|
INTRODUCTION
My defence is not so much based on detailed replies to the charges in the indictment prepared by the Chief Prosecutor [of the State Security Courtsl. as it is about what 1 see as a more important topic: how to reach an historic reconciliation from a revolt under the leadership of the PKK, and increase the possibility of a solution to the Kurdish issue. 1 have created an opportunity for peace to these [armed) activities that could very well be called a low-intensity war.
Actually. I voiced these views for the first time as a response to President Turgut Ozal's call [for a ceasefire?!. At the historic press conference on 15 March. 1993 |where 1 declared the ceasefire], this is exactly what 1 said:
"We are not demanding an immediate separation from Turkey. We are realists on this subject. Do not interpret this I ceasefire I as a simple tactic [serving a hidden agenda] There are many reasons as to why [we are realists]. Those who understand the historic, political and economic situation of the two peoples [the Kurds and Turks!, know well that separation could not take place. They [the Kurds and Turks] are intertwined like flesh and bone."
I have emphasised this in many interviews. We want the relations to be rearranged. Knotted relations and contradictions of a thousand years await untangling. Our fundamental understanding rests on a free and equal rearrangement of [Kurdish-Turkish relations]. To dub us "separatists" at every opportunity, is in fact the attitude that aims to fan separatism. The current arrangement of relations is hugely draining the life and the wealth of both the Turkish and the Kurdish people.
Here is what I clearly said on the occasion of our latest unilateral ceasefire on 1 September 1998 before I was handed to Turkey at the end of a plot carried out by an international force:
"The war. if not originating from a very important contradiction, is a madness. Especially, meaningless terror and violence should never be part of human affairs. If this huge oppression of us is let up a bit and stopped; if human rights and democracy are promoted'to improve our relations, and if problems are solved through dialogue. I don't think you will find any other people and organisation that are as thirsty for peaceful methods as us."
I continued with these words:
"...right now the most fundamental problem of Turkey is to take democracy out of its state of demagoguery and trust it to the care of the people. This should not be taken as bashing the Republic. Especially, divisive and separatist, it never is. If anything, it is a wish for democratizing the Republic. This indeed is in the interest of Turkey. This is. if anything, to resuscitate Turkey from its currently choked off state. Those who speak and act in the name of the Republic must do something about this counter-democracy. This is basically what I said about violence."
"We are the side that has suffered the most from this violence. Who could blame us if in this state of horrific imbalance of forces, in order to avoid extermination, we were forced to defend ourselves, our most legitimate rights, our identity and culture? The UN Constitution and even the Constitution of the Turkish Republic recognizes [the legitimacy of] the defense of these rights.”
I am quoting these because some people might misinterprete these views that I have adopted due to the harsh conditions of my solitary ...
| 
