We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter assesses the evolution of demands by the Turkish Kurdish community from secession to devolution in the context of the most recent negotiations between the Turkish state and Kurdish leaders. The chapter begins by offering background on the Kurdish community with an emphasis on Turkish Kurdistan and the priority placed on decentralization by the Kurdish leadership in that country. This context sets the stage for a close examination of the reconciliation or “peace” process in Turkey between 2009 and 2015 and the evolution of Kurdish leaders’ views on decentralization that emerged over the course of that period. In the third section, the chapter engages with the published political tracts detailing the theory of democratic confederalism that encapsulates the innovative thinking that has emerged over the last two decades among the Kurdish leadership about the potential for devolution to serve their goals of self-governance. The final section of the chapter considers from the perspective of the comparative literature on federalism and devolution the implications of Kurdish theorizing about decentralization as a form of self-determination and the potential of the political experimentation underway in Turkish Kurdistan seeking to implement those theories on the ground.
The final chapter summarises the book's argument that insurgent groups’ ability to maintain popular support and legitimacy is a key dimension of their success or failure. It shows that the PKK, notwithstanding its ever decreasing military capacity, has proven resilient because of the strength of its relationship with its supportive constituency. It proceeds to assess the strength of the argument, explaining the challenges in demonstrating causality in the field of conflict studies. It further assesses whether the book's framework could possibly explain the evolution of the movement in the period after the timeframe of this book. It briefly gives an overview of changes in the PKK since Öcalan’s capture in 1999, including its dramatic ideological transformation, reconfigured structures, the growth of an affiliated Kurdish civil society, the strength of Kurdish political parties and their relationship with the PKK. It also looks at the PKK’s role in Syria and how its experiences there have shaped the conflict in Turkey.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.