The decision hearing of the Kobanê Case, which was filed against the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) after the democratic protests that took place between 6-8 October 2014 against ISIS's attacks on Kobanê, was turned into a tool for political "profit" by the AKP government through paramilitary groups, will be held tomorrow. It is stated that the decision to be made in the case where 108 politicians, 18 of whom have been imprisoned, including HDP former co-chairs Figen Yüksekdağ and Selahattin Demirtaş, have been tried for 3 years, is important as it gives clues about the course of Turkish politics.

 

 

HDP former co-chair Figen Yüksekdağ, who has been held captive for 8 years as a result of the detentions and arrests that took place on November 4, 2016 and went down in history as a "political genocide operation" against Kurdish elected officials. Yüksekdağ, answered our questions about both the situation that emerged in Turkish politics after the March 31 elections and the Kobanê Case hearing, which is at the decision stage.

 

 

According to Yüksekdağ, who gave the message, "They used this case to hold democratic politics hostage from start to finish and to take revenge for the races they lost," a possible "punishment" decision against HDP and therefore the Kurd voters; It will have a deep impact on the memory of Kurds, revolutionaries and working masses.

 

 

Yüksekdağ's answers to our questions from Kocaeli Prison are as follows:

 

As a month and a half has passed since the local elections of March 31, 2024, we can see that the election results lead to important tactical and strategic changes for all political parties day by day. In summary, what message did the election results convey to whom and to which understanding?

 

 

 

 

 

 

The March election means, first of all, the change of the hopelessness of "there is no change" that has become widespread in society. The disappointment experienced in the 2023 general elections gave way to a different climate. We can say that we have entered a climate of hope and populist democratic change. The heavy pressure that had accumulated on society for years and the imposition of monist fascistic rule would of course come to a breaking point. The March 31 elections are such a moment. The extension period obtained by the political power with its policies of crushing the opposition through fascism has come to an end. Therefore, the majority of the society inflicted a heavy defeat on the AKP-MHP alliance by saying "stop". This is a social-political reaction developed by the silent majority against those who govern through the ballot boxes. Of course, the persistence of the dynamics of political struggle in resistance, despite its shortcomings, inability to gain a mass character and weakness of claim, plays an important role in the basis and behind this reaction.

 

 

Peoples and women demonstrated their desire to put an end to the government's line of dividing society, creating conflict, inciting hatred and hostility, and spreading injustice to the smallest cell of life. At the same time, we see that the war policy, which has been going on for years and has turned into a guarantor of the continuity of power, has lost its former effect. People now refuse to be condemned to hunger and poverty with the words "Do you know how much a bullet costs?" Even if it is not a reflection of a holistic consciousness or political content, there is such a generalized natural reflex. Those who did not want to be governed as before strongly shook the status quo of the rulers. The government, which is trying to turn the election results into an opportunity to revise the status quo, is trying to overcome the shock of the earthquake. Despite the people's strong demands for democratic change and economic prosperity, the government is letting the ball fall to its own advantage and to the constitutional agenda. The people gave a very strong message to the palace government, but their addressees do not seem to have received this message.

 

 

DEM Party also acted with the strategy of "winning" in the local elections, not "making them lose" or "making them win". Was the "Third Way" approach of the DEM Party, which had a share in the situation that emerged especially after the May 14 General Elections, successful, considering the current results?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The DEM Party's election strategy has been a clear success. This is the success of the people, the women's libertarian line, and all the labor and democracy forces represented in the Third Way. I attach importance to the election results, especially as they are a strong response to attacks to liquidate democratic politics. This success, achieved under the shadow of the party closure, the Kobanê Conspiracy Case, uninterrupted arrests and political genocide operations, is the victory of the resistance. Like all of our achievements, it is well deserved. By holding on to this level, new opportunities to reach higher have emerged.

 

We are in a process where the Third Way strategy will develop and come into being in a powerful way. It must be admitted that the results of the March 31 elections have created changes in the political map and equations. In such a process of change, any path that does not open horizons for itself, develop and follow its own existence, inevitably first becomes shaken and controversial, and then is removed from new equations. In other words, the political strategy that we call the Third Way, which will not be processed with instant daily acquisitions, is more vital for the people of Kurdistan and Turkey than it was yesterday.

 

 

On the election day, the government, which wanted to turn the election results in Kurdistan in its favor with the voters, then carried out a coup against the will of the people in Wan. However, it was almost crushed by the will of the people. Different opinions emerged within the People's Alliance against the coup attempt. Who do you think intervened in this process?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It was one of the examples of the people's unique struggle and gains against the trustee coup. This is not just a current victory, it is a historical victory. This victory was won by those who did not surrender to the atmosphere of pessimism and discouragement that had been felt for years by the people that they could not pass their own municipality and could not keep it even if they were elected. The fruit of the continuity of struggle and not compromising on righteousness and legitimacy under all circumstances has been an ever-growing gain. This situation is the opposite of what the government has been trying to do for 8-9 years, its strategy of collapsing and pushing people to the bottom. If you try to bring down a people, you will also foster in them a stronger sense and consciousness of standing up. Therefore, the objection against the trustee regime turned into a multifaceted social moral stance in the March 31 elections. The government's move to appoint trustees by developing the trustee regime and registering its own civil servants to the ballot boxes before the election did not achieve what it wanted in the face of the great moral stance of the people. There is success achieved despite illegal fake voters, tactics of tampering with political demography, and the destruction and fatigue created by the trustees. A government that does not deem Kurds worthy of the right to vote has lost all legitimacy in the eyes of the people. The historical response of the Kurds, who reproached and rebelled against this, determined the periodic course.

 

 

Political, conscious public; Just as the truth determines the period, it will also determine the future. There is a people's truth that knows how it wins and what more it can gain when it transcends the political principles of the rulers. It was mainly the public who intervened in the trustee initiative in Wan. There were already predictions that after the elections, the government would attempt to seize municipalities for one reason or another. What was not well known was to what extent the public would respond to this possible coup attempt. If the people had not shown a strong democratic resistance in all Kurd cities and the west, especially in Wan, I do not think that different voices would arise in the AKP, and even if they did, they would not be on the agenda. The ruling bloc could not remain indifferent or failed in the face of the people's glorious uprising and broad segments uniting on a democratic basis and embracing the elected co-mayor. Another noteworthy point is this: The trustee mechanism of fascism has now lost its meaning in the face of the people's resistance.

 

 

Municipalities have become a haven for the cliques within the People's Alliance and a haven for bribery and corruption. This mechanism, which has become a symbol of decay and corruption, has turned the AKP into a party whose signboard even shakes in the region. The HUDA-PAR initiative, which they replaced with the Kurd initiative, turned into a complete fiasco. In such circumstances, in the heat of the moment, there were AKP members who thought that it was not wise to stage a political coup against the Wan Municipality. If it were not for the people who do not give up their rights and defend their will in the fields, no one would doubt that new trustees will come.

 

 

Was the coup attempt against Wan a "preliminary test"?

 

 

Of course, in its most well-known sense, it was a survey of usurping municipalities. We all know that the danger is not over yet, but a social struggle force is developing that knows what path to follow and what course of action to follow and reiterates what it knows with every experience. The groups of people who intervened in politics with all their vitality and majesty during the freedom march, on the difficult roads of Newroz, no longer want their will to be tested and their patience to be tested. The government cannot save itself by polling the Kurds and increasing the pressure on DEM and democracy forces. The ruling and palace regime must examine its internal dynamics, which are actually rotting away. Does he have the ability to do this? It is debatable.

 

 

It is claimed that the election results also changed power relations and balances. How should we evaluate Erdoğan's recent statements that "there is a need for softening in politics" in a period where discussions are ongoing about the AKP's policy change? Is the softening also related to the end of the unlawful acts in the Kobanê Case, in which you were also tried?

 

 

It is true that the balances have changed. DEM Party, Kurd, left, socialist weight played a decisive role in disrupting the existing balances. In particular, Kurd votes were the main determinant of CHP's gains. It was equally the main determinant of the loss of power. The discourses of détente, on the other hand, have so far been no more than an attempt to soften the heavy defeat suffered by the palace government. No one yet can see where this abstract discourse finds its counterpart. It is obvious that there is no tolerance for being ruled by sticks and guns, but does the government have the capacity and ability to soften? The real question is, is it possible for those who constantly press the gas to corner normally?

 

 

So, how do you evaluate the opposition's ability to adapt to these discourses so easily?

 

 

Along with the government, the main opposition also clung to the compromise discourse of détente. What is interesting is that Erdogan and the palace regime are currently using the détente consensus statements and negotiations to determine their own axis. As for the Kobanê Case, if the government really has an intention to soften, this should be seen first and foremost in the field of judiciary. Because the field of suppressing the opposition, dividing the society and applying the law of the enemy is the judiciary. Of course, what we should really be interested in is to develop the social struggle, the anti-fascist movement, and the women's freedom march in its own independent channel, without being subject to any limits or expectations. From now on, as it has been until today, no authoritarian fascist structure has changed and will not change without strong popular movements. As always, we will develop our own struggle channel and determination.

 

 

CHP Chair Özgür Özel announced that he will send a delegation to the Kobanê Case hearing on May 16. How do you evaluate the "except Kurds" insistence from the CHP's perspective? Can we talk about a policy change in the CHP regarding the Kurdish issue?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This attitude is normal, first of all, in terms of its harmony and consistency with CHP's claim of democracy. Unfortunately, as the tenor of democratic normality in the country has shifted considerably, even fulfilling the mandatory requirements of politics has become an extraordinary situation. Of course, we can also accept that there has been an improvement compared to CHP's previous approaches.

In a conjuncture where even those who staged a trustee coup argue among themselves that it will no longer continue like this, it is both normal and necessary for the main opposition party to take a very advanced stance. At the same time, it owes more respect and responsibility to the Kurd voters, who have been the undisputed determinant of the CHP's electoral successes in recent years. As a main opposition party claiming power, CHP has still not announced a holistic program for the democratic solution of the Kurdish issue. This issue remains the weak side of its political claim. Their close monitoring of the Kobanê Incident is important for the development of Turkish democracy and the resolution of crisis elements in this area. Of course, we see that the CHP administration has recently focused specifically on the Gezi Case. There is a need for an approach that does not harm the integrity and hurts the social conscience regarding widespread unlawfulness and conspiracy cases. A holistic opposition front must be formed against Gezi, Kobanê and all unlawful political cases.

 

 

A component law was built together with the revolutionary, socialist and democracy forces in Turkey. However, during the last general and local elections, huge debates developed around this issue. In what respect is there a need for the juxtaposition of the Turkish revolutionary movement and the Kurdish political movement in the coming period? And how should this union develop based on past experiences?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Immune from all the problems and shortcomings of life, the strongest aspect of the HDK-HDP tradition and today's DEM Party is that it carries the synergy of integrity created by being a constituent. Of course, we need to confront and solve the problems that block us at each stage. But it should not be forgotten that our democratic political strategy has achieved historical gains under the influence of this idea and paradigm. It was exposed to the most relentless attacks of the masculine dominant status quo due to the power of this line it represents. If we forget this power or fade its importance, we will remain alien to our own experiences and our own power. Today, on the contrary, we need to hold tighter to the Third Way, which is represented in the DEM Party and HDK, and repair the wear and tear on this path.

 

 

Political power and order politics have been carrying out strategic attacks against the revolutionary and socialist dynamics of Turkey, especially the Kurdish political and freedom movement, for a long time. The strategy and game are clear. We do not have the luxury of sending everyone within their own borders, suffocating or neutralizing them within those borders, or giving credit to these attacks and tendencies. The liberation and fate of all the oppressed are interconnected. Let's look around us, pay attention to the world, the region, the internal dynamics of the country and the direction of social development. HDP was founded by anticipating the historical transition process of just such a period. History is full of the destruction of those who were caught in great floods without ships or in order. For this reason, it is necessary to know and increase the value of the political knowledge and equipment that has been created.

 

 

I want to talk about the Kobanê Case a little more. Release was expected from the court, but the court changed its decision and said that the detention would continue and that the verdict would be announced on May 16. Do you think that this change of decision is based on procedural deficiencies, or has the government not yet made a decision regarding HDP politics in your person?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Kobanê Case has already been a complete disaster from the very beginning in terms of law and procedure, which is the basic meaning of this concept. A case involving such a procedural scandal should not be decided under normal circumstances. At least they need to rehabilitate the file to save the image. But of course, this is the Turkey of the palace and the palace prosecutor, MHP. This is what they say to us and the whole society with their judicial decisions and practices. The decision is made or not. This doesn't matter anymore. They used this case to hold democratic politics hostage from start to finish and to take revenge for the races they lost. They will continue to lose as long as they attack our people and subject them to political genocide. I don't know if they are determined or undecided, but we are at ease and our hearts are clear. At least we think that 8 years of captivity gains meaning every time they lose.

 

 

They tried very hard to make us struggle with this conspiracy case, its gravity and intensity that surpasses oppression and ill-treatment. But we saw each hearing as a network and field of political struggle. At the same time, we did not hold back against the calls of duty of women, our people and our party. We will again focus on our own duty and our own decisions.

 

 

What will a punishment decision aimed at democratic politics cause to Turkey's politics and its people? And will it cause the government to lose?

 

 

The Kobanê Case and the political trials against all HDP elected officials were not limited to punishing us from the very beginning. It meant a serious intimidation of the whole society, labor and freedom forces, and drawing a line. Leaving the outcome to the conscience of the ruling judiciary in cases such as Kobanê and Gezi opens the way to surrender to this imposed line and conviction. It is vital for the general social good to exhibit a political attitude based on fundamentally rejecting the condemnation of legitimate and justified social movements. When we look at it from the perspective of power, there is no need to say much. There cannot be a daily reversal of a decision in which Kobanê and HDP, that is, the Kurds' honor, will and bond with the reality of Turkey, were tried and condemned. It has a deep impact on the consciousness and memory of the revolutionary, libertarian laborer and left masses, who are a bridge to the democratic unity of Kurds and peoples in particular.

 

 

On May 16, the last words of you politicians will be taken. What will be Figen Yüksekdağ's last word in this historical case?

 

 

I and most of my co-defendants completed our final remarks about 2 months ago. I can only repeat what I said that day; Those who resist have the last word, both yesterday and today.

 

 

MA / Fırat Can Arslan