EC119 Contemporary Britain

EC119: Understanding Contemporary Britain
Nations believe in the right to self-determination. They want to decide their own faith but this request is not being welcomed generally by governments. Especially after French Revolution, nationalist movement increased and expanded all around the world. It influenced multinational empires such as Ottoman Empire and British Empire firstly. For example, Greeks and Bulgarian rebelled against Ottoman; colonized states revolted against British. That's why empires and also states lost their power after nations' liberation movement. Nowadays, this issue still continues in many parts of the world. By the aim of gaining independence, nations sometimes appeal to force and violence and then unfortunately people are killed both sides which are from state and nationalist. However, some nations demand their self-determination rights with political and democratic ways to the state. These two different methods which are used by Kurds and Scottish people are in today's contemporary Turkey and England. The purposes of this paper is to review recent news and try to compare to approach of Turkish and English government to Scottish and Kurds. Firstly, historical process between Scottish and English will be explained briefly and then how their relationships continue today will be given. Then, why Turkish government and Kurds are fighting each other will be mentioned and how their relationship will go on. Finally, differences and similarities will be compared between two states' approaches. This paper attempts to show that there is not only one solution to suppress nationalist rebellion with guns and for being powerful country is not mean to need centralized administration.
Development of the Union Jack.Development of the Union Jack.One of the world's most complex administrative structures is the United Kingdom. The UK consists of four countries. They are England, Scotland, Wales and North Ireland. Three of them are not fully independent. England holds the most of concessions in this union. That's why people sometimes use the UK as an England. Other countries' governments are autonomous. They have some rights to take decisions to internal affairs but they are dependent in external affairs. This paper focuses on Scotland because they strongly demand for a fully independence in recently.
Development of the Union Jack.
Development of the Union Jack.
Colours denote the winning party, as shown in the main table of resultsColours denote the winning party, as shown in the main table of results The king of the Scotland was crowned of English thrones in 1603 and this is basis of the UK. This event was called the union of the crowns. However, the kingdom of Scotland merged officially with the kingdom of England under the Acts of Union in 1707. Scot people did not want to merge actually. They were poor but free. Nevertheless, Scot nobles and elites collaborated with British and merged parliaments. Until 1997, this marriage went well. This year, Scottish electorate voted for devolution in referendum and parliament was convened by the Scotland Act 1998, which sets out its powers as a devolved legislature. The first meeting of the new Parliament took place on 12 May 1999. In 2014, Scottish Independence Referendum could be the milestone for Scotland. The independence referendum question, which voters answered with "Yes" or "No", was "Should Scotland be an independent country?" The "No" side won and Scots missed the chance of total independence. However, people witnessed a rise of Scottish National Party (SNP) in the United Kingdom general election of 2015. Scottish even said "no" for independence, they gave their vote to nationalist party. And actually this party represent just Scottish people. As you can see the map, north, where the majority of Scottish lives, is yellow (SNP). So, we can say this party is a separatist party. One of the woman parliamentarians from SNP said "The Nationalist Party won the last election alone, we want Scotland to leave the UK and become an independent state; but peaceful ways, without giving credits to violence." Moreover, she remunerate to British government. She continues "Defending independence has always been peaceful and legal. But if it was not such a democratic environment, Scotland could appeal to violence." Scottish people cannot thank British enough because of their decentralization policy. They have an option to squash Scottish nationalist movement, but especially during the labor party period, this autonomy process was initiated. Prime Minister Harold Wilson, Labor Party, published report as follows: "Separatist nationalism is getting stronger in Scotland, let's give autonomy and some central authority rights." Today, foreign policy, defense, taxation and social security are controlled by center, London. The general budget is determined in London and sent to the Scottish Parliament. Scotland can spend money at their own wish, but the final decision is still Britain's parliament, so the center. Justice, health, education, environment is in Scottish Parliament.
Why the Scots want to leave after 300th years? People may wonder this questions' answer. First of all, one of the most important reasons to merge to the kingdom of the Britain was money. In 17th-18th centuries, the kingdom of Scotland was poor, unlike Britain. And now, one of the main reasons is economic. Oil reserve was founded in the North Sea. After that, Scottish is getting better economic condition but Scotland want to increase oil tax. However, it is beyond their authority. The UK, in other words England, decide the taxation. Scotland is able to get only 10-15 percent share of the oil tax because of the part of the United Kingdom. Probably, if they are independence, they will increase revenue from oil tax significantly. Furthermore, according to Scotland's census in 2011, 62 % of the population specified their identity was "Scottish only". This percentage varied from 71 % for 10 to 14 year old to 57 % for 30 to 34 year olds. 18 % of the people indicated "Scottish and British identities only". This was the highest in the 65 to 74 age group, at 25 per cent. In consideration of these data, young generations do not belong to Britain, unlike older people. It shows us that the older people adopt Britain identity more than younger ones because of the old habits, says but now it is changing.
Colours denote the winning party, as shown in the main table of results
Colours denote the winning party, as shown in the main table of results
Kurd inhabited area 2005Kurd inhabited area 2005 On the other hand, my country, Turkey has been in trouble with Kurds for a long time. This Kurdish Issue dates Ottomans era. Different ethnicities lived in Ottoman Empire. Because of this multi-ethnic society, particularly after French Revolution (1789–1799), lots of national rebelled against center. When Turks migrated from Central Asia to Anatolia around 11st century, Kurds had been living already in the eastern part of Anatolia. Both nations' religious are Muslims but, their sectarians are different. Most of the Turks are Sunni and Kurds are Alevis, and also their languages different. Until the beginning of the 19th century, there was not significant friction between these two nations. Ottoman's centralization policy disturbed Kurds tribes, so local notables revolted in order not to lose their privileges. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk cooperated with Kurdish elites against allied powers at First World War and War of Independence. After the establishment of the republic and war (1923) , alliance was broken because religion was the main factor that tied two nations together and it was gone with abolishment of the caliphate and secular reforms. Atatürk could not keep his promise to take Mosul where the most of the population was Kurd and found rich oil reserve. Republic of Turkey's policy was centralization, homogenization and assimilation using both military and education. States' idea was Turkish nationalism and for them Turkish identity became important. They tried to create common culture, history and language in order to become united. State banned to use Kurdish, changed the names of the towns and villages and also was migrated obligatorily. All revolts were suppressed by military. Government denied of Kurdish existence. Between 1945 and 1960, states adopted integrative policy. Some Kurds entered to parliament. Kurds focused on their identity, culture. People can determine their own fate and national question was accepted. This also triggered Kurds. Main Kurdish demands were economic development and recognition of existence of Kurds and their rights. In 1971 and 1980, Kurdish parties were banned like, elected Kurd mayors were dismissed and many Kurdish leaders and intellectuals were arrested or killed by unknown during military coups. All Kurds lost their faith to constitutions. They became underground structures as only mean of their survival. In 1978, PKK was formed and armed propaganda began and it turned terrorism. Abdullah Öcalan was arrested in 1998, but people are still dying.
Kurd inhabited area 2005
Kurd inhabited area 2005
To sum up, Turkey's and England's policy about other nations are different. That's why, conclusions are different too. All riots against the governments are not welcomed firstly, but states have to overcome those. England handled 300 years ago and now they negotiate with Scotland peacefully and legal framework. However, Turkey is still suffering because every day people die. Turkey has to improve economic condition in Kurds regions. Eastern parts of Turkey are still underdeveloped. GDP and GNP per capita are always lower than west part of Turkey. Also governments have to adopt changing national identity. They are not against the nations, they are with nations, embrace all people. English government does it well rather than Turkish government. England is more libertarians, tolerant, unlike Turkey. For instance, before the Scottish referendum, English government offered them more imperium if Scots do not leave the UK. Absolutely, no threat or threatening speeches came from politicians. By the way, Turkey has made great progress. Kurdish parties now the third biggest party in the assembly. Government established Kurds TV, radio and allow to open an elective course which is learned Kurdish in the university. In addition, people has to understand nothing is important than people lives. Scotland and England is a good example for Turkish people. They lived together happily in 300 years. Then, they are almost separating, but it is not the end of the world.
References:

Aygün, Muhammet, Confusing State Structure: United Kingdom. [online], http://www.yazangenclik.com/birlesik-krallikin-kafa-karistiran-yapisi-2977 [accessed December 3rd, 2015]
Bozarslan, Hamit. "Kurds and the Turkish state." The Cambridge History of Turkey 4 (2008): 333-356.
Cemal, Hasan, We want to be independent but peaceful ways, not violence! [online], http://www.milliyet.com.tr/bagimsiz-olmak-istiyoruz-ama-barisci-yollardan-siddetle-degil-/siyaset/siyasetyazardetay/30.07.2011/1420437/default.htm [accessed December 3rd , 2015]
Dogu Ergil. "The Kurdish Question in Turkey." Journal of Democracy 11.3 (2000): 122-135. Project MUSE. Web. 6 Dec. 2015. 

National Records of Scotland (2011), Census 2011: Detailed characteristics on Ethnicity, Identity, Language and Religion in Scotland – Release 3A. [online],
http://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/news/2014/census-2011-release-3a [accessed November 30th , 2015]
Yavuz, M. Hakan. "Five stages of the construction of Kurdish nationalism in Turkey." Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 7.3 (2001): 1-24.