(en) "Poor in means but rich in spirit" - Cesur Milusoy interview Janet Biehl (de)

After my visit to Rojava in early December 2014, I published an article with my 
impressions here and here. ---- Meanwhile, journalist Cesur Milusoy interviewed me on 
December 23. The interview is published in German, here. This English version contains 
some amplifications on the German version. ---- Janet, you just returned from a journey to 
Rojava that lasted more than a week. How did you and the group enter Rojava? The Turkish 
border is closed, and ISIS controls much of the territory in Iraq. ---- We started out 
from Erbil, Iraq, and crossed the border at Semalka. The organizers had arranged for the 
crossing in advance. Once we arrived, we had to wait a few hours until someone made a 
telephone call. Then we crossed the Tigris and entered Cizire. ---- Cizire is a small 
canton in Syrian Kurdistan that is at war and at the same time is daring to build 
something new. To ask a banal question, what were your impressions?

Rojava seemed to me to be poor in means but rich in spirit. The people are brave, educated 
and dedicated to defending their revolution and their society. Their revolution is 
grassroots-democratic, gender equal, and cooperative. I've never experienced anything like 
it. The people of Rojava are showing the world what humanity is capable of.

a female Asayis

You went to Rojava to see whether the self-government functions along libertarian 
principles. What did you find? To what extent are the principles of Murray Bookchin present?

Rojava's system is similar to Bookchin's ideas in the most crucial way: power flows from 
the bottom up. The base of Bookchin's system is the citizens' assembly. The base of 
Rojava's is the commune. One of my questions before arriving was whether Rojava's communes 
were assemblies of all citizens or rather meetings of their delegates or representatives 
in a council. But I found out that the communes are made of up a neighborhood's 
households, and that anyone from those households may attend and participate in a meeting. 
That's an assembly.

Another similarity is that in both systems power flows upward through various levels. 
Citizens' assemblies can't exist in isolation--they have to have a mechanism by which they 
interconnect with their peers, yet one that remains democratic. Rojava's solution is the 
people's council system that rises through several tiers: the neighborhood, the district, 
the city, and the canton. Bookchin, by contrast, spoke of towns and neighborhoods 
confederating. Murray called the broader levels "confederal councils," where as in Rojava 
they are called people's councils at every level, or even "house of the people." In both 
cases they are made up of mandated delegates, not representatives as in a legislature. 
Rojava's delegates--called co-presidents--convey the wishes of the people the next level 
up-they don't act on their own initiative. So that's another similarity. In Rojava, the 
people's councils aren't made up only of co-presidents from the lower levels; they also 
comprise people elected to enter at that level. The councils seem to be quite large. I 
think that's a good idea.

In addition to the council system, Rojava has a transitional government in place as well, 
a built-in dual power. The council system is separate from it but also carries the wishes 
of the people into it, through various mechanisms.

You have also spoken about the revolutionary process there.

Bookchin wrote extensively about the revolutionary process, in his histories of 
revolutionary movements. You can't make a revolution just any day, he would point out; 
history has to be on your side; only at times does a "revolutionary situation" develop, 
when it's possible to change the system. He lamented that all too often, when a 
revolutionary situation came around, the revolutionaries weren't ready for it. They longed 
for an opportunity to make change, but they did not organize in advance, and so when the 
revolutionary situation developed, they missed their chance.

Rojavans did not make the common mistake. They prepared for decades before the 
revolutionary situation happened,building counterinstitutions, creating a structured 
counterpower. The Qamislo massacre of 2004 taught them that they had not prepared 
sufficiently, so they intensified their preparations. So when the revolutionary situation 
came in 2012, they were ready. When the regime collapsed, leaving a power vacuum, the 
counterinstitutions were in place to take the power, and they did.

Rojavans understand something else Murray argued too, about power. The issue is not to 
abolish power--that can't be done. The issue, is rather, to define who has the power: will 
it be a regime, or will it be the people? Rojavans understood when the moment arrived that 
the power was theirs for the taking, and they took it. He would have applauded heartily.

And finally, I think he would have commended the work of Tev-Dem, a movement of civil 
society organizations established in order to create the council system--communes and 
other institutions of democratic self-rule. I think he would have commended Rojavans' 
imagination in inventing a movement whose purpose is to creat democratic self-government.

You speak of creativity that Bookchin would have praised, but the creativity is 
essentially Abdullah ?calan, head of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), who was inspired 
by some writings of your partner, as was the Syrian branch of the PKK, the PYD. The PKK as 
originally based on Marxist-Leninist ideology. Did you observe any signs of this in Rojava?

In the past decades ?calan and the PKK have renounced Marxism-Leninism. Their goal is now 
to create a base democratic, ecological, cooperative, and gender-equal society. I saw no 
gulags there, not even close. I saw a place that seemed genuinely committed to creating 
that society, even if it's still al work in progress.

The equality between men and women is an important issue for you. In the Middle East women 
have a difficult role. Has that changed in Rojava?

women at an assembly meeting in Qamislo

Misogyny is deeply rooted in the Middle East. Women have fewer rights there than almost 
anywhere else in the world. Their intelligence end value are denigrated. They may be 
married while still girls. Their husbands can beat them with impunity, and husbands can 
have plural wives. And when a woman is sexually abused, her male relatives blame her and 
may commit an honor killing or even coerce her into committing an honor suicide. She is 
often excluded from education and from working outside the home, and she is certainly 
forbidden to participate in public life.

In Rojava this grim condition is undone, as the whole society is committed to creating 
equality for the sexes. Girls are educated along with boys. They can choose any 
profession. Violence against women is forbidden. A woman who experience domestic violence 
can bring the problem to a public meeting, where it is discussed and investigated. Above 
all they may participate in public life. In Rojava's democratic self-government, a meeting 
must consist of 40 percent women. The institutions have no individual heads--they must 
always have two co-presidents, one man and one woman. An elaborate series of women's 
councils exists alongside the general councils. Women's councils have veto power over 
decisions that affect women. Rojava's defense forces consist of units for men and units 
for women.

Do women play a large and more important role in the revolution, without which these 
structures would not be possible?

Yes. In many places we were told that Rojava's revolution is a women's revolution; that a 
revolution that does not alter the status of women really isn't a revolution at all; that 
transforming the status of women transforms the whole society; that freedom for women is 
inseparable from freedom of society; and even that women are "the main actors in economy, 
society, and history." Such ideas are taught not only in the women's academies and the 
Mesopotamian Academy but also in, for example, the academies that train the defense and 
security forces. At the Asayis academy in Rimelan, we were told that half the educational 
time is dedicated to equality of the sexes.

One cause of conflict in the Middle East is the oppression of ethnic groups. In Rojava 
many cultures and religions exist alongside each other. How freed o you think the 
minorities are in the self-government? Did you have an opportunity to speak to any of the 
remaining Christians?

It seems to me that Rojava's Kurds understand very well the importance of this question, 
since they very well know the experience of being an oppressed minority. Today as the 
majority in Rojava they know that it would be unacceptable for them to impose on others 
the kinds of exclusions that they experienced in Syria and that they still experience 
elsewhere.

Moreover, they consider diversity to be a positive good. Rojava's social contract affirms 
the inclusion of all minorities, by name. When we met with Nil?fer Koc, co-president of 
the KNK, she defined Democratic Autonomy not in terms of democracy but expressly as "unity 
in diversity."

One aspect of Rojava's diversity is the Assyrian Christian community. What is the 
situation for them in Qamislo?

We met a group of Assyrians in Qamislo, who explained to us that the Baath regime ad 
recognized only Arabs as the sole ethnicity in Syria. Like Kurds, Assyrians had no 
cultural rights and were barred from organizing a political party. But in the summer of 
2012 the revolution founded the self-government, and since then the Assyrians have 
experienced both improvements in their condition. The revolution established three 
official languages; Kurdish, Arabic, and Soryani (the Assyrians'' language). Assyrians 
even have their own defense unit, the Sutoro.

Of course, our delegation couldn't examine the whole society under a microscope. But we 
asked the group of Assyrians what difficulties they experienced with the self-government. 
They responded that they have no difficulties. They participate in the people's councils 
at all levels. We learned that in the transitional government each minority must have 10 
percent of the seats in parliament, even when they don't have 10 percent of the 
population. That's positive discrimination.

Most important, the Assyrian women have organized themselves. They believe that women are 
essential to democracy, and that democracy is essential to women. "Self-government means," 
said one Assyrian woman, "that women are more effective and can participate and can learn 
to become leaders. ... We have in common with Kurdish women the wish to defend the 
society. ... We have relations with Kurdish and Arab women ... The Assyrian Women's 
Organization also includes Arab women. We want to improve the condition of all women in 
this area, not only Assyrian women.

It is one further splendid aspect of this "women's revolution": women of all ethnicities 
share the same problems from traditional society. In Rojava the equality of the sexes ties 
women together across ethnic lines, bringing everyone closer together.

What is daily life like? Are schools, doctors, electricity, and water all supplied for free?

Rojava has been fighting a long, grueling war of self-defense against ISIS, and to that 
end the self-government maintains defense forces (YPG, YPJ) and security forces (Asayis). 
Arming these men and women, providing them with food and uniforms, and meeting other 
military needs consumes 70 percent of the budget. The remaining 30 percent goes to public 
services. Rojava considers health and education to be basic human needs, and on that slim 
budget, it finances public systems for both.

The main economic activity in Cizire is agriculture. With its fertile soil and good 
growing conditions, the canton is rich in wheat and barley. Before the revolution it was 
the breadbasket of Syria. Notably, the Baath regime declined to build processing 
facilities in Rojava, even flour mills. The self-government built one only recently, at 
Tirbespiye, and now provides flour for the whole canton. Bread remains the staff of 
life--each household gets three loaves of bread a day, which the self-government provides 
at 40 percent below cost.

the flour mill in Tirbespiye

For the last two years the self-government has supplied seeds to the farmers, and diesel 
for their machinery, so they can continue to cultivate their lands. The self-government 
has also created local companies to develop infrastructure and to build roads. And it 
finances the refugee camps in the Kurdish areas. Humanitarian institutions are present 
there too, but only symbolically--they don't finance electricity, water, or education, 
because Rojava is not internationally recognized; the agencies have to work through the 
KRG and Damascus, which doesn't allow it. So Rojava must provide for them. The result is 
an economy of survival. Electricity and clean water are in limited supply.

How are people paid?

Some Rojavans earn wages, but many work on a voluntary basis; still others just make their 
living, say, from a cow. "We consume bread together," Hemo said, "and if there is no 
bread, we do not get bread."

Still, at the top of the economic development agenda is the creation of cooperatives, in 
Rojava's "community economy." "Our political project and our economic project are the 
same," said Abdurrahman Hemo, an adviser for economic development in Cizire canton. For 
two years Cizire has been promoting cooperativism through academies, seminars, and 
community discussions, and is building them in different sectors. Most of the cooperatives 
are agricultural, but others are springing up in trades and construction.

a sewing cooperative, Derik

What is Rojava's income? Do people pay taxes?

Rojava collects no taxes from its people, and receives a small income from the border 
crossing at Semalka. But most of Rojava's income by far comes form Cizire's oil. The 
canton has thousands of oilfields, but at the moment only 200 of them are active. Once 
again, the Baath regime exploited Cizire's raw materials but refused to construct 
processing plants. So while Cizire has petroleum, it had no refineries. Only since the 
revolution has the self-government improvised a large refinery to produce diesel and 
benzene, which are sold cheaply in the local economy. Diesel is now cheaper than water--it 
goes fuels the small generators that provide power in much of Cizire. But the canton 
exploits petroleum only for its own use.

Why can't Rojava just sell its oil abroad and gain income from exports?

The reason is the embargo. Rojava shares a long border with Turkey, and several border 
crossings exist. But they are officially closed now, since Turkey embargoes Rojava both 
politically and economically. The KRG observes turkey's embargo, although it has relaxed 
in recent months to allow trade through the Semalka crossing. But because of the virtually 
complete embargo, Rojava must build everything itself, from local materials. It gets no 
investment from outside-all production and all consumption are domestic. Self-sufficiency 
is not ideology--it's an economic reality.

Is the self-government sustainable? Can it survive? Or does it depend on the outside, that 
is on the political power game of Turkey, the United Stats, and so on? Or is there an 
opportunity that one could call historic?

The principles of democratic autonomy are anticapitalist, but Rojava has in any case no 
economic surplus that can be used to develop the economy. The economic development 
adviser, Hemo, is seeking outside investment. "We want to be self-sufficient," he told us, 
"but to develop quality of life, we need some kind of industry." Rojava needs a power 
plant and a fertilizer factory. But the cooperative economy can't finance industry at that 
level, he told us. "We need help from outside, private or public, so we can build our 
social economy together."

In what is called the "open economy," outside investment is welcomed as long as it 
conforms to the social nature of the Rojava's "community economy." Without outside 
investment, Hemo believes, Rojava can survive maybe only another year or two. But although 
Rojava must industrialize, it must not create a state economy, or a centralized economy. 
Even with outside investment, it should remain locally organized: "We need a common 
economy, and factories should be communally owned."

But outside investment is lacking, because Rojava's existence is not internationally 
recognized. Potential investors have no legal access--they have to they have to go through 
the KRG and Damascus. And they have no physical access--the absence of border crossings 
with Turkey. To survive, Rojava needs openings to the outside world. It seems clear that 
Turkey must open its borders and allow this noble and high-minded project to continue.

http://www.biehlonbookchin.com/poor-in-means/