A Liberal Community in a Socialist Country

Within the framework of the title I have given, I would like to seek answers to the questions of “Why couldn’t the Turkmens exceeding 3 million in number not organize in Iraq?” Why did they not initiate any armed struggle and request to be the part of any political organization during the Baas Regime?” Let us analyze the situation of Iraq at that time from the point of World Politics.

The competition to gain arms/power/supporters as a result of the dualities, which come across especially after the Second World War (the cold war period) was observed on all parts of the world in a serious manner. After the movements of independence, another factor that was dominant in the regional politics of the Middle East was the logic of Cold War. While the conflict between the US and the Soviet Union was going on, the conflicts of interest were transformed into a period of conflict named as the cold war, which was caused by nuclear threats. 12 March 1947, which is the date when the Truman doctrine was announced, is accepted as the beginning of the Cold War era. The world was divided into two poles in opposite parts and this logic was behind the world until 1989 when the Wall in Berlin was knocked down.

Each block has determined its own external politics and defense strategy within this framework. (1) If we are to explain these indirect conflicts under brief headings, all of the events to cited hereunder in this paragraph are caused by the conflicts between these two global forces: The Pig Gulf Transfer in 1961, The missile crisis in Cuba in 1962, The Korean Crisis in 1950-1953 (north, south Korea) (3) etc. As some of the countries in the Middle East took place in the “continment” defense strategy of the US, polarization became inevitable. Turkey, Iran and Iraq established the Baghdad Pact in 1955 upon proposal of US in order to prevent any possible Soviet attack. Turkey, which is among one of the most important allies of the US is also a member of the North Atlantic Defense Pact (NATO=. The Baghdad Pact that caused a reaction of the Soviets caused the anti-imperialist atmosphere in the region to become even more widespread.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, when the Nasırist and National trends during the era of 1955 are taken into consideration, the loneliness of Iraq in the Arabic world '1 See: Erasad Hürmüzlü, Torkuman we al-watan al Iraqi p171' became more distinctive. When the Haşimi Union between Jordan and Iraq are added to this loneliness, the Kingdom was ended by General Kasım and Abdul-Selam Arif on 14.07.1958 with a bloody coup. The communists were now on stage as a result of this. (5). Meanwhile the Russian President Khrushchev was threatening NATO at each opportunity. Then the US placed nuclear missiles in England in December 1957. Afterwards, 6 months later, when the NATO soldiers arrived in Lebanon to support an event in Lebanon in July 1958, the Russian Government sent an official warning to US and England, reminded the atomic power of the Soviet Union and stated that if the American Forces initiated any action against Iraq, the 6th Squadron of the US would be transformed into a melted steel mass. (6) When we analyze this era, we face the Kerkuk Massacre of 1959 which is of interest to the World and the Iraqi Turkmens. We should carefully analyze the evidences about that era:

The Massacre in Kerkuk was directed only against Turkmens

Extinguishing the Turks in Iraq had been one of the main goals of the Soviet Union in that era. Fighting against being Turk was very important for the Soviet Union. The most distinctive reason for this is the fact that the largest land of the Soviet Union was Turkish land. The domestic policy of the Soviet Union was to divide and control nations in order to preserve the artificial borders.

The central government was an onlooker to the Kerkuk massacre in 1959 When the political problems lived in Iraq between 1950 and 1959 are observed, it should be noted that Iraq was initially lined with the West (during the rise of US and the Soviet Union) and then it was in line with Russia. The “Hashimi Union” between Iraq and Jordan in 1958 caused significant reactions in the Arab World. The official policy against West as of 14.07.1958 was the beginning of the ethnic policies based on ethnic basis. Hence, in the provisional constitution of the Republican regime declared for the first time in Iraq, the equality of citizens were violated and it was emphasized that Arabs and Kurds were partners of Iraq. (7) In this manner, other nations living in Iraq were disregarded and were kept subject to a treatment of a second class citizen.

As a result, when we analyze the political history of Turkmens, it is not possible to come across any socialist movement. The struggle of Turkmens is based solely on peaceful characteristics and some sections still criticize this matter. Peaceful methods are generally a characteristic of “liberal/liberalistic” societies. However, “As long as dominant opinions are mandatory for everyone, they have put a constraint on the desire of persons to learn. The beliefs of the majority and their moral considerations closed the way for innovators.” (8) Similarly the famous sociology professor Alexis de Tocqueville mentions the “ideal type of the democratic society” in his book named American Democracy. According to this book, the fact that democratic societies are not devoted to fighting does no mean that they can not fight. Tocqueville was thinking that they would may be fight and with the fear of war, centralization, which is seen to be successful everywhere will gain speed with the success achieved. (9) In this way, the dark period started in Iraq and the only society that displays the characteristics of liberal morality is being taken under pressure by despot administrations and is being ignored. The main goal in here was to extinguish the Turkish identity in Iraq by preventing a possible Liberal movement. If we summarize, the Turkmens in Iraq is not a society displaying the “culture of violence”. For instance, it is possible for a society to use violence for solving the problems of a culture. (10) This feature of the culture is a potential as well and it prepares the basis for this condition. For instance, tendency of traditional violence is seen in Corsica (France). (11) The nature of the Turkmens in Iraq is different from all the other societies/nations in the region. The form of struggle of the Turkmens in Iraq was no bloody as that of the French* and Russian societies. They were suppressed by liberal forces without being distinguished. The only humanist liberal society in Iraq is that of the Turkmens. “As the duration of the war gets longer an d as it tears off citizens from their jobs and lives and as their enterprises become unsuccessful, the passion that links them with peace may sometimes shift to arms…” (12) The Turkmens in Iraq are conscious that happiness cannot be built on “blood” and they hate war. Anyhow, societies that have despotic tendencies make themselves known by the methods they adopt during their internal transitions and changes.As a matter of fact, the Turkmens have revealed their peaceful position in this respect. This is not something to be embarrassed of or to be resented. The democratic potential in the Turkmens should come into light at once and must have a distinctive role in the restructuring of Iraq.

To conclude, the importance attached to the Kerkuk massacre in this article is the fact that it has a global characteristic. In fact, many massacres have taken place in Iraq but must of those massacres were of “national” characteristics and were tied to a single source. Source in this article means the dictator leader of Iraq and the massacres made during the war. In short, the massacres made against societies and nations other than the Turkmens result form power problems in the national context. The difference of the Kerkuk massacre however is the fact that it is the focus of global conflict. Because, Turkmens in this area to the contrary of other nations were massacred because of their liberal/liberalist structure.

Note: ٭ Read the opinions of Charles James Fox (1789) and his colleague Edmund Burke in that period foe this subject. See: Kenneth Minogue; Politics and despotism. Liberte, Page: 94,2002
(1) TURAN, Ömer, THE MIDDLE EAST, The point where history begins, Step ajans, P<254-255
(2) LANGLOIS, Georges, history of the 21st century, Nehir Printhouse, 2000, p 373.
(3) W.H.Mc Neill, The World History, İmge p 576
(4) TURAN Ömer, A.g.c.p.255
(5) KETANE, Muhammed, Al-Turk we Al-Arab, Tushki, P338, Ankara, 2001
(6) CRAIGE, Gordon, GEORGE, Alexender, FORCE AND STATEGRAF, NY, p122, 1983
(7) AL-HİRMİZİ, Ershad, The Turkmen and Iraqi Homeland, Kerkuk Foundation, p 28-29, Istanbul, 2003
(8) F.A. Hayek; The Path of Slavery, Liberte, 1999, P20
(9) ARON, Raymond, Phases of Sociological Thought, Bilgi Printhouse, p 189
(10) DÖNMEZER, Sulhi, Criminology, 8th Edition, Istanbul, Beta, 1984, Quotation
from this book: Hamide Zafer: Terrorism With Its Sociological Dimension, Beta 1998, p 23
(11) Hamide Zafer, A.g.c. p 23
(12) See: OC,C,I,2 book, page 283, taken from this source: R.A.Ag c.s. 189