Table of Contents

1. Governing areas of dissidence; 2. Policies of extreme makeover: state-Kurdish relations in the early Turkish republic; 3. State building and the politics of national identity in Morocco; 4. The making of an armed conflict: state-Kurdish relations in the post-1950 period; 5. The rise of the Amazigh movement and state co-optation in Morocco; Conclusion.

Promotional Information

This book compares the relatively peaceful relationship between the Berbers and the Moroccan state with the violent relationship between the Kurds and the Turkish state.

About the Author

Senem Aslan is Assistant Professor of Politics at Bates College, Maine. She has published articles in the International Journal of Middle East Studies, Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, and the European Journal of Turkish Studies.

Reviews

'Senem Aslan demonstrates through comparative historical analysis of the Kurds in Turkey and the Berbers in Morocco that intrusive nationalizing projects can undermine rather than increase the strength of a state. The research is exemplary and imaginative, the contribution to our general understanding of states and nations in the contemporary world fundamental.' John A. Hall, James McGill Professor of Comparative Historical Sociology, McGill University

'Nuanced and insightful, historically grounded and theoretically informed, this first-ever comparative study of Turkish and Moroccan state policies toward their respective ethnic Kurdish and Berber minorities is a masterpiece, and a timely one at that. Scholars and policy makers alike would do well to consider its findings.' Bruce A. Maddy-Weitzman, Marcia Israel Principal Research Fellow, The Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies, Tel Aviv University

'Nation-Building in Turkey and Morocco is elegant, compelling and utterly readable. Aslan's comparative analysis of the different ways local communities responded to state plans for their integration into the nation-state offers a fascinating corrective to the way we typically think about central authority and fills a critical gap in studies of nationalism and state-society relations. It is impossible to read this work and to ever think about state power the same way again.' Nicole F. Watts, San Francisco State University