The Co-Presidency of the KCK (Kurdistan Communities Union) Executive Council released a statement in reaction to the published report by the National Solidarity, Brotherhood, and Democracy Commission.
The KCK statement on Sunday reads as follows:
“The ‘National Solidarity, Brotherhood, and Democracy Commission,’ established on August 5, 2025, presented the final report of its months-long work to the public on February 19, 2026. This report is being discussed extensively. As it directly concerns our movement, we deemed it necessary to present our views on the report to our people and the public.
The search for a solution to the Kurdish question and the democratization of Turkey by Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan started in 1993 and so has been ongoing for 33 years. This process, which began during the presidency of Turgut Özal, has now reached a new stage. The 33 years of discussions on resolving the conflict and the negotiations that have been conducted have produced significant progress on resolving the Kurdish issue and democratization. It has been known since Leader Öcalan’s interview with the late M. Ali Birand in 1988 that he has been seeking a democratic solution to the Kurdish issue. He has called for a democratic solution at every opportunity and has repeatedly ensured ceasefires and non-conflict to pave the way for such a solution. The approach of Leader Öcalan is well known to the people, to both the domestic and international public. It is clear that the Turkish state and political forces are also aware of the approach of Leader Öcalan.
On October 22, 2024, MHP Chairman Devlet Bahçeli made an appeal to Leader Öcalan in his parliamentary group speech. It was an appeal that was undoubtedly made with the knowledge of President Tayyip Erdoğan. Leader Öcalan responded to it by saying that if given the opportunity, he had the power to bring the Kurdish issue and the current conflict to a political and legal level. Following meetings with the DEM Party delegation and state officials, on February 27, Leader Öcalan made the ‘Call for Peace and Democratic Society’ on Imralı Island in the presence of the DEM Party delegation. Pervin Buldan and Ahmet Türk read the call of Leader Öcalan in front of hundreds of journalists. Leader Öcalan stated to the valuable revolutionary democrat Sırrı Süreyya Önder that what was stated in this call would only be realized if the legal and political requirements were met, and he emphasized this to the public after the call was read.
The PKK held its 12th Congress between May 5 and 7, 2025, dissolved its organizational structure, and decided to put an end to the armed struggle. It was also decided that Leader Öcalan must play a role in the realization of the points included in the call of February 27. With the dissolution of the PKK and the cessation of armed struggle, the stage has been set for the state to fulfill its legal and political obligations.
Leader Öcalan has consistently called for the parliament to intervene during all periods of non-conflict and negotiations with the state. After the ‘Call for Peace and Democratic Society,’ he emphasized that a commission formed by the parliament should address Turkey’s fundamental problems, such as the Kurdish issue. Other political parties, primarily the DEM Party and the CHP, also stated that this issue should be brought to the parliament. When the democratic public also expressed this demand, the AKP-MHP alliance decided to establish a commission.
The establishment of a broad 51-member commission, comprising the majority of parties represented in parliament, was an important step in Turkish history. Although named ‘National Solidarity, Brotherhood, and Democracy,’ it is known that this commission is primarily concerned with the Kurdish issue and the problems it has created. Leader Öcalan, our movement, and our people have attached great importance to this commission. It has also been highly valued by the Turkish public. Consequently, expectations for this commission have been high. For this reason, it has remained a constant topic of discussion. Although insufficient, many groups, primarily former assembly presidents, have been heard. The majority of those heard expressed their views on the solution to the Kurdish issue. Although late and insufficient, Leader Öcalan was also heard during a visit to Imralı. Leader Öcalan conveyed to the commission that the factors that created the Kurdish issue, the historical Kurdish-Turkish brotherhood, and the alliance should be taken as a basis for the solution of this issue and that the solution could be achieved through democratic integration based on the recognition of the fundamental democratic rights of the Kurdish people. Leader Öcalan has consistently emphasized that the Kurdish issue must be resolved through democratic integration. He has stated that this can only be achieved by completely abandoning denial and granting the Kurdish people their fundamental democratic rights and self-governance based on local democracy. The Kurdish people have also consistently stated that they stand behind the solution project of Leader Öcalan. For this reason, they have repeatedly named him as chief negotiator. And as it is known, we are fully committed to the decisions taken by Leader Öcalan.
The commission report, released after months of work, contains fundamental shortcomings and omissions. The content of the report is flawed due to these fundamental shortcomings and omissions. Undoubtedly, the failure to resolve the Kurdish issue is primarily a result of the lack of democracy. There has been a persistent avoidance of democratization, precisely because it would benefit the Kurds, meaning it would pave the way for a solution to the problem. The report does not name the Kurdish issue. It is impossible to solve a problem without naming it. The report states that solving the problem depends on eliminating its root causes, but these root causes are not identified. This is Turkey’s 100-year-old impasse. For 100 years, the focus has been on the consequences, not the causes. The 100-year-old cause is the denial of the Kurds. Even though it is claimed that the denial has been abandoned, legally and politically, this denial is intended to continue. This is why the report does not mention the Kurdish presence and the Kurdish issue. Therefore, talking about Kurdish-Turkish brotherhood has no social, cultural, political, or legal value.
In order to avoid saying ‘Kurdish issue,’ the term ‘terrorism issue’ is insistently used. It is also stated that the permanent solution to the terrorism issue lies in democratization. In fact, the report acknowledges that the conflicts stem from the unsolved Kurdish issue. It also reveals that the issue has been approached from a security perspective until now. It is stated that the problem cannot be solved with this approach. Thus, it is admitted that the social, cultural, and political aspects of the Kurdish issue have not been considered. This means that the Kurdish identity is not accepted and the problems are not resolved. By not mentioning the Kurdish identity and issue in the report, everything is squeezed into the terrorism bracket, and the old understanding and policy are continued.
The report repeatedly mentions democratization. Thus, the source of the problem is accepted as the lack of democratization, which would ensure the recognition of the Kurds’ existence and fundamental rights. How can there be democratization without addressing the Kurdish existence and issue? Will there be democratization without the Kurds? The logic of the report implies this.
On the other hand, the Kurdish issue, which has been going on for 100 years, and the objections, resistance, and struggle of the Kurdish people are attributed to external forces. Our freedom movement has been struggling for 52 years, relying on the strength of our people and resisting with sacrifice in the face of difficulties. For decades, the Turkish state has used its geopolitical position and NATO membership to attack our freedom movement with the support of external forces. Leader Öcalan was handed over to Turkey through a conspiracy led by the US, Israel, and the UK. If it weren’t based on our people and our own strength, our struggle for freedom would not have lasted 52 years. In fact, the Turkish state, relying on external powers, aligning itself with their policies, and pursuing a policy against the 1,000-year-old Turkish-Kurdish alliance, has exacerbated the problems. From this perspective, the claim that our freedom struggle relies on external powers carries no meaning beyond classic smear campaigns and special war propaganda.
Although some elements within our ranks have committed acts that Leader Öcalan and our movement do not accept, our struggle has taken its place in history as one of the purest and most honorable freedom struggles. From this perspective, we do not accept the labeling of our movement as terrorism. There are tens of thousands of murders committed by the state’s military, police, or affiliated militia forces. Undoubtedly, thousands of casualties have been suffered by the warring parties as a result of decades of war. Leader Öcalan has repeatedly proposed the establishment of a truth commission to investigate war crimes committed during the war. In short, it is not right to portray the casualties as one-sided. We are already saying that, knowing that there is a war and that its consequences are severe, the problems cannot be solved through conflict.
In essence, the concept of terrorism, which is frequently mentioned in the report, undermines the spirit of the report and creates a situation that hides the root causes of the problems. Exposing the negativity created by the war is a separate issue. However, the issue the commission focuses on is the problems arising from the non-recognition of the existence and fundamental rights of the Kurds. Turkey’s fundamental problem is the Kurdish issue and the related issue of democratization. When we approach the problem in this way, it becomes easier to find solutions. From this perspective, it is important to focus on the style, method, and approach that facilitate the resolution of problems.
The concept of democratization is used dozens of times in the report. Again, it speaks of rights, law, fundamental rights, freedom of thought, and association. These references clearly show that the source of the problem is not external forces or the pretext of terrorism. From this perspective, recognizing the fundamental democratic rights of the Kurdish people, which is the essence of the problem, and establishing democracy will provide the solution to the problems that led to the establishment of the commission. Then it will be possible to state that the commission played a role in solving the problem.
One of the topics emphasized in the report is the laying down of arms and the return to Turkey. Leader Öcalan has demonstrated his determination to pursue democratic politics. We state that our future political life and struggle strategy will be based on democratic politics. From this perspective, the laying down of arms has been approached on the basis of the freedom to pursue democratic politics. Leader Öcalan has also emphasized that he wants to continue his political life by pursuing democratic politics. This is an issue that has not been discussed correctly in Turkey and has not been presented correctly in the commission’s report. We are not just any individuals. Armed guerrillas are not individuals thinking about returning home. Saying “lay down your arms and go home” is a humiliating approach. What do they expect to happen after arms are laid down? Leader Öcalan has put forward a paradigm, an understanding of democratic politics and democratic integration, with its organizational model and working style. Can a free democratic political struggle be waged on this basis? Or why should we go to a political environment like the current one in Turkey, where those who engage in democratic politics and struggle democratically for the solution of the Kurdish question are seen as criminals and thrown into prison? Therefore, it will only be possible to lay down weapons and return to Turkey if the guarantee of unhindered democratic politics based on freedom of thought and organization is secured and if it is made clear that the solution to the Kurdish question will be achieved through democratic integration.
Imposing a political environment that lacks freedom of democratic politics and aims to completely eliminate our freedom movement is a continuation of the old mindset. From this perspective, it is important to take steps towards democratization that include resolving the Kurdish issue through democratic integration. There is no point in saying “lay down your arms and come” without eliminating the factors that created the problem. If there is a call for free democratic politics, it is important that the changes to the laws mentioned in the commission’s report are implemented without delay. We dissolved the party, we laid down our arms, and we fulfilled our obligations. Now it is necessary for the state to fulfill the political and legal requirements to advance this process.
When we held the 12th Congress and decided to dissolve the party, ending the armed struggle, we emphasized that what was expressed in the ‘Call for Peace and Democratic Society’ could only be put into practice by Leader Öcalan. If, despite a year having passed since the February 27 call, there has been little progress, it is because Leader Öcalan does not have the conditions to work freely. The main addressee of the issue on which the parliamentary commission prepared its report is Leader Öcalan. The state has already acknowledged this through its statements and declarations. From this perspective, for everything stated in the February 27 call to be fully and properly realized, Leader Öcalan must be free. To this end, the state must officially recognize the interlocutorship it has de facto accepted and ensure that Leader Öcalan has the freedom to work to fulfill his role. If this is not done, the credibility and seriousness of the state’s policy of resolution will be questioned. If Turkey is serious and determined to overcome all its problems and become a rising power in the Middle East based on Turkish-Kurdish brotherhood and democracy, then it must openly recognize Leader Öcalan as a counterpart and ensure that Leader Öcalan has the opportunity to meet and talk with everyone.
If the complete stagnation of the peace and democratic society process is not desired and the positive results expressed are to be achieved, then ensuring that Leader Öcalan has the conditions to work freely is the urgent task.
The resolution of the Kurdish issue and democratization in Turkey concern the Kurdish people and all the peoples of Turkey. The Kurdish people and the peoples of Turkey must take responsibility for this issue with sensitivity. Such a crucial issue should not be left solely to the discretion of the state and the efforts of the freedom movement. If the efforts of Leader Öcalan are to bear fruit, our people, the peoples, and all democratic forces must organize and struggle for the resolution of the Kurdish question and democratization. Everywhere, democratization and the resolution of fundamental issues have been achieved through struggle. On this basis, in the second year after the ‘Call for Peace and Democratic Society’ by Leader Öcalan, everyone must embrace this call, intensify the struggle, and play their part.”
Leave a Reply