As the unilateral cease-fire declared by the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) nears its deadline (June 1), there is no sign, nor a gesture, of the violence. The mine explosion yesterday, which killed six soldiers and wounded eight others in Çukurca of Hakkari province, and the kidnapping of two construction workers near Şemdinli were followed by an air raid into northern Iraq. Before the mine incident, reports earlier this week told of massive army operations in various areas and “important” casualties for PKK, mentioning three “key commanders” of the organization as dead. In that context, the escalation of the last days smells of a vicious retaliation. The mood in the aftermath of the bloodshed exposes a swing between hope and rage. The awareness of “being on the knife's edge” is perhaps higher -- and also more fragile -- than any other critical time before. Because this is the juncture, at which usually conservative political actors had started to send messages, albeit carefully disguised in rhetoric -- in favor of a solution.
Deniz Baykal is one of them. Before the news on violence in Hakkari, Baykal was quoted as saying that the laying down the arms by the PKK would be inevitably followed by an amnesty for its members. (This statement was revised later by Baykal, saying that as long as “terror” continues, there is no meaning at all in discussing a solution.) Still, the same Baykal was rather positive to respond to the invitation to Baghdad by Iraq's President Jalal Talabani.
President Gül, who was his usually encouraging, optimistic self in his statement, was also clear in his condemnation of what he called a “cowardly act.”
Murat Karayılan, the acting head of the PKK, is also giving mixed signals through the media. While he was keen on what the media interpreted as “extending an olive branch” to Ankara in an interview with Milliyet's Hasan Cemal, he raised, as it were, the stakes by putting the devolution of power to Scotland as some sort of condition for talks, in another interview for The London Times. “Britain accepted the will of the Scots by giving them a parliament of their own, and that's what the Turks have to do with us,” he said.
Yet, this part of the statement -- rightfully -- overshadowed what he further told the Times' reporter: “Kurds do not want to continue the war. We believe we can solve the Kurdish question without spilling more blood. We are ready for a peaceful and democratic solution in Turkey -- to be solved within Turkey's borders.”
Perceptions of people in Turkey are very blurred at the moment. This has to do with the immense fatigue and mistrust that there will ever be an end to the conflict, as well as being kept out of what is being “cooked” in Ankara, behind closed doors.
Gül was careful not to go to detail as to whether and in what sense there would be “good things happening soon.”
So, as the guns continue to talk, is there any hope of progress?
Nobody is sure.
We can summarize it in the light of the following data: The PKK is willing to be visible in the regional picture and that it supports a pan-Kurdist conference in Iraq in September. Reports say Iraqi Kurds act as intermediaries, currently, between Kandil and Ankara. Various sources mention a conditionality conveyed by the PKK on constitutional amendments as a “guarantee” to lay down arms. The PKK insists that Article 66 of the Constitution (about the nature of citizenship of the republic) be amended beforehand. But this may be dropped if the talks change in nature (i.e., if the Democratic Society Party [DTP] is chosen as a dialogue partner). Expectations are high that the “leadership,” seen as a necessity in the solution framework, must be taken over by Gül. A number of positive steps will depend upon whether Gül will be able to gather the political parties and other actors to define a road map, and to disperse nastiness stemming from daily political discourse. The most urgent item on the agenda is how to stop the violent confrontation. On this point there seems to be no clear path for a solution. The ongoing military operations, coupled with police raids on the PKK links at various legal organizations (trade unions, etc.), and the PKK attacks are threatening the efforts for a temporary lull over the summer. If and when a cease-fire is achieved, a set of steps are to be introduced: Several inmates will be sent to the island of İmralı where PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan is imprisoned, nurses and imams who speak Kurdish will be sent to predominantly Kurdish provinces, a 10 percent threshold for eligibility in national elections will be lowered to 5 percent, propaganda in Kurdish will be allowed -- all before a campaign on amnesty is launched. Of course, given that the summer will be quiet, free from incidents.
But back to the question in the title. My overall impression is that there is not yet a common ground for going further. The rifts and disagreements in Ankara are to be taken seriously. As usual, the pace for action is too slow, giving way to provocations and doubts.
I fear of yet another summer in bloodshed and in despair.
