By Ted Grant and Fernando D'Alessandro
February 26, 1999
The arrest of Abdullah Ocalan the leader of the PKK (Workers Party of Kurdistan), hasbrought the oppression of the Kurdish people to the attention of the whole world. TheTurkish government has attempted to portray Ocalan, as a bloody terrorist, responsible forthe deaths of thousands of Turks. It is true that many Turkish soldiers and civilians havedied in the 15 year war against Kurdish separatism. But that is not the responsibility ofone man. It is the result of the national oppression of the Kurds meted out by the Turkishruling class, the same class that oppresses all workers in Turkey, whether Kurdish orTurkish. Thousands of Kurds have also died as a result of the operations of the Turkisharmy in South East Turkey.
Workers around the world must support the struggle of the Kurdish people against theoppression they suffer at the hands of the Turkish regime. However, it is not sufficientto simply support the cause of the Kurdish people. It is also necessary to explain whatlies behind the oppression of the Kurds and show a concrete way out of the impasse theyare facing.
The capture of Abdullah Ocalan, is part of a continuing onslaught on the Kurdishminority in Turkey. The fact that no European power was prepared to give Ocalan asylumshows that they all tacitly supported Turkey's demand for his arrest.
Ocalan had appealed to several European countries for political asylum, or at least aninternational trial. No one was prepared to give him asylum and yet the right to asylum isinscribed in all their constitutions. In reality they give the right to asylum to suittheir purposes, but denied it to Ocalan.
Ocalan's quest for asylum
Germany, initially called for the arrest of Ocalan. When he arrived in Italy last year,seeking asylum, he was arrested because of the German request. But once arrested theGerman authorities did not request his extradition. The Germans did not want to be leftwith the hot potato. The Italian government was then left to try and solve the problem. Itcould not extradite Ocalan to Turkey because the Italian Constitution forbids extraditionto countries that have the death penalty. So it resorted to putting pressure on him, tomake him understand that he was not wanted. Forced to leave Italy he then spent weekstravelling around half the world looking for another safe haven. He appealed to the Greekgovernment, but all they could come up with was their embassy in Kenya. And that turnedout to be a trap.
This shows how the governments of the West all talk of self-determination for thesmaller nations, but in reality they treat them as so much small change in their ownmanoeuvrings.
The CIA was clearly involved in tipping off the Turkish authorities of the presence ofOcalan in the Greek embassy in Nairobi. The Greek government also collaborated in trickingOcalan into leaving the embassy, letting him believe that he was about to be flown to theNetherlands. It is obvious that the Greek government was put under enormous pressure bythe United States. Turkey is an important ally in the area for the US.
However, the collaboration of the Greek government in the arrest of Ocalan has alreadydestabilised the situation in Greece. The Greek Prime Minister, Costas Simitis, has beenunder fire at home for letting Ocalan fall into Turkish hands. Greece's foreign ministerand two other ministers were forced to resign over the affair. It has caused widespreaddiscontent at what is seen as a betrayal. Simitis is facing opposition inside his ownparty, the Pasok. The youth of Pasok have organised demonstrations in solidarity with theKurds, in open opposition to the party leadership.
According to the New York Times, "Papandreou [deputy foreign minister of the Pasokgovernment] did not hide his dismay over the government's bungled diplomacy. 'By whatevermistakes, Greece has partial responsibility for turning Ocalan over to Turkey,' he said.'There is an obvious feeling of humiliation in public opinion that has to be recognized.'The arrest of Ocalan, who was under Greek protection in Nairobi until he was seized byTurkish agents, was devastating to most Greeks, who sympathize with the Kurdishcause..." (New York Times, 19.2.99)
The popularity of Simitis was already lagging. This latest affair will further increaseopposition to his government. In fact in the face of this opposition he has attempted tosave his face by increasing anti-Turkish demagogy, and this is bound to increase tensionbetween these two countries, both members of the NATO alliance.
Thus all the European governments share in the responsibility for the fate that nowawaits Ocalan. In Turkey the authorities have managed to get a 36-page confession out ofthe man. We can but guess at the methods used to extract this confession. As The Guardian(26.2.99) commented, "Only Mr Ocalan's interrogators know what he has reallysaid" obviously implying that torture may have been used.
Ocalan has now been charged with treason and the state is seeking the death sentence.The Western governments who all refused him asylum are now putting pressure on the Turkishgovernment for a "fair trial". Behind this lies their understanding that ifOcalan were to be executed this would aggravate the situation among the Kurds evenfurther.
Historical background
Before these events unfolded many people had probably not even heard of the Kurds. Butwho are the Kurds? The number of Kurds totals about 24-27 million. Kurdistan has aterritory the size of France. The bulk of Kurdistan is divided between Turkey, Iran, Iraqand Syria, with smaller enclaves in the ex-Soviet republics of the Caucasus. The bordersthat divide Kurdistan are artificial borders that have been drawn against the will of theKurdish people according to the interests of imperialism. These borders have dividedvillages, towns, even families.
The Kurds are one of the most ancient peoples of the Near East. They have been livingin the area known as Kurdistan for about 2,500 years, long before the Turks arrived. Theyhave their own language, which is divided into various dialects, and is unrelated to theArabic or Turkish languages. Of the dialects the most widely spoken is Kurmanci. This isspoken by about 60% of all Kurds, and 90% of the Turkish Kurds speak it. The other maindialect, Sorani is spoken by about 25% of the Kurds, mainly in Iran and Iraq. There is avast literature in the Kurdish language going back to the tenth century A.D. Theoverwhelming majority of Kurds are Moslems, about 75% of whom are Sunni and 15% areAlevite Moslems.
The Kurds have played a significant role in the history of this region going back toancient times. According to Arab, and Armenian sources, the Kurds founded severalimportant states during the Islamic epoch between the tenth and thirteenth centuries, aswell as in the distant past. Sultan Salahaddin (Salâh al-Dîn) a Kurd was the founder ofthe Ayyûbid state, which included Egypt, Syria, and Kurdistan, and played a particularlysignificant role in history.
The Turks, whose roots are in Middle Asia, arrived in what is now known as Turkey muchlater, after the eleventh century, and founded the Selchuk and subsequently the Ottomanstates. Kurdistan was fought over between the Ottoman and the Persian empires. The Kurdishprinces, in this period, managed to maintain a certain autonomy by siding first with onethen the other. However in 1638, Kurdistan was officially divided between the Ottoman andPersian empires in the Treaty of Kasri Shirin. From then on Kurdistan has been prey toforeign domination.
The betrayal of French and British imperialism
At the beginning of the nineteenth century the Kurds fought for the unity andindependence of Kurdistan, but were always defeated. But at the end of the First World Warthe Kurdish question re-emerged. The Ottoman Empire collapsed and the areas it previouslydominated were carved up into new states. In 1920 the Treaty of Sèvres, was signed byTurkey and the Allied powers.
Article 64 of the Treaty stated that: " If within one year the Kurdish peoplewithin the areas defined in Article 62 [the area known as Kurdistan] shall .... show thatthe majority of the population of those areas desires independence from Turkey, and if theCouncil [of the League of Nations] then considers that these people are capable of suchindependence and recommends that it should be granted to them, Turkey hereby agrees toexecute such a recommendation and to renounce all rights and title over these areas."
Turkey initially defined its new borders as those "which include the areas settledby the Turkish and Kurdish majority". About 70 Kurdish Members of Parliament werepresent at the first session of the Great National Assembly in Ankara and were officiallydesignated as the "MPs of Kurdistan". The Turkish representative, Ismet Pasha,declared at the signing of the Lausanne Treaty in 1923 that, "The Kurds are not aminority but a nation; the government in Ankara is the government of the Turks as well asof the Kurds."
That was simply to dupe the Kurds in Turkey. Both the Treaty of Sevres and the Treatyof Lausanne were dead letters from the moment they were signed. British and Frenchimperialism had no intention of allowing the Kurds to have their own state. In thebuilding up of the modern Turkish state there was no room for the Kurds. Britishimperialism tore up the Treaty of Sèvres and proceeded to deploy RAF aircraft against theKurds in their mountain strongholds.
Subsequently the existence of the Kurds was denied. The Kurdish language, the practiceof Kurdish culture, even the concepts of "Kurdish" and "Kurdistan"were forbidden. Article 39 of the Treaty of Lausanne, according to which the citizens ofTurkey had the right to freely use their respective languages in all areas of life, wastrampled upon, and the Kurdish language was totally forbidden in the educational systemand the printed media. Speaking about the Kurds and criticising the oppression of them washeld to be a severe crime and was massively punished.
The betrayal of the Kurds by British and French imperialism was embodied in the Treatyof Lausanne, signed on 24 July 1923 which parcelled out the region between Turkey, Iranand Iraq, with no mention of the Kurds. Thus those areas of Kurdistan which had been partof the Ottoman Empire were carved up once more. Part of them were included in the Britishand French Mandates, where Syria and Iraq later came into being. The biggest area ofKurdistan remained within Turkey.
As a result, in 1925 there was a large-scale revolt in southern Turkish Kurdistan andtwo years later a resistance movement developed that lasted three years in the north andeast. These revolts were put down by the Turkish army, but only after fierce fighting andheavy casualties. The Turkish Government then introduced a series of measures aimed atabsorbing the Kurds into the Turkish nation and wiping out their distinct nationalidentity and culture. Most significantly, the study of the Turkish language was madecompulsory, and the Kurds became known officially as " Mountain Turks".
This oppression of the Kurds led to further uprisings, the major ones taking place inArarat in 1930 and in Dersim in 1938. The Turkish state waged war in Kurdistan on apermanent basis. And since 1979, Turkey has ruled Kurdistan through military law, a Stateof Emergency, and a dirty war.
To this day the Kurds in Turkey are not recognised as a minority because recognisedminorities would have the right to teach in their respective languages. A ban imposed byTurkey's last military government on the use of Kurdish in everyday life was lifted in1991, but Kurdish is still illegal in broadcasts and in educational or political settings.A court case to ban Turkey's main pro-Kurdish party is under way at this very moment. Evento defend the rights of the Kurds in a peaceful manner is considered a crime.
The plight of the Kurds in Iraq and in Iran
The Kurds living within the borders of Iraq, have also been resisting oppression sinceWorld War I. They staged uprisings in 1919-1923, and again in 1933 and later. The greatestKurdish uprising in Iraq began in 1961 and lasted until 1970. Iraq's rulers formallyrecognised a Kurdish identity after the overthrow of the monarchy in 1958. But there hasbeen a constant conflict between the Iraqi state, increasingly centralised andtotalitarian since the Ba'ath party came to power in 1968, and the Kurds with theirmountain tribal traditions and growing self-awareness as a potential nation.
In 1970 the government of Iraq reached an "agreement" with the Kurdsconcerning an autonomous region. But this was simply a stalling tactic on the part ofBaghdad which ignored the conditions of the agreement, thus provoking a new war in 1975which lasted until 1991. Iran was supporting the Iraqi Kurds. As has always been the case,Iran supported the Kurds in Iraq while it continued to oppress its own Kurds. SaddamHussein, under pressure, initially made territorial concessions to Iran. Then, to win backthese areas, it started the destructive eight-year war against Iran which devastated theKurdish areas of Iraq. Using the excuse that some of the Kurdish factions had supportedIran in the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, Saddam Hussein reacted by razing villages and attackingpeasants with chemical weapons killing thousands of Kurds.
Saddam Hussein suffered a massive defeat during the Gulf War of 1991 and the Kurdsrebelled again. Spontaneously they rose in the northern industrial towns - Suleymania,Hawlir and Kirkuk - where the oil industry is concentrated. Inspired by the Iranianrevolution against the shah in 1979 they set up shoras only to be crushed by Iraqi troops,and western imperialism did nothing to help them. Again, we see how the fortunes of theKurds were dependent on the interests of imperialism, this time US imperialism.
Faced with the spontaneous uprising of the Kurds in Northern Iraq US imperialism leftSaddam's elite republican guard untouched, which then moved to reoccupy the Kurdish townsin the north. The imperialists preferred Saddam in power, compared to a socialistrevolution. However, even the republican guard was defeated and thrown out of Suleymania,the centre of the uprising.
The problem was that nobody had a clear strategy of what was to be done next. Theleaders of the PUK and KDP, having a purely nationalist outlook, were incapable ofdeveloping a class strategy and appealing to the workers of the whole of Iraq to unitewith them in the struggle to overthrow Saddam Hussein.
Once the Kurdish rebellion had been crushed, the United States created a so-called"safe haven" for the Kurds within Iraq by imposing a "no-fly" zonenorth of the 36th parallel. The refugees expelled previously were able to return to theirhomeland. But not before a new war had been fought among the Kurds of Northern Iraq. From1994-98, two Iraqi Kurd factions &endash; the Kurdistan Democratic Party, led byMassoud Barzani, and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, led by Jalal Talabani &endash;fought a bloody war for power over northern Iraq. In September 1998, the two sides agreedto a power-sharing arrangement and created a "parliament" and a "nationalgovernment".
US imperialism, in its usual cynical fashion, made use of the Kurdish people's struggleagainst Baghdad in order to establish its "protectorate" over the north of Iraq.This insolent act had nothing to do with the defence of self determination, but was aimedat crippling Iraq. US imperialism is the main counterrevolutionary force in the world. Itwas naive and stupid of the Kurdish leaders to expect it to uphold their interests. As wehave seen on many occasions, especially in the Middle East and in the Balkans, thebourgeois leaders of small nations, under the guise of "self-determination" endup as the agents of one imperialist power or another.
The problems of the Iraqi Kurds have still not been solved today. The two factions, KDPand PUK are mere puppets of rival imperialist interests in the area. This is revealed bythe fact that over the years the PKK has come into conflict with Barzani's KDP faction inNorthern Iraq, which controls the Turkey-Iraq border. Barzani has criticised the PKK forestablishing military bases inside Iraqi-Kurd territory to launch attacks into Turkey! TheKDP controls the road carrying goods between Iraq and Turkey, and it has benefited fromthe taxes it is allowed to impose on goods travelling through this route. This includesoil sent abroad from Iraq in defiance of United Nations sanctions. To preserve thisprofitable activity and to maintain good relations with Turkey, the KDP leader, hascracked down on the activities of the PKK inside Iraq. As a token of gratitude the Turkshave helped the KDP in its struggle against the PUK. In 1997 a large Turkish force helpedthe KDP to block a PUK assault.
More recently the Turkish authorities have been trying to cobble together a dealbetween the two opportunist tribal based Kurdish guerrilla movements, KDP and PUK, inNorthern Iraq so that the PKK bases there can be closed down.
Without bases in Syria and Iraq, and without a sympathetic population to supply themfood, shelter and arms transport, thanks to the mass deportations, the PKK is finding itmore difficult to sustain its guerrilla warfare.
None of this, of course benefits the ordinary Kurdish workers and peasants on bothsides of the border. In the meantime the whole country is being subjected to a UN embargo,and the Iraqi Kurds are suffering like the rest of the Iraqi population.
The state of Iran has practised a policy of oppression against the Kurds similar tothat of Turkey. After World War II, Iran was occupied in the north by the Soviet Union andin the south by Great Britain. The Kurds were able to proclaim the Kurdish Republic ofMahabad in the territories occupied by the Soviet Union. But soon thereafter, once theSoviet troops had withdrawn, the government in Tehran, with the support of Britain andAmerica, annihilated the Republic of Mahabad.
Again when the Iranian revolution overthrew the Shah in 1979, the Kurds of NorthernIran could enjoy relative freedom with the setting up of an autonomous region. But thisdid not last long either. The new regime of the mullahs clamped down militarily on theKurds and the armed resistance to the Islamic fundamentalist regime that began in 1979 isstill continuing today.
The hypocrisy of US imperialism
What had alarmed the Turkish government was that by the early 1990s, Ocalan's movementhad a certain control over large parts of eastern Turkey, appointing local officials,collecting taxes and administering its own legal system. It had developed genuine masssupport in these areas. That explains the Turkish government's savage military campaign inwhich many Kurdish villages were burned and many suspected rebel sympathisers weretortured or killed or disappeared. Between 1991 and 1997, some 1,500 Kurdish nationalistsdied in what until January 1998 were classified as 'unsolved crimes.' Then a governmentreport revealed that the killings were the work of state-sponsored death squads.
In all this the hypocrisy of the US, is sickening. While they continue to talk of theplight of the Kurds in Iraq they turn a blind eye to the oppression of the Kurds inTurkey. They even allow the Turkish army to enter Iraqi territory to hound the PKK, inspite of the so-called protection of the Northern Iraqi Kurds against the "evil"Saddam Hussein.
Because Iraq and Iran are considered opponents of US interests in the Middle East, USimperialism is prepared to give some limited aid to the Kurdish minorities in thesecountries. So Kurdish nationalists in Iraq are portrayed as "freedom fighters"while Kurdish nationalists in Turkey are "terrorists". It is true that the Kurdsin Iraq have been brutally oppressed. Saddam Hussein has even used chemical weaponsagainst them, killing thousands. But what has the Turkish army been doing for the last 30years in South Eastern Turkey against its own Kurds? The Turkish generals have mobilisedbetween 200,000 and 300,000 men, about half the forces of the Turkish army in theiroperations against the Kurdish separatists, maintaining a permanent force of about 50,000in South East Turkey.
The Kurds in Turkey
The largest part of Kurdistan, which in terms of both its population and its territorymakes up about one-half of the total, lies inside Turkey. This part amounts to one-thirdof the total territory of Turkey. About 13 million Kurds live within the borders ofTurkey, 8 to 10 million in Iran, 5 million in Iraq, and 1.5 million in Syria.
About one-third of the labour migrants who have left Turkey in the past 20 to 30 yearsand came to the countries of Europe are Kurds. If we add to this the number of Kurds fromTurkey and the other parts of Kurdistan who have fled to Europe in recent years forpolitical and economic reasons, the number of Kurds living in European countries comes toabout 1 million.
Of the roughly 10 to 12 million Kurds that live in Turkey, 70 to 75 percent now livemostly in the slums of Ankara and other cities to the west of the capital, together withmillions of Turkish workers. Hundreds of thousands more have gone to cities in Kurdistanor migrated, often illegally, to Europe. Of those who left their villages some 560,000,according to an estimate accepted by the State Department, were forcibly evacuated bygovernment forces. [The purpose of emptying villages was to deny the PKK resources,including food and men who might join it.] According to Turkish government sources, 80percent of the villagers turned urban dwellers are unemployed.
A journalist from The Guardian visited a village in south-eastern Turkey at thebeginning of the year and reported on the situation facing the Kurds:
"The men from the village of Kalkum in south-eastern Turkey gather at the samecoffee house at the same time every day...
Their village was burnt and evacuated more than six years ago by the Turkish army, atthe height of its battle against the PKK, the Kurdish separatist movement. The coffeehouse is in the centre of the teeming city of Diyarbakir, where the villagers have joinedhundreds of thousands of other refugees forced out of the surrounding countryside.
The intensity of the Kurdish war has faded as the military has saturated the regionwith tens of thousands of troops. But the sense of dislocation is as strong as ever.Conflict still rages in the minds of the dispossessed.
'We've all been evacuated,' said a man with sad eyes, 'and no one has a permanent job.Some of us try to sell goods on the street; some even beg'." (The Guardian, January2, 1999)
Mass support for the PKK
Only by taking account of this situation can we understand how the PKK, the mostmilitant wing of the Kurdish nationalist movement in Turkey, was able to emerge as a massforce in South Eastern Turkey. The PKK has the backing of millions of Kurds inside Turkey.
We cannot condone, of course, the bombing of civilians in the cities, or the vendettakillings of anyone who does not abide by the decisions of the PKK. These methods have notserved to further the cause of the Kurdish people. In fact they have strengthened the handof the Turkish generals who can use these attacks as an excuse for their own militarycampaign against the Kurds, and in particular against the PKK.
The aim of the Kurdish workers and peasants should be to build unity with the Turkishworkers against the common enemy, that is the capitalists and landlords that rule Turkey.This cannot be done with terrorist bombing campaigns. They must win over the Turkishworkers who are also oppressed by the Turkish regime. This is even more the case nowconsidering that millions of Kurds have been proletarianised and live in cities likeIstanbul and Ankara side by side with Turkish workers. They work in the same factories andworkshops. The solution to the problems of the Kurds lies in a joint struggle against theoppressive Turkish regime together with the Turkish workers.
Initially the PKK had proclaimed that its aim was not only the total separation of theKurdish speaking areas from Turkey, but also that of a state uniting all the Kurds, ofTurkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria. None of the regimes in the area would allow this. Andneither could Western imperialism tolerate such a thing. All the regimes in the area areprepared to give limited support to this or that group of Kurdish nationalists, when itsuits their interests, but they will never accept the creation of any Kurdish independentstate.
Inter-imperialist conflicts
Support for this or that Kurdish nationalist movement that each regime in the area maygive only reflects their own narrow national interests. The Iraqi regime has supporteddifferent factions at different times, the same goes for the Iranians, Syrians and Turks.But to help them in creating their own state would mean creating a precedent whereby theirown Kurds would begin to call for separation. This would lead to the break up of Iraq, andTurkey. In this Iran would stand to benefit. That explains why US imperialism gives mildsupport to the Northern Iraqi Kurds but will not allow them to set up their own state,because this would put enormous pressure on Turkey that could break up in the process.
That is why the Kurdish people can place no confidence in any of the imperialist powerswho may periodically appear to side with their cause. They will only use them as so muchsmall change in their own manoeuvrings in the area.
Oil is an important element in the conflict. A large part of Iraq's oil resources is inKurdistan. A part of Iran's oil resources is also in Kurdistan, in the region aroundKirmanshah. Turkey's oil resources are almost exclusively in Kurdistan (in the regionsaround Batman, Diyarbakir, and Adiyaman). Syria's oil resources are also mainly inKurdistan, in the region around Cezire. The territories of Kurdistan are also rich inmineral resources such as iron, copper, chrome, coal, silver, gold, uranium, andphosphates.
There are also plans to develop oil fields in the Caspian Basin. How is that oil to betransported? Proposals are being considered for various new pipelines. One, would passthrough or close to Turkish Kurdistan, carrying oil from Azerbaijan and other Caspian oilproducing countries of the ex-Soviet Union to a terminal at the Turkish city of Ceyhannear the eastern end of the Mediterranean.
That is one reason why the Turkish ruling class will not relinquish control of thisarea. The other is that the bourgeoisie of Turkey has big ambitions after the fall of theSoviet Union, especially to its east. It has annexationist ambitions over the NorthernIraqi oil fields. These are also in Kurdish territories. In fact the incursions into Iraq,while serving the purpose of hounding PKK forces, also serve as an excuse to establish amilitary presence in Northern Iraq. The Northern Iraq no-fly zone, imposed by westernimperialism, in fact aids Turkey in working towards this goal.
Syria also has its own ambitions. But it has been weakened by the collapse of theSoviet Union, its former ally. If the Soviet Union had still been a superpower, mostlikely Turkey would not have been able to threaten Syria with war if it did not expelOcalan. The Turkish government forced Asad of Syria, under threat of war, to end hissupport for the PKK. PKK militants were obliged to quit the facilities he had provided forthem in Syria and the Bekaa valley in Syrian-controlled Lebanon. This was a humiliationfor Asad.
There is a long standing dispute between Syria and Turkey over the Turkish province ofHatay on the Syrian border. It is one of the reasons why Syria, until October 1998,supported the PKK, fighting the Ankara government (while of course silencing its own onemillion Kurds in the north). The power game that is being played out in the area can beseen by the fact that a month after his capitulation to the Turks, Asad of Syria receivedthe promise of military assistance from Russia.
US imperialism is very worried about Turkey's position because, after Israel, it is itsmain ally in the area. A simmering conflict has been going on for years between Greece andTurkey. The imperialist aspirations of the Turkish ruling class are adding to growingtensions with Syria, Iraq and Iran. That explains why Turkey has now, a de facto alliancewith Israel. Israel is supplying Turkey with arms and Turkey has allowed Israel to carryout military air training operations over Turkish territory. In this line up the UnitedStates is backing Turkey. It was in fact the pressure of US imperialism that forced Greeceto hand over Ocalan to the Turks. Russia, is also watching, the situation carefully, withits historical allies, Syria and Iraq, as we have already seen.
The struggle of the PKK in difficulty
The huge military onslaught on the part of the Turkish army, together with the mountingpressure on the PKK to dismantle its bases in Syria now means that the PKK is militarilyon the retreat. But this was already the case before Ocalan's capture. In fact, the ironyof the situation is that Ocalan was proposing a "political solution" to theconflict. The PKK, basing itself on the examples of Northern Ireland, the Palestinians,and ETA in the Basque Country declared, for the second time, a unilateral cease-fire inSeptember 1998.
Ocalan abandoned the call for an independent Kurdistan and appealed to the EuropeanUnion and the European governments to give the Turkish Kurds limited autonomy. That is notthe way one would expect a genuine communist leader to behave. You cannot expect any realhelp for the oppressed Kurds from the bourgeoisie of Western Europe. The EU has importanteconomic trade links with Turkey and is planning to bring it into the Union at a laterstage. The European governments are supplying Turkey with weapons which are killing andmaiming Kurdish men, women and children!
Back in November when Ocalan had fled to Italy seeking asylum, The Guardian reportedthe following: " 'I have come to Italy to open the way to a political settlement,'Ocalan has announced on the PKK's web site. 'I am opposed to all terror, even if itoriginates from us. I am ready to do whatever I can so that it will be stoppedimmediately.' But although Italy's president and Germany's foreign minister have suggestedthat Ocalan's arrival in Europe could form the catalyst for action to solve Turkey'sKurdish crisis, it is obvious that Ankara will never negotiate with people it calls'bloodthirsty PKK murderers'. (The Guardian, 25.11.98).
The Turkish military are not prepared to make compromises with the PKK guerrillas. Theythreatened Syria with war, and are on the offensive against the Kurds. The capture ofOcalan has given them a new confidence. After his arrest, the Turkish military sentthousands of soldiers into Iraqi territory, together with armoured cars and helicopters,in pursuit of PKK guerrillas.
Hundreds of arrests were carried out all over the country. Even Ocalan's youngerbrother Mehmet, who seems to have nothing to do with the guerrillas, was arrested. Thisreflects the ruthless methods of the Turkish military. They wish to break Ocalan with allmeans possible and humiliate him before the eyes of the millions of Kurds who look to thePKK and its imprisoned leader.
For now the army is not prepared to talk of "political solutions". It wishesto eliminate the problem militarily. They would like us to believe that the Kurdish causeis a lost cause. However, that conclusion would be a big mistake. For now the PKK is onthe retreat, but if no lasting solution is found the problem will come back again andagain.
The Turkish government with its mass deportations and forced migration of the Kurdsdoesn't understand that it has been digging its own grave. By bringing masses of Kurdstogether in the cities they have paved the way for a genuine mass movement of all theworkers of Turkey, which in contrast to guerrilla warfare would actively involve themajority of Kurds. What is more they have also laid the ground for a united struggle byKurdish and Turkish workers, something which would really shake the military backed regimeto its foundations.
All workers in Turkey face the same fundamental problems - military repression, badhousing, unemployment, which are all aggravated by the war in Eastern Turkey - and theyare mainly organised in the same unions. In a movement based on the towns they would uniteagainst the common enemy.
The solution of the Kurdish problem is an impossible task under capitalism, for so longas the Kurdish people remain oppressed and without rights the struggle will re-emergerepeatedly.
Although the Turkish authorities wish to break the back of the PKK, at the same timethey have combined this with some recognition of a Kurdish identity. For instance it is nolonger illegal to use the Kurdish tongue in everyday life, although no newspapers or TVand radio transmissions are allowed in Kurdish, and the use of Kurdish in schools is stillforbidden. If genuine concessions on these questions had been made 20 years ago, theymight have been sufficient, but, as always, it is a case of "too little, toolate". Half hearted measures will no longer suffice. But, on the other hand, the PKKalso offers no solution.
It lacks an internationalist perspective and a genuine class approach to the problemsof the Kurdish workers and peasants. Without this it is not possible to win over theworkers of Turkey and of all the Middle East to the cause of the Kurdish people. Withoutan internationalist perspective the danger of nationalism is for ever present. This isshown in a recent statement of Ocalan. While continuing to defend the rights of the Kurdsto autonomy, he proposed a drive of Turkey towards the East. But genuine autonomy for theKurds will not be achieved in this way: it is not the way to appeal to the workers andpeasants of the countries to the east of Turkey!
What this shows is the impasse facing the leadership of the PKK after 15 years ofguerrilla warfare. The PKK is further than ever from its ambition of self-determinationfor the Kurdish people. The fact is that under capitalism this is not possible. As TheEconomist (20/2/99) stated, expressing the views of British imperialism, "the Kurdsneed to recognise that there is no political room in the Middle East, at present or in theforeseeable future, for an independent state of Kurdistan." It does add some adviceto the Turkish state: "A lasting peace can be forged only if the Kurds, especiallybut not only in Turkey, are given the fair deal that has so far been denied them." Ofcourse this ignores completely the role of British imperialism over the years and its partin the consistent betrayal of the Kurds' aspirations.
A solution under capitalism is impossible
Only a prolonged period of economic development would lay the basis for solving theKurdish question. If there were enough jobs and houses for all the workers of Turkey, bothTurkish and Kurdish, if there were a steady increase in the standard of living for all thepeoples of this area of the world then one could talk of a "peaceful","political" solution. But the world is facing exactly the opposite scenario.Forty per cent of the world is already in recession and the rest is moving ever closer toit. Particularly the underdeveloped countries are facing terrible hardship. Unemploymentis going up and the standard of living of the masses is under constant attack.
Kurdistan is a particularly backward area from the point of view of economicdevelopment. The people live in poverty in a potentially wealthy country. The colonialconditions have prevented the country from developing. Any profits made in Kurdistan flowout of the area. Society has not been modernised, and the feudal structures of the pasthave not been completely eliminated. The tribal structure in the rural areas haspersisted. Kurdistan is still ruled by a semi-feudal social system. There is nosignificant bourgeoisie or working class in the modern sense of the word. In other wordsthe Turkish bourgeoisie have not even been capable of completing the tasks of thebourgeois democratic revolution.
In an attempt to reduce support for the PKK the Turkish government has spoken of theneed for more roads, more schools, more medical facilities for the Southeast of thecountry. That is why they have come up with the idea of the "South-Eastern AnatoliaProject". The idea is to develop the economy of South Eastern Turkey. The planencompasses the spending of $1.8 billion on transport, health facilities, education,telecommunications, mining, industry, and tourism. But the Kurdish nationalists, are notso optimistic. There is insufficient foreign investment and many Turkish businessmen doubtit will be profit-making.
As the Financial Times reported, "Business leaders of Turkey's backward south-eastcan just about keep count of the number of times the government has promised to boosteconomic development in the region.
"An 'investment onslaught' announced by Bulent Ecevit, the caretaker primeminister, to help win over disgruntled Kurds after the capture last week of AbdullahOcalan, leader of the PKK guerrilla movement, is by their tally the eighth pledge of itskind. But the announcement was not accompanied by any calculation of how much money wouldbe allocated to the region". (Financial Times, 24.2.99)
While the government "talk" of investing money the capitalists understandthat the world market leaves no room for the development of Kurdistan. So the money isspent on repression rather than on economic development. The war against the PKK iscosting Turkey $8 billion a year.
A Socialist Federation is the only way out
All this shows that there is absolutely no way out for the Kurdish people undercapitalism. So how are the aspirations of the Kurds to self-determination to be achieved?So long as the interests of the various local and international ruling classes remain, theroad to self-determination is blocked. True autonomy can only be achieved through aSocialist Federation of all the Middle East, including Turkey.
Within this federation there would be autonomy for all the minorities in the areaincluding the Kurds. They would have the right to use their own language, to develop theirown culture, etc. Once the interests of capitalism and landlordism are eliminated therewould even be the possibility of having their own state. There is no other road.
All the regimes in this area oppress their own peoples. It is in the interests ofworkers across the Middle East to overthrow their own ruling classes. That is why thestruggle must be one for the building of genuine workers' parties in all these countriesthat would work for the unity of the working class of all nationalities in the strugglefor Socialism. This is not a Utopia, but the only practical road.
It should be noted that the Kurds have always come close to some form of autonomy atmoments when there was a revolutionary upsurge internationally. The 1917 Russianrevolution overthrew Tsarism and thus led to Russia pulling out of the region. Thistogether with the general revolutionary wave that followed the First World War raised theprospect of a state for the Kurds, as embodied in the 1920 Treaty of Sevres. As that wavepetered out reaction was able to get the upper hand and the Kurds of Turkey (and not onlyof Turkey) were smashed.
At the end of the Second World War, the presence of Russian troops in Northern Iran,together with the revolutionary movements on a world scale, allowed for the setting up ofa Kurdish state in Northern Iran, only to be smashed by Iran, a year later, with thesupport of British imperialism.
Again, in 1979 it was the revolution of the Iranian workers against the Shah that gavethe Kurds in the north a temporary respite and a certain autonomy, with the setting up ofan autonomous region, only to be smashed again once the reaction of the mullahs had setin. Had there existed a genuine revolutionary party in Iran at the time things would haveturned out differently. A socialist revolution would have been possible in Iran. Thisrevolution would have conceded autonomy to the Kurds in the north. This would haveinspired workers across the whole of the Middle East. It would have been the beginning ofthe revolution throughout the whole of the Middle East, and within this context thequestion of the Kurds and of all the minorities in the area could have been solved.
This shows that throughout history the question of autonomy of the Kurds has beenclosely linked to the revolutionary movements of the workers in the region and on a worldscale.
We must base ourselves on the perspective of a renewed wave of class struggle acrossthe Middle East. Only in this way can we see the possibility of the overthrow of thedespotic regimes that dominate the area, and within that the concrete possibility ofself-determination for all the minorities.