Self-criticism in DTP; silence of the hawks

The leaders of the political parties had the opportunity to make a reasonable assessment following the completion of deliberations at parliamentary sessions. There is to be no change in the position of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and the Republican People’s Party (CHP), which view the democratic initiative as a project of destruction. This position and the solidarity between these two political parties are so obvious that the MHP even sent a message to the CHP supporting its Dersim statement.

The opposition bloc seems eager to develop its policy on the perceived destructive nature of the process. Because they have no useful material from the initial steps of the initiative, the opposition will most likely rely on the developments that took place during the return to Turkey of Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) militants on Oct. 19.

On the other hand, the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) and the Democratic Society Party (DTP) are clarifying their next steps. It should be noted that they are not acting as a unified bloc; quite the contrary, they are reminding each other of their responsibilities with respect to the initiative. The DTP has asked the government to take further steps, whereas the AK Party has called on the DTP figures not to make any mistakes so as to ensure that the initiative succeeds.

The AK Party wants to keep the project alive and is also attempting to minimize the impact of the opposition bloc on public opinion. A leading party figure told me in a friendly chat of the difficult position of the DTP. They have asked for an acceleration of the process without any further waste of time.

However, they have a difficult time when the initiative is welcomed excessively and no reaction is shown by the public. The balance is so delicate that when the demonstration of joy during the return of the militants is exaggerated, their support base becomes more eager about the process; however, in this case, the opening has led to misunderstandings in Turkey. On the other hand, the faith of their base in the initiative becomes weaker when a critical style is adopted. They have become particularly displeased at this stage with the designation of three PKK leaders as drug smugglers by the US authorities. They also seem to have been influenced by the criticism by Nechirvan Barzani, former prime minister of the Kurdish administration in northern Iraq, who argued that some DTP figures and PKK leaders do not actually want peace.

Despite these negative developments, it appears that the party leaders have agreed that the hawkish DTP figures should remain silent during the process. They particularly question their role in what happened during the ceremony held to welcome the PKK militants returning to Turkey on Oct 19. A DTP leader is self-critical of their excessive role, saying that at least they should not have displayed the party bus at the ceremony. The same figure draws attention to the absence of a single Turkish flag at the event and recalls the positive reactions to the speech delivered by DTP leader Ahmet Türk during the plenary session in Parliament.

The DTP seems pretty decisive about not making the same mistakes again during the return of more PKK militants in the days to come. Their decisiveness is based on the conviction that Ergenekon sympathizers are ready to sabotage the return of other militants. There are also reports saying that the MHP and CHP have printed fliers reading “The state’s project of destruction: Oct. 19, Habur.” These fliers have been stored for use during the general election campaigns scheduled to take place in 18 months’ time.