Turkey says PKK disarmament could start 'within days', says AK Party spokesman
Asked by reporters whether there was a timeline for the PKK militants to lay down their arms, spokesman Omer Celik said:
"I don't want to give a definite timeline at this stage. (...) Now we've reached a stage where it could happen in a matter of days."
Celik added that the coming days would be "extremely important for a Turkey free of terrorism".
The PKK, which has been locked in a bloody conflict with the Turkish state for more than four decades, decided in May to disband and end its armed struggle.
Since the PKK launched its insurgency in 1984 - originally with the aim of creating an independent Kurdish state - the conflict has killed more than 40,000 people, imposed a huge economic burden and fuelled social tensions in Turkey.
The PKK's decision to disarm could boost NATO member Turkey's political and economic stability and encourage moves to ease tensions in neighbouring Iraq and Syria, where Kurdish forces are allied with U.S. forces.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
44 minutes ago
- Telegraph
It shouldn't take Trump to tell Netanyahu to end it
Do you want to look wise before an audience of foreign policy experts? Would you like to humour the average Western diplomat? One sure-fire way is to mutter sagely that any leader who tries to reshape the Middle East is bound to come to grief. The grand panjandrums will never admit it, but the prime minister they most heartily despise – Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel – has managed to transform the strategic balance of the region with astonishing speed. In just nine months, he has eviscerated Hezbollah in Lebanon, triggered the downfall of Bashar al-Assad in Syria and wrecked the nuclear ambitions of Iran's regime. One by one, superficial and widely-believed assumptions – that Hezbollah was impregnable, that Assad was safe as houses, that Donald Trump would never send US forces into action in the Middle East, and that Iran's nuclear programme was indestructible – have tumbled ignominiously to the ground. Now, precisely because of that success, the time has come for Mr Netanyahu to draw a line. He should accept America's proposed ceasefire in Gaza and stop the killing. Everywhere else, he has succeeded. In the rubble and misery of Gaza, he can at least bring Israel's Carthaginian campaign to an end. True enough, the great minds of the foreign policy world are already questioning Israel's military achievements. Many are deeply invested in the adamantine belief that military action can only ever achieve a short delay in Iran's progress towards a nuclear weapon. Every plant can be rebuilt and every centrifuge repaired or replaced, or so runs the argument. Very soon, the vital elements of Iran's nuclear enterprise might be just as menacing as before. Hence the attention paid to Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, when he said that in 'a matter of months' Iran would have 'a few cascades of centrifuges spinning and producing enriched uranium'. But a 'few cascades' – which means, at most, a few hundred centrifuges – is only a fraction of the 20,000 that were installed in Iran's nuclear plants at Natanz and Fordow before they were bombed by America and Israel last month. Even if Mr Grossi is right and Iran swiftly rebuilds its ability to enrich uranium to weapons-grade, it would still need to convert that material into the solid form used for the core of a nuclear bomb. One problem: Israeli bombs have flattened the conversion facility required for this task. And where exactly will Iran find the scientists with the expertise for this supremely delicate operation? Are they still alive? We know that Israel has killed many of Iran's nuclear experts and training their replacements will be the work of years, if not decades. Here is another problem: given that Mr Netanyahu's spies have obviously penetrated every level of Iran's regime – particularly the nuclear programme – any scientists or officials who might be ordered to rebuild the whole effort will have to be thoroughly investigated and vetted. Those who do the vetting will themselves need to be vetted. Once again, this is the work of years. Israeli intelligence seems to have spent decades recruiting agents in the most sensitive pillars of the Iranian state; rooting them out again could take just as long, even supposing that it's possible at all. As for the destruction of Hezbollah and the downfall of Assad, our diplomats will say that Israel has been tactically adept but strategically blind. They will quote the great Prussian military theorist, Carl von Clausewitz, on how 'war is the continuation of politics by other means' and they will say that Israel's campaign has killed individuals without achieving a political outcome favourable to its interests. Yet, once again, there are good reasons to question this familiar analysis. After the elimination of Hezbollah's entire leadership and thousands of other operatives, the terrorist movement could not prevent an avowed opponent, Joseph Aoun, from becoming President of Lebanon in January. In former years, Hezbollah had the power to veto Lebanese presidential candidates but no longer. That is one squarely political benefit of Israel's campaign. Meanwhile, the disembowelling of Hezbollah deprived Assad of the most reliable force keeping him in power in neighbouring Syria. His flight into exile cleared the way for new leaders who are now negotiating through American mediators for a possible normalisation and peace agreement with Israel. Earlier efforts never got anywhere under Assad, but they might under his successor. If so, Israel will have achieved a political goal that would have satisfied Clausewitz. But Gaza is the great exception. What is the objective of Mr Netanyahu's ever more futile campaign, now the longest and bloodiest war in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict? What cause could justify such suffering among ordinary Palestinians? A deal has been on the table for months. Hamas will release all the Israeli hostages in return for a permanent truce and a withdrawal of forces. Having reshaped the region and confounded his critics, Mr Netanyahu should now do what is both right and wise. He should take what is on offer in Gaza, bring the hostages home and end the war.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Israeli military used 225kg bomb in strike on Gaza cafe, fragments reveal
The Israeli military used a 225kg bomb – a powerful and indiscriminate weapon that generates a massive blast wave and scatters shrapnel over a wide area – when it attacked a target in a crowded beachfront cafe in Gaza on Monday, evidence seen by the Guardian has revealed. Experts in international law said the use of such a munition despite the known presence of many unprotected civilians, including children, women and elderly people, was almost certainly unlawful and may constitute a war crime. Fragments of the weapon from the ruins of al-Baqa cafe photographed by the Guardian have been identified by ordnance experts as parts of an MK-82 general purpose 225kg (500lb) bomb, a US-made staple of many bombing campaigns in recent decades. The large crater left by the explosion is further evidence of the use of a large and powerful bomb such as the MK-82, two ordnance experts said. An Israel Defense Forces (IDF) spokesperson said the attack on the cafe in Monday was under review and that 'prior to the strike, steps were taken to mitigate the risk of harming civilians using aerial surveillance'. Medical and other officials said between 24 and 36 Palestinians were killed in the attack on the cafe and dozens more were injured. The dead included a well-known film-maker and an artist, a 35-year-old housewife and a four-year-old child. Among the injured was a 14-year-old boy and a 12-year-old girl. Under international law based on the Geneva conventions, a military is forbidden to launch attacks that cause 'incidental loss of civilian life' that is 'excessive or disproportionate' to the military advantage to be gained. What is considered acceptable is open to interpretation but experts said only a target whose elimination might have a very significant impact on the course of a conflict could justify the death of dozens of civilians. The cafe had two storeys – an open upper deck and a lower floor with wide windows on to the beach and sea – and approaches that were clearly visible from above. Gerry Simpson, of Human Right Watch, , said: 'The Israeli military hasn't said exactly whom it was targeting but it said it used aerial surveillance to minimise civilian casualties, which means it knew the cafe was teeming with customers at the time. 'The military would also have known that using a large guided air-dropped bomb would kill and maim many of the civilians there. The use of such a large weapon in an obviously crowded cafe risks that this was an unlawful disproportionate or indiscriminate attack and should be investigated as a war crime.' Dr Andrew Forde, an assistant professor of human rights law at Dublin City University, said the strike was shocking. 'When you see a situation where there are heavy munitions being used, particularly [in a] crowded civilian space, even with the best targeting in the world … that will necessarily create an indiscriminate outcome that is not in compliance with … the Geneva conventions,' he said. The family-run al-Baqa cafe was founded almost 40 years ago and was well known as a recreation spot for young people and families in Gaza City. It served a small selection of soft drinks, tea and biscuits. Though the vast majority of Gaza's 2.3 million population suffer acutely with growing malnutrition and a continuing threat of famine, some have savings or salaries that allow them to patronise the few remaining cafes. The port area where al-Baqa cafe was located was not covered by any of the evacuation orders issued by the IDF to warn of impending military operations. Marc Schack, an associate professor of international law at the University of Copenhagen, said: 'It is almost impossible to see how this use of that kind of munition can be justified. If you are talking about 20, 30, 40 or more civilian casualties, usually that would have to be a target of very great importance … For coalition forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, the accepted number for a very high-level target was less than 30 civilians getting killed, and only then in exceptional circumstances.' Trevor Ball, a weapons researcher and former US army explosive ordnance disposal technician, identified a Jdam tail section and thermal battery which he said suggested either an MPR500 or an MK-82 bomb was dropped. Another expert with extensive experience of recent conflicts identified the bomb similarly. A third said they could not make a reliable assessment from the pictures presented to them. Israel has an wide range of munitions and has frequently used much smaller weapons for precision strikes against individuals in Gaza, Lebanon, and in its recent air offensive in Iran. The IDF said in a lengthy statement earlier this year that even the most sophisticated measures employed to assess civilian harm were hardly ever perfect and that its choice of munitions was 'a professional matter contingent on the nature of the strike's objective'. The statement said: 'While some targets are suitable for smaller payloads, others may require heavier munitions to achieve mission success – for example, when intending to destroy structures that are built with certain hard materials, large structures, or underground tunnel.' On Tuesday, an Israel government spokesperson said the IDF 'never, ever targets civilians'. Israel has repeatedly accused Hamas of using civilians as human shields, a charge that the militant Islamist group denies.
Sky News
2 hours ago
- Sky News
All eyes on Gaza but what about Ukraine?
👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈 While the world's gaze turned to the Middle East, Russia has pushed on with its summer offensive against Ukraine, ramping up attacks. Meanwhile, the US has ordered a pause in sending weapons shipments to Ukraine due to concerns about a low stockpile in America, but at what cost? In today's Sky News Daily, Gareth Barlow is joined by defence analyst Michael Clarke, who explains what's going on in Ukraine and why attention has faded.
