Parliament went back into session on Oct 1. In its new term, Parliament has been attributed a great deal of importance. True, this Parliament has assumed a historic role to construct a new Turkey, take steps towards democratization, maintain the rule of law and expand the sphere of freedoms. The will, as underlined in the referendum held on Sept. 10, 2010 that said no to the guardianship and endorsed efforts at democratization, empowers this Parliament.
The new Turkey is not a desire, it is a reality. The military guardianship is retreating from the stage and its supporters are losing power. Those who turn a blind eye to this reality cannot change it. Quite the contrary, they will suffer extensively after noticing that they were wrong to think that nothing has changed at all.
Take a look at the suspicious helicopter crash in which Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu died. Those who cannot admit the reality of a new Turkey have acted recklessly and carelessly; this incident shows that. The suspects who tried to tamper with the evidence and who kept everybody else away from the site have now responded to the question of why they removed the parts. They claimed, “We removed them out of curiosity.” This was the same as the former chief of staff holding a LAW weapon and comparing it to a pipe. This was the case when the military launched Internet sites using public money to undermine the prime minister and the president. Asked why they did this, they said, “We launched those websites based on instructions from the Prime Minister’s Office.” After heavy interrogation, they relied on the pretext, “there was an unwritten instruction.” Once the truth was revealed, they moved to another pretext, “I did not do it; my commander did.”
The new Turkey is a rock-solid reality. Those who hit it will be destroyed, including the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and those who support it.
The Kurdish Communities Union (KCK)-PKK-Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) line is not representative of the Kurds in Turkey. We should avoid from making the mistake of referring to all Kurdish citizens as supporters of the terrorist organization because we should note that one side of the conspiracy is to deepen the alienation between the Turks and the Kurds and lay the ground for a civil war. At this point, it is necessary to promote brotherhood, consolidate bridges between the hearts of people and strongly defend tolerance.
Under the current circumstances, Parliament is the place to resolve the Kurdish issue. It is necessary to make a distinction between the terrorist PKK and the resolution of the Kurdish issue because the actual problem is not the same as the one as defined by the KCK-PKK-BDP neo-nationalist pro-Kurdish movement. The neo-nationalist pro-Kurdish line seeks to create an autonomous structure in 24 provinces in the East and southeast Anatolia, and separate this region from the Turkish administrative system and rule it as they want. They desire for an authoritarian-fascist regime where they would assign their militants to the mountains as security forces, implement a different legal and judicial system and exclude Islam from social life. The demand for education in the Kurdish language is only a pretext. They will not give up their desires and demands even if this demand is fulfilled. Therefore, the problem we are dealing with is the issue of neo-nationalist Kurds. To this end, they want to make the BDP part of the propaganda and their political struggle, rather than part of the solution in Parliament. Despite all this, it is necessary to talk to the BDP during the parliamentary deliberations and consider its views out of respect for the choices of the people.
Despite this approach, if the BDP insists to play the role assigned to it by neo-nationalist Kurdish politics, Parliament should remain decisive to resolve the Kurdish issue, like any other issue, through democratization. Having decisiveness, the Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) should be supportive of the ruling party. Turkey now needs an extensive and broad consensus; almost as broad as the one achieved during the War of Independence. Every man of conscience concerned about the future of Turkey should be able to appreciate the sensitivity of this issue. We need to have broad perspective. I wish our politicians learn a lesson from past mistakes and do not insult each other anymore.
We have seen a lot of politicians, we need statesmen.