The problems arise if a conflict comes to a point where a solution seems possible or even likely. All of a sudden the status-quo, which governed the conflict, is broken through, and at the same time the rules mentioned above go out of the window. In such times we usually see the most bloodiest of incidents. All the parties, big or small, high or low, see their long running existence threatened. Then they react in the only way they know how, they strike out with all their power. No target is illegitimate in those times. That’s why the days shortly before a possible solution are the most dangerous in any conflict. Everyone wants to get the retaliation in before the dust settles, may be for good. There is also another reason for all this. Often the solutions are not only full of compromises, they also carry the real danger of betrayal in them. Compromises can be accepted by people who have given their lives to the struggle. But betrayal is unacceptable. It proves that everything has been for nothing, and no one who holds principles dear can live with that, and rightly so.
When Ireland was divided in the twenties of the last century, the people in the North were left behind en betrayed. They struck back, which was fully justified under the circumstances. When in the 90s the IRA accepted the Good Friday agreement, the Republican people were again left behind. The main elements of the conflict were not settled; there was still a British presence in Ireland and Ireland was not reunited. Some accepted the deal, because the prisoners were coming home. Others stayed silent because they were tired of the war. But a minority stood firm and did not give up the struggle. It is still going on today. When the deal was first on the verge of acceptance incidents took place which shocked everyone. A good example is the Omagh bomb. Many died, especially because the authorities mishandled the situation at the time. Did they do this on purpose? Very likely because it got the so-called peace process out of the mud and had it up and running again. The results, good or bad, we see today.
Another long running conflict which falls into this category is the Kurdish conflict between the Turkish state and the Workers Party of Kurdistan, the PKK. At the beginning of the conflict the Kurds demanded independence, later different forms of autonomy. Now the main demand of the PKK is cultural and political rights for the Kurdish population within the Turkish borders. Up to now there has been no settlement because the Turkish state refuses to move an inch and prefers to isolate and kill the Kurds. So the struggle has been going on, moving from war to ceasefire and war again. There were times when there seemed to be some movement. But those opportunities always came to nothing and in the meantime the war carried on.
In recent weeks there were reports that the jailed PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan was involved in serious negotiations with the Turkish state. When the reports were confirmed wild rumors started flying around. Some said that there would be a cease fire in May and in August the PKK would hand in its weapons. Others said that the weapons would already be handed in by March. There were tales of a road map for peace which already showed all the steps which would be taken. Furthermore there were rumors that, if all this became reality, Öcalan would be given house arrest instead of his current prisoner status. And some even said that he would be completely released to play his part in politics. The Turkish press was full of stories like these, and because of all that the status quo, which had existed for so long, seemed to be on the verge of collapse.
The reaction to this came almost immediately. In Paris 3 Kurdish women activists were murdered in cold blood in de Kurdistan Information Centre. The killers are still unknown. Shortly afterwards a Kurdish association building in Genk, Belgium, was destroyed by a firebomb. Earlier, a similar association was damaged in Vienna, in Austria. In Moscow a weapons dealer who had ties with the PKK was shot dead. All of this happened in the space of days. It is clearly a reaction to the peace rumors. The question is who is behind all this. When the 3 women were gunned down in Paris the Turkish state said it was part of a feud within the PKK. Even the Turkish PM Erdogan claimed that there was evidence to back up this theory.
But now we know that the attack in Paris is not the only incident, and it appears that there is a campaign of some sort going on which targets Kurdish activists, organsations and meeting places. When a feud was at the bottom of all this it would have taken a different shape. From the past we know what feuds within organsations look like. They are marked by a series of tit-for-tat attacks in which both sides suffer casualties. In this case there is no evidence to support the feud theory at all. It is far more likely that Turkish fascists, who are known to have death squads in Europe, have panicked after the peace rumors and embarked on a bloody murder campaign. They hope that this will restore the status quo and allow the war to continue. They would rather see the world burn than give concessions to the Kurds.
This does not mean that within the PKK there are no disagreements about the talks with the state and a possible solution. The PKK leaders in the mountains have already said that they have doubts and apprehension about the current process. This is logic. When there is talk of solutions and compromises, betrayal is usually not far away. For many this is unacceptable, and rightly so. The PKK can prevent major disagreements about the way forward if they take a number of measures. First of all the negotiations, if and when they start, must not be solely between Abdullah Öcalan and the state. Öcalan is a prisoner of the state and can be put under pressure. He is not free to move, and furthermore, it is not acceptable that one man becomes the central figure. That is a recipe for disaster.
If there are negotiations the leaders in the mountains, the leaders of the prisoners and the Kurdish civic leaders must be directly involved. Only if a possible settlement is carried by all these parties there is a real chance of success. When for example the Guerrilla is left out, chances are that they will just carry on the war in the mountains and ignore the talks. Then the whole process would collapse. Because of the uncertainty and the bitterness it would bring, many more people would die.
No conflict can carry on forever. There must be a solution one day. That also goes for the Kurdish conflict. But a solution must be a just one, carried by the majority. There must be concessions by both sides, but no betrayal. And what is even more important, no weapon must be handed in until it is absolutely clear that there will be a just peace and a better and more independent life for the Kurdish people. With real rights which are guaranteed in a new constitution. The question must be if the Turkish state is ready for all this. The facts of the last weeks show that they are not. Apparently they have still not learned a lesson from the last 30 years. That is a shame, but also a risk. The coming time could very well be more dangerous than the last 30 years have been. And the Turkish provocations need to be answered in the right way. Otherwise the whole conflict could explode with many more victims. In short, everyone connected with the conflict in some way must be on guard in the coming time. This to prevent more tears and more blood.
No comments:
Post a Comment