by Martin Aslan
Since the onset of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, a new wave of far-right Turkic solidarity has been rising amongst Turkish volunteers and lead to the creation of the Turan battalion. Their involvement, while not endorsed by any Ankara officials, highlights the complex dynamics of foreign volunteerism in the conflict and the rise of a renewed Panturkism, fueled by far-right ideology.
The Turan Battalion: A Panturkic Initiative
Established on November 20, 2022, the Turan Battalion is a unit of volunteers enlisting individuals from Turkic-speaking nations, including Türkiye, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, amongst others. Founded by Aidos Sadyqov, a Kazakh opposition activist, the battalion is led by Almaz Kudabek Uulu, a Kyrgyz national who previously worked as a hairdresser in Kyiv.
The name ‘Turan’ refers to the ancient mythical homeland of Turkic populations in Central Asia. The battalion embraces a Panturkist ideology that is dating back to the 1880s and has opposed Russian influence in areas populated with Turkic, and most particularly in Ukraine. The ‘grey wolf’ on its logo is a strong reference to the ‘Ülkü ocakları”, an ultra-nationalist group formed in 1969 which has been associated with extreme xenophobic ideologies.
Kudabek Uulu has stated that the battalion's goal is to combat what is perceived as Russia's oppression of Turkic people and Muslims. The Turan Battalion has participated in significant battles, including Kherson, Kharkiv, and Bakhmut. Despite facing legal proceedings in their home countries, many members remain committed to the cause and report having support from their families.
Turkish Government's Stance
While the Turkish Civil Code does not formally prohibit citizens from joining a foreign army, it does forbid spreading propaganda and enlisting in the armies of explicitly designated enemy groups—such as the People's Defense Units (YPG). Although there is no specific law prohibiting Turkish citizens from participating in foreign conflicts, authorities have reportedly discouraged involvement in the Ukraine war. Having said so, some Turkish nationals attempting to join Ukraine's International Legion have allegedly been sent back by the Ukrainian authorities, possibly due to diplomatic concerns.
Individual Turkish Volunteers
In addition to those enlisted in organized groups like the Turan Battalion, some Turkish citizens have individually joined Ukraine’s Armed Forces. One such figure is Eyüp Görkem Yılmaz, a 20-year-old young man from Trabzon, who enlisted in 2023 and has served in Zaporizhzhia. He drew attention for posing with Nazi symbols, which he later dismissed as dark humor in a Serbestiyet interview, denying any ideological alignment. Yılmaz emphasized the role of humor on the front, even when expressed through questionable symbols. He cited his ties to Crimean Tatars, a sense of Turkic solidarity and a Ukrainian step-family, as key motivations for joining. His fluency in Ukrainian enabled him to serve directly in the national army rather than the International Legion.
The YouTuber and X user Ötürken is another Turkish fighter in Ukraine. Unlike Yılmaz, he joined the International Legion and does not seem to speak Ukrainian. His weekly videos document his daily life and those of his fellow soldiers. As a medic, his content gives tips and insights into his life in Ukraine and explanations on his missions and the equipment used.
Although these two men seem to have different visions of the war, they both refuse to glamorize it and stick to a realistically violent narrative. They also emphasize youngsters or any other Turkish must not join the war without having thought it through carefully. Yilmaz even invites them to ‘study, go abroad’ instead. Even if they both insist on their solidarity ideal being their key motivation, far-right ideas and have an unhidden taste for violence might also be motivating factors.
One last example is that of Kadir Soylu, a Turkish café owner in Lviv, who chose to stay in Ukraine during the conflict and became a volunteer fighter. He has been recognized by the Ukrainian Armed Forces for his contributions, which include delivering supplies to soldiers and supporting military hospitals.
This variety in profiles shows that the motivations of these Turkish fighters are heterogeneous and may stem from different dynamics.
The awakening of a neo-Panturkism
The motivations driving these fighters go beyond territorial issues. While some are fueled by a deep sense of Turkic ‘brotherhood’, others are motivated by a personal agenda or drawn by nationalist narratives. Their reasons may vary, but a common thread connects them all: solidarity with Turkic communities — especially in this case with those in Crimea, now under Russian control. Indeed, the Crimean Tatar, who are made up of Turkic peoples and descendants of Mongols, are considered to be persecuted by the Russian authorities. This situation has motivated a number of volunteers of Turkic origin to join the Ukrainian ranks in solidarity.
And this prompts a broader question: are we witnessing a revival of Panturkism? Is today’s Panturkism, reshaped and presented as a form of Turkic solidarity, reactivated in order to counter Russia?
The use of symbols like the Grey Wolf and the language used by volunteers point toward a renewed embrace of Panturkist ideas. Panturkism, an ideology that emerged in the early 20th century and was shaped by intellectuals like Ziya Gökalp (1876–1924), calls for the unity of Turkic peoples across Central Asia and asserts that they share a common origin in Turan, a region in Central Asia. Today, a narrative advocating for those historical ties seem to be resurfacing–particularly amongst Crimean Tatars, many of whom fled to Türkiye after Russia’s annexation of Crimea.
Historically, Panturkism claims has appeared to gain momentum when Turkic communities were facing external threats–in this case, from Russia. Rather than a constant ideological current, Panturkism seems to be a rallying point, surfacing in times of crisis and potentially a powerful influence tool.
However, there is a striking difference between today’s Panturkism and the original ideology. Indeed, the presence and the role of the state have been fundamentally redefined. While 19th-century Panturkism was strongly supported by the Turkish state, today’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs adopts a more reserved stance regarding the war in Ukraine and the involvement of Turkish people.
This dynamic prompts several critical questions: How long can Ankara maintain a balance between its citizens' involvement in the Ukrainian conflict and its fragile political and economic relationship with Moscow? Is it truly effective to confront one nationalist narrative with another? Or could these seemingly opposing ideologies—Panturkism and Russian nationalism—ultimately have found points of convergence?
Comments
Post a Comment