Tweet
QANDIL HAS TERMS: KURDISH REBEL LEADER DISCUSSES EXPECTATIONS FROM PEACE PROCESS WITH TURKEY
Taraf, Turkey
June 1 2013
Interview by Ceyda Karan with Murat Karayilan on Mt Qandil
According to Murat Karayilan the most important condition for the
Kurds to go along with the presidential system is democratization.
We are in the Qandil Mountains in the region known as the "Medya
Defense Areas." We are sounding out the region while the PKK [Kurdistan
People's Congress, KGK] is leaving Turkey in groups.
Accordingly, together with Kurd journalist colleagues Erdal Er and
Gunay Aslan we got the opportunity to interview KCK [Assembly of
Communities of Kurdistan] Executive Council Chairman Murat Karayilan.
Under the shade of a huge walnut tree in the Qandil Mountains we
discussed the withdrawal process, the conference for peace and
democracy, what Karayilan calls "The New Turkey" as well as the
campaign to have Abdullah Ocalan set free, the AKP's [Justice and
Development Party] desires for a presidential system plus regional
developments starting with Syria.
Common Solution Project For All Component Parts
Karayilan says: "The Kurd problem is Turkey's problem. All those people
and circles in Turkey who feel responsible, who favor the peoples
living together, who favor fraternity and the peoples having equal
freedom need to consider the solution their duty. That is why our
leadership suggested four conferences." However, he underscores that
there is no manipulation on their part concerning the conferences:
"That is not the case. The groups there, the forces included in the
conference ran it on their own initiative." He believes the first
conference "attained a certain level of response."
"I think that as a first step it was a success, it was positive.
However, it could have had more scope. It should be expanded and
continued. For example, I think that by taking a second step it could
have greater scope and could be an important effort that targets those
groups that were unable to attend." He says that every group needs
to clarify their proposals through discussion and come up with a text
that can be called "the common solution project for all the component
parts." He continues: "Perhaps at the top there is a process that
is playing out as these forces clashing. Correct. However, the only
real way to find a deep-rooted and lasting solution to this problem is
through social accord. In other words, it is a problem that can only be
fixed by the inclusion of all social forces with everyone contributing
as much as they can, showing humility, developing empathy and with
everybody making a real effort to fix this century-old problem."
Wise Persons And Conference Not "Rivals"
So, is there any "rivalry" between the planned conferences and the
Wise Persons process that the government came up with to sell the
solution process to the Turkish public? Karayilan said: "There could
have been rivalry but really all those sides who genuinely favor a
solution to the problem need to treat these conferences as positive."
He adds: "Just as we find the Wise Persons activity to be lacking we
nevertheless see it as something positive. Why? We thought it was
going to have a much broader function, but it has been shaped with
a very different format and it is operating differently. All the
same, it is a good thing, we say. This is because they are trying
to generate a mindset in favor of the solution. They are trying to
convince people. This really is a good thing. All we are saying is
that its scope could have been different. Actually, the other side
should be thinking like that. So, this is a good activity. Now though,
a process that includes all the forces of democracy in Turkey, the
left-wing groups, the Alevi groups, other identities, the Armenians,
the Assyrians, the Suryanis, in fact all the groups that have been
kept out of the system until now, can of course develop much better.
If the other side really is in favor of a solution it really should
not ignore this."
The AKP Wants To Do Everything Its Own Way
Karayilan criticizes the AKP at this point: "The AKP seems to want to
do everything its own way. It wants to drive everything itself under
its own influence and its own supervision. If a problem has two sides
to it then both sides needs to have the initiative. But while the
AKP is trying to direct the process like this its approach is that of
treating the other side as a back-up, and this is unacceptable. Nobody
is anybody's back-up. They need to make it easier for all those
components that need to play a role to be able to play that role."
Emphasis On "New Turkey"
Karayilan emphasizes the "New Turkey" saying: "If we really want to
develop a process of social accord, we need to include all of this
society's components like it or not, especially the left-wing ones,
the social democrat groups and all those groups that have been kept
out of the system and even harmed by it until now so that we can form
a new Turkey. I mean, if we really are talking about forming a new
Turkey what is this new Turkey going to be like? Is it going to take
shape only with a handful of projects being run by the AKP in its
line of thought? No. New Turkey is only possible with the powerful,
initiative-taking and active participation of all social groups and
the political will that speaks for them. Some people are saying the
AKP is running the show so we should wait and see what the AKP is going
to do. That approach is wrong. No. Everybody needs to be included and
active and influential. I think that would be the correct approach."
Gulen Community Should Come Along Too
We ask who the other groups were whose participation was hoped for:
"Does this include political Islamists, the Gulen Community and the
business world?" Karayilan's answer was interesting: "Included of
course, why not? They can come along. This problem is all of Turkey's
problem, not just the problem of the left. This first formation in a
way shaped the left's perspective. Common ground was formed. It can
now grow and become broader. There could be effort to this end. For
example, with a second step you could work to include even more diverse
groups. This would produce an even more refined solution project,
one that everybody could take charge of."
On The Contrary, We Understand The Process Better Than Anyone
We ask about the government's criticism of Karayilan in particular
Yalcin Akdogan's comment of "he misunderstands the process." Karayilan
appears reluctant to engage in polemics. He says he does not want to
create more problems for the process. However, he does stress: if we
really had misunderstood the process we would not be at this point
now. I can say that he has got it all wrong, that we understand the
process very well indeed and that we have tried to read the spirit
of the times correctly."
What The CHP And MHP Are Taking Advantage Of Karayilan finds fault
with the way the CHP [Republican People's Party] is criticizing the
government saying, "The process is not transparent." "The AKP has yet
to present its own solution project. Actually, the process is more
transparent than the previous one, more transparent than Oslo. But
not entirely. The reason for this is that the AKP has not clearly
presented the public with the government's or the state's perspective
on a solution or its project. That is why some groups are asking what
is going on. Furthermore, those who are opposed to the process are
taking advantage of this and adopting an even more critical approach.
In fact, some part of the CHP and the MHP [Nationalist Action Party]
are exploiting this. Yet, if what is wanted is presented clearly there
is nothing here that the Turkish people will be offended by. We are
not talking about Turkey breaking up but about a project that will
cements Turkey's voluntary and lasting unity. We think it is wrong
to portray giving the Kurds their rights, which are universal and
natural rights, as being an under-the-table deal. I mean, I think
that should this be explained to the public in a more courageous
fashion it would provide an answer to those types of criticism."
Let Everything Be Discussed Openly
We ask Karayilan about criticism to the effect that in Turkey the
people learn about developments from him and not from the government:
"We actually share our opinions with the public as much as our means
will allow. There is nothing off limits for us but there is this:
Let us say there is something that has been discussed and debated by
both sides. We would naturally never fully disclose anything in a
way that would disturb the other side. That would not be nice. But
it is our wish that the projects be discussed openly. That is the
right thing to do."
Karayilan's New Turkey
So, does the "New Turkey" that Karayilan talks about rest on the
nation-state model? Karayilan first counts the Kurd problems and
the democratization of Turkey as inseparable parts: "New Turkey
should be a democratic country. It should a pluralist, egalitarian
and libertarian country. We think that the Kurd problem can only be
given a permanent solution on this basis. Turkey as a true democracy
means a solution for the Kurd problem."
Afterwards, he stresses self-rule and argues with the French example
that the central state structures are weak now: "The world's first
centrist nation-state was founded in France in 1789. After that, many
countries took France as their example when carrying out bourgeois
national democratic revolutions. Turkey also took France as its
example. But for example when the President of France passed away what
did Mitterand say? He said just as there was a need for centralization
in the founding of France back then, so there is just as much need
for decentralization in France's development today. And the island
of Corsica today is almost exemplary. It has its own parliament and
education in its own language. It has everything. This is happening
in France."
According to Karayilan, this means "being a model" and not "break-up."
France is not breaking up. It is a country that is taken as a model. A
model country for centralization, a single language, a single nation
etc. Today, though, it is developing local governance because it is
not possible for democratization to develop without first developing
the approach and the understanding of local government and developing
the means by which society can govern itself locally and be included.
Furthermore, social life is so rich now that it is difficult to govern
from a single center. This means that the economic structure that
has taken shape, in particular the level of science and technology
in this day and age, the improvements in the electro-technical field
and in the field of telecommunication; all these things have effected
radical changes in social life. Therefore, it has become difficult
to govern even one village or town from a single center. There is a
trend towards decentralization because people are seeing this."
Presidential System Will Make Life Hard
In his interview with veteran journalist Hasan Cemal, Karayilan
said that the parliamentary system had already failed to introduce
democracy and so there was no harm in debating the "presidential
system." Reminding him that within the PKK there was a powerful
leadership structure in which Ocalan was practically a "living legend,"
we ask Karayilan whether or not "the way of thinking in Turkey was
conducive to a presidential system in which all the mechanisms of
democratic control would function fully, or whether it might lead to
an authoritarian administration." Karayilan says: "For one thing,
the problem is without doubt one of mindset. I mean, it is not
possible to create a social superstructure without a change in the
way of thinking." He says the KCK system was created to develop local
administration not central. You can feel his concern at having his
comments on the presidential system interpreted as them being ready to
reach an agreement with the AKP. Karayilan says: "The Kurd problem is
one that is forcing a solution in a very urgent fashion. We think that
discussing the solution to this problem together with the question of
whether the system in Turkey should be parliamentary or presidential
all within the same context might create further problems. That is
not our preference. But while Turkey is being restructured it is best
not to look out of one window only. I mean, you need to discuss the
alternatives. That is what we meant by saying, 'We are not necessarily
opposed to a presidential system.' What we are in favor of actually
is this: The Kurd problem needs to be treated separately. That is true.
Turkey's system problem needs to be discussed within the context of
democratization. But placing them both in the same basket and making
that basket heavier might make it harder to achieve a solution. That
is what worries us."
Opposed To Turkish-Style Presidency
According to Karayilan, the Kurds have some terms for accepting a
"presidential system": "What matters to us is democratization. I mean,
under any Turkish-style or Middle East-style presidential system in
which just one group has any say; there is no way such a system can
bring democracy or Turkey or be any use at all. We would never go
along with it. We are saying it would be correct to look for a system
that will bring democracy to Turkey and that if really has legal
underpinnings and local government and if initiatives are shared; if
it will bring maturity to the foundation for democratization and not
a tyrant, then yes it can be debated. In this respect, we are saying
that too much debate and putting this ahead of everything else will
cause a log-jam. Our proposal: do not lead with this."
What Does Second Stage Expect?
Karayilan boasts that they have fulfilled to a significant degree their
responsibilities for the solution and that they will continue to do
so. "Look, there is the ceasefire, the release of captive soldiers,
and the most important decision of all, to decide to withdraw and put
that decision into practice. In this respect, a huge distance has been
covered in terms of developing the climate for democratic debate and
preparing the grounds needed for new steps to be taken. This first
stage is coming to an end particularly with the fast current that is
going to take place in the month ahead. It is over, really." According
to Karayilan, the second stage needs to begin already: "The second
stage is all about the legal and constitutional topics pertaining to
fixing the Kurd problem. As a result, it is a period where the state
and the government need to do more of what needs to be done. We have
said this on many occasions. We expect this. We now expect the steps
that need to be taken to be put on the agenda."
First Expectations Of Second Stage: The release Of prisoners, The
KCK Trials
We ask Karayilan about his expectations of the "second stage," which
he says will begin next month. "The ball is now in the government's
court. There are things that need to be done first. The government
is forcing itself to wait, but for what we cannot say. There was that
trip the United States and back. Most recently there was that period
of trying to determine or direct developments in the region." He
says that before the constitution is changed there needs to be an
"annual clean up" and that the government has no more excuses left
not to take the democratization steps that it is going to take. He
lists his expectations.
He talks about the inmates in prison who have contracted fatal
illnesses: "They number in their dozens. I do not know for sure, but
close to 100. Normally, in any democratic and humanist county they
would be released because they are near the end of their lives or
they cannot make it under prison conditions. There have been times in
Turkey when sick prisoners are released on presidential orders. But
some sick prisoners are not released because they are Kurds. There
is discrimination. This discrimination needs to be over now. People
are dying in prison because they are Kurds. So, I think these kinds
of humanitarian steps ought to have been proposed by now."
One other expectation the PKK has is for the trials relating to the
KCK remand prisoners to be dropped: "Again, a process has begun that
will take guns out of the equation entirely in the Kurd problem. This
was started by Leader Apo [Ocalan] and we are committed to seeing it
through. What happens then? Politics happens. Should that not require
politicians in prison to be released? Everybody knows that none of the
KCK prisoners have done anything illegal in their lives, not so much
as carry a knife. They are only inside because they were in politics.
Examples like this could have been a road cleaning. Again, at the heart
of the, in inverted commas, Counterterrorism Law is martial law in
Kurdistan. It is legislation for martial law. So, seeing that we want
to launch a new era should this not be done away with? It should be,
of course. The government could do this without breaking a sweat.
If it were to do this, this would give us confidence and give our
society confidence too. We would take even more courageous steps."
Tomorrow: "Let Nobody Think we are Lowering our Sails"
[Translated from Turkish]
Taraf, Turkey
June 1 2013
Interview by Ceyda Karan with Murat Karayilan on Mt Qandil
According to Murat Karayilan the most important condition for the
Kurds to go along with the presidential system is democratization.
We are in the Qandil Mountains in the region known as the "Medya
Defense Areas." We are sounding out the region while the PKK [Kurdistan
People's Congress, KGK] is leaving Turkey in groups.
Accordingly, together with Kurd journalist colleagues Erdal Er and
Gunay Aslan we got the opportunity to interview KCK [Assembly of
Communities of Kurdistan] Executive Council Chairman Murat Karayilan.
Under the shade of a huge walnut tree in the Qandil Mountains we
discussed the withdrawal process, the conference for peace and
democracy, what Karayilan calls "The New Turkey" as well as the
campaign to have Abdullah Ocalan set free, the AKP's [Justice and
Development Party] desires for a presidential system plus regional
developments starting with Syria.
Common Solution Project For All Component Parts
Karayilan says: "The Kurd problem is Turkey's problem. All those people
and circles in Turkey who feel responsible, who favor the peoples
living together, who favor fraternity and the peoples having equal
freedom need to consider the solution their duty. That is why our
leadership suggested four conferences." However, he underscores that
there is no manipulation on their part concerning the conferences:
"That is not the case. The groups there, the forces included in the
conference ran it on their own initiative." He believes the first
conference "attained a certain level of response."
"I think that as a first step it was a success, it was positive.
However, it could have had more scope. It should be expanded and
continued. For example, I think that by taking a second step it could
have greater scope and could be an important effort that targets those
groups that were unable to attend." He says that every group needs
to clarify their proposals through discussion and come up with a text
that can be called "the common solution project for all the component
parts." He continues: "Perhaps at the top there is a process that
is playing out as these forces clashing. Correct. However, the only
real way to find a deep-rooted and lasting solution to this problem is
through social accord. In other words, it is a problem that can only be
fixed by the inclusion of all social forces with everyone contributing
as much as they can, showing humility, developing empathy and with
everybody making a real effort to fix this century-old problem."
Wise Persons And Conference Not "Rivals"
So, is there any "rivalry" between the planned conferences and the
Wise Persons process that the government came up with to sell the
solution process to the Turkish public? Karayilan said: "There could
have been rivalry but really all those sides who genuinely favor a
solution to the problem need to treat these conferences as positive."
He adds: "Just as we find the Wise Persons activity to be lacking we
nevertheless see it as something positive. Why? We thought it was
going to have a much broader function, but it has been shaped with
a very different format and it is operating differently. All the
same, it is a good thing, we say. This is because they are trying
to generate a mindset in favor of the solution. They are trying to
convince people. This really is a good thing. All we are saying is
that its scope could have been different. Actually, the other side
should be thinking like that. So, this is a good activity. Now though,
a process that includes all the forces of democracy in Turkey, the
left-wing groups, the Alevi groups, other identities, the Armenians,
the Assyrians, the Suryanis, in fact all the groups that have been
kept out of the system until now, can of course develop much better.
If the other side really is in favor of a solution it really should
not ignore this."
The AKP Wants To Do Everything Its Own Way
Karayilan criticizes the AKP at this point: "The AKP seems to want to
do everything its own way. It wants to drive everything itself under
its own influence and its own supervision. If a problem has two sides
to it then both sides needs to have the initiative. But while the
AKP is trying to direct the process like this its approach is that of
treating the other side as a back-up, and this is unacceptable. Nobody
is anybody's back-up. They need to make it easier for all those
components that need to play a role to be able to play that role."
Emphasis On "New Turkey"
Karayilan emphasizes the "New Turkey" saying: "If we really want to
develop a process of social accord, we need to include all of this
society's components like it or not, especially the left-wing ones,
the social democrat groups and all those groups that have been kept
out of the system and even harmed by it until now so that we can form
a new Turkey. I mean, if we really are talking about forming a new
Turkey what is this new Turkey going to be like? Is it going to take
shape only with a handful of projects being run by the AKP in its
line of thought? No. New Turkey is only possible with the powerful,
initiative-taking and active participation of all social groups and
the political will that speaks for them. Some people are saying the
AKP is running the show so we should wait and see what the AKP is going
to do. That approach is wrong. No. Everybody needs to be included and
active and influential. I think that would be the correct approach."
Gulen Community Should Come Along Too
We ask who the other groups were whose participation was hoped for:
"Does this include political Islamists, the Gulen Community and the
business world?" Karayilan's answer was interesting: "Included of
course, why not? They can come along. This problem is all of Turkey's
problem, not just the problem of the left. This first formation in a
way shaped the left's perspective. Common ground was formed. It can
now grow and become broader. There could be effort to this end. For
example, with a second step you could work to include even more diverse
groups. This would produce an even more refined solution project,
one that everybody could take charge of."
On The Contrary, We Understand The Process Better Than Anyone
We ask about the government's criticism of Karayilan in particular
Yalcin Akdogan's comment of "he misunderstands the process." Karayilan
appears reluctant to engage in polemics. He says he does not want to
create more problems for the process. However, he does stress: if we
really had misunderstood the process we would not be at this point
now. I can say that he has got it all wrong, that we understand the
process very well indeed and that we have tried to read the spirit
of the times correctly."
What The CHP And MHP Are Taking Advantage Of Karayilan finds fault
with the way the CHP [Republican People's Party] is criticizing the
government saying, "The process is not transparent." "The AKP has yet
to present its own solution project. Actually, the process is more
transparent than the previous one, more transparent than Oslo. But
not entirely. The reason for this is that the AKP has not clearly
presented the public with the government's or the state's perspective
on a solution or its project. That is why some groups are asking what
is going on. Furthermore, those who are opposed to the process are
taking advantage of this and adopting an even more critical approach.
In fact, some part of the CHP and the MHP [Nationalist Action Party]
are exploiting this. Yet, if what is wanted is presented clearly there
is nothing here that the Turkish people will be offended by. We are
not talking about Turkey breaking up but about a project that will
cements Turkey's voluntary and lasting unity. We think it is wrong
to portray giving the Kurds their rights, which are universal and
natural rights, as being an under-the-table deal. I mean, I think
that should this be explained to the public in a more courageous
fashion it would provide an answer to those types of criticism."
Let Everything Be Discussed Openly
We ask Karayilan about criticism to the effect that in Turkey the
people learn about developments from him and not from the government:
"We actually share our opinions with the public as much as our means
will allow. There is nothing off limits for us but there is this:
Let us say there is something that has been discussed and debated by
both sides. We would naturally never fully disclose anything in a
way that would disturb the other side. That would not be nice. But
it is our wish that the projects be discussed openly. That is the
right thing to do."
Karayilan's New Turkey
So, does the "New Turkey" that Karayilan talks about rest on the
nation-state model? Karayilan first counts the Kurd problems and
the democratization of Turkey as inseparable parts: "New Turkey
should be a democratic country. It should a pluralist, egalitarian
and libertarian country. We think that the Kurd problem can only be
given a permanent solution on this basis. Turkey as a true democracy
means a solution for the Kurd problem."
Afterwards, he stresses self-rule and argues with the French example
that the central state structures are weak now: "The world's first
centrist nation-state was founded in France in 1789. After that, many
countries took France as their example when carrying out bourgeois
national democratic revolutions. Turkey also took France as its
example. But for example when the President of France passed away what
did Mitterand say? He said just as there was a need for centralization
in the founding of France back then, so there is just as much need
for decentralization in France's development today. And the island
of Corsica today is almost exemplary. It has its own parliament and
education in its own language. It has everything. This is happening
in France."
According to Karayilan, this means "being a model" and not "break-up."
France is not breaking up. It is a country that is taken as a model. A
model country for centralization, a single language, a single nation
etc. Today, though, it is developing local governance because it is
not possible for democratization to develop without first developing
the approach and the understanding of local government and developing
the means by which society can govern itself locally and be included.
Furthermore, social life is so rich now that it is difficult to govern
from a single center. This means that the economic structure that
has taken shape, in particular the level of science and technology
in this day and age, the improvements in the electro-technical field
and in the field of telecommunication; all these things have effected
radical changes in social life. Therefore, it has become difficult
to govern even one village or town from a single center. There is a
trend towards decentralization because people are seeing this."
Presidential System Will Make Life Hard
In his interview with veteran journalist Hasan Cemal, Karayilan
said that the parliamentary system had already failed to introduce
democracy and so there was no harm in debating the "presidential
system." Reminding him that within the PKK there was a powerful
leadership structure in which Ocalan was practically a "living legend,"
we ask Karayilan whether or not "the way of thinking in Turkey was
conducive to a presidential system in which all the mechanisms of
democratic control would function fully, or whether it might lead to
an authoritarian administration." Karayilan says: "For one thing,
the problem is without doubt one of mindset. I mean, it is not
possible to create a social superstructure without a change in the
way of thinking." He says the KCK system was created to develop local
administration not central. You can feel his concern at having his
comments on the presidential system interpreted as them being ready to
reach an agreement with the AKP. Karayilan says: "The Kurd problem is
one that is forcing a solution in a very urgent fashion. We think that
discussing the solution to this problem together with the question of
whether the system in Turkey should be parliamentary or presidential
all within the same context might create further problems. That is
not our preference. But while Turkey is being restructured it is best
not to look out of one window only. I mean, you need to discuss the
alternatives. That is what we meant by saying, 'We are not necessarily
opposed to a presidential system.' What we are in favor of actually
is this: The Kurd problem needs to be treated separately. That is true.
Turkey's system problem needs to be discussed within the context of
democratization. But placing them both in the same basket and making
that basket heavier might make it harder to achieve a solution. That
is what worries us."
Opposed To Turkish-Style Presidency
According to Karayilan, the Kurds have some terms for accepting a
"presidential system": "What matters to us is democratization. I mean,
under any Turkish-style or Middle East-style presidential system in
which just one group has any say; there is no way such a system can
bring democracy or Turkey or be any use at all. We would never go
along with it. We are saying it would be correct to look for a system
that will bring democracy to Turkey and that if really has legal
underpinnings and local government and if initiatives are shared; if
it will bring maturity to the foundation for democratization and not
a tyrant, then yes it can be debated. In this respect, we are saying
that too much debate and putting this ahead of everything else will
cause a log-jam. Our proposal: do not lead with this."
What Does Second Stage Expect?
Karayilan boasts that they have fulfilled to a significant degree their
responsibilities for the solution and that they will continue to do
so. "Look, there is the ceasefire, the release of captive soldiers,
and the most important decision of all, to decide to withdraw and put
that decision into practice. In this respect, a huge distance has been
covered in terms of developing the climate for democratic debate and
preparing the grounds needed for new steps to be taken. This first
stage is coming to an end particularly with the fast current that is
going to take place in the month ahead. It is over, really." According
to Karayilan, the second stage needs to begin already: "The second
stage is all about the legal and constitutional topics pertaining to
fixing the Kurd problem. As a result, it is a period where the state
and the government need to do more of what needs to be done. We have
said this on many occasions. We expect this. We now expect the steps
that need to be taken to be put on the agenda."
First Expectations Of Second Stage: The release Of prisoners, The
KCK Trials
We ask Karayilan about his expectations of the "second stage," which
he says will begin next month. "The ball is now in the government's
court. There are things that need to be done first. The government
is forcing itself to wait, but for what we cannot say. There was that
trip the United States and back. Most recently there was that period
of trying to determine or direct developments in the region." He
says that before the constitution is changed there needs to be an
"annual clean up" and that the government has no more excuses left
not to take the democratization steps that it is going to take. He
lists his expectations.
He talks about the inmates in prison who have contracted fatal
illnesses: "They number in their dozens. I do not know for sure, but
close to 100. Normally, in any democratic and humanist county they
would be released because they are near the end of their lives or
they cannot make it under prison conditions. There have been times in
Turkey when sick prisoners are released on presidential orders. But
some sick prisoners are not released because they are Kurds. There
is discrimination. This discrimination needs to be over now. People
are dying in prison because they are Kurds. So, I think these kinds
of humanitarian steps ought to have been proposed by now."
One other expectation the PKK has is for the trials relating to the
KCK remand prisoners to be dropped: "Again, a process has begun that
will take guns out of the equation entirely in the Kurd problem. This
was started by Leader Apo [Ocalan] and we are committed to seeing it
through. What happens then? Politics happens. Should that not require
politicians in prison to be released? Everybody knows that none of the
KCK prisoners have done anything illegal in their lives, not so much
as carry a knife. They are only inside because they were in politics.
Examples like this could have been a road cleaning. Again, at the heart
of the, in inverted commas, Counterterrorism Law is martial law in
Kurdistan. It is legislation for martial law. So, seeing that we want
to launch a new era should this not be done away with? It should be,
of course. The government could do this without breaking a sweat.
If it were to do this, this would give us confidence and give our
society confidence too. We would take even more courageous steps."
Tomorrow: "Let Nobody Think we are Lowering our Sails"
[Translated from Turkish]