Why did terrorist leader Öcalan not call to 'lay down arms'? Pro-government journalist Nagehan Alçı explains on Barzani's channel

MHP Chairman Devlet Bahçeli, following his initial call, saw the DEM Party İmralı Delegation—which visited İmralı on December 28 to meet with terrorist organization PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan—return to İmralı for a second time on January 22, following their visits to the Turkish Grand National Assembly. The meeting between the delegation and Öcalan lasted approximately 4 hours.

BAHÇELİ'S EXPECTATION OF A 'CALL TO LAY DOWN ARMS' WAS NOT MET

MHP leader Bahçeli had announced his expectation for a call to lay down arms before the DEM Party Delegation's second visit to İmralı, stating: "In the second meeting between the DEM delegation and İmralı, it must be declared without any conditions that the PKK's organizational existence has ended, that no results can be achieved through terrorism, and that this bloody page has been closed." However, following the second meeting, the call to lay down arms expected by Bahçeli did not come.

PRO-GOVERNMENT JOURNALIST EXPLAINS WHY THE CALL DID NOT COME

HaberTürk columnist Nagehan Alçı, known for her proximity to the government, claimed in a statement on Barzani's channel Rudaw that a group in Qandil is resisting terrorist leader Abdullah Öcalan and that they are not yet at the point of burying their weapons. Alçı said, "For Abdullah Öcalan to be able to make this call, or more accurately, for this call to find a response after he makes it, Qandil, the YPG, and Rojava must reach a point where they comply with this call."

Alçı stated that if the call does not come by Nevruz, the state's reaction will be very harsh. 

"A GROUP IN QANDIL IS AT THE POINT OF 'WE WILL NOT BURY OUR WEAPONS'"

Alçı said, "As far as I understand, unfortunately, a consensus—or rather, a point where they would say 'if Abdullah Öcalan calls for it, we will now bury our weapons'—has not been clearly reached by both sides yet. My understanding is that the reason for the delay is that there are still problems at these points."

Alçı used the following expressions:

"A group in Qandil is resisting Abdullah Öcalan, and because their own existence is tied to weapons, they are at the point of 'no matter what, we will not bury these weapons.' They were looking at it as if the problem is essentially there, that it cannot be resolved there. They thought Syria could be resolved more easily. Because they viewed the structure in Syria as one that would listen to Abdullah Öcalan's word more easily."

WHY DID ÖCALAN NOT MAKE THE CALL?

Now, has this equation changed in the week or ten days that have passed? Why, even though the visit to Abdullah Öcalan took place, did the concrete call we were expecting—'now bury your weapons'—not come today? Frankly, the Syrian equation is confusing me here. I mean, as expected in Syria as well. The strategy that the YPG will surrender its weapons to the centrally established government and become part of the army has not yet been able to be implemented at this stage. The YPG is resisting there, clashes are still continuing there, and I suppose because that snag cannot be overcome, the expected call from Abdullah Öcalan cannot be made in Turkey either.

Pointing to the middle of February and stating that terrorist leader Öcalan is expected to make a call to bury weapons before Nevruz, Alçı continued her words as follows:

"The DEM delegation's work was in this direction. The state's expectation was also in this direction. Now, if it doesn't happen, I can't say I was wrong; if it doesn't happen, then the conclusion is that Qandil and Syria are resisting, the YPG is resisting, and Abdullah Öcalan does not want to question his leadership—to put it in quotes—by speaking against a picture where his word will not be listened to."

"THE STATE'S REACTION WOULD ALSO BE VERY HARSH"

But look here, the state's reaction would also be very harsh. Because from the beginning, the state is also saying this: this time the weapons will be buried. A clear peace will be declared, and then—not things like 'first this will happen, that will happen, then we will talk about peace'—those types of things, as in the past, do not exist.

"THEY SAY 'IF THE PKK RESISTS, WE WILL RETURN TO VERY HARSH METHODS'"

They say, 'If the PKK resists, then we will return to very harsh methods.' Therefore, I hope such a thing does not happen. Look, this is very, very important for Turkey's peace, for the Middle East's peace, and for our Kurdish brothers and sisters."

DEM PARTY'S STATEMENT ON THE SECOND İMRALI VISIT

The DEM Party İmralı Delegation, consisting of Sırrı Süreyya Önder, Pervin Buldan, and former Mardin Metropolitan Municipality Mayor Ahmet Türk—who was replaced by a government-appointed trustee—made the following statement after the second meeting with terrorist leader Öcalan:

"To the Press and the Public,

As the DEM Party İmralı Delegation, we held a meeting with Mr. Abdullah Öcalan on İmralı Island on January 22, 2025.

During the meeting, Mr. Öcalan first expressed his condolences to the families of those who lost their lives in the tragic fire in Bolu and wished a speedy recovery to the injured. 

Our delegation provided him with the necessary information regarding the negotiations we are conducting.

Mr. Öcalan's work regarding the process is ongoing. Once his preparations on this matter are completed, the necessary statements will be made to the public. 

We, as a delegation, will continue our work and contacts, and we will inform the public as developments occur.

This process will allow everyone, all of us, to live together and freely. With the hope that this will be realized, we await the valuable contributions of all segments of society.

DEM Party İmralı Delegation

January 23, 2025"

News Source: 12punto