PUK President at MERI 2025: The PUK Is United and Securing Major Election Victories

Interviews 12:00 PM - 2025-10-08

PUK President at MERI Forum 2025.

Speaking at the MERI Forum 2025, held under the theme “Shaping the Future: Visions for Peace and Prosperity”, President of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), Bafel Jalal Talabani, delivered a wide-ranging address on the state of the PUK, governance in Kurdistan and Iraq, and regional developments. He stressed that the PUK is now stronger and more unified than ever before and called for partnership, institutional reform, and patriotic leadership to guide the Kurdistan Region and Iraq toward stability and prosperity.

The following is Talabani's answers to the host's questions:

PUK Unity

There are no internal divisions in the PUK. PUK is more united now than it’s ever been, and the proof is in the pudding. All you need to do is look at the last elections. Every single election that we’ve had since we have a new leadership, our votes have increased exponentially from the election before, and that’s the examination that a political party is put through, like a student at school. Patriotic Union of Kurdistan is in the strongest position its been for many many years, we’ve had a lot of problems historically, we’ve had issues with mam jalal becoming sick and then he successes kak Kosrat, Hero Khan, one after the other, many political parties would have had a difficult time surviving such traumas, but the PUK because of its depth of cadre and its depth of support was quite easily able to surmount these obstacles from no time at all for the first time in 25 years, just a couple of years ago the PUK was able to become the number 1 vote winner and seat winner in the provincial elections and in the last election, even, our votes crossed the theatre one top by an average of %93 which I’m not happy with because I know the potential of the PUK, and until the PUK is again the number one party in the middle east, I will not be happy and neither will my leadership.

Development in Sulaymaniyah

With great experience and wisdom, you just need to look at Sulaymaniyah in the last 3 years, in the middle of a financial crisis, with limited access to foreign investment. My brother and his team have been able to create more projects in these three years than even in the boom times of Kurdistan when oil was plentiful and oil was flowing and the budgets were very, very high, and they’ve done this by very, very interesting ideas with exchanges of projects for lands and for other investment possibilities. But really, if you want me to cut through the political spiel and get to the meat and potatoes of it, Sulaymaniyah is open for business, and when you come to do business in Sulaymaniyah, nobody will tap you on the shoulder and say you can have this business if you give me 50% of it. That doesn’t exist where we are, and that’s what’s bringing people to Sulaymaniyah. People are coming from the south. People are coming from here (Erbil), from Duhok, and we’re having boom years. And imagine when the situation as a whole improves, imagine how much more the Region will move forward. It’s not enough, though; this has to apply region-wide, and when I say region-wide, I don’t mean all of Kurdistan, I mean Baghdad. Baghdad has massive potential for growth.

On Opposition and the Rule of Law

It’s not an accident that every opposition party lives in Sulaymaniyah, and it’s not a coincidence either, and neither is it a coincidence that almost every political activist today active in Kurdistan and many active in Iraq find safety and succor in Sulaymaniyah. This is not correlatable to the three gentlemen that you’re discussing; the three gentlemen that you’re discussing, 1 of them is under financial charges and personal charges, he’s been found guilty in an open and extremely transparent court case. Another one is dealing with quite serious allegations, again with overwhelming evidence. Again, I’m not sure how that one’s going to go. And if you’re very politely talking the questions of my dear cousins, having a political party is not a shield against brigandage, and neither does it provide you an access or an escape from the judiciary. My-let’s call them kak lahur and his faction, the evidence against them is overwhelming and the evidence against them is evidence that cannot be forged, it’s evidence that cannot be created, we’re not talking about confessions, we’re talking about telephones, hard drives, drones, computers, weapons, ID cards; Insurmountable evidence as well as Mr. Lahur’s own words. It was Lahur that went on television and said I have a militia and I’ll fight to the death, etc, etc, etc. Being a political leader doesn’t put you above the law. It doesn’t mean that you can plan to kill your political opposition. It doesn’t mean you can rob from the business community. And it gives you no safety net from the judiciary, and nor should it frankly.

Formation of the New KRG Cabinet

It’s more about the system rather than positions; positions are important to implement plans, but it’s more about the system. The Question is: Did anybody win the elections? No. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. The winning party would form its government and continue forward, and perhaps out of generosity, we would offer the other party certain positions. The fact that nobody was able to win the elections decisively and, after, form a government means that we must have a coalition government. 

So what do you need for a coalition government? You need partners. Now, two of the main partners are in quite detailed talks about the formation of a coalition government, which must be fair. Which must be transparent, and which must focus on the actual problems of Kurdistan. And if that comes to be. So if those conditions come to be, there’s nothing to stop us from forming a government, but what we’re looking for is, and my question to the KDP brothers and sisters, —and they’re brothers and sisters— Is you want observers or partners? If you want partners, partner with us. And it’s like that when we work together on things. Historically, every time we’ve worked together, we’ve moved this place forward. Every time we’ve worked together, we’ve had benefits for the people, we’d ensure security, we fought Daesh together, we fought al-qaeda together, and we liberated Iraq together. We wrote the Iraqi Constitution together. And this is the mood that we want. This is the reality, whether you like it or not; in a very strange way, we’re not each other’s opposition. If you wave a magic wand and make the PUK disappear from Sulaymaniyah, the KDP won’t gain 1 more seat, and the same can be argued in Duhok with us. So what does that mean? Partnership or you do your thing, I do my thing. Nobody wants that, nobody in Kurdistan wants that. We want partnership, but we want to carry the burden. To carry the burden, we have to be involved in the decision-making process. It’s almost unfathomable that I have to explain this on a stage like this; you would think that that would be common knowledge.

The Prime Minister is the PRIME minister with authorities clearly defined; a minister should have his authorities clearly defined. This in itself could be a good start.

On Institutions and Governance

Not only partisan security, this is one of the weaknesses of Kurdistan: the lack of institutions. You can argue that sometimes we don’t even have institutions, we have personalities, and that’s not a way to run a country. I’m not happy with that. The building of institutions that are actually institutions, this is what we lack most of all, and I think what makes me very happy is that when I talk to my friends in the KDP, they understand this, and they want to move in this direction with us.

One of the things that we don’t always do is we put our signatures to documents that we know damn well will not be successful. That’s the first thing that we should not do, such as the last budget agreement. From the first day that they showed me this agreement, everybody was really happy except me. I think it was the PM al-Sudani that said: Why aren’t you happy? I said, sir, they’re not gonna do this, and neither are you. Then why sign it? 

Let’s have real dialogue, let’s have real negotiations, and let’s agree to things that we can actually do. Let’s say yes, I can do this, and then follow through. Too many times, personalities, internal personality problems- these things become the crux of the problem, not the actual situation itself, and this is wrong too, and again, how does this disappear? By institutions. One institution dealing with another institution, rather than one personality dealing with one personality. I think the easier things will become.

I think the signing of the agreement, the oil flowing again, and the wages coming. I think it’s a good mood and it’s a good chance for Kurdistan. Now united kurdish bloc can get back a lot of the rights that we feel that may have been lost in Baghdad. Now, in the upcoming negotiations, I’m very excited about the elections and I’m very excited about after the elections and what happens in Baghdad and what happens in Iraq as a whole.

Elections and Voting Concerns

I’m worried about vote rigging. I’m worried about intimidation of voting. And look at the numbers, numbers are up. I mean, you look at some areas where certain groups were able to get more votes in certain regions, as Saddam Hussein, is that an actual occurrence, or was someone standing over you saying: put your name there and put your name there. But this happens everywhere in the world, and the Americans complain about their elections that there’s rigging, etc. I think, as worrying as the potential of rigging is, the vast amount of money that everybody seems to be accepting from different parts of the world, there are so many different countries pumping money into different groups and different parties, and it makes you think how shameful. With pride, I can say the PUK has not taken a dollar from any country and will not take a dollar from any country. And that’s the way we need to be. When I get to Baghdad, I’ll say some things you might find interesting.

Baghdad and Iraq's Needs

What does Baghdad need, and what does Iraq need? More than anything else? A change of mood. Ladies and gentlemen, there’s a reason why 70% of Iraqis don’t vote in the elections. It’s because they’re not happy with the state’s quota. Iraq is a great country. Iraq is the birthplace of the civilization of mathematics, of astronomy, and lots of other things worthy of mention. Above everything else, Iraq needs a patriotic Iraqi movement for an Iraq independent of external influence. This does not mean not having a partnership with countries, but Iraq’s political decision-making process must be independent, and it must be made for Iraqis by Iraqis, for Iraq. And once this begins to happen, everything will move forward for Iraq. And 70% of voters will not sit at home and watch I don't know Judge Judy rather than go to elections.

Peshmerga and Security Forces

The Peshmerga Ministry has not been united. We have the 70s forces and the 80s forces; they’re recognized, professional, military units, trained with Iraqis, trained by foreigners, trained by the Americans. I’m not aware of any of these actors of which you speak, but I’m willing to discuss in detail anybody you think may be so.

Are you talking about the general Hashd al-Shaabi (Popular Mobilization Forces) that took part in the liberation of Iraq from many threats, including Daesh, or are you talking about some of the outlaw groups that, for example, six of which have been deemed terrorist organizations? Please be specific so I can answer.

The latter have to be integrated into the legitimate forces, or they must be dismantled. I think the state first needs to desire; once the state has the desire, I think the state has the ability. I didn’t say that the state doesn’t have the desire. In the middle of an election cycle, I think it’s remiss for anybody to undertake such an undertaking. I think they’ll need to wait until after the elections.

Syria and the SDF

The French are playing a huge role in calming the situation in Syria.

I think if Damascus’s expectations of the SDF are realistic and Damascus can hold itself together, I’m optimistic for their ability to get on. If unreasonable demands are made, I don’t expect the SDF to go along with them, and neither would I encourage them to. I think the reasonable demands are for the Kurdish regions to have some form of autonomy whether that be at governorate level or something like that, that our language be recognized, that our culture be recognized and protected, as there be some form of security apparatus that’s safe for us and acceptable to us as Kurds, and integrated in some way into the greater intelligence and military apparatus. These are reasonable requests. My fear is that Syria, like Iraq, needs a patriotic Syrian project. Syria also shouldn’t be subject to the whims of other countries, whomever they may be.

Other Kurdish parties (in Syria) are not as relevant as the SDF. I think there’s a reality you deal with. The person that’s able to do things for you. I’ll go back to something I said in my little announcement the other day: I sit in Sulaymaniyah, there are dozens of parties in Sulaymaniyah, we had a hunger strike of some teachers and they rejected the opportunity to sit with anybody, anybody, but they wanted to see me, and I went to see them and I never forget this: I sat with these teachers and they had drips in their arms and they were sitting on the floor in this dirty tent, hungry, it was shameful just to see that view, and it really affected me I thought about it for days afterwards. There was a particular lady. She was really aggressive towards me —with her right to be so— and I understood their problems. I thought about some ways trying to fix it. One of the things she said to me was really harsh, and that was almost beyond the realms of diplomacy, but she’s really hungry, and I get grumpy when I’m hungry. I said to her: Why did you come to me? She said cause you can get it done, and I said: Who did you vote for? And she said: Not you. Well, vote for me, I’ll have more ability, and I can get it done easier. And this is the same in Syria. If there’s an election tomorrow, we know which Kurdish groups would win the election by how much they would win. So you have to deal with the reality of the situation. All the Kurdish groups deserve their recognition. All the Kurdish groups deserve their rights, but there’s also a reality we cannot forget.

There is the potential for many spoilers in Syria. There are internal and external spoilers. I’m changing my opinion of the leader of Syria. I think he means well. I think he’s trying. I think he’s got a very good grasp of the troubles that he faces. My concern is for the people around him; is everybody around him as reformed as he is? And then you look, Syria is in a difficult place, everybody is vying for their influence there because of its strategic location. There’s a possibility for Iranian involvement, a possibility for Turkish involvement, and a possibility for Israeli involvement, and I think Syria should be left to deal with its own problems. We should only involve ourselves to help, not to try to use Syria as a plus for us.

PUK’s Unique Role and Diplomacy

PUK is a unique party; we have good relations with everybody. We have great relations with the Americans, we have fantastic relations with the Iranians, I count the Russians as well, with Europeans, Great Britain—I’m still a subject of His Majesty— and then also China and many, many more. And I think we have a unique relationship with the Kurds in Syria, especially with Mazloum and the others. This puts us in a unique opportunity to be able to mediate and to be able to help and put out fires, and that’s all what the PUK wants to do, really. We have no interest in Syria other than the rights of the Syrian people. They’ve had a terrible life, and we’ve seen that in Iraq; we’ve seen what happens, and they deserve better. I think the PUK is in a unique position to be able to help with some of that, and you may know, and some people sitting here know that the PUK has helped in many steps in Syria.

Conversation with Mazloum Abdi

In my last conversation with Mr. Abdi, we didn’t advise each other; we threw a few ideas around. One of my ideas that he liked was to make every opportunity to do a genuine deal with the Syrians and to deal with the reality of the situation, and to not be left behind because there’s a train. However solid the tracks are, we can argue, but there’s a train and it’s moving, and I think that we need to be on that train. I know he understands that—he understood before I said it. He understands it, but he needs the same from the counterpart, and I’m hoping that Al-Sharaa, His Excellency, can deliver that.

Syria’s Complex Landscape

Syria is a place with different cultures, different religions, and different peoples, much like Iraq. Is Iraq perfect? No, but I think the system in Iraq, modified likely for Syria, is really the only way to go. I think the Syrians understand that, and it’s just a case of arguing boundaries. I think they can come to some agreement on that, but definitely there needs to be some form of decentralization. It’s logical.

The Peace Process in Türkiye

Being genetically an optimist as a Talabani, and optimistic by nature, I just think the process as a whole has been agreed to by all sides. Now we’re in the very, very minutiae of details, and details are complicated—it will take time to do this.

I rather think it’s not stalled, and I rather think that there are now some legal and elementary steps that have to be taken, and I’m hoping that these steps will be taken. I’m hoping that the process will continue. But everybody I speak to, on all sides, is still firmly on board with this peace process. Luckily, I don’t have to make that decision; Abdullah Ocalan has already made that decision to disarm, so we’ll be there to assist in any way we can.

Iran’s Position

So, Iran has been weakened? We’ll get to that in a moment. You can argue Hezbollah certainly has been weakened, you can argue that Hamas certainly has been weakened absolutely—but does that necessarily mean that Iran has been weakened?

I watched very closely the 12-day war and what happened in Iran, and I came to a conclusion: after 24 hours, there are very few countries in the world that could tolerate what Iran tolerated. Not just in the Middle East, even in Europe. Imagine an entire level of your military-industrial complex disappearing in a matter of a few hours—scientists, politicians, civilians… Not only did they survive that, but within hours, they were able to retaliate.

What does this show us? It shows us that Iran genuinely has institutions. They may not be institutions in the Western sense because there may be a religious form of leadership that runs parallel to these institutions, but the survival of Iran proves that institutions are deep. And in fact, in some ways, Iran, you could argue, has been weakened; in other ways, you could argue Iran was strengthened.

We are also talking to our Kurdish friends in Iran. These attacks actually galvanized the people in Iran; they unified them. I was in the UK when COVID broke out, and I saw an old man and an old woman physically fighting over toilet paper. When Mr. Trump warned the Iranians to leave Tehran, they opened the supermarkets to people and they had signs up: “If you could afford to pay, pay; if you couldn’t, don’t.” It unified people. People fled north; nobody slept on the streets; everybody was led into people’s houses.

But the real question is: what do we want from Iran? Do we want less Iranian influence and involvement in Iraq? That could be done, but not in the way that some Western countries think. Western countries don’t understand the depth of the relationship, even culturally, with Iraq and Iran. Every single political leader above a certain age in Baghdad—including Kak Masoud, including a lot of people in this room—when they were in opposition to Saddam, they lived in Iran.

My brother and I were refugees in the UK. I love Her Majesty the Queen to this day, and it won’t end well for you to insult her in front of me. Why? Because when my house was burned, she gave me a house. When I couldn’t go to school, she sent me to school. When my stomach was empty, she fed me. This is the depth of the relationship between Iran and Iraq. It’s not as simple as the Iranians say, “Do this,” and Iraq says, “Yes, sir.”

No, it doesn’t mean the Iranians should be in charge of Iraqi politics. The opposite is true. As much as I’m friendly with the Iranians, as much as I’m friendly with the Americans, this is our country and we need to manage it; we need to run it. It’s not your job. If you want to help us, thank you very much, we’ll accept help. But Iraq has to be patriotic. We’ll have to believe in Iraq, we’ll have to believe in our people, and we have to make our wrong decisions. Until we can do this, those 70% of people won’t vote for us, and we’ll never really make huge steps forward. We’ll step forward, we’ll trickle forward, but we’ll make huge leaps and bounce.

Iranian Concerns and Regional Tensions

What I’m hearing from the Iranians is quite simple actually. My understanding is that the Iranians, at quite high levels, are quite concerned that there will be conflict coming very soon—not with the United States, I think their assessment is more towards Israel. They consistently say they have no desire for nuclear weapons.

But there’s a complication, further complicated by the attacks in Doha recently. There’s an impression among the Iranians: what’s the point of negotiating if we could be struck any time by Western weapons? I think this is a valid threat. I think for talks to go forward successfully, there needs to be some kind of resolution to this question. It’s a question now a lot of people are asking, and I hope there’s still a desire to talk. I know that they were really happy with Mr. Witkoff; he was described as a very respectful and smart negotiator. I like to see negotiations take place between Americans and Iranians, two countries and peoples that I love dearly.

I hope Iraq will be spared. Last time, a lot of groups showed remarkable restraint—that Iranians retaliated directly to the Israelis and the fire didn’t spread—but the potential is there that it could get bad here. I’m hoping it won’t. I’m hoping that the cool haze will prevail, and I’m hoping that this next conflict won’t take place. There won’t be a resolution to this with force of arms. Some problems cannot be resolved with force of arms, and knowledge cannot be erased by force of arms. This is one of the main points: once you learn something, you can’t unlearn it. So managing that learning process, I think, is the way to do it. Violence is not the answer.

Thoughts on the Trump Administration

I’ll tell you what I do like about the Trump administration so far. At least we get straight answers. At least there’s clarity of purpose. There seems to be clarity of mission. I think the policy is still being formed. I think the file has not been given to a specific organization or specific personality, but the meetings that we have in the US, I’m very happy with. I think now we’re actually getting more clarity; we’ll get yes or no. Before, it was just more confusing.

I think deep down, Mr. Trump is a peacemaker. I think he has a lot of balls in the air that he has to manage, but I like the fact that he’s not afraid of making decisions. Sometimes not making a decision is worse than making a decision. I think if Mr. Trump does want a more peaceful world, the way is clearer to identify than a less peaceful world. So it may be more difficult to take that path. Taking that path will take bravery. I don’t think bravery is something that Mr. Trump lacks. I saw that assassination attempt, and that was very impressive.



PUKMEDIA Exclusive