ISTANBUL – At the first session of the "Conference on the Democratic Transformation of the Republic" held in Istanbul, it was emphasized that "a new social contract is needed" so that the problems of the past century are not repeated.

 

At the "Conference on the Democratic Transformation of the Republic in the Second Century" held in Istanbul, the sessions began following the opening speeches. The first session of the conference, attended by numerous intellectuals and writers from politics, culture and the arts, civil society organizations and journalism, was titled "The Founding Story of the Republic, Possibilities and Those Left Out."

 

Moderated by Levent Köker, the session featured presentations by Erdoğan Aydın on “Was a Democratic Republic Possible?”; by Hülya Osmanağaoğlu on “The Republic: Bourgeois Revolution, Class Struggle and the Feminist Movement”; by Namık Kemal Dinç on “A Century-Long Deadlock: Kurds Between Revival and Annihilation”; and by Pakrat Estukyan on “What the Past Suggests for Building the Future.”

 

Köker pointed out that people often hesitate when evaluating the past and referred to the contradictions surrounding the founding of the Republic.

 

THE PLURALISM OF THE FIRST PARLIAMENT

 

Speaking first, Erdoğan Aydın said, “An understanding that glorifies the founding of the Republic continues to be influential.” Emphasizing the need for a radical reassessment, Aydın stated, “Without doing this, it will not be possible to resolve our problems.”

 

Aydın added, “In the face of the straitjacket that has imprisoned democracy behind heavy walls, we must ask ourselves the right questions. The beginning presents us with a picture contrary to what we have been told.”

 

Referring to the pluralistic character of the First Assembly, Aydın said, “There were Kurds in this Assembly; there were Alevis.”

 

Stating that the 1921 Constitution was the most democratic constitution these lands had ever seen, Aydın asked, “Did the concept of the nation point to Turkishness? No. Numerous speeches in the Assembly show us that the nation referred to the peoples of Turkey, described as true brothers and sisters who respected one another’s rights and freedoms.”

 

Referring to the period between 1923 and 1925, Erdoğan Aydın said, “The pluralism of the First Assembly was eliminated. From that point onward, there were people of Kurdish origin, but no Kurds. The same was true for Alevis, Circassians, and Laz people. What was imposed was a centralizing constitution aimed at Turkifying everyone.”

 

Aydın added that there is a need for the founding spirit of the Republic.

 

HÜLYA OSMANAĞAOĞLU: THE WOMEN'S MOVEMENTS MUST ALSO BE RECOGNIZED

 

Hülya Osmanağaoğlu stated that when the AKP began constructing a new regime, it started by “attempting to seize all of women’s gains.” She noted that the Constitutional Court had most recently annulled the right to indefinite alimony.

 

Listing women’s associations and journals established after 1908, Osmanağaoğlu emphasized that these were shut down after 1923. She stated that the emphasis on the “Turkish woman” replaced the emphasis on the “Muslim woman.”

 

Osmanağaoğlu stressed that at a time when a democratic republic is being debated, the feminist movement, the women’s movement, and TJA (Free Women's Movement) must also be recognized.

 

“Not merely by speaking of ‘women,’ but by recognizing the feminist movement, the women’s movement, and TJA in Turkey as political actors,” she said.

 

DİNÇ: A NEW SOCIAL CONTARCT IS NEEDED 

 

Namık Kemal Dinç drew attention to the denial faced by Kurds after 1919. He stated that attitudes toward Kurds began to change after 1921 and added, “The closure of the First Assembly marked the end of the Kurdish-Turkish Alliance. April 15, 1923, can also be seen as the starting point of the Kurdish issue.”

 

Dinç noted that during that period, the Ankara government avoided mentioning Kurds domestically while claiming abroad that it was “the representative of the Kurds.” He pointed out that the consensus reached with Kurds in 1919 was gradually abandoned.

 

Emphasizing that Kurds today are no longer the Kurds of a century ago, Dinç said, “Kurds have become a people whose struggles are held up as an example. They want to be equal political subjects alongside other peoples.”

 

Stating that Kurds constitute approximately twenty percent of the country’s population, Dinç continued: “However, the democratization of Turkey is not something that Kurds can achieve on their own. The Kurdish reality must be acknowledged. A century ago, not only the Kurds but society as a whole lost. If we do not want to lose another century, unity among democratic forces is essential. A new social contract is needed.”

 

ESTUKYAN: KURDS HAVE REACHED A NEW STAGE NATION-BUILDING PROCESS

 

Pakrat Estukyan stated that they have struggled to become citizens of a democratic republic. While it is often argued that Turkey was founded through an anti-imperialist struggle, this was not actually the case, Estukyan said. He argued that the Republic was built upon imperialism, adding: “Serious lies and serious crimes formed the mortar of this Republic’s foundation. They told us about the War of Independence. When we looked back, we saw that they had fought their own citizens. At the beginning of the 1920s, the population was 13 million. Four million were non-Muslims. Today, the population is 85 million. If we add up all non-Muslims today, we can barely exceed one hundred thousand. It appears that the War of Independence became a war of getting rid of them.”

 

“What has happened is that Kurds have reached a new stage in their nation-building process. At the beginning of the last century, Kurds were groups whose national consciousness had not yet formed and whose ties were based on religion and tribes. They had not established a settled order. However, the Kurdish awakening of the last forty years, together with the political struggle accompanying it, is the reason why we are now searching for a new understanding and seeking to lead the country toward a brighter future. Therefore, extraordinarily important expectations are being placed on the Kurds of Turkey.”

 

Estukyan stated that all peoples in Turkey are now represented within the DEM Party and emphasized that this political movement has shown a sincere attitude toward confronting the massacres committed against Armenians.

 

He said that the DEM Party now bears an even greater responsibility and went on to describe the problems faced by Assyrians and Syriacs who returned to the Tur Abdin region of Mardin after the 2000s.

 

Estukyan concluded his remarks as follows: “When villages were evacuated, they were forced to migrate to Northern Europe. When a climate of democratization emerged after the 2000s, some of these people returned. They began rebuilding the homes they had left behind. In their efforts to establish new lives, they encountered problems with their neighbors. Some even lost their lives. When we ask who these neighbors are, they answer: ‘Kurds.’

 

We know the Kurdish tribes that served as village guards. We know the tribes that supplied soldiers to the Hamidiye Regiments. The Kurdish political movement bears a heavy responsibility toward Assyrians and Syriacs, which is the responsibility of saying, ‘I stand with you.’ Not merely within negotiations and political processes, but as a matter of principle.”