Sami Tan
The political process in North Kurdistan is currently mired in intense debate and complexity. A pervasive sentiment among many is that despite immense sacrifices and resistance, the political movement has achieved very little. Critics often argue, “This is not a solution; it is a capitulation,” routinely drawing parallels to international examples and highlighting the achievements of similar national movements elsewhere.
Yet, a stark contradiction emerges: while these critics lament the lack of political gains, many of them simultaneously condemn armed struggle in the harshest terms. They argue that the presence of arms obscures the national cause from the global spotlight and undermines its international legitimacy. However, historical reality seldom supports this view; I have yet to witness a nation securing its rights and achieving liberation entirely without conflict. More often than not, immense costs are paid for seemingly modest gains. Furthermore, short of those acting as proxies for occupying powers, no well-wisher of their own nation would dismiss the sacrifices of their people’s youth by claiming they died for nothing.
It is a rational argument to state that cultural rights and a democratic republic can be achieved without armed conflict. Conversely, it is entirely detached from political reality to claim that an independent or federal Kurdistan can be established solely through democratic procedures. Unfortunately, in the contemporary world—and particularly in the Middle East—a status of independence or federation has never materialized without conflict. We must not deceive ourselves or the public on this matter.
To those who criticize the current phase, my proposal is straightforward: accelerate your own efforts. If, as you claimed, conflict was the primary obstacle preventing your message from reaching the masses, that obstacle is now diminishing. This is the moment to present your vision to the people, organize effectively, win their hearts through democratic means, and advance your cause.
From my perspective, the current trajectory reveals a clear dynamic: while the Kurds could not secure a status like independence, federation, or autonomy through armed struggle alone, the state has similarly failed to eradicate the Kurdish issue. Today, Kurds have solidified their position as indispensable geopolitical actors on the global stage. The core strength of the Kurds now lies in their political leverage. Despite relentless crackdowns, they have successfully preserved this political power, and it has become an irreversible reality.
However, for this power to yield results, it must be organized, educated, and structurally revitalized. The current phase provides the Kurdish movement with precisely this window of opportunity. When analyzing ongoing developments, this shift becomes evident. The movement is restructuring itself across all domains. In particular, initiatives centering on Kurdish culture and language are foundational acts of Kurdish nation-building. These efforts will inevitably fortify the Kurdish national identity.
The primary challenge in this transitional phase, however, lies within the movement’s own cadres. Many have failed to adapt to the requirements of this constructive era. Operating with outdated mindsets, they often exhibit a disruptive rather than a constructive mentality, maintaining a rigid and exclusionary approach that contradicts democratic principles.
If the Kurdish movement can successfully organize during this period and lead society with a pluralistic, inclusive vision, it can effectively dismantle the assimilationist agendas of ruling states. By doing so, Kurds can integrate their identity into the dominant political system, shaping it with their own voice. This is neither submission nor assimilation; it is the essence of democratic integration.
A dangerous trend among the detractors of this process is the argument that because the “Apoist Movement” is allegedly lowering its demands and leading Kurds toward capitulation, it should be excluded from the sphere of national unity. Such a stance directly harms the collective interests of the Kurdish people. It fractures the organic national spirit that has naturally flourished among the population, sowing division when unity is paramount. No political faction fighting for Kurdish freedom should be ostracized from the national platform. The Kurdish political landscape must establish a comprehensive national compact across all parts of Kurdistan to build unity on solid ground. Beyond that, anyone who wishes to struggle for their own vision is free to do so—the door remains open to all.
——————————-
