Why is the HDP lonely now?

Why is the HDP lonely now?

Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) co-chair Selahattin Demirtaş broke his silence with this proclamation: “The threat of a coup is ongoing. There are hidden members of the Fethullahist Terror Organization [FETÖ] and enemies of [President Recep Tayyip] Erdoğan who are now trying to re-plot the coup that failed when it was staged with the military on July 15, this time by creating a widespread victimization in the grassroots…”
We know there are Erdoğan enemies; we also know of the hidden Gülenist members. It is not definite, though, to what extent Demirtaş knows of enemies of the HDP and their domestic hidden members of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). 

Would you not expect a politician who can draw this rationalization to also say this? Inside the HDP, there are hidden PKK members who are undermining the HDP. There are HDP enemies within civilian politics who make civilian politics meaningless by not excluding the terror method. There are hidden pro-Kandil people who, by not separating the HDP from the Kandil Mountains (where the PKK are headquartered), are putting the democratic struggle method under the reservation of terror. 

It is not adequate to tell both the state and the PKK that the Kurdish issue will not be solved with arms; also, calling for the silencing of arms is not adequate. 

The HDP is rapidly losing blood. Neither Demirtaş nor his fellow politicians can stop this; they first should say “no” to terror. When it comes to that, they hesitate. 

HDP deputies are under terror investigations and have been subpoenaed by prosecutors. 

Those who argued in the past that the HDP should be supported and strengthened as an antidote for terror now do not stand by it or cannot stand by it.  

When did the HDP reach the point of not being able to be supported or stood beside? Which enemies of the HDP, which hidden PKK members, have caused this? Why did they become isolated? Where did they make a mistake? 

In my opinion, Demirtaş should also ponder these questions, alongside questions of the enemies of Erdoğan and hidden Gülenist members.  

52 percent freedom for women’s clothing 

The PEW Research Center conducted a survey in seven countries where the majority of the population is Muslim. In Tunisia, Egypt, Turkey, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, the question of how women should be dressed was asked. 

When the respondents were asked to choose among six different styles of Islamic veils, 46 percent of the respondents in Turkey chose the modern headscarf instead of the full veil, the burqa with an uncovered face, a loosely tied headscarf or no headscarf, while 32 percent preferred to see women with no headscarf on. 

More interesting responses were to the question whether women should be left free in their clothing choices. In our country, 52 percent of respondents answered that they preferred women to be free. In the pro-freedom field, Turkey, with 52 percent, was second after Tunisia among seven Islamic countries. Those who favored not to interfere with women’s clothes in Tunisia were around 56 percent. 

This rate dramatically drops in other countries. 

The good side of this is that our conservatism is relatively far from bigotry and narrow-minded impositions. More than half of the society has adopted the pro-freedom stance. They say it is up to women to choose whether to wear a headscarf or not. 

The concerning and actually the crippled aspect is that a percentage as high as 48 percent believes that others have the right to interfere with how a woman dresses.  

Seeing this picture, it has a special significance that the case of the attack on nurse Ayşegül Terzi is processed on charges of intervention in one’s lifestyle, right?