A strange operation

We have come very close to the end of the road in the referendum process. God willing, it is clear that people's decisions have largely taken shape toward the new constitutional amendment package to be voted on tomorrow. By tomorrow evening we will have learned how any doubts that may still remain in some will end at the ballot box, under the ballot box's own de facto pressure, and how the definitive decision will manifest itself.

Not all of those who will perhaps vote "no" in tomorrow's vote, but those who ran the "no" campaign are of course far more interested in the content of the package, there is no doubt about that. It is evident from how they distorted the content of the package with the most creative devilish ideas possible. They know very well that if the package passes the people's approval, a system of tutelage that has been producing uninterrupted privileges for them for eighty years will end, and naturally they oppose it. At every stage they went to all lengths to divert the subject from the content of the package. Do not be fooled by their pretending to debate while doing so; they will not be convinced even if a verse came down from the sky. Because what makes them say "no," that is, reject, is not some proof or argument they are looking for.

There are those whose interests will be directly harmed and whose privileges will be lost if the package passes; they know well what they are defending by saying "no." And then there are those who say "no" to whatever comes if it comes from the "AK Parti," who have gotten stuck on a purely ideological consideration without making any assessment of interests. The passing of the package is absolutely in their interest too, yet there is a strange situation in which they are made to say "no" to something that is in their own interest. However strange it may seem, these attitudes are the most ordinary expression of what we call ideology. Wanting the opposite of what is in one's own interest corresponds precisely to what Marx called distorted consciousness, ideology. Let ideology blind you, and it will put people into unthinkable behaviors and unthinkable alliances. It can make a friend appear as an enemy and an enemy as a friend. It destroys the faculty of distinguishing friend from enemy.

Strange alliances make us witness HSYK members issuing invitations to Öcalan's "no" in the referendum. At inopportune times, at moments when everyone calls it an opening, we witness the PKK escalating violence and rushing to the aid of warlords whose hearts beat for war. Now let us ask, if you like, what the operation against the organization, which is said to have taken a decision of non-action until 20 September, proved to whom, and what support it gave to whom, right on the eve of the referendum.

Until yesterday, in the streets of Van, Diyarbakır and Batman, there was a high expectation that the BDP voter, who had been subjected to boycott pressure, would see a statement through Öcalan's lawyers who were to meet with him, softening the boycott and even saying that whoever wished could say "yes." In the Southeast the voter is going through a tremendous rupture because of the BDP's boycott decision, and everyone knows that the success of the boycott will be possible only thanks to the organization's open threats. In contrast, while everyone expected that a positive statement would come from Öcalan and that the threat over the voter's will would be lifted, this operation both prevented Öcalan from making such a statement and stirred a feeling in the masses in favor of the boycott. So, to save whom or what has the operation been carried out in this case?

Without questioning the "sabotage" intent revealed by this operation, whose only result was to tighten somewhat further the "no" or "boycott" front that showed signs of loosening, there is no possibility of the terror problem ending. However much the government runs around with the opening, it needs to see that not a step can be walked unless it brings its contacts with the PKK under control with its own timing. Has it not always been like this in the past? It is clear that the newly formed command echelon still does not show the necessary harmony with the political will's policy on the Kurdish question. It is understood that a group within the TSK is still in resistance to the government's peace policy. An armed force that resists the political will is not a good omen.

Yet in handling such problems, the era of governments keeping in step with the TSK has to close. The era is now that of the TSK keeping in step with the political will, and of leaving the fight against terror to the political will with all its transparency and in all its dimensions.

The intention, the result and the alliance joined by this operation, which rained fire on the homes of 9 Kurdish families in the Southeast, are plain as day. If hunting terrorists is this easy, why was it not done at other times? Why were they left to be watched as they came to raid outposts and martyr our soldiers? There is obviously a force that can deliver whatever performance it wants against terrorist acts whenever it wants. What determines with what timing and at what intensity this force will show itself?

Whatever this thing is, it has certainly entered into an open anxiety of existence because of the referendum. That is why it has made so many mistakes in such a short time.

A happy holiday to you.