Reminding that the PKK emerged as a workers’ party and was born during the resistance against the 1971 coup, Duran Kalkan also drew attention to the revolutionary struggle currently being waged under the umbrella of the People’s United Revolutionary Movement (HBDH); “HBDH will make 2022 the year of the collapse of AKP-MHP fascism by striking fascism from where it least expected by turning all cities of Turkey, from Istanbul to Izmir, from the Black Sea to Çukurova, to Ankara, into a front of revolutionary resistance,” he said.
Duran Kalkan, a member of the PKK Executive Committee, gave an exclusive interview to ANF on the occasion of May 1 Labor Day. He made evaluations on many issues, from his meeting with the member countries of the socialist bloc for the first time, to the joint revolutionary struggle that started with ADYÖD and FKBDC and continues today with HBDH.
May 1, World Workers’ and Workers’ Solidarity Day is approaching. Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan (Kurdistan Workers’ Party-PKK) is also a workers’ party. As a movement, how do you define a meaning and mission for today?
First of all, I wish a happy May 1, the day of unity, solidarity and struggle of the working class, to all comrades, especially Leader Apo, to our working people, our revolutionary-democratic friends and to all workers and laborers of the world. May 1, 1977 In the person of the Taksim Martyrs, I commemorate all May 1 martyrs with respect and gratitude.
Yes, we are also a workers’ party and from the very beginning we have been trying to take May 1 as an important day, to make sense of it, to celebrate it, and to turn it into a day of struggle. It is not unusual for us to be a workers’ party. Because the Kurdish society is 99 percent laborer, they work all over the world today, especially in the metropolises of the powers that colonized Kurdistan. Even at this point, Leader Apo said that “Kurdish society is being employed in the most sluggish jobs”. When we emerge as the leading party of such a society, it is not strange for us to call ourselves the “workers’ party” and contradict the social structure. On the contrary, the “Kurdistan Workers Party” is a nomenclature that expresses the reality of our society. As the leading party of such a worker and laborer society, it has named itself as the “workers’ party”, and on this basis, it has been a movement that gives great meaning and importance to May 1 since the first day. He tried to live and evaluate every May 1 meaningfully. It not only educated itself, raised awareness, deepened it in terms of meaning, but also made May Days a day of development and promotion of the struggle.
The PKK has dozens of May Day martyrs, such as Ramazan Kaplan and his friends who were martyred in Garzan, and Abdulkadir Çubukçu, who was also martyred in Beirut. He treated and lived every May 1 as a day of new evaluation and raising the struggle. This has greatly served the development of the PKK.
If attention is paid, despite the disintegration of real socialism, the reality of May Day has continued as a fundamental value in the consciousness and activity of workers and laborers, and it continues as a factor that is getting stronger, not weakening, even now. Why? Because it is directly related to the class. It is not a situation related to power and the state like real socialism. On the contrary, it is related to the class. In other words, it is based on the social ground, it is connected with the struggle. It has found meaning through murder, hanging and struggles. It is as if there is no national society that has not experienced massacres and great martyrs in the last hundred and eighty years all over the world. It has been a day that became integrated with such a struggle. Therefore, even if the approaches, understandings and organizations connected to political powers and states disappear and become history, May Day has become a living reality. Why? Because it depends on society. It depends on the struggle. Therefore, as long as societies, workers and laborers exist, their struggle for freedom and democracy will always exist on May Day. This is how we understood and made sense of May 1 and lived on this basis. As a party, we will try to live on this basis from now on and make every May 1 a day when our struggle for freedom and democracy is more conscious, organized and raised.
MAZLUM DOĞAN WANTED IT TO BE A COMMUNIST PARTY
You stated that the PKK defined itself as a workers’ party at its exit. Why was this name chosen?
The PKK is in the position of a movement that was born and developed within real socialism. Therefore, the effects of real socialism are at a decisive level in the initial thought, organization and action structure. Pioneer party organizations within the real socialist system were also mostly called “communist party” or “workers’ party” during the formation of the PKK. Undoubtedly, there were also named parties connected with the working class, which considered themselves pioneers. But the most common nomenclature was these two. It was either called the “communist party” or the “workers party.”
The PKK’s emergence as a Leader, its ideological group development and the process of becoming a party has always been a process where these names were discussed, discussed and seen as synonymous. The PKK did not separate them too much from each other. However, when the Founding Congress was held in Fis Village of Lice on 26-27 November 1978 and it was officially decided to establish the party, it became necessary to embody the name. In this process, there was a discussion within the movement about how a full and clear naming should be at the level of his administration. There were also friends who thought and defended that the name “communist party” should be given directly. For example, “Mazlum Doğan” friend was one of them. However, considering the situation of Kurdish society and societies in the Middle East, and considering the unrealistic propaganda of the ruling circles towards the socialist movement and communism, the name “workers’ party” would have been more accurate and meaningful in terms of better integration with society in such a situation. It provided more integration with the society. In fact, while the name “communist party” was based more on ideological lines, the name “workers party” was based more on the social base and class. Friend Mazlum Doğan was also expressing that the party should be named “communist party” because he had a sharper ideological approach, that the movement would develop with this name, at least for a while, and that it would change its name later if necessary. After such a discussion, the vast majority concluded that a socially based naming would be more beneficial. Therefore, it was decided to take the name “Kurdistan Workers Party”, PKK as the basis.
In any case, the friends who had objections, especially the Mazlum friend, had absolutely nothing to oppose or reject the name “workers’ party”. They even adopted the name “workers’ party”, but they also adopted the name “communist party”. They were saying that only we can represent such a line ideologically, in order not to allow the establishment of fake communist parties that do not comply with the ideological line, and they were calling it “communist” and saying that we should take the name “communist party” in order to prevent the formation of fake movements that do not live communism in essence, and to block them. At least for a while, if a party with this name was established in Kurdistan, then other powers would not be able to establish such parties. Therefore, they were advocating such an idea, since false movements that contradicted the ideological line would not occur in Kurdistan and would not be allowed. Still, they thought it would be right to be called the “workers’ party” and to work as a result. For this reason, although there has been a debate, the name “workers’ party” is a name that has been decided as a common opinion.
Do you have a solidarity and relationship with the world worker and labor movements and unions? What kind of connection do you have?
The PKK movement was born and developed as a movement that criticizes real socialism in certain aspects from the very beginning. His main criticism of real socialism was that it put politics ahead of ideology, thus sacrificing ideological principles to politics, and keeping state politics above everything else. On the other hand, the PKK has always found it more appropriate to prioritize ideological principles and measures and to deal with politics based on them.
He defined and criticized the approach of real socialism, which puts the state interests of the Soviet Union above everything else, and thus tied the socialist movement to the interests of the Soviet Union, as “modern revisionism”. The instability and inadequacy of the Soviet Union’s approach to the liberation struggles of the peoples, and in this context, the fact that the Kurdish people’s attitude towards the national liberation struggle was not correct, led to the development of such evaluations and criticisms.
The Soviet Union always cared about the conflicting aspects of the Anglo-German politics of the states that committed genocide on the Kurds, and always opposed the resistance of the Kurdish people for the sake of supporting these states on the basis of such an interest. Instead of opposing the massacres and genocides carried out in Kurdistan and supporting the Kurdish people’s struggle for existence and freedom, they followed a political line that remained silent or supported the massacres carried out by the Turkish, Iranian and Arab states in Kurdistan in the name of the interests of the Soviet Union. This played an important role in the PKK’s development of such a critical approach to real socialism.
As a matter of fact, the extreme social chauvinistic ideological character of organizations from Turkey and Kurdistan, which acted in close relations with the Soviet Union during the birth and development of the PKK, and their rejectionist approach to the Kurdish issue, and even their denial of the Kurdish existence, played an important role in such an assessment. Yes, he ideologically criticized the approach of real socialism, which puts the interests of the Soviet Union above everything else, but always cared about the existence of the Soviet Union and the “socialist system” as a whole, and the oppressed peoples preferred the Soviet Union strategically in terms of their national liberation struggles. viewed it as a valuable political organization. In other words, the criticism in question did not lead the PKK to deny the existence and power of the real socialist system, to ignore it, to reject it altogether. It has always been open to political relations on the basis of ideological criticism.
RÊBER APO MET WITH REAL SOCIALIST COUNTRY REPRESENTATIVES 2 TIMES
As a matter of fact, since 1979, he had the opportunity to recognize more socialist systems, more real socialist organizations, and tried to develop a certain relationship with them. Since 1980, it has maintained a certain relationship with Bulgaria and similar powers, which represent real socialism in the Middle East. Again, within the Palestine Liberation Movement, it developed the most relations and cooperated with the organizations that were in closer relations with the Soviet Union.
In other words, he saw the association of any Palestinian organization with the Soviet Union not as a negative, but as a positive, and carried out his efforts to develop political relations on this basis, in addition to his ideological criticisms. Within the framework of these, he also entered into a certain discussion with real socialist representatives in order to develop more relations in 1982 and 1987. On this basis, Leader Apo made an effort to meet with representatives of real socialist countries twice, to discuss and express his views on the development of the socialist movement in the world within the framework of the solution of the PKK and the Kurdish problem. But all these efforts did not reveal any tangible level of relationship-alliance. The real socialist system itself experienced a tragic disintegration and collapse at the beginning of 1990, without going to a conclusion anyway.
The next period can be evaluated as a period that expresses a more concrete development. Essentially, after the paradigm shift, he made his criticisms of the real socialist system in a more comprehensive, systematic, deep and understandable way, and brought his own thoughts to a more clear and new paradigm. brought development.
THE DEFENSE OF THE LEADERSHIP EXPANDED INTERNATIONALLY
In this direction, as a dimension, it has been an activity to distribute Leader Apo’s defenses by translating them into different languages, thus spreading the ‘Democratic Modernity Theory’ among all workers and laboring segments. The other dimension has been the efforts to carry out a common struggle with various movements, especially in Europe, at the international level, and to be in solidarity with various attitudes. These efforts are today’s struggles aiming at the physical freedom of Leader Apo, platforms for discussing the new paradigm developed by Leader Apo, and mainly by the left-socialist movements in different parts of the world, which carry out a more correct and effective struggle against the capitalist modernity system by overcoming the mistakes and shortcomings of real socialism. It continued as efforts trying to ensure that it was born and developed in the places where it was born.
The fight against ISIS and the development of the Rojava Kurdistan Freedom Revolution contributed greatly to the development of these internationalist efforts. An important development has emerged both in the discussion and transfer of Leader Apo’s new paradigm to different areas, and concretely within the framework of participation in the war waged in Rojava against ISIS. known; Young people from all over the world, from England to Canada, came to Rojava Kurdistan, joined the Kurdish Freedom Revolution and fought against ISIS. Some of them were martyred by fighting heroically. The Rojava Freedom Revolution and the struggle against ISIS showed its power to be such an international center of attraction. When these combined with Leader Apo’s new paradigm and the PKK’s internationalist understanding of relations and alliances, a struggle organization was created in the form of campaigns aimed at the physical freedom of Leader Apo against the Imrali torture and isolation system, and when a Kurdish organization that recognizes the PKK all over the world, Many personalities, intellectuals, artists, thinkers, groups, organizations, unions and movements have emerged who see and evaluate their people and the freedom struggle and try to be in solidarity with them.
Within this framework, there is a certain level of relationship and alliance today. These are more evident in the campaigns of struggle aimed at the physical freedom of Leader Apo. There is no need to give concrete names here, but worker and labor movements and unions from England to South Africa are an important solidarity force. Ecologist and feminist movements and currents in different fields are in contact with the PKK’s struggle at one level or another.
The PKK does not have an understanding of establishing a world organization or developing a bureaucratic structure so quickly and formally. Such approaches are not suitable for the reality of life and the dialectic of development of movements. Instead of such overly schematic and formal developments, it cares more about intellectual development, education, influence, that is, ideological awareness and gaining a common perspective, and on this basis, it cares to develop solidarity, fraternity and combat friendship in more practical struggle. There is also a certain strength of relationship developed within the framework of these. The extent of these is seen more clearly, especially in the campaigns of struggle aimed at the physical freedom of Leader Apo.
Undoubtedly, the current level can be seen as a beginning in terms of reaching the potential of the PKK’s ideological and strategic relationship, making them conscious and organized, and drawing them into a common struggle. It can be said that it is quite narrow and insufficient. The real, concrete situation is like that. But even so, the current level is important. It lives in a position of continuous development. Consciousness, organization and action develop together. They are not separate from each other. The PKK does not find the approaches that separate them from each other correct. Therefore, although what is available is seen as very insufficient, it is on the right route and has great importance. A little more organized action and much more effort is needed here. In particular, the situation of the Kurdish people, the meaning of the Kurdish existence and freedom struggle for humanity, Leader Apo’s paradigm of Democratic Modernity and the Imrali torture and isolation system that has been implemented for 24 years, to the peoples of the world, workers and laborers, women and youth, intellectuals and artists, revolutionary and democratic forces. We have a duty and responsibility to transport more, to carry, therefore, to carry our own truth to humanity more. This is the responsibility of our entire movement. Foreign relations and alliances are the main responsibility of our work. At a certain level these are organized and run. But it is narrow and insufficient. We evaluate and criticize. We believe that this narrowness and inadequacy should be overcome and become much stronger, and the capitalist modernity system should be opposed, and an alternative new democratic world and free life should be created on the basis of democratic confederalism. Our effort is based on this. We also believe that this will happen.
PKK IS A NEW MENTALITY
What are the reasons behind the approaches of certain circles in Turkey, which only try to highlight the national character of the PKK?
In the past 50 years, there have been erroneous and wrong approaches towards the PKK, either consciously or unconsciously, from many different aspects. Among them, there are those who are highly conscious and planned, which can be seen as hostile attacks that hinder the PKK’s development. There are some misconceptions that arise from misunderstandings and therefore develop on the basis of applying their own truths. For example, it was tried to be associated with the intelligence services when the reality of the PKK did not emerge concretely at this level and was not recognized by everyone. There were those who expressed this within the Turkish left and within the so-called Kurdish movements. Such circles secretly or openly stated that the PKK “is a movement brought about by intelligence organizations such as MIT and CIA”. This propaganda had a certain effect on Turkish society and left-socialist circles, although not at a very advanced level.
Again, based on the fighting character of the Kurdish people, there have been approaches that think and evaluate that the PKK is a very practical movement, that it does not have such a theoretical depth and power of thought, and that its practical side is at the forefront. As they got to know the PKK, they saw that the truth was not like that, and realized that they were wrong.
In fact, they saw that the PKK is a great Leadership movement, in this sense, a new mentality, a great power of thought, and based on a deep theoretical understanding and consciousness. Its practical side, however, expresses a very limited side of this theoretical power. His practice is not stronger than his theory, on the contrary, his theory is stronger than his practice. At this point, Leader Apo said, “We can only put our thoughts into practice at five percent.” He also stated: “We have the problem of organizing big thinking and putting it into action.’
So the opposite of such thoughts was correct. The much stronger dimension of the PKK was its theoretical side. Because it represented a new leadership emergence. The narrow, weak side was the practical side. These circles considered themselves the power of theory and entered an effort to direct the PKK’s practice. But when they saw the reality of the PKK, its leadership and theoretical level, they realized that their approach was wrong and gave up on their goals.
THE PKK STRUGGLE CANNOT BE EXPRESSED ON THE NATIONAL DIMENSION ONLY
Approaches that see only the national dimension of the PKK ideology and do not want to see its social side also express a similar mistake. In fact, it can be said: In the beginning, such a situation existed practically. In the period when the PKK was based on real socialist ideas and organizations, its national character was more prominent. Because he had nothing new or different to say beyond real socialism in social, political and cultural dimensions. What was different was that he criticized the projections of real socialism in Turkey and Kurdistan, their wrong approach to the Kurdish national question, their approaches that denied it or did not handle it correctly. On this basis, the reality that essentially made the PKK determinant was their ideological approach, which put forward the Kurdish national problem correctly and envisioned its solution through struggle on the basis of national freedom, and their prominent features at this point.
Leader Apo criticized the Turkish left’s approach to the state, the revolution and the organization in the face of the 1971-1972 resistances, and their way of fighting. However, his main criticism was towards the approach to the Kurdish problem and the development of the Kurdish National Freedom Movement. So the first dimension became the national dimension. This is how the PKK became known. Such was the situation that was somewhat concrete at that time. But later this situation changed in many ways.
In fact, at the beginning, although he expressed a new idea in revealing the Kurdish national problem and determining the solutions for it, it also had an ideological side that criticizes the approaches of real socialism that put the state interests ahead of ideological principles. Such consistency existed within the PKK itself.
However, left-socialist circles in Turkey and Kurdistan have taken as a basis to see the opposition movements as a one-dimensional and as a national movement instead of considering them as a whole, since they see themselves as right and are in a constant ideological struggle with the PKK. They wanted to implement this as a method of struggle against the PKK. In this way, they showed the PKK as a narrow, nationalist movement and said that it was not a left-socialist movement. They tried to narrow down the PKK and exclude it from the left-socialist movement. Thus, they wanted to prevent the PKK’s foreign relations and alliances, and tried to keep the Kurds, Kurdish revolutionaries and socialists, who were mainly within their own organizational structure, within their own organization. By portraying the PKK as narrow and nationalist and defining themselves as a socialist movement, they tried to keep the Kurdish revolutionaries in question within their own organization. They had such concerns and problems. If they had considered the PKK as a holistic national and social freedom movement, then they would not have been able to keep the Kurds within their organizational structure. Naturally, their place would be to join the PKK. With this concern, they tried to show the PKK as narrow and nationalist.
In fact, instead of seeing the truth, some organizational concerns, interests led to distorting the real situation. However, the PKK was born as a movement that criticizes the side of real socialism that does not attach importance to ideological principles. He also criticized the ideological approaches of the revolutionary-socialist movement in Turkey to some extent, especially he attributed the reasons for the defeat in the face of the military coup of March 12, 1971 here. He believed that in order to create an invincible movement, it was necessary to eliminate the ideological reasons that led to this defeat, and he acted in this way. In fact, with a kind of self-critical approach, he learned the lessons of this great resistance against the March 12 coup, and transferred them to the PKK formation. This, in turn, developed the PKK in a more accurate and robust way, both theoretically and practically.
PKK IS THE THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL INTEGRITY MOVEMENT
Of course, in the following periods, the aspects of the PKK that envisaged social struggle came to the fore. For example, the Women’s Freedom Revolution, the ideological line that started and developed this revolution, the theoretical understandings, the male-dominated mentality and criticisms of the family and life order developed by the power and state system expressed a very important situation in this regard. Again, the ecological approach was a very deep and important ideological approach. He also criticized the very narrow, short-cut approaches of such real socialism that did not see the historical reality of society in all its dimensions. Therefore, the PKK was able to transform itself into a new synthesis of freedom with a new way of thinking and practice, by constantly deepening and developing the dimension of being a social freedom movement at the beginning.
Of course, these now show the strength of the PKK. The PKK is a theoretically and practically integrated movement, a movement that provides daily development and struggles. Therefore, those who do not see the PKK as right, or rather those who are stuck in their own delusions, who are stuck in the face of the PKK’s truth, cannot say anything against the theoretical and practical reality of the PKK, they want to fight against the PKK by narrowing it in various ways and distorting the PKK reality. Of course, this is not a correct style of struggle, it expresses the weakness and narrowness of its owners. It is clear that such a weakness and a narrow approach cannot be effective against the PKK, and a successful struggle cannot be waged. Therefore, although those who have such an approach are trying to save some things, they have always lost in the medium and long term, and they continue to lose.
PKK OUT OF THE RESISTANCE TO THE 1971 COUP
Kurdish People’s Leader Abdullah Öcalan has been trying to establish relations and alliances with leftist and socialist circles in Turkey since the PKK was founded and even at the group stage. Why can’t this unity be fully achieved, what kind of obstacles are there?
The PKK has become a movement that was born and developed within the Turkish revolutionary movement, that broke away from it and gained strength and progress. Leader Apo emerged from the revolutionary resistance developed against the fascist-military coup of March 12, 1971. The cadres that formed the PKK became revolutionary sympathizers by warming themselves in the fire of this resistance. They took an interest in the left-socialist struggle. When they entered into such a struggle and saw the reality of the struggle, they came together around Leader Apo and formed the birth and development of the Apoist Movement. Leader Apo expressed his situation by saying, “The blow went through my hair, I was not a militant who took organized action yet, but I was also an advanced sympathizer of the THKP-C, ready to become active at any moment.” Other cadres who joined Leader Apo were at the level of sympathizers who were younger and came from behind. In this sense, the PKK is one of the revolutionary groups that were cooked and shaped in the resistance against the March 12, 1971 coup d’etat and emerged from that resistance. The PKK is a movement that was born and developed as a part of the revolutionary movement that struggles against the understanding and policies that want to turn Turkey into a fascist-oligarchic dictatorship based on that resistance. Leader Apo was born in such an environment and has become a reality of leadership that deeply understands, feels and participates in the resistance in question, and that started out on this basis. Leader Apo has always expressed this with honor and pride. He stated that his leadership exit was an ascent and march based on preserving the memories of Mahirs, Denizs and İbrahims and achieving their goals. Such was the truth. He always found it meaningful that the leadership exit should be like this.
Within this framework, he is a part of the Turkish Revolutionary-Socialist Movement. That’s how he came out from the start, and that’s how he always saw himself. As he became more conscious, he saw and understood that an important dimension of this was that the Kurdish society should be organized on the basis of national and social freedom and drawn into the struggle. It became a Kurdish party, it struggled in Kurdistan. He trained and organized the Kurdish people and drew them to the freedom struggle, but he always considered and evaluated these efforts as a strategic part of the Turkish revolutionary movement and democratic revolution. He waged this struggle mainly against the government and state system, which developed oppression, exploitation and massacres at an advanced level in Turkey.
In other words, the enemy was common, the goals were common. Only the organizations and the grounds of struggle were different. The revolutionary movement in Turkey was organizing itself and was struggling in the fields of Turkish society. The PKK, on the other hand, was based on the Kurdish society, organized and struggled in Kurdistan. That’s how the difference was. This was Leader Apo’s approach from the very beginning. He did not see them contradicting each other. He saw the organization and struggle of the Kurdish society for national and social freedom in a structure that not contradicted the democratic revolution struggle of the peoples of Turkey, but formed a unity with it. He did not compare them. He always believed that they could be together and together, and he worked to keep it that way.
This was fundamentally significant effort. Leader Apo and the Apoist group participated in the reorganization of the Revolutionary Youth Movement of Turkey at an active and pioneering level after the March 12 coup process was over. Önder Apo took part in the establishment and practice of Ankara Democratic Higher Education Association at the presidential level. Haki Karer friend took part in the management. The Apoist group was one of the groups that participated most actively in this joint organization of the Revolutionary Youth Movement of Turkey. On the one hand, there was the Apoist group, which was organized as the revolutionary ideological group of the Kurdish youth, but on the other hand, it also envisaged the joint organization of the Turkish Revolutionary Youth Movement. He saw the joint organization of the revolutionary organization of the Kurdish youth and the Revolutionary Movement of Turkey as movements that could develop together, not contradictory, but intertwined.
Again, after the 1980 fascist-military coup, he pioneered the organization of Leader Apo and the PKK United Resistance Front Against Fascism in order to develop the joint resistance and united struggle against fascism. He participated at the most active level in order to develop a common anti-fascist, democratic resistance against the September 12 fascist coup in Turkey and Kurdistan. He had the most effort in his theoretical and practical development.
PKK ALWAYS CARE ABOUT THE JOINT STRUGGLE
Now, why did these efforts not achieve full success, did not turn into practice, did not last long? What obstacles were there in front of this? These questions are important even though they are long debated and widely answered questions. As someone who knows the concrete situations in this regard, I can express the following: Leader Apo and the PKK did not have any significant shortcomings or mistakes. He may have made mistakes in practice. They may not have acted on time, could not explain themselves well, could not act fully organized, but they did not have an approach that considered the unity weak in terms of understanding and practical application, underestimated the common struggle, remained outside it, and unified the separate struggle against it and itself.
He always cared about the common struggle and the common organization. He also envisaged making every effort and sacrifice for this. I can express this clearly. In this context, there were criticisms directed at the PKK in some periods, but they were not true and did not reflect the truth. Owners should consider and evaluate again and again. In this sense, the main obstacle to the failure of unity, the inability of the revolutionary movements of Turkey and Kurdistan to unite in a high-joint organization and to develop a common struggle stemmed from the thoughts and style of the Turkish socialist movement.
Chauvinism as thought had implications. We call this social chauvinism. There are approaches that deny the Kurdish reality, the Kurdish existence, and the Kurdish Freedom Struggle. Something is said about the Kemalist movement: Supposedly, Mustafa Kemal said, “If there is a need for communism in this country, we will bring it.” Now the Socialist Movement of Turkey has said: “If there will be a Kurdish freedom, we will bring it too.” This is a kind of Kurdish denial. It’s not contempt for the Kurds, it’s ignoring them. It is an approach of “You can’t do anything, if you need something, only we can give it”. This is real chauvinism, social chauvinism. The left-socialist movement in Turkey could not get rid of it. He did not realize the deep meaning of this. He didn’t see the danger in that.
That great nation chauvinism has always existed in various forms. In terms of style, a common struggle was avoided. They were influenced by the attitudes of the ruling classes and the state administration that denigrated and portrayed Kurds as dangerous. By staying away from the Kurds as much as possible, protection from the brutal attacks of the Turkish State was taken as the basis. Here, the cunning, utilitarian approach, that if there is to be repression, should go against the Kurds, I will not be the target, I will not be exposed to that violence, has prevailed.
On the other hand, there is the size approach. For example, what happened when ADYÖD was closed by the state and AYÖD was established instead? Only under the leadership of the Revolutionary Yol group a youth organization emerged. The anti-democratic approach, “We are many, we are outnumbered, so we make all the decisions, we are the administration, you have to join us” has always prevailed. Whoever became stronger in the leftist movement in Turkey showed a similar approach. However, this was not democracy. Democracy is about protecting the rights of the minority. To give them a place is to be with them. But that was not the case.
Of course it would be; Turkey is a wider society, a wider population, a wide geography, Kurds are small in population, in many places, Kurdish organizations may be few in number. Then it will always depend on the one in Turkey when there is a finger account. It’s already colonial. Then the left-socialist movement will also connect. How is this different from the current colonial attachment? We cannot say, “Colonial attachment is bad, but attachment to me is good”. Addiction of any kind is bad. We must break them all. Where there is addiction, there is no freedom. Free will does not develop. Such an understanding of democracy based on numbers and finger calculations had a significant impact on preventing the development of the union.
THE SITUATION OF PASSIFICATION IMPROVED AFTER 12 SEPTEMBER
As a final reason, we should mention opportunism. In fact, the exit of Mahirs, Denizs and İbrahims was a great historical breakthrough. He was truly valiant, heroic. The Turkish Revolutionary Movement can always be proud of revealing such heroism and valor. But this outlet was also brutally murdered and crushed. The seas were executed, by filming and disseminating them. In front of everyone, Mahir Çayan and his friends were brutally murdered by the Turkish army. İbrahim Kaypakkaya was killed in torture. They always showed them to society, women, youth, revolutionaries to intimidate. It was said that “those who act like this will end up like this”, and almost a horror was tried to spread. No one can say it didn’t have an effect. Especially during the March 12 coup process, special war tortures were developed for the first time. Hundreds of revolutionary-young militants were arrested and tortured. They were subjected to heavy pressure. Also, the fact that such a massacre against revolutionaries, the execution of the execution, was kept alive, affected people’s feelings and thoughts. No one can say that there was no effect, there was no intimidation.
Leader Apo took lessons from these and predicted not to make mistakes in Kurdistan and to develop a correct way of working and fighting. This approach and style led to success. In Turkey, instead of being like this, fear, fear and withdrawal dominated. Between 1975 and 1980, an important struggle was waged against the fascists at the youth level. As a result, when the coup of September 12, 1980 went, there was more withdrawal and pacification, considering that such a struggle could not yield any results. Thus, the attitude of opportunism, escapism from practice, not engaging in revolutionary war practice developed. In general, this attitude emerged at the organizational level.
A JOINT GUERILLA MOVEMENT COULD APPEAR AFTER 1980
This led to the inability of Turkish revolutionary organizations to make an exit and to resist in the struggle against the fascist-military coup of September 12, 1980. Those who say that they are the heirs and continuation of a movement that took such strong actions against the 12 March coup, were obliged to develop a successful guerrilla struggle against the 12 September coup. That’s how practice was supposed to be. The PKK made great efforts to develop this, and took the lead. The United Front of Resistance Against Fascism (FKBDC) expressed exactly this, and the Kurdistan branch of this front developed such a guerrilla resistance on the basis of the 15 August Initiative. This was a very strong foundation. For example, based on this, FKBDC resistance could develop in Turkey. The Turkish branch of the FKBDC could also achieve what could not be achieved in 1971-1972, relying on the guerrilla resistance in Kurdistan. He could turn defeat into victory. He could have defeated this fascist-genocidal mentality and politics by unleashing a great guerrilla movement in Turkey.
If this were the case, not the collapse of real socialism in the 1990s, but the disintegration of the fascist-genocidal mentality and politics in Turkey, which would be the disintegration of NATO, the collapse of the capitalist system. The relation of Turkish revolutionism with the developments in the world is at this level. If revolutionary resistance could develop, if the will could be shown, world revolution could be achieved, the capitalist modernity system could be destroyed in the world, collapse and disintegration could be experienced. But that didn’t happen. When this did not happen, it can be said that the disintegration of real socialism also depended on this. Not everything can be connected here. But regeneration efforts in Russia, for example, have not been successful. If a revolutionary movement developed within the framework of a correct ideological-political line in order to overthrow the capitalist modernity system in Turkey, this would have a positive effect on the change, renewal and restructuring in Russia.
Of course, as long as the paradigm of power and state was not overcome, no matter how much progress it made, it would eventually collapse. Throughout history, the main reason why freedom movements have not been able to make it permanent despite their great success in practical struggle is that they rely on the paradigm of power and the state, and they want to realize freedom and democracy by means of oppression and exploitation like power and the state. Libertarian developments could not be permanent without changing this tool and overcoming the paradigm of power and state. But if the Turkish Revolutionary Movement had developed and imposed victory towards the 1990s, it would have brought about this practical paradigm shift and ideological renewal within itself. Practice has such power. But when that didn’t happen, it was real socialism that was dissolved.
Now, if it is to be said why the great revolution that emerged in the early 1970s did not triumph but experienced such a situation, the effects of this chauvinism and social chauvinism should be seen as the main reason for this. Social chauvinism should not be taken lightly. Social chauvinism practically means opportunism. It means not paying attention to anyone but yourself. It is an anti-democratic approach. It is not possible for a person without democracy to develop and maintain freedom. The situation of the Turkish revolutionary movement clearly shows this. As the main barriers, one can express them. It is a subject that needs to be evaluated even more deeply and there is a situation that must be corrected by taking the right lessons.
WITH HBDH, CHOWAN EFFECTS WERE MASSIVELY BROKEN
On the other hand, there is the fact of the People’s United Revolutionary Movement (HBDH), where you meet with Turkey’s revolutionary movements under one roof. Has a spirit been created that can realize the revolution at the level you expect since its establishment? In this sense, what kind of mission is defined for HBDH, and what results does it produce?
Since March 2016, we have developed a new organization, alliance and union with some revolutionary organizations of Turkey under the name of People’s United Revolutionary Movement. This is a continuation of ADYÖD and FKBDC. It is based on the same understanding and attitude on our side. We can definitely state that. In this sense, we need to state clearly from the outset that our approach is strategic. Our friends in HBDH should know well that; Our approach is certainly not tactical, non-political, not based on current interests. On the contrary, it is an approach that foresees Turkey’s democratic revolution, aims at the liberation and free life of all Turkish peoples, and aims for the workers and laborers of Turkey, women and youth to reach a free and democratic life. The PKK sees these targets as its own. It has been in a strategic relationship and alliance that includes these from the very beginning. When the way was cleared, it came to a position that struggled at the forefront, as in ADYÖD practice. Again, as in the FKBDC practice, even if its allies did not take the necessary steps, the PKK did not hesitate to take the step of resistance for freedom alone, to fight on this basis and pay the price. These express the concrete reality and what the PKK approach is. There should be absolutely no wrong understanding and attitude in this matter.
What were the conditions that gave rise to HBDH? What is the difference from the others? Why did it last so long? Now in its sixth year, this is important. The revolutionary organizations of Turkey and Kurdistan could not be in such a long-lasting alliance. Even the Turkish Revolutionary Movement could not develop such a long-lasting alliance within itself. This is the first time. In fact, it is also related to the establishment conditions of HBDH. At this point, I can draw attention to two factors.
First; It is a change in approach to the Kurdish problem. Organizations within the HBDH have significantly exceeded their previous attitudes and approaches to the Kurdish problem and its solution. Undoubtedly, they think exactly like the PKK. It cannot be said that they have come to a common ideological position in all respects. If so, the approaches and the level of alliance may be even more different. However, we can say that a line that goes beyond social chauvinism on fundamental issues and approaches the Kurdish struggle for existence and freedom positively and positively has been reached. They have come to a line that does not deny the existence of the Kurdish people, considers it necessary to organize and fight for freedom and democracy, support and participate in such a struggle. Those social chauvinistic influences have been severely broken. Of course, as a paradigm, the effects of real socialism have not been fully overcome. Therefore, we can say that a complete consensus has been reached on how freedoms will be experienced and realized in organization and practice, not everything has been resolved, but the social chauvinistic perspective that is necessary for a common struggle and which creates an obstacle for it has been overcome to a great extent. If this were not so, this union would not have been possible and would not have lasted six years. This is an important intellectual dimension on which HBDH is based. Ideologically, there is a dimension, development, convergence. A dimension that we can call friendship has formed.
Latter; is political. With the “collapse action plan”, AKP-MHP fascism made an alliance and there were attacks aiming to destroy the PKK and its Kurdish existence and its freedom, and to bring the Kurdish genocide to a conclusion. This, of course, is not a simple attack. It expresses a political and military attack that has a very comprehensive, ideological, deep historical significance. In fact, it foresees the extermination of the Kurd. We need to see how a political-military approach that envisages the destruction of the Kurd represents a great danger for Turkey, and how it poses a great danger for the existence of the peoples of Turkey and for workers and laborers to reach a free and democratic life. It is necessary to see and understand what kind of fascist oppression, terror and dictatorship the mentality and politics that want to bring the Kurdish genocide to a conclusion mean.
THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT FORM HBDH SEE THE KURDISH GENOCIDE
The revolutionary organizations that make up HBDH are organizations that evaluate the political process in this way. The organizations that make up HBDH are organizations that see how the Kurdish genocide, which is intended to be developed with the “collapse action plan” and the AKP-MHP alliance, will lead to a multiplying fascist dictatorship in Turkey. They are organizations that understand what a catastrophic danger this poses for the peoples of Turkey, workers and laborers, women and youth, and believe that in order to prevent this, they must form an alliance with the PKK and the Kurdish people’s freedom struggle and develop a common resistance. The PKK also saw this reality, believed that a more advanced relationship and alliance should be developed with the revolutionary-democratic forces of Turkey in order to nullify the AKP-MHP fascist-genocidal attacks on this basis, carried out such a policy and made calls in this direction.
Of course, revolutionary organizations from Turkey within the HBDH saw this fact and approached the process. When this situation is combined with overcoming the effects of social chauvinism ideologically, they believed that the revolutionary movements of Turkey and Kurdistan should develop a common struggle by forming the most advanced unity-alliance in order to prevent a very dangerous situation. Also, this belief gave birth to HBDH. Of course, when we look at it from here, HBDH is a revolutionary union, an alliance that aims to achieve an anti-fascist democratic revolution established to prevent the Kurdish genocide and a fascist-genocidal dictatorship that will rule in Turkey for a long time. It is the alliance of movements that sees this. Such was the approach of the movements in HBDH to handle and evaluate the political-military process. With this dimension, it is an alliance of practice, an alliance of resistance, an alliance of struggle. It is an alliance that has a practical dimension to prevent the institutionalization of AKP-MHP fascism and the realization of the Kurdish genocide. In order to prevent this, it is a revolutionary-resistance alliance that takes the revolutionary war against total fascist-genocidal aggression as a basis and aims to develop it in all dimensions.
The reasons for the establishment can be summarized essentially as follows. Undoubtedly, other reasons and reasons can be seen, but these are the main ones and these are enough to understand and see the truth. So, is there a proficiency in practice? How were the developments? These are also evaluated from time to time. This situation was discussed and evaluated in various aspects at the beginning of HBDH’s sixth year. There are also aspects to be considered, handled correctly, owned and developed; There are also parts that are missing, contain errors, need to be corrected and corrected. The last six years has been a great struggle, the greatest resistance.
HBDH IS THE ONLY POWER TO HIT FASCISM IN THE LANGUAGE I UNDERSTAND
Everyone should know that the only force that resists and fights against AKP-MHP fascism in Turkey and Kurdistan, and strikes a blow against fascism in a language it understands, is the People’s United Revolutionary Movement. It carried out the most meaningful and greatest resistance in history on the line of revolutionary war against the all-out genocidal aggression of AKP-MHP fascism, it took place on this mountain, it took place in the city. A resistance war that spread to metropolises from the Black Sea to Istanbul to Izmir was developed by HBDH. Dozens and hundreds of heroes of this resistance have been martyred. The revolutionary resistance led by our party in Kurdistan is also a part of Turkey’s anti-fascist democratic revolution struggle. All of the heroic martyrs of this resistance are HBDH martyrs. When we look at it from here, HBDH is a movement that has hundreds and thousands of martyrs. You have to see this fact once. This is very important and meaningful.
HBDH did not give up its line of resistance. This line, his struggle is true, it is meaningful. It is an entity that represents democratic Turkey against fascism on a revolutionary line.
Undoubtedly, there are forces waging a democratic struggle. They also have significance and meaning. We appraise, we don’t say anything; but it should be known that the existence of democratic politics depends entirely on the existence of revolutionary resistance. Without HBDH, there would be nothing left in the name of democratic politics in Turkey now. However, now there is a democratic political movement strong enough to create an alternative to AKP-MHP fascism. We have to see it, we have to understand it. We need to know that this exists in the political environment created by the HBDH struggle. Therefore, HBDH is shouldering the big burden. HBDH carries out the main struggle. In this sense, there is a dimension that needs to be carefully evaluated.
On the other hand, both ADYÖD and FKBDC were short-lived. He could not complete even a year properly. HBDH has been resisting and struggling for 6 years. It is important that it has become such a long-term alliance. It represents an important form of relationship. He created important developments in terms of spirit, emotion and thought in partnership. We live this. We live in resistance to such heavy oppression. Even if we can’t have a very close relationship and discussion, everyone is fighting in this unity under their own responsibility. This shows that; The HBDH step is correct. A new identity has been created for the joint struggle of Turkey and Kurdistan against the People’s United Revolutionary Movement and AKP-MHP fascism. A battle position has been opened. The battle ground has been established. Everyone can unite in the line of HBDH, under the banner of HBDH, and wage an anti-fascist, democratic and libertarian struggle. Such a flag of struggle has been raised. The 6-year process has shown and proved that this is a force that is persistent in victory and capable of creating victory.
Of course it has its shortcomings. While we always take into account the struggle being waged, the march on such a victory line, the resistance spanning 6 years, its history and great importance, we also see the mistakes and shortcomings of the struggle being waged. There are aspects that need to be evaluated in terms of inadequacy. While fascism is attacking so much, why can’t there be more resistance when the peoples of Turkey have so much power and opportunity? Why didn’t it grow big? Why couldn’t he spread the war further into the cities? Couldn’t mass power be developed bigger? These are the problems of the struggle and we are discussing them at the level of the movements within the HBDH. Every movement approaches this process critically and self-critically, on the basis of learning lessons. This is a reason for self-criticism for us.
AKP-MHP FASCISM MOST FEARED BY HBDH
Of course, the HBDH activity should have been much stronger, it should have dealt more fatal blows to the AKP-MHP fascism. In this sense, it was deficient, insufficient, there are weaknesses. We see this. It could not be practiced exactly as desired. In other words, Turkey’s and Kurdistan’s revolutionary-democratic potential could not be effectively channeled into a total resistance against AKP-MHP fascism. This potential could not be made conscious, organized, drawn into war. The war remained mostly on the shoulders of the guerrilla and the vanguard. By educating and organizing the society, he could not fully draw into the war. We have not been able to develop social resistance, mass resistance at a permanent and victorious level. These are always our main tasks that we need to develop in the upcoming period. We believe that the groundwork for realizing these has been formed. Its foundations were laid, its line was revealed, its flag was opened as HBDH. The rest is practical work, education, organization and action. It will come true with the practice of all revolutionaries and organizations.
In order to prevent HBDH, we need to talk about the attacks of the enemy. It should not be forgotten that AKP-MHP fascism feared HBDH the most. In the last 6 years, it has attacked HBDH the most. Yes, it is ostensibly attacking democratic politics, various mass organisations. They attack and arrest women and youth movements, especially HDP. He arrested tens of thousands of people. Now he exerts pressure, tortures in dungeons. But these are the obvious points. There are also unexplained pressures and attacks. These are the attacks against HBDH.
From the very beginning, AKP-MHP fascism saw HBDH as the greatest danger to itself, and carried out attacks and developed operations aimed at inflicting a heavy blow by making annual, six-monthly special plans against the organizations within HBDH. He did this in the cities and in the countryside, seeing as if taking part in HBDH was the biggest crime and the first danger for himself, he mobilized all his strength for destruction attacks to destroy them. HBDH is also exposed to such attacks. Organizations within HBDH were subjected to dozens of planned attacks. They gave martyrs. Hundreds of his staff were arrested and thrown into dungeons. Thousands of supporters were arrested. The AKP-MHP fascism mobilized all Turkey’s means to prevent the HBDH from becoming a practice, and applied and attacked fascist pressure and terror. This must be seen and known. Not being able to see and overcome these attacks on time and not being able to prevent them left the development of the practice weak.
HBDH WILL MAKE 2022 THE YEAR OF FACISM’S DECREASE
Now there are difficulties, many obstacles. These are the difficulties created by enemy attacks. It exists in Kurdistan as well as in Turkey. We will overcome this situation. There are attacks on Media Defense Areas. Zap, Avaşin line is wanted to be occupied. There are constant attacks against Rojava and Shengal. There are constant attacks, arrests, operations and torture in Turkey and Northern Kurdistan. AKP-MHP fascism is under attack. As HBDH, the common resistance movement of the peoples of Turkey and Kurdistan, workers and laborers, we have the duty and responsibility to direct our forces to more struggle, to train and organize our potential more, to draw them into the struggle, and to develop a total revolutionary people’s war resistance at the level of mobilization against AKP-MHP fascism. We are trying to develop them.
Of course, now AKP-MHP fascism is attacking Zap and Avaşin in order to crush the guerrilla with one last effort. This is the last hurrah. The guerrilla is resisting this, the people are resisting. This resistance needs to spread to Turkey the most. While AKP-MHP fascism wants to make the fascist dictatorship dominate and prolong its life by attacking Zap, Avaşin, Rojava and Shengal by crushing the revolutionary resistance there, we should spread the revolutionary resistance in the mountains, plains and cities more in Turkey and move it to the metropolises. We need to target AKP-MHP fascism in all its economic, political and military aspects, spread the war more, strike the enemy where it is weakest, strike fascism from the side, inside and behind. That’s the only way to overthrow fascism. This is the task of HBDH. In this process, HBDH will mobilize the youth and women of Turkey more and develop the resistance more in the cities. HBDH militias will attack AKP-MHP fascism after attack. While AKP-MHP fascism wanted to take a front in Zap and Avaşin and crush the guerrilla there, HBDH turned all cities of Turkey, from Istanbul to Izmir, from the Black Sea to Çukurova, to Ankara, into revolutionary resistance fronts. It will strike where it does not expect and will make 2022 the year of collapse of AKP-MHP fascism. This is our determination, our approach. HBDH will now overcome its deficiencies in the previous period by developing the struggle on this basis. He has this assertion and will. He draws these conclusions from the self-critical approach of the past, and has the will to collapse fascism by making every place a field of struggle in the coming period and making every day a day of action against AKP-MHP fascism.
