Monday, December 26, 2011

New Definitions of Terrorism from the Minister of Internal Affairs [Turkey]

Taken from the Turkish daily Radikal, 26/12/2011 15:24 online version, accessed 22:00 Central Turkish time. Translated by Zeynep Oğuz.

Minister [of Internal Affairs, İdris Naim] Şahin claimed that those who work to exculpate PKK are brushing aside the reality of terrorism and instead fighting the ones that fight against it. He stated that there are two structures at work: one to fight against terrorism, and another to fight against those who fight against the fight. Expressing the urgency to identify the weeds in the backyard that feed terrorism, he continued his remarks as follows:
“There is an alternative system against these [terrorists]. Our system. They have no rules. A legal system has law, order, rights, the separation of good and evil and that of the guilty and the innocent. It even argues for a humanistic struggle when it comes to fighting those that are deceived, dismayed, kidnapped, and put into terrorist organizations. So, on the one hand there is lawlessness, and on the other is a struggle carried outwithin a legal framework. However the activities of the terrorist organization[s] are not limited to armed attacks; they do not only take place up on mountains, and slopes, nor only in cities and on the streets, and on the back streets at nights by laying insidious ambushes. [Terrorism is not only armed terrorism.] There is another leg of this [operation]. There is psychological terrorism, there is scientific terrorism. There is the backyard that fosters terrorism. In other words, there is propaganda, terrorism propaganda.”
Şahin claimed that some people support terrorism by twisting it, by making up justifications for it, and by rendering it reasonable. He added:
“And how do they achieve that? Maybe they paint their reflections on a canvas. Or they may write poems, articles,short features, or wherever they write. Unable to slow down, they get carried away and try to demoralize the soldiers or the police, who fight against terrorism, by turning them [fighters] into the subject matter of their works of art. In one way or another, there is some kind of battle with those who fight against terrorism. The[se battles are the]indirect activities of terrorism that take place in the back yard –and this back yard is Istanbul, Izmir, Bursa, Vienna, Germany, London, wherever [they may be], [at] a university chair, an association, a non-governmental organization.
As a matter of this day and age, the more the non-governmental organizations we have the more democratic we are but, from the point of view of terrorism, too, it is a need to infiltrate into these organizations; and they can; it is possible to do so, so they have. It starts out as an innocent association; some are cultural organizations, others educational. Now, the fight against those ones up in the mountain and in the rural areas is relatively easy, but when it comes to [dealing with] the backyard, the weeds get mixed up with garden cress. They all appear green. They all get mixed up; some are poisonous, some are beneficial.One understands which is which only when one eats them.”
“We are aware of the psychological warfare”
Emphasizing the difficulty of combat in the backyard of the terrorist organization, Şahin explained that they needed to distinguish them by means of a surgeon’s sensitivity. Minister Şahin stated that they are not against art and continued:
“First of all we have problems demarcating that back yard. And exploiting our trouble in distinguishing, they claim, ‘I am a beneficial herb, too, I am parsley. I am only stating my cause,I happen to be in this back yard.’ That is to say, by making the most use of democracy, terrorism has spread all over like rhizomes. And on the one hand is the structure of terrorism, with its illegal, unlawful framework. On the other is you fighting against it within a legal framework –and which, by the way is the way it will continue being, it is not that we are complaining. But on yet another side is the unarmed [sub]structure of terrorism. That is, the configuration that provides support for those who bear arms. That is to say the subsidiary powers. Depending on the occasion, it [the configuration] only sings songs, but every three song is an address to the audience, whereby there is a nice little message. Whatever you take from it, however you interpret it. It is art that is performed on stage. What can you do, we are not against art as such, but we do have to pluck these with the sensitivity of a surgeon, we all have a responsibility to be aware of these. There is terror, there is war against terror, and there is also a configuration that fights the war against terror. We are aware of this psychological war.
There is so much grudge against the state that, in the scrap that they call their agreement, they refer to themselves as an organization, and not a state. I mean, they are enemies of the Turkish state, we understand that much, but they are so against the state that they cannot use [the word] state for their own organization. What is it, then, what is a state? What does a state do? State is order, state is law, state is hierarchy, state is property, state is chastity, state is freedom, education, health; state is the very life itself. In that case, an organization that is not a state, is the state of the mightiest at a given moment. Whoever has the strength, whoever is the sovereign, rules. A group of individuals that feed off of each other. Man is a wolf to man. Whoever can get their teeth onto others becomes the state. And the sympathizers who tag along behind them. If only they [?] could live that reality for one day, not even one day, 10 minutes, I know what they would do but there is no way out. It is no joke. Because it [the reality] is exposed by those who did find the way out. I used to say this, but now the confessors are confirming it. It is an environment where all kinds of lewd behavior, moral corruption, every form of inhuman state takes place, from eating pork, to Zoroastrianism, from whatever nation and brotherhoods, to, excuse my language, being gay. There is only way in and no way out. The way in is fear, the way out is death. It is this kind of a configuration.”
“We have to interpret what they say as meaning the opposite”

Declaring that there is a document entitled “the sub [?
]-agreement,”whereby there is a specific enumeration for it [?], Şahin stated:
“Associations are listed as one item, and the political parties as another item as part of this structure. If it is not, then go ahead and say so; explain, first and foremost, to the Grand National Assembly of Turkey [GNAT], and say ‘Somebody has written fallaciously, irrelevantly about us.’ If you are indeed free and courageous then go ahead and tear that document up [as a sign of rejecting its content], and yet you are not free. It is a structure where, in their own minds, they see all of my Kurdish brothers as slaves, seeing them as ‘automatic members,’ and ‘the political faction, including the parliamentary group, as one indivisible whole.’ Thereafter you dare talk about freedom; which freedom, you are not free yourself. If you are free, if you are sincere, then reject [the claims]. The language of peace, peace, brotherhood, freedom, is it? Which freedom? Is there a freer platform than the one at the GNAT for expression of freedom? That is an untouchable podium. And you have it.
There is no further podium for any citizen of this country. There is no further assembly. We are in a structure where this is abided by, this is tolerated, and this is called ‘freedom.’ And, thank God, we are [free] and we represent a model to the world. If you have an opinion, come along and express it. Nobody says anything, they won’t. If the majority of this country follows you when you express your opinion then your rules and policies shall govern. But you keep yelling ‘freedom, peace’ on the one hand, and on the other you have trouble with the lack of your followers. And yet, ‘I am here, I must exist, too,’ you say. You partake in democracy and engage in antidemocratic activity on the side.
We can easily understand the language of their backyard, of the representatives of this political configuration, in fact all of them, if we read it backwards. One has to invert whatever they say. I have found out their motivations, their worlds this way.Whatever they declare as good, is evil; and if they think it is evil, it isgood. If they say ‘peace,’ therein is a sign of war. If they say ‘democracy’ there is atrocity. If they say ‘human’ there lies a trap for humans. If they say ‘love’ that means hatred and grudge. Whatever they say means the opposite.One understands it when one reads backwards.” (AA)