The newspaper Yeni Yaşam carried out an interview with Cemil Bayik, co-chair of the KCK Executive Council. The interview was carried out by Nezahat Doğan.
The first part of the interview can be read here.
From its founding to the present day, we have seen the PKK renewing itself, changing and transforming itself, and determining its strategy in the Kurdish struggle for existence, especially with the periods of unilateral ceasefires in the name of peace since 1993. Where is the movement today, and what concrete changes and transformations is the PKK undergoing?
Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan intervened against the policy of denial and annihilation that was being carried out against the Kurdish society. Based on this, he developed the organization and struggle. The aim was to render this policy of denial and annihilation ineffective. It was to make everyone accept the existence of the Kurds. According to those who pursued this policy of denial and annihilation, the struggle for something that didn’t exist seemed the biggest crime. From the very beginning, Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan and those involved in this movement were determined. They took this step even at the risk of execution. Because claiming responsibility for a people whose identity and existence were denied, starting a struggle for its revival and for a new hope, was a crime and punishable by death in the eyes of those who pursued this policy. Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan fought against this, and through this struggle, he showed everyone that the Kurds are a people and a nation. And he didn’t just stop there. Just as the struggle demonstrated the existence of the Kurdish people, it also demonstrated that no one could prevent it from further development.
Looking at the point the struggle has reached – neither the state achieved its goal nor did the PKK. What happened?
At this point, it is necessary to elaborate on the success of the PKK. This is because the state’s policy of denial and destruction has been defeated. The PKK’s struggle has demonstrated that this policy is no longer feasible, that the Kurds can no longer be denied or annihilated. This is a great success for the PKK. The state’s policy failed. When Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan achieved this, it was precisely at a time when real socialism was collapsing. Since the PKK was founded in the context of real socialism and under its influence, Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan no longer wanted to continue the PKK in the same way it was founded, as he saw that it would not yield results. He made a strategic change during the first ceasefire in 1993.
You said that the strategic change he made today is nothing new. Was it a strategy that was envisioned in 1993 but not put into practice, because it sure seems as if it is new today?
The strategy itself is not new. Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan brought the strategic change to the agenda with the 1993 ceasefire. On that basis, he adopted the principle of setting an end to the armed struggle and resolving the issues on a political and democratic basis, which he also stated at the press conference back then. At that time, Turgut Özal was the president. Turgut Özal had also fought to eliminate the PKK; however, he saw that he could not destroy it, and not only that, he saw that if this fight continued, it would cause great losses to Turkey. For this reason, he decided not to set an end to this policy. Through some journalists, he said that “not everything Apo did was wrong.” In fact, when Turgut Özal was about to go on a trip abroad, he said, “I will take steps to resolve this issue.” At that very moment, the forces opposed to the solution intervened.
Who were those intervening forces that you are referring to?
Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan defines it as both intervening forces from the outside as well as the inside. Within our ranks, there was Parmaksız Zeki (Şemdin Sakık), and from the outside, there was the counter-guerrilla group called Yeşil, affiliated with the Special Warfare Department of the Turkish state. These forces stood in the way of the process, preventing it from developing and sabotaging it. However, Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan did not abandon his goal. The PKK’s 5th congress put change and transformation on the agenda. For this purpose, he developed a political report that was presented to the congress. This change envisaged a radical transformation, but although the congress took some steps, it did not achieve the level of change that Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan was aiming for. Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan then wanted to implement the change and transformation he had initiated in the movement in his August 15 speech in 1998. However, the international conspiracy prevented this. Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan completed the transformation and change he had been developing since 1993 under the extremely difficult conditions of the system of isolation on the Imrali prison island. He broadened the theoretical foundation, laid the ideological foundation, and established the according organizational and systemic structures. In 2005, he said, “I take responsibility for this.”
Why didn’t he develop this earlier, but not until 2005?
Because until 2005, he had not yet achieved complete clarity in his system. Once he achieved it, he took the initiative and responsibility. This is a reality of Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan’s way of working and struggling. Whatever step he takes, he takes it in a way that serves his goal. And accordingly he takes responsibility for it after achieving clarity over it. He wanted to firmly implement the change and transformation he initiated under the Imrali conditions for us as well. Our movement also carried out some work on that basis, however, there was interference in that as well. There were mistakes on our part in this process.
What were those mistakes, and how did they occur? What kind of blockage did he face internally, and where did he find the solution?
Our most fundamental mistake was failing to recognize these sabotage activities in time and failing to develop measures to thwart them.
Did this lead to a repetition within your ranks?
Of course, it prevented the change and transformation that Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan was striving for and foresaw from taking place. When change and transformation did not take place, it led to the continuation of the old style. Thereby it caused repetition.
Would the situation have been so much different if that change and transformation had been achieved to some extent?
Of course, it would have been totally different. Later, our fundamental mistake was that while Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan made a definitive decision on change and transformation and wanted to restructure the movement on this basis, and while he faced the international conspiracy and the capitalist system, aiming to resolve this and advance the process of change and transformation, we were unable to join the struggle that Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan was waging in this manner.
Why were you unable to do so?
Because the conspiracy had caused a liquidation group to from within the movement at that time.
Did it strike a heavy blow? What was the aim and what was sought to be achieved?
It surely did strike a serious blow to the movement. Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan was taken hostage in the course of the international conspiracy, and they thought that the movement would disintegrate, but once they realized that the movement did not disintegrate, it increased pressure. They conveyed this to us: “If you want to survive, you will abandon Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan and his line. You will adopt a new leadership and line, and then you will have the right to live. Otherwise, you have six months to live.” This is the message they conveyed to us.
Who conveyed this message?
They sent us the message via Kurds. Some international and regional powers and some collaborationist Kurds were mobilized on this issue. They came to us and said, “This is being said about you, and we agree with it.” We replied to them that we fully trust our leadership and the line of Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan. When we gave this answer, they understood that we wouldn’t back down under pressure. So, they pushed forward the liquidationist group within the movement.
Through whom were they trying to achieve this, and in what circumstances?
They developed it with some organizations in southern Kurdistan. We had already moved away from the old paradigm and were adopting the new paradigm. We were trying to structure ourselves on that basis but hadn’t fully restructured yet, and it was in this environment that the conspiracy developed. They thought that if there was an intervention from within in this situation, we wouldn’t be able to take the step toward the new paradigm, and since we had moved away from the old paradigm, they hoped that we thereby would simply disintegrate. There is also the Soviet experience; a similar situation arose in the Soviet Union.
How could this be stopped?
We stood firmly against the liquidationists.
Did you anticipate or foresee this liquidationism at that time?
We thought that something would be possible, but we didn’t think it would reach that level. There were conspiratorial forces from the outside, as well as Kurdish elements involved in the conspiracy. They had activated their extensions within us. They were doing this by abusing the PKK’s resources. We stood against this and prevented them from dismantling the movement. Our fundamental mistake was that we didn’t manage to stand as firmly against liquidationism as Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan did. Liquidationism had developed in connection with the international conspiracy. And we failed to see that interconnection and what was behind it. I cannot say that we did not see it coming at all; we saw it coming, but we did not think about it comprehensively enough and underestimated it. That is why it caused such great damage.
If we had fought against liquidationism like Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan, seeing that there was an international conspiracy behind it and that there were Kurdish elements within it, and if we had resisted against it as a whole, then perhaps we would not have suffered such damage. But we didn’t just lose here. There were also shortcomings and mistakes in properly understanding the KCK system that Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan put before us. While we were fighting against liquidationism, we couldn’t fully convey the system to the cadres. We didn’t take it seriously enough to instill it through education. Everyone understood it in their own way, approached it in their own way, and applied it in their own way. That’s why the KCK system couldn’t be properly implemented, and that’s where our main loss was.
If the KCK system had been implemented as intended, would things have turned out differently?
If the system had been properly understood and put into practice, the subsequent steps would not have been taken. Because the system was not properly understood and implemented, Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan intervened later.
You said that the PKK renewed itself and was rebuilt after losing time due to the liquidationism. How is it that Öcalan, who has been isolated for years and whose ties with the organization have been cut, still has such strong ties with the organization and the people? How did the PKK continue this struggle without establishing ties with its leadership?
Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan once said, “Where my prison writings are, there am I.” From our perspective, being physically with the leader is certainly important, but what is more important is to ensure unity with his philosophy, ideology, line, goals, spirit, and style of work and leadership. Once this is achieved, whether we are physically together or not does not mean much to us. Of course, it makes a difference to the people and our international friends. We identified ourselves with the leadership. I am like that as a person. The Kurdish people are like that too. Whatever was achieved was achieved with Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan. The people are aware of this very well. The militants and members of this movement also know this very well. That is why, no matter how severe the isolation was, it never created a rift between Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan and the people and the movement. They said, “This movement is a leadership movement. If we capture the leader, if we render him ineffective, this movement will not continue. We will easily achieve our goals.” For this reason, they used all their internal and external resources. They wanted to make Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan forgotten both within the organization and among the people. However, not only did they fail to make him forgotten, but on the contrary, loyalty and trust in the Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan grew even stronger both within the movement and among the people.
Why is this loyalty and trust so strong both within his own organization and among the people?
Because everyone knows Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan’s life, they know what he has achieved through his leadership. They know what it means to stand by their leader and what consequences losing their leader would entail, so they have strengthened their ties.
What kind of problems is Turkey facing, and does making peace with the Kurds and resolving the Kurdish issue mean overcoming the deadlock?
Turkey is experiencing serious economic, political, and social problems. In other words, they realized that the policies they were pursuing had failed. They realized that if they persisted with those policies, they would face even greater problems. Then again, there are the developments in the Middle East. These developments are also directly affecting them. They realized that if they did not improve their relations with the Kurds and gain their support, both internal problems and developments in the Middle East could spell their doom. This is because they had experienced a similar situation before, namely the situation faced by the Ottoman Empire. It is well known how the Turkish people and the Turkish state overcame this process. Mustafa Kemal developed strong relations with the Kurds and the Soviets. He waged his struggle on this basis and went to Lausanne. These things are known. So, in order to avoid facing such problems again, they were forced to turn to the Kurds; they were forced to turn to our leader. They supposedly wanted to destroy our leader and complete the Kurdish genocide, but they ended up becoming dependent on the Kurds and the Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan.
Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan has always focused on change and transformation in his struggle from the time in Ankara to the present day. Some may say that change and transformation have been newly added to the agenda, but that is not the case. This movement has always been based on change and transformation from the very beginning. That is why it has continued to develop. Otherwise, it would have been eliminated long ago.
When we look at examples from around the world and the discussions that have taken place, is the PKK the only organization that has been able to sustain its existence in this way for so many years? Why?
Yes, it is the only example. No other organization could have survived, but this movement has, because it is based on constant change and transformation. That is why it survives.
Now, some people are evaluating it by asking, “Where does the PKK get its power from? Does it get its power from this force or from that force?” The PKK does not get its power from anyone. The PKK has its own sources of power. It has its own philosophy, ideology, line, principles, and standards. Because this movement has dedicated itself to freedom and is focused on this goal, it creates power for itself. Moreover, because it rejects all approaches that do not serve this goal, it constantly creates sources of power for itself. For example, it does not develop the movement based solely on its positive aspects but also turns its negative aspects into positive ones and puts them at the service of the movement. There is no other power in the world that has such a philosophy.
Just as philosophy also brings solutions and analysis, your movement also operates a mechanism of criticism and self-criticism at every one of its levels. What kind of structure for this do you have?
This movement creates its own sources of power; it has its own principles. One of these is criticism and self-criticism. With this, it constantly purifies itself of shortcomings and mistakes. It constantly renews itself and keeps itself alive. In this way, it puts both its successes and failures at the service of the movement’s development. I have not come across any comparable example of another movement like this in my readings so far. This movement strengthens itself with both its positives and negatives. Because in this movement, negatives are taken as the basis of change. All obstacles, mistakes, and impossibilities are taken as challenges to be overcome. This is what keeps the movement constantly developing and alive. Kurdish people’s leader Abdullah Öcalan has never demanded anything from anyone. He has focused on identifying what is needed for the goal of freedom and fulfilling those requirements. He has never had the mindset of “Let an opportunity arise, let some possibilities exist, and then I will develop the struggle.” Rather, he himself creates the opportunities and possibilities.
Source: ANF News
