The Conflict Between Defeat and Revival in Kurdish History: A Hegelian Reading of Kurdish Liberation Movements in the Twentieth Century

Abstract

This study examines the political history and national liberation movements of the Kurdish people during the twentieth century through a philosophical lens, employing the Hegelian dialectical method. The primary objective is to comprehend the recurring cycles of defeat and resurgence that characterize contemporary Kurdish history. The research posits that the Kurdish struggle transcends mere military and political conflict, manifesting as a "struggle for recognition" (Anerkennung) rooted in Hegel’s Master-Slave dialectic.

In this interpretive framework, every historical defeat is perceived as a "negative moment" that inherently harbors the seeds of a subsequent revival and a more profound national self-consciousness. The study demonstrates how Kurdish movements transitioned from tribal and localized forms toward modern organizational structures by navigating the failures of successive revolutions; this evolution represents the journey of the "Kurdish Spirit" (Geist) toward the realization of free will. Ultimately, the research concludes that defeat has not functioned as a terminus for the Kurds, but rather as a dialectical catalyst for transcending obsolete stages and attaining higher levels of political and national consciousness.

 To achieve its objectives, the study answers the following questions: How can the concepts of failure and revival in Hegel's philosophy of history be used as a theoretical tool for reading Kurdish liberation movements in the twentieth century? How were the thesis (common situation) and anti-thesis (conflict and failure) stages embodied in contemporary Kurdish history and what impact did the struggle between primary consciousness and the division have on the course of history? How can the Kurdish political mind reach the stage of synthesis (rational conclusion) and build a sustainable and institutional national awakening through the dialectical overcoming of disasters? How can we transform Kurdish history from a dispersed state to an intellectual laboratory in which the struggle of forces moves towards a historical goal (national identity)?