Cemil Bayık, Co-Chair of the Kurdistan Democratic Communities Union (KCK)
Based on Abdullah Öcalan’s conception of history, which goes beyond the statist (1) paradigm and looks at historical developments from the perspective of a socialist paradigm, Cemil Bayık analyses the current situation in the Middle East and in particular the Arab-Jewish question and uses it to develop perspectives.
Part 1
As the globalisation of capital increases, all places with human populations become important to the forces of capitalist modernity. This is one of the main reasons why the contradictions and rivalries in Asia and the Pacific have increased in recent years. Because today the capitalist system grows and develops through consumption. That is why today’s world is called a consumer society, which is a correct term. The system of capitalist modernity has reached the stage of a consumer society. Thanks to the development of science and technology, the problem of production has already been solved: everything imaginable can be produced. However, this does not mean that the problems have been solved. On the contrary, we are in a phase in which the problems are particularly great. This is because the system of capitalist modernity is still dominant. The existence of capitalist modernity prevents the problems from being solved. On the other hand, the fact that consumption has become the main means of capital has led to the problems being shifted to the outside of people and society. This manifests itself in the destruction of nature, the destruction of ecology and the increasingly uninhabitable state of our planet. When the main goal was consumption itself, everything, including nature, became more and more objectified. Abdullah Öcalan (2) has stated that the system of civilisation, which has developed through the separation of subject and object and the deepening of the difference between them, has reached its maximum depth in the system of capitalist modernity and will gradually reach a stage where even the subject is objectified. We are now experiencing such a stage. This is naturally reflected in more contradictions, competition, conflicts and wars. This is happening in the form of the Third World War (3). Because contradictions are not local or regional, but universal. The respective contradiction arises from the system itself.
The most modern navy in the world is in the Middle East
Since the system exists everywhere, contradictions and states of war have been carried everywhere. Undoubtedly, these contradictions are played out through certain centres. One of these centres is the Middle East. It has been an important centre since ancient times. Therefore, the region was also one of the centres of contradictions and conflicts. It still holds this position today. The increase in contradictions and rivalries in other places such as Asia in the consumer society phase does not mean that the importance of the Middle East has diminished. On the contrary, it has increased. The recent developments in the Middle East are also important in that they highlight the fallacy of such a discussion.
Abdullah Öcalan has already stated that all contradictions and conflicts today fall within the realm of the Third World War. This is best illustrated by recent developments in the Middle East. If this were not the case, the most modern war systems in the world would not have been brought to this region. The most modern war fleet in the world is currently in the Middle East.
When the developments in Palestine became apparent, the USA brought its largest warship to the region. It is rumoured that the second ship will also be brought there. It is also rumoured that the United Kingdom will bring its naval fleet to the region. The largest US warship means the largest naval fleet in the world. That means a serious war posture. It would be wrong to say that this only applies to Israel’s war against Gaza and Hamas. There is no doubt that Israel’s existence and security are very important to the USA and NATO. Even if it is only for this reason, there is nevertheless an attitude to war that could be followed by action. However, the existence and security of the State of Israel is a regional issue. It concerns not only the area on which it was established, but the entire Middle East.
The founding of the state of Israel, which led to a renewed escalation of the historical Arab-Jewish question and the emergence of the Palestinian question, is closely linked to the Middle East policy of the forces of capitalist modernity. For one of the cornerstones of the established order in the Middle East is the existence and security of the state of Israel. One result of this order is the Palestinian question. Because of this situation, the Palestinian question is a question that affects the entire Middle East to this day.
The actions of Hamas on 7 October and the subsequent Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip and the region have reconfirmed this fact. It is not yet clear how these developments will turn out.
Now everyone is discussing it and trying to predict how events will turn out or develop. There is no doubt that it is difficult to predict at the moment. We don’t know whether it will be an escalating war or a series of conflicts with defined borders. However, the deepening contradictions between the forces of capitalist modernity and the deepening crisis of the system show that developments will take place within the framework of the Third World War.
This is also reflected in the attitudes that are expressed. On the other hand, the development is not only to be observed in the Middle East. Developments in other parts of the world are also heading in this direction.
The war in Ukraine is an example of this. With Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, the Third World War has left the borders of the Middle East for the first time. However, current developments indicate that the centre of the war will once again be the Middle East. In fact, it has always been the centre of war, without interruption. In Kurdistan and Palestine, there has been uninterrupted war for a hundred years. The whole region has always been a battleground for the Kurdish and Palestinian question. What is new now is that capitalist modernity has reached the stage of consumer society and its consequences are coming to light. The most important conclusion we must draw from this is that the Third World War is intensifying in the Middle East as well as in other parts of the world and that future developments will take place on this basis.
For the Kurdish and Palestinian issues, just as for the Jewish people, a real and lasting solution is important
One of the main pillars of the existing order in the Middle East is undoubtedly the policy based on the genocide of the Kurds. This reality must be taken into account when analysing the Palestinian question, the order in the Middle East and the new developments. Otherwise, one cannot properly understand the origin of the problems, the nature of the developments and thus the results that will emerge. The order imposed in Kurdistan and Palestine is an expression of the order established in the Middle East. This is based on the genocide of both peoples. Therefore, the positive and negative developments in Kurdistan and Palestine have an impact on the entire region. While the struggle of the two peoples and their striving for freedom shake the genocidal, colonialist order in the Middle East, the prevailing “order” strengthens it. And likewise, the existence and the question of the Jewish people is a reality in the Middle East. This is also an important fact of the region. The existence and the question of the Jewish people cannot be ignored or denied.
The change of the order that has emerged in the Middle East, which is based on the interests of capitalist modernity, can only be achieved in this way: a process on a democratic basis with the overcoming of the relations of domination and exploitation and the enabling of a free and equal coexistence of the peoples. It is important to look at the Kurdish, Arab and Jewish question from such a perspective. All other approaches are absolutely wrong and incomplete. Arab nationalism (in the context of anti-Semitism) sees the problem in the return of the Jews to the Middle East, while Jewish nationalism (Zionism) sees the problem in the existence of the Arabs: For some to exist, the others must disappear. This is a completely wrong approach. These approaches, which are the result of nationalism and a nation-statist mentality, have only deepened the problems to this day. These approaches are the reason for all the painful losses. At the same time, this approach, which has developed as a result of the statist mentality and its nation-state variant, is presented as the only option. But in reality, it is not the only option for the peoples. Such a historical reading is completely wrong and unfounded. It is only right that neither the return of the Jews to the Middle East nor the existence of the Palestinians is the problem. By going to the roots of history, Abdullah Öcalan has uncovered the reality that underlies all issues, including the Arab-Jewish question, in their historical development. This new reading of history developed by Abdullah Öcalan is extremely scientific. It has a quality that correctly reveals social reality. Abdullah Öcalan’s new conception of history, which goes beyond the statist paradigm and looks at historical developments from the perspective of a socialist paradigm, is of the utmost importance for solving the problems in the Middle East.
The historical Arab-Jewish question arose as a result of the development of state civilisation. Even independently of each other, the Arab and Jewish questions are a result of state civilisation. Abdullah Öcalan dealt with this in detail in his consideration of the historical development. He has shown the connection with the contradiction between the Hurrians (4) and the Amurites (5) in history (6). These are important, and without knowing or taking them into account, it is not possible to understand the nature of today’s problems and offer a solution. Because then the consequence would be that no solutions can be developed for the problems and that they continue to worsen. One of the issues that has intensified as a result of this approach is the Arab-Jewish question. To date, there is no other approach to the Arab-Jewish question than the current view: The forces that oppose each other as enemies have agreed to solve the problem with the mentality of capitalist modernity and its nation-state understanding.
Nevertheless, both suffer from the mentality of capitalist modernity and its nation-state understanding. However, the Arab-Jewish question, which we encounter today as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, is based on the nation-state mentality and the nation-state approach. The approach of establishing nation-states in the old territories where Arabs and Jews live is the main cause of this problem. Without overcoming this approach, a solution to the problem will not be possible. Indeed, this is essential not only for the solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but also for the solution of all problems in the Middle East, especially the Kurdish question.
The emergence of the Palestinian question
Just like the emergence of the Kurdish question, the emergence of the Palestinian question is also a result of the Middle East policy of capitalist modernity. In the period before the First World War, the approach of the forces of capitalist modernity in the Middle East was to dismantle the Ottoman Empire and create dependent nation states. The Ottoman state’s alliance with Germany could not prevent the development of this process. After Germany’s defeat in the First World War, Great Britain and France reshaped the world and the Middle East. The influence and control of Great Britain in particular developed in the Middle East. The geography of the Middle East was fragmented as far as possible in the form of dependent states. Kurdistan was divided into four nation states and the Kurdish people were included in the series of genocides. This was the result of an agreement between the Turkish state and the forces of capitalist modernity. On the one hand, the Kurdish people were exposed to genocide; on the other, the Turkish, Persian and Arab nation states were made dependent. The forces of capitalist modernity considered this method suitable for asserting their interests. The extermination and liquidation of numerous peoples, such as the Armenians and Assyrians, also took place within this process. And the re-emergence of the Arab-Jewish question and the emergence of the Palestinian question are also results of this process. There is no doubt that each question has its own aspects. The return of the Jewish people to the Middle East in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and the process that followed should be seen in this light. With the development of capitalist modernity in Europe, pogroms and massacres against the Jewish people also increased. As a result, the Jews developed the idea of settling in the Middle East, which they regarded as their old land, and establishing their own state there. To overcome the obstacles to this endeavour, they enlisted the support of the forces of capitalist modernity. This was the main reason why the problematic situation arose. At that time, Britain tried to balance the dynamics in order to make the Middle East more dependent on itself. This is a classic method of the system of capitalist modernity and imperialism. In short, it is a policy of balance and divide and rule. It would not be wrong to say that Britain has exploited the situation of the Jewish people in its approach to the “Middle East” question and the Arab question. The approach of the forces of capitalist modernity is based on the relationship of interests, and Britain acted in this spirit at the time.
There is certainly also a reason that involves broader issues. For example, Britain feared that the US would support Germany in the war because the Jews who had fled to America from the pogroms in Russia had established relationships with the US. To prevent this, Great Britain began to come to terms with those Jews with whom it had contact and to take a greater interest in the Jewish cause. This was because Russia sided with Great Britain against Germany in the First World War. During this time, Russia was the place where pogroms against Jews occurred most frequently. In the end, the feared scenario did not materialise and Great Britain was the victor of the war. The October Revolution developed in Russia.
Later, however, the Jewish population was mainly exposed to massacres and genocide under the Nazis. As a result, there was an increased immigration of Jews to the Middle East.
With all these processes, Arab-Jewish contradictions and conflicts have also increased. With the founding of the nation state of Israel, this conflict has intensified and deepened to this day.
The flight of the Jewish people from the pogroms in Europe to the Middle East was indeed a correct and necessary step. For in the Middle East, the Jewish community will come into contact with itself and ensure its development. Outside the Middle East, it is not possible for the Jewish people to develop as a society and secure its existence. Abdullah Öcalan explains this in a historical, social and current analysis.
However, the fact that the return of the Jewish people to the Middle East was conceived with a nation-state mentality and the process was to be carried out accordingly led to the opposite results. In addition to the nation-state mentality, the presence of historical religious and even tribalist perceptions has further deepened the contradiction. This has led to a situation that is even more dangerous than before, not to mention the fact that the Jewish people must overcome the issue of its existence and create the conditions that will ensure its development. The process can be summarised as follows: The history of the Jewish people and the development of the genocide that the Palestinian people are facing today are an example of results of designs made with an statist mentality. Because the situation is extremely painful. The Jewish people came to the Middle East, to the land of Palestine, because of the massacres they were subjected to in Europe. The reason why the Jews were subjected to massacres that led to genocide is state civilisation in the form of capitalist modernity and the understanding of the nation state. However, due to the same mentality, the Palestinian people are exposed to massacres and genocide. This situation is indeed an example from which lessons should be learnt. There is probably no other historical event that is as exemplary and instructive as this one.
The nation-state approach exacerbates the problems
The fact that problems cannot be solved with the nation-state model, but are exacerbated, is best illustrated by the Arab-Jewish question, the emergence of the Kurdish question and the fact that these issues remain unresolved. This is also a result of the nation-state approach, just as other problems in the Middle East are based on this very approach. Since it could not be overcome in the Middle East, it has not been possible to solve the problems. Almost none of the problems have been solved and no developments have been set in motion to solve them. As the Israeli-Palestinian conflict shows, there are serious problems that could plunge the entire region into war at any time. The same applies to the Kurdish question. The genocidal, colonialist and nation-state mentality of the Turkish state against the Kurds and its corresponding policies are linked to conflicts, war and genocide in the Middle East. This situation shows that in reality there is no development and that what is called development is purely formal and not real. Moreover, the constant interference of the powers of capitalist modernity in the Middle East, their organisation and management of the Middle East according to their interests, is also due to this mentality. It was the forces of capitalist modernity that designed the Middle East on the basis of nation states. This system still exists. If there has been a change, it has been in the form of US and NATO intervention in some regimes based on the needs of the global capital system. This is not a qualitative change. National-statism continues to dominate thinking and policy in the Middle East.
The role of the nation-state approach in the current phase of the Palestinian question is crucial. Arab nationalism against Jewish nationalism has not only failed to solve the problem, it has actually exacerbated it. It has gone so far as to adopt a fanatical stance on the one hand, while on the other it can adopt the opposite stance when conditions change. The fact that the Arab nation states have not always stood up for the cause of the Palestinian people has hurt the Palestinian cause the most, especially at the beginning of the conflict. With the official establishment of the State of Israel, the Arab nation states adopted a radical stance towards Israel. Over time, however, opposition to Israel and the Palestinian cause have taken a political form.
With the coming to power of Nasserism (7) and later the Baath parties (8) in Syria and Iraq, the Israeli question and the Palestinian cause became a political rivalry. This approach of the Arab nation states also prevented or hindered the independent development of the Palestinian movement. A generalised approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is undoubtedly wrong. In order to understand the truth, it is important to look at events and phenomena in their historical development, their contexts and interconnections. However, this should not be done in such a way that everything is equalised. It is the mentality and policies of the Israeli state that have created the Palestinian question. Just like the Turkish state, the Israeli state also suffers from a genocidal mentality. The Israeli state deals with the Palestinian people in the same way as the Turkish state deals with the Kurdish people. The Turkish state builds its existence on the Kurdish genocide. In the same way, the Israeli state has built its existence on the genocide and annihilation of the Palestinian people. The approach based on Arab nationalism has reinforced this mentality. These two nationalisms have fuelled each other.
Jewish nationalism stipulates that Palestine belongs entirely to Israel and for this purpose the Arabs must be eliminated; Arab nationalism envisages the establishment of Arab sovereignty in Palestine and that Israel must be destroyed for this purpose. These two nation-state approaches, characterized by traditional nationalism and religion, have rendered the issue unresolvable given the escalation of the conflict and the genocide of the Palestinian people. The failure of the Arab nation-states to truly embrace the Palestinian cause and find a solution to the problem initially had a positive impact on the development of the Palestinian movement. After the defeat of the Arab nation-states by Israel in 1967, the Palestinian movement began to strengthen and fight for the liberation of the Palestinian people by truly embracing the Palestinian cause. Since then, the struggle of the Palestinian people has grown stronger and is recognized throughout the world. The Palestinian movement and the struggle of the Palestinian people have been supported by the peoples of the Middle East and around the world.
Many people from the Middle East and the world have joined the fight for the cause of the Palestinian people in the ranks of the Palestinian movement. Support for the Palestinian cause in the region and in the world undoubtedly rests on the fact that the Palestinian movement has a socialist perspective. It received support from many socialist countries and movements, especially the Soviets. As is known, the PKK also traveled to the areas where the Palestinian movement was present and carried out actions in solidarity with the Palestinian movement. During this time, the PKK, which had just completed its formative phase, fought on the front line during the Israeli attack on Beirut, and as a guerrilla movement it suffered its first casualties here. These relationships forged by the Kurdish freedom movement have enabled the peoples of Palestine and Kurdistan to stand in solidarity with each other to this day.
This article is part of the Palestine Series which is a digital series of articles focusing on the Palestinian question. Part 2 of this article and more upcoming articles will be published on the website. Follow us on X and Instagram to keep updated.
References
1. Statism refers to a political assumption according to which economic, social or ecological problems can be overcome through government action.
2. Abdullah Öcalan, leader of the PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party), in solitary confinement in Turkey since 1999
3. “Towards a common fight for peace”, KR 224, p. 41 ff.
4. The Hurrians were in the 3rd and 2nd millenniums B.C. BC settled on the border with northern Mesopotamia.
5. The Amurrites were an ancient Semitic-speaking people from the Near East. They are mainly found in the area of the middle Euphrates.
6. This is about the contradiction and conflicts between sedentary peoples in city states and nomadic peoples. See Abdullah Öcalan's comments on the early history of the Middle East in various of his books.
7. Gamal Abdel Nasser's (Prime Minister of Egypt from 1952-54) version of the idea of a unified Arab nation from the Atlantic to the Persian Gulf is known as Nasserism.
8. The ideology of Baathism combines nationalist pan-Arabism and revolutionary secularism with the elements of Arab socialism.
