Iğdır and the Mount Ararat Rebellion – Part 2

In my previous article, I specifically emphasized that the Mount Ararat Rebellion was not one-dimensional but rather had an intertwined, spiral structure. We had examined the first spiral, the initial nucleus, together, stating that the rebellion emerged as resistance to an unjust decision. However, a new dimension was soon added to the movement. The factor that triggered this was the Xoybûn (Hoybun) Society, established in Lebanon. The resistance on Mount Ararat quickly gained a political character.

Before inviting you to delve into the establishment of the Hoybun Society and the depth of the rebellion, I would like to inform my readers, who may have less interest in historical or social topics, about three different issues. It will be impossible to examine or understand the Mount Ararat Rebellion without considering these variables.

FIRST FACTOR: KURDISH SOCIAL REALITY

The average reader has probably read or heard the phrase "Kurdish Rebellion" in history books or the media. This is a general perspective. It conveys the meaning: "There are Kurds in Turkey, and they have rebelled!" We must elaborate on this general assessment. Otherwise, it will be impossible for us to understand the Kurdish Rebellions that have occurred since 1920, and we will struggle to evaluate the Mount Ararat Rebellion, which is our subject.

Kurdish society in Turkey is broadly divided into two linguistic groups: Zazaki and Kurmanji. (As I stated in a previous article: There is no standard Kurdish. Zazaki and Kurmanji are not dialects of each other. Each of them is an independent language. Similarly, Sorani, Gorani, and Lurish are also independent languages.)

Kurdish society in Turkey is broadly divided into two sectarian groups: Alevi and Sunni.

Of course, there are also Yazidi Kurds, but I prefer the most general approach.

In this case, Kurdish society in Turkey consists of four main components:

Zazaki (language)-Alevi (sect)

Zazaki (language)-Sunni (sect)

Kurmanji (language)-Alevi (sect)

Kurmanji (language)-Sunni (sect)

The geographical regions of these four groups are also different. They very rarely live intertwined. For example, all Kurds in Iğdır belong to the Kurmanji-Sunni group. The reality of different linguistic-sectarian social groupings has played an important role in determining the fate of Kurdish Rebellions. For example, those who participated in the Koçgiri Rebellion were Kurmanji-Alevi communities. The main force of the Sheikh Said Rebellion was the Zazaki-Sunni group. The main force of the Dersim Rebellion was the Kurmanji-Alevi and Zazaki-Alevi groups. All the tribes forming the main force of the Mount Ararat Rebellion belong to the Kurmanji-Sunni group. While one of the four groups mentioned above rebelled, the others largely remained spectators. Sometimes, they did not just remain spectators but acted in cooperation with the state.

If all Kurds in Turkey belonged to only one of these four groups, then the chances of success for Kurdish Rebellions would have been high. I want to give an example of the "alienation" between these groups:

İbrahim Ağa, who initiated the Mount Ararat resistance that would later turn into the Mount Ararat Rebellion, was angry with the government for three reasons:

• When the Russians attacked the province of Bayezid in 1915, I fought heroically against Russian troops alongside Gur Hesso.
• In 1919-1920, as a commander of the Hamidiye Regiments, I fought against Armenian Komitacıs and saved the Azerbaijani Muslim population in the Iğdır plain.
• After the 1925 Sheikh Said Rebellion, I cooperated with the army to prevent the fleeing leadership from crossing into Iran.

İbrahim Ağa was angry with the state for these three reasons. Therefore, he opposed the 1926 exile decision, took up arms, and took refuge on Mount Ararat. If Kurdish consciousness had existed uniformly across the entire Kurdish geography, İbrahim Ağa would not have had the problem of capturing the rebel leaders (of the Sheikh Said Rebellion) belonging to the Zazaki-Sunni group; in fact, he would have supported them.

During the predominantly Zazaki-Sunni Sheikh Said Rebellion, no aid went to the Sheikh Said Rebellion from the Iğdır and Bayezid provinces, which belonged to the Kurmanji-Sunni group. Meetings were held on this matter, but they struggled to convince the people. Similarly, the Zazaki-Alevi Holmeki Tribe, to which Mehmet Şerif Fırat, the author of the book "Eastern Provinces and Varto History," belonged, cooperated with the state and played an important role in suppressing the Zazaki-Sunni Sheikh Said Rebellion.

In short, when "Kurdish" is mentioned, you are not facing "a single group" but four different social groups and realities. Kurdish Nationalists either do not want to see this reality or try to dictate a "universal and one-dimensional Kurdish" identity from top to bottom by embracing "socialist" ideology. This approach has never resonated with the people. Religion and language are two social identities stemming from centuries of depth; they cannot be destroyed in a day or by an ideology!

SECOND FACTOR: MOUNT ARARAT REGION VARIABLES

1. MOUNT ARARAT LOGISTICS: Mount Ararat borders three countries. If it were a mountain in the middle of Eastern Anatolia, the rebellion could have developed along a different trajectory (positive or negative). Furthermore, during the years of the rebellion, Little Mount Ararat was within Iranian borders. In the final year of the rebellion, Little Mount Ararat gained importance. The Republic of Turkey ceded a region in the Van area to Iran, and in return, incorporated Little Mount Ararat into its borders. The rebels, surrounded on all sides, lost their logistical support.
2. CELALİ TRIBE: The Celali Tribe determined the course and fate of the Mount Ararat Rebellion. The presence of the Brukan, Redkan, Hayderan, and other tribes in the rebellion area was almost non-existent.

The main characteristics of the Celali tribe, which consists of three main branches (Helikan, Hesesori, Sakan), that stood out during the rebellion are as follows:

• All the tribes in the Mount Ararat region, both on the Turkish and Iranian sides, belong to the Celali tribe. In this sense, the Mount Ararat Rebellion gradually turned into a "Celali Tribe" rebellion. The main striking and fighting forces were members of this tribe.
• The Celali tribe is a confederation of tribes. Some of the tribes supported the rebellion, some acted with state forces, and some preferred to remain neutral.
• Some of the Celali tribe are entirely on the Turkish side (Gêloî, Gıskan, Kotan, etc.), some are entirely on the Iranian side (Mala Bozo and Helikan), and some are settled on both the Turkish and Iranian sides (Sakan, Kızılbaşoğlu).
• In some parts of the Celali tribe, the institution of Sheikhdom (Sakan) is important, while in others (Helikan), there is no such institution.
• The Celali tribe is scattered across three countries: Turkey, Iran, and the Soviet Union. However, during the rebellion, the Soviet border was closed. There was no coming and going. Furthermore, the Celali tribes on the Iğdır side had a different culture and understanding because they had been governed by the Glava system under Russian rule for many years or were under the administration of the Güneş Family. Since the Celali tribes on the Bayezid Province side, i.e., the Ottoman Empire, were organized in the form of Hamidiye Regiments, there were significant differences in terms of administrative understanding between the two groups participating in the rebellion.
• Two serious tribal conflicts have been ongoing within the Celali tribe for years: Gêloî-Kızılbaşoğlu on the Iğdır side, and Kotan-Sakan on the Doğubayazıt side.
• Some of the Celali tribe are poor, and some are rich.
• In short, if the entire Celali tribe had unconditionally supported the rebellion as a single force and under a single leadership, the rebellion could have either prolonged or spread over a wider geography, increasing its impact.

1. IRAN: Iran, like Turkey, was uneasy about the possibility of a Kurdish state being established and therefore maintained a significant military presence in the region. Some tribal forces (Milan) acted with Iranian soldiers, especially striving to control the area between Greater and Lesser Mount Ararat. If Iran had been a supporter of the Kurdish rebellion, everything could have developed along a different trajectory.
2. 1929 GLOBAL ECONOMIC CRISIS: The rebels could not receive the necessary money and supply support from the Armenians, as decided at the establishment of the Hoybun Society. The main reason for this was that Armenians living in the diaspora were affected by the 1929 global economic crisis and could not deliver the promised financial resources to the rebels. Efforts were made to overcome this financial contribution by collecting gold and valuable jewelry, but under the conditions of the day, gold meant nothing more than "barter" value, so the collected gold remained unused and could not be used to purchase weapons and supplies.
3. ATATÜRK-KAZIM KARABEKİR PASHA TENSION: During the War of Independence, Kazım Karabekir Pasha revived the Hamidiye Regiments in Eastern Anatolia and maintained close relations with the leadership. When the Eastern border was secured by mutual agreements in 1921, Kazım Karabekir Pasha disbanded the Hamidiye Regiments. It is very interesting that at exactly the same time, Çerkez Ethem and his units, who had shown extraordinary merit on the Western Front during the War of Independence, were also disbanded by İnönü. The Hamidiye Regiment leaders were exiled in 1926, and Çerkez Ethem, to avoid capture, first took refuge in Greece and then moved to Jordan, where he passed away.

However, soon after, Kazım Karabekir Pasha and Atatürk clashed. The party founded by Kazım Karabekir Pasha was closed on suspicion of being involved in the Sheikh Said rebellion. After the İzmir Assassination Attempt, he was tried for execution. In 1927, he was retired. He withdrew into seclusion.

You might wonder what all this has to do with the Mount Ararat Rebellion. "The Conqueror of Eastern Anatolia," Kazım Karabekir Pasha, was in close contact with Kurdish leaders in the region during the War of Independence. He had friendships and camaraderie with all of them. He was in constant correspondence with them. It is known that he was against the 1926 Law on the Exile of Agha and Beys, but his powers were taken away in those years. If Kazım Karabekir Pasha had been sent to the region during the Mount Ararat Rebellion, he would undoubtedly have been able to persuade the Hamidiye Regiment leaders and cadres who participated in the rebellion and bring the rebellion under control. Kazım Karabekir Pasha is loved and even remembered with great respect among Kurds.

The late Mecit Hun writes in his childhood memories:

"Our relatives from nearby villages like Karahacılı, Kolikent, and Hıdırlı would gather in our guest room on evenings when my father was home and chat. They usually talked about the war with the Armenians, the sacrifices of the Kurdish militias and Hamidiye Regiments, and especially the Azerbaijani resistance in Yerevan and Nakhchivan. Everyone remembered Kazım Karabekir Pasha with special respect."

The name Atatürk was perceived in Kurdish homes in this region only as a "distant statesman"; they did not see him as one of their own. In my childhood (1965-1972), I would occasionally see a picture of Kazım Karabekir Pasha in Kurdish homes I visited, but an Atatürk picture was never hung. This situation probably still continues.

When the suppression of the rebellion dragged on, Atatürk attributed this situation to the "officiousness" of the commanders in the region, who probably maintained their loyalty to Kazım Karabekir Pasha, and assigned Salih Omurtak Pasha, who was also born in Thessaloniki, to suppress the rebellion. He may have been right in this foresight because with Salih Pasha's arrival in the region, the balance shifted in favor of the army.

1. WARPLANES: During the years of the rebellion, Turkey's number of warplanes was estimated to be around 100. As İhsan Nuri Pasha also stated in his memoirs, the presence of warplanes largely intimidated the rebel forces and accelerated their defeat. If warplanes had not been used, the army's advance would have been much more difficult.

Until the spring of 1930, warplanes did not have a deterrent effect on the rebels. Because, after all, when warplanes appeared in the sky, the rebels could easily disappear among the rocks. However, İhsan Nuri Pasha perhaps made his biggest mistake throughout the rebellion. In the spring of 1930, he asked the Kurdish tribes in the wide region (Van, Bitlis, Tendürek, Süphandağ) to come to Mount Ararat with their families and animals. When black tents were set up on Mount Ararat and civilians settled, the planes now had a target to hit. As civilians died, the morale of the fighters also deteriorated. The rebellion rapidly moved towards defeat. We will revisit this issue later.

1. LOOTER MENTALITY: During the Mount Ararat Rebellion, a group close to the leadership but acting independently resorted to animal theft and looting. This group gained so much power that neither İhsan Nuri Pasha nor İbrahim Ağa could stop them. I want to give two examples: First, from the personal account of the late Süleyman Kutlay, the elder brother of the esteemed Kurdish intellectual Dr. Naci Kutlay Bey:

"Many books have been written about the Mount Ararat Rebellion. Praises were showered with romantic and heroic pages. However, the events that actually happened had nothing to do with this. The movement was based on a looter mentality from the beginning. I know that many people will judge me when they read these lines. But I consider it my duty to speak the truth. On the other hand, the reason that pushes me to speak so definitively is the events I personally witnessed. Remember, I was a 13-year-old boy when this rebellion ended!

Perhaps the only idealistic leader of the rebellion was İhsan Nuri Pasha. He had also fled to Iran two months before the rebellion was suppressed.

There was a person named Ş.Z. He was originally from Iğdır. He had taken part with the rebel forces. He would come with his armed groups, forcibly take animals from nearby villages, and sell them in Iran. Think about it, can a movement that covets the property of poor Kurdish villagers, whom you claim to 'save,' be taken seriously? Unfortunately, this clamor was not limited to the villagers' property. At every opportunity, they also violated the honor of respected tribal figures. Ş.Z. had forcibly abducted the daughter of Mahmut Bey, the brother of Eleşref Bey, a prominent figure of the Torun family and the Kurds of the region, to the mountain. Unable to bear the injustice and humiliation inflicted upon her, the girl committed suicide three months later by putting a rifle to her head. There was no understandable logic to this action. One day, I had the chance to meet Ş.Z.'s brother, Ş.A. He had also joined the rebel forces like his brother. As our conversation drifted to the years of the Ararat Rebellion, I curiously asked him:

"Why did you go to the mountains back then?"

"To save the Kurdish people!"

"But how? Which people were you trying to save? You laid hands on the property of the villagers and the honor of their beys!"

Ş.A. met my outburst with silence.

The looting gangs in the Mount Ararat Rebellion were called 'Cer' by the people. They would ride horses, armed, and go on animal raids whenever they pleased. Villagers would be terrified by their arrival and lock themselves in their homes. No one could resist them. Besides, no one had weapons!

The danger was coming towards our village. My grandfather decided to protect our village and our animals from these bandit raids. One day, he took a few villagers with him and went to the Allahuekber Mountains near Sarıkamış. Years ago, Enver Pasha's army of 90,000 had frozen to death in one of the forests there. The weapons and equipment remaining from this massacre were still underground. They carried back as many rusty iron and rotten wooden-stocked Mausers as they could collect. The rust was cleaned, and the iron parts were put into new stocks. In this way, we had weapons to defend the village.

Immediately, tasks were divided in the village. Eight villagers took on guard duty. Four would watch the area around the village during the day, and four at night.

All the animals in the village were gathered every morning and sent as a single herd, which we called 'Naxır,' to the Medyen plateau behind the village. My father would instruct the shepherd:

"As soon as you hear a single gunshot, gather the animals and bring them back to the village!"

Within a few days, news came that there were armed horsemen in the deep valleys surrounding the village. My grandfather watched what was happening carefully with binoculars. Yes, the bandits had arrived!

A shot was fired immediately, and a message was sent to the shepherd. Our animals entered the village, kicking up dust. Defense preparations were made immediately. The number of horsemen was increasing, and they were approaching the village resolutely. When they were about 200 meters away, my grandfather told them not to approach, otherwise, he would open fire. A reply came from the other side:

"Yusuf Ağa, don't misunderstand, we have no ill intentions! We are just hungry!"

"Don't approach! Stay where you are! If you want bread, I'm sending it."

My mother immediately lit the stove. She baked bread, which we called 'Nanış Keva.' We packed it with yogurt and cheese and sent it to the bandits with a guard.

After eating, they got back on their horses. They shouted towards the village:

"Yusuf Ağa, allow us to pass through the middle of the village and continue on our way!"

"Absolutely not! You've eaten your food, now go!"

My grandfather was not willing to let down his guard until the last moment. The armed horsemen followed a path below the village and disappeared behind the mountains and in deep valleys.

This time, another fear gripped my grandfather: What if someone reported to the gendarmerie, "Yusuf Ağa gave food to the bandits!" My grandfather immediately went to the district governor of Tuzluca and informed him of the situation. Indeed, some time later, such a report would be made, and my grandfather would be interrogated again."

***

Another historical anecdote is as follows: Ahmed Şemo's words to his close friend and rebel leader İbrahim Ağa, with whom he had a deep bond of friendship dating back, during a meeting. İbrahim Ağa asked Ahmed Şemo to join the rebellion. Ahmed Şemo's answer was clear:

"No blessing comes from a movement that forcibly seizes the property and livelihood of the Kurdish people. I am not sad for the rebellion, but for your fate. May the bullet that strikes you, if it does, be a Kurdish bullet."

THIRD FACTOR: HAMIDIYE REGIMENTS

Some writers have claimed: During the Ottoman period, Kurds cunningly (!) acted and agreed to organize as Hamidiye Regiments, trapped the innocent (!) Ottoman administrators, expelled Armenians from Eastern Anatolia, and after seizing the emptied villages and towns, they moved to create a "Kurdistan" in this region. Unfortunately, there are many books and articles that propagate this absurd thesis. Those in this group go further, holding Kurds responsible for the 1914-15 Armenian deportation.

Especially since the 1970s, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Turkish think tanks, cornered by "Armenian genocide" claims in international diplomacy, prepared serious (!) reports in this direction and presented them to international organizations. The first to acknowledge the unseriousness of these reports were Armenians in the diaspora. Armenians accuse the Hamidiye Regiments of participating in the deportation but do not see them as the planners of the deportation. Therefore, the Hamidiye Regiments neither trapped the Ottoman administrators nor planned the deportation decision with the Ottoman administration. Moreover, as seen in the İbrahim Ağa incident, the Ottoman/Turkish administration used the Hamidiye Regiments not only in the Armenian deportation but also to suppress or control Kurdish Rebellions. If the purpose of the Hamidiye Regiments was to establish "Kurdistan," why would they capture those who started another Kurdish Rebellion and hand them over to the state?

Now, let's get to the most important point: I wrote above that Kurds are grouped into four main categories. The Hamidiye Regiments were formed only (or predominantly) from Kurdish tribes belonging to the Kurmanji-Sunni group. The Ottoman Empire, since Sultan Selim I, had maintained a distance from the Alevi population (Turkish, Zaza, Kurmanji), viewing them as potential secret allies of Iran in a war. For this reason, Hamidiye Regiments were not formed within the Zazaki-Alevi and Kurmanji-Alevi groups. Similarly, the Zazaki-Sunni group was also excluded when the Hamidiye Regiments were established.

All these statements refute the thesis of writers who are not deeply knowledgeable about the subject, claiming that "Kurds cunningly (!) acted and, after expelling the Armenians, had a secret plan to establish a Kurdistan on their land." Interestingly, the Hamidiye Regiments, formed from Kurmanji-Sunni Kurds, oppressed the Alevi Kurds in the region even more than they did the Armenians during the deportation.

Some Turkish writers have put forward theses such as "the purpose of the Kurdish rebellions was to restore the Caliphate." The three groups I mentioned above were already excluded by the Caliphate or the central authority. There is only one group that would champion the cause of the Caliphate: the Kurmanji-Sunni group. All the tribes that participated in the Mount Ararat Rebellion belong to the Kurmanji-Sunni group. During the rebellion, there was no demand in any narrative or document for the restoration of the "Caliphate." Only resistance was shown to the Hat and Dress Revolution, which was also seized upon by the rebel leaders and used for propaganda purposes.

Here I would like to open a parenthesis: in this geography where there are five different languages (Kurmanji, Zazaki, Sorani, Gorani, Lurish) and various religions and sects (Sunni, Shia, Yazidi, Jewish, etc.), there are two definitions that connect people: Kurd and Kurdistan. In this sense, it is possible to draw a parallel with the "Turk" and "Turan" idea. Just as an Uzbek can say, "I am not a Turk, I am an Uzbek" when necessary, a Zaza can also say, "I am not a Kurd, I am a Zaza" when necessary.

***

Now let's take a look at the establishment of the XOYBÛN Society:

XOYBÛN (HOYBUN) SOCIETY

The Hoybun Society was founded on October 5, 1927, in the home of Armenian Dashnak leader Vahap Papazyan in Bihamdun, Lebanon. Alongside famous Kurdish aristocrats and nationalists such as Celadet Ali Bedirhan, Kamuran Ali Bedirhan, Haco Ağa, Mehmet Şükrü Sekban, Nuri Dersimi, Ekrem Cemilpaşa, and Memduh Selim, Armenians of Dashnak origin also took part in its establishment. Xoybûn is not an abbreviation of anything. It is a Kurdish word. If we translate it word for word, it means something like "To Be Oneself." Of course, for someone who speaks or knows Kurdish, this word means "Independence."

The joint declaration was roughly as follows: There was no Armenian population left in Eastern Anatolia. In the first stage, an Independent Kurdistan would be established. Kurds would provide the military force for this struggle. It was not possible for Armenians living in the diaspora (Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Europe, America, and other countries) to send military forces. Military aid from the Soviet Armenian Republic, which remained within the borders of the Soviet Union, also seemed impossible because there was an agreement between Turkey and the Soviet Union not to interfere in each other's internal affairs. The Aras River, which formed the border, was controlled by Soviet soldiers.

According to the agreement, in the first stage, Armenians in the diaspora would provide financial (and arms) aid. Once the rebellion gained strength and an Independent Kurdistan was declared, Armenians in the diaspora would exert their diplomatic influence and do what was necessary for the newly established state to be recognized by international organizations and states. After the establishment of Independent Kurdistan, the migration of Armenians from the diaspora to Independent Kurdistan would be ensured, and the borders of an Independent Armenia would be determined by a referendum at a later date, according to the resulting population balance. In short, Kurds and Armenians decided to embark on a path where they would complement each other, with one providing military force and the other financial and diplomatic support, under changing circumstances.

To give a political character to the ongoing spontaneous resistance movement on Mount Ararat and to initiate the first rebellion, İhsan Nuri Pasha, of Ottoman military origin, and Ardeşir Muradyan (Zîlan Beg), of Armenian origin, were sent to Mount Ararat with a group of 20 people. Now, the second period of the Mount Ararat Rebellion, the political period, had begun.

İhsan Nuri Pasha became the leader of the movement. The Republic of Ararat was declared. Kurdava became the capital. İbrahim Ağa was honored with the title "İbrahim Pasha" and appointed Governor of Bayezid (Ağrı), in a sense, relegated to the position of second-in-command.

The reader might ask: Why did only one Armenian, Zîlan Bey, take part in the Ararat Rebellion? Zîlan Bey's presence would provide a justification for the Dashnak Armenians to make diplomatic maneuvers in terms of recognizing the Kurdish State envisioned in the Hoybun Declaration. For example, Vahan Cardashian, an Armenian-born Dashnak living in New York, wrote in a letter to the US State Department that there were several Armenian officers at the head of the operations in Ararat, putting pressure for the legitimacy of the declared Kurdish State to be accepted. In other words, Zilan Bey's presence on Mount Ararat was mostly necessary for diplomatic maneuvering.

TO BE CONTINUED