THE present round of negotiations for collective wage agreements in Turkey involves nearly half a million workers in public enterprises. Some 100,00 metalworkers are already on strike and are soon to be joined by 100,000 textile workers. But it is the miners of Zonguldak that have been at the forefront of working class combativity. FUAT ORÇUN S EVERAL factors have been fuelling militancy. Firstly the system established after the 1980 coup d'état is slowly but crumbling. President Turgut Özal's Motherland Party (ANAP) won the 1983 legislative elections with 45% of the votes. In 1987 it got two thirds of the seats, but only 36% of the votes, while in the municipal elections of March 1989 its score was down to 21% (see IV 166, June 26, 1989).
But, rather than making the slightest concession to the appeals for legislative elections, the then Prime Minister Özal had himself elected president by his parliamentary majority. Özal has concentrated so much power into his own hands that institutional reform is blocked.
The workers, meanwhile, in the absence of independent forms of political expression, are totally outside the political system, at a time when both the debates on the Kurdish question and the strikes of spring 1989 showed the growth of social discontent, sharpened by the catastrophic results of ten years of economic liberalism.
Wages have fallen by a half and the rate of unionization has stayed at around 11% - in 1980 there were about 5.7 million trade unionists, but only 1.7 million in 1985, rising to 1.9 million in 1990. It would be too much to say that the past decade has seen the creation of a new working class, such as that which carried through the Brazilian economic miracle". Even so, given their economic situation and awareness of the declining credibility of the regime, Turkish workers are determined not to accept further wage cuts.
Furthermore the actions of May 1989 saw a change in attitudes and in union personnel. A number of union leaderships passed into the hands of more militant elements, near to social democratic ideas. This has been the case with Genel Maden-Is, the General
Mining Union, affiliated to the right0 wing Türk-Is confederation.
The Gulf crisis has aggravated the situation. Pushed along by Ozal, Turkey has been dragged into playing an active military role in the crisis. However, the president is about the only person in the country who wants this war, which is supported neither by the workers, the bourgeoisie, nor the army high command itself. The crisis has given a further upward twist to inflation, while the oil producing countries, and notably Iraq, are among Turkey's main trading partners. And all this puts the workers in an even more insecure position.
Zonguldak is a city of 1.1 million people, isolated on the shores of the Black Sea. Its whole social and cultural life are centred on the mines. This is a peculiarly favourable situation for militant trade unionism. The new leadership of Genel Maden-Is, and its president, Semsi Denizer — nicknamed the "Turkish Walesa" — have taken full advantage of this to oust the old union leadership which was isolated from its base.
Fall in mining profits
Zonguldak was the fifth largest city of Turkey in 1975, but is now somewhere below the 20th largest. The reason for its decline is the fall in the profitability of the mines. And this is also the main reason used by the government to reject the workers' wage demands. They have threatened to close the mines, arguing that it is cheaper to import coal. And, in fact, imported coal - mainly from South Africa - costs $50-60 a tonne while that of Zonguldak sells at $80, its cost price being $130 a tonne. The mines thus operate at a loss, since state subsidies have been abolished ( Germany and France, for example, subsidize their coal by $72 and $69 a tonne respectively).
Thus the conflict in the mines is more than just a wage struggle. The miners want more than just a rise; they want a decent wage, giving them back the standard of living they enjoyed ten years ago before the military coup.
It is the government, however, accustomed to meeting no serious opposition, which has been responsible for the symbolic significance which the miners 11 struggle has assumed. Özal thought that,
February 4, 1991 • #199 Internations! Viewpoint
TURKEY by threatening, on television, to shut the mines, and using the war hysteria, he could settle for a pittance, while buying off the union leaders in the usual way. But the miners were determined and their leaders were not for sale.
A three-day warning strike involving 44,000 miners was the first step. The union demanded the resumption of negotiations, and the government replied with threats. Notification of the strike was given for November 30, when 48,000 miners went on strike, supported by 24,000 other workers deprived of the right to strike. Zonguldak was abuzz. For a whole month dozens of meetings and demonstrations were taking place with miners, their families, shopkeepers, officials and even pawnbrokers.
The demonstrations were organized by ad hoc committees set up by the unions, while the strike itself was organized through strike committees. Ozal's threats only served to further radicalize the struggle, although the national television maintained a news blackout on the strike.
The struggle became one between the miners and Ozal, and the former decided to organize a march on the presidential palace in Ankara. Faced with this radicalizátion, the Türk-Is union confederation was obliged to support the miners. It called on December 20, 1990 for a day of "general unemployment" on January 3 or two weeks after (the formula of "voluntary non-paid unemployment" was a way round the constitution and laws which forbid general strikes and sympathy strikes).
Union leader joins military government
The Türk-Is trade union was founded just after the Second World War on the US model and with the support of US unions. It has always been connected with the regime, and was the main rival of the progressive DISK confederation in the 1970s. After the 1980 coup, the Türk-Is' secretary general, Sadik Side hecame labour minister in the first miler govemment. Sevket Yalmaz, its p. ent at that time, and still in place, is known to be close to the ex-prime minister Demirel and his Party of the Just Way (DYP -the right wing opposition).
It is thus somewhat ironic that Türk-Is, under pressure from below, found itself calling actions to force the government into negotiations. At the same time this was a manoeuvre since it involved postponing the march on Ankara.
Türk-Is was above all frightened by the prospect of a massive and uncontrolled extension of the struggle since, just after the miners' collective agreement, those of other groups organized by Türk-Is were up for negotiation. The rises demanded by the miners were nearly three times 12 those being put forward by the right wing • unions in Türk-Is.
In any case, the miners postponed their march to January 4, and the day of action went ahead on January 3, despite threats from the government and bosses. Depending on the source, participation was between 60 and 90% - a success, particularly given that nothing like this has been attempted for 10 years.
Dozens of buses carrying miners from Zonguldak to Ankara were stopped by the army and police. The miners then decided - in the middle of winter - to walk the 280 kms to Ankara.
The Türk-Is president, Sevket Yilmaz, called on the miners' leader to abandon the march. The latter replied: "When we say that Özal bears the main responsibility for the past ten years, we must add that Sevket Yilmaz also fully shares that responsibility. He has nothing to offer the working class. He is even one of its chief obstacles... His mentality is that of the government."
From 80,000 to 120,000 workers then took the road, although the government had declared their action illegal. The cortege contained women and men, people from Zonguldak and the surrounding area. It was the biggest march in the history of the Turkish workers' movement. Need to overcome the legacy of dictatorship
As Semsi Denizer put it: "We must above all put an end to the fear that has been instilled in us by the repressive region of September 12, 1980. People must be made to raise their heads, and see the realities of Turkey today.... We have tried to practice up-to-date democracy with all its institutions and practices."
Their first stop was a small town of 15,000 inhabitants. Here the whole population came out to greet and provide for the miners. Food coming from the surrounding area and the capital was fairly distributed. On the second and third days, the march was surrounded by the police and army. Then, finally, on the government's instructions, barricades were erected and the demonstrators' way blocked. Some 200 miners were arrested for trying to get across the barriers.
The march could go no further, but the miners refused to go back and negotiations began. Things came close to a clash with the soldiers when convoys carrying bread and blankets from Ankara were blocked.
Women from the mining community played a very important role. They were everywhere present, galvanizing the troops, lifting morale, organizing solidarity and marching in the front ranks. When Denizer suggested that they should go back to Zonguldak and await the outcome of negotiations, they refused indignantly: "Our place is with our friends. Nobody will be able to say that they died of cold!" They also launched the shout: "Soldier, are you going to shoot us down? We are
International Viewpoint #199 • February 4, 1991 not in Israel!"
On the fifth day, with negotiations promised, the miners, overcome by the cold, isolated and in the absence of any massive solidarity actions, were obliged to return to Zonguldak, but have not given up the fight: "we were not looking for a fight. We hoped that they would remove the barricades. But they seem to regard us as enemies.... If I had asked for it, we could have got through the barricades. We were 120,000, a crowd 6 kms in length. There were 45,000 miners in the front rank.... Faced with this danger I gave the order to retreat.... They would have shot us down.... It was too cold to stay and conduct a war of nerves.... It was hard, but we decided to go back home. Conditions in Turkey are not ripe for such an advance.... That would need united action by all the democratic forces; without that it is impossible to get over the barricades mounted against democracy." 2
The government has tried to profit from the Gulf crisis to drag out the negotiations. The miners fear that the government will order a state of war to suspend the strike.
Pressure for renewal in unions
Besides the wage negotiations, the strike in Zonguldak represents an important step to overcoming the legacy of the lost decade. In the unions, the renewal that started in spring 1989 is continuing. Nineteen out of the 32 Türk-Is unions are still in the hands of collaborators, but they are under pressure. The fact that Özal has stepped forward as the mouthpiece of the enterprise management has had an impact on the workers. In the last legislative elections the two social democratic parties got 43% of the vote in Zonguldak, and social democratic deputies and even the rightist DYP took part in the march, while town halls controlled by the former have given practical support.
A number of legal obstacles have been brushed aside in action. Even the bosses confederation has spoken out against legal attacks on the workers and demanded an overall solution to the wage problem.
The coming months will show if the march on Ankara was a harbinger of a fundamental change. As the miner's leader Semsi Denizer said, "The working class must above all be united, for its interests are the same. Our rights will not be decreed by the leaders. We cannot expect that anywhere in the world. We have to win them by our own efforts. Obviously that involves risks; we must be ready to take them. The resistance in Zonguldak will be the best of examples" 3* 1. Interview with Semsi Denizer in the daily Cunhuriyet, January 13, 1991. 2. Semsi Denizer, Milliyet, January 13, 1991. 3. Declaration at the end of the march on January 9, 1991.
ALGERIA