Discussions surrounding the resolution process, initiated by Abdullah Öcalan’s call on 27 February, continue. Following this historic appeal, the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) held its 12th Congress from 5 to 7 May, where it announced its decision to end the armed struggle and cease all activities conducted in the name of the PKK.

Speculations about whether the PKK would respond to Abdullah Öcalan’s call have now come to an end. However, despite the historic decisions taken at the congress, the ruling government is attempting to delay bringing the matter before parliament. Moreover, despite the declaration to lay down arms, pro-government media outlets are obstructing the process with debates such as “the surrender of weapons.”

Before and after the congress, Remzi Kartal, co-chair of the People's Congress (Kongra-Gel), who was in Southern Kurdistan (Başurê Kurdistan), spoke to ANF about the congress proceedings and the new phase of struggle.

You were in South Kurdistan during the 12th Congress of the PKK. What is the significance of the decisions made and the will that was demonstrated during the congress?

We are witnessing a historic moment for the people of Kurdistan and all the peoples of the region. This process was initiated by Mr. Öcalan. The Third World War is still ongoing in the Middle East, and societies are experiencing immense destruction. In response to this, a new beginning has emerged, one that opens a path to resolving regional issues for the peoples of Kurdistan and the broader region.

With this initiative, Mr. Öcalan created the possibility for the Kurdish question in Turkey to be resolved through democratic means, and for the Kurdish and Turkish peoples, two of Turkey’s foundational communities, to come together for a new and democratic beginning. It was with this purpose that he issued his call on 27 February, which many have referred to as the “Manifesto of the Century.”

It was also a profoundly historic decision for the PKK to hold its congress based on Mr. Öcalan’s call. However, the congress process unfolded amid constant aerial bombardments and security threats. Despite these serious challenges, the fact that the PKK was able to carry out preparations in two separate areas, ensure the safety of the congress, bring together delegates, and conduct the congress smoothly and successfully is of great importance.

During the gatherings in both areas, Mr. Öcalan’s message and political report were presented to the congress. The unification of the outcomes from these two sessions and their declaration to the public stands as one of the most significant developments of 2025. This is not only about the Kurdish question, it marks the beginning of a broader democratic transformation across the region. It is a process aimed at resolving fundamental issues and advancing the democratic and free conditions of all peoples in the region through a new mindset, a new vision, and a new approach.

You were in the region before and after the congress. Did you participate in the congress? What was the atmosphere like before and after? How are senior figures in the Freedom Movement evaluating this process? What are your observations from the region?

I went to South Kurdistan during the congress process. Due to security reasons, specifically concerning the safety of the congress, I was not able to attend. My presence could have created a security issue for the congress. However, I was informed about the preparations, and I can say that the PKK is experiencing, for the first time, such a high level of unity, cohesion, and shared spirit.

For example, in the 2000s, Mr. Öcalan had shared a message suggesting the dissolution of the PKK and the beginning of a new phase. But during that period, there were internal issues within the organization. Because of tendencies toward division and fragmentation, the necessary conditions for leaving behind the PKK and initiating a new process could not be realized.

Abdullah Öcalan once said: “The PKK was formed in the context of the 1970s. At that time, the real socialist system and the broader international socialist movements were dominant. This was a paradigm centered on the state, on nation-state power and class.” However, Mr. Öcalan moved the struggle away from this class-based paradigm.

Especially with the paradigm he presented in the 2000s, he transitioned the movement toward a system grounded in democratic society and democratic socialism, one that is not centered on the state or power but instead aims to build a society based on women’s freedom and ecological consciousness. In the past, it was not possible to fully implement or realize these ideas. But now, the conditions for doing so exist.

What are these conditions?

The Turkish state has spent the last decade attempting to conduct a war based on military technology, but it failed to achieve its goals. Despite this, the PKK made a major strategic move by proving that it could continue its struggle even in the face of such a technically advanced war.

On an international scale, the war unfolding in the Middle East and the crises and dangers it has produced have become central issues. Both dimensions created a period of serious crisis for Turkey.

Abdullah Öcalan saw this moment as an opportunity to bring an end to the PKK’s past strategy of war and armed struggle in the Kurdish question, and to initiate a new phase of struggle. He seized this opportunity, and all the cadres of the Freedom Movement gave great significance to this process in response to Mr. Öcalan’s call.

Undoubtedly, for those who wish to truly understand this process, there are questions such as “How will it happen?”, especially in light of the state’s attacks and the conditions under which Mr. Öcalan is being held. However, in both congresses, there was overwhelming belief and support for the new process initiated by Mr. Öcalan.

There has been some discussion about whether Abdullah Öcalan’s will and perspective were reflected in the congress. Was his perspective truly present in the congress?

Abdullah Öcalan conveys his messages through the delegations that meet with him. Just as he has shared messages with the public, he also sent his messages to the congress, both in written form and through technical means. Mr. Öcalan is, in fact, creating a major opportunity. And this opportunity is not only for the Kurdish people. Yes, the Kurdish question is one of Turkey’s most fundamental issues, but it also represents a new beginning for all the peoples of Turkey and the entire region.

For this reason, if a congress is to be held based on Mr. Öcalan’s proposals, it is entirely natural for him to submit his political report in writing and to convey his message through technical means.

Did you see or read this message? Can you share anything about its content?

Yes, it is based on the call he made on 27 February, addressed both to the public and to the PKK. The framework is the same: a congress grounded in the paradigm of democratic society and built upon the message of Peace and Democratic Society. Within this framework, the PKK would bring its organizational existence to an end as a political movement, end its armed struggle as a method, and begin preparing for a new phase of struggle.

What is this new method of struggle?

First and foremost, it requires the creation of political and legal conditions to advance this process. The one who initiated and is developing this process is Mr. Öcalan, and what is essential now are the conditions for his free life and ability to work freely. For our people and for our movement, this is the fundamental criterion in approaching the process. Regarding the new phase, Mr. Öcalan has clearly stated, “I will be the one to lead the negotiations that will take place.” On this basis, the movement will also act in accordance with the negotiations and developments that Mr. Öcalan will conduct on Imralı.

In the message sent by Mr. Öcalan, is there a roadmap for how the process will proceed? Or does the Kurdish side have a timeline in this regard?

Undoubtedly. The PKK has now declared its dissolution and ended its armed struggle. However, there is still a force in place, and it remains armed. The essential issue now is for these arms to be laid down and for that force to join democratic and social life. That is the core matter.

First and foremost, Mr. Öcalan himself must be allowed to participate in democratic, political, and social life. Then, the members of the PKK, those who have led this long struggle, must also be able to join the democratic, political, and social process. This is the key issue.

Accordingly, legal and political steps must be taken to make this possible. A negotiation process carried out on this basis, and steps taken in line with it, must be supported by corresponding legal and political measures.

These negotiations are being conducted on Imralı between Mr. Öcalan and relevant state officials. Within the framework of those negotiations, a roadmap will naturally emerge regarding the steps to be taken for the future.

However, there seems to be a tendency on the government side to reduce the issue to a debate about disarmament. What is the Kurdish perspective on this? How is this being addressed?

This issue was clearly addressed in the statement made by the congress committee. The language used by the media is not serving the process; on the contrary, it is poisoning it. Everyone must take great responsibility in this regard.

Turkey, as a country, is at the beginning of a new chapter. As Mr. Öcalan has stated, historically, a great civilization was born out of the encounter between Turks and Kurds in the Middle East. Peoples, faiths, and diverse social identities together built a rich civilization. However, the nation-state-centered policies driven by capitalist modernity have poisoned the region, leading to deep conflicts over the last century.

Now, we are entering a process that can eliminate these conflicts and allow all identities to coexist on the basis of equality. The potential developments in economic, social, political, and societal freedom within this process are incredibly inspiring. For this reason, all segments of Turkish society, its political institutions, intellectuals, media and publishing organizations, and the Turkish and Kurdish people as a whole, must act responsibly and abandon this toxic discourse.

The movement has voiced criticisms on this matter. Yet certain circles, who have no genuine interest in democracy and who continue to rely on racist and denialist policies, persist in exhibiting the same familiar, negative attitudes, simply because they do not understand the process. Everyone must now recognize their own responsibility in this.

To develop and expand the historic opportunity created by Mr. Öcalan, everyone must fulfill their duty.

The 27 February declaration had two key dimensions. One was a call for peace, which is being addressed through talks with the state. The other was a call for democratic society, seen as an appeal to the public. What can you say about the struggle to build democracy? What kind of struggle will this be, and through which paths and methods will it be carried out?

The most fundamental issue in this process is the understanding that peace is only possible through democracy. What we are witnessing is an extremely deep and prolonged period of conflict and war. Ending this and crowning it with peace can only be achieved by opening the way for democratic rights and freedoms. And that can only happen if the process reaches a legal, constitutional, and political level. For that, a struggle is required.

Political parties, intellectuals, academics, all trade union movements, in other words, all the dynamic elements of civil society, must play a role in this process. Because peace can only be achieved through societal peace. That means society must come to understand and embrace peace, comprehend that peace is rooted in democracy, and develop a belief that fighting for democratic freedoms is essential. Reaching that level of understanding and commitment is critical, and it requires everyone to take responsibility.

Yes, Mr. Öcalan is currently engaged in an intense struggle to develop a foundation of political democracy through negotiations. But outside of Imralı, all social dynamics in Turkey must also generate public pressure and awareness to advance this process. The same applies on an international level. Whether Kurdish or Turkish, our friends around the world and internationalist forces must help create a positive climate and play an active role by contributing to the democratic momentum in Turkey through their work and their public platforms.

We believe this process will be nourished and developed through democratic steps. It must be understood as a struggle, a process of change and mutual influence, not something that will happen automatically or compel the other side to act on its own. Mr. Öcalan initiated this change from his own side, starting with the PKK, in order to influence the other side. By spreading this change to the people, he is also transmitting it to the other side and thereby shaping it.

In this sense, it is crucial for the forces of democracy to first transform themselves and then aim to transform the other side. Such a mechanism will undoubtedly serve as a guarantee for the development of democratic struggles.

Following the announcement of the congress decisions, some claimed, “The struggle is over.” What is your view? Does the end of the armed struggle mean the end of the struggle itself?

All of these evaluations are either politically motivated attempts to discredit the PKK or stem from a complete misunderstanding of the PKK’s struggle. How did this struggle begin? How was it formed? What hardships did it overcome to arrive at this point?

The PKK’s struggle is the freedom march of Mr. Öcalan. This march, under the name of the PKK, has withstood fifty-two years of international and regional obstacles. In Mr. Öcalan’s own words, the struggle has now entered a new phase. And notably, Mr. Öcalan is initiating this transition at a time when the PKK is at its strongest. The 1990s and 2000s were also periods of intense struggle, but this current phase is when the PKK is most powerful.

Through this struggle, the Turkish state’s war-focused strategy, which has been pursued relentlessly for the past decade, has been rendered ineffective. Additionally, there has been a major war in the Middle East for over ten years. Meanwhile, the model proposed by Mr. Öcalan’s paradigm has been implemented in Syria for more than a decade. This model has shown not only how to address the Kurdish question, but how the principles of democracy, equality, and freedom can solve broader regional issues. It has demonstrated how a model based on women’s liberation, democracy, and ecology can unite peoples and diverse faiths on the basis of freedom.

In the midst of widespread destruction across the Middle East, the Kurdish freedom struggle remains strong and present on the ground. Within this context, Mr. Öcalan issued his call. At a time when the movement is at its most powerful, he said, “Hold a congress and declare the PKK’s dissolution.” In this sense, some of the current interpretations are simply inaccurate.

This call represents the beginning of a new phase of struggle. The struggle continues. What is the struggle? It is the struggle for freedom. What is happening now is a shift, from a paradigm centered on the state, the nation-state, power, and class, to one centered on democratic society, the will of the people, social dynamics, and women’s freedom. The struggle will go on; only the means are changing.

The PKK was the tool that emerged in response to state oppression. Now, Mr. Öcalan says, “There must be no force, violence, or repression. Politics and a democratic space must be created. The tools of struggle in this new phase should be rooted in democracy and civil society.” The appropriate instruments for this new period will be declared in the near future.

This is the code of a new political and organizational struggle. The struggle continues; it has not ended. Only the instruments of struggle have changed.