Historical necessity and the CHP that catches up with history

I am not very fond of the phrase "historical necessity." It has always had a side that makes human will, and therefore politics and human difference, impossible, and therefore makes human or moral choice unimportant. But Turkey's democratic transformation, even if it is a long, thin, thorny, rugged, even obstructed process, increasingly gives the impression of a historical necessity. Indeed, it is increasingly understood that this process, although it falters from time to time, and although it encounters discouraging developments suggesting that nothing has changed or will change, is in terms of direction an irreversible process. The simplest fate awaiting those who cannot keep pace with this process, those who at certain phases of this process cannot behave in line with its spirit, who cannot keep pace, is to fall outside history.

Turkey's democratic transformation is also not a process that concerns Turkey exclusively. Turkey's historical course is a course with direct reflections, effects, and consequences in its region too. We saw this very clearly in the process also called the Arab Spring. The entire climate belt in which the Arab Spring took place consists of regions to which Turkey's historical depths extend, and the most important mission of the administrations that these regions were subjected to over the last century was to insulate from one another, to sever from one another, this climate belt that had been shattered to pieces.

Yet Turkey's approach, formulated as the "policy of zero problems with neighbors," also involved going beyond this mission written for all these countries by the colonial powers. When problems are zeroed out and a renewed integration among all countries is achieved, the borders placed between them become meaningless. The concrete benefits of a regional integration in which these borders would increasingly lose their importance were seen in a short time. Regimes of the mukhabarat slowly began to melt, to dissolve. Instead, the peoples of the region saw within a short time how great a value and wealth the increasing relations and communication gave them. It is possible to say that all the problems arising in the region from now on are in a way produced to sabotage this historical juncture.

Turkey's democratization process thus ceased to be a subject that concerns only itself. The events developing in the region increasingly make the transformation Turkey has entered no longer solely its own choice. Moreover, not only Turkey but the other actors in the region too are inevitably turning toward this choice.

The approach of CHP leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu in the past week, offering to put his hand under the stone on the Kurdish issue and be part of the solution, can also be read as a natural reflex toward not remaining outside the visible flow of history. That Kılıçdaroğlu has seen this is important for himself. Even though they see it, the desire to resist it can prevail in some. Not everyone can always behave with the same rationality when it comes to entering the paths that history puts before people. A thousand and one calculations, or lack of calculation, can come into play. Emotions rather than reason can be more decisive in the decision-making process. And this can be the place where politics or the political is grounded (where its energy and effect are discharged).

Kılıçdaroğlu's offer to the governing party to be part of the solution on the Kurdish issue shows that he intends politics. Politics is the skill of making moves, when the time comes, that no one predicted but that open a new page for solution and negotiation. Kılıçdaroğlu shows this skill from time to time, and truly, in this respect he exhibits a leadership increasingly more worth watching in politics.

I do not agree with the criticism that by doing so he will contradict his own base or cause a disintegration in his own base. On the contrary, party bases always respond more positively to the original political performance displayed by the leadership. The capacity of party leaderships to influence their own bases and to form certain political habitus in them must never be underestimated. The transformation the AK Parti has created in its own base on many issues has been the best example of this.

However good and positive a move this move of Kılıçdaroğlu is, his making the participation of the MHP and the BDP a condition on what is to be done about the Kurdish issue is a condition as contrary to the intent of the undertaking as it can be. In democracies, a condition of consensus aiming at one hundred percent is a complete innovation and superstition. Neither does ideal democracy have such a condition, nor do the things to be done require such a great consensus. In democracies there are rules, and within the framework of the rules certain decisions to be taken are required to have a sufficient majority.

That is why, in response to the attitude the CHP has displayed toward dialogue and partnership in solving the problem, the AK Parti's declaration that, even if no one else does, the consensus of the two center parties would be sufficient and that it is ready for this is a sign that the path of politics is quite open this time.

The country's historical course increasingly reminds us of necessities, but still, whether to comply or not is entirely up to the human being.