Erdoğan’s Violent Last Resort
The
ongoing attacks against Kurds in Turkey are part of a last-ditch
effort by Erdoğan to hold onto power.
by
Alp Kayserilioğlu, Guney Işıkara, & Max Zirngast
13
September, 2015
In
the months leading up to Turkey’s June
7 general election,
there was widespread violence against the leftist, pro-Kurdish
Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP).
Some two hundred attacks on rallies, HDP campaigners, and party
buildings were registered, culminating in bombs detonating in HDP
offices in Adana and Mersin (fortunately no one was killed) and two
bombs going off at a huge rally in Amed/Diyarbakir, killing four
people.
The
perpetrators of these attacks were rarely sought out, let alone
convicted. But their source is quite clear: the environment of
right-wing and Islamist paramilitary groups and several youth groups
close to the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), as well as
the extreme-right Nationalist Movement Party (MHP). The Turkish
police did nothing to halt this violence. Meanwhile, both the media
close to the AKP and Turkish officials up to President Recep Tayyip
Erdoğan have added fuel to the fire, verbally assailing the HDP
ceaselessly.
Between
Monday and Wednesday of last week, nationalist and fascist mobs
attacked some 250 to 300 HDP offices. They set some party buildings
ablaze, including the central office in Ankara. On Tuesday night,
fascist mobs across the country held marches “condemning terrorism”
that led to simultaneous attacks and firebombings of dozens of HDP
bureaus.
Additionally,
there have been numerous attacks throughout Turkey against civilians,
workers, stores, and companies presumed to be Kurdish.
A
young man was stabbed to death in Istanbul after he spoke Kurdish on
the phone. Coaches traveling to the Southeast were stoned or stopped
and asked for identification. Kurdish agricultural workers young and
old were beaten silly. One Kurdish citizen in the southwestern city
of Muğla was severely beaten and forced to kiss a statue of Atatürk,
the founder of the Turkish Republic. And in one curious case, a young
man was assaulted by MHP supporters because he “appeared” to be
Kurdish — yet turned out to be a MHP supporter himself.
The
violence hasn’t just come from private actors. State institutions
have gone after civilians directly, prompting many Kurdish cities to
declare their autonomy and along with it, the necessity for
self-defense. The urban guerrillas of the Kurdish youth YDG-H —
perhaps surprisingly, not militants from the Kurdistan Workers Party
(PKK)
— are the driving force behind this effort and are protecting the
population from state force in many cities.
In
the last few days, the border town of Cizre has
come to exemplify the state’s war on the Kurdish population. For
about a week, the town has been completely under siege by (special
operation) police, and the last few days have seen twenty
reported deaths in
the town — many of them children and non-combatants who wanted to
help the wounded or were outside of their houses after the
state-imposed curfew.
A
humanitarian disaster is looming, and commentators are comparing the
Turkish state’s approach to Israel’s siege of Gaza. And,
prevented from entering Cizre by car, a group of HDP MPs as well as
the party’s cochair, Selahattin Demirtaş, are making the
trek towards the city after starting from about 90
kilometers away.
All
of this is happening as Turkey approaches its crucial November 1
election.
A War for Political Gains
What
has happened? What is the reason for this racist outburst? Why and
how did this war escalate?
The
violence has its proximate origins in bloodshed this summer in
Dağlıca, a military outpost in the Hakkarî province, a region in
which PKK guerrillas control large swaths of rural land. On September
6, the PKK had Dağlıca completely encircled. Nonetheless a military
convoy sought to reach the outpost, and mine explosions and fighting
ensued, leaving at least seventeen soldiers dead.
While
this came amid an ever-escalating war in Kurdistan, it was presented
in the Turkish media and by AKP and MHP officials as an unexpected
attack. In reaction, supporters of the MHP, the AKP, and other
right-wing groups staged marches on the night of September 8, which
ended all too often in front of or inside a HDP building.
There
is a larger background to this recent wave of violent marauding,
though — the deep political crisis in Turkey and, more
specifically, the hegemonic crisis of the AKP. After the June 7
elections crushed Erdoğan’s dream of introducing a presidential
system — which would have meant rule by Erdoğan alone — the AKP
quickly made it clear it had no real intention of sharing power.
Coalition talks were used to buy time, all while the war on the
Kurdish liberation movement and the democratic and left opposition
was escalated.
In
the wake of the July 20 Suruç
massacre,
in which thirty-three young socialists traveling to Kobané were
killed by an ISIS suicide bomber, there have been constant police
raids, supposedly as part of the war against ISIS (or alternatively,
against “all terrorism,” meaning ISIS and the PKK).
But
this war on terror is a farce. According to the Human
Rights Association,
there were 2,544 detainees between July 21 and August 28.
Of these only 136 were associated with ISIS and 22 with the
organization of Fethullah
Gülen,
an ally-cum-enemy of Erdoğan. The rest were affiliated with the Left
or the Kurdish movement. In addition, of the 301 actually charged,
just 33 were associated with ISIS and 4 with Gülen. Again, the
remaining people were of the Left or the Kurdish movement.
With
waning support for the AKP and a declining economy, the policy of
open war is the last resort for Erdoğan and his close circle.
After thirteen years of corrupt, single-party rule, the AKP is no
longer a “regular” party. It can’t just relinquish power. So
Erdoğan and the remaining AKP cadres are doing all they can to hold
on.
From
Gezi to Rojava
AKP
hegemony has been slowly eroding ever since it suffered its first
major blow from below during the 2013
June Uprising.
At the time, the AKP was involved in the so-called “solution
process,” or “negotiation process,” with the Kurdish movement.
That there was such a process in the first place was a result of the
PKK’s superior military performance in the preceding years, which
had forced the Turkish state to look for non-military means —
or at least also non-military
means — to cope with the PKK.
Erdoğan
hoped that the negotiations would allow him to return to his Kurdish
policy of binding the more conservative Kurdish vote to the AKP while
marginalizing the PKK. But it wasn’t successful before the
negotiations, and it isn’t successful now.
In
fact, as the talks continued and the state took little or no positive
steps vis-à-vis the Kurdish movement, it became increasingly
clear that the PKK and the Kurdish movement were winning. That
is to say, the PKK was augmenting its own position by linking a
political mass movement to its guerrilla movement, as well as
strengthening ties with democrats and leftists in Western Turkey —
made possible by the June Uprising.
The
Kurdish movement was bolstered during this period for two main
reasons: the military and ideological successes of the Rojava
revolution — which is closely associated with the Kurdish
liberation movement in Turkey — and the rise of the HDP.
Erdoğan
felt his power slipping. He turned to ISIS, giving them tacit
support, if not open sympathy. But his hopes that ISIS would be able
to deal a serious blow to the Kurdish movement were delusional.
Instead, the opposite happened. Not only did the PYD extend its
territory in Northern Syria, but the Kurdish struggle gained
legitimacy around the world.
In
contrast to the US — which fostered the Free Syrian Army and
ISIS, but was also able to strike ISIS when it saw fit and work
together with the YPG/PKK — the Turkish state has shown no tactical
flexibility. It has not understood that the Kurdish liberation
movement in Rojava and North Kurdistan/Southeast Turkey is too strong
to be beaten militarily.
It
has not grasped that from its perspective and from the perspective of
US imperialism, the fight against the revolutionary elements of the
Kurdish liberation movement has to be waged on other levels as well.
Neither is it tactile enough to understand that now is the time to
“use” ISIS and to start intervening in Syria with air strikes as
the US-led coalition is
doing.
In
other words, the difference between the US government and the Turkish
state lies not in the realm of principles, but in tactics — and in
Turkey’s aspiration to becoming a stronger regional power, a goal
it is unable to achieve as it finds itself in a deep hegemonic
crisis.
With
the rise of the Kurdish movement, Erdoğan effectively ended the
negotiations long before the elections. In March
he declared that
there was no Kurdish problem, and PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan, one of
the most powerful voices in the Kurdish movement, has remained
isolated on the prison island of Imralı since April 5.
This
was a clear attempt by Erdoğan to prepare for open war, and it was
understood as such by the Kurds, who all state as a principal demand
for a potential ceasefire an open line of communication with
Öcalan. After the election, Erdoğan’s efforts intensified,
reaching a crescendo in the week after the Suruç massacre.
However,
Erdoğan’s strategy of escalation and incitement of nationalist
sentiments in order to regain the initiative and reclaim some lost
votes — thus pushing the HDP below the 10 percent electoral
threshold needed to stop the AKP from changing the constitution —
isn’t working out so far. Most people see through this cheap
game. Polls have shown the June 7 election result wouldn’t change
in any significant way.
At
the same time, the AKP is getting ever more pressure from where it
hurts the most — the families of the dead soldiers. Hardly a day
passes without news from some funeral with slogans against the AKP
and its “palace war,” as the opponents of the current
conflict call it.
In
one case, the brother of a fallen soldier, himself a soldier of rank,
made a short and tearful speech at his sibling’s coffin in which he
held Erdoğan and the AKP responsible for his death. As the video
spread through social media, the AKP media was forced to respond.
They first accused him of being an Alevi, and then switched to
asserting he had sympathies with Gülen and even the PKK! Just a few
days ago, Erdoğan stated in a live interview that “some fathers of
martyrs don’t have character.”
Fascism on the Rise
While
Erdoğan and leading AKP cadres are pushing the rhetoric of an
all-out war, even they admit that the reason for this conflict is not
“terror,” but their poor electoral showing. Last Sunday,
Erdoğan stated that
“the situation would be different, if a certain party would have
gained 400 seats [his declared goal before the election].”
And
even though it is crystal clear that the PKK cannot be
eliminated militarily, Erdoğan has declared the war won’t cease
“until the last drop of blood” and Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu
has said they will “eradicate all the terrorists from the
mountains.” It’s a claim leading Turkish officials have been
issuing ever since the PKK took up armed struggle more than thirty
years ago.
The
wave of racist attacks against Kurds and the HDP is a reflection of
the AKP’s failed strategy, and a desperate attempt to shift the
balance of power in their favor by openly walking towards fascism.
Under
the direction of Erdoğan and Davutoğlu, the AKP seems to be using
intensified warfare to extend and perpetuate the state of emergency.
This, they hope, will stoke nationalist and chauvinist sentiments and
gain them votes.
And
if it doesn’t, it will provide them a pretext to cancel the snap
elections — either via a coup or by using the state of emergency to
prevent almost all of Kurdistan from voting, which would push the
HDP vote below the 10 percent threshold.
Indications
that Erdoğan and Davutoğlu are preparing for such a scenario can be
found in some of their speeches from late August, in which both note
that they will advise the Turkish Armed Forces to do “whatever
needs to be done” during the November contest. Erdoğan stated in a
recent interview that “every measure will be taken in order to not
allow what happened in the June election to repeat” — this
despite the fact that even the Supreme Electoral Council
declared that the election took place in a safe and unbiased
environment.
Still,
the plan of intimidating Kurds and consolidating the rest of the
country along nationalist lines will be very difficult to pull
off.
Firstly,
the Kurdish liberation movement has significant power and mass
support. The PKK leadership has stated that up until now the
guerrilla forces has only been retaliating and using their right
of legitimate self-defense. As noted above, it’s the YDG-H that is
leading the fight in the cities, not the PKK. But the PKK also
recently said that they will not remain indifferent towards civilian
massacres. From these declarations it becomes clear that the massive
attacks in Dağlıca and Iğdır, where scores of police were killed,
were responses to the massacres carried out by the Turkish state.
And
secondly, there is fear within the power bloc that outright war is
not going to solve the hegemonic crisis, and more and more people,
including in the military, think the war to be senseless and only in
the interest of a narrow clique. So cracks within the ruling class
and the political and military elite are already forming, and the
economic situation, long unstable, is further deteriorating. If the
war escalates, the power bloc likely won’t hold together for long.
The
entirely NATO-ized military could, under the command of the US and in
view of crumbling popular consent and disgruntled big capital, launch
a coup against the AKP in order to safeguard the neoliberal status
quo. Or the “realist” fraction within the AKP could depose
Erdoğan. There are many ways in which the power bloc could break
apart if the conflict intensifies and the hegemonic crisis
deepens.
Towards a Democratic Revolution
Despite
his power and stature, Turkey’s democratic and revolutionary forces
must avoid the mistake of viewing Erdoğan as the sole problem.
Erdoğan
and the AKP were very valuable for leading factions of capital in
Turkey.
They dismantled the
ossified military’s control over the entire society and the
economy, which in the 1990s had led to deep political and economic
crises and was an obstacle to the deepening of neoliberalism in
Turkey. The AKP did so by simultaneously establishing a massive
police apparatus, which is controlled by executive and legislative
authorities.
In
the entire period from 1980 until the AKP’s ascendance to power in
2002, the degree of privatizations, deregulation of labor and social
rights, and influx of foreign capital was only a fraction of what
it became under the AKP. Equally, the party has
streamlined the state apparatuses under the leadership of executive
authorities, making them much easier for capital to control.
Erdoğan
and the AKP have thus overestimated their own function — i.e.
installing a new regime that organizes the hegemony of the leading
factions of finance capital and the political elite — and are
clinging to power. Their hegemony is eroding.
Still,
it shouldn’t be assumed that they’re on their death bed. Finance
capital, as centrally organized in the Turkish Industrialists’ and
Businessmen’s Association (TÜSIAD),
hasn’t yet been able to find a viable alternative to the
AKP.
Secondly,
the majority of the bourgeoisie is not in principle opposed to the
regime the AKP has constructed — not even the main opposition
party, the secular and supposedly social-democratic CHP aims to
reverse the neoliberal status quo.
Neither does it challenge the
Turkish state’s fundamental principles, such as denial of
the Armenian
Genocide.
And just days ago the CHP voted to extend the military’s mandate to
march into Iraq and Syria to “defend national security interests,”
if necessary.
On
top of this, leading members of the TÜSİAD have announced that the
presidential system Erdoğan desires is not anathema to them, but
only that they’re against it being reduced to personalities.
In
short, there is no substantial or principled difference between the
various factions of the ruling class in relation to the country’s
essential democratic problems. Their only differences are a matter of
who is in charge and reaping the profits, and how the hegemony of the
power bloc is organized.
The
Turkish bourgeoisie originated in an alliance with feudal lords and
has its basis in the Armenian Genocide, the plundering of Greek and
Jewish property, and the occupation, division, and colonization of
Kurdistan. All this while embracing, central, if modified, elements
of the Ottoman state, such as the centralized
vilayet/province-system.
Both
state and society in Turkey are thus anti-democratic to the core. And
it’s the Turkish bourgeoisie that profits the most from this
suppression of popular forces, as it facilitates the exploited to be
positioned against each other along ethnic, religious, and national
lines.
Democratization
and freedom in Turkey are something the popular classes of the
different nations, religious denominations, and nations must fight
for — in contradistinction to imperialism, and to the entire
Turkish bourgeoisie and its allies.
The Gezi Uprising
in 2013 and the revolution in Rojava have made possible the
development of a revolutionary-democratic alliance of the different
popular strata in the East and the West of the Turkish Republic. In
this moment of crisis, it will be especially important for the
Turkish left to establish connections with the Kurdish liberation
movement, which is currently at the forefront of the fight for
democracy
Now
is the time to strengthen the popular democratic struggle.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.