As tensions escalate across the Middle East, Turkish political writer Mahir Sayın has described Democratic Confederalism—a grassroots model of stateless democracy developed by imprisoned Kurdish leader Abdullah Öcalan—as the only viable path out of the region’s cycle of conflict and domination. Speaking to Ömer Güngör of Mezopotamya Agency on Friday following the recent 12-day Iran–Israel clash, Sayın said the enduring crisis stems not only from imperial rivalry but also from the structural weaknesses of the nation-state system itself.
“People across the region are exhausted,” Sayın said. “And yet no peaceful political project is on the table—except one: Democratic Confederalism.” His remarks come as world powers attempt to broker calm in the aftermath of Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear sites on 13 June and the fragile ceasefire mediated by the United States on 24 June. Sayın argues that fossil fuel competition, arms races, and authoritarian governance—both foreign and domestic—continue to fuel instability, from Gaza to Iran, from Turkey to Lebanon.
Democratic Confederalism, first proposed by Öcalan in the early 2000s, envisions a system of decentralised, locally governed communities, united by mutual cooperation rather than ethnic borders or military force. Though rooted in Kurdish political struggles, the model has inspired grassroots experiments in North and East Syria (known as Rojava) and gained academic support globally. “This is not a Kurdish-only project,” Sayın said. “It’s a framework for coexistence and ecological, gender-equal democracy.”
Sayın placed the renewed Iran-Israel conflict in the context of growing great-power competition. He argued that energy corridors like the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC)—a US-backed rival to China’s Belt and Road Initiative—are deepening regional divisions. “This is a battlefield for global order,” he warned, “but the people paying the price are those whose cities are bombed, whose lands are exploited, and whose hopes are buried.”
Sayın also criticised the Turkish government’s approach to regional politics. Once an enthusiastic partner in US-led reshaping of the Middle East, Ankara now attempts to straddle multiple alliances—both Western and Eastern—creating what he called “a dangerous balancing act.” He pointed to the government’s ambiguous role in the IMEC project and noted Turkey’s ongoing domestic repression of Kurdish political expression as part of a broader failure to break with the nation-state paradigm.
Echoing Öcalan’s recent 27 February statement calling for a transition from armed struggle to democratic politics, Sayın said the model must go beyond Kurdish regions and inspire regional transformation. “If democracy and grassroots governance can take hold in Turkey,” he said, “it may light the way for the wider Middle East.”
Sayın acknowledged that Democratic Confederalism faces powerful resistance—not just from regional governments but from global powers invested in top-down control. Yet, he insisted, the region’s fragmented peoples could be united by mutual self-rule, not domination. “It’s a long road,” he said, “but in a century marked by climate collapse, displacement, and militarised economies, it may be the only road left.”
