Former PKK commander Nizamettin Taş: “The PKK is loyal to Öcalan mostly in words, not in substance”

Nizamettin Taş, a former senior of the military wing of the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) from 1995 until his resignation in 2004, discussed with Medyascope Editor-in-Chief Ruşen Çakır the recent talk of a ‘Kurdish opening’ initiated by hardline ultranationalist leader Devlet Bahçeli.

Since the mid-1980s, the Turkish Armed Forces have engaged in sporadic conflict with the PKK, a separatist militia group and political party classified by the Turkish government as a terrorist organization. While violence between Turkey and the PKK, concentrated in the country’s heavily-Kurdish southeast, peaked in the 1990s, intermittent fighting has continued, particularly in the 2015-2016 period. PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan has been imprisoned on the isolated İmralı Island in the Sea of Marmara since his arrest in 1999. 

Starting in the early 2010s, the government of then-Prime Minister of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdoğan initiated a so-called ‘solution process’ aimed at ending the long-running conflict. The process included high-level negotiations between Öcalan and Turkish authorities, culminating in a call from Öcalan in spring of 2013 that the PKK end its armed struggle against the Turkish state.

The solution process, however, broke down in late 2014 amidst major protests throughout southeastern Turkey related to the Siege of Kobani, a Kurdish-majority town in northern Syria attacked by Islamic State fighters. Erdoğan announced publicly that the Turkish military would not interfere in the siege, characterizing the PKK and YPG forces defending Kobani as terrorists. 

The killing of two Turkish police officers in southeastern Turkey in the summer of 2015 led to the full collapse of the solution process. In the fall of 2016 co-leaders of the pro-Kurdish People’s Democratic Party (HDP), Selahattin Demirtaş and Figen Yüksekdağ, were imprisoned on alleged terrorism charges stemming from the Kobani incidents.

Following the failed coup d’etat attempt in July 2016, a gradual entente between the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and Bahçeli’s Nationalist Action Party (MHP) saw Erdoğan embrace harder-line stances towards the country’s Kurds, exemplified by the widespread deposition of democratically-elected pro-Kurdish politicians following 2019’s local elections.

At the opening of the Turkish Parliament in early October 2024, Bahçeli surprised many by exchanging friendly handshakes with members of the DEM Party, the pro-Kurdish successor to the HDP. This was followed by a surprise announcement from Bahçeli in late October that Öcalan could be released and invited to speak in parliament if he agreed to dissolve the PKK’s military forces.

Despite this surprising development, the recent ousting of numerous pro-Kurdish politicians across Turkey has led to skepticism of a reboot of the long-stalled solution process. In late October, a PKK attack at the Turkish Aerospace Industries facility in Ankara just days after Bahçeli’s surprise announcement led many to question the sway Öcalan still holds within the organization.

In a recent interview with Ruşen Çakır, former PKK leader Nizamettin Taş argues that Öcalan may no longer possess the influence necessary to initiate a full disarmament of the PKK.

Nizamettin Taş is a Kurdish politician and former high level commander of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). Born in Turkey in 1961, he is also known by his nom de guerre “Botan.” Taş played a prominent role in the PKK’s activities and was part of its leadership during the 1980s and 1990s. He was closely associated with Abdullah Öcalan.

“Until the CHP, right-wing, and conservative parties are convinced, the problem cannot be solved”

Medyascope: Did MHP leader Devlet Bahçeli’s recent moves surprise you?

Nizamettin Taş: “In the past, it was not possible to take steps towards a solution to the Kurdish issue without obtaining permission from the army. We started to overcome the army’s strict denialist approach [towards the existence of the Kurdish issue] during the [President Turgut] Özal era. Özal reportedly said, “I can convince the army, the real difficulty is to convince the public.” The percentage of those who have a negative view of the Kurdish issue in Turkey exceeds 70%. This includes not only the right-wing and conservative segments, but also a large nationalist and Kemalist wing that pretends to be leftist. Very little change has been seen in the mentality of the public opinion, which has been a barrier to the Kurdish issue since the beginning. If this observation attributed to Özal was really made by him, it means that he evaluated the reality of Turkey very well.

Every party leader who came to power after Özal, without exception, made some attempts to solve the Kurdish issue. However, every step taken was sabotaged either by the military or by the fierce resistance of the opposition parties before it even started.

In Turkey, it is not possible to resolve the Kurdish issue without convincing not only the army but also the Republican People’s Party (CHP) as the founding party, as well as the right-wing and conservative groups that constitute the main obstacle. The failure of the solution process, most recently initiated under Erdoğan’s leadership, is a clear indication of this. The government must learn from past experiences and include the CHP, the army, and other groups, especially the MHP. Doing this is an important measure taken against forces that may want to sabotage the process.”

“Outside of Bahçeli there is no other leader who will invite Öcalan to parliament”

The resolution process has no chance of being implemented by any leader or party, including Erdoğan, unless it is turned into official state policy.

In this respect, the inclusion of Devlet Bahçeli in the process is not a surprise, on the contrary, it is a necessary step. However, Bahçeli raising the bar very high and inviting Öcalan to the Parliament to speak in this manner was quite an unexpected surprise for me and everyone else. or rather the last surprising move that would come to mind. It was the last thing we would have expected.

Bahçeli’s statement about Öcalan has a symbolic meaning. It is undoubtedly Erdoğan who convinced Bahçeli to speak; however, apart from Devlet Bahçeli, there is no other leader in Turkey, including Erdoğan, who would have the courage to invite Abdullah Öcalan to speak in the Parliament. Explaining this with individual courage would be incorrect. We assume that Devlet Bahçeli made this speech by trusting in the immunity offered by his position and the group he represents. Anyone in Turkey, other than Devlet Bahçeli, who had attempted to speak in this manner would most likely have been hanged. The fact that Bahçeli stands by his statement stems from this powerful position he has. He made this statement with great self-confidence and without paying attention to any criticism.

Medyascope: Does the suggestion that Öcalan give a speech to the DEM Party parliamentary group seem realistic to you?

Nizamettin Taş: Devlet Bahçeli’s statement on Öcalan shocked everyone and caused extensive discussions regarding its true meaning. On the one hand, it opened the door for everyone to talk beyond their means, and on the other hand, it was reduced to the PKK dissolving itself in return for Öcalan being placed under house arrest by separating the Kurdish issue from its context. It would not be right to underestimate Bahçeli’s stance on Öcalan, but reducing the issue to a different tone of the old security approach carries the risk of frustrating the process, as it has in the past.

Medyascope: Do you agree with the assessment that Bahçeli made these statements in response to possible international and regional developments and threats to Turkey?

Nizamettin Taş: The Kurdish problem has now become an international and regional problem, unlike the past. If the current process fails once again, it will no longer be just a domestic problem, but will once again be on the agenda as a direct part of the contradictions and conflicts occurring in the Middle East and the world. Despite his unexpected move regarding Öcalan, Bahçeli still shows a security-oriented approach to the Kurdish problem. However, the Kurdish problem has long since passed this threshold.

Undoubtedly, issues concerning security have not yet been resolved, and in this context, the PKK declaring a ceasefire and ending the war and paving the way for politics are of great importance. However, the Kurdish problem contains a series of political and constitutional demands that cannot be confined to this scope. There can be no thought as naive and shallow as believing that the problem will be resolved even if the PKK disbands itself and lays down its arms. After all that has happened, it is no longer possible for the Turkish state to escape the proverbial fire using old firefighting methods.

Medyascope: In this context, is there a possibility that the PKK could be used against Turkey by some regional and global powers?

Nizamettin Taş: In Turkey, to tell you the truth, there has been no real change of mentality regarding the resolution of the Kurdish issue. There are many circles that are angry and want to undermine Bahçeli’s statement, which has no other content than proposing that Öcalan be put under house arrest in return for dissolving the PKK.

It goes without saying that the Kurdish problem cannot be solved based on the dominant mentality in Turkey. It is not the change in mentality that has brought the problem to the agenda; on the contrary, some steps are being taken as a result of the developments in the region.

It is believed that the Turkish administration, which has a thousand years of state tradition, has seen that if it closes itself off from the developments in the Middle East and leaves the solution of the Kurdish problem to the initiative of other powers, the danger will boomerang and hit it sooner or later. The new process that the state wants to develop under its own initiative stems from the imposition of regional conditions rather than domestic ones.

“If it truly wants to solve the issue, the Turkish government must take some important steps”

Even a figure like Bahçeli, who shaped his entire life on anti-Kurdism, making some statements that would shock everyone, does not stem from a change in mentality, but rather from this political necessity. Bahçeli’s inclusion in the process and his unexpected overtures are a sacrifice made for the survival of the state. Bahçeli’s inclusion in the process has increased the chances of the project being brought to a conclusion without being sabotaged, unlike in the past.

However, Bahçeli’s desire to steal the role from Erdoğan and take the process under his own control is paving the way for new problems to arise in the future, if not now. It is not necessary to be a prophet to calculate that Bahçeli’s approach, which goes a step beyond security policies and proposes the disbandment of the PKK in exchange for Öcalan being pardoned, will pose a problem in the future, and that the Kurdish issue has long since passed this point. If the Turkish state wants to take the initiative on the Kurdish issue, it has to take some steps beyond this. If Bahçeli does not show understanding on this issue and continues to limit the problem to Öcalan, contradictions will inevitably emerge in the coming period. However, it seems much more difficult for Bahçeli, who has taken such risks, to step back from now on. 

Medyascope: Is Bahçeli taking these steps with Erdoğan’s knowledge, or could there be some disagreement between them?

Nizamettin Taş: It is difficult to say whether there is consensus between Erdoğan and Bahçeli on every issue. In the upcoming process, it is likely that the tendency to compromise will continue, even if it is difficult, and that they will have to walk together not only for the state’s survival but also for their own party and personal futures.

Attempting to solve the Kurdish issue in Turkey carries with it many negative elements, more than is typically thought. When we look at the general picture, we see that a period of complete ignorance is being experienced in the true sense of the word. There are large numbers of people who watch with horror at the great decay and corruption not only in material terms but also in political, social and cultural terms, and that the country is becoming more and more barren every passing day.

“It is not realistic to draw exaggerated conclusions such as that Turkey will be divided”

Medyascope: In this context, is there a possibility that the PKK will be used against Turkey by some regional and global powers?

Nizamettin Taş: In a context where no real change of mentality has taken place, and where a hollow and insecure nationalist and chauvinist structure dominates, a gangrenous problem like the Kurdish issue, which has now gained an international and regional dimension, has become quite difficult to resolve. When viewed from this perspective, there are very few reasons to be optimistic about the solution of the problem.

However, evaluating the reality of Turkey by looking only at this picture will lead us to a misleading conclusion. The social structure in Turkey has never been in a decision-making position in any period of history. Whether wrong or right, the executive authorities of the state have always been the ones who declare their will and make decisions. The fear of division guides the administrative reflex of the Turkish state. As in the past, the Turkish state is giving the green light to this process not as a result of humanitarian and democratic values regarding the solution of the Kurdish issue, but because it is concerned that the fear of division will become reality if no steps are taken within the initiative.

The Turkish state is taking action on the Kurdish issue more in order to take precautions against developments stemming from regional conditions rather than for internal reasons. In the current situation, the state does not yet have a very clear policy in order to solve the Kurdish issue. In fact, rather than solving the problem, they have requested that the PKK declare a ceasefire and dissolve itself in exchange for Öcalan being put under house arrest. However, since the problem has come to the agenda not because of internal conditions but because of the pressure of regional factors, we have not the slightest doubt that the security policies that currently include dissolution of the PKK will be rapidly sidelined and lead to other developments.

Based on this, it is unrealistic to draw exaggerated conclusions such as that Turkey will be divided in the coming period. Despite the paranoia of division of a great state like Turkey, which is in a strategic position, there is no state that will approve the change of its borders. It is not possible for any power, especially the US and Europe, to approve this due to their own interests. However, it is very difficult for the same powers to support the security policies that the state has been implementing so far to ensure that Turkey will not be divided.

These powers will not come out against things like the recognition of the identity of the Kurds, the granting of the right to mother-tongue education, and the implementation of democratic reforms in cultural, social and political areas. In fact, even if there is no external imposition, the Kurds’ own power is easily sufficient to realize all these demands. Insisting on the framework drawn by Bahçeli not only creates problems for the Kurds, but also presents an invaluable opportunity to the powers that want to launch an operation against the Turkish state. Realizing the danger that has come to its doorstep, the Turkish state must inevitably take some steps beyond where it currently stands.

The conditions the Middle East is going through necessitate that the PKK take some steps beyond dissolving itself in order to resolve the Kurdish issue. However, if the thousand-year-old Turkish state mindset does not grasp this reality, then the destructive process will deepen and get out of control.

Medyascope: On a similar note, could the PKK be used to destabilize Iran, especially by Israel and its supporters?

Nizamettin Taş: Even if we do not count the past, the Kurdish issue has a history of at least two hundred years. During this period, the Kurds have always been a part of the power struggle. The current position of the Kurds, who have only played the role of the sacrificial lamb until now, is gradually changing. The new process that the Turkish state has initiated under the leadership of Devlet Bahçeli in recent months stems from the increasing importance of the Kurds’ role and position in the Middle East.

No one has any doubt that Israel and the US will now follow a much more aggressive policy to surround Iran with all their might and to neutralize the forces it relies on. It is enough to just look at the map to see that Kurdistan will be most affected by any possible change.

After the Hamas attack, it has become crystal clear that the state of Israel is in a very weak position, contrary to what was thought. It is not possible for the West to give up Israel’s existence under any circumstances. However, defending Israel by providing external support indefinitely is becoming increasingly problematic. In order to protect Israel, which is surrounded by hostile nations and states, it is necessary to either eliminate these states as a threat or to bring in other forces that will provide balance.

It is not necessary to be a prophet to predict that the Kurds will gain new positions by taking advantage of every possible change that will occur in the Middle East. The reality of Southern Kurdistan and Rojava is the clearest evidence of this. For some reason, Kurdish forces in Turkey are seen as simple pawns of others. The balance of power in the Middle East should not be read in this way. It is not possible to use even the most ordinary organization without considering mutual interests.

If the PYD plays a role as a simple pawn of this or that power, as some circles in Turkey claim, then why is Turkey taking certain initiatives with great panic? The main purpose of the new process that the Turkish state wants to initiate through Öcalan is to prevent Rojava from gaining a new status by taking advantage of the changes that are taking place in the region. This means that the relations developed by the PYD with the US are not one-sided and only looking out for the interests of the West, as is sometimes thought. It is unnecessary to say that the party that holds the power in the relations benefits more. However, all parties accept that Rojava has benefited to the maximum extent from the relations it has entered into with the West after the ISIS war.

“There is not a single state that would consent to Turkey occupying Rojava”

Medyascope: Ankara’s main concern seems to be Syria/Rojava. Could there be a new Turkish Armed Forces operation in this region?

Nizamettin Taş: If Turkey attempts to enter Rojava, it means the reversal of all the developments foreseen in the Middle East. The fact that powers that are already at war consent to this contradicts the reality of the region. If Turkey makes such attempts without risking friction with many powers and only by turning a blind eye, it will have opened the door wide open to unpredictable dangers. Similarly, leaving the Kurdish issue unresolved in Turkey will not only consume the state’s energy but will also continue to be a soft spot that external powers will always have control over.

There is always a danger that the Turkish state will invade Rojava. However, it is not as easy as it seems to emerge victoriously from this. Sooner or later, the issue will once again be on the agenda with different dimensions. There is not a single state in the world that will consent to Turkey invading Rojava. Turkey will find itself in a new conflict not only with the Kurds but also with the Arab states, Iran, the US, Europe and Russia, and many fronts will open up against it.

Medyascope: Could Erdoğan’s expectation that the US will use and then abandon the Kurds in Syria come true under a Trump administration?

Nizamettin Taş: The Trump administration’s reason for existence requires defending the state of Israel. It is debatable how a leader like Trump, who does not know how to make decisions, will act in favor of the Kurds. However, there are strong indications that the candidates picked for his incoming administration will act in favor of the Kurds. We have no doubt that the PKK, which has found room to maneuver even under these conditions despite being on the terror list, will provide much more suitable ground and external support in the event of the occupation of Rojava.

The process initiated in Turkey reveals that the government is aware of these possibilities and that some measures will soon be taken. If these measures are successful, only the Turks and the Kurds will benefit from this. In the event of failure, not only the Kurds but also Turkey will lose its advantage as a regional power and find itself in a losing situation where it constantly struggles with contradictions and conflicts.

“The PKK’s loyalty to Öcalan is not in substance, but mostly in words.”

Medyascope: Would the PKK leaders in Qandil agree to lay down their arms if Öcalan wanted them to?

Nizamettin Taş: The PKK’s loyalty to Öcalan is mostly in words, not in substance. In the true sense of the word, a completely opportunist attitude has been adopted. Despite the fact that loyalty ceremonies have been organized by sprinkling the words “leadership, Reber Apo” in every sentence, the PKK has not implemented any of the instructions given [by Öcalan]. The current stance of the PKK is no different from the past. Despite appearing loyal, they have no intention of giving up the approach that has been going on for twenty-five years.

Not only the PKK, but also Öcalan is responsible for this. Kandil accepts İmralı as the center of will in every statement. If Öcalan had taken a definite stance in terms of banging his fist on the table from the beginning, it would not have been possible for the Kandil administration [PKK headquarters in northern Iraq] to act so recklessly, almost mockingly. Kandil finds a wide area of maneuver for itself by taking advantage of Öcalan’s ambiguous and meaningless statements. If the same attitude continues, it would not be difficult for the PKK to frustrate the process by diluting it under the oaths of loyalty, as it did in the past. In fact, all the statements made so far show that the same opportunist attitude continues.

From now on, everything will take shape depending on how Öcalan behaves. If, as in the past, vague definitions are made and the Kandil administration is given the opportunity to speak, it is unnecessary to even repeat that the same frustrative attitude will continue to be displayed.

“Öcalan is being given one last chance”

Öcalan is being given one last chance. Missing this opportunity once again means that he may not have such an opportunity ever again. Öcalan must take a stance knowing that the PKK has no intention of carrying out any instructions by him. He has not yet lost all of his chances in this regard. Despite exploiting it, the PKK still swears allegiance every day in order to benefit from Öcalan’s power. The PKK’s mortgage of its own will also necessitates them to comply with the instructions given. The decisive factor here is whether Öcalan will show the necessary wisdom by taking advantage of this weak point of the PKK. If he does not want to bury himself alive, he must give the PKK administration definitive instructions to be implemented immediately and without delay, without leaving any room for maneuver.

“The attitude of the DEM Party and other legal institutions will be decisive”

Medyascope: How could PKK leaders come to the point of laying down their weapons?

Nizamettin Taş: Whether the PKK will comply with the instructions given is a debatable issue. However, even if the PKK administration rejects the instructions, its determined stance will find broad support among the administration, cadre, and fighters. In time, it will end with the dominance of those who take a stance in favor of Öcalan. The attitude of the DEM Party and other legal institutions will be decisive in this regard, and if a positive result is achieved, it will have a more positive effect on the  [PKK’s] European and mountain cadres.

The PKK has a weaker hand against Öcalan than in the past. It no longer has any significant military power in Turkey. The influx of new recruits has stopped, and there is no longer the possibility to cross the border and re-establish bases in the interior [of Turkey]. The practical situation clearly shows that insisting on this situation, where there is no maneuverability other than isolation from the world and hiding in tunnels against new technological weapons, will only exhaust the organization. This weak situation of the PKK administration, which seems determined to thwart Öcalan’s instructions whenever it finds the opportunity, may eventually force it to accept the process unwillingly, unless all maneuver areas are closed and new excuses are presented to exploit.

The process initiated in Turkey does not contain the ingredients necessary to solve the Kurdish problem. At this stage, it has no purpose other than the PKK dissolving itself in exchange for Öcalan’s release.

However, even the worst deal made regarding Öcalan is much better than the continuation of the current situation, in which the PKK faces the danger of losing all its gains.

Written & translated for Medyascope by Leo Kendrick

Medyascope English YouTube

Keywords: Nizamettin Taş, PKK, Öcalan