Hakan Öztürk, the chairperson of the Labourist Movement Party (EHP), emphasized that socialists are not prepared for the new period and warned that they should not assume they can evade this issue. He stressed that they must engage with the problem and take responsibility for addressing it, as socialist principles regarding national issues already necessitate such an approach.

Öztürk spoke to ANF about Abdullah Öcalan’s 'Call for Peace and a Democratic Society.' He stated, ‘‘Öcalan's call is ultimately a call for laying down arms, peace, a democratic society, and politics. After all that has happened and all the historical developments concerning the Kurdish issue, this was something that could be done, and it has been done.’’ Öztürk pointed to the immense pressure and accumulated will for resolving the Kurdish issue, stressing that this call should be viewed positively. He emphasized that this determination could manifest itself through the path outlined by the call. Highlighting the strength, legitimacy, and significance of this pressure, Öztürk underlined that it has the potential to yield results.

The impact of the previous ‘resolution process’

Hakan Öztürk emphasized that the fact that the previous ‘resolution process’ managed to stop the bloodshed should be considered a profoundly positive outcome on its own. He stated,  “We can see that within the climate created by the process, there were certain gains regarding the use of the Kurdish language. Additionally, it is worth noting that the Gezi resistance, the organizational potential of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), its 13% vote share, and the Justice and Development Party (AKP) losing its ability to form a government on its own all occurred during the same period.’’ Öztürk further asserted, ‘‘No matter how much pressure is applied, no matter how much they try to narrow the path forward, the final outcome will not change fundamentally. Similar results will emerge in the current process as well. The pressure for democracy is greater than the pressure and repression aimed at preventing it. Objectively, this is what reality shows us.’’

Preparing Turkish society for peace

 Öztürk stated that it is possible for the Turkish people to be prepared for a peace process and continued: “For decades, society has been subjected to chauvinistic propaganda. People are made to believe that even the slightest misfortune is the fault of those who struggle for their rights. That is why this is not an easy task. However, throughout the entire period of struggle, the principle of the brotherhood of peoples has always been upheld as a core value. This will create a great opportunity in the coming period. Moreover, we do not always have to start from square one; this time, we begin from somewhere in the middle. Our society has accumulated a wealth of experience. It can look ahead based on these experiences. As the saying goes, ‘Starting is half the battle.’ And we have started. Languages and attitudes will begin to evolve and open up toward democracy. This will happen even more rapidly than expected. The hardest part

is always the beginning. But now, a sliver of light has pierced through the sealed box. With the momentum of having taken this first step, we can weave together the ideal of democracy with the realities of our circumstances. At this point, the task falls to the political actors.”

Socialists are not ready for this process

Öztürk noted that socialist parties in Turkey are not yet prepared for this process, but they can become ready. He stated: “The task of addressing the Kurdish issue, peace, and fraternity has always been shouldered by Kurdish socialists. Those outside of Kurdish socialist circles must also take on this responsibility properly. There have been very good examples in terms of style and method when it comes to articulating this issue, peace, and fraternity. We can build upon those examples. Ultimately, this framework must be conveyed to the entire society, and it should be presented in a manner that resonates with people.”

They should not think they can evade the issue

Öztürk emphasized that the first thing socialists must do is to abandon the notion that they can sidestep this issue. He said: “They must see it as their duty to engage in this struggle and speak from within it. The principles of socialism regarding national issues necessitate this approach. The national question is not only a matter that existed in Russia; it exists in our country as well. Lenin consistently criticized struggles that remained at a purely syndicalist level. He advocated for integrating the struggle into a broader fight for democracy. One of the most fundamental aspects of democracy is, of course, national freedom. Our perspective must be shaped accordingly. Beyond rhetoric, the left must provide historical and geographical comparisons to articulate the Kurdish issue. It should emphasize external references, work to keep those who think negatively in a neutral position, and engage in discussions through concrete, current, and prioritized solution proposals.”