Hakan Tahmaz, Chair of the Peace Foundation, said that the process initiated by Abdullah Öcalan is more advanced than previous ones, stressing that differences of opinion among political parties and regional developments pose both opportunities and risks for this process.
Speaking to ANF, Tahmaz underlined that the fact that most parliamentary parties have met at a common point demonstrates that the current process is more advanced than previous ones. “The consensus reached over the commission’s work and evaluation of the process marks an unprecedented level,” he said.
Risks created by uncertainties
Tahmaz said that while the commission was an important step, certain uncertainties in the process carry serious risks. “Especially regarding the AKP, there is no clarity about what they will do. There are strong indications that they are reducing the entire process to disarmament, essentially equating it with the laying down of arms. I believe this poses significant risks to the process,” he said.
To avoid missing the opportunity
Tahmaz emphasized that the point reached through Öcalan’s call and the PKK’s subsequent decisions are very positive. He added: “This is a historic opportunity for resolving the Kurdish question without weapons or conflict, but through law and politics. To avoid missing this opportunity, everyone must shoulder greater responsibility. In this regard, the commission can play a very important role. Despite all its shortcomings, it is an opportunity for the socialization of peace and the development of societal consensus on the basis of equal citizenship. The Parliament is the most important pillar of peace’s legitimacy. That is why it is significant that this process begins in Parliament.”
Reducing it to disarmament is a mistake
Tahmaz said there are difficulties regarding the political will that has emerged: “The problem arises from each party evaluating the commission and the new process from its own perspective. There is no full consensus on the commission’s purpose; even its name was decided at the last minute. Reducing the issue to simply the PKK dissolving itself and the removal of arms would be a major mistake. The silencing of weapons and the end of conflict is certainly valuable, but global experience show that even the resolution of armed conflicts requires a negotiation framework. Even if weapons are set aside, cultural and social violence may continue. Therefore, eliminating all forms of violence depends on establishing a genuine political solution and a negotiation ground.”
Equal citizenship and free life
Recalling that following Öcalan’s call on February 27, the Peace Foundation also began preparations and translated into Turkish the 2021 book Negotiation Process in Nonviolent Political Conflicts by Vicenç Fisas, founder of the Peace School at the University of Barcelona, Tahmaz said: “Because the PKK’s declaration to end armed struggle, or the organization’s dissolution, does not automatically resolve the problem of equal citizenship or the use of collective rights. We regard this process as a new stage in shifting the demand for peace, the struggle for equal citizenship, and the quest for free life onto the political ground and into society. In my view, Öcalan’s February 27 call was both a call for the PKK to dissolve itself and for society to struggle for a resolution of the issue within legal and political frameworks.”
AKP intolerant of Kurdish gains
Tahmaz warned that failing to seize this opportunity would cost Turkey valuable time: “Previously, when the talks collapsed, Ankara realized just how great an opportunity had been missed. The Kurdish issue is taking on new forms. The AKP government has come to a position where it is not only opposed to Kurds’ basic rights domestically, but also intolerant of Kurdish gains elsewhere. Today, the main reason for international involvement is the government’s attitude, particularly its Rojava policies, which amount to interference in Syrian territory and treating it as a threat. Recently, steps have been taken to heighten domestic political tensions, while attempts at Kurdish unity in Rojava are also being obstructed.”
The process is being stalled
Tahmaz added: “On the one hand, with operations targeting the CHP and rising political tensions, domestic politics in Turkey is becoming more fraught. On the other hand, efforts at unity between the HTS administration in Rojava and the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria are being met with hostile rhetoric. This hampers the socialization of peace and stalls the process. Instead of producing and strengthening ways of living together with Kurds and other communities both in the Middle East and within Turkey’s future, Turkish politics—and in particular Hakan Fidan’s rhetoric—takes the exact opposite stance. Some may view this as an intra-party power struggle, but I believe it reflects state policy. Such an approach undermines Öcalan’s efforts to transform the Kurdish political movement and its armed forces into democratic politics and a legal framework, and it is incompatible with today’s global realities. The AKP’s moves to exclude the CHP from the process expose its inconsistency. Even the calls and legal steps taken by the MHP highlight the gap between the AKP and MHP, as well as the AKP’s reluctance. This poses risks; it is difficult to predict where the current tensions will lead, and particularly the frictions between the AKP and MHP may cause the process to stall.”
Source: ANF News
