Recep 

Tayyip Erdoğan, in his opening speech at the Parliament, claimed that Turkey is the homeland of the Kurds and spoke of Turkey’s supposed role as the protector of Kurds outside its borders. However, the reality does not match these words. So far, Turkey has done everything in its power to prevent Kurds in other parts of Kurdistan from gaining any form of status. The government still laments the developments in Southern Kurdistan (Başur). That is why Erdoğan frequently repeats: “We will not make the same mistake in Syria that we made in Iraq. Syria is our red line; the Kurds will not have a status there.”

Turkey deployed its army to Iraq and Syria, establishing dozens of military bases there. The main target and reason behind these attacks and occupations were the Kurds. With the Iraqi and Syrian states weakened and unable to stop the Kurds, the Kurds had gained an opportunity to claim their rights. Turkey then assumed the role of intervening to block their path and prevent them from achieving any political status. Today, the Turkish army, in addition to operating within Turkey, is using its military power in Iraq and Syria to suppress and control the Kurds. In short, the Turkish state is doing everything it can to repress and, if possible, eliminate the Kurds within the three countries.

One of Turkey’s historical and fundamental problems, the Kurdish question, has been reduced to the notion of “terrorism.” The existence and struggle for rights of an entire people have been presented to both domestic and international audiences as terrorism. All of the state’s resources have been poured into this war. There is no alliance it has not sought, no concession it has not given. To wage this war under total control, it established the presidential system, which has evolved into a dictatorship. As a result, all democratic gains and state institutions have been steadily eroded.

We have been discussing and writing about these issues for decades. The critical question now is whether the state’s mentality and strategy have changed and whether it has reached the point of recognizing the Kurds and conceding their rights that remains a vital question. All of Turkey, and above all its intellectuals and democratic forces, must scrutinize and debate this. In his speech to Parliament, Erdoğan said the process was moving positively, yet even while sending those optimistic signals he insisted that no Kurdish formation would be allowed in Syria and repeated his old policies and threats.

Abdullah Öcalan and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) have taken strategic steps toward a solution, but there has been no concrete action from the authorities in Turkey. As seen in Syria, hostility remains the prevailing policy. Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) continues to receive support under all circumstances, and the aim is to crush the Kurds beneath HTS. Erdoğan repeatedly emphasizes his unconditional support for HTS. He does not stop at backing HTS politically; by deploying military force there he regularly directs HTS against the Kurds, prevents reconciliation, and mobilizes it to create an environment for attacks.

If Turkey were truly the protector and guardian of the Kurds, it would not so recklessly support HTS against them. It would not welcome HTS leaders with open arms while imposing Kurdish leaders on the world as terrorists. What kind of protectorhood is this, that throws the Kurds into the arms of genocide? If Turkey’s plan to label the Kurds as terrorists and unleash HTS against them is carried out, the result will be genocide. The atrocities HTS committed against Alawite and Druze communities are well known, as are its previous actions. They abide by neither law nor the rules of war. It is not difficult to imagine what they could do to the Kurds.

Despite these facts, why does Erdoğan’s administration respond to the Kurds’ efforts to defend themselves and to claim their identity and rights with policies amounting to genocide? With such policies and a mindset like this, how can Kurdish-Turkish brotherhood ever be achieved?

Abdullah Öcalan has long worked and continued his efforts to resolve the Kurdish question through peaceful means. He has taken steps that would astonish the world. He accomplished from the outset what would normally be left until the end. State officials said that if Abdullah Öcalan called for it his position would change. A call was made, but they did not take any steps. Then they said the PKK should hold a congress, that too was held. Then they demanded a weapons-surrender ceremony; that also took place. Yet there has still been no change in Abdullah Öcalan’s status. He continues to be held as a hostage. Although the “right to hope” law is a legal obligation, they have not even placed it on their agenda. Eleven years ago the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) issued a ruling on this matter; those rulings are legally binding on Turkey. Now the Justice and Development Party (AKP) government is conditioning that the Autonomous Administration and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) be handed over to the Damascus government. As can be seen, affairs are not being conducted within the framework of brotherhood or the rule of law.

If there is to be peace and brotherhood, should not the peoples of Turkey, and above all its intellectuals and democratic forces, prepare for this and work to accelerate the process? Yet the government and the media under its control have no serious effort in this regard. The government wants to keep the process entirely under its control and steer it as it wishes, it can carry it out or it can end it. With this approach and mentality, neither peace nor democracy will come. If a genuine peace is to be achieved, Mr. Öcalan must not be held as a hostage. His path must be opened, he must be able to meet with society, and he must be enabled to contribute to the healthy and swift advancement of the process.