Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu made important statements at the iftar program held in the Tuşba district of eastern Van province the other day. One of these was about the issue of a coalition, while the other was about the resolution process –which happens to be the section I took below.
“(…) It is not sufficient to not talk about peace now. Those who truly believe in democracy, those who talk about freedom, peace, and human rights should now be talking about disarmament. If the resolution process will be on the agenda, it should be known that the promises made in May 2013 should be fulfilled. I call upon all respondents, especially the pro-Kurdish Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) which always mentions peace, but does not adopt a firm stance against the terrorist organization, and remains silent against attacks: they should know that we will take precautions if anyone wants to cause harm to the peaceful atmosphere of the country in any way and will not allow them to harm the tranquility of our citizens. Each weapon carried illegally throughout Turkey is a tool of attack directed towards Turkey's peace and brotherhood. Public order and our national unity and fraternity project will proceed without making any concessions.”
A simple question reveals on which ground these words mean “the emperor has no clothes.”
Does the outlawed PKK's - which found a sphere of existence under the conditions of the 1980 coup- armed struggle have any meaning today, if the issue was really about the democratic rights of the Kurdish citizens?
Does “I will continue the armed struggle” have any meaning for the democratic rights of the Kurds, in a country where 80 HDP deputies -including PKK's leader Öcalan's niece- were elected in the parliament, equaling the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) which also had 80 deputies, and a country where denial of Kurdish identity has officially ended?
Isn't it obvious that it is comical for the PKK -which displays such environmental sensitivity that they shoot people who do not obey the closed season- to legitimize this weapons issue by discourse of the ecological society and women's rights?
Can the continuation of the HDP, and PKK which have “high democratic standards”, which allows it to name the AK Party –the movement which put an end to the denial of Kurdish identity - “authoritarian”, that they would make calls –similar to the one which ended the lives of 52 citizens- be possible without colony and parallel media makeup?
The truth is, as Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu stated, the PKK did not keep its promise that it made in May 2013, in front of the global media when they said “we are withdrawing.”
The rest is nonsense, fallacy.
It has no reason not to keep this promise. It is not appropriate in terms of democratic criteria that the HDP, which obtained 9.7 percent of the votes in the Presidential elections and 13 percent of the votes in the general elections, continues as the crutch of an armed terrorist organization.
This concrete anomaly cannot be concealed by flexing the truth. The cunningness to use weapons as an element of tutelage in domestic politics – for the sake of downgrading a political movement which drank the hemlock poison which prevented the resolution process- cannot be camouflaged by playing a saz (a Turkish instrument) or by the parallel media outlets' deception.
Even if they say hesitation was present during this process, by indorsing the lack of confidence in the state for the AK Party, there you go with the coalition government. If the issue was lack of confidence in state, and if they have more trust in those who said, “The best Kurd is a dead Kurd,” in the past, the AK Party is no longer in power alone: make your call, and disintegrate with the PKK.
But if your problem is something else, then forsake deceiving the Kurdish people by exacerbating nationalism, and express your real intentions to the public.
In fact, people should see what type of a goal their support for you will be serving, so they can make their decisions accordingly.
So that people will not find themselves in an unexpected situation amidst the dust of mobilization to carve the Resolution Process by Kobani lies and to demonize the AK Party, which is the only guarantor of the process.
You have no reason to not withdraw. Öcalan's freedom request is a precondition that was not be included in the process and you know very well that making this a precondition means “I do not want peace” in a sneaky way.
Re-read Öcalan's words from tapes where he said he would consider it a “dishonor” to make his situation a matter of bargaining in the resolution process. Say whatever you want to say explicitly, let the people decide.
But do not use the Resolution Process as a Trojan horse and push the country towards an adventure. Where are your revolutionist ethics? Or is revolutionist ethics something like this? Are all ways permissible for you to reach your goal?
How similar it looks to the self-defensive deception of the parallel organization; we shouldn't be surprised about how well you two get along.
Protecting and valuing the Resolution Process can only be possible by an open/honest attitude. It is not a point in question that those who always talk about the process do not see the fact that the PKK and the HDP will not reach anywhere with this attitude.
The solution is not to completely abolish this process and return to security policies, nor is it about making this as a tool for disintegration. Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu also openly expresses that this drift cannot continue.
The Resolution Process has to pass this fine line and enter an open way by tilting. The responsibility for this issue is not only in the hands of the AK Party.
Let the AK Party pay a political price, it is not a problem, but do not let our people and country pay a price.
Because those who pay a price for their people and peace mean that they won all elections.
