Kurdish gu leader spe The recent Kurdish rebellion in Turkey was led by the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK). Below we publish extracts from an interview with the PKK's leader, Abdullah Öcalan, which first appeared in 2000'e Dogru, the journal of the Socialist Party, a Turkish group of Maoist origin. DOCUMENT
AVE you planned an uprising for this spring? I must first of all make it clear that the PKK had not specially planned attacks which would plunge Turkey into turmoil in 1992. In reality our activities, which we have pursued in a systematic fashion for 20 years, have gained a new and specific acceleration in 1992 with the transition to a national army, the national awakening, and a firmer affirmation of the national will. All this could certainly be called an uprising or attack, but, and I am speaking in the broadest sense, there is an opportunity that one can seize in 1992.
This movement is led by the PKK and we arrive at Newroz (the Kurdish New Year) in spring in a strong 16 blows despite a very hard winter. y • position, without having suffered any gence of alternatives amongst the Kurdish people capable of building an alliance with the population of Western Turkey. And so it goes on.
Any escape from this vicious circle depends on the outcome of political struggles and differentiations amongst the Kurdish people. Whatever the judgements that could be made of the PKK and its acts, it undoubtediy represents a legitimate component of the Kurdish movement - the most important on the ground. It is necessary to support the struggle of the Kurdish nationalist movement.* 8. During a symbolic hunger strike in protests against the massacres of Newroz, a Kurdish nationalist mufti characterized Demirel as an "infidel". erilla aks must emphasize that 1992 should be considered an important year not only for the national liberation of the Kurdish people, but for the democratic liberation and independence of Turkey.
Our struggle had an impact, albeit indirect, on the coming to power of the Demirel government. If he is really intelligent, if he is a real politician, he would correctly analyze his raison d'etre and why he came to power and would find a way to resolve the problems with us. We said this via the media before he formed his government. We even said that we would not step up our actions but await the opening of channels for a political solution.
But I saw that even if the government wanted this, the forces in the shadows would not allow it. Demirel did not have the capacity to enter into a dialogue [with us]. It was the shadowy forces who called the tune. Their advice, presented by their representatives on the National Security Council (MGK), is accepted by parliament and this is how business is conducted. Demirel is trying to get along with the military and is making a charm offensive towards them. He is even taking Ozal as a model.
We have seen that this government does not pursue a different goal to its predecessor. We have of course used our right to resistance. There is also an attempt to whip up chauvinism in Turkey. To combat this we have said
International Viewpoint # 227
April 27, 1992 that we will give our support and solidarity at all levels to the democratic and revolutionary forces of Turkey. • An uprising, as we all know, is an attempt to take power. Either it succeeds or you are conquered. It is more than a simple stepping-up of the struggle. Did the PKK have such a project this spring or is it a question of the government attempting to provoke a showdown?
That is not our concept of an uprising. A study of our history and of provocations until this day shows that this conception has existed in history. They have wanted to impose this on the people's movement that we lead and to draw us into an uprising that would end in failure. Our tactical approach is not to get a final result by a sudden uprising but to put popular struggle in the forefront.
The peasant is tempted by jacqueries. His character leads him to want a final result in two or three days, by an uprising. We know what this has cost the people. We have said to our insurgent peasants: "You will get nowhere with this mentality."
The results of such cut-price uprisings are clear. Crushing defeat and capitulation. And, of course, such moods have also developed in our party. Those who want a jacquerie today will be ready to capitulate tomorrow. They are unable to accept the need for planned and organized work.
Our party follows a long-term policy. It aims to better organize the people under guerilla protection. It is not a matter of aiming at an immediate result but to change into a growing army that organizes itself and does not leave room for provocations; it aims to spread throughout the country the permanent people's uprising — or action or demonstration - the terminology doesn't matter - without limiting it to one or two places.
There could be a big movement arising out of Newroz, but in my view there will not be an uprising aiming at a seizure of power. They [the forces of order] can still mount provocations and attempt a massacre. But our reply will take place in the limits I have just described.
It is necessary that what happens is not just a demonstration by the people of Kurdistan alone; it must also [find an echo] in Turkey. It is necessary that a demonstration that
TURKEY / KURDISTAN starts in Istanbul is pursued as far afield as Bolan or Cizre. Such is the meaning of the symbolic slogan: "Solidarity between Zonguldak [the miners] and Botan [the Kurds]".
The guerillas are certainly going to step up their activities. This is essential because they are calling for our total capitulation. And we will not unilaterally lay down our arms. We are not opposed to a ceasefire. We are indeed inclined to this so that the problems can be resolved politically.
The Turkish people must understand that the PKK does not want violence at any price. It says: there is a serious national question, there is a democratic question. This cannot be resolved Dy unlateral acts by the resolved by unilateral acts by the government, the parliament or the army, but by starting out from dialogue between the organizations that represent our peoples, the legitimacy of these organizations and their official character.
To put an end to the violence it is not enough to recognize the [Kurdish] reality; the parties have to find the courage to sit down around the negotiating table. This would be a very civilized and reasonable solution. • What do you think of the government's attitude, in particular concerning the state of emergency?
The government, and especially the SHP as a member of the coalition, has had an incoherent attitude on the
Who backs the PKK?
question of the state of emergency. Its abrogation was initially included in the [government's] protocol and in the
SHP election manifesto as well as in the protocol signed between the SHP and candidates originally from the
HEP. Demirel raised a lot of hopes. But at the same time as he was speaking his fine words, the very same day the bombings were stepped up and the shadowy forces multiplied their anonymous assassinations.
I thus say that either these people [SHP-DYP] have not succeeded in becoming the real government of the country or they are playing a double game. In fact, instead of waiting for gestures of goodwill from our side, it is for the stronger party, the party that in practice dominates, that is the government, to make the necessary moves.
It is 13 years now that I have been here with my comrades. We have come through the worst winter of the century, and known hunger and thirst. After all, we too are human beings. If we did not have elevated objectives to achieve, objectives that we cannot renounce, we would not have come through these conditions.
The government does not want to understand this. They think we are fanatics addicted to terrorism, bloodthirsty monsters who take pleasure in shedding it. This is not true.
Furthermore, who in fact are the bloodthirsty monsters if not the exploiters? How have people been able to become rich in Turkey? I ask people to reflect on this and compare how we live.
It is not the PKK who commits daily anonymous assassinations. Perhaps there have accidentally been some murders, which fall outside our political line. Those who commit undisciplined acts in our ranks are known. They are expelled or called to account for their actions. But we always find a solution, despite our limited capacity to control what goes on.
But opposite us is a government which has a great capacity for control and good information. Why has it not been able to catch the murderers of journalists? How can one have confidence in such a government?
IN an interview in the Turkish newspaper Milliyet early this year PKK leader Abdullah Örcalan made the following remarks: "the people will be more active... and take part in the war. I have armed the country's people. The only way in which [the state] can admit the Kurds' identity is by agreeing to talk to us....
"The constitution should be amended...A unitary state cannot be democratic. The Turkish republic must become a federation...We will be setting up a national parliament this year... Each town will choose its delegates...We are preparing a meeting for next July or August... The article in the constitution on the integrity and indivisibility of the people and the territory is a calamity...
Henceforth we will react against Demirel...The person we best understand is Özal... he says he is a Kurd and talks of a federation... The members of the HPE have been ineffective in parliament... I have sent them their instructions... it is useless for them to remain inside the SHP.
The PKK's present budget is $100m and our annual income in Europe is about 50m Deutschmarks... The Germans support us now... France and Greece have softened their position. Syria gives us neither money nor arms. Iran is not an enemy of the PKK, since it fears Turkish ambitions in the Middle East... Saddam does not make any difficulties for the PKK. *
It is necessary to put an end to army terrorism. One does not need to use air power against a handful of terrorists, nor amass such a concentration of troops in the region. This is not aimed at a handful of terrorists. Tanks have taken up position everywhere in Cizre. Is the [town of] Cizre wholly terrorist? And what then is the definition of terrorism? • What have you to say to those SHP deputies who were previously in the HEP, if the emergency law is voted through parliament?
A party [like the SHP] which shows so little coherence, so few principles, and so many contradictions is doomed to disappearance. As for the HEP deputies, if the PKK had not supported them, nobody would noer have heard of them. They can- 1 7 not renounce their Kurdish identity;
April 27, 1992 •
TURKEY-KURDISTAN / ex-YUGOSLAVIA if they do they will not be able to take the least step in Kurdistan, among the Kurdish people.
Inönü wants to assimilate them into the SHP [without even respecting the protocol]. This is a chauvinist attitude. The SHP is a party that maintains Kemalist traditions, which are in favour of crushing and assimilating the Kurds. This would be a unilateral, imposed assimilation. And this is what can be expected from these deputies.
Either these deputies are arch traitors and will accept that or they will defend a minimum of their self-respect and will reject that policy. They would then not accept the emergency law. Honest deputies from the HEP must in our view leave the SHP.
It is Özal who, in a certain way, contributed to the founding of the HEP, in order to weaken his rival the SHP; he introduced a law which led to the HEP getting financial support.