Prof. Dr. Ibrahim Mohammed Ali Mercune, one of Egypt’s leading scholars of Islamic history and civilisation, offered an extensive assessment of Abdullah Öcalan’s philosophy, the nature of the peace process and its regional implications in an interview with ANF’s Arabic service.
The first part of this interview can be read here.
Öcalan’s decision to begin this process with himself was also striking…
Absolutely. Steps such as ending the armed struggle and dissolving the organizational structure of the PKK are rare and courageous acts in a world dominated by power politics. This call represents an approach that places the strength of peace, not weapons, at the center. That is why I see Öcalan as a great historical ‘aristocrat’ of the East and as a ‘horseman’ of this difficult era. In the bloody conditions of the region, reminiscent of the Middle Ages, he plays a lone melody of peace; he struggles to bring the peoples around a common table, to orient them toward shared interests, and to help them stand together against external threats.
What about the other side? The Turkish state? What should be done now?
Unfortunately, the interests of external powers lie in the continuation of the conflict. A successful peace would create a strong unity among the peoples of the region, and this would generate significant resistance against the capitalist-imperialist system. All states where Kurds live, especially Turkey, must recognize Kurdish rights and support this project. Turkey and the Kurds share deep historical partnerships and mutual contributions. Kurds have never collaborated with external enemies, nor have they acted in ways that would endanger the states in which they lived.
For this reason, the Turkish regime must take these historical truths into account, understand the significance of Öcalan’s message and philosophy, and open space for it to be implemented on the ground. The isolation imposed on Abdullah Öcalan must end, and his right to hope must be guaranteed. Failing to recognize Kurdish identity as part of the solution constitutes a major obstacle to the success of this process. Turkey should support this moment with practical steps. Doing so would not weaken Turkey; on the contrary, it would strengthen it.
What can be said in terms of the countries of the region?
With this philosophy, I would say that we are facing an opportunity that the entire Middle East should not miss. At a time when the countries of the region must heal their internal fractures in order to confront the unpredictable and unknown dangers coming from the West, this opportunity should not be lost. We are in a period marked by intense difficulties, which makes this a call that arrived at the right moment. When external threats increase, strengthening internal unity becomes indispensable.
Throughout history, whenever we united against a common enemy that sought to occupy our lands and seize our resources, we succeeded. In the army of Saladin Ayyubi, Kurds, Turks, and Arabs fought side by side, and the victory at Hattin was the result of this unity. We must learn from history. We are living in a time when we can clearly see that the outside world is waiting for us to collapse. When you see ruthless powers trying to defeat you psychologically and morally, with their merciless economies and merciless weapons, there is no escape and no solution other than survival, and surviving together. Today as well, we can stand against the economic and military pressure of external powers only by remaining united. No matter which people leads the way, respect for identity and culture is essential.
How do you see the future of this process in light of all this?
It is clear that this process will be difficult and that we have a long road ahead, especially in a context where the influence of international actors and networks of interest in the region is known to everyone. Despite all developments, we are still speaking of a process that is in its infancy and one that requires patience. In any region or field, every step that contradicts pragmatism or existing interests, even if it points in the right direction, always encounters numerous obstacles and challenges; it undergoes a difficult transition and pays a heavy price before becoming visible.
Yet despite all of this, the call initiated by Abdullah Öcalan has stirred the global conscience on behalf of the Kurdish people, like a stone cast into still water. This call has not turned fanaticism or ethnic differences into slogans; on the contrary, it has emphasized coexistence with other peoples and seeing them as parts of a shared whole. Today, it is this understanding that defends peace, that supports the unification of all peoples and social components within a political, cultural, and civilizational perspective, while insisting that each identity must be preserved. In other words, the Kurdish people are not an instrument of destruction but of construction; they strive not to erase diversity but to hold it together and turn it into a creative force.
In this framework, I would particularly underline that although Abdullah Öcalan’s call for peace has not yet produced the level of results hoped for today, it represents a genuine political and social movement, and for that reason its impact will inevitably manifest itself, perhaps with delay, but certainly.
Do you have anything you would like to add?
I would underline this in particular: most high-level politicians, and even many revolutionary speakers, produce speeches and projects, yet they do not create the mechanisms necessary to implement them. Even a rigorous scientific understanding tells us that ‘a strategic plan and a corresponding action plan are required for any undertaking.’ Preparing a strategic plan is easy; the real challenge lies in building the mechanisms that make implementation possible.
What distinguishes Abdullah Öcalan from others is precisely this point. Beyond being an intellectual pioneer, and beyond being a philosopher of this phase, he has not been content with merely presenting a plan; he has also developed the mechanisms that allow that plan to be put into practice. Moreover, while bringing this into life, he began with the part that concerned himself. One component of these implementation mechanisms was the dissolution of the organizational structure of the PKK.
Abdullah Öcalan chose not to exploit the difficult conditions in Iraq, even though those circumstances could have enabled him to pursue many objectives. He did not use weaknesses or ongoing conflicts to obtain a piece of land or to establish dominance over any particular region of Iraq. In his view, the public good stands far above personal interests or narrow group priorities.
What is truly worthy of praise is that he has grounded his approach in a philosophy of unity, shared life, peace, and compassion and that he has not left this philosophy at a theoretical level but has supported it with a strategic plan and an actionable program.