Peace processes

Perhaps, it’s better to name all ongoing initiatives under “peace processes” without giving any specific ethnic or political status to them. Because, this is the first time that Turkey is genuinely trying to pronounce the word “peace.” It has been either blabbing or failing to pronounce it correctly or having a hard time to say it or going back to the only language it knows in view of speaking the language of peace correctly. Clumsiness is the case everywhere, society, state or politics. Indeed it is not easy to rid of century-old problems, deep wounds that are hard to heal and serious heartbreaks. This is a period when utmost patience, conscience as much as logic are required. But there is a group refuting the use of the language of peace. That, languages of the Republican People’s Party, or CHP, and the Nationalist Movement Party, or MHP, in a way to show which is better in warmongering during the historical plenary hearing in the Parliament last week about the “Kurdish opening.”

You all heard CHP deputy Onur Öymen's chilling remarks indeed during the first hearing held on Nov. 10:

“Unfortunately, mothers in this country have cried a lot. We have lost many soldiers throughout history. We lost 200,000 in the Çanakkale [Dardanelles] War. None came forward and said ‘Don’t let mothers cry. Let’s forget about this war.’ Did mothers not cry during the War of Independence? Did mothers not cry in the Sheik Said revolt? Did mothers not cry in the Dersim revolt? Did mothers not cry in Cyprus? Did anyone say ‘Mothers should cry no more? Let’s have a deal with the Greeks. But unfortunately you are saying this because you don’t have the guts to fight the terror.” In a sort of disclaimer Öymen announced in the aftermath of his “historical” remarks, probably due to his referral to the Dersim massacre and due to fears of losing votes as he implicitly targeted Alevis, the CHP deputy said: “As I said in my speech, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk disagreed with the method of negotiating with armed terror organizations as the Justice and Development Party [or AKP] seems to favor. In the Republican period, indeed, Atatürk had never negotiated with any armed groups revolting against the state.”

CHP’s “political commissioner” is right though. Despite important remarks, Mustafa Kemal made at the İzmir Economy Congress in 1923 regarding the process through which human communities move away from destructive fights to peaceful and productive activities, a peaceful mindset has had difficulties to settle in this lands. The same goes for Atatürk’s famous quote, “Peace at home, peace in the world.” Just like for Mustafa Kemal and for almighty elites of the time, all wars Öymen listed in his speech are weighing equally. It doesn’t make a difference if you fight against the British or French in the Dardanelles or Alevis and Kurds in Dersim. You are fighting the enemy, because these were considered as enemies of that community (Turks) trying to become a nation. Or as Ziya Gökalp said once, “This state needs a nation,” every other entity going against the description of that nation was and is an “enemy.”

War lobby's stakes

The problem is that the CHP-MHP duo is doing politics today with a mindset of those years. In fact, they are doing politics as the representatives of a “war lobby.” In that sense, they are extremist political parties. When it comes to peace processes, we have plenty of signs that they will do everything in their power to prevent steps to be taken, let alone providing support. We haven’t heard anything new during parliamentary sessions other than a command like “The PKK must lay down arms” and a recommendation other than the CHP’s 20-year-old Kurdish report, which has been sent to the paper basket long time ago by the CHP itself. The empire of fear built by the parliamentary opposition in this country has any place neither in Turkey nor in its new posture as a regional power, neither in the world conjuncture today nor in Turkish society's expectations of peace and calm.

However, attitude of the CHP-MHP duo sets ongoing initiatives to an extremely sensitive ground and makes public support vital. The AKP’s move to explain the initiatives to the public is crucially important. The Interior Minister, during his presentation to Parliament on Nov.12 qualified the ongoing initiative as part of an overall democratic move intending to bring more freedom to everyone. This new paradigm is indeed essential to convince citizens who are against the singling out of Kurds only when the government utters the words “democracy” and “freedom.”

Along the same line, steps to be taken abroad are equally critical. We should read relations newly established with the Regional Kurdish Administration in northern Iraq in this direction because these problems are external and cross-border as much as they are domestic. Since the early days of the Republican period these problems were usually tried to be solved by war and law enforcement solely. In other words, if the “Kurdish initiative” and opening towards Armenia are not supported by the Greek/Cypriot-Greek initiative, one of three legs of the trivet will be missing. And there, the imbalance may encourage those who are eager to block other initiatives. At this point, the importance of a full fledge initiative, of which we have heard just rumors so far, to tackle all existing discords between Turkey and Greece, starting with the Cyprus question, is obviously crucial.