With so close to solving a century-old problem…

We have come as close as possible to the ideal of a terror-free Turkey. All the conditions for the final resolution of an issue that has occupied Turkey for the last 41 years specifically in the case of the PKK, but within a broader historical perspective for a century, have almost been formed. Of the state outlook that was the source of this problem a century ago, of the nationalist denialist approach, of the arrogant state outlook that ignored the Kurds, condemned them to non-existence, and crushed and broke, striking with its bronze hand, those who occasionally voiced discontent, there is no trace today.

LET US ACCEPT THAT THE PKK, WHICH SET OUT 41 YEARS AGO WITH TERROR ATTACKS ON ERUH AND ŞEMDİNLİ, FOUND EXCUSES FOR ITSELF IN THIS DENIALIST APPROACH OF THE STATE.

It was the era of identity politics. It was not at all difficult to persuade Kurdish youth, who had a separate language, a separate culture and way of life, because of the treatment they were subjected to on that account. In any case, even if the PKK did not persuade them, the distrustful and constantly suspicious state practices that came to probe them right after easily persuaded the youth. State officials made Kurdish youth enemies of the state by displaying to the people all the examples, practices and approaches that the PKK could not provide. Plenty of rumors circulated that this was done in cooperation. It was very clear that the junta-ists, who were organized with the state's means and who liked to deck themselves with the epithet "deep," profited from this style of politics. But the price of their short-term, self-interested profiteering was paid by the Turkish and Kurdish sons, mothers and fathers of this country. Moreover it was paid by Turkey, which was expected to play a pioneering, model role in every respect in world history and geography. Turkey remained squeezed in this narrow vise for a full century. It was held back, prevented from saying what it had to say to history.

From the moment the PKK emerged, it was also very clear that the conditions that created it were not only the Kurdish problem in Turkey. This problem worked as a professional international company, perfectly suitable for internal and external centers of mischief who wanted to draw a border on Turkey (an expression it has been a long time since I used). The resolution of this problem would mean the liquidation, without payment of dividends, of a company with many partners and in which everyone holds large shares. Anyone who attempted a radical resolution of the problem without knowing this or taking it into account was soon put out of the game or forced to pay heavy prices. Turgut Özal, Eşref Bitlis, Adnan Kahveci and Uğur Mumcu were typical examples of these.

ERDOĞAN, WHO TOOK OVER THE ADMINISTRATION OF THIS COUNTRY IN 2002, WITHOUT TAKING THE COMPANY DIMENSION OF THE MATTER INTO ACCOUNT AT ALL, WENT AFTER SOLVING THE "KURDISH PROBLEM" DIMENSION, REGARDING IT AS A HUMAN AND ISLAMIC PROBLEM.

In his famous speech in Diyarbakır in August 2005, he declared that he "recognized the Kurdish problem and was resolved to solve it," and he truly solved the dimensions of the matter relating to the Kurdish problem. That is why over time he reached the luxury of saying "there is no Kurdish problem." We know that those who desire the continuation of the Kurdish problem, those who make a living off this problem, were very angry at these words of his. Yet what was done in this process consists of revolutions that anyone with a bit of conscience cannot ignore. Anyway. It was discussed and debated at length. Now a new stage has been reached.

The picture Öcalan presented to the PKK for laying down arms in fact goes no further than creating an awareness about precisely this picture. There is no trace now of the conditions that drove the PKK or any other Kurdish movement to arm itself. Turkey has solved the Kurdish problem, and the PKK has no reason or ground stemming from the Kurdish problem to continue this fight.

This was in fact what he had said before, too, during the resolution process. But at that time international conditions and again the company shareholders had not given up their shares, and the tenders offered by the US-Israel, especially in Northern Syria, had seemed very attractive. Today those conditions are not there either. The US under the Trump administration is withdrawing from Syria, and moreover despite Israel. And Israel today has no good for itself, so there is not even a chance that it will keep the promises it makes in any tender it would give.

The international conjuncture largely supports the possibility of a terror-free Turkey. The only thing that remains is perhaps for all segments of a society that has grown used to living with this problem for years to understand this new process and to produce a language, a behavior and an attitude suitable for it. We can say that in fact all segments of society, first of all the DEM circles, have perceived, embraced and supported this process very well, and are acting in a balanced, measured and careful way in their statements. Essentially, from now on a PKK that does not make the decision to lay down arms and dissolve itself will have a serious legitimacy problem within its own base and will be treated as a spoilsport.

SHOULD THE CHP KEEP AWAY FROM THE POT?

However, it seems we will once again have a problem with a CHP that, as before, has not managed to embrace the process. Özgür Özel, speaking at the rally in Van, saying "The people of Manisa elect a mayor, and he takes office and governs. He is elected in Osmaniye, and governs. He is elected in Rize, and governs. When it comes to Diyarbakır, Batman, they say 'You cannot elect, and if you elect, we will not let you govern.' This is the Kurdish problem," has displayed either the imprudence of adding water to a cooked dish or the irresponsibility of throwing a spanner into the process.

For God's sake, are these words to be said at precisely this stage? What is the meaning of Özel's clinging at this hour to arguments that DEM, even the PKK, are not putting forward at this hour, and have carefully set aside? If even Ahmet Türk, who was removed from his post as Mayor by the appointment of a trustee in his place, is at the forefront of this process, then too much has already passed over these debates; voicing them at this hour is, at best, "inappropriateness."

But since the occasion has arisen, let us remind: Trustees were not appointed to the municipalities because Kurds elected them. They were appointed because the PKK appointed its own trustees to these municipalities and tied them to terror activities. The source, cause and initiator of the Kurdish problem in Turkey was the CHP. Now that this problem has been solved under the leadership of the AK Party leader and President Erdoğan, clinging to these words that even the PKK has thrown into the trash during the process would only remind us of the perpetrator of this problem, which cost Turkey so much time, people, energy and morale. Moreover, when this problem is solved in this way, it will already be seen that the trustee question will have been solved of itself. Everyone will have elected whom they wish, everyone will have been governed as they deserve.