In the begininng of last August,  Interior Minister Beşir Atalay started a process that is called Democratic Initiative to solve the Kurdish problem during the press conference he held. The language he used was really new and he implied that everyone from every region of the country will be consulted and every idea will be evaluated within the decision process. Actually he tried to take everyone’s opinion related to this issue since that day and tried to form a frame of the problem with a series of consultation meetings and workshop activities.

However, the extension of the negotiations and the issue that there is no appearance of any tangible packs on behalf of the goverment prepare a psychological base for dissapointment about a solution pack. For a constitutional regulation that is eventually necessary about the democratic problem parliament was not appearently giving hope. Because far away from doing so, CHP and MHP were not even accepting the existence of the Kurdish Problem and they clearly showed that their attitude to pose an obstacle for a solution.

In fact there were two dimensions of the problem that are not completely inseparable. The first and the most emergent one was to save the country from an environment of conflict, to stanch the blood. The second one was to correct the situation and the official discourse that created the Kurdish Problem in a frame of democratic initiative.

It is clear that in order to stop conflicts we need to discourage PKK terrorists located on mountains from armed struggle and persuade them to come back. However, neither the Turkish public opinion nor the official authorities are ready enough to decide about the reasons to take the weapons from PKK. The official discourse that was valid until now abide by the assumption that they were either “deceived to be located on mountains” or they yearn for coming back home with repentance when they were offered minimum penalty. It is clear that this simple assumption prevents a correct approach and it also created a false public discourse or public perception in this direction. As it was the assumption what should be done was to “convince the deceived ones” and to “give them a chance of repentance” to “make them come back home they miss” and bring the other traitors into line and it was that simple according to what have been told until now. Active repentance law and the campaigns that were organized in the name of home coming were expected to collapse PKK. So the government has nothing to do but to punish them in the severest way as they ignore the chance that was given to them.

However, neither the chance of repentance was bringing them home nor the desire of the government to scourge and annihilate them was dissolving the ones on the mountains, it was even accelerating the number of the ones going to the mountains. The begining of 1990s and the repentance laws that became valid in 1999 had no slightest effect on terrorist deactivation. On the contrary, things got out of the hand each day. Additionally “terror” stands as a reality with a social base that can not be ignored and  covered up with official discourse.

Therefore the demonstrations of joy that were held to meet the PKK terrorists who accepted to surrender by coming back from Kandil as a result of the studies carried on by the government as a part of democratic opening made a trauma effect on Turkish public who were accustomed to move with the idea of “deceived – repentant terrorists”. The scene in which PKK groups had no sign of repentance and they were so happy was not acceptable for the people who managed to live with that story for years. So the reactions about that scene showed that Turkey was not ready enough to cope with this problem and so to say it also showed that  for the first time people came across with the reality that at the other side of Fırat, things were different. Unfortunately, the environment of conflict that was experienced for 25 years created two worlds that were seperated and broken from each other. When it was said “peace” at one side of Fırat it reaches to the other side as “death”, when it is said “brotherhood” it is reflected as “terror” to the other side. When the words of “unity”, “assimilation”, “cooperation” is heard at one side military operation or pressure can be understood. Existing discourse depicts a falsified communication environment. No speech or discourse express their own goal.

It was expected that new groups would be coming from Europe and Kandil. But it will be understood if it was sabotaged  when the first group arrived. Those meetings did not occur by themselves. On the contrary, DTP had prepared them days before. Therefore there is a possibility that the government lost their confidence with DTP with whom they planned the most of the steps of this process. As DTP can not be deprived of the political perception not to foresee how those meetings would be understood at the other side of Fırat, it can be understood that they do not adopt their apparent discourse about cleaning out the mountain.

After all a correct point of view for the ones in the mountains to provide the cleaning out should be brought.  The conditions that made them go to the mountains should be considered and it should be kept in mind that they were not dying for coming back home. Psychological barriers that are put on their way of  homecoming with the statements like active repentance, confession, commitment should be removed. It should not be expected for the ones who came back home to sit in their homes as quiet kids having learned their lessons. For them, a level of struggle process would be completed and the other level would be started. From now on, Turkey should be ready for political arguments which will be stated as more clear, more daring options. These arguments may be more harrowing as they are not accustomed. Probably they will make the public angry. The first level of the process that caused this harrowing situation which postponed the process is a clear example of this situation. Although Prime Minister Erdoğan stated his anxities by saying “we may go back to the begining if it resumes”, we can not start over the process as the distance covered made the older situation not to be reversed again. 
   
Translated by Gamzegül Akça