Iraq’s Call to Disarm PKK Fighters Underlines Regional Security Challenges for America

As Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein urges the disarmament of remaining PKK militants in northern Iraq, the move exposes layered complexities in a region where Washington must remain vigilant. The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), long designated by the U.S. as a terrorist group, has operated across borders, undermining stability not only in Iraq and Turkey but indirectly threatening American interests through regional disorder.

Why Does Disarming the PKK Matter to America?

The decades-long insurgency led by the PKK has fueled cross-border violence that complicates Ankara’s relations with Baghdad and weakens allied cohesion. By calling on so-called “PKK elements” in Sinjar and Makhmur to lay down arms, Iraq signals a desire for sovereignty and control over its territory—principles at the core of America First national security policy. For Washington, supporting such efforts is critical; unchecked insurgencies create power vacuums exploited by extremist groups hostile to U.S. interests.

Turkey’s consistent push for the complete withdrawal of PKK fighters from neighboring countries aligns with securing its borders and ensuring regional peace—goals that mirror America’s need for stable allies who can manage their own security without endless U.S. intervention. The recent signing of 26 memorandums between Iraq and Turkey, spanning energy, security, and water rehabilitation, also demonstrates pragmatic cooperation rooted in mutual interest rather than globalist meddling.

Can This Diplomatic Momentum End Four Decades of Conflict?

The symbolic withdrawal of PKK forces from Turkey into northern Iraq, culminating in a ceremony earlier this year and Abdullah Öcalan’s call for disarmament from prison, suggests cracks in the long-standing insurgency. Yet as Foreign Minister Hussein admits, armed factions still linger—posing risks not just locally but internationally.

Herein lies a critical question: Will Baghdad fully enforce disarmament and prevent these militant enclaves from becoming sanctuaries for terror? History teaches skepticism; agreements often falter without strong enforcement on the ground. The United States must monitor these developments carefully—not merely as observers but as supporters of genuine national sovereignty in both Iraq and Turkey, pushing back against destabilizing actors who threaten freedom and security.

While flights between Iraq and Turkey resume after years of suspension, signaling thawing tensions, Americans should ask: How long before this fragile peace translates into enduring security? And what role will Washington play—will it empower these nations to defend themselves or allow globalist distractions to erode focus on tangible threats?

This moment calls for clear-eyed accountability from American policymakers committed to America First principles: prioritize partnerships that respect sovereignty; back measures strengthening local governance; reject open-ended conflicts; and confront militant groups undermining freedom at home and abroad.