Cengiz Çiçek, a member of parliament for Istanbul from the Peoples' Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party), commented on President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s recent meeting with the Imrali delegation. He said that the process has now reached a qualitatively new phase.

Çiçek noted that Erdoğan had previously denied the Dolmabahçe Agreement by declaring he did not recognize it. He emphasized that Erdoğan's presence in the current talks signals a shift to an entirely new level in the process.

New political moment after Dolmabahçe rejection

Cengiz Çiçek referred to the Dolmabahçe Agreement while discussing the recent meeting, and also underlined the long struggle that has brought the process to its current stage. He said: "The historical significance of the meeting between the Imralı Delegation and President Erdoğan, from our perspective, lies here. These lands have experienced two peace processes: Oslo and the most recent Imralı process. Today, both sides carry lessons and experiences from those periods. These events unfolded in full view of society. During the Dolmabahçe Agreement, President Erdoğan himself officially declared the end of the process by stating, ‘I have no knowledge of this agreement. I do not recognize it.’ Immediately afterward, a plan of total collapse was put into effect. For the past ten years, we have collectively experienced the consequences of this collapse plan. These consequences have been not only political, but also economic, cultural, and social. In this context, the recent meeting between our delegation from the DEM Party and President Erdoğan represents a significant step forward in historical terms.

Above all, it is society, the forces of resistance, and the Kurdish people’s enduring struggle that have played a decisive role in making this new picture possible. Even in the most difficult times, we have consistently said that as long as we resist and carry on the struggle, history never moves backward. It always moves forward. When we look at the Erdoğan who once said, ‘I do not recognize the Dolmabahçe Agreement,’ and compare him with the Erdoğan who today meets with our Imralı Delegation, we see that this shift in position already tells the story of progress. In that sense, it is possible to say the following. The state at its highest level, since this meeting took place at the Presidential Palace, has now stepped into the framework of this dialogue."

The process has moved to a qualitatively new phase

Çiçek added: "This meeting and the developments that followed are subjects of their own and need to be addressed separately. Still, from our perspective, it is not difficult to say that the process has entered a qualitatively new phase. Months have passed since October, and during this time, both supporters and critics have openly discussed President Erdoğan’s distance from the ongoing developments and debates. Many tried to understand the reason for his hesitancy. Everyone has offered different interpretations based on their own position, and we ourselves have done so too. But in general, there was a clear image of Erdoğan appearing distant and extremely cautious regarding this process. The recent meeting between our delegation and President Erdoğan clearly indicates that he is now likely to take a more serious and direct role in the process. The recent statement by Devlet Bahçeli also appears to reflect this shift.

The situation we now face is this: every relevant actor, including those representing the government and the state, as well as those representing Kurdish political movements, has been involved in this round of talks. This phase of political dialogue can now be considered complete. Naturally, the public now expects concrete steps to be taken in order to move the process forward. If such high-level meetings continue without being followed by practical actions, I believe this will only deepen public distrust and frustration."

The first priority is Mr. Öcalan’s conditions

Cengiz Çiçek stated that the first step must be the improvement of Abdullah Öcalan’s conditions of isolation. He explained the reasons as follows: "If this process is to be brought to a conclusion, the conditions of Mr. Öcalan must be improved. In the end, what is being discussed is the possible dissolution of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), its disarmament, and the removal of the Kurdish question from the framework of armed conflict and its transition to a legal and political context. Peace is made between the forces that are engaged in war, and naturally, there are necessary steps for such a disarmament process and for distancing the Kurdish issue from conflict and violence. Among these steps, without a doubt, the most important and perhaps the most urgent is ensuring Mr. Öcalan’s physical freedom and improving his working conditions."

He added: "Above all, we say this based on the statement made by the PKK itself. The organization has declared that in order to hold its congress, its leader must be involved in the process. And this is entirely natural. The PKK may be viewed as an illegal organization under current law, but it is a party in name and structure, and like every party, it has a leader. Every political party holds its congress with its leader. In what form or through what mechanism Mr. Öcalan takes part in the congress is something that must be left to the parties involved.

Mr. Öcalan must be involved in the congress process

The realization of such a historic congress requires the participation and involvement of Mr. Abdullah Öcalan in the process. In the same way, creating an environment suitable for a healthy and legitimate congress also depends on halting military operations and ending the conditions of conflict. In recent months, thousands of operations and airstrikes have been carried out in and around Southern Kurdistan. Under such security conditions, convening a congress appears extremely difficult. Officials from the PKK have already made this point repeatedly. What is required of us now is to help foster the necessary conditions. And this responsibility must no longer be viewed solely as the task of the DEM Party, Kurdish politics, or the Kurdish movement. The Kurdish question is now a matter that concerns all peoples living on these lands. There is no need to be Kurdish to see this clearly, because the unresolved nature of the Kurdish question now deeply affects everyone’s living conditions and shared future.’"

Participation of all opposition parties is essential

Çiçek was asked to comment on the recent statement by Republican People's Party (CHP) Chair Özgür Özel, who said in an interview, 'Any step taken toward resolving the Kurdish question would be valuable.' In response, he said the following: "There is a need to completely normalize the political climate in Turkey and make it more moderate. For many years, we have said that military solutions to the Kurdish issue would always harm Turkish democracy and weaken its foundations. History has proven us right. At the same time, the rise of antidemocratic practices across western Turkey during periods when peaceful efforts were being made regarding the Kurdish question is also a reality that directly affects this issue.

That is why responsibility falls on all political forces, whether in power or in opposition, including the Justice and Development Party (AKP), the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), the CHP, the DEM Party, as well as all social parties and broader opposition circles. This responsibility lies especially with the ruling bloc. Unless the political climate in Turkey is normalized and a climate of dialogue and negotiation is established among all parties, many problems will remain unresolved.

For example, the Kurdish question and the broader issue of democratization in Turkey are often portrayed as if they are in conflict with each other. In reality, they are deeply interconnected and should be understood as issues that directly affect one another. Therefore, the participation of the CHP in this process should not be judged solely by the party's individual efforts. We must collectively seek ways to ensure that the entire opposition, especially the CHP, takes part in this process. This is not the responsibility of the DEM Party alone. Of course, as the DEM Party, our delegations have held meetings with the CHP and other parties, and those meetings have been positive. But the ruling bloc must not view this systemic and deeply rooted problem, which stands as one of the biggest barriers to Turkey's democratization, as something that concerns only the DEM Party. We would like to see the government explain how it intends to approach this issue and, if it has a solution framework, to share it with all opposition parties, just as it does with us. This is extremely important."

CHP appears significantly more open compared to the past

Cengiz Çiçek underlined that the government also needs to take concrete steps in order to create a more moderate and dialogue-oriented political climate. He stated that one consistent truth has emerged from all their meetings and from the statements of senior figures in the CHP, including the party chair. He added that this should be acknowledged. He stated: "Despite all the traps and internal challenges it faces, the CHP, especially under the leadership of Özgür Özel, who has been tested personally on this matter, now appears considerably more supportive of a democratic solution to the Kurdish question. At least in terms of declarations and expressed positions, it is significantly ahead compared to the past. This is a positive stance and one that should be encouraged. We have suffered the consequences of the opposite in the past. During the last resolution process, there was a situation where the ruling parties, such as the AKP and the MHP, appeared to be pursuing a solution. On the other side, however, there was an opposition bloc, including the CHP, that maintained distance or even took a stance against any such initiative. The transformation from then to now has taken place through consistent effort. It happened through everyone’s contribution and through the recognition of a historical truth."

Çiçek stated that this emerging and simple reality should now guide political positioning. He said: "Everyone should define their stance with this level of self-confidence and clarity. This applies to us as well. The Kurdish question and the Kurdish people’s struggle for democracy and freedom have become one of the most significant democratic forces in Turkey. The political line adopted by the DEM Party, which positions itself as a third path, has become a reality that no political actor can afford to overlook or exclude. It is now a central force, a defining subject. That is why every political actor, both in government and in opposition, must now clearly express support for a democratic solution to the Kurdish question. Any political force that distances itself from this position will lose ground. In my opinion, the current political landscape proves that both the government and the opposition have begun to recognize this truth. All political developments in the coming period will be shaped by this reality. A state that resolves the Kurdish question will, in truth, raise its democratic standards. This is exactly what Mr. Öcalan has emphasized time and again. We must push for systemic democratic transformation. If we avoid being trapped by daily political calculations and approach this issue with a long-term perspective and clear objectives, then together, with Mr. Öcalan, Kurdish political actors, and our shared efforts, we will be able to provide more accurate and meaningful answers to this historic challenge."

Our struggle carries historical significance

Çiçek also responded to criticisms directed at the recent meetings of the Imralı Delegation, particularly during the period of protests sparked by the move against Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Mayor Ekrem Imamoğlu on 19 March. He pointed out that these criticisms fail to grasp the broader historical meaning of the current struggle. He said, “In the hundred-year history of the Republic, there is undoubtedly a legacy of denial. I am not referring only to the Kurdish people. This struggle has been carried out by all the segments that have been excluded and denied by the official state paradigm, including the Circassians and Alawites. Mr. Öcalan once said that the total electoral support of those kept outside the state’s framework amounts to around 30 percent. One of his main goals has been to transform all these excluded social groups and identities into a unified political struggle, recognizing their differences as a source of richness. This is why I am not limiting my remarks to the Kurdish issue alone. Still, since your question was framed within the Kurdish context, I must say this very clearly. From the past to the present, the Kurdish people’s struggle for status, for recognition, for freedom, has always served to raise democratic standards in Turkey. It has kept the pursuit of democracy and freedom alive. It has consistently strengthened the desire to uphold equality and justice across this land."

Subjecting the DEM Party to a test of democracy is not a fair approach

Cengiz Çiçek addressed the frequent criticisms that frame the DEM Party as needing to pass a so-called "test of democracy." He argued that this attitude is neither correct nor democratic. Çiçek said: "Imagine, just for a moment, that Kurdish politics, the Kurdish movement, or those demanding a democratic solution to the Kurdish question had never existed. Imagine that there had been no such struggle over the past 40 or 50 years. In that case, there may not have been any movement at all for democracy or freedom in these lands. Whether people vote for us or not, whether they criticize us or not, there is one truth that all segments of society must acknowledge. This struggle, which unites the DEM Party, Kurdish politics, socialist movements, and the third path, represents the most significant democratic struggle on these lands. That is why we find it disappointing and frustrating when, at every opportunity, certain forces subject the DEM Party or the Kurdish movement to a democracy test. This is not a fair or democratic approach. We say this because the very existence of our struggle is what continues to keep hopes for democracy alive in Turkey. It is not only a source of hope for the DEM Party. It also keeps hope alive for those who vote for CHP, and for those who support other opposition parties outside the ruling bloc, including AKP and MHP. Millions who have given their hearts and votes to the opposition find strength in this struggle. That is its historical importance."

The DEM Party is not an object of anyone’s desires

Çiçek warned against viewing the DEM Party as a tool to be used for the interests of either the ruling power or the opposition. He described such an approach as dangerous, misguided, and ultimately self-defeating. He said: "In discussions about contested political issues, treating the DEM Party with pragmatic calculations to serve the ruling bloc’s interests, the opposition’s strategies, or any other party’s goals is a serious mistake. It is also something that leads to loss. We have always made our position clear. We are not an object of anyone’s desires. We are a third force, a third path. Outside the two dominant political blocs that have historically shaped the country, we are trying to organize our own front. What we are building is an alternative perspective of power, one based on peoples’ self-governance. Our struggle is a historic one, aimed at pushing the system toward democratic transformation. At the same time, it is a current struggle born from a long legacy of resistance."

Çiçek added that everyone must now ask themselves some fundamental questions. "If certain expectations are placed on us, we have already responded clearly. Our co-chairs have made this known. Our comrades who speak in the name of the party and the struggle, especially during Newroz, have said the same thing. The appointment of a trustee in Van, or in Dersim or Hakkari—what we call a trustee coup because it overrides the will of the people—is the same kind of intervention we see in the operation targeting Imamoğlu and the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. It is an assault on the will of millions. It is a coup. It is an antidemocratic act. Everyone must act with a sense of responsibility when it comes to responding to this situation through protests or other actions. The next phase should be approached accordingly. In our view, CHP also needs to step up and push harder. Millions of people took to the streets. Any political force that fails to recognize this will inevitably lose. And I say this not only about others but also for ourselves. The vast majority of those who protested were demanding a democratic future. They wanted to renew their hope in their own future and keep it alive. In fact, this stance even went beyond the CHP itself."

He concluded his remarks by saying: "This is not unlike what happened during the Gezi Park resistance. It was never just about a few trees. It was a scream of rebellion against suffocating policies. Similarly, the recent reaction cannot be explained solely as support for Imamoglu or opposition to a move against the municipality. Millions of people in Turkey have been living under pressure, in a state of siege, deprived of air to breathe. What we witnessed once again is that people have begun to defend their own spaces of freedom and democracy. This is a very clear picture for us. But subjecting only the DEM Party to scrutiny is, frankly, a sign that our struggle is not fully understood. Especially since the recent local elections, people need to recognize how the democratic position taken by the DEM Party at critical turning points has contributed significantly to this country."