Political Context of Öcalan’s Call
It is not often today that a socialist people’s movement makes the front pages of the world’s media. On February 27, Abdullah Öcalan, the leader of the Kurdish freedom movement, shared a two-page letter with the people and the world, which certainly reached the headlines of all major media worldwide. But more importantly, it was a call that has the potential to move politics in the Middle East and the world in a long-awaited positive direction.
The short but important letter contained several highlights that have been intensely debated in recent weeks. Among them is the dissolution of one of the last surviving Cold War-era socialist parties, the PKK, and its laying down of arms. We will look at the political context that led to this call in an attempt to understand it, and we will look at the manifestos written by Öcalan from his prison cell on the island of Imrali to find the ideological basis for these proposals.
The current political situation in the Middle East
The statement that “we are currently living in the era of World War III” is hardly contradictory when we look at the scale and speed of events in the Middle East, with the fall of al-Assad, the rise of Trump and his new aggressive policies, the uprisings in Turkey against the imprisonment of CHP leader Imamoglu and the continuing genocidal war of Israel against the Palestinians in Gaza. The whole world is being reshaped by these events and a fundamental development is the emerging hegemonic role of Israel in the Middle East, acting as the strong arm of the USA in this region.
Turkey is in turmoil because its role in the Middle East and on the world stage is being questioned. During the First World War, the Ottoman Empire disintegrated and Turkey was given a temporary role as the guardian of Western hegemonic interests in the Middle East because it could play a role in controlling the Kurds. First through political arrangements made in the establishment of the Republic of Turkey, and later through a genocidal war against the Kurds that has now lasted for 100 years.
When the Zionist state of Israel was founded, it was not yet able to secure the interests of the Western hegemonic states, but much has happened since then. The Arab states have accepted Israel’s existence and even developed trade agreements with Israel, in effect turning their backs on the Palestinian people. The tentacles of Iran, first Hamas, then Hezbollah, and most recently the Syrian government under al-Assad, have been eliminated or severely weakened, leaving the field open for anti-Iranian and Western interests at the doorstep of the Islamic Republic. The war in Ukraine has made it impossible for China’s new Silk Road megaproject to be implemented as planned, and in fact has created a barrier of war and instability in Ukraine that has sabotaged these plans and enabled the U.S. and the leaders of capitalist modernity to resume their plans for the Middle East, which were interrupted mainly by the October Revolution of 1917.
The opportunities of the Third Wold War – The emergence of a democratic confederalism of the Middle East
If the war in Ukraine was a plan devised by capitalist modernity, under the leadership of NATO to sabotage the trade routes of China and the destruction of Gaza and Iran’s axis of power on the Mediterranean coast were part of a plan to secure the trade and energy routes of the USA, Israel and their Western allies, then the guerrilla resistance in the Zagros Mountains against the Turkish state was also part of the dynamics of this situation. The Turkish state was very motivated to develop an alternative route from the south of Iraq, through the mountains in the north, leading to Turkey, thus connecting the riches of the Arabian Peninsula with the markets in Europe. This would have put Turkey in a position of power, controlling the routes and making them important for the Western hegemonic states. The guerrilla resistance, which has lasted for 8 years of uninterrupted war, showed how a people without a state can change the course of global politics.
Capitalist modernity has no solutions for the peoples of the Middle East. After World War I, it tried by creating nation-states such as Syria and Iraq, then under the power structures of France and Britain. These fabricated states got out of control and out of the hands of the West. The 2003 attack on Iraq was an attempt to regain that control, this time under the leadership of the US and its allies, and Saddam was executed. Today they are trying to complete this project by removing al-Assad. But again, the only solution they can offer is a new kind of state, this time under the rule of a jihadist government led by the HTS. The peoples of the Middle East are wise enough to see the impending disaster that this will bring, and the massacre of the Alawites is only a sign of what will happen under such a rule.
The alternative in a very real sense is offered by the revolution in the DAANES, also known as Rojava. It has already proved capitalist modernity wrong by uniting Kurds, Arabs, Armenians and Syriacs in one system. And the people in the surrounding areas are very interested in what is going on. The Druze communities in southern Syria have expressed their support for DAANES and have shown signs of adopting similar confederal practices. The ideas of democratic confederalism are being practiced in Europe and in Abya Yala and other communities that have their own tradition of democratic confederalist forms of organizing are receiving and giving strength to the revolution of the Autonomous Administration in an ideological and solidary sense. The resistance of the people against the Turkish state and its paramilitary mercenaries, the SNA, at the Tishrin dam is only the result of a revolution that has lasted for more than 10 years and has touched millions of lives and is a proof of their ability to resist and the importance of the interconnection of struggles and this instills fear into the hearts of the leaders of capitalist modernity.
The way out for Turkey
As the vanguard of the attacks against the Kurdish freedom movement, Turkey is the most affected by the gains of this revolution. It can be seen how the Turkish state is shaking at its foundations and the recent uprisings in Turkey, where millions of people took to the streets to show their rejection of the AKP government, are just a sign of this.
Öcalan’s call for peace and a democratic society suggests to Turkey that it should change its ways and consider a real democratization of its system. Allow the people to live in mutual acceptance and peace. This is not only a call for Turkey to come to its senses, but also an act of offering them a way out of their own social crisis. Öcalan has proposed that the PKK should disband and lay down its arms, and Turkey has been unable to respond. The attacks in the mountains against the guerrillas have increased and when the opposition party CHP shows signs of negotiating peace with the PKK, the AKP turns to repression and imprisons the leading candidate of the CHP, Imamoglu. In the face of the changes, the Turkish government shows its inability to renew and find solutions. They are repeating their strategies and proving that they will perish if they continue like this.
The role of peace in the history of the movement
Is the call for peace in this political situation a call for surrender? To answer this question, it can be helpful to look at the history of the PKK’s peace efforts since its early years. It becomes clear that this is not a new philosophy, but rather a continuous effort to offer the Turkish state a way out of its crisis by building real peace.
The PKK is one of the few socialist parties that survived the Cold War and even managed to strive and grow in its aftermath. This is largely due to its ability to question the status quo, to question itself and to propose new and radical ways forward. This is not the first time that Öcalan has called on the PKK to make peace and lay down its arms.
Chronology of Peace Efforts
- 1993: PKK becomes a mass movement and first unilateral ceasefire begins – Turkey responds by attempting to assassinate Öcalan
- 1995: New unilateral ceasefire begins – Turkey continues attacks
- 1998: Turkey threatens to attack Syria if it doesn’t extradite Öcalan – he decides to leave the country
- 2000: 7th Congress – strategy for democratic political struggle is adopted
- 2002: 8th Congress – decision to dissolve the PKK
- 2004: Öcalan calls to stop armed campaign – Turkey continues its attacks – Kongra Gel decides to resume armed struggle as all political methods are blocked
- 2005: Congress decides to revive the PKK
- 2009: 6th unilateral ceasefire
- 2011: “Roadmap to Negotiations” presented by Öcalan at the request of Erdogan – there was no response, so Öcalan withdrew from negotiations
- 2013: Öcalan calls for guerrillas to withdraw from Bakur, Northern Kurdistan – Turkey continued attacks and withdrawal was halted – ISIS attacked Kobane with support from Turkey
- 2015 – present: Turkey has been bombing the guerrillas in the mountains and the DAANES continuously.
The call for peace and a democratic society has a strong foundation in the writings of Öcalan, and it is very relevant to the times we live in to examine some of these ideas.
Peace and democratic society in the paradigm of the Kurdish freedom movement
What kind of peace is Öcalan talking about when he suggests the PKK to lay down its arms? These pressing questions have been discussed in detail in the manifestos written by Öcalan. The question of peace and war is a question that is always at the center of revolutionary movements, but they also have a tendency to cling to war and make it almost their main identity, while a socialist movement should always be in search of opening the way to peace. In his work “Sociology of Freedom”, in the chapter “The Problem of Peace and Democracy in Society”, Öcalan mentions the peace-war conundrum in these words: “When a society can no longer create and run institutions that provide meaningful moral and political guidance, that society has succumbed to oppression and exploitation. It is in a state of war,” explaining that a society at war has failed in its historic effort to reconstruct its social fabric and become a society again and is in a state of war to regain the capacity for peace. He goes on to explain the relationship between peacemaking and a society’s ability to defend itself: “A state of war is nothing but the absence of peace. As such, only self-defense will make peace possible. A peace without self-defense can only be an expression of submission and slavery.”
It is also central to define what we mean by peace, Öcalan talks about the importance of the aspect of submission-dominance in defining what peace really is: “There are different parties to every peace and the complete dominance of one party over another does not and cannot mean peace. Moreover, the weapons will fall silent only when there is acceptance of the functioning of the moral and political institutions of society.” The manifests speak at length about the universal right of every being to defend its own existence, and this is true of every society. The need to lay down arms increases when there is a possibility to achieve respect for the existence of that society. And in the case of the Kurdish society, it has taken the step from total denial, 50 years ago, at the beginning of the history of the Kurdish freedom movement, to becoming a political subject that is on the agenda of all political forces in the world. It has proved its existence beyond any doubt and is ready to think about peace.
But peace is not peace if it comes with total submission as a price: ”Third, again regardless of the positions of the various sides, they agree to respect the moral (conscience) and political institutions of societies when addressing the problems underlying the conflict. This is the framework of what we call a “political solution.” A cease-fire that does not include a moral and political solution cannot be called peace.” This is a clue to the requirement to democratize Turkey in order to achieve real peace. If the Turkish state cannot accept the political institutions and the moral identity of the Kurdish people there is no basis for peace but if these changes are considered the road to a long lasting peace and a political solution is wide open. In conclusion Öcalan states: ”Democratic politics is a central issue for a principled peace. When society’s moral and political institutions are functioning, the natural outcome is the process of democratic politics. Those who want peace must understand that peace can only be attained if politics based on morality play a part.“
What is meant by democratic society?
In these following extracts from the 4th manifesto, in the chapter “How to live, what to do, where to start?” the questions necessary to define the life we want to live are posed. What is a democratic society? How will that society be possible if there is no vanguard party leading it? Öcalan embarks on these questions in these words: “The first joint answer to the questions “How to live?”, “What to do?” and “Where to start?” must come from within the system and on the basis of system opposition. However, system opposition from within the system requires behaving as a fighter for truth at the level of the ancient sages, where one puts one’s own life on the line at all times.” In this passage, Öcalan explains the reason why the PKK was founded at that time. The Kurdish people were on the verge of losing their culture and identity. There was a need for a concentrated group of cadres who could take the responsibility of saving this identity under the most difficult conditions, which was Turkey during the Cold War. But in the same answer as to why it was created, there is perhaps also the answer as to why Öcalan is proposing to dissolve it. The Kurdish people have proved their existence beyond any doubt. They have organized several revolutions, including the historic revolution of Rojava, which is now standing on its own feet. They have proved their ability to defend themselves on the ideological level as well as on the physical level.
The responsibility of how to live and what to do is now on the shoulders of society itself: “The truth struggle gains increasing importance and success when it is waged in every moment of life in all social areas, in communal-economic and ecological units, in democratic cities, at the local, regional, national and transnational level.” The revolution can not transform the system if it continues as the task of a chosen few, it has to transcend and reach all levels of life, existence and society.
