Sebahat Tuncel began her political journey in the youth branch of the People’s Democracy Party (HADEP) in the 1990s. She continued her work within the women’s movement, in parliament as an MP, in prisons, and today within the Free Women’s Movement (TJA).
Part one of this interview with ANF can be read here.
Women were comrades in the struggle, but women at home
How did the growth of the women’s movement in the 1990s affect the Kurdish movement?
As the struggle intensified in the 1990s, women’s participation also increased significantly. In this regard, the role of Abdullah Öcalan was decisive. Addressing women’s freedom consciousness together with the Kurdish people’s struggle for freedom; treating women’s freedom issues as an inseparable part of this struggle; and assigning women to central roles under the slogan “Without the freedom of women, society cannot be free” became among the fundamental dynamics of this period.
At that time, women’s militarization in the guerrilla ranks coincided with the emergence, in the legal and democratic sphere, of roles for women beyond traditional ones, as mothers saw their children join the struggle. The figure of a woman who would embrace the claim of freedom and struggle for the liberation of a people created a different reality. Women joined the struggle in very large numbers.
In that period, what primarily mobilized women was not so much the intensity of gender consciousness as the Kurdish people’s struggle for freedom. However, as women worked alongside men within the struggle, they began to recognize the problems they experienced based on being women. Women who were comrades with men within the party and institutions were compelled to assume traditional roles when they returned home. This eventually led to tension. Women’s freedom came to be defined not only as a principle in the party, in the public sphere, or in the workplace when one is a comrade, but also as a way of life at home, as a measure of patriotism.
Women who were patriotic were expected to embrace the line of women’s freedom and to take a stand against all forms of discrimination, othering, and degrading language and behavior directed at women. This understanding developed alongside women’s organizations. For example, the HADEP organizing took place largely in the form of commissions, and women’s participation was limited. With HADEP, the process of structuring into branches began. I define this as a very important period both in terms of strengthening women’s consciousness and in terms of it becoming a social measure of patriotism.
Afterward, the quota system was implemented. Initially, a 25 percent women’s quota was applied, with an autonomous organization taken as a principle. During the Democratic People’s Party period (DEHAP), this rate increased to 35 percent. With the Democratic Society Party (DTP), 40 percent equal representation and the co-chair system were adopted. With the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), the co-chair system, equal representation, and the zipper system were put into practice. Abdullah Öcalan’s perspective on women’s freedom had a major influence on these developments. This perspective played an important role in the transformation of men, while also making the labor of the women’s struggle visible.
Women embraced this perspective and made very intense efforts to develop the line of women’s freedom and women’s organization. During the HADEP period, we had women’s commissions; youth commissions, and mothers were also involved. They were not “only mothers”; they were truly subjects of this struggle. There was a very strong women’s participation. Those women gained consciousness there, acquired the perspective of women’s freedom, and imposed it as a measure on their children, families, neighbors, and all circles with whom they were in contact.
Kurdish mothers were not only mothers, but also comrades
The struggle of Kurdish mothers is also described as unparalleled in the world. How did this struggle begin?
The participation of mothers and women was very intense. As I mentioned, many young people chose other arenas of struggle, while those who remained here were predominantly women. The families of prisoners, the families of guerrilla fighters, and a significant segment of our political base, speaking specifically of the western regions, were made up of people who had been forced to migrate to the west due to war and conflict in Kurdistan. The state’s policies of denial, annihilation, and assimilation operated on many levels. Around four thousand villages were burned in this country. People were forced into the village guard system; most Kurds rejected this imposition and chose forced displacement instead. One of the main reasons why so many people from Kurdistan live in metropolitan centers today is precisely this.
Around four thousand villages were evacuated, and those who had lived in these villages were forced, in many cases overnight, to load their belongings and migrate to the western metropolises. In that sense, they became politicized precisely because they came here through a political act of refusal. They came because they said “no” to the culture of surrender and submission imposed on their identity and culture.
These people face hunger and housing problems here. They experienced language barriers; most spoke Kurdish, and the language issue in the west was a serious problem. They were confronted with alienation and discriminatory policies. Despite all the severe hardships they endured, they did not accept humiliation. They refused the oppression imposed on them and came to the west with dignity intact.
Women organize families and communities
This was a form of politicization. In fact, many of those who formed around the party and whom we described as patriots came from this social segment. Women played a leading role there. Women have a social dimension. For example, when a man comes to the party, he organizes only himself; when a woman comes to the party, she organizes her entire family.
During the hunger strike periods of that time, many women came with their children. Many of their children grew up in those chairs. Women resisted policies of repression while also struggling against patriarchy within the family. Many women would complete their household duties in the morning so that there would be no problems at home and then come to work in the party. This is something that is difficult to put into words.
At a more organized and political level, the way women participated in the process at the base played a decisive role. Sometimes this was described as, “They came here because of their children.” No, that is not the case; they were also political subjects of this struggle.
It was in the early 2000s that the Peace Mothers were formed officially. At that time, they also published a bulletin, and I was one of the editors responsible for that publication. We were prosecuted during that period. There was a need for a structure in which women could work in a more organized way. Mothers were becoming increasingly organized and developing politics more strongly.
However, the process in 1999 in which Abdullah Öcalan was brought to Turkey as part of an international conspiracy had a very heavy impact on society. Despite this, women played an extremely active role during that period. On the one hand, there were hunger strikes; on the other, occupations of buildings belonging to the ruling party. Women were once again at the forefront of the resistance and struggle carried out against the international conspiracy.
In another period, during the debates on mother-tongue education in the 2000s, mothers signed petitions demanding that “Kurdish be offered as an elective course for our children.” We collected petitions discreetly. In Esenler, 25 mothers submitted petitions; all of them were detained overnight and held in custody for four days. Men also came to the party with their children, asking, “What are we supposed to do with the children?”
Mothers became central political subjects
Mothers became among the most fundamental subjects of every action and every process. For this reason, it would not be accurate to define them solely through motherhood in the classical sense. In feminist politics, it is sometimes said, “We want to go beyond being mothers; we are not only mothers, but we are also women.” This is politically valid, because women are not defined solely by motherhood. However, the understanding of motherhood in our context is different. What the Peace Mothers pioneered speaks precisely to this.
One of the fundamental aspects of the institutionalization of the Peace Mothers is this: yes, they are mothers, but they are also comrades. In the Kurdish people’s struggle for freedom, it is mothers who have stood on the front lines, taking the risk of detention, arrest, and torture. As you may recall, during the 2015–2016 Self-Administration Resistance period, it was these mothers who went to retrieve the bodies left in the streets. Despite harassment and violence by the state, they did not leave the bodies there. They acted as political subjects.
The 1990s were a period in which this became somewhat more institutionalized. The scope of the Peace Mothers’ activities was limited, focusing largely on the families of prisoners and what we referred to as “families of martyrs,” families whose children were in the struggle and whose central demand was peace. They carried out many actions for this purpose. They went to the General Staff headquarters, held weekly sit-ins in Istanbul demanding peace, and traveled to war and conflict zones to call for an end to clashes. In every period, they took on an active role as political subjects, saying, “Let our children not die again.”
Beyond this, it is also possible to speak of thousands of Kurdish women who, while being mothers, were actively involved as subjects within the struggle.
Turning despair into hope is the duty of a revolutionary
Have you ever felt despair during your life in struggle?
I have never fallen into despair. To be a revolutionary means transforming despair into hope, because the struggle itself instills hope. People struggle for what they hope for: the freedom of the people, the freedom of women, the freedom of nature. What keeps you standing and dynamic is precisely this state of hope.
For this reason, a person who is in despair cannot struggle. Where there is despair, there is no movement and no struggle. For revolutionary organizations like ours, and for those who take part in revolutionary struggles, hope is fundamental.
Were there no difficult moments? There were. There are moments in the struggle when one becomes angry, refuses to accept what is happening, and says, “This is too much.” We have lived through very heavy processes. Yet each time, the hope of being able to succeed carries a person forward and keeps them standing.
For example, things that once seemed utopian are becoming realities today. When Abdullah Öcalan said, “Kurdistan is a colony,” at the very beginning of the struggle, no one foresaw that the struggle would reach this point. Today, however, the existence of Kurds is recognized across the world, and a very significant process is underway regarding the securing of Kurdish freedom.
Of course, the struggle has not ended and will continue. Yet this fifty-year process contains a history within which we could fit thousands of revolutions: the line of women’s freedom is one of them; ecological freedom is another, and socialist consciousness is another. In other words, it is linked to how one conceives of revolution. Revolution is not only about tearing down one thing and replacing it with another; it also refers to the development of revolutionary, profound, and radical transformations within this process.
In this sense, despair has no place in a revolutionary handbook. I have never been without hope. If we are to live in a different world, we can only create that world ourselves. A life drawn for us by others is not our life.
Leave a Reply