Dünya / İngilizce Yazılar / Kürdistan

The History Searching For a New Direction, Communists, and the Struggle for Freedom and Socialism


The History Searching For a New Direction,

Communists, and the Struggle for Freedom and Socialism

Honourable guests, dear comrades!

On behalf of the communists of the Northern Kurdistan wish you welcome and greet you all with love and respect. First of all we thank and wish success to the Communist Party of Kurdistan (Southern) for holding such a comprehensive meeting.

We will present our opinions and suggestions about the agenda of the meeting to be held on July 16-17, that is to say about the “Assessment of the global developments and changes with a Leftist perspective” and “The tasks of communist, leftist, progressive, and patriotic forces of Kurdistan as well as those of the world and of the region.”

  1. The Crisis of Capitalism and Its Results

In 1990s we had encountered the confessions of renegade communists such as “we did wrong” or “How wrong we were.” They were everywhere, and we were surrounded by them. But throughout the last year we read, and will continue to read, the confessions of  advocates of capitalist-imperialist system. The confessions such as “Free marked has collapsed,” “Capitalism is not the future of humanity” and “It is proved that Marx was right” come directly from the theorists of the capitalist-imperialist front. We will hear such things more. Those who believed that only in socialist regimes there is state intervention in economy, but in capitalism economic crises are solved “within the rules of the free market economy” without any state intervention have been surprised and shattered when they witnessed the most extensive state intervention in economy by USA during last crisis.

It is necessary to lay bare the name and the extent of the crisis and to take a stand against deceptive propaganda. For the sworn ideologists of capitalism strive to consider the crisis and the capitalist system separately. It is said and written that the present crisis has not stemmed from the structure of capitalist system, but is the  result of wrong policies of CEOs, that is, of the “administrative errors” and that it will be overcome in a short time. When the state set about the intervention in economy with the bailout plans of trillion dollars in order to rescue the companies and banks, notable in the Western centres where the argument of “capitalist free market” had been produced, they try to save the situation, humming that “it is experienced once in a blue moon.” However, the present crisis has been giving serious signals since last two years, especially in USA. We say USA, because the epicentre of the existing crisis is the West, especially USA.

In short, what lies at the basis of current crisis?

a- Monetarist and  privatisation policies, which have dwarfed at first and then disabled the state in economic affairs since 1970s, had a role in generation of the crisis. The current crisis has burst through the extreme point of the structural cyclical depression of capitalism, which is financial sector into real sector. Finance sector defined as the bloodstream of capital has collapsed, and are collapsing. Financial capitalism cannot survive without hard currency and money circulation, just as human body cannot survive without blood circulation.

b- Other precipitating causes of the crisis are the excessive consumption, created and encouraged in society, and rapid swelling of the mortgage loans as a result of “the loans on non-existent assets”; and the traffic of transnational hot money going wherever the balance between risk and profit was most suitable, that is wherever the interest rates were highest in 1990s when the global barriers to finance capital were removed. At first capitalism made production and therefore provided work and bread for workers while exploiting them. However, today’s facts are the break off production, the prominence of hot money running after high interest rates and transformation of dwelling, the most fundamental need of humankind, into a credit item with the purpose of commercial profits. The barbarous character of imperialist capitalism getting rid of all its social and humanitarian values and attacking the humankind savagely has gone too far to drive Jewish Chief Rabbi into rebellion. Ishak Haleva, the Chief Rabbi of the Jews of Turkey, who participated in “The Meeting of Civilisations,” said that “A man is starving every three and a half seconds in the world” and added that “The children dying of  malaria in Africa one every 30 seconds are not included. Everyday, 6000 persons are dying of AIDS. On top of it, homosexuality is spreading rapidly.” He asked “Well, what is the civilisation doing in the meantime?” Drawing attention to the 500 million dollars  of military expenditure by the civilisation hourly, Halva remarked that “If you say that civilisation, 1 have decided not to be civilised; no need to such a civilisation! Civilisations are committing suicide.”

c- As a result of the facts that capitalism has approached its physical as well as historical limits, that mechanisation has approached its limits within the capitalist system as Marx had pointed out and created the accumulation crisis and, on top of it, commoditisation and cultural degeneration of last 30 years, the current crisis has broken all safety valves.

d- To label the current crisis mere a crisis of liberalism, especially “of neo-liberalism” is not enough to explain the current crisis and also the state interventions violating the principle of “laissez faire, laissez passer.” The current crisis is not peculiar to a particular period, it is the crisis of capitalist system and its industrial civilisation.

The scale, depth and the grave results of crisis have pushed people in new researches. It leads the bourgeoisie to new institutionalisations within the system. Large rescue operations put into effect by the state from the beginning of the crisis and the issues voiced at “the 7th Asia-Europe Meeting” held in Beijing mean that henceforth a regulated and controlled economy in worldwide capitalism will be one of the principal economic policies. In the Meeting attended by 27 European and 16 Asian countries, Chinese Prime Minister had said that “we need financial innovations, but we need financial control much more.” European and Asian leaders have declared the need to “regulate the world banking system so as to allow a closer control.”

Control over markets requires new financial institutions or renovation of the old. Trying to overcome the crisis, the bourgeoisie says that “financial markets have become globalized, so the rules and control systems must become globalized too.” They aim to renovate the institutions such as IMF and WB or replace them with the new ones. The capital wants to build up new global financial networks and control institutions on the grounds that for example “that Germany carries out an independent interest rate policy or France returns to the fixed exchange rate and makes devaluation at times or Britain turns the scale by increasing the budget deficit are the steps leading to the global crises in these circumstances.” In short, a new Bretton Woods, a new arrangement suitable to the current structure and the needs of capital is intended.

But the fact that this orientation requires global compromises including some developing countries as well as chief imperialist actors has been seen and understood primarily by USA. She comes out of, or rather is removed from the position of “I make history, you will discuss it.” G-20 Summit held on November 15 must be considered as “the first step in global compromise” that will determine the new financial rules and institutions. A new economic policy and institutionalisation based on a new compromise under the leadership of USA, Russia, EU, Japan and China and including some of the “developing countries” are intended.

The search for compromise does not eliminate the conflict of interests and the struggle for hegemony among the imperialist centres. On the contrary, if economic recession and narrowing markets will last for several years, fight for market shares among imperialist centres will escalate. But it seems that it will be an indirect fight waged through local, small forces such as Lebanon, Kosovo and Georgia, not a direct war among imperialist centres. Will hegemonic calculations among different imperialist poles spread to the military area? The history shows that great economic crises lead to great imperialist wars. Will the current crisis also lead to? The transnational character of the capital, that is, the comparatively high level of economic and commercial interdependence and nuclear deterrence are the barriers to a direct war between imperialist centres. Can they not be crossed? It is difficult to say precisely “yes” or “not”. However it is evident that imperialists are waging a war for energy resources as well as market share through the local, regional forces.

The crisis has created and is creating new circumstances too. Just as Russian intervention in Georgia put an end to the military decisiveness of USA, the financial crisis has proved that USA is no longer an economic determinant. USA and EU are still the centre of gravity in the global economy, yet we witness that the balance point is moving gradually from the West to the East (Asia).

  1. International Political Developments

We the communists of Northern  Kurdistan rejected at the beginning the theses of “Empire,” “an unipolar world,” “the clash of civilisations” and “the end of history” put forward with the collapse of the Socialist Block. We declared that they were born dead. We pointed out that the world was no longer a bipolar system divided into the capitalist and the socialist, but multipolarity within the imperialist-capitalist system was going on. We emphasized that USA was seeking after the imperialist interests and calculations under the cover of “low intensity democracy” and “replication of  freedom potential”, rejecting the claim of  “uni-centrality” or even “centerlessness” and the opinion that USA was “a contemporary empire”

In 1990s K. Rouve, President Bush’s former advisor, said that “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality –judiciously, as you will– we’ll act again, creating other new realities … We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” Well, was that reality? No! Yet USA had begun to see itself as “emperor,” moreover some theorists had hailed USA as emperor. However, empire allegation, which never had equivalence in the real life, has come to an end politically and militarily as well as economically. The fight for the partition of the world generally and particularly for the dominance over Eurasia among the imperialist centres is escalating. Caucasia, Central Asia, the Middle East and the Balkans are the main areas where the conflicts have been intensified. And Kurdistan is the focus of imperialist conflicts. It is not the question of the communists of Kurdistan and those of the East only, but the common question of the communist, progressive movement of the world generally to take a stance in respect to the probable developments..

The aim of USA’s imperialist calculations is Eurasia stretcihg from the Balkans to China. With the disintegration of USSR, Western imperialism, especially USA, saw the Balkans, Caucasia, Central Asia and the Middle East as the areas to be shared. The Balkans, Eastern Europe and the Baltic countries have been shared between USA and EU.

The next step was to share Ukraine, Moldova, Caucasia and Central Asia which would deepen the encirclement of Russia and set the stage for the encirclement of China. Military occupation of Iraq after Afghanistan, the calculations about Iran, the plans to pull Armenia and Azerbaijan as well as Georgia into the Western Alliance (through the efforts of Turkey), all are the part of calculations about the dominance over Eurasia.

With Putin, Russia has rapidly responded to the siege of Russia by USA and the Western Alliance and founded the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) with China, forming a contra pole. SCO adopts the slogan of “Asia belongs to Asians” against the hegemonic calculations of USA and Western Europe. USA got annoyed of SCO, because it has reached a position capable of counterbalancing the West and ruins the plan of USA to encircle and disable Russia and China. As a result, USA retreats to the line of “let’s govern the world together,” developing new tactical policies. Will the process take USA from tactical policy change to a strategical one? It seems so.

If USA, Germany and France are imperialists, are Russia, China and SCO socialists? Never! Russia has re-emerged as another imperialist pole. There are no imperialist policies in Chinese history. It is difficult to say that China is now an imperialist centre, but it is equally difficult to explain the current regime. The Communist Party is in power; and economy is open market of global capitalism! In other words, a savage capitalism is developing under the Communist Party.

Friends, comrades.

If Turkey will be key state in USA strategy to counterbalance Russia in Caucasia, and it seems so, it is necessary to reflect on the repercussions over Kurdistan, particularly Southern Kurdistan. Will the returning of Russia to the Mediterranean and the Middle East create new manoeuvring areas for the national movement in Southern Kurdistan? How will the increasing importance of Turkey in USA strategy affect the relations between USA and the Federal Kurdish Government (FKG)? Perhaps it may create some possibilities for independence of FKG from USA. Well, have the FKG the ability to make use of the contradictions among the imperialist centres? Worth to deal with.

Among these multiple problems, it is important  how to channel the reaction of the peoples of the region to imperialism and capitalism into a revolutionary path. It is known that in recent years it has been channelled by the militant political Islam. Now it is the responsibility of the comminist movement to take the initiative again all over the region.

III. Our Responsibilities and Duties

First of all, we want to share a fundamental approach of our Party with you: “Revolutionary waves and dynamics of the 20th century could not overcome the imperialist-capitalist system worldwide and decisively. Socialist regimes, notably USSR,  suffocated and collapsed at a certain stage of their development.

“Against the liberal doctrine setting forth the question of freedom within the framework of state, Marxism approached the question from the perspective of transitional state as “non-state government”, that is, from a broader viewpoint. However, socialist regimes could not carry into effect the “transition from the state to statelessness, rather than withering away, the state grew stronger. Consequently, the revolutionary wave of 20th century ebbed away, the dynamics which were the products of that wave were clogged or disintegrated and evolved into capitalist system. The process is going on. Unable to surpass decisively the worldwide imperialist-capitalist industrial civilisation and its modernist fabric, the revolutionary dynamic of 20th century evolved into it.

“In this process, the communist movement of 20th century transformed and is transforming into a new social democratic movement. In 2000s, the communist movement of the world should aim to opt out of the shadow of 20th century by a serious breaking away. Continuity and breakaway  always went hand in hand in history. Every breakaway contain the continuity as a bridge between past and future. Today’s communists movement should maintain the continuity on the basis of Marxism, the theory of scientific socialism and the soaring revolutionary spirit of 20th century; but at the same time it should also break with the old communist structure now transformed into a new social democratic movement such as left-nationalism or liberal left, and with the political program and the ways of practical struggle peculiar to 20th century. In 21st century, world communist movement will and should be reshaped through that breakaway and continuity. As the communist of Northern Kurdistan, we aim to actualize the breakaway and continuity in this framework.

“Anti-capitalism is growing stronger in proportion to the 20th century. Capitalism never before in its history had been questioned so deeply and barely. Non-governmental organisations, social forums and the world communist movement struggling against capitalism with the again socialism alternative –each of these dynamics is striving to give substance to the history again searching for a direction.

“It is another condition for the success of the revolutionary dynamics of 21st century  to improve international struggle of progressive, revolutionary, communist dynamics of the West and the East against imperialist-capitalist system on the basis of a new synthesis without attempting to replicate the 20th century. The East should aim at the unity of struggle without being self-enclosed and exclusionist. When the October Revolution destroyed Euro-centrism and surpassed West-centrism, carrying the centre of gravity of the revolutions, especially political revolutions, to the East in spite of the assertion that “socialism is possible only in the advanced capitalist countries,” it did so without any orientation despising the role and dynamic of the West in the world revolution and giving credence to the West versus the East opposition. Surpassing the west-centrism, Lenin never gave credence to an ideological-political orientation bringing about the East-centrism, blessing the East. On the contrary, he aimed at the unity of the revolutionary dynamics of the West and the East. Lenin’s approach illuminates the communists of Kurdistan adopting the perspective of “from local to universal” (21.yy’da Özgürlük ve Sosyalizm Manifestosu [The Manifesto of Freedom and Socialism in 21st Century], Gün Yayıncılık).

From that fundamental perspective, the communists should redefine the alternative society to capitalism.

For many years, the dynamics of communist, progressive, revolutionary politics were aware of the fact that imperialist capitalism had decayed and degenerated as a system and the crisis of capitalism had turned into the crisis of industrial civilisation. Moreover, they produced political programmes too. Well, how will we tell that fact to the working class, working women, young, unemployed and generally working people, and how will we equip them with the political consciousness? How will we stop the trade unions which have integrated into the capitalist system and become the ideological apparatus of it from impeding the struggle of the oppressed, exploited classes, that is, wearing them down with some reforms within the limits of the system? Such are some questions to be answered from now on.

We are again faced with the question of “What is to be done?” While answering the question with a new content, how should we reproduce Lenin’s political language and tactics without replicating them. The world communist movement is again faced with the concrete political struggle expressed by Marx as “Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.” For this it is necessary to comprehend that “the streets are the true podium of the people”.

What will happens if the communist movement as an universalistic movement confines itself to the local, territorial solution, while the bourgeoisie are seeking after a global solution to global crisis? It cannot make headway. We have to find the universal solution as well as local, territorial one.

The structure of globalized capitalism and the nature of the struggle against it require the local/territorial political and organisational pursuits in organic relationship with the universal solution. The end of neo-liberalism has been reached; this is a fact voiced not only by us, but by the bourgeoisie. There is ever broadening consensus on the fact that, let alone liberalism, the time of capitalism as a system has gone. But we come back to the point: the question is not to “interpret” it, but to be able to overthrow it. It is to prepare the millions of workers and labourers for that purpose. It is to redefine the outlines of the alternative society to capitalism, that is of socialism, and explain it to the people. A socialist society project containing free health care and education for all, job and housing security for all was the reality of the 20th century and enough to define the socialist society in the circumstances of the time, but it not enough today. We should be able to convey to the people, to the workers a socialism project maintaining these fundamental lines, but redefining their contents, not blessing work, on the contrary questioning irrational economic activity, having more leisure times, consuming less, being et peace with the nature, focusing on the human, not on the state, even if it be a socialist state.

  1. The Middle East and Kurdistan

The Middle East is still the hot bed of problems, notably the Palestinian and Kurdish questions as the bleeding wounds. In addition, the increasing Kurdish-Arab tension on the issues waiting to be solved in Southern Kurdistan is pregnant with new hot developments. As communists, as progressives, what is our attitude to these questions? And what should be the concrete political stance of the Middle Eastern communist movement? These are the important regional questions on which we must dwell.

With the Obama administration, USA has given the first signs of the policy she will pursue, a policy taking for granted the current borders and status quo. When she overthrew Saddam regime in Iraq, the main target was Iran. However, walking back and forth it has embarked on the quest for a compromise. When she overthrew Taliban regime in Afghanistan, the target was Russia. Yet, walking back and forth she was obliged to seek support from Russia against Taliban. As a result, USA strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan did not work, and therefore she has been obliged to take for granted the old border and status quo. Are the new policies of USA, which she has developed because of her strategic dilemma, strategic or mere temporary tactical policies? As we have already said, USA does not change her strategy of dominance over Eurasia, thus the calls by Obama are mere tactical. At least, it seems so for today. Will the tactical change bring about a strategic one? We think it will. We’ll see.

However, it seems that Obama’s calls for compromise and his Cairo speech have been influential. It is evident that USA has ceased to declare radical Islam as the new “enemy” on the basis of fictitious theses such as the “clash of civilisations”, and is seeking reconciliation with Islamic world including the radicals. In short, if imperialist USA and her allies lower their guard, it will contribute to lowering the guard of radical political Islam in a wide area from Hezbollah to Shariah regime in Iran. The impact has been seen in Lebanon. Hariri’s pro-Western the March 14 Alliance has won the elections in Lebanon, while the March 8 under the leadership of Hezbollah has failed. It seems that Obama’s calls for reconciliation with Iran have deprived the Islamic regime of the external threat weapon it has used to affect the masses, even if partially.

Iran has the capacity to affect the region with every aspect of her internal politics. Add to it, the militant dispossition of Shiism. It is evident that the events experienced immediately after the June 12 elections are not the results of a simple, temporary reaction. It is clear that the building stones of the oppressive regime stifling the society since 1979 have begun to move, and that the Mullah will not be able to rule Iran as before. Those who hold the power either will device some intrasystem reforms to appease the waves from the bottom or in the medium term be faced with the new upsurges questioning directly the regime, if they suppress the mass uprising with a bloody massacre. As the “holy face” of the Shariah regime, Hamaney’s prestige has been damaged in the eyes of the people, when he gave support to Ahmedinejat and declared his “victory” in spite of the rigged elections. Hamaney the “guide” has become the spokesman for the despots and dishonest rigging the elections.

Moreover, the system is questioned by the influential religious and political authorities known as “reformists.” That is to say, there is a serious crack at the top of the Iranian Shariah regime. It is useful to remark that the mass opposition of the peoples and the revolutionary, communist, national democratic dynamics is not limited to the demands and goals of the “reformists.” In Iran the fundamental problems and demands feeding the opposition of the oppressed peoples and the exploited labourers to the regime are: Liberty, equality, equity! The oppressed peoples, women, labourers, the suppressed broad masses struggled against and overthrew the Shah regime demanding liberty, equality and equity. But they soon encountered with the same problems. The name, character and more importantly actors of the regime had been changed, but the same problems had continued and became heavier.

In the Middle East, the Palestinian and Kurdish questions continue to be two fundamental issues in the region. Without finding a solution to the Kurdish and Palestinian questions, the efforts to reach a permanent peace in the Middle East will come to nothing. As the communists of Kurdistan, we expect and support the unity of the Palestinian national liberation movement in spite of its internal problems. We favour the solution based upon the free will of the Palestinian people.

The other bleeding wound of the Middle East is the Kurdistan question, that is ours. Kurdish/Kurdistan question appears as the freedom and unity of a fragmented people and country in general historical perspective. In specific historical context, the question of national and social liberation of the working people in parts of Kurdistan waits to be solved. Iranian, Turkish and Syrian regimes calculate to siege and eliminate the Southern Kurdistan where the Kurdish people have taken important steps on the path of national freedom, while they refuse to recognize the national demands of Kurds in the parts of Kurdistan they controlled by force. Withdrawal of USA from Iraq, that the central government of Iraq gives the signs of Saddamist policy towards Kurds as it consolidate its power, and that Sunni and Shiite Arabs begin to pursue a joint policy in respect to Kurdistan, ignoring their internal contradictions –all are the indications of the fact that central government of Iraq will participate in the siege.

The problems of Federal Kurdish Government founded in Southern Kurdistan with the Sunni and Shiite Arab politics within the framework of the Federal Iraq State are growing. In the basis of the problems lies the fact that about one third of Southern Kurdistan, notably Kerkuk, is not controlled by FKG. The status of the cities such as Kerkuk, Xaneqin and Shengal has not been determined yet, and this aggravates the problems.

To be in relationship and solidarity with Kurdish national movements in the other parts of Kurdistan is for the benefit of both FKG and the national movements in the other parts. A democratic National Congress embracing all national democratic forces of Kurdistan will play an important role in raising the siege around the Southern Kurdistan and in the solidarity of national democratic movement.

In addition, we want to share with you our view and proposal that on the road to the World Communist Party, every step taken to unite the communist movements in the four parts of Kurdistan will be a move towards the unity and solidarity of comminist movement in the Middle East

  1. Our Questions and Duties in Northern Kurdistan

For last twenty years, although all Turkish prime ministers have recognized the Kurdish question, Turkish regime still does not recognize it officially. The rejection and denial policies have been imposing upon Kurds by force of  arms since the establishment of Republic. Monist mentality and practise of “one nation, one language, one flag” formalized by the 1924 Constitution are continuing. In his Hakkari speech Prime Minister Erdogan, who seemingly recognize the Kurdish question and favours the reforms, said that “What did we say? We said one nation, we said one flag, we said one homeland, and we said one state. They came up against this. Those who came up against this have no place in Turkey. Welcome, let them go to wherever they want” and revealed that he have the same red lines as those of fascist Party Nationalist Movement Party (NMP) and the Republican People’s Party (RPP).

But new developments, especially the federal construction in Southern Kurdistan, narrows politically and militarily the field of action of chauvinist Turkish regime. While the regime maintains its traditional views, the non-binding quests for “new solutions” by institutions and persons are going on. For the ideological and political devices the chauvinist regime has used against the Kurdish freedom for 80 years have become controversial, questionable. Therefore, from the President to the local administrators, to the political parties, everyone is in a quandary about the question. Some are voicing the new reforms within the regime, while some are glossing and repeating the old practices in the name of “new.”

The intensification of political relations among Washington, Ankara and Hewlêr; the increasing official contacts of Ankara with Federal Kurdish Government; the “joint command centre” established in Hewlêr; the efforts by Ankara before USA and EU in context of Kurdish question and relations with the Southern Kurdistan; Hewlêr Symposium organised by Abant Platform, and finally Hewler Kurdish Conference to be held –in short, a series of diplomatic, political and practical initiatives attest to a new plan.

Recently, President Abdullah Gül has not only said “if we do not hurry up, we will miss the historical opportunity” , but insisted that the “solution is in sight.” And Prime Minister Erdogan has made statements supporting Gül and started a new discussion, saying “a new process” and “for years, those of different ethnic identity have been chased out of the country … In fact that was an outcome of a fascist approach.” What does “the historical opportunity” mean? When the state and government authorities say that “the conditions are favorable for the solution of Kurdish question, and this opportunity must not be missed”, what do they mean? Or what encourages the Turkish Republic?

The first “historical opportunity” is that the government, top-level bureaucracy and in part the army have come to terms with taking some steps on the Kurdish national question.

The second “historical opportunity” is the role USA has given to Turkey in the Middle East and Caucasia as a result of the shifts in worldwide economic, military power balance and the deepening crisis of USA’s Eurasian policy. Turkish regime perceives this role as a “historical opportunity.” USA taking the current borders and status quo as the basis of her policy, even if it be tactical, encourages Turkey. Turkish regime has begun to feel safe, turning to her traditional politics of “the Kurdish question is the question of Iran, Syria, even Iraq as well as Turkey. Acting in concert, we can solve it within the current borders.”

The third “historical opportunity” is the impact of USA’s efforts to compromise with Iran on the armed movements in the Middle East, as a part of USA’s “let’s govern the world together” policy in respect with Russia, Germany and France. An USA seeking compromise with Iran will not need any armed organisation, including PJAK and PKK, at least in the short term. Viewing these orientations as the developments narrowing the field of action of PKK, Turkish regime perceives them as “historical opportunity.”

The fourth “historical opportunity” is the transportation of the oil of Southern Kurdistan to the West through Turkey. The Turkish regime perceives the transferring of the Southern energy resources to the West via Kerkuk-Yumurtalık pipeline as an “historical opportunity” in two respects. On the one hand, resources are created for Nabucco that will break the Russian monopoly. On the other, she thinks that it will make the Southern Kurdistan government dependent on Turkey and thereby break down the solidarity among the parts of Kurdistan. More importantly, the international capital drilling and marketing the oil of Kurdistan wants stability in the area. Here the Turkish regime perceives all these developments as “historical opportunity.”

While Turkish regime considers some measures to be taken within the limits of unitary regime, she strive to determine new red lines. For Turkish regime focuses on the disorganisation of the Kurdish national democratic forces, rather than taking steps to solve the Kurdish national question. For her, firstly, in case she will be forced to take some steps, the more the Kurdish organisations become weaker, the better she feels. Secondly, the steps to be taken “must be in the limits of unitary state.”  Thirdly, the steps must not have “constitutional assurance.” And finally, “If PKK will give up arms, they come to Turkish border and surrender to the Turkish security forces without any direct or indirect international observer or conference.” These are the plans favoured by Turkish regime.

Meanwhile, the community of Fethullah Gülen, the advocate of USA’s moderate Islam strategy in the Middle East, strives to solve the Kurdish question with “neo-Ottomanism.” Abant Platform, which is in the same line with Gülen, held a symposium under the title “Searching for Peace and a Future Together” on February 15-16, 2009 in Hewlêr. The aim is to promote the integration of Southern Kurdistan with Turkey and to enhance the regional effectiveness of Turkey

As a result, the Kurdish question is the question of an annexed country and an oppressed nation, and the solution should be viewed from that perspective. Irrespective of the forms it may take, the solution to the Kurdish question contains the right of Kurds to establish their own state. Not ignoring that principal perspective, we should propose the following as urgent solution:

Constitutional amendments recognizing the existence of Kurds as a separate nation; education in mother tongue; an unconditional amnesty; abolishment of village guard system; and not expecting PKK guerrillas to surrender on the border line like smugglers.

If Turkish regime wants to take step, it should firstly meet these urgent demands. In case these steps are taken, PKK will give up arms. They already have explained that they wanted to give up arms. In these circumstances, the Kurdish national democratic movement should hold a conference embracing all parts and discussing the question in all respects to determine a common stance. Otherwise, both FKG and the national democratic forces of the other parts will have difficulty in breathing. We wish that all will act with the awareness of that fact. We communists have acted and will act with that awareness.

While ending, we pay our respects and wish success to you all.

June 14, 2009


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

WordPress spam blocked by CleanTalk.