Last week, after many years of minor and major problems between Turkey and the U.S. members of NATO, in result 3 PKK leaders (Murad Qarailan, Jamil Bayk and Duran Kalkan) were identified as terrorists and millions of dollars have been allocated for information leading to the "identification or location" of those leaders.

This decision was unexpected in the current situation. But this is the result of the interests of great powers. The policies of the great countries after the Sykes-Picot agreement (1916) where their interests began to burst, it was then when they lost their humanitarian, philosophical and freedom principles. After the WW2 U.S. won a lot by supporting Western Europe’s nations destiny rights, after the cold war, which gave the hope of the increase of democracy.

After the fall of Saddam’s Regime, for the first time in history south of Kurdistan have gained major supporters. And the so called Arab Spring brought the expanding of freedom which the US showed support for the uprising people again. After the formation of ISIS, danger surrounded the interests of the US and the western countries, US had the most effective role in war against ISIS and supporting Peshmerga and other anti ISIS forces.

Every now and then, U.S.'s reaction against the enemies of democracy and violators of human rights, have given U.S.'s policy a better popularity.

So far, the United States has not defended Assad's government in Syria, has not stopped its actions against the Islamic Republic of Iran, has not stopped its pressure on Turkey, and its political view is clear on tribal forces in Iraq. 

And the Syrian situation, which became the subject of regional and international issues, then Russia began to send troops and the United States surrounded western Kurdistan, and talked about pulling the PKK out from the list of terrorists, but....

And suddenly to resolve the bilateral relations between the United States and Turkey, they made three of the PKK leaders victims of their peace contract. 

This decision is obviously full of secrets. The most important thing in my opinion is "Does this view serves the democratic strategy, civil life, human rights and freedom upon which the US strategy depends?"If it does, the United States has made the right decision without any doubt, but if it does not support the US strategy then I must say that this is a wrong decision.

To make my thoughts clear and pure to Turkey or any other country, I must clarify the following:

After the cold war and in this globalization era I’ve always said: PKK’s ideology and strategy in fight for freedom have expired. I even criticize the Partisan system of PKK. 

I’m not with giving up and throwing arms as well but I’m with peaceful solutions, civilized revolution, elections and expanding of democratic revolutions. 

When (HDP) gained 80 chairs in the Turkish parliament, I have sent my message to Qandil and Diyarbakir and said that it’s in their favor to participate in the government. 

When they moved the fight into the cities, I thought it was a dangerous decision. But this does not mean that the entire issue (Democratic-national) of north and west of Kurdistan should be viewed from this angle.

Suppose the PKK has more problems, but we must ask ourselves, did the Turkish government commit less mistakes?

- Does the Turkish government suffer from less problems in the area and Turkey?

- Is the Turkish economic status rising or falling?

- Is there any place for other journalists, politicians and activists in Turkish prisons?

-Why at the international level has the EU not yet accepted Turkey?

- Unemployment rate is rising and companies are withdrawn, economic barriers are clear or not?

- Why did the Turkish army prepare a codetta if it was a national, professional and constitutional guard? 

If we compare the Turkish problems and the PKK's mistakes in any way. Turkey is ten times more responsible for Turkey's situation, the democratic process, and the freedom of civilians. But the United States, which hundreds of information reaches to the Pentagon and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in a second, without thinking about any problem and the political equation of the area, and after the rescue of their priest, made such a decision. If this situation continues as such, the U.S. may also back down from west Kurdistan.

Identifying the 3 PKK leaders who delegated their life to fighting for freedom as terrorists is certainly not serving the strategic goals of the U.S. in the Middle East and will not save Turkey from the different sanctions. 

Supporting turkey that has backed down from democracy is not a solution, so that it will continue on its policy and breach the democratic and civil rights of the Kurds in north Kurdistan.

Also PKK can’t gain the Kurds rights by using guns and non peaceful revolutions. The peaceful solution like that in Colombia is better than the Turkish military suppression and the armed revolution of PKK.

At the end it’s worthy of telling that: 3 months ago, on 12-8-2018 the new U.S. Consul in Kurdistan region, Steven Fagin visited us and criticized PKK and I responded: U.S. imposed economic sanctions on Turkey over a priest, but 13 thousand Kurds are captured and more than 20 million Kurds in Turkey don’t have the rights to study in their own language, how will they not do a democratic revolution? The Consul laughed and I was saddened by what he said.

Mala Bakhtiyar ( Member of the Executive Body of the PUK Political Bureau)