Un territoire de marge en haute Djézireh syrienne (1921-1940)

Résumé :Au sortir de la Première Guerre mondiale, les nouveaux États fondés sur les décombres de l’Empire ottoman adoptent, dans leurs zones rurales respectives, des politiques similaires afin de stabiliser leurs frontières et leurs populations. Si divers groupements ethniques et/ou religieux du Moyen-Orient sont touchés par ces changements, les plus touchés sont les Kurdes, majoritairement ruraux et principalement répartis depuis 1925 sur quatre États : la Turquie, l’Irak, l’Iran et la Syrie. La haute Djézireh syrienne, objet d’un vaste projet de sédentarisation entrepris par la France en tant que puissance mandataire au Levant (1920-1943), offre à cet égard un singulier terrain d’observation des populations rurales kurdes dans l’entre-deux-guerres. L’auteur envisage les relations centre-périphérie à partir de la notion de « marge», dans un sens certes spatial mais aussi culturel, politique et social.After World War I, the newly established states in the Middle East implemented similar policies for stabilizing borders and populations, especially in rural areas. These policies affected various ethnic and/or religious groups, but the impact was heaviest on the Kurds, a people divided after 1925 among four countries: Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria. Upper Jazira, an area located in Syria at the junction with Turkey and Iraq, was the target of a comprehensive project for settling people that France carried out under its League of Nations’ mandate (1920-1943). It provides a vantage point for observing rural Kurdish groups during the interwar period. The center-periphery debate is revisited by using the concept of “margins” in not only its spatial but also its cultural, political and social senses

Where are all the students? Demobilisation and re-engagement in higher education in Turkey and beyond

The uprisings that erupted unexpectedly in the Middle East between 2010 and 2011 propelled the region’s youth to the forefront of the political and media spheres. According to some scholars, we are witnessing a re-politicisation of Middle Eastern youth, a marked contrast to their ‘depoliticisation’ and ‘apathy’ as a group in recent years. Yet, although the youth (incidentally, the majority of the population in the region) have unquestionably participated in popular protests, student unions seem not to have played a role thus far. From a macro-level perspective, the marginal role of student associations may seem natural; whilst nationalist and revolutionary leaders encouraged students to actively participate in politics ‘for the sake of the nation’ until the 1960s, both revolutionary and conservative regimes progressively sought to ‘depoliticize’ them. This turned higher education into a privileged ‘sandbox’ for testing methods of repression which would then be extended to all segments of society. However, while scholars should consider the political context of a given society, namely, the authoritarian or semi-authoritarian regimes of most Middle Eastern countries, we must ask: what can meso- and micro-level analysis reveal about the complex and multi-layered phenomena of collective demobilization and individual disengagement? This special issue offers some responses to that central question, analysing different case studies within higher education, from Turkey and Egypt to Morocco and Mexico, over the last forty years

The Shared Political Production of ‘the East’ as a ‘Resistant’ Territory and Cultural Sphere in the Kemalist Era, 1923-1938

While traditional accounts of Atatürk’s Turkey approach the state as a powerful and centralized apparatus, this article suggests, on the contrary, that Turkey was still a state in the making and lacked a consistent policy in the face of the multiple social and political challenges that emerged in the 1920 and 1930s. Concretely, the article suggests that the Turkish regime’s response to contestation was to put in place extremely violent policies concerning the inhabitants of the Eastern provinces, in particular. In so doing, it paradoxically contributed to the creation of a specific ‘territorial’ and ‘cultural’ entity: ‘the East.’ It also argues that despite Kemalist elites’ strong ideological commitment, Turkish authorities were obliged to take into consideration the dissenting discourses elaborated by Kurdish intellectuals who claimed the existence of a Kurdish region in Eastern Anatolia. In that respect, and based on a historical approach, the article analyzes the Kemalist period through the lens of the interaction between the Turkish state and the Kurdish movement in order show how cultural, political, and religious spaces are constructed, reshaped, and eventually politicized as an outcome of the struggle between the state and some segments of a given society

Où sont les étudiants du supérieur ? Démobilisation et réengagement du milieu universitaire en Turquie et au-delà

The uprisings that erupted unexpectedly in the Middle East between 2010 and 2011 propelled this region’s youth to the forefront of the political and media scene. To some scholars, we are witnessing a re-politicisation of the Middle Eastern youth, which stands in marked contrast to their "depoliticisation" and "apathy" of recent years. Yet, although the participation of the youth "by the way the ’majority’ of the population in the region" to popular protests is an undeniable fact, student unions seem to be out of the picture so far. From a macro-level perspective, the marginal role of student associations may appear "natural". Whilst nationalist and revolutionary leaders encouraged students to actively participate in politics "for the sake of the nation" until the 1960s, revolutionary as well as conservative regimes progressively sought to "depoliticize" them. In that respect, the university field became a privileged site of experimentation of methods of repression which would then be expanded to be used in all sectors of society. However, though scholars must take into consideration the political context of a given society "authoritarian or semi-authoritarian in most of Middle Eastern countries", what the meso and micro levels of analysis reveal us about the complex and multi-layered phenomena of collective demobilization and individual disengagement? This special issue offers some responses to that central question while analyzing different case studies within the university milieu from Turkey to Egypt, Morocco, and Mexico over the last forty years

Introduction

DEPUIS LONGTEMPS, et particulièrement depuis le début du XXe siècle avec l’émergence des nationalismes dans la région, l’espace rural kurde constitue un véritable enjeu politique. En effet, les révoltes de la première moitié du XXe siècle et les guérillas qui ont marqué la seconde moitié du XXe siècle se sont produites dans cet espace et ont profondément transformé les relations ville-campagne. Les campagnes kurdes ont été le terrain de conflits aussi symboliques que réels : symboliques parce..

Étudiants « émigrés » et activisme en Europe : le cas de la KSSE (1958-1975)

Plus de 40 ans après, le « moment 68 » – compris ici comme une année symbolique représentant la « longue décennie » (de 1954 à 1975) et ponctuée elle-même par l’essor de la « nouvelle gauche » et des conflits marquants tels que la guerre du Vietnam – continue à soulever des débats passionnés parmi les intellectuels, la classe politique ainsi que les chercheurs qui s’interrogent sur sa signification et son héritage à la fois culturel et politique. D’une part, les souvenirs des acteurs et des t..

Les Kurdes de Syrie, de la “dissimulation” à la “visibilité” ?

Depuis la création de l’État syrien, divers segments de la société kurde ont été intégrés au système politique et/ou communautaire. Toutefois, si durant la première moitié du xxe siècle, cette intégration ne présentait pas de problèmes majeurs, l’identité kurde n’étant pas menacée, elle s’est avérée plus complexe avec l’arrivée au pouvoir du parti Ba‘th. Alors que des élites civiles et religieuses ont été cooptées par le régime, la plupart des Kurdes ont opté pour la « dissimulation », cultivant les signes identitaires de la remise en cause de l’idéologie officielle dans leur for intérieur. Or l’autonomisation progressive du champ politique kurde en Syrie et les expectatives suscitées par l’autonomie kurde en Irak ont créé les conditions favorables à un changement de stratégie identitaire passant de la « dissimulation » à la « visibilité ». Un passage qui pourrait se réaliser sous le signe de la radicalisation, voire de la violence. Since the creation of the Syrian state, diverse segments of Kurdish society have been integrated into political and civil society. If, however, during the first half of the 20th century this integration did not present major problems – Kurdish identity was not threatened – with the accession to power of the Ba’th Party, Kurdish integration proved more complex. While Kurdish civil and religious elite were co-opted by the regime, most Kurds opted for “dissimulation”, cultivating internally forms of identity that challenge official ideologies. However, the progressive autonomy of the Kurdish political space in Syria and the uncertainty aroused by Kurdish autonomy in Iraq have created conditions for a change in ethnic strategy, from one of “dissimulation” to one of “defiant visibility.” This transition could lead to radicalization and even violence