A political partly may not come into existence without having an explicit plan, a specific goal and a clear vision for their future. Every political party around the world is born to either stand against corruption, violations of laws or mismanagement by governments, or they establish a movement to seek independence within specific boundaries; the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, is an example, whose aim is to declare independence.

Every single political party or movement, on its initial steps of practicing activities, has its own aim and agenda for its country or nation; they use this agenda to serve their people; but should be well aware of not falling under the influence of other countries or foreign powers. Differently, what I see from PKK is a huge difference between what they have claimed as their “own” agenda for setting their nation free, and what is being witnessed as a fact on the ground. PKK is not really using its agenda perfectly as it claims it does .

PKK, from the beginning, has been treating its members — we could say — as slaves since they force them to accept and implement PKK’s ideology and use it to serve the party only. PKK makes its members act like robots and do whatever PKK wants. The party, however, practices this method to establish a strong and tough army, but in fact they don’t have more than an army of robots which could be replaced any time soon. PKK uses its members to serve its own ideology rather than using its ideology to serve its members and nation.

An obvious example was Turkey’s parliamentary election in 2015, when the pro-Kurdish People’s Democratic Party (HDP) received around 80 seats in the legislature. It was actually a chance that people gave them to prove themselves. They were expected to show their voters that they are committed to fulfill their promises, not just verbally, but also by making drastic changes and transitions.

However, PKK extended its influence on HDP and did not allow the party to join the government because the act could not benefit them, while people’s benefit were neglected completely. If HDP had joined the government and performed a wise policy, they would probably have the chance of forming the government alone in the future, and become the ruling party in Turkey. They refused to join the government, instead, preferred renewing the elections, but unfortunately their votes dropped this time and Kurds lost the chance of joining the government and playing a key role for the next few years.

In addition to harming their members, supporters and other Kurds indirectly, PKK has brought a deadly war with the Turkish government to the center of cities which has so far cause the displacement of 700,000 people from their homes with not less than 50,000 civilian houses destroyed; it never worths the death of so many innocent people who lost their lives during this conflict.

Beside all these facts, PKK can still save its people by agreeing to a cessation of hostilities with Turkey which President Masoud Barzani has suggested. President Barzani is an influential peaceful leader in the region who is sparing no efforts to solve the issues via dialogues. In 2011, he received the Atlantic Award for promoting peace, stability and religious tolerance in the region.

Such an approach can benefit both PKK and Turkey equally as they have already lost a lot and will certainly lose more if they do not come up with a solution to their disputes.