Turkey: The front will be developed further

Wed Sep 24 12:56:12 BST 1997

Kurtulus no. 31, 24 May 1997

The front will be developed further.

The oligarchy has closed the MayDay file for its part. Because
firstly, the crisis is it in has become so big that it has become
necessary for them to keep the revolutionaries out of the public's
eyes for as much as possible, and secondly, the oligarchy did not
achieve any success on MayDay.

>From the leadership of Türk-Is, the governor of Istanbul to the
columnists in the papers - like Mehmet Ali Birand - : all of them
spoke about a "successful" MayDay. They expressed their wish and
that's all they got. They made themselves ridiculous. The masks of the
collaborators fell and the situation of the people's masses were
obvious. Türk-Is, DISK and all chambers of commerce came together to
emphasise, as always, that they represent 6,5 million people. No, they
do not represent 6,5 million people. The situation there in became
obvious on the MayDay squares.

On the other hand they were unable to prevent the march of the
revolutionaries. The revolutionaries approached the enemy with their
banners, their flags and their "militias". It was shown to the people
in Turkey that the revolutionaries are not people's forces which can
be pushed into the background in one way or the other, and that the
revolution can not be prevented. Despite all the threats and the
demagogic statements before MayDay, despite the arrests and the
relatively small participation of the masses, the oligarchy was unable
to achieve a real success. The MayDay celebrations have kept a
consistency of the masses and a nation-wide spread. The failure of the
oligarchy becomes obvious when looked at the front.

For the revolutionaries, it is something which has to be looked at
carefully, the lesser participation of the masses. More precisely,
seen the developments since Susurluk, the number of people should have
increased but the participation of the masses was more or less equal
to the previous year. That's the present situation. Seen from the
viewpoint of the mass movement, the problem is not a general decline,
it is a decline which is specific for MayDay. This must be seen
clearly. On 12 March and on 16 March, for example, the masses did come
despite many obstacles. Twice as many people participated at these
commemorations, compared to 1996. 

The demagogy of the enemy regarding MayDay has not been eradicated
completely. The marks which were left behind by MayDay 1977 and 1996
have not been removed, the masses have not been given enough
confidence. On the contrary, opportunism pursued a road which
established this mistrust. The year long policy of liquidations,
massacres and disappearances, and the consequences for the
consciousness of the masses, constitutes the material basis for the
effect of terror and the demagogy of provocation. In such
circumstances, the behaviour of the left (i.c. opportunism) did not
succeed in drawing a clear line from its front against the demagogy,
it did not succeed in leading the masses, giving them confidence.
Despite the decreasing participation, the reality of the revolution
ruled on the squares and in the streets. In contrast to the
capitulation of the trade unions of the MGK, tens of thousands marched
among the ranks of the revolutionaries. This is the essence of MayDay.
Despite the disadvantages and the deficiencies, the front presented
itself as a force. And the front, with its strength, will go on to
organise and develop the people's movement. The crisis of the
oligarchy will continue and increase. They act as if the causes for
this crisis must be looked for among parts of the bourgeois politics.
The search for new governments, early elections, petitions and threats
of a coup will remain on the agenda. But none of this will provide a
clear and obvious solution and elevation for the crisis. 

The policy of massacres by the state, which became apparent in
Susurluk, will continue, and so will the gang wars. While this
situation limits the manoeuvring space for the oligarchy, it is
imperative for the revolutionaries to organise the people's masses
against the state, which revealed itself in Susurluk, in a struggle
with clear demands. The manoeuvring space for the oligarchy is
limited. Neither the proposals of TÜSIAD, which are needed for the
system, nor the proposed economical and social measures of the MGK
regarding Kurdistan, can be implemented because of the present
economical and political desperation. The system does not even
consider itself strong enough to introduce reforms, to take tactical
steps to strengthen the reformists.

At such a point, the policy of the revolutionaries, the democrats and
revolutionary democratic institutions and organisations plays a major
role. It's obvious, peace or early elections are not on the agenda in
this country. This can only be temporary tactics of the ruling
classes. 

The end of the 80's and the beginning of the 90's were a period in
which the call for "peace" found an echo. Now, at the end of the 90's,
the shroud has fallen from this peace which was enforced by
imperialism. To offer such a "peace" to the people once again,
constitutes a throwback for the revolution. 

The functions of earlier elections was even openly described in the
bourgeois press: "curtailing the pressure". That advanced elections,
with no other function than diverting the anger and dissatisfaction of
the people through the poling boxes, have nothing to do with
revolutionary politics and tactics is obvious. 

Neither reformist, legal, tactics like advanced elections and "peace",
nor the propaganda of opportunism - far remote from the needs, the
demands and the fears of the masses - can proof themselves. Apart from
coincidal similarities, these demands are so old and far off from the
conditions for effectiveness, that they can not even achieve short
term effects. The front will continue to develop, it will stay away
from the tactics and the policy of opportunism and reformism, basing
itself on the revolutionary mass line, never loosing the perspective
of power out of sight. The only line which can develop further, the
only way the revolution in Turkey can be achieved, is this one. 

Day by day, it is becoming more clearly that the people's councils and
the proposals for a people's constitution constitute a policy which
fulfils the needs of this age. While opportunism and reformism try to
copy these proposals in part, they continue their pseudo-criticism,
essentially aiming at rendering these proposals ineffective. They will
continue this policy. 

The policy and the tactics of the front are causing confusion in a lot
of minds. They have difficulties to comprehend the originality of the
line of the front, its growing roots with the reality of the country
and the people. Some talk about red headbands, some talk about masses
in the mosque. We do not concern ourselves with these things. We are
talking about a front. About a people's movement. We are aware of the
fact that there will be no revolution without a front and the people's
movement. This is our task and we will pursue it and we will continue
our development along this line. 

Our present proposals and the policy we pursue will find an echo when
they fulfil the present needs. We could come with new proposals
tomorrow. While we develop these proposals, come up with a new policy,
we do not care what they call us. We care about developing the
revolution, about organising the masses for the revolution, about
enlarging the front and leading the struggle. Our policy and our
proposals are right as long as they serve these aims. 

As is shown concretely, for example at the organising in the trade
unions DISK, KESK and the unions of the MGK, this will not be an easy
process. During this phase, there will be an ideological struggle with
opportunism, reformism, but also with those forces within the system,
or seeking integration in the system, which call themselves "left" or
"revolutionary". It will be the actual objective of our policy to
enlarge the people's front, to confine the enemy's front. There are
two sides to this. One side is to unite all people's forces, all
democratic institutions and mass organisations which strive for
democracy, which want freedom and justice. We will be adamant in this.
On the other hand, it will be inevitable to deal with those who call
themselves "left" and "democratic mass organisations" but who
essentially try to prevent the revolution at the side of the MGK and
the oligarchy. For example, in the struggle within the working class
it is a must to deal with a union policy, favourable to the MGK. Such
a process will be seen in the struggle in the Gececondular as well.
The same will occur among the workers in the public service. 

We will deal with them in all areas. In this process, the reformists
will be forced to a clear line, they will be forced to choose. The
intellectuals will have to give up their vague position, the KESK will
have to give up its swaying between a democratic position within the
system and a revolutionary one, they will have to take a clear
position. This is a quite natural need and a result of progress. While
we work at the one side to unite the people's forces, the people's
movement, we will force this on an ideological basis on the other.
Regarding this, the front takes a quite clear and open line. The
intellectuals, the public servants, the reformists and the
opportunists will be drawn into the masses. There they will have to
show colours. Depending on how we organise the people, create
organisations in which the broad people's masses will be able to use
its rights to decide for itself, all will be forced to either join
these, or they will be separated from the people. The struggle demands
the same decision: depending on how it will develop - armed or unarmed
- in different ways, all will have to seek their compromise with the
system, or they will have to take their place among the people. 

The task of the front has become even bigger now, its mission more
clear. Our main task is establishing our organisation in such a manner
that we will be able to fulfil this task, succeeding in this mission.
It's obvious, the oligarchy will try to block the front constantly and
massively. It especially seeks to prevent the emergence of cadres in
the front organisations, the democratic organisations and
organisations of the people who would be able to take upon themselves
a leadership position. It seeks to eliminate the existing cadres. We
have to take great care at training the cadres to crush the attempts
by the enemy. When the oligarchy eliminates, we will build, when it
destroys, we will reorganise, when it annihilates, we will have to
re-emerge at the same place even stronger, more experienced. This side
of the struggle will continue without a break, without interruption.
There is no room for daydreaming about "democratisation", "peace" and
"early elections" in this struggle. 

The enemy has been destroying for decades. But the line of the front
regarding the masses has proven its value by keeping upright, despite
destruction, by continuing the struggle and developing the people's
movement. The essence of this line, clearly visible at MayDay 1996 and
1997: believing in the people, the roots with the reality of the
country and the people, political clarity, productivity and
determination in its policy. 

Based upon this, the front has now become politically the most
productive, it is the most vivid among the masses, the most constant
and determined organisation in the struggle for the revolution. Yes,
we are self-confidant. 

This confidence must be carried to all our activities, from the
smallest to the biggest, it has to be carried into all our contacts,
all actions. When we act confident, that's for sure, we will achieve
even bigger and quicker results. 

The militias of the front are marching.... The front says.... The
front acts.... The front fights.... The martyrs of the front.... The
pamphlets of the front.... Under the leadership of the front.... Yes,
everybody will talk about the front. The front will be present in the
nightmares of the enemy, it will be on the tongues of the people,
shoulder to shoulder with its friends. This claim is not unrealistic.
It's a normal requirement in the setting of our mission, the aims of
the revolution and the determination to power. Those who do not
achieve this, who can not realise this work, will be unable to
organise and realise the revolution. With this determination and this
confidence, we will march on. Nobody will be able to stop the front.
Obstacles can only be temporary ones. And we will not be deterred by
these difficulties. Our history, our present reality, the situation in
our country and of our people, they all show the conditions for the
development of the front. The front will develop further, because of a
political necessity, and it will show itself worthy of our history,
our present existence, our country and our 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