TOWARDS THE CRIMINALISATION OF A PEOPLE? - THE EUROPEAN INTERIOR AND JUSTICE MINISTERS' CLAMP DOWN ON THE TURKISH KURDS
More than 700 Kurdish villages have been destroyed within recent months. Harassment of civilians including the routine use of torture and rape are common practice among the Turkish security forces. While the world's attention is focusing on Yugoslavia, little is said about state-sponsored terrorism and military operations ammounting to ethnic cleansing in Turkey. Instead, European Interior and Justice Ministers, bowing to longstanding demands of Turkey's "Iron lady", Prime Minister Ciller, have opened the hunt against the PKK (the Workers' Party of Kurdistan) and its tens of thousands of sympathisers among the large Kurdish immigrant community in Western Europe.
Germany and France have banned the PKK. Other countries are still hesitating about the "opportunity" of such a move. At the moment, only Belgium has unequivocally rejected Mrs. Ciller's demands. Here is an overview on the state of European "internal security" policies - as experienced by the Kurds.
Ban in Germany
On 26 November, the German government imposed a ban on all activities of the PKK and a long row of Kurdish associations assessed as front or cover organisations of the PKK.
The ban was officially justified as the governments response to a series of violent demonstrations and attacks of Kurds, mostly directed against Turkish installations in Germany. The last had occurred on 4 November. Kurds took the streets in 30 German cities. One Turk was killed In Munich, the Turkish Consulate was stormed,personal held as hostages, but finally released unharmed.
Similar demonstrations and attacks occurred the same day in France, the UK, and Switzerland. However, the PKK hastened to denie any involvment in what seemed to be a well co-ordinated operation. According to the PKK, the riots were no more than a spontaneous outbreak of protest among the Kurdish communities in Europe against the recent brutal escalation of Turkey's warfare against the Kurds.
Following the ban, German police immediately raided more than hundred localities and offices belonging to "suspect" Kurdish associations. Bankaccounts, postboxes, documents and other property were seized.
Yet, the result of the broad "anti-terrorist" operation was meager: Apart some knives and an old sword belongin to a Kurdish theatre-group, no arms were found, and, what is more, not a single person was arrested.
Interior Minister Manfred Kanther, a hardliner on internal security and public order, stressed that the widely publicised operation was a "signal against extremism in all its forms" and "the State's answer to the escalation of terror and violence by foreign extremists".
Kanther publicly appealed to all "law-abiding" Kurds in Germany, to denounce fellow country-men suspected of extorting their support for the PKK. Voluntary witnesses were promised particular witness-protection.
Both German and Swiss authorities have earlier encouraged, if not pressed, Kurdish immigrants to co-operate with the police in hunting PKK-activists - with little success.
The most obvious explanation for this lies in the strong emotional support among the Kurdish Community for the PKK's armed struggle against the Turkish regime. While many Kurds are critical about the PKK's ruthless warfare and lack of internal democracy, few would go as far as denouncing its activists to the police of their host country and thus, as they suspect - indirectly - to the Turkish security forces.
Indeed, to draw the line between PKK members, activists, and more or less committed sympathisers on the one hand - all terrorism-suspects according to the ban, and an assumed silent majority of "law-abiding" (i.e. anti-PKK) Kurds on the other, is an all but impossible task and paves the way for arbitrary practice of the prosecution authorities.
In Germany alone, the Kurdish community totals approx. 450,000 persons, whereof some 4000 are officially regarded as "members", and some 40,000 as "sympathisers".
As the PKK never has formally existed as an organisation in Western European countries, these figures are difficult to verify. However, the Kurds having some feelings of loyalty towards the main Kurdish resistance movement rather than towards the Turkish State are likely to form an overwhelming majority among the Kurdish immigrant-community in Western Europe. If they are not "sympathisers" of the PKK now, they might become such, if confronted with Turkish-European policies aiming at the criminalisation of Kurdish resistance.
While Mr. Kanther's clamp-down on the Kurds is likely to find strong support among an electorate with strong "law and order" and anti-foreigner sentiments, voices critical of the ban also can be heard.
PRO ASYL, a German association for the defense of the right of asylum, expressed concern about possible effects of the ban. A new wave of deportations and expulsions of Kurds to Turkey would endanger the lives not only of PKK-activists but also many other alleged sympathisers, PRO ASYL says. And the German Social-Democratic Party (SPD) fears the ban might lead to the public criminalisation of the entire Kurdish community in Germany.
Ban in France
On 30 November, only four days after the German move, the French Interior Minister, Charles Pasqua, in his turn imposed a ban on the PKK and several other Kurdish organisations. Already on 18 November, 111 Kurds were stopped by the police whereof 24 were deferred to an investigating judge [juge d'instruction]. One of the persons under investigation for membership with a "criminal association in relation with a terrorist operation" was detained on remand. A Kurdish women, known for having served as an interpretor for Kurdish politicians visiting Paris, was put under house-arrest, and interrogated under strong pressure by the French Secret Service, according to the Paris daily, L'Humanité .
Mr. Pasqua was anxious to point out, that his decision had nothing to do with recent events in Germany, but was a "direct consequence" of the Conference of European Interior Ministers on 19 November, in Athens. Mr. Pasqua stressed that while he had "some understanding" for the problems of the Kurds, the time had come to "act against terrorism". Yet, the PKK is not known to have committed any act of terrorism on French soil.
Critics of the ban believe that it must be seen against the background of the French government's anxiousness not to endanger its economic relations with Turkey. Since 1990, France has concluded arms-deals worth a 550 million US-dollars, including i.a. the sale of French "Cougar" combat-helicopters.
Conference of EU-Ministers of Home Affairs and Justice divided
The EU-Ministers of Home Affairs and Justice discussed the PKK-issue at their conference on the eve of the December-meeting of the European Council in Brussels. Ministers failed to reach agreement on a common line. While the major EU-countries, Germany and France pleaded for a EU-ban on the PKK, Belgium and the Netherlands opposed such a decision, the latter mainly on the grounds that a ban would be "counter-productive".
The Swiss dilemna
The division among EU-countries brought the Swiss government - particularly anxious to show conformity with common EU-policies since the Swiss vote against membership with the EEA - on the horns of a dilemna.
Public opinion and Swiss media have shown more understanding for the situation of the Kurds in Turkey than other countries in recent years. Moreover, Switzerland, as opposed to Germany, has no tradition of banning organisations and lacks corresponding legislation. Yet, the main reason for the Swiss hesitations in following its big neighbours, France and Germany, is the wide-spread view among governmental and police circles, that a ban on the PKK would be ineffective, if not counter-productive. The Swiss Minister of Justice and Police, Arnold Koller, said that such a measure threatened to further push the PKK into illegality. This view drew strong support from the Neue Zürcher Zeitung , Switzerlands leading conservative daily, usually not known for liberal stands on internal security issues. Under the Rubric "Berne's dilemna with the Kurds" the newspaper writes i.a.:
"But what would a ban on the PKK help? The PKK does not only deal with acts of violence - the difference between reality and its revolutionary rethorics is still perceivable. This PKK would be pushed underground. So far, it has been fairly accessible [approachable? responsive?] and thus easier to control. With a ban, it would no longer be. Considering its internal disciplin and its high degree of organisation in Switzerland and elsewhere in Europe, it would surely pose a far bigger threat to public security, if forced to act from the underground.(...) There are reasons to believe that the PKK will be easier to keep within bounds with the sword of Damocles of a impending ban rather than by being actually banned and, as a consequence, having to be hunted by the few policemen speaking Kurdish."
The article also deals with the dilemna that could rise for the Swiss government, if the EU as a whole agreed on a ban on the PKK. Yet, even in this event, the Neue Zürcher Zeitung is sceptical about the usefulness for Switzerland to align. With Switzerland remaining the only Western European country tolerating the PKK, the latter "would have ever more interest in not putting at risk this last remaining space of legality".
After the French decision to align with the German hard-liners, the Swiss government came under strong pressure to impose a ban, but resisted - at the formal level at least. Instead, the government steered a middle-course. The police increased surveillance and administrative harassment of Kurds suspected of links with the PKK. A man widely regarded as a speaker and representative of Kurdish immigrants in Switzerland was arrested and deported. 14 other Kurds were banned from entry.
The Swiss Social-Democratic Party which had earlier vehemently opposed a ban on the PKK rejected the government's half-way alignement as "unsatisfactory". While Switzerland was taking one-sided decisions against the Kurds, it was furnishing arms to Turkey. It would be wiser for the government to offer the country's services as a mediator in the Turkish-Kurdish conflict, instead, the Social-democrats said.
A Social-Democrat MPs warned of deporting representatives of the oppositional Kurdish intelligentsija. This would ammount to leaving the field to violence.
Another MP pleaded against the use of police measures against suspect Kurds: "If concrete crimes occur, they should be prosecuted by the means of regular penal law".
Belgium resists
The Belgian government has, so far, been most out-spoken in its opposition to criminalisation of the Kurds. In the wake of the NATO-summit in Brussels in early January, the Turkish Prime Minister, Mrs. Ciller, openly accused the Belgian government of supporting Kurdish terrorism and exacted a Belgian ban on the PKK. The Belgian Prime Minister Dehaene dryly rejected the claim, because, as he said, this was "not the best way for solving minority problems".
Indeed, Mrs. Ciller's firm opposal to grant any cultural rights to the Kurds is not popular in Belgium, where the Flamish people look back on hundred years of struggle for equal cultural rights.
The Belgian authorities also strikingly diverged from their European neighbours in their assessment of recent violent incidents involving Kurds. On 1 january, at the eve of the NATO summit, heavy street-fighting broke out in Brussels between Kurds and Turcs. Immediately, Turkey blamed the Kurds for the incident. But Interior Minister Tobbak hurried to their support: According to the police investigation, a fascist Turkish organisation, the "Grey Wolves", were alone responsible for the violent incidents, he said. The "Grey Wolves" are ill-famed for their close contacts with the Turkish military, the secret service MIT, and the embassies.
Policing instead of politics
The Belgian revelations have given rise to new questions in France, Switzerland and Germany, about who really sparked off the "Kurdish" attacks that led to the ban of the PKK and to a further, maybe irreversable, step towards the criminalisation of an entire ethnic immigrant community in Western Europe.
However the answer may be - once again the advocates of "Fortress Europe" have gained ground: Repression, instead of conflict resolution - policing, instead of politics. The Kurdish immigrants, one should fear, are likely not to remain alone in suffering the consequences of this development. Once again, European governments are pooring oil into a smouldering conflict in a buffer-country in the fortress' backyard and creating a "terrorist" people in the heart of Europe.
N.B.
Sources: Dagens Nyheter, 27.11.93; Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 28/29.11.93, 1.12.93, 8.12.93, 3.12.93, 14.1.94; Le Quotidien de Paris, 22.11.93; La Marseillaise, 22.11.93; L'Humanité, 22.11.93; Die WochenZeitung, Nov.93; Archipelago, No 3/Dec.93. See also: FECL No.14, p.3: The making of a "terrorist association" - The political trial of the Workers'Party of Kurdistan"; FECL No.20, p.1 (on German "internal security" policies).