The terror-free Türkiye project was initiated by the Turkish state to address both the terrorism issue and the Kurdish question in the country. It was first proposed by Devlet Bahçeli, the leader of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), the junior partner in the ruling coalition. The project was later adopted by the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) leadership. Different state institutions joined the process. It eventually turned into a state project.

The project targets the transformation of the Turkish political perspective at two different levels. At the national level, it aims to "consolidate the national front,” as explained by Turkish officials. The main objective of the project is to get rid of one of the most active political fault lines, the Kurdish problem, in the country.

At the regional level, it intends to eradicate terrorism from the Middle East to create a terror-free region, as the PKK and its branches are active not only in Türkiye but in several regional countries. In other words, Türkiye has been struggling to end the political instability in the whole region. It is well known that violent nonstate actors constitute the second most significant threat to the political independence and territorial integrity of regional states, ranking just after the interventions of global powers.

On the other hand, the project is designed to solve Turkish political problems in two different phases. It is perceived and planned as a gradual process. In the first phase, it intends to end the violence and terrorism in the country. Therefore, the only actor that the state institutions negotiate with in the process is the PKK and its affiliates. Although there is no bargaining with the PKK, the state negotiates the management of the process with the PKK.

During the second phase, the state intends to initiate a large-scale political transformation through discussions with different political and social actors. The ruling coalition will try to reach a consensus in Parliament in order to pass the necessary resolutions to finalize the process. As a matter of fact, the Kurdish problem is expected to be solved within the context of a large-scale process of democratization. Therefore, different social and political actors are expected to contribute to the process.

Challenges facing process

There are many challenges facing the ongoing process. Different internal and external actors and dynamics try to prevent the smooth promotion of the process. Actors who oppose the process have been exploiting every small detail to halt the process. They also try to instrumentalize every development to criticize the authorities and force them to abandon the process. The more it gets closer, the more interventions are witnessed. Below, I will underline some of the developments that are exploited by the opposition.

One of the recent developments that was used by the opposition and some political circles was the meeting with the PKK terrorist group's jailed ringleader, Abdullah Öcalan. The National Solidarity, Brotherhood and Democracy Committee, established by Parliament Speaker Numan Kurtulmuş, decided to send a delegation to the Imrali Prison to meet with Öcalan. However, several political parties, including the main opposition party, the Republican People's Party (CHP), refused to send a member to the committee. They went further and declared that meeting with Öcalan was unacceptable.

After the delegation visited Öcalan, several political groups and parties demanded that the authorities disclose all notes from the meeting. However, it is clear that requesting the full release of negotiation notes effectively means calling for the termination of the process. Once disclosed, certain statements made by the participants could easily be misused or taken out of context. In other words, the demand is not an innocent one; it aims to distort the process.

Another development that was exploited by some political circles was Mesut Barzani's visit to Şırnak to attend an academic event commemorating the renowned Kurdish poet, Molla Jazari. Some groups backed by the opposition exaggerated the visit and attempted to provoke the public to rise against the process by using images shared on social media. Those who overemphasize these developments are trying to halt the process.

Kurtulmuş asked political parties represented in Parliament to prepare reports and submit them to the committee. Some opposition political parties, including the CHP, submitted their reports. The contents of the reports were surprising, since they were exclusively focused on the political process, rather than the military process. They have been trying to underline the factors that are expected to be discussed during the first phase of the process. It is known to everybody that the first phase of the process focuses on ending the use of violence and terror. The second phase of the process focuses on the resolution of political problems. Asking about the resolution of the political problems means halting the process.

The greater the possibility of solving the process, the more those who oppose the process try to intervene to halt the process. At the beginning of the process, those who opposed it largely remained indifferent, assuming it would ultimately fail on its own. Some even expressed conditional political support. However, as expectations for a solution grew, they began to intervene directly in the process. Since then, they have attempted to sabotage it.

All in all, opposition political parties take different positions toward the terror-free Türkiye initiative. Some parties and groups oppose the process. For various reasons, they do not want the issue to be resolved. They represent the denial policy of the past. The second group wants the problem to be resolved exclusively under their own leadership, primarily so they can derive political advantage from the process. The third group wants the problem to be solved, but not by Erdoğan and his team. This group does not wish Erdoğan to come out stronger from the process. The fourth group supports the resolution of the problem without any condition. Unfortunately, the first three groups representing the national opposition try to challenge the process and exploit every opportunity to create barriers to halt the process.