The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) has declared a ceasefire in response to PKK founder and leader Abdullah Ocalan’s call for the organization to disarm and dissolve, putting further pressure on the government of Turkey to take action towards a political settlement.

“We in the PKK agree with the content of the call as it is and state that we will fully comply with and implement the requirements of the Call on our part,” confirmed the PKK Executive Committee in a March 1st statement announcing the ceasefire.

On March 2, the Peoples’ Defense Center Headquarters Command, which oversees the PKK’s armed forces, stated that all units must immediately comply with the ceasefire. They confirmed that it applied not only to their regular forces but also to “special duty sacrifice teams and all autonomous units,” referring to the groups responsible for actions like the October 23rd attack on the headquarters of Turkish Aerospace Industries.

The PKK’s Conditions

The PKK will not disarm and dissolve unconditionally. The group expects the government of Turkey to take several steps to implement the next phase of the peace process. The three demands made in the ceasefire declaration were:

• Creating a “suitable security environment” in which to hold a party congress: In Ocalan’s statement, he requested that this congress be held so that the PKK could make a formal decision to end the war and dissolve itself. This would make such a decision more legitimate and binding and decrease the likelihood of dissident or splinter groups. The organization’s senior leadership would have to meet in person to be able to do this. Any attacks on such a gathering or its participants would be perceived as serious spoilers.
• Securing “democratic politics and legal grounds”: This is similar to the language shared by the DEM Party Imrali Delegation following Ocalan’s statement. From the Kurdish movement’s point of view, it likely refers to the establishment of official structures to work on the process, like a parliamentary commission, as well as legal changes like amnesty provisions, the release of political prisoners and an end to judicial interference in civilian pro-Kurdish politics, guarantees for Kurdish rights, and more. Kurds want these steps to be concurrent with the PKK’s disarmament and dissolution.
• Ensuring Ocalan’s “conditions to live and work in physical freedom and establish unhindered relationships with anyone he wants”: Ocalan’s free participation in negotiations has been a demand of the Kurdish movement for years. Now, the PKK wants Ocalan to participate in any congress in which it would decide to lay down arms. They had previously made this demand before Ocalan’s statement.

Building on the Ceasefire

A unilateral PKK ceasefire is a positive move towards the realization of these goals. To facilitate further action by both the PKK and the government of Turkey, and an ultimate political settlement to one of the region’s longest-running conflicts, the ceasefire should be made bilateral.

Turkish leaders responded positively to the PKK’s declaration. MHP leader Devlet Bahceli said the ceasefire announcement was ‘supportive’ and ‘complimentary’ to Ocalan’s call. But on the ground in Iraqi Kurdistan, the Turkish military continues to strike PKK positions. New strikes have been reported every day since the ceasefire’s declaration.

If these attacks continue, they could create unnecessary obstacles to progress and convince many Kurds that their Turkish interlocutors are not sincere about peace. In the past, the PKK has called off unilateral ceasefires because of Turkish refusal to reciprocate.

The international community should urge Turkey to end these strikes and enter into a de facto reciprocal ceasefire. No formal declaration of a ceasefire is necessary on Turkey’s part. Turkey-PKK clashes often drop to their lowest rates in late winter and early spring due to environmental factors. Local partners, like the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, could be engaged to monitor security conditions.

It should also press for the government of Turkey to take the commensurate legal and political actions. Many of these steps, particularly those related to the fate of political prisoners and democratic Kurdish politics, would simply bring Turkey into alignment with the existing legal frameworks and obligations that it shares with its Western allies. Under ceasefire conditions, Turkey’s security-related justifications for repression of civilian Kurdish politics have even less merit than usual, a point that allies and partners could make.

(Photo taken by author, March 21, 2024)