Who is the PKK fighting for?

This is not the Kurds’ war

The war the PKK has declared and is fighting is not compatible with the PKK’s aims. First of all, the Kurds have no interest in this war. To the contrary, it will increase unease in the region and among Kurds living in Turkey’s western regions, as they will once again have to confront terrorism. Second, the PKK has no interest in this war. The PKK’s members, who have been waiting for a general amnesty to be issued and have been dreaming of starting a normal life, are going to pursue a meaningless war in the mountains. Öcalan, the very person who declared this war, expressed this view. He said, “This process has no benefit for the Kurds, the Kurdish Communities Union [KCK] or the state.” He even predicted that the PKK would be defeated and dissolved -- in other words eliminated -- in this war. International and regional balances are not as they were in the 1990s. The PKK does not stand a chance. So then what does it want?

This war appears to be the product of delicate balances within the PKK itself; the organization is using this war to deal with its internal power struggle. On the surface, this war is being waged to make the state deal directly with the organization. This war is a not a war that has a strategy or a political objective; it relies on the organization’s tactical priorities. These tactical priorities have nothing to do with the Kurdish problem that has brought about the PKK problem. It is specifically underlined that this war will end if the government at least unofficially addresses illegal organizations such as the KCK and the PKK and Öcalan. This war that has been declared is as foolish as children who misbehave just to draw attention to themselves.

The excuse for the “moderate war,” as described by terrorist or PKK rhetoric, is the refusal of the Turkish Republic to directly deal with the PKK leadership and especially Öcalan in solving the problem. The government ignored the Peace and Democracy Party’s (BDP) proposal “to sit at the table with the PKK and bargain,” which it defended on a legal basis. Terrorism re-emerged because the government declined in the face of the organization’s insistence on its “sitting at the table,” “addressing the leader” and “bargaining.” Let me repeat this again. The only goal of the recurring terrorism is to force the state to deal directly with the PKK. Once the PKK finds a state authority that agrees to at least unofficially talk with them, it is going to start negotiating, lay down its arms and dissolve itself. We might then ask, “Why isn’t the state agreeing to address the PKK and stop the bloodshed?” There are a couple of reasons. The first reason has to do with the PKK’s ability to represent Kurds. The PKK has the ability to represent one-third of the Kurdish community, particularly in the Southeast. Taking the PKK as a legitimate party will automatically make it the representative of all Kurds. When it is not taken as a legitimate party and it starts to express itself through violent means, the organization becomes marginalized. Kurds are more sensitive about the Palestinian cause than Arabs and the rest of Turkey. Kurds will have no respect left for a PKK that attacks Turkey simultaneously with Israel. As a response to the insistence on being “addressed,” we could ask, “Why isn’t it enough to address the BDP, which is a legal party?”

Second, addressing the PKK would mean political suicide for the government. Any government that agrees to negotiate with a terrorist organization will be torn into pieces by the opposition, even if it is for a noble purpose like stopping bloodshed. There would be no trace of that party left in the next elections.

The third reason is the most crucial: Even if the PKK is taken as a party, terrorism will continue. As with all illegal organizations, the PKK has hierarchy and discipline issues. These problems became evident in the recent attacks at Reşadiye and Sarıyayla. Even if the government decided to deal directly with members of the organization, including Öcalan, there’s no guarantee that the terrorism would end. We’d then be left with the question of “Which PKK?” There would be a marginal organization saying, “Our leader sold us out” and shedding blood and attacking everyone just to be able to prove their cause. In brief, it is virtually impossible to solve the terrorism problem by “addressing” the organization.

PKK fighting with the AK Party

When speaking about the attack in İskenderun that killed Turkish soldiers, BDP deputy Emine Ayna said, “This war is no longer going to take place in just Kurdistan.” This in fact is not a comment but a clear threat. BDP Co-Chairman Selahattin Demirtaş’s comment upon his return from the US was even sharper; he said “there may be a couple of İskenderun-like incidents every day.”

The length of the statement that came from the KCK’s executive council does not explain the logic behind this war, but it does include a very important detail. This time the PKK is waging a war directly against the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government, not the Turkish Republic or the Turkish Army. There are some segments of the text that carefully highlight that this war is against the AK Party. It is important to focus on this very critical detail. The Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and the Republican People’s Party (CHP) also need to realize that they are adopting a stance and making judgments about a war that has been launched against the AK Party. The PKK is fighting a war not against the state but against a political party that is in power. The PKK is using force to threaten the competition that parties normally pursue with propaganda and campaigns to effect change in their favor. Remember that the AK Party is one of the two political powers with relatively close representative capabilities over the Kurdish population.

It is the first time that the Kurdish problem is being dealt with at such an advanced level. The AK Party has taken great risks and major steps to expand language and identity rights for Kurds. In two years, the government has achieved 10 times more than what has been achieved throughout the entire history of the republic. Isn’t the success of TRT-6, a step that has raised the bar for Turkey, meaningful enough on its own? Turkey is heading down a course in which all remaining problems are going to be solved. The only disruptions are the PKK’s attempts to put on a show, such as at Habur, and its insistence on being “addressed.” Will the war the PKK started contribute to solving the Kurdish problem or impair it? The objective answer to this question alone is enough to explain the situation.

The AK Party government is fighting a war all by itself without any weapons on all four fronts. The only advantage to being right is doing the right thing at the right time and being the representative of those who seek peace and serenity in the region. American “neocons,” Israeli bandits and Ergenekon supporters who are wasting all of their energy in courtrooms are trying every method to destroy the AK Party. All of these groups are the ones that are going to benefit from the dirty war that the PKK is fighting. If the AK Party loses face, Israel’s terror will declare victory. American neocons who thrive on wars and conflict will have a larger sphere of influence. Ergenekon supporters will first heave a sigh of relief and then start making new plans to return to the old days.