I have been in Diyarbakır which is a South Eastern province of Turkey for a couple of days to understand where we are for the solution. I am thinking for a moment, in actuality, what should be said, what should be talked about and what should not be talked. I know that my words are going to be reprehensible.
I had better talk like that rather than dying with my dilemma. It is like clinging to life despite broken arm and leg. Of course, it is not easy but not impossible too. Rather than remaining between East and West, we should speak and make people speak about both East and West. In reality, people are ready for a solution; the real problem is in diplomacy. Meaningless discourse of Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) and hardening approachs of Justice and Development Party (AKP) members are not going to be a solution. AKP is the only political element besides of BDP. Nobody cares about Republican Peoples’ Party (CHP) and National Movement Party (MHP). Believe it or not, committed services are prevailed on the hearts of people. You can usually hear these kinds of sentences “We do not have to wait in the lines of hospital anymore”, “from now on everyone can make their trip by a plane” and also “Koran Courses have become liberalized”. But contrary to this, “mother tongue issue” and “equal citizenship” are still brain twister. BDP’s clash against the parliament is supported by the local community and people. With whom I have met says that the 80 Thousand votes of Hatip Dicle was stolen. In one perspective, the point is about being stucked in the middle of AKP and BDP. The people have sympathy AKP due to committed services, on the one hand but on the other, about identity demands, by the 2005 declamation of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Diyarbakır, risen expectation of people who are disappointed at this moment. For that reason, people are resentful to AKP and BDP is seen as the only solution. Additionally, public is not very component on democratic autonomy. Common expectation of everybody is to live together in peace.
By using the point of “common expectation of everybody is to live together in peace”, we should touch the punch line and bounce ideas off each other. There must be a way to remove the gap between Eastern children who show victory sign and their “Apo” passion and Western children who hates from “terrorists”. The reason of this situation is closely related with delayed Kurdish Nationalism and Kurdism. If it is not wrong to compare, they have been trying to make up an “Atakürt”. It is surprising that we have a frame of mind which says that ‘I have quited smoking because the “leadership” wanted me to.’ But the problem is that the new nationalism movement is not going to gain favor for none of us. And also, in this point, one of the members of BDP is saying similar statements. For him, the only problem is the system. AKP is establishing denial with its own hand. AKP criticizes Kemalism and its struggle with it is to found its own capability and also to solidify it. We have also talked about TRT Şeş (6) that is an important step but the answer was surprised me “ TRT Şeş (6) is actually the most important example” he says, “ you used to say ‘terrorist’ in Turkish in the past, but right now you are saying ‘terrorist’ in our own language which is Kurdish.” He adds; however, if you realize that during the report, “we” and “you” emphasizes show us psychological disintegration. By using classic reflex and last days’ more used idiom ‘but we call a cat as cat’ {ama biz kediye kedi deriz in Turkish}, even I tried to mean, I would prefer to think deeply to understand the issue more clearly. He disallowed me to say for Abdullah Öcalan “the killer of thousands” and “baby killer”, he said that ‘this is a deception of the media, the organization (PKK), does not harm any civilians. This person actually, was estranged from the PKK until 1994, moreover, he was enemy of PKK. But, when his uncle was killed by JİTEM, since then, he had participated an investigation, he has started to think as a member of PKK. The public and politicians do not expect that we are not at bay with PKK and call them as terrorist group. He positively says these statements. And when the dialogue comes to subject about “democratic autonomy”, he said “democratic autonomy” is a thing which we used to have in the past but we lost it now. I asked a question what do you take possession by declaring democratic autonomy, by saying this kind of sentences, democratic autonomy will not be accepted, but the answer drive me to despair. “We have already started to instutionalize, can you see this school, by our own money which is collected from our municipalities, and we will build another one. We will give our education, if officials comes and try to close the school, we will react and we will contravene against them and this fight will be reflected to public, then civil war will occur”. There are no more words about this sombre scene. Moreover, I teased by saying that “will you shoot me?” he said that “if you support my democratic struggle, of course not”
All this dialogue and statements are, of course, not to create sombre scene not to burst people’s bubble, I share to understand more, if you ask how we can make sense of these statement, there is still a process to make dialogue. We should talk without prejudices and preconditions. Perhaps, we forgot that the best way to understand the circumstances we need dialogue but why this issue becomes complicated? Because of not having dialogue, don’t you think so? It should not be forgotten that the gap among politicians and people is another matter, both in BDP and AKP. It should not be compared among the politicians and voters, and every politician is not fully and rightly represents the people. The important point which should be taking into consideration is to how both BDP and AKP politicians represent. People want politicians to frame peace and solution as soon as possible and also the deaths must be stopped. In a word, you cannot say all members of BDP are supporters of democratic autonomy, and all AKP members are not supporters of democratic autonomy instead of looking the political figures, we should look at how people want to solve this issue. You can say, the public is not in the parliament, but the politicians, and they negotiate with each other, too. Therefore, rather than public says, the important point is what politicians do. However, it is quite obvious that the situation of politicians who are not making policy for their people. For instance, to understand that, in the region, referendum can be done for democratic autonomy whether public wants or not. I am sure that BDP will reject firstly. Because Kurds do not want to leave, furthermore, they want to negotiate much more than before. Even if ‘democratic autonomy’ does not mean leaving but they try to revolt against the governors. Same situation is valid for AKP. In the region, the poll will ask whether the Kurdish issue finished or not, by answering No! Not finished yet. Because there is no supplemental policy about Kurdish and constitutional citizenship. As long as Kurdish classes be added and the 66 Article of the current constitution is not amended, we cannot talk about concrete steps, as we can understand from these circumstances, the important thing is that what people want in the short and middle term. Without looking physclogical and sociological extend, without looking from Diyarbakır to Turkey and without empathizing, the problem will not be solved. If the son who shows victory sign for Abdullah Öcalan is our brother and if he carries a Turkish Republic ID, that is our duty to understand him.
Burak Yalım
Translated by Yasin Erdoğmuş
International Relations Student at Yalova University
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
