This insightful book by Murat Somer sheds light on a very critical debate in the politics of Turkey, namely the Kurdish question, which has persisted under different international and domestic contexts for more than a century. The issue has significance for various dimensions such as democratisation, identity, security, societal peace and socioeconomic development, and relates not only to Turkey but also to the region in which it is located. The quintessence of the book is to explore the foundations of an order at the state and society level that would resolve the Kurdish question. To this end, this book offers a novel, well-structured and analytical outlook to the Kurdish question from a constructivist perspective by synthesising scholarly discussions on ethnic studies, identities, polarisation, democratisation, and religious and secular politics. Therefore, while the book explores the causes impeding the resolution of the Kurdish question, it also aims to discuss the relation between modernity and ethnic identities, democratisation, socioeconomic and cultural ruptures and their dynamics not directly related to the Kurds.

The book takes two approaches: conceptual and empirical. In the conceptual part, Somer offers robust definitions of the concepts used in both the academic literature and contemporary discussions regarding the Kurdish question. The empirical part, on the other hand, analyses standard narratives constructed since the early period of modernisation in Turkey, which contributed to the emergence of Kurdish question through a shift from a compatible identity model to rival identity model.

Conceptually, the main hypothesis developed in the book is based on ‘The Three Dilemmas’, which have shaped and continue to shape the Kurdish question. This critical trilogy comprises the foreign insecurity dilemma, the elite cooperation dilemma and the common identity dilemma, which manifested themselves along with different factors emerging from domestic and international political developments. The foreign insecurity dilemma refers to eliminating the likelihood of the establishment of a Kurdish state that would result from the separation of Turkish Kurds and their integration with the Kurds in the rest of the region. The elite cooperation dilemma refers to the inability to sustain elite unity among moderate actors to balance each other and work together in resolving the Kurdish question. Finally, the common identity dilemma refers to the inability to define a common national identity, which would not impose a same name and meaning, but would rather be able to meet the demands for the rights and identity of the Kurds, while at the same time not cause uncertainties amongst the majority embracing the Turkish identity (p. 375). Factors not relating to the Kurds per se, have also nourished these dilemmas. For example, the foreign insecurity dilemma necessitates the coordination and cooperation amongst other states and actors in the Middle East, since Ottoman Kurds were divided between Turkey, Iraq and Syria. Domestic struggles for power, as well as ideological differences and distrust, which resulted in inter-elite as well as intra-elite fractions are factors that aggravate the elite cooperation dilemma and prevent rapprochement amongst elites with respect to secularism, modernisation and religion. Finally, the common identity dilemma rests upon disagreements and discussions regarding Turkish identity and common identity. This results from the lack of reconciliation on the very essence of common identity and uncertainties regarding the weakening of Turkish identity against Kurdish identity (p. 377).

The explanatory strength of the book derives from this analytical framework, which helps the reader to trace the opportunities and weaknesses that have arisen since the beginning of the state-building process in Turkey. In doing so, Somer empirically applies the analytical framework based on the three dilemmas on three main periods. First, is the period starting with the early modernisation period of Turkey, which resulted in the shift towards a rival identity model. Second, is the period after 1990s and Somer asks why and how a shift in discourse on the Kurdish issue and the Kurdish question came about; here he highlights the changing context during the 1990s. Finally, the author adopts the same analytical framework to the contemporary developments since 2000s, by analysing arising opportunities and risks that were undertaken. Somer questions why openings in the Kurdish question have not resulted in success and draws similarities with the early period of the state building, arguing for a return to the point zero in a resolution of the Kurdish question. Defining the dilemmas shaping the Kurdish question in retrospective, the book posits that Turkey failed to overcome these dilemmas through an ideal approach due to extraordinary context-dependent conditions. This resulted in a narrow model of nation-state rather that a model of state-nation, which would help the emergence of a more open, permeable national identity, and a nationalisation model based on pluralism.

The book offers a fresh definition of the Kurdish question and the main concepts relating to it, which are essential in understanding the essence of the issue, such as nation, nation-state, state-nation and ethnic group. According to Somer (p. 29), the Kurdish issue in Turkey emerged from the state’s inability to solve its political and governmental problems relating to the Kurds, caused by Turkey’s modernization course. The question was how to solve these issues, with processes belonging to Kurds, namely with political and societal means, in which the Kurds could participate with their own identities and preferences. Defining the problem as such and making a distinction between the ‘Kurdish issue’ ¹ and ‘Kurdish question’, ² the book explores the origins of the Kurdish question, which are found in the narratives during the modernisation process from the late Ottoman Empire to the early period of the establishment of the Republic. Somer then reconstructs the narrative on the emergence of the Kurdish question by adopting analytical narrative, thus delineating the contours, which would explain why and how the three dilemmas have emerged. Adopting an analytical narrative is the methodological strength of the book, as it enables the readers to compare the periods and observe the critical junctures, which explain the shifting discourse and the conditions shaping the Kurdish question over time.

The definition of the Kurdish question inherently poses the question of what are the nation, nation-state, ethnic group and ethnic categories. The author’s contribution to the understanding of the Kurdish question stems from the definition of these concepts from a constructivist perspective. As Somer argues (p. 67), a constructivist perspective points to the narratives constructed by the elites regarding the processes envisioning common identities, the territorial boundaries of the state and the members of a nation as well as the narratives emphasising the key roles of the state policies used in the construction of a nation, such as policies on education, language and broadcasting. Building upon this constructivist understanding, the author (p. 71) defines the nation-state as a state type, which is based on a nation, belonging to the nation and identified with the nation, which in other words derives its legitimacy from the existence and support of that nation. This discussion on nation-state is followed by the definition and discussion on ‘state-nation’ by asking what happens if there is already one (or more than one) community possessing nation consciousness during the state-building process, meaning, a community that perceives itself as a separate nation as far as its political sovereignty is concerned. Somer (p. 78) finds the answer in policies of ‘state-nation’, which give maximum autonomy to the communities in possession of national consciousness, without jeopardising the territorial integrity and state as a unitary actor as far as its political sovereignty is concerned.

The major contribution of the book unfolds with the introduction of the state-nation, as the author argues that in state-nations, different nationalities of citizens are deemed not rival but compatible, and are recognised by the state. Somer further argues that the consolidation of such a compatible identity image is possible by embracing the common national identity with different names. In other words, it should be possible for the Kurdish to define themselves both as Kurd and as Türkiyeli, ³ as well as for the Turkish people to define themselves as Turkish or Türkiyeli. The discussion on rival and compatible identity images contributes to the existing literature on Kurdish question by showing that the Turkish nationalism model has become a dominant ideology as a result of political developments, which denied the rights and the existence of the Kurds. In other words, Somer situates the definition of both identities, (Turkish and Kurdish) based on whether they see each other as rivals, rather than defining these identities on ethnic-civic basis. ⁴ In doing so, the author not only defines the Kurdish question, but also tackles it together with conceptualising the Turkish question, which is often neglected in scholarly discussions.

Somer’s contribution to the debate with Return to Point Zero is ground-breaking in its conceptual and empirical aspects. First, by approaching the Kurdish question from a constructivist perspective, Somer shows how the relation between agent and structure reproduces the Kurdish question and helps the reader to rethink the concepts, such as nation, nation-state, state-nation or ethnicity, that are deemed as given, when the Kurdish question is discussed. Second, the in-depth empirical analyses and within-case comparisons through analytical narratives help the reader to observe critical junctures, which are essential to compare the similarities and differences of different periods. Third, the explanatory framework based on the three dilemmas shows that the understandings and preferences of actors play a decisive role in shaping the course of the Kurdish question over time, since preferences in one dilemma significantly affect preferences in other dilemmas and mutually reproduce each other.

Finally, Murat Somer offers the reader invaluable insights, and policy recommendations for overcoming the contemporary vulnerabilities in thinking and understanding of the Kurdish question, hence eliminating the three dilemmas. To eliminate these dilemmas the foreign insecurities, elite disunity and uncertainties regarding common identities should be addressed with constructive policies. The future challenge for the Kurdish and Turkish questions derived from the three dilemmas is either a separation of two opposing identities in one society or their integration in an open society with plural common identities through sound state-nation policies.