Peace process in Turkey: Where are we at?


2015-03-10 10:59:22

NEWS CENTER (DİHA) - The following article “Peace process in Turkey: Where are we at?” was written by Amed Dicle and appeared in Özgür Gündem. It has been translated by Kurdish Question into English below.

After the statement that was jointly read out by the HDP and the AKP everyone is now awaiting for concrete steps to be taken. Other than the earlier planned visit of Sirri Sureyya Onder and Leyla Zana to Imrali Island, there hasn’t been any significant development in the past 10 days. According to HDP MP Idris Baluken, a HDP delegation will first go to Qandil to meet with KCK officials and then head to Imrali to meet with Abdullah Ocalan.

In order for the negotiation process to be put back on track, certain practical arrangements have to be made. The first thing that needs to be done is the changing of the inmates in Imrali Prison and for an administrative team to be sent next to Ocalan. This point was previously agreed upon by the government. Even the names of the people that were supposed to be in this team were approved. There is absolutely no obstacle in the way of this materialising.

Another urgent matter is the release of critically ill prisoners. Contrary to what AKP officials are saying, there is no juridical obstacle blocking this from happening. Prime Minister Davutoglu himself blocked this from happening after the uprisings of 6-8 October last year.

Another concrete step that needs to be taken at this stage is the formation of the ‘observatory committee’. It has been stated that the names of the people deemed appropriate for such a committee have also been discussed at Imrali. It is expected that this committee will take part in future meetings and observe the negotiations between the two sides.

These methodological measures will have an impact on the essence of the process. It is not right to deem the process a success or failure without these steps being taken.

The Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Ocalan had presented the government and the PKK with a draft document outlining the parameters of the negotiations in November last year. The document consisted of 4 headings and 66 subheadings and was approved of by all sides. The statement read out jointly by the HDP and AKP on the 28th of February was a summary of this document.

According to the draft, all headings were to be negotiated on. These negotiations would be completed by the 15th of February. If these headings were to be agreed on then this would be followed by concrete steps.

Ocalan is proposing for a committee to be formed in Parliament to oversee the practical steps. The job of this committee — that should also have members from outside of parliament — is to research the truths. Ocalan is demanding that this committee meets with him first. In this meeting Ocalan wants to explain why the PKK took up arms and he also wants the mistakes and errors committed by both sides during the conflict to be investigated. The reason for this proposal is to enlighten the history of the conflict.

If the negotiation process had been finalised by the 15th of February and this committee had been formed, then Ocalan was going to make the call to the PKK to gather its congress in April to declare that it was ending its armed struggle against Turkey. However, this never happened. In order to overcome this impasse, Ocalan made his call on the 28th of February. From this point onwards the process can only move forward as follows:

By adding new members to the Imrali delegation Ocalan will form his own negotiation team and just like in the previous two meetings the state delegation will be present at the meetings. In the last two meetings the Undersecretary of Public Security Muhammet Dervisoglu and two other officials were present. It is not known whether these people will continue to be at the meetings or if the personnel will change. These are important issues as it will determine whether the government is sincere in its approach to the process. Those that are at the meeting on behalf of the state need to have some sort of power of sanction.

The observatory committee has an important role to play in overcoming any differences between the sides and making sure each side holds up to their own promises.

Both sides will negotiate on each and every one of the articles on the draft document, bringing in specialist supervisors if and when necessary.

Even if the process continues in a healthy manner, all articles proposed in the draft require legislative amendments. In any case, the last of the 10 articles in the document is the drafting of a new constitution.

Seeing as the parliament is set to close on the 5th of April, this is not possible to achieve. So what will happen?

The expectancy of the Kurdish movement is this: For all sides to sign an agreement at the end of the negotiation, for certain steps to be taken before the election and for the newly elected parliament to pass the legislative measures required as part of the negotiations.

It is worth mentioning here that whether the PKK gathers its congress or not, or what kind of decisions it will take if it does all depends on the content of the negotiations. If the negotiation process results in success and the parliamentary commission referred to above is formed and meets with Ocalan, then the agenda of the PKK’s congress will have been predetermined. Ocalan is hoping to give a clear message to this commission.

Are all of these going to happen? Well there is a serious lack of trust for the AKP government. The government still does not possess a working roadmap. Rather, it is just trying to counter the moves made by Ocalan. In actual fact, the AKP’s DNA is incompatible with accepting the Kurds as a people. However, the state’s Kurdish policy has irreversibly collapsed. The problem now is that they are unable to come up with a new Kurdish policy and this is the real holdup. The real danger is that this indecision is making AKP play for time and this scenario doesn’t end well for anyone.

The Kurdish movement wants to make the transition from armed struggle to political struggle. This organisation took up arms because all political aisles were blocked; now it is determined to force through a political opening. The perception of the Kurdish people is that only an armed struggle could have made all the developments of today possible. The armed struggle is seen as the guarantor of political gains. The state policies of Turkey in the last 90 years left the Kurds with no other choice. We will find out in a short time whether this policy has changed or not.

In short, rather than asking whether the PKK will gather its congress or not and declare an end to the armed struggle, we must follow the negotiations in Imrali and see what is made of the articles in the draft document.

(nt)