Serhat Eren, an MP for the Peoples’ Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party) from Diyarbakır (Amed), said that the latest report by the Sociopolitical Field Research Center (SAMER) titled “Analysis of Public Opinion Surveys Conducted in the Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia Regions in the Context of Periodic Discourse and Practices” shows that people in the region offer cautious and conditional support for the process.
Eren noted that the economic crisis and unemployment stand among public concerns, while demands related to the Kurdish issue, particularly legal guarantees, sentence enforcement regulations, and the “right to hope”, have gained strength. He added that public trust in the process is shaped by the consistency between political discourse and concrete practice.
It is not possible to explain this process with one or two steps alone
Serhat Eren stated that public support for the resolution process has increased, referring to the SAMER survey conducted in 16 provinces where Kurds predominantly live.
Eren said: “Several findings from SAMER’s research need to be highlighted. It should be stated that confidence in this process has grown following the call of 27 February, the holding of the congress on 5–7 May, and the laying down of arms on 11 July. The survey conducted in 16 provinces where Kurds predominantly live found that Kurds largely support this process. At the same time, we see that the steps taken throughout the process have been viewed positively, and that this has been welcomed in terms of responsibilities being fulfilled.
However, it is also clear that the laying down of arms and the decision of dissolution alone are not sufficient for resolving the Kurdish issue through democratic means and methods. Throughout this process, which has continued for more than a year, society has expressed that the government and parliament have not fulfilled their responsibilities. The failure to take concrete legal steps has undermined trust in the process. There are steps that need to be taken to rebuild public confidence.
Ultimately, following Abdullah Öcalan’s call, arms were laid down, and dissolution took place. The necessary steps were taken to move the Kurdish issue onto political and legal footing. From this point on, the government bears responsibility for making improvements in the field of democratic politics. Undoubtedly, it is not possible to explain this process with one or two steps alone.”
The process must evolve into a positive peace process
Serhat Eren said the report highlights serious structural deficiencies in the process, stressing that the failure to take legal steps has undermined public trust.
Eren also said: “One of the prominent findings in the survey conducted across 16 provinces is that the non-recognition of the right to hope and the principle of hope is seen as a problem. Likewise, the failure to provide guarantees for those involved in the mechanism, from Öcalan on Imrali Island to members of commissions, stands out as another serious issue. The fact that necessary regulations, particularly regarding the Anti-Terror Law and the Penal Code, have not been implemented appears to have damaged trust and hope in the process, according to the findings.
In the initial stage of the democratic resolution of the Kurdish issue, efforts were made to socialize the process after a commission was established within parliament. Numerous civil society organizations, businesspeople, and legal groups were consulted, and this phase was valuable in terms of embedding the process within society. However, this phase has now been completed.
In the second stage, legal steps were expected to secure non-conflict. The prolonged nature of this phase and the continued absence of concrete measures have increased public doubts and deepened distrust in the process.
Ultimately, to ensure the social and political participation of those who laid down arms, this process, described as negative peace, must evolve into a positive peace process. For this to happen, the necessary legal steps must be taken. The findings show that these steps have not been taken so far.”
Producing social consent is essential
Eren stated that international experiences in ending armed conflicts show social consent is indispensable for making peace durable and said: “In such resolution processes, there are certain steps that must be taken to bring an end to armed conflict. This is not unique to Turkey; there are many examples of this around the world. Global experience tells us the following: in resolving a social issue, social consent must first be produced. Efforts that will socialize the solution and peace must be carried out by both sides. Kurds have undertaken many such efforts and continue to do so.
However, when we look at the government, we see that before taking the necessary legal steps and regulations, it has failed to put forward a language and stance that would strengthen social consent. This can be observed across the board, from pro-government media outlets and television channels to politicians and the language they use. We still see that the language has not changed, and that the concept of peace continues to be criminalized by being associated with terrorism.
If social consent is not produced and society is not prepared for a resolution and peace process, taking legal steps and making regulations becomes more difficult. The deadlock we are experiencing today stems in part from this. Because both the government and the opposition have failed to fulfill their responsibilities in this regard, the government appears blocked and weakened on the urgent legal regulations that need to be enacted.”
Democratic negotiations must be conducted on equal terms
Serhat Eren stressed that urgent and concrete steps are needed to strengthen public hope in the process, saying that democratic negotiations must be carried out on equal terms.
Eren said: “When asked about the urgent steps that would enable society to view this process with hope and optimism, it is first necessary to speak of an ongoing negotiation process. Democratic negotiation requires the parties to have equal conditions in temporal and spatial terms. Today, while the state has the capacity to engage in talks and discussions through all its institutions, the other party to the negotiation, Abdullah Öcalan, has none of these conditions. For this reason, equality in negotiation must first be ensured, and the path to these passes through the legal recognition of the right to hope for Öcalan.
Recognizing the right to hope is not only a political matter; it is also a legal obligation under the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). At the same time, enabling Öcalan, who is a central actor in resolving a problem that has persisted for more than a century, to conduct this process under free conditions is a political necessity. The first concrete step that must be taken is to place the right to hope under legal guarantee.
Secondly, there is the reality of an organization that has declared its dissolution and the laying down of arms. This stance has been demonstrated in practice for more than a year. In such a situation, while the state should take immediate steps to strengthen the ground for democratic politics, the government is failing to seize this opportunity. Legal regulations must be enacted to ensure the social and political participation of those who laid down arms, those currently in prison, and tens of thousands of people who are abroad for political reasons.
These steps would secure non-conflict and transform the negative peace process into a positive peace. However, this would not, of course, mean the complete resolution of the Kurdish issue. The need remains for constitutional guarantees for identities and languages, the strengthening of local democracy, and a new social contract.
At the same time, there are administrative steps that could be taken without requiring any legal amendments. Even symbolic yet effective practices, such as providing Kurdish interpreters in public institutions, could strengthen public trust. Despite this, we see that the government has not taken even these steps and that a negative trajectory continues.”
The opposition’s approach to a solution is also inadequate
Eren also assessed the opposition’s stance on the process, saying that declarations of support fall short of producing a solution and said: “The surveys conducted show that the opposition also supports this process; however, we can say that this support is quite insufficient. I can describe the opposition’s position as follows: a patient goes to a doctor, the doctor diagnoses the illness, but then says, ‘let the chief physician change first, and then we will begin treatment.’ This is exactly the opposition’s approach. The existence of the Kurdish issue is acknowledged, but the solution is postponed with the argument of ‘after we come to power.’ Can such an understanding be acceptable?
On the one hand, statements are made expressing support for the process; on the other hand, we see almost the same language as that of the government in the opposition media, among its academics, lawyers, and politicians. This attitude is also clearly visible on television screens. Acknowledging the existence of the problem while assuming no responsibility whatsoever for its solution is unacceptable. The opposition also bears responsibility for socialization and for producing social consent. It is necessary to move away from an approach that names a century-old problem yet remains entirely outside the resolution process.
On the other hand, surveys conducted across four different periods over the course of the year reveal that one of society’s most fundamental problems is the economic crisis. This situation is not independent of the war and conflict environment produced by the insistence on leaving the Kurdish issue unresolved. The channeling of the country’s resources into war for forty years has led to the deepening of the economic crisis. If the Kurdish issue is resolved, it will be possible to allocate resources not to war but to public welfare, which would in turn push the economic problem into the background.”