Analysis: Kobane and its impact on Turkey's democracy

ISTANBUL - For the first time since the beginning of the so-called "Kurdish peace process", the streets of cities in south east Turkey are empty. Massive protests and clashes with security forces resulted in the declaration of curfews in more than six cities for the first time since the early 1990s.

The peace process to solve the decades-old Kurdish issue was initiated by the Justice and Development Party (AKP/AK Party) in late 2012. Commenced as discreet talks between the jailed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) leader Abdullah Ocalan and Turkey's National Intelligence Organisation (MIT), the basic aim of the process is to repair the democratic deficit in Turkey.

Over the last two years, the government took some steps to introduce a series of reforms to end the armed conflict between Turkey and PKK forces. So far, the 30 years-long conflict has claimed the lives of more than 40,000 people.

As a goodwill gesture and as part of the reconciliation framework, the PKK withdrew its armed fighters from Turkish territory and hibernated in the Qandil mountains in northern Iraq. Since then, there has been no direct fighting.

In the meantime, the Syrian civil war took a dramatic turn in November 2013: when Bashar al-Assad's forces lost control over the northern part of the country, Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) - the Syrian offshoot of PKK - took the opportunity to exert influence and declare autonomy. The Rojava declaration, the official name of Syrian Kurds' new political body was established to negotiate autonomy or other means of self-governance in a post-Assad era.

As a result, the PYD experienced a degree of self-rule after many years of oppression by the Syrian Baath government and Turkey did not take this move lightly. Turkish leaders made calls to the PYD to join the Free Syrian Army - the moderate opposition fighters in the country - against Assad forces, but their requests were never taken up. Turkey even blamed the PYD for collaborating with the Assad government.

In recent months, as Islamic State (IS) has made significant gains in northern Syria and fighting over the Syrian border town of Kobane has become a pressing issue, the reaction of the anti-IS coalition, the initial inaction and then the reluctant support of Turkey for the coalition, and the "peace process" have all become intertwined. Meanwhile, calls to Turkey and the international community for direct help to Kobane have intensified as violent protests have broken out in Turkey and worldwide.

Multilateral stalemate

So far, Turkish officials have made somewhat contradictory statements, but mostly, Turkish measures to save Kobane appear to be absent. Since the beginning of the siege almost a month ago, hesitant Turkey effectively joined the anti-IS coalition. However, discrepancy between the expectations of Turkey and other coalition partners pushed the situation into a deadlock.

"Kobane resistance" has become a litmus test for all the parties' willingness and capacity to deal with IS. Abdullah Ocalan was quick to connect what is happening in Kobane to the current peace process, as the Kurdish town has had a symbolic and practical value in the PKK's past as well as for Kurdish political movement.

Government officials have repeatedly refused this linkage, and have emphasised that Syria's affairs should not affect a domestic political issue. In addition to that, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has equated the PKK to IS. "It is wrong to consider them in different ways [...] We need to handle them all together on a common ground," he told the press last Saturday.

This was before pro-Kurdish People's Democracy Party (HDP) called for nationwide protests to put pressure on the government to help Kobane. So far, at least 23 people have died in clashes.

According to Vahap Coskun at Dicle University in south eastern city Diyarbakir, the resentment resulting from the harsh security measures against the protestors and the feeling of entrapment on the other side of the Syrian border, combined with the sentimental value of the small Kurdish town, have boosted the notion that Kobane and the peace process are linked.

"PYD, PKK and HDP have put a huge emphasis on Kobane. Though Turkey appears to ignore this fact now, the pressing humanitarian and sentimental aspect of the situation will force the government to accept this link," Coskun told MEE.

Indeed, Selahattin Demirtas, the co-chair of HDP articulated this resentment. During a press conference on Thursday, he said, "When he was the prime minister, Erdogan said that Syria is our domestic problem. [Ahmet] Davutoglu also made similar remarks. The fact that they distance themselves from Kobane now results in resentment. The state is discriminating against Kurds."

However, leaving aside the humanitarian aspect of the situation and international calls for urgent help, the Turkish government appears to make a distinction between symbolism and propaganda on one side, and cost and benefit calculations on the other.

Last weekend, Saleh Moslem, the co-president of PYD was in Ankara and had indirect talks with government officials. According to leaked information and Moslem's comments, both parties sat down to discuss the conditions that would allow Turkey's deliberate or discreet help to save Kobane.

It is still unknown how the talks concluded, but the developments on the ground do not show any signs of reconciliation. According to Fehim Tastekin at the Turkish daily Hurriyet, who recently returned from a lengthy stay in the region, both parties have "red-lines" that make it very difficult for them to reach an agreement.

"The government does not want to sit down in the wake of the gains of PYD after Rojava. However, while the deadlock continues, things could get out of hand for the government," he told CNN Turk channel on Wednesday.

The uncertainty about the end result of the talk underscores different and sometimes speculative comments. For instance, Avni Ozgurel, a former daily Radikal columnist, believes that Moslem reassured Turkey regarding PYD's relations with the Damascus administration. "In return for promises, Turkey could turn a blind eye to PYD's military build-up in the region," he told MEE.

Turkey's options

Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu and Turkish diplomats reiterated that the IS threat is in fact an outcome of the Assad government's atrocities. As long as the Syrian leader stays in power, fighting against IS or any other radicals on the ground cannot produce desired results as far as they are concerned.

For that aim, Turkey wants the establishment of safe havens in northern Syria - small protected areas to control the refugee influx - and a no-fly zone in the same area to prevent Assad forces from launching air strikes.

Despite the unwillingness of the coalition forces to directly engage with Assad, mixed signals from different parties somewhat explains Turkey's reluctance. On Wednesday, US and UK top diplomats announced that they are willing to examine the possibility of creating "safe havens", but Pentagon and White House later ruled out that option.

Under the circumstances, Turkey's calculations emphasise the need for justification and legitimacy for a possible military action in Syria. For former Radikal columnist Ozgurel, without a UN Security Council decision, Turkey would not defend Kobane, nor any other parts of Syria.

"It is impossible for Turkish military to enter Syria," he told MEE.

He added: "What makes Kobane different? Why would those who did not defend Mosul defend Kobane?" 

Technicalities are one aspect of the situation, but for some analysts, when it comes to political means and opportunity calculations, "international legitimacy" appears to be the secondary reason for inaction.

Vahap Coskun of Dicle University believes that if both parties could have struck a concrete deal when Moslem visited Ankara, Turkey's calculations, and therefore actions could have taken another turn. "On the one hand, political preferences did not match. On the other hand, Turkey does not want to take any unilateral action in Syria," he said.

In the wake of political calculations, protests in Turkey are being perceived and presented differently. Mehmet Sahin, an analyst at Ankara based think-tank Institute of Strategic Thinking, believes that the protests in Turkey and the attempts to link Kobane to the peace process are a strategic move by HDP.

"Whilst the HDP talks to the government within the peace process framework, it sometimes forgets that it is a political party and acts beyond the political realm," Sahin told CNN Turk on Wednesday. "In a way, HDP and PKK see these protests as a laboratory experiment."

To support Sahin's point, Ozgurel stressed the need for making a distinction between PKK and the peace process. "[The peace process] is not an attempt to appease PKK, but it is an initiative of democratisation," he told MEE.

As a result of the pressing nature of the situation and completely different views of all parties, the Turkish government does not want to capitulate to the various attempts to manipulate the matter. All things considered, the double-edged nature of the problem seems to be limiting not only Turkey's options, but also the options of the Kurds, the PKK and the anti-IS coalition.

For Coskun however, the protests unleashed many dormant problems. "[The protests] did not produce a desired outcome. In fact, they jeopardised possible scenarios to help Kobane, had a negative impact on the peace process, and most importantly they unleashed deep divisions between Kurds," he said.

Along the same line of thinking, Fehim Tastekin recalled Cemil Bayik's - a top PKK executive - words: "our generation can make an everlasting peace, but if peace is not made with us, the new generation might never come to terms."

On Thursday, Abdullah Ocalan made a call for speeding up the peace process.