To be or not to be on the 'right side of history'!..

Of those who claim there is a “Kurdish issue” in our country, only the terrorist leader-PKK-DEM defines it point by point. The rest—like the blind men describing an elephant—are feeling their way in the dark.

The most interesting is Özgür Özel’s attitude. Both when he was CHP Chairman and now, he says, “We have never denied the existence of the Kurdish issue.” When it comes to fleshing this out, he only responds: “The problems of the Kurds exist until the Kurds say ‘I have no problem left,’ and they must be solved. Telling someone ‘You have no problem’ is authoritarianism. In democracies, it means that person has a problem until they say ‘I have no problem.’”

The goals of those on the PKK-DEM line regarding the PKK opening process and the demands they list for the “solution of the Kurdish issue” are well-known. It is enough to look at the message the terrorist leader in İmralı sent just four days ago to the conference titled “Democratic Confederalism in Kurdistan” held in Turin, Italy. He stated:

“The end of armed struggle does not mean peace on its own. For peace to be permanent at the end of the process, the causes of the conflict must be eliminated, the Kurdish existence, language, and culture must be guaranteed, the obstacles before democratic politics must be removed, and equal citizenship must be legally secured. Democratic integration... must be a democratic transformation where differences are not denied, rights are recognized, and common life is established on the basis of equality.”

So, what has Özel, who supports the opening process and voted “Yes” to the PKK law even though a large portion of his deputies opposed it, been saying about these demands?

On one hand, he defended the view that, “If Kurds in Turkey say, ‘We do not feel equal,’ it is the duty of all of us to solve that problem. But we will sit down and negotiate it all together.” On the other hand, he said, “No one objects to the flag, the name of the country, or the definition of citizenship in the Constitution. But there are inequalities in practice; these need to be corrected.”

Likewise, on one hand, he stated that they also have “red lines” on “such sensitive issues,” while on the other hand, he argued that talking about the matter starting from red lines is “not correct in terms of negotiation technique.”

What Does “Taking Place on the Right Side of History” Mean?

The reason we are highlighting these is as follows:

The day before yesterday, DEM co-chairs Tülay Hatimoğulları and Tuncer Bakırhan visited Özgür Özel. The main topic of the meeting was, of course, the PKK opening. While Bakırhan wanted the process to accelerate and for a way to be found for all political parties to participate in the Monitoring Board planned to be established in Parliament, he thanked Özel and the New Party management for “standing in the right place” despite being subjected to immense pressure.

Özgür Özel summarized his position as follows:

“The peace process in Turkey; the end of terrorism, the laying down of arms, and the end of conflicts so they never return—no one living on these lands is harmed by this. Everyone benefits and gains... It is important for an environment where everyone living in the country can live as brothers and sisters with all their differences. At this point, we have not changed the stance we took on the first day when we said, ‘One must take place on the right side of history,’ and we reaffirm this stance.”

Since DEM is praising the stance of Özel and the New Party, and Özgür Özel is talking about “taking place on the right side of history,” let us recall some statements from the last month.

Tuncer Bakırhan first responded to Özel’s words, referring to the terrorist leader, “We would like to talk about Selahattin Demirtaş returning to his home instead of someone else coming home,” as follows:

“The issue is not housing, it is position... What needs to be discussed is the nature of the process underway in Turkey and Mr. Öcalan’s position in this process... The process is on the table, the interlocutor is clear... How will the New Party solve this issue if it comes to power? Will it achieve disarmament and peace without talking to the party and interlocutor of the issue, by keeping Mr. Öcalan in 12 square meters and depriving him of communication and working conditions? Mr. Özel said in 2024, ‘I am raising the stakes, I am offering Kurds ownership of the Republic of Turkey state.’ Mr. Öcalan also advocates for the integration of Kurds with the Republic as equal citizens. The goal seems the same. But how will a solution be achieved by offering a people ownership of the state while leaving that people’s leader and the interlocutor of the issue out of the agenda?”

He then claimed that “the CHP, as the founding party of the state, has a historical responsibility in the Kurdish issue” and spoke as follows:

“Now a new party has been established, its name is the New Party. Shouldn't it have started with a ‘new’ understanding of the Kurdish issue? We see that Özel and the line he represents have not been able to form an institutional mind on this matter. The same picture exists in the formation of the commission, in not going to İmralı, and regarding the right to hope. It was the same in the latest vote in Parliament. The chairman and the management said ‘yes.’ This was very valuable. But 54 out of 91 deputies said ‘no’... On one side is the will that advocates for a solution, on the other are 100-year-old status quo reflexes.”

Let us note that Özel or the New Party management did not respond to the accusation that “the CHP has a historical responsibility in the Kurdish issue” and continue.

Again, Tuncer Bakırhan, at a forum held in Erbil last week, not only explained that “the nation-state is sometimes not a solution” and that “Turkey is trying to find the ground it has lost for a hundred years,” and emphasized the importance of Kurdish unity in Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran; he also met with Mazlum Kobani and Ilham Ahmed, whom Turkey is still searching for with a red notice, in addition to Nechirvan Barzani, Bafil and Qubad Talabani. He commented on this by saying, “We gave a photo with all Kurdish actors; it was precious and valuable.”

In an interview with Barzani media, Bakırhan repeated that “a 100-year-old problem is on the table in the solution process” and stated, “In the first stage, steps to disarm the PKK and create a ground for politics are at the forefront. The second stage is directly related to the strengthening of municipalities, democracy, and the constitutional rights of the Kurdish people.”

The Opposition Should Abandon its “Founding Philosophy”

Let us come to Bese Hozat, the co-chair of the KCK, who still lists her threats and demands with a weapon in her hand. While she argued that “the nation-state has not brought freedom to any people” and demanded “the recognition of the collective rights of Kurds,” she criticized Özel’s New Party as follows:

“If the CHP from the beginning, and now the New Party, had strongly embraced this process, there would not have been such pressure policies on the opposition in this current situation... It had won many municipalities locally... It was a serious power... But it could not evaluate this correctly... It could have put forward a very serious democracy program, a serious project aimed at solving the Kurdish issue. It could have very strongly embraced this developing peace and democratic society process. By putting forward a solution project for the Kurdish issue and taking leader Apo as an interlocutor... it has always ignored leader Apo’s interlocutorship, rejected it in a way... Now the New Party is continuing this.”

Continuing, she claimed that the reason the opposition remains “stunted” is that it “does not break away from the state’s 100-year-old codes, clichés, institutionalized ideology, and founding philosophy, and cannot update this.”

Finally, stating that “the opposition has been saying ‘there is a Kurdish issue’ in its rhetoric since the Deniz Baykal era,” she asked:

“Well, what is this Kurdish issue? How do you name it? What is your solution plan, your project? Do you recognize Kurdish identity?... Are you ready to make a libertarian constitution? Do you accept local democracy? Kurds see leader Apo as the chief negotiator, as the interlocutor; do you accept leader Apo as the interlocutor?”

While Özgür Özel says for the PKK opening, “one must take place on the right side of history,” it is clear what these people expect from him and his party; they want him to take “responsibility for the 100-year-old Kurdish issue,” abandon the state’s founding philosophy, and accept the terrorist leader as the “chief negotiator of the Kurds.”

Is this, and remaining silent about these, the “right side of history”?!

Yesterday, Özel also said that “the New Party is the nation’s party and they take their instructions from the nation,” but he did not take the PKK law, which a large part of his party voted “no” to, to the Constitutional Court. Not only did he not take it, but by coincidence, he met with the DEM members on the last day of the application and was honored with Bakırhan’s praise that “they stood in the right place despite being subjected to immense pressure”!..

Müyesser YILDIZ

October 21, 2026