This study is undertaken to evaluate the profile of the PKK (Kurdish Workers Party) and Kurdish political behavior separately in an attempt to distinguish the Kurdish issue from terrorism. PKK's profile has changed between 1978, when it was founded and now, depending on Turkey's internal politics as well as the changing international environment. Basically, it started out as a Marxist‐Leninist separatist organization, but by 1990 switched to demanding a federation of Kurds and Turks, and simultaneously bidding for a role in an independent Kurdestan comprising southeastern Turkey and northern Iraq. PKK's only consistent policy is to have remained a Marxist‐Leninist organization so far. The first part of this article addresses the roots, objectives, and methods of the PKK. The second part assesses the problem within Turkey's domestic environment, with a focus on whether PKK truly represents Turkey's Kurds. The third section tries to answer the question of who provides the logistical and financial support for PKK, thereby exploring the issue's international dimensions. The last section evaluates prospects regarding a “political solution” to the problems of the southeast, which is now being voiced in both Turkey and Western capitals. © 1995 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

Throughout the past century, anti-Americanism crescendoed and then subsided in rough proportion to the global power projected by the United States. In Turkey, anti-American protests reached a new level of intensity in the late 1960s when U.S. actions challenged Turkey's sovereignty. While subtle acts of resistance came from the military and other government officials, most protests came from ideologically motivated leftists who clashed with equally dogmatic ultranationalists and Islamists. The ensuing battles resulted in the most prolonged era of terrorist violence in modern Turkish history. Thus, anti-Americanism in Turkey can serve as an instructive case study. In this essay I conclude that anti-Americanism stemmed from Turkish efforts to preserve sovereignty as well as from the ideological commitments of the Turkish Left. Terrorism, the political use of violence to provoke fear, was a different matter. It was reactionary and ethnocentric, concerned with internal conflicts and policies as well as transnational ones. In view of its deep roots and its lethality, some observers suggest that terrorism's causes are irrelevant: Political violence need only be dealt with through punitive legal action. In contrast, in this essay I argue that U.S.-Turkish relations formed part of the context in which terrorism arose and that the history of those relations thus provides cautionary lessons on the sources of anti-Americanism and the terrorism with which it is sometimes associated. Anti-Westernism in Turkey has differed from that elsewhere in the Middle East. The Turkish republic, as an heir to the Ottoman Empire, has a long tradition of statehood. Although it fought repeated wars against European imperialism from 1911 to 1922, its heartland was never colonized. While Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of the Turkish republic, was in power (1919-1938), he insisted on independence and sovereignty, but he did not hesitate to seek the "assistance of the Western powers for the peaceful development of Turkey.. .. Modern Turks present an unusual phenomenon-an oriental nation looking to the occident for help in the regeneration of their country." 1 For once, an "oriental" country had the freedom to

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract