Monday, August 31, 2009

Public opinion on the Kurdish question

To solve the Kurdish question certainly requires a strong political will, which seems to exist, as frequently expressed by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Yet a “Kurdish solution” needs to be received positively by the public at large.

A public opinion research poll conducted by the Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research (SETA) in collaboration with Pollmark indicates that people are in support of the new initiative. Forty-three percent of respondents approve the government's new Kurdish opening. Those who oppose it stand at 39 percent. The rest are still undecided, watching the developments. Despite a very strong opposition coming from the Republican People's Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), which did everything possible to provoke Turkish nationalism on such a delicate issue, it is encouraging for the government to see that the majority is still behind the initiative.

What is more interesting is that people do not approve of the opposition's negative attitude towards the Kurdish opening. When asked if they approve of the opposition's (CHP and MHP) policies towards the government on the Kurdish initiative, only16 percent expressed support, while a huge majority (62 percent) disapproves. This shows that despite the huge difficulties of selling the idea of a Kurdish solution, the government has done better than the opposition in persuading the people. It has done so because the people, contrary to the calculations of the opposition, want to give a democratic solution a chance.

I think people are more progressive than the pro-status quo forces assume. They are aware that some new approaches need to be developed in order to solve this problem, which has cost them a lot. This is clear from another result of the SETA survey: 71 percent of respondents think that the methods used in the last 25 years to fight the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) proved “unsuccessful.” Based on this observation, they want to see some new methods employed to address the Kurdish question, the root cause of PKK terror.

Yet people wisely think that the terror issue and the Kurdish question are two different things. An overwhelming majority (65 percent) think that even if the PKK is eliminated through military means, the Kurdish question will remain unresolved. Therefore “political means” need to be considered, where people look upon political actors to join in the process.

Among the political actors, the Democratic Society Party (DTP) is rated exceptionally well. Thirty-five percent view the DTP's approach to the government initiative positively. This is an extremely high approval rating given the fact that the DTP's electoral support is around 5 to 6 percent. The more the DTP appears supportive of a peaceful solution to the Kurdish question within a united Turkey, the more likely that the DTP will become a party in Turkey not only of the Kurds. Thus the role the DTP plays in the solution process will contribute to the normalization of the party in the country. Other important data are that 46 percent of Kurds polled and 36 percent of the Turks polled stated that the DTP's views represent the views of the Kurds. This result shows that the DTP's claim to be the sole representative of the Kurdish demands does not have a social and political base.

The SETA research also demonstrates that “Turkish fear” that Kurdish rights may turn into a secessionist movement is widespread. Seventy percent of Turks polled think that Kurds want to establish an independent state. Any solution process should certainly take these concerns seriously. The fear that a solution may lead to a division of the country is likely to lock any attempt to address the question. Yet I think that this concern of Turkish people may also be the master key to opening the lock. If Turkish people are persuaded by the Kurdish political actors and the Kurdish people at large that the Kurds do really want to live together in a united Turkey, then the psychological barriers of Turks will be overcome.

In fact, the will to live together is knitted into the social fabric. One-third of Turks polled and two-thirds of the Kurds polled say that they have a relative from the other side. This result proves how Turks and Kurds are closely connected. Moreover, 70 percent of Turks and 87 percent of Kurds state that they would not be disturbed by mixed marriages among their close relatives. Despite years of conflict and tension at the political level, Kurds and Turks seem not to have given up on each other. I think this social integration despite political division is a rare phenomenon in the world of ethnic conflict.

In sum, there exists not only political will to address the Kurdish question at the moment but also public support for it, and the public will to live together in a democratic and plural country.

31 August 2009

Monday, August 17, 2009

The Kurdish initiative and Turkish opposition

By “Turkish opposition” I mean the main opposition parties of Turkey, namely the Republican People's Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP). It has become crystal clear once more that Turkey's No. 1 problem is the lack of a “progressive and democratic opposition.”

All opposition parties place themselves on the “right” of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) and oppose any “democratic openings” initiated by the government. As such, they appear reactionary. They even resist the search for a solution to the Kurdish question, a question that had consumed for decades Turkey's national resources as well as caused the loss of thousands of its youth.

It is almost impossible to generate consensus to resolve a “vital issue” like the Kurdish one acting together with such opposition. Their attitude toward the government's Kurdish initiative is incomprehensible. They treat the Kurdish question as if it were a question of the AK Party and they would not like to be part of its solution.

Devlet Bahçeli, the leader of the MHP, equates any step to be taken on the Kurdish question with treason. In his recent speeches, the MHP has emerged as a party that threatens stability and social peace. His statement, “If necessary, we will stay on the mountains for 50 years,” is worrisome in the name of peace and stability in the country, and in the region, too.

In a similar vein, Deniz Baykal, the leader of the CHP, criticizes Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan for meeting with DTP leader Ahmet Türk, saying, “Meeting with the DTP is the same as a meeting with the [Kurdistan Workers' Party] PKK terrorist organization.” Is this statement appropriate for a political party that is a member of the Socialist International? Are social democrats not in favor of democratization and peace?

Baykal also emphasizes that the “Turkish identity” and the definition of “Turkishness” as mentioned in Article 66 of the Constitution, calling “everyone a Turk,” cannot be altered. Are social democrats not in favor of the equality of citizens, regardless of their ethnic origin?

The CHP is not because it is no longer a social-democratic political movement but a party competing with the ultranationalist MHP by adopting an even more chauvinistic discourse. Baykal refused to meet with the coordinating minister, Beşir Atalay, to share his ideas and proposals addressing the Kurdish question. Instead, the government was criticized for not having spelled out a clear idea, a package of measures.

There is nothing new in Baykal's and the CHP's objection to “progress.” They voted against the revision of Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK), fiercely opposed a reform law on non-Muslim foundations, countered a solution to the Cyprus problem in 2002-2004, rejected a new and democratic constitution and tried to block the way of the European Union accession process.

So the CHP and Baykal not only fought in the past for a radical and undemocratic notion of secularism that threatens democracy, they are now trying to block the way for a solution to the Kurdish question, a question that blocks Turkey's full democratization. Theirs is a fear of democracy.

The CHP represents the founding mistakes of the republic -- that Turkey belongs to the “Turks” (leading to the policies of kicking out the non-Turkish populace, including the Armenians, the Greeks, and the Jews and the Turkification of the Kurds), yet the Turks cannot be left on their own to chose who is to rule in a democratic regime (establishing the vanguard of the Kemalist elite in the CHP, the military and the judiciary).

This Kemalist model is no longer sustainable. In fact, the current search for a solution to the Kurdish question is an admission of the failure of the Kemalist/nationalist model (imagining and coercively constructing a homogenous nation) that is still upheld by the CHP and the MHP.

The CHP's socialism has long been dead. If they somehow continue claiming to be socialists, they can only be called a “national socialist” party. To complete this picture Baykal only needs to grow a thin moustache.

17 August 2009