Why did Bahçeli refute Deniz’s murderer?!

“Those who shoot and get shot for the fatherland are both honourable.” This is a famous quote from Ciller, president during the Dogan Gures and Mehmet Agar government in the 90s. With these words, Ciller was honouring the Susurluk’s nationalist-mobster ‘employees’, of those first and foremost Catli, whom Agar referred to as “my kids”. Starting prior to September 12, Catli, who was used in the organisation of counterinsurgency, was supposedly wanted by the state while he was gadding about with a fake passport and identity the very same state provided him with, getting involved in various ‘sectors’ from political party congresses to tenders with his team. In the 90s, ‘fighting the PKK’ was added to the portfolio. He was no stranger to that. It was even laid down in court documents that they had taken the task of strangling seven young TİP members in their homes before the 80s. Along with murderous groups like JİTEM, they were responsible for a series of unsolved murders during their ‘fight against terror’ shift in the 90s. Prepared by the highest security bureaucrats and confirmed by the state leaders (MGK), a list of “Kurdish businessmen helping the PKK” was handed to them. Without a trial, the judgement had been maid: “They are aiding the organisation”! The rest was up to the hitmen. The story is known; saving some lives in return for bribes, while taking other’s lives and their money…

***

The reason why we are reminding of this known story, are the parallels to the murder of Deniz Poyraz after his HDP İzmir office had been raided. The conclusion various government units came to, the ‘paradigm’ they created and the decision they made served the purpose of creating an area of ‘legitimacy’. This relied on the 90s unsolved murders and the ‘legal legitimacy’ of the state’s conclusion that “they were helping the PKK”. Buldan’s, Canturk’s, Anter’s and many others were murdered under this ‘legitimacy’. The MGK of that time and the Çiller cabinet, as well as the Agar-Gures group have a direct responsibility for this. To say that “some were just radicalised, acted on their own”, is just empty babbling, given that even those “acting on their own” were equipping themselves with said legitimacy before their actions.

And today, with a ‘security policy’ in the manner of “HDP is PKK’s recruitment service, HDP/PKK are the same…” we reached the İzmir murder. After misleading minds for years with a “HDP is terrorist” agitation, what could be more natural than somebody eventually taking matters into their own hands? “It was a lone wolf murder”, sure. Whether it was a lone wolf or a devoted dog, what does it matter? Under which policies ‘legitimacy’ this murder was carried out, is what really matters.

***

And exactly this legitimacy is being highlighted by government collaborator Bahçeli, who declared Deniz Poyraz as a “militia co-operator, who brought combat-ready PKK sympathisers to terror camps”. Don’t be fooled by his faltering damnation of the murder, providing a reason for the assault and the murder is what he is really after. While a fascist murderer might say “I’ve done it to cool my boiling blood”, Bahçeli puts the assault’s reason on political grounds. In a way, it’s like refuting a personal reason like ‘cooling one’s blood’! Alongside this refutation, by repeating the “HDP is PKK’s conscription office”-style government propaganda, Bahçeli is also admitting the ‘causal link’ to the Deniz Poyraz murder. The murder he claims to condemn is what he is legitimising.

***

Bahçeli didn’t have to do this. He could have acted more ‘diplomatically’ and sit it out by condemning it. The fact that the regime they want to build requires an uncompromising/intolerant attitude and process in all respects plays a decisive role in this. But there is another specific development bothering him. Deniz’ murder provoked a broad popular reaction, which made the future very promising. Those who went on the streets where only a tiny fraction of this reaction. It was quite unexpected to see such a reaction to this assault on a party that was marginalised by the ruling bloc, subject to hostile law and thus at the brink of closure. It was at least to be expected that the Nation Alliance parties could experience some disharmony or tension due to the severity of the assault. But no. By presenting a most possibly careful profile they managed not to fall on AKP/MHP’s level. This forced Bahçeli to remind people that “we condemn this attack but remember that it is a terrorist that was killed”. By being the political translator of those, who say “it has to be prevented that HDP uses this assault to claim victimhood”, he pretty much disclaimed the reason behind the fascist assault and murder. This is a justification that is increasingly met with suspicion and hesitation by those who are perceived as potential takers and whose social equivalent is gradually falling.