Bilgehan Uçak wrote: It's time for peace to become social

Even though he was the former Chairman of the HDP and now, in addition to being a member of parliament, he has been elected to the İmralı delegation, a saying I learned from Mithat Sancar, who has always remained a “teacher” in my eyes, has never left my mind: “You can make war with the minority, but peace with the majority.”

The burning of weapons by 30 PKK militants under the leadership of Bese Hozat must have been one of the biggest steps taken towards ending the Kurdish issue.

But no matter how big this step is, it is not a “sufficient condition. ”

This ceremony was of vital importance as it would not be possible to establish a permanent solution without laying down arms.

Now it is time for these images to continue, for democratization steps to be taken with determination, that is, for peace to be socialized.

Just these days, the Ankara Institute's report titled "Disarmament of the PKK and the Kurdish Issue" was published.

The results are not encouraging and reveal that there is still much work to be done to end the Kurdish issue.

The first piece of data from the Ankara Institute, which I find both striking and thought-provoking, is as follows: "One in three people (37%) say there is a Kurdish problem in Türkiye. According to a two-thirds majority, there is no Kurdish problem in Türkiye."

You cannot solve a problem whose existence you do not acknowledge; moreover, all the steps taken cannot be taken because they would be suicidal for those in power if they meant losing votes.

If two-thirds of Türkiye says there is no such thing as a Kurdish problem, if they claim that Kurds have never been subjected to discrimination or that the Kurdish problem started with the PKK, we need to see that we are still far from a lasting peace and solution.

One of the report's findings is this: "Among the participants, the strongest perceptions regarding the causes of the Kurdish issue are concentrated around the following: 'Other states' attempts to divide Türkiye' and 'the emergence of the PKK.' Internally driven causes, such as 'discrimination by the state' or 'lack of recognition of Kurdish identity,' are seen as less influential by the majority of society. The emergence of the PKK is perceived as a cause, not a consequence, of the Kurdish issue."

The PKK is not the first Kurdish rebellion; it is the twenty-ninth, but the longest.

Therefore, there was no Kurdish problem because of the PKK; the Kurdish problem gave birth to the PKK.

In other words, the disappearance of the PKK does not mean the end of the Kurdish problem.

The PKK is the result, not the cause.

When you do not accept this, you identify the Kurdish issue with the existence of the PKK.

It is not possible to build the future by ignoring the suffering and discrimination suffered by the Kurds, and the thousands of people who fell victim to unsolved murders.

Therefore, everyone should support this process and do something to socialize peace.

Otherwise, those who have reservations about the course of the process may be proven right, which will bring us to the brink of a greater rupture.

Despite Bahçeli being the one who lit the fireworks of the process, nationalist support is still very low.

A crucial point here is that the process has been underwritten by the dominant political actor who, for years, has given the most radical reactions to the steps being attempted today. We see that the credit and political ownership the MHP has extended to the process has a significant impact on public perception. This invaluable advantage appears to be preserved in terms of the process's progress, public ownership, and its achievement of results.

The report also shows that Bahçeli's "insurance policy" was not purchased from anyone other than the MHP.

While the majority of society believes the state treats people equally, this perception is significantly reversed among Kurdish participants. This difference demonstrates that ethnicity is not only a cultural affiliation but also a variable that shapes the relationship with the state. The gap between the perception that "we have never been equal," particularly among DEM Party voters, and the perception that "we have always been equal," particularly among İYİ Party voters, strikingly reveals the extent to which political polarization and perception asymmetry have reached in Türkiye.

It is very important that PKK militants burned their weapons along with their cartridge belts and that the organization declared itself dissolved directly from the mouths of the highest authorities.

But these are not enough.

If the end of the Kurdish issue is perceived only as the Kurdish political movement achieving various gains, without caring about the democratization of Türkiye, we cannot achieve lasting peace.

I'm quoting from the report again: "While belief that the PKK will lay down its weapons remains far below support for the organization's disarmament process, it has been steadily increasing over time. In the survey, 36 percent believe the PKK will lay down its weapons, while 54 percent believe it will not."

The report shows that the majority of Turkish society approaches the process with a certain degree of optimism, but also with caution.

Two-thirds of society has a positive outlook on the process that aims to force the PKK to lay down its arms. While support for the process remained around 50 percent throughout 2025, this rate surpassed 60 percent after May 12th.

The Institute announces that this rate will reach 70 percent when the report is published.

But there is something to keep in mind here.

No one in their right mind would oppose disarmament; as the PKK takes steps, this rate will inevitably increase.

But “supporting disarmament” unfortunately does not mean “socializing peace.”

In a society where two out of every three people say "There is no Kurdish problem" and where the majority identifies the Kurdish issue with the PKK, we must cultivate peace in detail and make it permanent.

People we can blindly trust, like Bereket and Mithat Sancar, are directly involved in the process.

Our duty is not to be content with laying down arms, even though it is a very important step, but to do something to socialize peace.

Because you can make war with the minority and peace with the majority.