The article quoted says it´s not! How have you concluded otherwise? Give us the bits that make you think otherwise.
The first mention of Kurds in the book is on page 73: "Turkey´s many terror groups each have their own signature. The Kurds tend to be theatrical. They need to attract atention to themslves as a nation. The anti-EU Grey wolf nationalist see themselves in the romatic tradition of young Turks and favor individual asassinations and street shootings."
Pages 212 to 214 of the book: "In 2021 I was assigned to a military intelligence unit in Diyarbakir... In the run-up to EU accession we decided to conduct a series of strategic strikes against the PKK. The plan as to damadge its structure and weaken Kurdish nationalism´s bargaining position beforem European human rights and ethnic minority tied our hands%
...
"Operation Euphrates was a project to field test a second-generation chemical device on an isolated civilian population. It consisted of an airborne nanoscale agent designed to enter the brain and modify the dopamine, oxytocin and serotonin uptakes."
...
"The agent was designed to increase the passivety, disrupt associational ties and enhance mutual distrust while at the same time expanding receptivity to our information."
Now there is no mention af a "Kurdish problem" anywhere in the book after pages 215. The only mention is first to try to explain the tram bombing by the lone woman and then the exerp when a general tells of a mission against the Kurds before the EU accession.
I would recommend you read the book and not just go by some critic that read the synopsys of the book and thinks he has understood the whole story.
The story is about 6 people who´s lives have been changed by the bombing on tram 119 and what happens to them in the folloowing days after the incident.
By the way the book is about 30 dollars in any good book store, hard cover on top of that!
|