There was a dangerous discourse propounded during the Gezi Park crisis. According to this discourse, “the ballot box did not mean everything.” The goal of this sentence was not to compensate the representation/influence gap during the period between the elections, which are held every four years. The discourse aimed to – without regarding it as necessary to conceal the goal - stir the streets and bring the country in an ungovernable position, or to create legitimacy for the takeover of the state administration by the military, similar to the way Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi did in Egypt.

The fact that the Republican People's Party (CHP) did not give hope about coming to power through politics was accompanied with perception management operations which condemned the White Turk sociology to hopelessness and anger. As the democratization initiatives and economic progress were strengthening the society as a whole, a completely adverse perception gained momentum amongst laicist neighborhoods. Therefore, the only thing that had to be done during the Gezi incident was to mobilize the streets. The necessary platform to “get rid of the dictator” was prepared, thanks to the media operation.

A mindset which favored the wellness of the society would never attempt such a way. This situation meant the outright denial of politics, disregarding the democratic transformation of the country, and to open the door to present chaos against the will of the people or actual dictatorship.

During that period, Berat Özipek brought forward the following lines in response to Max Horkheimer's –one of the founders of Critical Theory- refusal to support the street movements of the 1960s:

“Despite all of its flaws, even the most unsteady democracy is better than a dictator which will be the inevitable end of a revolution today – it seems necessary for me to explicitly say this for the sake of truth… To defend and protect limited freedom against increasing threats and to expand it where possible … is a much urgent duty than to put it in jeopardy through desperate acts.”

When Gezi's coup section failed to succeed, the December 17 and 25's parallel operations were put into operation. You know what happened. A great struggle was waged. The same way a discharging soldier counted days to be set free, millions of citizens awaited the elections. They expressed their position in the March 30 and August 10 elections. However, the perception management operations did not stop; they even got globalized and became impudent.

And finally, by concentrating on the equalization of the AK Party with ISIL, they carried out the rehearsal for uprisings on October 6-8. The people did not give credence to this uprising, but the same way it happened in Gezi, here too, innocent citizens were massacred. However, despite everything we were able to reach the June 7 general elections. To have been able to carry out elections on June 7 was the greatest success of societies within Turkey and the AK Party. To reach such a point against a strong alliance which had taken all means of craziness to make the political system dysfunctional is the work of the maturity of all people in Turkey. Therefore, the democratic effect of election results, which secure all of us, independently from the fact that they delight some people and upset others. Here, I would like to congratulate all of our citizens who ran to the ballot box to cast their votes, regardless of which party they voted for. The results produced by their votes is always most welcome.

It is one thing to evaluate the perception management operations during the election process, and it is a completely different thing to evaluate the election results. To match up the two analyses is a different way to say “the ballot box is not everything” and is quite wrong. To be consistent in our principles should be based on holding the election results in high esteem at all times.

Like I stated yesterday, the results gave the strong message that the only place to resolve the issue is through the Parliament. It seems like the results were not predicted to be this way, and that the actual intention turned out to be different in that the outlawed PKK continued to shed blood in the southeastern province of Diyarbakır and they had attempted to light the fire of a clash between the PKK and Hizbullah, similar to the one which took place back in October 6-8.

Now is the time for the discourse presented by the Peoples' Democratic Party, or HDP, in the West to be tested. Will the HDP –which gained over 13 percent of the vote by pledging to ensure trust, hope, peace, equality and fraternity- utilize the political power it has gained for peace and disarmament of the PKK, or will it cantonize the PKK which is backed by this political power? If the goal is to reach democracy –as the claim-, why would the PKK backed by the HDP start executions following the latter's victory?

The six million electorates who voted for the HDP have the most right to pose these questions. The six million voters most probably did not vote for the PKK for them to assimilate the religious people and those outside of their group in Turkey's southeast.

I had previously claimed that “such an HDP” to pass the threshold would not result in the most favorable outcomes as we were expecting. It was obvious that a structure which does not put a distance between itself and the terrorist organization, one which does not confine violence, or go beyond the obvious rhetoric, and one which promotes democracy in the West and exploits the organization's pressure and threat in the East and moves along a dual channel; does not instill confidence in the people.

But I would like to be mistaken in my claims and to apologize from the HDP. I am not being ironic or allegoric. I wish with all my heart that my predictions prove wrong, that the HDP keeps its pledge for peace, and says, “That's enough, renounce violence, take your arms, withdraw, and leave the rest to us from now on,” to the PKK. Let us condemn the executions in a strong manner altogether, condemn violence and suffocate it.

The HDP should not be the legitimizing force in the Parliament for the cantonization of the Southeast, or the assimilation of conservative Kurds. It should at least do whatever it can. It should rest assured that we will stand by them until the very end.

This issue is the responsibility of all parties and citizens. What happened yesterday is left in the past. Our common responsibility is to preserve and develop the security, unity, prosperity, and freedom of all citizens and our country.