The government’s solution strategy for the Kurdish problem

Because of this it is not correct to logically construe the given messages. Because most of the time the words that are being said are being used like a weapon to obtain an end. The government’s language that fights terror creates this complicated language’s symmetry as natural.

During the week the government announced a new strategy in order to solve the Kurdish problem. The official strategy was not announced from their own mouths. Using large newspapers the news was spread through whispers. News was published that the government’s solution carried a legal quality. The government does not accept the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) as an appropriate addressee. It was announced that they will not negotiate with Abdullah Öcalan. Only Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) representatives from Parliament are seen as trustworthy parties to negotiate with. This strategy means that the Oslo process is being abandoned, and the government will no longer meet with İmralı as an address in the negotiation process. The government will associate only with legal people and purposes.

This notice of this new strategy was also featured in Aksiyon weekly’s latest issue. According to this news the PKK leadership staff met with an intermediary in Brussels. The intermediary of the Oslo peace process apparently presented PKK leaders with an interview text made up of 12 questions. There is no doubt that this meeting is connected to the Turkish government since the questions meet that which the Turkish government is seeking. This hints at two questions. One of which is whether or not the organization’s leadership will agree to abandon their weapons and move to a European country, the second is their offer of reinforced local rule within a democratically autonomous land.

There are also other indicators that are coming from the PKK proving that this meeting did in fact take place, and thus the Turkish state is conducting meetings around the idea of this solution strategy. During Nevruz Kurdish politicians say without thinking to this dilemma’s solution “We want a state in Kurdistan.” It is important to note that the aforementioned questions have different bases. The PKK can abandon violence. But in exchange they need to present it as a positive to their own people, and in this way they need to protect their reputation. This gain is basically their demand for democratic autonomy. They will speak to their people and present the deal as a trump card; then, they will give up violence. Ok, but will the government permit this?

The demand for a state in Kurdistan, that is, the demand for “democratic autonomy” is not the Kurds, but that of the Kurdish political movement. This demand is not Kurdish; it will satisfy the neo-nationalist Kurds seeking a government, a neo-nationalist group that is disconnected from normal Kurds. Sixty percent of Kurds live outside of the region where a Kurdish state would be established. Because every solution is based on the how essential this land is, it is clearly the Kurdish neo-nationalists’ dream. The government refuses a “special solution for the Kurds.” However, the government is ready to give more autonomy to Kurds living in the Southeast. There is one requirement: Every place must remain legally Turkish and must not be private to Kurds.

This means within the government’s dénouement strategy -- this is not a new page. The government remains determined to eliminate terror. The government is studying the PKK’s internal balance. It is clear that the PKK is in communication with Öcalan. But the democratic delegates within Kurdish politics are paving the way by bringing the BDP and a legal element to the forefront.

How will the PKK respond to this strategy? The violence that has escalated coinciding with Nevruz, proves that the PKK is pushing forth both weapons and the support of the people to the battle ground. There is still a glimmer of hope for the PKK in the unresolved crisis in Syria. There remains the Kurdish conference that will take place in Erbil in the month of June. Until June the strategy of war will continue. At this meeting a conclusion will be reached.