REWŞENBÎRÊN ÇEPGIR Û KURD: EDWARD SAID, HAMID DABASHI Û TARIQ ALÎ

REWŞENBÎRÊN ÇEPGIR Û KURD: EDWARD SAID, HAMID DABASHI Û TARIQ ALÎ

Barzoo Eliassi

Yek ji taybetmendiyên berbiçav ên retorîka rewşenbîrên çepgir ew e ku hêzên Rojavayî wek jêderka gelek xerabiyên li Rojhilata Navîn dibînin. Ev xerabiyên han gelek caran wek emperyalîzm, kolonyalîzm, neolîberalîzm, dagirkerî, cixirandina mezhebgîriyê, şer, îstismara aborî û hwd. tên bilêvkirin.

Ev sekna çepgiran di peywenda Rojhilata Navîn de bêtir eşkere dibe; cihê ku nivîskar û zanyarên wek Edward Said, Tariq Ali û Hamid Dabashigelek caran bi awayekî bijarker (selective) li dijî YE û Îsraîlê aliyê Filistîniyan girtine. Lê belê kêm caran li ser giliyên siyasî yên nufûsa mezin a kurdan a li Rojhilata Navîn disekinin, ku marûzî kêmgîriya (discrimination) etnîk, nîjadkujî, zimankujî û pişaftina çandî maye.

Diyarkirina vê yekê gelekî girîng e: Hêzên kolonyal ên wek Brîtanya û Fransa li gor kêfa xwe sînorên Rojhilata Navîn a hemdem xêz kirin, lewma tevî ku berpirsiyarên sereke ew in, dîsa jî serdestên kurdan ne îngilîz, fransiz, emerîkî an îsraîlî ne; lê dewleta Tirkiyeyê, dewleta Îranê, dewleta Sûriyeyê ye û heta demên nêzîk dewleta Îraqê bû. Van dewletan gelê kurd ji hêla çandî, siyasî û aborî zeft kiriye.

Ligel ku pareke mezin a rewşenbîr û nivîskarên çepgir seraqet heşmet- karên hin tevgerên neteweyî ne -yên wek tevgera Filistînê -û wan wek tev- gerên dij-emperyalîst/dij-nîjadperest/dij-kolonyal dibînin; hin ji wan meyl dikin ku tevgerên neteweyî yên kurd marjînalîze û bêdeng bikin û wan wek pirsgirêkên navxweyî yên hin dewletan bibînin û nikarin parçebûna nasnameya kurd bibînin ku bi awayekî dîrokî hatiye sepandin.

Ev rewşenbîrên hanê (mînak Tariq Ali û Hamid Dabashi) ji alîgiriya guherîna van dewletan an parastina mafên neteweyî yên kurdan bêtir, alîgirê wê yekê ne ku ev dewletên otorîter ên heyî (ku ew bi xwe damezirînên emperyal û kolonyal in) serdestiya xwe bidomînin.

Jê wêdetir tevgerên neteweyî yên kurd gelek caran wek wekîlê dek û dolabên emperyalîst û siyonîst ên li dijî Rojhilata Navîn tên dîtin. Ev rabêj, bi armanca ku daxwazên kurdan ên mafên siyasî, aborî û çandî paşguh bikin ji hêla Îran, Sûriye û Tirkiyeyê ve tê bikaranîn.

Çepgir û rewşenbîrên xuyanî yên wek Noam Chomsky, Harold Pinter û Dario Fo dema ku rewşa komên cuda yên bindest ên Rojhilata Navîn rave dikin ji Ali, Said û Dabashi bêtir hevgirtî û hewîner in.

Chomsky ku herwiha Filistîngirekî xurt û hevalekî Saîd ê vê dawiyê ye, tim û daîm him polîtîkayên erjeng yên tirk ên li dijî kurdan û him jî bazirganiya çekan a Emerîkayê ya ligel Tirkiyeyê rexne dike.

Bi heman awayî Pinter pir zû bi tevgerên Dij-Aparteîd têkiliyên xurt danî û dijberekî sext yê dagirkirina YE’yê ya 2003yan a Îraqê bû, lê herwiha mafên zimanî yên kurdan diparêze, ku vê yekê kiriye ku li Tirkiyeyê jê neyê hezkirin. Bi heman awayî Fo zexta tirkan bi vî awayî rave dike: “Kurdistan dijî. Ew di hişê her takekesê gelê kurd ê 35 milyonî de dişewite, ku nasnameya wan hatiye dizîn û li Tirkiye, Îraq û Ewropayê bûne penaber. Ew di agirên Newrozê de û di zindanan de, ku 12,000 girtiyên siyasî di hucreyên tecrîtê de defnkirî ne, dişewite û dijî. Ew di bîr û birînên wan kesan de dijî ku wenda bûn û êşkence dîtin. Ew dişewite û dijî li çiyayên berxwedanên navdar, ku cîhana rojava jê re dibêje terorîzm.”

Berovajî Chomsky, Pinter û Fo, Said ne ku tenê mafên kurdên niştecihên du dewletên ereb-desthilat ên neteweyî marjînalîze dikir, lê herwiha helwes- teke parêzvanî jî nîşan dikir dema ku rejîma Seddam di salên 1980yî de gaz berdida ser kurdên Îraqê. Bi tenê carekê Said, xwe dispart raporeke CIA’yê, derbareyê rastiya nûçeyên bikaranîna Seddam a çekên kîmyewî ya li dijî kurdan gumana xwe dianî zimên û ji bo vê wehşetê artêşa Îranê tawanbar dikir.

Said di London Review of Booksê de destnîşan dikir ku “ Angaşta ku Îraqê gaz berdaye ser welatiyên xwe gelek caran dubare dibe. A soxî ev yek ne zelal e.”

Balkêş e, derbarê bêdengkirina raya giştî ya navneteweyî ku rû-bi-rû bû bi hovîtiyên ku li Îraqê li kurdan û şiiyan dihatin kirin, ramanên Said û berjewendiyên Emerîkayê nêzî hev dibûn.

Bêhemd an bi qestî dema ku Said alîgiriya rejîma otokratîk a Sedam Husên dikir, derawaya wî ya gerdûnî dibû yeke partîkularîst, ku vê rejîmê nasnameyeke xeternak a ereb diparast.

Ji ber ku zanista postkolonyal zêde zêde di bin bandora Said de maye, wê bandor li gelek bîrmendên postkolonyal kiriye ku di riya Said re bimeşin; li dijî siyonîzmê bin û wek sembola rojeva çepgir û dij-emperyalîzmê li ser tevgerên Filistînî binivîsin.

Bi heman awayî Dabashi jî di pirtûka xwe Iran: A people interrupted de bahs dike ku Îran bi dirêjiya du sed salên dawî, bûye warekî wisa ku bêhna xebatên akademîk û lêkolînan jê difûre û bi hêviyên Îraneke kozmopolît tije ye; lê di heman demê de jî bêyî ku hevgirtî be angaşt dikir ku ew nijadperestiya fars rexne dike. Di pirtûka Dabashi de termên farisî û îranî ji dêvla hev tên bikaranîn û lêpirsîna derawaya gerdûnî ya zimanê farisî nake; ku ev derawa şîdeta sembolîk e û encama pişaftina çandî ye ku bi zextan hatiye sepandin.

Derbareyê rewşa kurdan a di dîroka Îranê de, Dabashi behsa kurdan dike û behsa wê yekê dike bê kurd çawa ji dawiya salên 1970yî- sala ku Komara Îslamî ya Îranê hat avakirin bi vir de bi awayekî nefambar (inexplicably) heşt caran ketin qada siyasî ya dîroka Îranî.

Şayesandinakurdan a Dabashi jî problematîk e, ji ber ku kesî tu carî maf an cihê ku giliyên xwe yên siyasî bi lêv bikin nedaye wan. Ji dêvla wê, ew bi awayekî guhnedêr behsa kurdan dike wek “şerkerên ku xweseriyê dixwa- zin”(rp165), an wek “tevgerên kurdan yên cudaxwaz” (166) û wek komeke “bin-netewe”(258) ku dikare qaşo Neteweya Îranî ya kozmopolît bike pêkhateyeke eşîrî ku ev yek jî wê encamên dabeşker û têkçûyî bi xwe re bîne.

Dema ku Dabashi hewl dide çandeke îranî ya kozmopolît bisêwirîne, derbirîninan derbareyê kurdan û Îranê berpêş dike ku îzaha wan pir dijwar e û dikarin her xwînerê rexnegir şaşwaz bikin: “Heger kurd ji Îran, Tirkiye, Îraq û Sûriyeyê biciviyana û welatekî xwerû-kurd ava bikirana şevpestê netewe-dewleteke ji hêla etnîkî paqijkirî dê bi tenê modela qebîleperestiya ruhbanî, ku niha li Îranê desthilat e, xerabtir bikira,” û “ Wek netewe-dewletekê, piştî Îslamîzasyona serkeftî ya saziyên wê bi çaryek sedsalekê hîn jî Îran warê wê çanda siyasî ya kozmopolît e.”

Dabashi ji hêla retorîkî ve daxwazên kurdan yên bo afirandina netewe-dewletekê ceza dike; ji ber ku qaşo ew ê rê li ber “şevpestekê” an “paqi- jiya etnîk” veke. Bi awayekî dûrî aqilan, têkoşîna kurdan a serxwebûna siyasî jî ji hêla Dabashi ve bi piştgirtina hêza ruhban a Îranê tê tawanbarkirin. Yanî Dabashi bi awayekî neeşkere ji kurdan dixwaze ku mixalifiya xwe biqedînin û dûr bikevin ji têkoşîna li dij serdestiya farisan, serdestiya ku li Îranê komên ne-fars kêm digire.

Dabashi wek warekî çanda siyasî ya kozmopolît behsa Îranê dike û ev baweriya çewt nîşan dide bê ew çiqasî ji rastiya civaka Îranî dûr e, cihê ku emperyalîzma çandî ya faris şerma çandî hêdî hêdî zerkî komên ne-faris dike û nahêle kurd navên bi kurdî li zarokên xwe bikin an jî bi zimanê xwe perwerdehiyê bistînin.Heger ev newekheviyên han encamên qaşo çanda siyasî ya kozmopolît a Îranê bin, hingê kozmopolîtî ji amûreke veşartina serweriya farsî pê ve ne tiştek e.

Eşkere ye ku bo Dabashi, xwedîbûna mafên neteweyî ji bo piraniya cîhanê xwezayî xuya dike û di heman demê de li hember kurdên bêdewlet retorîka dekonstraktîv divirvirîne.

Dema ku neteweperestiyên komên bindest (subaltern) bi rêkûpêkî tên problematîzekirin û dekonstruktekirin û dema ku ev komên bindest jî dixwazin ala xwe bilind bikin û wî tiştê ku bi tenê di destê neteweya serdest de ye bi dest bixin, ev dustandardiya kambax berbiçavtir dibe.

Tevî ku neteweperestiya komên bindest wek afirandina cudaxwaziyê tê dîtin, neteweperestiya komên serdest wek parastina bihevrebûna civakî, biratî û yekîtiya li nav cudahiyan tê dîtin; helbûkî di rastiyê de ji hêla newekheviyên polîtîk, çandî û aborî cudahiyên mezin diafirîne.

Van rojan, Tariq Alî vîdyoyek weşand ku tê de piştgiriya tirkan dike, ên ku bi wêrekî li hemberî hikumata Erdoğan a otorîteryan şer dikin û qaşo çirûska hêviyekê li parzemîna Ewropayê vêxistine.

Ew bi helwesteke biçûkbîn van protestoyan û tiştên ku diqewimin li Spanya, Portegal û Yewnanîstanê dide ber hev, cihê ku ewropiyên naskirî dibin xala normatîf a danberhevê. Lê belê divê em bi cidiyet dîsa li ser derawaya Alî bifikirin.

Li dijî rejîma otorîteryan a ku Ali bahs dike, vî dehsalê dawî li Tirkiyeyê bi riya tevgerên civaka sivîl bi sedan ciwanên kurd di ber xwe dane. Di maweya van xwepêşandanan de ew di bin hovîtiya şîdeta polêsan de mane û ketine hefsan. Çima Alî tu carî wek kesên wêrek behsa wan nekiriye?

Dema ku kurd protestoyan dikin, ew wek kesên ekstremîst, terorîst û cudaxwaz tên dîtin, ji ber ku qaşo protestoyên wan bi tenê berjewendiyên kurdan derdibirin. Û dema ku bi temamî protesto nakin an jî qismen beşdarî protestoyan dibin, ew wek kesên ku ji rejîma li ser kar razî tên dîtin.

Derawaya rewşenbîrî ya Ali, Dabashi û Said nîşan dide ku ew ne bêalî ne an jî ne ne-nasnameperest (non-identitarian) in lê rewşa wan riyeke taybet derdibirîne da ku em bibînin ku cîhan ji hêla etnîkî, çandî, îdeolojîkî û siyasî tê sêwirandin.Derawaya wan nikare gerdûnîtiya gerdûnî bixwaze, lê belê gerdûnîtiyeke xweserî hinekan e ku xizmeta hin berjewendiyan dike.

Hişmendiya rexnegîr a navdar a Said bi tenê bi bilêvnekirina zilma li hember kurdan namîne, herwiha rastiyan jî berovajî dike û dibe alîgirê hêzeke stemkar. Bi awayekî paradoksî Said rola rewşenbîr wek “gotina rastiyê ji desthilatê re” pênase kiriye. Ev berovajîkirina Said bi hinceta ku ‘haya wî ji rewşa siyasî ya kurdên Rojhilata Navîn baş tuneye’ nikare bê şuştin. Bêhaybûn ne bêgunehîye; lê heger bi wan bastûrên desthilatê yên ku li cîhanê newekheviyan didomînin razî be, pesendkirin e.

Belkî ji bo ku Ali û Dabashi kurdan wek nûnerên rastî û nirxên gerdûnî bibînin û bibin heyranên wan û wan pîroz bikin, divê kurd biqîrîn û bibêjin “bimire YE û Îsraîl” û/an “bimire kapîtalîzm/neolîberalîzm”; belkî paşê li klûba rabêja çepgir a wêrekî û berxwedana heqîqî bikêfxweşî bên pêşwazîkirin.

ji îngilîzî: Umran Aran

REWŞENBÎRÊN ÇEPGIR Û KURD: EDWARD SAID, HAMID DABASHI Û TARIQ ALÎ

Vejandina Zimanê Îbranî

Nûrealîzma Îtalî, Yilmaz Guney û Hêvî

Tehlîlek di Peywenda Teorîya Monomîtê de li ser Çîroka “Meymûn Xanim û Mîrze Memûd”

Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

REWŞENBÎRÊN ÇEPGIR Û KURD: EDWARD SAID, HAMID DABASHI Û TARIQ ALÎ

Related Posts

Vejandina Zimanê Îbranî

Nûrealîzma Îtalî, Yilmaz Guney û Hêvî

Tehlîlek di Peywenda Teorîya Monomîtê de li ser Çîroka “Meymûn Xanim û Mîrze Memûd”

Leave A Reply Cancel Reply