No one can doubt the socialist identity of the Kurdish freedom movement and the socialist identity of the Kurdish people's leader Mr. Abdullah Ocalan. The Kurdish freedom movement and its leader define themselves as the inheritors of all the socialist strugglers in human history.
Of course there are differences between the PKK and other socialist organisations in Turkey. The PKK has restructured itself as a result of extensive self-criticism and a thorough criticism of classical socialism and its practiced forms. It sees classical socialist theory as insufficient. The PKK believes that classical socialism is not anti-capitalist enough and is too involved with the state; whereas the state is a tool of suppression. To topple a state in order to create a new one is not revolutionary practice, rather, to surpass, topple or minimize the hegemonic system and replace it with a socialist system by implicating socialism in the moment is the PKK's adopted method. To topple a state is not the same as toppling the system. To liken these two things together is a sign of deviation from socialism.
Even those that have shown great belief and effort in developing socialist theory and even ultimately sacrificing their lives to this end have maybe lacked in completely liberating themselves from capitalism. Capitalism, with its mentality, economy, sociality and culture is a totality. To reject, surpass and exclude oneself from capitalism as a totality is vital. This exclusion must start immediately; to delay this exclusion and synchronise it with the abolition of a state is a deviation from socialism. To insist on creating a new state on grounds that it will be a socialist one, is at the very least a lack of an acquaintance with the states ontology. The Kurdish freedom movement has purposefully distanced itself from the hegemonic system's systemic institutions, lifestyle and culture. The PKK has killed the capitalist, the state and the sexism within.
Certain circles are claiming that the Kurdish freedom movement is a "bourgeois movement", or that it has retreated from its ideals. On the contrary, the Kurdish freedom movement questions the socialist identity and the lack of depth in socialist theory of those who are putting forward these types of claims. Firstly, the very lifestyle of the PKK puts across what kind of socialist organisation it really is. Every aspect of life within the PKK is organised communally and collectively. Of course as one of its principle ambitions is to democratise society the PKK builds relationships with a wide spectrum of social movements and civil organisations. All socialists must see this as a practical obstacle that needs to be dealt with by all revolutionary movements on the road to revolution.
The PKK, as a socialist movement, will always seek socialists and leftist democrats when forming political alliances. However, as a movement of social democratisation, the PKK holds responsibilities against society as a whole and therefore wider strategic alliances with all social factions is understandable. The negotiations in Imrali Island are being developed within these parameters. Yes the PKK wants to make the government take certain steps, but this is happening as a result of our joint struggle with the democratic forces in Turkey; in other words we are forcing the very people we are struggling against to take positive steps. To argue that socialist movements do not negotiate with the state is a delusional approach to the political struggle inherent in socialist struggle. We are not talking about negotiating on ideals and principles. These are mere political negotiations. These are not negotiations on the struggle itself, but negotiations on the means of struggle.
There is now a major opportunity for the left to develop in Turkey and fill a gaping hole in Turkey's political spectrum. The people of Turkey want justice, equality, democracy and freedom; and for this there is a need for a decent leftist platform to struggle for these demands. However, this platform has been left unmanned for at least the past fifteen years. Conservative and nationalist wings cannot meet these demands. This is why leftist democrats and those who call themselves socialists need to seriously question themselves.
On the one side of the political spectrum in Turkey you have the nationalists and on the other side you have the conservatives. There seems to be a gaping hole that needs to be filled urgently. The People's Democratic Party is an important project to this end; but the distant stance of certain groups is hindering the progress of this project. Socialist organisations must act responsibly and take their place in this project, as no other alternative socialist platform is currently visible on the horizon.
By taking part in the process of democratic solution initiated by the Kurdish people's leader Abdullah Ocalan, the socialists of Turkey can reinvigorate themselves. There is an urgent need for leftists, socialists, democrats, leftist liberals, ethnic groups, religious groups, women and youths to come together at a conference of democratisation where a union can be formed around a detailed program for democratisation. A strong democratic organisation can very quickly conjure popular support in Turkey.
Writing by Mustafa Karasu
- Details
I must firstly state that the Kurdish freedom movement's quest in finding a democratic solution to the Kurdish question is not something new; this quest is at least twenty years old.
It is well known that the Kurdish freedom movement has always adopted a modest and consistent approach to this end. During these twenty years the Kurdish freedom movement's proposals for a solution have been coherent with Turkey's territorial dignity and have been based on a fundamental democratisation of Turkey. The following duality has been a basic principle for our movement: without a solution to the Kurdish question Turkey cannot democratise, and without a democratisation of Turkey the Kurdish question cannot be solved.
The Kurdish freedom movement is a socialist and anti-capitalist movement. It is opposed to the culture of capitalism and its social and economic ways. Our movement defines the state as ontologically opposed to democracy and freedoms and it does not see the state as either a solution to the national question or a means to socialism. State abolition and state making is not seen as revolutionary action, rather, our movement possesses a philosophical and ideological paradigm in which state opposition is practiced via the construction of an alternative stateless system. The Kurdish freedom movement holds the view that military violence, in the final analysis, only serves to strengthen state structures; while an atmosphere of democratic politics strengthens social dynamics. Saying this however, where the opportunity to practice democratic politics does not exist then self-defence mechanisms can be legitimately deployed.
The Kurdish freedom movement states that democracy and freedom can only be achieved by struggling against the state through the democratic self-institutionalisation of the people. Our paradigmatic approach identifies the state, by definition, as unable to supply its subjects with democracy and freedom; even to be in expectancy of this is to submit to slavery. Only when the actions of our movement are analysed within this context can reliable evaluations be made.
This was the ideological stance of the PKK during war; and now, during the stage of democratic struggle. This is not subject to change in an atmosphere of peace. During peace the struggle doesn't end, only the means of struggle change. Peace is a time in which armed violence is no longer a means of struggle; however, needless to say the struggle itself goes on. The struggle against state sovereignty will always continue. This struggle will continue to be pursued through revolutionary means. The establishment of a stateless society is an expression of a radical and fundamental struggle. Democratic struggle and democratic politics are deployed in order to achieve these radical and fundamental ends.
Only once the very existence of a people has been established and is being acknowledged can democratic struggle become a preferential means. The Kurdish people's leader Mr. Ocalan and the Kurdish freedom movement are struggling within these parameters.
Only eighteen months ago the AKP government was adamant on "crushing" our movement and even talking about executing the Kurdish people's leader; it must be well understood that the current atmosphere has come about as a result of an arduous struggle. Anyone with a right mind must surely be able to appreciate this. The Kurdish freedom movement is by no means showing any concessions on its principles or its social projects; rather, it will be the Turkish state and the AKP government that will have to go back on its backwards, chauvinistic and dictatorial policies. The aim of the democratic struggle is to bring the state and the AKP to commit to a democratic solution. The Kurdish people are insistent on utilising their most basic rights. Economic, political and cultural self-administration is a principle ambition. A democratic solution for us is structured around these principles. It is needless to say that the Kurdish freedom movement is in no concession of any of its principle ambitions. The intention behind the very retreat of our guerrilla forces was to create an atmosphere in which these principle demands can be met and subsequently put into practise.
Claims that the PKK and the AKP are negotiating on a prospective Turkey that will be authoritarian while also leaving aside other communities are way off the mark. These are fabrications belonging to those that oppose the search for a democratic solution by the Kurdish people's leader. On the contrary the efforts of the Kurdish people's leader is making the AKP take steps backwards, while also propagating the freedoms of all the peoples of Turkey.
These are the aims of the process of democratic struggle. However, the destiny of this process lies in the outcome of the struggle between the hegemonic powers and the forces of democracy. Hegemonic forces have never been ones to easily concede their grasp on power and privileges. The character of this process will only be defined by the resolute stance of the revolutionary democratic struggle. The AKP may still be intending to drag the process on, or it may not be determined in solving the Kurdish issue or democratising Turkey; however, if the forces of democracy show support for the efforts of the Kurdish people's leader then the AKP will have to show compromise by opening itself to democratisation. This can only be achieved through a cooperative union of the Kurdish people and the democratic forces of Turkey.
Written by Executive Committee Member of the KCK Mustafa Karasu
http://kurdishquestion.com/north-kurdistan/news/the-search-for-a-democratic-solution-is-also-a-struggle-against-all-hegemonic-powers.html
- Details
The AKP government is completely disregarding the opinion of the people. The AKP government believes that it can resolve everything by force; and it seems to take confidence in its being the biggest police state in the world.
It is very difficult for a political power to continue its existence for very much longer once it has begun to require the services of the police force to maintain its authority. The AKP government rather than strengthening itself through democratic progress, it is finding itself relying on the force of the police.
We can see a similar approach by the state towards Turkey's most important problem: the Kurdish problem. Although guerrillas of the Kurdistan freedom movement have been pulling out of Turkey's borders the state is yet to make any move towards democratization. The Kurdish freedom movement is taking the process very seriously, however this so far has not been reciprocated by the state. A state that approaches one of the most significant developments in its recent history in this manner cannot do much better when it comes to other social issues.
Last year, the Kurdish freedom movement freed its captives and withdrew its forces from within the borders and thus ensured an atmosphere of peace; at this stage nothing else can be expected from our movement. The AKP government must act now, or face being questioned on grounds of integrity and solemnity. At present many people are already questioning this. We believe that politics cannot be conducted with an anxious mindset; however, this lack of integrity will be seriously evaluated by the Kurdish freedom movement.
If the AKP government is of the belief that the Kurdish freedom movement has no other choice but to pursue this process then it is wildly mistaken. The Kurdish freedom movement has the support of tens of millions of people and thousands of dedicated cadres; anyone who does not take this seriously does so at their own peril. If the AKP government thinks that it can once again mislead or divert the attention of the Kurdish people's leader Ocalan or the Kurdistan freedom movement it is deceiving itself.
The AKP government should at once reanalyze the gravity of the retrieval of the guerrilla forces and act accordingly. If a government who previously has made claims that "if the guerrillas retreat then the problem will be resolved" is remaining static and inactive then questions of integrity will naturally persist. This at the very least can only be defined as carelessness. If the government does not wake up soon, then it will surely be unable to bare the heavy burden that will follow.
The PKK is a forty year old party. Throughout this time it has been doing politics and struggling in the hardest part of the world. Any organization that has maintained itself and persistently struggled in the Middle East for forty years has no doubt vastly gained political experience and accumulated a huge potential of belief and struggle. Anyone that does not take this seriously will surely sink.
This organization, along with its leadership, cannot be misled. The guerrillas pulled out of the borders for a democratic process to begin. This means legal and constitutional reform. It is now way past the time for these steps to be taken. Work on a new constitution should should have been stepped up and finalized. At the very least, if the government is sincere, it must allow the head-negotiator of the Kurdish people to appropriately carry out this role.
The time has come for the demands of democracy and freedom of the Kurdish people – who have been struggling for these for the past forty years – to be met. Otherwise the Kurdish people are prepared to struggle for many more years to come. Slavery will not be accepted so struggle will always persist. If the freedoms of the Kurdish people are not granted than the struggle will only get stronger. The Kurds possess a tradition of struggle and uprising. It is for this reason that those who believe that they can stay in government without resolving the Kurdish question have not yet understood the matter in hand.
The Kurdish freedom movement has so far done everything it has promised to do. It is now the turn of the government to do so. It must take steps in a way that builds confidence among the Kurdish people and the forces of democracy in Turkey. The AKP must meet the demands of the Kurdish freedom movement, the Kurdish people and the democratic forces of Turkey as soon as possible.
Writing by Cemil Bayık
http://kurdishquestion.com/north-kurdistan/turkey/the-process-where-are-we.html
- Details
There were two specific characteristics of the local elections held in Turkey on the 30th of March. The first was the fact that the election was a showdown between the AKP and the Fetullah Gulen movement; or, to be even more precise, a showdown between Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Fetullah Gulen.
The second distinct characteristic was the head-to-head struggle between the BDP and the AKP in Kurdistan. This can also be defined as the struggle between the organised face of the Kurdish political struggle, the BDP, and representing the Turkish state, the AKP.
In terms of both of these main characteristics, the local elections was more a referendum. As a matter of fact, during the heated debates leading up to the election, all sides uttered this very word.
The Republican People's Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Action Party (MHP) were barely able to proclaim themselves as subjects of the election. This is because in terms of being an alternative to the AKP, both these parties fall way short. Due to their extreme nationalism and actual fascism, they can't even be recognised as democratic alternatives. Even though they tried to benefit from the AKP-Fetullah conflict to muster a few extra votes, they were woefully unsuccessful.
The conflict between the AKP and the Fetullah Gulen movement has ended the coalition that brought them both to power on the 3rd of November, 2002. There is no longer an AKP-Fetullah Gulen coalition.
Without a doubt, the USA, EU, KDP, CHP and MHP all have vested interests in this conflict. Even Iran, Russia and China could be added to these. In 2002, the USA backed this coalition, however, in the recent conflict the USA clearly sided with the Fetullah Gulen movement. Maybe the best way to define the conflict politically is that it is actually between the AKP and the USA. The Fetullah Gulen movement has been utilised by the USA in this conflict.
The separation of political paths during the past three years between the USA and the AKP is clear for everyone to see. This process began as a conflict between the AKP and Israel; however, step by step, the policies towards Iran, Iraq, Egypt and Syria turned this into a separation between the USA and the AKP. Behind the Fetullah Gulen movement is coalition of the USA, United Kingdom, Israel and the CHP-MHP; while the AKP has been able to rally support from Germany, France, Russia, Iran and China. Although the administration in South Kurdistan - specifically the KDP - has relationships with both sides, during this time it has largely supported the AKP. The decisive factor here being the as of yet not very well documented depth of the economic and business ties between the AKP and the KDP.
Preliminarily, it seems as if Recep Tayyip Erdogan has come out on top in the duel played out on the 30th of March. I say preliminarily because the way the USA and the Fetullah Gulen movement conduct their business is not similar to that of the AKP. Therefore, even though they lost at the ballot box on the 30th of March, this does not mean the fight is over for them. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, by singularising the target as the Fetullah Gulen movement, pulled these powers into its own fighting arena - the ballot box - where he was able to beat them. However, the forthcoming presidential and general elections will no doubt be seen by the USA and the Fetullah Gulen movement as an opportunity for revenge.
Politics in Turkey is passing through a very critical stage. The campaign for presidential election due to take place in August has started. This election will be more decisive in announcing the real winner and will give us a clearer insight into the new politics of Turkey. It is as of yet unclear how each conflicting side will approach the aforementioned election. However, there are signs for both a reconciliation or a deepening of the conflict. Whereas the possible approach of the USA-Fetullah Gulen movement is unclear, the AKP is seeming to look for a reconciliation but without a retreat of its current stance.
It can be observed that the AKP's plan is for Recep Tayyip Erdogan to be President, while Abdullah Gul becomes Prime minister. By getting the USA to accept this formula, the AKP is looking to reconcile with the USA. However, the USA's stance on this is not yet clear. Besides, this formula also depends on the stance of the Kurds.
On the 30th of March, the overwhelming majority of the Kurdish people voted for "Democratic Autonomy". The fact that the BDP won mayorships in a total number of eleven cities, of which three were metropolitan, shows this; even though it could hardly be called a fair and democratic election. The AKP disproportionately utilised all state apparatus and even cheated in places like Urfa, Bingol, Mus, Tatvan, Ceylanpinar and Agri. It can be easily said that this was the most unfair and fraudulent election of the Republic's ninety year history. Depsite this, the BDP came out with an overwhelming win.
The unassimilated part of Kurdistan, east of the Euphrates, has clearly voted for democratic autonomy. It is well known to everyone that the cities of Urfa, Bingol and Mus were fraudulently won by the AKP. Despite this, the election map clearly marks out a geography demanding for democratic autonomy. The results to the West of the Euphrates, only shows the humanitarian crime committed by the Turkish state in assimilating the Kurds.
In the referendum of the 30th of March, 2014, the Kurds said yes to democratic autonomy. This is the fourth referendum that the Kurds have recently won. The first was on the 29th of March, 2009. The organised face of the Kurdish political struggle back then was the DTP. Preceding that was the referendum that was held on the 12th of September, 2010. Those who wanted democratic autonomy in Kurdistan also won this referendum. The third referendum in which the Kurds were victorious was the general elections held on the 12th of June, 2011.
Therefore, the elections held on the 30th of March was the fourth referendum. It is time for everyone to recognise the will of the Kurdish people demanding for democratic autonomy. Those that are not separatists and are for democratic unity should specifically recognise this.
However, it is evident that neither the Turkish state or the AKP government want to recognise this will. It is also evident that other powers such as the European Union do not have a different stance to that of the Turkish state. Everywhere these powers talk about "the will of the people", however, when it comes to the Kurds, this principle is forgotten. Global democracy cannot be realised with such a double standard.
Rather than acknowledging the will of the Kurdish people and solving the Kurdish question within a democratic framework, the AKP government is choosing to crush and eradicate the Kurdish freedom movement. The AKP is increasing military activity in Northern Kurdistan. It is also supporting Al-Qaeda affiliated gangs in Western Kurdistan (Syrian Kurdistan), openly threatening the Kurds of Rojava. Political imprisonments and police terror against the Kurds is continuing relentlessly. Rather than saying "Yes" to the Kurdish people's leader Abdullah Ocalan's efforts for a peaceful and political solution, it is choosing to continue its policies of delay and fraud.
What can the Kurdish people do in this case? It has won in four referendums yet its will is not being respected. In order to exist and live freely no other option is being left to the Kurds, other than resistance. This being the case, no one should doubt the ability of the Kurds to resist until a free and honourable life is attained!
WRİTİNG by Duran Kalkan - Member of the Executive Committee of the PKK
- Details
If certain circles are in favour of a Syria in which no single force is dominant, then the position of the Kurds is pivotal
Erdogan recently visited the USA and it seems as if a comprehensive discussion was undertaken. This is at best, rare. The primary agenda was Syria. Within this framework the Kurdish question was a subheading. To be more precise these headings were discussed one within another.
The results of Erdogan’s visit to the USA have acknowledged the fact that the stance of the PKK and the Kurds of Western Kurdistan during this Syrian crisis has been the most accurate. It seems as if the USA, Russia, China and the West as a whole have brought themselves to a similar point. The Kurds have established themselves as a third way in Syria. They did not side with either the current regime or an opposition completely lacking in democratic and liberationist characteristics. Both sides were deemed insufficient. Consequently, they are proving in practice that a third way is possible. In fact, they are extending their claim that without an alternative to these ‘sides’ the crisis in Syria cannot be overcome. Currently the USA, Europe, Russia and China are in the search for a third way.
Bashar Esad will leave Syria and the Baas regime will cease to exist, but a Syria in which political Islam will be sovereign will not be acceptable. There will not be a single hegemony. It seems as if a democratic Syria in which all forces will coexist is inevitable. Political Islamists will not be side-lined as they were by the Baas regime, but they will also not be the primary power holders. A democratic reconciliation that will enable the coexistence of all ethnic, religious and social sections of the community will materialise. In this system the Kurds, Alevis and all other ethnic and religious communities will be able to express themselves and organise their societal affairs. Sunni Islam will also be able to express itself freely without the need for the establishment of its own hegemony.
This reality will make minorities like the Kurds and the Alevis a fundamental basis of democratisation in Syria. The Kurds have already proven this. The Alevis will eventually see that their one time hegemonic status will no longer persist and therefore it will be in their interest to strengthen the democratic mind-set. The Alevis can no longer insist on supporting an authoritarian rule. From now on any such insistence will endanger the ability of the Alevis to participate in the free and democratic future of Syria. Therefore, their very situation demands of them to be a force for democratic change. A Syria in which political Islam is not the hegemonic power is something that the Alevis can support. This option will also be strongly advocated by the Armenians, Assyrians, Yezidis, not to mention Women’s organisations and leftist democrats.
The USA, the EU and Russia will have to settle for a truly democratic Syria. Erdogan’s visit to the USA has shown this. The message to Turkey has been to not make itself an obstacle in front of this type of development. From now on, Turkey will stop supporting the efforts of radical Islamists. The message to the other more political Islamists that Turkey is in relationship with will be somewhat different: “consolidate your political existence and we will consolidate your positions in the newly formed Syria”. Turkey has been made to accept and adopt this new policy.
This policy does not completely fall in line with the Kurdish project; there are important differences. These forces will obviously be wanting to place their own collaborators within the system. However, the Kurds will be party to the third way solution in Syria. The Kurds will have their status and freedom accepted. In a democratised Syria their current gains will be protected; because for a Syria that wants to adopt the third way, this is imperative. If certain circles are in favour of a Syria in which no single force is dominant, then the position of the Kurds is pivotal. The moderate seeming opposition in Syria are in essence nationalists, hence its conservatism in regards to Kurdish rights. However, even they are in no position to reject the rights and freedoms of the Kurdish people. This is because the rejection of the rights of the Kurdish people is only possible in an authoritarian hegemony; the circumstances in the region, however, no longer allow for any such hegemony.
Esad, it seems, is on his way out, but the structure of the state is not about to be completely changed. The Baas party will continue to exist and Arab nationalism will also make itself felt. This Baas party however, will base itself on Sunni Arabs. The position of the Alevi Arabs necessitates that they steer clear of nationalism and the alienation of other communities. The political preferences of the Alevis will change in parallel with the formation of ‘new Syria’. The Alevis and the Kurds must be seen as the guarantors of a democratic Syria. The comprehension of this fact by international powers is a positive development. The current impasse has forced them to this. Turkey, after realising that the AKP’s policies were ineffective, has had to reluctantly approve of this new policy.
Erdogan’s statement that ‘we will oppose terrorism’ is meaningful. By this he does not mean the PYD, as he used to. Although in the meetings with the USA ‘the threat from PYD’ was mentioned, the organisation taht is seen as terrorist in Syria is the El-Nusra front, in other words, Al-Qaeda. The USA, the EU, Russia and China will take note of the opposition forces, but they will also move to isolate those that they have deemed as terrorist. Once this new project has matured and starts being deployed, those that stand in its way will also be done away with. Anyone wishing to prolong the conflict and sustain instability will also be eradicated. Any force that is not interested in becoming the new hegemonic force in Syria, but is hoping to take part in a democratic Syria will be able to do so. However, the new constitution will stand in the way of anyone fostering ambitions of being the new dictators of Syria.
These new circumstances will bring problems for Turkey and those organisations that it previously had ties with. Turkey, who has secret relations with Al-Qaeda in Iraq and supported this front in Syria, is now faced with an important decision; just as it has previously cut off strong ties it once had with Iran and the current Syrian regime, it must now do the same with organisations like Al-Qaeda. In short, Turkey’s previous approach of trying to please everyone has come to an abrupt end. Turkey is once again reorienting itself in-line with the Western camp that it has always been a part of. No longer will it make any incongruous outbursts. Saying this, if Turkey is successful in solving its Kurdish question and remains in pursuance of its own process of democratisation, than this will no doubt widen its area of manoeuvrability in the International arena. In the 21st century, the only way this external area of manoeuvrability can expand is through internal democratisation. It is extremely clear that from now on without extensive democratisation or without the formation of a democratic society, no force can adopt anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist policies. In Turkey this road passes through the solution of the Kurdish and Alevi questions and the question of radical democratisation.
It seems that one of the central outcomes of the AKP’s visit to the USA was an agreement on a Syrian project in which there is no place for a political Islamist hegemony. If the AKP, however, rather than pursuing hegemonic aspirations decides to insist on a democratised Turkey, it will firstly strengthen its own political foothold, and secondly, it will expand its scope of manoeuvrability in the face of international pressure.
Capitalist modernity has been forced to apply for a third way in Syria. Turkey has been brought to a stage where it too must solve its Kurdish question and also transform Turkey into a fully democratic country in which no community is hegemonic. The PKK leader saw an opportunity for exactly this and this is why he initiated the process of democratic solution. If this process is capped with success then it will not only be Turkey that is democratised, but the process itself will be a model for the solution of all problems encompassing the region. If Turkey really does want to be an effective force in the region, than it really must do so within the framework of democratic transformation. Only if Turkey becomes a beacon of democratic transformation can it have a positive impact on the developments in Syria. Contrary developments, however, will drag Turkey back to its previously ineffective role. Consequently, Turkey will only be a thorn in the side of all neighbouring countries; that which neighbouring countries will only want to neutralise.
Our sincere hope is that Turkey chooses to become a beacon of democracy and freedom as opposed to anything else.
Mustafa KARASU
http://www.pkkonline.net/en/index.php?sys=article&;artID=196
- Details
President of Kurdish Democratic Confederation (KCK) Murat Karayilan said they extended the unilateral ceasefire against Turkey after receiving a letter from Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan.
Karayilan said it was only possible to extend the ceasefire if Ocalan's power was brought into the process. And as soon as the leadership of the Kurdistan Worker's Party received the 5 page letter they decided to declare a ceasefire until the general elections in June 2011.
"Our leader Ocalan saw the positive attitude of the state or the negotiating team for a solution (for the Kurdish Question)(...) and sent us a letter which calls for extension of unilateral ceasefire" Karayılan said.
He also said that the five conditions should be met by the Turkish state for a peaceful solution to the Kurdish Question.
PKK demanded demanded to stop military and political operations and to release Kurdish politicians who are unjustly detained. The organization also requested to enable imprisoned Kurdish leader Abdullah Öcalan's active participation in the process.
According to the Kurdish Muovument, the dialogues should go beyond negotiation. In order to advance the process, the organization suggested establishing an investigative commission into the constitution and to remove the second-to-none election threshold of 10 percent.
Karayilan said that these demands are just and could be met by the Turkish government in the current political climate.
Karayilan said they also have alternative plans if Turkish government fail to satisfy Kurds and met Kurdish demands.
He said firstly Turkey has to accept the unjust policies which are implemented against Kurdish minority since the creation of Turkish Republic.
"They have to tell Turkish people the reality. They have to tell about the atrocities against the Kurdish people" he said.
"They are calling our leader 'head of the seperatists'. Is this real? Do we want to be seperated from Turkey? No! Since 18 years we are struggling for cultural and identity rights of Kurdish people. (...) We want to solve the Kurdish Question by dialogue."
He called the Turkish government to seize the opportunity for peace and not underestimate the power of the PKK and Kurdish people. Karayilan said they have information about the level of negotiations with Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan and they will have a meeting to discuss about the negotiation points in two months with fellow PKK commanders.
He also added that Turkey did not respond the previous ceasefires declared by the KCK. Karayilan also accused Turkish media for providing false information about the PKK and Kurdish Question.
We are not withdrawing from North Kurdistan
President of Kurdish Democratic Confederation (KCK) Murat Karayilan says its impossible for the guerilla forces withdraw from North Kurdistan.
Turkish press is speculating that PKK accepted Turkey's demand to withdraw its guerilla forces to South Kurdistan (Iraq territories) for some time.
HPG guerillas were withdrawn from North Kurdistan in 1999 after Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan called for a permanent ceasefire. Turkish army continued its operations against the withdrawing guerilla forces.
More than 200 guerillas were killed between 1 August 1999 and 1 August 2000 in Turkish military operations.
Karayilan ruled out any possibilities that will lead to a guerilla withdrawal from North Kurdistan.
'If there is a possibilitly for peace then our guerillas in Dersim will join this process. But they will stay where they are' he said.
Karayilan rejected the calls from Turkish side and said no military withdrawal will help solution of the Kurdish Question.
Karayilan also rejected claims that Kurdistan Freedom Falcons (TAK) has connections with the PKK or KCK. He said that TAK is a seperate organization which was formed about 7 years ago and noone can show PKK or KCK responsible for TAK's actions.
A TAK member carried out a bomb attack against a bus full of Turkish police in Istabul's famous Taksim Square. Thirty-two were killed in the attack while the attacker was killed by the explosion. ANF
Nearly a thousand Kurds arrested in Syria
Karayilan said Syria implements a new repression policy towrds Kurds and the last arrests are all connected with a group of nationalists within the Syrian government.
He said the new wave of arrests is a serious threat to Kurds living in north-east of the contry.
Karayilan called the Syrian government to stop the operations against Kurdish dissidents and said that “it will only help to provoke Kurds against the Damascus regime”.
He also called Syrian Kurds to unite and resist against the oppresive politics of the Damascus regime.
Syria is home to about two million Kurds. About 200,000 of them has no official recognition.
In the last two months Syrian police and intelligence arrested a number of Kurds in Qamislo and Haseki. Human rights organizations puts the number between 500-700 while Karayilan said nearly a thousand.
- Details