The PKK says its last fighters have left Turkey. Yet the announcement exposes a dispute that withdrawal alone cannot settle: the Kurdish movement wants freedom for Abdullah Öcalan and enforceable political guarantees, while Ankara's legal protections remain tied to verified disarmament. A peace process that has produced real concessions is struggling to turn them into a working settlement.
By the Editorial Team of TLF
The Last Fighters, According to the PKK
In a statement issued on 8 October, the leadership associated with the dissolved Kurdistan Workers' Party said it had withdrawn its remaining forces from Turkey a few days earlier. According to Rudaw's account, it also evacuated four military tunnels and positions in the Metina area of northern Iraq, presenting the move as an attempt to remove Ankara's grounds for treating them as a threat.
The main withdrawal had been announced in October 2025, after the PKK declared its dissolution that May. This latest statement claims completion of the remaining pullout. It provides no independently verified inventory of fighters or weapons, and leaving Turkish territory does not establish that every weapon has been surrendered.
That distinction matters. The PKK, designated a terrorist organisation by Turkey, the United States and the European Union, is asking Ankara to recognise its steps as sufficient grounds for political movement. The state has set a wider test.
Öcalan Remains the Unfinished Business
The Kurdish demands extend beyond easier prison visits. As DW Türkçe reported on 8 October, the movement called for Öcalan's release and further legislation on freedoms, warning that continued delays would deepen doubts about the process and affect its own position. That warning signals mounting frustration. It does not announce a return to fighting.
Öcalan has been imprisoned on İmralı since 1999. His call for disarmament helped launch the PKK's dissolution, but Kurdish representatives argue that the man expected to steer the transition still lacks the conditions to do so.
Reporting on the leadership's statement, Peregraf said it complained that promised meetings with journalists and other visitors had not happened. It also accused the government of failing to act on recommendations arising from the parliamentary process. These are the movement's allegations, rather than an independently established account of every government undertaking.
There Is a Law. Its Protections Are Conditional
Ankara has taken a legislative step. Reuters reported that parliament passed the framework law on 10 August, establishing a route for the group's dismantling and the reintegration of former members.
The dispute concerns what that route actually guarantees. DW's account of the adopted legislation describes conditional relief from prosecutions and sentences, with exclusions for intentional killings and some life sentences. Öcalan is outside its scope. Vice President Cevdet Yılmaz nevertheless said he could continue contributing to the peace process.
Senior figures face particular uncertainty. The movement says the framework leaves its leadership outside the promised settlement. Coverage depends on offences and sentences, so a blanket claim that every commander is excluded would go too far.
The PKK had already argued in August that fighters needed guarantees of lawful political participation before laying down their weapons. In its statement reported by Rudaw, it demanded conditions allowing Öcalan to live and work freely, alongside protection against renewed prosecution for political views and organisation after return. The fear is concrete: a fighter leaves the mountains, enters civilian politics and ends up in prison.
The MGK Holds the Gate
The National Security Council's 30 September communiqué retained Ankara's security vocabulary. It grouped PKK/KCK and PYD/YPG among threats to national unity and state survival, while reviewing progress towards a "terror-free Turkey" and a "terror-free region". Its regional sections stressed state authority and integration in Syria, and sovereignty in Iraq.
The operative omission concerned the law. As Bianet reported, the communiqué announced no confirmation that the organisation and linked formations had ended their actual existence and surrendered their weapons and ammunition, the finding required to activate the framework's protections.
The date deserves care: that meeting preceded the 8 October withdrawal announcement. Its silence cannot be described as Ankara's rejection of a claim made eight days later. It does, however, expose the mechanism at the centre of the dispute. The security institutions assess compliance, and the MGK controls the confirmation needed for legal relief.
A Process Under Strain, With Talks Still Alive
DEM Party representatives have challenged that arrangement directly. According to KRDNews's report of their remarks, Sezai Temelli criticised the MGK's authority over implementation, while Gülistan Kılıç Koçyiğit said there was still no firm timetable for fighters' return. They also sought access to Öcalan for journalists and intellectuals.
The evidence supports an assessment of serious strain. It also shows continuing engagement: Rudaw reported that DEM representatives met AKP officials on 8 October to discuss the next steps.
TLF's assessment is that sequencing has become the central obstacle. Kurdish representatives want credible freedoms and personal guarantees to make disarmament and return possible. Ankara's framework makes verified dismantling and weapons surrender the gateway to its protections. The withdrawal claim may narrow the military dispute, but the next test is whether either side can offer enough certainty for the other to move.