Nils Andersson said that Abdullah Öcalan offered a rational approach in Third World conditions.
Following Abdullah Öcalan’s “Call for Peace and a Democratic Society” on 27 February, the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) held its 12th Congress, which took historic decisions, including the possibility of dissolving the party. International support continues to grow for both Öcalan’s historic call and the PKK’s 12th Congress resolutions.
The congress decisions of the PKK have been evaluated as important steps that strengthen the peaceful and democratic resolution of the Kurdish question, while also calling on the Turkish state to take concrete and inclusive steps toward a solution.
Nils Andersson, one of France’s leading intellectuals, a theorist, editor, and writer, answered ANF’s questions on the matter.
For more than 26 years, Kurdish People’s Leader Abdullah Öcalan has been held in captivity under conditions of severe isolation in Imralı Island Prison. Under his leadership, a new process has emerged in Turkey aimed at the democratic resolution of the Kurdish question. To begin, how do you assess the existence of such a process and Abdullah Öcalan’s peace initiatives?
First of all, I want to say that the figure of Abdullah Öcalan cannot be separated from the struggles and imprisonment of Antonio Gramsci, Nelson Mandela, Adem Demaci, Georges Abdallah, Marwan Barghouti, and Leonard Peltier. They never submitted; they continued their struggles for the social and political freedom of their peoples and continue to do so. I believe this is significant.
We also know that at this present stage, Abdullah Öcalan does not consider his personal freedom as a precondition and accepts to continue his struggle from prison. I wanted to highlight this important point at the outset.
Then perhaps we should recall the different stages. The first stage, as is known, was the armed struggle declared in the 1970s and 1980s. However, the so-called “Third World” period, when many countries were able to free themselves from colonialism was destroyed as a revolutionary force by imperialism due to corruption, repression, and neo-colonialism.
This meant a dead end for armed struggles. At this point, Abdullah Öcalan made the right decision to choose another path to secure the rights of the Kurdish people. At that time, this meant demanding autonomy within the Turkish state. But this demand faced the dogma of the inviolability of borders, internal borders, external borders because today this principle is carved into the very marble of international law.
We have concrete examples. For instance, during Algerian independence, France could not detach the Sahara from Algeria. Similarly, in Spain, it was impossible for Catalonia to achieve any form of independence within the Spanish state. The principle of the inviolability of borders is one that all states defend today, because it serves to protect their own power and frontiers, securing their sovereignty and influence.
From here, we arrive at the current stage chosen by Abdullah Öcalan: the recognition of cultural existence, the granting of autonomy to Kurdish political institutions, and the search for a political-legal solution. This is a rational decision; it is a decision appropriate to today’s international context and to the possibilities of people’s struggles. For this reason, this objective must be understood and heard as a just, reasonable, and legitimate goal.
Abdullah Öcalan’s new proposal is rational
Should the 12th Congress resolutions of the PKK be seen as part of the new strategy Abdullah Öcalan wishes to develop? Moreover, considering the state of war in the Middle East and the global climate of militarization, why does the possibility of the PKK abandoning armed struggle cause concern in some circles?
In the current international context, in a world shaken and overturned, we are living through an accelerated phase of history; everything is being upended. This marks the disappearance of the twentieth-century world, that is the issue. I believe that, depending on the periods, moments, and global balances of power, the forms and instruments of struggle must be adapted to the objective conditions. It is known that armed liberation struggles, which were central in the “Third World” period, in the so-called “storm zones,” have now reached their limits.
This does not mean they have ended forever; but they have reached their limits. Therefore, we must adopt an objective approach to this reality. And today, in a world threatened by current conflicts, potential conflicts, and even, as has been openly declared, the possibility of a Third World War, I believe all initiatives for peace and all political-diplomatic solutions must be pursued.
In my view, precisely here lies the fact that the Kurdish question is no longer merely a Kurdish question; it has become a global question. This issue must be defended against the prevailing tendencies of aggression, war, and extreme brutality in the world. The Palestinian issue clearly demonstrates that repression knows no limits, and Israel is carrying out a real genocide.
At a time of extreme violence, in which the balance of power between peoples, imperialism, and ruling authorities is as it is, defending a cause as Öcalan has done, demanding cultural identity rights in the context of Turkey is not a demand for autonomy within Turkey; rather, it is the recognition of cultural identity. It is the demand for the right of Kurdish institutions to exist, for the Kurdish community to have its own institutions, and for those structures to live within Kurdish society. This is the true path to peace.
I believe that under the current conditions this path is a just one, profoundly just. Because today it is necessary to stand against those who drive war; they are extremely active. Yet for peoples, war is the worst possible fate. In this sense, I think that Abdullah Öcalan’s new proposal is rational, just, and suited to the period and the political circumstances we are in.
The establishment of such a commission within parliament is important
Both the Kurdish Freedom Movement and its leader Abdullah Öcalan have taken significant steps, despite all the risks for the success of the process. Yet the state’s failure to take concrete steps so far raises questions about its sincerity. Although a commission has been established under the roof of parliament, the Kurdish side argues that the state must take more concrete measures to resolve such a deep-rooted problem. What is necessary for the success of this process?
Yes, a commission has been formed within the Turkish Parliament to address the issue. This is the first step and shows how complex and difficult the task is. But at the same time, it also shows how important this goal, the goal of peace, even as a minimum goal, truly is. The outcome of this initiative is extremely significant. From the perspective of the Kurdish question, the establishment of such a commission within parliament is an important advance.
For the success of this process, it would be beneficial for foreign states, governments, and international institutions to support this initiative and contribute to the achievement of peace. The current situation indicates that the process will move forward with small steps. Yet under today’s global conditions and balance of power, such an initiative is the possible path, the realistic path, and indeed the only path forward.
Therefore, at this stage it is vital for the Kurds to receive support from outside: of course from governments and international institutions, but also from public opinion and from the peoples themselves. This is an issue that must be explained and understood. I believe this is a great goal: to win this struggle of knowledge and awareness for the Kurdish people, for the cause they defend, and within the conditions of Turkey, the Middle East, and the world.
I would like to emphasize in particular that the Kurdish cause is an important cause that goes beyond Turkey and the Middle East. Because in today’s world, the ideas they defend are, in fact, a universal cause. The world is a mosaic of peoples, languages, and cultures. And it must be well understood that the Kurdish people’s cause transcends not only the framework of Turkey but also that of the Middle East.
Their struggle is universal, because the world is made up of a mosaic of languages, peoples, cultures, and religions, each with its own history. Across all continents, state borders have been drawn through wars or colonialism; they have become disputed and led to conflicts for geographical, cultural, or linguistic reasons. Today there are more than 300 regions in the world where freedom movements are struggling for independence, resistance, self-determination, autonomy, sovereignty, or cultural rights, because state borders have been imposed on peoples.
Therefore, the Kurdish cause is not an isolated cause. Today it is a pioneering one; it symbolizes the right of peoples to have their own autonomy, independence, or cultural and social rights. And I believe that, in this sense, in the twenty-first century, this will become one of the fundamental contradictions in the world. The Kurdish cause, in this respect, is a pathfinder; it is opening a space within the context of today’s world.
That is why it is extremely important. Yes, the difficulties will be great. The global balance of power is not in favor of the Kurds; this is an obstacle, a serious handicap. But the cause is just, and it is this justice that must be carried forward and defended.
Everything that strengthens and supports the Kurds’ struggle, whether in Turkey or in Syria, is important. At this point, in order to overcome obstacles, political, informational, and diplomatic efforts must all be carried out. Because we know the nature of the Turkish state: it is closed; it has no real will for change. But history is written by peoples; the actions of people shape history. For this reason, it is necessary to be active, to mobilize, to never abandon the struggle, and to expand the scope of international support.
There is no such thing as an international community
You emphasized the need to expand the scope of international support. By this, do you mean the support of the international community, states, or international institutions, or are you referring to solidarity and support to be created among peoples?
First of all, there is no such thing as an “international community” at the level of states; it has completely collapsed. The clearest proof of this reality is the absolute failure of the United Nations. During the Cold War period, it may have played a partial role, but today it has lost all meaning. The nonexistence of what is called the “international community” is clearly revealed in Europe’s stance on the Palestinian issue.
This situation is part of the negative balance of power faced by peoples. There is no international community; there is no consciousness. Returning to the Holocaust, the genocide against the Jewish people, at that time it was said that people did not know. Of course, there were those who knew, but the broad masses of people only learned the truth in 1945 with the liberation of the camps.
Today, however, the genocide against the Palestinian people is unfolding before our very eyes. And the reactions in Europe are filled entirely with double standards: two different measures, two different values. As if the death of an Arab does not have the same worth as the death of a white or a Christian. This is the reality. It is a terrible situation that shows how deeply human consciousness has been corrupted. Terrible. And this is the real problem: at the level of states, there is no longer an international consciousness. It must be rebuilt, revived, but this time at the level of societies and peoples.
Yet peoples themselves are also in captivity; they are imprisoned by the discourses, propaganda, racism, and racist, imperialist, and militarist rhetoric they are exposed to. They have submitted to it.
It is precisely in this context that the concrete struggle of the Kurds for cultural identity rights and autonomous political institutions gains meaning. These two are inseparably linked. And this is why the Kurdish cause is a universal cause; it is a cause that concerns all of us. Because it is one of the most essential and vital struggles to rebuild an international public consciousness and an appropriate global framework for the liberation and rights of peoples.
Öcalan is right in his criticism of Marxism
Kurdish People’s Leader Abdullah Öcalan, in his notes sent to the 12th Congress of the PKK, also offered criticisms of Marxism. As one of the important advocates of Marxist theory, you had previously written the preface for the French edition of Öcalan’s book The Manifesto of Democratic Civilization. How do you evaluate Öcalan’s criticisms of Marxism?
Yes, I wrote the preface for the French edition of Abdullah Öcalan’s books. This is indeed an important matter. Öcalan’s criticisms of Marxism are largely justified.
For example, his critique of the excessive importance given to economism. On this point, I believe Öcalan is absolutely right. Twentieth-century socialism prioritized the economy. Of course, the economy is vital. Feeding people, improving living conditions, these are primary objectives. Yet it is necessary not to fall into the trap of economism. Because in reality, the transformation of society and this is precisely what is being attempted today in Rojava, takes place first and foremost through the change in individuals’ consciousness.
This is not about the food placed on the table, nor about whether people can go on holiday. True transformation lies in people’s consciousness. And I believe the point Öcalan makes here, his critique of economism, is extremely significant.
After all, the purpose of socialism, of Marxism, of communism, when it was first formulated, was human freedom. Freedom is, of course, social, but it is also individual, moral, and political. At this point, I believe Öcalan’s critique of twentieth-century socialism is correct. This dimension was either underestimated or insufficiently addressed. The collapse of the system is the clearest example of this, not only an economic collapse, but also an ideological one.
This shows that the real fundamental issue, people’s consciousness was not truly taken into account. Of course, propaganda was made, agitation was carried out, but when the regimes fell, the outcome was clear. For this reason, I fully support this critique. Öcalan directs other criticisms at Marxism as well; however, I believe that on this particular point his critique is especially justified. In my view, it is one of the main reasons why socialism and communism fell into an impasse in the twentieth century.
Another striking point in Abdullah Öcalan’s notes was his emphasis on the commune and communalism. What would you like to say on this?
The emphasis on the commune is truly important. I believe that what we are witnessing today can clearly be seen through the concept defended by Öcalan regarding the society to be built and the form of social relations to be established, and through the experience put into practice in Rojava. This is based on the principle of the commune and on the understanding of building from the bottom upward to the top. The practice currently in force in Rojava is precisely this.
Even now, at this stage, it is known how this has transformed people’s relations within Kurdish society in Syria and even beyond, among surrounding peoples. This is an extremely significant approach, because beyond the national question, or beyond merely social issues or the immediate consumer interests of individuals, it prioritizes the development of individual consciousness.
In this respect, without a doubt, it is an experience that makes a valuable contribution to the communist and socialist project. And this project, the Rojava experience, continues today more than ever to offer an answer to the problems of peoples and societies.
Thank you for your valuable comments. Finally, is there anything you would like to add?
Everyone must recognize the situation in which the Kurdish people find themselves, as well as the great difficulties they have overcome so far and those they are still forced to confront. It is also necessary to understand the right process that Abdullah Öcalan has initiated under today’s conditions. The Kurdish question is a cause for all of us. Of course, it is the cause of the Kurds; but beyond them, it is also the cause of everyone in Europe and in the world. Because this issue is situated within the context of our shared history, a context that can only be described as tragic.
Who is Nils Andersson?
Ninety-one-year-old Frédy-Nils Andersson, commonly known as Nils Andersson, is a Swedish-born Swiss-French thinker, editor, and writer. Known especially for his anti-colonial and pro-peace stance, Nils Andersson was expelled from Switzerland in 1966 due to his publications supporting Algeria’s struggle for independence and Vietnamese fighters, as well as texts that included the ideas of Mao Zedong.
Nils Andersson later settled in France, where he continued his education and political life. Author of numerous books, he is an important figure in the intellectual and political sphere, particularly for his anti-colonial stance and support for freedom movements around the world.
He also wrote the preface for the French edition of Kurdish People’s Leader Abdullah Öcalan’s book The Manifesto of Democratic Civilization
