DHKP/C: Unity among the people, fight against imperialism!

[english at ozgurlluk.xs4all.nl]

Kurtulus nr. 7, 14 September 1996

UNITY AMONG THE PEOPLE, FIGHT AGAINST IMPERIALISM!

Kurds, Turks, Arabs, Persians, all the people in the Middle East!

There is only one way to break the imperialist siege against the
Middle East:

Unity among the people and the fight against imperialism!

Clashes between the KDP and the PUK... Intervention in Iran and
Iraq... Imperialist attack... Occupation attempt by the Turkish
oligarchy... 

The "witches' cauldron" of Northern Iraq is still boiling... 

Who is gaining what? Who feeds from this "witches' cauldron"? Who is
loosing?

The newspapers are writing about "a new order in Northern Iraq". In
reality there is nothing new. There is nothing new for the people. The
developments of the last two months have shattered the military and
political equilibrium. First there were clashed between the KDP and
the PUK. The balance of forces was changing day by day. This caused a
direct military intervention by the imperialists and the states in the
region. 

Iran supported Talabani with troops. Then the army of Iraq intervened
in the zone, forbidden to them by imperialism, at the side of Barzani.
Thereupon imperialism bombed Iraq. 

When we look at the present situation in Northern Iraq, we see that
Barzani has become stronger. But things have become very complex in
the region. The question is: who gained besides Barzani? Has the KDP
really become stronger? Or the Saddam regime? Imperialism? The Turkish
oligarchy, planing an alliance with Barzani?

Countless scenarios about the developments in Northern Iraq were
developed in the press. From "the US knew and accepted that Saddam
crossed the 36th. degree of latitude and marched towards Erbil" to
"Barzani planned all his manoeuvres together with the US and the
Turkish oligarchy"... Parts of these scenarios might contain a certain
degree of truth, but essentially they do not mean a lot for the
Kurdish people and the people in the Middle East. Because there is one
constant factor in these scenarios: the Kurdish people is always the
looser, no matter who planned the events in Northern Iraq and who won.
That's the most important thing for us. We do not have to analyse the
events which are just games of the ruling class, we have to initiate
new developments. The main problem now is how we can make sure that
the Kurdish people and the people in the Middle East are no longer the
losers. 

The Kurdish leaderships who called imperialism to intervene in
Northern Iraq, legitimising it, are responsible as well for the
attacks and the massacres. 

There have been clashes between Barzani and Talabani before. But
because of the status of the "Autonomous Kurdish Federation", Barzani
and Talabani became increasingly dependent on imperialism. On the
other hand they became the official rulers of Northern Iraq, securing
an income for themselves. Therefore the clashes between the two
factions have an economical dimension as well. It is imperialism which
has created this status in Northern Iraq. 

When imperialism introduced this status after the attack against Iraq
in 1991, some believed "imperialism wants to protect the Kurdish
people against Saddam". They even thought that a state of their own,
no matter how and in what form, was "progress". Many - calling
themselves Kurdish patriots - legitimised the presence of the
imperialists in the region for this reason. They agreed to the
presence of the "Hammer Force" (Celik Güc, Special Intervention Forces
of the Turkish Army) and US-military bases in Kurdistan. Neither
Barzani nor Talabani, nor the PKK took position against this nesting
by imperialism in Northern Iraq with the imperialist attack against
Iraq and at a later point. On the contrary, they agreed because of
several reasons. Not even the HADEP-delegates in parliament raised
their voices against the "Hammer Force". 

The results show how many flies were hit by imperialism with just one
strike: 

1. Because of the support of the imperialist manoeuvres by some Kurds,
the anti-imperialist consciousness of the Kurdish people was clouded.
This was the biggest gains which imperialism was able to achieve. 

2. Imperialism further legitimised its policy of attacks and
interventions world-wide.

3. It split the peoples in Iraq, thus hindering the revolutionary
dynamics, dividing the forces which should fight together. 

If imperialism would not have found collaborators, seeing them as
"protectors", would it have been so easy for them? If the Kurdish
people in Iraq would have fought against the imperialist attack
against Iraq together with the people of Iraq, if they would have
fought together afterwards against Saddam for their liberation,
imperialism would not have settled so easy in the region, as if it was
"their fathers house". 

As long as the presence of imperialism continues in Northern Iraq, the
Kurdish people will continue to loose. 

The US attacked Iraq "to save Kuwait" and to "restore world peace.
Under the pretext of "protecting the Kurdish people", this situation
was created in Northern Iraq. Many people, calling themselves
left-wing, revolutionary or patriotic, fell into this trap as well.
The most recent imperialist attack was first legitimised with the
reasoning that Saddam had crossed the 36th. degree of latitude and
that it was an attack against the Kurds. US-imperialism again defended
the Kurds - but this time only a part of them -, the "Kurdish leader"
Talabani immediately agreed to this attack. But in the statement on
behalf of the US-government , issued immediately after the attack, it
was said that the attack was just intended to defend to US oil
interests. US-spokesperson Glyn Davies stated that they only wanted to
protect the oil resources in the south of the region. 

Those who still claim that the US wants peace in the region, or that
they want to protect the Kurdish people, must either be blind, or
collaborating liars. The reasons of the presence and the attacks by
imperialism became quite clear at this point. All progressive,
patriotic forces should re-examine their conduct and their statements
since 1991. 

This open motivation for the imperialist attacks show something else:
as long as imperialism is present in the region and its presence is
considered necessary by the Kurdish leaders, and legitimised, there
will be no liberation and independence of the Kurdish people, nor of
the people in the Middle East. Because a free and independent country
would be dangerous for the imperialists, their oil and their
oil-dollars. After the last attack it has become obvious that if one
trusts imperialism, it will be impossible to achieve independence in a
single corner of the Middle East. 

Of course, there are countries in the world, like Iraq, Libya and
Syria, which are nominally independent. People should ask themselves
why the Middle East is of such an importance to imperialism. Because
60% of the world oil reserves are in the Middle East (added with the
oil in the Caucasus and Iran even 80%). Would it really be possible,
an independent country in this region, accepted by imperialism,
existing without oppression and exploitation? 

Imperialism in the Middle East is more aggressive than anywhere else.
It acts more aggressively against the freedom and independence of the
peoples. Forgetting this for even one moment, means falling into their
hands. The freedom of the peoples in the Middle East can only be
achieved by an offensive struggle against imperialism. Those who try
to make the people believe that there is an alternative, although the
goals of imperialism are obvious, are opposed to the liberation of the
peoples. 

The pillar of the "New World Order" is the incitement of the peoples
against each other to push trough the imperialist interests.

For years imperialism has armed several countries against the "Soviet
and communist threat". Doing so, it strengthened the war industry and
the collaborators became increasingly dependent, politically as well
as economically, on the capitalist regimes. The doctrine of the Cold
War was used for a long time to achieve this. When the revisionist
powers broke down in the Soviet Union and several other states,
imperialism lost it main legitimisation for selling arms. Imperialism
needs a new doctrine to ensure a new boost for the war industry. This
boost is decisive for the entire economy. Under the name of the "New
World Order", imperialism is implementing its doctrine and policy with
a new justification. 

The New World Order is based on two pillars. First, the peoples and
countries are to be set against each other on the basis of
nationalism. And second, imperialist interventions are to be justified
in such a chaotic situation under the pretext of being forced by world
public opinion. Imperialism has been pursuing this policy since 1990.
Its attack against Iraq and the interventions in Northern Iraq by
means of the rapid deployment forces openly show this policy... This
intervention, sold to the public as the liberation of Kuwait from the
occupation by Iraq on the one hand, and as the saving of the Kurds
from the oppression by Saddam on the other, constitutes one of the
most important interventions by imperialism after the
contra-revolutionary conspiracy in the socialist countries. Those who
do not see that these interventions occur to secure the rule of
imperialism over the peoples in the world, legitimise the presence of
imperialism in the Middle East themselves. Imperialism always uses the
local powers that be where it shows its presence and intervenes. The
revolutionary and national forces who could not understand the reason
for the attack against Iraq and the presence of imperialism yesterday,
are now occupying themselves in vain with scenarios to explain the
development in Northern Iraq. The result is quite obvious: the
destruction of the unity of the Kurdish people. The unity of the
Kurdish people with the Arab  and the Persian peoples in Iran and Iraq
has lost. The developments clearly show that we have to put aside
short term calculations and short term political steps. 

The Security Zone of the oligarchy means occupation. 

Turkey, dependent on imperialism in all aspects, participated in the
imperialist attack in 1991 to "give one and take five". But
imperialism does not give away parts of its loot to its semi-colonies
so easily. The period after the war has been a period of increasing
political and economical tensions as well. 

One of the reasons was unquestionably the continuing war in Kurdistan,
or in other words, the "problem of the Kurds". The oligarchy carried
out new manoeuvres in Northern Iraq after the war and it engaged in
new relations to solve its internal political problems. Coalitions
were formed, one time with Talabani, the other time with Barzani,
sometimes with both. These coalitions were used during the border
crossing manoeuvres against the PKK. 

Since 1984, Turkey has been carrying out border crossing manoeuvres.
In some of them, more than 10.000 soldiers participated. But these
border crossing manoeuvres were, from a political and military view,
in fact results of a desperateness and they only increased this
desperateness. Terror, and more terror, is the desperate reaction
against the desire for independence and peace. Statements like "we
have eradicated them", "we have broken their backbone" have been made
so often that these actions can no longer convince people, not even
the rulers themselves. The Security Zone has been the result of this
development. More terror initially caused even more border crossing
attacks, now they have become established policy. 

The intentions of Turkey to occupy Northern Iraq are fully in
compliance with the plans of imperialism to contain the sphere of
influence of Iran and to weaken Saddam. But when this project was to
be carried out, neighbouring countries are Russia voiced their
objections. They did not see this action as an act to secure a zone,
they considered it to be an act of open occupation. The protesting
countries were afraid that there spheres of influence, there fields of
action, were being limited. Their protests and their objections did
not concern the suffering of the Kurdish people and the violation of 
the borders of another country, they only concerned their own
interests. Even without these objections, the setting up and
maintaining of the security zone did rise a lot of problems for the
oligarchy. Initially, the oligarchy intended to strengthen Barzani and
they wanted to settle Turkmenians in this area. But Barzani preferred
to play poker with Saddam and he objected these plans. On the other
hand, the Turkmenians tend to side with Talabani, rather than with
Barzani. However, these are only points of secondary importance, the
situation could change any minute on these slippery soil. The real
reason for the occupation is the attempt to weaken the hope of the
Kurdish people and its struggle. 

What's the situation of the liberation struggle in Kurdistan?

The developments on Kurdish soil, in which numerous countries and
political groups played a role and where only Kurdish blood was spent,
give rise to the question of what the situation of the  liberation
struggle in Kurdistan looks like. What will lead to liberation? The
collapse of Iraq? The collapse of Turkey, or even Syria? And of course
the question: "How will these collaborating, exploiting and
oppressions governments collapse?"

How was it possible for this historic tragedy of the Kurdish people,
the internal feuds and clashes among each other, to continue this
long? 

Why was the Kurdish people unable to liberate itself from the charity
from the neighbouring countries?

The main reasons are the relations and the coalitions with the
occupying countries who have different interests. Suppose, Iran
supports Talabani and Iraq supports Barzani. How do they support, and
why? All the factors which serve the liberation of the Kurdish people
essentially harm the interests of these countries. So why their
support? They support them because this support does not serve the
liberation of the Kurdish people, on the contrary, they become even
more dependent. They offer their support because there are
organisations which betray their own people, who fight against other
Kurdish organisations and who pay the price for this support. If these
forces who sign such pragmatic deals, who in fact invite imperialism,
would not exist, without doubt imperialism, nor the neighbouring
countries would be able to act so easily. 

Another question: who is Barzani, who is Talabani? For whom and in
who's name do they work? Who do they consider to be friends, and who
their enemy? What's their position in the national liberation
struggle?

Without looking at their previous relations and coalitions, it is not
possible to explain the present events in Northern Iraq and it would
not be possible to answer the question about the situation of the
liberation struggle in Kurdistan. 

Does the fate of a people depend on the contradictions between the
imperialists, or the contradictions among the ruling classes/ 

The Kurdish forces in Northern Iraq - Talabani, Barzani and at certain
points the PKK as well - have largely, until now, based their policy
on the contradictions among the imperialists, between the imperialists
and the states in the region, and between the states in the regions.
The balance between these forces was also determined by these
contradictions. This political line has strengthened them for a short
time, but the effects of this policy have weakened them again. 

In the discussions about this theme, it was constantly said: did not
Lenin, Stalin and Mao as well make use of the contradictions between
the imperialists? Yes, that's right. They have used the
contradictions, but they never subordinated their political line to
these contradictions. "Using the contradictions" has nothing to do
with "adjusting the line to the contradictions". When the imperialists
and the collaborating forces are able to push through demands with the
forces which want to use their contradictions, these forces have
become dependent on them. And this is what happened in Northern Iraq.

The war between Iran and Iraq and the situation which followed are an
example of how much these contradictions can be trusted: Iran
supported the Kurds in Iraq during the war, it armed them to fight
against Saddam. After the war, Iraq and Iran marched against the
Kurdish people together. The reward for the "support" has been
Halpaca. In Halpaca and other places in Northern Iraq, thousands of
Kurds were massacred. There are contradictions between Turkey, Iran,
Iraq, Syria and Russia, but as soon as certain developments disturb
their order, they will unite. And a Kurdish state would be a
development against they would unite most easily. Our people have a
saying for this: "One dog does not bite another". 

The freedom of the Kurdish people is only possible in a common
struggle together with the Turkish, the Arab and the Persian people. 

Imperialism and the states in the region view the nationalist line in
the liberation of the Kurdish people as "the lesser evil", compared to
the revolutionary line. That's why this line is sometimes legitimised
and supported by them. This explains the contacts of a state - banning
the word "Kurd" on its own territory  (Turkey) - with parties who
named themselves after Kurdistan (the KDP and the PUK). This also
explains why imperialism, which wants to disarm and liquidate all the
national liberation movements in the entire world, not only does not
attack Barzani and Talabani, it even gives them a state. The
imperialists and the states in the region know that a revolutionary
tendency in the liberation struggle of the Kurdish people which change
the balance in the Middle East to the benefit of the people. This
would be a severe blow to them. 

Imperialism wants to push through its own nationalism world-wide. A
nationalism, not directed against them but against the united struggle
of all peoples. 

The revolutionary line will achieve the liberation of the Kurdish
people together with the people in the countries where the Kurdish
people are living. 

A Kurdish national organisation, not allied to the people in the
countries it is active in, is weakening itself right from the
beginning. As long as there is no common struggle of the Kurds in Iraq
together with the Iraqi people, the Kurds in Turkey with the Turkish
people and the Kurds in Iran with the people in Iran, the ruling
classes in these countries will be able to contain the liberation war
military and politically as well. This can be concluded from the
experiences and the developments of the liberation struggles on a
national basis, waged in all parts of Kurdistan without the people in
the respective countries. The Kurdish people and its fighters should
learn from these experiences at the cost of thousands and tens of
thousands of victims.

The revolution against imperialism and the oligarchy will bring the
liberation of the Kurdish people. 

The experiences of the past have clearly shown: without the struggle
against imperialism and the collaborating states, the liberation can
not be achieved. Barzani and Talabani in Northern Iraq are examples
for this: Barzani unites with Saddam. Who will guarantee that there
will be no new Halapcas tomorrow? Talabani calls the US for support
and threatens: "Otherwise I will look for support in Iran". He flees
for the bandits and seeks refuge with the devil. What can the Kurds
achieve with such a policy? It will not lead to freedom, it leads from
one collaboration to the other.

Even when the states in this region have contradictions with
imperialism, in the end they are exploiters and oppressors as well.
They more or less depend on the imperialists, or they could become so
any moment. Therefore it is a mistake to rely on these states. To
achieve liberation, the Kurdish people has to fight imperialism and
the collaborating regimes which occupy Kurdistan, together with the
people in these countries. 

The revolution against imperialism and the oligarchy will enable the
Kurdish people another way of independence. Nowadays Turkey and Iraq
are so-called independent states, but they exploit their people and
massacre them cruelly. With such an independence, nothing will change
in exploitation. The only thing that will change will be the flag. The
Kurdish people will then be exploited under a Kurdish flag. When we
have to pay such a price for liberation, when thousands of our
children have fallen, and will fall, this liberation must be national
as well as social. The people should be liberated from all
exploitation and oppression. The revolution against imperialism and
oligarchy is also the road to a real independence for the Kurdish
people. 


-- 
Devrimci Halk Kurtulus Cephesi (Revolutionary Peoples Liberation Front)
DHKC Informationbureau Amsterdam
http://www.ozgurluk.org/dhkc                          
List info: english-request at ozgurluk.xs4all.nl