ETHNIC CONFLICT FROM A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE:

The Kurdish case

In my MA paper I approach from the historical perspective the Kurdish minority in

the four states where the Kurds represent the largest minority- Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria and
also, I look into the development of the Kurdish nationalist movement in these states and whether
this movement has achieved or not its final purpose- that of creating the Kurdish nation and how
the Kurdish identity has been influenced by the different policies employed by the state in its
approach to national minorities.

The thesis of my paper is that the different policies of the states, due to a certain
extent to their artificial design and young age, have determined the advent of the Kurdish
nationalist movement due to the rejection of the Kurdish identity and thus the denial of the
existence of a Kurdish minority.

This approach to minority is the result of the fact that these states are in themselves
young, and thus at the time when the ethnic conflict has emerged, were also operating the creation
of the identity of their majoritarian population, identity useful for the legitimation of the status quo,
given that after the demise of the Ottoman Empire, it cannot be argued for the existence of separate
nations, but rather the population had been grouped according to their religion, in the “millet”
system within which the different populations rejoiced a high degree of autonomy.

By approaching the situation in each case, there are some conclusions that I have
been able to draw:
ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE KURDS:
– it ranges from denial to repression
– the Kurdish population has been used as a masse de manoeuvre by the different states, due
to its important numbers, as to manage to consolidate the power
– the discourse of the states has adapted according to the historical context, and it changed
after the aims had been achieved
– the Kurdish movement has met harsh repression from all the states
– the different Kurdish organizations have found different means to advance their claims-
from peaceful to violent ones
– the existence of the Iraqi de facto state of Kurdistan in Northern Iraq has been the result not
of state policy, but of historical development and the opposition of the Kurds in Iraq to
Saddam's policy
– The international powers have been more interested in conserving the peace and the status
quo in the region rather than looking into the infringement of human rights in the Kurdish
care

KUDISH CLAIMS AND MEANS OF ADVANCING THEM:

– at times the means employed may not represent the best choice
– the discourse of the different organizations alters from more radical to moderate- from
claims of independence towards acquiring cultural rights and the recognition of their
identity
– guerrilla warfare appears as the only means of promoting their cause, given that they are not
recognized by the state, and thus have no legitimate means of negotiating- each
manifestation may be repressed on separatist claims and threats to the national unity- Iran,
Syria or Turkey
– even though the political organizations that employ guerrilla warfare have a transborder
existence, it may not be argued that there is a unitary transnational Kurdish nationalist
movement, given that they usually fight among themselves and may betray the Kurdish
cause as to promote personal agendas