Yeni Demokrasi: “Call for Peace and Democratic Society” and the Announcement of the Obvious
We hereby share an unofficial translation of an article published by Yeni Demokrasi.
Abdullah Öcalan’s ‘Call for Peace and Democratic Society’ is a document condemning the Kurdish National Liberation Struggle
The leader of the Kurdish national struggle, Abdullah Öcalan, who has been imprisoned for 26 years, has initiated a new process in the Kurdish national issue with his statement. Following a meeting between DEM Party parliamentarians and Abdullah Öcalan in İmralı Prison, where he is held captive, an “Appeal Text” prepared by Abdullah Öcalan was presented to the public. The statement calls on the PKK to disarm and dissolve itself, proposing a “peace” process based on reconciliation with the Turkish state. This call is not a tactical maneuver but the logical outcome of a conciliatory, reformist, and anti-Marxist line that has been systematically built over many years.
This call, which is in line with the Turkish State’s strategic orientation developed under the discourse of “fortifying the home front,” will also have implications for imperialist projects and regional power balances.
How Abdullah Öcalan’s call for the PKK to disarm and dissolve itself will be received by the PKK leadership and the Kurdish national movement in general will become clear in the upcoming period. In the first statement made on behalf of the PKK after the “call for disarmament and dissolution,” it was announced that they would comply with Öcalan’s call and declared a ceasefire. While the DEM Party delegation members who met with Abdullah Öcalan and presented the statement to the public approached the issue as if the Kurdish problem had been solved, creating the perception that “peace is happening,” the Turkish State, on the other hand, continues its attacks on the guerrillas, and Erdoğan, along with all the leading figures of the military-intelligence and civilian bureaucracy, continues to threaten Kurdish national forces. Öcalan’s call that ‘the PKK must dissolve itself’ is nothing but an adaptation to an imperialist and fascist strategy that demands the liquidation of a revolutionary organization. This call is an attack not only on the armed struggle of the PKK, but also on the raison d’être of the Kurdish national movement and its right to revolutionary resistance.
With the phrase ‘integration into the State and society, as any modern society and Party that has not been forced out of existence would voluntarily do,’ the Kurdish people are being advised to assimilate into the Turkish State and submit to the annexationist-colonialist system.
The Turkish State’s Strategy to Co-opt the Kurdish National Movement to Secure the “Home Front”
To consider Öcalan’s statement merely as an internal debate within the PKK is to confine the issue to a limited framework. The political atmosphere before and after this call shows that the perspective presented in the call aligns with the Turkish State’s new strategic maneuver. The Turkish State’s new political orientation, developed in conjunction with the discourse of “fortifying the home front,” aims primarily to neutralize the Kurdish national struggle, render revolutionary dynamics ineffective, and integrate the Kurdish movement into the system by forcing it into reconciliation with the State. Under the guise of “fortifying the home front,” the Turkish State is attempting to integrate the Kurdish national movement into the system to ensure internal stability. The statements made by Erdoğan and Bahçeli indicate that behind this call, there is not only a “peace process” but also an attempt to strengthen Turkey’s regional position.
At the heart of this strategy lies the goal of preventing the international recognition of the status gained by the Kurds in Syria and expanding Turkey’s maneuvering space in the region by neutralizing the Kurdish movement internally. The support provided by the US, the EU, and Israel to the Kurdish movement in the region has necessitated a new strategic move by Turkey. Öcalan’s call has emerged precisely currently and has aligned with the Turkish State’s regional plans.
It is understood that this new strategy developed by the Turkish State has several component parts:
First, for years, the Turkish ruling classes have felt the need to develop a new strategy to ease internal contradictions in the face of economic crises, political instability, power struggles within the ruling elite, economic contraction, uncontainable impoverishment, increasing public discontent among the working class and the people, regional war dynamics, and the imperialist power struggles in the region.
Israel’s aggressive policies in Palestine and the massacres in Gaza, the overthrow of the Assad regime in Syria, and the strengthening of the status of Syrian Kurds have shaken the regional balance. The Free Syrian Army, which Turkey has long sponsored, has been ineffective against the Kurds, and apart from the areas it occupies, Turkey has not achieved the success it anticipated. Until now, Turkey has managed the situation by exploiting the contradictions among imperialist powers and the gaps created, but the new situation and power balances have eliminated the possibility of continuing this policy. The Kurdish movement in Syria has further strengthened itself despite all the aggression of the Turkish State and its proxy militias.
Therefore, the discourse of the “home front” has been developed as a tool to manage these crises and contradictions. The Turkish ruling classes aim to soften the Kurdish movement under the guise of a “Turkish-Kurdish alliance” and, while ensuring unity internally, also seek to rely on the power of the Kurds in the region.
For years, the Kurdish national movement has been one of the greatest challenges to the Turkish State, which has defined it as a “survival issue.” The real issue for the Turkish State is not recognizing the political and national rights of the Kurds but breaking the revolutionary dynamics of the Kurdish movement and integrating the Kurdish people into the system. The Turkish State’s new strategy thus seeks to control the Kurdish movement and distance it from a revolutionary and independent struggle line. Therefore, Abdullah Öcalan’s call cannot be evaluated in isolation from the Turkish State’s new orientation.
Like all national issues in our era, the Kurdish issue is not only a matter between the directly confronting forces but also involves the intervention of imperialists and reactionary regional States. Thus, how the process unfolds will not be determined solely by the stance of the PKK leadership, which has declared that it will comply with Abdullah Öcalan’s call, and the Turkish State, but also by the involvement of numerous international actors.
The power dynamics in the Middle East are being reshaped following the overthrow of the Assad regime by Islamist forces and the Syrian National Army supported by the US, the EU, and Turkey. The Kurdish national forces, through the alliances they have formed with other regional powers, have become one of the main actors in the emerging regional equation. The Syrian Democratic Forces control a significant portion of Syria’s economic resources. Following the fall of the Assad regime, Syria has been de facto divided into multiple parts. The Druze people in Syria have also established a separate power structure in their regions, refusing to recognize the new Syrian government, and they have Israeli support. Israel is currently the most influential power in Syria and has occupied a significant portion of the country. Israel has gained great superiority along the Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria corridor. This situation is a complete defeat for the Turkish State’s policy in Syria, and Turkey is deeply concerned about Israel’s expansion. The underlying reason for the meetings with Abdullah Öcalan is the increasing strength of the Kurdish movement in response to regional developments, especially the growing Israeli support.
While the Turkish State determines its regional policies by leveraging contradictions among imperialist powers, the Kurdish national movement has entered a process of gaining international status by securing support from imperialist forces. In the face of the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army, which largely consists of jihadist mercenaries from outside Syria, not only US. and EU imperialists but also Israel, which has increased its regional influence, have provided support to the Kurds. Israeli officials have repeatedly warned the new Damascus administration not to attack the Kurds. Similar warnings were also issued by the foreign ministers of Germany and France and EU representatives in their meetings with the new ruling powers in post-Assad Syria. While the regional equation has not yet settled, the developments suggest that the Kurdish region in Syrian Kurdistan is gaining increasing international legitimacy, and soon, the Kurds in this region will solidify their control under internationally recognized governance. The participation of Yunus Behram as a representative of Rojava at the Munich Conference held between February 14 to 16, 2025, is a highly significant development in this regard. This was the first time that Rojava Kurds were officially represented at such an important international meeting, further advancing their status in Syria.
Compromise, Pragmatism, and the Replacement of the Revolutionary Line
Öcalan’s call should be evaluated within the historical context of the Kurdish national movement, its impact on class struggle in Turkey, and the regional policies of the imperialist system. The Kurdish national movement has not only shaped the freedom struggle of the Kurdish people for years but has also played a decisive role theoretically, ideologically, and politically within revolutionary and leftist movements in Turkey. Therefore, every step taken in the Kurdish national struggle affects not only the movement itself but also the power dynamics in Turkey and the broader region.
In this context, Öcalan’s call should be analyzed not only in terms of the internal political direction of the Kurdish national movement but also in relation to the balance of political forces in Turkey, the regional conflict dynamics, and imperialist projects.
The Kurdish question is not merely a matter of national rights. It is also a key factor in shaping revolutionary dynamics in Turkey. The Kurdish national movement has long been a force influencing the trajectory of class struggle in Turkey. This struggle has not only concerned the rights of the Kurdish nation but has also impacted the radicalization or reformist tendencies of the Turkish working class and the leftist movement. Therefore, the next phase will usher in a new stage of class struggle in Turkey.
Abdullah Öcalan’s statement does not conform to commonly accepted definitions such as “warring forces eventually sit at the negotiating table” or “every war has an end.” Although it may appear so on the surface, the reality is different. When warring parties come to the table, they reach a compromise based on mutual concessions and common ground. However, in Öcalan’s call, the understanding of “compromise” is defined through “self-condemnation.”
When examining the reactions from revolutionary circles, it becomes evident that some have not outright opposed the call, while others have implicitly supported it or endorsed it through their silence. These circles either lack a principled perspective on the national question or, due to their long-standing pragmatic relationships with the Kurdish national movement, fail to openly denounce the reactionary nature of this call, and in some cases, even provide tacit support.
By adopting such a stance, these groups not only reject the principle of the right of nations to self-determination but also deny the right of oppressed classes to revolution, thereby rendering their own existence meaningless.
Providing Relief to a Cornered Turkish State by Liquidating Revolutionary Dynamics
The “Call for Peace and Democratic Society” represents the most recent expression of a systematic ideological and political orientation aimed at the liquidation of the Kurdish national struggle. This call seeks to abandon the independent, organized struggle of the Kurdish nation, integrate it within the Turkish State’s borders, reduce Kurdish national rights to their most meaningless form, and reshape the Kurdish national struggle in accordance with the interests of the Turkish ruling classes.
The call’s text attempts to obscure the Kurdish nation’s national rights and freedom struggle under the terms “democratic society” and “peace.” When closely examined, it neither proposes a solution that would enable the Kurdish nation to secure its national-democratic rights nor offers any critique of the annexationist structure of the existing system. Instead, it presents an approach that distorts historical realities and aligns with the arguments of the Turkish ruling class.
Öcalan’s call distorts the roots of the Kurdish issue and seeks to de-legitimize the Kurdish nation’s struggle. It falsely attributes the origins of the Kurdish question not to the colonialist, annexationist, and massacring structure of the Turkish State but to the “climate of violence in the 20th century” and the influence of “real socialism”. Öcalan explains the emergence of the PKK in terms of ‘the 20th century, the most intensely violent century in history, the two world wars, real socialism and the effects of the cold war’, and claims that this formed the basis of the organization. This is a deliberate distortion that manipulates the existential causes of the PKK and the Kurdish national struggle.
Öcalan wants to portray the PKK as a historical aberration and to create the image of it as a false movement ‘influenced by real socialism.’ This effort serves to render the Kurdish people’s national democratic rights and struggle for independence meaningless and to liquidate organized resistance.
The claim that the existence of the PKK ‘should be dissolved because it has fallen into a lack of meaning and excessive repetition’ is merely a reflection of Öcalan’s ideological transformation. The raison d’être of a national liberation movement is not an ideological deviation, but the real demands of the people and the practices of the colonial State. While the Turkish State continues to deny the most basic rights of the Kurdish people, claiming that the PKK has become redundant is only a legitimization of the annexationist-colonialist policies of the Turkish State.
In doing so, it manipulates the historical truth, absolving the Turkish State of its responsibility while placing the blame on the Kurdish people and the Kurdish national movement, which have fought and paid heavy sacrifices for their rights. This approach, systematically developed by Öcalan over many years, has now reached a stage where it no longer requires any intermediate justifications, openly seeking to legitimize the subjugation of the Kurdish nation to the Turkish ruling classes.
By ignoring the Turkish State’s policies of denial and annihilation against the Kurds, it presents integration into the State as the solution, creating the illusion that Turkey is democratizing and that “solution processes” for the Kurds are advancing. However, even today, not only within Turkey’s borders but also beyond them, attacks against Kurdish national rights continue systematically.
Distorting Historical Reality and the Objective Basis of the Kurdish National Issue to Build a “Turkish-Kurdish Alliance”
Öcalan’s ‘1000 years of Turkish-Kurdish alliance’ is a repetition of a historical lie. The claim that there has historically been a ‘voluntary alliance’ between Turks and Kurds is an attempt to cover up the policies of oppression, massacres and assimilation implemented against the Kurdish people from the Ottoman Empire to the present day.
Since the foundation of the Republic, the Kurds’ right to autonomy has been usurped, their revolts have been bloodily suppressed and their identity has been systematically ignored. The policies of denial and annihilation applied to the Kurds from Koçgiri to Dersim, from the Zilan Massacre to the present day show that we are not facing a ‘voluntary alliance’ but a colonial administration.
The claim that ‘the last 200 years of capitalist modernity have tried to break up this alliance’ is a reactionary approach that conceals the roots of the Kurdish question, whitewashes the crimes of the Turkish State, and puts the Kurdish national struggle on the target board. Although the effects of capitalism are a fact, the main reason why the Kurdish people are under national oppression is the Turkish State and its annexationist-colonialist policies, which are shaped according to the interests of the imperialist system.
The Kurdish national movement has historically been shaped in opposition to the Turkish State’s policies of denial, annihilation, and forced assimilation, which have oscillated between repression and integration from the Ottoman Empire to the Republic, from the early 20th century to the present day. This historical struggle is not just about securing rights for the Kurdish nation; it is also a result of the fascist nature of the Turkish State.
During the Ottoman period, the Kurds maintained their existence within autonomous structures, but as centralization increased and the modern nation-state model developed, policies of assimilation and extermination were introduced. With the Treaty of Lausanne (1923), the Kurds were placed under the sovereignty of the newly established Republic of Turkey, and their national identity was denied.
In the early years of the Republic Kurdish uprisings were violently suppressed by the State, with major revolts such as the Sheikh Said Rebellion, the Koçgiri Uprising, the Ağrı Resistance, and the Dersim Uprising ending in mass-massacres. Following the brutal suppression of the 1938 Dersim Uprising, the political and social rights of the Kurds were further curtailed, and assimilation policies were intensified through even more brutal methods.
The founding of the PKK in 1978 was a direct result of this historical context and the Kurdish nation’s struggle for independence. However, in Öcalan’s statement, the reasons behind these struggles and their objectives are disregarded, distorting the roots of the Kurdish national question.
One of Öcalan’s fundamental historical distortions is his claim that the PKK’s founding and armed struggle were primarily due to the “influence of real socialism” and the “violent atmosphere of the 20th century.” However, the Kurdish nation’s struggle for independence and self-determination existed long before the PKK, and the Kurdish people had repeatedly risen against the Turkish State before the PKK was established. Öcalan’s approach does not merely target the PKK but condemns the entire history of the Kurdish national movement.
From the “Democratic Confederalism” Theory, Which Distorts Leninist Principles on the National Question, to the Liquidationist “Call for Peace and Democratic Society”
Öcalan’s latest statement is the culmination of a reformist, anti-Marxist, and conciliatory approach that has been deepening since the 1990s. For decades, Öcalan has developed new paradigms that reject Marxism’s theoretical framework on the national question and class struggle, instead advocating system-compatible solutions. His latest statement is not surprising given this ideological evolution.
In his “Democratic Confederalism” theory, Öcalan not only rejected Marxism and revolutionary struggle but also denied the objective laws of capitalism, dismissing the concepts of State, class struggle, and revolution while promoting an approach based on reconciliation with the imperialist system. By falsely claiming that Marx’s labor theory of value is incorrect and that “the working-class is a partner in exploitation with the bourgeoisie”, he replaces class struggle with submission and reconciliation. He dismisses Lenin’s and Stalin’s theoretical and political positions on the national question, going as far as calling them a “disaster” and outright rejects the right of nations to self-determination, including the right to establish an independent state.
His latest call, therefore, officially declares the perspective he has long been building – one that legitimizes submission to existing power structures and rejects both self-determination and revolutionary struggle.
“The Call for Peace and Democratic Society” is a Policy of Deadlock, not a Solution to the Kurdish National Question
Abdullah Öcalan’s recent statement calling for the dissolution of the PKK, the end of armed struggle, and the “integration” of the Kurdish nation into the Turkish State represents the culmination of a long-standing conciliatory line. The main arguments behind this statement are as follows:
1. Creating a manipulation regarding the source of the Kurdish issue and concealing the colonialist-annexationist, genocidal, and denialist nature of the Turkish State.
2. Presenting an illusion that there has been a positive shift in the Turkish ruling classes’ approach to solving the Kurdish issue.
3. Claiming that a process of democratization is underway in the Turkish State, creating an environment that could resolve the Kurdish issue.
4. Arguing that the Kurdish issue has already been resolved and that armed struggle is no longer necessary.
5. Claiming that democratization is possible through State reforms.
6. Stating that demands for independence, secession, and national rights are no longer necessary.
All these arguments are disconnected from reality and based on deliberate distortions. The fundamental cause of the Kurdish question is the Turkish State’s fascist structure, organized as a semi-colony of imperialism, its annexationist policies, and its oppressive, colonialist approach towards the Kurdish nation. The primary policy of the ruling classes in Turkey has always been to deny Kurdish existence, deepen assimilation, and absorb the Kurds into an annexationist system by usurping their national rights.
Öcalan’s statement creates the illusion that the Turkish State has changed its domination policies toward the Kurds and embarked on a democratization process. However, in recent years, aggression against the Kurds has expanded to include Iraqi and Syrian Kurdistan, municipalities have been taken over by state-appointed trustees, Kurdish political representatives and leaders have been subjected to mass arrests, and systematic military operations have been conducted in Kurdish regions, forcing the Kurdish people to live under a constant war regime.
By ignoring these brutal colonial policies and claiming that “democratic reconciliation” with the Turkish state is possible, Öcalan is turning his back on the historical experience of the Kurdish national struggle. The Turkish ruling classes have never abandoned their policy of denial and massacres against the Kurdish nation. On the contrary, whenever the Kurdish national movement has been strengthened, the State has responded with harsher repression. Today, the Kurdish nation remains under annexationist domination, its most basic national rights are being denied, and contrary to the claims of democratization, it faces intense State terror.
Öcalan’s call essentially demands that the Kurdish nation completely abandon its right to independence and self-determination. This call legitimizes a solution based on assimilation into Turkish bourgeois domination and an agreement with the Turkish State that requires Kurds to renounce their own identity. However, national liberation struggles are revolutionary struggles against imperialism and colonialism. The right of nations to self-determination is a revolutionary principle that cannot be reduced to mere cultural rights and local governance reforms. The Kurdish nation has the right to self-determination, which includes the right to establish an independent State. The exercise of this right is a matter for the Kurdish nation to decide.
Democratic Reconciliation and ‘Peace’ Deception
Öcalan claims that the current fascist Turkish State will be democratized through reforms, stating that ‘the second century of the Republic can only have a permanent and fraternal continuity if it is crowned with democracy’. However, looking at the structure of the political regime in Turkey, this is not possible.
The Turkish State continues to implement heavy repressive policies against the Kurdish movement, such as appointing trustees to municipalities, arresting political representatives, carrying out broad operations and organizing military attacks. In such an environment, the call for ‘democratic reconciliation’ is nothing but a policy that forces the Kurdish people to surrender by ignoring the State’s aggression.
The discourse that ‘there is no other path than democracy for the search and realization of the system’ is a propaganda of reformism that rejects the revolutionary struggle and confines it to seeking solutions within the system. However, the national liberation struggles in the world history have shown that the real solution is possible only through the organized revolutionary struggle of the people.
Öcalan’s statement aims at the liquidation of the objective revolutionary character of the Kurdish national struggle. However, it will inevitably face the objective constraints imposed by regional power dynamics and class contradictions. The real solution lies not in reformist compromises and policies aligned with imperialist interests, but in a revolutionary line that upholds the Kurdish nation’s right to self-determination and intensifies the struggle against imperialism and annexationist states.
The National Question in the Age of Imperialism and the Revolutionary Solution
The national question, inherited from the past, remains one of the fundamental contradictions that require resolution in the age of imperialism. Both the independence struggles in semi-colonial countries and the demands of oppressed nations within multinational States are direct reflections of the general crisis of the imperialist system.
With the imperialist stage of capitalism, the national question has ceased to be an “internal issue” of States, as in the era of competitive capitalism, and has instead become an “external issue” in which imperialist powers directly intervene. Lenin and Stalin demonstrated that in the age of imperialism, national questions could no longer be resolved through an independent bourgeois-democratic solution but only through proletarian revolution as part of the world revolution. Mao further developed this understanding by emphasizing that national liberation struggles deepen the crisis of imperialism and play a crucial role in the era of proletarian revolutions.
Today, the national questions of Palestine and Kurdistan, among others, are directly linked to imperialist hegemony struggles, exploitation mechanisms, and military domination. Imperialism manipulates national questions for its own interests by dividing nations, fueling nationalism, and turning opposing popular movements against one another. However, national struggles represent one of the weakest points of the imperialist system.
The complete and liberating solution of the national question in the imperialist era is the responsibility of the proletariat. The liberation of oppressed nations from the domination of oppressing nations and the grip of global imperialist finance capital is only possible through revolutions led by the proletariat. The ability of the bourgeoisie to establish independent and free national sovereignty has been exhausted in the imperialist era. Therefore, any democratic revolution must either advance towards socialism or be dragged into imperialist dependency. The bourgeoisie, by its very nature, gravitates toward becoming a part of the imperialist system. Becoming a people dependent on imperialism means the obliteration of all progressive and democratic gains. The only way for oppressed nations to achieve complete and definitive liberation is to create political polarization in favor of people’s democracy and to organize along the revolutionary path.
Öcalan’s latest statement signifies the liquidation of the Kurdish national struggle. According to the fundamental principles of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, the freedom of the Kurdish nation can only be achieved through a revolutionary path. The liberation of the Kurdish nation is only possible through a revolutionary struggle against imperialism, the dominant Turkish State, and reactionary regimes in the region.
