Abdullah Öcalan has called for the Kurdistan Workers’ Party to put down their weapons. What will this mean for Iraq?
In the rugged mountains of northern Iraq, a potential peace breakthrough hangs in the balance. Abdullah Öcalan, the imprisoned leader of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), recently issued an unexpected call for disarmament—a move that could end one of the Middle East’s longest-running conflicts. But in the shadow of Turkish military bases that now dot Iraq’s northern landscape, a question looms: Is this really about peace, or is it about changing who controls Kurdish territory?
Many regional analysts have noted that Turkey’s interest in northern Iraq extends beyond security concerns to broader geopolitical influence. The pattern of establishing military outposts well beyond what might be necessary for counter-terrorism operations suggests longer-term strategic objectives. For decades, Turkey has regularly conducted cross-border operations into Iraq. Turkish jets target Kurdish militants while Iraq’s leaders watch, largely powerless to stop them.
Now, if the PKK disarms, Iraq could finally regain control of its own borders. But history suggests that the path forward may be more complicated.
A Call for Peace—or Just a Pause?
The PKK has been fighting Turkey since the 1980s, seeking more rights and autonomy for Kurds in a conflict that has claimed tens of thousands of lives. Turkey considers it a terrorist group and has spent decades trying to eliminate it, while others view it as a legitimate resistance movement fighting for Kurdish rights.
Öcalan’s call from his prison cell should, in theory, mark a turning point. However, previous peace initiatives have collapsed, including notable ceasefires that fell apart when neither side fully trusted the other’s intentions.
The PKK today faces significant pressure. Turkish drone technology has enhanced Ankara’s military capabilities, making PKK positions increasingly vulnerable across the mountainous terrain where they once operated with relative security.
Even if most fighters agree to lay down their weapons, reintegration is complicated by regional politics. The Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq maintains uneasy relations with the PKK and fears angering Turkey, its largest trading partner. For Kurdish communities caught in this struggle, the choices are limited. Many civilians in border areas express fatigue at being caught between Turkish military operations and the PKK presence, yet question whether peace will bring true independence or simply a change in which external power exerts control over their region.
Turkey’s Real Goal in Iraq
If the PKK disarms, Turkey should logically withdraw from Iraq. But Ankara’s actions suggest broader ambitions.
In recent years, Turkey has established numerous military bases across northern Iraq, some deep inside Iraqi territory. These installations show signs of permanence—with infrastructure that indicate long-term occupation rather than temporary security operations. Turkey has followed a similar playbook in northern Syria, where it initially intervened against the Islamic State but now controls territory through proxy forces.
When questioned about these expansions, Turkish officials consistently cite security concerns and emphasize respect for Iraq’s territorial integrity while asserting their right to self-defense against threats. However, actions on the ground often tell a different story.
Economic interests also fuel Turkey’s presence. The border crossings between Turkey and Iraqi Kurdistan generate substantial trade, giving Ankara significant leverage over the KRG. Water resources provide another incentive—Turkey’s dam projects on the Tigris River have impacted water flow to Iraq, creating an additional point of leverage.
For Turkey’s government, maintaining military operations abroad also serves domestic purposes. Cross-border operations tend to boost nationalist sentiment at home, providing political benefits beyond security objectives.
Can Iraq Push Turkey Out?
Iraq’s government faces a sovereignty crisis. Prime Minister Mohammed Shia’ al-Sudani has publicly demanded that Turkey respect Iraq’s borders, but these statements have had limited impact on Turkish operations. Baghdad’s challenge lies in translating diplomatic protests into meaningful pressure. Without the military capacity to directly confront Turkish forces, Iraq needs to pursue other strategies to reassert control over its territory.
Iraq could, for instance, leverage regional diplomacy. Iran, which maintains influence in Baghdad, has its own concerns about Turkish expansion and could potentially help pressure Ankara. Regional diplomatic channels could be activated to address the issue of foreign military presence.
Iraq could also push for international supervision of any PKK disarmament and subsequent Turkish withdrawal. Various international organizations have experience with complex security transitions and could provide neutral verification.
By developing comprehensive reintegration frameworks, the Iraqi government could also work with international partners to create opportunities for former fighters, drawing on models from other post-conflict situations where militants were integrated into civilian life.
For the Kurdish communities most affected, these high-level negotiations often seem distant from daily reality. In areas where Turkish operations are most intense, local communities report restrictions on movement and economic activities, affecting their livelihoods and sense of security.
The Risks of Premature Optimism
History offers sobering lessons about peace initiatives in this region. Previous attempts at resolution between Turkey and the PKK initially showed promise before collapsing into renewed violence. Kurdish civil society leaders have consistently emphasized that military approaches alone cannot resolve the underlying issues. Any lasting peace would require addressing the fundamental questions of cultural rights and political representation that motivated the conflict initially.
For Iraqi Kurds, the stakes extend beyond security. Economic development in the region has been hampered by ongoing military operations. Tourism—once a growing sector in Iraqi Kurdistan—has declined as conflict makes popular mountain areas unsafe.
Most concerning for regional stability is the vacuum that could form if the PKK disarms without proper safeguards. If existing armed groups withdraw while Turkey maintains its presence, the region could see the emergence of new militant organizations or the strengthening of other armed factions seeking to counter Turkish influence.
A Defining Moment for Iraq and the Region
As Iraq approaches this potential turning point, the implications extend far beyond its borders. A successful resolution could create a model for defusing other regional conflicts, while failure could trigger a new wave of instability. For ordinary Iraqis—particularly Kurds—sovereignty means more than just changing which foreign power controls their land. Many express the desire for self-determination after generations of being caught between competing regional powers.
The coming months will reveal whether Öcalan’s call for disarmament represents the beginning of genuine peace or merely a shift in how power is contested in this troubled region. What’s certain is that Turkey’s response—whether it withdraws or entrenches—will reveal its true intentions more clearly than any diplomatic statement could.
For Iraq, reasserting control over its northern territories would mark a crucial step toward full sovereignty after decades of external intervention. But this will require strategic diplomacy, international support, and a vision for a future where Iraq’s borders are defined by Iraqis themselves, not by foreign powers.
For American policymakers, this situation presents both challenges and opportunities. The United States has longstanding alliances with both Turkey (a NATO member) and Iraq’s Kurdish region (crucial allies during the fight against the Islamic State). How Washington navigates these competing relationships could significantly influence regional stability. A Turkish withdrawal from Iraq would reduce tensions that have complicated America’s stabilization efforts in the region. Conversely, if Turkey expands its presence despite PKK disarmament, it could undermine Iraq’s fragile democracy—a significant American investment after decades of involvement.
Ameer Al-Auqaili is a PhD Candidate in political science at Wayne State University, specializing in World Politics with a focus on power dynamics, non-state actors, and the intersection of religious and political identities in the Middle East and the United States.
This article first appeared on the website of Foreign Policy in Focus.