Category Archives: Turkey

Growing polarisation of Turkey deepened by a policy of no-peace and no-war

Leave a reply

The promise of progression in the Kurdish opening and a true resolution to Turkey’s age old Kurdish dilemma has slowly disintegrated.

Rather than a positive climate that should been created by AKP’s historic success at the recent elections with anticipation of democratic reform and a new constitution combined by a record number of Kurdish PM’s elected to parliament, the last few months have served as an ominous prelude to a growing social divide, increased bitterness and rising inter-communal  tension.

The PKK continues to cast a hefty shadow on the Kurdish landscape yet the government refuses to negotiate with them, and continues to attack them culturally, politically and militaristically thereby punishing all Kurds.

Underpinned by a Kurdish boycott of parliament and a contentious declaration of democratic autonomy much to the fury of Ankara is a number of controversial trials of Kurdish politicians and a deepening Kurdish-Turkish divide created by a growing number of Turkish casualties in an escalating war with the PKK.

With signs of a dangerous increase in the polarisation of Turkey, sentiments are hardly helped with the recent high-profile charges against Kurdish politicians.

Only this week Turkey charged over 100 Kurdish politicians, 98 of which are former mayors, for signing a demand over two years ago that called for better conditions for imprisoned former PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan.

Prosecutors had deemed that such demands constituted terrorist propaganda, whereas for the Kurds it merely reemphasised the prevalent out-dated mentality and approach of the Turkish judiciary. The politicians could face years in jail and the trials will almost certainly placate growing Kurdish resentment towards Ankara.

As witnessed by the huge Kurdish uproar and protests that came with a number of pre-election arrests and charges, the Kurds are increasingly determined to stand up to what they see as Turkish political aggression against the advancement of the Kurdish cause. The BDP have maintained a boycott of parliament in retaliation for the stripping of jailed deputy Hatip Dicle of his seat.

The proclamation of more trails comes hot on the heels of popular Kurdish deputy Aysel Tuğluk who was elected to parliament last month been given a two year sentence for similar charges.

Placing a dark cloud on reconciliation and soothing of sentiments is the high-profile “KCK trials” which includes 12 Kurdish mayors and dozens of other politicians. Ankara has accused them of been part of KCK, an umbrella organisation of the PKK.

The nature of these trials has cause greater enmity amongst the Kurdish community and even criticism from the European Union and international observers. The continuing harassment of Kurdish political parties and the application of ruthless outdated penalties in cases where there is subjective evidence at best, not only damages the chances of a breakthrough via Kurdish political channels but yet again places the Kurds into opposing camps of thought.

The Turkish government has vehemently refused to negotiate with the PKK on an official level, yet the continuing disillusionment in Kurdish circles and the suppression of any Kurdish political vehicle, means that the PKK remains as entrenched a part of the Kurdish problem and thereby its solution as ever.

Only this week Abdullah Ocalan in a detailed and emotive statement ended talks with the AKP, claiming “If they want me to resume a role then I have three conditions, health, security and an area where I can move freely”.

It is clear from the statement that the AKP has long been in discussions with the PKK. However, while refusing to legitimise the demands of the PKK against a backdrop of hawkish circles, it at the same time tries to muster peace.

Ocalan accused both the AKP and PKK of using him as a ‘subcontractor’ and for their own purposes. Ocalan claimed the AKP wants war and does not want to resolve the question.

While some claim that Ocalan’s apparent criticism of the current PKK command and those who rally around his name, is a sign of dissent within PKK circles, it is not clear how much sway Ocalan had in any case from his prison cell. Ocalan’s name continues to be used as a figurehead and to strengthen the PKK identity, in reality the PKK is the result of a greater Kurdish problem and not an Ocalan problem. Even if the PKK were banished, under the current hostile climate another off-shoot will quickly emerge.

Turkish nationalism and suffocation of the infant Kurdish political renaissance means more than ever the PKK remain the default representation of the Kurds and the only true interlocutors to the Kurdish problem.

It seems that after thousands of lost lives, billions dollars of lost expenditure and decades of failed policies towards the Kurds, Ankara still doesn’t come to term with the limits of any military solution. In recent weeks the Turkey has reaffirmed its commitment to attack the rebels with all its might. The life of either a Kurd or Turk is equally sacred and tears of a mother are equally regretful. After 40 years of confrontation and painful memories, it is time that all sides see that bloodshed must be ended.

Only recently Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan boldly proclaimed, “there is no Kurdish problem; only a PKK problem.” And that the issues of the Kurdish citizens in Turkey are not to do with the PKK.

On the contrary, the PKK has not been eradicated because Turkey has refused to see that the problem is not 5000 guerrillas but 15 million people. Without resolving the root of its age-old conundrum, Turkey’s continual cutting of branches will never bear any fruit.

The issue of the 5000 guerrillas and the 15 million people goes hand in hand. More than ever the PKK is intertwined with the struggle of the Kurds in Turkey.

Too often Turkey’s policies have meant that Kurds have been trapped with no real alternative. Not for the first time, the Kurdish political campaign has ground to a halt and the PKK remains the noose by which Ankara can control and intimidate the Kurds. Ankara too often not only tries to resolve the problem without the PKK but without the Kurds themselves.

Turkey’s policies continually place the Kurds into the hands of the PKK, yet ironically the Turks then use this as an opportunity to charge Kurds for been supporters of the PKK.

It is Ankara’s policies and continual labelling of any pro-Kurdish figure as PKK or terrorist related that has given the PKK more weight.

This general labelling of Kurds in Turkish circles as separatists or PKK collaborators has fuelled inter-communal friction. Not all Kurds support the PKK lest all Kurds been supporters of violence or having anti-Turkish sentiments.

This is demonstrated with the strong support for the AKP in previous elections, and even though they were over shadowed by BDP’s record success at the recent polls, the AKP still mustered 30 seats.

But clearly the Kurds feel that they have given the AKP enough time and support, but the AKP has not lived up to its pledges and bold pre-electoral promises.

The problem is that although the AKP has made a number of positive steps and breakthroughs in resolving the Kurdish problem in last decade or so, their hands are tied by the nationalist elite and general nationalist euphoria that plagues Turkish society.

Keeping the Kurds content with piecemeal gestures in the east yet appeasing nationalist circles in the west has proved almost impossible.

On the back of the recent spate of Turkish casualties in fighting with the PKK, inter-communal tension has become dangerously high.

Popular Kurdish singer Aynur Dogan was heckled off the stage by the audience at a concert for singing in Kurdish after the death of Turkish soldiers. This was preceded by protests and attacks by both sides in Istanbul.

This attack on Kurdish identity shows the progress that Turkey still needs to make. There appears this mentality that an attack on a Turk by a small group of Kurds is akin by an attack by all Kurds.

The younger generation of Kurds, with growing expectations and resentment towards Ankara, will be more difficult to appease. This standoff between expectant and frustrated Kurds and the government’s tentative dealing of its Kurdish problem will only lead to a wider gulf.

The only solution is a new Turkey that embraces the Kurds as true partners and as a key component of their society.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc.

Dialog is the way forward for stability and prosperity

Leave a reply

As Turkish parliament stutters to a start, Kurds demand wholesale measures not piecemeal gestures

The recent national elections in Turkey were historic for the AKP as Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan secured a landslide visctory and a third term, and many had hoped would also be historic for the future face of  Turkey.

However, the ushering of a new chapter inTurkeyhardly got off to the best of starts as boycotts by the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the pro-Kurdish Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) derailed any short-lived post election euphoria.

The simultaneous boycott by the CHP underlined the broader national frustration with judicial handicaps and democratic constraints in Turkey, and strengthened the sense of injustice amongst the Kurds.  

Progress on the Kurdish issue has been stop-start and inconsistent at the best of times, nevertheless, the Kurdish question has taken a new footing under Erdogan’s tenure. Some of the reforms, cultural rights and increasing reachout to the Kurds in the midst of nationalist hysteria have certainly been symbolic.

However, as we have seen with the unprecedented Arab spring that has rocked the Middle Eastern horizon and toppled many long established regimes, once expectations rise unless progress on the ground and fulfilment of demands rises exponentially with it, the enmity and determination of the people can not be contained and this leads back into a vicious cycle of tail-chasing socio-political progress.

The experiences of the Kurds in Turkey is hardly glittered with glory but as expectations have naturally grown and the people have become steadily more confident, the raft of changes proposed by the Turkish government has failed to appease Kurdish ambition.

Erdogan has promised to secure consensus for the drafting of a new constitution with a key demand of the BDP and PKK been recognition of Kurdish identity amongst the proposed amendments.

Much like the much heralded ‘Kurdish opening’, Turkey finds itself in position of promising much but delivering little against a backdrop of hawkish circles and nationalist anger. As such Kurdish hopes for comprehensive changes to the constitution are unlikely.

Erdogan’s AKP previously enjoyed strong electoral support in the Kurdish regions but the latest elections demonstrate a bewilderment and lack of faith in Erdogan fulfilling his promises.

The balance of keeping the west and east of the country happy has almost certainly shifted in the favour of appeasing the west of Turkey. Erdogan has proven he can stand-up to the traditionalist elite and rise above the might and influence ofTurkey’s military peers. But this battle has proved a difficult and contentious balancing act and as such Erdogan’s reach-out to the Kurds has quickly been followed by backtracking.

In the current Middle Eastern turmoil, the rising prominence of Kurds in Iraq and Syria and the changing strategic shape of the region, it is the east of Turkey that’s holds the real card to Turkeys growth, prosperity and stability.

In the pastTurkeycould afford to ignore their restive Kurdish population at will and worse confide them to second class status but in the present age such policies will only see a kickback forAnkara.

Without economic growth in the region, social and cultural advancement, more political freedom and a much a larger slice of state focus and investment, what reasons will the Kurds have to sway towards Ankara and reconciliation?

It is time for the Turkish government to offer the Kurdish population a real political alternative. The Kurds have often been stuck between successive repressive governments and violence and resistance of the PKK. This has had led to a vicious cycle where the people have been seemingly trapped. On the one hand the Turkish government’s overtures simply do not fulfil those expected of a modern democratic European nation and on the other hand the Turkish government has drastically undermined political representation in the region which has ubiquitously left the PKK as the representatives and interlocutors of the Kurdish nation.

Indeed this PKK shadow continues to hinder Kurds in the political arena.  BDP is a reincarnation in a long line of Kurdish political parties that have been banned and reprimanded. The fact that the BDP representatives had to run as independents tells its own story with the electoral system continuing to plague Kurdish advancement.

Whilst Erdogan recorded a landslide victory, the real victors at the recent polls were the BDP with 36 votes. However, the BDP boycott of parliament as a result of the stripping of jailed deputy Hatip Dicle of his seat along with the refusal to release 5 candidates awaiting trial in prison quickly dispelled hopes of a new beginning and evoked fears of a return to the poisonous atmosphere of the past.

If this was a one off occurrence then perhaps it would be more understandable, but practically every Kurdish party in the past has been hindered and disbanded for one reason or another.

The Kurds fear that the government is already trying to clip their wings again as they potentially form a considerable voice in parliament.

Just where does this leave roadmap for the Kurdish opening? Evidently, the more disillusioned the Kurds become the more the PKK threatens to grow in influence. Kurdish political advancement is a must for Turkey to shake the cob webs of its past struggles against the PKK. In the new dawn of a new age, violence is no longer an acceptable form of political resolution and like most ordinary Turkish citizens, the Kurds do not favour violence or instability. They want jobs, opportunities, cultural and political freedoms and investment.

As bitter of a pill as it is to swallow, the PKK is now intertwined with the Kurdish opening and a solution to the Kurdish problem. Even the government behind the political chambers has realised this and have kept contact with jailed PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan, but this has been concealed and played down for fear of a major government own goal.

In reality, without a resolution to the PKK dilemma, the Kurdish question can never be resolved. This is the by-product of Turkeys own mistakes. It has failed to promote political representation for Kurds and at the same time has refused to acknowledge the PKK.

Turkeymust break from tentative steps and piecemeal gestures to its Kurdish population and instead implement tangible wholesale reforms.

The Kurds are eagerly looking towards Ankar ato gauge the sincerity and appetite of the government for real change.

In the meantime, the PKK continues to lurk in the background with its own threats and demands and ongoing confrontation in the south east. Against a backdrop of nationalist fever, the government is unlikely to meet PKK demands, negotiate directly or grant any level of amnesty.

While an inflammation of armed insurrection is unlikely, the Kurdish population as they have shown in the protests leading up to the elections, can cause more unrest and political damage than any armed struggle.

As witnessed in theMiddle East, mass mobilisation of the masses is far more superior to any military might. The Kurdish population is not a small insignificant corner of Turkey but an integral part of its past, present and future.

There is no reason why Turkey could not usher a new era of  true fraternity. The Kurds have much more to gain with a productive Ankara by its side but at the same time can not indefinitely accept token gestures.

Both the Kurds and Turks, both within Turkey and beyond are inseparable entities. The prosperity of both nations lies only with the advent of strong relations and new channels of dialogue and understanding.

As difficult as it may prove for the BDP, it must end its boycott and not to succumb to further weakening in parliament. While Turkey must realise that it must first solve democratic shortcomings in its own backyard before launching itself as the regional sponsor of the new reformist tidal wave in the Middle East.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc.

The ‘Kurdish opening’ in Turkey remains as open as ever

Leave a reply

There is no doubt that the relations with Kurds both withinTurkeyand also with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) have improved under the auspices of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. However, one cannot help but see a man who appears shackled and incoherent, in the midst of reformists, Islamists and pioneers on the hand and secularists, nationalists and conservatives on the other hand.

As a result, the onset of the Kurdish issue or the ‘Kurdish opening’ as coined by Erdogan has been inconsistent and often prone to taking one step forward and two steps back.

Clearly, the Kurdish situation is a far cry from the dark days of the 1980’s and beyond. From sheer denial and second class status, Kurds have increasingly become a critical pawn on the Turkish sociopolitical board.

However, amidst a backdrop of controversy, political friction, ongoing battles with PKK, not to mention ideological battles in the Turkish parliament, to say thatTurkeyno longer has a Kurdish issue is an illusion.

Whether it is an ethnic problem or the problem of individual Kurdish citizens, it is still primarily a Kurdish problem that needs both short-term and long-term solutions more than ever.

However you label the problem, the measures, initiatives and remedies remain the same. As such, the Kurdish opening is as open as ever.

There is no doubt that Erdogan has taken some bold steps, starting in August 2005 when he openly admitted the presence of a Kurdish problem and the regretful way the Kurdish situation has been handled by previous governments. Some democratic reforms have progressively taking place which in a historical context may seem like significant concessions but in practice do not meet demands or expectations expected in the modern age.

At a time, when a breeze of change is happening across the Middle East,Turkeyas a strategic actor in the region does not need reminding that minority rights fall well short of those expected of a future EU country.

The Kurdish problem is real and needs to be addressed in wholesale measures and not piecemeal gestures. The longer such the Kurdish issue is sidetracked, mislabeled or neglected, the more the situation will fester and become the achilles heel ofTurkey.

The presence of millions of Kurds inTurkeyis a fact as is a war that has raged on for decades against PKK militants with no clear outcome. Whilst any armed insurrection or the death of any civilian, Turkish or Kurdish, is highly regrettable, successive governments have certainly manipulated the separatist tag and the more ardent Kurdish sentiment, while not filling the vacuum by reaching out to more liberal Kurds.

Not all Kurds are separatists or anti-Turkey lest supporters of violence.  There is no reason why the Kurdish community cannot become a celebrated, diverse and symbolic part ofTurkeyif they are sufficiently tied into the makeup and future of the country.

All too often, the Kurds have become stuck between PKK camps of thought and repressive governments. This stalemate has lead to a vicious cycle of “no war, no peace”, where only the ordinary Kurds have suffered.

If the region had better investments, new infrastructure, expansion of cultural rights and economic prosperity, the very root of the PKK dilemma will be cut. You can cut the branches of your problem indefinitely, but without bold, ambitious and practical steps, only a policy of fire-fighting will ensue.

To give the greater Kurdish population a firm alternative, the Turkish government must encourage Kurdish political development in the region not try to cripple the onset of real interlocutors in the Kurdish issue.

In his recent speeches in the south east, Erdogan has been vigorously critical of the pro-Kurdish Peace and Peace and Democracy Party (BDP).

Amidst a backdrop of nationalist fever and general hawkish pressure, criticism of the PKK and its jailed leader Abdulah Öcalan is somewhat inevitable, but the measures to blight the credibility of the BDP, not to mention the dozens of closures of Kurdish parties in the past, only stoke tensions further.

While his speech was a strong emotive message about the fraternity of Kurds and Turks, the practical measures in the background do not always correlate with the essential sentiments of his speech.

AKP is desperate to win the Kurdish vote and this is by no means a foregone conclusion, especially if they continue to alienate the liberal or the yet undecided Kurds. While historically the AKP has fared well in the region, Kurdish sentiments have been increasingly swayed away from them as entity that can serve their needs.

Erdogan boldly stated “this land is our land. This is our motherland. There is no discrimination, no separatism. We are one, and we are together. We will be one, we will be united, we will be big and fresh”. Only with the right practical steps, incentives and implementation of real democratic reform will this truly happen and not be left to mere electoral rhetoric.

The idea that you can end decades of unrest, conflict, repression and ethnic grievance in a few years of limited reforms is a misnomer. Only in 2005 was the Kurdish issue officially highlighted and only in the past few years has a Kurdish opening or democratic reforms been discussed. As much as deep-rooted issues as those in the south east did not come about in a few years, the resolutions cannot be established as easily as limited reforms in few short years or without a proper roadmap or supports from all levels of society.

“Every tear shed in this region seeped into our hearts, conscience and soul…” proclaimed Erdogan. Tears may be wiped away but mental scars remain. Only with true co-existence and equal status, can Turks and Kurds flourish hand in hand. What the Kurds want is essentially no different to those of any Turkish citizen – employment, a good standard of living, education and a bright future.

Erdogan’s move to visit the KRG region in March of this year can only be commended. The Kurds are major players in the region and the need for new thinking, cross-regional harmony and mutual economic benefit overrides outdated nationalist ethos and Turkish fears.

The Kurds of Iraq rely heavily onTurkeyas a gateway in economic, cultural and political terms. As much as the Kurds needTurkey,Turkeyhas come to realize that it needs the Kurds both within their borders and also inIraq.

Meanwhile, as the PKK claimed responsibility for a deadly attack on a convoy ofTurkey’s ruling party, nationalist tensions were hardly eased, as Ocalan threatened a harsh response unless Turkey begins dialogue to end the conflict within six weeks.

Clearly, many discreet meetings have taken place with Ocalan, but efforts to lay down arms have been clearly inconclusive, with Ocalan blaming the AKP government for failing to respect an “agreement” to halt military operations.

However, the violence is increasingly used for political advantage and any concessions ahead of the elections are unlikely, whilst the way frequent protests which have been quelled by the government in the south east have hardly helped to bridge the divide.

If the Kurdish political parties increasingly operate under a PKK shadow on the one hand and government hostility on the other, the PKK will continue to threaten to be the only representative voice of the Kurds. Any democratic process or real political gain can only stall without true recognisable and widely respected Kurdish interlocutors on the ground.

The greatest goal of the Turkish government should be to isolate the PKK, not militaristically or economically but emotionally. Unless it continues to implement real and tangible solutions to its Kurdish problem, the vicious cycle will only continue unabated.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: eKurd, Various Misc.

A referendum on the taste for change and the historical foundations of Turkey

Leave a reply

For a country seemingly in transition and an ideological tangle between its historical roots and the reformists intending to drag Turkey into the new millennia, the vote over constitutional amendments held extra significance.

Many had perceived the vote as a referendum on Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan himself and the thermostat by which to gauge the ruling party AKP’s likely showing ahead of next years crucial national elections.

A hard-fought and contentious campaign was followed by a tense vote as the Turkish people voted ‘yes’ to the constitutional reform package on the table. The polarisation of Turkey could not be painted better than the fact that although 58% of the electorate voted in favour, large section of the Kurdish south east boycotted the vote or voted no. Elsewhere, large sections of Istanbul, a secularist bastion, were weary of government measures to dilute historical state principles and ideals.

The AKP, who stormed to power in 2002 with a tight-hold on the Turkish political arena, faced stiff criticism from nationalist and conservative circles, especially from the main opposition party, CHP, who accused the Islamist rooted AKP of a de-facto Islamist coup and aiming to seize control of the judiciary.

Since the AKP assumed political ascendancy, many key reforms designed to facilitate EU accession have been passed. This has included loosening laws around restrictions on freedom of speech, allowing landmark if not limited and state controlled broadcasting in Kurdish and slowly clipping the wings of the powerful Turkish army, the long-time guardians of the secularist ideology.

One of the key aims was to limit the power of the judiciary and the largely independent hand of the constitutional courts, whose status at times has afforded a free hand in upholding the now mystical secular and nationalist ethos of the state, and who were even close to banning the AKP only a couple of years ago.

The new measures provide the government greater influence over the selection of judges and also include steps to try army officers in civilian courts.

In many ways, the constitutional referendum pitted an old Turkey against an aspiring new one.

Over the past decades since foundation of the republic, certain blueprints of Turkey such as its strong secularism, nationalist ideals and the almost sacred role of the military were almost deemed untouchable.

While the AKP and Turkey has a long way to go, the sense of new if not highly contentious dialogue has been a strong development for Turkey as it tries to reshape its strategic role and identity both in the Middle East and Europe.

Admittedly, many of these reforms have been forced by EU accession demands than pure free will but the change in the air in recent years has certainly rocked the established elite.

The same ideals that engulfed Turkey in the 1920’s can not be merely applied indefinitely. The advent of globalism, a new world order and more transparent economic unions, means that Turkey must simply change with the times, or become stuck in out dated ethos that will only prove counter-productive to its advancement and standing.

Eventual entry into the EU is a major carrot and one that will ultimately see Turkey make further constitutional changes required, no matter how hard they may be to stomach in certain quarters, let alone discuss at this sensitive juncture.

As debate and a sense of anxiety in some nationalist circles continues to grip Turkey, perhaps it was fitting that the referendum was held on the day that marked exactly 30 years since a military junta took power 30 years ago and duly adopted the current constitution in 1982.

The current constitution drawn up by military influenced and ultra partisan actors with very specific objectives at the time is out-dated and simply incompatible with that of an EU aspiring country.

This common acceptance of the need for modernisation begs the question why all the fuss over the reform package? The answer is that although the reforms included only 26 amendments to the 1982 constitution, many which were widely expected and some now irrelevant, many hawks and nationalists fear that this may just be the tip of the iceberg as the AKP government manoeuvres further to imprint its ideology.

Critics will point to the way the reform package was rushed through earlier this year, and to the fact that citizens had a choice of ‘all or nothing’ over the proposed changes. While Erdogan has been heralded for spearheading economic and political advancement in Turkey, opposition camps point to his rigid style and view the Prime Minister with a degree of mistrust.

Ironically, while for some the constitutional amendments were too radical, for the impoverished Kurds struggling in the shadow of authoritarian and repressive laws and who largely abstained or voted “no”, the reforms simply do not go far enough. Many of the key laws and stipulations that continue to impinge Kurdish rights remain enshrined in legislature. For example, the key law that stipulates that any political party must attain a 10% threshold to enter parliament has continually blighted Kurdish political parties. Teaching and broadcasting in the Kurdish language are still limited and freedoms are still someway short.

Quite simply the changes simply do not quench the evident need of greater political reform in Turkey. However, particularly for the Kurds, who only decades ago were denied altogether, the gradual thawing of age-old mindsets is more significant than the limited reforms on the table at the current time.

It took many decades to usher even the notion of change and thus expectancy that the Turkish nationalist horizon will now suddenly tip upside down is optimistic at best. The democratisation of Turkey will continue, and as frustrating and tense as it has been, further changes will be painstaking, gradual and not wholesale.

For example the much anticipated ‘Kurdish opening’ ran out of steam as the government became paralysed by stiff opposition, perception of ‘succumbing’ to the PKK and also at the same time from instability and general mistrust in the south east, who argued the steps did not go far enough.

While disappointedly the iconic steps by the government to reach out to the Kurds never took any semblance of ascendancy, the channels of democratisation and dialogue are surely, if not slowly, taking root.

New democratic pages must be turned to ensure modernisation of Turkey’s south east and a peaceful resolution to the Kurdish question.

The EU must shoulder a lions-share of responsibility in carrying and pushing Turkey towards accession and prosperity, by loosening the nationalistic constitution further and particularly ensuring that Kurdish rights are advanced further. After all if Turkey joins the EU, it will be bringing its millions of Kurds with it.

While US President Barack Obama’s belief of “vibrancy” in Turkey’s democracy is exaggerated, in Erdogan own words, Turkey has at least “crossed a historic threshold”.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Peyamner, Various Misc.

The vicious cycle of ‘no peace, no war’ bites Turkey once more

Leave a reply

Hope and growing expectation that the age-old Kurdish issue could be finally resolved in Turkey, underlined by the government’s bold and historical undertaking referred to as the “Kurdish opening”, quickly evaporated.

The derailment of the brief positivity that was sewn in the much impoverished and conflict scarred east of Turkey is highlighted by the dramatic escalation of events in Turkey this past week.

The PKK have evidently escalated attacks in recent weeks, but the death tolls marked by a string of deadly attacks over the past number of days has rocked Turkey and stirred nationalist anger.

A bomb attack on a bus in Istanbul, claimed by an off-shoot of the PKK, the Kurdistan Freedom Falcons (TAK), brought the number of soldiers killed to 17 in less than week.

This has placed immense pressure on Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, already under broad attack from the opposition and nationalist circles for his attempts to reach out to the Kurds and ultimately reach out to the PKK to lay down their arms.

This all begs the question, where did it all go wrong? Surely, all sides would seek to capitalise on positive motions to bring peace to Turkey and a democratic settlement to such an age old problem that has left scars on both sides? The simple answer is no. This is Turkey after all, and cracks formed from decades of nationalistic policies, disenfranchisement, bitter feelings from both circles and a raging guerrilla war that has claimed thousand of lives, will not be papered over all too easily.

Turkey has finally come to the realisation that cutting the branches of your problem is not equivalent to cutting its root. As long as the PKK machine is fuelled by government policies, peace will not be achievable and bloodshed will continue.

The greatest goal of the Turkish government should be to isolate the PKK, not militaristically or economically but emotionally. Not all Kurds support the PKK and certainly only a very small minority of Kurds prefer bloodshed to peace.

However, even as Kurdish political parties with firstly the DTP which was dramatically ousted last year for alleged links with the PKK and was the first fatal blow to the peace process, and there successor the BDP, have had presence in the Turkish parliament, they have failed to become the true representatives of the Kurds and have succumbed under the great PKK shadow and persistent attempts in Turkey to clip their wings, before the political birds could even fly.

However, the Turkish government hardly helped their cause, in spite of what initially seemed positive developments between the AKP and the now defunct DTP last year.

Nationalists and Kemalists have gulped at the mere idea that the Kurdish problem should be drawn on a democratic or ethnic basis and have persistently acknowledged the battle with the PKK as a fight against terrorism. In truth, the root of this battle is for greater cultural and democratic rights, freedoms and social development in the Kurdish region.

As such, these democratic openings and initiatives can only be attained in the Turkish parliament, not in the mountains or by the sheer military might of any army. Therefore, the more the Kurdish issue is rendered to a battle in the distant mountains, whilst the situation on the ground deteriorates, this only entices Turkey into a vicious “no peace, no war” cycle that as history has shown has blighted both sides.

In spite of widespread public pressure and the recent attacks, Erdogan maintained his pledge to the Kurdish opening and the broadening of Kurdish rights. However, as violence escalates, Erdogan will have a fight on his hand to instil any motion in parliament against a backdrop of opposition and sheer animosity. Constitutional changes, the fundamental aim of the Kurds, will become almost impossible in such a tense and nationalistically polluted climate.

In reality, ongoing tension in many ways supports the nationalist and Kemalist circles, the Turkish military as well as the PKK. As peace and democratic moves falter, the PKK continues to be the flagship of the Kurds.

It is important for Turkey not to rescind on its pledges, lest allow the PKK to take centre stage again. It must support and encourage Kurdish political evolvement, which has historically been starved and facilitate true representation in the Turkish parliament, rather than pressure, alienate or as has been common place, shut down Kurdish parties all together.

The peace initiative took a great blow when the government was largely embarrassed, as what should have been a milestone for the Kurdish opening with the surrender of a number of PKK rebels last year turned into a pro-PKK ceremony.

Currently, there has emerged a huge vacuum in the peace process that can not be so easily bridged. The Turkish government will simply refuse to ever negotiate directly with the PKK, let alone be seen to succumb to the rebels. The war with the PKK has become far too bloody, too many scars have developed and too much pride is at stake for that to ever happen.

Yet as long as the PKK continues to be the representative voice of the Kurds, then the process is stalled without true recognisable and widely respected Kurdish interlocutors on the ground.

The aim of Turkey should remain unhindered. Reach out to the Kurds and entice them into a genuine alternative between separatism and violence on the one hand, and historical repression by successive Turkish governments on the other.

The tears of a mother, whether Kurdish or Turkish, are sacred. Violence serves no gain and only deepens scars. The more deaths that emerge, the more that both sides reach deeper into the position of no return.

When the Kurds see development of their region, democratic rights, employment and a firm place as true partners of the Turks, Kurds will themselves turn on separatists or those who seek violence or bring instability.

For now, the situation will get worse before it gets better. With imprisoned PKK leader, Abdullah Ocalan openly abandoning efforts to seek dialogue, this has culminated in a fresh wave of violence, with the PKK threatening more attacks until its demands for greater rights are fulfilled.

While Erdogan remains persistent on his bold and historical opening, he can not at the same time watch as attacks escalate and pressure mounts. A dismayed Erdogan accused European countries of not doing enough in its combat against terrorism.

This was an all too frequent criticism of the US in the past, even as the US have openly denounced the PKK and publicly defended the Turkish government while often overlooking Turkish actions in Iraq.

As Turkey continues to flagrantly breach Iraqi sovereignty with military incursions and air raids, this places the Iraqi Kurds into a more precarious predicament. Iraqi Kurds, who have often been blamed for aiding the PKK, have repeatedly refused to fight fellow Kurds.

However, with the much welcome thawing of relations between Turkey and Kurdistan in recent times resulting in the landmark visit by Kurdistan President Massaud Barzani, the Iraqi Kurds may well have a price to pay for the new strong bond with Turkey.

Barzani pledged “all efforts” to assist Turkey on his visit, and the Turkish government may well give the Iraqi Kurds more support and official recognition, including annexation of disputed territories, for their hand in further alienating the PKK.

This places the Kurdistan government into a tough situation. It needs the strategic support and recognition of Turkey to prosper and develop, while at the same time it does not want the PKK problem to become a greater Kurdish issue. After all, no matter how you look at it, the Kurdish dilemma in Turkey is a cultural and democratic one, specific to Turkey alone and can only be resolved in the Turkish parliament – and no where else.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: eKurd, Peyamner, Various Misc.

Barzani’s landmark visit to Ankara symbolises new historical passage between Kurds and Turkey

Leave a reply

Three years is a long-time in any part of the world, but can be equal to a lifetime in the Middle East. Although, economic ties have been relatively strong between Turkey and the Kurdistan Region for many years, political ties became strained and contentious as Iraqi Kurds assumed a new “official” role in the new Iraq and with it considerable power and strategic standing.

The visit this week of Kurdistan Region President Massoud Barzani to Ankara, the first since the US invasion in 2003, bears significant ramifications for both Turkey and Kurds all over the region and not just in Iraq.

For a long while it seemed that Turkey would remain obstinate on old mentalities and was ever-reluctant to recognise the new reality across the border, even as other major powers flocked to open consulates, assume bi-lateral trade ties and build political cooperation.

While Kurdistan has been affectively autonomous since 1991 and not 2003, Turkey could live with that reality as to a great extent the region was under a firm eye, strategically confined and required support of Turkey.

However, its one thing acknowledging a reality behind closed doors and another openly accepting and recognising that reality. This is Turkey after all – a country that for many decades denied even the existence of the Kurds, let alone the establishment of a Kurdistan Region and who has fought deadly battles against the PKK Kurdish rebels since 1984.

Witnessing first-hand what initially appeared to be the materialisation of their greatest fear in 2003 would not have been easy to stomach. Especially as images of Peshmerga forces storming triumphantly into Mosul and Kirkuk in April 2003 under the Kurdistan flag, were flashed around the world.

Turkey has long feared greater Kurdish autonomy or even outright independence. This anxiety would have hardly been eased as Iraqi Kurds assumed key positions in Baghdad, negotiated historical terms in the constitution and became invaluable allies to a U.S. that had been stuck in a quagmire and short of genuine partners.

As Turkey has plunged deeper into its battle with the PKK in recent years, hawks in the Turkish military squarely pointed the finger at Barzani for sympathising and even aiding the Kurdish rebels.

Turkish military commanders openly threatened to invade the region many times and in 2009 decided to do just that. This was probably the lowest point in the post-2003 ties between the Kurds and Turkey. Some Turkish politicians and especially the ultra nationalist military elite were astonished at what they saw as Barzani overstepping his power and daring to “stand up” to them, after heated exchanges over the PKK and status of oil-rich Kirkuk.  After all, how could any Kurdish “tribal” leader have the audacity to remain outspoken and firm against the mighty force of Turkey? A proud nation built on strong sense of nationalism and enormous ethnic pride.

For Turkey, it has simply been a case that whether you publicly accept a reality or not, that reality is still true. An internationally recognised Kurdistan Region exists and is enshrined in official legislature. The existence of a Kurdistan is no longer a taboo, even if it continues to be a common one in Turkey, but a reference to an internationally recognised political entity. The Kurdistan flag is no longer a symbol of “separatism” but a symbol of a federal region. The Kurdish language is not only spoken but is now one of the official languages of the Iraqi state. The Peshermrga forces do not belong to political groups but are an official force of the Iraqi state. This list can continue and continue.

The overwhelming basis is that Turkey can ignore the new developments and this new reality to its own detriment. Closer to home, decades of conflict in the east has seen no gain but bloodshed for both Kurds and Turks.

Bound by age old principles and Kemalist foundations, Turkey seemed unwilling to waver from its historical stance. However, Kurds are a fundamental part of the Turkish state and key partners in the development and prosperity of Turkey. A Turkish drive for political reform and a new roadmap to resolve its age old dilemma is the best chance in many decades of a new true social basis that will allow Turkey to flourish economically and politically.

More importantly, Turkey has come to realise that Iraqi Kurds will not forgo strong ties with Ankara even at the expense of ties with Baghdad. The bustling trade between Turkey and Kurdistan reached a remarkable $9 billion in 2009. This will only increase further. Iraqi Kurds rely heavily upon Turkey for a number of strategic reasons and ironically the Turks are by far the best partners the Kurds can muster. Turkey is their door to Europe, to economic prosperity and the regions vision of becoming a de facto part of Europe.

Equally, the support of the Iraqi Kurds will no doubt help to finally resolve the PKK dilemma in Turkey. Turkish Kurds look eagerly for new job opportunities and development of their cities. With the much anticipated door to the EU opening sooner or later, the Kurds of Turkey can only gain by been a integral part of the Turkish picture and will benefit tremendously from the strong ties with their Turkish brethren, as long as Ankara can finally free itself from age old taboos and embrace Kurdish ethnicity and culture as part of its official framework.

A peaceful, stable and flourishing region is not only good for Iraqi Kurds but an essential buffer and access point to the Gulf for Turkey. Kurds, who share similar political and religious ideology, are just what Turkey needs against the ever changing picture in the Middle East and growing Shiite power both in Baghdad and Tehran. Ankara’s hand in Erbil will ultimately ensure equilibrium against Tehran’s hand in Baghdad.

Its time to realise that Kurds and Turks are natural allies and the best of strategic partners. Why create enemies of each other, when clearly both in the present and the future, they must both work hand in hand for mutual prosperity and protection?

Kurdistan Region can be an affective arm for Turkey, and form a de facto confederation. Iraqi Kurdistan has immense potential, hunger and oil. The much touted Nabucco pipeline will be the glue between both sides of the borders.

Such a partnership, which only recently seemed far from an ideal match after growing friction, is slowly unfolding into a partnership that will not only take Turkey and Kurdistan forward, but will be a momentous and landmark gain for the greater Middle East region, starved of positive developments and stability.

For Kurds and Turks, it has become very evident that it’s a case of our differences are small, but our similarities are huge.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Peyamner, Various Misc.

DTP ban clouds quest to mend bridges in Turkey

Leave a reply

Two months can be a relatively long-time when it comes to politics in Turkey. Only recently there was widespread optimism and hope that Turkey was finally intent on tackling its age-old Kurdish dilemma head-on. However, hope quickly turned into despair with the contentious decision to ban the Democratic Society Party (DTP) by the Turkish Constitutional Court for its alleged links to the PKK, a claim that has long reverberated in hawkish circles.

Big Swing in Turkey

When Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan made a historic speech, widely referenced as the “Kurdish Opening”, his vision was as courageous as his boldness to pass momentous democratic measures in Turkey against a backdrop of opposition.

The plan itself took several more weeks to be unveiled as widespread bickering, controversy and debate gripped Turkey around the ground breaking measures proposed.

Whilst the steps finally unveiled fell short of Kurdish expectations and was undoubtedly watered-down under heavy criticism and pressure from the Turkish opposition, it was nevertheless for a country that long denied even the existence of its Kurdish population an important step that was hoped would finally bring unison and stability to the south east of Turkey.

DTP banned

The decision to ban the DTP in many ways has been long-time coming. Almost as soon as the DTP became the first Kurdish party in the Turkish parliament for 14 years, the party found itself under pressure from many a circle intent on clipping the wings of a growingly influential party in the much disenfranchised Kurdish quarters.

Although the decision is bitterly disappointing especially in light of the great deceleration affect it has had on the Kurdish initiative, until mindsets are greatly changed in Turkey such decisions are unsurprising.

The closure of the party is the last in the line of 10 Kurdish parties to be closed down by Turkish authorities. Under the orders of the prosecution, 37 party members including DTP leader Ahmet Turk have been banned from politics for five years. The harsh penal codes when it comes to preserving the foundations of the Turkish republic has meant that even the ruling AKP party has not been immune to the viciousness of the Turkish constitutional courts.

Once sentiments had somewhat calmed, Ahmet Turk strongly indicated that the remaining politicians where the DTP held 21 seats in the 550-member parliament, would form another group and remain in parliament.

Whilst the disillusionment of the politicians is understandable, it is of paramount importance that the Kurds remain on the democratic road. Regardless, of whether another 10 pro-Kurdish parties are banned in subsequent years, it remains very clear that the only place that Kurdish issue can be solved is via parliament and not in the mountains via sheer military force.

Who represents the Kurds?

Clearly, the PKK continues to assume strong support amongst the Kurds in Turkey. Although the DTP made fundamental gains at the municipal elections earlier this year, the PKK continues to be the common denominator when it comes to any discussion around the Kurdish issue.

Whilst the DTP could have done more to take over the new mantle as the chief representation of the Kurds and distance itself emotively from the PKK, the PKK cloud continued to linger in the DTP window. The PKK trace is deep-rooted in south east, namely as the Kurds have had no parliamentary representation in successive decades and thus in reality a lack of political alternatives to dilute the PKK influence over the years.

Certainly for Turkey, the decision to ban the only legal Kurdish body will have an adverse affect on democracy in the region. Ironically, this position places the PKK closer to the fore as the bastion of Kurdish identity.

Years of bloodshed and billions of dollars of expenditure has continually highlighted that without addressing the root cause of the Kurdish struggle, gulfs will continue to widen in Turkey.

Whilst Erdogan’s guile stirred Kurdish optimism and at least theoretically placed the long-term role of the PKK in jeopardy, the decision to ban the DTP once again leaves a feeling of despondency and a lack of faith amongst the Kurds.

Furthermore, as it currently stands almost 2.5 million people have affectively lost their representation. Unless this political gap can be urgently filled, then this will stir more bitterness and disappointment.

This is not the first time, and many suspect not the last, where Turkish rhetoric around resolving its Kurdish dilemma has not been met with real intent or concrete steps.

Opposition backlash

After much promise from the Turkish government, there is a big feeling of Turkish backtracking over the historic steps. The immense pressure from nationalist circles in Turkey placed severe pressure on the government and Turkish courts not to be seen as weak or undermining the foundations of the Turkish republic, which for many has almost mystical importance.

The surrender of a small group of PKK guerrillas was designed as a test of Turkish desire and it was hoped that this would be the first of many.

However, the surrender was met with such high-profile jubilation from Kurds that it almost felt like a victory parade for the PKK and this has proved a counter-productive step by the Kurds. It yet again placed focus on the PKK as the real front of the Kurdish initiative, which for the government was embarrassing and emanated weakness in the face of their arch enemy.

The intense media coverage this received placed a devastating knock on Erdogan’s initiative. This was a fundamental chance for the DTP who were key actors in the historic surrender to firmly assume the mantle piece as the chief interlocutors of the Kurdish movement. However, in many regards the DTP failed to truly out-strip the PKK shadow as the new champion of the Kurdish movement.

Widespread riots in Kurdish cities over the prison conditions of PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan followed by a number of high-profile clashes between the PKK and the Turkish army only added fuel to a raging opposition fire.

While Erdogan, who was strongly critical of the decision to ban the DTP and vowed to press on with his vision of reforms, became increasingly isolated the Turkish government realised that changing mindsets would be a much more difficult task than they imagined.

In a twist of irony, not long ago Erdogan held a number of meetings with Ahmet Turk regarding the initiative which he hailed for its positive impact and productive influence.

Pressure from EU

The decision to band the DTP was met with disappointment from the EU, which has placed the enhancement of minority rights as a keystone of Turkey’s bid to join the EU.

Whilst this saga has served a significant blow, it simply must not detract either Kurds or Turks from reality. The future of Turkey relies on the affective integration of the Kurdish population. Decades of nationalistic polices has served no side and if Turkey harbours any glimmer of aspirations to join the EU then this must come with the realisation that this can only occur if the Kurds and Turks enter the EU hand-in-hand.

The era of violence in any struggle is over. The world is exponentially smaller and much more transparent than ever before. No nation can systemically deny another lest if the world turns a blind eye. Support for the PKK remains strong but to dwindle this down Turkey must take more courageous steps and embark on a long-term opening with patience and perseverance than expect that Kurdish sentiments can be easily swayed.

Just as it is difficult to sway Turkish nationalist sentiments towards the Kurds, it will take just as long to convince Kurds that the Turkish government is sincere in finally embracing them as a fundamental cog of the Turkish landscape.

With the DTP vowing to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) against the ruling of the Constitutional Court, this episode may just receive the global spotlight that will put pressure on the Turkish government to reenergise its widely-highlighted goal of broadening Kurdish rights.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Online Opinion, eKurd, Peyamner, Various Misc.

Building new bridges in Turkey based on old realities

Leave a reply

The time has come to usher a new era of peace and brotherhood. This no longer has to be a distant pipedream but an emerging reality that can propel Turkey to new cohesion and unity.

After 25 years of bloodshed and missed opportunities, Turkey must realise that cutting the branches of your problem is fruitless without addressing its root.

After much blood has been spilled, thousands have been killed, billions of wasted expenditure and decades of ethno-social animosity, Turkey got no closer to resolving its most prevalent issue since the formation of the republic. By the same token, as far as the PKK are concerned, violence and insurrection is no longer the solution to addressing its goals in the modern era. The opportunity for long-term peace has not been greater than at any time in history.

In the context of past policies, whilst recent reform and democratisation measures may have falling short of expectations, they still serve as remarkable progress for a country where the word “Kurd” has been a deep-rooted taboo. Now the times for ubiquitous promises are over and the Turkish government must implement concrete steps to back its rhetoric.

Greater consensus

Last month, the AKP government spearheaded by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdo?an, announced a new democratisation motion in the shape of a package of landmark reforms designed to address the Kurdish issue through greater rights and recognition. In the governments own words the initiative was a “courageous” step aimed at ending the violence and building new bridges in Turkey. 

Whilst the contents of the plans have been concealed, measures by the government have been met with resistance from opposition parties and also from the “guardians of the republic”, the nationalist army.

It says a lot about the high sensitivity that prevails on the Kurdish topic that the government is anxious to ascertain broad public approval for the plans across the Turkish mosaic and has frequently defended its plans. Divided opinion remains common on the Kurdish issue and the nationalist circles remain highly-emotive about any plans that are deemed to break the mystical foundations of the republic.

Clearly, the problem for Turkey has never been a few thousand rebels in the mountains but the issue of 15 million Kurds, a great portion of its society. Kurdish rights and freedoms have been quelled for decades for simple fear that the Kurds endanger the sovereignty and unity of the republic. Such fears have resurfaced with warnings from Turkish army chiefs and opposition parties that any plans must not endanger unity or age-old Kemalist principles.

As a non-Turkic entity and the perceived potential harm they can cause to the foundations of Turkish society, successive governments have gone to great lengths to repress and assimilate Kurds and to eradicate elements of culture and “Kurdishness” from the Turkish landscape. However, this has failed to mask the fact that Kurds are a distinct ethnic entity and have every right to enjoy an equitable existence in lands they have inhibited for thousands of years.

A Turkey for both Kurds and Turks

Even the staunch nationalist army has realised over time that they can not defeat the PKK through sheer force alone without dealing with the heart of the issue and enticing the Kurds into brotherly ties. Whilst it may be easier to focus on ridding the mountains of the rebels, the real focus should be to ascertain why the rebels remain grounded with support in their battle.

The majority of the Kurds do not decree separatism and prefer to remain in a prosperous and modern European state with aspirations to join the EU. The advantages of the Kurds becoming a key productive component of Turkey are endless. If the Kurds were effectively enticed with more rights, employment and investment in the region, support for armed struggle in the midst of such greater benefits and gains that come from been part of a major European state would rapidly evaporate.

The Turkish “fear” culture of the Kurds should diminish and Kurds should finally be embraced as an essential and rightful cog of Turkish society. Antagonism must end and bloodshed must cease. The face of a mourning mother on either side of the divide is a tragedy, the life of a Kurd and Turk are just as sacred as another.

For wounds to heal between Kurds and Turks, one must look to the future and not the past. The past may have been grim and harsh but a solid future could be built based on harmony, peace and prosperity and above all else equality.

Diversity in Turkey should not be masked and repelled but embraced. Ethnic and cultural diversity of a country say much about its fundamentals, heritage and history. While nationalists will embrace every inch of Turkish land then by the same token it is unacceptable that large swathes of the Turkish southeast remain impoverished and lacking key infrastructure. Why shouldn’t all parts of Turkey treated by the same regard in reality as it is enshrined in the constitution?

With a more open society and breaking down the Kurdish fear factor, perhaps it may not be too long before Turks from the west of Turkey can visit the southeast in greater numbers through tourism and taste another flavour of Turkey. Any why not? The southeast of Turkey has as much of a fascinating history and culture as anywhere else. It is a part of Turkey after all and therefore should not be treated as a distance neglected land inhibited by a people who “despise” Turkey.

The path to reform

Whilst reform over past several years has been welcome, it has essentially been in dribs and drabs rather than wholesale measures aimed at resolving the problem. True reform as the government have seemingly proposed must be all encompassing and not implemented in half-measures.

At the core of “courageous” reforms must be the advent of constitutional changes. No reform or initiative that addresses the heart of the republic can be ultimately successful without amendments to the blueprint of the country – its constitution. The principle that Turkey is for Turks only is an outdated ethos. This doesn’t mean that the greater foundations of the republic will necessarily unravel, it just means that Turkey can finally get away from a nationalist mentality that was planted at such contrasting times in history to the current era of globalisation, democracy and diversification that we find ourselves in today.

Kurds must be recognised as a distinct minority within Turkey with the Kurdish language noted as one of the official languages of Turkey. The Kurdish population should be allowed to exercise more language rights in the south east and a level of autonomy must be granted to municipalities in the Kurdish parts of the country. Kurdish names should be freely used in public and villages should be renamed to their original names.

The Kurdish “region” should now be treated as a distinct part of Turkey, not to promote separatism but to build a bridge based on this reality to create a new unison.

Although, the government has pledged a “democratic path”, it has ruled out direct negotiations with the PKK or greater amnesty. The PKK is a key actor in the region and if the Turkish government refuses a bilateral peace with view to dissolving the PKK as a military force, reforms may prove counterproductive.

Rallies in Turkey

Recent celebratory military parades were used as a show of force by the army that it still holds the aces in preserving the core foundations of the republic. The Turkish army chief recently stated that he “respects cultural diversity” but was opposed to the politicisation of the issue, a thinly-veiled caution that major changes to the blueprint of the Turkish republic would be blocked.

Rallies were also organised in Diyarbakir to promote peace initiatives and Kurdish rights. Arguably, announcement of reform packages were pushed through by the Turkish government in light of Abdullah Ocalan’s own declaration of a “road map” that he plans to release on resolving the Kurdish issue.

Whilst Turkey has ruled out negotiations with the PKK, in what would arguably be portrayed as a major “defeat” for Turkey by opposition parties, the government has held encouraging talks with the Democratic Society Party (DTP) after previously contentious relations, an important development since in practice the DTP has become the bastion of the Kurdish political movement.

A great platform has been afforded for peace and brotherhood in Turkey. If the measures are enforced in the same vigour as intent then a great future can be forged in Turkey for both its Kurdish and Turkish constituents.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Peyamner, Various Misc.

As its National Pride is Wounded, Turkey Invariably Points the Finger at the Iraqi Kurds

Leave a reply

Turkish military and political leaders squarely accused the Iraqi Kurds of having an indirect hand in the latest deadly showdown between PKK rebels, reportedly resulting in the death of 15 Turkish soldiers and 23 Kurdish rebels, and countless wounded.

Perhaps, it was the daring nature of the daytime attack near the border that shocked the Turkish hierarchy, pressing them into a customary strong-worded rhetoric. The strong and respected Turkish army, as the protectorate of the republic and the symbol of Turkish nationalism, have since the inception of Kemalist-ideology, posed an almost mystical identity. The idea of such a flagrant attack by the much-loathed rebels was bound to rattle sentiments across Turkey.

However, as much as Turkey would hate to believe, let alone acknowledge, even the mystical might of the Turkish army has simply not been enough to counter an equally vibrant nationalist movement. The analogy is of a ferocious lion been bitten in broad daylight, by a much smaller-cat, who in the knowledge of been unable to ever directly counter such a beast, will nevertheless aim to strike psychological ‘bites’ to the proud animal rather than ever serve it any great physical damage.

This attack, along with those of the past has done just that. They have hurt Turkish pride and stoked national sentiments, forcing Turkey to take decisive action as in the mass-invasion of this year, designed to send unwavering intent that the lion will fight back to uphold its honour and eminence, than belief they can kill the nemesis cat in the midst of a torrential landscape.

As mass funerals and patriotic outcries highlight the death of every Turkish soldier, thousands of Kurdish deaths, the ‘debris’ of the greater nationalist-project, are ignored. Insurgent and violent means of gaining goals, least of all terrorist acts, belong in the bygone era and are ultimately counter-productive and a prelude to tarnishing what may essentially be a justifiable cause. However, let’s not forget that there is a mourning mother on each side.

While, it is simply untrue to allege such direct Iraqi Kurdish support such as to provide weapons, roads and hospitals, undeniably as the crisis grows and Turkey takes more abrasive action, it is slowly submerging Iraqi Kurdish sentiments into the conflict. The Iraqi Kurds rely heavily on Turkey, and in the modern era maintaining strong relationship with a monumental European neighbour has been much more important than aiding and abetting their ethnic-brethren in a violent battle that the Iraqi Kurds would do well to avoid.

It is true the Iraqi Kurds could do more. But in the eyes of Turkey, this ‘more’ is a deadly inconclusive inter-ethnic confrontation with the PKK, resulting in mass-suffering for the local population and destabilisation of the region. And for what? In order that Turkey will continue to treat the Kurdistan Regional Government with disrespect and utter discontent, let alone the simple virtue of acknowledgment and direct dialogue?

The time for realism has never been greater in the back of this latest shockwave across the region. On the eve of Turkish parliamentary vote to extend the 1-year authorisation for cross-border attacks, this attack was clearly designed to ensure that Turkey will not only authorise another extension but take graver disproportionate measures against their foes.

And this is exactly the focus and attention that not only the PKK craves, but it decisively needs to survive as a movement. As Turkey will feel forced to take more abrasive measures, this will eventually evoke a broader regional conflict that will serve no sides, but the sides of violence and bloodshed.

Turkey must act at the root of problems. Rather than addressing how to shoot down rebels in mountains, Turkey could seek ways of seeing them come down at their own will.

Promises of greater south-eastern development and more encompassing reforms, may have been more than encouraging compared to past records, but in the context of today have been beset without any significant action.

Now is the time to stop further blood-shed and promote a feeling of brother-hood in Turkey. Lets not let forgot there are millions of disgruntled Kurds in Turkey, and only a minority in arms. Not all Kurds believe in confrontation, not all Kurds rejoice at Turkish deaths. The people want jobs, peace and prosperity – they have long-chosen Turkey and the prospects of the EU over unrealistic daydreams.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: eKurd, Peyamner, Various Misc.

Turkey Finally Offers Dialogue, Under a Cloud of More Bombardments

Leave a reply

As the roar of planes and bombardments, quickly condemned by the KRG, dominated the foreground, in the back­ground announcement by the National Secu­rity Council (MGK) of Turkey to initiate much over due talks with Iraqi Kurds, introduced a wel­come air of optimism.

The green light for talk and engagement instead of confrontation and al­ienation was followed by the first official Turk­ish contact with the KRG on March 28th, and is a product of a somewhat softer stance adopted by both sides in recent weeks.

Turkish relations with the Iraqi Kurds have proved capricious since Kurds won self rule in 1991. Relations, how­ever, took a fresh twist post-2003 as the Kurdish entity was galvanized by the new Iraqi constitution and the Kurds steadily increased in prominence, economic prosperity and confidence.

A problem dealing with a growingly independ­ent Kurdistan Region on their doorstep was greatly exasperated as the PKK after a period of relative calm post-1999, chose the mountains of Iraqi Kurdistan as the fitting stage to launch the latest wave of their own deadly battle for nationalism.

Although now en­shrined in legislation, the Turkish government has refused formal recogni­tion of the KRG. This is perceived as an action that would effectively endorse Kurdish autono­my and potential right to independence. It would also simultaneously undermine their own battle against Kurdish national­ism and the containment of their restive Kurdish minority.

As tensions have soared over the PKK guerrilla camps in the Qandil mountains, the Turkish government has repeat­edly accused the Iraqi Kurds of tolerance or even direct support of the PKK, a claim the Iraqi Kurds have vehemently denied.

All the while, the US, stuck in somewhat of a quagmire in the south of Iraq has been likened to a man with two wives, torn between supporting argu­ably its two most crucial allies at the present time.

Turkey finally decided to take matters into its own hands, firstly when parliament endorsed cross-border military in­cursions in October 2007, then by a series of bomb­ing campaigns thereafter aided by US intelligence. Unable to prevent further widely-publicised rebel attacks, the Turkish gov­ernment succumbed to pressure from its hawks and finally launched a highly-controversial week-long offensive into Iraqi territory.

Claims of strategic vic­tory by Turkish gener­als is highly debatable and under US pressure, the Turkish army hastily withdrew under a cloud of uncertainly and much confusion.

Amidst the thick politi­cal dust, once thing be­come glaringly obvious, the Turkish army once again failed to inflict sub­stantial damage on PKK bases let alone defeat the threat emanating from Iraq altogether.

Lacking a politics front to this 24-year battle, twenty-five cross-border incursions have so far proved fruitless. Turkey must tackle the heart of the issue and deal with the root of the problem if it desires any long-term solution. Mere premises of investment in Eastern Turkey and recognition of its ‘Kurdish issue’ have so far not resulted in any substantial action.

Repeated harsh ex­changes with Iraqi Kurd­ish leaders have proved counter-productive whilst sowing a common feeling of mistrust.

Clearly, both sides have much to gain from a common partnership and constructive dialogue. Regardless of a lack of official recognition, trade between both sides has been flourishing at a re­markable pace for many years. Both sides have al­ready reaped much gain from indirect ties.

The time of paramili­tary tactics employed by the PKK are over. Rebel attacks have certainly influenced Turkish concessions and attracted international attention but it will fail to take the issue to the next level needed. By the same token, turkey must shed its decade’s old rigid and outdated imperialist and nationalist ideals.

Both the Kurds and Turks are here to stay. Iraqi Kurds will continue to develop and grow inde­pendently with or without Turkey. It’s much more advantageous for Turkey to influence, shapeand support the region under its stewardship, rather than continue a policy of denial.

The benefits of a produc­tive and harmonious relationship are countless. A prosperous, secular and democratic Kurdistan serves as a vital buffer to Turkey’s east while the possibility of having an EU country on its door­step in the not too distant future is an enormous op­portunity for Kurds on both sides of the border.

Its time for Turkey to shed its outdated philoso­phies and embrace the idea that natural eventu­alities can not be over­come by sheer arsenal.

The Kurdish arm has been outstretched for many years in eagerness of friendship and com­mon brotherhood, if only Turkey can finally fulfill promise this time around and shatter its age-old ta­boos.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Peyamner, Various Misc.