Kurdish Autonomy: The Key to Turkish Unity?

In a geopolitically turbulent world, Turkey has the transformative opportunity to address long-standing grievances and foster national unity.Granting autonomy to Kurdish regions, along the lines of the 20-point memorandum through which North Borneo, now Sabah, joined the Federation of Malaysia.

Turkey’s centralised governance has historically suppressed Kurdish cultural and political expression, fuelling conflict with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and resulting in over 40,000 deaths since 1984. Recent calls for peaceful engagement by imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan present a critical opening for pursuing structured autonomy as a viable solution.

Implementing a well-designed autonomous framework could yield significant strategic benefits for Turkey:

Enhanced Internal Stability and Security: Recognizing Kurdish identity through local governance would likely reduce internal conflict and tensions, leading to substantial savings in military expenditures and allowing the government to redirect resources toward broader national priorities.

Economic Revitalisation and Local Development: Empowering Kurdish regions to manage fiscal policy, natural resources, and infrastructure projects can stimulate economic growth. Tailored regional strategies can address historical disparities and promote inclusive development, similar to Sabah’s successful resource management approach.

Improved Governance and Administrative Efficiency: Local control over key areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure would ensure policies align with regional needs. Decentralization would enhance government responsiveness, improve public service delivery, and promote robust democratic practices.

Cultural Integration and National Unity: Protecting Kurdish cultural and linguistic heritage would foster social cohesion and alleviate feelings of alienation. Embracing and promoting Kurdish traditions and languages would strengthen national unity by celebrating Turkey’s diverse identities.

Enhanced International Reputation and Diplomatic Leverage: Proactive reforms addressing minority rights could improve Turkey’s international image, presenting a narrative of modern, inclusive governance. This enhanced reputation could attract foreign investment and strengthen diplomatic ties.

Cost Savings in Security and Conflict Resolution: Reducing military engagements and counter-insurgency operations would save lives and significantly lower the economic burdens associated with prolonged internal conflicts.

Granting autonomy to Turkey’s Kurdish regions could pave the way for a more stable, prosperous, and unified nation. To establish an effective Kurdish self-governing region, it is essential to create a democratically elected regional parliament and executive administration, ensuring efficient local governance and representation.

Granting local taxation powers and control over natural resource management will incentivize self-sustaining regional development and economic growth. Cultural and social autonomy must also be prioritized by institutionalising Kurdish language education, supporting cultural institutions, and safeguarding heritage, which will reinforce social cohesion and promote a strong cultural identity.

Additionally, clearly defining the powers and responsibilities of the regional government through constitutional guarantees is crucial for ensuring lasting stability and legal clarity.

Finally, establishing structured mechanisms for intergovernmental coordination will facilitate effective cooperation and conflict resolution between regional and national authorities, fostering collaboration and mutual understanding.

Together, these elements can create a robust framework for Kurdish autonomy that promotes governance, development, and cultural preservation.

Historical Attempts

From the founding of the Republic, successive Turkish governments pursued a policy aimed at creating a singular national identity, which involved the suppression of distinct Kurdish cultural, linguistic, and political expressions. This approach fostered deep-seated resentment among the Kurdish population, leading to long-term instability.

In the 1980s and 1990s, in response to uprisings and the rise of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), Turkey engaged in extensive military counterinsurgency operations. While these measures temporarily quelled open conflict, they also contributed to widespread alienation among Kurds, highlighting that a purely security-focused approach, without addressing underlying political and cultural grievances, is unsustainable and often exacerbates tensions.

In the early 2000s, as part of the reforms initiated during the European Union (EU) accession process, Turkey began to relax restrictions on Kurdish language and cultural expression. This period saw a gradual liberalisation that allowed for Kurdish television programs, literature, and language courses.

While incremental cultural concessions improved the social climate, they underscored the lesson that symbolic reforms must be matched with substantive legal, economic, and political changes to be truly effective.

The most significant attempt to resolve the Kurdish question came during the 2013–2015 peace process, known as the Çözüm Süreci.

This initiative aimed to secure greater cultural rights, increase political participation for Kurds, and de-escalate armed conflict through comprehensive negotiations. Ankara made concessions that included legislative changes and initiatives to incorporate Kurdish concerns into public policy.

However, the process ultimately stalled amid political polarization, internal opposition from hardliners on both sides, and a lack of clear institutional guarantees. This experience demonstrated that successful peace initiatives require robust political will, inclusive engagement of all stakeholders, and legally binding frameworks to safeguard reforms across successive administrations.

Key Lessons

Past efforts to address the Kurdish issue demonstrate incremental reforms, while beneficial, are insufficient without structural changes to the centralised power dynamics. For a lasting solution, reforms must encompass fiscal autonomy, political empowerment, and clear constitutional guarantees.

Additionally, temporary measures lacking codified legal protections have proven vulnerable to reversal, underscoring the necessity of incorporating constitutional amendments or permanent legal frameworks that define the powers and responsibilities of a Kurdish self-governance region.

Sustainable progress also requires broad inclusion of multiple stakeholders, including local civil society, Kurdish political leaders, and national institutions. Previous attempts have faltered due to inconsistent policies resulting from political shifts, highlighting the importance of cross-party consensus and long-term commitment.

Furthermore, while addressing cultural grievances is critical, it must be paired with economic incentives and political participation; experience shows that cultural concessions alone are inadequate without comprehensive socio-economic development and institutional empowerment.

The value of third-party mediation cannot be overstated, as historical impasses have demonstrated the need for neutral mediators. Involving trusted international actors can bridge divides and sustain momentum toward lasting agreements.

Finally, establishing clear mechanisms for conflict resolution is essential; past attempts that lacked such frameworks ultimately collapsed. Creating intergovernmental councils or dispute resolution bodies can effectively manage overlapping interests and address grievances in a timely manner.

International Mediators?

Trusted international mediators like Norway, Switzerland, and Oman could play crucial roles in guiding Turkey through the transition to Kurdish autonomy, given their track record at the international and regional levels

Norway is renowned for its track record of impartial mediation in complex conflicts, Norway could provide essential oversight, facilitating dialogue based on mutual respect and compromise. Norwegian peacemaking efforts expanded significantly in the post-Cold War era.

Throughout the 1990s, Norway gained recognition for its role in resolving armed conflicts in the Middle East, Central America, and Africa. The 1993 Oslo Accords, aimed at addressing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, became the most notable Norwegian intervention, though it ultimately failed to rectify longstanding injustices.

In contrast, Norway’s involvement in ending the complex civil wars in Mali (1995) and Guatemala (1996) is widely regarded as successful. In the 2010s, Norway played a crucial role in facilitating peace talks between the Colombian government and FARC guerrillas, beginning with months of secret diplomacy that led to initial discussions in Oslo. Norway’s commitment to peace in Colombia dates back to 1999, highlighting its long-standing dedication to conflict resolution.

Further south, Switzerland has a strong tradition of neutrality and diplomatic expertise. It also offers an unbiased platform vital for navigating sensitive negotiations. While Swiss diplomats have engaged in extensive mediation efforts, it is crucial not to overestimate Switzerland’s role in peacebuilding.

The end of the Cold War ushered in a new era where multilateral organisations gained prominence in conflict resolution. During the 1990s, Switzerland faced complex relations with the European Union (EU) and scrutiny over its World War II role, prompting a reorientation of its foreign policy.

Bern sought to enhance its diplomatic influence through multilateral cooperation, achieving notable successes such as the 2002 ceasefire agreement in Sudan’s Nuba Mountains and the 2009 Zurich Protocols between Turkey and Armenia, though the latter had limited impact.

Other initiatives addressing conflicts in Nepal, Burundi, Colombia, and Cyprus yielded mixed results, and efforts in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict often provoked backlash from Israel. However, in 2019, Switzerland successfully facilitated a peace agreement between the government and rebels in Mozambique, highlighting its ongoing commitment to mediation.

Meanwhile, in West Asia, Oman is notable for its discreet yet effective diplomatic practices, particularly in the Middle East, Oman could adeptly address the regional and cultural sensitivities integral to Kurdish-Turkish relations.

The Saudi-Iranian renormalisation agreement of March 2023 marked a significant turning point in Middle Eastern diplomacy. While China received much of the credit for facilitating this reconciliation easing this intense rivalry, the groundwork was laid by Iraq and the Oman over the previous two years.

Omani and Iraqi mediators recognised that the agreement would be more sustainable with the backing of a major global power, prompting them to request that the signing take place in Beijing under Chinese auspices. Notably, conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon since then have not undermined progress in reducing tensions between Riyadh and Tehran, contributing to a sense of optimism about the future.

International examples of successful subnational autonomy further illustrate effective models:

• Quebec (Canada): This region exemplifies effective cultural preservation within a federal structure, balancing a strong local identity with national integration, demonstrated in the Canada-Quebec Accord.
• Catalonia and Basque Country (Spain): The two different autonomous regions of Spain and their different approaches demonstrate how significant local autonomy, especially in fiscal and cultural matters, can coexist within a unified national framework, despite existing tensions.
• Scotland (UK) and Åland Islands (Finland): The case of devolution in the UK and of Åland in Finland showcase effective management of devolved powers by central governments, clearly delineated to prevent conflict while promoting local self-governance.

These examples and mediators can provide valuable insights and support as Turkey navigates the possibility of such a critical transition.

Autonomous Kurdish Model

A future proposal for Kurdish autonomy in Turkey should draw on historical lessons by implementing comprehensive reforms that go beyond soft measures. This reform package must include fiscal decentralization, political empowerment, and robust cultural protections, granting real authority to a regional legislature, executive, and judiciary, all supported by constitutional reforms.

To ensure long-term commitment, political processes should be insulated from short-term power shifts by embedding reforms in permanent legal frameworks and establishing independent oversight bodies. Additionally, incorporating inclusive mediation with neutral international mediators can provide essential guidance during negotiations, helping to prevent unilateral reversals and ensuring that commitments are respected over time.

Finally, creating a roadmap for gradual transition is crucial. A phased approach, potentially supported by referenda or periodic evaluations, would allow for adjustments that are both practical and sensitive to the evolving socio-political landscape, fostering a sustainable path toward Kurdish autonomy.

Conclusion

An optimal structure for a Kurdish self-governing region would include a democratically elected legislative body, an accountable executive, and an independent judiciary, ensuring that local populations have a voice in governance.

Local fiscal and cultural autonomy should be balanced with clearly reserved national powers to maintain cohesion within the state. Additionally, robust intergovernmental mechanisms must be established to facilitate ongoing dialogue, dispute resolution, and equitable resource management.

International examples such as Quebec, Catalonia, the Basque Country, and Scotland demonstrate that while no single model is perfect, combining elements — like Quebec’s cultural protections and negotiated federal arrangements — can create a tailored solution that respects both Kurdish aspirations and national unity.

This approach would not only help mitigate historical conflicts but also empower the Kurdish region to contribute meaningfully to Turkey’s overall social, economic, and cultural fabric, fostering a more inclusive and harmonious society.

Turkey’s adoption of a carefully designed autonomous model, inspired by successful international examples, can effectively balance Kurdish regional empowerment with national integrity.

The involvement of experienced mediators from neutral countries, with Oman as a prime candidate, can facilitate productive negotiations, ultimately paving the way for enhanced internal stability in Turkey. This strategy is likely to lead to economic prosperity and an improved global reputation during a time of significant geopolitical volatility.