Author: Ozge Genc
Published on: 12/03/2025 | 00:00:00
AI Summary:
Shifting alliances in Syria confirm that Ocalan’s message is not isolated or purely domestic but offers a crucial opportunity that could redefine everything from Turkiye’s security policies to the future positioning of Kurdish actors. The PKK leadership responded by declaring a unilateral ceasefire with final disbandment as well as decisions on disarmament and other matters delayed until the congress can be held in a month or two. The PKK is considered a terrorist organisation by Turkiye, the United States and the European Union. Ocalan has advocated for ceasefires in the past, but this is the first time he has called for the PKK to cease to exist. This is likely linked to shifts in Kurdish political movements, Turkish state strategy and broader regional realignments. Externally, the “Kurdish issue” has long been an obstacle in Turkiye’s foreign relations, particularly with Western allies and the EU. Concerns over rights and liberties, the undermining of Kurdish rights and political representation have contributed to tensions. By proactively managing this transition, Ankara could frame itself as the architect ofkurdish political normalisation. Turkey’s military operations in Syria shifted primary battleground from Turkiye’s border areas into northern Syria. This strategy has not only established Turkish-controlled zones but also altered the conflict’s geography. The PKK’s disbandment is not a done deal, however, opposition parties, particularly the Republican People’s Party (CHP) remain hesitant to support the initiative. Turkey aims to shape terms of the PYD’s acceptance within a reconfigured Syrian framework. A resolution of the “Kurdish issue” could enhance Turkiye’s diplomatic leverage, especially with European and American actors critical of its policies against Kurds domestically and in neighbouring states. The PKK’s ceasefire is a notable first step, but its long-term viability depends on how to institutionalise it. It is crucial to recognise that no peace process can be built on uncompromising demands or an idealised, frictionless roadmap.
Original: 1749 words
Summary: 308 words
Percent reduction: 82.39%