Britain,Anarchist Federation Statement on Rojava - December 2014

The following statement addresses the situation in which Devrimci Anar?ist Faaliyet (DAF), 
Revolutionary Anarchist Action, are involved on the Turkish/Syrian border in opposition to 
IS. This is a struggle which, if lost, will probably result in far greater repression and 
tyranny than workers in the region already face, in towns and on the land. It is also one 
in which class-consciousness and the class struggle must remain at the forefront of 
anarchist responses. Anarchists on the ground are fighting in a less-than-ideal situation, 
not least given that the state forces of Syria, Turkey, Iraq, Iran and the US, also claim 
to combat IS. We continue to offer practical solidarity through the International of 
Anarchist Federations (IFA/FAI). We also offer our own evaluation of the situation.

The Anarchist Federation is only too aware of the support that many anarchists, including 
those who describe themselves as anarchist communists, anarcho-syndicalists and class 
struggle anarchists, are offering the ?Rojava Revolution?. This includes lauding the PKK 
(Kurdistan Workers Party) as a party that has somehow morphed from being an authoritarian 
nationalist party into being a near-anarchist catalyst for social revolution in the 
region, and describing the situation in Rojava as similar to the revolutionary situation 
in Spain in 1936 (David Graeber, as well as Derek Wall of the Green Party left).

Those who wish to hold on to their principles and to keep a clear head, need to examine 
the facts. The PKK at its birth adopted a leftist nationalist stance. This leftism was 
very much of the Stalinist variety. In 1984 it began an armed struggle against the 
Turkish state. With the capture of Abdullah Ocalan, its leader, by the Turkish state, a 
new period in the evolution of the PKK began. In line with leaders of other parties of the 
same ilk, Ocalan was and is seen as a charismatic figure to which the leadership elements 
and the base of the party pay obedience. Ocalan is described as ?the sun? around which the 
various political and military organisations revolve. This situation has not changed with 
his apparent adoption of Bookchinite confederal municipalism. Ocalan deliberately 
modelled himself on Stalin right down to the personality cult. With the collapse of the 
Soviet Union and its satellites, Ocalan and the PKK began to manouevre, to change 
positions, no longer being able to look towards a discredited state capitalism.

When the PKK military forces were compelled to move over the border to Syria, they met 
problems with the Kurdish peasantry there, many of whom still held to Moslem religious 
beliefs at odds with PKK leftism. This impelled Ocalan to talk about Kurdistan as ?the 
cradle of international Islam?. At the same time the PKK entered into a tacit alliance 
with Syria?s Assad regime, an enemy of the Turkish state.
Ocalan then completed another turn and talked about becoming Turkey?s ?most powerful ally? 
and that ?the war on behalf of borders and classes has come to an end?. When this failed 
to impress his captors, Ocalan then took another turn, recommending that Bookchin must be 
read and his ideas practised. This initiated an intensive marketing campaign by the PKK 
towards Western leftists and anarchists in order to look for support and allies.

Apart from the strange occurrence of the PKK, after decades of Stalinised nationalism, 
apparently turning overnight into some sort of organisation advocating Bookchinite 
libertarian municipalism, it should be pointed out that this came not from the grassroots 
of the PKK but was handed down by Ocalan through the PKK command structure. In fact, 
whilst Ocalan and the PKK might be posing as born again libertarians, it should be 
remembered that the PKK, whilst facing towards the West as advocates of direct democracy 
and of secularism, at the same time advocates the setting up of Democratic Islam 
Congresses to accommodate the Islamists and to religiously legitimise the PKK. This was 
also at the instigation of Ocalan. In a letter that Ocalan sent to the Democratic Islam 
Congress he referred to his ?brother believers? and goes on to say that ?we cannot be 
defined by western concepts such as communism and atheism". Further he then talks 
favourably about the Islamisation of Kurdistan. So much for secularism!

As to any change in the structure of the PKK from an extremely centralised structure with 
Ocalan at the tip of the pyramid into a libertarian federalist organisation controlled by 
the membership, there is no evidence whatsoever that this has happened. The PKK?s 
?Democratic Confederalism? is described by Ocalan as ?a system which takes into 
consideration the religious, ethnic and class differences in society", in other words the 
class system is not being questioned at all. The Koma Civak?n Kurdistan (KCK) (Group of 
Communities in Kurdistan) an organization founded by the PKK to implement the Democratic 
Confederalism programme, defends private property in its Contract (the key document in the 
aforesaid programme). This is under Article 8, ?Personal, Political Rights and Freedoms". 
Section C of article 10, "Basic Responsibilities" defines the constitutional basis of 
mandatory military service:"In the case of a war of legitimate defense, as a requirement 
of patriotism, there is the responsibility to actively join the defense of the homeland 
and basic rights and freedoms?.

Zafer Onat, a libertarian communist in the region remarks ?While the Contract states that 
the aim is not political power, we also understand that the destruction of the state 
apparatus is also not aimed [at], meaning the goal is autonomy within existing nation 
states. When the Contract is viewed in its entirety, the goal that is presented is not to 
be seen beyond a bourgeois democratic system that is called democratic confederalism?.

Anarchists can remember Gaddafi?s Green Book, which in rhetoric had far more radical 
language, where it says: ?All that the masses need do now is to struggle to put an end to 
all forms of dictatorial rule in the world today, to all forms of what is falsely called 
democracy - from parliaments to the sect, the tribe, the class and to the one-party, the 
two-party and the multi-party systems.... No democracy without popular congresses and 
committees everywhere. ... Democracy is the supervision of the people by the people.? But 
did anyone seriously believe that this was actually being implemented under the repressive 
regime of Gaddafi?

The uprising against the Assad regime meant that in the course of events, that regime 
ceased hostilities against the Syrian branch of the PKK, the PYD (Democratic Union Party). 
This was in order to concentrate on fighting its other opponents, the Free Syrian Army, 
etc. How seriously should we take the claims about the Rojava Revolution in the Kurdish 
part of Syria?

We should be clear that the PYD has set up a parliament structure, the 
Auto-Administration, which it controls with allied parties. It passed a conscription law 
in July compelling families in the region to send one of their 18-30 year-old members to 
serve in the defence corps of the PYD, for a period of six months, either continuously or 
intermittently over a one year period. ?Non-adherence? to this law was subject to 
punishment as stipulated in the law. This law was passed without consulting with other 
political formations in Rojava and explicitly drafts Kurds into armed groups completely 
under the control of the PYD. At the same time the PYD is treating other Kurdish political 
formations in Rojava in an authoritarian totalitarian way, backed up by its use of armed 
force. It marginalises them and refuses entry into any decision making.

The so-called cantonal assemblies and grassroots bodies are themselves under the sway of 
the PYD and the Auto-Administration can either approve or block any decisions by these 
bodies. There is no real direct democracy here, workers and peasants do not control these 
bodies. At the same time no genuine workers and peasants militias have developed, all of 
the armed groups are under the control of the PYD. Furthermore, there is no socialisation 
and collectivisation of the land and the workplaces, as happened, for example, in Spain in 
1936. The PKK/PYD marketing campaign has presented the situation in Rojava as one of 
progressive revolution, but the working class and the peasantry have no autonomous 
organisation. Whilst there is a quota of 40% representation of women within these local 
councils/communes/committees, it can be seen from the above that the local structures are 
in fact not much different from municipal councils in the West, where they act in their 
role as the local state as support for and in connection with the central state and 
parliament. Indeed, while some compare the ?Rojava Revolution? to Spain 1936 perhaps a 
better analogy would be the Bolsheviks in 1917 which many anarchists, both internationally 
and inside Russia, mistakenly supported initially as a truly revolutionary force.

As regards the women?s armed groups, whilst there are signs of feminist influences within 
them, it should be remembered that the women?s fighting groups are segregated from male 
units, with no mixed fighting groups. Gaddafi and Saddam both had women?s military 
brigades, but that did not mean that there was women?s liberation in Libya and Iraq. 
Similarly women?s military brigades exist in Iran with no sign of emancipation of women. 
For that matter, ISIS has all-female brigades called al-Khansaa and Umm al-Rayan.

As Zafer Onat remarks: ?First of all we must identify that the Rojava process has 
progressive features such as an important leap in the direction of women's liberation, 
that a secular, pro-social justice, pluralist democratic structure is attempting to be 
constructed and that other ethnic and religious groups are given a part in the 
administration. However, the fact that the newly emerging structure does not aim at the 
elimination of private property, that is the abolition of classes, that the tribal system 
remains and that tribal leaders partake in the administration shows that the aim is not 
the removal of feudal or capitalist relations of production but is instead in their own 
words 'the construction of a democratic nation''.?

As Syrian-Kurdish anarchist Shiar Neyo comments: ?From the PYD?s point of view, this was a 
golden opportunity to impose its authority and expand its sphere of influence in the 
Kurdish areas in Syria. This political pragmatism and thirst for power are two important 
factors in understanding the party?s dealings with the regime, the revolution, the FSA, 
and even the Kurds themselves. They also help explain many phenomena that seem to bewilder 
some commentators and analysts, such as the suppression by PYD forces of independent 
activists and those critical of the party?s policies, in much the same vein as the 
Baathist regime did. By way of example, one can cite in this regard the Amuda massacre in 
July 2013, in which the People?s Protection Units (YPG) opened fire on unarmed 
demonstrators, or the closure of the new independent radio station Arta in February 2014, 
under the pretext that it was not ?licensed?. The PYD?s forces have also assaulted members 
of other Kurdish political parties and arrested some of them under a variety of excuses; 
they have been controlling food and financial resources in the Kurdish areas and 
distributing them in an unjust manner on the basis of partisan favouritism, and so on and 
so forth. Such practices remind people, rightly, of the oppressive practices of the Assad 
regime.?

What we are saying might not be popular at the moment, but we feel that our analysis will 
be borne out by unfolding events.

Our proposed actions

1.Argue for fully open borders for refugees and aid to these refugees. Highlight the 
conditions in the refugee camps and of Syrian refugees in Turkish cities forced to beg or 
to turn to petty criminal activities in order to live.

2. Provide humanitarian aid to Rojava via IFA, which has direct contact with DAF.

3. Encourage and support any independent action of workers and peasants in the Rojava 
region. Argue against any nationalist agitation and for the unity of Kurdish, Arab, 
Moslem, Christian and Yezidi workers and peasants. Any such independent initiatives must 
free themselves from PKK/PYD control, and equally from aid by the Western allies, from 
their clients like the Free Syrian Army, Barzani?s Kurdistan Democratic Party, and the 
Turkish state.

The Anarchist Federation, 1st December 2014.

http://www.afed.org.uk

---

For references, and statements & discussion elsewhere:

References:

Servet D??man? (Enemy of Wealth) anarchist website, Turkey- Rojava: Fantasies and 
Realities [article by Zafer Onat, in several language translations]: 
http://www.servetdusmani.org/rojava-fantasies-and-realities/

Tahrir-International Collective Network website: On the Syrian Revolution and the Kurdish 
Issue ? an interview with Syrian-Kurdish activist and journalist Shiar Nayo: 
http://tahriricn.wordpress.com/2014/04/07/syria-on-the-syrian-revolution-and-the-kurdish-issue-an-interview-with-syrian-kurdish-activist-and-journalist-shiar-nayo/

Statements:

International of Anarchist Federations: http://i-f-a.org/index.php/news [several 
statements by KAF (Kurdish Anarchist Forum, UK and Europe) and DAF (Revolutionary 
Anarchist Action, Turkey), including translations]

http://anarsistfaaliyet.org/ (DAF website)

https://libcom.org/tags/kurdistan-anarchist-forum (KAF related articles)

Further discussion:

Workers Solidarity Alliance, USA: 
http://ideasandaction.info/2014/10/rojava-anarcho-syndicalist-perspective/ 
[anarcho-syndicalist individual, critical of national liberation context]

Anarkismo, platformist network: http://www.anarkismo.net/article/27540 [reply to the WSA 
position with many comments]