Explaining and defining Kurdish society is still relatively easier. The Kurdish people, animal husbandry, agriculture, and the mountains are, in a sense, one and the same. Urbanism, as a concept, is distant from the Kurds.
Perhaps village life is a social reality historically created by the ancestors of the Kurds. The more the Kurds are villagers and nomads, the farther they are from urbanism. Commagene explains very well that semi-village life and semi-nomadism have been the Kurds’ thousand-year-old system of movement and settlement. Their cities, too, were mostly built and filled by occupying forces. Yet this does not mean that the Kurds did not build cities or that they were not the owners of civilizations.
It is known that, foremost among them, the Urartu, Median, and Mitanni states possessed many cities and civilizations. In the Middle Ages, they also built many cities and provincial governments. However, because the states and governments they founded were not long-lasting, the cities mostly became headquarters of occupying powers and were composed of surrounding communities.
In the early periods, the Sumerians, Assyrians, Arameans, Persians, and Hellenes left the imprint of their influence on cultural and written works. In the Middle Ages, however, Persian and Arabic language and culture left their marks. Many intellectuals, statesmen, and commanders played their roles through the languages and cultures of these neighboring peoples. Although Kurdish culture and language have an ancient foundation and root, because Kurdish rarely became a written language and did not become a state language, it could not leave sufficient documents behind or develop accordingly. Nevertheless, Kurdish culture has reached our present day through different paths, through its resistant ethnic existence and its historical works.
It is highly probable — as many archaeologists also explain — that Kurdish culture and language began as the culture and language of the first Neolithic revolution on the slopes of the Zagros-Taurus mountains. Over time, they formed the basis of all cultures and languages whose roots are Indo-European. It is estimated that, from around 9000 BCE onward, this spread across the Indo-European geography not physically, but culturally. These formations themselves most likely emerged between 15000 and 10000 BCE, with the exit from the fourth Ice Age, as the most autochthonous — native — language and culture.
Kurdish ethnicity became quite distinct by around 6000 BCE. We first see them on the stage of history under the name Hurrians, between 3000 and 2000 BCE. The Sumerians, due to their forests and mines, and the Hurrian communities, due to the richness of their civilization, confronted each other for thousands of years in a tribal-defensive struggle. This historical dialectic continued with Babylon, Assyria, the Hittites, the Scythians, the Persians, and the Hellenes. Perhaps no people or lineage took part, as much as the Kurds did, in the opposing tribes of nomadism and settlement. For Sumerian civilization to reach the Hittites, Luwians, Ionians, and Persians, the role of the Hurrians and Medes was decisive. Because of this reality, the peoples being discussed belong, closely or distantly, to the Indo-European language group.
In Herodotus’s history, it is very clearly seen that the sources of the language and culture that influenced the Hellenes were Median. The Hellenes lived, until roughly 900–400 BCE, under strong Median influence. During this period, they received many material and spiritual cultural elements from Urartian, Median, and Persian sources, and enriched them through their own synthesis.
It is estimated that the ancestors of the Kurds — the Hurrians between 2500 and 1500 BCE; the Mitanni, who were also of Hurrian origin, between 1500 and 1250 BCE; the Nairi between 1200 and 900 BCE; the Urartians between 900 and 600 BCE; and the Medes between 700 and 550 BCE — lived in those periods through tribal confederations and kingdoms. Kurdish society in these periods was hierarchical and was passing toward statehood. One can observe that they established a strong patriarchal system. Yet, because women were still active during the Neolithic agricultural period, women had significant weight in Kurdish society. It is highly probable that women used this power for a long time. Its foundation was the agricultural revolution. The feminine elements in language and in the cult of the goddess are essential traces and documents confirming this truth.
Zoroastrianism developed between 700 and 550 BCE as a revolution in Kurdish mentality. The Zoroastrian mentality rests on agriculture; it greatly loves animals; it is based on equality between women and men; and it is a free moral understanding. This culture flows, on one side, through the Persian homeland toward the East, and on the other side, through the Hellenic homeland toward Western civilization, exerting a strong influence on both. It becomes differentiated along the East-West cultural line. It strongly influences both sides and, in the formation of civilization, played a socializing role at least as significant as Judaism and Christianity. Persian civilization is, in truth, a civilization founded by the Medes; it is a Medo-Persian civilization that continued with Persian lineages. This truth is shown very clearly in Herodotus’s history. From beginning to end, the Medes were the second ethnic element, the partner of the empire. The same situation continued in the Sassanian period. Within the same Iranian civilization, it would be a realistic stance to see the role of the Kurds in the second rank.
Policies of Forced Assimilation Against the Culture of Kurdistan
One of the social policies most frequently used by the blocs of power and war is the policy of assimilation. In general terms, assimilation means the melting and absorption of culture. Through assimilation policies, the blocs of power and war seek to strip the groups they dominate of their ability to resist; for this purpose, they take away the tools in their hands. First of all, the dominant language is imposed upon the local language, which expresses mentality. Through the official language, the culture of local languages is suppressed, and they are prevented from playing a role in life. The dominant culture and language, as the language of education, politics, and economy, provide benefit to those who use them. The one who uses the culture and language of the subordinated, however, loses. Within this duality, it becomes difficult for the local language to stand against the language of power — especially if these languages have not become written languages and have not determined their main dialects. The fate of such languages and dialects is dark.
Assimilation is not carried out only against language, but also against all social institutions shaped by power. The dominant religion and nation are restructured at every level according to the reality of the institution. Once an institution is officially recognized in the political, social, economic, and even mental fields, and once it is legally protected, other minority and defeated institutions are forced, either by coercion or voluntarily, to undergo assimilation according to the dominant institutions and to take their place within officialdom. The more economic coercion and political interests enter the agenda, the faster the melting process becomes.
Forced assimilation has played a destructive role against the existence of Kurdistan’s culture at least as great as war and terror. We can apply the same historical method and go back to the earliest periods. If we say that Sumerian language and culture were the greatest language and culture of assimilation, this should not be seen as an exaggerated statement. We understand this from its sentence structure and vocabulary. First Sumerian, then in order Hurrian, Mitanni, Urartian, Median, and Persian, and later Babylonian and Assyrian — their sources lead to Aramaic. Later, Aramaic became a great language of assimilation in the early periods of the Middle East.
One can see this reality in the texts of the Hittites, Urartians, Mitanni, Medes, and Persians. Like English today, Aramaic in that period was the “inter-ethnic” language, the common language of mutual understanding. Especially among the aristocracy and the bureaucracy of the state, even when more than one language was used, one of them was Aramaic. The local language was used alongside Aramaic. As we also experience today, the official language of power is taken as the basis in the official dealings of the state; in that period, Aramaic — and earlier Akkadian and Sumerian — was the essential language. Local languages were mostly used among the people, who had no literacy, as tools of oral communication. One can see this reality in Urartian texts, just as today many rulers of dependent states speak English and French.
In Persian texts, the place of Aramaic is clear. In that period, throughout the Middle East, it was both the language of diplomacy and the language of trade. In all related records, it can be seen that assimilation played a major role in the architecture of state administration, literature, and law. It is even estimated that Jesus also knew Aramaic. Syriac, which is a national form of Aramaic, was another tool of assimilation. Hebrew had influence only in a more limited field. Hellenism, however, because it spread in an opposing situation, made the Hellenic language influential in the Middle East — like English and French today. Hellenic and Syriac moved together on the same path. Both struggled to become influential in Kurdistan, especially in the cities. Urfa is a specific example of this. Aramaic is a deep culture lived by Armenian, Syriac, Arabic, Kurdish, and finally Turkish. Yet at the same time, it opened the way to harsh assimilation and extensive cosmopolitanism. One can understand this truth very well from the current situation of Urfa.
The role of Syriac in the culture of Kurdistan comes before that of the later Arabic. One can say that it played the role of a language of enlightenment. The essential reason for this result is that the Syriacs lived in the cities. The Kurds, like the people of Commagene, used Kurdish dialects as the oral language of nomadic and village life. Their written sources are limited, but this does not mean that they do not exist at all. Especially in Washukanni, the capital of the Mitanni — located on today’s Syria-Turkey border, around Serêkaniyê/Ras al-Ayn and Amude — many written records show that proto-Kurdish was used as a written language in the 1500s BCE.
In Kurdistan, between 300 and 250 BCE, the existence of peoples of Hellenic origin within the Hellenic kingdoms themselves, especially their weight in the cities, shows that the Hellenic language was used for a long time. It played the role of a colonial language, just as in our own day the cities of Kurdistan live under foreign cultures and languages. The peoples outside the cities, however, lived with their own local cultures and languages.
With Islam, the language that came to the forefront was Arabic. Arabic, which had previously been the language of the Bedouins, became the most prestigious language in the Middle East with urbanization and the emergence of Islam. It became the language of science and literature. As the official language of power and war, Arabic gained great dominance. Against weak languages of African origin, it became dominant throughout North Africa and down to the south of the Zagros-Taurus region. Culture and science, too, came to be produced and lived in Arabic. It held a distinct place. Those who used Arabic could take a place in the bureaucracy, enter the class of scholars, and pursue knowledge. For this reason, Arabic became the language of advancement and interests. Its importance, which continues to this day, is indebted to these material realities.
After Arabic, the role of Persian was more limited. It too became an official language and spread especially through the rule of the Seljuks in Iran. When the Seljuks conquered Anatolia and established a state centered in Konya, the official language was also Persian. Mawlana wrote his work known as the “Masnavi” in Persian. Turkish, like Kurdish at that time, was used by the people outside the cities as a tool of oral speech and literature.
Arabic dominance was influential in Kurdistan. In particular, the stratum of mullahs and seydas regarded Arabic as the language of worship, and this caused a severe influence. Likewise, the urban population began to admire the Arab way of life. From clothing, appearance, and form, to tracing one’s lineage back to the Arabs, this became a fashion. In the story of every dynasty, an Arab link became quite normal. Dominance in education, instruction, fashion, politics, diplomacy, art, and science even influenced a language such as Persian, which had experience in statecraft. A half-Arab occupation took place, and the entire Middle East adopted Arabic names and titles. This dominance continued harshly until the development of the concepts of nation and nation-state.
With the spread of the capitalist system and the formation of the nation-state, the process of assimilation against Kurdish culture and language became even harsher. Turkish was added to the coercion of Arabic and Persian. In the early and medieval periods, Kurdish culture and language preserved their existence within ethnicity. But with the increase of technical and scientific possibilities, the three dominant cultures and languages, as official cultures and languages, powerfully crushed and melted Kurdish through their influence. This culture and language, which produced many literary works even in the Middle Ages — such as Ehmedê Xanî’s Mem û Zîn — became increasingly confined under political pressure. Kurdishness, as culture and language, was placed in a state of suspicion. It was made a subject of sin and criminality, and being Kurdish was increasingly criminalized. It was left face to face with the harshest bourgeois practice of sin and prison.
Issues connected to the Kurdish reality were placed in the category of dangerous crimes. All three nation-states — Turkish, Persian, and Arab — went beyond the culture and language of the state and carried out, with severity, a campaign of melting, distancing, and tying the entire Kurdish existence to the dominant culture and language. All schools of education, including education in the Kurdish mother tongue, were banned. While the possibilities that could have enabled Kurds and Kurdish to learn modernism in the schools of the dominant nation existed, Kurds and Kurdish were left outside modernism in every field. The printing of books, newspapers, and even the most ordinary Kurdish music was treated as Kurdishness and accepted within the framework of crime. Yet they themselves, in their own languages, were carrying out work that would ultimately leave behind a Hitler-like nationalism. They did not step back from their theories of the greatest nation. “The noble nation” was the name of the Arabs. Turkishness was a reality of happiness. Persian identity was the greatest nobility in history. They awakened the nationalist feelings of capitalism. These took on a narcotic effect, covering over all forms of backwardness.
But the third great step of capitalist globalization made the rise of locality into a value of technological development. Radio and television made prohibitions on language meaningless. Work carried out abroad enabled the Kurds and Kurdishness, to some extent, to come back to themselves. Undoubtedly, at the foundation of this reality lay the decisive influence of contemporary struggle. The democratic national resistance brought with it Kurdish identity, language, culture, and self-confidence. Against the coercion of war and power — against forced assimilation — it created resistance. The resistance of self-defense served as a bridge for the re-emergence of national cultures and languages.
Cultural Existence Is Possible Through Language
If I cannot speak in my own mother tongue, if my children cannot learn their mother tongue, then what meaning remains in my life? It is partly because of this reality that I am against the family and the existing relations between women and men. I hate this form of relationship.
Whoever has chains and shackles placed on his language has also had chains and shackles placed on his mind, heart, and way of seeing. When I was still seven or eight years old and went to the primary school in Cibîn, our neighboring village, I did not know a single word of Turkish. On my way to and from school, I would always ask myself: Why do we not learn in Kurdish, and why are there no Kurdish schools? In those years, I had already noticed the denial of rights imposed upon us. Education in the mother tongue is the most important and fundamental right; it is included among the three generations of rights. It exists in European conventions. It also exists in the United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights.
Cultural existence is possible through language. In this matter, language is the most important factor. If the mother tongue is banned, this is cultural genocide… It is more terrifying than physical genocide. Are the Kurds to disappear? If this continues, the Kurds will melt away and vanish. Are we not allowed to demand our mother tongue? In this matter, Kurdish mothers and children must express their demands loudly and present their democratic reactions; this is their most natural right.
No nation without a language can be imagined; therefore, work regarding the Kurdish language must become more active. Why has there not been a Kurdish Language Institution until now? Even Atatürk, when he founded the new republic, first established the Turkish Language Institution. We, too, must quickly reach such an institution. If such an institution has not been established until now, this is a deficiency, and this deficiency must be removed as soon as possible.
This could also take the form of a Language Academy. What is important is to reach institutionalization in the field of the Kurdish language as soon as possible. These points must be discussed, and the institutionalization of the Kurdish language must be achieved.
Free Spaces Must Be Created for the Kurdish Language
What I want to do is to create free spaces both for the Kurdish language and for other dialects. If I declare Kurdish an official language now, the language itself will be harmed. The first reason is that many people do not understand it. The second reason is that the language has not yet built itself. Many dialects have become intertwined. This could lead to fragmentation and ignorance. To tell the truth, everyone can speak on the ground we have created; one can even speak the language of one’s own tribe. One should not be against this.
As for the selected language, a committee must gradually work on it. Now is the right time for this, and the possibilities for it have also been created. A committee for high Kurdish should be established. Whoever understands language can study how the language has developed up to the present day, gather this knowledge, and through the long-term work of this committee, build a high Kurdish language. In other words, Sorani, Dimilkî/Zazakî, Kurmanji, and Gorani can be developed. Later, the people can use this as their own language. The language system must be conducted in this way. Until this is realized, each dialect should carry out work in its own field, sing songs in that language, hold conversations, and use it however it wishes. Unlimited freedom… We cannot create laws for this here. This is something natural. Natural things need both time and space.
For example, it was said before as well: “If you want to do something for Kurdishness, you must first open the way for the Kurdish language.” I never made this an obstacle before me. Some have wanted for a hundred years to do something for the language, but they have not been able to do anything for Kurdishness. I did not begin the revolution with a strong Kurdish. I began the revolution in Turkish, and today I still provide the greatest service. I carry Kurdishness forward in this way, with depth and breadth. Many books are also being published in different dialects. I did not do this myself, but I opened the way for it. I created political and ideological possibilities. In the coming years, you will see that it will take its greatest place within Kurdishness as well. This is what is being carried out, and this is what is correct. Others do not do this very well; they handle the issue in a very narrow way. If they continue like this, they will cause loss.
Among us, the issue of languages will never arise. It is possible that in the future Turkish and Arabic languages may also be used in our schools; one should certainly not be afraid of this. But Kurdish schools must gradually be built. For a certain period, these will be run together. If Kurdish is weak, the languages of neighboring peoples will remain dominant for some time; later, they will gradually reach the same level and be conducted within a balance. After some time, high Kurdish will become dominant. Above all, if we can achieve independence in our politics, culture will also develop together with it and become dominant. For this reason, one must not create hostility toward languages. If one is hostile toward languages, one cannot gain anything.
But one must also stand strongly and deeply upon one’s own language. One should not have an approach such as: “I began with the enemy’s language, and I will continue like this until the end.” Likewise, one should not present a very narrow approach on this matter. An approach such as: “I will not learn any language other than my own” is also not appropriate. In essence, both approaches are the same. Both cause harm. Here, balance must be achieved. I say that the dialects should also be included; whoever wants to do whatever they wish may do so, but a strong language is also necessary. Children must be organized from primary school all the way to university. If this is carried forward in this manner, I do not believe any problems will arise. Possibilities are being created, and fields of work are increasing day by day. Teachers can be gathered together, and work can be done on certain plans and programs. Language work can be carried out in an organized and methodological way through this path.
It has been proven in the world that the racial approach is the most backward approach. Racism represents backwardness. The idea that the culture and language of a race are backward or without value is wrong, and it will gradually disappear. This approach is against humanity. It is true: the enemy cuts you off from your language, imposes its own life and language upon you, makes you love it, and causes you to hate your own language. There is great destruction here. But there is another matter as well. I learn Turkish more; I even love the characteristics of Turkish more than the president of the Turkish state does. But this does not stand in the way of my love for Kurdishness. On the contrary, I have carried out and continue to carry out the greatest Kurdishness. This is the question of internationalism, humanism, and brotherhood. If you do not carry these together, you will fall into a very great error. Narrow racism is one of the reasons for the death of peoples such as the Armenians and Syriacs.
On the other hand, not surrendering oneself to assimilation is also a very important point. I did not surrender myself to assimilation. Do you know what my first condition was? Since my childhood, I stopped assimilation. Even if I had become a high-ranking civil servant, even if I had finished university, in order not to give myself over to assimilation, I did not stoop to the life of the dominant. I do not want to criticize you; learning a language is also very important. But now, even if you cut off my head, I cannot learn someone else’s language. There are many languages; even if you gave me all of Europe, I would not learn their languages or their way of life. I am not a narrow racist; I am very human-loving. But I cannot speak other languages, and I do not like doing so. I love whatever serves brotherhood and unity. I have educated myself on this matter.
The foundation of brotherhood is the enlargement of Kurdishness. This is the best thing for the Kurdish people. For example, some Kurdish leaders wear Kurdish clothes, but they are the greatest slaves of the enemy. They always speak Kurdish, yet the service they provide to the Turkish race and Turkish fascism is not provided even by the Turks themselves. Here, the issue is not merely wearing Kurdish clothes and speaking Kurdish words. The issue is respect for brotherhood and greatness. The respect we have shown for brotherhood until now has not been shown by any leaders, and we want to continue it in this way.
In relation to the Turks, I certainly do not see myself as inferior. I have great respect for their pashas and presidents. I am a shepherd, an ordinary villager. But the national consciousness that I acquired correctly declares that the Kurds, too, are a nation; the Kurds, too, are an honorable nation; and they must certainly be recognized.
Some tribal chiefs created a certain style. They wore Kurdish clothes and spoke the Kurdish language, but they destroyed the house of the Kurds. This is a great lesson. Our intellectuals must focus seriously on these matters. Let them not make mistakes. Kurdish schools can be built; one can even build universities. But for this, time and preparations are needed. This is a scientific matter; scientific research is needed, and possibilities are needed. It cannot be done through bans or through clothes; it cannot be done merely with a few light Kurdish words. This has been proven.
Some say of me: “Why does he not speak Kurdish?” No! I can conduct work in Kurdish. I stated this at the beginning as well: I did not begin the revolution for the sake of a Kurdish song. These are mistaken approaches. Let no one deceive themselves, and let no one speak cheaply about us. The value of the work I have done on Kurdish culture and language is very great. I distinguish these matters from one another. How can a person be with the culture of the people and the heart of the people, and at the same time be with the enemies of the people? I know these two points well and put them into practice.