Turkish public awareness of the disbanding of the PKK is low: survey

In Türkiye, the outcomes of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party’s (PKK) disarmament and dissolution congress, convened in response to a proposal by Nationalist Movement Party leader Devlet Bahçeli and a call from PKK founder Abdullah Öcalan, are announced on May 12. Central to the process are critical issues such as the modalities of disarmament and the legal and political status of PKK members both within and outside Türkiye. Despite the significance of these developments, numerous challenges and uncertainties remain unresolved. Notably, the broader public’s limited awareness and engagement with the process are major concerns.
According to a recent study, the details of which we will elaborate on shortly, only 10% of the public were informed about the PKK congress. An additional 25% have heard of it but are unaware of its content, while a striking 65% remain entirely uninformed.
A significant portion of this month’s issue of the Türkiye Raporu—a monthly publication shared with subscribers by the research team “Research İstanbul,” directed by Can Selçuki and for which I serve on the Academic Advisory Board—has been dedicated to examining how the public perceives the ongoing disarmament process. The study, conducted nationwide between May 2 and 6, contains several noteworthy findings and will be shared with subscribers in mid-May.

The majority is unaware

Although the government and experts closely following the process emphasize the significance of the PKK’s decision to convene its congress, it is difficult to assert that the public shares a similar level of awareness or sensitivity. According to the findings, 65% of respondents reported being unaware of the upcoming congress, while 25% indicated that they had heard about it but were not familiar with the details. Only 10% of participants said they have detailed knowledge regarding the PKK’s disarmament and dissolution congress and its broader implications.

These findings highlight two key issues:
1. The process, during its critical turning points, has not been adequately communicated to the public thus far. This suggests that the process is being conducted in a largely top-down manner, detached from societal engagement.
2. Even in a politically attentive society such as Türkiye, the fact that the majority remains unaware of a development as historically significant as the PKK’s congress indicates that other, more immediate concerns dominate the public agenda.
The deepening economic crisis and growing livelihood struggles appear to be limiting the public’s attention to other issues.
What matters is the end of the PKK
Among various global precedents, the PKK’s potential disarmament process is most comparable to the experience of the Irish Republican Army (IRA) in the United Kingdom. The IRA declared a ceasefire in 1997 and, following the 1998 “Good Friday Agreement,” formally announced in 2005—under the supervision of an international commission—that it had fully decommissioned its weapons. That process was made possible through multilateral negotiations, trust-building, and mutual concessions.
In contrast, the Turkish government has repeatedly emphasized that no negotiations with the PKK are taking place, and that if a bloodless resolution to this decades-long conflict is not achievable, military struggle will continue. Nevertheless, issues such as a possible political amnesty, prisoner releases, and the future status of PKK militants remain significant and are increasingly subject to public debate.
According to recent survey findings, the public lacks clear knowledge of these matters. Even if the process concludes successfully, there is widespread uncertainty regarding its aftermath. The data suggest that society’s primary concern is simply the swift dissolution of the PKK, as illustrated in the following table.

Moreover, these figures reflect only the opinions of those already aware of the congress. It is likely that if these questions were posed to the broader public, the responses would be significantly harsher.

Lack of proper communications

When it comes to the issue of abandoning weapons, the outlook remains far from promising. While 48% of the public supports the idea of weapons being surrendered within Turkey, only 36% approve of their destruction through a process that lacks a clear procedural definition. Although this may not appear to be a major problem at first glance, considering the dynamics in Syria, Iran, and northern Iraq, the ultimate fate of these weapons could play a decisive role in shaping the region’s future.
Both global experience and Türkiye’s history demonstrate that societal engagement and democratic institutionalization are essential components of effective conflict resolution.

Public awareness is essential

An informed society is more likely to embrace a peace process and demonstrate resilience against provocations. Democracy facilitates dialogue over violence by providing all parties with opportunities for expression, representation, and negotiation. The rule of law and the protection of fundamental rights further reinforce both the preventative and sustainable dimensions of such a process. In this context, the implementation of transparent and inclusive policies that ensure public participation would enhance both the legitimacy and the durability of the process.
Although establishing these conditions in Türkiye may prove difficult in the short term, disregarding them could result in a missed opportunity of significant long-term importance. The fact that the majority of the public remains unaware of such a strategically critical issue—one that deeply affects Türkiye’s present and future—may pose serious challenges for the process in its later stages.