Share this
Ehmed Pelda
“Erdoğan’s Diyarbakır visit is a reflection of the failure of the policy to force the Kurds into submission. The failure has already been witnessed in Gare, Zap, Avashin and Metina, and is now echoing in Diyarbakır. The rest are mere details,” writes Ehmed Pelda for Yeni Yaşam.
All the plans were prepared with the objective of rendering the Kurds ineffective, breaking their will, bringing them under control and subjucating them. There was a common goal in the ceasefire moves starting in 1993, Oslo and the İmralı negotiations, the Dolmabahçe declaration, the violence in Kurdish cities, the trustees coup against elected mayors, imprisoning members of parliament and politicians, military interventions in Afrin, Serê Kaniyê, Gire Spi and Southern Kurdistan: Forcing the Kurds into submission.
It’s true that the Kurds have paid heavy price. They have been robbed of many rights previously won in the legal struggle. Many women, people both young and old, the civilians and fighters have lost their lives. Families have been ruined. Cities, lands, historical remains, the flora, trees have been plundered.
We may criticize mistakes of the freedom movement in the military and political spheres in terms of methods and tactics if we go into details, but strategically the only motive of the movement has been self-defense. Öcalan’s search for a peaceful solution since 1993, his transforming this to a strategic vision clearly demonstrates the frame of mind, approach and strategy of the present movement. If the war apparatus is still running, this is related to nothing more than self-defense.
And this defense, despite the heavy price paid, successfully countered the ongoing plan to force the Kurds into submission. Today the legal and democratic bodies of the Kurds are still intact and of key importance in Turkey’s political structure. Despite the threat of dissolving political parties, the policies of arresting elected officials, seizing and obstructing local governments, neither the freedom movement nor the the people have given ground.
Despite the deception, the tricks, the huge military offensives carried on with the support of both NATO and Russia, the occupation of cities and lands, the system in Northern and Eastern Syria is able to defend and develop its mechanisms, economic, political and military structures against Turkey. It is also able to solidify further its recognition in the local and international spheres.
Most recently the attempt to occupy Southern Kurdistan and destroy the organisation, in par with [the Turkish Minister of Defense] Hulusi Akar’s talks with the Regional Government, Iraqi Government, England, Germany and NATO, has been blocked in spite of the support of all of the aforementioned parties. There might have been deployments in certain locations. F-16s, helicopters, armed and unarmed drones, chemical weapons, trained dogs, village guards, gangs that have been extensively used. But the resistance, the steadfast will, infrastructure and capacity of PKK continues to remain unruptured. This is best known by Hulusi Akar himself and he has admitted it.
After having used up all political, legal and military means, the Turkish rulers have turned to the last resort of having Kurds kill each other.
However they have faced an unexpected civil, social and political resistance on this path as well, and they have found themselves in yet another dead end. Despite Germany’s interference against the representatives of the civil resistance, its open support to Turkey, the operations against the civil resistance in the Southern Kurdistan, the people of the South, artists, NGOs, a majority of the political parties, did not permit a confrontation between the Kurds. The planned moves have been blocked.
Erdoğan’s Diyarbakır [Amed] visit is a reflection of his desperation and predicament. This must not be reduced to an election policy, to merely government tactics. Nor should the implementatation of a long term state policy be identified with a single political party.
In this context it is of vital importance to recognise once again the value of resistance. Thus the policies must be reshaped in preparation for new moves.
