Does Erdogan really intend to eliminate all Kurds from Turkey?

Oh ye of little faith:

“Georgians arose from the ancient Colchian and Iberian civilizations. They embraced Christianity in the early 4th century and now majority of Georgians are Eastern Orthodox Christians and most follow their national autocephalous Georgian Orthodox Church. There are also Georgian Catholic and Muslim communities in Tbilisi and Adjara, as well as a comparable number of irreligious Georgians.”

“A complex process of nation formation has resulted in a diverse set of geographic subgroups, each with its characteristic traditions, manners, dialects and, in the case of Svans and Mingrelians, language. The Georgian language, with its own unique writing system and extensive written tradition going back to the 5th century, is the official language of Georgia as well as the language of literacy and education of all Georgians living in the country. Georgian, Svan and Mingrelian, together with Laz spoken by the related Laz people form the Kartvelian language family.”

“Most historians and scholars of Georgia as well as anthropologists, archaeologists and linguists tend to agree that the ancestors of modern Georgians inhabited the southern Caucasus and northern Anatolia since the Neolithic period.[24] Scholars usually refer to them as Proto-Kartvelian (Proto-Georgians such as Colchians and Iberians) tribes.[25] Some European historians of the 19th century (e.g., Wilhelm von Humboldt and Paul Kretschmer) as well as Georgian scholars (R. Gordeziani, S. Kaukhchishvili and Z. Gamsakhurdia) came to the conclusion that Proto-Kartvelians might be related linguistically and culturally to the indigenous (pre-Indo-European) peoples of ancient Europe including the Pelasgians, Etruscans and Proto-Basques.”

“The Georgian people in antiquity have been known to the ancient Greeks and Romans as Colchians and Iberians.[26][27] East Georgian tribes of Tibarenians-Iberians formed their kingdom in 7th century BCE. However, western Georgian tribes (Moschians, Suanians, Mingrelians and others) established the first Georgian state of Colchis (circa 1350 BCE) before the foundation of the Iberian Kingdom in the east.[28] According to the numerous scholars of Georgia, the formations of these two early Georgian kingdoms of Colchis and Iberia, resulted in the consolidation and uniformity of the Georgian nation.[29]”

“Proto-Georgian Kingdoms/peoples:”

“The ancient Jewish chronicle by Josephus mentions Georgians as Iberes who were also called Thobel (Tubal).[30]
Diauehi in Assyrian sources and Taochi in Greek. Lived in the northeastern part of Anatolia, a region that was part of Georgia. This ancient tribe is considered by many scholars as ancestors of the Georgians. The Georgians of today still refer to this region, which now belongs to present-day Turkey, as Tao-Klarjeti, an ancient Georgian kingdom. Some people there still speak the Georgian language.[31]”

“Colchians in the ancient western Georgian Kingdom of Colchis. First mentioned in the Assyrian annals of Tiglath-Pileser I and in the annals of Urartian king Sarduri II. Also included western Georgian tribe of the Meskhetians.[28][32]”

“Iberians also known as Tiberians or Tiberanians, in the eastern Georgian Kingdom of Iberia.[28]
Both Colchians and Iberians played an important role in the ethnic and cultural formation of the modern Georgian nation.[33][34]”

“According to the scholar of the Caucasian studies Cyril Toumanoff:”

“Colchis appears as the first Caucasian State to have achieved the coalescence of the newcomer, Colchis can be justly regarded as not a proto-Georgian, but a Georgian (West Georgian) kingdom … It would seem natural to seek the beginnings of Georgian social history in Colchis, the earliest Georgian formation.[35]”

Now for the Khazars. Pay attention to their arrival dates into Europe (centuries after the Georgians had become Christian. And many centuries after Georgians were first recorded in history:

“The tribes[39] that were to comprise the Khazar empire were not an ethnic union, but a congeries of steppe nomads and peoples who came to be subordinated, and subscribed to a core Tűrkic leadership.[40] Many Tűrkic groups, such as the Oğuric peoples, including Šarağurs, Oğurs, Onoğurs, and Bulğars who earlier formed part of the Tiĕlè (鐵勒) confederation, are attested quite early, having been driven West by the Sabirs, who in turn fled the Asian Avars, and began to flow into the Volga-Caspian-Pontic zone from as early as the 4th century CE and are recorded by Priscus to reside in the Western Eurasian steppelands as early as 463.[41][42] They appear to stem from Mongolia and South Siberia in the aftermath of the fall of the Hunnic/Xiōngnú nomadic polities. A variegated tribal federation led by these Tűrks, probably comprising a complex assortment of Iranian,[43] proto-Mongolic, Uralic, and Palaeo-Siberian clans, vanquished the Rouran Khaganate of the hegemonic central Asian Avars in 552 and swept westwards, taking in their train other steppe nomads and peoples from Sogdiana.[44]”

“The ruling family of this confederation may have hailed from the Āshǐnà (阿史那) clan of the West Türkic tribes,[45] though Constantine Zuckerman regards Āshǐnà and their pivotal role in the formation of the Khazars with scepticism.[46] Golden notes that Chinese and Arabic reports are almost identical, making the connection a strong one, and conjectures that their leader may have been Yǐpíshèkuì (Chinese:乙毗射匱), who lost power or was killed around 651.[47] Moving west, the confederation reached the land of the Akatziroi,[48] who had been important allies of Byzantium in fighting off Attila’s army.”

“An embryonic state of Khazaria began to form sometime after 630,[49] when it emerged from the breakdown of the larger Göktürk Qağanate. Göktürk armies had penetrated the Volga by 549, ejecting the Avars, who were then forced to flee to the sanctuary of the Hungarian plain. The Āshǐnà clan whose tribal name was ‘Türk’ (the strong one) appear on the scene by 552, when they overthrew the Rourans and established the Göktürk Qağanate.[50] By 568, these Göktürks were probing for an alliance with Byzantium to attack Persia. An internecine war broke out between the senior eastern Göktürks and the junior West Turkic Qağanate some decades later, when on the death of Taspar Qağan, a succession dispute led to a dynastic crisis between Taspar’s chosen heir, the Apa Qağan, and the ruler appointed by the tribal high council, Āshǐnà Shètú (阿史那摄图), the Ishbara Qağan.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgians

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars

Actually it was the other way around. The diplomatic core of the Hapsburg Empire was concerned about the objectives of key persons within the Serbian government of the time. Serbia was the key direct threat for them (subsequent occurrences were to demonstrate the accuracy of that assessment).

The Archduke wielded limited managerial or direct political power at that time. What influence he did have was due to being #1 in line for acquisition of the throne if the Emperor died. Nevertheless, he was not in a position of control in the empire and certainly was not some lone voice “holding the empire back” from war with Russia or with Serbia. Such a war was not then sought by Franz Joseph, nor was it the active policy of the administration even after the change of government in Serbia. They well remembered the loss of Venetia and Lombardy etc. and were reluctant to engage in another military entanglement which could force an undesirable outcome. War was viewed with suspicion and caution at that point There was not majority support for a clash of arms within the administration. War was discussed and promoted by some (as it always is), but avoidance of war was preferred. There was strong reluctance to follow that path- a tragedy that sentiment did not long hold after the murder of the Archduke and his wife.

The Archduke’s proposal was not for the acquisition of Serbia. His plan was to side-step the threat of Serbian expansion into the empire’s territory by grant to minority nationalities of the same recognition as Hungarians already possessed within the Hapsburg empire. That is, they would administer their own territories with their own languages and customs within the Hapsburg empire. In a sense he sought a to create a federation which would have had not merely two groups (Austria and Hungary) but at minimum three and probably more than that (likely five). He had several reasons for this approach. Some of them were:

He believed in continuation of the empire first and foremost.

The empire was backward industrially and technically in many regions.

The empire was far weaker economically than was officially admitted. There were large areas and many people who were not prosperous but backward (even by the standards of that time).

His overall goal was that the Hapsburg monarchy continue in absolute control with no further losses of territory from the empire.

There were political entities/states which were a direct threat to the Hapsburg empire, Serbia being the most serious, ambitious and active threat. He thought that the best way to neutralise the possibility of Serbian expansion into the Hapsburg lands would be by granting economic and political rights and recognitions to Serbs and other Slavs living within the empire. He reasoned that when they lived better than the people in Serbia, then there could be no fertile ground for external interference to take root and thrive. He sought to eliminate causes that could be exploited and lead to unrest.

He sure did not like Hungarians, considering the entire race to be chauvinistic and ignorant. He sought to balance the Hungarian influence within the empire by providing other groups with similar status and privileges. {his view of Hungarians was in direct opposition to what the Empress had thought of Hungarians- she, of Germanic extraction, was very favourably inclined towards them, considering them hard done by and unfairly treated by the empire}.

He disliked the administrative apparatus of the empire and its bureaucratic and diplomatic structures. He believed they needed overhaul with many of the insiders and office holders displaying what he perceived as decadence needing to be swept out. {his opinions were an important counterpoint to the behavious of Emperor Franz Joseph, colloquially referred to as “Joe the bureaucrat”, who involved himself daily in the processing of low level administrative tasks while avoiding far more important matters- acquiescing to poor advice with filtered information, effectively handing the responsibilities of ruling/managing the empire to banal career administrators and those involved in political intrigues- this likely due to the earlier failures of his reign for which he bore personal causal responsibility}

The Archduke’s communications were quite clear about what he was going to do when he got his opportunity and why (what he perceived the threats to be). It is interesting to consider what may have occurred had he survived to do as he intended.

Ironically, it was at the Archduke’s own instruction that he was not protected as thoroughly as might have been the case. He wanted to be seen to be accessible and close to the people. He did this against firm recommendation. Further, once the first attempt on his life had failed, he insisted on continuing onward with the day’s planned schedule of visits. This decision, again against professional advice, doomed him as it yielded to Princip the opportunity to kill.

Final point. It is a fact of history that the plot to murder the Archduke was supported and enabled by senior members of the Serbian government of the time; if not government policy it came close to being so. It is to the shame of European people of all nationalities that circumstances progressed into a series of conflicts that mortally wounded European civilisation.

By the way, it appears that governments of the 20th Century, through acts of military commission, are causally responsible for the demise of around 8% of humanity. If one includes acts of civil omission, negligence and interference as well the total would be vastly higher. The series of events to which we are referring here (leading up to WW1) was the “starting gun”.

Siotu