|
Interview with Sebahat Tuncel, Kurdish
Women MP of BDP in Turkey 15.3.2010
|
|
|
|
"The
Turkey's Democratic Opening opened the road to
prison for the Kurds"
March
15, 2010
Sebahat Tuncel, a Member of Parliament representing
Istanbul in the Turkish Grand National Assembly,
asserts that “if you have a criticism of the system
you’re smeared either as a separatist or terrorist”.
Interview with Necmiye Alpay of Radikal newspaper,
February 1, 2010
Translated from Turkish by Jake Hess (jakerhess@gmail.com)
/ Original text available at www.radikal.com.tr
Member of Parliament
Sebahat Tuncel, who joined the Peace and Democracy
Party (BDP) when the Democratic Society Party (DTP)
was shut down, said the following about the new
party and the ‘democratic opening’ before the BDP
congress: ‘In our program we won’t focus solely on
the Kurdish issue. The state wants to confine us to
the region.
|
Sebahat Tuncel, Kurdish MP in the Turkish parliament |
We
won’t allow this.’ ‘The PKK is a result of the
problem, not its cause. The PKK will cease to be an
issue when the issue itself is resolved…if the
Kurdish people’s language, identity and cultural
rights aren’t secured then even if the PKK disarms
the Kurdish people won’t give up their rights’
Sebahat Tuncel is one of the parliamentarians who
joined the Peace and Democracy Party (Barış ve
Demokrasi Partisi - BDP) following the closure of
the Democratic Society Party (Demokratik Toplum
Partisi - DTP). Last year we spoke on a panel
together. We met in Istanbul on Sunday, 24 January
to talk about the BDP and its congress scheduled to
take place on February 1.
Sebahat Tuncel is a good speaker, one who undertakes
her duties with energy, an important public figure.
She uses very few clichés when articulating her
parties views and doesn’t take it as an opportunity
to opportunistically separate herself from her party
while articulating her own. We chat a little bit
before the interview. It doesn’t seem like the
dreams and aspirations she’s brought up won’t be
shared.
The other young, female BDP activists accompanying
her are also like that.
There are many questions, however, and we have to
start somewhere.
The difference between BDP and DTP
Necmiye Alpay: With regard
to being ‘a party for all of Turkey’ will the BDP
have a different thrust than DTP?
Sebahat Tuncel: The AKP (Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi
- Justice and Development Party, the current ruling
party) and state protocol were what prevented the
DTP from being an all-Turkey party. But actually the
DTP - with its program defending a democratic and
peaceful solution to the Kurdish issue, women’s
emancipation and ecologically-friendly lifestyles -
actually was a party for all of Turkey.
If you look at its two and a half year-long tenure
in parliament you see that it played the major
oppositional role on issues from poverty and the
question of women’s rights to ecology and democracy.
However, only our views concerning the Kurdish issue
were reflected. We pointed this out at every
opportunity. The democratization of Turkey will pass
straight through a solution to the Kurdish issue.
Most of the time we were faced with the criticism
that we didn’t present ourselves as an intermediary
[in a possible conflict-resolution process]. If
that’s the case the truth is that we didn’t see
another intermediary regarding a solution to the
Kurdish issue with whom we could share our views and
suggestions.
Our requests for meetings were vehemently rejected.
They behaved as if we weren’t there. They repeated
and stopped with confused refrains such as ‘our
negotiating partners are the people.’ The prime
minister met with us once -- that was a result of
public pressure -- and he met with us not as prime
minister but as ‘Chairman of the AKP’. You know,
there’s a phrase; ‘spring doesn’t come with the
opening of a flower.’
This meeting could have been a positive step for
Turkish democracy and solutions to its problems, but
unfortunately the prime minister wasn’t able to show
the bravery to meet with the Kurds’ political
representatives, and democracy was postponed to
another spring.
To be a party for all of Turkey means to see all of
the country’s problems as the party’s own problems
and to generate policies in light of that. In that
sense, while doing politics with the DTP we were an
all-Turkey party. When we decided to carry on with
BDP we tried to build our party program and statutes
in accordance with that. In my view, the parties
which aren’t for all of Turkey are those which have
the mentality which ignores the country’s Kurdish
issue or sees it as a ‘terror problem’. We’re one of
the rare parties that sees the solution to the
Kurdish issue and the self-expression of differences
as questions of freedom and democracy and generate
projects in that regard.
At the moment we’re preparing for our February 1st
congress with a program on this topic which is more
developed. We don’t only focus on the Kurdish issue
in the program. Generally speaking we’re a party
which sees everything from freedoms,www.ekurd.netlabor
issues, sexuality, nationalism, militarism, to
ecological issues as all being Turkey’s problems and
we adopt the most progressive posture on these
matters. Although the programs aren’t read we
consider what we write there to be important.
For example, our programs show the importance we
attach to our forty percent gender quota for women,
implementation of a joint party presidency
comprising one man and one woman, and attitudes
toward sexuality.
I want to stress once more our insistence on the
struggle for democracy and freedom and that as BDP
we’re going to meet the future in light of our past
experiences.
The state wanted to confine us to the [southeast
Anatolian] region and cut off the space in front of
us. We as the BDP won’t allow this. Our
understanding is that to be an all-Turkey party
means if there’s a problem with a power plant in the
Black Sea region, to deal with it, to resolve it; if
the region has a different problem, for example an
unemployment problem, to pay attention to it, to
come up with a solution.
We deal with ecological issues in a way detailed to
the same extent that no other party deals with them.
We’ll continue to see our differences as a guarantee
of democracy and peace and challenge those who view
them as a danger. And we believe that we’re going
also going to grow. Look for yourself, many
intellectuals who didn’t join DTP have joined BDP.
We consider this participation very important.
There’s a situation now in which all state
institutions seem to have declared war on the
political will of the Kurds. They closed our party.
A prohibition on political participation has been
imposed on 37 of our friends, including our
co-chairperson Mr. Ahmet Turk and one of our
parliamentarians, Ms. Aysel Tugluk; some of our
elected mayors and members of city council have been
handcuffed and arrested; as you know the number of
arrests has surpassed one-thousand.
[The state] is trying to close democratic political
channels to Kurds. However, in my opinion the state
and its spokesperson, the AKP, is forgetting
something: the Kurds are an organized people, they
know what they want and what they’re struggling for,
and for thirty years they’ve exerted enormous labor
and paid a dear price, and after that they’re still
ready to pay. The state must see this reality and
recognize the Kurdish people, and the rights the
Kurds derive from being a people must be
constitutionally secured.
Otherwise the cause of the resulting chaos and
tension will be the AKP government.
KCK operation created fear
NA: The KCK operation was a
pretext, presumably. I assume that this KCK incident
has frightened many people, it’s created concerns
such as that a new illegal organization has emerged.
ST: Yes, in the March 29th local elections our
people showed at the ballot box that they accept our
politics. This situation caused the state to
re-examine its policies toward the Kurds. For that
reason a process like the ‘democratic opening’ was
begun. But this process isn’t about resolving the
Kurdish issue. It’s about looking at how requests
can be dealt with at the absolutely minimal level.
The fundamental definition of the problem hasn’t
changed.
As President Gul said, this is a joint project of
all state institutions. The understanding of dealing
with the issue as a matter of ‘terror’ hasn’t
changed; this is a project of elimination with a
democratic cloak. That’s why the political
representatives of the Kurdish people and human
rights defenders were portrayed as KCK members and
arrested on that basis. And there’s a desire to put
the Kurds under pressure by shutting down a
political party which constitutes their organized
power.
There’s a desire to isolate Kurds in both Turkish
and global public opinion by saying ‘these aren’t
DTP members, they’re PKK members’, and to some
extent this has been successful.
For example, when the PKK is the topic in question
everyone choose to keep a distance and stay silent
in the face of human rights abuses and state
violence, and moreover most of the time criticisms
which need to be made of the state are directed
toward us. We see ourselves as being responsible to
the Turkish people, the Kurdish people, and the 72
million people who live in Turkey.
For that reason, at every opportunity we point out a
truth which is hidden from our people, namely that
the Kurdish issue isn’t a ‘terror’ issue but rather
a matter of a people existing with their culture and
identity. In other words the PKK isn’t a cause but a
consequence of the issue. In that regard when the
Kurdish issue is resolved the PKK will also cease to
be an issue. We’re saying that a solution to the
Kurdish issue won’t be a solution in a true sense if
the PKK and Mr. Abdullah Ocalan aren’t taken into
account. This is a reality.
Today the PKK has thousands of guerrillas and the
state is saying ‘you’re in the mountains, stay
there.’ In other words, instead of solving the
problem the state is imposing deadlock as a
solution. It’s saying the PKK should disarm and
dissolve itself and submitting [its plan] to the
people like that. But that’s not valid.
If today the Kurdish people’s language, identity and
cultural rights aren’t secured then even if the PKK
disarms the Kurdish people won’t give up their
rights. This has to be properly understood both by
the state and our friends. If this reality isn’t
acknowledged, every opening which develops in Turkey
will haul the country’s bright future into darkness.
NA: There were journalists
who understood and wrote this. Those who know the
region and closely follow the issue…
Could the BDP together with
all democratic-minded individuals from Turkey exert
more common effort -- especially regarding a
solution to the Kurdish issue -- than it is now, and
if so what forms could that common effort take in
your opinion? Intellectuals have joined BDP, a group
joined together with Zeynep Tanbay and Busra Ersanli.
But what can be done aside from this?
ST: We as the Peace and Democracy Party are going to
continue the struggle for democracy and peace with
decisiveness. We’re going to carry on this struggle
together with all forces on the side of democracy,
peace and freedoms. All of this country’s problems
are our problems.
We’re also going to develop a solution together. As
you know there are various platforms and initiatives
such as the Turkish Peace Assembly, United Movement
for Democracy, Women’s Initiative for Peace. In
other words, democratic individuals and forces such
as women’s organizations, youth organizations,
leftists, socialists and feminists are our
fundamental allied forces.
You know that it’s not very easy to wage a struggle
for democracy in Turkey. If you have any criticisms
of the system, the system smears you as either a
‘separatist’ or ‘terrorist’ and imposes this view on
society through the facilitation of the media.
For that reason the media is an important sphere and
this sphere needs a certain language in accordance
with peace, equality and democracy.
Most of the time the grounds for racism, militarism
and sexism are laid with the language used in the
media. The fact that the Kurds’ demonstrations,
democratic demands, actions and activities are
portrayed with such language causes more emotional
ruptures to emerge between the Turkish and Kurdish
peoples, those who wear headscarves and those who
don’t, religious people and non-religious people,
and Armenians and Turks.
And of course we’re the ones who suffer the most
from this.
The state is not only trying to obstruct our
domestic work, it’s even exerting considerable
pressure to disrupt our international projects.
A while back one of our friends joined a meeting of
the European Left Party in Germany, and he was
supposed to meet with someone else following that
meeting but had to leave because something urgent
came up. Instead of cancelling the meeting I joined.
By saying ‘don’t meet with the DTP, it was closed in
Turkey because it’s the political wing of the PKK’
the Turkish embassy there wanted to interrupt our
meetings in Germany.
In any event it shows that the embassy makes its own
decisions about who the parties we meet with will or
will not speak to. Of course it’s an interesting
situation, to inform another country about your own
parliamentarians in that way…
We’re aware that the struggle we’re going to wage
with our new allies who will join us at the party
congress will be a difficult one. However we find it
very meaningful that these new participants are
joining us in the face of those who wish to simply
confine us to the southeast Anatolian region or
suffocate us.
Democracy, peace and freedom is necessary for
everyone in this country. For that reason I’m saying
a joint struggle is inescapable. In our Party
Assembly there’s going to be a working 80-person
committee developing policies on this matter in
particular. In light of the fact that we live
together and are going to live together, for us it’s
very important to come together in all areas.
Many intellectuals from all of Turkey will have a
role in our Party Assembly, and as they should.
The benefit of the left
NA: Ufak Uras’s behavior
has been important. Also, leftist parties, the New
Left initiative, and the Freedom and Solidarity
Party…Don’t you think all of these could be
beneficial for joint efforts, especially on such
matters as resolving the Kurdish issue and
democratization?
ST: We identify ourselves as a leftist party and
we’re identified with the people. And we consider
cooperation and dialogue with democratic and
socialist forces in Turkey important.
However, in a general sense the left isn’t very
strong in Turkey. The left has big problems, such as
establishing relationships with the public. It’s
going through a period marked by division. If the
left were more powerful in Turkey it’d be easier to
democratize the country and solve social problems,
above all the Kurdish issue.
Our work in our Party Assembly can secure this
connection. This congress taking place on February
first is an extraordinary congress. The BDP is going
to begin with a congress. Our real work begins after
this.
NA: Ahmet Insel has an
article in today’s Radikal Two…
ST: Yes, I read it. Now, the PKK and Abdullah Ocalan
are realities of the Kurdish question, and this is
one of the points that just can’t be understood.
It’s an informative situation. What are the PKK
members in the mountains going to do, how will it be
done, how will they come here? No one is saying
anything about this topic. Policies aren’t being
created, existing laws are being mentioned. Effort
must be made to change existing laws. We’re making
such effort.
This is also a topic that intellectuals from Turkey
haven’t been able to deal with, in my opinion. In
other words debates on the Kurdish issue are
undertaken within the confines of official ideology.
Of course there are others who take a different,
more realistic approach. Everyone wants to leave
this violent situation. If you can’t see the sources
of this and if you set a course according to daily
developments, the issue won’t be settled and will
become even more insurmountable.
As I said before I see the correct approach as to
deal with [the PKK] not as the source of the problem
and to try to get them to come down with that in
mind, but to see them as a result of the issue and
to work from there. In that respect, steps that the
state must take regarding peace and democracy are
most of the time expected from the Kurds, which is
something the Kurds don’t understand.
In my view the source of the issue isn’t Kurds but
the state’s ‘one nation’ approach that ignores the
Kurds. As long as this approach doesn’t change, not
only Kurds but all social actors who criticize the
system will suffer from the approaches in which the
state labels others ‘enemies’ and ‘separatists’.
There’s still hope
NA: Do you think hopes
related to the Democratic Opening have finished,
what do you think?
ST: The Democratic Opening opened the road to prison
for the Kurds. Their political will was assaulted,
handcuffed. It caused the incarceration of our party
leaders. The democratic reactions people showed on
the street were terrorized. Our people were lynched.
[The Opening] died in the middle of the street. The
Opening’s turned into an effort to eliminate the
Kurdish movement.
However, despite all of these experiences, if not
today then definitely tomorrow peace and freedom
will prevail in this land. The AKP is trying to
crush our hope, but the actual hope that will be
crushed is the AKP’s. By generating policies aimed
at eliminating this people’s struggle for freedom
the AKP is going to eliminate itself. Everyone knows
that this isn’t the AKP’s project. The EU and USA
are behind it. They’re also trying to reach success
in their plan by getting the Kurdistan Regional
Government on their side.
I want to say this on the topic of democratization:
Today a large segment of the population in Turkey is
in favor of democratization and peace. A very wide
segment is again raising their voices regarding a
solution to the Kurdish issue. In my view this is
the fundamental point. The AKP can’t secure
democratization in Turkey.
The AKP’s character isn’t suited for that. However,
because a powerful leftist option hasn’t emerged the
AKP is trying to lead this process. For that reason
society needs leadership and a dynamic force for
change. A revolutionary dynamic. Whoever is the core
of this dynamic will expand the Opening.
In my view, in Turkey the state is redesigning
itself. In other words it feels that it needs to
redesign itself in accordance with the current age,
because it won’t be able to carry on with its old
form and administration. The Ergenekon
investigation, searches carried out in the cosmic
room, and the military’s assertion that ‘we decoded
and canceled the [coup] plans’ are part of this
redesigning.
In other words, when the dynamic of change in Turkey
in question is the AKP and the state that has
commissioned it, it doesn’t represent a change or
transformation in a true sense; rather, the system
is removing the structures that are obstructing its
way. If there could be a powerful, democratic,
leftist dynamic, Turkey could experience a reckoning
with the past in a true sense and there could be a
positive beginning.
Unfortunately, we’re very far from that.
Copyright, respective
author or news agency
Top |
Kurd Net
does not take credit for and is not responsible for the content of news
information on this page
|
®
