KCK: Peace depends on ending isolation of leader Ocalan and rejecting de facto policies

The Co-Presidency of the KCK issued a statement to the public today addressing the “peace and democratic society” process, the isolation imposed on leader Abdullah Ocalan, and the Turkish state’s approach to these issues. The statement included the following:

"For some time, a framework law has been discussed in the Turkish press and public opinion. Evaluations that do not conform to the peace and democratic society project pursued by Rêber Apo [Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan], and even reverse interpretations, have been voiced in the press. Most recently, the proposals presented by Rêber Apo in İmralı on May 24 and the meetings between the DEM Party delegation and AKP officials have been presented as if they were new developments. However, no meeting has been held with Rêber Apo since May 24. Following this meeting, the proposals presented by Leader Apo were to be evaluated by the government. These evaluations were to be conveyed to Rêber Apo, and their results were also to be communicated to our Movement. However, this procedure has not operated so far. Therefore, there has been no contact or development to evaluate since that day. While the isolation imposed on Rêber Apo continues on such a historic and important issue, our Freedom Movement has likewise received no information during this period.

Our Freedom Movement has stood by the process led by Rêber Apo and has made every necessary effort. While we have made multifaceted efforts toward the democratic political resolution of the problems, we have also taken important steps. We have supported the efforts to enact freedom laws that would enable free democratic politics. In this context, we found the report prepared by the Peace, Brotherhood and Democracy Commission to be positive, although we consider it incomplete and inadequate.

The Peace and Democratic Society Process directly concerns us. In order not to negatively affect the process and the dialogues conducted with Rêber Apo, we did not consider it appropriate to make frequent statements on behalf of the Movement. However, the policies pursued recently, along with the statements and evaluations made, have made it necessary for us to issue a statement and present our views to the public.

Without meeting and discussing with Rêber Apo, and without obtaining the opinion of our Movement, saying that such-and-such a law will be passed with such-and-such content would be regarded as a manipulation, an imposition, or even a conspiracy. Indeed, Numan Kurtulmuş stated that a law would be enacted, those willing to come will do so, and if there are those who do not, the necessary action will be taken against them. Any decision concerning this organization must be taken as a whole and implemented as a whole. Our Freedom Movement only takes comprehensive laws and comprehensive steps into consideration. Otherwise, there can be no situation where some come and others do not. The issue is not merely that the fighters lay down their arms. Naturally, the attitude toward the fighters and leadership of this movement must also be uniform. Adopting a different approach would amount to sabotaging this process.

At the congress where the decision to dissolve the PKK was taken, we as the Freedom Movement decided that the dissolution and disarmament process could only be carried out by Rêber Apo. He can only conduct this process under conditions where he is free to work. Our people and our Movement have made it clear from the very beginning that they will not accept any policy or implementation that does not include Rêber Apo’s freedom and conditions in which he can live and work freely. Without adopting a positive approach regarding Rêber Apo’s status and taking concrete steps in this direction, no one can ensure the implementation of the decisions taken at the congress of the PKK

The dialogue with Rêber Apo and the relationship with us are intended to establish a comprehensive policy and attitude. It cannot be a matter of simply passing a law and saying those willing may come and others may not. Is a solution indeed being sought through this process, or is it intended to confuse the public? Or is a special war being waged against the Freedom Movement? If a law similar to the ‘Return Home Law’ is enacted without presenting a comprehensive democratic solution, neither our people nor our organizational structure will accept it. Therefore, if the aim is to resolve a century-old problem, fifty years of conflict, and the issues of separation, then a correct understanding and approach must be put forward.

It now appears that policies preparing for war are being pursued once again. The chief of the Turkish national intelligence organization (MIT), İbrahim Kalın, is not merely the head of the intelligence organization; he is traveling throughout Iraq almost like the government’s prime minister. Similar meetings had previously been held during the attacks on Rojava. What is the MIT Chief doing in Baghdad, Sulaymaniyah, and Hewlêr [Erbil]? Are these forces to be assigned certain roles within a plan to attack and eliminate our Freedom Movement? Undoubtedly, the entire Kurdish people and all political forces should be vigilant against such policies. Turkey’s statements should be viewed as unilateral and contrary to the interests of the Kurdish people. Instead of resolving its own internal issues, is Turkey planning an attack against our Freedom Movement together with Iraq following the Iraqi government’s decision concerning armed groups outside the army? It is also known that similar discussions have been held with Iran. If the Turkish state indeed has such plans, we believe Iraq should not accept them.

We wish to emphasize clearly that neither Rêber Apo nor our Freedom Movement will accept a fait accompli. To pursue a special warfare policy by saying, “We passed the law, but they do not accept it,” would be an irrational approach. It would mean continuing the policies that have failed for a hundred years and have led to a rupture between the Kurdish people and Turkey. Therefore, both in the approach toward Rêber Apo and toward our Freedom Movement, it is necessary to act with seriousness and responsibility.

As the Freedom Movement, we possess the will and determination to implement a political approach that will achieve democratic integration with Turkey on the basis of a democratic political solution that eliminates the atmosphere of conflict and separation that has persisted for a century. It is also a historical responsibility for the Turkish state to fulfill its part by adopting policies and taking steps that will enable the implementation of our will and determination and make democratic integration possible.

The democratic public and our peoples should remain vigilant against approaches that would sabotage the Peace and Democratic Society Process. By waging a more effective struggle against the isolation maintained in İmralı, they should fulfill their responsibilities in ensuring the success of the Peace and Democratic Society Process."

ANHA