Support for Bahçeli from Tuncer Bakırhan: 'Credit must be given where it is due'

MHP leader Devlet Bahçeli’s handshake with DEM Party deputies during the new legislative year of Parliament, followed by his words, "Let Öcalan come to Parliament, speak to the DEM Group, and announce that he has liquidated the organization," had changed Turkey's agenda 180 degrees.

DEM Party Co-Chair Tuncer Bakırhan, a party to the debate, stated that he believes there is a consensus between President and AKP leader Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Bahçeli, but that there is no clarity in the process.

'CALL TO LAY DOWN ARMS'

Expressing his astonishment at the expectation of a "lay down arms" call from the DEM Party, Bakırhan asked, "This place cannot say to Öcalan, who holds a weapon, 'Leave the weapon and come.' No, we can say it, but who would believe it? Who would come or believe in an environment where we are imprisoned and tried with decades-long sentences?"

Bakırhan answered Gazete Duvar's questions regarding the agenda.

Highlights from Bakırhan's statements are as follows:

It has been almost a month and a half since MHP leader Devlet Bahçeli shook your hand at the opening of Parliament. During this process, Bahçeli has made remarkable and controversial statements. How would you summarize this month and a half?

I think it is positive that discussions aimed at resolving the issue have begun. But there is a problem. The issue is being discussed from the wrong angle. If you notice, the consequences of the issue are being discussed. Things like, 'Let this person speak, let that person lay down arms, let this person build a wall in between, let the other phrase their words this way.' In a month and a half, we haven't heard the causes; we are all discussing the results. What is the Kurdish issue? Did it just appear out of nowhere? A discussion that starts with its consequences makes one anxious and uneasy.

'BAHÇELİ SAID VERY IMPORTANT THINGS'

Do you think there is a crisis in the People's Alliance?

At first, we tried to understand. But it is certain that those words were not said out of nowhere. He said very important things. Credit must be given where it is due. Many positive concepts were actually used and defined, such as the right to hope and democratic politics. We tried to understand.

During this 45-day period, I believe that from the beginning, the ruling partners—while there may be nuances—were aware of this entire process and that there was a division of roles among them.

"WE WANT PROGRESS"

I do not think that rhetoric such as peace in Turkey, the right to hope, or Öcalan speaking in Parliament started this process. There is likely a history to this issue between Erdoğan and Bahçeli. There may be differences in expression, tone, or content. It may not have been described the same way by both. But the issue itself is one that has been discussed between the two.

I think there is a consensus here. But what is it? If it is a consensus aimed only at eliminating the consequences, it will lead to a repetition that has been going on for a hundred years. For 100 years, Kurds have risen up 21 times and been suppressed. The country's economy and energy have flowed into this. There is serious decay. We are facing a government that knows this history very well. There is an MHP that constantly emphasizes 'Turkey's interests,' and I think those interests start precisely with resolving this issue right here. It is in all of our interests.

Therefore, either they are testing the waters, or they are trying to understand Trump's Middle East policy following the US elections. But there is a reality; this issue has now imposed itself. If it has reached a point where even the MHP is talking about it, we hope and want this issue to move forward. Let these discussions be a process. Let these discussions be an occasion for the resolution of the issue through negotiation and dialogue; we want this more than anyone. Our entire practice, language, rhetoric, and actions all serve the thought I just mentioned.

APPOINTMENT OF TRUSTEES

How should the imposition of a meeting ban on Öcalan be interpreted in this picture?

On one hand, very ambitious, grand words are being spoken, and on the other, trustees are being appointed. The places where trustees are appointed are also interesting. Bahçeli says, 'Let Öcalan come.' A trustee is appointed directly to Öcalan's own district. There have been some contacts between Ahmet Türk and Bahçeli in the past, and you see a trustee being appointed to Mardin. A trustee is appointed in Batman to replace the female co-mayor elected with the highest number of votes. Most importantly, a trustee is appointed to a mayor elected through a city consensus.

NORTHERN SYRIA

It is being discussed that the Kurdish issue is not just an internal matter for the government, but also an external one. Besides the government easing its hand abroad, shouldn't this also have a reflection internally?

We are not saying 'don't ease your hand.' Yes, there is a very troubled, painful process in the Middle East where it is unclear where or how it will reflect tomorrow. If there is a concern for Turkey's future and security, there is a way to emerge from this in the safest way possible. The most dynamic force there is the Kurds. A dialogue and an environment of peace that will develop with them is the greatest security for these places. As they say, 'the greatest window of opportunity.' Today, there is a war for secure energy lines and trade routes from China to Europe. Other countries are coming and investing hundreds of billions of dollars there. New alliances, new borders, and new conflicts are emerging just to protect that secure line. The distance between Qamishli and Nusaybin is 50 meters. There is an opportunity to solve the issue they are spending two hundred billion dollars on and fighting for with a 50-meter plastic pipe. There are great opportunities that peace with the Kurds would provide for this country. Instead of evaluating this and turning these opportunities to the benefit of the country's people, there is a blind hostility.

When the Federated Kurdistan Region was formed, if the Kurds in Turkey had said, 'A federated region was formed there, let us also call for independence,' they would have been right; that was a security threat. But despite that federative structure there, they said 'common life, living together, democratic republic, democratic nation' here. Is there anything as valuable as this?

I don't think even a pebble, let alone a bullet or shell, has been thrown from North East Syria into Turkey. Is it right to have so much hostility toward a region that tries to establish good relations with Turkey, constantly gives positive messages, and talks about dialogue, negotiation, and peace despite all the targeting? The approach there is poisoning things here as well.

This is also very important; if you ignore a people who are facing the West, prioritizing women's rights and animal rights, who have trees and flowers in their fields, and who are intertwined with life, then you create the real security threat.

'WE DO NOT HAVE AN ATTITUDE OF NOT MEETING WITH THE GOVERNMENT'

Have you considered requesting an appointment from the government to open a door and make progress in this process?

If it will create a ground and a development for the benefit of the people and the democratization of Turkey, we will do anything. But they are pointing fingers and insulting us morning and night. They say 'terrorist' and appoint trustees. How can we go in an environment where trustees are appointed?

We never have an attitude of not meeting. But really, the time, the ground, what has been experienced... If this issue is to be solved, of course, sitting down and establishing a dialogue with the most rejecting, the most extreme, and the most opposing, and establishing a ground for us to at least understand each other, even if nothing else happens, is of course very important. But rest assured, we are also watching and observing. There is no such ground. The climate is truly very troubled.