The Long War That Ended Last Week

Something remarkable happened last week, though it didn't get the attention it deserved: A long and brutal war came to an end.
For more than four decades, the Kurdish militant group known as the PKK waged an insurgency against the Turkish state that left some 40,000 people dead and reshaped the lives of millions. The PKK's announcement on May 12 that it had 'fulfilled its historical mission' and was ending the armed struggle it has waged since 1984 got little notice outside Turkey, partly because the world was distracted by Donald Trump's flattery tour of the Persian Gulf monarchies. But that's the way it often is with wars: magnetic at the start, ignored when the violence fades. 'War makes rattling good history,' the novelist Thomas Hardy observed a century ago, 'but peace makes poor reading.'
The PKK's decision to disarm came two months after its imprisoned founder and leader, Abdullah Öcalan, issued a statement suggesting that the war had become obsolete. Öcalan had held secret meetings with the Turkish government for a year, but the content of those talks remains a mystery, and it is still far from clear what the PKK—or the Kurds more broadly—stands to gain from the group's decision to forswear violence and instead focus on 'building a democratic society,' as their announcement put it.
The Turkish government now has an opportunity to consolidate the peace by offering some kind of amnesty to the PKK's fighters, who have not yet handed over their abundant weapons, and by addressing the grievances that sparked the war in the first place: more cultural rights and respect for the Kurds, an ethnic group that makes up about 18 percent of Turkey's population. The Kurds are also substantial minorities in Syria, Iraq, and Iran, where the PKK insurgency had important spillover effects.
If Turkey fails to seize the moment, the conflict could erupt again. That has happened before. I was there the last time peace talks between the state and the PKK broke down, in 2015, and I saw the consequences up close. Cities and towns across southeastern Turkey were bombed, more than 1,000 people were killed in the following months, and thousands of activists and members of pro-Kurdish parties were thrown in prison on trumped-up charges. Many remain there.
So far, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has described the PKK's decision as a victory against terrorism. But the PKK is expecting political concessions from Turkey, including amnesty for its fighters and a broader recognition of Kurdish political and cultural rights. As one of the group's leading figures, Murat Karayilan, said last week: 'We believe the armed struggle must end—but unless the state makes legal changes, peace won't be possible in practice.'
The PKK's leaders see their latest move less as a surrender than as the advent of a new phase in their movement, which has long promoted an ideology—leftist, secular, environmentalist—that sits uncomfortably with Erdoğan's Islamist authoritarianism. That was apparent in the video the group released last week, showing a group of its leaders in combat fatigues, chanting an oath to Öcalan. 'I will fight against the dominant and state-worshipping system that dominates our civilization,' they said in unison. 'I will keep alive all the values created by the PKK.'
Öcalan has been living in isolation on the prison island of Imrali, in the Sea of Marmara, since his capture in 1999. Now a white-haired 77-year-old, he maintains a cultish authority over the PKK; his portrait hangs everywhere, and he is known by the reverential moniker ' Apo ' ('Uncle'). About 20 years ago, he became a devotee of Murray Bookchin, the late Jewish eco-anarchist then living in Vermont, and integrated Bookchin's thinking into the PKK's doctrine.
The government has been extremely guarded in its comments about Öcalan and the PKK's decision, but the viability of the new arrangement will depend on what it offers the group in exchange for relinquishing its weapons. 'If they offer too little, that's a problem for the PKK and its supporters,' Aliza Marcus, the author of Blood and Belief, a history of the movement, told me. If the government appears to be granting too much, that could anger Erdoğan's right-wing-nationalist coalition partners, who tend to see Kurds as a threat to Turkish unity. That Öcalan will be released is very unlikely, for example, and his top deputies are expected to be given some kind of asylum in other countries. But many rank-and-file PKK members may be allowed to return to their old life.
One possible point of division lies in Syria, where an affiliate of the PKK has run a de facto statelet in that country's northeast for the past decade, holding up Öcalan as its ideological leader. Erdoğan said the new announcement would apply to the Syrian affiliate, known as the Syrian Democratic Forces. But the leaders of the SDF have made clear that they will not be bound by it.
Within Turkey, whatever the outcome of the political give-and-take between Erdoğan and the PKK, this peace effort seems likelier to hold than its predecessors, in part because the PKK has lost some of its earlier advantages. The Turkish military has developed killer drones and other technologies that allow it to hold Kurdish leaders under siege even in remote strongholds in the Qandil mountains of Iraqi Kurdistan. And many Kurds have grown weary of the war, which has made their life miserable for decades.
The Kurds also have something to offer Erdoğan. He has hinted through proxies that he wants to change Turkey's constitution so that he can remain in power after his second term as president ends in 2028—but that would be difficult without the support of the Kurdish political parties. The Kurds would also like to see a revised constitution: one that would modify the definition of Turkish nationality—now framed in ethnic terms that make them feel excluded—to a more civic model.
Erdoğan has never actually proposed this cynical quid pro quo, but comments by some of his allies suggest that it is at the core of the presumptive agreement with the PKK. If so, he is taking a risk. Changing the constitution would likely require a popular referendum, and polls suggest that most Turks oppose an amendment to allow the president a third term. Even the Kurds may balk.
'If the constitution is not democratic, people won't vote for it,' says Ceylan Akça, a parliamentarian who represents the city of Diyarbakir, in southeastern Turkey, for the pro-Kurdish party known as DEM.
Many ordinary Kurds have high expectations, Akça told me. They hope to see Kurdish political prisoners released from jail, greater tolerance for their language and culture, and a revision to the country's anti-terrorism law, which is now written in a way that appears to target Kurds. Above all, Akça said, they want a more inclusive understanding of what it means to be a Turkish citizen, whether that is reflected in the constitution or in government policies.
Akça traveled around Turkey in recent weeks, alongside other legislators, holding town-hall-style meetings to help ordinary Kurds make sense of the PKK's decision to stop fighting. Many of the gatherings were emotionally wrenching, she told me; a lot of the participants had lost family members in the insurgency.
'I saw a lot of people crying as they watched the announcement,' Akça told me. 'It's the end of an era.' Her own message, she said, was to reassure people that a more peaceful and democratic day was coming.
'Now is the right time for the state to tell people they don't need to be afraid,' she said.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Washington Post

26 minutes ago

• Washington Post

Trump says Gabbard was 'wrong' about Iran and Israeli strikes could be 'very hard to stop'

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said Friday that his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard , was 'wrong' when she previously said that the U.S. believed Iran wasn't building a nuclear weapon, and he suggested that it would be 'very hard to stop' Israel's strikes on Iran in order to negotiate a possible ceasefire.

Politico

28 minutes ago

• Politico

Israel presses ahead with strikes as Trump's 2-week deadline looms

Israeli officials insisted Friday that they will keep up their bombing campaign against Iran, even as President Donald Trump has given Tehran a two-week deadline to come to some sort of diplomatic deal that reins in its nuclear program. Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, laid out his country's case at the U.N. Security Council, facing off Friday with Iranian representatives who urged the world to stop the Israeli strikes. 'Israel will not stop. Not until Iran's nuclear threat is dismantled, not until its war machine is disarmed, not until our people and yours are safe,' Danon declared. The Israeli assertions highlight how Trump's statement that he'll decide 'in the next two weeks' whether to strike Iranian nuclear sites provides an opportunity to Israel as much as it puts pressure on Iran. For Iran, it's two weeks to come to some sort of diplomatic deal with the U.S. that constrains its nuclear, and possibly other, programs. For Israel, it's a focused timeframe to do as much damage as it can to Iran's nuclear and broader military infrastructure before the U.S. may pressure it to accept a diplomatic solution. The more damage Israel does, the more it could weaken an enemy and improve the odds that Iran will capitulate to U.S. demands in the diplomatic process. The strikes themselves couldthreaten the survival of Iran's Islamist regime. Trump told reporters on Friday that he wasn't about to push Israel to halt its assault in Iran while he weighs what the U.S. should do. 'It's very hard to make that request right now,' Trump said. 'If somebody is winning, it's a little bit harder to do than if somebody is losing, but we're ready, willing and able, and we've been speaking to Iran, and we'll see what happens.' A senior administration official, granted anonymity to speak about the president's thinking, said 'everything is still on the table.' 'This is about giving this a little time and seeing if things look any different in a couple weeks,' the official said. Trump's 'two-week' window was delivered Thursday by press secretary Karoline Leavitt, who said, quoting Trump, that his delay in determining whether to join Israel's attack on Iran was 'based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future.' Trump often says he'll make decisions in two weeks, only to extend his deadline again or never follow through. Still, Israel and Iran appear to believe the next two weeks will be a crucial phase. Iranian officials showed up for nuclear talks with European officials on Friday in Geneva; Israel pressed ahead with its bombing campaign against Iran, which is responding with missiles. Iranian officials met Friday with European envoys in Geneva in an attempt to revitalize the diplomatic process. The talks ended on an ambiguous note. Iranian officials have said their participation in future talks would hinge on Israel stopping its attacks. Some European representatives said talks should continue regardless, even as they urged both sides to avoid escalation. 'We invited the Iranian minister to consider negotiations with all sides, including the United States, without awaiting the cessation of strikes, which we also hope for,' French foreign minister Jean-Noel Barrot said. For Israel, the most critical, but perhaps toughest, official objective is eliminating Iran's nuclear facility at Fordo. That facility is buried deep underground, and Israel has been hoping Trump will enter the fight and use special, massive U.S. bombs to destroy it. There are concerns, however, including among Republicans, that Iran could retaliate against U.S. assets if America enters the conflict on any level, dragging America into another Middle Eastern war. Trump campaigned on avoiding such wars. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has hinted that Israel has means to destroy Fordo on its own. It's not clear what those methods could involve, but Israel has significant intelligence operations inside Iran and it has often surprised even Washington with its capabilities. Either way, current and former Israeli officials said they saw no reason for Israel to back off its strikes now, despite calls for deescalation from some world capitals. The more Israel degrades Iran's capabilities, the less able Tehran will be to mount retaliatory attacks on Israel or the United States, should the latter choose to enter the war. From the beginning, 'the Israeli planning was based on the assumption that we have to do it alone,' said a former Israeli diplomat familiar with the situation. The person, like others, was granted anonymity to discuss highly sensitive issues. It's unclear whether there is any deal with Iran that Israel would deem strong enough. There is tremendous distrust of Iran's Islamist regime within Israel's security establishment, leading to a sense that Iran would cheat on any deal. Another unsettled question is whether a deal with Iran will cover only its nuclear program or also curb its ballistic missile initiative and support for proxy militias in the region. Some analysts have argued that Netanyahu decided to begin attacking Iran last week because he was worried earlier nuclear talks between Iran and the Trump administration would yield too weak a deal. If new efforts at diplomacy yield fruit, Trump could pressure Netanyahu to accept whatever deal emerges, potentially even by threatening to withhold weapons and other equipment Israel needs to defend itself against Iran. The war is costly for Israel, which has been fighting on multiple fronts — in particular against Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip — since October 2023. As one Israeli official said, Iranian missile attacks feel like 'Russian roulette' to Israeli citizens.

Bloomberg

29 minutes ago

• Bloomberg

Harvard Nears ‘Mindbogglingly' Historic US Deal, Trump Says

By and Anika Arora Seth Updated on Save President Donald Trump said his administration has been holding talks with Harvard University and may announce a deal over the next week, potentially ending a standoff that has jeopardized billions of dollars of the school's funding and ignited a rollicking legal fight. 'They have acted extremely appropriately during these negotiations, and appear to be committed to doing what is right,' Trump said Friday on Truth Social. 'If a Settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be 'mindbogglingly' HISTORIC, and very good for our Country.'