Does PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party) deserve to keep its terrorist organisation status?

In My Humble Opinion
1

I read that PKK is closely affiliated with PYD. Some sources claim they are basically the same but they exist only in different places.
PKK is designed as a terrorist organisation long ago. I do not know on what this designation was based. I read a lot about it but I am confused. They say PKK attacked civilians. Is this a enough to designate them as terrorists? Some claim these attacks were in fact the attacks of the Turkish government and carried out to blame them on PKK. I cannot trust any of the sides in this conflict.

1.) Did PKK get designated as a foreign terrorist organisation mostly because Turkey is (or was) an important partner to the US or NATO, although it did not much deserve being called terrorists?

2.) In the recent years, they got the US (and probably some other Western countries’) support against ISIS. I feel like everyone appreciates this. However, terrorist designation continues despite the support and their positive outlook in the media. Is this fair?

3.) Is it really impossible to be objective in the evaluation of this conflict?

2

They continue to execute attacks inside Turkey that clearly aim to influence the population in order to achieve their political aims. They’ve been doing it for four decades. That’s a terrorist organization, and it’s not a new one. States are allowed to use violence to achieve their political goals within constraints by international law. Aside from the partisan provisions of the Geneva Conventions, non-state actors aren’t allowed that freedom. States wrote the agreements.

Now we do sometimes skip labeling groups as terrorists when we support their insurgency. Press releases tend to mention “freedom fighters” or the more neutral insurgent in that case. Even with the weakening of the relationship Turkey is formally a NATO ally. They continue to be an important regional power. Supporting Turkey’s interests to get other things we want from the relationship is still arguably in support of US national interests even with the current friction.

It’s not fair. Fairness doesn’t necessarily advance US interests.