Despite Abdullah Öcalan’s isolation on Imrali Island, his “Call for Social Peace and a Democratic Society” in February, the Kurdistan Workers’ Party’s (PKK) decision to burn its weapons after its 12th Congress, and finally, its announcement to withdraw from Turkey have all drawn renewed attention to Öcalan’s hope for peace and the steps Turkey must take.
Research Coordinator of the Political and Social Research Center (SAMER), Yüksel Genç, spoke to ANF about these developments.
Yüksel Genç stated that Abdullah Öcalan and the PKK have taken all necessary steps for the integrity of the peace process, but that society does not have sufficient trust in the government, parliament, or opposition. Genç said: “Even though society still supports the peace process, there is caution about whether it can truly succeed and deliver results. Based on the findings of our previous research, we can say that there is a lack of trust in how well the ruling power, the opposition, and institutions such as the Parliament are fulfilling their roles and missions in relation to this process.
For example, the greatest lack of confidence appears to be directed toward the government, followed by the opposition and the Parliament. Therefore, in Turkey, the perception that the main political actors have not fulfilled their roles and missions in carrying out a peace process creates a major obstacle.
This situation stands out as one of the main reasons preventing the overcoming of the barrier of social trust. The data we obtained in our field studies show that Mr. Öcalan and the PKK have fulfilled their role and mission. However, there remains a lack of confidence that the government, the opposition, and the Parliament will do their part, and people continue to approach them with caution.”
The Parliamentary Commission falls short of expectations
Yüksel Genç noted that public expectations regarding the parliamentary commission formed to address the peace process are low and said: “It is widely believed that the role expected from Parliament and the newly established commission does not align with the current situation. The expectation that the commission will strengthen the peace process in a positive way is quite low.
There is a strong belief among the public that the government, the mainstream opposition, and Parliament have not adequately fulfilled their respective roles. People point to the lack of mutual steps as the main reason for this. In order to overcome the barrier of public distrust, both sides must take steps toward one another. A process in which public confidence is not secured always has a weak chance of success.”
Yüksel Genç stated that no confidence-building steps were taken following Abdullah Öcalan’s historic declaration in February and continued: “Under normal circumstances, following Mr. Öcalan’s historic declaration, steps that would instill public confidence should have been taken. After the decision to lay down arms, tangible and visible actions were also expected. In fact, under normal conditions, concrete measures should have followed the establishment of mutual trust. Steps that would facilitate and strengthen the process and give confidence to society should have been taken in Turkey; however, it seems that these were not sufficiently observed.
The decisions made during the PKK’s 12th Congress were already historic. Very radical steps were taken that rendered the long-standing discourse of ‘survival’ and ‘division,’ which consolidated social fear around the PKK, meaningless. At a time when a profile capable of taking much stronger steps existed, the state failed to act.
The burning of weapons was a clear demonstration of the sincerity and seriousness in implementing these decisions. As you know, the withdrawal was also announced yesterday. This withdrawal should be seen as a crucial turning point in itself. When an armed force withdraws its units from conflict zones, it is a clear declaration that it no longer poses a threat to society and that there is no longer an internal security concern.
Moreover, the PKK has shown great self-sacrifice in this regard. The PKK has completely prevented the emergence of any potential ground that could be exploited for conspiratorial mechanisms. It appears to have closed off all possible avenues through which the process could be provoked or sabotaged from within.
Therefore, after such serious and selfless steps taken for the integrity of the process, if the government still fails to take meaningful action, it will lead to the weakening of society’s connection to the process and a further erosion of trust in the government.”
Mr. Öcalan should have been granted the ‘Right to Hope’ after the February declaration
Yüksel Genç emphasized that Abdullah Öcalan should have been granted the “right to hope” following the February Declaration and that he should have led the process as the chief negotiator. Genç added: “After the February Declaration, Mr. Öcalan should have been granted the right to hope and allowed to conduct his role as the chief negotiator under fair conditions. Since that declaration, steps that would build confidence and clear the path, such as the release of political prisoners, the freeing of ill detainees, amendments to the execution law, and the abolition of the Anti-Terror Law, should have been implemented. Yet none of these measures have been taken so far.
Had these measures and reforms been realized, instead of withdrawing its forces from Turkey, the PKK could have disarmed and considered participating in social life with the goal of transforming Turkey’s political sphere. However, due to the continuing lack of guarantees, the process still has limited potential to achieve the desired transformation in political and social areas. This situation has effectively shifted the withdrawal not into civilian life but beyond the borders.”