Karasu said that “the situation of the guerrillas who have laid down their arms is also an important issue.”
In this in-depth interview, Mustafa Karasu, member of the KCK Executive Council, spoke about the recent anniversary of the Yazidi massacre carried out by ISIS in 2014, the “right to hope,” and the recent establishment of the parliamentary commission, part of the process to find a solution to the Kurdish question.
August 3 marked the anniversary of the genocide of the Êzidî (Yazidi) people by ISIS. What do you have to say on this occasion? What is your message to the Êzidî people?
On the occasion of the recent 11th anniversary of the genocide against the Êzidîs, I respectfully commemorate all those who lost their lives in this genocidal attack. I also commemorate with great gratitude and respect the comrades who fell as martyrs while resisting the Daesh occupation and attack.
This attack on the Êzidî people was one of the genocides of the 20th century. They are a people that have faced many genocidal attacks throughout history. Daesh wanted to deliver the final blow and wipe them out completely. Şengal [Sinjar] is the homeland of the Êzidî people. By attacking such a place, they wanted not only to annihilate the people but also to wipe them out of history. It was the historic resistance by both the YPG/YPJ and the HPG/YJA-Star forces that prevented the conclusion of this massacre. It was a small group of comrades who intervened at first, and then the YPG, YPJ, HPG, and YJA Star followed, saving the Êzidî people from total genocide. We experienced this process very vividly, and the footage of what happened lies in front of the eyes of the world.
While the peshmerga forces of the KDP were running away, our guerrillas, both men and women, demanded to go to Şengal. Basically all of our military forces insisted on going to Şengal. Some comrades even secretly got into cars and tried to go to Şengal without the organization’s approval. They were going to Şengal to save the Êzidîs from genocide. Our guerrillas, all our militants, and our cadres had turned their attention to Şengal in the face of the genocide being carried out there. This was decisive; it was a historic stance. No one should forget this.
When we saw this stance of our comrades, the guerrillas, we were both excited and proud of them. And in fact, our comrades swept Daesh out of Şengal with this spirit. And from that day on, the Êzidî people in Şengal have started to establish their own autonomy and self-government through their own organization. This is very important. It is a turning point in the history of the Êzidî people. Throughout history, the Êzidî people have always been oppressed and forced to defend their existence in the margins of society. Undoubtedly, the fact that they have survived to this day shows that they have put up great resistance, that they have not backed down from the struggle to survive despite all the attacks, and that they have resisted to survive even at a heavy cost.
When it comes to the Şengal resistance, everyone should be aware of the approach of the Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan. When Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan, launched this struggle, this Movement, when he set out on the path of the Kurdish people’s struggle for freedom, he stood by the Êzidî people from the very beginning. He made great efforts for their liberation and for them to embrace their identity. He always pointed out that our Movement has to stand up for the Êzidîs.
Today we are talking about the 74th Ferman, as the attacks on the Êzidî people are called. Some speak of the 73rd, others of the 72nd. Already before the 73rd Ferman, in which more than 500 people lost their lives, took place, Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan, warned and said that there may be an attack on the Êzidî people. He said that precautions must be taken and that protection must be organized. He pointed this out again before the 74th ferman by Daesh took place.
The fact that our guerrillas and militants took action immediately after this attack was because of the approach of Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan. It was because he had warned our Movement. In this respect, our Movement has fulfilled its responsibility to history, humanity, and the Êzidî people without fail.
When ISIS attacked Şengal, this became the top agenda of our Movement, and we discussed how to get there and how to save the people from genocide. We mobilized all our resources to fulfill this necessity.
Indeed, the consequences of the genocide are still severe. Thousands of people were killed and buried in mass graves. It is still unknown how many women and children were kidnapped or went missing. The whereabouts of thousands more are still unknown. One must never forget them.
On this occasion, what I want to say to the Êzidî people is that they must reflect on this history, reflect on these genocidal experiences, and organize themselves to ensure their survival. They must organize both their self-defense and their self-governance. The means to do so have emerged. By continuing their self-defense and self-governance, they must inevitably realize an Êzidxan that they govern themselves. We believe that they will achieve this.
The latest message of Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan, was also very meaningful in this regard. We believe that the Êzidî people will appropriately respond to the message of Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan.
Based on this, while once again paying our respects to the martyrs, I wish all our Êzidî people success in their future struggle for self-government and autonomy.
You have already mentioned the current process; let us now turn to that. For you, it is essential that the Right to Hope is implemented and applied to Abdullah Öcalan so that the process can continue to develop. However, the government’s stance on this issue is negative and dismissive. How do you assess this?
There has been a negative approach to the so-called ‘Right to Hope’ for many years now. It was ten years ago that the Right to Hope was brought up by the European Court of Human Rights. Last year, they issued a warning to the Turkish government on this matter, but one year later, the issue is back on the agenda unchanged. The Turkish government has not budged an inch on this issue. Its failure to take steps in this regard is, of course, related to its approach to the Kurdish issue, its approach to Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan, and its approach to the process. The response given to the Right to Hope is truly meaningless. It has no legal basis, and it is not in accordance with the laws they themselves have signed.
Devlet Bahçeli clearly stated, “Let the organization be dissolved, let those engaged in armed struggle lay down their weapons, and then let the Right to Hope be implemented.” He even said, “Let him [Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan] come and speak in parliament.” They did not dare to let him speak in parliament. Otherwise, he could have explained the reasons for the dissolution of the PKK and the cessation of armed struggle more accurately to the public. They did not do this, but Devlet Bahçeli said that the Right to Hope will be implemented. Devlet Bahçeli’s words must be followed by actions. Devlet Bahçeli, before anyone else, needs to focus on this issue and ensure that the Right to Hope is implemented. But apart from this, it is not just a promise made by Devlet Bahçeli. Devlet Bahçeli made that statement in agreement with Erdoğan. In other words, it is the common view of the alliance that forms the current government. Therefore, the government currently ruling the state must fulfill its obligations regarding the Right to Hope.
We are currently going through an important process. Our leadership and our movement are determined on this issue. We want to take this process to a point where it will result in the democratization of Turkey and the resolution of the Kurdish issue. From this perspective, while we and Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan, are taking such an approach and making crucial calls, and while our Movement has taken the necessary stance on both the dissolution of the PKK and the cessation of armed struggle, the failure to implement the Right to Hope and the failure to secure unrestricted, free working conditions for Kurdish people’s leader is truly a major shortcoming. This must be remedied. If this is remedied, the process will progress further, and developments will be more positive. The concerns that have arisen in the public sphere will be alleviated.
It is necessary to fulfill the requirements of this process in order to alleviate the concerns in society, not only among Kurds but also among the Turkish people. First and foremost, Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan, must be granted free and unrestricted working conditions, meaning that the Right to Hope must be clearly and explicitly put into practice.
The commission has now been established in the Turkish parliament and its first meeting is imminent. How do you view this development in the context of the process?
If democratization is to be achieved, the address for the Kurdish issue is the parliament. The parliament has to be the place to resolve it. In this regard, the establishment of a commission in the parliament is meaningful, but what is important is how this commission will work and what its goals will be. Establishing such a commission is important, but it should be enshrined in law, and its goals should be clearly and explicitly stated. In other words, it should have a program and a goal related to the democratization of Turkey and the resolution of the Kurdish issue. These are still not entirely clear, but their establishment is important.
The leadership, in 2014, I think, wanted the parliament to get involved and a commission to be established in parliament. Because the Kurdish issue or issues arising from the Kurdish issue can only be discussed and brought to the agenda by a commission. In this respect, we view its establishment as a positive first step. But I would like to emphasize that it is not enough to just establish a commission. Again, the name of this commission must be appropriate. A name that expresses democratization would be positive. A commission cannot be established by simply saying “Turkey without terrorism” every day.
The commission must have decisive competences. First and foremost, this commission must meet with Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan, because the issue being discussed, the process that began with Devlet Bahçeli’s speech and was continued with Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan, positive response, is related to the Kurdish issue and the problems arising from the Kurdish issue. Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan, is the addressee and the center of this issue. In this regard, if this commission is to function properly, adopt the right working method, present its work from the right perspective, and carry out meaningful work, it must go and talk to and discuss with Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan. This must be the first issue they address. Without this, it is impossible to imagine this commission functioning effectively.
This commission has now been established. A timeframe of two to three months has been mentioned. That’s not how it works. What can be resolved in two to three months? It seems that the only thing that they want the commission to do is to organize the laying down of weapons of the guerrilla and the guerrilla leaving their positions in the mountains. This is a problem. There is the Kurdish issue, and there is the issue of democratization in Turkey. What will be the point of this commission if it does not address these issues? We are talking about a century-old problem. There have been 30 uprisings since the founding of the Republic. There are reasons for this. In this regard, if this commission only deals with the situation of those who will lay down their arms and come forward and takes a step in that direction, then that is wrong; that is incomplete. It does not meet the needs of the current process.
They say, “How did this process begin? To ensure Turkey’s security. There are developments that jeopardize Turkey’s security both internally and externally.” If such a process was initiated to further prevent these developments, then it cannot be a commission that only discusses the laying down of arms and the situation of those who lay down their arms. Limiting this commission to this would sabotage the process.
Sure, the establishment of the commission is an important step. Of course, it is a process, and there are limited developments; we cannot say that nothing is happening. There are meetings with Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan, back-and-forth discussions, meetings in parliament, and delegations meeting with parties. It is being discussed and debated in the public sphere. But such a commission has been much discussed and has to be given a crucial role. Everyone expects a lot from this commission. If it limits itself to the issue of what will happen to the guerrillas, it will be meaningless.
Undoubtedly, the situation of the guerrillas who have laid down their arms is also an important issue; it needs to be resolved, but it needs to be resolved as part of a whole. Without democratization, without the enactment of various laws, and without steps being taken to resolve the Kurdish issue, it will be in vain. Right now, people who speak out for the freedom of the Kurdish people, who fight for their freedom, and who simply make statements are being arrested. If democratization does not develop now, if these steps are not taken, what will happen to those who go tomorrow? They will be arrested. They go, they speak about the Kurdish issue, they organize, they make efforts to resolve the Kurdish issue, and then they are arrested. This is not how it should be.
The Kurdish issue must be resolved, and a democratic environment that will enable this must be developed. Laws that will promote democratization and pave the way for the resolution of the Kurdish issue must also be enacted. These issues must also be discussed in the commission. This commission should not limit itself to the situation of those who have laid down their arms.
There are already criticisms in this regard. DEM Party members are criticizing it, and we are criticizing it too. This is not how it should be. What will this solve? Is this why we are taking these steps? We are not taking these steps just for this. There is the issue of democratization, and there is the issue of resolving the Kurdish issue. In this regard, a commission that is limited to two months will not meet its objectives or expectations
