Treacherous Kurds!!!

TREACHEROUS KURDS!!! 

Dear readers! A friend sent me an article via Messenger, hoping I would read it. The title of the article is: “KURDS IN THE GREEK ARMY”. I will analyze and evaluate this article in detail shortly. There is no name at the bottom of the article. It is not clear who wrote it. My Google search revealed that the article was published on a website called TÜRK MECLİSİ. The link to the article is: (http://www.turkmeclisi.org/?Sayfa=Temel-Bilgiler&Git=Bilgi-Goster&Baslik=yunan-ordusunda-kurtler&Bil=673) 

Anonymous articles are usually written by cowards. Since this article is being sent around on the internet, I felt it absolutely had to be answered. The purpose of the article is to create Kurdish-Turkish animosity in the country and to lay its theoretical foundations. I consider it a democratic duty to refute the fake thesis, which undoubtedly originated from dark forces, and to inform the public accordingly. 

Let's get to the article… 

The original title of the article is: “KURDS IN THE GREEK ARMY” 

In the minds of ultra-nationalist (fascist) Turks, the names “Armenian”, “Greek”, “Arab” and “Kurd” are as immutable and fixed as inscriptions carved into granite, signifying an eternal enmity. The claim or thesis is as follows: The treacherous (!) Kurds joined forces with the Greeks during the National War of Independence and collaborated against the Turks!! Even while reading the title, the reader is unconsciously made to imagine two eternal (!) “enemies” arm-in-arm, which have been implanted and imposed on their “subconscious” for years, and surrenders to a prejudice in favor of the mischievous author before even reading the article.  

I would like to make a reminder: Unfortunately, in the last decade, ultra-nationalist Turks have been hiding behind symbols that combine Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and the Turkish Flag. This is a dangerous trend. Those who wish to express "fascist" sentiments and ideas should stop using the founding father of our nation-state and our sacred flag as symbols. It has now become impossible to distinguish between a true Atatürkist and a fake one.  

THE AUTHOR WRITES:  “Let the Kurds confront their history a little” 

MY ANSWER: Kurds are interested not only in their modern history but also in their past stretching back into the depths of history, and they confront it without fear. There are thousands of books and studies written on this subject. Even while Mustafa Kemal was alive, in the 1930s, to accelerate the assimilation process, it was claimed that the word “Kurd” came from the sounds “Kart-Kurt”, the use of the word “Kurd” in newspapers was banned, and this view was accepted as the official thesis. However, because Kurds continued their struggle for identity without faltering, the phrase “Kart-Kurt” was thrown into the dustbin of history starting from the 1958s. If our cowardly author had written this article in the 1930s, he would probably have been tried in the Independence Tribunal for using the word “Kurd”. I condemn you for not daring to use the word “Kart-Kurt”, which was the official thesis of the 1930s. Your title should have been: KART-KURTS IN THE GREEK ARMY.  

THE AUTHOR WRITES: “With the Kurdish initiative coming onto the agenda, a very different debate also began. On August 30, Chief of General Staff Başbuğ said, "We all became martyrs for this country together," showing the gravestones in the martyrs' cemetery to journalists. We were already accustomed to hearing similar statements from Tayyip Erdoğan. On the anniversary of the Battle of Çanakkale, he also said in Çanakkale that "Turks and Kurds fought together." Frankly, since the establishment of the Republic in Turkey, there had never been a debate about who fought for this country and who did not. It hadn't been done because there were no people trying to divide this country. Since there weren't, no one had opened old ledgers. However, now there is a divisive and anti-Turkish Kurdish movement, there are terrorists of this movement, there are deputies of this movement, and there are supporters of this movement. “ 

MY ANSWER: Both the then Chief of General Staff, Mr. İlker Başbuğ, and our President, Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, stated a correct but incomplete piece of information when they said, "Turks and Kurds won the Battle of Çanakkale together." The Battle of Çanakkale took place in 1915. The Ottoman Empire existed. If you ask which nations, peoples, tribes, and communities were part of the Ottoman Empire's army in the Battle of Çanakkale in 1915, without including the Balkan countries, considering the territorial losses in the Balkan Wars in 1912, the answer will interest you: 

In the Ottoman Army, alongside Muslim (Turk, Arab, Circassian, Abkhaz, Laz, Kurd, Pomak, Roma) soldiers, non-Muslim soldiers (Armenian, Greek, Jewish, Assyrian, Chaldean, Yazidi, Nusayri) who constituted the empire also fought. In the Çanakkale Wars, 558 of our soldiers who lost their lives on the battlefields were from the non-Muslim elements of the empire.  

The esteemed author uses such an expression as if only soldiers belonging to the Turkish ethnic group served on the front in the Çanakkale War. Unfortunately, historical facts cannot be ignored or rewritten at will by pressing keyboard keys at a desk.   

The author uses the phrase: “Frankly, since the establishment of the Republic in Turkey, there had never been a debate about who fought for this country and who did not. It hadn't been done because there were no people trying to divide this country.” 

Apparently, the author is unaware that the Battle of Çanakkale took place in 1915 and the Republic of Turkey was founded in 1923. He presents his thoughts in a jumbled manner. Since the establishment of the Republic of Turkey, Turkey has participated in two major wars: the Korean War and the Cyprus War. In both, Turks and Kurds fought together. If we also consider the cross-border operations in Iraq and Syria, many of the fallen soldiers are of Kurdish origin. If you are curious, you can find out the number of fallen Kurdish-origin village guards and soldiers since the PKK started its war in 1984 from the General Staff archives. These martyrs died so that this country would not be divided. NEVER forget that you owe a Fatiha to their sacred souls and an apology to their families. 

THE AUTHOR WRITES: “These separatists come out with historical lies at every opportunity and say that Kurds and Turks founded this country together, but Mustafa Kemal betrayed them and did not give Kurds their rights. While the debate continued about what the rights of Kurds were, and whether they were given or not, something else entirely was opened for discussion; were Kurds really with Turks when they founded this country?” 

MY ANSWER: I do not know which city the esteemed author is originally from. Did he ever wonder why Mustafa Kemal Atatürk held the Erzurum and Sivas Congresses in Eastern Anatolia, where Kurds are concentrated, and not in Samsun or Konya? Is the author aware of the Kurdish delegation that participated in the Erzurum Congress?  

The congress, which opened on July 23, 1919, ended on August 7, 1919. The implementation of the decisions taken at the congress and the success of the national struggle depended on the attitude of the Kurdish tribes in the East and Southeast. Mustafa Kemal was well aware of this. For this reason, immediately after the congress, he wrote letters to the tribal leaders, calling them for help. For example, the letters he wrote on August 13, 1919, to Küfrevizade Sheikh Abdulbaki Hazretleri in Bitlis, Abdurrahman Ağa Hazretleri in Şırnak, Ömer Ağa Hazretleri in Dirşulu, Resul Ağa Hazretleri in Muşar, former Deputy Sadullah Efendi Hazretleri in Siirt, Sheikh Mahmut Efendi Hazretleri, Ziyaettin Efendi Hazretleri from Nurşinli Meşayih-i İzam (Great Sheikh), Cemil Çeto Bey, a leader (rüesa) in Garzan, and Tribal Chief Hacı Musa Bey in Mutki, document this behavior. (These letters are located in the documents section of Atatürk's Nutuk, in the document segments numbered 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, respectively.) 

I deemed it appropriate to include one of the documents demonstrating the great need for national unity and solidarity to achieve success, one of the letters sent by Mustafa Kemal, in this article. 

“To His Holiness Sheikh Abdülbaki of Küfrevizade, Bitlis 

My virtuous Efendi. I presume that your esteemed self is in Bitlis. This matter has now been confirmed based on the information I received. The difficult situation in which our homeland, the exalted seat of the Caliphate and Sultanate, finds itself is known to your learned self.  

I immediately resigned from the military with the conviction that there could be no other motto of patriotism than to dedicate oneself to working with the nation and within the nation until the day our nation emerges from its current calamity. Because my official position and title prevented this. 

For today, the only remedy is to show the unity of the nation to the whole world and to secure our sacred rights with the power that the nation will demonstrate. I present the principles reiterated at the Erzurum Congress. It is expected that your patriotism and devotion to the homeland, which are acknowledged, will be exercised in that region to block all kinds of instigations from our enemies. I offer my respect and affection, Efendi.” 

After this exemplary letter in which Mustafa Kemal sought help from Kurdish leaders, let's move on to the second important point:   

When the Russian army, which had occupied Eastern Anatolia up to Sivas, withdrew from the region in 1917 on Lenin's orders, it left its weapons and ammunition to the Armenian committees fighting against the Ottomans alongside them. Kazım Karabekir Pasha reorganized the army and started the war against the Armenian committees in Eastern Anatolia. Realizing that he could not defeat the Armenian committees alone, he revived the Hamidiye Regiments, gave them status, organized them in military order, gave them ranks, and paid them salaries. 

I find it useful to list the Hamidiye Regiments, which were reorganized and re-established in the Bayezid Province and Ağrı with the encouragement of Kazım Karabekir Pasha, by their names: 

Hamidiye Regiments revived in Bayezid province in 1918: 

1. Birxkî (Bılgıkan) Celalî Regiment under the command of Sheikh İbrahim Bey: The center of this regiment was in Bayazıt province. Sheikh İbrahim Bey is the father of Mehmet Bayazıt. Mehmet Bayazıt was exiled to Istanbul by the 1926 Exile Law. Mehmet Bayazıt's son, businessman Selahattin Bayazıt, once served as the president of Galatasaray Sports Club. 
2. Sakan Celalî Regiment under the command of Sheikh Abdülkadir (Kotan): The center of this Regiment was also in Bayazıt Province. Sheikh Abdülkadir participated in the Ağrı Rebellion in 1929. He became one of the three important leaders of the rebellion. When the rebellion was defeated, he took refuge in Iran. In 1946, when the Mahabad Kurdish Republic was established, he became the responsible person for the Maku region. He died in Iran. His tribe returned to Turkey in the 1940s. His son Hasan Kotan was a classmate of Shah Reza Pahlavi. His grandson Mahmut Kotan served as the Mayor of Doğubayazıt for a period. 
3. Kotan Celalî Regiment under the command of Ahmet (Konyar) Ağa (Ahmet Hesso): The center of this Regiment was also in Bayazıt Province. He is the father of İsa Bey, who played an important role during the Ağrı Rebellion years. Hüsrev Konyar (Xosrof Beg), well-known by the people of Iğdır, is the son of İsa Bey. Hüsrev Bey's son Ali Konyar served as the Mayor of Doğubayazıt for a period. 

4. Sipkan Regiment under the command of Abdülmecit (Öztürk) Bey: The center of this Regiment was Tutak. His son Halis Öztürk participated in the Mount Ağrı Rebellion and was part of the leadership cadre. Years later, he was pardoned and returned to Turkey. In 1950, he became an Ağrı Deputy for the Democrat Party. He was tried for execution alongside Adnan Menderes in Yassıada. 

5. Kör Hüseyin Pasha Haydaran Regiment: The center of this Regiment was Patnos. He is the grandfather of Ağrı deputy Cemil Erhan. Kör Hüseyin Pasha waged the most effective struggle against the Armenian committees. He almost single-handedly conquered all of Eastern Anatolia. Secret forces, fearing his growing influence and power, had Kör Hüseyin Pasha assassinated by a person named Medeni. 

6. Ademan (Haydaran) Regiment under the command of Ahmet Ağa: The center of this Regiment was Hamur. He is the father of former Ağrı Deputy Fecri Alpaslan. 

7. Hamidiye Regiment under the command of Eyüp Pasha's son Resul Bey 

If it were not for the help of the Kurdish Hamidiye Regiments, Eastern Anatolia would not have been liberated from the Armenian committees, and the military forces and equipment here could not have been sent to the Western front in the war against the Greeks.  

Esteemed author, when the Republic of Turkey was founded, Kurds and Turks acted together. In fact, Rauf Bey (Orbay), the Deputy of the Executive Committee and Deputy of Sivas, stated the following during the Lausanne negotiations: 

"As you know, gentlemen, all the attempts of the British to annihilate the Turks and Kurds residing in Turkey have failed in the face of the unity of these two noble nations. All their corruptions have melted away in the face of people who are brothers in religion, brothers in blood, and brothers in aspiration." 

THE AUTHOR WRITES:: What were the rights of the Kurds? 

MY ANSWER TO THE AUTHOR: Under the conditions of that day, a federal structure should have been established. Lazistan could also have been a part of this federation. The fact that the Laz and Kurdish languages were different from Turkish made a multi-structured federation inevitable. Many countries in the world are governed by federations. The conditions of that period were suitable for this. Turkey suffered the pain of this with four successive Kurdish rebellions. (Koçgıri, Sheikh Said, Ağrı Dağı, and Dersim). The reason for the Kurds' defeat in these rebellions was their four-part division in terms of language and religion: Zaza-Sunni (Sheikh Said Rebellion), Zaza-Alevi (Dersim), Kurmanji-Sunni (Ağrı Dağı Rebellion), and Kurmanji-Alevi (Koçgıri and a part of Dersim). If all Kurds were, for example, Kurmanji Sunni or Zaza Alevi, no one could have prevented the establishment of an independent Kurdistan. Kurdish rebellions were fragmented due to language-religion differences; while one rebelled, the other remained silent.  

THE AUTHOR WRITES: “In recent weeks, retired Major General Osman Pamukoğlu was a guest on Habertürk television and stated that Kurds did not fight alongside Turks in the War of Independence and Çanakkale. This was expressed on television for the first time. Pamukoğlu explained the historical truth by showing the figures and maps we had previously published in TÜRKSOLU. In Turkey, there was no delay in the reaction from those who talked about breaking taboos, those who opposed the official historical understanding, and liberals; they were immediately labeled with Turkish racism and Turkish separatism. Then the level dropped to ridiculous and pathetic explanations such as Kurds being in the War of Independence, and even that Kurds gave the most martyrs against the PKK. But now the debate has begun, historical taboos will be discussed, and the truth will prevail. 

MY ANSWER TO THE AUTHOR: I have already answered this article. I would like to ask Osman Pamukoğlu, who was born in Sinop: Where were my grandfathers when they were fighting against Armenian committees? Or were they in the army of Çerkez Ethem, who was later declared a "traitor"? Perhaps he was a member of the separatist Rum Müdafaa-i Meşrufa Cemiyeti, which had a branch in Sinop. 

THE AUTHOR WRITES: “Therefore, no one should be ashamed of their ethnic identity, they should confront their history and reconcile: Yes, Kurds participated in the War of Independence, but they fought in the Greek Army, not the Turkish Army! Let's add one more thing, those who have been saying for years that Arabs stabbed the Ottomans in the back should say the same thing for Kurds; Kurds stabbed the War of Independence in the back.” 

MY ANSWER TO THE AUTHOR: It is clear that the author must first pay attention to his terminology: when he writes "Arabs stabbed the Ottomans in the back," he forgets that Arabs were also a nation within the Ottoman Empire. The esteemed author probably meant to write: "Arabs stabbed the Turks in the back." If he made a slip of the tongue and used the word "Ottoman" instead of "Turk," then our answer is crystal clear: No current Arab country was founded on historical Turkish lands. Why would Arabs choose to remain within the borders of the Republic of Turkey and experience the drama that Kurds in Turkey are currently experiencing, namely not being able to use their mother tongue in schools, when they could have established 23 Arab states and lived their own language and culture freely? Arabs did not stab anyone in the back. They established their own states on their own lands and using their own languages. 

The esteemed author contradicts himself tremendously: On the one hand, he makes claims such as Kurds were not in the Çanakkale War, they were not in the War of Independence, and on the other hand, he admits that Kurds fought alongside Turks against the Greeks on the Western Front. Since the author's rambling is a habit, this time he claims that Kurds who surrendered to the Greeks were organized as a military unit by the Greeks and fought against the Turkish and Kurdish forces loyal to the Grand National Assembly. Poor author! He probably confuses Çerkez Ethem and his Turkish forces with the Kurds. Çerkez Ethem and his Turkish units took refuge with the Greeks and fought against Turkish and Kurdish forces. Let's assume that the esteemed author is right, and an independent army was formed from the Kurds who surrendered to the Greeks, and they fought against the GNA forces. The GNA armies, who were the winning side, should have killed or captured the pro-Greek Kurds. Is it possible for him to find a document proving this in the General Staff Archives?  

THE AUTHOR WRITES: Kurds who stabbed the Ottomans in the back during the Ottoman-Russian War. The emergence of the Kurdish question in the Ottoman Empire began as an Eastern Front problem. Russian imperialism, which had been on the rise since the 17th century, began to pressure the Ottomans from both the Eastern Front (Caucasus) and the Western Front (Balkans) from the early 1800s. While the Russians incited the Slavic-origin Bulgarians and Orthodox Greeks on the Western Front, they reached out to Armenians and Kurds in the East. Immediately after the 1800s, the first Kurdology studies were initiated by the Russians. The books that are still the most fundamental reference sources for Kurdish nationalists today were also written by the Russians during this period. In response to these Russian efforts, an awakening began in the Ottoman Empire. Conflicts began between Russian-backed Kurdish tribes and the Ottomans. Between 1830 and 1855, 8 Kurdish rebellions occurred. But the real major Kurdish nationalist movement took place in 1877. This date is the date of the 1877-78 Ottoman-Russian War, known as the 93 War. A front was also opened by Kurdish tribes against the Ottomans, who were fighting the Russians in both the Balkans and the Caucasus. The Bedirhan and Sheikh Ubeydullah rebellions lasted for four years. Before attacking Erzurum, Russian General Korganof met with the chiefs of the Zeylani and Sepki tribes and paid them a large sum of money. The result was positive; the Kurds did not support the Ottomans against Russia. The general character of Kurdish rebellions was shaped here: whenever the Turkish state fought an enemy, a Kurdish rebellion would inevitably begin. Russian support for the Kurds continued afterward. But after the 93 War, both the Armenian and Kurdish questions would emerge together. When our eastern provinces came under Russian occupation, the rebellions of both Armenians and Kurds would continue uninterrupted.  

MY ANSWER TO THE AUTHOR: The esteemed author is also confusing dates. The Bedirhan Bey Rebellion occurred in 1847, not in 1877-78. The Ottomans armed Sheikh Ubeydullah themselves, especially to use him against the Armenians, but they did not achieve the desired result. Consequently, in later years, Hamidiye Regiments were established to create a Kurdish armed force against the Armenians. A reminder: In the 1877-78 war, Eyüp Pasha, the leader of the Kurds within the Russian Tsarist Empire, took refuge with the Ottomans with his soldiers at the most critical moment of the war to avoid fighting against the Muslim Ottomans. The Ottomans allowed him to settle in Küpkıran and its surrounding villages. Furthermore, the founder of Kurdology and the author of the first Kurdish grammar book in 1787 was an Italian missionary priest named Maurizio Garzoni. Which of your mistakes should I correct, esteemed author! 

THE AUTHOR WRITES 

“What were the Hamidiye Regiments? The Hamidiye Regiments were established in 1890 during this period. The aim of the regiments was to prevent Armenian massacres against the Turkish people. Some writers are now attempting to distort the facts about these units established by Abdülhamit. Of course, Kurdish tribes took part in these regiments, but these tribes seized Ottoman weapons and then began to confiscate lands evacuated by Armenians. The reason for the Kurds joining these regiments was not to support the Turks but to seize Armenian lands. In fact, these regiments would later be disbanded. However, even after the disbandment of the Hamidiye Regiments, they would not lay down their arms and would fight against the Ottomans. With the outbreak of World War I, the Kurds would also act with the Russians in the Eastern regions. The Russian Embassy, which was influential in the region at that time, had taken control of the Kurds. Indeed, Kurdish rebellions began immediately in 1914. As the Russian armies occupied Eastern Anatolia, the Kurds helped the Russians with the dream of independence. According to the famous Sykes-Picot Agreement, Armenia and Kurdistan would be established in the East and would be connected to Russia. This is also why the Kurds did not fight in Çanakkale. The plan, which was formalized in the agreement in 1916, was already the plan that the Russians had been implementing since 1830. However, World War I overturned all balances. During this period, the Kurds collaborated with the Russians, the British, the French, and the Americans. The independence of the Kurds was decided with the Treaty of Sèvres. In other words, in the period from World War I to the War of Independence, the Kurds always acted with the forces occupying Turkey. This situation, that is, the Kurds not fighting with the Turks in World War I, is clearly stated in the reports of that period. Russian Gordlevski writes exactly these lines: "The Turks began to be very angry with the Kurds because they did not participate in the defense of the homeland." However, when the Bolshevik Revolution took place in Russia, things changed. Because Lenin supported Mustafa Kemal, not the Kurds. He annulled the Sykes-Picot Agreement. Then came the Turkish-Soviet Agreement, and the Kurds were left alone. From this date onwards, the main patrons of the Kurds would be the British, not the Russians. The communists in Turkey and the Soviets would also support Mustafa Kemal, not the Kurdish rebellions.  

MY ANSWER:  LIES! LIES! LIES!  

The Hamidiye Regiments were established by Sultan Abdulhamit to suppress the Armenian National awakening. The era of nation-states began with the French Revolution. Every nation wanted to establish its own state. Greeks, Bulgarians, Albanians, etc., everyone pursued the ideal of a nation-state. Naturally, Armenians and Kurds also got caught up in this ideal. This is their most natural right. The only problem is that Kurds and Armenians lived intertwined in Eastern Anatolia. The Ottoman State, taking into account religious tendencies, supported the Kurds between the Armenians and Kurds, whose national interests clashed in terms of borders, with the Hamidiye Regiments. When World War I began, the Ottoman fear was not that the Kurds living in Eastern Anatolia would support the advancing Russian forces, but that the Armenians would. For this reason, Armenians were subjected to forced displacement. It is understandable that the Ottoman State removed the Armenians in Eastern Anatolia on the Russian border from the region, but there was an intent in subjecting Armenians in all cities to forced displacement. Genocide claims largely find supporters based on this approach. There was no Kurdish rebellion in 1914. You should be deported from Turkey for giving false information.  

THE AUTHOR WRITES: 

“Were Kurds at Sarıkamış? After all this, it becomes easier to understand why Kurds did not participate in the Çanakkale War. The Kurdish betrayal, which began as early as the 1830s, had long been deeply rooted, and during World War I, Kurds were fighting for the Russians, not for Turkey. Therefore, it should not be surprising that Kurds were not on the list of martyrs during the Çanakkale War: they did not participate in the war not because Çanakkale was far away, but because they were distant from the Turks. Some know that they can no longer hide this truth. Therefore, they say that Kurds fought on other fronts, in Sarıkamış. Of course, this is also a big lie. In the General Staff archives, the list of martyrs of Çanakkale and the War of Independence was kept according to military branch records. Therefore, the figures for Çanakkale and the War of Independence are real, and no one can object to them. But if there are those who claim that Kurds fought in Sarıkamış, let them present the figures. That is, let them do what we did, come forward with documents against documents. But there is not even a possibility that Kurds fought against the Russians in Sarıkamış because the Kurdish tribes were already controlled and directed by the Russian Embassy at that time. 

MY ANSWER: Just a moment ago, you said that Kurds participated in the War of Independence, and that the Greeks organized the captured Kurds and used them against the GNA armies. Now, by saying, "In the General Staff archives, the list of martyrs of Çanakkale and the War of Independence was kept according to military branch records. Therefore, the figures for Çanakkale and the War of Independence are real, and no one can object to them," you are contradicting yourself. Furthermore, you are confusing dates again. The Sarıkamış Operation took place in 1915. The Ottoman State existed. The origins of those who fell martyr in Sarıkamış are the same as the composition of the Ottoman army that fought in Çanakkale in 1915 (Turk, Arab, Circassian, Abkhaz, Laz, Kurd, Pomak, Roma, etc.). 

THE AUTHOR WRITES:  

A treacherous Kurdish tribal chief, Hacı Musa of Mutki 

The beginning of our War of Independence is May 19, 1919. On August 24, 1919, the Representative Committee (Heyet-i Temsiliye) was formed to manage the War of Independence. There is also a Kurd in the 9-member committee: Hacı Musa Bey, the chief of the Mutki Tribe. However, this Kurdish agha is a traitor who was brought in. Indeed, Hacı Musa Bey is also the leader of the Kurdish Azadi Society, which was established in Erzurum in May 1923. One of the members of the Azadi Society is Sheikh Said. The Azadi Society contacted the British, the French, and the Soviet Union to seek support for an independent Kurdistan. Later, this organization participated in the Assyrian (Nasturi) Rebellion, which began with British support. After the suppression of the Assyrian Rebellion, they fled to Iran. Later, Mustafa Kemal would make a statement about this treacherous Kurdish tribal chief in his Nutuk.  

The treacherous Kurdish deputies in the First Parliament 

The establishment of the Grand National Assembly in Ankara was on April 23, 1920. From this date onwards, the GNA Army was also established and fought the War of Independence. In the parliament of that period, just like in today's parliament, there were divisive Kurdish deputies. These Kurdish deputies did not help Turkey's War of Independence; on the contrary, they organized a rebellion against this War of Independence. Yusuf Ziya Bey, a Kurdish deputy from Bitlis, was also a member of the Azadi organization. Yusuf Ziya Bey was also a British agent. Mustafa Kemal Pasha suspected Yusuf Ziya Bey and had him followed. Indeed, Mustafa Kemal's suspicions came true, and Yusuf Ziya Bey participated in the Assyrian Rebellion. Even more serious is that Yusuf Ziya Bey also had men within the military. From the unit tasked with suppressing the Assyrian Rebellion, Division Commander İhsan Nuri, Rasim from Van, Tevfik Cemal, and Lieutenant Ali Rıza were also members of the Kurdish organization and crossed over to the other side with 270 soldiers during the rebellion! As can be seen, we do not see Kurds who participated in our War of Independence and fought with Turks, but rather Kurds who infiltrated the War of Independence, continued their own Kurdish organization, collaborated with British and French occupiers, and finally opened a front against the Turkish army.  

Let us also note that this organization instigated another rebellion in Hakkari in 1920, three years before the Assyrian rebellion, to secure British support. 

A Kurd also issued the death sentence for Mustafa Kemal 

So, is this the only betrayal of the Kurds during our War of Independence? In fact, from the beginning of the War of Independence, the Kurds were against Mustafa Kemal. It was Kurdish Mustafa Pasha who issued the death warrant for Mustafa Kemal! The brother-in-law of the same Kurdish Mustafa Pasha is Kurdish İzzet Bey, who is the Minister of Interior of the Istanbul Government. Kurdish İzzet Bey is also a British agent. Kurdish İzzet Bey also has a nephew, Şerif Pasha, who is the Paris representative of the Kurdistan Teali Society. The mass that the Istanbul Government and the British intended to use to prevent Mustafa Kemal's movement was the Kurds. Damat Ferit met with the Kurdistan Teali Society and offered them autonomy in exchange for fighting against Mustafa Kemal. Damat Ferit met with High Commissioner De Robeck and proposed the formation of a 15,000-strong Kurdish army and attacking Mustafa Kemal with the Kurds, in accordance with the terms of Sèvres. The most important initiative in this direction was the Ali Galip incident. British agent Major Noel, Ali Galip, and the leaders of the Kurdistan Teali Society went to Malatya. Here, they would form a Kurdish unit, kill Mustafa Kemal on the way to Sivas, and prevent the Congress from convening. However, Mustafa Kemal learned of the initiative and took precautions. In Malatya, Turkish units cornered the British agent, Ali Galip, and the leaders of the Kurdistan Teali Society. There was an arrest warrant. Noel asked the British for help. Pressure was put on the palace, but no result was achieved. In the end, they had to flee. As can be seen, even before the Sivas Congress, the Kurds were against Mustafa Kemal, together with the British and the Istanbul Government. British secret documents also confirm this. In the report sent by Mr. Kindson to London on November 28, 1919, it is written: "Although we do not believe in the Kurds, it is in our interest to use them." 

In High Commissioner Robeck's report to Lord Curzon dated December 9, 1919, the following is written: "The Kurds have placed all their hopes in the British government. Meanwhile, Mustafa Kemal is becoming increasingly dangerous. The forces are ready to pay money to use the Kurds against Mustafa Kemal Pasha." 

Kurds in the Greek army 

But the Kurds are not content with this. According to information provided by British Secret Documents, the Kurds are also in contact with the Greeks. The Kurds, who met with the Greek representative in Amasya, suggested to the Greeks that Kurdish prisoners captured in the Turkish army be treated well and that these prisoners be used against the Turkish army. The offer was accepted, and the captured Kurds entered the service of the Greek army. The biggest result of the Kurdish-Greek cooperation was the Koçgiri Rebellion. Just before the Greek army made a major advance, the Kurds rebelled. As the Greek army advanced towards Bursa, the Kurds began to march towards Sivas. The American Military Attaché reported the situation as follows: "... If the Greeks win a significant victory, the Kurdish rebellion could seriously threaten Turkey's rear. However, if the war in the West develops in favor of the Turks, the Turks can put an end to the Kurdish problem with one of their half-dozen talented leaders. The British undoubtedly know this situation. Nevertheless, they believe that Mustafa Kemal cannot seize Mosul as long as he is preoccupied with the Kurdish problem. Therefore, they are helping the Kurdish movement." The starting date of the Koçgiri Rebellion coincides not only with the Greek advance but also with the London and San Remo Conferences. The Ankara Government is thus being squeezed. 

Kurds want Sèvres 

Baytar Nuri, one of the leaders of the Koçgiri Rebellion, explained the rebellion program as follows: “First, Kurdish independence would be declared in Dersim, the flag of Kurdistan would be raised in Hozat, and the Kurdish national force would move from Erzincan, Elazığ, and Malatya towards Sivas to demand recognition of Kurdistan's independence from the Ankara Government. The Turks would accept this demand because our demand would be supported by armed force.” The rebellion grew, and the rebels sent a memorandum to the Ankara Government. The memorandum, transmitted by telegraph, consisted of the following articles: “1-Clarification of whether the autonomy of Kurdistan accepted by the Istanbul Government would also be recognized by the Ankara Government 2-Immediate response from the Mustafa Kemal government regarding the autonomous administration of Kurdistan 3-Immediate release of Kurds in prisons in Elazığ, Malatya, Sivas, and Erzincan 4-Withdrawal of Turkish officials from provinces with a Kurdish majority 5-Withdrawal of units sent to the Koçgiri region.” 

The Kurds did not stop there; on November 25, 1920, on behalf of the Western Dersim Tribal Chiefs, they applied to the Grand National Assembly as follows: “According to the Treaty of Sèvres, an independent Kurdistan needs to be established in the provinces of Diyarbakır, Elazığ, Van, and Bitlis. Therefore, this should be created. Otherwise, we declare that we will be forced to take this right by force of arms.” 

Greeks attack Bursa, Kurds attack Sivas 

The Ankara Government did not back down against the Kurds, even though the Greeks captured Bursa in the West. Central Army Commander Nurettin Pasha prepared a plan to suppress the rebellion. The Giresun regiment under the command of Topal Osman was also placed under Nurettin Pasha's command. The Turkish Army began its march against the Kurds on April 11, 1921. Clashes with 45,000 Kurdish militias lasted for 3 months. On June 17, 1921, the rebels surrendered. As can be seen, starting from the preparations for the Sivas Congress, the Kurds did not work for the War of Independence; on the contrary, they always fought against the War of Independence. The Koçgiri rebellion is the biggest proof of this. The General Staff also evaluates this rebellion as follows: "Due to this operation, which is of great political importance, the first step of the Kurdish independence cause was intended to be established with the Koçgiri incidents, which is the clearest and most definite evidence of external influences." As can be understood from this evaluation, the event is not an isolated rebellion, but the first step of a cause! The Kurdish rebellions that will follow will also prove this. Indeed, the leaders of the rebellion evaluate the event in this way: 

“Koçgiri is a stage of the Kurdish War of Independence; we lost a pitched battle with it, but the war is not over. We will win the final victory.” This means they fought for the Kurdish War of Independence, not the Turkish War of Independence. This is the historical truth, and neither the Turkish Chief of General Staff, nor the Turkish Prime Minister, nor journalists, nor Kurds can change it. 

Kurds will confront their history... 

MY ANSWER TO THE AUTHOR: You are telling fairy tales, esteemed author. Which of your lies should I answer? The addressee of the Treaty of Sèvres is the defeated Ottoman State, not the Kurds! If you want to know who issued the death sentence for Mustafa Kemal, I recommend you take a look at the document below: 

File Classification 

Ministry of War - Military Court 

FILE NO: 70 

Ministry of War 

Military Justice Department 

Branch: 

Number: 705 

IMPERIAL DECREE 

Mehmet Vahidüddin 

APPROVAL 

“Regarding those who are accused of being the instigators of disturbances and mischief under the name of Kuvayı Milliye, illegally collecting money from the public by force, conscripting soldiers, torturing and persecuting those who act contrary to this, and attempting to burn and destroy cities, thereby disrupting internal security, and who have been dismissed from the military profession after being removed from the Third Army Inspectorate: Mustafa Kemal Efendi of Thessaloniki, former twenty-seventh division commander, retired colonel Kara Vasıf Bey of Istanbul, former twentieth corps commander, Brigadier General Fuat Pasha of Salacak, former Washington ambassador and Ankara deputy Alfred Rüstem of Midilli, former director of health and Doctor Adnan Bey of Istanbul, and former Western Literature professor Halide Edip Hanım, as detailed in the decision record dated May 11, 1336 (1920) and numbered 20, in accordance with the fourth paragraph of article fifty-five and article fifty-six, by virtue of the first paragraph of article forty-five of the Civil Penal Code, the judgment and decision rendered in absentia by the Istanbul No. 1 Martial Law Court, for the removal of their military and civil ranks and decorations, and all official titles, and their execution, and due to their current fugitive status, for the seizure of their property according to legal provisions and its administration in due course, has been approved for retrial when they are apprehended. 

The Minister of War is responsible for executing this Imperial Decree. 

May 24, 1336 (1920) 

Grand Vizier and Acting Minister of War 

Damat Ferit 

Now do you understand, Mr. Author, who issued the death warrant for Mustafa Kemal? This decision was taken with the approval of the Sultan and the signature of the Grand Vizier. Furthermore, if you had written about the lineage of those who attempted to assassinate Atatürk in İzmir, you would have contributed to the reader.  

I do not wish to consider your other fairy tales:  

IF I SAY THIS MUCH, IT WILL BE AN ANSWER TO YOUR ENTIRE ARTICLE. YOUR ARTICLE, AIMED AT AROUSING PREJUDICE, HATRED, AND SUSPICION AGAINST KURDS, IS ACTUALLY A CIVIL WAR SCENARIO.  

THE STRUGGLE OF THE KURDS FOR A NATION-STATE IN THE 1920S AND 30S WAS THEIR MOST NATURAL RIGHT. IN THE KOÇGIRI, SHEIKH SAID, AĞRI DAĞI, AND DERSIM REBELLIONS, THERE WAS A DESIRE TO ESTABLISH A NATION-STATE. THIS CANNOT BE CALLED TREASON. THEY WERE MERELY UNLUCKY AND UNSUCCESSFUL.  

TODAY, THE KURMANJI AND ZAZA PEOPLE IN TURKEY ARE STILL DENIED THE RIGHT TO READ AND WRITE IN THEIR MOTHER TONGUES. BUT THE ERA HAS CHANGED. WITHIN THE RULES OF UNIVERSAL DEMOCRACY, WITH MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING, KURDS AND ZAZAS WILL CERTAINLY ATTAIN THEIR IDENTITY RIGHTS. FOR THIS, THEY NEED NEITHER ARMED STRUGGLE NOR TO BEG ANYONE. CIVIL DEMOCRACY AND THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE ARE THE STRONGEST WEAPONS! NO TANK OR CANNON CAN STAND AGAINST IT. GANDHI, MANDELA, MARTIN LUTHER KING, AND OTHERS HAVE PROVEN THIS MANY TIMES OVER. 

YOU WILL BE SAD, BUT THAT DAY WILL ALSO COME WHEN THE IDENTITY RIGHTS OF KURDS AND ZAZAS WILL BE GUARANTEED IN THE CONSTITUTION.