Cengiz Çandar stated that the resolution process has entered a new phase tied to the broader struggle for a democratic Turkey.
The long-anticipated announcement of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party's (PKK) dissolution came on May 12, in response to the call made by Abdullah Öcalan on February 27. The PKK, through its 12th Congress convened between May 5 and 7, declared the end of its organizational existence and the cessation of its activities.

After the announcement, questions quickly emerged, particularly in the Turkish public sphere, regarding the significance of this decision: what kind of political and practical struggle will follow, how the Kurdish Freedom Movement, which has become a major force in the Middle East, will shape its policies beyond Turkey, and what kind of political approach it will adopt toward Turkey itself.

Cengiz Çandar, an MP of the Peoples’ Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party), who took part in negotiations between the PKK and the Turkish state during earlier ceasefire periods and is known for his expertise on Middle Eastern affairs, shared his assessment with ANF regarding the PKK’s announcement and the developments that may follow.

Cengiz Çandar said, “Kurds now have a chance to attain a status in Turkey and the region that is more influential and more widely accepted than ever before.” He emphasized that the talks being held are not based on bargaining but rather aim to open a door toward resolving the Kurdish question.

The PKK’s announcement is of historic significance

Cengiz Çandar described the PKK’s decision to lay down arms and dissolve itself, taken at its recent congress, as a development of historic importance. He said, “The PKK’s 12th Congress decision to end the armed struggle and dissolve the organization is of historic significance. It marks the beginning of an entirely new era. This is, in itself, an exciting development. It shows that the Kurdish people have now reached a phase in which taking their place on the stage of history and securing their rights no longer requires armed struggle. From this perspective and at this stage, one could say that a real opportunity has emerged to reinforce the brotherhood of two peoples, who have lived side by side like flesh and bone for a thousand years, within the framework of the twenty-first century. I find this process both exciting and deeply meaningful.”

A Kurdish uprising is ending by its own decision for the first time

Cengiz Çandar pointed out that one of the most important aspects of the PKK’s disarmament is that, for the first time, a Kurdish uprising is being brought to an end not by being crushed, not through the “destruction” of their leader, but by the decision of the movement itself. According to Çandar, this process should not be viewed as the resolution of the Kurdish question, but rather as the beginning of a new phase of attempts to resolve it, and continued:

“The uprising that ended with the congress declaration is the longest, most widespread, and most powerful Kurdish uprising in the history of the Republic of Turkey. After Abdullah Öcalan’s historic ‘Call for Peace and Democratic Society’ on February 27, 2025, I stated on several occasions: for the first time in the history of the Republic, a Kurdish uprising is being brought to an end without being crushed, without being suppressed, and without its leaders being ‘eliminated’ but instead by the will of the Kurds themselves. For the first time, Kurds are ending an uprising that they themselves started.

In his February 27 call, Öcalan said: ‘Just as any modern society or party whose existence has not been forcibly ended would voluntarily do, we seek integration with the state and society.’ He invited the PKK to convene its congress and to make the decision to disarm and disband. The expressions ‘whose existence has not been forcibly ended’ and ‘voluntarily’ should be especially noted.

That is why this stage must be understood as the end of the longest, most widespread, and most powerful Kurdish uprising in history, by the Kurds themselves. This indicates that the Kurds are now in a position where they no longer need armed rebellion to gain their rights and status. Precisely for this reason, what we are witnessing now should not be seen as the resolution of the Kurdish question, but quite the opposite, as the beginning of initiatives to resolve it. From now on, the resolution process will be carried out in a peaceful environment, as an inseparable part of the struggle for a democratic Turkey. This is a completely new phase.

In most countries, disarmament is reached through negotiation and even bargaining, often as part of a inductive process. In Turkey, the process appears to be unfolding inductively. First, the weapons are silenced, and then the resolution of the Kurdish question is to be pursued through democratic means. That is what it looks like. The road ahead is long, and the task is difficult.”

If the post-May 12 period is secured, Turkey could play a constructive role in Syria

According to Çandar, the Gaza war, which began on October 7, 2023, marks the beginning of a new phase of transformation in the Middle East. He stated: “With the Gaza War that began on October 7, 2023, and the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States (US), the Middle East is entering a new phase of transformation, one filled with uncertainties. A significant part of the Palestinian people is now facing genocide. A new axis, shaped around an Israel, Saudi Arabia alliance, is being envisioned, an axis aligned with Trump’s plans for the region.

Where and how will Turkey position itself in this new framework? The testing ground will be Syria. If the post-May 12 period in Turkey can be stabilized, Turkey could be expected to play a constructive role in Syria, particularly between the Kurds and Ahmed Al-Sharaa. Otherwise, the unstable situation in Syria will negatively impact both Turkey and the Kurdish regions. Syria remains a zone of potential crisis and risk.”

I do not clearly see a social response to the calls upon socialists in Turkey

Cengiz Çandar also commented on the PKK’s appeal to the socialists in Turkey. He criticized the lack of a clear social response to socialist appeals within the country and noted that socialism is currently experiencing a global crisis.

“I do not clearly see a strong social response to the calls for socialism in Turkey. The socialist and leftist movements in Turkey suffered serious blows, especially after March 12, 1971, and most significantly following the military coup of September 12, 1980. These movements were severely weakened. On top of that, we must also consider the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s and the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

So, the crisis or problem regarding socialism is not unique to Turkey; it has an international dimension. There is no socialist movement capable of replacing what was once known as ‘real socialism,’ no model of socialism that captivates the working class and large popular masses.”

There was no bargaining, a door was opened toward resolving the Kurdish question

Contrary to what is often claimed in public discourse, Cengiz Çandar stated that the İmralı process was led from the beginning by the head of the National Intelligence Organization (MIT), İbrahim Kalın, and rejected the claim that the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) did not favour the process. He noted that Kalın was involved in the İmralı talks with the approval of President Erdoğan. Emphasizing that no bargaining took place and that both sides simply took steps to initiate a resolution to the Kurdish question, Çandar continued:

“The process with İmralı was led from the beginning by İbrahim Kalın. He could not have maintained contact with İmralı without the approval and knowledge of Tayyip Erdoğan. Erdoğan standing behind, and Bahçeli being at the forefront, actually helped the process move along smoothly. There was truly no bargaining. There was no need for bargaining either, because this was not a negotiation-based resolution process. What happened was the conclusion of a forty-year Kurdish uprising through the decision of its leader, Abdullah Öcalan. From the government’s perspective, this is ‘a Turkey without terrorism.’ From the Kurdish movement’s perspective, it is ‘peace.’

This is a stage. A door has now been opened to initiate the resolution of the Kurdish question and to move forward on the path of democratization. That is what has happened.”

The risk of sabotage is always present; there are those who oppose a Kurdish–Turkish alliance

Çandar emphasized that the risk of sabotage is always present in such processes and pointed out that there are forces who do not want to see a Kurdish–Turkish alliance, which would strengthen Turkey. He continued:“Of course, there is a risk of sabotage; we are in the Middle East. We are speaking of a country like Turkey, whose geopolitical significance is beyond dispute. The Kurds of Turkey make up half of the Kurdish population worldwide, and they currently represent one of the most dynamic actors in the Middle East. There are those who feel the need to block the formation of a historic Kurdish–Turkish alliance that would strengthen Turkey, and they may very well be planning to sabotage the process. Among those who can see this most clearly is Abdullah Öcalan.”

Kurds now have a chance to attain a more influential status in Turkey and the region

Cengiz Çandar stated that the PKK decision to lay down arms is expected to have enormous consequences and stressed that the DEM Party must reposition itself.

“For nearly half a century, the PKK has been a major center of gravity, shaping and influencing the Kurdish sphere. For forty years, it waged an armed struggle. Its decision to disband and disarm will generate enormous effects that cannot yet be fully foreseen. The DEM Party, first and foremost, operates within the environment the PKK created.

The DEM Party must now adopt a new position. With Abdullah Öcalan taking on a new role, under conditions that must change after twenty-five years, a new identity grounded in a democratic and civilian framework will emerge. How, when, and in what form this will happen, we do not yet know. But it is possible to imagine that entirely new dynamics, previously unanticipated, may come into play, and that the Kurdish political landscape will become more diverse and vibrant.

Kurds now have a historic opportunity to attain a status in Turkey and the region that is more influential and widely accepted than ever before.”[1]