In October 2024, Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) Chairperson Devlet Bahçeli's harsh yet strategic call, declaring that "Türkiye must be completely rid of the scourge of terrorism," and then the surprise message from Imralı in early 2025, Abdullah Öcalan, leader of the PKK, openly called on the organization to "lay down all arms" and "dissolve itself" marked a significant turning point in Türkiye. We have witnessed Turkish intelligence authorities begin to reap the fruits of a process they have been working on for a long time. As of June 2025, the PKK convened an extraordinary congress, making a principled decision to end the armed struggle. And on July 11, PKK forces in northern Iraq had quietly withdrawn from areas near the Turkish border and symbolically laid down their weapons in small groups. Thus, the most concrete peace initiative in the nearly 40-year history of the conflict was taken.

How did Türkiye resolve conflict?

So, what would the PKK's laying down of arms mean strategically for Türkiye and the region? Before delving into this question, we need to look a bit further back at the turn of events so far and try to analyze what brought the PKK to this point.

The process that has driven the PKK to lay down its arms over the past year stems from the heavy military losses the organization has suffered on the ground, the severing of its logistics lines by Türkiye's pinpoint operations and the significant shrinkage of its international support network. Türkiye's "Claw" series of operations in northern Iraq, in particular, significantly weakened the organization's mountain cadre, resulting in the loss of both its field mobility and morale.

During the same period, some supporting circles in the U.S. and Europe, driven by the perception that the organization was contributing to regional instability, distanced themselves from the PKK, limiting its international manoeuvrability. U.S. special envoy to Syria Thomas J. Barrack’s recent words, "We don’t owe a state to (Kurds),” expose this radical change of the table. Meanwhile, Türkiye, through both diplomatic channels and its consistent security policies on the ground, has made some aspects within the organization receptive to a peace process. The shifting balance of power in Syria, Iran's partial withdrawal from the region and Türkiye's strengthening of its regional leadership position also meant isolation for the PKK. All these factors led the organization to reconsider its option to lay down its arms.

40 years of terror end

We also need to consider the last four decades to understand the historical context of the recent situation. The PKK struck the axis in 1984, emerging as a "separatist terrorist organization" with its first attacks. In the 40 years since then, the PKK has inflicted countless losses on Türkiye: civilians, security forces and public employees have paid a heavy price. Aside from human losses, climbing up to tens of thousands from both sides, it is estimated that the country has suffered more than $1 trillion in direct losses due to its fight against terrorism, let alone indirect costs.

However, the Turkish state has consistently countered the organization using military, intelligence, judicial and diplomatic means. From a military perspective, Türkiye has dealt heavy blows to the organization through internal security operations and cross-border operations. By the late 1990s and early 2000s, the PKK was driven out of its attempts to infiltrate urban life. In 2015-2016, the organization's efforts to establish de facto provincial autonomy were thwarted by "Operations Trenches."

From an intelligence perspective, targeted operations, surveillance of the organization's leaders, judicial processes and specially authorized prosecutors' offices dealt a blow to the organization's finances, leadership and central staff responsible for propaganda. During this period, Türkiye successfully established a systematic, disciplined and publicly supported structure in the fight against terrorism.

The resolute diplomacy that led to the PKK's designation as a terrorist organization in Europe and the U.S. narrowed the organization's international legitimacy. Faced with this, the PKK adopted a strategy of using different names. While the PKK, which had formed offshoots like the YPG in Syria and received support from the U.S. under the pretext of fighting Daesh, its regional dominance was hampered by Türkiye's persistent operations in Syria and Iraq. Despite its temporary regional dominance, the movement failed to establish a state and become a recognized legitimate actor in the international arena.

The PKK's disarmament following recent developments has the potential to transform Türkiye from a country experiencing internal turmoil into one that has resolved its internal problems. In other words, the road is now open to perceive the Kurds in Türkiye no longer as an internal problem, but rather as an opportunity for regional advancement.

Fortification of domestic front

The PKK was a domestic problem on which Türkiye invested significant resources and energy. In a geopolitical environment marked by conflict, the state was unable to fully implement projects related to economic growth, social reform, cultural transformation and political consolidation. The impact of disarmament could be crucial in this context.

The transformation in Türkiye's perception of security is the first crucial element. With the end of the armed conflict, the "terrorist threat" mentality will diminish, and public order and individual freedoms may ease. This process must be supported by a comprehensive democratization and freedom of expression initiative encompassing all opposition groups.

Establishing an investment climate is another potential outcome. The country's appetite for investment in areas such as tourism, agriculture, and infrastructure is likely to increase. This has the potential to align with an inclusive growth model that integrates the East and Southeast Anatolia regions into the broader Turkish economy.

Social integration is also a key element in this regard. Issues such as political inclusiveness, cultural representation, and legal equality for Kurdish citizens could be revisited; previously taken steps toward cultural freedom could be expanded, which could strengthen Türkiye's internal stability. These achievements have the potential to move Türkiye away from being a country experiencing internal turmoil by managing its internal balances and bring it closer to the vision of a stable state model. To put it more clearly, the removal of a major problem facing Türkiye opens the door to a series of historical administrative, economic, and diplomatic opportunities for the country.

Filling power vacuum in Mideast

Recently, Israel's internationally unlawful and genocidal regional operations have restricted Iran's reach beyond its borders. Iran, particularly in Syria, Lebanon and Palestine, has faced a decline in its strategic influence. This geopolitical vacuum has opened a window of opportunity for Türkiye.

Since the beginning of the Syrian civil war, Türkiye has emerged as a "state-building actor" in regions like Afrin, Tel Rifaat, and Azaz, initiating reconstruction efforts for the local population with public services such as electricity, water, education, and health care. With the December 2024 Revolution, Türkiye became Syria's primary kingmaker, providing technical, administrative, and intelligence support to President Ahmed al-Shara’s government in establishing a state. As a result, the country has become a sphere of influence for Türkiye.

The new geostrategic hegemony in Syria has also created opportunities for development projects. Cross-border local government cooperation, agricultural development and humanitarian aid – all of these are increasing Türkiye's influence within Syria. International transit trade, centered on the M5 highway of Syria, is paving the way for Türkiye to influence the entire Middle East.

In short, Türkiye is assuming a historic role in Syria, transforming it not only into a military power but also a founding and guiding actor in the region. Now, with the disarmament of the PKK, conditions may allow Türkiye to shift gears.

Protector of Kurds

The PKK's disarmament and self-dissolution could have a lasting impact on the Kurdish political movement. Türkiye is creating the conditions to assume the role of "protector of the Kurds." The primary dynamics in this strategy are political power and legitimacy. Disarmament facilitates the transfer of legitimate values of representation to political processes. By drawing Kurdish political figures into mainstream politics through dialogue, Türkiye can strengthen local democratic forces.

With its normalization policies in areas such as education, music, culture, and television broadcasting, Türkiye was already addressing a political-ideological framework that encompassed Kurdish culture. Following disarmament, Türkiye's cross-border regional influence has the potential to spill over into cultural spheres. The fact that Turkish television and Turkish soap operas are among the most-watched foreign productions in Iraq, Iran and Syria demonstrates Türkiye's soft power in the region.

By engaging in dialogue with Kurdish politicians in areas such as Iraq's Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), Iraq's central government and Syria, Türkiye can be perceived as a strategically serious civilian force. This could enable Kurdish politicians to undertake more comprehensive integration projects with Türkiye.

This move will present Türkiye as a "protector state" for the Kurdish population, not only in its territories but in the whole Middle East and increase its soft power in the region. This new position, which could limit Israel's influence over the Kurds, also has the potential to prevent the Kurds from being used as a regional pawn for Israel's projects to destabilize the Middle East. By assuming the role of protector of the Kurds, it will strengthen its regional influence and position Türkiye as the leader of a regional axis.

Let us leave the economic reverberations and opportunities created by the PKK’s disarmament, an event with multidimensional and multilayered consequences, and its geostrategic effects on regional competition, for our following commentary.