Log in

View Full Version : Turkey - The Pure Fascist State



AlwaysAnarchy
2nd November 2006, 02:46
I was amazed and disturbed to find out how fascist the country of Turkey is. It has been involved in some of the worst human rights abuses, including acts which have been deemed as "barbaric" even genocide, of the past 50 years and even in the 1990s maybe the worst human rights abuses. It has been involved in ethnic cleanisng and has always been harsh against revoltuionaries, that's why I call it The Pure Fascist state. More information by anarchist intellectual Noam Chomsky is included below.




Axis of Evil: Turkey, Israel, and United States?

Chomsky Addresses ANC Forum on US Policy in West-Central Asia


WATERTOWN, MAJune 7, World-renowned dissident intellectual Noam Chomsky, speaking at an Armenian community forum, analyzed and condemned repressive Turkish, Israeli, and US policies in West-Central Asia, likening them to the thuggish tactics of gangsters using force to maintain control.

Professor Chomsky made his comments during a public forum organized by the Armenian National Committee (ANC) of Eastern Massachusetts. Titled US Policy in West-Central Asia, Freedom of Speech, and the Kurds in Turkey, the event was held on June 7, at the Armenian Cultural and Educational Center, in Watertown, and was attended by some 200 Armenian and non-Armenian supporters and activists. Introduction

Prof. Chomsky was introduced by Armenian Weekly editor Jason Sohigian, on behalf of the ANC of Eastern Massachusetts. Taking the opportunity to address a mostly non-Armenian audience, Sohigian provided historical background on the host organization, the ANC, as well as the ARF.

The Axis of Evil

Prof. Chomsky began his talk with an overview of the region and the role of the US there. He discussed the axis of evil recently described by President Bush as including Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. He noted that the term was inappropriate because these countries cannot possibly be considered an axis, in that two of them were recently at war with each other and have nothing to do with the third.

He therefore explored why these countries were selected as leading enemies. Chomsky said North Korea was chosen because it is not Muslim, so that current actions by the US wouldnt be portrayed as a war against Islam.




Turkey

Chomsky discussed other meanings of the phrase axis of evil as used in international discourse. He noted that the Egyptian newspaper Al Ahram called the US, Turkey, and Israel the true axis of evil. In Bushs example, there is evil, but in the other case, there is an actual axis, said Chomsky, adding that theres plenty of evil to go around.

Turning his attention to Turkey, Chomsky acknowledged that Turkey has been a US ally since the end of World War II, has a powerful military force, was valuable for its proximity to the Soviet Union, and was the recipient of a large flow of arms from the US, which is the measure of how close an alliance is.

During the Clinton years, the flow of arms was four times higher as during the entire Cold War period, revealed Chomsky. In 1997 alone, Clinton sent more arms to Turkey than during the entire Cold War period combined. The flow was so extreme that Turkey was the leader for the transfer of US arms, aside from Israel and Egypt.

This flow of arms had nothing to do with the Cold War, and took place after the Cold War was winding down and ended, and increased after the Cold War through the late 1990s, said Chomsky. He noted, however, that these were the years that the Turkish operations against the Kurds were taking place. It began in 1994, atrocities escalated in the mid-1990s, and the flow of arms increased along with them. This is straightforward state terror, a term borrowed from the [Turkish] Minister of Human Rights in 1994, when two million were driven from homes in southeast.

According to Chomsky, Kurdish human rights groups in Diyarbekir estimate that by now over three million refugees have been created by the attacks. He said it was very easy to find accounts of these barbaric atrocities in human rights reports, and that it is estimated that 50,000 Kurds have been killed.

Chomsky called it state terror and even some of the worst international terrorism seen in the 1990s. He said that US support came not only through arms but also in the ideological realm, through silence: Keep it all under wraps, because if people here find out about it, they are not going to permit it, adding that an important task of the educated sector of society is to go along and make sure that people dont know anything about what is going on. It is extremely important not to let people know that they are participating in some of the worst atrocities of the time. He explained that this approach has been carried out very successfully in the US, as almost nobody knows about what was going on in Turkey. Chomsky noted that this was all going on at the same time as everyone was praising our commitment to principles of human rights in the late 1990s. He explained that the US and England were unwilling to tolerate atrocities near the border of NATO in Kosovo, but that worse atrocities were tolerated inside the borders of NATO. Chomsky described it as a tribute to the discipline and submissiveness of the educated sector, and as another kind of contribution to the atrocities.

Chomsky admitted that it was not completely true that nothing was said about state terror in Turkey. He said there is some discussion of it, but that Turkey is lauded for it. He pointed out that the annual State Department report on terrorism in 1999 singled out Turkey for its positive experiences in countering terror. He also indicated that this assessment was considered perfectly reasonable when reported on the front page of the New York Times. In Fletcher Forum, US Ambassador to Turkey Robert Pearson recently credited Turkey for its positive accomplishment in countering terror and said the US can have no better ally in countering terrorism because of Turkeys achievements in countering terror. Pearson also said, It is no surprise that Turkey should be in the lead in joining the war against terror. Chomsky reminded the audience that Turkey was the first country to offer troops to the US after Sept. 11. He added that Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit declared that it was, as Chomsky put it, in gratitude for proving arms for the enormous state terror operation he was conducting.

Chomsky said that Turkey has been selected by the US and England to fight the war against terrorism. He also pointed out that operations such as those carried out by Turkey in the southeast are always called counter-terror. He reminded the audience that Nazi propaganda also claimed that the Nazis were protecting their populations from a terrorist threat--a reference to the various anti-Nazi resistance movements.

bcbm
2nd November 2006, 20:57
Authoritarian and militaristic, yes, but I would hesitate to call it a (let alone "the") pure fascist state. I think Leo would be more qualified to speak on this subject though. I'm familiar with the history of Turkey (and I'm surprised Chomsky didn't speak of the continued occupation of Cyprus), but I confess some ignorance about the current state of affairs.

rouchambeau
4th November 2006, 21:34
Killing a bunch of people is not fascism.

Clarksist
4th November 2006, 22:18
Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2006 03:34 pm
Killing a bunch of people is not fascism.
QFT.

It isn't like fascism is just "kill your citizens", it is an economic system as well.

Just Wikipedia it.

Leo
14th November 2006, 21:53
Chomsky's is a very shallow analysis of the history of the Turkish state. It's not even an analysis actually, I doubt that Chomsky ever read a book about the subject. Of course, there is nothing else to expect from Chomsky, but anyway.

Identifying certain states as the "axis of evil" is a pretty dumb thing to do really. All nation states have one purpose: serving the bourgeoisie, and they do it by any means necessary. Nation states of course don't necessarily like each other, similar to different companies but all of them are always anti-working class.

As for the "pure fascist state" thing, this term is pretty meaningless. Turkish state did have a fascistic nature in some periods. Between 1923 to 1950 there was a one party rule and the first leader was called "Eternal Chief", the second one; "National Chief". Those titles are pretty close to titles used by the regimes in Italy, Germany and Spain, and the economical nature of the regime was also pretty similar to the corporatist model. In 1945, 'democracy' was introduced, and a new party was elected in 1950. There were military coups in sixties, seventies, eighties and a minor one in nineties which didn't result in any bloodshed. Coups in sixties and seventies did not result in military rule for a long time, neither did the one in nineties. The one in 1980 was unbelievably brutal, and the regime introduced was absolutely fascist but when their term was up, they stepped down nicely.

Anyway, it is wrong to think like "democracy against fascism", as democracy and fascism are usually very closely related, and especially when we examine the historical rise of fascism in Italy and Nazi Germany, we see that it had a weird relationship with bourgeois democracy which basically brought the fascists to power. Sometimes fascism means military junta leaders stepping down when their term is up and sometimes democracy means getting shot down in the streets and getting tortured in prisons and racists running for elections and winning. Fascism really is an expression of what bourgeois democracy is, inside.

ComradeOm
16th November 2006, 18:31
It looks like Chomsky has finally lost it. Turkey has long been a US client state and has long made little bones about suppressing separatist movements within the nation. None of this is new and none of it is particularly fascist.

Where Chomsky finally loses it though is in arguing that Turkey has been lauded for its campaign against the PKK. While recognising the PKK as a terrorist organisation, Western nations have always encouraged Turkey to play nicely. This was never more evident than the EU application process where Turkey has been repeatedly told that its accession is partly dependant on internal reforms designed to tackle human rights abuses.