Peoples’ Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party) MP Zülküf Uçar evaluated the war and chaotic process in the Middle East as well as the search for a solution to the Kurdish issue. He emphasized that, for the “Democratic Society and Peace” vision developed by Abdullah Öcalan to succeed, the state must urgently enact legal regulations and adopt a transparent approach.
Uçar stated: “Mr. Öcalan’s recent emphasis regarding the process was that it should not be interpreted narrowly. For him, the process represents a new alternative to both historical and contemporary critical ruptures and political upheavals. Although this alternative has become concrete in Turkey between the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and the state, it is not limited to this context. Mr. Öcalan particularly warns all states against the hegemonic wars carried out through Iran. Noting that there are three competing political visions and lines in the Middle East, Mr. Öcalan seeks to develop a democratic solution. Both hegemonic states and the nation-states in the region have their own calculations of dominance. However, these calculations are not as consistent and coherent as they were during the Cold War. They possess the capacity to generate new wars and conflicts at any moment. The hegemonic pursuits taking place in Syria, Iraq, and Iran demonstrate that war and massacres are being constructed as the new reality of the Middle East.”
Responsibilities imposed on the state cannot be postponed
Mr. Öcalan has consistently argued, through highly compelling analyses, that a way out of the current chaotic political situation can be achieved through the establishment of a democratic republic. However, this vision places certain responsibilities on the state. His recent messages indicate that he is highly determined to ensure the success of the process. At every point of deadlock, he has presented the state with new paths and methods, effectively guiding it toward a solution. The process conducted along the axis of the state and the PKK primarily aims to develop the democratic republic. At the same time, Mr. Öcalan’s solution perspective encompasses a much broader vision. His references to Anatolia and Mesopotamia reflect this outlook. For Mr. Öcalan, the fundamental solution lies in democratizing society and thereby enabling it to gain a will for freedom.
Zülküf Uçar also highlighted that Abdullah Öcalan’s solution perspective has the potential to produce major outcomes in two directions. Uçar said: “On the one hand, it seeks to build the ‘Democratic Republic’ by compelling the state toward democratization; on the other hand, it aims to strengthen the social foundation as the principal basis of a political solution by developing the ‘Democratic Society.’ The reference to Anatolia and Mesopotamia reveals the objective of expanding the democratic society and making it functional as the primary method of resolution for this geography. In summary, based on Mr. Öcalan’s statements, the success of this process is a necessity for all parties. This is because the multifaceted calculations, rarely seen in the history of the Middle East, exert significant pressure on both states and societies. For Mr. Öcalan, the only way to prevent this pressure from turning into an explosion is through peace and democracy.”
Transparency in the state’s stance is vital for the process
Zülküf Uçar also assessed the current stage of the “Democratic Society and Peace” process and continued as follows: “If we look back at the February 27 Peace and Democratic Society call, we can understand where the process stands. On that day, Mr. Öcalan put forward a solution perspective that has not deviated up to the present. This perspective was built on two pillars: the dissolution of the PKK and the adoption of legal measures. Both Mr. Öcalan and the PKK have fulfilled all the responsibilities incumbent upon them. All ethical and political processes required by the solution vision defined at the outset have been carried out. The main missing element is the framework that Mr. Öcalan outlined in the call as the basis for a solution. This was defined as a ‘political and legal framework.’ The state’s area of responsibility lies precisely within this framework. However, it can be said that the state has not yet taken any steps in this regard. Had the will and capacity for a solution demonstrated by Mr. Öcalan been met by the relevant counterparts at the same level, the process would have reached success long ago. As previously noted, Mr. Öcalan, together with the PKK, is fulfilling his responsibilities to implement his own method of resolution while at the same time continuously urging the state to meet its obligations. In fact, nearly all the efforts that have brought the process to its current stage belong to Mr. Öcalan. With the adoption of legal regulations, the process will advance to a higher phase. For this reason, the most important criterion for determining the stage of the process is the transparency of the state’s stance. There is, however, another issue that must be emphasized. Mr. Öcalan did not design this process solely as a negotiation with the state. An additional opportunity, perhaps equally important, has emerged. Since the beginning of the process, the Kurdish people have gained significant opportunities for organization, even if these remain de facto. Strong possibilities have opened up for the development of a democratic society. The Kurdish people have also crossed important thresholds in efforts toward national unity. The process initiated by Mr. Öcalan has so far created linguistic, cultural, and organizational opportunities for the Kurdish people. In this sense, the process carries significant potential. With the implementation of legal regulations, this potential is likely to produce far more historic outcomes.”
Practical steps should not be delayed
Zülküf Uçar stressed the need for urgent steps to ensure the healthy progress of the process. Uçar said, “At the current stage of the process, the common expectation of all parties and society is that the state fulfills its responsibilities. It is known that this responsibility will be concretized through legal regulations. Denialist and assimilationist approaches must be abandoned. First and foremost, the Kurdish people must be included within the legal framework and their existential rights must be recognized. The way should also be paved for members of the PKK to enter democratic politics and engage in political activities freely. At the same time, it is essential that those in the diaspora and prisoners in jails, who represent one of the most significant issues of the past fifty years of conflict, be included within this legal framework. Mr. Öcalan defines the legal arrangements required by the process as a ‘democratic integration and peace law.’ In this context, the legal status of the Kurdish people, the opportunities for PKK members to participate in democratic politics, the release of all prisoners, and the return of exiles should all be addressed. These three headings are interrelated and constitute the most urgent issues.”
State must recognize Abdullah Öcalan as chief negotiator
Zülküf Uçar underlined that both the physical freedom of Abdullah Öcalan and the official recognition of his status in Imrali are crucial for the process to reach a faster and healthier conclusion. Uçar said, “First of all, it must be stated that Mr. Öcalan, through the ideas he has developed, is in a position to reconstruct social and political equations from the ground up and to influence all political visions. When conditions are provided for him to communicate directly with society, he can dismantle the walls of hostility that have been built for a century between the Kurdish people and the Turkish people. The ‘historical sociology’ method, through which he simultaneously draws on history and sociology, enables him to understand society in the most realistic way. Mr. Öcalan has a very powerful project that he can present to society. His physical freedom and the possibility of free communication are therefore essential. Within the current socio-political structure, where all conceptions of liberation have developed around power and ultimately transformed into mechanisms of oppression and exploitation, Mr. Öcalan offers society a perspective of freedom. For years, he has been seeking ways to restore the will for freedom within society. This will create significant opportunities not only for the healthy progress of the process but also for resolving the immense freedom problems of Middle Eastern societies. Of course, for the process to proceed in a healthy manner, this is one of the most urgent steps that must be taken without delay. Because, from this point onward, the establishment of conditions for ‘democratic negotiation’ is essential. Democratic negotiation requires that both parties have equal opportunities to speak and to advocate their methods of resolution. However, under the current conditions, such opportunities have not yet been provided for Mr. Öcalan. For democratic negotiation to function properly, the issue of his status must also be clarified. The state must recognize Mr. Öcalan as the chief negotiator and declare this to the entire society.”
Leave a Reply