Is the democratic initiative over?
by
Nacİ Bostancı*

But this problem is an impasse that has been building jup for several years. It is obvious that it will not be solved with a single move and that there will be ups and downs to it. A temporary climate of anger and concern is usually replaced by hope and the belief that a solution is possible after a certain period. During these shifts, some circles manage to stay resolute, do not allow their minds to be taken hostage by terrorism and blood, continuously discuss finding a solution and try to maintain this climate. The existence of this kind of center of gravity is very important. It is this center of gravity that prevents shifts as a society. Developing a core staff whose members stand in the same center of gravity even if politically they are in different places for this impasse will serve as a strong support to the hope of finding a solution. If a country lacks a common ground that transcends polarizations or a common stance that tries to develop a new discourse by complimenting political tones, it is a misfortune for that country. It is obvious that Turkey is not unfortunate.

People who ask if the democratic initiative is over have different expectations. What’s interesting is that among the people who appear to be each other’s opponents, there are some who share an excitement about the initiative coming to an end. If the initiative ends, their expectations on what will happen in its aftermath are at completely opposite ends. It brings to mind the prayers of Nasreddin Hoca’s daughters, one of whom was married to a farmer and the other to a potter. While one prayed for plenty of rain, the other prayed for plenty of sun. The result: Both were going to cry, but one out of happiness and the other out of sadness. But the democratic initiative is a process that is trying to establish the conditions for people to live peacefully together without causing any more pain. The majority of people outside of these two circles are concerned and worried about the initiative. Their hearts are in their boots. The government’s determination must be relieving concerns to a certain degree. Yet people know that they cannot be too confident about the government maintaining the same level of determination while terrorism is on the rise.

Examining social and political developments

Looking at the dynamics of social and political developments is important when discussing the fate of the democratic initiative. Beyond their “roles as guides,” political actors are in fact subject to the same dynamics. The important thing that needs to be considered is this: If Turkey is democratizing in the general sense, then the democratic initiative is a process that will become meaningful in this respect and will continue to move forward in line with this general democratization. The democratic initiative is not independent of the process of democratization. It cannot have its own distinct route.

As for democratization in Turkey, we are both seeing it and living it. Particularly over the past 30 years, Turkey has become a more open-minded, more transparent, more urban, more self-confident and a country that trusts civil society. Democratization means the citizens of a country reject tutelage over their minds and show that they are mature adults. Who is going to become a mature adult? The people living in this country. People are going to be able to free themselves from other people’s pressures, direction and definitions and be able to describe and define themselves and live their life in any way they want.

There is no subject left in Turkey that is not discussed. Problems that just until yesterday people did not even want to confront in their dreams are now matters of public debate. No one is exempt from criticism. No individual or circle can present itself as being the source of sacred authority and thereby demand unconditional obedience from the people. There is no such thing as “our elders know something we don’t.” Anything one person knows, everyone knows. This kind of environment, even if you don’t identify it or declare a political will in this direction, will push for a “democratic initiative.” Different people with different identities will express their demands in public debates as “mature individuals” and attempt to obtain political and social results from these debates.

The political will has, so to speak, taken the lead to add momentum to this spontaneous development and to remove the dynamics that ruin democratization’s ordinary climate by way of terrorism. Exaggerating the role of the political will in this matter and designating it as the factor that virtually determines social conditions would be wrong. But this mistake was made with various intentions. Statements like “substantiate it,” “announce your projects” and “persuade the people” were efforts to this end. Any announcement and promise that did not suit the “spirit of the time” would have primarily jeopardized the initiative.

The government did not make this mistake too often. At a time when on the one hand people were discussing their opinions more freely and conducting politics due to democratization and on the other terrorism was pushing people to become more immersed in their own positions, the first step that needed to be taken was to create an atmosphere of hope and trust. This is what the government pushed for.

No alternative recommendation

Opponents of the democratic initiative sometimes used killings and other time emphasized the “lack of content” to solidify their positions. But they could not put forward an alternative recommendation or display an approach that found support from their own constituents. Essentially, there appears to be no other project other than the initiative process that is compatible with democratization in the general sense that can ensure peace and unity. The only alternative to peace and negotiation is hostile, security-oriented approaches. The most important advantage of the democratic initiative is its strong stance on solving prevailing political problems in society using a common mentality that is based on social negotiations. Its economic and social backdrop is another topic. It is this mentality that shapes the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government’s activity parameters. If another party were to come to power, it would also have to compromise and reconcile with this mentality and abide by the same parameters. It’s impossible to become the ruling power without coming to terms with this social mentality.

Since democratization is still in progress, the democratic initiative is going to continue its parallel journey. While some people see painful events as an obstacle to the democratic initiative, others assess them as developments that underline the need and urgency for the initiative. The latter inclination is becoming stronger. The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) has taken a stance against the democratic initiative. The reason is obvious: The mentality in the mountains is far from appreciating the conditions of ordinary political developments. The weapons it possesses makes it feel like it can do anything. It does not want to lose its “unique” position over circles it views as its constituents. It wants to maintain its existence as the most important actor in the equation.

But it is these very reasons that are blocking a peaceful solution to the Kurdish problem. It is trying to legitimize its existence by damaging the democratic initiative, which is setting sail with winds of democratization. Political actors have a deep-rooted relationship with the socio-political context they thrive on, and this relationship is what determines their fate. If we lined up the strategies, costs and promises of the PKK and the democratic initiative and looked at the current social spirit, it is obvious that developments would eliminate the PKK. The PKK is under the heavy threat of an approach that has a different tone and that appeals to people’s hearts and minds. The issue is the ability to use social and political dynamics properly and building peace and unity with the least cost. The responsibility rests on the political institution that represents the society.

The government is doing everything that it can. The Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) should design its policies according to what it would do if it were the ruling party. Envisioning a leap from an opposition shaped by the feeling of victimization to a ruling party mindset will certainly be helpful for them. The problem of politicians losing their sense of maturity while everyone else in Turkey becomes a more mature individual is an interesting contradiction that cannot be sustained forever.