] family-civil society- state (Rojas 1996 :1). Maybury-Lewis, moreover, con-
cluded in 2002 (cited in Dean 200 9: 1069) tha t all too often [nation ] state s feel
they cannot modernize effectively if they tolerate indigenous cultures in their
midst .
4 The modernity project in Turi
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
11/25
DE GR UY TE R M O U TO N Linguistic genocide in Turkey 8
Concerning the nature of this project, Atatürk is recorded as emphasizing
tha t the Turks have only ever gone in one direction - tow ards the West (cited in
pi g l
2 0 1 0 :1 ) .. . For everything in the w orld - for civilization, for life, for suc-
cess, the tru est guide is knowledge and science (cited in Kinzer 2001 : 36)
Gentlemen, uncivilized people are doomed to be trodden under the feet of civi-
lized peo ple We will live as a progressive and civilized na tion in the aren a of
civilization (cited in Zeydanlioglu 2008: 155, 160), wh ere we will take science
and technology from wherever it is and insert it in the head of each member of
the nation. There is no restriction an d cond ition on science and tec hn ol og y. ... If
[ignorance] is not eliminated, we will stand on the same spot. If something is
stand ing on the same spot, this m ean s that it is going bac kw ards (Atatürk, cited
in cited in Zeydanhoglu [2008:160]).
For Conversi (2006: 326), Atatürk could only conceive developm ent as u tter,
rem orseless and com plete W esternization . As far as the founde rs of the Turkish
Republic were concerned, the E u ro p ea n .. . experience of the past century was
central to their p ro je c t— Em phasis was given to developing a sense of nation-
hoo d based on the Turkish langu age (Kirisci 200 4:276 ). Indee d, Tachjian (2009:
2) con clud es that it wa s just as im portant to 'Turkify' it econom ically, linguisti-
cally and demographically as it was to liberate the land. Indeed, the aim of the
leaders was to establish a [modern] nation-state that was based exclusively on
Turkish identity. Consequently, the presence of other ethno-n ationa l groups, the
question of their cohesion and investment in the development of their commu-
nity became insupportable . Colonial genocides against Kurds, Armenians, As-
syrians, Chaldeans, Syriacs, Greeks and Others have, not surprisingly, taken
place (Fernandes 2010a, 2010b, 2010c).
For Üngör:
. . . the key discursive devices which the Kemalist centre employed to represent their rela-
tionsh ip with the Kurdish periphery was 'civilization' The non-Turkish population of the
eastern provinces was looked down upon as primitive and inferior, fit only] for colonial rule
by a Turkish [westernized] master nation which operated in the name of progress and ratio-
nality. They were viewed, moreover, as inherently treacherous and anti-Turkish and hence
threats to security against which Turkish state and army personnel had to be perm anently
on guard. (Üngör 2008: 32)
Forging a uniform nation out of the heterogeneous Ottoman population meant
official into leranc e to differences. In tolerance m ean t either forceful assim ilation
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
12/25
8 6 D Fernandes DE GR UY TER M O U TO N
geno cide of Kurds (Fernand es 2007). So assim ilation followed by eviction and
decimation of the 'others' became inbuilt characteristics of the republican re-
gim e (Ergil 2009 :1).
It was the d iscourse of we sternization/m ode rnization , Mesud Yegen (1999)
co nte nd s, tha t led the Republic to perceive - an d de-legitimize - the Kurd-
ish resistance as a resistance of pre-m odem ity and briga nd s (Uçarlar 2009 :
117). Atatiirk, indeed, is recorded as justifying repressive - indeed, genocidal -
state action in the following way: Could a civilized nation tolerate a m ass of
peop le who let themselves be led by the no se by a herd
oishaykhs dedes sayyids
chelebis babas
and
amirsV
(McDowall 1996: 196). The physical ex istenc e of
Kurds, moreover, could even be rejected and denied by Turkish state-discourse
thoug h the app lication of mo dern pseudo-scientific theories (Fernandes 2010a).
After the elimination and forced removal of the Kurdish elites from the
East , using such rationa lizations, the Kemalists saw the rem aining K urdish
pop ulation . . . as 'raw ma terial ' for the Turkish nation (Üngör 200 8: 33) to be
disposed of at will (Nezan 1993; Fernandes 1998, 2010a). The Turkish constitu-
tion, moreover, con secrate d Kem al's vo luntarist fiction, accord ing to wh ich
Turkey
is
strictly Turkish (Chaliand 1994:30 ). As the m ode rn state wa s founde d
on an extrem e fascist kind of natio na lism , like tha t of the Nazis in som e re-
spects (Hayri, as cited in Akturk et al.
[2001:
479]) and that of Mussolini in Italy
(Tirman 2005; Beçikçi, as quoted by Van Bruinessen [2005: 28]), impulses that
made genocide a conscious strategy amongst the Kemalist elite became even
more pronounced (Fernandes 2010c). Orientahsm and other western pseudo-
scientific theories justified and inspired genocidal assaults against the Other. For
Zeydanhog lu (200 8:159): The Kemalists took on w hat I call the 'White Turkish
M an's Burde n' in order to carry out a civilizing m ission :
The making of the Turkish nation went hand in hand with the forgetting, postponing and
canceling ofthe Kurdish ethnic identity [Mesud] Yegen 199 9:1 20)... and the suppression
of the Kurdish ethnic identity was made possible by a state knowledge-production that re-
lied on European O rientalist constructs and racial theories. Etienne Copeaux
(1998: 52)
h as
unde rlined that Turkish historiography and linguistics are 'children of Western Orientalism;
they are its products'. (Zeydanhoglu 2008:161,162,163)
In prac tical term s, Turkish Orientalism wa s crystallized in Kemalist pse ud o-
scientific theor ies: These theories were disse m inated widely through ou t society,
especially in school textbooks, and still continue to influence the discourse of
Turkish natio nah sm tod ay (Zeydanhoglu 200 8:16 4). The application of torture
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
13/25
DE GR UY TE R M O U TO N Linguistic genocide in Turkey 8
In terms of the manner in which metanarratives of modernity supplied the
terms by which indigenous Kurdish peoples were constructed as the inverted im-
age of civilized peo ples, Ayce Akturk ha s detailed the m ann er in which Kurds
were called kuyruklu kurt, meaning 'Kurd with a tail', or kiro, meaning 'uncivi-
lized, uneducated, rude, worthless, one who knows nothing'. Meanwhile , the
Kemalist inspired, modern mass education system and med ia indoctrinated
people that Turks were the h eroes of the world (Akturk et al. 2001: 479, 480 ).
With the Republic becoming the great storyteller of the nation , sponsoring the
grand narratives of nationalism, independence and secularism , Kurdish dis-
course s were cast as villains (Houston 2001: 89). During the Tunceli [Dersim]
rebellion , unsurprisingly, it wa s said: 'W hat the Republican regime has been
doing in Tunc eli' - i.e. its linguis tic/cultural an d physically genocidal assau lt
against Kurds (Sociahst Party of Kurdistan [PSK] 2008; Fernandes 1998, 2010a,
2010c) - 'is not a military op era tion , bu t the march of civilization' (Mesud
Yegen
1999:
560). The Turkish position was that these 'primitives' and 'ban dits '
should give way to modern civilization, just like the American Indians had. This
should be effected by their assimilation to the supposedly superior Turkish cul-
ture an d the physical elimination of those who resisted (Van Bruinessen 1994b:
167,168). After the Dersim rebellion had bee n supp res sed , other Kurdish regions
being 'civilized' from abov e knew better tha n to resist (Van Bru inessen 1994a:
12,13).
Military reports call[ed] all people of Dersim indiscriminately 'bandits'
even as the Law on Resettlemen t providefd] the legal framework for a policy
of eth no cid e (Van Bru inessen 1994: 149, 150, 152, 153). Inö nü , right ha nd an d
successor of Atatiirk , indeed , expressed th e official positio n: 'We are frankly
[njat ionalist—
We
m ust Turkify - even in socio-linguistic terms - the inhabit-
ants of our land at any price, and we will annihilate those w ho opp ose the Turks
or le turquisme (Barkey an d Fuller 1998:10) (Jongerden
2001:
81).
Concerning the impacts of the Southeast Anatolia Regional Development
(GAP) Project, intended to modernize, civilize and develop the predominantly
Kurdish East via the con struction and ope ration of
9
power stations,
22
dams and
linked developm ents, the top-down project has always been und erpinn ed by the
long standing assimilation policies of the Turkish state with regard to [indige-
nous] Kurdish people - their forced inclusion into mainstream Turkish culture
and society (Ronayne 200 5:36 ), using genocidal processes and tech niqu es (Fer-
na nd es 2010a). For Gerger (1997:18), mod ern Turkish na tion al, s ecular values as
advance d by Kemalism had ensured that the nation -buildin g process degener-
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
14/25
8 8 D
Fernandes
DE GRUYT R
MOUTON
Constitution as sacrosanct which cannot be amended; even proposals to do so
may constitute a criminal offence .
5 The Kurdish genocide 1924-2010
The consequences of this paleo-imperialist march towards modernity and civili-
zation have been d evas tating. Not only the Kurds, but o thers have been subjected
to ongoing genocidal assaults as modern laws, administrative, developmental,
educational and accounting/propaganda systems, penal codes (some fashioned
on Mussolini's fascist codes) and rational military and counter-insurgency meth-
ods and techniq ues have been applied (F ernandes 2010a, 2010b, 2010c). In
Besikci's (1990) view, the law on the pacification and modern reform of Tunceli
un dou bted ly served to legitimate genocide (Van Bruinessen 1994b: 183).
It is also imp ortant to apprec iate that Atatürk, as its first Preside nt, saw the
unification an d mod ernization of educa tion as the key (Commission on Social
Issues 20 08: 1) toward s framing c ulture within a modernist-Turkish nation alist
straight-jacket. Under this guiding framework, the diversity of langua ges in
Anatolia was an obstacle to the construction of a homogeneous cultural identity
that would become the basis of a national one. Thus, the imposition of Turkish
lang uag e - in schoo ls, law courts, press and media outlets and all public recre-
ation al and v/ork spaces - becam e the most significant instr um ent of the state
for creating a Turkish national identity. The new link between the state, its citi-
zens and the national identity was enforced by the obligation of Turkish as the
national language, whose alphabet [even] replaced Arabic letters with the Latin
script in November
1928
(Uçarlar 200 9:120 ):
The Latin script
w s
introduced not only
to
undermine the power of religious lea d e rs .. . but
also to break ties with the Ottoman past in order to accelerate the reforms in favor of
westernization Furthermore, the expected increase of literacy was supposed to serve
the construction and spread of the concept of [the modern] nation Moreover, the Turk-
ish language was [itself] purified from the Arabic and Persian words that represented the
Islamic and 'backward' Ottoman past. (Uçarlar 2009:121,122)
For Shafak: In the nam e of mod ernization, our language shrunk tremendously
(cited in Lea 2006 :1) Very few peo ple in Turkey questio n today the Turkeyfi-
cation of the language that we went through. I find that very dangerous because
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
15/25
DE GR UY TE R M O U TO N Linguistic genocide in Turkey 9
the Turkish Historical Fou nda tion. The aim of the foundation was to create a
natio nal [modern] edu cation in the service of political aim s (Uçarlar 2009 :121,
122).
To Uçarlar: Every attemp t by the Turkish elite to eliminate the hegem ony of
the Kurdish elite over the Kurdish people also aimed to destroy the political, eco-
nom ic and social elemen ts of Kurdishness, as well as the co nsciou sness of Kurd-
ishn ess am ong the peop le It is not so striking that the Kurdish lang uag e was
targeted in the service of [modern] nation and state build ing (Uçarlar 200 9:
125).
In terms of the painful adju stm ents that were deem ed to be necessary to
progress to the level of contemporary civilization, certain Kurdish sources have
estimated that over half a million [Kurdish] pe op le were depo rted, of whom
nearly half died
en route
between
925
and 1928 alone (Lustgarten
2003:
6). Dur-
ing the aftermath of the failed Sheikh Said uprising of
1925,
seen by many as a
natio nalist and religious respo nse by Kurdish factions to the secular a nd Turkifi-
cation linked reforms of the m odern state (Leicht
1998;
Fernand es 2010c), Randal
(1999: 121) ha s concluded tha t hu nd red s of Kurdish villages were burn ed, and
between 40,000 and 250,000 peasants died in the ensuing 'pacification'. Over
the next dozen years or so, perhaps a million Kurdish men, women and children
were uproo ted and shipped to Western Anatolia . Large pa rts of the Kurdish
popu lation were sent to concentration cam ps in the western provinces (Frodin
1944: 5).
The Turkish Prime Minister reported ly state d in 1938: We will carry out a
military opera tion in Dersim There will be an exterm ination action Our
army ... will begin maneuvers in the area, ridding it of its inhabitants. In this
way, the problem will be pulled up by
its
roo ts (Dersimi 1999
[ 952] :
289). Ataturk,
in a speech at the opening of parliam ent in
1936,
similarly clarified that: We have
to remove this a bscess [Dersim, rena m ed Tunceli in Turkish] at its roots. To deal
with this problem, we will give wider pow ers to the gov em m ent (White 200 0:
79). Such pow ers led to further genocidal mass acres, slow death m easures,
Turkish place name-changing, forced assimilation and forced resettlement (Fer-
na nd es 1998, 2010c).
In linguistically and culturally genocidal terms, in March 1924 - i.e. one year
before the first Kurdish rebellion/up rising - the public use of Kurdish and the
teachin g of Kurdish wa s proh ibited. Influential Kurdish land ow ners and tribal
chiefs were forcibly resettled in the west of the coun try (Zürcher 2004:178). Mod-
ern law courts refused to accept Kurdish (Fernandes 2010a). Article
2
of the 1924
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
16/25
9 0 D Fernandes DE GR UY TER M OU TO N
According to the 1925 Plan for the Reformation of the East, "the cities and
towns where Kurds live were listed, and speaking Kurdish there was banned"
(Bayrak [1993: 486, 487], cited in Malmisanij [2006: 6]). Kurdish speakers found
themselves being fined according to a tariff for every Kurdish word spoken (Fer-
nandes
1998).
"Kurdish language, music and national costume were outlawed
Like it or not, everyone w ithin Turkey's bord ers were by legislation declared to be
Turks. The words Kurds and Kurdistan like Armenia and Pontus were forcibly
erased from d ictionaries and lite rature " even as "m any slogans were coined: 'One
Turk is worth the whole world ... Turkish blood is clean, pure and superior ' "
(Baksi 1986:103). Broadcasting and pubhshing in the Kurdish language was pro-
hibited (Fernandes 2010c) even as "the newly established nationalist institution
called People's House { alkevi] would gear Turkish identity and Kemalist ideol-
ogy to the popular aud ience" (Üngör 2008: 33).
"The compulsory adoption of surnames in 1934" served to "turn numerous
Kurdish families into Turks, ö ztü rks , Tatars, or U zbeks" (Van B ruinessen
1997:
6).
Alinak reiterates the view that Turkification of Kurds via the schooling system
and forced resettlement were core objectives advanced by inönü and Marshal
Çakmak during the 193O's (Önderoglu 2010:1). For Jongerden:
In the 193O's and 194O's, government policy in Dersim ... resembles the conquest and
occupation of enemy territory.... The building of an educational structure was given
pr io rity. ... It was even suggested that Kurdish children be sent to boarding schools where
they would speak exclusively in Turkish Right up to the present day, boarding schools
are established in the Kurdish areas in order t have more control over the children's educa-
tion and to enforce a switch of their identity. (Jongerden 2003: 77,78)
In Dersim, after the 1937-1938 genocidal onslaught, "the Turkish army kidnapped
many Kurdish children w ho were unde r the age of seven and placed them in Turk-
ish families in western Turkey" (Koivunen 2002: 99). The Tunceli law ensured
that educational establishments engaged in assimilating orphan Kurdish girls
strictly enforced the teaching of Turkish, whilst banning the Kurdish language
(Fernandes 2010a). The Resettlement Law of the 193O's, moreover, "abrogated
any legal recognition of Kurdish tribes and their leaders, thus permitting the au-
tomatic seques tration of their imm ovable assets. All settlem ents in which Kurdish
wa s the mothe r ton gu e" were to be "dissolved, and the d isplaced Kurds were to be
resettled" - as part of the Turkification drive - "in localities where they would
mak e up no more tha n 5% of the pop ulation It w as further prescribed that
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
17/25
DE GR UY TER M O U TO N Linguistic genocide in Turkey 9
family un it. It has been judged that p arents, m arried son s and m arried grand sons
shall be evicted to different a reas (Turkish Hum an Rights Association 1996:19).
Other culturally and physically genocidal plans, policies and practices have
been evident since the 193O's (Fernandes 2007, 2010a). Forty nine Kurdish intel-
lectuals , for ex am ple, were arrested in 1959 as par t of a wider initiative tha t w as
aimed at intentionally murdering 1,000 Kurdish intellectuals (Anter 1991). During
the 199O's, Kurdish intellectuals were on ce again subjected to assassin ation and
disappearance (Fernandes 2010a). During the 194O's, a report by the Inspector
General of the First Inspectorate recommended that more Kurdish leaders from
the East be deported even as Turkish language board ing schools for Kurdish
children were to be con structed , where all traces of Kurdish cultu re and lan-
guage could be expu ng ed (McDowall 1996: 209, 210). The 1949 Provinc ial Ad-
min istration Law further auth orized the chan ging of nam es of places an d this
authority was used quite liberally. Moreover, article
6
ofthe
972
Popu lation Law
prohibited giving Kurdish nam es to new -bo m s (Yegen 200 8: 3).
After the 1960 cou p, the m ilitary regime in 1961 system atically start ed to
chang e Kurdish place nam es into Turkish and establish reg ional boa rding schools
in order to ass imilate the Kurdish po pu latio n (Uçarlar 2009 : 129). The Forced
Settlement Law that was passed at the time stipulated that this was done in
order to 'carry out certain social reforms' that would 'demolish the order of the
Middle Ages tha t exists in Turkey ' (Zeydanhoglu 2008 : 65). General Gürsel, as
head of the military regime, lauded a book . . . which claimed that the Kurds
were in fact of Turkish origin , and de clared w hilst stan din g on an Am erican ta nk
tha t: 'There are no Kurds in this country. Whoever says he is a Kurd,
I
will spit in
his face' (Zeydanhoglu 200 8: 64, 65).
Waves of place nam e cha ngin g , inde ed, occurred - a nd were initiated -
[even] under so-called liberal govern m ents (Jongerden 2009 : 10). Various gov-
ernm ent initiatives were aimed at stoppin g Kurds from listening to foreign broad-
casts in Kurdish and even accessing Kurdish educational courses internationally
(Fernand es 2010c). Uçarlar (2009:133,134 ) confirms that the military adm inis-
tration (1980-3) ba nn ed strictly the use of Kurdish langua ge The assim ilation
of Kurdish children into the Turkish language w as fostered throug h the dissem i-
nation of compulsory schooling. The Kurdish names of villages that [had] re-
mained intact after the changes of the 196O's were adjusted into Turkish. Kurdish
families were forced to give Turkish names to their children , and this pressure
was still being ap phe d durin g the first decade ofth e 21st century (Fernan des 2007,
2010c). Torture has continued to be applied in a genocidal context (Fernandes
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
18/25
9 2 D Fernandes DE GR UYT ER M O UT O N
Helsinki Watch (1990: 37) ha s further detailed th e ma nne r in wh ich, in May
1989, the National Security Council launched a campaign denying the existence
of a distinct Kurdish nation and a Kurdish language. Pamphlets were issued and
distributed to schools in the south-e ast to reinforce this message. Skutnabb-
Kangas (cited in Fernandes [2006: 34]) concluded in 2002 that Turkey's policy
still fit[ted] two of the definitions of genocide in the
U
International Convention
on the Prevention and Pu nish m ent of the Crime of Genocide [What is hap pen -
ing] is genocide , accord ing to the UN definition In addit ion , Turkey is of
course also comm itting Hnguistic genocide acc ording to the specific definition on
linguistic genocide . More recent assessme nts have drawn the sam e co nclusions
(Skutnabb-Kangas 2005,2010; Skutnabb-Kangas an d Fernandes
2008;
Skutnabb-
Kangas an d D unbar 2010). Even by mid-2010, Cengiz Aktar confirmed tha t teach -
ing Kurdish at [public] school[s] is not at all on the agen da of the governm ent
and state (Aktar 2010:1).
With regard to the na ture of the sta te's genocidal policies in Turkish Kurdis-
tan between 1984-1997, some estimates suggest that over three million Kurds
were forcibly displaced and subjected to mental harm, tens of thousands of peo-
ple were killed, over 40 00 s ettlem ents w ere fully or partially destroyed a nd thou-
sands of people disappeared (Fernandes 2010a, 2010b). In development terms,
too,
the South eastern A natolian Project has been used to facilitate an ethnic and
cultura l genocide again st Kurds (Tataii 2010; see also Fern ande s 2010a). The
genocidal actions of the Turkish state during the 2000-2010 period have also
bee n recognized, as suc h, by a num ber of genocide scho lars, policy analysts, law-
yers,
human rights campaigners, political organizations and movements (Fer-
na nd es 2010a, 2010b, 2010c).
To
Gerger (cited in Cudi [2010:1]), writing in August
2010:
The US seems to have reached some sort of an und ersta ndin g with the
governing Justice and Development Party (AKP) concerning the Kurdish issu e :
The previous state strategy was to nationalist-Kemalists, 'total liquidation through
violence' Now vnth the active aid of president Obama, the liberal coalition under the
AKP government tried 'Açilim' which m eant a new phase - liberal phased liquidation
[But] even this created serious cleavages v«thin the ruling classes and now it seems that
they have met again at the old strategy of nationalist total liquidation through force and
violence. (Cited in Cudi [2010:1])
6 Conclusion
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
19/25
E GRUYTER MOUTON Linguistic genocide in Turkey 93
ing the genocidal process in Turkey has been substantive. For Schulter, it is im-
portant to recognize that:
while
the
European Holocaust
of
1939-1945 against Jews
and
other 'inferior' peoples
rightly serves as an ideal case of genocide, the persecution of... the Kurds under the Turk-
ish Republic, is also genocide in the original and proper sense of the term as coined by the
jurist Raphael Lemkin
. . .
Turkish policy
in
Northern Kurdistan
. . .
might serve
as an ex-
ample
of
the attempted cultural destruction
of
a 'national pattern' by forced . .. 'Turkifica-
tion'. In fact, Lemkin's original description of genocide, with its focus not only on the sys-
tematic slaughter and starvation of the Jews but also on the imposition of the German
language in places such as Luxembourg, might have cited Turkish policy in Northern Kurd-
istan. (Schulter 2000:1)
Today, culturally and linguistically genocidal policies and practices are still in
place and the spectre of physical genocide looms once again (Fernandes 2010a,
2010b). For Havemann (2005: 61): It may be comforting to claim that genocide
was a facet of early/simple/industrial modernity and that it does not happen any
more.
The law, state and dominant culture selectively forget, engaging in histori-
cal denial: they deny the immediacy of genocide and ethnocide or that what went
on in Australia , for example, ought to be described as 'genocide' . However,
modernization has always produced and legitimated atrocities and suffering
In Australia , he concludes - as I do in this article with regard to Turkey - the
apparently 'civilizing' imperatives of modernity... amount to genocide Until
we overcome denial by acknowledging the truth, we can never get to 'the place
called reconciliation' (Havemann 2005: 61, 79).
eferen es
Ahmed, Nafeez. 200 3. Behind the war on
terror.
East Sussex: Clairview.
Aktar,
Cengiz. 2010. Education in mother tongue. Hurr/y en3 August.
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.eom /n.php?n=education-in-mother-tongue-2010-08-13
accessed
3
August 2010).
Akturk, Ayce, Hakki Haylir
Ahmed Tigran. 2001. A foot
in
Australia, three souls
in
Kurdistan.
In Gina Lennox ed.).
Fire,
snow and honey:
voices
from Kurdistan, 477-4 92 . Sydney:
Halstead Press.
Al-Qasem , An is. 1977. Racism and wo rld peace. In Executive Council, International Organization
for the Elimination of
All
Forms of Racial Discrimination [ed. , Zionism and racism:
proceedings of an international
symposium,
7 -16. London: Bill ing
Sons.
Alvarado, Emmanuel. 2010. Language
and
politics.
ew Renaissance
29 September.
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
20/25
9 4 D. Fernandes E GRUYTER MOUTON
Anter, Musa. 1991. Hatiralarim [My mem oirs]. Stockholm ; Wesanen Welat.
Ashcroft, B ill, Gareth Grifñths Helen Tiffin. 200 0.
Post-colonial
studies:
the key
concepts.
London New York; Routledge.
Baksi,
Mahm ut. 1986.
Kurdish voice:
Shivan
Perwer.
Location
not
listed ; Helin House.
Banerjee, Subhabrata. 2007. Corporate social responsibility: th e
good
the
ba d and the ugly.
Cheltenham; Edward Elgar Publishing.
Barkey, Henry Graham
Fuller.
1998. Turkey s
K urdish question.
B oston; Rowman Littlefield.
Ba rt, Daniel. 2005. The Turkish c ond ition. Kurdistan
Observer 26 May.
http;//www.armeniandiaspora.com/showthread.php?28091-The-Turkish-Condition
(accessed
30
July 2010).
Bauman, Zygmunt. 1990 [1989]. Modernity and the holocaust. C ambridge; Polity.
Bauman, Zygmunt. 99 (1989). Modernity and the holocaust. Ithaca; Cornell University Press.
Bayrak, Mehmet. 1993.
KUrtterve
Ulusal-DemokratikMücadeteleri:
Gizli
Belgeler-Araftirmalar-
Notlar. Ankara; Öz-Ge Yayinlari.
Beçikçi, Ismail. 1990. Tunceli kanunu 1935 ve Dersim jenocidi [The Tunceli law of 935 and the
Dersim genoc ide]. Istanbu l; Beige.
Bejikçi, Ism ail. 200 9. Europe subm itted to the Ankara c riteria.
PEN-Kurd
2-9.
http;//www.pen-kurd.org/englizi/ali-kilic/Europe-submitted-to-the-Ankara-criteria.pdf
(accessed 30 juiy 2010).
Book Rags. 2006 . Mode rnization. Book Rags. http;//www.bookrags.com/research/
modernizafion-este-0001_0003_0/ (accessed 30 July 2010).
Bourke, Joanna.
2000.
An
intimate history of kilting.
London; Granta.
Chaliand, Gerard. 1994.
The Kurdish
tragedy.
London; Zed.
Commission
on
S ocial Issues. 2008 . John Dewey
in
Turkey. Social
issues 20
October.
http;//deweycsi.blogspot.com/2008/10/republic-of-turkey-was-proclaimed-on.html
(accessed 30 July 2010).
Conversi, Daniele. 200 6. Genocide, ethnic cleans ing and nationalism . In Gerard Delanty
Krishan Kumar (eds.).
The Sage
h andbook of nations and nationalism 320 -334 . London,
Thousand Oaks New D elhi; Sage.
Copeaux, Etienne. 1998. Turk
tarih
tezinden TUrk-islam sentezine [The Turkish history thesis of
the Turkish-Islam syn thesis]. Istanb ul; Tarih Vakñ Yurt Yayinlari.
Cudi,
Nucan. 201 0. Gerger; New round for Turkey power s trugg le./IW f 5 August.
http;//en.firatnews.com/index.php?rupel=article nucelD=714 (accessed 5 August 2010).
Dersimi,
Nuri. 1999 [1952]. K urdistan tarihinde
Dersim
[Dersim
in the
history
of
Kurdistan].
Berlin; Mezopotamien Verlag.
Dean, Bartholomew. 2009. Machetes in our hands, blood on our faces. Anthropological
u rterly 82 4). 1069-1072.
Devi,G.
N. 200 9. The G N Devi Reader. Hyderabad; Orient Blackswan.
Docker, John. 2004. Raphael Lemkin's history of genocide and colon ialism. Paper presented at
the United States Holocaust Mem orial Museum , Washington, 26 February.
Ergil, Dogu. 2009. O fficial view of the Turkish state towards the m inorities in general.
Kurdish
info
25 November. http;//www .kurdish-info.eu/News -sid-Dogu-Ergil-official-view-o f-the-
turkish-state-towards-the-minorities-in-general-14087.html (accessed 30 July 2009).
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
21/25
E GRUYTER M O U TO N Linguistic genocide in Turkey 9 5
Fernandes, Desm ond. 200 6. Turkey's US backed war on
terror:
a cause for concern?
Variant.
33-36.
Fernandes, D esmond. 200 7.
The
Kurdish
and Armenian
genocides: from
censorship
and denial
to recognition?
Stockhoim:
Apec.
Fernandes, Desmond. 2010a. Modernity mod ernization and the genoc ide of Kurds a nd
Others.
Stockholm: Apec.
Fernandes, Desmond. 2010b.
The Armenian, Assyrian, Syriac Greek
Kurdish,
Greek Cypriot
and other genocides: recognition and
deniatism.
Stockho lm: Apec.
Fernandes, Desmond. 2010c. The politics of genocide recognition and denialism: the Armenian,
Assyrian,
Syriac
Greek Kurdish,
Greek Cypriot
and other genocides. Stockholm : Apec.
Frodin, Johan. 1944. Neuere kulturgeografische Wandlungen in der ostlichen Türkei. Zeitschrift
dergesellschaftfurerdkunde79{\02 . 1-20.
Gerger, Haluk. 1997.
Crisis
in Tur/cey (MERA Occasiona l 28). Amsterd am: MERA.
Havemann, Paul. 2005 . Den ial, modernity and e xclusion: indigenous placelessness in
Australia. Macquarie Law Journal
5.
57-80.
Helsinki Watch. 1990. Destroying ethnic identity: the Kurds o f Turkey. Washington: Helsinki
Watch.
Herman,
Edward David Peterson. 2010.
The
politics of genocide. New York: IWonthly Review.
Hinton, Alexander Laban. 200 2. The dark side of m odernity: towa rd an anthropology of
genocide, in Alexander Laban Hinton (ed.). Annihilating difference: an anthropology of
genocide,1-39. Berkeley London: University of California.
Hinton, Alexander Laban. 2007. Genocide and modern ity. In Conerly Casey Robert Edgerton
(eds.), A
companion
to psychological
anthropology:
mode rnity and
psychocuttural
change,
419 435. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hobsbawm, Eric. 1989.
The age
of empire,
1875-1914.
London: Abacus.
Houston, Christopher. 2001. Islam,
Kurds
and the
Turkish
nation state. Oxford New York:
Berg.
Jongerden, Joost. 2001. Resettlement and reconstruction of iden tity: the case of the Kurds in
Turkey.
The
Global
Review
ofEthnopotitics 1(1). 80 -8 6.
Jongerden, Joost. 200 3. Vio lation o f human rights and the Alevis in Turkey. In Paul White Joost
Jongerden (eds.),
Turkey s
Alevi enigma: a
comprehensive overview
71-89. Leiden: Brill.
Jongerden, Joost. 2009. C rafting space, mak ing peop le: the sp atial design of nation in modern
Turkey.
European Journal
o f
Turkish Studies
10.
http://ejts.revues.org/lndex4014.html
(accessed on 30 July 2010).
KHRP. 2010. KHRP condemns Turkey's ejec tion of
U
Turkey civic commission
chair. KHRP Press
Release 26 Ap ril, http://www .khrp.org/khrp-news/550-khrp-conde mns -turkeys-ejection-
of-eu-turkey-civic-commission-chair.html (accessed 26 April 2010).
Kinzer, Steph en.
2001. Crescent
and star. New
York: Farrar
Straus âGiroux.
Kiriççi,
Kem al. 200 4. The Kurdish que stion and Turkish foreign policy. In Lenora M artin
Dimitris Keridis(eds.), The future of Turkish foreign policy 277-3 14. Massachusetts: MIT.
Koivunen,
Kristiina. 200 2.
The
invisible war in north
Kurdistan.
He lsinki: university of Helsinki
PhD thesis.
Laing, Jacqueline. 2008. Information technology and biométrie databases: eugenics and other
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
22/25
9 6 D. Fernandes E GRUYTER MOUTON
Leicht, Justus. 1998. A balance sheet
of Kemalism. WSWS
7 November.
http://ww w.ws ws.org/articles/1998/novl998/turk-nl7.shtml (accessed
30 )uty
2010).
Lemkin, R aphael. 1944. Axis rule in occupied Europe : laws of occupation - analysis of
government
proposals
for
redress.
W ashington: Carnegie Endowment
for
International
Peace.
Lofti, M anal. 2007. Kurd: the forbidden word inTurkey./\s/ior(7/\/-/\wsof 6 December.
http://wwv/.aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=3&id=11177 (accessed 30 July
2010).
Lukunka, Barbra. 2007. Ethnocide. On line encyclopedia of mass violence 3.
http://wwv/.massviolence.org/Ethnocide (accessed
30
July 2010).
Lustgarten, Anders. 2003 .
This
is the only valley
where we
live: the impac t ofthe Mun zur dams.
London: KHRP/Cornerhouse.
Malmisanij, M. 2006. Thepastandthepresentof book publishing in Kurdish language in
Turkey. Location not liste d: Next Page Foundation.
May, Stephen. 1999. Introduc tion.
In
Stephen May
(ed.).
Indigenous
community based
education, 1-7.
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Maybury-Lewis, D avid. 2002 . Genocide against indigenous peoples. In Alexander Laban Hinton
[ed.). Annihilating difference: an anthropology of genocide, 43 -5 3. Berkeley London:
University
of
California Press.
McDowall, David. 1996.
A
modern history o f the
Kurds.
London: IB Tauris.
Neu, Dean
Richard Therrien. 2 003.
Accounting
for genocide. Blackpoint
London : Fernwood
&Zed.
Nezan, Kenda l. 1993. Kurdistan
in
Turkey.
In
Gerard Chaliand
ed.),
A
people without
a
country:
the
Kurds
and Kurdistan, 38 -94 . London: Zed.
Noakes, Jeremy. 2010. Review of architects of annihilation. Reviews in H istory
373.
http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/373 (accessed 30 July 2010).
önderof lu ,
Erol. 2010. Trial against Kurdish politician stirs up h istory.
BIANews Center 25 May.
http://bianet.org/english/minorities/122226-trial-against-kurdish-politician-stirs-up-
history (accessed 30 July 2010).
Phillipson, Robert. 1997. Realities and myths
of
linguistic imperialism.
Journal
of Multilingual
and Multicultural
Development
18 3). http://www.multi l ingual-matters.net/ jmmd/018/
0238/jmmd0180238.pdf search='phill ipson%20linguistic%20imperialism (accessed
30
July 2010).
Rafferty, Jean. 2005. Zarakolu.
Norsk
PEN. http://www.norskpen.no/pen/Zarakkolu2.html
(accessed 30 July 2010).
Randal,
Jonathan. 1999.
After such
knowledge,
what forgiveness? iVIy encounters with
Kurdistan.
Boulder: Westview Press.
Rojas, Robinson. 1996. Modernisation theory and the laws of social change.
Robinson Rojas
Archive, http://www.rrojasda tabank.info/capital8.htm (accessed 30 July 2010).
Ronayne, Maggie. 20 05.
The
cultural and e nvironmental impact of large dam s in southeast
Turkey. Galway London: N ational University of Ireland KHRP.
Salih,
Karim. 20 06. P ossibilities
of
prosecuting Turkish leaders
for
crimes against humanity
and war crimes. KurdishMedia.com 3 November.
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
23/25
GRUYT R MOUTON Linguistic genocide in Turkey 9 7
Shafak, Elif 2005. Linguistic cleansing. New Perspectives
Q uarterly
22{3 . http://www .
digitalnpq .org/arch ive/200 5_su mm er/05_ shafak.htm l (accessed 30 July 2010).
Shoup, Daniel. 2006 . Can archaeology build a dam? Sites and politics in Turkey's south-east
Anatolia project.
Journal
o f
Mediterranean rchaeology
19{2 .
231-258.
Simpson,
Christopher. 1993. The
splendid blond
beast: money,
law and
genocide
in the
twentieth
century. New York: Grove.
Skutnabb-Kangas,
Tove.
2000.
Linguistic
genocide
in edu cation - or worldwide diversity and
hum an rights? N\at\vjah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum A ssociates.
Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. 2005. Endangered linguistic and cultural diversities and endangered
biodiversity. Paper presented at the conference on Cultural Diversity and Linguistic
Diversity, Diyarbakir, 20-25 March. http://www.pen-kurd.org/Diyarbakir-seminar/
tove-endange red-linguistic-and-cultural-diversities.html. Turkish version: Tehlike Altmdaki
Dilsel ve Kültürel Çe itlilik ve Tehlike Altmdak i Biyoçe itlilik - Ç e^ itliligin Korunmasinda
Dilsel insan Haklari Egitiminin
Rolü.
Bîr.
Kovera
lêgerîn û
lêkolînê.
Aroçtirmo -
inceteme
dergisi
3. 7-37. http://www .kovarabir.com/dr-tove-skutnabb-kangas-tehlike-altindaki-
dilsel-ve-kulturel-cesitlilik (accessed 5 August 2010).
Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. 2010. Crimes against humanity in education, and applied linguistics
- corporate glob alisation or geopolitical knowledge glocalisation? Plenary presentation at
the British Association for Applied Lingu istics, Aberdeen, 9-11 September.
Skutnabb-Kangas Tove & Robert Dunbar. 2010. indigenous children's education as linguistic
genocide and a crime against humanity? A global view. Gátdu Cala. Journal of Indigenous
Peoples
Rights
1.
http://ww w.e-pa ges.dk/grusw eb/55/ (accessed 5 August 2010).
Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove & Desmond Fernandes. 2008. Kurds in Turkey and in (Iraqi) Kurdistan :
a comparison of Kurdish educational language policy in two s ituations of occupation.
Genocide Studies
an d
Prevention 3(1). 43-7 3.
Socialist Party of Kurdistan (PSK). 2008. Statement on the 50th anniversary of the UN Genocide
Convention. Paper presented at the UK House of Commons, 9 December.
Spiegel.
2010. Turkish EU minister on the Armenian genocide controversy.
Spiegel On line
International
6 March. http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,683701,00.
htm l (accessed 30 July 2010).
Solomon,
Jon.
2010. Reappropriating the neoliberal university for a new Putonghua (common
language). Edufactory Web Journal 0 .
http://www .edu-factory.org/edul5/we bjournal/nO/S olomon .pdf (accessed 30 July 2010).
Swartz, Dana. 2007. Human rights are not protected by Turkey's constitution .
KurdishMedia.
com 5 November. http://forum.p olitics.be /sho wth read.ph p?t= 669 84 (accessed 30 July
2010).
Tachjian,
Vahé. 2009. The expulsion of non-Turkish ethn ic and religious groups from Turkey
to Syria during the 192O's and early 193O's.
Online
Encyclopedia
of Mass
Violence.
http://www .mas sviolence.org /Article?id_article=330 (accessed 30 July 2010).
Tataii, Steve. 2010 . Turkey's
GAP
project is an ethnic and cultural genocide against Kurds.
£/rurd.nef 3 March. http://www .ekurd.net/mismas/articles/misc2010/3/state3706.htm
(accessed 30 July 2010).
Taussig,
M ichael. 1987. Shamanism,
colonialism a nd the wild m an: a study in terror and
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
24/25
9 8 D. Fernandes E GRUYTER MOUTON
Tirman , John. 2005. Ataturk's c hildren.
Boston Review
December 1997-January 1998.
http://www .bostonreview.net/BR2 2.6/Tirman.htm l (accessed 30 July 2010).
Turkish Human Rights Association (IHD). 1996. Ha bitat2: the alternative report. Ankara,
Istanbul Diyarbakir:IHD.
Turner, Bryan (ed.). 1990 .
Theories
o f modernity
and
postmodernity. London: Sage.
Uçarlar, Nesrin. 2009 . Between majority power and minority
resistance:
Kurdish Hnguistic
rights in Turkey.
Lund: Lund University.
Üngör,
Ufur Om it. 2007. Excuse me, did you say genocide?: on the poverty of debates on mass
violence inTurkey. The Armenian Weekiy 73 16), 24 April .
http://www.hairenlk.com/armenianweekly/gin042107_08.htm (accessed 30 )uly 2009).
Üngör, Ugur Ü mit. 2008. Seeing like a n ation-state: Young Turk social engineering in Eastern
Turkey, 1913-50 . Journai
o f
Genocide Research 10(1). 15-39 .
Van Bruinessen, M artin . 1997. Race, culture, nation and identity politics in Turkey: some
comments. Paper presented at the M ica Ertegun A nnual Turkish Studies Workshop on
Con tinuity and Change, Department of Near Eastern Studies, Princeton University, 24-26
April.
Van Bruinessen, M artin . 1994a. Genocide in Kurdistan? The suppression of the Dersim rebellion
in Turkey (1937-8) and
the
chemical
war
against the iraqi Kurds.
In
George J. Andreopoulos
(ed.).
Conceptual
and historical dimensions of genocide, 141-170. Pennsylvania:
University of Pennsylvania Press.
Van B ruinessen, Ma rtin. 1994b. Genocide of Kurds. In Israel Charny (ed.).
The Widening Circie
of Genocide. Vol. 3: Genocide-A Critical Bibiiographic Review 165-192. New Brunswick:
Institute on
the
Holocaust and Genocide.
Van Bruinessen, Martin. 2005. Ismail Bejikçi: Turkish sociologist, critic of Kemalism and
kurdologist. The Journal
of Kurdish
Studies 5.
19-34.
Visvanathan , Shiv. 1988. On the annals of the laboratory state. In Ashis Nandy (ed.). Science,
hegemony and violence: a requiem for modernity 257-2 88 . New De lhi: Oxford University
Press.
White,
P aul. 2000. Primitive rebels or revolutionary modernisers? The Kurdish nationai
movement in
Turkey.
London:
Zed.
Yeten, M esud. 1999. The Kurdish question in Turkish state discourse, yourna/ of Contemporary
W/story
34(4).
555-568.
Yegen, Mesut. 2008 . Banditry to disioyatty: the Kurdish question in Turkey. Ankara: Seta.
Zeydanlioglu, Welat. 2008 . The wh ite Turkish m an's burden: orien talism , Kemalism and
the
Kurds in Turkey. In Guido Rings Anne Ife (eds.),
Neo cotoniai
mentalities in contemporary
Europe? Language a nd discourse in the cons truction of identities, 155-174. Newcastle
upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
Zeydanlioglu, Welat. 20 09. Torture and T urkification in the Diyarbakir M ilitary Prison. In Welat
Zeydanlioflu
John Parry (eds.). Rights
citizenship and torture:
perspectives
o n
evil
law
and the state,
73 -92 . Ox ford: Inter-Disciplinary.
Zürcher, Erik. 200 4. Turkey: a modern history. London: I. B. Tauris.
-
8/17/2019 Modernity and the Linguistic Genocide of Kurds in Turkey FERNANDEZ ILSL 2012 Copy
25/25
Copyright of International Journal of the Sociology of Language is the property of De Gruyter and its content
may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express
written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.