Talking with the PKK
 
 
  |  
  |  
  |  
  |  
RSS
  |  
  |  
  |  
20 June 2013 Thursday
 
 
 
 
 
 
Columnists 02 October 2010, Saturday 0 0 0 0
GÜRKAN ZENGİN
g.zengin@todayszaman.com

Talking with the PKK

No one really understood what the statement, “The government does not talk, but state institutions may talk,” actually meant. But it seems, whatever was intended with it was attained. What was intended? To prepare society for dangerous contact with potential social and political ramifications.
The messages given both by the president and the prime minister served this end. Then the Erdoğan government made this contact by taking a significant political risk.

No one can say that they did the wrong thing. Thus, the Kurdish issue and the terror issue started to take different paths. This contact or talk will have at least two basic functions. First, although it may sound a bit paradoxical, this contact will provide relief the pro-Kurdish Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) regarding the issue of who will be considered best to address in talks over the settlement of the Kurdish issue. Indeed, the BDP had been elected to Parliament with the votes of Kurdish citizens but it had failed to exhibit any will at the expense of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) leader Abdullah Öcalan. Now, the representatives of the Kurdish voters are in a position to talk with the government in an easier manner. This applies to the government as well. Secondly, thanks to these contacts, the mumblings are about what are the demands from the state. Thus, a list of open and clear demands will replace a host of vague or abstract statements.

Provided that the realities of Turkey and universal standards on human rights are taken into consideration in voicing these reasonable demands, a solution can certainly be expected. The process of democratization and the EU bid will further facilitate this. What is uncertain here is whether Öcalan will place his personal situation as an obstacle to the settlement process. If he does this, the process will hit a dead end. We will see.

It is also wrong to assume that these talks with Öcalan, being carried out to the knowledge of the general public, means the end of the PKK terror. This talk may only be considered as a start. Weekly or monthly ceasefire announcements do not impart much confidence. It is known that around these times every year, the PKK ends its attacks and returns to its bases until the following spring. A meaningful or good-intentioned ceasefire should be announced in spring and for an indefinite period of time.

Columnists Previous articles of the columnist
9 October 2010
The headscarf ban should be no more
2 October 2010
Talking with the PKK
25 September 2010
‘The Case of the AKP’ and the Felicity situation
19 September 2010
Turkey’s importance for Europe
4 September 2010
Turkey cannot set up a missile defense system against Iran
21 August 2010
Orientalist stereotypes and Turkish foreign policy
14 August 2010
The elephant in the room and the rope extended to Israel
7 August 2010
In the aftermath of the council
31 July 2010
Managing terror and mass psychology
17 July 2010
Important ground in the CHP transformation: The Kurdish problem
10 July 2010
Yes, we must live together!
3 July 2010
As we wait for the Obama- Netanyahu meeting
19 June 2010
Axis change or paradigm imprisonment?
12 June 2010
The collapse of the UN order
5 June 2010
Israel is facing reality
29 May 2010
Hakan Fidan at the helm of MİT
15 May 2010
Russia’s vision problem
1 May 2010
The elephant in the room and Turkish foreign policy
24 April 2010
Normalization with Armenia is difficult
17 April 2010
Don’t close the door on the CHP
10 April 2010
Fine tuning the probe
3 April 2010
Yerevan’s small calculations
27 March 2010
MHP in same bed with the historic bloc
20 March 2010
‘Model partner’ or ‘genocide offender’?
13 March 2010
It is hard to be a Turk
7 March 2010
Is Russia deceiving Turkey?
27 February 2010
Travail of new Turkey
20 February 2010
The basis of the estate in trouble
13 February 2010
Çankaya plans
6 February 2010
Saving the protocols
30 January 2010
Last days of bliss in Cyprus file
23 January 2010
A sledgehammer of a decision
16 January 2010
A truth the crisis reveals
9 January 2010
Election debates in Ankara
2 January 2010
New constitution in the new year
26 December 2009
BDP may prove worse than DTP
19 December 2009
Second attempt at the initiative
12 December 2009
Speak up, ‘Western Kurds’
5 December 2009
Grave responsibility
21 November 2009
Hunting for peace in the Middle East
14 November 2009
Why is the chief prosecutor being monitored?
7 November 2009
Did Barzani get the message?
31 October 2009
Is there a change of axis?
24 October 2009
Initiative can’t return to the beginning
17 October 2009
Two ministers, two different ‘European visions’
10 October 2009
Armenian initiative and Davutoğlu effect
4 October 2009
Gül’s messages
26 September 2009
As kids start school
19 September 2009
İstanbul becomes ‘capital of peace’
12 September 2009
Sarkozy’s head, EU’s vision
5 September 2009
MHP’s nationalism
29 August 2009
MHP should lend ear to Halil İnalcık
22 August 2009
Bringing the opposition down from the mountains
15 August 2009
Turkey’s Mesopotamian vision
8 August 2009
Commander
1 August 2009
Harmony at the state level
25 July 2009
Neither with nor without Öcalan
18 July 2009
A call to Nimet Çubukçu
11 July 2009
Turkey won’t accept the Mosul carrot
4 July 2009
Is a Kurdish Obama possible?
27 June 2009
Document and ‘survivability question’
20 June 2009
İlker Başbuğ’s historic mission
13 June 2009
Turkish challenge
...
Bloggers