After more than four decades of violence, Turkey has taken one of its most significant steps yet toward ending its long-running conflict with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK.
Turkey’s parliament has approved a landmark law creating a legal framework for the PKK’s disbandment, the reintegration of former militants and parts of the wider peace process. The measure passed with 468 votes in the 600-seat parliament, bringing together an unusual coalition that included President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s ruling AK Party, its nationalist MHP allies and the pro-Kurdish DEM Party.
The vote does not end the conflict overnight. But it moves the peace effort from political promises toward something far more concrete: a legal process for what happens after the guns are put down.
From Battlefield to Parliament
The conflict between Turkey and the PKK began in 1984 and has claimed more than 40,000 lives, while leaving deep political, economic and social divisions, particularly in southeastern Turkey. The PKK is designated as a terrorist organisation by Turkey, the United States and the European Union.
For decades, attempts to resolve the conflict have repeatedly failed.
This latest initiative is different in one crucial respect.
The Turkish parliament is now attempting to create the legal machinery needed to move former fighters away from an armed organisation and back into civilian life.
The legislation provides legal protections for many former militants who have not committed specified crimes and allows some prison sentences linked to PKK membership to be suspended.
That makes the law more than a symbolic peace gesture.
It addresses one of the most difficult questions in any armed conflict: What happens to the people who fought once the fighting ends?
A Peace Process That Began With an Unexpected Proposal
The road to Monday’s vote began with a surprising political development.
In October 2024, Devlet Bahceli, the leader of Erdogan’s nationalist MHP ally and a long-standing hardliner on Kurdish militancy, unexpectedly suggested that imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan could address parliament and announce the group’s dissolution.
The proposal opened a door that had appeared firmly closed.
In February 2025, Ocalan called on the PKK to disarm and dissolve itself.
The PKK subsequently announced in May 2025 that it would end its armed struggle and break up. Two months later, a group of militants symbolically burned their weapons at a ceremony in northern Iraq.
What once looked like an unlikely political conversation gradually became a formal process.
Parliament Now Gives the Process Legal Weight
The Turkish parliament established a commission in August 2025 to examine how disarmament and reintegration could be managed.
Politicians, officials, civil society representatives and other groups were consulted before the commission recommended legislation.
That work has now produced the law approved on August 10.
For Ankara, the measure is part of President Erdogan’s vision of a “terror-free Turkey.”
For Kurdish politicians, however, the legislation is only a beginning.
They argue that lasting peace cannot depend solely on disarmament. Broader political and democratic reforms will also be necessary.
That disagreement could become one of the biggest tests of the process.
Ending the Violence Is Only Half the Challenge
The law deals with the mechanics of dismantling an armed organisation.
But the conflict has never been only about weapons.
For decades, Kurdish political and cultural rights have been at the centre of wider tensions in Turkey.
The new legislation does not settle questions surrounding expanded political and cultural rights, changes to Turkey’s anti-terrorism laws or the future status of Ocalan, who has been imprisoned on Imrali island since 1999.
That means the parliament has solved one difficult problem without necessarily resolving all of the political grievances that helped sustain the conflict.
Why Reintegration Could Be the Real Test
Peace agreements can be announced in a single day.
Building a lasting peace takes years.
Thousands of people connected to the PKK’s armed and organisational structures now face an uncertain transition.
The new law is intended to provide a legal route for many of them to return to civilian life.
That could be crucial.
Without a credible reintegration process, former fighters could remain isolated, face legal uncertainty or become vulnerable to renewed militancy.
With one, Ankara has a greater chance of turning the end of armed struggle into a lasting political settlement.
An Unusual Political Alliance
Perhaps one of the most striking aspects of the vote is who supported it.
The legislation received backing from Turkey’s governing AK Party, its nationalist MHP partners and the pro-Kurdish DEM Party.
These parties have very different political identities and constituencies.
Their agreement does not mean they share the same vision for Turkey’s future.
Instead, it suggests that there is now a sufficiently broad political interest in ending the armed conflict to move forward with legislation.
That alone represents a major change from previous peace efforts.
Why This Moment Is Different
Turkey has attempted peace negotiations with the PKK before.
A previous peace process began around 2012 but collapsed in 2015, triggering another period of intense violence.
The latest initiative therefore carries the weight of that history.
Both supporters and critics know that previous hopes for peace have ended in renewed conflict.
The challenge now is to prevent the same pattern from repeating.
The Regional Dimension
The consequences could extend beyond Turkey’s borders.
The PKK has operated across parts of Iraq and has had connections to Kurdish armed groups in Syria. Ocalan’s 2025 call for dissolution was therefore significant not only for Turkey but for the wider Kurdish political and security landscape.
A genuine end to the PKK conflict could potentially reduce tensions along Turkey’s borders and reshape Ankara’s security calculations in neighbouring countries.
But it could also raise complicated questions about Kurdish groups elsewhere in the region and how they respond to the changing political environment.
The New Perspective: The Hardest Part of Peace May Be Starting Now
The parliamentary vote is historic, but it should not be mistaken for the finish line.
In many ways, the difficult part begins after the law is passed.
Weapons must actually disappear.
Former militants must be reintegrated.
Security forces must adjust to a changing threat environment.
Kurdish political demands will continue to be debated.
And both sides will have to convince communities that the process will not collapse as previous peace efforts did.
The biggest danger is not necessarily a dramatic return to war tomorrow.
It is the slow erosion of trust.
If Kurdish communities believe the government has ended the armed conflict without addressing legitimate political concerns, support for the process could weaken.
If Turkish nationalists believe concessions have gone too far, political resistance could grow.
And if former militants believe reintegration promises are unreliable, the transition could become unstable.
A Historic Opportunity—but a Fragile One
Turkey has now created something that previous peace efforts lacked: a formal legal framework for moving from armed conflict toward disarmament and reintegration.
That is a substantial achievement after more than 40 years of violence.
But peace will ultimately be judged not by the parliamentary vote, but by what happens afterward.
Will former fighters genuinely return to civilian life?
Will political and cultural grievances receive greater space for peaceful debate?
Will Turkish and Kurdish communities begin to see the conflict as history rather than an unresolved threat?
Those questions remain unanswered.
For now, however, Ankara has crossed an important line.
The PKK conflict that once seemed destined to continue indefinitely is being addressed through legislation rather than another military campaign.
The guns may be moving toward silence, but Turkey’s real test is whether it can turn that silence into a durable peace.
Leave a Reply