Journalist and writer Berrin Sönmez stated that the 'Call for Peace and a Democratic Society' made by Abdullah Öcalan should not be limited solely to the Kurdish question, and that it is inappropriate for the government to approach this call from a security-centered policy perspective.

In an interview with ANF, Berrin Sönmez said that the government has focused solely on disarmament, whereas Mr. Öcalan has aimed to steer the call toward peace and democratization. She noted that the short text reflects a significant paradigm shift. Recalling that the call also underlined the responsibilities of the government in order for the process to move forward, Sönmez said: “The demand to be an equal part of a democratic system was incredibly valuable. Even if calls for peace and democracy do not come from the state itself, this process—through becoming a social demand—can pressure those in power toward democratization.”

Government's approach remains security-focused

Assessing the responsibilities the call places on Turkish politics, particularly the government’s stance, Sönmez continued: “This is a critical stage, one that is needed not only by Kurds but also by Turks and other peoples. Achieving social peace is a necessity for everyone, even for those who oppose it. Yet the government’s approach is not aimed at responding to social demands but remains focused on security. A new system is being shaped both domestically and abroad, particularly in relation to Syria, Iraq, and Iran, where Israeli and American policies pose significant threats. This situation requires serious internal change. Will the government take these necessary steps? So far, it has taken none. The ruling power expects the other side to fulfill certain demands, but that is not a sustainable approach. If there is indeed a genuine need for peace, then the government must act accordingly. There are expectations around the decisions that will emerge from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) congress, but if the process is drawn out, it risks being derailed. Even if both sides are willing, there is always a possibility of sabotage—so the process must be carefully safeguarded. The number of people who advocate for peace must grow, but that will only be possible if the government fulfills its responsibilities.”

Government is terrorizing civil society

Despite the difficulties of the current process—particularly due to pressure and attacks on Northern and Eastern Syria— Sönmez noted that the absence of any statement from the PKK signaling the end of the process is a hopeful sign. She stated: “There are reports that talks with the Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) were positive. On the other hand, the government is attempting to terrorize civil society. The detention of members of the Peoples’ Democratic Congress (HDK), the imprisonment of artists and journalists—all of this raises serious concerns. The government's effort to criminalize the opposition, to associate the search for justice and opposition parties with terrorism, is a deeply troubling development. The president’s recent remarks about ‘transforming the opposition’ at his party’s congress once again highlight the pressures placed on dissenting voices. The calls directed at Mr. Öcalan are not only linked to foreign policy—they are also tied to domestic politics. The government is using this process to secure its internal power and weaken the opposition. It is clear that no steps have been taken toward democratization, and that the government continues to view this entire process solely through the lens of security.”

An honourable path forward for both sides

Berrin Sönmez pointed out that while some segments of society have responded positively to the call, there are also groups that feel uneasy about it. She explained: “The brevity of the statement has left many with questions. But there may be a reasonable explanation for keeping it short given the current atmosphere, where every word is subject to interpretation, a more detailed statement might have led to even more speculation. Despite the differing views between Kurds and Turks, there seems to be a shared recognition on both sides of the deep need for peace. The call for disarmament, after forty years of conflict, could be seen by both sides as an honourable way out. During this process, although civil society actors, human rights defenders, women, and some political parties have generally supported the call, there is still a cautious attitude across the board. This cautious optimism reflects the depth of the public’s yearning for peace. The fact that Devlet Bahçeli emerged as the first to respond to this call may open a space for nationalist circles to distance themselves from anti-Kurdish rhetoric and begin to understand the Kurdish issue more deeply. The lack of objections from the MHP could, in turn, pave the way for a more moderate stance among nationalist groups. In conclusion, the societal demand for peace is unmistakable. This process, if supported by the joint efforts of human rights defenders and political parties, could reach a broader social base. Seizing this opportunity may prove to be a vital step toward establishing lasting peace.”

A political solution to the Kurdish question and women’s equality

Sönmez stated that the call is directly linked to the Kurdish question, but also deeply affects the overall political landscape in Turkey. She explained: “For many years—indeed, throughout much of the history of the Republic—this issue has been one of the greatest obstacles to Turkey’s democratization. The other major obstacle is the issue of women’s rights and gender equality. I always describe the carriers of democracy in Turkey as the ‘two Ks’: Kurds and women. These two groups—women and the Kurdish people—make up half of society. Therefore, achieving a political solution to the Kurdish question and dismantling the attitudes that oppose gender equality are of profound legal and societal importance. In this new period, it is essential to establish a system in which Kurds can live as truly equal citizens—where the equality promised on paper in the constitution is fully felt in daily life. This is not only necessary for Kurds, but also for Turks and all other communities—religious and secular, artists, leftists. Women’s equality, as the other pillar of democracy, must be at the very heart of this process. Making peace sustainable is inherently tied to the reproduction of culture, and that can only happen if women take an active role. United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1325 underlines that women must participate actively in conflict resolution and peacebuilding processes. When women are meaningfully involved, new generations will be born into a culture of peace, and this will ensure that peace is lasting. For this reason, I want to once again emphasize the importance of women’s place in this process.”

Uncertainty and risk of sabotage in the process

Sönmez emphasized the current state of uncertainty, stating that meaningful public discussion can only expand once this ambiguity is addressed. “Who will do what? To what extent will each side act? These questions still remain unanswered,” she noted, and continued: “Of course, not everything can be openly discussed in such a process. However, identifying some key milestones would help create a greater sense of security in society. At the moment, there is a lack of trust that stems directly from uncertainty. This distrust prevents people from relying solely on hope. That is why I believe a commission should be established. Such a commission would ensure that the parties are held accountable for their commitments and would play a vital role in ensuring the process moves forward in a healthy way. Once this commission is formed, not all details may be shared directly with the public. However, providing regular updates would help involve society in the process. In this way, peace could become more deeply rooted in social consciousness. The longer the process drags on and uncertainty lingers, the more likely it is to face sabotage. To be prepared for such risks, the presence of a commission capable of building public trust will be essential. Moreover, the volatile nature of the Middle East could also have an impact on this process.”