Although never supportive of violence of any kind, I have always supported the Kurdish cause. Today, what I expect from those striving for equal rights for the Kurds in Turkey, is a change of attitude. Only by breaking the vicious circle of provocations and violence is there a realistic prospect of development for South-East Anatolia. Of the Turkish government, I expect serious efforts in order to tackle the chronic socio-economic problems of the region and to grant full cultural and political rights.
The renewed violence in the South-East makes one presume that not all parties involved genuinely want the Kurdish problem to be resolved. The closer we come to a political solution, the fiercer some fractions of the parties involved seem to look for reasons to take up their arms again, and consequently the more a renewed guerrilla war becomes likely, the less likely a solution becomes.
In the clannish and hierarchical structure of Kurdish society those at the top of the hierarchy tend to profit from the absence of rule of law in some parts of the Kurdish regions. "Rural Kurdish society remains profoundly conservative and tribal. Many in the countryside are in thrall to the PKK, which Turkey, the EU and the US have branded a terrorist organisation," wrote the Financial Times correspondent Vincent Boland in December 2005. The majority of the Kurds who wish to build a decent life in the towns or to return to their villages, should no longer be hostage to cynical leaders and a minority within the ‘military’ wing of the PKK looking to escalate the conflict.
As many Kurds today realise, the rapprochement between Turkey and the EU constitutes a unique chance for them to have their demands fulfilled. Therefore, the present circumstances are very favourable to a satisfactory solution. Turkey has already started negotiations with the European Union, and Europe has never paid so much attention to the situation of human and cultural rights in Turkey. The recent plenary debate in the European Parliament on the situation in the South-East in a good example.
Kurdish forces eager to achieve progress should take advantage of this interest in their cause. This interest will only remain vivid, as long as the accession of Turkey to the EU actually comes closer. By persisting in the use of violence, the PKK plays into the hands of a minority of conservative forces within the Turkish state that see EU-accession as a danger to the integrity and sovereignty of Turkey. These forces know very well that the EU will not open its doors to a country engaged in a guerrilla war, and the best way to deny them victory is by refusing to engage in any sort of violence.
Instead of following the path of the militant branch of the PKK, Kurdish leaders should intelligently embrace the opening offered by Erdogan in 2005 in a speech in Diyarbakir, and thus force him to concretise what he means by 'resolving the conflict through democratic means'. Sympathy of the European Left for the pleas of the population in the South-East remains vivid, but we are awaiting a radical breakthrough in the battle of the Kurds for equal rights.
At the same time, the Turkish government should acknowledge that in order to reach enduring peace in the South-Eastern provinces, a first imperative is the assurance of the rule of law. The disproportionate use of force by police forces in Diyarbakir and Kiziltepe should be strongly condemned. The use of automatic pistols to disperse demonstrators is inexcusable and clearly in breach with international law. Incidents like that in Semdinli, where members of the security forces were arrested after the bombing of a bookstore owned by a former Kurdish guerrilla in November 2005 should be fully investigated, and justice should be done. Reinforcing the national anti-terror laws and thus risking limiting freedom of expression and giving reactionary forces within the judicial apparatus tools to crack down on opponents will not bring a solution any closer.
The reformers on both sides must understand that the only way to move forward is to help one another. By turning their back on violence, the Kurds can give Prime Minister Erdogan, who is under immense pressure from nationalist elements in the opposition, the army and even in his own government, more room to come up with proposals to improve Kurdish rights. By delivering promptly and fully on previous and very prudent promises concerning language classes and broadcasting rights in Kurdish, and by bringing forward radical plans for the socio-economic development of the region, the government can help the reformers among the Kurdish leaders to show that communication with the Turkish government works better than fighting with the army. Finally, both sides should understand that the road to lasting peace in South-East Turkey runs inevitably through Brussels.