BY NASUHI GUNGOR
STAR- Last weekend, many people were curious how well the ruling Justice and Development (AK) Party would do in southeastern Anatolia. The AK Party competed with the Democratic Society Party (DTP) in the region, especially in Diyarbakir, but lost many mayoral seats. In sum, the AK Party again came in first in the east and southeast. But the picture is changing, in light of the Kurdish issue. Obviously, the DTP has gained a lot of initiative.
The current northern Iraq policy, established by the government and other government institutions at the end of 2006, was a difficult process for Turkey in terms of management. Despite certain criticisms, we should be aware that this policy is a good one and is getting results. The purpose of the dialogue established with Kurdish groups in Iraq was of course establishing relations with the regional administration. When Turkey was developing these relations, it was also looking for ways to reduce the impact of terrorism in its own territory. Efforts to grasp the problem from the inside out were the only way, though this involved many risks. And Turkey did this.
People were wondering how these ties with the regional Kurdish administration on this side of the border would impact Kurds living in Turkey, or more clearly, how they would be affected by a semi-autonomous structure. The results of the local elections don't change the fact that a great many Kurds living in Turkey are still voting for the AK Party and so the DTP can't get more than a certain percentage of the vote, despite its success in municipalities. But more dynamic and politicized Kurds vote for the DTP.
Our continued influence in northern Iraq is closely related with the stance of Kurds living in Turkey. The Kurds who vote for the AK Party are very similar to those around Kurdish leader Massoud Barzani, at least in general areas like piety and conservatism. But there's an important detail in this process, namely the dissolution (or transformation) of the PKK. How thing will be structured on our side towards northern Iraq after the PKK lays down its weapons is very different from the current structure.
If Turkey doesn't make this process the victim of its own calculations -for example, if the DTP develops a different approach in the municipalities it won and tries to move closer to the center - this could have important consequences. This would also decrease terrorism and also the heightened public tension reflected in the elections. Secondly, the arguments of those who say that the regional Kurdish administration could hurt Turkey's unitary structure would be disproven. On the contrary, how Kurds living in Turkey will be able to affect the region will be clearer. If we can understand the election results, we could get a handle on certain difficult problems.
But both the AK Party and the DTP, and firstly the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), have to grasp what the elections meant. If the DTP can maintain this dynamism with an approach that serves Turkey's integrity and if the political parties opposing it - for example the MHP - can see things correctly, much can be done. This would expand Turkey's maneuvering room and boost its chances of becoming a power which can establish a line of defense outside its borders.