PKK Executive Council Member Murat Karayılan answered ANF's questions regarding the recently enhanced war of Turkey against the Kurds in Northern Kurdistan. Karayılan underlined that Erdoğan started this war to be able to get 400 deputies in November 1 election.

The first part of the interview was translated into English below.

It is claimed that the state is now holding talks with Öcalan who is allegedly saying "They will not stop the conflict even if I tell them to do so. Therefore, it makes no sense to issue such a call. I cannot let the position of the Leadership to be questioned". What sort of a path would PKK pursue if Öcalan called the Kurdish movement to end the clashes?

We have not received such information in this regard. This aggression and war did actually begin with the isolation imposed in İmralı. There currently exists an isolation and psychological warfare against Leader Apo [referring to Öcalan] at the moment. I cannot understand how the officials of this state can have the face to talk to a folk's leader under isolation and ask him to make such a statement. If Erdoğan had any respect to the communities and groups different from himself, he wouldn't subject Leader Apo to such an inhuman isolation. Yet, anything could be expected from these people who bear a mindset for sovereignty and exploitation.

If our Leader gave an answer as you mentioned, then he did the right thing because he doesn't have the circumstances to say 'end the resistance' at the moment, and it is obvious that it would be compulsive if he did so.

Our Leader made great efforts for a democratic resolution of the Kurdish question since 1993, especially during the last two and a half years. Erdoğan, however, destroyed them all. He didn't just overturn the table of talks, but also denied everything saying that there is no Kurdish question or an addressee. He thus left no grounds for further steps. Still, it is seen clearly that they are making an imposition on our Leader and he is resisting it.

One other thing is that Leader Apo can only issue a call in the event of an agreement on a project. The call he made in 2013 was also based on a recognition by state of the project he had presented, and an agreement by two sides. However, the state retracted and denied everything after a while. In this regard, the devastation caused by AKP is a great one. It ignored all the efforts made till that point for the sake of votes and its own ruling. It smashed and crushed such an issue of historic importance for Turkey's society because of its view towards everything out of its own window. This is an irresponsible and self-interested attitude that cannot possibly pave the way for a solution.

'THIS WAR WAS STARTED BY ERDOĞAN'

Many valuable individuals and circles are now calling for a ceasefire, and most recently representatives of HDP have issued more striking calls. We value all these calls and support their essence. Yet, those making these calls should also see that the Turkish side is every day pledging to 'keep the operations going until the last terrorist lays down arms', which manifests a very harsh, warmongering attitude and an intention to continue with intense attack. We are using our right to retaliation against these attacks. This is a resistance of defense against violent attacks that aim an annihilation, and which inevitably faces defense-a must for existence and living. An opposite case would be a surrender which doesn't comply with humanity and the cause of freedom at all. A ceasefire can only be realized by a view of this reality. Qandil hears all the calls but a mutual attitude is needed for a ceasefire. Past practices proved us that one-sided ceasefires can accomplish no result.

Those wanting to stop the war need to see this truth; this war was started by Erdoğan. Some circles for denial and annihilation did also get involved in this process in an alliance but this war is basically waged by Erdoğan for 400 deputies. He wants to win the November 1 election by running all balances upside down through war after he faced the truth that he will not be able to succeed this under normal circumstances.

Therefore, one side of the war wants to keep it going. This side, which is the government, needs to be forced to change its attitude in this regard. In other words, they might give up this in the event of facing the truth that they cannot accomplish the result they desire by waging this war. Turkey's society and the circles siding with peace and democracy should therefore raise a stronger voice and manifest a stronger reaction to make Erdoğan stop this. This is also because of the fact that we might suffer heavy blows in the event of weakening out defense position one-sidedly, and this situation might lead up to intolerable consequences for both us and all democracy forces.

'AKP STARTED THE WAR WITH THE ISOLATION OF ÖCALAN'

At the moment, AKP wants to rule a concept that targets all the Kurdish people and intends to cow them into submission. Long before that, it started this process with the isolation of the Kurdish leader that has no legal ground, is based on a law of war, and violates the state's own laws. A fresh basis for a ceasefire can be provided by firstly starting a struggle against this policy of the AKP, and criticism of its warmongering attitude. And, this can only be ensured by the initiation of a new process for mutual consolidated ceasefire which should also involve monitoring mediators.

On the other hand, the Kurdish movement is not alone now. In the past, we were able make a call and give an instruction to 'stop the actions', and guerrillas would indeed do so, but the situation is different today as it is not only the guerrillas that is a part of this war. There is a reality of YDG-H and the society. When we are to take a step today, we cannot do it unbeknownst to the people of Cizre, Gever and Amed. The people resisting there lay down their lives while resisting the attacks. In this sense, circumstances have been exceeded for a one-sided step from us unless there exists an assurance that there will be no attack from the other side, i.e. a project of reconciliation. Some say 'PKK could now declare a one-sided ceasefire as it did in the past'. Right, we could do this one-sidedly in the past because it was only the HPG and the Turkish army that confronted each other in the war during that times. This is not the case at the moment because resistance has become socialized now.

The complexity of the matter is obviously evident. Yet, an agreed solution can be accomplished, as stated above, if an approach paying regard to the criticalness of the matter is developed.