Nazi Germany, Turkey & The Kurds
How Nazi Germany Looked To Destroy The Turkish State Through a Kurdistan
Opening Statement
Political discourse and debate, mostly among the mainstream, is troubled with some form of half-witted point scoring game that would involve both sides trying to besmirch their opponents through their corruption of history and the application of buzzwords for better publicity. Here, by drawing similarities between themselves and those seen as ‘oppressed’, or, by fabricating a fine yet uneducated line between the opponent and those seen as ‘evil’, those engaging in the conversation can win greater sympathy from outsiders and those monitoring the discussion. Unfortunately, ever since the end of the second world war Kurds have watched themselves fall victim to this form of dialogue, and when I say Kurds I speak primarily to those living outside of what would comprise a Kurdistan, and many in which dare not communicate with Kurds back home never mind in the Kurdish tongue. In retaliation to the mass importing of liberalism into Kurdish society Islamism expeditiously takes the hearts of many Kurds today — growing up amidst the ruins of decades upon decades of lies, forced liberalization and regimes / political parties that preach the buzzword of the decade, democracy (which would mean to constitute something of fairness and representation) but practice an unprecedented form of liberal totalitarianism — it’s not hard to notice, to anyone with even a single eye focused on the region, that the political face of the Kurds is moving toward a point of no return, which will see things change forever.
However, I am not here to talk about any of that, I am currently in the middle of putting together three articles, two of which should cover many questions regarding Kurdish political history and my understanding of what is to come in the near future. One article will delineate solely around the years of 1912 to 1946, which will focus on the political affairs and political parties of the Kurds, which was mostly represented by a form of National Socialism and aggressive interest in the Fascistic and Nationalistic regimes worldwide, contrary to the mass lies surrounding this time. The second article will focus on the political climate that came after that time period all the way up until now in the present day, with closing remarks from myself on what we can approximate to transpire in the foreseeable future. This article will set forth to present a comprehensive analysis of a chapter in Kurdish history, involving The Axis during WW2 (primarily Nazi Germany), the Turkish state and The Kurds. Today, and ever since the early 1970s, the Turkish government has been represented by Kurdish liberal leftists as being a “Fascist oppressor” where liberal leftists worldwide, not just the Kurdish, characterize Kurds as the ‘Holocausted’ and the Turkish regime as the ‘Holocausters’. Regardless of the political establishment, leaders and the policies implemented in Turkey, the regime and the state itself will always remain ‘fascist’ to these groups of people who cannot come up with coherent critics of politics, so instead resort to childish clichés. The famous “everything I don’t like is Fascist and Nazi”. This tactic as explained above is not alien to everyone else, as it is used by Palestinian liberals, for example, that see the state of the Israel as the new Nazi Germany and themselves as victims of their Fascism and in parallel with the Jews or Europe (also illustration painted by Jewish leftists). Liberal Kurds, Liberal Palestinians, Liberal Armenians, Liberal Greeks, Liberal Poles, Liberal Russians, Liberal Armenians and the Liberal Irish among many others use this scheme of gathering commiseration very effectively, ‘pigeonholing’ all that moves within a few centimetres of them as “Nazi” simultaneously with their shallow attempts at concealing their own history of affiliation with radical politics. The difference is someone like me is proud of that part of my people’s history, and I seek to share it with the world, which I intend to do. The motives for these laughable gambits can be easily understood, and one would hope it is a manoeuvre practiced by those new to the political sphere with no real stature or position to truly be making remarks and comments on political affairs.
However, the issue that actually led to me writing this article is that it not only influences the political ideologies which are put forth by those surrounded by these nonsensical ramblings of misinformation and mischaracterizations, but it also completely mutilates historical research and history itself. Kurds, with such a rich and relentless history have it all thrown into shackles and for what? To score extra points in a Twitter argument between a Turk living in Germany and a Kurd living in Sweden? You ask any of these Kurdish defenders of ‘politically correct policy’ and ‘humanitarian justice’ what it means to be Kurdish and they’ll list for you every supposed massacre that took place since 2001, plus a prologue and epilogue explaining how “Erdogan is basically Hitler”. Then, hilariously, these same Kurds will cry at a Turk (example) for telling them they have “no history”, but are you really that surprised? When asked to talk of your people’s history you spit out a fit on genocide and oppression spanning a decade or two at most, so it is not shocking to see people take your ethnic group as a joke historically because you present it as one. This is also why, with a few exceptions, almost no good literature exists in English on Kurdish history, it is either ridiculous theories which were presented by European ‘Race Realists’ of the 20th century on Kurds supposedly being Germanic or Nordic (which will be talked about in this article with the books and authors in mention cited) or malicious suppositions that push a narrative of Kurds being heterogeneous nomads with no ancestral homeland (claims that have been confuted in full by multiple academics and qualified historians such as Dr. Ako Mirzadayy, Dr. Cemsid Bender, Mr. Jamal Nebaz and Prof. Soran Hamarash, to name a few. Rev. Wingram, Hayton of Corycus, Archibald Henry Sayce, Henry Smith Williams and M. Al-Karadaghi are other notable historians that disprove this that are not of Kurdish lineage. These theories are widely accepted by Kurdish Liberals, primarily Kurdish Anarchists, and opponents of Kurdish statehood as a way to argue against Kurdish Nationalism. Both the Nomad and European claim tie in together, built on falsehoods, and will be shown later on in this article and disproven entirely in another future article using the works of the historians mentioned above).
This article will concentrate chiefly on the Kurds in Turkey (Bakur) during WW2, their relation to the Axis and the political position of the Turkish state in contrast to the Axis. It will also refute many myths regarding the ideology of the Turkish state at the time, and it’s leaders, in contrast to Fascism and National Socialism. All the while I will be invalidating many pernicious historical accusations that are dispensed by the Kurdish left alongside solidifying the historical importance and connection between the Kurds in Turkey and the Axis (primarily Nazi Germany), but it will not examine anything else beyond that. In the other article I intend to finish, as mentioned beforehand, I will discuss the attempts of Kurdish independence in Syria (Rojava), Iraq (Bashur), Iran (Rojhalat) or in the Southern Caucuses by Kurdish Fascist / National Socialist organisations and by foreign forces of the axis (e.g. Nazi Germany) in discreet operations and warfare during this time period. That article in mention will cover all areas of what would encompass a Kurdistan and the political parties / the axis attempts to formalize a Kurdish state. It will also look into the Kurdish Fascist / National Socialist parties in Turkey (Bakur) like Xoybûn and the Hevi (who’s policies and political history shall be studied abridged) for they will be left out of this particular article. This article is written as a response to the Kurdish left and the liberal minded political commentators that attempt to brainwash Kurds into seeing down a sorry lens of piteous distress and playing into their dishonest moral framework.
Part 1: The Abwehr & Turkey
In 1935, only two years after the NSDAP rose to power, Adolf Hitler wanted Germany to be aware of those that surrounded the German Reich. Extensive research and studies were conducted by the German Secret Service (Abwehr) on those that either posed a threat to the German cause or could be seen as a possible ally. Several studies were conducted, most of which were done publicly (for example the studies on Iran, Syria and Iraq by Fritz Grobba, which played a big part in German identification for a possible Kurdish state), however the study on the Turkish state was done entirely in secret. The report on the Turkish state, titled ‘Militargeographische Angaben Über Die Türkei’ (Turkey’s Military and Geographical Documents) focused primarily on the geographical location of Turkey, its borders, crops, oil, ethnic minorities, landscapes, mountains and manpower among many other things. Now one reading this might begin to wonder, why was the German government from the years 1935 until 1941, when the document was completed, gathering information on Turkey and had classed the entire inquiry as top secret? [1] The study was so confidential and hidden from party circles that even men such as Werner Von Der Schulenburg and those very close to Adolf Hitler himself were stunned when it was brought to light (who will be mentioned later on in the article). The documented research, published in 1941, remained hidden and unknown until the early 2010s when Turkish historian Şenol Şahin Çörekçi, who lives in Germany and is known for his research on Turkish-German relations, was handed the document by a family member of a retired German officer, who did not want to be named. [2] The exhaustive research book and all the notes and other documents that came with it opened a door, previously unopened, on what was truly in store for the Turkish state had things gone to plan for Nazi Germany. One of the greatest masterminds behind the initiation of the report was Franz Von Papen, who became the German ambassador to Turkey in 1939. [3] Previously in the mid 1930s German attempts at making Papen the Ambassador in Ankara fell short when Mustafa Kemal Atatürk had rejected this request from the German government as he did not trust him. [4] After Atatürk’s death Papen was enlisted as ambassador again, but rejected once more in November 1938 by the new president of the Turkish Republic İsmet İnönü and again in February 1939. Then in April 1939 the German government demanded that Papen be the Ambassador to Turkey and all attempts at rejection fell short, İnönü could not withstand German pressure on the issue. [5] Papen’s arrival in Turkey, on 27th of April 1939, was very significant as it was around the same time Turkey had signed the “Peace Front” pact inspired by the United Kingdom to stop Germany if “German aggression continued”. [6] The 27th of June 1939 marked Turkey’s second close pact with the Alliance in quick succession, this time with France, in an obligation to uphold security in the Balkans against German threats. [7] Papen’s second letter to the Turkish government since becoming ambassador on August 21st 1939 arrived with a threat, that if Turkey did not back off it’s close alliances with Britain, France, the USA and the Soviet Union it would be met with harsh economic sanctions. [8] Turkey simply ignored the threats and continued to uphold it’s agreements signing a third major deal with Britain and France on the 19th of October 1939 named the “Treaty of Alliance”. [9]
Following years of ignoring German threats and demands the Turkish government felt a sudden shock throughout the backbone of the government for the Germans had just crushed the Allies in France (June 1940). Turkey was now threatened point-blank on multiple occasions following the German victory by Papen himself and through letters sent by the German government. Germany threatened to support internal and external threats to Turkish sovereignty if they did not sign a friendship agreement with Germany that ensured economic support and rejected allowing the Allies a stronghold in Turkey against Germany. [10] İnönü, Turkey and the previous policies of Atatürk’s rejecting Papen’s influential character within Turkish borders put the Turkish government on edge and forced them to forfeit in the face of German demands. Between the years 1940 to 1942 Turkey had completely submitted to German influence and agitation which lead to multiple signed economic deals. [11] The famous ‘German–Turkish Treaty of Friendship’, signed on the 18th of June 1941 in Ankara, was signed under these conditions, and entailed a declaration of neutrality and peace between Turkey and Germany where Turkey was to uphold Nazi Germany’s security by not allowing the Allies to station in Turkey and to not turn on the German state on the side of the Allies. The Germans were to also not plan or act out any policy or operation that could fracture Turkish sovereignty. [12] However, this was not the case, as ever since 1935 the Germans were planning something to take place within Turkey’s borders, in conjunction with propping up an outer threat to hurt it’s borders. During this time Franz Von Papen, as disclosed prior, was essential in finalizing the German report on the Turkish state, which would solidify the German plans and plots they had in mind. Even after the June ‘Friendship Pact’, only 4 days later, Turkey rejected German demands on the 22nd of June to close the Turkish straits to Soviet warships, which threatened Germany after the German invasion of the Soviet Union. Turkey rejected these demands and even with Papen’s famous pressure was applied to the Turkish government he was unable to have the straits close to Soviet merchant ships as he demanded. [13] Papen was not safe in Turkey at this time, and continued toxic relations between Germany and Turkey only hurt his safety further. On the 24th of February in 1943 Papen saw an attempted Soviet assassination on his life, leading many to believe the Turkish government had allowed it to happen. [14] İnönü and the Turkish government had become aware by this time that German influence and presence in Turkey was not a positive, and in 1943 after Turkey had responded to British calls about allowing air based in Turkey to be used against the Axis, and joining the Allies in their fight, Hitler had sent a letter to İnönü personally threatening him with the total destruction of the Turkish state with the Luftwaffe from Greek and Romanian bases if he accepted. [15] It was also in this very letter where Hitler once again assures İnönü that Germany was not planning anything that could harm Turkeys sovereignty, but just as before, Hitler was lying through his teeth, and knew exactly of what was to come if the Germans were successful in the Soviet invasion. The economic chokehold that Germany placed over Turkey’s neck depraved them of any real economic progress throughout this time period. Turkey was subject to total German dominance in foreign trade and Germany would time and time again try to influence their politics and use the economic factor as leverage — and if that didn’t work, there came threats of invasion and bombardment. As a result of the German economic throttle İnönü was forced to make many harsh decisions, one of the many policies implemented by İnönü was the famous “wealth tax” that saw a massive increase in taxes. In January 2012 Shabbat Levi, a Turkish Jew who lived under both Atatürk and İnönü and actually witnessed the wealth tax period, said in an interview at the age of 98 “I forgave the Wealth Tax because İnönü saved us from Hitler”. [16] Shabbat Levi was one of many Jews who praised İnönü for maintaining his stance against Germany, and also praised Atatürk for his sympathy toward the Jews of the Turkish Republic (which we will go into more detail on further down the article). Similarly İshak Alaton, the multimillionaire Jewish tycoon who was born and raised in Atatürk’s Republic, said the same things in regards to the wealth cut and hostility to German demands. So what was Hitler’s plan all along? What was it that motivated the German report on the Turkish state starting in 1935 and after its completion in 1941, what was the need for Papen’s harsh and demanding aura in Turkey which contributed so much to the reports execution? Why did the Turkish government tread lightly around the Germans and why were there Soviet assassination attempts on the German ambassador, around the same time the Turks denied German requests to close the straits to Soviet ships? What was Hitler’s reason for hostility, what did he see in Turkey that could threaten Germany in the future?
Part 2: The Kurdistan Game
The title in this section of the article may confuse many, but it is the name given to the plans by Nazi Germany in multiple declassified documents shared in the Turkish media. [17] As Nazi Germany came closer and closer to the completion of their military report on the Turkish state and, the new Turkish identity in general, multiple threats became apparent that could imperil peace in the Caucuses and Europe. The first big threat was the obvious one of Turkey fulfilling a policy of “biased neutrality” that could shift either way depending on the political climate, relations between the Soviet Union and Turkey in the past which helped create the Turkish state entirely did not aid this German suspicion any better. [18] The second greatest threat that the Germans noticed in their report on Turkey was expressed vocally in a meeting during March 1940, between Armenian nationalists and the Germans whilst discussing their plans for an Axis lead invasion of the Turkish state. What threatened the Germans here was the belief that Turkey was not willing to accept German plans for the Middle East (primarily in Syria in Iraq) as Turkey held many claims to lands in both states which Germany was not willing to give up. The Germans and Armenian nationalists of the ‘Armenian Revolutionary Federation Dashnaktsutyun’ (which is now left leaning, as opposed to it’s historical political ideals) discussed how Turkey was a supporter of the British and French policy in the region, as a way to defy Kurdish statehood and Armenian claims that threatened Turkish sovereignty. [19] Turkey’s history with French occupation in the region was a pleasant one, putting aside the fact the French gave a helpful hand to Atatürk in his revolution, France had also, after drawing up the borders for the newly formed state of Syria, retracted on its decision to keep the Hatay province Syrian and practically handed it over to Turkey without discussion after a Turkish-French treaty guaranteeing Turkish friendship to France during the Second World War in 1939. [20] Nazi Germany witnessed this very clearly, and German diplomat Werner Von Der Schulenburg argued for giving Turkey the entirety of Northern Iraq (Southern Kurdistan, Bashur) as a counter to the French handing the Turks the Hatay province and ensuring Turkish friendship with Germany. Hitler swiftly rejected this proposal, and Schulenburg shortly after ended up in a concentration camp, where he died, for protesting Hitler’s rejection of handing over these Kurdish lands to Turkey and for allegedly attempting to assassinate Hitler — many believe if Hitler had accepted Schulenburg’s idea the Germans could have won the war. [21] The third and final greatest threat that Nazi Germany saw in Turkey was that of Pan-Turkism / Turanism. The Germans understood that sooner or later Pan-Turkism would be a danger to Germany and Europe if they allowed Turkey and Azerbaijan to join together. The idea of Pan-Turkism/ Turanism extended both eastward and westward, and looked to unify parts of Europe, such as Hungary, with the Greater Turan. Many documents were found in the ‘Ministry for Occupied Eastern Territories’ that discussed the terror that could inflict Europe and Asia if Greater Turan was allowed to blossom. [22] The fact that Pan-Turkism was first promoted in the 1860s by Arminius Vambery, a Hungarian Jewish British agent that worked with Theodore Herzl, the father of Zionism, and Lord Palmerston, a British Freemason, probably made the Germans even more mistrustful of these ideas. [23] On the 27th of May 1940 the Germans set up a meeting to put together a plan to counterbalance the Turkish threat. Attending the meeting was German SS Commander Friedrich Vollheim, Armenian politician and ex-minister of finance of the first Armenian Republic Sargis Araratyan and Armenian General Drastamat Kanayan, nicknamed ‘Dro’, who later lead the Nazi-backed Armenian Legion. The three agreed at the meeting to plot an invasion of the Turkish state and to arm the Kurds with the intent of supporting their separatism from Turkey and the other states they resided in. Both sides pledged a promise to work together to eliminate all hostilities and conflicts between Arabs and Kurds, thus resulting in the creation and protection of Kurdish statehood. [24] The agreement was later finalized by Joachim von Ribbentrop in Bucharest, July 1940, both Heinrich Himmler and Adolf Hitler received copies of the agreement which stated full support for an independent Kurdish state and the unification of Armenian territories now in Turkey after the invasion and breakup of the Turkish state. It was stated in the Nazi-Armenian alliance protocol, which aimed to save the Kurds from what was called in the protocol “Turkish oppression”, that the political structure of an independent “Kurdistan” was to be liberated and it’s final borders (in relation to other other German operations planned in Iran, Iraq and Syria, which will be discussed in the other article to be written, disclosed in the opening statement) would be determined later on. [25] Turkey would have been completely reshaped with the Kurdish territories constituting a larger independent Kurdistan, the Armenian territories were to be unified with the existing Armenian state and other Armenian territories under Soviet occupation, and it is understood that the Greek territories would have been handed over to Greece to shake off British influence in the Monarchy. Top secret British documents taken after the war show that Hitler had asked Franz Von Papen to find a way to assassinate Turkish president İnönü and have him replaced with Ömer Faruk Osmanoğlu who was to be sent back to Turkey from his exile in Egypt. An entirely new Turkish establishment was to be formed under Osmanoğlu and the assassination of İnönü was bound to create political instabilities that would make it easier for the Germans to demolish any form of Turkish residence. [26]
Unexpectedly, as a result of the Soviet retaliation to the German invasion and the decrease in momentum of the German forces heading eastward the plan had to be set aside until the Germans could reach and capture Stalingrad. Despite Operation Barbarossa failing in being able to defeat the Soviet Union in a single campaign the Wehrmacht had captured vast expanses of territory, including Ukraine, Belarus, and the Baltic republics. On the Western Front, Germany held most of Europe, the U-boat offensive in the Atlantic was blocking American support to the Soviet Union directly, and Erwin Rommel had just captured Tobruk to further aid the Axis against the Allies. [27] Kurds and Armenians were eager to see the Germans advance on Stalingrad in the hopes it would result in the fulfilment of the operation, many more Armenians were enlisted in the Armenian Legion by Garegin Nzhdeh, and thousands of Kurds flocked to join the Germans in the fight against the Soviets. “The Caucasian-Mohammedan-Nazi Legion”, which consisted of ethnic Muslims of Abkhaz, Circassians and Kabardians. Balkar, Karachay, Chechnya, Ingush, and the peoples of Dagestan, in addition to the Kurds, numbering about 30 thousand (Kurdish) fighters” joined the Axis in the march on Soviet territories. [28] In the summer of 1942, but the plan had changed slightly. Instead of just invading Turkey from Armenia and what would become Kurdistan, Turkey would be invaded from all sides this time. From the north it would be invaded from Bulgaria, from the east by Armenia, from the south by what would formalize Kurdistan and through Greek docks westward. [29] The plan was exactly the same as the one prior, to assassinate İnönü and have him replaced with Osmanoğlu, to break up the Turkish state and establish an independent Kurdistan in the south and unify greater Armenia out of the Armenian territories. The plan was orally described and accepted by Adolf Hitler as well as being written up again by Ribbentrop, and signed by him and many other Nazi officials, the plan was now called ‘Aktion Gertrud’, (Operation Gertrud). [30] Once again, the greatest stimulus for this operation was the threat of a Greater Turan, “the leaders of Nazi Germany feared the unification of the Turkic communities” [31] and “wanted to establish an independent Armenia and Kurdistan against the Greater Turanian Khanate”. [32] Operation Gertrud was to be completed in just a few weeks, airborne bombers were stationed in Batumi and seven ships sailed for the Aegean Sea as backup. The Germans were planning the unification and structure of Kurdish rebels to support the Kurds in Turkey (Bakur) from Iraq and Syria (Bashur and Rojava), and additional Armenian forces were to be deployed east of the Kurds. Nazi Germany was not the only player in Kurdish affairs, Şerif Pasha, who had been in contact with Nazi Germany for years now and was the founder for the ‘Kurdish Society For Cooperation & Progress’, had been in talks with Benito Mussolini, The Emperor of Japan and of course, Adolf Hitler, to try to and organize something to benefit the Kurds of Turkey had Hitler and Mussolini invaded. [33] Nevertheless, the operation was once more cancelled, as the Soviet army repelled the Germans at the battle of Stalingrad, the way looked to be over and the Germans were heading toward defeat. If it were not for the Soviet victory in Stalingrad Turkey was to be invaded and ultimately divided. [34] Just over a year after the German defeat in Stalingrad Turkey cut all relations with Germany and severed all their pacts in August 1944, and on the 23rd of February 1945 Turkey declares war on Germany. [35] On the 25th July 1945 it became well known the intentions of the German Reich toward Turkey, when Dr. Nerin Gün, a Turkish professor in Lausanne, published an article in ‘The Gazette’ on the German plans. [36]
Part 3: Hitler & The Kurds
The relationship between the Kurds and Adolf Hitler, specifically the Kurds in Turkey (Bakur), has been showcased clearly in the previous two parts, but what was Hitler’s opinion of the Kurds as an ethnic group? What did he think of the Kurds and is there any literature on the Kurds published by the Nazi German government? Before we go through all of this there are some common claims I’d like to disprove. One of the many reasons why all of the information I have discussed in this article is news to many is because many Kurds, primarily those that can speak English and have access to mass media, are set to believe the Nazis were an enemy of the Kurds, and that the Nazis aided the Turkish state in oppressing Kurds and were ideologically aligned with Turkey. One of the biggest fabricated claims purported by the Kurdish liberal left is that the Nazis gave poison gas to Atatürk which was used against Kurds in the Dersim massacre, this is one of many attempts by liberals to situate the Turkish state with Nazi Germany in an attempt to win condolences from other liberals worldwide and forge an argument against Turkey which fits their moral framework. Below I am going to completely refute this lie of the Nazis giving a helping hand to the Turkish state in their actions against Kurds in Dersim with actual documented proof and other sources that dismantle these sorry claims.
The Dersim Massacre has been heavily politicized by the Kurdish liberal left online — who mostly reside outside of what would comprise Kurdistan — the reason why this is done is not to honour or share a moment for those that died during the event, but rather to try and tie in the Turkish state with Nazi Germany, as explained already. The lives of Kurds are swept aside by these people, who don’t care, all for greater consolation. So, how accurate are these claims? Did Nazi Germany willingly sell poison gas to Turkey to use on the Kurds in Dersim? The politicization of the Dersim Massacre is one that happens regularly by Kurds and non-Kurds, as also shown in 2011 on the 23rd of November when now President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of Turkey called it a ‘tragic event’, a clear way to rally up more Kurdish supporters in his cause for presidency. From late March 1937 to the 2nd of January 1938 the Turkish army bombarded and attacked Kurdish Alevi tribes and areas of the Dersim region, over 40,000 Turkish troops were deployed against a poorly armed 6000 Kurdish rebels, led by Seyid Reza. Historians such as David McDowall estimate the casualties on the Kurdish side to exceed 30,000 [37] and Turkish government sources claim the number to be around 13,000 [38]. The attack is explained as being a retaliation against Kurdish rebels who sought to detach themselves from the Turkish central government. Many Kurdish historians speculate that the argued causes for the Dersim massacre and the reasons for the Turkish advance on Dersim were made up by the Turkish government, and only used as a way to disarm, exile and kill Kurds of that area; however, this is not the subject matter and thus it will not be discussed further, rather we will talk about the massacre itself and the external forces that might or might not have played a role in it. Vigen Avetisyan, who judging from a few online searches and inquires is Armenian, wrote an article in 2020 claiming that the Nazis gave poison gas to the Turks to be used against the Kurds in Dersim. This article, which cited no sources, had no real backing to its claims, was shared around all over Twitter and caused an uproar by Kurdish liberals who believed every word of the 142 word ‘article’. The piece of writing goes to claim that “Atatürk argued with Hitler that killing civilians with poison gas was not a crime, after which Hitler did the same with Jews in Germany” which is borderline hilarious. Two attached images show comments from the Turkish Council of Ministers who are proposing buying gas in 1937, and the devices for filling them into aircraft bombs from German companies. The German ARD News Channel also published a short documentary claiming that gas was purchased from Nazi Germany and used on the Kurds in Dersim, which caused heavy backlash from multiple historians. Before I quote historians that delved into the Dersim Massacre and disproved the theory of alleged Nazi German gas that was used, I wish to go through my own research that I conducted and show what I had found. Over 5 months ago I contacted the Federal Archives Department of Military Archives in Berlin, where I asked for all documents and information on the Dersim massacre and sales of gas to Turkey from Nazi Germany, unfortunately almost nothing existed, and everything that was sent to me was totally irrelevant. The documents shared by those trying to ‘prove’ that the Germans sold gas to Turkey that was used in Dersim cite talk about the possible purchasing of Chloracetophenon and Iperit from Nazi Germany. There exists no documents in German about the sale of these gasses, Chloracetophenon and Iperit, to the Turkish state, but these demands and talks exist. What’s interesting to note is that Chloracetophenon and Iperit were NOT the gasses used in Dersim, the gas used in Dersim against the Kurds was Zyklon B, which no document confirms was sold to Turkey by Germany, neither was it asked for by the Turkish state from Germany. Bora Celik, who is actually from Dersim, believes it was indeed Zyklon B that was used, [39] and multiple testimonies from other Kurds, such as Nuri Dersimi, that witnessed the events at Dersim match the description of the gasses described by Bora Celik. [40] Historian Uğur Ümit Üngör claimed that he saw in German and Turkish archives that Zyklon B was purchased from Germany many years ago, but since then all these claims have been disproven as no evidence of any of this can be found and Üngör himself has remained quiet on this issue and brought up nothing to back his claim. According to archived British documents titled ‘The Turkish Military Authorities’ Turkey had requested both Chloracetophenon and Iperit in response to the Italian attack on where tear and mustard gas was allegedly used. [41] Turkey also requested a specialist on gas warfare as no one existed within Turkey that has any past experiences with handling gas. The details of the document were published in the Turkish ‘Dünya’ newspaper and again by Turkish political analyst Cengiz Özakıncı, where it said: “Turkish military authorities want to recruit a British adviser on gas warfare. It will be among the duties of the consultant to provide training on gas warfare, defence against the effects of gas and related problems in Ankara […] Contrary to their British request for experts, I would suggest the Turkish government the opportunity to train a Turkish officer on a course in England.” [42] As determined above the gas used in Dersim was most likely Zyklon B, and it could not have been the Chloracetophenon and Iperit gasses. Chloracetophenon, more commonly known as tear gas, cannot kill nor do the damage that was described by Kurdish historian Nuri Dersimi, Iperit, a type of Mustard Gas, can also not result in the deaths that the Dersim massacre is estimated to have produced. According to a study conducted by the Institute of Medicine in 1993, Irperit causes blisters on the skin and the infections that arise from these blisters can result in death between one to fourteen days after infection. [43] This, once again, does not fit on line with the narrative of the Dersim massacres, as the deaths accursed there and then as a direct result of the gasses. There is no evidence at all that Nazi Germany gave Zyklon B to Turkey, and all the supposed ‘evidences’ pointing to Germany providing gas to Turkey for Dersim hold about as much water as evidence that the British were the ones to give the gas (remember, we actually have British documents proving they reviewed and reviewed Turkish requests, but no German documents). To further negate these claims entirely I’d like to cite two historians, the first being Ismail Küpeli, a Turkish left-liberal minded historian who is very critical of Atatürk and supportive of Kurds. He is also one of the first historians to openly document and speak about the Dersim massacre, and in 2020 gave an interview about the massacre. He was asked: “Looking at these documents, is it a correct historical assessment to think that Germany played a role in the Dersim massacre, just as it did in the Armenian genocide?”, Ismail Küpeli then replied “No, so far, no documents have emerged indicating such a connection. I don’t think there is that connection”. [44] Sinan Meydan, another Turkish historian, but one not critical of Atatürk in his assessment, also disproves the claims, showcasing that even though the gasses Chloracetophenon and Iperit were clearly not powerful enough to kill the Kurds in Dersim as we understand they were, there exists still no documented proof that these gasses were purchased from Germany. [45] So this leaves us with a question, how on earth did Turkey acquire Zyklon B gas to use against the Kurds in Dersim? In 2021, ‘Radyo Dersim’ (Radio Dersim, a popular Kurdish radio station located in Dersim) claimed that the Zyklon B gas used by Turkey on the Kurds in Dersim was produced by Jewish scientists of IG Farben who fled Nazi persecution to Turkey. [46] In a lengthy article titled ‘Türkiye, Yahudiler, 2 Dünya Savaşı’ (Turkey, Jews, World War II) many of the most notable names of Jewish immigrants that fled Nazi Germany and arrived in Turkey are named, many of which were scientists, as proven when it says “According to Norman Bentwich some 1200 scholars and scientists were dismissed from German institutions in 1933–1934, some 650 of whom emigrated. Considering that 190 of those emigrated to Turkey this is a mighty significant percentage”. [47] Many of the Jewish scientists that fled to Turkey formally worked for IG Farben and dealt with poisonous chemicals and gasses, alongside producing Zyklon B. [48] If Kurdish liberals are willing to blame Nazi Germany for the Dersim massacre, with little to no evidence, why don’t they blame the British, where there exists just as much ‘proof’ that it was they who had a hand in Dersim? Or, what about the Jewish scientists who fled Nazi Germany, where we have way more solidified indications that it could have been them that produced the gas? Of course, the liberal leftists will always blame the Nazis, despite lack of evidence, but never the Jews, regardless of what you put on the table as proof. Then you have to ask yourself another question, why would Adolf Hitler allow the transportation of gas to Atatürk to be used on Kurds if the same Kurds he’s allowing to get massacred become the central point of an invasion he would be planning at that exact time?
The second claim the Kurdish liberal left uses to slander National Socialism / Fascism is to claim that Atatürk was some sort of Fascist, thus we should blame all that happened to Kurds under him on Fascism. This claim is very easily deconstructed through multiple sophisticated academic studies on the topic, but before I do that I’d like to point out that even if Atatürk was a Fascist or a National Socialist that’s not an argument against the political philosophy of these ideologies, rather it’s just further proof that the liberal left seriously cannot formulate a constructive criticism of National Socialism / Fascism so they just align it with everyone they dislike and cry about it. The number one book cited to claim Atatürk was a National Socialist / Fascist is the book Atatürk in the Nazi Imagination by Stefan Ihrig, hilariously, practically everyone who waves around the front cover of this book online hasn’t actually read it and luckily for me, I have. Ihrig in his book goes to show that Atatürk was a source of inspiration for Germans who had lost parts of their country after the ‘Treaty of Versailles’, witnessing from abroad Germans saw a man, Atatürk, stand up against foreign powers in his revolution and “take back” what he deemed was his. Right, Left and centrist parties all over Germany spoke of Atatürk with enthusiasm, so it was not a narrative selective to a few. Ihrig shows us earlier on in his book that even the most liberal parties, such as the Vossiche Zeitung had expressed their yearning for an Atatürk like character to come liberate Germany. [49] The key to understanding the book ‘Atatürk in the Nazi Imagination’ is in the title, the word ‘imagination’. The Nazis knew that Atatürk had an almost mythic character in Nazi Germany, as a result of his revolution which the Germans were in dire need of against foreign powers, so they utilized this. The Nazis claimed that the Turkish war of independence was totally independent of Soviet support, which Hitler and the Nazis, as proven earlier, knew was not true [50] but claimed this anyways as a way to uplift the spirit of the German people and to oppose both Soviet communism and liberal capitalism. This is also the same propaganda that led to Hitler calling Atatürk his “star in the darkness” in the 1920s [51], not because he was ideologically aligned with him, but because the Germans witnessing his resistance to defeat captured their imaginations. Stefan Ihrig himself proves this later on when he beautifully examines the intentions of the book saying: “This analysis of Atatürk in the Nazi imagination thus illustrates the flux in images about Turkey in Germany and the very specific societal and political factors that always influence such kinds of perception: Our national, societal, and personal views and discourses about the “Other” are much more about us than about any actual “Other”; they are dependent on time and place, on fears, expectations, plans, and dreams. We must always be wary of alleged traditions and continuities. More often than not they are constructed and imagined rather than real”. [52] One final example from the book that further prove what is being said is when the Nazis, in the public eye, completely ignore the Kurds as an ethnic minority in Turkey and push a narrative that claims Turkey is ethnically homogeneous. [53] The Nazis knew very well this was not true deep down, as Hitler himself during that time was having entire reports conducted on the Turkish state in which the Kurdish minority would gain their independence after the invasion of Turkey. Even the book ‘Die Neue Türkei’ by Edmund Schopen, which I have translated into English and read in full, discusses the Kurdish minority in Turkey, as it does in Iraq and other states, describing them as “Aryan”. [54] Atatürk’s political philosophy and aura is best described as liberal, sure Atatürk practised a form of dictatorial Authoritarianism, but in his own words: “I shall dictate Democracy so that there shall never be another Dictator in my country ever again […] I am not a dictator, they say that I am very strong and strong willed; Yes, this is true, there is nothing that I desire that I cannot achieve, because I do not know how to act relentlessly and by forceful means, to me the dictator is one who makes others succumb to his will. I would like to rule not by breaking hearts but rather by winning them”. [55] Eldar Mamedov, who served as a political adviser for the Social Democrats in the Foreign Affairs Committee of the European Parliament, analysed Atatürk’s secular policies and concluded that Atatürk’s secularism and conceptions of freedom were liberal and at its core centred around individual rights. [56] Thus, we can infer, that Atatürk’s authoritative nature was one to bring about liberal democracy and his understanding of both freedom and secularism were centred around the individual, meaning it was liberal. The comedic thing about all of this is that the Kurdish liberal leftists who try to compare Atatürk with the likes of Hitler actually have more in common with Atatürk than Hitler ever could, which is why, oddly, the PKK and HDP supporters in Turkey (Bakur) fly flags of Atatürk despite their claims. Nesim Seker, another political analyst, describes the ideology of Atatürk as a “third way between socialist and liberal ideologies”. [57] Professor Gökmen, Taha Parla and Andrew Davison, three historians that came closest to identifying Atatürk with Fascism, however, still did not fully support the idea that Atatürk, stating that the tendencies were there (such as economic corporatism) but was nevertheless not Fascist. [58] That being said, no historian has done more extensive research into Atatürk and his ideological beliefs as Dr. Dragos Mateescu, who concludes his research calling all examples of associating Kemalism / Atatürkism with Fascism as naïve. [59]
All of this is not to say that Fascist / National Socialist political figures did not exist within Turkey at all, no, that is a ridiculous thing to say as everywhere all over the world existed and exists people with such ideals regardless of where they come from; be it in China, France, the United Kingdom, India, Brazil, Jamaica, Argentina, Egypt and elsewhere. The most notable Turkish political figure that is regarded as a ‘Fascist’ and ‘Nazi’ by the media is Alparslan Türkeş, the founder of the well known ‘Neo-Fascist’ Turkish Grey Wolves. Despite the fact that the Grey Wolves have become an almost thug-like organisation for whatever is the current regime in Turkey and hold practically nothing today that would be in line with political Fascism or National Socialism, Türkeş definitely had some ‘Fascistic’ tendencies. His ‘Nine Lights’ doctrine, despite being very vague, argued for a form of corporatism (both economic and governmental) that seemed way more long-term and sophisticated than what Atatürk practiced. [60] The doctrine also appears much more opposed to the liberal democratic tendencies of Atatürk but that’s about as far as it goes. Just like with Atatürk, Türkeş who is the alleged father of Turkish ‘Fascism’ and the one who birthed the alleged ‘Neo-Fascist’ Grey Wolves completely rejected Ethnic Nationalism. Professor David Llewelyn Jones outlines Ethnic Politics as being an innate and central component of German National Socialism [61] and other movements in Europe during and prior to the second world war that would fall under the same categorization. Despite Race/Ethnicity not being as vocal in Mussolini’s brand of Fascism, in comparison to that of Metaxas, Codreanu or Pavelic, it was still nevertheless a key component of the ideology and motivated a lot of the policies implemented which we cannot find anywhere in the works of Türkeş. [62] The Nationalism of both Atatürk and Türkeş clearly fall in line with the French post-enlightenment concept, which is inherently liberal, and finds its foundations mostly on citizenship and language rather than ethnos. Türkeş famously once said: “The more Turkish we are, the more Turkish they are. If they are Kurdish, we are also Kurdish […] Kurds are our own brothers. We love them more than anyone else. They are Muslim like us. They prostrate the same Qibla like us. We are all of the same ummah of the same prophet, the same sacred people. We are connected by the book. We carried out the national struggle together. […] We established the Republic together. My nephews are Kurdish. My sister is married to a Kurdish man. We cannot leave each other!”. [63] Türkeş would justify this by also saying: “We do not accept the Kurds as a separate race, but as Turan, of Turkish origin. Both history and knowledge confirm us. We are as Kurdish as the Kurds”. [64] Türkeş most definitely knew this was not true, as does practically anyone else with even the smallest amount of interest and knowledge in history, Turks and Kurds are absolutely of different races, anyone who says otherwise is ridiculous and should not be taken seriously, but people like Türkeş and the so called Turkish Nationalists preach this narrative all the same as a way to justify their clear Civic Nationalism. Are these really the words of a true Fascist? Would any real Fascist fabricate history like this to justify the intermixing of different ethnicities for the acceptance of a Civic Nationalism which is fundamentally liberal? What makes all of this even more ludicrous is the fact that Türkeş himself is proven to be Jewish, and was born to a Jewish family exiled by the Ottomans to Cyprus with his real birth name actually being Hüseyin Feyzullah. [65] Devlet Bahçeli, who took over the leadership of the Grey Wolves and the Nationalist Movement Party after Türkeş died (which is also associated with Fascism and National Socialism by uneducated liberals, and was also founded by Türkeş) is believed to be of Armenian-Jewish lineage. [66] Isn’t it strange that both Bahçeli and Türkeş, two of the most vocal and most popular Turkish ‘Nationalists’ in history after Atatürk, which have opposed Kurdish Nationalism and Kurdish separatism so staunchly are themselves Jewish? Isn’t it also strange that Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of the Republic of Turkey and named the “Father of the Turks” (this is the meaning of Atatürk) was also a Jew? [67] Not forgetting the likes of Emmanuel Carasso, Mehmed Cavid, Fevzi Çakmak, Talaat Pasha and Hasan Tahsin among many other military men and politicians that fought for and helped create the Republic of Turkey (many of which being a part of the ‘Young Turks’) were also ethnic Jews? [68] Then of course Munis Tekinalp and Halide Edib Adıvar, two of the biggest advocates for Kemalism / Atatürkism, both being Jewish also. [69] The Jewish Young Turks that exiled many Kurds, a fact unknown to many, [70] were essential to the founding of the Turkish Republic that has fought Kurdish statehood since its birth. Anyways, back to Turkish ‘Fascism’, clearly we can see Atatürk and Türkeş are not worthy of titles affiliated with ‘Third Position’ Politics, the Grey Wolves themselves have extensive ties to the CIA [71] where back in the 1970s the CIA through an agent sold the Grey Wolves weapons to combat Kurdish separatism. [72] But what about Nihal Atsız? Atsız, who is much lesser known in the mainstream media, is in my opinion is the closest thing to a form of Turkish Fascism / National Socialism as he was an admirer of German Nazism, preached an aggressive form of Ethnic Nationalism and was a critic of Atatürk’s liberal Civic Nationalism. [73] Despite all of this, Atsız was still a big admirer of Zionism, and praised the Jews on multiple occasions regarding the newly formed state of Israel, contrary to his earlier views on the Jewish people. [74] Clearly Turkish Nationalism and the Turkish State has a Jewish problem, just like how the Turkish Military today is dominated by Generals of Jewish origin, [75] which probably explains why Israel is Turkey’s largest supplier of military arms that go directly toward destroying Kurdish separatism, [76] and why Turkey despite its public stage play of Anti-Zionism has talks “underway with Israeli leaders on building an under sea natural gas pipeline” with Israel. [77] Atsız had practically no effect on Turkish politics, never formed a political party and was ignored by the German Nazis (unlike Kurdish Fascists Rafiq Hilmi and Ramzi Nafi). With an exception for Atsız, the major Turkish nationalist figures that get affiliated with the terms “Nazi” and “Fascist” all stood in favour of maintaining the Kurdish populations in Turkey, and through citizenship, spoken language and the intermixing of both populations looked assimilate the Kurds into the Turkish identity. However, this is virtually impossible given the fact the Kurdish population in Turkey is huge, and well on its way to becoming the majority ethnic group in the country if things continue the way they are going with the birth rates. [78] Also because of the fact that Ethnocentrism is an innate Kurdish feature and something that takes up the hearts of an overwhelmingly large portion of Kurds worldwide, in which many are not willing to let go of, you cannot imagine this assimilation process ever working. Yes, many ethnic Kurds have assimilated into the Turkish identity as have ethnic Greeks and ethnic Armenians, İnönü famously being just one Kurdish example of this and Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, who currently leads the Republican People’s Party (founded by Atatürk) is also of Zaza Kurdish origin, but this is nowhere near the number of Kurds which have maintained their ethnic identity and to this day engage in ethnic politics. Academics and Experts on Fascist history and philosophy, such as A. James Gregor totally ignore political movements such as the Grey Wolves on his study into Neo-Fascism. Gregor noted the similarities between Atatürk’s revolution and the fascist inclinations in the early years of his rule, but that’s about as far as it went. [79] The Bolsheviks under Lenin practiced a form of Corporatism early on, which drew immature similarities between Italian Fascism and Soviet Bolshevism, but once again it ended there and the similarities only went thus far. [80] If we are to use Atatürk’s corporatism to paint him as a Fascist, then the same could be done for Lenin, which would be preposterous.
The social policies enacted by Atatürk, alongside the protection and emancipation of Jews fleeing German persecution (hence why Atatürk has a statue in Israel), would most definitely not be in line with National Socialist / Fascist thought. I have already mentioned briefly the status of the Jews in Turkey under Kemalism, as I have the alliance between the Jewish Bolsheviks and Atatürk (also Jewish) — that provided Turkey with “10 million gold roubles, 45,000 rifles, and 300 machine guns with ammunition” [81] — but I would like to go more into the Jewish question in Turkey under Atatürk a little more and put to rest the claims of him being allies to Nazism. Arnold Reisman, a Jewish researcher into political affairs during WW2 and the treatment of Jews in Europe claims that Turkey does not get enough credit for its aid toward and treatment of the Jews, in one of his papers titled ‘They Helped Modernize Turkey’s Medical Education and Practice: Refugees from Nazism 1933–1945' Reisman goes through the rich history of Jewish refugees from Germany into Turkey and how they shaped the Republic today. [82] In Reisman’s other work on Einstein and Turkey, he discovers how Albert Einstein and the Turkish State worked together to save Jewish refugees fleeing Europe by settling them in Turkey with some of the most important roles in modernizing the country. Nazi Germany was, naturally, very angered by this. [83] Just as Turks allowed Jews to share the same home, they also shared the same abuses from Germans. In the historical document titled ‘Mistaken for Jews: Turkish PhD students in Nazi Germany’, Marc David Baer discusses multiple instances in where Turkish students in Germany were mistaken for Jews by National Socialists and abused. Baer states “November 9, 1938, is a significant date in both German and Turkish history. That day witnessed the pogrom against Jews in Austria and Germany that signalled the beginning of the Holocaust. That same day the young Turkish Republic lost its first leader, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, who had led the Muslim side in the Greco-Turkish War (1918–1922) and established the republic in 1923, built on the ashes of the Ottoman Empire. Turks in Berlin were eyewitnesses to violence against German Jews that day, and some of them were targeted by the mob because they “looked Jewish.” Tarık Emiroğlu, a Turkish student of architecture in Berlin in 1938 and 1939, mentioned in a letter to his grandmother that during the pogrom “a ruckus almost started when Turks dispersed into the street after having gathered at the (Turkish Club of Berlin’s) clubhouse upon hearing of Atatürk’s death. Seeing a lot of dark-skinned people gathering, Germans mistook the Turks for Jews who were planning a counter action and raised an uproar, but the police intervened and resolved the issue”. [84] This was just one of multiple instances in which Turkish students in Germany were attacked by mobs for “looking Jewish” as Baer discovers. The acceptance of the Turkish state to allow Jewish migrants to settle for their safety was similar to how Leo Trotsky was received and protected in Istanbul following his exile [85] but also how Istanbul became a safe haven for German Occult organisations that were exiled and banned by the Nazi Party. Miguel Serrano affirms: “The Third Reich banned the Thule Society and other occult orders because there was too much old nonsense in these esoteric clubs, as well as some connections with Freemasonic societies like the Golden Dawn, Aleister Crowley’s Satanism, homosexuality and so on. The founder of “Thule,” von Sebottendorf, had connections with Turkish Freemasonry. Immediately after the Third Reich came to power he escaped to Istanbul, where it is said that he committed suicide in the Bosphoros in 1945, at the end of the war. He was probably killed by the Intelligence Service, after being manipulated by it during his lifetime. Something similar happened to Karl Haushoffer”. [86] The Turkish states acceptance of Freemasonry is no surprise, considering Atatürk himself was a Freemason. [87] It is also widely believed that Atatürk was himself a bisexual, as shown in H.C. Armstrong’s book ‘Grey Wolf, Mustafa Kemal, An Intimate Study of a Dictator’ that describes his personal life and interaction with other men. [88] This is also why radical feminist and pro-lgbt politician in the CHP (the party founded by Atatürk) Canan Kaftancioglu cites and praises Atatürk as a supporter of the LGBT publicly, but still denounces Kurdish separatism. [89] Getting back to Turks in general, Çörekçi, the founder of the military report on Turkey by the Abwehr, believed that behind Hitler’s kind words for Turks and Turkey in the public eye his intentions were only harmful, and that he had a hatred toward Turks. He said in 2012 that “I know that nearly 500 Jews of Turkish origin were killed in Berlin. I interviewed a witness, Isaak Behar, a survivor of Hitler’s policies, who told me his experiences. As the oppression of Jews in Germany increases, those of Turkish origin wanted to be taken for shelter in the Turkish Embassy, however they were prevented from doing this. We know that most of them were killed”.[90] Allegedly, a total of 8 Turks were killed at the Bergen-Belsen Concentration Camp, it was determined that 126 Turkish citizens were brought over from various European countries and were stationed in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp after Turkey broke diplomatic relations with Germany. Many of the Turks in these camps were later returned to Turkey. [91] All of this clearly shows us that Atatürk was in no way relatable to Nazism, be it from his acceptance of Freemasonry, Jews, Homosexuality/Bisexuality, Liberal Secularism, Individualism and his rejection of Ethnic Nationalism among other things — Matevosyan’s book also goes into how Atatürk defied both Kurdish Ethnic Nationalism and Turkish on page 231, opting for a multi-ethnic society united by its borders and language alone. [92] To put to bed the claims of Kemalist Fascism once and for all, I quote Charles H. Sherrill who said “(Atatürk) was absolutely opposed to the Fascist system” [93]. There are many other books and articles I can cite in favour of my argument, but I believe what I have shown already is enough.
Now that both of those claims have been severed in half, it is time to end this section of the article on how Adolf Hitler and the Nazis saw the Kurds as an ethnic group. Austrian historian and social anthropologist Felix Von Luschan is believed to have had a great impact on Adolf Hitler, and his racial studies were a part of Hitler’s upbringing and entrance into the political scene. The tool used by the Nazis in identifying and clarifying the skin tones of different racial groups was actually designed by Luschan himself. [94] Now ultimately this brings to the minds of many the propaganda regarding the alleged “horrific treatment of lesser races in Nazi Germany”, but this topic I will have to leave to another date when I will look to refute many claims regarding ‘Inferior’ and ‘Superior’ dichotomy that the Nazis apparently believed in and the widely accepted Lebensraum. For now however I will just ignore it and continue with the topic at hand. Felix Von Luschan wrote multiple things about Kurds in his books, that we can infer with confidence influenced the opinion of Adolf Hitler toward the Kurdish populations. Luschan wrote: “Can it be mere accident that a few miles north of the actual frontier of modern Kurdish languages there is Boghaz-Koi, the old metropolis of the Hittite Empire, where Hugo Winckler in 1908 found tablets with two political treaties of King Subiluliuma with Mattiuaza, son of Tusrata, king of Mitanni, and in both of these treaties Aryan divinities, Mithra, Varuna, Indra and Nasatya are invoked, together with Hittite divinities, as witnesses and protectors? And in the same inscriptions, which date from about 1380 B. C, the king of Mitanni and his people are called Harri, just as nine centuries later in the Achaemenidian inscriptions Xerxes and Darius call themselves Har-ri-ya, ‘Aryans of Aryan stock.’ So the Kurds are the descendants of Aryan invaders and have maintained their type and their language for more than 3300 years. The Kurds speak an Aryan language, the eastern Kurds are little known. They speak a different dialect from the western tribes, but both divisions are Aryan. […] The Kurds are, in colour of skin, hair and eyes, so little different to the northern, especially the Teutonic breed, that they might easily be taken for Germans. There is nothing to contradict this racial affinity in the reputation for honour and courage, which in spite of their rapacious tendencies, the Kurds enjoy wherever it has been found possible to compel them to labour or to the trade of arms. In Persia the Shah entrusts the security of his person to Kurdish officers rather than to any others. Their loyalty to their hereditary Wali, which neither Turks nor Persians have been able to shake, is also noted with praise. The Kurd prefers to wander with his herds and in the winter lives in caves like Xenophon’s Carduchi. […] There are so many tribes differing from one another, that only the briefest summary may be given. Judged as specimens of the human form, there is probably no higher standard extant that that of the Kurds. The northerner is a tall, thin man (obesity is absolutely unknown among the Kurds). The nose is long, thin and often a little hooked, the mouth small, the face oval and long. The men usually grow a long moustache, and invariably shave the beard. The eyes are piercing and fierce. Among them are many of yellow hair and bright blue eyes; and the Kurdish infant of this type, were he placed among a crowd of English children, would be indistinguishable from them, for he has a white skin.” [95] Now, I personally do not agree with any of this, I do not believe we Kurds have any relation to Europe, nor do we to the label ‘White’, and as told before I will be writing something soon on Kurdish history using the works of Kurdish and non-Kurdish academics that I mentioned in my opening statement which go against all of this. This understanding however clearly extended into Hitler’s train of thought and behind closed doors Adolf Hitler would openly profess an appetency to learn more about the Kurds, where he would also affirm his support and supervision for the Kurds living in Turkey and elsewhere. This is shown first hand in the Turkish book titled (in English) ‘Fascism: German Identity and it’s Relations with Turkey’ where Hitler said he was “hoping for help to prove that the Kurds are an ‘Aryan’ people, and therefore a people worthy of the friendship and protection from the German Reich”. [96] This was no doubt disclosed very early on before German travels through Kurdish areas and quite possibly very shortly after Adolf Hitler had read the works of Felix Von Luschan. In Gottfried Johannes Muller’s book on his travels into Kurdish lands, who was a Nazi Abwehr agent, he spoke very clearly about the “Aryan Kurds” and their lifestyle. [97] In the original unedited version of Hitler’s Table Talks, in German, Adolf Hitler is recorded talking about the Kurds, in which he refers to them as ‘Germanic’ and goes as far as to say Atatürk had to be Kurdish for his looks and maybe because of his character. He states: “We have lost some of our Germanic peoples, who are sitting as Berbers in North Africa and as Kurds in Asia Minor. One of them was Kemal Atatürk, a blue-eyed man who had nothing to do with the Turks.” [98] Hans F. K. Günther is by far the most prominent racial theorist and writer on racial history from the Third Reich, his book ‘The Racial Elements of European History’ has an entire section in it dedicated to Kurds, where on one page he describes the characteristics of Saladin, whom he calls a “tall Kurdish chieftain” that was “high-minded, brave, just, moral, chivalrous towards woman and prisoners, generous, a loved of learning”. [99] Günther also talks about the cephalic index of the Kurds, which is measured at 75. which according to Günther was the Teutonic type. [100]
Closing Statement
This entire article has been put together as a way to disrupt and impair Kurdish liberal leftist attempts at deforming Kurdish history and Kurdish politics as a way to feel safer within their moral frameworks. I have proven and shown within this article the history between Nazi Germany and the Kurds of Turkey (Bakur) in company with rebutting multiple mendacities regarding this part of history. All sources cited in this article can be seen below in the references section for anyone who doubts the validity of the information provided where they can feel free to double check.
References List
1 — İnce, A.H. ‘Hitler’in Türkiye’yi İşgal Planı’, 2020.
2 — Tarih Dükkanı. ‘Nazi̇leri̇n 2.dünya Savaşi Yillarindaki̇ Türki̇ye Plani’ — Operasyon Gertrude 2. Dünya Savaşı Tarihi’, 2019.
3 — İnce, A.H. ‘Hitler’in İnönü’yü Öldürme Ve İhtilal Planı’, 2020.
4 — Watt, D.C. ‘How War Came The Immediate Origins of the Second World War’, 1938–1939, pp. 279.
5 — Watt, D.C. ‘How War Came The Immediate Origins of the Second World War’, 1938–1939, pp. 280.
6 — Watt, D.C. ‘How War Came The Immediate Origins of the Second World War’, 1938–1939, pp. 281–282.
7 — Watt, D.C. ‘How War Came The Immediate Origins of the Second World War’, 1938–1939, pp. 305.
8 — Watt, D.C. ‘How War Came The Immediate Origins of the Second World War’, 1938–1939, pp. 310.
9 — Rolfs, R. ‘The Sorcerer’s Apprentice: The Life Of Franz von Papen’, pp. 392–393.
10 — Rolfs, R. ‘The Sorcerer’s Apprentice: The Life Of Franz von Papen’, pp. 397–398.
11 — Weinberg, G. ‘A World In Arms’, pp. 78.
12 — Rolfs, R. ‘The Sorcerer’s Apprentice: The Life Of Franz von Papen’, pp. 404.
13 — Rolfs, R. ‘The Sorcerer’s Apprentice: The Life Of Franz von Papen’, pp. 400.
14 — Sudoplatov, P. ‘Special Tasks: The Memoirs of an Unwanted Witness — A Soviet Spymaster’.
15 — Rolfs, R. ‘The Sorcerer’s Apprentice: The Life Of Franz von Papen’, pp. 406.
16 — Turkish News. “Varlık Vergisi’ni affettim çünkü İnönü bizi Hitler’den kurtardı”, 2012.
17 — Dr. Gökpinar, H. ‘Kürdistan Oyunu’, pp. 38.
18 — Gökay, B. ‘Why Revolutionary Russia Backed Turkish Nationalists Over Communists’, 2017.
19 — Dr. Gökpinar, H. ‘Nazi̇–Ermeni̇ İtti̇fak Protokolü Ve Kürdi̇stan Oyunu’, para. 1.
20 — Jörum, E. L. ‘Syria’s “Lost Province”: The Hatay Question Returns’, 2014.
21 — TheAlternativeHypothesis, ‘How Germany Could Have Won WW2’, 2019.
22 — Abramian, A. ‘Forgotten Legion: Sonderverbande Bergmann in World War II, 1941–1945’, pp. 64.
23 — Landau, J. M. ‘Pan-Turkism, From Irredentism to Cooperation’, 1995.
24 — Dr. Gökpinar, H. ‘Nazi̇–Ermeni̇ İtti̇fak Protokolü Ve Kürdi̇stan Oyunu’, para. 2.
25 — Dr. Gökpinar, H. ‘Nazi̇–Ermeni̇ İtti̇fak Protokolü Ve Kürdi̇stan Oyunu’, para. 3.
26 — İnce, A.H. ‘Hitler’in İnönü’yü Öldürme Ve İhtilal Planı’, 2020.
27 — Kershaw, Ian ‘Hitler: 1936–1945: Nemesis’, 2000.
28 — Tashkndi, K. ‘Operation Abdeen Palace Balcony: The Nazi Brotherhood’, 2020.
29 — Mayer, S. L. ‘The Rand McNally Encyclopedia of World War II’, pp. 54.
30 — Jeloschek, A. ‘Freiwillige vom Kaukasus’, 2003.
31 — Türkçe Malumatlar, ‘Almanların Türkiye’yi İşgal Planı Gertrude Operasyonu’, para. 3.
32 — Türkçe Malumatlar, ‘Almanların Türkiye’yi İşgal Planı Gertrude Operasyonu’, para. 5.
33 — PaulosTheMede, ‘The Life of Ramzi Nafi Rasheed Agha and The Kurdish Nazi/Fascist Connection — Making Sense Within The Mist Of Time’, 2021.
34 — Kerrigan, M. ‘The Secret Plans of The Second World War’, pp. 95–97.
35 — US State Department, ‘Allied Relations and Negotiations With Turkey’, pp. 6–8.
36 — Dr. Gün, N. ‘Türkiye’deki Alman Planları’, 1945.
37 — David McDowall, ‘A Modern History of The Kurds’, pp. 209.
38 — NTV Tarih. Aralık 2009, pp. 59.
39 — Klei, E. ‘De Slachting In Dersim (1937–1938), Voor Altijd In Het Koerdische Geheugen’, para. 39.
40 — Bruinessen, M. V. ‘Kurdish Ethno-nationalism Versus Nation-building States’, pp. 116.
41 — British Military Archives. ‘The Turkish Military Authorities’, 1938.
42 — Özakıncı, C. ‘Cengiz Özakıncı, Alman Devlet Televizyonunun Atatürk’e Yönelik Dersim Iftiralarını Belgelerle Çürütüyor’, 2019.
43 — Institute of Medicine, ‘History and Analysis of Mustard Agent and Lewisite Research Programs in the United States. Veterans at Risk: The Health Effects of Mustard Gas and Lewisite’, 1993.
44 — Karakülhancı, A. ‘Yeni belge: Almanya Dersim Katliamını Izlemiş’, 2020.
45 — Meydan, S. ‘Dersim’de Zehirli Gaz Kullanıldı’ Iddiasına Cevap: Siz Kimi Kandırıyorsunuz?’, 2019.
46 — Radyo Dersim, Makaleye Yanıt Olarak: ‘Sonra Türklerin Beklediği Fırsat Geldi’, 2021.
47 — Bilgi Güçtür, ‘Türkiye, Yahudiler, 2 Dünya Savaşı’, 2015.
48 — Hayes, P. ‘Industry and Ideology: IG Farben in the Nazi Era’, pp. 196.
49 — Ihrig, S. ‘Atatürk in the Nazi Imagination’, pp. 15.
50 — Ihrig, S. ‘Atatürk in the Nazi Imagination’, pp. 84.
51 — Ihrig, S. ‘Atatürk in the Nazi Imagination’, pp. 115.
52 — Ihrig, S. ‘Atatürk in the Nazi Imagination’, pp. 230.
53 — Ihrig, S. ‘Atatürk in the Nazi Imagination’, pp. 175.
54 — Schopen, E. ‘Die Neue Türkei’, pp. 134.
55 — Kemal, M. ‘The Ataturk, Statement to Gladys Baker’, 1935.
56 — Mamedov, E. ‘Why Atatürk’s Secularism is Liberal, 2012.
57 — Seker, N. ‘Vision Of Modernity In The Early Turkish Republic: An Overview’, 2007.
58 — Ter-Matevosyan, V. ‘Turkey, Kemalism and the Soviet Union’, pp. 158–159.
59 — Ter-Matevosyan, V. ‘Turkey, Kemalism and the Soviet Union’, pp. 159–161.
60 — Landau, Jacob M. ‘Pan Turkism in Turkey, study of irredentism’, p. 150.
61 — Jones, D.L. ‘Ethnocentrism in National Socialism: A Dissertation’, 1965.
62 — Zoltanous. ‘Italian Racism in Fascism’, 2022.
63 — Uludağ Sözlük Alparslan Türkeş Ile Ilgili Bütün Yazılar, Sayı: #924495 19923105.
64 — Meydan Gazetesi Arşivi. ‘Kürtler Türk’tur’, 1992.
65 — Sertkaya, M. F. ‘Gerçek Alparslan Türkeş Kimdir?’, Akademi Magazine.
66 — Sertkaya, M. F. ‘Devlet Bahçeli’, Akademi Magazine.
67 — Atajew. ‘Prominent Turkish Secularist Author Says Mustafa Kemal Was a Jew’, 2000.
68 — Atajew. ‘Masonic Dictator Mustafa Kemal Ataturk Was A Donmeh Zionist Jew’, 2000.
69 — Sertkaya, M. F. ‘Türklerin Tarih Boyunca Yuttukları En Büyük Zoka, Türkçülük Akımının Önderi Olan Gizli Yahudi Hahamlar Ve Munis Tekinalp’, Akademi Magazine.
70 — Schaller, D. J. ‘Late Ottoman Genocides: The Dissolution of The Ottoman Empire and Young Turkish Population and Extermination Policies’, pp. 7–14.
71 — Martin A. ‘Turkish Dirty War Revealed, but Papal Shooting Still Obscured’, 1998.
72 — Jacoby, T. ‘Political Violence, the ‘War on Terror’ and the Turkish State’, 2014.
73 — Aytürk, I. ‘The Racist Critics of Atatürk and Kemalism, from the 1930s to the 1960s’, 2011.
74 — Benigo, O. ‘The Turkish-Israeli Relationship’, pp. 77.
75 — Kapner, N. ‘Jewish Control Of Turkey’s Military & Flotilla Murders’, 2010.
76 — Vardi, S. ‘The Hypocrisy of Israel’s Alliance With The Kurds’ 2019.
77 — Ackerman, G. ‘The Unlikely Israeli Behind Budding Ties With Turkey’, 2022.
78 — Ghosh, P. ‘A Kurdish Majority In Turkey Within One Generation?’, June 5 2012.
79 — Gregor, A.J. ‘In Search of Neo-Fascism: The Use and Abuse of Social Sciences’, p. 193.
80 — Gregor, A.J. ‘In Search of Neo-Fascism: The Use and Abuse of Social Sciences’, p. 260.
81 — Kapner, N. ‘Jews Plotted The Armenian Holocaust’, 2007.
82 — Reisman, A. ‘They Helped Modernize Turkey’s Medical Education and Practice: Refugees from Nazism 1933–1945', 2008.
83 — Reisman, A. ‘Jewish Refugees from Nazism, Albert Einstein, and the Modernization of Higher Education in Turkey’, 2007.
84 — Baer, M. D. ‘Mistaken for Jews: Turkish PhD students in Nazi Germany’, 2018.
85 — Daniels, R. V. ‘Exile and Assassination of Leon Trotsky’, Britannica.
86 — Hood, B. ‘A Talk With Miguel Serrano’, 2020.
87 — Freemasons Community, ‘Famous Freemasons (A-Z)’, 2022.
88 — Armstrong, H. C. ‘Grey Wolf, Mustafa Kemal, An Intimate Study of a Dictator’, pp. 253–254.
89 — Ashdown, N. ‘A Motorcycle-Riding Leftist Feminist Is Coming for Erdogan’, 2020.
90 — Turkish News. ‘Hitler Türkiye’yi İşgal Etmeyi Planlıyordu’, 2012.
91 — Turkish News. ‘Nazi toplama kampında ölen Türkler için anıt levha’, 2012.
92 — Ter-Matevosyan, V. ‘Turkey, Kemalism and the Soviet Union’, pp. 231.
93 — Sherrill, C. H. ‘Bir Elçisen Gazi Mustafa Kemal’, pp. 119.
94 — USHMM, ‘Dr. Friedrich Rösing Collection’, 2017.
95 — Grant, M. ‘The Passing of The Great Race, 4th Revised Edition’, 1916.
96 — Oğuz, B. ‘Faşizm Alman Kimliği Türkiye İle İlişkiler — Cilt 2’, pp. 22–23.
97 — Muller, G. J. ‘Einbruch Ins Verschlossene Kurdistan’, 1937.
98 — Seewald, ‘Hitlers Tischgespräche im Führerhauptquartier’, pp. 88.
99 — Günther, F. K. ‘The Racial Elements of European History’, pp. 151.
100 — Günther, F. K. ‘The Racial Elements of European History’, pp. 102.
