Öcalan’s Call: A Potential Honourable Exit for All Parties

This is an unscheduled post, prompted by the significance of yesterday’s events. I felt compelled to share my analysis of PKK leader Öcalan’s historic call for the PKK to disarm and disband.

There should be no misinterpretation or underestimation of Öcalan’s call for the PKK to disarm and disband. It is clear, and it is historic.

He is calling on the organization he founded four decades ago to dissolve itself. The message references historical turning points—the Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Bloc, or as he puts it, the “collapse of real socialism”—but it exists in a temporal vacuum. It begins with the PKK’s foundation, explains why it was necessary, then pivots into self-criticism: the organization, he argues, became too nationalistic and, in doing so, drifted toward separatist aspirations—a nation-state, federation, administrative autonomy, or culturalist approaches —all of which, he says, failed to meet the sociological needs of Kurdish society. The message culminates in its historic call to the PKK.

What it does not contain is any reference to where the Kurdish issue stands today. Nothing about rights, democratic backsliding, or authoritarianism. No preconditions for the PKK’s dissolution. It is as if time stopped in 1999, the year he was arrested. The implication is that had he remained free, by the time the Soviet Union collapsed, and the Cold War ended, he would have dissolved the PKK then. That is why this message feels suspended in time. This is not a criticism—just an observation.

More than that, I believe this was the only way an imprisoned leader could have made such a call.

It had to be addressed solely to the PKK, in a temporal vacuum wihleleaving no ambiguity about his intent to end armed struggle.

This was not a statement about the broader Kurdish issue or the rights and lives of Kurds in Turkey. They simply were not the subject of this message, which is clearly part of an agreement he has reached with the Turkish state.

A Call That Divided Opinion

In Diyarbakır, reactions were mixed, and understandably so. Many had elevated Öcalan to a near-mythical status, and here he was, signaling the end of an era in Kurdish resistance. The moment was bound to be emotional, as it marked a rupture with the past and all the narratives and tropes that continue to shape the present. For generations of Kurds, the PKK has been the primary framework through which political processes were understood and navigated.

Less understandable was the outrage from some influential figures in the Turkish intelligentsia. Their argument → That Turkey is experiencing its most severe authoritarian consolidation, democratic rights are under daily assault, and the rule of law has collapsed—so how can the Kurdish struggle be over?

This argument is, frankly, selfish. Just because the Kurdish movement founded an armed wing forty years ago does not mean the onus is on them to fight for democracy in Turkey. More than 40,000 people—on both sides—have died over the past four decades. The armed struggle and its tools must end, regardless of Turkey’s broader political landscape. There is no moral basis to claim otherwise.

More to the point, Öcalan might not even feel responsible for carrying the burden of Turkey’s democratic transformation. The repression that was once concentrated on the Kurdish movement has expanded. If, in the past, only Kurdish municipalities were seized under the pretext of "terror links," today CHP mayors are being removed just as swiftly. Equal footing for Turkish voters and Kurdish voters before a crackdown, he might have thought(!)

On a more serious note: The authoritarian condensation point has been reached, and now the rain falls on everyone. Who can blame the Kurdish movement for sitting across a negotiation table?

Meanwhile, Öcalan’s message could open a crucial path forward that many failed to grasp: an honourable exit for the PKK, the Turkish state, and the Syrian Kurdish entity in northern Syria.

1. The PKK’s Honourable Exit

Öcalan’s letter makes a key assertion: the PKK waged the longest Kurdish insurgency in Turkish history and was not defeated. He writes:

"As any modern society or party not forcibly dismantled would do voluntarily, convene your congress, make a decision, integrate with the state and society; all groups must disarm, and the PKK must dissolve itself."

As I argued in my 2017 book, the PKK’s priorities and ambitions regarding Turkey have shifted dramatically over the past decade. Their focus is now Syria, where they have established a semi-autonomous administration in the north—Rojava. The PKK has not been operational within Turkey’s borders for quite some time. By first disarming, then dissolving voluntarily, the PKK can tell its base that an organization already defunct inside Turkey is ending—not by defeat, but by choice. That is an honourable exit.

2. A New Reality for Syrian Kurds

With the PKK’s shadow lifted, the SDF—the Syrian Kurdish military force, also shaped by Öcalan’s ideology—would be in a stronger position. Its relations with Ankara and Damascus could improve. The SDF has already agreed in principle to integrate some of its forces into the Syrian army. Öcalan’s argument that “a separate nation-state, federation, or administrative autonomy have all failed” makes it easier for the SDF leadership to sell this decision to its constituents.

3. What This Means for Turkey

For Turkey, the disbanding of the PKK would be a geopolitical game-changer. Most immediately, it would remove the biggest diplomatic obstacle to normalizing ties with the SDF. With the PKK gone, Turkey could finally tolerate a Kurdish-run semi-autonomous administration in Syria. That would be its own honourable exit—if Ankara seizes the opportunity in time.

This is a step in conflict resolution and must be interpreted as such. Ending the PKK will not suddenly erase the injustices Kurds face in Turkey. It will not dissolve the miasma of authoritarianism either. Ending the PKK is not the conclusion—it is the beginning.

---

Will the PKK Follow This Call?

Abdullah Ocalan, in the middle with the Committee of DEM Party that visited him in Imrali. This is a still from a video. As I noted in my earlier post, there was a standoff between the PKK and the Turkish state over a video message. It seems there is indeed a recording of Öcalan delivering his statement. Whether—or when—this video will be sent to the PKK and SDF remains unclear.

The real question is whether the PKK will heed Öcalan’s call. I can say with confidence that its leadership was aware of this call before it was made public—Öcalan had already sent messages to various parts of the organization, including the SDF. They have stated that they will abide by his decision. I do not expect a volte-face from them. However, they will stress that this process will take time, and they will demand constant communication with Öcalan—effectively calling for a shift from solitary confinement to house arrest under state supervision.

Meanwhile, most opposition parties in Turkey have welcomed the announcement. The leader of the main opposition CHP, Özgür Özel, along with former Foreign Minister and Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu and former Economy Minister Ali Babacan, issued statements of support—an encouraging sign.

Salih Muslim, a member of the Syrian PYD Presidential Council, commented on Öcalan's call:

"The Turkish state's presence in Syria has hindered the Kurdish people from attaining their rights. The development of such a process would mean a resolution in Syria as well, and Turkey refraining from intervening in Syria would pave the way for positive developments."

Muslim also stressed that the Turkish state must take concrete steps for the PKK congress to take place:

"The PKK had previously made it clear that the congress would not be held unless Leader Apo's physical freedom was ensured. Therefore, it is imperative that his conditions change immediately, that he is released from İmralı, and that his physical freedom is secured so that the historic step he has taken can continue. Ocalan has made a historic call—the ball is now in Turkey’s court."He added, "This is a process that will unfold over a long period and cannot be expected to conclude in a single day."

SDF Commander Mazloum Abdi, meanwhile, made it clear that the call does not directly impact their forces in Syria:

"Öcalan's call was directed at the PKK. It was not specifically about our region. However, if this process succeeds, it will have a positive impact on us, and Turkey will no longer have any pretext to attack our region."