The government’s decision to end the dialogue process of 2013–2015 for its own political calculations has caused people to approach efforts for a democratic and peaceful solution to the Kurdish question with caution. While the government speaks of domestic peace, its daily additions to policies of suppressing the opposition deepen these concerns, casting a shadow over the participation of labor circles in the process.
Özgür Karabulut, Chair of the Revolutionary Construction, Building and Road Workers’ Union (Dev Yapi-Is), affiliated with the Confederation of Progressive Trade Unions of Turkey (DISK), spoke to ANF and said that this approach delays the socialization of the process.
Karabulut said the absence of any stance from unions regarding this process is a major shortcoming. He added: “In this process, no struggle that does not go beyond the current status quo and does not challenge existing patterns can achieve any economic, political, or social gain.”
We are organizing in a sector where Kurdish workers most affected by war are employed
Kurdish People’s Leader Abdullah Öcalan’s call for “Peace and a Democratic Society” on 27 February, Karabulut said, changed many institutional relations. He explained that they represent a segment that has struggled to survive for decades in the midst of war and conflict. Karabulut underlined that it is workers and laborers who have been most affected by this cycle of war and conflict, and continued: “We are carrying out organizing activities in the construction sector, where Kurdish workers displaced from their villages, whose villages were emptied, and who have been affected by war and conflict are most heavily employed. We face the negative consequences of those anti-democratic practices. Our friends, our members, Kurdish workers, construction workers, wander from site to site across the country with a suitcase on their backs. They are subjected to inhumane working conditions at these construction sites. In addition, they are exposed to racist attacks because of their Kurdish identity. They are constantly subjected to violations of their rights. When they demand their wages, they face lynching and exile simply because they are Kurds. A very recent example of this happened: Kurdish agricultural workers were targeted in these racist attacks. Seasonal agricultural workers and construction workers are interconnected at the same time. They work as seasonal agricultural laborers in the summer and construction workers in the winter. We are waging an organized struggle not only against exploitation but also against this discrimination.”
Öcalan’s call gave us hope
Karabulut stressed that the Kurdish question is one of the most fundamental issues of these lands, adding that without its resolution, the economic and political problems shaped alongside it also have no chance of being resolved.
Karabulut pointed out that the war is financed with taxes taken from workers and laborers and emphasized that one of the main reasons for the economic crisis and impoverishment experienced especially in the last 10–15 years has been the government’s policies of war and deadlock. For this reason, Karabulut said that the process which developed with Abdullah Öcalan’s call on 27 February gave them hope. He explained: “The hope that war and conflicts might come to an end can also create the ground for us to express other vital problems through democratic means. Foremost among these is the freedom to organize. At present, we cannot organize freely, because there is a labor law and a trade union law shaped by the 12 September coup. It is not really possible to overcome this. At its core, there has been a government that confined itself to security-oriented policies and carried out its policies within that framework. Once this issue is resolved, we will have a better chance to express the economic problems, the problems of workers’ organization, and the problems of unionization in this land, and to create change and transformation through democratic channels.”
The absence of unions’ stance on the process is a major shortcoming
Karabulut noted that women, young people, and many other dynamics have expressed both positive and negative views and made contributions to the process. However, he emphasized that, in a self-critical assessment, the absence of any stance from the unions within the labor and democracy forces regarding this process is a major shortcoming.
Karabulut also pointed out that the process rests on fragile ground: “At this stage, institutions are going through a process of change and transformation. We can observe that. Everyone has entered into different positions and polarizations according to this new process. For example, there are also practices, programs, and plans that oppose the process. Certain leftist circles, workers, and laborers who see themselves within the labor struggle are among the most important groups that could speak out or push for rapid steps toward democratization, but during this period they have remained silent and passive observers. I believe this also stems from the approach of the unions, because unions are absent in this process. For instance, on Sunday, at the rally in Kadikoy on the occasion of 1 September World Peace Day, union participation was very limited. This results both from the anxieties created by the process and from their failure to see it as their role or duty.”
They see the Kurdish sphere as a risk area and do not want to enter
Karabulut said the Kurdish question serves as a litmus test and continued: “While the democratic resolution of the Kurdish question should be a demand of workers and laborers, the government has for years rendered them neutral through war policies. This has stripped unions of their democratic essence, of their transformative and progressive nature. Remember, exactly five years ago the Turkish Medical Association declared that war is a public health issue, and a campaign of terror was unleashed against it. Speaking the truth from this field was blocked, and we could not even stand behind them. The Kurdish question is seen as a risk area, and many circles do not want to enter this risk area. Those who do are narrowed, silenced, and suppressed there.”
No struggle that fails to challenge the status quo can achieve any social gain in this process
Karabulut underlined that in their current state, unions have no mechanism or struggle that pushes the boundaries of the system and stressed that this must change.
Karabulut said, “In this process, no struggle that does not go beyond the current status quo and does not challenge existing patterns can achieve any economic, political, or social gain,” and he continued: “Today, a union movement that has no stance on the Kurdish question or on peace has no chance of increasing workers’ bread even by a single bite. They remain silent because they fear the government. Most recently, we saw the role of Türk-Is and Memur-Sen in collective bargaining. They have fallen into the position of being an extension of the government, unable to go beyond it. They cannot voice opposition to the government because they fear losing their seats and shaking their status quo. And today the government tells society: we will resolve this issue with the parties involved, you stay out of it. But this is not an issue that can be resolved only between the parties. Yes, weapons may be laid down, a ceasefire may be declared, but as long as we cannot establish social peace, as long as all the dynamics of society cannot become part of this and subjects of it, there is no chance of success. Nor will it be possible as long as the influence of the capitalist class, which draws strength from this war and enforces mechanisms of repression, is not broken.”
A call to unions
Karabulut emphasized that unions must be part of the struggle for peace and made the following call: “They do not necessarily have to take sides; they should declare their own demands, the demands of workers and laborers, their concern for peace, their concern for a solution, and they should wage a struggle for these. There is no other way. What do we mean by peace? What positive contributions can workers make to peace? These must be expressed and the struggle must be expanded. For example, today the international trade union movement is showing resistance to Israel’s occupation and genocidal policies in Gaza by refusing to load warships or provide materials. Yet here we only watch. We cannot even participate in a rally. However, the demand for peace is always in the interests of workers and laborers. They must not shy away from raising this demand.” Karabulut also said, “The same situation applies even to militant unions. They may remain as spectators due to mistrust in the process. But if it is desired that the process should result in gains for workers and laborers, then they must speak out more. They must voice their demands regarding the process, with all their strengths and shortcomings. They must become part of the process in order for it to be socialized. Unions must not remain confined to economic issues alone but also take a stance and steps on social issues. The trade union movement has done this in the past, and today it must break out of its shell and do so again. The DISK held protests demanding the closure of the State Security Courts, or anti-fascist struggle rallies before the 12 September coup. Because fascist repression also blocked DISK’s organizing. Today, labor and democracy forces must speak out and take steps to challenge the government.”