The road map on the way to Qandil

It was 1991.

Süleyman Demirel and Erdal İnönü had formed a DYP-SHP (True Path Party – Social Democratic Populist Party) coalition government.

The coalition was going through its honeymoon period.

Ministers would visit the provincial offices of both parties during their travels.

Ministers from the SHP were always full of praise for Demirel, and Demirel would have İnönü accompany him everywhere he went.

The coalition government had synergy.

During those days there was talk of both parties “joining forces” for the local elections.    

It didn’t happen, of course.

Even if not to the extent mentioned above, I used to think the relationship between the AK Parti (Justice and Development Party) and the HDP (Peoples’ Democratic Party) would proceed on a different plane after the reconciliation process had commenced.

The opposite was true.

They are not proceeding like two parties implementing the reconciliation process but rather like two elements on the frontlines of a war. The HDP -- while constantly showering the CHP (Republican People’s Party) with praise -- saves its rhetoric, which it cannot use on the MHP (Nationalist Movement Party), for the AK Parti and the architect of the process, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

This process is poisoned by the statements issued by Cemil Bayık, Aysel Tuğluk and, occasionally, Selahattin Demirtaş.

Particularly since the incidents of Oct. 6-8, where 51 people were brutally murdered…

If a strong political will that believes in the reconciliation process didn’t exist in Turkey, the country could have been dragged in a very different direction in the wake of the incidents of Oct. 6-8. If you recall, during those days we were debating whether Turkey would revert to the mindset seen during the declaration of a state of emergency in the 1990s.

The parties involved are carrying out a reconciliation process but have unfortunately not managed to develop a language of reconciliation. There should have been a language of resolution.

If we had opted for the implementation of a reconciliation process based on mutual trust, then many things considered as problems today would not have been problematic at all. Let alone that this did not materialize; it is not easy to implement the reconciliation process on the basis of threats, which is the HDP-PKK line.

Many debates were conducted in regard to the calls made to the public by the HDP co-chair, Demirtaş, during the incidents of Oct. 6-8, which resulted in 51 of our people losing their lives and the region’s becoming engulfed in flames.

Demirtaş, who contested the presidential elections with his “hailing from Turkey initiative” and garnered 9.5 percent of the votes, had his sincerity about “hailing from Turkey” brought into question, and this resulted in comments to the tune of “the makeup of hailing from Turkey has been washed away.”

Demirtaş, who kept silent for a while after the incidents of Oct. 6-8, had said, “We weren’t able to foresee what would occur when we made our call for people to take to the streets.”

Demirtaş’s role in the events of Oct. 6-8 was not extensively questioned once the wheels started turning again in the search for a solution.

However, we were once again reminded of Demirtaş’s role in the events of Oct. 6-8 following his comment of “we will block the domestic security package on the streets.” This is because street unrest has played a role in this country’s past, and the people of this country possess memories.

When the MHP says streets, the clashes between the left and the right come to mind. When Demirtaş says streets, the brutal murder of 51 people and the looting that occurred in various cities comes on the agenda.

The events of Oct. 6-8 have been stored in memories as a trauma of the near past, in the same way that the events of Sept. 6-7, 1955 are considered a trauma. What is the sense in issuing statements that awaken these memories? Who has benefitted from unrest on the streets? Wasn’t spilling the blood of 51 people enough? Who will benefit from the further spilling of the blood of our youth?

There is one thing that corroborates the statement by Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu that “Demirtaş will be responsible for every drop of blood shed, if he issues a call to take to the streets.” Actually, it is not one thing that corroborates this statement but rather the 51 people buried in cemeteries in Diyarbakır, Batman, Mardin and Bingöl.

This reconciliation process is a strange beast. While Demirtaş was making these statements and Prime Minister Davutoğlu was announcing that Demirtaş will bear responsibility for any bloodshed, the HDP delegation -- that had met with Deputy Prime Minister Yalçın Akdoğan, who is responsible for the reconciliation process – was in Qandil (the mountain base of the PKK in northern Iraq) to discuss the road map, which Ankara had agreed to. Action was taken so swiftly that Sırrı Süreyya Önder, who prefers to travel by road due to his fear of flying, was left out of the delegation.

The road map and its details that were agreed upon during a “solution” meeting chaired by Prime Minister Davutoğlu were forwarded to the HDP delegation. Public order has been the sine qua non of the reconciliation process in the wake of the incidents of Oct. 6-8. This is because the government considers public order as the guarantee for the reconciliation process.

The leadership is of the belief that “it will not be possible to implement a solution without public safety, given that not much else remains in the search for a solution since the withdrawal of forces didn’t materialize and the process of refraining from offensive actions is frequently violated.”

Contrary to the strongly-worded statements by Demirtaş and Davutoğlu, the climate prevailing in Ankara is one that points to progress being made in the reconciliation process. A positive climate prevails on the leadership’s front.

The road bump posed by the topic of creating a secretariat on İmralı (the prison island where Abdullah Öcalan is serving a life sentence) is being negotiated in the shape of changing the other inmates on the island. Ankara had objections to two names in this regard. The proposing of alternative names is on the agenda.

I would like to underline the significance of the following development. The road map presented to the HDP delegation contains concrete steps with regard to a time table and an observer committee.

The reconciliation train will be back on track and move forward if the process is not damaged by another sabotage attempt and if Qandil does not put forward unacceptable conditions. We might witness the speeding up of the process from this point onward.