Baykal’s letter

It is no accident that there are more than 50 political parties in operation; parties whose agendas look alike but have never sat around a table to do business together. It is also not surprising that problems linger until they become gangrenous, at which point a military putsch amputates them or they become unbearable burdens. The Kurdish, Armenian and Cyprus cases are only a few of the problems that resemble minefields.

There is a government in office which has demonstrated the civic courage to take on the responsibility of solving all of these problems one by one. Why would the opposition parties take the position, or for that matter perceive it to be their duty to oppose such national initiatives or to obstruct them? This is a redundant question in Turkish politics. Opposition parties oppose everything and anything. Otherwise how could they be called opposition? This odd result is due to the deep cultural fractures and ideological divides that have set social groups apart and against each other. For some, the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) is too religious, too conservative and too parochial. That is why they must be put away and kept out of power at all costs. This mentality renders opposition to such a party fair game by whatever means. Unable to get Mr. Deniz Baykal, the leader of the main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP), to commit to meet him before, despite repeated calls, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan finally wrote a letter to Mr. Baykal to convene to design a mutual strategy in order to end the Kurdish conflict.

In response, Mr. Baykal starts his letter by questioning the intentions of the prime minister. He says the reason why the government has not clearly formulated what is popularly called the “Kurdish or democratic initiative” is because it is trying to cover up its intentions. And what are those sinister intentions? Mr. Baykal outlines them as follows: 1) To extract the term “Turkish nation” from the Constitution. 2) To change the language of education (to something other than Turkish). 3) To pardon the notorious armed Kurdish organization, the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). 4) To design a policy shaped by the roadmap sent from İmralı (the prison where PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan is serving a life sentence).

Mr. Baykal knows that each of these accusations will raise discontent among people who have been convinced to send their sons to fight in a war within against traitors and agents of imperialist powers intent on dividing and devouring our country. All of a sudden these terrorists may become respected citizens and our brothers and sisters without informing the public as to the reasons for this conflict and why it should be defused. So he is playing on the fundamental fears that will raise a collective uproar.

He says, “Your call to end the tears of mothers and stop further loss of lives” is not policy, but merely propaganda. Then he delivers the final blow: “What concessions will you give?”

Then he mocks the president by ridiculing his statement about “finding methods that will stop the loss of human life, economic resources and the nation's energy.”

He alleges that the incumbent government has made this country's national unity and national identity questionable. However, what he offers as good policy are the age-old plans that have never been put into effect properly, such as encouraging agriculture, animal husbandry and border trade; creating new businesses that will offer jobs to the unemployed; and implementing projects that will raise the social status and economic standing of women. These are all long-term projects that have been on the national agenda for decades. Partly it was the neglect of the CHP to undertake these projects during the long years of its single-party reign that aggravated the Kurdish problem. Yet Mr. Baykal accuses the prime minister of failing to act in the interests of the country and proposes the obvious in return.

 Then he says we can get together in person to discuss these “unacceptable” issues at "my party headquarters." However, the next sentence is totally contradictory to meeting him in private. He says a TV crew should record the session.

What do all these confounding statements tell us?

1) Mr. Baykal has become a prisoner of his position as an opposition leader. His language, his logic is totally negative.

2) He is quite sure that this “initiative” will fall flat soon and end in disgrace for the government.

3) He dwells on the notion that the people of Turkey are against the Kurdish initiative and others such as the Turkish-Armenian rapprochement. Yet this belief could be quite deceptive, for the nation is fed up with the sterility of the people who have led them so far and with an opposition that talks but does not deliver.