This AWTWNS news packet for the week of 18 August 2014 contains three articles. They may be reproduced or used in any way, in whole or in part, as long as they are credited.
Web site: aworldtowinns.co.uk
To subscribe or for back issues, go to www.aworldtowin.org or http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/AWorldToWinNewsService/
Write to us – send us information, comments, criticisms, suggestions and articles:
– Editorial: Israel, Gaza, Iraq and imperialism: the real problem and the people’s real interests
– Ferguson, Missouri, U.S.: Righteous rebellion against police murder and martial law
– An interview with Amir Hassanpour on recent events in Iraq and Iraqi Kurdistan
Editorial: Israel, Gaza, Iraq and imperialism: the real problem and the people’s real interests
18 August 2014. A World to Win News Service. The British columnist Robert Fisk recently wrote that if people wanted to “address ‘the underlying issues’ of the Israel/Palestinian war”, as U.S. President Barack Obama’s Secretary of State John Kerry advised, they should ask themselves why the Palestinians are in Gaza. The answer is not what Kerry had in mind.
Two-thirds of Gaza’s people are refugees. Israeli forces deported people to Gaza because it was outside the land they wanted in 1948, when the Zionist army violently drove out 90 percent of the Arab population to make way for what became Israel that year. Their homes were destroyed and Jewish settlers were brought from abroad to fill the new towns built on the ruins. Then Israel seized Gaza in 1967, first trying to fill it with more Jewish settlers and then turning it into a prison. Now it is starving and shooting the prisoners – in the name of protecting southern Israeli towns like Ashkelon and Sderot where so many Gazans came from.
The even bigger “underlying question” is why the U.S. and other Western governments arm, finance and politically support Israel, and even send more colonists. Why do they declare that their military might will always stand behind Israel’s “right to defend itself”, despite occasional friction? It is because what they are defending is the U.S.’s principal reliable military outpost in the Middle East, a pillar of imperialist domination of the region and its peoples. The so-called “Jewish lobby” is not what motivates U.S. support for Israel, it just helps create public opinion to justify that. Israel’s indispensable role for the U.S. is the fundamental reason for the Zionists’ unending aggression, proud brutality and limitless arrogance.
The basic “underlying issue” is oppression. This is the point of view from which we should look at Hamas. It cannot be supported because it does not represent liberation from oppression. Its political, social and ideological programme is reactionary, contrary to interests of the vast majority of Palestinians and world’s people. It stands for an obscurantist outlook, religious rule and the subjugation of women.
Instead of wringing hands or being paralysed by this complexity, a correct understanding of the underlying issues should make it possible and irresistible to take political action, especially to oppose Israeli aggression, which can never, under any circumstances, be justified as “self defence”. With the understanding that Zionism is not only racism but an essential imperialist tool, we can expose and denounce the U.S. and European hands that hold up the Israeli state founded on ethnic cleansing and that allow these murderers to massacre unarmed Palestinians again and again, whether they be children and youth shot dead at demonstrations in the West Bank or whole families killed in Gaza.
And further, with this understanding, we should support the demand to lift the blockade of Gaza – a common demand of the Palestinian people – as an elementary question of justice and solidarity with Gazans and all Palestinians.
The “underlying issue” in Iraq, to continue with the same method, is also imperialism. How can Obama talk about delivering “humanitarian aid” to Yazidis, Kurds or anyone else when the U.S. made possible the humanitarian disaster in Gaza (not to mention Afghanistan, Libya, Haiti and everywhere the U.S. has intervened)? The American blockade, bombings, invasion and occupation created the mess that is Iraq, and now Obama and his cohorts in the UK and France want to bomb and maraud some more. This has to be opposed.
As for the religious and ethnic divisions in Iraq that the West claims requires their intervention, ever since the Sykes-Picot agreement during WWI when France and Great Britain divided up the region between them, the imperialists have done their best to set up colonial and neocolonial regimes based on ethnic and religious divisions in Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, allying with reactionary elites in power to this day.
The rise of Islamic fundamentalism is the result of a confluence of factors, including economic and social changes produced by the globalization of the imperialist economy, a disgust with the hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy behind the values promoted by the Western imperialists and their local flunkies and crooks, the inability of the past Arab nationalist movements to conceive a thorough break with the imperialist world market, the slander that is all most people know of the Russian and Chinese socialist revolutions, and the years the U.S. and other powers spent supporting Islamist groups for their own immediate interests (such as the passive and sometimes active aid the Israeli secret services gave Hamas to counter the secular national liberation movement in Palestine). While Islamist currents have gotten out of control and their actions have become a real problem for these powers today, Islamism’s widespread influence among the oppressed is also a problem from the point of view of the liberation of the peoples of the Middle East and the world.
What is now called the Islamic State (formerly called ISIS or Da’ash) is an affliction on the peoples of Iraq and Syria, and anyone who argues anything else would have to explain how cutting off heads to impose religious terror, ethnic cleansing and patriarchal rule could unite the peoples of the Middle East to fight their real enemies. At the same time, the imperialists with their hi-tech weapons have ended many times more lives than anyone with swords, despite the “democratic” and “civilised” discourse they use to justify their murder. This situation is an extreme example of a basic truth: Islamic fundamentalism and Western imperialism are locked in a real battle, but if you support either of them you end up supporting both.
We have to expose the imperialist powers and the system that is the source of the problem, build resistance to more of their bloody interventions that did so much to bring the Middle East to where it is today, and also expose and oppose Islamism (and religious rule in general), which would not have the power it now enjoys in the world without the workings and crimes of the imperialist system.
It is especially important for people to grapple with the facts to understand the situation as it really is, and for those who have some understanding to act in a way that can begin to reach out and move people very broadly and become a rallying point for resistance and a source of hope in an otherwise dark situation. Further, it is very needed for people to raise banners of revolution in opposition to both imperialism and the religious forces that seek only to modify the world’s oppressive order to their advantage and outlook and not change it in any liberating way. The emergence of real, living, growing movements determined to overthrow the old order and build a new state power, and a vision for radically new, totally liberating societies where people everywhere would want to live, could make it possible to begin to seize the initiative from the people’s enemies.
– end item-
U.S.: Righteous rebellion against police murder and martial law
18 August 2014. A World to Win News Service. An 18-year old black man named Michael Brown was gunned down in cold blood by a white police officer as he and a friend sauntered down the street on 9 August in Ferguson, a working class suburb of Missouri’s largest city, Saint Louis. Ferguson is about two-thirds Black, with a police force that is almost entirely white.
Police murders of young Black and other minority youth are a common occurrence in the U.S. And people have had enough. In Ferguson they stood up and stood their ground, righteously rebelling against Brown’s killing, the vicious militarized police repression and the authorities’ refusal to indict the officer. The people’s defiant response to this brutal execution in full public view has riveted the attention of U.S. and world news. Social media are exploding with angry comments and debates. A woman carried a sign during the late-night protests that read “Making history”.
A report filed by a Revolution newspaper correspondent described the scene on 14 August:
“Ferguson is under siege. Even though they don’t say it, it is martial law, straight up. The city has been cut off from the rest of the surrounding area. Police vehicles have set up blockades at many intersections using military personnel carriers and riot police. The U.S. government has given military hardware to local police and they are using it against the people to try and intimidate them.
“There is a no-fly zone over the city, and drones are being used to enable the authorities to focus on the protesters. Police helicopters have been hovering above the protest, streaming bright lights all over the protest area. There is the feeling of a war zone and the use of war tactics being brought down on the people in this city. But people have not backed down…”
Brown’s killing comes two and a half years after the widely covered murder in Florida of another black youth, Trayvon Martin, by a neighbourhood vigilante who was found innocent by the U.S. justice system despite months of furious nationwide protest. As the rebellion continued in Ferguson, in South-central Los Angeles people shouting the same slogan, “Hands up, don’t shoot”, marched to demand justice for the murder of Ezell Ford, a 25-year-old Black man with mental illness shot dead by the infamously racist LA police department in early August. These same police had beat 37-year-old Omar Abrego to death nine days earlier. A black-middle aged man, Eric Garner, was recently strangled to death by New York City police while being arrested for selling cigarettes. All these are just a few of the many victims of U.S. police brutality.
The situation in Ferguson is changing rapidly as the different contingents of the ruling class try to figure out how to handle and control this mass outrage – using despicable lies to slander Brown and sending out Black representatives of other law enforcement agencies, Black church spokesmen and “liberal” politicians (all the way up to Obama) to plead with the people to stop their struggle, while they intensify the repression. As we go to press the National Guard had been called out on 18 August but protesters continued undeterred that night, and several arrested. More information at revcom.us.
Following is an editorial dated 17 August in Revolution, newspaper of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA.
One week into the struggle for justice for Michael Brown and everything has changed – and nothing has changed.
Everything has changed: people stood up and fought back and refused to back down in the face of bullets and tanks, scolding and phony sympathy, and everything else. Fighting back and simply demanding justice for Michael Brown and that these pigs stop murdering young Black men. Simply demanding that the humanity of millions of youth be recognized. And when they did – when they went right up against the dogs and the gas and the bullets – they got sympathy from all over the world, they inspired others to stand up, and they put this question squarely on the agenda and changed the terms in which everybody thought and talked about it. People stood up and showed that the people who run this are NOT all-powerful, and that the force they use against the people is NOT legitimate. This is real progress, and it is solely due to determined struggle.
At the same time, nothing has changed. There is no justice at all – whatsoever. The pig who murdered Michael Brown still walks around uncharged. In fact, we don’t even know the number of bullets that he fired into Michael! We don’t even know why these pigs let Michael lie in the street like a dog for FOUR HOURS after he was shot and who made that ugly, horrible decision. And that damn chief of pigs who released the video designed to assassinate Michael’s character still has his job. There is not even a whisper of consequence for any of these pigs. God DAMN this shit!
Right now is no time to stop the struggle, or try to turn it into some bullshit voting thing or some demands on some lying politicians somewhere else. Right now is time to redouble the struggle, to take it to a HIGHER level. These righteous demands – to indict and jail this pig, to fire the pig chief, to give a full accounting ASAP – these have to be met now, not next week or next year.
Don’t tell us that “it takes time to charge someone” – it doesn’t take time to charge and indict a Black or Latino youth who they think might have done something. Hell, it doesn’t take time to kill them, when they don’t get onto the side-walk fast enough or stop selling cigarettes or just look the wrong way.
We don’t need promises about how the Department of Justice is gonna take care of it – the Department of Justice is the Department of IN-justice. The only thing it takes care of is protecting this goddamn system.
Let’s be real clear: if people had listened to those at the middle of the week who said “trust in Ron Johnson” [the Black state police chief sent in to “calm” the situation]… if people had listened to those who said “okay, be angry but don’t be too angry”… if people had stayed out of the streets when the pigs told them to… then none of any of the progress that HAS been made would have been made. This struggle has to keep going and it has to go higher and broader, involving more people.
And as we keep on struggling, ask yourself this: WHY does this keep happening? WHY, after all the years of voting, of trying to get an education, of “doing all the right things” and all that… WHY? Because it’s a system – and right now this system has no more use for millions of Black and Latino youth and they are penning them in, locking them down, and killing them off. They are demonising and dogging these youth to justify all that. We need a revolution to deal with this – one that dismantles all their state power and brings in new power, which really does serve the people in getting emancipated, and contributing to emancipation all over the world.
We don’t need people telling people to vote, to trust in the Justice Department, and all that mess. We don’t need people saying that they’re militant, then acting like deputies and junior cops. We need unity, demanding justice – NOW!
Indict and jail the killer cop! Fire the police chief! Full accounting of what happened: immediately!
Fight the power, and transform the people, for revolution!
– end item-
An interview with Amir Hassanpour on recent events in Iraq and Iraqi Kurdistan
18 August 2014. A World to Win News Service. The following interview with Amir Hassanpour of the University of Toronto first appeared in the July issue of Atash (Fire), a communist newspaper in Iran.
Atash: We take this opportunity to talk with comrade Amir Hassanpour on recent events in the region and in particular Iraqi Kurdistan, and the on-going discussion about the referendum on independence proposed by the Kurdistan Regional Government.
Q: Comrade Amir, we know that in an interview with Voice of America, Massoud Barzani, the president of the Kurdish Regional Government in Iraq, said that Iraq’s ruling system has fallen apart and Kurds are not the reason for that. He said that the Kurds had not put previously forward independence from Iraq, even when they were hit by chemical bombardment [under Saddam Hussein, in 1988]. It is the others who have created a situation such that the country is effectively in a state of collapse. Kurds have the right to protect their fatherland, Kurdistan, in order to become a place from where they can help other Iraqi brothers. Kurds should put the independence of the area under the Kurdistan Regional Government to a referendum. What is your position and views on these issues?
Amir Hassanpour: It is clear that Kurds are an oppressed nation in Iraq and other countries in the region. Most of the Kurdish people have been craving an independent state. There is no doubt that as an oppressed nation, Kurds have the right to self-determination. Barzani had raised the discussion of independence even before the recent events [ISIS taking control of part of Iraq], without being able or wanting to take any real steps. But now there is a new situation. Iraq has practically disintegrated, due to the actions of the ISIS, tribal forces and the Islamist militia of Moqtada Sadr as well as the policies of Prime Minister Nouri Maliki’s government.
The Kurdistan Regional Government was a result of the first U.S. war against Iraq in 1991. It evolved gradually and took its present form after the second U.S. war in 2003. Now, due to the military advance of ISIS, the conditions to declare independence have ripened. In fact, however, the KRG has been semi-independent so far and any referendum or other consequent actions would formalise what already exists.
I should mention that in the last two decades or so, based on international law, several new countries have been created in a similar way – for example South Sudan, East Timor and countries that emerged as a result of the disintegration of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union. But if Kurdistan became independent, that would be under particular regional and international conditions where Kurdish nationalists in Iraqi Kurdistan have already been in power.
This government represents a nationalism that is in power and has a parliament, executive apparatus [cabinet, administration, an army called Peshmerga, police, a security apparatus, prisons] and justice department, though its powers are more limited than those of U.S. states and Canadian provinces. But since the central government of Iraq doesn’t have that much power, the KRG is almost independent. Opposition from the U.S., Iran and Turkey is one of the reasons that this project has not been accomplished, but this situation might change. Though the U.S. might oppose it at the present time, the main problem that the U.S. has with it is not the formation of a Kurdish state. What the U.S. is concerned about most is ensuring its political, economic and military influence in the whole region. For example, they are looking for changes that would guarantee the interests of the U.S. and its allies such as Israel. And one thing is clear, if the U.S. opposes independence, the Kurdish leaders would follow suit.
Q: You are saying that Iraqi Kurdistan de facto is independent. But some political trends argue that if Kurdistan becomes independent in a region that Islamism and reactionary forces are growing everywhere, it can become a base for non-religious and secular forces. A power in which feudal patriarchy will disappear and there would be no sign of the kind of religious and ethnic wars that are going on in other parts of Iraq. How much does such a picture correspond to reality?
A: It looks more like a dream than reality. After 23 years, the KRG experience has shown something different. It is true that for a short period of time after the collapse of the Saddam regime, Kurds could think they were no longer suffering from national oppression. Many were happy to have an administration, military and justice apparatus in which they could speak in Kurdish, but such celebration did not last long. They soon realised that the new capitalist class that has taken power is resorting to violence, but this time in the Kurdish language.
But even if [we assume] national oppression has been diminished to a large extent in this region, U.S. colonial oppression has replaced the national oppression of the Saddam regime. Kurdistan’s government has become completely dependent, economically and politically, on the U.S. As far as the interests of the Kurdish people and in particular the majority who are exploited, and also women, half of the population concerned, the KRG and formal independence would not be able to make any changes in those relations. The claim that Kurdistan could be an independent base for secularism or an alternative to the kind of theocracy seen in Iran, Afghanistan and Iraq is very untrue.
After theocrats seized power in Iran, the two parties that run the Kurdish government, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) and Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), like most of the regimes in the Middle East, tried to become more Islamic. Most of the Iraqi Kurdish nationalists who were non-religious have increasingly resorted to praying and fasting. Despite the fact that nationalist movements after the Second World War were not mainly religious, the leaders and intellectuals of these two Kurdish parties failed to include secularism in their political programmes even in a very limited way, i.e., calling for the separation of the state and religion, and in fact have compromised with religious forces to a large extent. Under the rule of these parties Kurdistan has been filled with mosques and the cities have become cities of minarets [mosque domes]. Consequently this government cannot be called truly secular. It is hard to believe that this government is a progressive force or could help the people in other parts of Iraq since they have increasingly pushed the people of Kurdistan towards religion over the last 23 years. Despite differences within the leadership, this government has oriented itself toward Israel, Turkey and Iran, and I cannot see any degree of progressiveness or liberationism in their words or acts.
Q: You said that the KRG has oriented itself toward Israel, but many Kurds do not see anything wrong with that. They argue that Israel has brought about a state for an oppressed nation and it is internally run by a democratic system. And since KRG is a government, it should have relations with other governments in the region, so it is natural to have relations with Turkey and Iran, too. They argue that even though in the past taking a position against Israel and the genocide of Palestinians was a distinguishing characteristic of a progressive stand, that no longer is the case. The problem is that some people do not see anything wrong with aligning themselves with Israel. Some even dream of being treated by the world powers in the same way Israel has been treated by them, so that they can build Kurdistan in the region in the same way Israel was built.
A: That’s true. One of the dreams of Kurdish nationalists in the last twenty years has been to become like Israel, and for this they have wanted to utilize the imperialist powers’ plans for the region [to promote its own independence]. Even worse, some of their intellectuals have idealised the Zionist project as a national liberation movement, and have considered terrorists such as Menachem Begin a freedom fighter. They have even translated some of his writings into Kurdish. The irony is that while some progressive Jews outside Israel consider the Zionist regime as an apartheid and exploiter regime, many of the nationalist Kurds consider it a symbol of democracy and national liberation. This [is serious] and raises questions about their own nature.
Those who don’t see what Israel is doing to the Palestinian people, who don’t see the ethnic cleansing, the crimes against humanity and have no sympathy for the Palestinian people and are not protesting against it, or deny these crimes, not only are not fighting for liberation but knowingly or unknowingly are helping these crimes continue. This is part of the limitation of all nationalist movements that see their interests coincide with the interest of the imperialist powers and system. In fact there is a common interest that compels them to work within the framework of the same system and not against it. The KRG has become part of the nuts and bolts of this system and wishes to become like Israel.
But considering present conditions in the region as a whole, even if a referendum were held, it seems unlikely that this country could become [really] independent even if it becomes a member of the UN.
All the pillars on which it stands are dependent on other regimes in the region, especially Iran, Turkey and certainly Israel and also to the U.S., more the U.S. than the European Union. This has been and continues to be the case since the KRG was created 23 years ago. Its economy is completely dependent and even its bottled drinking water comes from Turkey and Iran. Its food comes from Turkey, Iran and the U.S. Even Ranak va Chookha [the Kurdish traditional costume] is made in China. Kurdistan’s agricultural economy is incapable of providing for the needs of its own people.
Saddam destroyed the Kurdish villages during the Anfal genocide operation [launched by the Baathist regime in 1988] and the Kurdish government has not been able to revitalise these villages so that they could be self-sufficient and rely on their own production. For example, take oil production. The KRG cannot export its oil without complete reliance on Turkey. In the current situation, it is not clear what will happen to the south of Iraq, but even if the Kurdish nationalists are thinking about [real] independence, they will not be able to realise it. This government has been dependent economically, politically and militarily from the beginning and up to now on others. In fact some kind of formal independence will not nullify that dependence, but will officialise it.
Q: Some refer to the reality of life under the KRG. They say this is an oppressor government. Honour killing incidents are increasing tremendously, Islamism is growing; there is not even one reliable library. Kurdish intellectuals who have been studying in other parts of the world are reluctant to go back to Kurdistan because they don’t have the necessary freedom to act and be able to serve the people and exchange their knowledge and experience with the people in Kurdistan. Iranian Kurds are exploited in Iraqi Kurdistan and there is a hierarchy between Iranian Kurds and Iraqi Kurds. Also immigrant workers and servants from the Philippines, Nepal and Bangladesh are harshly exploited in Iraqi Kurdistan. The agricultural economy has not been revitalised and there is no sign of basic industry. But even in light of all that, these people argue that since the Middle East is on fire, Kurdistan would be a safe haven for Kurdish people and those who want to find refuge there. Barzani also gives the impression in an interview that Iraq is on fire and wants to rescue “this room” from of the Iraqi “house”.Is that a reality? Doesn’t it have a positive aspect?
A: It could, if the government had a revolutionary line, but it does not.
Q: For example, in WW2, socialist Russia could not stay away from the fire of the war. They were self-sufficient, revolutionary and they had industry. Of course they paid a high price, because so many of their people were killed. How is it possible in such a situation to rescue “a room”?
A: As far as the spreading fire is concerned, it is not possible for the KRG to rescue even so much as a small space, first of all because of the nature and the political line of the KRG. Under the guidance of Turkey, the KRG have fought against PKK and massacred their forces (in Iraqi Kurdistan). Both parties (the KDP and PUK) took part in that project. Syrian Kurds recently declared autonomy in some areas in Syrian Kurdistan, but the KRG under Barzani decided to build a canal along the border with Syria, in order to separate the two parts of Kurdistan. The mid-90’s war between PUK and KDP known as a “suicidal war” is another example. The KDP demanded help from Saddam’s army to suppress the PUK. Kurdish unity and the idea that they would help each other have not worked out so far.
Regarding the question of Kurdish workers who come to work from Turkey and Iran, or the treatment of political forces and workers from other parts of the world or other examples, I don’t want to say that there is no other kind of relation with Kurds from Turkey or Iran. There are some who are better off. Some Kurds from Iran or Turkey have opened shops or restaurants or have other economic activities. But the political and ideological line of the KRG as a whole is like that of other nationalist rulers. For example, when India became independent in 1948, the whole peninsula was ruled by a nationalist force. This country has a powerful military and relatively powerful industry. It has also many other resources. But the poverty is unbelievable. India has more slaves than anywhere else in the world. We are also aware of the situation for women in India. This is the result of the rule of a nationalist force in India.
But to some extent, the national movement that could be considered most comparable with Kurdistan is the Palestinian. Right now, a part of the force that rules Palestine has turned into the gendarme for the Israeli state. The other part of that is a theocratic force, Hamas. These forces do not have the ability to take any steps to liberate the Palestinian people.
Of course, Kurdistan has its own geographical area, unlike Palestine, which has been completely occupied and where the brutal process of ethnic cleansing is continuing. But the result of KRG rule has not been so brilliant. The other problem is the political and ideological line and program of Kurdish nationalist leaders.
In sum, the Kurdish nationalist leaders are proud to be a part of the nuts and bolts of the imperialist system. They openly say that. They have no alternative and they don’t want to try any other alternative.
They proudly claim that, unlike many other countries in the Middle East, in Kurdistan there is a free media. But even that is not true. Over the last 20 years there have been many cases of killing journalists and suffocating any kind of criticism.
The fact is that, no matter how you look at it, you cannot see any progress. Many people argue that Iraqi Kurdistan now has an international airport, the roads are built up, there are many shopping malls, many tourist attractions in the mountainous regions for internal and foreign tourists and so on. But when you look at the people of Kurdistan, despite their many natural resources such as oil, they have a destroyed agricultural economy and no proper industrialised economy to improve the overall economic situation of the people and to create jobs. So I see no shining future for an independent Kurdistan. This is not because of the limitations of the Kurdish people but because of the class nature and ideology of the nationalist leaders.
Q: So the solution, just like in other parts of the world, is to make revolution, a socialist revolution, and create a socialist state (in Kurdistan). Something that is no longer fashionable. What are the potential and material bases for such a revolution in the Kurdish regions? Do you think it might be possible that a communist force could emerge from the rubble of the “left” movement in Kurdistan?
A: At the moment, Islamic fundamentalists; Arab, Kurdish, Assyrian and Turkmen nationalists; and Arab tribal heads have the upper hand in Iraq. They [tribal leaders and Islamic fundamentalists] have the initiative in the whole region with the exception of part of Syrian Kurdistan. But all are working within the framework of the existing capitalist relations. The Western powers and capitalism as a whole are in a mess themselves and are caught between these regional contradictions, or to put it in another way, they themselves are part of these contradictions. I don’t see a revolutionary trend, i.e. one led by communists. From a historical point of view, it is clearer than ever before that there is no way out except through revolution. But given the situation in the international communist movement, there is no communist movement in the region that can shoulder such a heavy responsibility successfully.
More than anything else, due to the restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union and ultimately in China and the experience of these defeats, the communist movement is going through a state of sloppiness and lack of initiative. There has not been a real summation of the past communist movement in the region, and not only in Kurdistan. During this time the communist movement has been retreating. However, despite these unfavourable conditions, at the same time I can see the best opportunity, too. We are experiencing serious chaos in the imperialist system and the order they created after WW1. There is now a situation that makes it possible to put an end to this system. But without the existence of a communist movement and a correct political, ideological and organisational line that can never be achieved.
Q: Do you mean there is no hope and nothing should be done?
A: No. Historical conditions over the last three or four decades have shown that ideological and political line is even more decisive. It is clear that without revolutionary theory, it is not possible to make revolution. Marxism provides us with such a theory, but without its development and a revolutionary synthesis of our past victories and defeats, it will not be sufficient. What I’m trying to say is that the subjective elements are lagging behind the objective possibilities.
Question: What are the potentially favourable elements for revolution in such difficult situations?
A: The difficult situation itself is part of the material basis. I mean that the situation is crying out for change. It is possible to reverse the situation in which fundamentalists and imperialist powers have the initiative. The situation is such that the communist movement can intervene and change it. Of course this means a communist movement that has a correct line to analyse the situation correctly and turn it into its opposite.
Q: Do you have anything else to say, any message for those who want to change the world but are shocked by the various reactionary forces and imperialists in the field?
A: There is no middle way; you are either with the Islamic fundamentalists and imperialists on one side or with the people and communist forces or any freedom fighters who are against both anti-people poles on the other side. If there is a communist or revolutionary force that thinks that it is possible to stand in the middle, then we should ask which experiences in the past have shown this to be the case. The conscious individuals and forces should seriously decide whether they want to be part of the present unacceptable situation or want to create another world and break slavery’s chains. Communists and the communist movement can change the course of history while they are reconstructing and revitalising themselves, just as they have done many times in the past.
– end item-