Tweet
Hurriyet Daily News, Turkey
Nov 20 2009
Peace processes
Friday, November 20, 2009
CENGÄ°Z AKTAR
Perhaps, it's better to name all ongoing initiatives under `peace
processes' without giving any specific ethnic or political status to
them. Because, this is the first time that Turkey is genuinely trying
to pronounce the word `peace.' It has been either blabbing or failing
to pronounce it correctly or having a hard time to say it or going
back to the only language it knows in view of speaking the language of
peace correctly. Clumsiness is the case everywhere, society, state or
politics. Indeed it is not easy to rid of century-old problems, deep
wounds that are hard to heal and serious heartbreaks. This is a period
when utmost patience, conscience as much as logic are required. But
there is a group refuting the use of the language of peace. That,
languages of the Republican People's Party, or CHP, and the
Nationalist Movement Party, or MHP, in a way to show which is better
in warmongering during the historical plenary hearing in the
Parliament last week about the `Kurdish opening.'
You all heard CHP deputy Onur Ã-ymen's chilling remarks indeed during
the first hearing held on Nov. 10:
`Unfortunately, mothers in this country have cried a lot. We have lost
many soldiers throughout history. We lost 200,000 in the Ã?anakkale
[Dardanelles] War. None came forward and said `Don't let mothers cry.
Let's forget about this war.' Did mothers not cry during the War of
Independence? Did mothers not cry in the Sheik Said revolt? Did
mothers not cry in the Dersim revolt? Did mothers not cry in Cyprus?
Did anyone say `Mothers should cry no more? Let's have a deal with the
Greeks. But unfortunately you are saying this because you don't have
the guts to fight the terror.' In a sort of disclaimer Ã-ymen announced
in the aftermath of his `historical' remarks, probably due to his
referral to the Dersim massacre and due to fears of losing votes as he
implicitly targeted Alevis, the CHP deputy said: `As I said in my
speech, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk disagreed with the method of negotiating
with armed terror organizations as the Justice and Development Party
[or AKP] seems to favor. In the Republican period, indeed, Atatürk had
never negotiated with any armed groups revolting against the state.'
CHP's `political commissioner' is right though. Despite important
remarks, Mustafa Kemal made at the Ä°zmir Economy Congress in 1923
regarding the process through which human communities move away from
destructive fights to peaceful and productive activities, a peaceful
mindset has had difficulties to settle in this lands. The same goes
for Atatürk's famous quote, `Peace at home, peace in the world.' Just
like for Mustafa Kemal and for almighty elites of the time, all wars
Ã-ymen listed in his speech are weighing equally. It doesn't make a
difference if you fight against the British or French in the
Dardanelles or Alevis and Kurds in Dersim. You are fighting the enemy,
because these were considered as enemies of that community (Turks)
trying to become a nation. Or as Ziya Gökalp said once, `This state
needs a nation,' every other entity going against the description of
that nation was and is an `enemy.'
War lobby's stakes
The problem is that the CHP-MHP duo is doing politics today with a
mindset of those years. In fact, they are doing politics as the
representatives of a `war lobby.' In that sense, they are extremist
political parties. When it comes to peace processes, we have plenty of
signs that they will do everything in their power to prevent steps to
be taken, let alone providing support. We haven't heard anything new
during parliamentary sessions other than a command like `The PKK must
lay down arms' and a recommendation other than the CHP's 20-year-old
Kurdish report, which has been sent to the paper basket long time ago
by the CHP itself. The empire of fear built by the parliamentary
opposition in this country has any place neither in Turkey nor in its
new posture as a regional power, neither in the world conjuncture
today nor in Turkish society's expectations of peace and calm.
However, attitude of the CHP-MHP duo sets ongoing initiatives to an
extremely sensitive ground and makes public support vital. The AKP's
move to explain the initiatives to the public is crucially important.
The Interior Minister, during his presentation to Parliament on Nov.12
qualified the ongoing initiative as part of an overall democratic move
intending to bring more freedom to everyone. This new paradigm is
indeed essential to convince citizens who are against the singling out
of Kurds only when the government utters the words `democracy' and
`freedom.'
Along the same line, steps to be taken abroad are equally critical. We
should read relations newly established with the Regional Kurdish
Administration in northern Iraq in this direction because these
problems are external and cross-border as much as they are domestic.
Since the early days of the Republican period these problems were
usually tried to be solved by war and law enforcement solely. In other
words, if the `Kurdish initiative' and opening towards Armenia are not
supported by the Greek/Cypriot-Greek initiative, one of three legs of
the trivet will be missing. And there, the imbalance may encourage
those who are eager to block other initiatives. At this point, the
importance of a full fledge initiative, of which we have heard just
rumors so far, to tackle all existing discords between Turkey and
Greece, starting with the Cyprus question, is obviously crucial.
Nov 20 2009
Peace processes
Friday, November 20, 2009
CENGÄ°Z AKTAR
Perhaps, it's better to name all ongoing initiatives under `peace
processes' without giving any specific ethnic or political status to
them. Because, this is the first time that Turkey is genuinely trying
to pronounce the word `peace.' It has been either blabbing or failing
to pronounce it correctly or having a hard time to say it or going
back to the only language it knows in view of speaking the language of
peace correctly. Clumsiness is the case everywhere, society, state or
politics. Indeed it is not easy to rid of century-old problems, deep
wounds that are hard to heal and serious heartbreaks. This is a period
when utmost patience, conscience as much as logic are required. But
there is a group refuting the use of the language of peace. That,
languages of the Republican People's Party, or CHP, and the
Nationalist Movement Party, or MHP, in a way to show which is better
in warmongering during the historical plenary hearing in the
Parliament last week about the `Kurdish opening.'
You all heard CHP deputy Onur Ã-ymen's chilling remarks indeed during
the first hearing held on Nov. 10:
`Unfortunately, mothers in this country have cried a lot. We have lost
many soldiers throughout history. We lost 200,000 in the Ã?anakkale
[Dardanelles] War. None came forward and said `Don't let mothers cry.
Let's forget about this war.' Did mothers not cry during the War of
Independence? Did mothers not cry in the Sheik Said revolt? Did
mothers not cry in the Dersim revolt? Did mothers not cry in Cyprus?
Did anyone say `Mothers should cry no more? Let's have a deal with the
Greeks. But unfortunately you are saying this because you don't have
the guts to fight the terror.' In a sort of disclaimer Ã-ymen announced
in the aftermath of his `historical' remarks, probably due to his
referral to the Dersim massacre and due to fears of losing votes as he
implicitly targeted Alevis, the CHP deputy said: `As I said in my
speech, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk disagreed with the method of negotiating
with armed terror organizations as the Justice and Development Party
[or AKP] seems to favor. In the Republican period, indeed, Atatürk had
never negotiated with any armed groups revolting against the state.'
CHP's `political commissioner' is right though. Despite important
remarks, Mustafa Kemal made at the Ä°zmir Economy Congress in 1923
regarding the process through which human communities move away from
destructive fights to peaceful and productive activities, a peaceful
mindset has had difficulties to settle in this lands. The same goes
for Atatürk's famous quote, `Peace at home, peace in the world.' Just
like for Mustafa Kemal and for almighty elites of the time, all wars
Ã-ymen listed in his speech are weighing equally. It doesn't make a
difference if you fight against the British or French in the
Dardanelles or Alevis and Kurds in Dersim. You are fighting the enemy,
because these were considered as enemies of that community (Turks)
trying to become a nation. Or as Ziya Gökalp said once, `This state
needs a nation,' every other entity going against the description of
that nation was and is an `enemy.'
War lobby's stakes
The problem is that the CHP-MHP duo is doing politics today with a
mindset of those years. In fact, they are doing politics as the
representatives of a `war lobby.' In that sense, they are extremist
political parties. When it comes to peace processes, we have plenty of
signs that they will do everything in their power to prevent steps to
be taken, let alone providing support. We haven't heard anything new
during parliamentary sessions other than a command like `The PKK must
lay down arms' and a recommendation other than the CHP's 20-year-old
Kurdish report, which has been sent to the paper basket long time ago
by the CHP itself. The empire of fear built by the parliamentary
opposition in this country has any place neither in Turkey nor in its
new posture as a regional power, neither in the world conjuncture
today nor in Turkish society's expectations of peace and calm.
However, attitude of the CHP-MHP duo sets ongoing initiatives to an
extremely sensitive ground and makes public support vital. The AKP's
move to explain the initiatives to the public is crucially important.
The Interior Minister, during his presentation to Parliament on Nov.12
qualified the ongoing initiative as part of an overall democratic move
intending to bring more freedom to everyone. This new paradigm is
indeed essential to convince citizens who are against the singling out
of Kurds only when the government utters the words `democracy' and
`freedom.'
Along the same line, steps to be taken abroad are equally critical. We
should read relations newly established with the Regional Kurdish
Administration in northern Iraq in this direction because these
problems are external and cross-border as much as they are domestic.
Since the early days of the Republican period these problems were
usually tried to be solved by war and law enforcement solely. In other
words, if the `Kurdish initiative' and opening towards Armenia are not
supported by the Greek/Cypriot-Greek initiative, one of three legs of
the trivet will be missing. And there, the imbalance may encourage
those who are eager to block other initiatives. At this point, the
importance of a full fledge initiative, of which we have heard just
rumors so far, to tackle all existing discords between Turkey and
Greece, starting with the Cyprus question, is obviously crucial.