The talks between PKK Leader Abdullah Öcalan and the Peoples' Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party) and the discussions on the solution of the Kurdish issue continue. While AKP officials are discussing the problem on the basis of the PKK's laying down arms while no steps have been taken to solve the Kurdish issue, Kurdish politics arguest that 'arms are a consequence of the Kurdish issue' and that the consequence will disappear if the problem is solved. 

 

KCK Executive Council member Zübeyir Aydar evaluated the process to Mezopotamya Agency (MA). Zübeyir Aydar stated that he found the İmralı talks important and that this was the beginning of a process. Aydar stated that what Abdullah Öcalan has been defending until today is the same and said that the important thing is what the state will do. Regarding the PKK's call for laying down arms, Aydar stated that the reasons for taking up arms must be eliminated. Aydar said, "The Kurds demand that this issue be resolved on the basis of law and politics. But if you consider the issue only as weapons, if you see the weapons in the hands of the Kurds and make it a problem, even if you take a weapon away from someone, someone else will take it again. In this respect, the issue must be handled as a whole. The issue should be evaluated on the basis of the rights, free life, language, culture and self-government of a people. Otherwise, if you deal with a result that has emerged, a result that has emerged due to reasons, you cannot solve the issue. The issue must be handled in a radical way and everything must be discussed in its proper place and a conclusion must be reached."

 

SOLUTION THAT ABDULLAH ÖCALAN WANTS TO PUT FORWARD

 

Stating that Kurds took up arms against the policies of denial and assimilation they experienced during the PKK's establishment, Aydar emphasised the need to create condtions for laying down arms. Stating that the isolation continues despite the talks held on İmralı Island, Aydar emphasised that in order to solve the problems, Abdullah Öcalan's physical freedom must be ensured and he must be able to contact his organisation and communicate with the world. Stating that the freedom of Abdullah Öcalan and the democratic solution of the Kurdish issue will open new horizons for Turkey and the Middle East and will affect the whole world, Aydar added, "The solution that Leader Apo wants to put forward is a paradigm that is completely local, mutual and fundamental for the peoples of the region; within the framework of plans to live together freely and protect the future together. The Leader i in the approach of 'let's solve it oursevles' so that all external circles do not get their hands in this matter. Ha has a role in this issue, he is insistent. This is the most appropriate way and method for all the peoples of the region. This must be ensured."

 

Regarding Abdullah Öcalan's statement "Either my solution or the US solution", Aydar stated the following: "Either we sit among ourselves and solve our own problems through dialogue and on the basis of the interests of the peoples, or everyone in the region, especially the USA - not only the USA; many powers, including Russia, China and Europe - will get their hands into these affairs. This is in nobody's interest. We know this: When external powers come to the region, they come with their own agenda. Why should the US come and develop solutions for the Kurds, Turks or Arabs and Persians without having any interest in it? This is also true for other countries. In this respect, we need to listen to the voice of Leader Apo here. The paradigm put forward by Leader Apo says; ‘Let us, as the peoples of the region, come together and solve this problem together.’ We can ask for help from others in solving our problems. We can ask for help in different ways, methods and issues. But not in the way others want, but on the basis of the interests of the peoples of the region. This is the approach, this is the call, this is the issue. In this respect, everyone must heed this call."

 

Stating that the change in international balances necessitated the initiation of negotiations for the solution of the Kurdish issue in Turkey, Aydar said, "In such an environment, it is neither in favour of the Kurds nor the Turks to have problems between the Kurds and the Turks. In this respect, the approach based on Turkish-Kurdish unity is the right approach. However, this approach must not remain in words, it must not be nothing but a manipulation, it must not be a deception, a way of buying time and stalling. We have been through many such processes with the Turkish state since the process started in ‘93, but we could not get the result we wanted from any of them, because the other side was not prepared for this. It was intended to buy time."

 

'THEY NEED TO CHANGE THEIR LANGUAGE'

 

Stressing that Erdoğan's statement "either you lay down your arms or we will bury you with your arms" is a threat, Aydar emphasised that they will not accept these statements and said, "If we want peace, we will make peace, if we want dialogue, we will make dialogue. There can be no peace with the language of war and threats. This is not a discourse of peace. If this is the approach, the problem will not be solved and no results will be obtained. When we look at the practices of the government, we cannot see any practices that are in line with the process. In other words, on the one hand you will appoint trustees to Kurdistan municipalities, on the other hand you will carry out military, political and all kinds of operations. You will bomb here and there every day, you will detain thousands of people and put them in prisons, you will attack Rojava every day. Under these conditions, it cannot get results, it does not seem possible. They need to change their language and attitude."

 

Stating that the government's language regarding the İmralı talks is not correct, Aydar said that the Turkish media also approached the talks in this way. Ayder added, "The media takes a position according to the government's language. The approach of the ruling media on this issue is unaccountable. Sometimes there is a media language that crosses moral boundaries and tries to create the perception of a special war. In this respect, the media should act very accountably. Some of the media act in this way, but very little. It is a language of psychological warfare. From time to time they make false statements and they manipulate the public opinion. At the same time, they do not include people from our community in their discussion programmes. They form a committee of their own and discuss on our behalf. This is not the right approach. If we are to solve these issues, the media is a very effective organ in forming public opinion on this issue. We must act accordingly."

 

MA / Fırat Can Arslan