One Party (DTP) Two Styles (Leyla Zana & Aysel Tugluk)
Leyla Zana and Aysel Tugluk represent two different fractions within the Democratic Society Party (DTP). The first is seen as pan-Kurdish whereas the latter claims being the MP of the entire country as well as stressing Kurdish nationalism. Zana seems to prefer being supported by the terrorist organization PKK (Kurdistan Worker’s Party). Tugluk, on the other hand, underlines the necessity of getting rid of violence. “The Kurdish political movement should base its ideology on system of values, strictly away from hostility” with the words of Ayse Tugluk. Different from Leyla Zana, who seems to be heavily affected by the terrorist leader Abdullah Ocalan, Aysel Tugluk proposes an agenda for solving the problems of Turkey within the area of politics.
The Rising Struggle within DTP
Politics starts when people start talking. The political course only continues when there is no violence, animosity, or anger. Social problems can only be solved when reasonable and constructive arguments dominate the political discourse. Tension strategy, nihilism, destructures, fragmentation, polarization and above all human death are the most important rivals of politics.
Turkish political history has witnessed significant violence, animosity and anger before. One can see that radicals’ efforts were to drag politics into violence between 1991 and 2007. However, a different understanding seems to be on its way in the recent months.
The murder of five Kurdish high school students and a father on December 3 2008 in Diyarbakır revealed a long time division within DTP. On the one side there are the pro-Kurdish who persist on staying under the shadow of PKK. On the other side of DTP there are those who try to keep politics away from violence, and seek finding solutions within the field of policy.
Ayse Tugluk amid the Division within DTP
PKK held the responsibility of January 3, 2008 bomb attack in Diyarbakır and further threatened the public by urging “everyone to draw lessons from the event”. In response Ayse Tugluk responded as follow: “How the words can be effective in the environment of bombs and death… Because of this event DTP will be isolated and worthless, thereafter it will not be possible for DTP to continue policy making. Only the perpetrator must be liable for each action, approach, and word.” All these opposite words prove the separation in DTP. And one of the sides will win in this process.
“…Yes, our voters demand their identity and culture. But they want also composure and economic welfare. As DTP, we must conduct our policy with these arguments and democratic maturity...” This speech of Tugluk can be regarded as the words of a wise politician, indeed. In the elections process Ayse Tugluk had said that the plans of DTP should not only focus on the ethnic issues but also it must product solutions to the problems of Turkey.
Tugluk has always opposed to take Ocalan’s priorities on the agenda of the party. Different from Zana, Ayse Tugluk highlighted that the party voters want to live in peace, composure, and welfare, and the nature of politics necessitates finding solutions for the daily problems of people.
In response to Leyla Zana’s separatist and slogan based politics, Ayse Tugluk had said that, “the problems such as infrastructure, education and health issues are also important as much as identity and cultural rights. We had a claim to be Turkey’s Party. Have we managed to create a nationwide politics, style and language? No. Although we had aimed to be Turkey’s Party, we even couldn’t manage to represent our own voters. Frankly, we failed.” All these words reflect her approach to find solutions for concrete problems.
DTP and Leyla Zana
Leyla Zana does not refrain from addressing Ocalan as her hero and persistently supporting PKK. After Pınarcık murder PKK had said that: “we will kill in order to be the authority”, and after the increase in the number of civil deaths Ocalan continued by further provocation: “city conflicts will start. No matter what its costs will be. It is not difficult to get into a bus and blow yourself up. We have enough people to do that…” That the propaganda of the terrorist organization goes over death goes without saying. From these explanations it must be understood that in the separation process of DTP there is a cadre which has nourished from the violence since the 1980’s. PKK, to which Leyla Zana affiliates her and its captured leader Ocalan seems to perceive the normalization process as a threat to themselves.
Kurdish Politicians against PKK Terror
PKK, calling the civilian murders as “success” and training suicide bombers to reach this “success”, urged everyone to take the “necessary lessons” after its attack on 3 January 2008. It goes without saying that thousands with a Kurdish background also condemned the bloody event. Most of the Kurdish politicians also condemned it. Many Kurdish politicians manage to stand against PKK’s attempts to dominate the party in this regard. Aysel Tugluk was one of these politicians, her words go as follow: “…I couldn’t go to identify the dead persons. His broken and blasted body was put in sack. This situation touched my hearth. Mehmet Mutlu, father of dead child, was waiting. Another father had gone to take his daughter. A girl had left her class earlier to meet with her friend. And another one had gone to class to visit her friend. They were only living their daily life. Anyone does not care about death at this age, at that time, at that place…and a youth does not die at his/her seventeen…and when the children are dying what can we say to whom?...”
Aysel Tugluk represents the recently appearing face of the Kurdish political life. She seems to be on the way of being one of the important persons who are wise enough to seek solutions in places other than under the shadow of violence. Tugluk clearly distinguishes herself from the terrorist organization PKK by her following words: “when the children are dying what we can say to whom?” Besides, the MP claims make DTP the party of Turkey by putting reasonable issues such as infrastructure, education and health on the party agenda. According to Tugluk, the AKP success in the southeast of Turkey lies behind the party’s concrete policies to solve the regional problems. Her words are quite illustrative in terms of showing in which field she wants to compete with her political challengers: “AKP was successful because it understood all the society, and answered demands of people.”
European Support
Recently, Europeans understand Turkey in its fight against terrorism much better than the past. Olli Rehn, the European Commissioner for Enlargement, praised Turkey’s democratisation process and drew attention to the shrinking manoeuvring scope of the terrorist organization. The Commissioner also underlined the necessity of distinguishing itself from PKK for DTP. The words of European Commission Turkey Desk Chief, Christian Danielson, also indicate a changing understanding within the European approach. Despite criticizing Turkey at the beginning, the Europeans realized Turkey’s justness in its fight, according to the Comissioner. He continued his speech by underlining the terrorist nature of PKK. Many Europeans regard PKK terror organization as the source of violence and condemn it, indeed. This is why various European politicians called DTP to retreat itself from PKK.
Since 2003, PKK has been isolating parties which are founded under its shadow. The terror organization intensified its attacks, especially in the cities, in the meantime. Terrorists still continue trying to smash a political movement representing people with a Kurdish ethnicity.
Concluding Remarks
Complaining from illiteracy while being the murderer of 123 teachers; protesting against the insufficient health care system whilst killing health-care personnel and defending the human rights of civilian regardless of 5257 victims is by no means acceptable. The terror organization does nothing but destroys the normalization process and wipes legal Kurdish political movements out. This was also what PKK attempted to achieve with the last attack in Diyarbakır. The terror organization tries to get on the agenda again through intensifying its bloody attacks. The murder of five innocent school children showed this once more. All those bear out that PKK perceives all these political initiatives, democratization efforts and human rights as a threat for itself.
The terrorist organization has been smashing parties, founded under its shadow by intensifying its attacks in large cities. PKK affiliated politicians seem to continue their attempts to block the attempts towards building Kurdish political movements which try to solve the problems within the democratic structure. That the European Parliament awards Leyla Zana does not seem to be very acceptable at this point.
Zana, who does not refrain articulating her loyalty to the terrorist leader Ocalan, was honoured with the Sakharov Prize, by the European Parliament in 1995 and got her prize in Brussels in 2004. Sakharov Prize is annually given by the Parliament to honor outstanding achievements in the fight to protect freedom of thought and expression against intolerance, fanaticism and hatred. The prize underlines the freedom of expression and of the press and indicate those as two of the most effective means of fighting oppression and key yardsticks by which to judge whether a society is democratic and open. The Parliament now seems to face a difficult question. Was Zana the right name in this regard or are there some other politicians, just like Tugluk, who deserve the prize much more?
Trans.by Serpil ACIKALIN and Nermin AYDEMIR
A Time Collapse in the Kurdish Problem
