ANF conducted an exclusive interview with Fuad Beritan, a member of the Executive Council of PJAK (Free Life Party of Kurdistan).
According to Fuad Beritan, the solution to Iran’s crisis does not lie in world capitals, but in Tehran. The interview also touches on the decisive role of society, Kurdistan’s place as a pioneer of democracy, the need for Kurdish–Turkish unity in Iran, and the lasting legacy of the “Jin, Jiyan, Azadî” [Woman, Life, Freedom] movement. The central question of this conversation is clear: Is the Islamic Republic ready for a profound surgery, or is it pushing Iran toward the abyss?
As a member of PJAK’s leadership, how do you assess Iran’s situation following the activation of the snapback mechanism?
Naturally, the snapback triggered by the Europeans represents nothing but the failure of Iran’s diplomacy and the broader structure of its ruling system. Up to this point, they have been unable to win global trust. This situation will prove extremely costly for Iranian society. In the coming weeks, the Islamic Republic has only one option: to find a formula of flexibility and retreat that convinces Europeans and the United States it seeks cooperation rather than concealment and confrontation.
Rather than focusing on persuading Western countries and the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Islamic Republic is leaning on Russia and China to escape this predicament. For instance, the final statement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit did not reflect any powerful, deterrent, or decisive initiative in Iran’s favor. The regime’s heavy reliance on this forum is unlikely to resolve its deeper crises with the United States, Europe, and Israel. It is evident that China and Russia have only limited political and legal tools to defend the Islamic Republic against Western powers.
The solution is not in Moscow, Beijing, Brussels, or Washington — but in Tehran. It is Iranian officials who have for decades entangled millions of lives, human resources, and national wealth in a suspicious and dangerous program. It is Iranian officials who have defined their security and military doctrine around the nuclear program, missile projects, and similar initiatives — while simultaneously institutionalizing impoverishment of society, repression and the iron fist, systemic corruption, and disregard for people’s demands as part of their governing character.
If sanctions have created widespread hardship for ordinary people, they have been a source of rent and enrichment for oligarchs, IRGC commanders, and their circles. The term “sanctions profiteers” is extremely accurate. They have placed personal and factional interests, the survival of the system, and the core of power above the lives of millions and generations. We all know this. But the real question now is: Do you not see the abyss?
Clearly, we are not worried about the fate of such a regime; what concerns us are the devastations its continuation imposes on the people. The people have no bread, no water, no electricity, no freedom, no human dignity. We will never accept gambling with the fate of the people. Foreign policy is always an extension of domestic policy; they cannot be separated. The Islamic Republic cannot resolve external crises without a fundamental transformation at home.
The solutions are not in enrichment percentages or enrichment sites, nor in such technical details. The solution lies in returning political power and will to the people. The solution is not governance emptied of ethics and rationality, but addressing society itself — the marginalized, women, minorities, nations, democrats, freedom seekers, and those of goodwill in this land. Those who are fed up with the current situation. Those who are not after tactical, short-term deals or a slice of the authoritarian cake, but who seek to change the content of politics, the style and nature of governance, and to redefine the relationship of people with each other and with the political structure.
So the legitimate question is not what political formula can save the system? The legitimate question is: from where and how should the Islamic Republic correct these deep distortions and compensate for the immense costs imposed on the people? Is such a thing even possible? And if it is, does any sound mind within the Islamic Republic exist to prioritize this? Skepticism and concern in this regard are entirely justified. We believe that any major decision impacting the fate of the people cannot advance without their participation. Anything in conflict with the people’s interests should never be placed on any government’s agenda.
It is precisely because many see no such capacity in the Islamic Republic that they are calling for moving beyond it. It is clear that the regime lacks the political capital to continue governing. As an established system, it must either undergo profound surgery within itself, or else continuing on this path will only accelerate its collapse.
What do we mean by surgery? Each political force has a different answer. Reformists seek a share in power and populist solutions. The government swings between the demands of the regime and populist slogans, or, at best, empty claims without follow-through. Khamenei’s position after Israel’s attack is ambiguous, and overall, there is no unified voice indicating recognition of the need for democratization and returning to the people.
When we speak of “the people,” we do not mean the narrow percentage of regime loyalists or a handpicked public. We mean the millions who have had no share of power, who have always been repressed, denied recognition, and continually forced to pay the price. We mean the majority of Iranians who want to live free, equal, and democratic lives.
As PJAK, we have repeatedly warned of this trajectory over the years. We have made proposals, offered solutions, and laid out roadmaps. But a regime intoxicated with absolute power has never felt compelled to heed these legitimate demands. Now we see how damaging the delay in accepting these proposals and demands has been for the people. Beyond the people, even the regime itself now feels deeply insecure.
To sum up: foreign policy cannot yield sustainable outcomes without internal change. Any potential nuclear agreement will go nowhere without dialogue with the people, without addressing the issues of freedom, democracy, and equality, and without accepting responsibility for the multilayered catastrophes produced by the Islamic Republic’s rule.
Politics is the art of governing society. This art cannot be sectarian, corrupt, devoid of political rationality, detached from society, hostile to the environment, theocratic, undemocratic, centralized, authoritarian, and patriarchal. We are ready to transform this situation into a democratic, society-centered, and ecology-based order, but we will never be part of shallow, tactical, deceptive, or hypocritical maneuvers.
The solutions must be serious, profound, and strategic. You cannot meet this moment with a bit of social engineering, issuing permits for a few concerts, a handful of critical TV programs, or showcasing false images of freedom of dress. Sporadic, deceptive attempts to temporarily appease the gray masses lack any strategic authenticity. These are security games. The fate of millions cannot be altered by such games. Nor will they save the regime. The problems are real and fundamental; the solutions must inevitably be the same.
We still do not know whether an agreement will be reached at the end of the 30-day deadline. But we do know that the return of sweeping UN sanctions will have catastrophic effects on the lives of all Iranians — especially workers, the marginalized, the excluded, and those living below the poverty line. And it is undoubtedly the Islamic Republic’s misguided policies that bear full responsibility.
How can people influence developments under such circumstances?
This is a critical question, because we are talking about an issue that directly concerns the people, society, and their future — yet the people and society themselves are absent from all decision-making and dialogue. No one asks their opinion, no one represents them, and no one voices their concerns and demands. The role that the Islamic Republic envisions for the people is that of obedient spectators: to bear the costs of the regime’s decisions and never raise their voices in protest. This is a disgraceful and corrupt policy. People do not deserve such treatment.
There is no doubt that the harsh security environment and the Islamic Republic’s repressive measures have produced this situation. But it would not be unrealistic to stress that society must now raise its voice louder than ever. The people have never remained silent, and they have already paid a heavy price. But today, society must declare: No power can gamble or bargain with my fate. I am here. I know my rights, I know my priorities, and I will no longer tolerate this situation.
How people express this protest is another matter; it will certainly not take a single form. But this voice, this spirit, and this protest are legitimate, ethical, political, and timely. The presence of the people in the public sphere is vital; to prevent anti-people deals and to ensure they are not used as bargaining chips in any agreement, they must reject the submissive role the Islamic Republic has assigned them more firmly than ever.
The essence of this presence is clear: no one can strike a deal that ignores our interests, demands, and priorities. Our priority is not the survival of the regime; our priority is a free and democratic life. It is avoiding hostility with the world and seeking peace and friendship with all nations. We want neither bombs nor dictatorship. We want freedom, equality, and a dignified life.
At every opportunity, in every place, and in every possible way, people must strengthen this spirit among themselves and send this signal to everyone. Any agreement that violates the rights of the Iranian people must impose costs on the Islamic Republic. Any cost resulting from the regime’s adventurism and hostility toward the world must fall on the Islamic Republic itself — not on the people’s lives. This is the rule of the current stage.
Therefore, no one should think they can make decisions without addressing society and the people.
Let’s focus more on Kurdistan. How do you assess the level of readiness among the Kurdish people in this period? What should their priorities be?
It is clear that a new era has begun in the Middle East. What we describe as a “Third World War” has taken on new dimensions in our region. We see its manifestations, to varying degrees, across many Middle Eastern countries. Neither totalitarianism, authoritarianism, and dictatorship, nor war and foreign interventions can provide a proper solution to these crises. Many of the existing challenges have deep historical, political, legal, and ideological roots. It is evident that the countries of the region can no longer govern as they once did. Everyone is compelled to adopt new policies to avoid harm during this critical juncture. The same applies to Iran and Kurdistan. Kurdistan represents an opportunity for the democratization of the Middle East and the redefinition of a new regional order.
The Kurds have proven themselves to be a responsible, moderate, pro-democracy, and equality-seeking force. They believe in free and just coexistence. They are not war-seekers, but they will defend themselves against any threat to their existence. The Kurds represent a “third path.” From this perspective, our society’s stance in the midst of the Middle East’s wars and crises constitutes an opportunity. Without Kurdish participation, a new Middle East cannot take shape. Without Kurdish participation, no project in the region can reach a decisive outcome. The Kurds have created values and carried out struggles that can inspire other peoples of the Middle East. The philosophy and practice of “Jin, Jiyan, Azadî” is one such example. The defeat of ISIS is another magnificent one. These are not merely partisan or structural matters; rather, this culture, resistance, and these values have become deeply woven into the fabric of Kurdish society.
As we have repeatedly stated, we are ready for every scenario. We are waiting for neither a savior nor a miracle, nor are we dependent on anyone’s goodwill. The Kurdish people’s struggle for freedom advances on the basis of democratic modernity and relies on the inherent strength of society itself. Of course, this stage carries its own particular sensitivities. Our people must unify their ranks more tightly. Political currents must coordinate more closely and develop strategic cooperation. Kurdistan’s strength and energy must be more cohesive and prepared. In this regard, everyone must act responsibly. Kurdistan has time and again proven itself to be a vanguard of democracy and freedom. In this stage too, it will retain this character — and no project in Iran will have any chance of success without cooperation and coordination with the Kurdish people’s struggle for rights. On this point, everyone should be assured.
This underscores the urgent need for nationwide dialogue among all advocates of freedom, equality, and justice. Yet serious shortcomings still exist across Iran in this regard. The longer it takes for the Kurdish reality to be recognized and for cooperation and coordination to materialize, the greater the political forces’ shock will be at future developments, and the stronger the roots will be for resistance and the emergence of alternative political projects.
On another level, let’s look at the performance of society. Civil society is the conscience of society, and fortunately, in Kurdistan, it is highly dynamic and active. For example, this dynamism is reflected in the wide range of environmental initiatives, nearly all of which are voluntary. In recent days, we witnessed repressive rulings issued against Kurdish teachers. Hundreds of people and civil society activists, in a symbolic act of protest, marched along the Abidar mountain trail demanding the cancellation of these dismissal and exile orders. This was a proper and responsible civic action. From here, I salute each and every one of them and their rightful, human protest.
This is the very spirit that the people of Kurdistan — and Iranian society as a whole — need: to refuse indifference in the face of repression, to refuse silence, to find each other, and to empower and validate one another. A democratic and living society must be this way. The Islamic Republic works around the clock to suppress and control the people. The people, too, must resist around the clock — to counter repression and to build a free, humane, and democratic society. This resistance in Kurdistan is profound and magnificent.
This spirit can even be seen in everyday human relations. Most recently, a young man from Saqqez drowned in the Mahabad dam and lost his life. For days, the people of Mahabad stood with his family and helped in the search for his body. They did not leave the people of Saqqez alone and collectively joined in their mourning. A responsible, conscious, and compassionate society displays such qualities.
This culture must spread across all areas and transform into an unbreakable political will and consensus. Wherever the community’s interests are at risk, action must be taken. Wherever unity is needed, steps must be made. Wherever civic resistance is required, it must be organized. This is what befits the people of Kurdistan. And on a larger scale, this is the culture I hope will spread across all of Iran.
The spread of this culture ensures that no power can overstep in any area. Standing up to authoritarianism and an undemocratic order follows precisely this path. These experiences and this culture of struggle must be expanded throughout Iran.
In recent weeks, your positions regarding Iran’s Turks have sparked reactions in political and media circles. How do you assess these reactions, and more broadly, the future of Kurdish–Turkish relations in Iran?
We have repeatedly demonstrated our goodwill toward Iran’s Turkish community. Our movement articulates its ideas and political projects openly, without embellishment or pretence. Let me state clearly: we believe in strategic unity and in humane, just coexistence. We do not regard Turks as a threat, nor will we ever be a threat to them. The elimination or weakening of neither Kurds nor Turks is a conceivable option. On the contrary, our movement does not view freedom and coexistence through a narrow, blood-and-soil lens. We base our relations with all communities — especially Turks — on coexistence, equality, mutual respect, and free, democratic participation.
In this regard, we believe that in the past, mistaken positions have been voiced by both Turks and Kurds. We have no expectations of certain media outlets or groups trapped in “Kurdophobia” who exploit it for political gain. Our address is to Turkish citizens, their intellectuals, and their conscientious and democracy-seeking individuals: in this critical stage, dialogue, cooperation, and mutual understanding must be strengthened. This is our official position. Anything else attributed to us either stems from ignorance and unfair suspicion, or from political interests behind it.
Therefore, we extend a hand of friendship to Iran’s Turkish community and call for a new chapter of strategic Kurdish–Turkish relations in Iran. In good faith, we announce that if there are specific concerns among Turks, we are ready for direct dialogue. Let democratic dialogue platforms be established. We have always been prepared for sincere, friendly, and respectful conversations with representatives of the Azerbaijani community. Friendship and cooperation with them is a value for us. The basis of this cooperation is not territorial expansion, but the development of a shared democratic model and a just common life in our shared geography.
We believe in democratic principles, and we are convinced that the majority of both Kurds and Turks share this aspiration. We are not a threat to Turks, and we do not consider Turks a threat to Kurds. Both peoples are part of the historical, political, and cultural reality of this region. Their existence gains meaning not through confrontation but through synergy. A new Iran can only be imagined with such a mindset.
In this context, we will carry out any responsibility placed on us to guarantee the shared security of Kurds and Turks. We are not a force solely to protect Kurds and advance a democratic project among them; rather, we believe human bonds must be strengthened from the ground up, common political models developed, and joint efforts undertaken. The progress and prosperity of Kurds and Turks in Iran must be seen simultaneously and side by side.
We want Turks to see us in this way. Any perception other than this has nothing to do with us. Any force that accuses us of holding a different mindset has made no effort to understand our reality — neither for dialogue nor for comprehending our programs. Therefore, we are not responsible for false judgments and stereotypes. We have never rejected a request for dialogue, never left an invitation to cooperate unanswered, and never ignored potential concerns.
For this reason, we expect conscientious individuals among Turks to evaluate our positions in good faith and without prejudice. We will not allow any force or ideology to sow enmity between Kurds and Turks. The more sensitive Iran’s situation becomes, the greater the need for redefined relations, mutual confidence-building, and bilateral and multilateral dialogues. This geography must not be a source of fear and anxiety for anyone; rather, it should become a shining example of cooperation among its peoples and the creation of a new, safe, free, democratic, and inspiring synthesis — for Turks, Kurds, Christians, and all communities.
As PJAK, we extend our hand in advance to all those who believe in coexistence and a shared future, and we send them our greetings and respect.
You mentioned the “Jin, Jiyan, Azadî” movement. As you know, we are approaching its anniversary in Kurdistan and Iran. What is your position on this?
The protests that emerged from the “Jin, Jiyan, Azadî” movement created a valuable legacy. Many lives were sacrificed for its humanitarian and freedom-seeking values. This movement belongs to all those who aspire to live free, equal, democratic, and dignified lives — in an Iran free of tyranny, dictatorship, inequality, oppression, and suffocation.
“Jin, Jiyan, Azadî” is not merely a slogan; it is a way of life and a profound philosophy of struggle. This philosophy is alive and dynamic. No other idea or approach in Iran has managed to connect people in this way, creating hope and enthusiasm. The Islamic Republic’s and authoritarian currents’ fierce attacks on it are not accidental. Repression, street killings, prison, and torture cannot extinguish the light that this movement has ignited.
One way to advance this movement is to keep alive the memory of its martyrs, to live by the values it has created, and to deepen both individual and collective struggles. Once again, we honor the memory of Jina Amini and all those who gave their lives in the “Jin, Jiyan, Azadî” movement. We renew our pledge to them and reaffirm our commitment to continue the struggle for freedom and democracy.
From here, we call on all our people — inside Kurdistan, across Iran, and in the diaspora — to join one another in every way possible, wherever they are. We call on them to represent the democratic values of the “Jin, Jiyan, Azadî” movement, and with its magnificent spirit, to base their actions on unity, solidarity, and cooperation.