Lives and Times of Militancy: Terrorism Trials, State Violence and Kurdish Political Prisoners in Post-1980 Turkey

Militant politics is at once a promise for revolutionary national movements and a threat to national security of states. As the discourse of terrorism re-gained prevalence in the 1980s, the Turkish state subsequently defined Kurdish militant politics as “terrorism” and resituated its war in northern Kurdistan as a “war on terror.” This dissertation examines how incrimination of the space of the political by the “war on terror” is critically refracted by Kurdish prisoners and their families within the courts of law. Focusing on trials prosecuting Kurds on a daily basis, it explores how courts conjure the threat of terrorism on the one hand and, on the other, how the promise of militant politics is retained despite and within the space of law. This inquiry proceeds from the argument that law expands its area of jurisdiction as it grounds accusations of terrorism on ordinary events unfolding in northern Kurdistan. It asks what are the ways in which anti-terrorism laws invest ordinary life with the capacity to exert extraordinary violence on state sovereignty? Based on three years of archival and ethnographic research in anti-terrorism courts in Diyarbakır, this dissertation explores documentary, surveillance, and counterinsurgency technologies through which the reach of law multiplies and the threat of terrorism becomes ubiquitous. Hence, it provides a unique picture of “war on terror” revealing not only the spectacular moments of state repression and torture, but also the ordinary processes of adjudication in which Kurdish prisoners submit their defense, organize collective protests, and forge moral injunctions. Focusing on discursive, performative, and ethical practices of Kurdish prisoners, this dissertation thus shows how boundaries of the political are continuously reconstituted during Turkey’s protracted “war on terror” in northern Kurdistan. The hegemonic images pertinent to terrorism identify the Middle East with a deluge of spectacular violence and garner public support for draconian anti-terrorism measures. The critiques of the “war on terror,” on the other hand, fail to recognize that the globalized discourse of terrorism is not merely a Western artifact deployed to demonize Muslim communities. Its reach goes far beyond the criminalization of Islamist groups as nation-states like Turkey deploy it strategically to silence political opposition. Additionally, this dissertation demonstrates the necessity of concentrating on more minuscule mechanisms of power such as surveillance, procedural law, and courtroom talk, to parse out the ways in which anti-terrorism laws not only gains currency but also reconfigures how we understand the political

Lives and Times of Militancy: Terrorism Trials, State Violence and Kurdish Political Prisoners in Post-1980 Turkey

Militant politics is at once a promise for revolutionary national movements and a threat to national security of states. As the discourse of terrorism re-gained prevalence in the 1980s, the Turkish state subsequently defined Kurdish militant politics as “terrorism” and resituated its war in northern Kurdistan as a “war on terror.” This dissertation examines how incrimination of the space of the political by the “war on terror” is critically refracted by Kurdish prisoners and their families within the courts of law. Focusing on trials prosecuting Kurds on a daily basis, it explores how courts conjure the threat of terrorism on the one hand and, on the other, how the promise of militant politics is retained despite and within the space of law. This inquiry proceeds from the argument that law expands its area of jurisdiction as it grounds accusations of terrorism on ordinary events unfolding in northern Kurdistan. It asks what are the ways in which anti-terrorism laws invest ordinary life with the capacity to exert extraordinary violence on state sovereignty? Based on three years of archival and ethnographic research in anti-terrorism courts in Diyarbakır, this dissertation explores documentary, surveillance, and counterinsurgency technologies through which the reach of law multiplies and the threat of terrorism becomes ubiquitous. Hence, it provides a unique picture of “war on terror” revealing not only the spectacular moments of state repression and torture, but also the ordinary processes of adjudication in which Kurdish prisoners submit their defense, organize collective protests, and forge moral injunctions. Focusing on discursive, performative, and ethical practices of Kurdish prisoners, this dissertation thus shows how boundaries of the political are continuously reconstituted during Turkey’s protracted “war on terror” in northern Kurdistan. The hegemonic images pertinent to terrorism identify the Middle East with a deluge of spectacular violence and garner public support for draconian anti-terrorism measures. The critiques of the “war on terror,” on the other hand, fail to recognize that the globalized discourse of terrorism is not merely a Western artifact deployed to demonize Muslim communities. Its reach goes far beyond the criminalization of Islamist groups as nation-states like Turkey deploy it strategically to silence political opposition. Additionally, this dissertation demonstrates the necessity of concentrating on more minuscule mechanisms of power such as surveillance, procedural law, and courtroom talk, to parse out the ways in which anti-terrorism laws not only gains currency but also reconfigures how we understand the political

The political ecology of a Ramsar site conservation failure: the case of Burdur Lake, Turkey

The Burdur Lake basin in Turkey’s Mediterranean region has been facing severe environmental damage in the form of increased pollution and a decrease in water volume, despite its Ramsar status as a major wintering site for the endangered white-headed duck ( Oxyura leucocephala ). In fact, after the basin was granted Ramsar status it was made the subject of a ‘hard-park’ conservation policy. This in practice disenfranchised and alienated local people but did not lead to the effective preservation of the basin. We aim to shed light on the political ecology of the ongoing degradation, which has layers at local, national, and international levels, by using both quantitative and qualitative methods (consisting of in-depth interviews, focus groups, and face-to-face, randomly selected interviews with 625 people). We specifically explore the possible reasons why local people by and large did not—despite their high level of environmental concern about the site—demand conservation policies or voluntarily take action to preserve their site. Acknowledging that the sources of the problem are multilayered in nature, thus requiring a multilevel solution, we then propose a governance modality tailored for the case at hand. Since many of the problems that Burdur Lake faces are not unique, it is hoped that the conducted analysis will be relevant to other similar sites.