BY ERDAL SAFAK
SABAH- We believe that all the political parties which respect the republic's basic values as laid out in the Constitution serve to enrich our democracy. Similarly, we believe that all non-violent views will help foster freedom of thought and expression. But one point should be stressed: Not rejecting violence and even refusing to condemn a bloody actions of the terrorist separatist group means passive or indirect support for violence, doesn't it? I'm talking about the Democratic Society Party (DTP), whose representation in Parliament I sincerely see as a chance for our democracy. DTP group leader Mardin Deputy Ahmet Turk yesterday rejected calls to condemn the terrorist PKK attacks, saying that such a thing would amount to `shrinking them to nullity' and even `making a concession from personality and honor.' Since their party's foundation, Turk and his colleagues have insisted on sticking to this line. They say that everybody only wants them to condemn the PKK and that others are trying to dictate their role. They also say that if they condemn the PKK, then their public effectiveness would weaken.
Even the suggestions made by European Union member countries' ambassadors in Ankara last week to put a distance between themselves and the PKK didn't work. European Parliament Turkey Rapporteur Ria Oomen Rujiten promised women DSP deputies who visited her in Strasbourg two weeks ago that they would be nominated for the Sakharov Human Rights Award, if only they put a distance between themselves and the PKK, but this didn't work either.
I'll leave aside the fact that Ahmet Turk inadvertently made a mistake by assuming that all Turkish citizens of Kurdish origin are at least sympathizers of the terrorist group, on the grounds that if they condemn the PKK, they would lose public support. But we can't help questioning his call to take a general stance against violence and weapons, because the DTP idea that all the weapons should be laid down also includes the request that the 23-year fight against separatist terrorism be finished with a solution, without any loser or winner. In other words, it expects the separatist terrorist group to quit its low-intensity war without being defeated. Putting it mildly, doesn't that mean passive support for terrorism, as I said above?
During the three-day Democratic Society Congress in Diyarbakir, the DTP proposed a model inspired by Spain. But he disregards one reality about Spain: Political parties which emerge as fronts for terrorist groups or are seen that way are immediately closed, and politicians who don't keep a distance from terrorist groups and fail to clearly condemn terrorist attacks are sent to prison, regardless of their age. The European Union also fully supports Spain's policies. We would never expect or wish such a thing to happen to the DTP. But it must be our right to expect them not to push the legal limits and not pour fuel on the fire, especially now when we're walking on the knife's edge...