Families in Turkey await news of loved ones as Kurdish insurgency ends
DIYARBAKIR, May 12 (Reuters) - Hours after the outlawed Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) announced it was disbanding its armed wing, families gathered outside an office in the Turkish city of Diyarbakir, many with tears in their eyes and photos in their hands.
Some talked about the chances for peace, but many had more pressing personal concerns - the children and other loved ones who had left to join the armed struggle over the decades who they hoped and prayed might now be able to come home.
"I haven't seen my son in 10 years," said Sevgi Cagmar, whose son was 19 when he joined the PKK. "I stayed awake for nights waiting for this news. If he comes back, the world will be mine."
Cagmar joined scores of other relatives waiting for news at the office run by the pro-Kurdish DEM Party in the largest city in Turkey's mainly Kurdish southeast.
All held out the hope that their relatives and friends would return - families usually get information if someone has died.
Hatice Levent clutched an image of her daughter Fadime who she believes joined the PKK 11 years ago when she was a university student. She accused the DEM of helping to arrange her daughter's departure.
"They stole her dreams, our future. I just want to hug her again. I'm waiting with open arms," Levent said. She thanked Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan for launching what she hopes is a final peace effort.
There have been many reports of PKK militants losing touch with their families for years. Much of the fighting in the past was focused in the rural areas of southeast Turkey. But the conflict has since mainly moved to northern Iraq, where the PKK has bases in the mountains.
Turkey has dozens of outposts in Iraqi territory and monitors its border with Iraq to stop people crossing back over.
"This war must end. Soldiers, police the ones in the mountains — all of them are our children," said Sultan Guger, whose son joined the PKK 10 years ago. "Brother has killed brother. We don't want any more pain."
In other cities in the region, people greeted the news with cautious hope - welcoming the chance of peace, but fearful of the future after more than 40 years of conflict.
"The PKK was an organization that brought Kurdish issues to the forefront," said Ihsan Ergiz from the southeastern city of Batman.
"If democratic rights are finally granted, disbanding is natural. It will be better for our country."
"Laying down arms is good, but we don't know what comes next," said a resident of Diyarbakir who did not give their name. "Will prisoners be released? We can't see the full picture."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
8 hours ago
- Telegraph
We shall not remain a free country if we continue to submit to radical Islamists
It shows in what strange times we live that it is the chairman of Reform, of all parties, who resigns over the question of banning the burka. Surely his party is the likeliest to favour a ban or – at least – to be able to contain internal disagreements on the subject. Probably Reform's chairman, Zia Yusuf, had other reasons to go. He is not the first person to find it challenging to work closely with Nigel Farage. In a spooky way, Reform tends to act as a mini-Maga, mirroring Trumpery in its highs and lows. Over there, Donald Trump and Elon Musk explode with a cosmic bang; over here, Farage and Yusuf then go off with a smaller pop. For this reason, I suspect that when Maga falters, as it eventually will, so will Reform. Nevertheless, Mr Yusuf is a Muslim. Partly for that reason, he was a recruitment coup for the supposedly 'Islamophobic' Reform. On Thursday, he said his party's newest MP, Sarah Pochin, had been 'dumb', at Prime Minister's Questions, to call for a burka ban; then he resigned. Let me take two other recent examples of where attitudes to Islam raise knotty problems. On Monday, Hamit Coskun, an atheist Turk, was found guilty of a 'religiously aggravated public order offence' and fined. He had burnt a copy of the Koran outside the Turkish consulate in London. In an article in this week's Spectator, Mr Coskun says he was protesting about President Erdogan of Turkey changing his country from a firmly secular state to 'a base for radical Islamists while trying to create a sharia regime'. The magistrate, however, decided otherwise. Mr Coskun had been 'motivated at least in part by hatred of followers of the [Muslim] religion', he said, and so he was a criminal. My other example comes from events outside Parliament on Wednesday. A noisy mob of anti-Israel demonstrators blocked, insulted and intimidated MPs and peers trying to enter. The protesters proudly announced that they were drawing a red line round the premises, as if they had that right. A disabled peer I know who travels by wheelchair, found it frightening to get through the crowd, though he determinedly persisted. He complained to a police officer, and got the airy reply, 'It's free speech, isn't it?' It indicates the sense of vulnerability such situations arouse that the peer asks me not to print his name. Another peer, Lord Moynihan, was surrounded near the Tube station entrance by black-clad youths who subjected him to an involuntary interview, which they filmed, including the question: 'Do you condemn the massacres of Gazans?' 'I do indeed condemn the terrible shootings by Hamas of their own people,' he bravely answered. It was noticeable – and has happened before – that when there are Gaza marches the police and the parliamentary authorities are lax about ensuring legislators can enter freely and protesters are kept at a distance. They seem not to acknowledge the vital difference between free speech and threatening behaviour. Obviously, the greatest passion behind the Gaza marches comes from Muslims (though the secular hard-Left is also involved). Have the police made a covert bargain with the march organisers? The fear of being called 'Islamophobic ' seems to disable the police's judgment. They do not properly enforce public order or protect the right of MPs, peers or staff, to reach their place of work unimpeded. Nor do they protect the right of ordinary citizens to enter Parliament without fear. They act as if the 'right to protest' allows parliamentary democracy to be made subject to a picket line. Yesterday, with many other peers, I signed a letter to the Lord Speaker, organised by Lord Walney. One of our points was that, on top of normal public-order legislation, there are at least four other laws which specifically protect Parliament from such attacks. Why are these not enforced, we asked, and why do the parliamentary authorities not take a stronger line to insist that they should be? One of the attractions of Britain to immigrants is that we are a free country, treasuring free speech. In many cases, immigrants enhance our freedom. Now that immigration is on such a vast scale, however, we suffer because many immigrants do not come from freedom-loving cultures. To the extent that immigrants can be grouped by religion, the largest single group are Muslims. For complex political, economic and cultural reasons, Islam is in global ferment. In that ferment, freedom is often scorned, except the freedom to advance interpretations of Islam, often the most extreme ones. Such Islamists have punitive, sometimes violent attitudes to promoting their version of their faith. At worst, this takes the form of terrorism. The words 'Allahu Akbar!' ('God is great!') have become the war-cry of an imminent explosion or attack. Even without actual violence, Islamism often involves naked anti-Semitism and unreasoning hatred of Israel. Militant Islam also tries to assert its power against the sort of freedoms which the rest of us (including, do not forget, many Muslims) cherish. Examples include forcing women and girls to cover their heads and even their faces, prohibitions on school swimming or singing, protests against being served by women in the public services and the banning of certain books and films. A leading Islamist demand is for a blasphemy law, although its supporters use other words to describe it. Most Muslims are highly sensitive to any perceived insult to their prophet, Mohammed, or to the Koran. Because they regard the Koran as 'the unmediated word of God', some take the view that disrespect to the physical object, the book of his word, is a direct attack on him, and therefore must be avenged. Belief in the sacredness of religious scriptures should be respected by non-believers, but it must not be defended by law, no matter how much transgressions may offend Muslims. It is unpleasant and foolish to burn the Koran in public, just as it was – which often happened in Britain until quite recently – to burn effigies of the Pope. But the only conceivable justification for banning would be in special incidents – burning a Koran in front of worshippers entering a mosque, for example – which would amount to an incitement to violence. The offence here should not be because the act was 'religiously aggravated'. A modern country should not adjudicate between the sincerity, truth or competing ardour of different religious claims. All it can judge is that some things in some places breach civil peace. In all the cases cited above, you can see politicians and public authorities tiptoeing round the subject. Surefootedness is certainly better than clodhopping where religion is concerned. But there is a growing, justified fear that we shall not continue as a free country if we defer to the angriest Muslim voices. Two concepts need to be faced down. The first is the idea of 'Islamophobia', to which this Government wants to give legal shape. The word 'phobia' suggests psychological abnormality, yet surely people are entitled to be frightened of any religion, especially of Christianity and Islam, which aims for conversion and claims universal truth. Such fears may be misplaced, but they are not criminal. The other concept embedded in public policy, thanks to the Equality Act, is that of 'protected characteristics' – one's religion, sex, sexuality, age, disability, race etc. These are intended to defend people against persecution, but in practice they drive us into warring categories. The only protected characteristic anyone should need is to be a British citizen. That unites. Everything else divides.
Spectator
8 hours ago
- Spectator
What being kidnapped taught me about the struggle for Kurdish independence
Twenty-one years ago, I was opportunistically kidnapped by supporters of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). In light of the PKK declaring last month its intention to discontinue its armed struggle against Turkey, I've been reflecting back on my involuntary run-in with the struggle for Kurdish self-governance. As with my kidnapping, the Kurdish cause had always been riven by amateurism, not to mention the petty feuds of the rival Kurdish organisations in Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria. Truces, mass casualty events, kidnappings, and negotiations followed each other haphazardly. The struggle was filled with freelancers, bandits, and entrepreneurs. It embodied contradictory approaches to Americans and Western power in the region. Steve had come to the Levant for a taste of the exotic. The year was 2004. We were both Fulbright Scholars. After a week in Syria, we were tired of ruins and banquets. We were headed to Beirut for the pleasures of real civilisation – the rooftop bar at the Virgin Mega Store, Haagen-Dazs, and the much-missed company of western women.
BBC News
a day ago
- BBC News
From NHS wards to field hospitals in Ukraine and Turkey
"One day you're working in Craigavon Area Hospital; the next, you're boarding a flight to a war zone."Dr Stephen Reaney, from Northern Ireland, travels the world as a volunteer, providing urgent medical care in disaster-hit 2023, he worked in southern Turkey, after a deadly earthquake killed more than 55,000 year before that, Dr Reaney was in Ukraine, after Russia launched a full-scale military invasion. "We're seeing the typical war casualties – men, women, and children," he told BBC News NI."It's very traumatic for the staff, but you just get on with it, particularly when children come in with severe burns, for example, it can be very distressing. "But we do our best for our patients." When he is at home, Dr Reaney works as an urgent care doctor for the Southern Health and Social Care for about four months of the year, he travels with the Christian organisation Samaritan's Purse to countries worst hit by sets up field hospitals to provide emergency described how a woman who had been trapped in a collapsed building following the Turkey earthquake survived after receiving two weeks of intensive care at the field hospital there. Twelve-hour shifts, seven-day weeks An example of one of the organisation's tent-like hospital rooms was on display at Dundonald Elim contained four trauma beds, basic vital sign monitors, ultrasound scanners and ECG monitoring equipment."The diagnostics are really quite simple, but we can do a lot with very little," Dr Reaney said of the one of the main challenges for him and his colleagues is to use medical resources carefully while deployed."Once they're gone, they're gone, until the next shipment," he said."There's little wastage. "We work efficiently and we do the most for the most."You just have to switch gears and remember you're not back in Northern Ireland. "You're in a very resource-limited environment, working in a small team, so that's a challenge."Dr Reaney told BBC News NI that while volunteering abroad, he and his colleagues work 12-hour shifts, seven days a week, treating patients who have come through "some horrendous experiences".He said the role is a rewarding one but acknowledged it can also be "traumatising", particularly for medics working on their first emergency response.
