The Kurdish question: there is no harm in being positive

To say that today, in the context of the Kurdish question, we are not at the point where we started does not mean that everything that can be done on this matter has been finished and that nothing remains to be done. Of course there is still much to do, but we want to say that whatever is to be done is now possible on the ground of politics. This means saying that the dimensions of the Kurdish question stemming from policies of denial and annihilation have been eliminated.

Therefore one cannot act as though this level had never been covered. It cannot be said that nothing has been done. That some Kurdish politicians continue to act as though this distance had never been covered produces psychological effects that cause the problem to be felt more than its real dimensions. Everything done in the name of the democratic opening thus falls short of the expectations created and pumped up for this reason.

Yet when one looks back with common sense, it is also clearly seen how much distance has been covered from the starting point. Despite this, what has been done is being made light of by inciting more anger and resentment. This is effective as propaganda and in fact makes no contribution at all either to peace or to the solution of problems.

You look, and the same politicians never stop saying words such as "peace," "the brotherhood of peoples," "stopping the bloodshed," but while saying this, at every stage they raise the bar of demand to points with no political counterpart, trying to make politics powerless. The alternative to a politics made powerless, in the context of Kurdish politics, is unfortunately violence, blood, death, not the brotherhood of peoples but their enmity, not peace but war.

An unreasonable politics, in the context of another problem, leaves only long-term grudges, but in the present context of the Kurdish question it issues only an invitation to violence, nothing else. For that reason, at this stage, regarding the solution of the Kurdish question, a great responsibility falls not on the state so much as on Kurdish intellectuals and politicians. Their most important responsibility is to be the first, before anyone else, to wake up to the fact that politics at present provides a sufficient ground for the solution of problems.

If you find the words of Diyarbakır Mayor Osman Baydemir, "This Nevruz will be a festival of peace and solution," too optimistic and paint gloomy pictures, you are not thereby wanting the solution of the Kurdish question more. On the contrary, in politics there is no other attitude as constructive and effective as optimism.

For those who adopt pessimism or gloom as an attitude, it is not possible to make progress in politics toward the solution of problems. Perhaps as a tactic, sulking and clinging to pessimistic discourses can at times be effective. But rest assured, those results are very simple, very cheap results in terms of a people's honor. As a lasting attitude, these discourses, which ignore positive developments and adopt ill-omened speech as a character trait, may get a result of their own kind, but that result will not be a beneficial one at all for their ultimate fate. At best this is an attitude of cynicism and brings no benefit to any side.

Today the political blockage over the Kurdish question has been lifted, but the psychological blockage still continues, because the language that creates this blockage is also kept in working order partly by Kurdish politicality. For that reason, "depoliticizing" the problem in the Strategic Thinking Institute's "Proposals for a Solution to the Kurdish Question" is considered important in order to be able to handle the steps to be taken on a cool-headed ground beyond political anger and partisanship.

The report's lines on the matter continue as follows:

"Achieving this requires the involvement of a "third force" that is not a direct party to the conflicts and that therefore will lower the tension in discussing the problem and developing a solution perspective, and by cooling the subject will enable it to be handled more easily.

This view, voiced by Prof. Dr. İhsan Dağı during the workshop, brought to the agenda the importance of a third force that will create weight in the direction of a solution in the Kurdish question. The third force here consists of the segments, wise persons and the President who have not so far been a direct party to the problem but are affected by it and whose involvement could open the way to the solution. What is expected of them in the solution process is that they get involved in a way that makes their presence effectively felt."

"The joint involvement of wise persons from every segment in the process can also serve an irreplaceable function in opening the blockages among the actors of the problem and minimizing new accidents on the road.

It is exciting to see that such a concern exists in civil society and that in recent months many concrete initiatives have been carried out in this direction. What needs to be done in this context is for civil and political wills to make an effort to activate this third force or forces."