A New Nowruz for the Kurds of Turkey

The most hopeful idea that has emerged in the new solar year in the silent hearth of the Middle East is the peace message from Abdullah Öcalan, the leader and founder of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), on the occasion of Nowruz celebrations. The imprisoned PKK leader has proposed a new roadmap for peace between the Kurds of Turkey and the Justice and Development Party (AKP) led by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, which will play a key role in advancing the idea of non-violence in the region and the world. The Kurds have always been entangled in undemocratic policies and friendships among Middle Eastern governments, which have led to the sacrifice of their interests and disregard for their cultural and social values. However, currently, efforts by Kurds in Iraq, Syria, and Turkey to minimize violent tensions and seek a peaceful and non-violent future in the Middle East have opened the way for encouraging and promoting the philosophy of non-violence among the ethnic groups and nations of this region. For the Kurds, the prerequisite for creating a peaceful and non-violent society in the Middle East requires abandoning the old and conventional methods of accessing power in the region; methods that only seek to shift power from one autocratic ruler to another. Non-violence is not limited to the inner circle of power and the guardians of traditional customs; rather, the measure of non-violence is the manner of interaction and cooperation with critics, opponents, and those who challenge the boundaries of tradition and societal beliefs. In other words, the measure of non-violence is revealed in interactions with critics and opponents. In the process of non-violent struggle, there is no such thing as 'friend' and 'enemy'; the process of dialogue, interaction, and compromise replaces the consumptive methods of the past. In fact, the method of 'enemy-making' gives way to a culture of cooperation and compromise. Dividing society into 'insiders' and 'outsiders' is inherently a zero-sum game, meaning that one’s gain necessitates another’s loss. In contrast, a culture of cooperation and participation is a process that enhances and energizes society and results in a win-win outcome. In other words, differences of opinion and ethnic, religious, and ideological diversity should not be viewed as a problem but as a valuable asset. The dynamism of modern and progressive societies is owed to the preservation and safeguarding of their pluralism and the breadth of their intellectual, ethnic, and linguistic spectrum. Achieving a non-violent society cannot be done without patience, tolerance, and endurance. Many prominent world leaders who transformed their societies underwent a long and arduous journey. Considering the outcomes of the struggles of the peoples of India, South Africa, and the civil rights movements in America, there is no doubt that non-violence is the best and most suitable method of political interaction to advance the idea of democracy and institutionalize it. The non-violent struggle is not just a method of civil resistance and political struggle; it is also a kind of process of moralizing politics. To achieve non-violence, one must end the culture of anger, hatred, and animosity. In this context, the role of civil institutions and democratic structures and understanding their genesis is very important. The process of democracy and achieving a better tomorrow cannot be accomplished merely by establishing structures and organizations. Creating these institutions and structures requires understanding their existential reasons. For example, one of the legislative body's duties is to reduce the cost of actions among citizens by providing non-violent mechanisms for resolving disputes. Accordingly, abandoning traditions based on revenge and retaliation and replacing them with a culture of truth-seeking, root-cause analysis, and problem-solving is the main prerequisite for the well-being of society. For this reason, respect for life and recognizing 'the other' is of particular importance. The survival of a shared and diverse space requires moral balance among individuals. Violence disrupts this balance as it signifies the destruction of the other. The most important step towards change is to promote a culture of interaction and diversity; this requires creating new concepts and sometimes new words, a change that ultimately should lead to the establishment of a new grammar in the political arena. Such a change in the political grammar and civil culture of the peoples of the Middle East is only possible if they listen to each other's narratives beyond feelings of revenge, pride, and national prejudices and recount each other's wounds and pains. The strategic horizon of non-violence is multidimensional; on one dimension, it involves the expansion of thought and dialogue, and on another, it involves increasing trade exchanges and flourishing cultural and artistic creativity. In other words, preserving and enhancing the space for cultural, artistic, and commercial exchange requires avoiding violent methods. The main issue here is the transparency and accountability of societies to confront their historical mistakes and prevent them from happening again in the future. Perhaps what Desmond Tutu once said as the head of South Africa's Truth Commission is a serious and interesting lesson for the current and future conditions of the Middle East. He described this commission as 'an effort to express this: now we understand what the past was, and we have reached a point where we can move beyond the past.' Now, it remains to be seen how we can create mechanisms and structures that help sustain and strengthen non-violence in the Middle East by moving from such thinking.