After four decades of violence that have claimed at least 40,000 lives, this was a momentous declaration. On Thursday, the leader of the Kurdish insurgency, Abdullah Öcalan, revered by his supporters, called on fighters to lay down arms. In a written statement from his prison cell – he has been held in isolation for a quarter of a century – he urged his Kurdistan Workers’ party (PKK) not only to disarm but to dissolve itself.
Yet optimism must be tempered. Ten years ago, a two-year truce between the militant group and the Turkish state imploded and some of the worst violence of the long conflict ensued. More than 7,000 people, including hundreds of civilians, have died since then.
That attempt at a deal with a group designated by both Turkey and its western allies as a terrorist organisation came amid a very different political context, before the contours of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s illiberal democracy were so clear. The need to end the violence endures. The difference is that this time, the peace efforts are driven by both domestic politics and regional developments.
In October, President Erdoğan’s hardline ally Devlet Bahçeli, who once called for the execution of the PKK leader, surprised observers by suggesting that his life sentence might be reconsidered if he told fighters to disarm. Mr Erdoğan’s ambitions to continue in office despite Turkey’s term limits are clear: he has generously indicated that he would be open to running again “if the people want it”. But this would require either early elections or a change to the constitution. In either case, he would need support from legislators beyond his coalition – perhaps from the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Equality and Democracy party (DEM).
The Middle East’s instability also strengthened Turkey’s desire for security solutions. Then, just over a month after Mr Bahçeli’s call, Bashar al-Assad unexpectedly fell from power in Syria – thanks in part to Turkey’s backing of the victorious rebels, Hayat Tahrir-al Sham. The US-backed, Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces are now fighting to maintain the autonomous region they established in north-east Syria, aware that Donald Trump’s return to the White House is unlikely to be helpful. Iraq’s warming relations with Turkey have seen an agreement to work together to counter the PKK.
That has left the PKK feeling isolated. This time, it looks as if the motivation on the Kurdish side is less about potential gains than the hope of a reprieve from military pressure and, in Turkey, from political pressure on the DEM, which has had several mayors removed and municipalities investigated – part of a broader pattern of increasing repression.
The PKK’s demands long ago morphed from an independent Kurdish homeland to greater autonomy in Turkey and more rights for Kurds, who account for as much as a fifth of the country’s population. Yet a deal may not necessarily bring much progress on these more modest demands. Ankara may prefer economic inducements: it recently announced a development plan for the Kurdish-majority south-east.
One question is whether thousands of PKK fighters – mostly outside Turkey itself now – will be persuaded. Another is the cost to the Kurds and Turkey. After so many deaths and so many false starts, moves towards peace must be welcomed. But the price should not be the indefinite extension of the president’s strongman rule, and any lasting resolution would surely require proper democratic representation for Kurds, as they are demanding.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
