Recent days have seen renewed hopes for a political solution to one of Turkey’s most complex internal issues, the Kurdish question. Devlet Bahçeli, leader of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), recently called on jailed Kurdish leader Abdullah Abdullah Öcalan to urge the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) to lay down its arms during a meeting of his party’s parliamentary group. This call has reignited discussions about whether a political solution is possible after years of security-centred approaches to the Kurdish question. Bahçeli’s remarks are seen as a new political step towards resolving the issue, prompting renewed reflection on peace efforts and settlement attempts dating back to the 1990s.
Efforts to find a political solution to the Kurdish question first gained attention in the 1990s through Abdullah Öcalan’s calls for peace and some government policies at the time. In 1993, together with Celal Talabani, Öcalan declared a ceasefire in Lebanon and made a peace appeal to the Turkish government. This was seen as a signal that the Kurdish movement was moving away from armed struggle towards a search for dialogue. At a press conference in March 1993, Öcalan emphasised the need for a comprehensive political approach to solving the problem, stating that violence should not be the means of finding resolution. He stressed that the PKK had no immediate goal of seceding from Turkey, describing the two nations as “intertwined like flesh and bone”.
“We do not want to solve problems through violence. However, there is a policy of denial in Turkey, which is rooted in historical factors and goes beyond the current governments. Especially since the foundation of the (Turkish) Republic, this policy of denial has intensified and continues to this day. The Kurdish question has reached a point where it affects the Turkish people as much as the Kurdish people and a solution is imperative,” said Öcalan, stressing the importance of a sincere step towards a ceasefire. He stated that the PKK could not be expected to unilaterally disarm, noting, “Complete disarmament would be worse than suicide,” indicating the PKK’s interest in guarantees through the peace process.
During the press conference, Öcalan called for a ceasefire to signal his readiness for a peaceful process and expressed his expectation of a positive response from the Turkish government. However, the passing of President Turgut Özal in the same year cast a shadow over hopes for a political solution to the Kurdish question. Following Özal’s death, political uncertainty and escalated conflict resumed. Öcalan’s appeals were repeated through PKK ceasefire declarations in 1995 and 1998, although each effort resulted in a return to conflict.
Özal’s approach to the Kurdish question is remembered as being uniquely focused on political solutions, unlike other leaders of the time. While supporting military and security measures, he also advocated peaceful means of resolution. Some sources suggest that Özal planned to resolve the Kurdish question through international political means, while others claim that he was one of the key figures suppoting Turkey’s “contra-guerrilla” networks within the security bureaucracy.
After Özal’s death, several attempts were made to resolve the Kurdish question. In 1995, the PKK announced another ceasefire, but this initiative quickly ended with the resumption of the conflict. In 1998, the Adana Agreement between Turkey and Syria became a turning point, and what the PKK calls an “international conspiracy” led to Öcalan’s capture. However, instead of speeding up the peace process, this development intensified the clashes and led to increased security measures in the region.
In 2009, the AK Party government launched a new ‘solution process’ to resolve the Kurdish question. This process aimed to create a conflict-free atmosphere by encouraging the PKK to withdraw from Turkish territory and expanding cultural rights. However, with the escalation of clashes in 2015, the solution process came to an end and security-focused policies returned to the forefront. These temporary ceasefires have kept hopes alive for a political solution to the Kurdish question, but a lasting peace has not been achieved.
Bahçeli’s recent statements, together with Abdullah Öcalan’s emphasis on a political solution in 1993, could mark the beginning of a new era in addressing the Kurdish question through political dialogue. These efforts reflect a commitment to building public confidence in peace being possible, drawing lessons from past experience to guide a constructive dialogue process. Turkey has made numerous attempts to address the Kurdish question over the years; today, moving beyond security policy and establishing political dialogue and social reconciliation is likely to remain one of the most critical steps in maintaining internal peace in Turkey.
