»Europe has Turned the Kurdish Question into a Tool for its Own Interests«
A Comprehensive Look at the Current Political Situation
Cemil Bayık, KCK co-Chair
The Kurdish people's struggle for freedom has been waged for decades under the leadership of the PKK and along the lines of Rêber Apo's [Abdullah Öcalan's] ideas. In its course, it has led to important achievements not only in Kurdistan, Turkey and the Middle East, but worldwide. With each passing day, it becomes clearer that this is a movement that represents the interests not only of the Kurdish people and the peoples of the Middle East, but of all humanity. On the basis of the new paradigm developed by Rêber Apo, the ideological-theoretical foundations of Democratic Modernity have been laid. On this foundation, a struggle is taking place that has shown very clearly that Capitalist Modernity is a system directed against society and humanity. Thus, the awareness and conviction that Capitalist Modernity must be overcome is spreading every day all over the world.
Through the PKK-led struggle, the real nature of the social and political structures in Kurdistan was exposed, which in turn led to important consequences. Very important results have also been achieved in the Middle East, Turkey and internationally. Nothing but our struggle would have been so capable of exposing the true face of Kurdistan's political forces - especially the KDP (Kurdistan Democratic Party). The exposure of the system of criminal gangs and the many other negative developments in Turkey would also have been unthinkable without our struggle. Without the PKK's struggle and its vision for the Middle East, neither the true face of the authoritarian regimes in the region, nor that of the Islamic State (IS) would be known worldwide today. Without the struggle instigated by the PKK, the real character of Capitalist Modernity in the Middle East would also not have become so visible. The cold politics of interests of Europe, the USA and all other forces of Capitalist Modernity would not have been so clearly addressed and thus would not have been so clearly recognized as a huge burden for the whole of humanity. It is obvious how much all these developments of the last years and decades serve the interests of peoples and humanity. We are proud of the fact that we were able to bring all the above-mentioned facts so clearly to light through our struggle. All this has unquestionably come about on the basis of the philosophical approach, paradigm, ideology and theoretical line developed by Rêber Apo - in conjunction with the reality of our struggle that has emerged from it.
No Coincidence: Start of Turkish Attacks on South Kurdistan after Erdoğan-Biden Phone Call
On the night of April 23-24, the Turkish state began an all-out assault on the Medya Defense Zones in South Kurdistan (North Iraq). It is no coincidence that this attack began only shortly after a phone call between Erdoğan and U.S. President Biden. Until then, Biden had always avoided holding talks with Erdoğan. Therefore, the fact of the immediate succession of the conversation on April 23 and the beginning of the Turkish attacks on South Kurdistan suggests that an agreement was reached during the phone call. Biden had had certain criticisms of AKP policies and had addressed them openly. But he refrained from some of his criticism in response to the fact that the AKP was willing to align itself with U.S. policy on certain points. So an agreement has been reached between the two sides. In the process, the U.S. has given the AKP the green light for its attack on the Medya Defense Zones in South Kurdistan. The KDP's support and Iraq's agreement or silence also play an important role in the current attacks. Of course, Turkey could attempt such an attack on its own, but without international support and the support or silence of the KDP and Iraq, failure of such an all-out assault would be very likely. After the defeat Turkey had suffered during its attack on the South Kurdish region of Gare in February of this year, it would not have dared to launch such a large-scale attack entirely on its own. At the time, Turkey had informed both the KDP and the United States in advance of the attack on Gare. Despite Turkey's extensive military capabilities, such attacks would fail without the political support of these forces. In Gare, the Turkish state suffered a severe defeat even despite this support. Therefore, the current attack on Metîna, Zap and Avaşîn would have directly failed resoundingly without the necessary political backing. That is why it is important to be aware that the current Turkish attacks on South Kurdistan are being carried out with the approval of the United States and Europe. Because without recognizing this fact it is impossible to understand these attacks or the concept of crushing the Kurdish people's struggle for freedom.
In order to properly analyze the developments related to Turkey, we must correctly understand both the social, national and political structures inside the country and the basis of its foreign relations.
The Middle East after the Treaty of Lausanne: Green Light for the Genocide of the Kurds
Turkey is a remnant of the Ottoman Empire, which had previously been home to many different peoples. The Ottoman Empire was not a classic nation-state, typically based on a single ethnic community. Entities such as the Ottoman Empire represented a political structure that accommodated many different peoples, nations, and religions under its umbrella. While ethnic communities other than the Turkic and non-Muslim faiths did not receive state support, neither was there a planned genocidal policy against them. The basic goal was to maintain the political hegemony of the Ottoman Empire. Until the 19th century, when the nation-state concept of capitalism became increasingly important in the region, pressure on the numerous ethnic and religious communities aimed more at ensuring their recognition of the political hegemony of the Ottoman Empire.
When the Ottoman Empire fell apart, the ruling circles within the ethnic Turkish community that had played an important role in the political center of the empire until then became active. On the basis of their self-image as a political ruling group, which they had developed during Ottoman rule, they set about building a nation-state and achieving nationhood for the Turks in as large an area as possible. To achieve this, they were also prepared to subject the other ethnic communities to physical or cultural genocides. These were important steps in helping the ethnic Turks gain power in the areas they dominated. Fundamental, however, were the later genocides of the Armenian, Pontos-Greek, and Assyrian populations in the region, all of which had been large communities even during World War 1. After the end of World War 1 and the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne, which established the borders of the newly created Turkey in 1923, a policy was pursued that subjected the Kurds to physical and cultural genocide. Thus, it was intended to make Kurdistan an expansion area for the Turkish nation. During the negotiation of the Treaty of Lausanne, the green light had already been given for the genocidal policy against the Kurds in return for the cession of the provinces of Mûsil and Kerkûk (in South Kurdistan/Iraq) to England. Thus, England had given its consent to the genocide of the Kurds. In this sense, the reorganization of the Middle East, which took place at that time on the basis of the Treaty of Lausanne, promoted the genocide of the Kurds. Since then, the basic policy of the Turkish state has been to carry out a genocide against the Kurds. Its entire policy and all its institutions have developed on this basis. Even today, the essence of the Turkish state is shaped by this policy and structure. All state actions are determined by them. So it would be a big mistake not to understand the policies and measures of the Turkish state in this context and to assume that this state can make decisions independently of these policies and measures. Of course, there is no doubt that a democratic revolution can decisively change this mentality and structure.
The order of the Middle East based on the Treaty of Lausanne and the relations of all the various states and political forces that have produced this order have all developed on the basis of a policy whose goal is the genocide of the Kurds. All politics and relations in the region have been developed within this framework for almost 100 years now. As long as the political relations and balances based on this order of the Middle East do not change fundamentally, the policies and relations of the international powers will also take place within the framework of this political system based on the genocide of the Kurds. For 100 years, all relations and balances in the Middle East have been established in this way. Therefore, it is essential to realize that this type of politics and balances can only be changed through a profound change at the level of ideology and understanding of politics.
European Policy: The Existence of the Kurds as a Means for Their Own Interests
In particular, the powers that had given the Middle East this new order initially developed relations with Turkey that were intended to position it against the Soviet Union. After the end of World War II, these relations were again considerably deepened, but at the same time they took on a more chaotic character. Turkey's admission to NATO and the subsequent intensification of relations with Europe also strengthened a central aspect of these relations: the fact that they were based on the goal of genocide against the Kurds. Turkey's partners had practically accepted this genocide as Turkey's legitimate right. Accordingly, it is important to always be aware of this fact when we analyze Turkey's relations with Europe and the United States. Moreover, we must not be deceived by the occasional European criticism of Turkey and imagine that Europe is pursuing the goal of democratizing Turkey on the basis of a solution to the Kurdish question.
Rêber Apo has described the policy behind Europe's relations with Turkey and the European attitude towards the Kurdish question in the following words: "hunting with the hounds and running with the hares". Today, Europe is still pursuing this immoral policy, which follows only the cold European interests. Until today, Europe does not pursue any policy that supports the Kurds to build a free and democratic life. It considers the Kurdish question as an important means to secure its own interests against Turkey and to be able to use Turkey at will. Europe has thus turned the Kurdish question into a tool for its own interests.
Another important aspect that plays a formative role in the development of European and U.S. policy toward Turkey is their goal of using Turkey as a kind of battering ram in the Middle East. Europe's close relations with Turkey historically date back to the time of the Ottoman Sultan Suleyman. Their most important impact was in the form of social and cultural influence in the Balkans and Anatolia. From the beginning of the 19th century, an epoch began that is generally described as the "Westernization" of the Ottoman Empire. So for 200 years this process of "Westernization" has been going on. Neither Europe nor the United States is willing to give up the influence they have gained during this period. Moreover, they consider their relations with Turkey to be comparable to relations with countries in other parts of the world and are accordingly convinced that they will eventually be able to bring Turkey completely under their control. Turkey, for its part, is trying to maintain its relations with the West, which have been based on the implementation of the genocide against the Kurds since the Treaty of Lausanne. Turkey has accepted to pursue a policy that meets the interests of the West as long as the West accepts the genocide of the Kurds. At present, both Europe and Turkey continue their relations with each other without any significant modification. It is important to see that the political relations of both sides are based on the implementation of the genocide against the Kurds. Therefore, those who want to determine their own policy and lead their own struggle must not make the mistake of losing sight of this fact. Of course, these relations, which are characterized by such a mentality, and the resulting order are nothing absolute. They can be changed through struggle. The possibilities for doing so have also improved. The democratic experiences gained through the political struggle in Turkey and Kurdistan, and the developing social and political dynamics in Europe, the West in general and worldwide, make it possible today to change the existing order based on the genocide of the Kurds. But this requires a struggle that correctly understands the internal dynamics and the nature of Turkey's foreign relations, and thus cannot be deceived.
One thing is certain: to distance oneself from the existing order and to change it is not easy. The existing order and structures based on old relations will always resist against change. There are also forces inside and outside Turkey that insist on the old relations and the existing order. We can see this very concretely and practically in the context of our struggle against the Turkish state. Europe and the USA in particular play a very negative role towards us. Undoubtedly, the policies of the KDP also have some influence here. Separate attention must be paid to this aspect. Europe and the U.S. are eager to keep Turkey always in a state of economic, social and political difficulties in order to make the country dependent on them. At the same time, they always rush to the rescue and prop up Turkey's state structures precisely when its political system is on the verge of collapse.
British policy: Keeping the " Sick Country" Alive for One's Own Interests
In 2014, the Turkish state developed the so-called "Submission Plan," and in 2015 it began to put it into practice with concentrated force. To the subsequent attacks of the Turkish state on the Kurdish people and democratic forces, the Kurdish freedom struggle, the democratic forces of Turkey and all political structures of the Middle East that had problems with the Turkish state system responded with a great and historic resistance. This resistance with its great sacrifices has continued since then and has pushed the fascist AKP/MHP government to the brink of collapse today. The end of this government will pave the way for a profound democratization in Turkey, which will draw from the experience of the democratic struggle. This will also mark the beginning of the democratization of the entire Middle East. However, Europe and the U.S. fail to align their own economic-political system with such a phase of democratization and to adopt the political philosophy necessary for it. They regard the fall of the AKP/MHP government and profound changes in Turkey as harmful to their own interests. Therefore, they always rush to the aid of this government, which they themselves call "fascist" and "dictatorial". The policy of Europe and the U.S. is to keep the AKP/MHP government alive until a new Turkish government that serves their interests is in prospect. Therefore, they support the current government both politically and economically. Europe and the U.S. also support the Turkish government's war policy, which it pursues for its own survival, in return for corresponding concessions from Turkey. Britain considered it in its interests to keep the then Ottoman Empire - they called it the "sick man" - on its feet for a whole 100 years. Today, then, it is the "sick country" dependent on them that they see as a part of themselves, so to speak, and keep alive accordingly. They do not want their borders to change, nor do they want a new domestic order for Turkey. The fact that they continuously support the AKP/MHP government, which is on the verge of collapse, shows this very clearly.
The freedom struggle led by the PKK exposes the true face of each of these powers. The exposure of their real nature helps to raise the consciousness of peoples and societies and thus creates a basis for bringing about much greater changes in the future. Certain circles in Turkey and among the Kurds believe that Europe and the USA are in favor of democratic change. But their assistance to the collapsing fascist AKP/MHP government has played an important role in making these circles see the true face of Europe and the U.S. as well.
Europe's Attitude: Democratization of the Middle East Not in Its Own Interest
Europe does not consider the democratization of the Middle East to be beneficial to its own interests. Societies and countries that democratize develop their own will and make their own decisions. They establish ties with all kinds of forces, but do not put themselves in dependency relationships with others. Our world is a whole. Every society and every country has characteristics that complement another society and other countries. In this sense, the need to establish relations follows naturally from the constitution of the world. It is contrary to the dialectic and the nature of the development of human history when societies and countries are separated from each other by fortified borders and walls, as during the Cold War. Today, when science and technology are so advanced, this is not only absurd, but simply must not happen. Europe is not interested in relations from which both sides benefit, but strives for a relationship of dependence that exclusively serves its own interests. For this reason, it opposes a genuine democratization of the Middle East. Europe knows that a democratization of Turkey would also lead to a democratic Middle East. It therefore prefers a Turkey that does not democratize but depends on Europe and adopts its modernist values. Without doubt, Europe does not consider it useful for its own economic and political interests if classically rigid dictatorships emerge. It wants state systems that have adopted European values to a certain extent and have been liberalized accordingly, but at the same time are economically, socially and politically dependent on Europe. If this were not the case, Europe would long ago have agreed to the collapse of the AKP/MHP government and a truly democratic government in its place.
So this is the Turkey that Europe and the U.S. want. At the same time, we are aware that European society does not accept Turkey's current political system, but instead supports European values. Even if it does not have a strong organizational force, it is important to be aware of the energy of such a public and make it a supporter of the political struggle. For it is with this democratic public that we can come together on the basis of the existing common ground with our approach to Democratic Modernity and its intended political structure. The values we represent and the values of this democratic public can be a basis for a common understanding to develop relations for a world of peaceful coexistence.
The bottom line is that the current Turkey, which is being used by the forces of Capitalist Modernity for their own interests, is an expression of the Middle East desired by these forces. Their vision is a Middle East that has been imbued with the values of Capitalist Modernity and where free and secure movement of capital and goods is guaranteed. They do not take into account at all the historical-social reality of the region. On the contrary, they impose the historical, cultural and political system of the West on the Middle East, with the purpose that the region finds itself in a permanent social and political crisis. This attitude of Capitalist Modernity to disregard the peoples' own will and social culture and impose its own ideas on them played an important role in the emergence of political perverted movements such as the Islamic State (IS). This is precisely why Rêber Apo described IS as a perverted force that emerged on the dung heap of Capitalist Modernity. Instead of appropriately approaching Middle Eastern social culture and Islam, Europe wants to shape a Middle East according to its own ideas by creating a collaborative political Islam. Europe has been pursuing this goal for 150 years now. The results are the despotic governments that oppress the peoples of the region or perverted movements like IS. If Europe and the U.S. do not change their current policies, this vicious cycle and chaos will continue. They will not succeed in making their vision of the Middle East a reality. Instead, the crisis and chaos will inevitably continue to grow and spread.
Due to this Middle East policy of Capitalist Modernity, the Democratic Modernity developed by Rêber Apo, the new order of the Middle East based on it and the struggle for it have gained even more importance. At present, all political approaches and solution projects outside the solution for the Middle East developed by Rêber Apo lead to nothing but a hopeless situation. Rêber Apo himself has always understood all his analyses as analyses for the entire Middle East and as its defense against the West. The roots of the Middle Eastern and Western civilizations are different from each other. Undoubtedly, the West has also produced important values, which are ultimately social values. These values have the potential to strengthen Middle Eastern social values and contribute to the democratization of the region. However, it is important not to confuse these values with the individualism and materialism of Western Capitalist Modernity. If we look at these relations holistically, we recognize the Middle East as the center of non-material civilization, while Europe is the center of material civilization. It is therefore impossible to solve the problems of the Middle East with a European approach. That is why Rêber Apo has also spoken about the fact that Europe does not succeed in imposing its understanding of solutions and modernity in the Middle East as it does in some other regions. With these words, he has pointed out that the respective nature of these two civilizations are not compatible with each other.
Becoming a Nation Does not Necessarily Mean Becoming a Nation-State
Rêber Apo always describes the history of the Middle East as a federal structure. As described by him, this represents the historical basis for the fact that all peoples and societies of the region have always lived together without a state or power. The history of the division of the Middle East into nation-states goes back only 100 to 200 years. For more than 4000 years, the societies and peoples of the region lived closely intertwined side by side and were in constant exchange. Their separation by strict borders does not represent progress. Becoming a nation does not necessarily mean becoming a nation-state. The nation-state is the prerequisite for the bourgeoisie to guarantee its own existence. For this reason, Rêber Apo has repeatedly emphasized that a solution to the problems of the Middle East is much easier to achieve if the goal is not state-building. This is exactly the right philosophy, policy and strategy to push back and eventually defeat the monistic and genocidal mentality and the similarly constituted political understanding of the nation-state. It is necessary to abandon the view that the nation-state only needs to be modernized, but is fundamentally progressive and necessary. This ideology is ultimately shaped by the nation-state mindset. It is the result of the understanding that one can save oneself from the genocidal mentality and politics that wants to destroy other nations by founding one's own nation-state. Although it may seem correct at first glance, this is an attitude whose result serves the false, genocidal nation-state understanding and the system that goes along with it. In this context, it is important to know that the states in the Middle East justify their genocidal policies by saying that the Kurds want to "establish their own state". It is not right to define the nation-state as an ideology and a legitimate goal just because others have also built their own nation-state. Our task is to name what is right and fight against what is wrong. Rêber Apo is trying to do just that: to liberate all peoples, including the Kurds, from the nation-state ideology and the hopeless situation it has created.
Democratic Modernity defends the right of every people and nation to the system of democratic autonomy, which is based on a democratic-confederal social system and can take different forms. This is the best solution for all peoples, including the Kurds. This is the model that offers the Kurdish people the broadest possible unity in the Middle East. Insisting on the nation-state means nothing else than leaving 80% of the Kurds in the genocide mill of the other nation-states and allowing a small circle of Kurdish rulers to establish their authority and provide them with a territory and a society to exploit. Of course, leaving 80% of Kurdish society and geography to the genocidal system of nation-states cannot be an expression of proper Kurdish identity, love of homeland and democratic attitude. Currently, there are some voices in Rojava - supported by the KDP - that advocate an understanding and policy of handing over most of Rojava to the Syrian genocidal system and working towards a Kurdish government that controls only the oil-rich regions of Rojava. The representatives of this way of thinking collaborated with the enemy of the Kurds in Efrîn and Serêkaniyê. The Kurdish population outside the oil-rich regions around Dêrik and Rimêlan is of no concern to the adherents of this mentality and policy. For them it is no problem to occupy all these areas and to expel the Kurdish population there! It is obvious that this attitude is a big mistake, even a betrayal. Because the representatives of this mindset would not even be able to defend Dêrik and Rimêlan.
It is important to see that the US and Europe legitimize and normalize the genocidal policies and the resulting actions of the various genocidal and colonialist powers - especially Turkey. It is the U.S. and Europe that view the PKK and the Kurds separately and put bounties on PKK leadership members. By claiming that the PKK and the Kurds are separable, they hide their support for the policies of the genocidal forces. On the basis of this very claim, they support the genocidal policy of the Turkish state. By giving the impression, just like the Turkish state, that they are not against the Kurdish people, but against the PKK, they conceal their own policy, which encourages the genocide of the Kurds. Thus, they try to present themselves as supporters and friends of the Kurds. It is absolutely necessary to expose this understanding and policy before the eyes of the whole world.
Whoever seeks to separate the PKK from the Kurdish people serves the genocidal, colonialist Turkish state and is a supporter and partner of Turkey's genocidal policies. The PKK has helped the Kurds to gain a place among the peoples of the world, has put them on the stage of history on the basis of their own identity and culture, and has gained them recognition. If the foundation for the PKK's emergence had not been laid in 1973 and if it had not waged a struggle that has now lasted almost half a century, there would be no Kurdish people and Kurdistan today, nor would there be the KDP, the PUK (Patriotic Union of Kurdistan) or any other Kurdish political forces. They are all standing on both feet today. But they imagine that they can stand on their feet even without the PKK, as they do at present. There is no doubt that the people of South Kurdistan have also made great sacrifices. Their political forces have made certain efforts and struggled throughout history. However, if the PKK had not entered the historical stage, they would have experienced all the defeats and would not have recovered. The birth of the PKK in 1973 played an important role in ensuring that South Kurdistan did not meet such a fate. If the Kurdish people are alive and are standing on their own feet everywhere today, who can deny the PKK's role in this? In this sense, to consider the PKK and the Kurds as separate from each other is to deny the existence of the Kurdish people. Not to mention the national, social, cultural and political results achieved by the PKK; nothing worse can be done to the Kurds than to claim that they and the PKK do not belong together. This means presenting it as normal and legitimate for Turkey to pursue its genocidal policy and, on top of that, supporting its claims. In this sense, all those who see the PKK and the Kurds as separate from each other are openly hostile to the Kurds.
KDP Policy: Basis for the War against the PKK and the Pressure on North Kurdistan and Rojava
Without a doubt, the KDP is the force most concerned with advancing, legitimizing and presenting as normal this policy of separating the PKK from the Kurdish people. Without the KDP portraying itself as the sole representative of the Kurds, supporting all those who call the PKK "terrorist" and portraying Turkey as the enemy not of the Kurdish people but of the PKK, Europe and the U.S. could not support the genocidal policies of the Turkish state either by portraying the PKK and the Kurdish people as separate. Because the KDP supports Turkey's claim that its war is not against the Kurds but against the PKK, the U.S. and Europe also portray Turkey's attacks exclusively as attacks against the PKK. Turkey itself always claims that it is not against the Kurdish people because it has relations with the KDP. Thus, it uses these relations as an argument to normalize and continue its genocidal policy.
If the KDP did not present Turkey's claims as normal and legitimate and did not describe the PKK with Turkey's words and arguments, the USA and Europe would not be able to support Turkey so openly in its war against the PKK. In this sense, it is the KDP that creates a basis for the war against the PKK, but also for the pressure on the people of North Kurdistan and Rojava. It is necessary that we clearly see these results of the KDP policy. If we did not do so, we would simply be ignoring facts. Without taking these facts into consideration, neither the hostility of the USA and Europe towards the PKK, nor Turkey's genocide and war policy could be fully understood.
Both the listing of the PKK as a terrorist organization and the bounty for three of its leading members constitute direct support for the Turkish state's war policy. Thus, Turkey can legitimize any of its attacks by claiming that it is fighting terrorism. The European Union placed the PKK on its list of terrorist organizations in 2002. The PKK was thus declared a terrorist organization by the EU at a time when the guerrilla had declared a unilateral cease-fire and had withdrawn most of its forces from areas within Turkey's national borders. The U.S. decision to place a bounty on the heads of three leading PKK members came at the same time as the Turkish state was intensifying its genocidal policies in North Kurdistan. This clearly shows that the decision of November 6, 2018 pursues exactly the same goals as during the international plot against our leader Abdullah Ocalan in 1998. As in 1998, the U.S. again played the coordinating role. In this sense, the renewal of the measure against our three friends on April 20 this year is a plot and an attack of destruction against the PKK and the Kurdish people's struggle for freedom. Moreover, it is clearly a measure to save the fascist AKP/MHP government that is on the verge of collapse. Thus, during the phone call between Biden and Erdoğan on April 23, the green light was given for the annihilation attacks on the guerrilla. This is such a dirty policy that in return for supporting the genocide of the Kurds, the genocide of the Armenians was officially recognized as such by the United States. At the same time, by saying that this decision was made in order to prevent new genocides, the struggle and existence of the Kurds is being used as a means of threat and pressure against the Turkish state. Thus, the present dirty policy was put on display in all openness: The fact of a genocide is being recognized, which happened 100 years ago and therefore can no longer be prevented, and at the same time a currently ongoing genocide is supported. One could not act more immorally.
Against the backdrop of this very policy, the Turkish state is oppressing the Kurdish population of North Kurdistan in various ways and is occupying Rojava. As a result of this U.S. policy, the Turkish state has begun its occupation assault on the South Kurdish regions of Metîna, Zap and Avaşîn. It pursues the goal of weakening the guerrilla, surrounding them and thus forcing them to surrender. If one considers the current attacks in conjunction with the KDP's policies, it becomes clear that this is precisely the goal. This is exactly why the KDP is currently trying to encircle the guerrilla in many different areas.
U.S. and European support for Turkey's extermination attacks on the PKK has reached such a level that even Turkey's use of chemical weapons does not lead to protest. The use of Islamist mercenaries in the South Kurdish Medya Defense Zones, which Turkey had previously used in Syria, Libya and Armenia, is also met with silence. With the constantly repeated statement that Turkey has the right to defend itself, the current genocidal attacks are supported. On the one hand, this support is given to put an end to the PKK's struggle, as it is causing problems in these powers' relations with Turkey. On the other hand, they are angry that the paradigm developed by Rêber Apo has created an alternative to U.S. and EU policies, which has ensured that their "democratic mask" has fallen. The efforts of the US and the EU to suffocate the struggle for democracy led by the PKK along the lines of Rêber Apo's ideas have clearly shown that these powers do not care one bit about democracy and freedom. Their support for the genocide that Turkey is committing has shown everyone that Capitalist Modernity knows no values other than its own interests.
KDP Areas in South Kurdistan: Hundreds of MİT Agents Active on the Ground
Turkey's attacking frenzy is not surprising. In the end, the U.S. and Europe are also simply continuing their relations with Turkey, which have long been based on the genocide of the Kurds. Thus they sacrifice them for their policy of using the Turkish state for their own interests. But it is completely incomprehensible how the South Kurdish political forces - especially the KDP - can remain silent about the attacks of the Turkish state. The nature of South Kurdistan is being burnt and destroyed, but the South Kurdish government remains silent. It does not raise any protest against the attacks on the guerrilla as well as against the destruction of the nature of South Kurdistan. By keeping silent, it also pushes the population and the democratic institutions of South Kurdistan to silence. Thus, it tries to prevent protests of the population and the democratic forces against the occupation. This policy and attitude are the biggest support for the occupation policy and strengthen the attackers. So, people turn a blind eye to the foreseeable consequences of these attacks on South Kurdistan. Of course, the attacks are directed against the PKK and the guerrilla at the moment. They are the current target of the attacks. But not to see the intention behind this target means nothing else than not to see the Kurdophobic and genocidal character of the Turkish state. This genocidal policy affects all Kurds. That is why the PKK is fighting to defend all Kurds and the whole of Kurdistan. For this reason, it has called dozens of times on all Kurdish political forces to defend Kurdistan together. If this were to happen, the Turkish army - already in great trouble fighting the guerrilla - would have to flee all the areas it occupies in a single night. Such political support for the guerrilla's selfless resistance and Kurdish courage would bring about the defeat of the occupiers. But such an attitude on the part of the Kurdish political forces has so far failed to materialize.
Apart from our ideological and political differences, we have not taken a position against the KDP in any form. However, the KDP has clearly taken an anti-PKK position due to its relations with Turkey and other forces. Our biggest struggle and war is directed against the Turkish state. Because it is the driving force behind the hostility against Kurds and wants to commit genocide against all Kurds. Its actions in North Kurdistan and Rojava correspond exactly to this policy and goal. However, the KDP continues to maintain very close relations with Turkey. While Turkey has certain problems even with its closest allies, the KDP is the political force with which the country has the best relations. It is obvious that this circumstance is rooted in the common PKK hostility. This is because the Turkish state develops all its relations on the basis of its hostility towards the PKK. Its conflicts also stem from its attitude towards the PKK and the Kurds. Turkey experiences conflicts from time to time even with the USA and Europe because of its policy towards the PKK and the Kurds. But there are no problems with the KDP. Because the KDP pursues a policy towards the PKK and the Kurdish population in North Kurdistan and Rojava, with which Turkey is very satisfied. And much more: The MIT [Turkish intelligence service] is basically operating unhindered in the areas controlled by the KDP. Hundreds of agents are active in the KDP areas, working together with the MIT. Their task is to locate guerrilla positions and report them to the Turkish state. If the KDP considered it a criminal offense to collaborate with the MIT and the Turkish state and to to assassinate members of the guerrilla, punished such actions, and convicted perpetrators, not a single MİT agent would remain in these areas. But instead, the KDP's relations with Turkey and its anti-PKK policy open the door to the organization of agents in the South Kurdish region of Behdînan. As a result of these spy networks, hundreds of guerrilla fighters and commanders have been murdered. It is not necessary to elaborate on and evaluate this fact any further.
In this context, we turn to the Kurdish society with a clear call: It must not tolerate these agents among themselves. In all relations and conversations such activities must be labeled clearly as a betrayal of the Kurdish people. All families and their environments must be educated accordingly. People who collaborate with Turkey must be considered as seriously guilty by the society. Not accepting them in society must become social culture. The Kurdish imams must give appropriate sermons in the mosques for this purpose. They must ensure that society takes a stand against the intelligence structures and the individual agents. Educating society in this regard is an important moral task. The patriotic imams have an important role to play in this regard because of their central role in the development of social morality. It is superfluous to describe the attitude of Kurdish politicians. Patriotic democratic politics must take a clear stand against these individuals and structures.
Everyone Can and Must Do Something Against the Occupation
For more than two months, the guerrilla has been putting up a selfless resistance. It is making great sacrifices to defend the Kurds and the democratic forces against the Turkish state and its planned genocide. The guerrilla will continue to play this role in the future. The HPG Press Center publishes the details of the guerrilla's selfless resistance on a daily basis. But to leave the resistance to the guerrilla alone would be a historic mistake. The current operation is not an ordinary attack. For this attack aims to push back the Kurdish people's struggle piece by piece, thereby making the genocide of the Kurds possible. With the attacks against the PKK the existence of the Kurdish people is being attacked. Accordingly, the current attacks are comprehensive, aggressive and dangerous. Not recognizing this means nothing else than being blind and deaf to the true character of the Turkish state. Kurdistan and the Kurdish people are at the center of the currently prevailing Third World War. Accordingly, they are facing unprecedented dangers. This is not an ordinary danger. A genocidal attack is taking place against them, which directly threatens the existence of the Kurds. The Turkish state's constantly repeats its statement that it will fight "until there is not a single terrorist left". This must be understood as "until there is not a single Kurd left who defends his identity and demands freedom". With regard to Rojava, there was initial talk of "not allowing a Kurdish corridor". This formulation was later reworded in the context of the special warfare and to deceive the international public, and it was said that one would "not tolerate a terror corridor". It was against this background that the various Turkish occupation attacks on Syria took place. This shows that all the attacks of the Turkish state are genocidal attacks and are directed against the existence of the Kurds. The genocidal and colonialist Turkish state does not tolerate a single Kurdish achievement. The relations with the KDP and some other forces only serve to legitimize Turkey's war against the PKK. The KDP, the South Kurdish politicians and the people of South Kurdistan know best what Turkey's attitude and role was after the 2017 referendum and the Iraqi operation against Kerkûk.
Against such an attack, which is directed against the Kurdish existence, the entire Kurdish people must resort to resistance. In all parts of Kurdistan and in the diaspora, not a single Kurdish political structure, institution, nor the people must watch the resistance without getting involved. All of them, filled with the spirit of national defense, must find their place in this resistance. There is no doubt that the current war is directed against the PKK and the whole guerrilla and PKK structures are resisting against it. At present, the attitude and resistance of the Kurdish people are still insufficient. Many circles seem to be mistaken, which realistically amounts to waiting until the attacks are directed against them as well. It is imperative that this attitude come to an end. Everyone can and must do something against the occupation. The Kurds, the most political people in this world, can form small units everywhere and attack the Turkish state. Millions of Kurds live in North Kurdistan and the major cities. Our people living there can form hundreds of self-defense units and make the enemy a target. Thousands of very valuable patriots who can naturally take a leadership role are among the Kurdish people. They must take responsibility and participate in the resistance without hesitation. Some actions and protest are taking place in North Kurdistan and Turkey, but this is not enough. There are thousands of targets that are in line with the policy of our Freedom Movement. They can all be attacked in a way that is in line with the line of struggle of our Freedom Movement and does not harm the local population. The self-established small units can attack these targets and thus put the Turkish state in a completely hopeless situation. Even though the PKK and the guerrilla are currently at the center of this war, it is a war of the entire Kurdish people and all its political forces. All Kurds who do not understand the war in this way are committing a historical mistake. They will regret their present attitude later. We emphasize the scale of this attack and danger so strongly to overcome such a mistake and misconception.
The following fact is well proven: Those who fight with each other know each other very well. The Kurdish people have been facing a genocidal state for at least 100 years and have been resisting to protect their own existence. Moreover, for half a century, an intense struggle has been taking place under the leadership of Rêber Apo. In the course of this struggle, Rêber Apo and the PKK have come to know the nature of the Turkish state very well. It is a great advantage for the fighters that they know their enemy so well. Thus, it is Rêber Apo and the PKK who know the Turkish state best. Therefore, when it comes to the Turkish state, everyone must take the analyses and predictions of Rêber Apo and the PKK very seriously. Those who are fighting daily against this state, which is waging a special war against its own people and the whole world, know this state best. This struggle has already revealed the true face of the Turkish state both inside Turkey and abroad. Everyone can see today on the basis of this fight in all clarity, what the Kurdish policy of the Turkish state is like.
This article was first published in the July/August 2021 edition of the Kurdistan Report.