Oral Çalışlar
The Turkish original of this article was published as PKK’ye tek söz etmeden barış bildirisi yazmak on 25th August 2015.
Yesterday the explosives planted by the PKK on a village road in Şırnak left two soldiers dead and three injured. Virtually every day now, here and there throughout the region the PKK keeps attacking the security forces, laying ambushes, mining highways. Over the last month, tens of young people have lost their lives.
Meanwhile, “self-government” is being proclaimed in some Kurdish cities. Ditches are being dug, barricades erected, armed clashes with the security forces spreading. The KCK keeps publishing statement after statement in support of this “self-government.” Entire towns are being burned and ruined. Many activists are being arrested, while others, as well as soldiers, policemen, and ordinary civilians are being killed in firefights. It is also the case that the bombing of Kandil and its surroundings by the state has led to huge losses of life.
Being really for peace
We can clearly see that a huge bulk of society is in favor of putting a stop to all this as quickly as possible so that the question can be taken back to the negotiating table. Various political circles including the HDP are calling on the PKK to proclaim a ceasefire without any “if”s or “but”s so that the guns can fall silent.
It is evident that the road to peace has to pass first and foremost through “an unconditional farewell to arms by the PKK.” While soldiers and policemen keep being killed, it is impossible to create the requisite public psychology for a pro-peace atmosphere.
While large sections of society are thinking in terms of “finding a way back to the Solution Process,” some other groups and circles that until yesterday had distanced themselves from any peace initiatives, including the Solution Process, between the government and the PKK, who had condemned all such attempts and proclaimed them to be a dead end, are now also turning around to lay fresh emphasis on “peace.”
This is what the journalist Nedim Şener has tweeted about such flip-floppers: “How fake it is when those who never supported and even actually opposed the Solution Process now start lamenting ‘the loss of a peace environment’! How cheap can politics get!”
But of course, people are entitled to changing their views. And if they are changing them in favor of peace, in principle we should be taking a positive view of this.
A one-sided approach to peace
Public sensitivity, recently enhanced by the escalation of clashes and deaths, has caused many circles to mobilize, holding meetings and drafting statements. New ad hoc organizations are taking shape.
Some, perhaps many such declarations share a common characteristic: an implicit verdict that “the peace has been shattered only by the state” stamps itself on all of them. You would look in vain in these statements for the slightest reference to the PKK’s attacks, mines, bombings, assassinations, or kidnappings.
The example of Demirtaş
Selahattin Demirtaş is in a position that requires him to be “accountable to society.” He is now reacting to the PKK’s ambushing and killing tens of security personnel. For the sake of returning to a truce situation, he is calling on the PKK to declare a ceasefire without any “if”s or “but”s, though it comes belatedly.
If you are going to be talking of peace,” you must also have a certain objective, logic, and consistency capable of fleshing out this concept. It is not possible to halt this bloody process by overlooking, belittling or trivializing PKK attacks. Of course we must also add that we as citizens are capable of asking the state, that is to say, the power at the other end of the current tragedy, to “stop it.” We are able to say that “this question cannot be resolved by bombing hills and mountains.” We are able to demand a solution to be produced without stepping outside the boundaries of a state of law.
Some calls for “peace” are given to some very harsh name-calling for politicians. Even that might be regarded as normal. But to be able to issue a call for peace without even mentioning the PKK has to be regarded as a “uniquely Turkish advocacy for peace.”
Being truly for peace requires an ability to oppose those who go in for guns and violence, and those who step outside the law, regardless of whose side they might be on. Only then can you be convincing and credible.