Upside down

In this sense, congresses these parties held over the weekend are extremely important because they have been dealing with one of the key issues that will define Turkey's future.

Having tried to analyze the AK Party congress in a previous column, I now turn my attention to the DTP. Many of us expected Ahmet Türk, a veteran and reputable figure in Kurdish politics, would be elected rather unchallenged. His family name, wisdom and moderate character keep him up there as an amalgam of a radicalized composition within the DTP, which, in a similar manner, is a coalition for ethnic-based politics.

It is apparent that the DTP's presence in Parliament has for some time been seen as more than an element to be tolerated; it is now understood that it can play a key role in setting out a roadmap for Kurdish reform, carefully labeled the “democratic initiative.” There is a remarkable level of “looking the other way” when DTP deputies and its local leaders openly praise violence and exalt the jailed and sentenced leader of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). A closure case against the DTP seems “delayed” in an unusual manner, and local military commanders have recently been photographed shaking hands with local mayors here and there in Kurdish areas. And, regarding the crisis of taking leading DTP deputies by force to be interrogated, a request which was initiated by various public prosecutors, the ruling party called for a constitutional change in favor of protecting their political immunity.

This has certainly signaled to the DTP that it is finally “recognized” as a political actor, even by the staunchest segments of the conservative state. But, additional moves in the direction of “opening doors” to a wider recognition of cultural and political rights, the fine line between self-esteem and counter-productive arrogance has become more visible than ever. This is displayed in the confused discourse of how a party can relate to violence, how to reason in order to be fully integrated into the democratic game of politics and how to resolve the problem of leading the negotiation process, which became a fact as soon as the AK Party declared to go “all the way.”

The DTP has understandably become a focal point of the fury of rebellious youth; uncontrollable elements of the PKK; diverse views on how to respond to the Kurdish initiative, which are bound to clash; and where to draw the line in terms of positions for itself.

As much as the AK Party's declaration on the Kurdish initiative was ambiguous and vague, the DTP's declaration was clear and obvious: The latter called for a change to the Constitution, for talking with Abdullah Öcalan -- the jailed leader of the PKK -- and that a mandate allowing cross-border operations into northern Iraq not be brought to Parliament at all.

Many may agree with the last demand, and also commend Türk for calling on the PKK to “stop playing with the trigger,” but the first two points, clearly showing confusion -- if not division -- within DTP, are bound to set obstacles in the coming delicate weeks and months. As told by Yusuf Alataş, one of the most prominent lawyers and human rights activists of the Kurdish side, to the Akşam daily yesterday, the “DTP should not forget that Erdoğan showed great courage by acknowledging the wrongs in the past and his party now shows courage in correcting them. The DTP must respond with the same courage. It must be self-critical.

“If you [Türk] say you are not in the game if you do not change the Constitution, it will not be a good beginning. You have to start from what is doable and reasonable. You are a leader, not a temperamental youth. The DTP must be able to say: ‘I have no problems with the flag, national anthem or unitary nature of the state. These are also my values'.”

Alataş concludes that the DTP must make it clear that “it is going to be in the process all the way, no matter what the cost.”