In an extensive interview with ANF, Cemil Bayik, Co-Chair of the KCK (Kurdistan Communities Union) Executive Council, provides a precise analysis of the geopolitical situation in the ongoing Third World War. He puts the attacks in Syria and Rojava into context, discusses their implications, and offers an outlook on the paradigm of Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan based on democratic society as a way out of crisis-ridden capitalism.
Bayık said that the attacks against Rojava are targeting the Rojava Revolution, in all its dimensions, because it has obstructed the new war of division being waged in the Middle East. He stressed that the attacks on Rojava have both international and regional dimensions and are directly linked to the state-centered policies of international powers.
The whole world is undergoing a process of structural changes, with developments taking place on a daily basis. There are conflicts and wars at the local and regional level in many parts of the world. One could speak of a war that has spread everywhere, with economic, social, and diplomatic crises. Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan defined this as the Third World War. How come that the center of the war is the Middle East and Kurdistan in particular?
The Third World War was initiated with the First Gulf War, and it has continued since. It might be hard for some to realize that the Third World War has already begun because it does not resemble the First and Second World Wars. The Third World War is unfolding under the conditions of globalized capitalism. It is not a harsh war based on rigid polarization like the First and Second World Wars. This is because there is no polarization and style of warfare aimed at defeating each other in the shortest time possible, as there was in the First and Second World Wars. The warfare today continues in various forms. A struggle within the system, seeking to push back other capitalist countries and strengthen itself through various and changing alliances, is being waged continuously.
All the World Wars occurred during periods when old balances were destroyed and new political balances and a relative status quo were sought to be established. Now, with the end of the Cold War, the war to create new political balances and establish a relative status quo according to the needs of the global capitalist system continues in place of the shattered political balances and status quo. Due to the nature of global capitalism, this war is a protracted but continuous one. It is primarily taking the form of regional conflicts. All this tension, conflict, and warfare are part of the Third World War. One must recognize its connection to the reality of global capitalism.
At the same time, the Third World War is also intertwined with the crisis of global capitalism. Global capitalism is experiencing multiple crises. The income gap between communities and countries, the ecological crisis, the continued heavy domination of women, the migration problem, armament, and the perpetuation of wars are the fundamental dimensions of this crisis. Since the systemic left opposition has failed to provide a solution to these problems, right-wing parties are coming to power in most countries. The proliferation of right-wing governments is an expression of the deepening crisis of capitalism. Clearly, the deepening crisis imposes a historical task on those forces struggling for democracy and freedom. In this context, those with the appropriate ideological-political approaches and solution projects have a high chance of succeeding.
The paradigm of the Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan, has the capability to respond to the problems that created this crisis. This shows that our struggle will develop further. The continuation of the Third World War in the Middle East and Kurdistan shows that the paradigm and solution projects of the Kurdish people’s leader, Abdullah Öcalan, have gained ground for development and results. Our freedom movement, which has developed to date, shows that, no matter how many difficulties and obstacles there are, if the paradigm of our leader is correctly put into practice, it will achieve even more than the developments created so far. Just as difficult conditions gave birth to our movement, the difficult conditions that will arise before us will be our reason to struggle and win.
Throughout history, the Middle East has been the geography where political balances and relative statuses have been established. Today again, the Middle East has become a battlefield where world balances will be established. Since Kurdistan is at the center of the Middle East, the war is intensifying in Kurdistan and its surroundings. The Middle East retains its importance for the world politically, economically, and socially. In our globalizing world, the Middle East must be viewed as a whole with Europe and Africa. If Western Asia is added to this, one can understand how geopolitically important the Middle East is. When also taking into account that energy is as vital as water for globalized capitalism and consumer society, one can better understand why this war is being waged in the Middle East and Kurdistan at its center.
Israel’s existence and its desire to increase its influence in the region, along with its moves in this direction, are another fundamental factor contributing to the concentration of the Third World War in the Middle East. Kurdistan, meanwhile, remains within the borders of four Middle Eastern states. These four states determine the balance of power in the Middle East. As such, Kurdistan remains at the center of the conflict in the Middle East. However, through decades of struggle, the Kurds have become a significant political force. They hold a crucial position both in the four countries into which their homeland was divided and in the political balance of the general Middle East. No international or regional power can pursue an accurate and effective Middle East policy without taking the Kurds into account. Undoubtedly, although they still primarily consider states due to their position, the Kurds will inevitably have a place within these political balances. Without resolving the issue of the Kurds’ existence and freedom, neither the countries that have established sovereignty over Kurdistan will achieve stability, nor will the regional policies of international powers yield results. The unresolved Kurdish issue is the most fundamental factor in the political crisis and problems in the Middle East. And the effectiveness of the struggle of the Kurds in the four parts of Kurdistan also brings with it the efforts of international and regional powers to bring the Kurds under their influence. They want to either neutralize the Kurds or make them part of their own policies. From this perspective, the regional war is also being waged over Kurdistan. But the Kurds are also using their important position in the political struggle to fight for their gains in the struggle for existence and freedom.
During the negotiations between 2013 and 2015, Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan mentioned that the imperialist attacks and war, which had stalled in Syria, would eventually shift north and east. The latest developments have proven that. What are your thoughts on the intensification of the war in Syria? The US has recently explicitly targeted Iraq and Iran. Is there a possibility that the war will spread to these countries too? What would be the possible consequences? How would Turkey be affected?
The eastern Mediterranean is like a gateway to the Middle East and Europe. Syria, Lebanon, and Israel are located here, as is Gaza, which is now occupied by Israel. Throughout history, there has been significant struggle over Syria. The Ottoman Empire gained control over the entire Middle East by opening the Syrian gate. This was also the area most intensely affected by the Crusades. During the First World War, it was again at the forefront of important battles and political struggles in the Middle East. It was an arena of struggle between Britain and France. Ultimately, France sought to dominate Syria, while Britain aimed to control Iraq and Jordan to assert influence in the region. The establishment of Israel further heightened the strategic importance of Lebanon and Syria. As long as Syria’s political balances and situation fail to achieve stability, uncertainty will persist in the Middle East’s future. For this reason, the US and the UK, with Turkey’s support, mobilized HTS and ended the Ba’ath regime in Syria. Undoubtedly, Israel also played a role in ending the Ba’ath regime. Israel’s intervention in Syria after the collapse of the regime was also part of this plan for destruction.
The current political regime in Iran is a target of the US and Israel. First, they neutralized Iran’s proxy forces in the Middle East. Now they are targeting Iran directly. In Iraq, a new political system was established with the US occupation. It is still a country under US influence. However, since Iraq is one of the places where Iran breathes, they want to remove the Iraqi government from a position of supporting Iran. They particularly aim to neutralize the Hashd al-Shaabi. Some steps were taken in this regard during the Sudani government. But the US and Israel do not consider this sufficient. They want to remove Iran from a position where it can take initiative. For this reason, Trump threatened the Shiite prime minister candidate. If no compromise can be reached, there will be some developments in Iraq as well. Political balances in Iraq, which has not gained stability, may change. The US’s first choice may also be to create a compromise. Indeed, Maliki seems to have given up on his candidacy.
It has become clear that the current Iranian regime has no chance to survive in its current form. This regime will either change or collapse. If it does not make fundamental changes, this outcome seems inevitable. However, a foreign intervention-based administration in Iran could further exacerbate the crisis and problems. This is partly why the 12-day war was halted. The uprisings that followed further weakened the regime. While harsh interventions may have caused a temporary decline in the popular uprising, it cannot be said that the regime has grown stronger. Israel and the US favor Iran remaining intact but with a change in regime. They see a unified Iran as more beneficial to their own interests. If Iran does not fragment when the regime falls, a democratic system based on autonomous regions becomes inevitable. In fact, Iran’s history is one of local autonomy. The modernization of this in Iran could bring stability. The history of the Middle East is a history of locals living within autonomy. The strife of nationalism came from the West. If the Middle East is in constant crisis today, an important reason for this is that the concept of the nation-state, which is contrary to the political history of the Middle East, has been introduced into the Middle East as a source of strife. The famous divide-and-rule policy is also based on this single-minded understanding of the nation-state.
Regarding Turkey, if the country does not change itself and become a democratic system based on Turkish-Kurdish brotherhood within the framework of the concept of the democratic nation, it will not escape its position as a country that constantly experiences and is used in crises. International powers that benefit from this situation can implement a design in Turkey based on their interests. The unsolved Kurdish issue is its weakest point; it creates real survival problems for Turkey. The Turkish state sees the dangers that may arise. On one hand, it may face dangers because it has not shown the will to change the Kurdish policy it has pursued so far.
Why have the Rojava Revolution and the Kurdish nation become targets of attacks? What message do you want to convey in this regard to the Kurdish forces and peoples? And what is the position of Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan on this issue?
The situation that most complicates the solution to the Kurdish question is the division of the Kurds in Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria. Kurds are the second-largest ethnic group in all these countries. There are Azeris in Iran, but since Shiism is their dominant identity, their ethnic side does not come to the fore or is not brought to the fore. These four states were shaped by the concept of the nation-state in the 20th century. Although the harshest approach to the Kurdish presence is found in Turkey, a hegemonic policy has also been pursued towards the Kurds in the other three countries. Given the Middle East’s crucial role in global balances, international powers base their policies on these states. This is a significant handicap for the Kurdish people’s struggle for freedom. And even if the four states are opposed on other issues, they can produce a common policy when it comes to the Kurds. This reality shows the difficulties the Kurdish people’s struggle for freedom will face. It must be considered when pursuing policies regarding the Kurdish people’s struggle for freedom. Overcoming these handicaps requires, on the one hand, a determined and strong struggle, and on the other hand, political subtlety and skill. In this respect, rhetoric and simplistic statements find no use in the Kurdish issue. The Kurdish issue cannot be compared to similar issues elsewhere in the world. The Kurdish issue remains unsolved not because of the scarcity or abundance of demands. It remains unsolved because of policies aimed at eliminating the existence of the Kurds through the concept of the nation-state.
The attacks on Rojava have both international and regional dimensions. International powers, considering that maintaining tactical relations with Rojava, with which they had formed an alliance against ISIS, was not in their own interests anymore, deemed relations with Turkey and some Arab countries more important. They reached an agreement with Turkey and the Arab countries on the overthrow of Assad. Again, Israel’s interests were considered. When the policy of establishing new political balances in the Middle East based on partnership with these countries was pursued, HTS’s attacks were overlooked. Since international powers are based on states, there is no comprehensive Kurdish policy. From this perspective, other political balances and interests were preferred. In fact, the Turkish Republic and HTS had always planned to facilitate this and launch an attack. Once the agreement was reached to hand over southern Syria to Israel, the attack was launched.
Everyone can see that the Kurds are influential in the Middle East. The struggle waged for decades in the four parts of Kurdistan has made the Kurds a very influential political force. The Kurdish freedom movement’s goal of a Middle East based on brotherhood among peoples, transcending the divide-and-conquer policies, does not suit certain powers. In the 20th century, the role assigned to the Kurds was to be a source of instability. In this way, the hegemonic powers kept the countries of the region under their domination. Although some cracks have appeared in this 20th-century policy, they still persist. The Kurds are not ignored; however, they do not pursue a unified Kurdish policy because they do not see it in their interest to remove themselves from a position of conflict and resolve the issue through democratic compromise. However, since the Kurds have become a significant force in every part of Kurdistan today, it has become difficult to maintain this policy. If the Kurds continue the struggle they have waged so far, and if the Kurdish political forces abandon the policy of blocking each other’s path or asserting their dominance, this policy will be overcome, and the Kurds will achieve a free and democratic life in every country where they reside. The democratic solution project of Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan, based on the concept of the democratic nation, is also a project to overcome the policies pursued by both international and regional powers against the Kurds. These policies cannot be overcome with narrow nationalist approaches and will only confront the Kurds with policies of genocide. When the Kurdish people’s struggle as a whole in all parts gains strength, the issue of the Kurds’ existence and freedom in the four parts will be resolved. Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan presents a strategic vision for the Kurds and aims for the democratization of all countries in the region. The convergence of the need for democratization in the Middle East with the Kurdish vision will usher in a new era not only for the Kurds but for the Middle East as well. The vision presented by him will also make the 21st century the Kurdish century.
The Kurdish people’s uprising in the four parts of Kurdistan in response to the attacks on Rojava and the impact of this uprising on world public opinion have once again demonstrated the immense power of the Kurdish people to achieve their freedom.
Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan also evaluated that the ongoing attacks are a threat to the paradigm of the democratic society. Could you further elaborate on this?
The paradigm of Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan, which is based on the democratic, ecological society oriented towards the freedom of the women, is a paradigm opposed to power, the state, and capitalism. Undoubtedly, those who exercise authoritarian power over the people and the capitalist modernist forces that have brought humanity to the brink of destruction do not accept this paradigm. They stand in the way of its development. From this perspective, not only in Rojava, but everywhere where Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan and the Kurdish freedom movement have an influence, they take a stance against this paradigm. Women, youth, workers, and all oppressed communities will not bow to power, to the state, which is an instrument of oppression over societies, and to capitalist modernity, which exploits and destroys nature. Indeed, people with different ideological or political tendencies all over the world are fighting against these forces that are hostile to society and nature. Our movement has a systematic ideology and theory on this issue. We prefer to wage this struggle in a democratic environment, not head-on and in direct confrontation. One dimension of our struggle is to achieve this ground for struggle. Oppressed peoples and societies wage their struggles most effectively under these conditions. We aim for and want to adopt such a style of struggle in the four parts of Kurdistan and in the countries in question. We believe that such an ideological and political struggle is also correct for Southern Kurdistan.
An important dimension of the attacks on Rojava and North and East Syria is that they targeted the democratic society. The Damascus regime, HTS, could not accept the democratic system in Rojav and North and East Syria. It was clear that there would be tension. Would this tension exist within a democratic environment, or would it involve the use of violent means? It was no secret that the rulers of Damascus would resort to violence, lacking a democratic mindset. Of course, they did not have the groundwork or power to do this alone. With the approval of international powers and the support of regional countries, they were mobilized to both eliminate this democratic system and break the Kurdish will. And it is clear that Rojava’s democratic system is being targeted. Tom Barrack said that there can be no democracy in the Middle East and that monarchy is appropriate. This is actually an insult to the peoples of the Middle East; it does not consider the peoples of the Middle East worthy of democracy. With this statement, North and East Syria were threatened. If monarchy is proposed for the Middle East, then of course the democratic system of Rojava and North and East Syria is seen as a threat. This democratic system is seen as a threat to the capitalist modernist system envisioned for the Middle East. One of the aims of the attack on Rojava and North and East Syria, on their democratic autonomous system, is to eliminate what they see as a threat to themselves.
Turkey has already viewed democratization as a threat to its survival. It has not taken steps toward democratization for fear that the Kurds would benefit from it. Democracy naturally means local democracy, taking local will into account. Turkey does not accept the European condition of local autonomy. There is no country that is democratic but does not accept the uniqueness and self-governance of different identities. If democracy is the realization of the will of the people, then the will emerging on the local level must also be accepted. In Turkey, however, the authority of governors in provinces and district governors in districts exceeds that of mayors elected by the people. Municipalities have a limited scope of work, confined to activities such as roads, water, sewage, and garbage collection.
Neither the coalition forces nor HTS nor Turkey have ever accepted the self-governance system established by Rojava and North and East Syria. They see democracy as a system of governance that will render their own systems ineffective. In this respect, they have aimed to break the will of the Kurds and eliminate the democratic system in North and East Syria. This is because this system, based on the Arab, Syriac, Circassian, Turkmen, and Armenian societies, was brought about by the Kurdish will that emerged from the Rojava Revolution. Therefore, this attack on the Kurdish will is a direct attack on the paradigm of the democratic society. They have seen that if this paradigm becomes effective in Syria, it will spread throughout the Middle East.
Given this situation, how do you view the assessments that the paradigm has been undermined, that the construction of a democratic society and the idea that peoples can live together democratically, freely, and justly have collapsed, and that this is even a fantasy, a utopia?
To say that the paradigm of women’s freedom, social ecology, and radical democracy of Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan has collapsed is to say that humanity is dependent on capitalism and oppressive exploitative systems. Francis Fukuyama once said that history had come to an end. In other words, neoliberalism was the final system for humanity, and no other political, social, or economic system could exist beyond it. When real socialism dissolved, mainly due to its own internal flaws, this was seen as a victory for capitalism. If any system is collapsing today, it is the statist, power-driven, capitalist, modernist system. Don’t the problems and crises this system is causing humanity around the world every day prove that it must be overcome? Those who say that the idea of democratic, free, and just living for peoples has collapsed in the case of North and East Syria are themselves in a state of collapse. More accurately, they are segments of society that are slaves to other ideas, devoid of the idea of free and democratic living. Let’s leave aside the collapse of this paradigm; it is an idea that offers new hope to humanity and will be increasingly embraced, along with the social and political system it envisions. What you mention is the demagogic rhetoric of those who know no system other than the nationalist and capitalist modernist system. It is their opposition to our leader and the PKK that makes them say these things. It is the discourse of those who have been paranoid about finding fault with our leader and the PKK for 50 years. However, the peoples, workers, women, youth, and forces seeking freedom see this paradigm as a hope.
This paradigm has been put into practice for 14 years, with its shortcomings and inadequacies, in Rojava and North and East Syria. It has become a model that the world looks up to, except for those who oppose Turkey and Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan. It has been proven that a social system based on such a paradigm can be established. There are shortcomings in the implementation in Rojava that can be criticized, and we also criticize them. But a social life system had been established. Women have gained a level of freedom they have never had anywhere else. Kurds, Arabs, Circassians, Syriacs, Armenians, and Turkmens have lived together as brothers and sisters without conflict. Although this system has been struck in certain ways by the attacks of international powers and forces hostile to the Kurds and democracy, it cannot be said that this idea and project have collapsed. Only some areas where this project was intended to be implemented have been occupied by the enemies of democracy.
It is known that both the ideas of Jesus Christ and Muhammad were seen as a fantasy and utopia, and attempts were made to dissuade people from them. Failing to offer a utopia that gives people hope in the face of the capitalist modernist system that is destroying humanity is tantamount to humanity lying down to die. Humanity is not dead. The paradigm of Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan clearly states that humanity is not dead and that sociality, which is a condition for human existence, will be revived with democratic values. This is precisely a call that can be realized, a project of salvation. Humanity can accept neither the current power-wielding state system nor the capitalist modernist system. If there is a collapsed idea and system, it is the male-dominated, power-wielding state system. The system that is alive, that will sustain life, and that is the future of humanity will be provided by the paradigm of Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan.
Can it be said that peoples cannot live together but only become enemies and slaughter each other? Can it be said that a democratic, free, and just system cannot be established? The Middle East is the cradle of humanity; many values have spread from here to the world. To say that nothing will come out of the Middle East because dogmatism and conservatism later emerged is to disregard the historical values of the Middle East. It is to look at the Middle East with an Orientalist, i.e., Westernized, mindset. It is to belittle oneself. Such thinking has no future. Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan presents a liberation project for all humanity. The values he puts forward are praised and embraced, but such approaches say that humanity cannot live freely, democratically, and fraternally. Once upon a time, people with right-wing and fascist mindsets used to say to socialists that human nature is selfish and individualistic, and that such a communal system cannot be established. Now it is clear that those who seek flaws in this paradigm have this very obsession. In short, this paradigm and the project it envisions have not collapsed; on the contrary, they will continue to develop and be embraced by the people.