Turkey’s Kurds and China’s Tibetans

The Dalai Lama accused of inciting riotThe Western corporate press is non-stop reporting on China’s suppression of the rebellion by its small Tibetan minority of about 6 million Tibetans, out of a nation of 1.3 billion. Many in the US support independence for a portion of Tibet, which would take away about 1/5 of Chinese territory if it were to take place.

China has about 21% of the world’s entire population. The bossy US has about 5%, so let’s see how the support for other peoples plays out in US press coverage of the current Kurdish rebellion in Turkey? Are we paying much attention to it? Turkish police clash with Kurds

What? Hadn’t heard about it yet? I’ve seen plenty of Free Tibet signs in town here in Colorado Springs, but have yet to see even one calling for Free Kurdistan. Why might that be? Why is nobody in the US calling for an independent Kurdistan for Turkey’s Kurds?

Kurds make up about 1/5 to 1/4 of Turkey’s total population of 70 million. These Turkish Kurds are over 1/2 of the total Kurdish population worldwide. If Americans are so worked up over the national rights of Albanians in Kosovo and the Tibetans in China, why are they so silent on the rights of the Kurds in Turkey? What’s with us dumb Americans? Is it that we are that politically and geographically illiterate, Virginia? (asking my Mom and my cat) Is it that we think the Turkish government to be ‘democratic’? lol…

I just don’t know…

7 thoughts on “Turkey’s Kurds and China’s Tibetans

  1. Clarity matters more than numbers.

    The Tibetan claim is so strong because sixty years ago they have a genuine sovereign nation, and because prior to that time period it was more or less homogeneous and ethnically/culturally/religiously different from the rest of China (deliberate colonization by China has changed that somewhat).

    Kosovo and Iraqi Kurdistan draw their claims not only from history, but from their de facto control and effective civil government of the regions that they claim. Both also had strong histories of regional autonomy the preceded their rise to de facto control.

    Turkey is an heir to the Ottoman Empire which in turn was a successor to a larger Islamic empire. There has never been a Kurdish country. Kurds have not managed de facto civil government in Turkey and in much of their claimed area are a plurality or a majority, but are far from the exclusive ethnicity in the region. As a result, their claims have less clarity and hence less international moral authority.

  2. ‘Clarity matters more than numbers?’ Says who, ohwilleke, and who is defining ‘clarity’ here? The only difference between Kurdish claims in Iraq and Kurdish claims in Turkey is the fact that the US has suppressed Kurds in one country (Turkey), and used them in the other (Iraq). Now are we being clear enough for you?

    Similarly, your rather bizarre efforts at logic in judging national claims of ethnic groups continues to support ethnic claims to independence only where ever the US government has been intervening to use an ethnic group against others (Kosovo against Yugoslavia and Tibet against China). Are we being clear here? Do we have ‘clarity’ now?

    I find it utterly bizarre that some US citizens actually think that an ethnic group of about 6 million at max have some sort of claim to splitting off a huge area of territory from a nation of 1.3 billion people! Yes numbers do matter, and not just who is manipulating ‘clarity’ at the moment. That would be the Pentagon and US corporate class, ohwilleke. I hope we have some clarity now?

    Can you imagine where this hoped for (by some) new nation of Tibet would be allied with? It would be the US and Britain, old colonizers and current imperialist dominators of the world who wanted China under their control back then, and still do. This new Tibet would sit and control water supplies that China is dependent on. In short, the US and Britain would have control over China’s water supplies. This is what US dupes backing Tibet independence are promoting. It is the wrong cause and the wrong time for doing such campaigning.

    I support the rights of equality with ethnic Chinese inside China for its many national ethnic groups, but simply find it appalling that supposed US and British based ‘humanists’ are trying to destroy China by supporting Tibetan independence. Goofy.

  3. What is legitimate about a Chinese claim of sovereignty that flows from conquest pure and simple?

    By the same reasoning, it would be fine for the U.S. to conquer Canada because the many in the U.S. need its resources which the few in Canada are hogging, as long as former Canadians were given equal rights.

  4. The claim of China over Tibet is a lot stronger than mere might alone. Ohwelleke, your analogy is rather weak.

    I think that Britain and the US mobilizing against China on behalf of Tibet is more apt to be compared rightly to if Bolivia and Cuba were demanding that the Navajo reservation be separated from the US and made independent due to it being a sovereign indigenous nation, all the while through using history being that the Anglos, along with the Spaniards, killed off Native Americans in the Americas as a whole. You would support that? It sounds logical, does it not? Oppressed Navajos have their right to ‘self determination’, and all that jazz? Oh YEAH! We are so damn liberal, are we not?

    Where do you, as an American, get off in judging claims of national rights in regions you know absolutely nothing of? Are you going to give Mexico the right to reclaim Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Etc., because of some pseudo historical analysis through your part? What about it, Mr. Judge?

    There is something supremely arrogant about Americans setting themselves up as supreme arbitrators around the globe in national disputes between other nationalities. It’s just plain stupid. It’s just plain imperialist, in short. You are not the grand judge between Tibetan and Chinese claims of sovereignty. You are just an American know-nothing know-it-all. That’s all it is.

    Ohwelleke, I don’t doubt that you have a big heart, but you can’t even differentiate between who it is that you should concentrate your fire on, and who you should not. I mean how lacking in judgement is that? And yet you got to bat for Tibetans? Do you know even a single word of their language, even? Get real, and drop the fashion statement of ‘Free Tibet’.

  5. Actually, there has been an effort by some nutty Anglos to redeclare Texas an independent republic, ohwelleke. China may start supporting that effort soon citing the historical claim for Texas independence held by nutty Anglos. And of course, there is always the historical claims of Mexico on that god forsaken terrain of Tejas.

    Personally, I support the historical right of Texas Blacks to set up a Black independent nation there for ex slaves that have never been properly reimbursed for their stolen lives and stolen labor. Nigeria will be supporting that claim against Austin and D.C. The Nigerians of Houston have gotten sick of them always being accused of running grand scams, when most of them come from the US capital instead.

  6. I think OHWILLEKE raises some relevant historical differences with Tibet. But I question whether it’s America’s place AT THIS MOMENT to criticize a rival nation for imperial overreaching. It might not even be appropriate to tell an ally how to mind their front step, while we are such genocidal stewards of ours. But to criticize a political and economic rival really only serves our own competitive claims on world resources.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *