Historian and political scientist Hamit Bozarslan has urged caution amid renewed discussions on a peaceful resolution to the Kurdish question in Turkey. In an interview with Le Monde, Bozarslan criticised the approach of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, questioning Ankara’s sincerity in the negotiation process. Bozarslan emphasised that Kurds, despite relying on international support, are determined to shape their own future and pursue self-determination.
Commenting on recent peace efforts by the Kurdish movement to secure a political solution to the decades-long conflict with the Turkish state, Bozarslan accused Erdoğan of “reducing the Kurdish question to terrorism” and portraying the Kurds as being “manipulated” by external forces. He warned of the dangers inherent in such rhetoric, noting that similar logic was invoked in 1915 to justify the Armenian Genocide and the repression of other Christian communities within the Ottoman Empire.
Addressing the complex relationship between Kurdish forces and international powers in the Middle East, Bozarslan acknowledged a degree of reliance – such as the military support provided by the United States in Syria – but emphasised that Kurds are striving to chart their own course. “They want to be subjects of their own history,” he said, highlighting their pursuit of self-determination while facing shifting geopolitical alliances.
"To ensure their survival, minority groups are often obliged to accept the conditions of an international power, but this does not mean they are passive: they develop multiple forms of resistance," Bozarslan said.
According to Bozarslan, the newly established interim Syrian government – formed following the fall of the Assad regime in early December – remains “fragile” and heavily dependent on ongoing negotiations with the Syrian Kurds. The Kurdish-led Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES), he noted, controls nearly 30 per cent of the country’s territory.
Damascus and the AANES have, so far, produced only limited “mini-agreements” on key areas such as oil management, security arrangements, and the standardisation of the education system, Bozarslan noted. These tentative steps, he suggested, reflect the cautious and fragmented nature of the ongoing dialogue between the two sides.
Commenting on the position of Kurdish organisations in Iran – amid heightened tensions between Tehran and Israel and renewed dialogue between Iran and the United States- Bozarslan said the groups “welcome any diplomatic or political measure that, without implying war, could weaken the influence of Turkey and Iran in the region”. He observed that many Kurds and other minorities in Iran now seek intervention against what they view as a regime “on its last legs”, though he cautioned that others remain wary of the potential consequences.
Bozarslan also noted that the historical division of Kurdistan among several Muslim-majority states contributed to the development of a distinctly secular nationalist discourse. The Kurdish collective identity is rooted in shared language and cultural heritage rather than religion or ethnicity, he explained.
The Kurd’s emphasis on language, culture, and secular nationalism, rather than religious beliefs, has fostered a more inclusive and progressive environment for women, Bozarslan stressed. He pointed to how this focus has paved the way for greater social equality and empowerment, with Kurdish women taking on prominent roles in both military and political spheres.
Among other publications on the Muslim-Arab world, Bozarslan edited The Cambridge History of the Kurds (2021) Cambridge University Press, and has co-authored a recently released work in French, History of the Kurds – From the origins to the present day (2025) Éditions du Cerf.
