Yesterday F asked "..I would like to hear your feelings about what is happening now in northern Iraq".
I replied her; "If you are asking about the Kurdish autonomy of northern Iraq; I feel very good things are happening. They are in a great efford on building their territory, education sytem, health sector and all.
If you are asking about the Turkish relations; I feel they begin to understand that their fear on a "Turkish invasion" is false. There is no likely threat. Turkey is not even thinking about economic sanctions for now and going on providing all their needs including electricity, food tranportation etc. They also begin to understand that PKK is not only harmful for Turkey but also for them. In fact in the past, in various past operations during Saddam they fought against PKK beside Turkish armed forces.
They were evacuating border villages for weeks. Last week Turkish helicopters also throw leaflets calling the PKK members to surrender, they will be welcomed and free immidiately if they didnt participate any murders and if they did they will be granted with "home coming" law. Though the Kurdish autority denied the operation yesterday, today they gave detailed (more detailed than Turkish officials) information about the operation. They say the operation is not in their territory, and taking their forces some 20 or more kilometres inside to give more area to Turkish forces for operations. They are calling the area between as "no man's land" saying they have no control at the part and want PKK leave Iraq borders.
Turkiye is also acting more clever this time. Opening new economic packets for the area, prepearing laws to accept Kurdish as second language in education etc. But PKK and related groups are getting more agressive as they loose hope and support. Today Leyla Zana made a provocative talk in Brusselles, at Kurdish Conferance again and said "There is no hope for peace without the involvement of 'Mr. Ocalan' (imprisoned leader of PKK)". They are also differences between them. 2 of their deputies gave interviews condemning the agressiveness. PKK is threating the propeace Kurds too.
One most dangerous thing in my opinion is; they cannot take shelter in northern Iraq any more as a result of these Turkish operations and Kurdish Iraq's altitude. They also loose ground in Syria and Iran is attacking continiously. Latest news is; as a result of all these loosing shelter and support they are heading to Armenia. Armenia is a very poor country and there are many illegal Armenian refugees in Turkey. Turkey and Armenia is begining to have better relations whatever the diaspora says. But if Armenia have to open doors by the efforts of Armenian diaspora to these terrorists there may be unwanted new developments at the area (Armenia has a problem of invaded "Karabag" with Azerbeijan and Azeris are Turkic origin with good relations). This is a puzzle with so many unknown.
But Northern Iraq is doing good inside its own territory, they are aware that Turkiye had no intention of invading them or have any problem with them, Turkiye's only problem is PKK based at the mountains in the middle and they begin to say "it is no man's land" , they dont have any power over, meaning Turkey can go on operations."
On the other hand, is it possible not to agree with some ideas in the speeces during EU Conferance? Certainly not. We founded this republic hand in had. For example DTP deputy Ahmet Türk began his speech as;
"I believe that Turkey’s attempt of accession into the EU is the fourth most important strategic decision in the history of the republic. The first decision is the strategic cooperation of the Turks and Kurds in building a country which materialises itself in the creation of the republic. This joint decision of the people is certainly historic one.
What is achieved here is the joint determination in creating a country which upholds the equality and freedom of each citizen. The post-republic strategic cooperation between the Kurds and Turks is the second strategically significant decision. This is the period of 1921-1924 and at this present time this period is looked at as the “golden age”.
The first parliament was deemed to be a joint parliament of Kurds and Turks. Representation was according to identity and region. In fact Mustafa Kemal himself believed that the Kurds should be allowed a special status and even made the statement “a type of village headmanship”.
This is a most notable period we can refer to, to tackle current problems and debates. The third significant strategic decision is: within the atmosphere stated above instead of furthering the republic democratically, the strategic cooperation with the Kurds was cut short and the period of conflict began."
Though he began mentioning total realities, can we say the "third strategic desicion" (with his words) was specially about Kurdish popilation or was there other, more important international tendencies, politics fallowing the rise of USSR and communism around the world. If we don't take the historical facts into considiration we can end at wrong venues.
Other example is Leyla Zana's speech. She mentions "methods including beatings, detentions, torture, executions, forced migrations, sending to forced exile, extra judicial killings, village evacuations, village guards, release based on confessions" etc and asks; "What about methods that not known or disclosed?"
Who can deny all those methods, nobody! But can we say those methods performed only to Kurds? Again we should remember the history, may be this time a closer history. These are all methods of Cold War era created by USA begining with Vietnam and exported all around the world. This country lost a generation, generations of intellectuals, socialists to those bloody methods.
Those methods didnt differ ethnicity in Turkey but only question the ideology of people till 90s. Just think the dungeons, torture rooms of 1980, do you think they were counting us as Turks, Kurds etc.. One difference was; while nearly all other democratic, socialist etc (armed or not) movements defeated or dissolved under the brutality of US backed September 12, 1980 military coup; those times' Apoists managed to survive and founded PKK (using their own brutality on civilian people).
Even if the youngsters of today can't know or remember; at least they can try to find news archives and read about the village raids, burned schools, murdered teachers or nurses, doctors by PKK.
It is right that one's terrorist can be other's freedom fighter. It is right that Kurdish people suffered much more than any other ethnicity in this country. Deserve more rights than they have now. But there is a point we shouldn't forget to see; change...
The defination of "terrorist" changed, defination of "freedom fighter" changed, concept of "fighting for democracy" changed, "world politics" changed, understanding of "human rights" changed, Northern Iraq is changing, Turkiye is changing...It is the soul of dialectic metarialism...
Unfortunatelly some couldnt change according to the nature of material. Some still seach solutions with armed conflicts or ethnic nationalism. May be Zana's question is just what "today's terrorists" should ask themselves too; "What about methods that not known or disclosed?"