What kind of Kurdistan?

What kind of Kurdistan?

Assessing the execution of Sheikh Said and his friends, as it is his 90th anniversary of their execution, historians have taken this as opportunity to assess the purpose and aim of Sheikh Said rebellion

Sark Istiklal Court charged Sheikh Said and 47 of his friends with death penalty. Researcher Sidar Ergul has taken the 90th year anniversary of the execution as an opportunity to make some important explanations of the massacre. Ergul underlined that Sheikh Said rebellion was a movement under the leadership of a Kurdish scholar in Kurdistan, but this movement was in the same line with Selahattini Eyyubi and Bediuzzaman’s Islamic movement.

Indicating that Sheikh Said rebellion has got wide place in the history, Ergul drove attention to that Sheikh Said rebellion was a Kurdish and Turkish unity gathered against the imperialist governments that invaded Anatolia.

“The independence war to being started from the east is significant”

Stating that Islam was the main factor that kept Turkish and Kurdish people unified for hundreds of years, Ergül additionally said this belief and unity stood out during the Independence war.

Drawing attention to that because Mustafa Kemal was well aware of this unity and for this reason for people to resist he was constantly emphasising on religion, “Mustafa Kemal was making praise religion. He was saying that they were struggling to save the caliphate. This unity would be procured in this way. Once this period is successful and the intruder government leaves Anatolia completely, the final step will be the Lozan agreement. While Ismet Inonu was the representative in Lozan, to provide the unity against the England he would frequently ıse the terms of Turks and Kurds. He would provide positif words. The Kurds at the time were fond of same attitude as well. They didn’t like the division. Especially independence war starting from the east is significant. But after the Lozan the language and the words were used before changed within announcement of Republic.’’

The rebellion of Sheikh Said is Islamic inline with Selahattin Eyyubi and Bediuzzaman.

Ergul claims that the rebellion of Sheikh Said is not due to a Kurdish riot or a motion that’s based on ethnicity. He stated that the essence of the rebellion of Sheikh Said is of a religious matter.

This motion started in Kurdistan. Ergul points out that Sheikh Said’s ethnic background is Kurdish and states, “There may be Kurdish people that have joined this motion. Whether someone is Kurdish or Turkish will not make him or her racist. Selahattin Eyyubi is Kurdish and he set up a government. He was the conqueror of Kudus. However he was never racist. Beddiuzzaman is also Kurdish and his aims and goals were also not racist. His struggles were of a religious matter. This is not a decline of one’s ethnic background. If religious matters were taken as the fundamental matter, all races and languages would be secure anyway.

What kind of Kurdistan?

Ergul states that, “The removal of khilafah gave the Kurdish people a big shock and leaded to a breakage. Once the government was set up, Islamic teachings were banned. Turkish commonweal was brought forward and a foundation for education was formed. It was not expected for Kurdish people to accept this progress. All historical records and research leads to this direction. There could have been a Kurdistan government as a result of the rebellion of Sheik Said. However, what kind of Kurdistan? What kind of Turkey? What kind of Arabia? Obviously, an Islamic Kurdistan. This is obvious in the statements of Sheikh Said and his case friends. (İLKHA)