Germany: what is permissible for PKK is not permissible for Erdogan
On November 4, several thousands of Kurds gathered in Düsseldorf, Germany, for a mass demonstration, demanding to release Abdullah Ocalan, a life-long prisoner and head of the Labor Party of Kurdistan. It is noteworthy that the PKK is considered a terrorist organization both in Turkey and in the European Union, and therefore the demonstration of the symbols of the PKK and portraits of its leader Abdullah Ocalan is legally banned in Germany.
Despite the current ban, confirmed by the Supreme Administrative Court of North Rhine-Westphalia on November 3, thousands of followers of the PKK in Düsseldorf raised hundreds of banners with the portraits of Ocalan and flags of the banned organization. While the Die Welt publication reports police clashes with demonstrators and use of pepper sprays due to the display of banned symbols, a live broadcast from the site by the German service of Russia Today indicates otherwise. The rally of supporters of the PKK continues, and the forbidden symbolism is massively demonstrated in the absence of any significant reaction from the German law enforcement agencies.
At the same time, numerous German users in social networks wonder why the German authorities initially allowed a demonstration in support of the organization that was legally recognized as a terrorist organization.
It is noteworthy that the rallies with participation of the supporters of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the ruling Justice and Development Party were banned all over Germany, which seriously complicated the Turkish-German relations. As an official reason for the ban of rallies, the German courts called then security considerations and a threat to public order. The fact that at the same time the rallies in support of the PKK, recognized as a terrorist organization, with which the Turkish state is at war, are not forbidden, speaks for itself: the contradictions between the de jure NATO allies - Germany and Turkey - have reached such proportions that it would be fairer to talk about barely concealed hostility, rather than the formally declared partnership.