Bahçeli's 'one Kurd, one Alevi' proposal had become the agenda! First statement from the MHP front: Called it 'Devlet Bahçeli's vision', did not deny it

The words allegedly spoken by MHP Chairman Devlet Bahçeli months ago during a closed-door group meeting with MHP deputies, "Let the President have two deputies; one Kurdish, the other Alevi," have become the center of political debate. 

While this proposal by Bahçeli created controversy in the public eye, different interpretations were made regarding the accuracy of the remarks.

Bahçeli's chief advisor and chief columnist for Türkgün newspaper, Yıldıray Çiçek, clarified the discussions in a column he penned today. In his article, Çiçek used the following expressions: 

“Discussions in the form of 'Let the President have two deputies; one Kurdish, the other Alevi' based on Mr. Devlet Bahçeli's name have begun to find a place on the agenda as lobby information. When we look at these discussions from the framework of the 'Devlet Bahçeli vision,' at the core of the statement lies a strong emphasis on brotherhood, indicating that our Kurdish and Alevi brothers and sisters who are loyal to their homeland, flag, and national values can take part in any representative office.”

“However, this unifying message is being attempted to be overshadowed by some segments through a hypocritical perception operation by distorting it as 'separatism.' We have even seen those who stooped so low as to say, 'He is proposing the terrorist leader Öcalan.' The most painful part has been the simple and hate-filled comments of some who emerged from within our own ranks.”

DAVUTOĞLU: “THIS PROPOSAL IS VERY DANGEROUS”

The first reaction to the proposal allegedly made by Bahçeli came from Future Party Chairman Ahmet Davutoğlu. Stating that Bahçeli should make the statement himself, Davutoğlu argued that seeing the proposal as a systematic model is wrong and risky. Davutoğlu made the following assessment:

“Mr. Bahçeli should clarify this proposal himself. If this is a piece of advice given temporarily for the health of the process, it can be discussed. But if he is proposing this as a system, it is very dangerous. I would never see it as correct.”