Give us the roadmap!

KCK Executive Council's leader Mr. Murat Karayılan spoke to Firat News Agency on 07 September 2009. Below is partial translation of the text. Full text of the interview can be read here.

Karayılan: Give us the roadmap [Öcalan's]!

HALİT ERMİŞ-ANF

Behdinan, 07 September 2009

The leader of the KCK Executive Council, Murat Karayılan asked that the roadmap submitted by Kurdish Leader Abdullah Öcalan be handed to them. Not receiving the roadmap could impact the unilateral conflict avoidance phase which is in effect by the PKK. Karayılan said "This is necessary for the conflict-avoidance to continue" and invited the government to take risks "for turning a historical page". Karayılan, who answered ANF's questions proposed [Nelson] Mandela and South Africa as a solution for Öcalan's situation. Karayılan stated that if operations [against PKK guerrillas] stopped there would be no losses, and reminded that their conflict-avoidance phase has been extended until the end of Ramadan. He stated again that he hoped for some positve steps within the two weeks left [until the end of Ramadan when conflict avoidance phase was extended recently].

*The roadmap Mr. Abdullah Öcalan submitted to the prosecution on 20 August [2009] is not yet given to the lawyers. What do you think about the fact that the roadmap is not given?

-The stand our people made in the 29 March [2009] local elections made it necessary to start a process for a democratic solution to the Kurdish Question. Based on this, as a movement, we started the conflict-avoidance phase on 13 April 2009. We extended this conflict-avoidance phase a few times to date. Our leader [Mr. Öcalan] stated that he would turn in the roadmap to both sides in order to transform the current process into a permanent democratic solution process. The media reported this and it became public knowledge. Our leader's roadmap is a roadmap submitted to the Turkish state, our movement, and the public so that the democratic solution turns into a permanent process.

The roadmap must be given to us

Our leader turned in the roadmap, the state took it. The state is reading the roadmap and determining it's politics accordingly. It toughens it's stand, takes measures accordingly. The state makes some speeches that constitute a response. But the state didn't give the roadmap to us or the public. If the Turkish state wants to solve this problem permanently, first it must quit such approaches. Hiding the solution formula prepared by the most important actor, meant for solution, and turning in for the stakeholders will not help the solution. Especially taking the solution formula and benefiting from it without giving it to others is not only unlawful but also not moral either. If they were not going to share the roadmap, they could have not taken it. They could say that they are not taking it. But they took it; they are benefiting from it; they are confiscating it. This is a stand that doesn't help a solution. In other words, this is a continuation of the mentality that doesn't care about Kurds and that says "I can do whatever I want." A solution can't be developed with this logic, with this approach.

I would like to state clearly again: If the state of the Turkish Republic and its government, at this stage in history, want a permanent solution to the Kurdish question, they should give up on these kinds of policies. In other words, they need to quit the policy that ignores Kurds and the Kurdish will and give us the roadmap.

It will affect the conflict-avoidance phase

*In this case [the state not giving Mr. Öcalan's roadmap], how will the conflict-avoidance phase will evolve?

-We extended the conflict-avoidance phase until the end of Ramadan festivities for two reasons. The first reason is the respect we have for Ramadan. The second reason is that we expect the Turkish state to give us the roadmap during this time. Hiding the roadmap and not giving it [to us] will hurt the discussion environment. The process will not move forward without the roadmap. Let me put it clearly: it will be very problematic for us to extend the conflict-avoidance phase. Of course we are discussing the events from every angle. It is obvious that the current phase will face serious difficulties and problems unless the roadmap reaches us by some means. We too have sensitivities, we have a base, we have different organizations, forces. They [the state] say there is the army, the army will do this and that. We have an army too. There are organizations and matters we have to consider. We have to consider all these phenomena. Therefore, such approaches are not right. Our people make demonstrations for this and demand. Our people's expectation, our movement's and democratic organizations' expectation is that the state gives the roadmap right away. Because this is necessary for the continuation of the process. Not giving the roadmap, despite these, will mean that the state doesn't want a solution. Then it is up to them whether to give it or not.

[...]

*The initiative that started as the "Kurdish initiative", later turned into the "democratic initiative, and lastly stated as "national unity project," is going on with intensive discussions. What does the change of names reflect in terms of correct comprehension of the problem and its solution?

-First, our movement's initiative on starting the process, then our leader's talks, and then our statements aimed to the public media, put the need for a democratic solution to the Kurdish question in Turkey on the agenda. The president's words, "good things will happen," and the government officials' words gave hope to people. An expectation and impression was created that the Turkish state would now try to solve the problem in a different way. But then, the process was slowly pulled back. First they said "Kurdish initiative," then they said "democratic initiative" and now they converted it to "national unity project." For example, the minister [of interior Mr. Beşir Atalay] spoke on the matter for 50 minutes without interruption, then for about 50 more minutes he answered questions but he was so careful that he didn't use the word "Kurd".

[...]

What kind of a unity is this that it's being protected by a force 400 thousand strong! Another point is that these forces [state's] defend a narrow, nationalistic, and racist line. These forces insist on 20th century's politics rather than today's. These forces often talk about unity. They talk about unity and brotherhood. What kind of a unity is this that it is being protected by a force of 400 thousand soldiers, police, and paramilitary guards [korucular]. If there is unity and brotherhood why have so many soldiers been placed in Kurdistan? According to the state's official figures, until now 40 thousand people died. That means this unity is being held up by weapons and killing. Now the problem is to transform this forced unity into a voluntary one.

[...]

What kind of a brotherhood is this!

You reject Kurdish identity and oppress Kurds and then talk about brotherhood. What kind of brotherhood is this? My language, culture, history, and names are forbidden, I can't own my identity but you say you are brothers. You say Kurds are our brothers but forbid everything belonging to them. This is slavery, slavery by force. We are in the 21st century and the Kurdish people have been enlightened with Apocu culture will not accept this [slavery]. Forcing slavery under the name of brotherhood and doing this by spilling blood with police batons and soldiers' weapons has nothing to do with brotherhood. In the current era this is not possible either. MHP and CHP need to understand this.

[...]

Empathy

[...]

You [the state] say that yours are martyrs, but the Kurdish people see you as the invading forces. You say you are protecting the homeland and dieing for the homeland, but the Kurdish people think their language, culture, and homeland are under invasion. There are people who go up to the mountains [join the guerrillas] for their honor, pride, and culture. These people give up everything. Haven't the people who put their lives on the line for their belief, ideals, and honor done so for a more sacred cause? If you compare in this way the martyrdom of Kurdish people, freedom guerrillas' are martyrdoms for protecting the Kurdish reality and for freedom of the Kurdish people, and they see this as a more sacred cause. Everyone has their reality but the important thing is to see the reality through the other side's eyes.

There is nothing more sacred and honorable than taking all the risks in Kurdistan and putting your life on the line for your language, identity, culture, and the people's freedom.

[...]

*As the KCK, you are in a conflict-avoidance position since April [2009]. However, the Turkish state didn't take a step and there has been no work for identifying representatives. Mr. Erdoğan and the general staff signaled, during the last meeting, that this wouldn't happen [reciprocating conflict-avoidance and identifying a representative for the Kurdish side in talks]. How would the continuation of this policy affect the conflict-avoidance phase?

-For the next two weeks we will analyze the other side's stand and approach to the issues. We want to learn if the state really wants to solve the problem. If they want to solve it, how they are planning to solve it. There were some well-meaning words. Some nice and fancy speeches were given. But like I said before, the process narrowed down and pulled back. It's obvious that the problem cannot be solved with this kind of approach. Therefore, we want to learn what the state truly wants to do.

If there is a policy to be devious again, this will bring great disasters. There are talks in various sections of the society. The press is maturing but, on the other hand, the state hinders the process by red lines. The observation is that there are some other things the state is seeing. For example, the military is getting ready. The minister of foreign affairs is visiting many places for some preparation. The state's representatives come to the south [South Kurdistan, Iraq] and try to convince people for their solution. They [the state] are trying very hard to find grounds for their official policies and sideline the PKK and the leader of Kurdish people [Mr. Öcalan]. This is very dangerous.

[...]

They are saying the DTP is being very rough. What has DTP done? In fact DTP says how the problem can be solved. DTP says that there cannot be a solution by sidelining the PKK and leader Apo, who represent millions of people. This is a reality! As this is not being rough or soft, it is not being close or far from the PKK either. It's stating a truth directly.

[...]

I say what's in Kurds' hearts. I am putting my life on the line for their interests. Even if you raise heavens, you can't separate my people and I from each other. You can kill, destroy, oppress, but this movement and its leadership will always have a big place in the Kurdish people's heart. You have to know this. You cannot separate this. Today the things leader Apo says from İmralı [prison] are what someone in Amed's cafe's, Hakkari's plains, and Dersim would say. The reality is this: the Kurdish people have established a unity with its leader and movement.

[...]

If you see my cultural values as divisive then how am I going to unify with you?

We ask if you [the state] are going to end the animosity against the Kurdish people's leadership, values, language, culture, and name. If you are going to end this animosity, let us see it in practice. The state officials talk but we don't see anything positive in practice. Can the AKP government say, "Look, we have been developing the process for the past thee months and we have done this and that"? They keep talking about TRT6 [state owned TV station broadcasting in Kurdish]. You started TRT6 but why are there so many prohibitions still in place? A poet in Kurdish history, Cigerxwin, is a very important person for the Kurdish people. The state considers it divisive that a municipality wants to name a library after Cigerxwin. If you see my cultural values as divisive, then how am I going to unify with you? In fact, what you are doing is divisive. Why don't you see it? It's divisive to ignore and sideline the Kurdish people and belittle and disrespect their values.

[...]

Nobody should miscalculate

It's being said that the international conditions are against us. No; that may be your opinion and it may seem that way to you. There is also the side that's visible to us. In this respect, we have reserves and potential to defend ourselves and advance our cause for years. Nobody should make miscalculations on this and approach correctly. We don't talk big. But we are not a simple force either. We are a force that successfully stood up, renewed itself, got stronger, and strengthened its belief and decisiveness despite the attacks against us, supported internationally. In this respect we are in a position in which we have established high morale and motivation, increased belief and decisiveness, and strengthened tenacity for success. I have to state that those who couldn't weaken us during the most difficult years [for us], of 1999-2004, can't ever weaken us today. There is no way for a movement that didn't weaken during that term to weaken today. [...] There are powers interested in conflict and no solution for the Kurdish question. But we are saying that we have to solve our problem ourselves before there is further wear between us. Our people's interests require this. This is to Turkey's benefit. It has to be seen correctly.

Denial...

The Republican People's Party (CHP) has always been the true face of the fascist Turkish state. The current speeches of the party's leader is nothing more than the ultra right wing and racist National Movement Party (MHP) says. Let's rewind back to 1930, when many massacres were being committed against Kurds, including the Zilan Massacre:

"Because this party (CHP), with the things it has done, has returned back the position of Turks, the true masters... The master of this country are Turks. The ones who are not pure Turk have only one right in the Turkish homeland, that is to be servants, to be slaves." (Hakimiyeti Milliye 19 September 1930)

The CHP and the Turkish state mentality represented by it tried to wipe off the very existence of Kurds and Kurdistan then and they are pretty much repeat the same tune now. CHP leader Baykal recently claimed there has been no Kurdish problem in Turkey for the past 87 years. I swear, I don't get him and so many that are like him (hint hint the TSK generals and their heard of ducks) who can openly tell such stupid lies that a five year old wouldn't believe. They do deserve an Oscar or two though because even Forrest Gump couldn't genuinely be that stupid.

So all these sorry excuses for humanity, including the generals who kill their own soldiers to undermine the peace process can talk and say all kinds of nonsense and it's all good. But if DTP, Mr. Öcalan, or PKK talks the whole Turkish media starts screaming about how that is out of line.

It seems to me that Turks want to solve the Kurdish problem without talking to Kurds. These people seem to have forgotten why all the Kurdish uprisings, including the last one lead by the PKK came into existence. Here is just a summary of human rights abuses that happened so far in 2009. It's not, by any means, a comprehensive list.

The fascist Turkish regime must understand that "life is like a box of chocolate..."

Qandil Observations: Part III

This is the third and final part of Mr. Murat Karayılan's interview with Filiz Koçali and Ramazan Pekgöz of Günlük daily. You can read Part-1 and Part-2. The original, in Turkish is here.

Qandil Observations -3

'Let the state take one step, we will take two'

As the interview goes on, it becomes clear how they [the PKK] weighed the latest developments. They are expecting well-meaning steps that are reassuring rather than words that sound nice. They don't seem to be receptive to any proposition about them without seeing these [well-meaning] steps. Yesterday the papers reported about the [Turkish] government would send a team to Makhmur [Maxmur]. Talks have been going around about emptying the Makhmur camp and sending the PKK members there. We ask what they think about the suggestion that they should be placed in the Makhmur camp. He gives a similar response to the suggestion that they should retreat their forces to Qandil. But this time, Murat Karayılan starts with a joke:

"Makhmur is too far... Our place is better than anywhere." Then he continues: "We won't move down to Makhmur. If a solution materializes, it can be discussed. Forces, based on an agreement out of the solution can behave according to a protocol developed there [in Makhmur]. But not in any other way. The stories of 'they will move down to Makhmur or they will return to Turkey, the leaders will go to Europe' is a scenario that is constantly brought up during the past few years. This scenario first came up during the first United States intervention in the region. Because we didn't accept this scenario, we started a new process on 1 June 2004. Now, even if I decide myself, I cannot execute it [the old scenario]. No administration [of the PKK] can."

'We have to be realistic'

He stresses that they [the PKK] have been acting extremely responsibly and they would try their best to open the doors for any positive development. He wants to make sure what he says is not misunderstood: "Why am I saying these? We have to be realistic. If we are really going to discuss the solution, we have to consider these facts."

He says that wrong information is being distributed about their situation. Their persistence on solution [to Kurdish question] is being interpreted differently and that it's not realistic to interpret their persistence as they are losing strength. "We are not desperate. But we are saying now that let's stop the violence. This is a societal problem and it can be solved with dialogue, with modern methods. The role of violence in solving societal problems is over now. Now the problem is in a form that can be solved through dialogue and democratic means. This is our strategy."

Then he explains that the PKK has reached a new paradigm and that they are working to implement the democratic and ecologically sensitive paradigm.

I really recommend some of the reporters such as those who "report" news like this to read what's following:

'Even if they offer an independent state we will not want it'

He says "It's not being understood why we don't want to establish an independent state. Even if they offer us an independent state we will not want it. Because we are against the power of the state. But this doesn't mean that we will do armed struggle because we are against power of the state. We are saying that the state system has been in effect for five thousand years. As long as the current concept of state is implemented, there will be separation among people, there will be high class and lower class. Therefore there will not be real democracy, there will not be equality; there will be a high class and a low class. We propose a more equality based system compared to the current state concept. What we are saying is a new society, a democratic society, a new system which is based on women's revolution, which has accomplished the ecological revolution.

He stresses again: "We have unilaterally started the 'conflict avoidance' phase. We are still seriously trying to implement this. We are still working hard for 'no-conflict' phase to come to life despite the operations in the field, despite the attacks and operations that target Kurdish politicians. We sincerely want development of a phase in which weapons will not be used anymore."

'It [solution] will empower development of democracy'

He says they find it more realistic for peoples to live together in a system based on equality and freedom than establishing a separate state. He gives the European Union as an example. States like Germany, France, and England, which were enemies 50 years ago and killed millions of people from one another, have now lifted the borders and are preparing a constitution together and asks "why shouldn't we develop the same thing in the Middle East".

He stresses that solving the Kurdish question by peaceful and democratic means will empower the development of democracy in the Middle East and can be a starting point to prepare the ground for democratization of the Middle East. He says that the reverse will just empower and solidify the anti-democratic systems in the region.

He draws attention to the fact that this position is not a tactical one but a strategic one: "That is the reason we want to develop a solution to the Kurdish question that would not pressure the the unity of Turkey. We are not moving along with the logic of 'let us pass this stage like this'. We are talking about permanent solution."

'We are in the 'we' too'

He says that if the people of the Middle East would self govern and develop themselves, it would reduce external intervention and it's crucial that we [the people of the Middle East] solve our problems with self-reliance. We say that the [Turkish] government is saying similar things. He continues:

"Yes, there are similar words coming from the government officials recently. But, for example, the most receptive person, the Minister of External Affairs says 'let us solve the problem ourselves, with our self-strength', but he keeps us out. The same minister holds talks with the USA, Iraq, and EU. Instead of discussing the Kurdish question with the Kurds, he discusses it with external powers. He doesn't include Kurds in his self-strength, he doesn't include any of the Kurds' representatives. If there is an external actor that can play a positive role, one should benefit from it. But it is necessary that we solve the problem with our own strength, based on internal dynamics."

'We rely on natural things'

"There is one way for solution: sincerity" he says and continues: "We are sincere about this subject, we are serious. We can solve our problems ourselves based on having the ability, strength, and willpower for mutual respect, overcoming the mistakes made in the past, and knowing how to mutually forgive the consequences of those mistakes.That's what we expect. We are serious about this, we are sincere. There is only one way; to move toward the solution sincerely. Overcoming the prejudices, improving trust, and efforts to create a common future must be on the agenda."

He says that the guarantee of a common future is theirs and continues: "Everyone says we are like finger nail and tissue but they provoke the peoples against each other very much. If fights between peoples is not happening it's mostly due to our ideological approach. We never told our people that 'Turks are like this, Turks are like that' and plant seeds of animosity between peoples [Turks and Kurds]. We criticized the system." He states that there has been 'reciprocal damages' and brings up the Commission for Investigating the Truth and Reconciliation which they proposed for this purpose.

'We are ready before anyone else'

[...] "Look" says Karayılan, "we rely on things that are natural; Kurdistan's geography and its people." He says that they are a movement which constantly changes, transforms, and updates itself both organizationally and tactically and continues: "the defense work is only about five percent of the work we do".

His final words for the interview are "Approach to the road map to be announced by Öcalan will be a measure of sincerity. We say that the government should take a step and ask us to take two. If the solution is truly wanted, we are ready for it before anyone else."

Serkeftin.

Go back to Part-1 or Part-2.

Qandil Observations: Part II

Today, I am posting the Part-2 of Mr. Murat Karayılan's interview with Filiz Koçali and Ramazan Pekgöz of Günlük daily. You can read the Part-1 here. Many thanks again to the heval who helped me with this piece. The original, in Turkish, can be read here.

Qandil Observations -2

'We completely agree with Yaşar Kemal'

[...]

We ask Karayılan about Yaşar Kemal's interviews at our paper [Günlük] and Radikal daily. "I read them last night." he says. He couldn't read it on time because of the Kongra Gel meeting. He states that Yaşar Kemal's words sincere and had good intentions. Karayılan invited the Turkish officials to think and reflect on the things Yaşar Kemal said in those interviews. He continues: "we completely agree with what's said there. Turkey has to understand this: what we say is exactly what any other person in Turkey who thinks realistically would say."

Then he brings up claim of several Turkish newspaper columnists on the Democratic Society Party (DTP) becoming like the PKK rather than PKK transforming into DTP and says "what we say is the same with everyone who sides with democracy and thinks realistically be it a shepherd in a village, a businessman in a city, a worker, intellectuals, or politicians."

'The most reasonable solution project'

A lot of factions in Turkey are talking about the road map that is to come out of İmralı island [from Öcalan] and make suggestions about its content. People wonder about [Öcalan's] recommendations related to the PKK which will be in the road map. We ask Karayılan about his predictions on the road map.

Karayılan's prediction is that the road map will be referencing the 1921 constitution, it will be on an axis that doesn't bring forth any ethnicity and that this road map would be the most reasonable and refined solution proposal from the Kurdish side. He states that saying 'this is Abdullah Öcalan's road map' and setting it aside would be very wrong and continues "This road map will be the pinnacle of peace endeavors developed since 1993, that's why it's important".

'I talked about pulling back in 99'

We mention that some factions expect to see 'the PKK laying down arms' in the road map and ask 'Will it be proposed that PKK pull back to outside Turkey?'

He reminds us the decision to pull outside Turkey in 1999. He himself announced to the PKK forces the decision to mocve them outside the borders of Turkey. He spoke to the forces for one hour. We ask him about his emotions during that talk. "If I put it honestly, I wasn't very hopeful. But our leader had asked. I was seeing it as a risky move but I was thinking it needed to be done. I remember it as a sad speech."

He tells about over 300 guerrillas were ambushed and killed while retreating to outside Turkey's borders. He talks about the traps, mass executions and massacres on the road [committed by the Turkish forces]. "But we still didn't change our mind and stood by our decision" he says.

He he asks a question and answers himself: "We didn't move for five years. Was any step taken? No! Was this period utilized? No! Now a lot people say that period was not utilized properly. We acted responsibly but the [Turkish] authorities of the time didn't act responsibly. The importance of our decision to retreat to outside Turkey's borders is being understood better today."

During those years, although they were outside Turkey's borders, in the South [Kurdistan], they were not left alone; the international forces along with Southern forces (he refers to Barzani and Talabani's forces) tried to surround and annihilate them. He states that after these developments they had to 'move back inside [Turkey]'. "Security and protecting lives was becoming a problem. Situations with danger to our own lives came up."

'I can't say retreat again'

We know that some factions are in the expectation of PKK's retreating outside the borders. This expectation doesn't just belong to the factions who say 'there can be no deals with terrorists' but also to some of those who see the PKK and İmralı as a reality and say that discussions with the PKK are necessary. We tell him about these expectations. He knows about it and says:

"This is not a scoreboard for a card game. No, why should we retreat? We stay where we are. Let the weapons be silent and we discuss the solution. Why should someone walk three months and come from Dersim? Let's discuss, talk, whatever is going to happen there, we solve the problem where it belongs. We don't see solution in this kind of requests. Who is going to guarantee that the same things will not be repeated again? [He is referring to retreating forces being ambushed and destroyed] I can't give such an order for a second time. Those who really want a solution, who want democracy shouldn't offer this."

'Mutual assurance and trust is a must'

Much pain has been lived. Now Prime Minister Erdoğan too, without distinguishing, says 'Let mothers not cry'. There are those who say that retreating outside the borders will assure those who believe that 'those at the mountains' have contribution to the pains lived?

He says that they value everyone who tries to contribute to the process and if they see sincerity for the solution they would certainly respond. But there are 'but's...

"Yes, we want to give assurances but in return we need assurance too. I am saying it candidly: we see such stand as move to weaken us, perhaps the initial phase of our annihilation. That's why I think those who want solution shouldn't defend such things. I know the state officials defend this. If mutual assurance and trust is to be mentioned, there is no trust in this [what's being asked of us], we don't trust this. Let me state clearly: don't force this on us because we don't trust [it]."

The issue of 'trust' a few days after our talks in Qandil was brought up after the meeting between DTP Chairman Ahmet Türk and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Erdoğan said "I believe we benefited from one another and for the future there will be positive steps based on trust". Apparently, 'trust' still remains to be an important issue before us.

'Öcalan is a force beyond the power of our administration'

What if such an offer [retreating beyond the borders] comes from İmralı, as some expect?

He says "let me be clear. Leader Apo's power is far beyond our administration's power."

But he says he doesn't think such an offer will come from İmralı: "Because he too knows that repeating such a thing for the second time will be difficult. Therefore not in that way but there may be something like a phased withdrawal, I can't know that. But he knows it too that retreating completely outside the borders will be difficult. That's why I don't expect something like that to be on the agenda right away."

If it doesn't take place on the agenda right away when do you think it could come up? How are the weapons going to get out of stage? Is it possible to reach a solution without having the weapons out of stage? We know that the public is discussing this and wants to know about it. He answers:

"It is possible to have a plan that will realize taking arms off the stage in phases. We are already discussing this at various levels. But let me say this: the road map will be presented to both sides, to the public. The road map will be presented to the state side and to us, the PKK. I don't think it will include measures that cannot be refused by either the state side or by us. That's why I said 'most reasonable'. But the state is already made some maneuvers which signal that the state doesn't care about the road map and it is trying to weaken the impact of the road map. We don't find this an approach conducive to solution."

Go to Part-1 or Part-3.

Qandil Observations: Part I

Filiz Koçali and Ramazan Pekgöz of Günlük recently interviewed Mr. Murat Karayılan. The interview appeared in three parts on August 7, 8, and 9, 2009. Here is the link for the original. I would like to thank the heval who translated this piece.

Qandil Observations -1

We did what Hasan Cemal asked

"We did what he [Hasan Cemal] asked. He [Hasan Cemal] said 'Everyone should keep their fingers away from triggers and PKK should take one step back'. Our forces in Turkey are trying their best to avoid conflict and not to be visible; they almost went under the ground. That's why the losses have reduced"

[...]

"We value every move and approach toward solution to Kurdish question regardless of who makes the attempt. It could be from the members of the state or civilians" says Karayılan.

'We pulled back'

Karayılan carefully read Hasan Cemal's series of writing after his interview with Karayılan. He reminds Hasan Cemal's following words "Everyone should put fingers away from the trigger and PKK should take one step back". "We did what he said. He said 'Everyone should keep their fingers away from the triggers', we started a no-conflict period and extended its duration.

Despite the operations conducted against our forces, we are still trying to keep the no-conflict process sustained. He [Hasan Cemal] said 'PKK should take a step back'. We pulled back. Our forces in Turkey are trying their best to avoid conflict and not to be visible; they almost went under the ground. That's why the losses have reduced."

Stopping the operations is at the top of requests made by various factions. In fact, stopping the operations [against the PKK] is seen as the first and important condition toward solution [to the Kurdish Question]. We ask about operations and he says 'there are still operations conducted but not as much as before'. He adds, "which means the state can stop the operations completely and turn the no-attack [from the PKK] period into no-conflict phase. Together we can develop a phase for complete cease fire where everyone stays put at their locations. We demonstrate, with all our might, our will for developing this phase". Then he says environment for dialogue can be created.

There Can't be solution without talks

Karayılan answers the suggestions developed for PKK and stresses that approaches such as 'PKK is different than the Kurdish question' are wrong and notaimed to solve the problem. He said that the Kurdish freedom struggle brought the Kurdish question to the daylight and similar things happened elsewhere in the world: "It is not necesary for Turkey to invent something new. Even if she tries, without being a proper solution, it will not bear any results. The

Minister of Internal Affairs says 'we will develop a solution unique to Turkey and sets an example for the world' and I hope that will be the case. But we don't know of solving a problem anywhere else in the world without talking to the stakeholders. Saying 'there is a problem, I will solve it myself but I will annihilate the owners of the problem' is not an approach for solution but for war. If war is not wanted and developing solution is wanted then the parties sit down, talk, and discuss."

Voluntary unity, not a forced one

Why talks and discussions? The answer is clear: "What's our purpuse for the solution? To achieve the societal reconciliation. To transform the currently existing forced unity into a voluntary unity. That's why the sides who are going to live together voluntarily must sit down and talk." He also states that willing to sit down and talk would be an indication of sincerity about wanting the solution.

He lists his expectations

He carefully watched the speech by Minister of Internal Affairs Beşir Atalay. Karayılan found Atalay's speech as 'positive' and stated that it was important and positive that Atalay for the first time spoke for the government and the state saying that 'we will solve this problem'. However he finds the content of Atalay's speech incomplete and insufficient: "nice words but the set up is not in a line which will bring solution."

He says "Mr. Atalay is someone who is responsible from security" and that they expected use of following sentences for starters: "From now on, we will not try to solve the problem with violence but by political and peaceful means. The operations will stop; we will not produce operations anymore but ideas." Karayılan states that from now on they will look at the actions.

PKK and the Kurdish question are like nail and tissue

Karayılan stresses the following: "An approach like 'I will not recognize your will, I will solve it my way, I will even talk to some sections of the society but I will not speak to you' will not bring complete solution. Kurdish question and the PKK problem are like nail and tissue, bound together. Separating them will not develop a solution."

Sincerity and trust needed

"Kurdish question is not a problem that formed yesterday. It's not a problem created by the birth of the PKK either. Existence of this problem has given birth to the PKK. That's why if Turkey really wants to completely solve the problem, she should set aside the prejudices. We should avoid the distrustful and prejudicous manners. If the state and the government presents and approach which shows trust and belief in Kurdish people, the Kurds will make every effort to honor that trust with practice."

Where Karayılan sees his hand strong is 'non-separation'. He continues: "Since there is no thought like separation is on the table, the discussions can be held with mutual respect along the lines how how to create conditions for equality, freedom, and living together."

Filiz Koçali - Ramazan Pekgöz

Readers of this blog can check Hasan Cemal's interview with Mr. Karayılan published in Rastî: Part-1, Part-2, Part-3, and Part-4.

Finally, I have to point out two things. The first one is the the PKK guerrillas are trying VERY hard to avoid any kind of conflict while Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) didn't halt its operations. Quite a few guerillas have been killed during the conflict-avoidance phase PKK has initiated unilaterally. However, when guerillas are surrounded and fired upon, they do defend themselves. Wouldn't you? So, a Turkish soldier died in a recent clash and Washington Post published an article. It says One Turkish soldier died in PKK violence. Of course, there is no mention of any of the sincere moves and sacrifices the PKK has been unilaterally making to prevent bloodshed. The article tries to portray the PKK as if the PKK is opposing to the solution to the Kurdish Question:

The armed attack comes as the government prepares to announce a series of measures aimed at reducing years of problems between the Turkish state and its Kurdish population, which have been a cause of violence and poverty for years.

Pathetic.

Karayılan, during his interview, stresses something again: non-separation. The PKK wants the problem solved within the unity of the state. The same article goes on calling PKK "separatist".

Did the TSK manage to buy some foreign reporters?

Go to Part-2 or Part-3

Mass Grave in Turkish Military Installation

A soldier who served in Semdinli Derecik Internal Security Brigade during 1994-1995 came out about an event in which 12 korucular (government paramilitary forces used against PKK and Kurdish people) were tortured, shot, and buried in a mass grave in the garrison.

The soldier even provided a schematic of the mass gave and alerted the prosecutor's office and spoke to Taraf daily. You can read the full article in Turkish.

The soldier stated that the commander of the brigade then was Lt. Colonel Ali Çamurcu, a known member of JITEM who is known to kill a lot of civilians after having them kidnapped.

The soldier who came out talks about the details of the encounter of how the korucular we tortured nonstop with allegations that they were helping the PKK while in fact they were not. The poor korucular were screaming for days that they were fighting against the PKK.

Some could say these 12 korucular met their demise but I feel sorry for them. Because the korucular are stupid enough to think that the fascist state will actually value them for betraying and killing their own people. The fascist regime will never forget that korucular betrayed their own people and so they can betray her too. That's why they have no value for the fascist regime.

A reporter has found the relatives of the killed and they described what happened. It appears that after a clash between the PKK and the military, the military raided the village, set the homes on fire, tortured people, beat up a pregnant woman and killed her baby, incinerated a person alive and took these 12 korucular to the military installation for torture and later killed them.

After the story hit the news construction work started in the military post where the mass grave is supposed to be located. It wouldn't surprise me though that the remains of the people have already been removed and incinerated. JITEM's professional killers have reported in the part that they were professional enough not to leave any body parts behind.

When the families of the "missing" complained, the government refused to investigate. Later when the matter was taken to the European Human Rights Court, Turkey simply said that the "disappeared" must have joined the PKK and the atrocities were committed by the terrorist organization.

It seems to me that Turkey conveniently omitted specifying the fact that the terrorist organization was the Turkish State.

Êdî Bese!

Enough already!