Kurdish issue reaches pivotal point
08/08/2011
Turkey has reached a critical juncture with its “Kurdish problem”, as
the gap between the state and the various Kurdish movements widens.
By Anna Woods for Southeast European Times in Istanbul — 08/08/11
The seats of elected Kurdish deputies in the Turkish parliament stand
empty as the BDP boycotts parliament and convenes in the predominately
Kurdish city of Diyarbakir. [Reuters]
During national elections in June, the Kurdish-backed political party
BDP managed to get 36 members elected to parliament. Though the
victory of the BDP-backed independent candidates was initially a cause
for celebration, the situation quickly deteriorated when the candidacy
of one of the elected parliamentarians, Hatip Dicle, was nullified
post-election.
In reaction to this, the party has staged a boycott, with elected
officials refusing either to enter parliament or to take the oath of
office.
Evaluating these events as they were unfolding, Lehigh University
professor of political science and Kurdish expert Henri Barkey
expressed serious concerns. Preventing Dicle from entering parliament,
he explained, “risks undermining the goodwill [Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip] Erdogan and the AKP had garnered” through the Kurdish Opening.
Though a parallel series of events affected the country’s largest
opposition party, the People’s Republican Party (CHP), a deal was
reached between it and the AKP and the CHP boycott soon ended.
A similarly rapid solution does not seem likely for the BDP-backed
candidates, however. The negotiations that have occurred between the
state and party representatives have been ineffective.
The candidates’ refusal to enter parliament has been criticised by
some observers, including Denise Natali, the Minerva Chair of the
Institute for National Strategic Studies, who believes the boycott and
its fallout represent a wasted opportunity.
“The BDP did indeed have other alternatives that could have given it
greater leverage in influencing change, as well as further
legitimising its position and Kurdish claims inside the political
arena,” Natali tells SETimes.
She says these alternatives included fielding candidates who had no
prison record and taking the oath of office “so as to move forward
with negotiations and show the Turkish state that it is serious about
change”.
Announcement of democratic autonomy
In mid-July, the level of conflict was suddenly heightened by two
parallel events.
The first was an attack attributed to the PKK that left 13 soldiers
dead in the southeast province of Diyarbakir, the headquarters of
Kurdish political activity in Turkey.
The deaths of Turkish soldiers as a result of PKK attacks have led to
a rise in Turkish nationalism, deepening the divide between Turks and
Kurds. [Reuters]
The clash gave new energy to Turkish nationalism and boosted anger
towards the Kurdish people and the BDP.
The second event may stand as a landmark in the evolution of the
Kurdish nationalist movement. On the same day as that Diyarbakir
attack, the Democratic Society Congress (DTK) announced a plan for
so-called “democratic autonomy” of Kurds in Turkey.
“A solution to this problem will only be found with the recognition of
Kurds as a people and their attainment of a status that is
fundamentally equal to all of Turkey’s peoples,” DTK Vice-President
Aysel Tugluk said. “As it currently stands, the Kurdish people do not
want to live as a people without a status in the face of policies that
threaten their existence as a nation.”
In an exclusive interview with SETimes, Kurdish parliamentarian
Sebahat Tuncel shared what she believes to be the significance of the
plan. “The problem isn’t just bringing an end to the violence or the
conflict. At the same time, it will enable a democratic society to
manifest its style of governance.”
Tuncel also highlighted the multiple aims of the DTK’s announcements.
“Democratic autonomy has two dimensions,” she told SETimes. “The first
is the democratic and peaceful solution to the Kurdish problem, what
we might call the peace project.”
The second, Tuncel continued, is “the democratisation project, which
will create opportunities for all Turkey’s identities, cultures and
beliefs to express themselves freely and as equals.”
Though the actual efficacy of this pronouncement of democratic
autonomy is in question, with some dismissing it as empty words and
others perceiving it as a threat to the territorial integrity of the
Turkish state, it inarguably augurs a new phase in Kurdish politics.
Though somewhat inelegantly and inefficiently divided among multiple
organisations and various authorities — the BDP, the DTK, the KCK,
the PKK and the figure of its imprisoned leader Abdullah Ocalan
himself — the Kurdish nationalist movement is evolving and
articulating its demands on a national and international stage.
Concern clearly remains regarding the connections between these
groups, with the state, the media and much of the public quick to
categorise BDP as merely an extension of the PKK.
To influence the state agenda, Natali says the BDP must convince
people otherwise.
“The BDP, or its successors and affiliates, will have to affirm that
they and the Kurdish demands are not a threat to the unity and
stability of the Turkish state in order for the Kurds to make future
progress on the political front,” Natali told SETimes. “At this point,
they have done just the opposite.”
Feasibility of an autonomous zone in Turkey
The question that lingers in the wake of the DTK announcement is what,
exactly, a system of democratic autonomy in Turkey might look like,
and whether it is possible given the current political climate.
Autonomous regions have, in some places, provided a productive
solution in areas of ethnic or religious conflict and
majority-minority tensions.
Spain, whose government included a roadmap for the establishment of
autonomous zones in its 1978 constitution, is often touted as an
example of a successful, peaceful transition to autonomy.
Catalonia and Basque country, each home to communities the state
recognises as historical nationalities, are governed by autonomous
legislatures and courts, and maintain ties to the federal government
through government councils, whose presidents require approval from
the monarch.
PKK deaths have also flamed Kurdish nationalist sentiment. [Reuters]
Canada, too, stands as an example of a state that has grappled with
demands for autonomy, particularly from the province of Quebec. Though
debate regarding the level of provincial autonomy continues there, it
is a peaceful part of the political process rather than a cause for
war.
However, as noted by Turkish detractors of autonomy, the geopolitical
and ethno-cultural realities of Turkey and the Middle East are much
different than of Spain and Canada.
Crucial to any system of political autonomy is a large degree of state
decentralisation, something that has long been considered an anathema
by the Turkish state. Officially, the central state is the arbiter of
many local policies, a fact that leads to a system both inefficient
and, for many, undesirable.
In a country where the Kurdish language was illegal until the early
1990s and its use is still curtailed in some settings today, the ideal
of equality — let alone autonomy — may seem out of reach.
Juha Raikka, a professor at Finland’s University of Turku who has
studied the practical and ethical facets of autonomy, says the public
must be tolerant for such solutions to be practical.
“The main condition is general acceptance of the solution,” Raikka
told SETimes. “Canadians accept that Quebec has autonomy. Finns accept
that the island of Aland has autonomy. That is why regional autonomy
works well.”
KB, a political writer and founder of the blog Kurdistan Commentary,
expressed scepticism about Turkey’s readiness for such autonomy.
“If speaking Kurdish is seen as threatening the territorial integrity
of the state, how could autonomy be possible? The Kurds need to be
recognised constitutionally and guaranteed their rights before
autonomy can be considered.”
According to Natali, the lack of readiness exists not simply within
the public, but at the state level, as well.
“Turkish officials, institutions, and political parties remain
committed to the unity and the stability of the state,” she says,
adding that “the very idea of an autonomous Kurdistan Region bordering
another autonomous Kurdistan region in Iraq would undermine that sense
of security and unity.”
Natali emphasises that a unilateral decision such as that made by the
DTK has no hope of affecting true change in Turkey.
“Any change in the nature of the Turkish state and its institutions
would have to engage constitutional and administrative reforms
acceptable to the Turkish populations and officials, including the
devolution of powers to the regions,” Natali says.
Indeed, the consensus is that constitutional change is at the heart of
any potential compromise between the restive Kurdish populace and the
less than flexible AKP, which makes extensive use of nationalist
sentiments to garner votes.
“The constitution is the key,” Barkey emphasised. “No matter what
happens, Turkey needs a new constitution. If nothing emerges from
Ankara on this front, all bets are off.”
As the solution is delayed and the impasse deepens, however, the
prospect of productive co-operation dims.
“The passage of time makes things always more difficult to settle,”
Barkey said. “What people do not understand is that in conflictual
situations, barring unexpected dramatic developments, time works
against the simplest compromise.”
This content was commissioned for SETimes.com.
From: Baghdasarian