new shoot black and white

Questioning women’s rights in Turkey? Ask a woman

Twitter:  @ceylanozbudak   

This week on Thursday, the people of Turkey celebrated the 70th anniversary of Turkish women’s right to vote, as well as the 80th anniversary of co-education in Turkey. The law recognizing women's voting rights was passed on Dec. 5, 1934, and the one on co-education on March 3, 1924. Even though Turkish women obtained the right to vote before many European countries it is still a shame that today we are referring to this as a favor in the world. Even the fact that we have to remember this day as somehow 'unique' or 'exceptional' is a disgrace; it should have been this way all along.

Within the confines of the opportunities they have been provided, women have always been frontrunners in the transformation of societies. Revolutions, uprisings, and ideological movements have generated arguments and policies related to the status of women in society. Changes or transformations that were not supported by women have never been achieved. How did the world come to believe that it is exceptional to grant equal rights to women? What makes men think they can tell women what and what not to do? Very clearly it is not because of a difference in intellectual capacity but can be because of physical capacity, which makes the act totally animalistic.

"Even though Turkish women obtained the right to vote before many European countries, it is a shame that we still refer to this as a favor"

Ceylan Ozbudak

I can almost hear my dissent claiming it is a religious obligation of men to control women, which is one of the greatest lies in history. Those who say oppressing women is in Islam are traditional conservatives. There is a difference between a traditional conservative and a religious conservative. The former preserve the moral values of traditions of their tribe or community rather than preserving the moral values of religion like the latter. At the time of our Prophet (pbuh) and before, a woman was not the owner of her property, nor could she inherit the property of her father or husband, though in some cases she had the right of managing it during the husband’s lifetime. When married, she was either assigned to her husband for good as his property, and in no circumstances could she be separated from him. Should the husband leave her, there was no law to protect her. It was obligatory on her to be resigned to her lot, and work for a living both for herself and her children. Should the husband die, the wife fell into the hands of her husband’s relatives, who could then marry her to whomsoever they liked. She was merely property, like a sofa or a hand-me-down bookcase. Some husbands would sell their wives or lose them in gambling and betting, and these were all considered to be within their rights. We all know that female babies were frequently buried alive because it was regarded as a disgrace for a man to have a daughter before he had a son.

By the advent of our Prophet (pbuh) all these iniquities were wiped away, as it were, with one stroke. He declared that God had particularly entrusted to him the task of safeguarding the rights of women. He proclaimed in the name of God that man and woman - by virtue of their humanity - were the equal of each other, and when they lived together, just as man had certain rights over woman, so had woman certain rights over man. Women could own property in the same way as men. A husband had no right to use the property of his wife as long as the wife, of her own free will, did not let him have some of it. These are the ways of our Prophet and how he embodied our religion at a time when the standards of the world were altogether opposed to it.

Women in Turkey

Treatment towards women is one of the main differences between Muslims living in Turkey and many other Arab countries. An important pillar of the depth of Turkey’s strategic advantage in its Eastern and Southern neighborhood is the diversity of its society, and the liberties painstakingly forged over the years, often with inspiration and support from the West. As one close friend of mine visiting Turkey at the moment, a think tank fellow from America stated, “One thing Turkish women are not is oppressed. Even in the parliament, ladies run the game. Even very conservative members of the Saadet or AK Party seem to have no problem taking directions from women.”

Republican project and the role of women

Turkey has a deep-rooted experience of equality between women and men, resting on historical, cultural and religious foundations. The foundation of the Turkish women’s movement was laid in the Ottoman Empire, and empowered during the Republican Era. The first high schools and universities for women were established in the Ottoman era. Since 1923, when the Republic of Turkey was founded, the reforms carried out under the leadership of Atatürk not only enabled women to have civil rights, but also for society as a whole to be reconstructed. Women were crucial in the Republican project of modernity. The explicit goal was not to fight religion but to fight tradition and custom, which were obstacles in pursuit of the modernization. On April 18th, 1935 Kemal Ataturk posed with women at the first International Women's Congress gathered in Istanbul. As in many photographs in which he appears with women, he gives explicit instructions that the women stand AT THE FRONT of the picture, NOT at the back behind the men. Ataturk did this deliberately to get people used to the fact that in the new, modern Republic being built, Turkish women WILL NOT rank second to men.

In the early period of the Turkish Republic, with the adoption of secular law, women were empowered to participate in arenas of the public domain such as education, business life and politics, and the government encouraged this involvement with equitable public policies. The Law on the Unification of Education, enacted in 1925, provided equal educational opportunities for women and men by arranging education under a single system. Dress reforms enacted in 1925 and the Turkish Civil Code enacted in 1926 provided equal rights both in domestic affairs and in individual terms. These were the primary reforms that transformed the legal status of women. Another important phase in shaping the legal status of women was women’s gaining of political rights. Turkish women were entitled to vote in local and general elections, in 1930 and 1934 respectively, long before many of their European counterparts.

Steps to enhance women’s rights in today’s Turkey

Turkey has taken the steps required by international law in order to eliminate discrimination against women and to support women’s rights. In this regard, efforts have concentrated on the implementation of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which was ratified by Turkey in 1985. There has been a dramatic increase in the rates of primary schooling. While the net number of the population having received primary schooling in 2001- 2002 was 92.4 percent in total, the rates of boys and girls were respectively 96.2 percent and 88.4 percent. In 2011-2012, the net schooling rates were 98.67 percent, while the rates of boys and girls were respectively 98.77 percent and 98.56 percent. The gender ratio in primary education has risen by 100.4 percent with a 10 percent augmentation in the last decade.

With the vision of “Zero Tolerance for Violence”, a struggle in all domains is ongoing. The “Convention of The Council of Europe for Preventing and Combating the Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence” ratified in Strasburg on March7th, 2011 by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe was opened for signature on May 11th, 2011 in Istanbul and was signed by 17 countries including Turkey. Turkey is the first country to have ratified the Convention in its Parliament. The Law on Protecting Woman and Family Members From Violence, Law no. 6284, was prepared by the Ministry of Family and Social Policy with the contribution and involvement of related parties in order to enhance the scope of the Law on Protecting Family (Law no. 4320) dating back to 1998. This law is the first case in Turkey of domestic violence being defined and tackled.

I also know from Foucault’s writings that empowerment is not simply the ability to exert power over people and resources: Empowerment involves the exercise rather than the mere possession of power. We can have all the necessary rules in place, but if society is not educated in a way to allow these legislations to work, we will never achieve the level of empowerment of women in practice. So let’s now look at the practical life examples from Turkey:

If we remember this June – the Gezi protests - there were ZERO complaints of harassment towards the women participating in the protests unlike the Tahrir scene with up to 90%. There were a few reports on the media claiming female protestors were harassed by the male police, however after the investigations began, these protesters later admitted the police in question were a); not male, and b); did not physically harass them. If you are getting no complaints from women in a crowd of thousands of angry people, it makes a very strong statement.

With the AK Party government, our constitution has been amended and one of the additions was including women in the group of those who are “positively discriminated.” Turkey aims to not only make women equal to men in their rights, but superior to men in their rights.

I am not a feminist. I don’t believe men and women are equals, and they are created differently. “Man can never be a woman's equal in the spirit of selfless service with which nature has endowed her,” said Mahatma Gandhi and “If you want something said, ask a man; if you want something done, ask a woman,” said Margret Thatcher. Women have proven themselves to be much more punctual and detailed workers in discipline and much more sensual human beings in their private lives. Men and women have equal rights in all matters. It is a disgrace to all societies that we are still talking about the rights of women and their empowerment rather than naturally living in an environment of mutual respect.

Turkey’s ‘open border’ policy has not backfired

Five-year-old Asiya fell asleep over a dirty blanket under the intense sun as she and her family arrived in Kilis, Turkey after an arduous three day journey from Syria. Her fragile body could not take any more, yet she carried more of her belongings in a plastic bag all the way from Aleppo.

A plastic bag per person was what her family could take out of the rubbles of their house, which was barrel bombed to pieces by Assad’s forces. They had nowhere to stay, nothing to feed on and no more relatives alive. Caught up in the hope and promise, many battered Syrian families fled to Turkey.

Reaction for Syrians in Turkey

Last week, hundreds of people in Turkey marched against the ever-increasing number of Syrian refugees in the country. People blocked roads, some attacked cars, some threw stones into shops owned by the Syrian refugees, claiming that the migrants are committing crimes and violating the peace. This outrage might well be the result of a minority group of ‘less tolerant’ Turkish ultra-nationalists, but we cannot ignore the fact that some reports from the West have also helped fuel the polarization against the Syrian people who are in desperate need.

Turkey adopted an ‘open border’ policy with Syria in order to help save the fleeing Syrian people. This decision was clearly the result of the compassion the Turkish people have for the people of Syria, with whom we share not only an 877 kilometer-long border, but also centuries-old close kinship ties from Ottoman times. As the Syrian civil war gathered pace, refugees started to flock to Turkey and Turkish authorities made a decision not to have them wait at the border for checks, risk their lives in long queues or compound the frustration of people who already lost their homes to a brutal dictator.

Saving the innocent people of Syria — who are unable to save themselves from brutality they did not invite and from an evil they did not appoint — is the very least Turkey can do

Ceylan Ozbudak

Like every political decision, this one also had its ups and downs; when you open the door to greet your long-lost relatives, parasites can also enter your house but you don’t close the door on people’s faces fearing unwanted elements might disrupt your peace, especially if your guests are wounded, sick or in desperate need. Certainly, this decision has had some repercussions for the Turkish nation; many unwanted elements such as radical fighters entered Turkey through open borders, but contrary to common speculation, it is my belief that Turkey never ‘accepted’ or ‘assisted’ extremists. For some reason, the reports of Turkey’s operations against these radical elements have been largely ignored and, inexplicably, media outlets let the speculations grow. Perhaps there was a desire to increase ratings through sensationalistic or hostile analysis.

Turks are immigrants too

The people of Turkey consist of an overwhelmingly immigrant majority. Starting from the beginning of the twentieth century and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, which encompassed three continents, immigrants started flocking to cities still under Ottoman control.

These groups were followed by the large population exchange with Greece, eventually forming the great diversity of Turkey with millions of immigrants. Looking at the Syrian example on the other hand, Syria used to be one of the top refugee-accepting countries. When the Kuwait war broke out, they accepted 4 million refugees. The majority of the Turks now feel it is our duty to welcome the Syrian guests as generously as possible— despite the clear lack of international financial or political support.

Ask a Syrian about Turkey

I asked Aboud Danachi, a Syrian author and blogger living in Turkey about the latest protests and wanted to learn how he felt about these. He said “All throughout human history when large groups of people have been introduced into a society, there has always been tensions. It happened with every wave of immigrants in the USA, and we see it happen with African migrants in Israel. So the remarkable thing is that such incidents in Turkey have been the exception rather than the rule.

“It is a credit to the generous spirit of the Turkish people that such incidents have been so rare. We have to keep in mind the unprecedented amount of freedom of movement and work that Syrians have in Turkey. If I was applying for asylum in the UK, I couldn’t work for years. Every single time my stepmother gets on a bus or metro there is always someone willing to give up their seat for her. It’s kind acts like that which make all the difference.”

Despite decades of what I believe to be Baathist ideological education to alienate Turkey, in the near future when the Syrian civil war comes to a close, many Syrians will have very strong ties with Turkey thanks to this policy.

Let us not forget most of those refugees had careers, affluent lives, houses and more only four years ago in their own county; they chose to be refugees instead of being tortured, beaten to death or raped or see their families torn to pieces by bombs; they left their lives behind to save their families. If those who oppose Turkey’s open border policy met the same fate, they would suddenly appreciate the humane nature of Turkey’s policy.

When people are being mercilessly slaughtered, those who can act, must.

There are 1,200,000 refugees right now in Turkey: 804,000 of whom are registered as such. The Turkish Red Crescent and the Turkish Disaster Emergency Management Presidency (AFAD) together have spent $2.5 billion for the Syrian refugees. Saving the innocent people of Syria — who are unable to save themselves from brutality they did not invite and from an evil they did not appoint — is the very least Turkey can do. This issue cannot be dealt with through cold analyses, or heartless assessments, talk of national interests or by citing “realpolitik” and ‘geopolitical requirements.’

The world needs to understand Turkey’s approach on the matter. Turkey is an overwhelmingly Muslim country and God has made it an obligation on Muslims to help every oppressed person regardless of their race, faith, or nation. Turkey will continue to welcome our Syrian neighbors, fellow humans, and co-religionists. Turkey is leading the way, will other nations in the region and beyond follow?

______________

The ISIS problem cannot be solved by arming the PKK

The ISIS menace has been spreading beyond the borders of Middle East. Both the EU countries and the U.S. are rightly alarmed by the situation. We are all watching the discussions about combatting the radical group very closely and I have to remind my readers that the popular notion “my enemy’s enemy is my friend” is the most unsound method ever offered.

With its fanatical interpretation of Islam, military victories, terrible methods of executions and mass murders, ISIS has understandably been the center of attention lately. Trying to come up with a solution, which will not put the lives of their citizens in danger, some countries in the EU and the U.S. have started discussing arming the militia of the PKK, designated by Turkey and the U.S. as a terrorist organization. As the trend of trying to whitewash the PKK ideology and its current situation continues in the Western media, many Middle Eastern pundits are also being lured into the populist tide. Turkey on the other hand, has been remarkably quiet about this situation despite the obvious unrest among the citizens of Turkey. While our diplomats are choosing the way of patience, I want to speak out about the frustrations of Turkey and the reality of the PKK.

The tide that changed the perception of the PKK has been the rescue operation of Yazidis from Mount Sinjar in Iraq. The U.S. military carried out a bombardment to clear the necessary area from ISIS fighters and the Peshmerga, joined by YPG and PKK forces, saved the Yazidi community through a safe corridor. I believe it wasn’t because the ‘heart warming and humanitarian’ PKK militias were so concerned with the safety of Yazidis; it was because it would be perfect PR for the organization.

What is the PKK really?

Founded by Abdullah Öcalan in 1978, the PKK is a Marxist-Leninist communist organization. Like all the examples of its ilk, the PKK has been a violent and bloody terror group. This factor is not subject to change (like many claim to have been) because the very bedrock of the communist guerilla struggle lies in inflicting terror and shedding blood. Abdulah Öcalan stated very clearly in his book that the PKK would never leave Leninist ideals behind: “The PKK developed in line with Marxist-Leninist tradition. After this it will obviously be shaped on this inheritance, inseparable as are flesh and bone.” (Popular Heroism in Kurdistan, p. 78)

Lenin had explained the nature of his communist revolution; “In principle we have never rejected, and cannot reject, terror.” (Lenin Collected Works, Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1961, Moscow, Volume 5, pages 13-24.)

The narratives of these groups must be tackled by 'counter ideas', not counter insurgencies

Ceylan Ozbudak

We can only predict the future by looking at our past and the course of history also showed us that terror has always been at the core of communist ideology. This was the very reason the U.S. took part in the Cold War; this was the reason many American lives were lost in Vietnam only to be disappointed by defeat both militarily and ideologically. Before I go on to explain the current status of the PKK, I want to remind my readers that even if the U.S. had won the Vietnam War militarily, it would make no difference in terms of restricting the spread of the communist ideology. Ideologies cannot be defeated within the borders of a South Asian coastline or a Middle Eastern desert.

Here comes the deception

Realizing the threat of losing the battle in the field of popular media, the PKK decided to change its narrative and started to claim they are a bunch of “communal liberalist” fellows who are simply fighting for an independent Kurdistan. First of all, the expression “communal liberalist” is an oxymoron because being a liberalist means supporting individual freedoms no matter how stark in contrast it is with the prevailing public opinion (as long as they do not limit the freedoms of others) and the word “communal” totally refutes this notion since it favors the well-being of the community at the expense of the individuals. Therefore communal ideologies do not maintain human or minority rights even if they promise as such: Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Lenin, Enver Hoxha, Pol Pot, Kim Jong Il all promised their nations a free and equal world where all citizens are treated with dignity. For this reason, the PKK would never deliver on its promise of a liberal Kurdistan; the moment its borders are secured, the regime will show its true colors and its first target will be the innocent Kurds of the region who oppose communist ideals.

A Marxist regime in establishment – a communist Kurdistan – will not be an ally for the Western powers since these powers will always be regarded as doomed in ideological terms. After the needed weapons are provided and a communist state is established, a communist Kurdistan under the PKK will assuredly be hostile to the U.S and quite contrary to popular expectation, it will be a threat to Israel in the region.

The foundation of Israel is religion and communism doesn’t recognize any morality or religion. What is happening now with the narrative of freedom for minorities and equality for women are only deceptive tactics communism uses for propaganda, experienced before the establishment of almost all communist regimes. Arming and politically backing the PKK will only bring a new miniature Soviet Russia to the Middle East.

If not by arming the PKK, how can we tackle the ISIS menace?

This is a very serious issue I want to explain in depth next week. The establishment of a communist state will only fuel the fire of radicalism by creating more grievances by feeding the “war against Islam” narrative. For some reason, some policy makers seem to have forgotten how arming a terrorist group has never ended well in history. When the U.S. armed the Taliban, this adventure ended with the U.S. being the archenemy of the Taliban and transferring weapons to al-Qaeda; the same al-Qaeda that I believe was used by NATO to topple Qaddafi in Libya. Needless to say, after seven months of military operations in Libya and hundreds of millions of dollars to reconstruct it afterwards, the Libyan military only needed half a day to stage another coup. The ties of U.S. intelligence agencies with the Mujahideen-e-Khalq and PJAK did not contribute to anything positive for either NATO or U.S. causes in the Middle East. When there is a reason for an organization to be listed among terrorist groups, the same criteria will remain despite the creation of a common enemy.

Neither these communist guerrilla groups nor radical dictatorships can be stopped by proxy armies made up of terrorist groups or bombing the area. The power of these malignant forces come from their ideologies and their power to recruit new people from any part of the world. Therefore a new ideology needs to be instilled in the minds of people and the narratives of these groups must be tackled by 'counter ideas', not counter insurgencies. A very strict educational program is needed to change societies. 
 

An antidote for ISIS’s poisonous narrative

If the soil of a small village is poisoned and the poison becomes contagious once it enters the human body, there is no way to save the population unless we find the antidote for that poison. We can quarantine the sick or burn all the fields we want, but one child playing in a field would be enough to revive the outbreak and contaminate the whole village. We can try to bomb the field but the airborne particles will simply make people sick. Terrorism, radicalism and extremism are just like this poison.

While the essences of all religions are more like fruitful fields which can offer blessed beauties, one drop of poison in their soil can ruin the crop and leave a barren hill behind. The antidote to this poison is a counter ideology.

Radical groups do not emerge by accident

A politicized youth is never an accident. It is always an intelligent effort. Most likely, none of these young people we see in Iraq, severing the heads of their opponents, would have thought a decade ago that they would come to this point. Someone has trained them to believe what they are doing is right. Someone has taught them an ideology, which enables them to feel hatred towards the people with whom they probably grew up. ISIS is not a group of thugs we can get rid of overnight: It is a way of looking at life, a mindset.

Counter-ideological work means a battle of ideas, not weapons. In the real world, this means challenging the extremist narrative

Ceylan Ozbudak

Call it ISIS, call it al-Qaeda, call it the Taliban, call it Boko Haram, al-Shabaab or what have you; it all starts with a single step... bigotry. Bigotry starts with trying to preserve outdated traditions in the name of religion. The illiteracy of women in some Muslim countries, the way women are treated, the hatred of Jews and Christians, the lack of quality of life, dirty streets stripped of any aesthetic merit, the lack of scientific studies; all these come from preserving the traditions of pre-Islamic tribes in the name of religion.

When we examine their actions, when we see radicals killing and beheading in the name of Islam, we must reject them and their sources. The radicals cite hadith sources, but many of these hadiths are disputed by mainstream Muslim scholars for centuries. Any sane Muslim would know that the Prophet Mohammad had never said or done any of the aforementioned brutal practices. Islam forbids such bigoted practices. We should not be afraid to expose this forgery in the name of the religion. Radicals draw inspiration from this relative silence on our part.

Step up and reclaim the religion

Therefore, the problem stems from within the Islamic community and must be solved within it. Even if we assume the military might of the superpowers took out the individuals one by one, the toxic ideology of bigotry has the potential to produce the same ilk over and over again. Weapons are useless against the ideas; though Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were militarily defeated, there are still many adherents of the fascist ideology in the West. We would be at fault to think Western civilization cannot be affected by this ideology. Even the finest steel plunged into salt water will eventually rust. If we are concerned about humanity, our civilization, the future of our children, we need to act now and stop the spread of this bigotry in the name of mainstream Islam.

On the other hand, the West requires counter ideological work. In other words, we must reclaim Islam from the bigots and jihadists. Counter-ideological work means a battle of ideas, not weapons. In the real world, this means challenging the extremist narrative wherever it raises its head—on websites, media outlets, university campuses, Friday sermons in mosques, in prisons: Wherever we encounter it, we must challenge it. But those who do the challenging must be effective, and require support from all of us. Depending on the context and audience, the counter messengers must be credible.

If radicalism raises its ugly head in mosques, then our imams need to be trained to counter that narrative and re-assert a modern and beautiful Islam. If extremists appear in the media, then we need prominent people to challenge them and isolate their message. If hardliners are on websites, then we need an army of young activists who root out their shallow and impractical arguments of darkness with the peaceful and practical message of real Islam. In colleges and universities, students and professors need the literature, speakers, and space to extirpate the bigots from dominating the prayer sermons or student unions.

All of this requires knowledge, financial support, coordination, government and the cooperation of civil society and the love and compassion of mainstream Muslims and other religions. We have yet to begin this effort globally in a sincere and serious manner. 

Ceylan Ozbudak

On Kobane, the PKK, ISIS and dragging Turkey to war

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2014/10/11/On-Kobane-the-PKK-and-dragging-Turkey-to-war.html

Despite evidence stating that the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) is a Marxist-Leninist terror organization, it has been treated kindly by the EU and the U.S. lately, as if the group were rainbow lovers.

The PKK and the Syrian Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) – which is affiliated with the PKK – was supposed to save the Middle East from ISIS and bring democracy to a land of oppressors and become heroes. After being badly beaten by ISIS, the same PKK has been rampaging through the streets of Turkey for the last week, showing its true face to the whole world. At least 31 people were killed and dozens injured across Turkey starting Tuesday as sympathizers of the PKK resorted to violent actions in protest of ISIS taking over the Syrian town of Kobane.

Municipal buildings, public libraries, schools, Islamic centers, buses, shops and political party centers were torched by the PKK supporters. Due to the widespread violent protests in the Kurdish populated southeast of Turkey, a curfew was imposedstarting from late on Tuesday. The military replaced the police in the cities under a ‘state of emergency’. With these actions, the PKK was not punishing Turkey for not initially joining the fight against ISIS, but punishing the Kurds of Turkey for not joining in.

The protests against the recent advance of ISIS in Kobane were not limited to Turkey. Demonstrations flared up in European cities including Rome, London, Vienna, Cologne and Stockholm. Hundreds of Kurdish protesters have occupied the Dutch parliament building, broke into the European Parliament and even caused disorder in always calm Marseille.

The PKK is trying to drag Turkey into war

As the determined march of ISIS continues, even under the heavy shelling of the coalition forces, (like I explained would have no effect) the Northern Syrian town of Kobane has become a battleground for the PYD/PKK insurgents against ISIS. The PKK is losing the town and is on the brink of complete destruction and apparently aims to drag Turkey down with it. After losing a great majority of its fighters in Kobane (along with the organization’s will to exist) the PKK decided to create a civil war in Turkey to try to divide the country and gain territory along with new recruits. In the PKK's scenario, Turkey would agree with their requests in order to continue the peace process and Turkey would be forced into a war in Syria. Once Turkey enters Syria to fight ISIS, the battlefront would expand to scores of other groups and the Assad regime. Again, according to this scenario, the Turkish military would be too busy fighting a war in Syria - and possibly in northern Iraq - to deal with an internal threat, allowing the PKK to become rooted in the southeastern Turkish towns.

It is time to listen to Turkey, and not impose decisions from London, Washington, and Paris

Ceylan Ozbudak

But the PKK did not calculate the fact that neither Turkish bureaucracy nor the Turkish government was open to such provocation and manipulation.

I believe the PKK does not represent all Kurds; the compassionate, Muslim Kurds who are my neighbors, friends, relatives and fellow Turkish citizens. Most Kurds do not support PKK, just as most Americans do not support the KKK. When we look at the demographics of the clashes in Turkey, the majority of the people fighting against the PKK's supporters were Turkey’s religious Kurds. Also on the Syrian side, many residents of Kobane left the town long before ISIS’ occupation because they didn’t want to stay under PYD/PKK rule, which did not bring them freedom but fear. These details, these facts and sentiments are not highlighted in the Western press. PKK, an organized group of Marxists have successfully deceived the West that they are the ‘Kurdish resistance’ and the best answer to ISIS. I believe nothing could be further from the truth.

The U.N., NATO and Turkey’s allies in the West are mounting daily pressure to force Turkey to get into a war in the Middle East using the “Kurdish civilians in Kobane” card. Firstly, there are few Kurdish civilians left in Kobane; 182,000 are in Turkey and in safety. The town is left only to PYD/PKK forces and ISIS. Secondly, Turkey has nothing to feel guilty about since it has been shouldering the spillover of the war alone for the last three years like a champion. Turkey has already proven to be on the side of civilians – all civilians – from all ethnic backgrounds without any segregation. Hosting close to two million Syrian and Iraqi refugees, Turkey also took in 182,000 Kurdish civilians from North Syria recently in addition to tens of thousands of Yazidis and many other ethnic minorities. Turkey has already spent more than $3.5 billion on refugees alone, which spared Europe from a giant refugee influx.

Most of what our Western allies are focusing on now is aerial bombing, which has resulted in civilian casualties. Turkey does not believe in increasing militarization as a solution. It is quite strange to expect that the machinery of war, such as bombs, rifles and missiles, should create an environment of peace and stability.

The world is tired of the conflicts in Syria and Iraq; the West is pushing Turkey to the front lines to get involved in the war and bring it to an end. No one is thinking about the civilian casualties, no one is interested in sustainable peace and it seems that no one is interested in what happens to Turkey. The PKK on the other hand is looking for an opportunity to divide Turkey. Turkey will not bow down to provocations. It is time to listen to Turkey, and not impose decisions from London, Washington, and Paris.