In their relations with Turkey, the US and Europe should give an end to this policy that is based on getting what they want from Turkey in return for supporting it against the PKK, the weak side of Turkey.

KCK (Kurdistan Communities Union) Executive Council Member Mustafa Karasu spoke to ANF about May 16's meeting between Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and US President Donal Trump in the White House. Karasu strongly criticized the two states for bargaining over the PKK, and called for an end to the development of relationship between Turkey and the US over the PKK.

 

WHAT WAS SPOKEN AGAINST THE PKK?

Karasu started his remarks with the following evaluation: “Debates on what the Erdoğan-Trump meeting would be like and what outcomes it would bring have been going on for weeks. This meeting took place finally and it outcomes were disclosed partially. We listened to the statement Erdoğan and Trump made to the press after their meeting face to face. We also listened to some comments made in this regard, as well as journalists that are familiar with the US and follow the US-Turkey relations. In this framework, we can make such an evaluation; what was discussed more than the meeting itself is 'What will the relationship with PYD-YPG be?'. Attention was focused on some topics such as 'Will the US carry out the Raqqa operation together with Turkey or PYD-YPG?'.

One other matter of debate was if Fethullah Gülen would be extradited to Turkey or not. This was, however, an issue that covers up the true face of the Trump-Erdoğan meeting and seeks to create such a perception in the public opinion. For sure, Turkey brought up the Gülen issue and the PYD, YPG and SDF forces during the meeting. These were also talked about after the meeting. However, what actually needs to be handled here is 'What was spoken against the PKK and what attitude was displayed there?'.

The meeting actually took place on this basis: the US told Erdoğan that they would provide support on the PKK issue to the extent Turkey complies with the conditions put forward by the US. The approach of the US is based on this framework.

As a matter of fact, Erdoğan essentially wanted to get some concessions with regard to the PKK issue by putting forward the cases of PYD, YPG and Gülen. Or, Erdoğan made concessions to the US in order to get the US support for the elimination of PKK. This meeting essentially took place on this basis.

In the press briefing, Trump stated twice that they support Turkey in its fight against PKK. He also stated that they would provide Turkey with the military equipment they had ordered. These are the points that need to be dwelled on more comprehensively. It is seen that the US manifested a stance promising to support Turkey in its fight to eliminate PKK in the event of Turkey acting in line with what the US told them on certain subjects.

PYD AND YPG CASE

After all, this meeting would not have outcomes such as whether SDF or Turkey would join the Raqqa operation, or whether the relationship between the US and PYD-YPG-SDF would continue or not. As Turkey forces the US to choose between itself and the Kurds, the US could not be expected to take a stand against the PYD-SDF anyway, nor to stop the operation it is conducting with these forces in Syria. Such a thing cannot come into question, and it didn't, indeed. The US stated, once again, during this meeting that they will continue to act together with PYD, SDF and revolutionary forces in Rojava in the fight against ISIS, and maintain its relations with these forces in the formation of new Syria. The US did not change its policy in this regard. However, it would be a delusion to keep only this aspect on the agenda and consider that the Turkey-US meeting had no other outcomes.”

BARGAIN OVER PKK CANNOT BE ACCEPTED

Karasu pointed out dirty bargains made over the PKK, and called on the US and Europe to abandon this approach:

“This policy needs to be exposed. The US and Europe are doing the same. They promise to support Turkey for the elimination of the PKK in the event that Turkey supports their certain policies and abides by some certain terms they put forward. This is a dirty policy of enmity towards the Kurds.

They say the Kurds and the PKK are different, so they will treat the Kurds friendly and the PKK with enmity! There can be no such a thing. Enmity towards the PKK and supporting Turkey and some other parties for the elimination of PKK is clearly animosity towards the Kurds. This meeting ending up with decisions to continue the relationship with PYD and SDF and support Turkey for the elimination of PKK, Kurdish Freedom Movement is a dirty policy that cannot be accepted. Neither we nor the Kurdish people or Rojava will accept this approach. These policies must be abandoned. In their relations with Turkey, the US and Europe should give an end to this policy that is based on getting what they want from Turkey in return for supporting it against the PKK, the weak side of Turkey. This is no moral policy. This is a policy of anti-Kurdishness and Kurdish enmity. This approach against the Kurds and this dirty political relationship has revealed itself to a certain extent during this meeting as well. It is seen clearly that this meeting was held in the framework of Kurdish enmity and dirty, immoral, unconscientious and anti-democratic approaches. From this aspect, if this meeting also ended up in an agreement on anti-PKK concept, it is not possible for this to be accepted, nor to be put into practice. Should this approach be put into practice, then this will mean supporting Turkey against the Kurdish people's freedom struggle. Approaches in which Kurds and PKK are treated separately are wrong and need to be abandoned. Developing relationship with PYD and YPG but enmity towards PKK! Developing relationship with KDP but enmity towards PKK! Developing relationship with HDP but enmity towards PKK! This will be enmity towards all the Kurds. In this sense, the US, Russia, Europe or other states establishing their relations with Turkey on this basis is not moral nor conscientious. This is a dirty policy and enmity towards the Kurds.”

THERE EXISTS AN ANTI-KURDISH CONCEPT OVER PKK

Karasu pointed out the Turkish state's genocidal policy targets not only Kurds but it is against democracy as well. He continued:

“Hostility towards democracy is also hostility towards the Kurds. Attention was focused on the latter before the meeting; what will the Raqqa operation and the Rojava policy be? For this reason, it would be wrong to make an evaluation based on this point alone.

PKK was discussed during this meeting and the US voiced support for the elimination of PKK. It would be wrong draw the conclusion that the meeting's outcome is in favor of the Kurds just because Turkey's policies in Rojava were not supported and Turkey couldn't get what it wanted. In this sense, this meeting should be viewed in all its aspects. Trump promising to support Turkey against PKK and provide the military equipment Turkey asked for reveals the fact that the meeting was based on an anti-Kurdish and anti-PKK concept. This is what is seen from the initial indications. We hope it is not like this though, as cold war policies will not be for the benefit of Europe nor the US.

COLD WAR ERA IS OVER, A NEW MIDDLE EAST IS TAKING SHAPE

There was polarization in the Cold War period. Turkey was important, it was receiving all kinds of support and its genocide of the Kurds was being ignored. However, that period is over now. A new Middle East and a new world is taking shape. Kurds are the democratic and democratization force of the Middle East. PKK is the motor of democratization of the Middle East. With its perspective of women's freedom, democratic autonomy and democracy based on society, it is the basic force of democratization. How could the best option for the Middle Eastern peoples be achieved by eliminating the basic force and dynamics of democratization? This will actually be clearing the way for ISIS and al-Nusra.

Turkey is an obstacle to democratization in the Middle East. The battle between us and Turkey is a struggle for the achievement of democratization in Turkey and the Middle East. Our battle is a struggle for democracy against sectarianism, fundamentalism and chauvinism, which pits the peoples against each other, in the Middle East.This is how the struggle against Turkey should be viewed.

ENMITY TOWARDS PKK MEANS SUPPORTING THE ENEMIES OF DEMOCRACY

When this is the case, supporting Turkey and its efforts for the elimination of PKK is supporting the enemies of democracy. Enmity towards PKK and elimination of PKK is strengthening the AKP government and enmtiy towards democracy. It will mean supporting ISIS and al-Nusra. Is this really the attitude of Europe, or the policy of the US? Then we need to know this.

During the 5 November 2007 meeting between Bush and Erdoğan, AKP was provided support for the elimination of PKK in return for the recognition of Southern Kurdistan. And now, if Turkey is being supported for the elimination of the freedom struggle of Northern Kurdistan Kurds in return for the continuation of relations with Rojava, this cannot be accepted. This is not for the benefit of the Kurds. Kurds and democracy forces cannot be deceived in this way. States should be clear on their policies and take sides with democracy forces today. It is not clear if they will adopt such a stance or not.

RELATIONS DEVELOPED OVER PKK SHOULD BE ENDED

The US approach to support Turkey against the PKK is a wrong one. Why do they support this? Why are they repeatedly making such evaluations? What did the PKK do? PKK seeks to develop democratization. It is PKK that developed the greatest battle against ISIS. If there had been a genocide in Shengal, all Europe and all humanity would be responsible for this. PKK saved humanity from being responsible for this crime by rescuing the Êzidîs. This is a bare reality. Today, Kurds are giving a battle against ISIS at the cost of their lives. Thousands have died in this struggle. Why? Because they grew up with the culture and mentality of the Leader. They are loyal to Kurdish People's Leader. True, they have no organic ties with us but this is what feeds them ideologically. Is this a bad thing? Is it a bad thing to be the motor of democratization in Rojava, Syria? How can the AKP ever influence Raqqa? It would just establish a domination of fanatic and sectarian circles and eliminate the forces of democracy. Is Manbij or al-Bab and Jarablus democratic? Is Rojava democratic, or the areas where Turkey entered? Everyone should question this. PKK plays a role for not feeding but throttling ISIS and similar circles. In this sense, supporting the Turkish state is not an acceptable case for the Kurdish people. We hope that approaches against the Kurdish people and their freedom struggle are not adopted. The Turkish state is against the Kurds and wants to put them through a genocide. Is it not true that all of Turkey's policies are shaped by its anti-Kurdish concept? This truth is known by Europe, the US and the whole world. So, when these states support Turkey, which policies will they be supporting? We do not argue that they should have no relations with Turkey at all. They should, of course, but these relations cannot be developed over providing support to a government that bases these relations on its anti-PKK and anti-Kurdish concept. These policies should be interpreted by our people, democracy forces and the world's democratic circles. These dirty policies, dirty relations and dirty bargains should be brought to an end. We will continue following and evaluating the outcomes this meeting. Our current comments are based on the first outcomes that have been revealed and disclosed. If these become clearer in the following days, we may have various comments as well.