With political parties campaigning to promote their position in the upcoming referendum, Öcalan’s name once again appeared in the middle of conversations and dominated public debate. This time opposition parties claimed that the Justice and Development Party (AKP) government had met with Öcalan and negotiated to carve out a unilateral cease-fire by the PKK during Ramadan and the referendum campaign period.Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan first forcefully rejected the claim leveled at his government, but later lowered the tone of rhetoric and admitted that state institutions may have had contact with Öcalan on behalf of the state (whatever that means), though his government never had contact with Öcalan. Erdoğan acts as if he is not the prime minister of this country and the government and the state are two disconnected entities.
The reason why Erdoğan made a U-turn is reportedly because the opposition Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) obtained video footage showing the head of the National Intelligence Organization (MİT), Hakan Fidan, on his way to the island of İmralı to meet with Öcalan. Speculation has it that the video was leaked to the MHP by military sources to use a few days before the upcoming referendum on Sept. 12 as a last minute surprise to convince people to vote against constitutional reform.
I don’t know how much of this is true, but I do know that the MHP is receiving help from a segment of the military against the AKP government. Furthermore, it is a well-known secret in Ankara that Fidan indeed met with Öcalan more than once.
The question is, what will happen if video footage showing a group of bureaucrats heading to İmralı to meet with Öcalan is broadcast on the eve of the referendum? In a normal country such a broadcast would have a huge impact on any election. But this is Turkey, and there are too many unknowns.
First, it would portray a negative image of the AKP government if the MHP uses this as evidence that the government is negotiating with the PKK. In fact, there is reason to believe this was the case because the PKK first declared a unilateral cease-fire, followed by both Öcalan and Murat Karayılan, a senior PKK commander, declaring that the government negotiated with Öcalan and opposition parties, arguing to convince the society of that. Thus, such a broadcast would haunt the AKP very badly and change the future of the country.
Second, Turkish society is open to
manipulation, especially that related to the deep state. In such a case, the AKP government and its media outlets would launch a campaign against the party that released the video and associate it with the deep state. If it is possible to portray the situation as one in which the “deep state” does not want you to say “yes” in the referendum, this would serve as an effective counter strategy for the MHP and the military that leaked the video to the MHP. In other words, an overwhelming majority of the
society does not want to see any “social engineering” project on their decision. Thus, whenever they see an election trick, they vote exactly the opposite of how the social engineers want them to vote.
It would be very devastating for a political party to end its political future because the very nature of the referendum debate is concentrated on whether you want militarization or civilization. Thus, at this point, political observers and journalists expect such surprise attacks. However, because there is a possibility that it will backfire, political actors still hesitate to use them.
