Failure of Peace Talks between Turkey and the PKK: Victim of Traditional Turkish Policy or of Geopolitical Shifts in the Middle East?

Ozkahraman, Cemal

doi:10.1177/2347798916681332

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, in December 2012, Erdoğan announced negotiations between the Turkish government and Öcalan to resolve the conflict, calling it a "peace process." In 2013, the PKK declared a cease-fire and withdrew its militants from Turkey to the PKK's headquarter in Mount Qandil to expedite the peace process (Ozkahraman, 2017). This peace process, however, collapsed in 2015 with both parties blaming the other.…”

Section: Historical Background Of the Kurdish Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Negotiations continued until 2011 when news of the negotiations was anonymously leaked to the public, resulting in mutual distrust between the parties; it also did not help the process that the level of violence between the groups subsequently increased. However, in December 2012, Erdoğan announced negotiations between the Turkish government and Öcalan to resolve the conflict, calling it a “peace process.” In 2013, the PKK declared a cease-fire and withdrew its militants from Turkey to the PKK’s headquarters in Mount Qandil to expedite the peace process (Ozkahraman, 2017).…”

Section: Historical Background Of the Kurdish Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Understanding the Kurdish conflict through the perspectives of the Kurdish-Turkish diaspora in Germany.

Ünal

Blaylock²,

Uluğ³

2022

Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding the Kurdish Conflict through the Perspectives of the Kurdish-Turkish Diaspora in Germany The perspectives of lay people within conflict settings are important because the ways in which they perceive and understand ongoing conflict can shape its course. While limited, existing research suggests that diaspora communities can also play a pivotal role in influencing conflict from outside their homeland; however, systematic examination of the different ways that members of diaspora communities frame conflict occurring within their homelands has not received attention. Using Entman's (1993) systematic frames analysis, research by Uluğ and Cohrs's (2016) examined conflict frames used by lay people from different ethnic groups in Turkey. The current research replicates and extends this work by examining conflict frames used by members of the Kurdish-Turkish diaspora in Germany following the same frame analysis: a) problem definitions, b) sources of the problem, c) moral evaluations, d) solutions to the problem, and e) barriers to the solution of the problem. Q methodology, a mixed-methods approach, was used to discover socially shared viewpoints regarding the Kurdish conflict with 43 people from the Kurdish and Turkish diaspora in Germany. Results highlighted four different conflict frames, labeled as a) a freedom for Öcalan frame; b) a nation-state ideology and democracy frame; c) an independence and identity for Kurds frame; and d) a terrorism, economy, and foreign power frame. These diverse viewpoints are evidence of the importance of emphasizing the role of diaspora groups' perspectives in conflict resolution and peace process. The article concludes with a discussion of similarities and differences across lay people in Turkey and diasporic communities in Germany.

show abstract

Section: Historical Background Of the Kurdish Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Historical Background Of the Kurdish Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the Kurdish conflict through the perspectives of the Kurdish-Turkish diaspora in Germany.

Ünal

Blaylock²,

Uluğ³

2022

Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Justice and Development Party partly inculpated the Republican Party for Turkish nationalism as one of the underlying causes of the Kurdish question and promised to resolve the issue through a peaceful process (Yavuz & Özcan, 2006). Indeed, the Turkish government became involved in several negotiations with the Kurdish leaders in Turkey such as the jailed leader Abdullah Ocalan in a period that came to be popularly known as the Çözüm Süreci (solution process) from 2012 (Ozkahraman, 2017). However, the absence of trust and sabotage of the peace processes led to failure and resumption of hostilities (Göksel & Mandıracı, 2016).…”

Section: Justification For Transnational Counterterrorismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transnational Operations, International Reactions, and Legitimacy: The Case of Turkey and Saudi Arabia

Nyadera

Islam

2020

Contemporary Review of the Middle East

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maintaining global peace and security remains an essential concern for many actors in the international system. To achieve this goal, both states and international organizations commend that action needs to be taken against perceived threats to national and international security. However, how to respond to these threats continues to divide the world. The declining role of the UN in peace enforcement, emergence of non-state actors, new forms of threats, and increasing unilateral actions by states have raised questions over the legitimacy of who, when, and how these actions can be taken. This article seeks to examine how international actors respond to transnational counterterrorism events. It adopts a comparative case study to discuss how regional and international actors reacted to Saudi Arabia’s Operation Decisive Storm in Yemen (2015) and Turkey’s Operation Peace Spring in Northern Syria (2019). It draws important similarities in the justification of both countries’ actions and the varying responses and attitudes these countries have received for their actions. The study identifies the lack of international consensus on transnational counterterrorism as a catalyst in the crisis being witnessed in crisis resolution. Factors such as timing, universality of the threat, prevailing circumstances, actors involved, and mode of operation shape international response on transnational actions.

show abstract

“…In 1991, Öcalan argued that “putting an end to the armed struggle abruptly means suicide” and “free debate, free partyization and the right to free democratic struggle will abolish the need for weapons” (Birand, 1992, p. 268). By comparison, in 1993, during the unilateral ceasefire of the PKK (Ozkahraman, 2017, pp. 56–57), he insisted that “violence on its own is not an instrument of solution,” and the atmosphere of war and violence was “a torture” to him (Öcalan, 1994, pp.…”

Section: Before İmralı: the Political Logic Of Violencementioning

confidence: 99%

From National Liberation War to Self-defense: A Historical Glance at Öcalan’s Perspective on Violence

Türk

2020

Contemporary Review of the Middle East

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The leader of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party ( Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan or PKK), Abdullah Öcalan, has played a crucial role in shaping the road map of the PKK since the founding of the organization in 1978. His ideas have substantially influenced the structure of the PKK. This article analyzes whether Abdullah Öcalan’s perspective on violence changed over the period between the founding of the PKK and the present. Using an interpretive–textual method, the study examines Öcalan’s approach to the question of violence before and after his imprisonment on the island of İmralı in 1999. The study attempts to make sense of how his perspective on violence was constructed and developed during these two periods. To achieve this goal, the study demonstrates the differences and similarities in Öcalan’s approach to the concept of violence during these two periods. Accordingly, it is argued that Öcalan’s perspective on violence is marked by continuity rather than a rupture.

show abstract

Failure of Peace Talks between Turkey and the PKK: Victim of Traditional Turkish Policy or of Geopolitical Shifts in the Middle East?

Cited by 7 publications

References 28 publications

Understanding the Kurdish conflict through the perspectives of the Kurdish-Turkish diaspora in Germany.

Understanding the Kurdish conflict through the perspectives of the Kurdish-Turkish diaspora in Germany.

Transnational Operations, International Reactions, and Legitimacy: The Case of Turkey and Saudi Arabia

From National Liberation War to Self-defense: A Historical Glance at Öcalan’s Perspective on Violence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About