The armed struggle of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) has come to an end, a development many view as an appropriate and necessary step. Now is the time for Kurdish communities in Turkey to pursue their political, cultural, economic, and academic rights through peaceful and lawful means. Despite this turning point, the Kurdish movement has left a profound imprint on both Kurdish and Turkish politics in recent decades. During this time, Kurdish intellectuals – often shaped by distinct ideological traditions – have faced significant challenges in articulating and advancing their visions, particularly within the evolving dynamics of the Middle East and broader global shifts. These struggles continue to fuel intense debates in light of recent developments in Turkey.
While a sustainable peace process is both urgent and necessary, it still faces numerous and complex obstacles. Amid this period of uncertainty, discussions, particularly among Kurdish and Turkish intellectuals, are at risk of becoming increasingly polarized, with some leaning toward more radical interpretations. As with all transitions, this phase carries moments of crisis that also affect Kurdish intellectual circles, sometimes amplifying tensions. Yet precisely in such times, the pursuit of dialogue and mutual understanding becomes indispensable. Without it, key opportunities for advancing peace and freedom for the Kurdish people could be jeopardized, despite the legitimacy of critical voices. Constructive engagement remains essential for protecting the integrity of both the Kurdish cause and the broader vision of peace within Turkey.
At this critical moment, the Kurdish intelligentsia in Turkey and abroad seems mostly absent. Or worse, they are fighting each other. Instead of having an open and serious debate about the future, we see harsh arguments on social media. People insult each other, and there is little respect or reflection. Meanwhile, the population waits for someone to speak clearly, to offer guidance. But many intellectuals stay silent or attack one another.
Have they given up on thinking?
A withdrawal that costs more than face
Historically, the Kurdish intellectual has always been a figure of resistance against colonialism, against state repression, against cultural erasure. But the role of the intellectual does not end where the external enemy begins. Today, it is more important than ever to look inward: at the self-imposed blockades of Kurdish society, at entrenched ideological dogmas, at the monopolization of public discourse by political movements.
Those who dare to criticize the current power structures within the Kurdish movement – be it the PKK, the architecture of armed struggle for an independent Kurdistan, or the lack of strategic vision – quickly become targets. Threats, defamation, intimidation – these are not signs of ideological strength, but symptoms of a fear of dialogue. And fear, as history teaches us, is always an enemy of freedom, including internal freedom. This is precisely the moment when the intellectual must speak out, must be visible, must stir the debate – not as a mouthpiece of any party, but as a societal catalyst in a time that demands reinvention.
The Kurdish question: between myth, power, possibility
The end of the PKK as an organizational structure unsettles long-held assumptions: Is armed struggle still a legitimate path? What replaces a hierarchical resistance movement? Can Kurdish identity be imagined beyond the idealization of a single organization, based instead on pluralism, democracy, and cultural diversity? Can and should Kurds place their trust in Turkish politics, given more than a century of experience?
Now more than ever, Kurdish intellectuals must be willing to ask these questions, freely, without ideological blinders, without fear of punishment. Yet it appears that many have either retreated into intellectual echo chambers or become entangled in bitter positional warfare. In this vacuum, populism, cynicism, and political resignation begin to take root.
The Kurdish question in Turkey is no longer just a geopolitical or security issue. It has become a cultural and societal challenge. It concerns identity in a fragmented world and a vision of self-determination beyond outdated narratives. What is needed now are new concepts. New terms. New voices. In short: new thinking.
The intellectual as cultural worker and not ideologue
Jean-Paul Sartre once noted that the intellectual must endure and transform the contradiction between humanism and reality. Michel Foucault’s notion of the “specific intellectual” – one who deconstructs power relations and offers alternatives – is no less relevant today. Applied to the Kurdish reality in Turkey, this means: the intellectual must stop seeing themselves as a translator of a decaying world and instead become the architect of a new order – one that embraces diversity, acknowledges internal conflict, and still dares to formulate a shared vision.
Kurdish society is heterogeneous, complex, and full of contradictions, and that is precisely its strength. But only if these contradictions are not denied or demonized, but embraced as a creative resource. The intellectual must not act as judge, but as moderator. Not as patriarch, but as mediator. Not as a megaphone, but as a dialogical counterpart.
A new beginning through thinking, not dogma
Now more than ever, we need an intellectual movement that is neither beholden to party lines nor addicted to power. One that does not fossilize in retrospection but dares to think ahead. One that understands: the fragmentation of the intellectual class weakens public trust, undermines solidarity, and prevents much-needed innovation.
Instead, Kurdish intellectuals should work to develop new models of social organization, federal structures, cultural autonomy, progressive education, and social justice. Models that reconcile individual rights with collective responsibility. Models that demonstrate: the Kurdish question is not a matter of the past, but a challenge of the future.
Thinking as resistance
The title of this commentary is deliberately provocative. But it is not meant as an accusation – it is an invitation. An invitation to rethink the role of the intellectual: as a cultural worker in the service of freedom. As a bridge-builder between theory and practice. As a mediator between old hopes and new realities.
The Kurdish intelligentsia in Turkey stands at a crossroads. It can continue to exhaust itself in internal rivalries, or finally open up the space for a new, courageous mode of thinking. Because only then can a new Kurdistan be imagined – not driven by dogma or doctrine, but grounded in dignity, diversity, and the unshakable desire for freedom.
