There was only one missing link in this chain: Armenia. But now we can safely claim that a new era has begun with Armenia.Indeed, the historic visit by Turkish President Abdullah Gül to Yerevan in response to an invitation by Armenian President Serzh Sarksyan to join him at a football match between national teams of the two countries is worth being heralded as the start of a new era between two countries. The civilized and diplomatic courage displayed by the presidents of Turkey and Armenia, whose border is still closed and which do not enjoy diplomatic ties, deserves much praise. We hope this lost link of the zero problems with neighbors policy will be put in place as soon as possible so that Turkey evolves into an oasis of peace surrounded by friendly countries.
In the great efforts exerted by Turkey for developing friendly relations with its neighbors, the resolve by the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) is the main driving force. Gül, who personally implemented this policy during his time in office as foreign minister, is lending support to this admirable policy also as president. Otherwise, he would not dare to proceed with such an initiative so harshly criticized by opposition parties and neo-nationalist circles.
Yet, despite its success in settling its problems with its neighbors, Turkey cannot formulate policies that would embrace all social groups within. Notwithstanding all well-intentioned attempts by the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party), the state has not yet been able to welcome religious/conservative groups as well as a majority of the Alevi and Kurdish populations. The state still perceives some of its citizens as its enemies or as a potential threat to itself, and acts accordingly just because their lifestyles are different. But having successfully pursued a policy of zero problems with its neighbors, Turkey should achieve the goal of having zero problems with various social groups consisting of its citizens.
Actually, we know that the AK Party government led by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is eager to initiate policies to ensure greater rapprochement between the state and the social groups that are the subject of discrimination. This eagerness, though yet to become reality, can be witnessed in the government's so-called "new Kurdish initiative" and the "Alevi initiative" and in the legislative work on the elimination of the headscarf ban on university campuses -- one of the most important problems for conservative groups -- and in the attempt to draft a new civilian constitution that would bring greater freedoms and individual rights to all social groups, including religious minorities. However, while it was not thwarted by the criticism and obtrusive attacks from the opposition concerning the visit to Armenia, the government is still unable to solve the problems the state has with its citizens irrespective of religion, language, ethnicity, ideology or lifestyle. In other words, while Turkey is extremely ardent in realizing the "peace in the world" part of founding father of the Turkish Republic Mustafa Kemal Atatürk's famous motto, "Peace at home, peace in the world," it still lacking in implementing the "peace at home" part.
As a person who knows well the willingness and determination of the government with respect to the "peace at home" part, I can assure you that it is the government that deserves the least criticism in this respect. Everyone is well aware of the fact that the steps the government took to secure domestic peace have so disturbed the establishment, top judiciary, high bureaucracy, pro status quo elites and the military that this uneasiness led to a closure case against the AK Party. Nevertheless, we can expect no one but the AK Party to try and launch formulas and initiatives devised to bring the state, Kurds, Alevis and conservatives closer together. At this point, we must note that newly appointed Chief of General Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ's mingling with the people in one of the southeastern provinces will make a significant contribution to the desired rapprochement between the state and the nation.
However, these good-willed and constructive gestures are still ineffective in terms of solving the problem. A public opinion poll conducted by Ankethane between Aug. 1 and 10 and whose results have just been released has revealed the urgency of bringing the state closer to the nation without any discrimination. You can read the details of this poll in today's edition of Today's Zaman. Suffice it to say that the answers to the question "Will we see a Turkish-Kurdish conflict in the future?" imply that this possibility is still worrying all citizens.
Another striking finding from the poll's results is that Kurds have split into two distinct groups. Although due to the Kurdistan Workers' Party's (PKK) terrorism, stretching back around 30 years, a Turkish-Kurdish cleavage could have been anticipated, this division has occurred in reality among Kurds. The division has created a group around the Democratic Society Party (DTP), radicalized due to armed conflict and adherence to the organization. Opposite this group are the Kurds who have not embraced radicalism or armed conflict. The existence of this "moderate" group of Kurds is a great opportunity for Turkey.
One cannot agree more with the words of Professor Doğu Ergil, the poll's analyst, who said: "A reasonable public administration should embrace this moderate Kurdish population, try to make it bigger and reward their political wisdom. This reward can be given by integrating the Kurdish culture with the system within the framework of democratic pluralism and human rights, not by banning everything that is Kurdish. Perceiving nation not as an ethnic and cultural uniformity/assimilation, but as political and legal union, and defining this in the constitution can serve as the antidote of this problem. If this is not done, and if this moderate Kurdish population is alienated politically, the ethnic division and conflict will become inevitable. By failing to create a modern pluralistic and participatory democracy, Turkish public administration will do what the PKK has failed to do. In this case, violence, which is seen as a tactical tool today, may evolve into a strategic purpose that targets division."
