the armed struggle

[Nistiman]

A couple of articles have been written on other kurdish news outlets, and some foreigners here have also voiced that the kurds should give up the armed struggle and pursue 'democratic means'.

While critical of Pkk's policies, none of my criticisms have centered around their use of 'violence' to pursue their aims. Their numerous calls for cease-fire, the constant appeal for a negotiation partner, their desire to tone down the demands and deal moderately with the turkish state suggest to me that their use of the armed struggle is wholly salutary.

Why do those who -- apparently -- want the kurdish problem in turkey to be solved press the kurds to give up their arms at a time when the military certainly shows no sign of willingness to compromise or negotiate?


Can anyone seriously assert that once the PKK lays down their weapons and an alternative 'democratic' Kurdish opposition is created, then the military will decide it is in its best interest to start a dialogue with the Kurds?

[tomjez]

Interesting I shall respond to it in a bit (working!!!)

[Piling]

Kurds in Turkey are in majority against the war.
So how could the PKK decide alone to provoke another destruction of Kurdistan against the will of its population ?

[tomjez]

So
For me armed struggle can only be an option when a majority of the population is behind the guerrilla. It was an option in the 80's and 90's when Kurds were forced to chose between the state and the PKK. NOW it's not the case anymore, and a few PKK members getting killed every week does not make Turkish government "kurds killer". I am against violence, but I am not a "hardcore pacifist". Riot can be legitim, guerilla can be legitim. I still believe there is a slight difference between turkish republic TODAY and Sadam Hussein's Irak. Maybe Turkey tried to genocide the kurds, but it was in the 20's 30's. It tried to kill the language, but it was in the 80's 90's.
Situation changed, and even if SOME military in turkey feel bad about new rights to kurd, they're not enough to legitimize a new kurdish armed rebellion.
I believe that NOW, in 2005, the solution can be democratic. Anyway PKK has never been, and is less than ever the representant of kurds. They are not fighting or talking in the name of kurds, and Turkish repulbic has no real interest in negociating with them. They probably killed more kurds than they killed soldiers anyway: traitors, capitalists, imperialists, deviants, men ploting agains Apo...

So PKK is definitely not an option for kurds in turkey. It never did anything for them and anyway does not care about kurdistan. I'm not saying the little PKKci fighting turkish army who maybe believes in what he does, I'm saying the leaders, whose main interest is traffic.

YEah Military will never compromize or negociate with PKK. It maybe silly, but on the other hand turkish public opinion would not accept it. What's more there is no need to negociate: offer real amnesty to PKK members and the leaders will be quickly alone in their mountains.

And hey, military don't decide everything. Government has done democratic reforms, things are improving, Kurds have much more rights than 3 or 4 years (I LIVE IN TURKEY I AM TALKING OF THINGS I SEE IN MY EVERY DAY LIFE).

PKK decided to resume military fight in 2004. Between 1999 and 2002 there was a great oppression of kurds. PKK did not fight, following the word of öcalan who only thought of saving his low life.
In 2002 democratization started. In 2004, PKK decided to resume fighting. Why???
Because they were afraid of being let aside. They are not fighting to defend kurds, to solve anything, they are fighting to prove they exist.
After 21 years, they did not understand that Turkey will NEVER negociate. Or I believe they do know that. But their aim is to create repression, their goal is to jeopardize democratization. PKK is not a democratic party, and democracy is not good for them.

When the put old people and children in first line against turkish police, what do they intend to do?

Democratization started because PKK was silent. The best thing they can do is dissolve. When turks stop being afraid of "separatism", situation will improve...

PKK has terror strategy. They don't want peace, they don't want democracy. Images of soldiers burrial, instrumentalized by governmental televisions do nothing good for kurds.

Nothing can be achieved with guns in Turkey. What do you expect? 5000 PKK managing to beat turkish army and create an independant kurdistan?

[Piling]

5000 PKK managing to beat turkish army and create an independant kurdistan?

A PKK State ? What a nightmare... for Kurds !

By the way I remember that in 90s the content of lessons to young PKK members was already : "We don't need to have a Kurdish state. We need a revolutionnary anti-imperialist Apoci State. If a Kurdish state is against the LINE (Apo's dogma) we should fight it. "

[Vladimir]

You were in the mountains

[Nistiman]

In response to Piling's claim that the majority of Kurds in Turkey are against a war:

I find that to be a very weak claim. The PKK has overwhelming support in the diaspora...are the diaspora Kurds fundamentally different from those in Kurdistan? Is it a coincidence that where the PKK can mobilize the masses freely and where there are no serious repercussions (death, torture, imprisonment, etc) to PKK support, we see that the Kurds in fact do share sympathies with the liberation struggle?

Those who have recently withdrawn their support have done so NOT on the grounds that they do not support the war.

Anyone who claims that Kurds do not support the armed struggle does not truly understand the Kurdish people. The Kurds have managed to exist until the 21st century because they have been good fighters, and they had the advantage of the mountains. The Turkish state realizes this better than anyone else for they have armed the Kurds themselves to fight against one another.

The Peshmerge and the guerrillas are not just a few disenfranchised youth from the margins of society. For the Kurds, war - and ultimately the war for self-preservation - has been a way of life. In fact, if you look at all states, at some point in their history, they have had to wage this war to protect their ideals, their way of life, and their future.

Tomjez, with all due respect, I think you've been watching too much Turkish TV. The PKK is not an enemy of the Kurds: no Kurd worth their salt can claim that PKK has not done 'anything' for the Kurds and that they have harmed the Kurdish cause.

If things are better in Turkey with respect to the Kurdish situation, I firmly believe that the only power that can take credit for that is the PKK. Otherwise, the Kurdish opposition would have been far too weak and would have crumbled under the brutal force of the Turkish military.

You say that the PKK or the armed struggle was good for the '80s and the '90s when the Turkish state was a "kurds killer" but now, there is no such need.

Two comments:

1) I would have thought you would have been sympathetic to the concept of 'liberty'. Had any other people suffered the fate of the Kurds, the results would have been much different. The Turkish state can oppress the Kurds without carrying out a physical genocide. The bonds of servitude can be felt just as painfullly when one is denied political freedom.

The armed struggle is justified if as a nation the Kurds feel that the Turkish state has become destructive of the inalienable rights of the Kurds - their pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. I think that aside from the use of chemical weapons, the Kurds under Saddam had more rights and recognition than at any time under the Turkish state.

2) You make the assumption that the changes that Turkey has made are permanent. What gives you that impression? Is there constitutional protection for Kurds? There isn't even any protection for the current Turkish constitution - a military coup has happened thrice before, why not now?

Let us say the PKK is defeated and a purely democratic, peaceful Kurdish political party is set up.

There is not one shred of proof that Turkey will use it to give the Kurds' their rights. They will see it as an opportunity to completely eradicate the Kurdish struggle and opt for a full assimilation of the Kurdish population. Why? Because they can, and that's how they've done it for the last 75 years. Will the Turkish populace say no to "Kemalism" and the military generals that propagate this vicious ideology? No, they will thank them for ridding the country from "terrorists".

They will throw all the democratic Kurdish political leaders in jail, maybe some in solitary confinement and - voila - the Kurds must then wait another 30 years to gather enough momentum to ask for their rights... That is if they ever get there ... because assimilation will loom over head...

What you must understand about the Turkish state and the military in particular is not that it will not negotiate with the PKK because the PKK is an armed 'terrorist' group - NO, the military will not negotiate with any KURD - no matter whether he is armed or unarmed, political or apolitical, democratic, pacifist or pseudo-Kemalist, an intellectual or simpleton.

Once they have eliminated the most powerful Kurdish organization, they will simply continue down the list... Any Kurd who hopes that Turkey will take them seriously once the PKK is eliminated is only digging his own grave.

The so-called 'democratization' started because PKK was silent, but look how fast it ended when the PKK resumed its struggle. This tells me that the REAL illusion was that there was a 'democratization' period at all......

[Nistiman]

one more thing: anyone who rejects a kurdish state because they don't agree with what sort of ideology will govern it gives away their higher aim - they are not for a kurdish state per se but for their ideology.

Those who say no to a kurdish state governed by Apocus are fundamentally similar to those Apocu's who say no to a kurdish state that is governed by primitive nationalists.

[Piling]

are the diaspora Kurds fundamentally different from those in Kurdistan?

Yes, of course. Firstly diaspora does not support itself the consequences of the war. And thei live in a out of time Kurdistan, they don't know what people really wants in the country. They have no information about it, except the propaganda of so-called press like Özgür.

And in Turkey Kurds are fed up to see the PKK collaborating with Turkish Officials and mafia in Kurdistan to racket people. And they are fed up of their rapt, execution, so-called crimes of honour when a Kurdish girl is killed because of her opinions or just because she refuses to make sex with a PKK chief, etc. In Kurdish areas, people are afraid of Turks and Apoci. They are working together.

The PKK has lost the war. In fact it has never tried to win it, because of Öcalan. Guerrilla laked of arms, money, etc, just because all the money was given to MED TV, where Öcalan could make jis propaganda during hours and hours. And because he refused to face directly Turkish state.
So now if they want to fight again it is not for Kurds, but for themselves, their own personnal power, Bayik vs Osman, Karayilan vs Leyla zana, etc.

But they don't want really freedom for Kurds, not if this freedom means that they lost their position. PKK are puppets in MIT hands. They don't care of Kurds.

[tomjez]

YOU WATCHED TOO MUCH TURKISH TV

[tomjez]

Nistiman. Living and working in Turkey and ON Turkey (as a scholar), I'm a bit sick of people not living here trying to teach me what I SHOULD KNOW.

When you say that Diaspora is not different of Kurdish people in Turkey, it's a proof that you don't know a thing. well Pilling explained it, and I agree: on this forum you have an assyrian wanting to kick kurds out of kurdistan to create assyria, an armenian wanting to annex all easter turkey for bigger armenia: they are proof that diasporas are a bit deconnected...
Turkish diaspora is also much more nationalist than real people in turkey.

A Kurdish State is not the best thing on earth: A kurdish state lead by Apo would not be better than Turkmenistan or North Korea!! No education (dangerous), no liberty (dangerous), no contact with the rest of the world (pernicious), no freedom of speech (no need, apo thinks for you). If you want such a state and you are in favor of armed struggle: WHY ARE YOU HERE??????????? Instead of saying KURDS WANT WAR, go and fight!!!!!!

hose who have recently withdrawn their support have done so NOT on the grounds that they do not support the war.

You asked them??

And with all due respect, either you're a PKK, either you didn't understand the movie: PKK IS AN ENNEMY OF THE KURD, because it's a stupid, totalitarian, dictatorial ideology. Because NO it did not do anything for kurds.
Kurds did not wait for PKK to be proud to be kurd. PKK is working in turkish, so it did nothing for Kurmanci. PKK declares that the greatest kurdish singer is a traitor because he disagrees with Apo, so PKK did not do anything for kurdish music.

PKK prevent any democratic movement to exist. Kurds are voting for AKP now in turkey, not for DEHAP.

And please: THERE IS NO LIBERATION STRUGGLE: PKK does not demand an independant kurdistan, they only ask for Öcalan's liberation, which is funny since Karayilan (effective leader of PKK) would be in deep shit if Apo was released...

If things are better in Turkey with respect to the Kurdish situation, I firmly believe that the only power that can take credit for that is the PKK. Otherwise, the Kurdish opposition would have been far too weak and would have crumbled under the brutal force of the Turkish military.

WAW. Firmly believe what you want, but things started to evolve when PKK was weak and useless. Situation of Kurds was horrible when PKK was active, much better after 2002. PKK justified all human right abuses in turkey, it allowed MHP to reach 20% of ballots, the army to keep an important place.

And ok: Democratization is because of PKK. But during democratization PKK resumed fighting. There is one thing I don't get, probably because I watch to much turkish tv (I don't have tv in Turkey by the way)

PKK was the best friend of military, because it legitimized their existence in Turkey. It created this nationalist education turkish people have. It allowed the saying "any kurdish demand is terrorist"

PKK does not care about kurdistan for god sake, when öcalan was arrested, they stopped fighting. What is more important, some stupid big belly moustachy megalomaniac, or freedom for kurds?? PKK answered this question.

Disparition of PKK would weaken the military. If all these democratic reforms happened, it's because PKK was weak and silent.

[tomjez]

Oh by the way what was armed struggle for PKK?

Destroying Kurdistan! As pilling said there were no military operations in non kurdish turkey. And PKK killed more kurds than it killed turkish soldiers...

Intellectuals, "traitors", political opponent, village guard (justified...), family of village guards (a bit less!), teachers....they were kurds!

In 15 years of guerrilla, PKK did not achieve anything on the military ground: probably the worse guerrilla ever. I mean even Nepalese Maoist are better...

[Vladimir]

How you know PKK killed more Kurds then Turkish soldiers? Yes, they killed Kurds. But you don't know if they killed more Kurds then Turkish soldiers.

I do know Turkish army killed a lot of Kurds. But I don't know if they killed more PKK'ers.

[tomjez]

From 1999 to 2004, they stopped fighting turkish army...they did not stop killing opponents!

From 1978 to 1984 they did not kill a lot of soldiers, they were busy crushing any opposition in kurdish movement...

So basically 11 years when "armed struggle" was exclusively targeting Kurds.

Peshmergas in Irak often managed to free parts of south kurdistan, to create "free zones". PKK NEVER did that. Unable to conquer anything.

It had huge money amounts, but it was not spend on weapons or training...

[Nistiman]

I don't have enough time today to give a well thought out response to the comments... I will try to do it tommorrow and to do it with as little emotional interference as possible, while admitting that this topic has utmost emotional impact...


~nistiman