As regional balances are shaken by the war unfolding in the Middle East, the search for a democratic peace process in Turkey continues. Ertuğrul Kürkçü, Honorary Chair of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), spoke to ANF about the war in the region, pressures in domestic politics, and the Kurdish question.
Kürkçü said that the outcome of the war between Iran and the United States–Israel will directly affect Turkey’s domestic politics and continued: “The question of how the war between Iran and the United States–Israel will end is a development that will directly impact Turkey’s internal politics. Because Turkey is positioned, indirectly, alongside the United States. Yes, there is no openly visible American direction in Turkey; however, Donald Trump’s concise remark that ‘Turkey does not do anything we do not want’ clearly reveals this indirect alliance.
Of course, no one in the world expects Turkey to openly carry the American flag. However, when we look at the general line of conflict, it is evident that Turkey is not in a position that openly opposes the military and political strategies of the United States in the region. Turkey is a member of NATO, and its relations with the United States also proceed in parallel with NATO through Gulf countries. Relations centered on Qatar, in particular, are decisive in Turkey’s regional position. The United States, meanwhile, is trying to maintain a balance in its relations with both Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
In this framework, if the conflict results against the United States, Turkey’s room for maneuver in the region will also narrow. The emerging balances against the United States–Israel alliance in the Middle East will be interpreted in favor of Iran and its allies. I do not think Iran is pursuing a strategy based on directly defeating the United States militarily. Rather, it appears to be following a strategy aimed at limiting the United States’ regional influence, forcing it to withdraw, and narrowing its room for maneuver in global politics. So far, it can be said that this strategy has been partially successful.”
Kürkçü also said: “However, in the coming period, there is a possibility that the United States may take a step it has long avoided: deploying troops directly into areas under Iranian control. From that point on, developments will be uncertain, because the two powers would face each other directly on this scale for the first time. Iran has previously engaged in conflicts with Iraq and Israel, but it has no experience of direct war with the United States at this level. It is also important to recall the failure the United States experienced during the hostage crisis in the early years of the Iranian Islamic Revolution.
For this reason, Iran is not an easy target for the United States. On the other hand, it can also be assessed that after a potential war of attrition, Iran could emerge from the conflict with greater capacity. Alternatively, the United States may declare that it has achieved certain objectives and withdraw from the war. Developments in strategic regions such as the Strait of Hormuz will determine the course of the process. For this reason, the conflict is expected to concentrate largely along this line.”
War to affect election process in Turkey
Kürkçü said that Turkey, like European countries, will be compelled to remain aligned with the United States due to energy and trade necessities. He said: “A significant portion of global energy flows passes through these regions. Iran’s decision not to completely cut energy supplies to Turkey may reflect a short-term balancing policy, but it does not resolve the structural problem. In the coming period, it is likely that the war will intensify and then, at a certain point, enter a phase of de-escalation. This process will have negative economic consequences for Turkey. Rising oil prices, increasing energy costs, and the resulting economic pressures will strain the government. This will create serious pressure and an unfavorable economic environment for potential election processes in Turkey’s domestic politics in the 2026–2027 period.”
Kürkçü said that Erdoğan appears compelled either to avoid elections or to impose a vote in which his opponents are sidelined, and linked this to pressure on the Republican People’s Party (CHP): “The use of the judiciary as a tool, and the appointment of the person managing judicial processes against the CHP as Minister of Justice, clearly indicates this plan. Attempts to push the Republican People’s Party, or more precisely the leadership of Özgür Özel, out of politics through unlawful practices have not yet been concluded. Therefore, pressure on the CHP is likely to intensify in the coming period.
At the same time, preventing opposition forces in Turkey from acting jointly is of strategic importance for the Justice and Development Party (AKP). In this context, if no concrete progress is achieved within the framework of a democratic society and peace process, the opposition of the Kurdish people is expected to become increasingly visible. This is because there is deep dissatisfaction within Kurdish society based on two main factors.
First, economic and political crises affect both Turkey and Kurdistan to the same extent. Second, expectations regarding a resolution to the Kurdish question have not been met. Hopes for positive peace have largely been disappointed.
Even in terms of conditions on the island, although there may be a limited increase in contact, its insufficiency is evident. No improvement has been achieved in Abdullah Öcalan’s living and working conditions based on the demanded legal guarantees. Beyond this, there has been no significant progress on issues such as Kurdish language and culture, demands for local governance, the return of municipalities seized by trustees, and the situation of sick prisoners and political detainees, including Selahattin Demirtaş.”
Expectations unmet in Kurdish question
Ertuğrul Kürkçü stated that no meaningful progress has been achieved in line with the historical and current demands of Kurds regarding a resolution to the Kurdish question, and said: “Yes, an environment has emerged in which the issue is discussed more openly. However, after so much sacrifice and a ground of non-conflict, this was already the minimum expected. Despite a historic step being taken, no real progress has yet been achieved in return.
On the other hand, it is clear that the attacks against the CHP have no legitimacy. The opposition’s failure to respond collectively to these attacks creates a serious weakness. Yet the metropolitan municipalities won by the CHP are largely the result of urban consensus and a broad-based public alliance. Kurdish voters and the Kurdish political movement have played a significant role in this success. The influence of Kurdish politicians in municipalities, especially in major cities, clearly demonstrates this.
Therefore, what is happening today is not only an attack on the CHP but also an intervention against the public alliance formed at the grassroots level. For this reason, these attacks must not be allowed to succeed. The joint advancement of negotiation and struggle processes is critically important in this regard.”
Kürkçü also noted that Turkey’s policies to date, which are not directly pro-American, have been partially aligned with its regional interests, and continued: “However, this has mostly applied at a tactical level. As tensions rise at the strategic level, signs are becoming increasingly clear that Turkey is preparing to position itself alongside Gulf countries against Iran. In particular, in the event of direct military intervention by the US in the region and a conflict developing through the Strait of Hormuz, pressure on Turkey will increase.
During this process, demands may be directed at Turkey, such as activating American bases, and it is not possible for the Erdoğan government to completely avoid these demands. In such a scenario, Turkey could find itself directly targeted by Iran. This would fundamentally alter the country’s security, political, and economic balances. The current conjuncture therefore represents a highly critical threshold.
The Trump administration may suddenly withdraw from this process in the short term, which also involves Turkey. However, the consequences for Turkey could be far more long-term and profound. With this trajectory, Turkey risks finding itself in a deadlock that could last for decades.”
Öcalan’s remarks a reminder to government
Ertuğrul Kürkçü also evaluated Abdullah Öcalan’s recent statements and said: “The most critical aspect of Öcalan’s remarks is the emphasis on democracy. I see that he has reformulated the strategy he has followed from the beginning in response to certain shortcomings encountered and has clarified it further in line with his own assessments. By clearly calling for an end to armed conflict and a transition to a different ground of struggle, he also makes it clear that there is no issue with the Republic.
However, the key point he underlines is this: the existence of the Republic can only be secured through democracy. Therefore, the main issue on the agenda today is a struggle for democracy, and this is also the demand. This emphasis is important because it reminds us of the following: armed conflict was only one form of struggle. That form may now be left behind, but the purpose and objective of the struggle have not changed. Fifty years ago, the goal was democracy; today, it remains democracy.
Since no significant progress has been achieved in this direction, it is inevitable that the Kurdish Freedom Movement will develop a new orientation suited to the current conditions. This orientation is clearly reflected in Öcalan’s statements. While he states that there is no perspective of returning to armed conflict, he signals that the struggle will continue through different tools and methods.
At the same time, he implies that the process may not remain limited to negotiations alone and could, depending on conditions, evolve again into a line of struggle. For this reason, Öcalan’s statements should be read not only as messages to the public but primarily as a warning to the government and those governing Turkey. These statements serve as a reminder to the authorities of their responsibility not to leave the initiated process unfinished and to carry it through to the end.”
Leave a Reply