In the second part of his interview with ANF, Remzi Kartal, co-chair of Kongra-Gel, said that “the approach and statements of Turkey’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan are a reflection of the state’s policy of perceiving the Kurds’ existence as an enemy, a threat, and a red line.”
The first part of this interview can be read here.
Turkey’s Foreign Minister, Hakan Fidan, does not leave Damascus. He speaks with threats against the Kurdish people and Rojava, and each time he says, “our tolerance has ended” or “we do not accept this.” As justification, it is stated that along with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), the People’s Protection Units (YPG) should also hand over their weapons to the Syrian government. How do you evaluate Fidan’s approach? Are these words connected to the ongoing process?
Indeed, the approach and statements of Turkey’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan are a reflection of the state’s policy of perceiving the Kurds’ existence as an enemy, a threat, and a red line. Hakan Fidan’s politics have not moved beyond this framework. With his language, attitude, and threats, he carries out this policy toward Rojava at a very high level, in a disrespectful and open manner.
This policy is suitable neither for the process in Northern Kurdistan (Bakur) nor for the process in Imrali. Abdullah Öcalan and the state are the two sides of this process. The process initiated by Öcalan means that the state must abandon hostility toward the Kurdish people, give up denial and annihilation, and recognize the existence of the Kurds. In return, the Kurdish people would recognize the state as their own, as the common state of both Turkish and Kurdish peoples.
As Abdullah Öcalan has said, during the Ottoman period, the alliance between the Kurdish and Turkish nations created a great empire and civilization. But this alliance was broken by the political concept of capitalist modernity. Racism and nation-state formation laid the foundation of this state. Racism against Kurds also began. At the beginning of the Republic, there was a Kurdish-Turkish alliance. After the Republic was established, however, the denial of the Kurds became a state policy, because the Turkish state was seized by the paranoia of division. At that time, they saw the Kurdish question as division.
But now Abdullah Öcalan says: “No, it is not about division. Kurds and Turks want to build a democratic society and a democratic, peaceful country on the basis of this state, our state.” This concept will strengthen both peoples; the Kurdish and Turkish peoples will continue to exist within this state, as the state of all of us.
Today in Syria there is no state, no politics, no law. The situation in Damascus is clear. What has been done to the Alawites, what has been done to the Druze, is evident. The reason is the Damascus regime itself, because there is no law and no system. The components of Syria are absent.
On what basis does Hakan Fidan say that the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the Autonomous Administration, the YPG, and the Women’s Protection Units (YPJ) should dissolve themselves and surrender to Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)? This is hostility against the Kurdish people. This is a demand to eliminate the Kurdish people’s achievements. That is why Hakan Fidan’s policy is extremely dangerous. With such a policy, there will be neither peace in Turkey nor a resolution of the problems in Syria.
Some Kurdish parties and circles criticize by saying, “Why do we not want a state? Why is Rojava Kurdistan not becoming a state?” Are these demands possible, and how do you evaluate these criticisms?
We see these criticisms as very narrow-minded and not suitable to the conditions of the Kurdish people and the general geography of Kurdistan. Today in the world, and especially over the last century, we have seen politics that establish the freedom of peoples upon the nation-state. Abdullah Öcalan, and in fact the PKK which was founded on this basis, once aimed for a united and independent Kurdistan. However, Abdullah Öcalan’s politics and struggle reached a clear conclusion: the nation-state is the concept of capitalist modernity. It redesigns peoples according to its own interests and drives wars among them. It sustains its politics and sovereignty through these wars.
The most obvious example is the Middle East. For a hundred years this very politics has been carried out there. The Kurdish people, the Turkish people, the Arab people, and the Persian people live together. Such a concept functions exactly as they want: wars between peoples continue, and they maintain this system on the backs of the peoples through financial capital and the war industry.
That is why Abdullah Öcalan says that freedom is inseparable from security. The freedom of the Kurdish people exists only with the security of the Kurdish people. If a people are always condemned to war and conflict, if this becomes their fate, then their freedom will not be permanent; it will be a calamity. Therefore, people need security. As the Kurdish people and democratic forces, we ground our security in Abdullah Öcalan.
Today, especially in North and East Syria, peoples live together. Indeed, east of the Euphrates, the Arab population is larger than the Kurdish population. What does Damascus want? Damascus wants to separate Kurds from Arabs. What does Turkey want? Turkey also wants to separate Kurds from Arabs. And what does Abdullah Öcalan say? “Whatever you do, do not leave the Kurds isolated; let Kurds form alliances with other peoples and components on the basis of freedom and democracy.”
Today, democratic autonomy in North and East Syria is precisely this, and we must strengthen the alliance of peoples. We must render ineffective the fascist and racist political concepts, as well as the international concepts that want to wage wars upon peoples. In Kurdistan, and in the Middle East more broadly, as peoples living together, we must build a system on the foundation of freedom and peace.
In the framework of the process, the PKK has dissolved itself, and a group of guerrillas burned their weapons. If the process collapses, what would be your achievements, what would be the state’s achievements, and what kind of situation would emerge?
Our people must have complete confidence in themselves. Until today, our people have reached this stage through the leadership of Abdullah Öcalan and the pioneers of the struggle. The struggle continues. At a time when Kurds were politically, spiritually, and in terms of belief reduced to nothing, this struggle did not retreat; on the contrary, it grew.
The guerrilla remains in its place. Symbolically, 30 comrades burned their weapons. They expressed their stance. They presented their beliefs and positions as a response to Abdullah Öcalan for political and democratic work. If democratic politics advances and conditions are created, they will also participate. If not, they will remain in place and protect themselves.
Political and social work continues both inside the country and abroad. Today we are stronger than in past periods. The steps taken by Abdullah Öcalan removed the politics that criminalized and terrorized the PKK and that stood in the way of a solution to the problem. This is why in the past ten months our gains have increased greatly. Everyone must have confidence in themselves.
Within the framework of Abdullah Öcalan’s message, we must organize and structure ourselves on the basis of the freedom manifesto, the call for peace, and a democratic society. In the country, in the Middle East, in all four parts of Kurdistan, and abroad, our people and the friends of our people must advance and organize their work in this period. The future belongs to us; it belongs to those who want peace and democracy. Whether the state takes steps or not, we will continue our struggle. This process offers us the opportunity to succeed. We must trust ourselves and our leadership and prepare ourselves accordingly.
You have been in Europe for years and you also follow European public opinion. What impact did the ceremony of a group of PKK guerrillas burning their weapons have on the European public?
It was very powerful. The ceremony on July 11 was deeply meaningful; with determination, discipline, and faith, it demonstrated to the whole world its stance: we are burning weapons. Because fire is sacred for the Kurdish people. We are burning weapons; in other words, we are determined for peace and democracy.
This was an event that resonated as strongly as Abdullah Öcalan’s message on the dissolution of the PKK and the Party’s response to it. The action echoed across the world and created great prestige both for our movement and for Abdullah Öcalan.
Let us trust in the leadership of Abdullah Öcalan, in his comrades, and in the struggle of our martyrs. The struggle continues. The tools and methods of struggle change with time; the work is carried out according to the conditions and opportunities of the moment. Today, more than ever before, we have the chance to succeed.
That is why no one should confuse themselves with different questions; do not dwell on “Has the state taken a step or not?” Everyone’s eyes and ears should be on Abdullah Öcalan. What did Abdullah Öcalan say, what did our movement say, and what must we do?
Let us not be overly occupied with “What did the state say?” but rather focus on what we should do. What does Abdullah Öcalan expect from us, what does our movement expect from us, and what must we do? Which responsibilities must we fulfill so that we strengthen Abdullah Öcalan’s hand? On this basis, let us expand our work.