Thinking on Armed Non-State Actors in Turkey
This week, at the 5th International Conference on Conflict, Terrorism and Society, held at Kadir Has University, we discussed the role of non-state actors in the globe. Most of the sessions I attended focused particularly on Jihadists -especially ISIS- who created a flow of fear throughout the world, while one of the most popular non-state actors were Kurdish non-state actors such as YPG or YDG-H. It is not a coincidence that most of the non-state actors that come to mind when people think about this term are armed.
International politics and global policies regarding power recognition create an atmosphere where legitimacy or sources of legitimacy are no longer questioned. Moreover, most of the legitimate/legal non-state actors are under financial, legal and political risks, especially in Middle Eastern countries or countries with similar political structures. Meanwhile, especially transnational non-state actors have already established their financial and social strategies. Both ISIS and regional governments in Rojava demonstrate interesting outcomes regarding their governance strategies. Unlike these non-state actors that are likely to become a state one day, there are also many local and decentralized non-state actors which are actively operating in the cities. These are armed non-state actors and have popular support in both real and digital public sphere. People shape their social media accounts regarding their positive attitudes regarding these organisations. There are even people who define their work status as “sniper” in one of these armed organisations. This is an extremely interesting issue and authorities should seriously analyse how and why an illegitimate actor gets this much support, while most legitimate actors are at risk in Turkey.
Armed Non-State Actors (ANSAs) were defined in Geneva Call as organised armed entities that are involved in armed conflict, which are primarily motivated by political goals, and which operate outside state control, thereby lacking legal capacity to become a legal party to relevant international treaties. The main issue over here is that, most of the academics who study ANSAs -myself included- agree on the fact that these organisations rose faster in the areas where government authority was “weak” or government did not function properly and couldn’t respond to the social demands of the public. Moreover, their emergence or acceleration can be an outcome of failures of legitimate non-state actors regarding enhancing democracy in Turkey, and the existing political and militaristic situation.
After all, it must be questioned why people support these ANSAs rather than relying on governmental forces. Especially in poverty zones of populated cities, people’s demands are probably not met, which becomes a huge problem as people feel they are on their own in raising their life standards or reaching their social goals. In addition to clashes going on in Turkey, these local dynamics demonstrate an interesting fact about the future of Turkey and the concept of justice among people. The less people believe in justice and law in Turkey, the closer they get to the organisations that have their own political agendas regarding the flow of social life.
Published at http://voiceofjiyan.com/2016/04/15/thinking-non-state-actors-turkey/