ئەرشیفەکانى هاوپۆل: English

Coup is the State, Revolution is Liberty!

July 17, 2016

The coup, which has been an inevitable reality of the state presence in this geography since the military coup of 1980, arose after 36 years, on the night of July 15. Many state buildings were blocked for a few hours during the military mobilisation based in Istanbul and Ankara. The coup started with flypast of fighter jets in Ankara and blocking of bridges in Istanbul by soldiers, and continued with taking hostage of chief of general staff and tank noise and gun shots in the streets. Many state buildings were shot by F16s and helicopters including the parliament building and the headquarters of National Intelligence Organisation; There were clash of arms in many places between soldiers and police. Following the events, national state television broadcast was cut and the coup declaration signed ‘Peace at Home Council” was read. When the ”5 Hour Coup” ended, more than one hundred soldiers, more than eighty police officers and more than eighty anti-coup protesters died. 2839 soldiers, among them many high ranked ones, were taken into custody.

During this 36 years period, the coup as a tool of political oppression, violence and suppression, has been used as a threat by the army over and over again. No doubt, for us, the oppressed, the coup means torture, suppression and massacre of the peoples in this geography in these periods. It’s evident that a structure which takes its power from the massacres it makes, would continue making massacres in the name of “protect the indivisible unity of the country”. The recent coup is a result of power groups fighting for power inside the state. Perhaps, the hidden existence of power groups outside the state pushes its definition to a wider scale. However, there is no doubt that the ones who reinforced their power as a result of this 5 hour coup are the current government and the head of state.

The night that started as a military coup was made into a “democracy holiday” while the state power gained control. Ruling party, AKP, gained the title of “repelled a coup” with its victory against the coup, on top its legitimacy over its “being elected”. Throughout the night, all TV channels made broadcasts that served this victory and made the propaganda of the illusion of democracy personified on Tayyip Erdoğan. This propaganda was also made continuously by the media that was known to be opposing. It this fight for state power, media not only took side with Tayyip Erdoğan, but also played the role of channelling people to the streets.

As well as the media, the opposing parties in the parliament which did not “spare” their support for AKP since the start of this process; fell into the “prevent others from making politics” trap of state power. Their stance “taking sides with democracy against the coup” as a mask of their political unawareness. This indicates clearly that in the short term, they will not mobilize other than reinforced state power politics. Defining the ones who “will die when Tayyip Erdoğan says die, will shoot when he says shoot”, filling the squares with “we want death penalty” slogans, focused on lynching anyone who comes across, as “democracy supporters”; isn’t this a sign of political stagnation of the same opposing parties?

With this coup and the victory against the coup, AKP now has the environment that it needs to create the ideological transformation on society. The “50% that hardly contained themselves at home” which was shown as threat by Tayyip Erdoğan during the Gezi Protests, were on the streets. The fascist culture which is an important part of the ideological transformation taking place from the law system to social life, was awakened with the ones mobilized by the state onto the streets. Not only that, they were guised as people trying to hold their power of democracy… It’s not hard to guess how these “democratic mobilizations” will face the oppressed in different ways in different places. We have already heard news of lynch activity towards the ones not taking sides with reinforced power of the state.

This fight of power groups trying to acquire the state power which operates on top of rising economic and political injustice; is nothing but the perpetuating of authority of oppressors on the oppressed, in order to destroy the freedom of the oppressed. There is no doubt that neither the visible or invisible dictatorship, nor the military of civil structures, nor the coup, nor the elections of political powers that are the enemy of the people, has anything to do with the will of the people. We, who believe that free life cannot be created by a coup or by elections, recognize the existence of the state as a coup to freedom and our revolt will continue until it creates a free world. The state is the coup, revolution is freedom. What we all need, is not get hopes up on the fights between authorities, but to known that hope is revolution for freedom.

Devrimci Anarşist Faaliyet (DAF)

Erdogan policies have played a major role in the Region

Erdogan policies have played a major role in the Region

By Zaher Baher

July 2016

In this article I will try to show how the regional policies, executed by Erdogan and his AKP (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi – Justice and Development Party) in respect of Rojava, Bakur and Iraqui Kurdistan, meet the goals of the Turkey’s president.

None of these policies are in the interest of Turkey. They already have suicidal impact on the country’s social, economic and political situation. In future it may even cause a military coup in Turkey.

As for the economic situation, the biggest damage is done to the tourism sector.

  • 8% of the workforce working in the tourist industry generates 12.9% of Turkey’s GDP.

  • According to Burak Cosan, The Daily News Istanbul, in 2014 almost 42m people visited Turkey.

  • Murat Ersoy, the head of the Tourism Investors Association in a press meeting on the 1st of June 2016 said “Our country’s loss in tourism revenue may increase up to $15 billion over this year and the decline in tourist numbers by 30 percent compared to 2015”.

  • The number of foreign arrivals visiting Turkey declined by 28% in April to 1.75 million compared to the same month of 2015, marking the steepest decline since May 1999, according to data by the Tourism Ministry.

  • The number of foreign people visiting Turkey decreased by 16.5% to 5.82 million in the first four months of this year compared to the same period of 2015.

  • In the first three months of 2016, tourism revenue decreased to $4.07 billion with a 16.5% drop, according to data that was released by the Turkish Statistics Institute (TÜİK) on April 29.

  • Tourism revenue was $31.5 billion in 2015, an 8.3 percent decline compared to the previous year. Leading Turkish tourism player expects $15 bln loss in revenue

We can all see at present that the social and political situation is getting worse as well. I believe the problems Turkey is currently facing are caused by ISIS which Erdogan has based his entire policy on.

How did that come about?

From the very beginning I said and believed that the main aim of invading Mosul by ISIS was because of Rojava and its social movement. The Democratic Self Administration (DSA) in Rojava up to this moment is exemplary not only in this region, but can be said for other parts of the world. As much as Erdogan is unhappy with the type of administration like the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), compliant in meeting his demands completely, he deeply hates DSA, which does not yield to his will.

The so called “international community” may have approved Erdogan’s war against Rojava in 2014. But instead of getting Turkey involved directly, he decided to use a proxy a terrorist group, ostensibly independent from Turkey. The problem was the terrorist groups supported by Saudi Arabia and Qatar were not strong enough to defeat YPG/J (the people and the women protection Units). Erdogan had to choose the most fanatical, brutal and ideological one, ISIS, to achieve all his plans with a very little risk.

Why Erdogan and his National Intelligence Organization (MIT) have chosen Mosul for ISIS?

There were many reasons for Mosul chosen to be invaded by Erdogan and his MIT plans. The historical reason is, Mosul was one of the regions of the Ottoman Empire in the olden days; it is very close to both Turkey & Syria; it is also well connected by public transport with both of these countries. The Community of Ezidis mainly situated in that area, and also the closeness of Mosul to Kurdish towns like Erbil, Duhok, Tikrit and Kirkuk. The region of Mosul is very rich with oil. It was one of the weakest points in the country, probably second to Falluja. The vast majority of its residents are Sunni who resent the central government. They were marginalized and having very difficult time on the hands of the Iraqi army, police and the security. There were also several minor reasons in favor of this option.

Using ISIS to invade Mosul

The important point in this article is the invasion of Mosul. Without this operation it would have been impossible for Erdogan to carry out the rest of his plans successfully and to play a major role in the region.

Following the invasion of Mosul, ISIS declared al-Raqqah its Caliphate capital. The connection between these two cities is strong. The land controlled by ISIS has expanded, al-Raqqah became stronger. The invasion has made it easy for Turkey to support ISIS politically and militarily. In the meantime, ISIS supported the state of Turkey by supplying it cheap oil and caused an influx of refugees, used by Erdogan as a bargaining chip in trading with Europe. Erdogan made it easy for ISIS to enter Turkey to terrorize the Kurdish and killing innocent people.

ISIS forces were under 5000, whereas the Iraqi forces were over 60.000 and equipped with new weapons including helicopters and tanks. It appeared, there was a conspiracy between Erdogan, KRG, Qatar and the Iraqi military generals in Mosul. Mosul was an easy victory for ISIS. There was no bloody battle; the entire town was taken within less than 24 hours. ISIS managed to gain many new powerful weapons easily that nobody could have expected. This boosted the confidence of ISIS and it then made its next move, to Kobane.

Why was Kobane, not Jazeera?

In order to execute their plans, Erdogan and MIT had to choose Kobane or Jazeera as their target. Distance wise, Qamishli in Jazeera is closer to Mosul at around 150 km, whilst from al-Raqqah is around 370 km. However, there were many other reasons to choose Kobane instead.

  • Kobane is smaller than Jazeera in size and in population, as such it would be easier to control.

  • Secondly, Kobane is between Afrin and Jazeera. Taking Kobane would cut the communications between remaining cantons.

  • Thirdly, Kobane is poorer than Jezeera economically; its YPG/J forces are smaller as compared with Jazeera. Furthermore, Assad’s has an army stationed in Qamishli and it is still there up to now; the army controls a few kilometers within Qamishli, the postal service and the airport. Kobane is free from Assad’s control.

  • The state of Turkey could support ISIS in Kobane and around Kobane through Sruce easier and better than supporting ISIS though Nusaybin, neighbor of Qamishli.

  • Finally, al-Raqqah is much closer to Kobane than Qamishli to Kobane.

I believe until the defeat of ISIS in January 2015 in Kobane, Erdogan and MIT policies were successful. In June and July of last year Erdogan adopted a couple more policies. Both policies were created to terrorize Kurdish people.

First, they did not approve the outcome of the general election held in June 2015 while the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) achieved excellent result well above the election threshold and gained 80 seats.

The second policy was his fascist attitude towards Kurdish people by terrorizing them, killing innocent people, arresting activists and creating a climate that was easy for ISIS to use suicide bombers. In July 2015, the suicide bomber attacked a gathering of a large group of leftist youth, communists and anarchists in Sruce; many people were killed and injured.

Erdogan was the beneficiary of using terror policy for three reasons. First, grounding a lot of forces there and restricted the freedom of movement to people. Second, made claim to his own people,Europe and the world that ISIS is his enemy too. Third, provoking PKK to start a war that gave him the justification to cancel the peace process and entering the war with Kurdish people all the way.

Alas, Erdogan was very successful and managed to provoke PKK and go with his tactic. Now the killing, arresting people, enforcing Curfew in Kurdish towns and cities, starving people withdrawing the political immunity on the HDP MPs continues. He also sacked 134 of the heads of Municipalities and replaced them with his supporters. All of this has been carried out in the eyes of US and the Western countries. All of this damaged the social movement in Bakur and were in the interest of Turkey government, its MIT, the right wing and racist groups.

Another success of Erdogan’s was that since 05/07/15 he hasn’t let Ocalan to be seen by any of his people including his own lawyers. This cut off the entire communication between Ocalan and PKK or other forces. This policy has again served the state of Turkey but not the Kurds from Rojava or Bakur.

Erdogan Policy in regards to Syria and Rojava

In this point of my article I draw the attention of the readers to both successful and failed policies of Erdogan.

Failures:

  • Bringing down a Russian fighter Jet and killing its pilots was a disaster for Erdogan. He was not able to participate in the war in Syrian skies, and it also economically and politically damaged Turkey. In effect, president Putin introduced boycott of Turkey as a tourist destination.

  • Erdogan also failed in convincing US and Western countries to set up a none-fly zone in Rojava. His main aim was just to fight the YPG/J forces there.

  • Another failure policy was he could not go ahead with the joint plan with Saudi Arabia to take their forces into Syria to support the terrorist group against Assad’s forces and YPG/J in the same time. By supporting ISIS and other terrorist groups damage was done to diplomatic relationship of Turkey and the USA.

At the same time, Erdogan scored some successes.

  • Economically, ISIS supported Turkey by providing very cheap oil, letting some of the companies in Turkey using the Syrian children labors, and also using refugees as a bargaining chip with Europe.

  • Normalizing diplomatic relationship with Egypt and also with Israel.

  • Erdogan and MIT managed to form a military group from Syrian Turkmen against Assad and use them directly, supporting and providing them everything to make them powerful enough to claim that they represent all Turkmen in Syria.

  • He also managed to make Kurdish opposition political parties (ENKS), the Syrian Kurdish National Council (that occasionally commit terrorist act especially in Jazeera), stand up against YPG/J and DSA.

  • The most successful policy of Erdogan and MIT was making ISIS so powerful against YPG/J that pushed them in line of US and jointly fighting ISIS. YPG/J now are facing the most terrible war perhaps after Kobane, with support of US forces to liberate the Caliphate capital, al-Raqqah.

Erdogan policy in regards to Iran:

Erdogan and MIT have a double policies towards Iran. On one hand the Kurdish question became a common problem for both of them, that can make them friends. On the other hand the same issue can make them enemies if Iran starts supporting PKK or PYD.

In the meantime, it is quite obvious that a big number of Iranian solders are taking part in the war side by side with Assad’s forces and Assad received other help from Iran. Assad also relies on support from Lebanese “Hezbollah” who are supported by Iran as well. Meanwhile Turkey is indirectly working on weakening Iran as a close ally of Iraqi government by supporting ISIS against Iraq. At the moment Iran-Turkey economical relationship is getting better and that is helping them to improve their political relationship too.

Erdogan’s policy in regards of Iraq and KRG

Erdogan and MIT used ISIS not only in Syria and Rojava. In fact ISIS was the most powerful and active group that Turkey has been using to execute their policy against the Iraqi government and KRG.

ISIS managed to invade Mosul, the second town of Iraq and became a major threat. Invading Mosul meant the other towns and cities in that region, like Erbil, Tikrit and Kirkuk faced a big threat as well. ISIS managed to control entire oil fields and refineries in the area; the income from their production fueled ISIS’ war effort instead of the government. Invading Mosul revived the old historic question of Mosul that always was in Erdogan’s mind. He wanted to annex it for Turkey.

I believe this can be one of the reason as to why Erdogan last year before the eyes of so called “international community“ brought 5000 heavy military forces with variety of different weapons, including tanks, to the border of Iraq close enough to Mosul. Since then Iraq keeps demanding Turkey to withdraw its forces, while Erdogan keeps ignoring these demands.

By invading Mosul ISIS controlled the dam of Mosul that can threat flooding Baghdad and many small towns and villages in the middle of Iraq. In supporting ISIS in invading Mosul, Erdogan managed to give strength to Arab Sunni tribes in the region at least if they do not support ISIS, they abstain to support the Iraqi government. Invading Mosul pushed the Iraqi government into deep debt by borrowing lots of money and buying more weapons. ISIS became more powerful and started to threaten to occupy Baghdad.

In 2014 ISIS rendered nearly a third of the country out of government control by taking more cities like Fallujah, Tikrit, Ramadi, Hit, Rutba and Telafar, with many villages. The threat of ISIS to Iraq was very real, up to this moment there has been no peace, no security in Baghdad and a few more towns in middle of Iraq.

In addition to all that Erdogan fighter jets since July of 2015 and even before that every week regularly crossed the borders and bombed heavily Qandil Mountain and the villages in the bottom of the mountain. This has caused the killing of so many people, injuring many more, displacing hundreds of family and killing their cows, cattle, dogs, sheep and destroying the environment.

In regards to Kurdistan and KRG, Erdogan brought them endless war. In this war Kurdish Peshmerga became the main forces to fight ISIS. The war between the Kurds and ISIS made Kurds an enemy of Sunnis and to certain extent to Arabs as a whole and the Iraqi government. In the meantime the war made KRG be more dependent on Turkey and closer to US and Western countries. In effect Iraqi Kurdistan has become a big military base for Turkey and US.

By using ISIS in the region of Mosul so successfully, Erdogan managed to make KRG in particular and Kurdistan in general almost a part of Turkey. He is working on Iraqi Turkmens as well to increase the dispute between them and Kurdish communities and to escalate the tension. The dependence from Turkey made KRG, particularly Barzani Party, KDP, the main enemy not just of PKK and PYD, in fact to whole Kurdish society in Rojava and Bakur. From time to time, obviously at the order of Erdogan, Barzani even closes KRG borders completely. The most recent embargo was almost for 3 months between March of this year and June. Even worse is the fact that Barzani became silent about everything that happens in Bakur and Rojava. He neither supports the Kurds there, nor protest against the state of Turkey.

ISIS also put the Kurdish Islamic political organizations under pressure. They must clarify their attitude towards ISIS, either “with us or against us“. In Iraqi Kurdistan we have a couple of Islamic political organizations and both have their own MPs in KRGs’ Parliament. However one of them is very pro-Erdogan and both of them so far have not denounced ISIS as a non-Islamic group. The vast majority of Kurdish does believe they are sleepy cells of ISIS. They might be right.

One more important effect of arriving ISIS to Mosul and the rest of Kurdish areas, was preservation of the position held by Barzani and his government. Despite the bad situation of KRG economy, people there are reluctant to protest. They have made people scared to go on strike, protest, even demanding their wage, salary. At the moment the KRG employees are getting less than half of their salary even they do not get that regularly. They are three to four months behind. This has affected the markets badly, whole services, projects have been stopped and poverty for many people will soon become unavoidable. Whenever and wherever people try to complain and protest they were told “they have to be grateful, at least they do not live under ISIS control and should not rock the boats because this is in the interest of ISIS and other our enemies”

Erdogan and his MIT policies for the time being were right and met their aims, even if they create a damage for Turkey in the long run. They were good for Erdogan, AKP and bad for Kurdish people and the rest of the region. It looks like Erdogan and his AKP now want to change their policy from war to peace with everybody except the Kurdish society. His future peace policy in the region certainly will be if not aimed to eliminate Rojava cantons, at least to reform them in the KRG manner.

Zaherbaher.com

SYRIA: Syria’s forgotten revolutionaries: an interview with Leila Al-Shami

SYRIA: Syria’s forgotten revolutionaries: an interview with Leila Al-Shami

rsz_screen_shot_2015-10-07_at_30630_pm     June 22, 2016, Source: bookwitty

Patrick Ward

In 2011 the Arab Spring swept the Middle East and North Africa. Millions of people rose up against dictatorships across the region, toppling governments in Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen, with the Libyan regime also falling following Western intervention. Among the countries in which revolution seemed to be on the cards was of course Syria. But, five years later, the country is in turmoil, with President Bashar Al-Assad clinging to the power he has left with the backing of the military might of Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and others. Facing them are reactionary Islamist forces such as Islamic State/Daesh and Jabhat Al-Nusra. The situation looks increasingly hopeless, and it is generally portrayed in the media as a battle between equally horrific forces, with ordinary people reduced to spectators desperately attempting to avoid barrel bombs or making terrifying journeys out of the country as refugees.

But there is a side to the story that is often overlooked – that of the continued resilience and self-organisation of Syrians resisting both the regime and groups like ISIS. This is the subject of Burning Country: Syrians in Revolution and War by Leila Al-Shami and Robin Yassin-Kassab, a comprehensive account of Syria’s recent history told often through the stories of people on the ground.

I spoke to Al-Shami about why contesting the prevalent narratives on Syria is so important.

Why did you write Burning Country?

There was a lot being written about Syria, a lot being written about Syrians, but very little that actually spoke to Syrians and asked them how they themselves define what’s happening in their country. So we really wanted to bring Syrian voices to the forefront, and to speak with people who had been involved in the revolution and see how they felt, to hear their story and to enable other people to hear their story.

I think in general a lot of the narrative on Syria, whether it’s been through people writing books or through mainstream journalism, has been looking at Syria either through a humanitarian lens or through an extremist lens. So, really wanting to see Syrians as either victims or terrorists, but not really wanting to see Syrians as agents of change.

Many people seem to think that the situation in Syria is simply too complicated to understand. Why do you think that view has become so common?

I think that a lot of mainstream journalism, which people depend on for a lot of their information on Syria, has been extremely poor. By focusing on issues such as the humanitarian crisis or the extremism, what people are getting are symptoms rather than causes. So people do not feel, often, that they have a real understanding of why this happened or what the dynamics on the ground are. For example, if you are looking at the refugee crisis only through a humanitarian lens, you are not looking at the causes of the refugee crisis. It’s going to be very difficult to find a solution, because there isn’t a humanitarian solution to a political problem.

One argument that comes across very strongly in your book is that there’s been a level of misinformation about the situation – of a regime that’s hated by the United States on the one side and on the other side you have forces like Daesh/ISIS and Al-Nusra, supported by Saudi Arabia, Turkey etc. That seems to have become quite a dominant idea in sections of the left, for example.

I think a huge problem is people coming to the Middle East through a pre-2011 paradigm, and they are trying to interpret things as they interpreted struggles that happened in the Middle East before. But of course the whole region changed radically in 2011 when there were transnational uprisings from Egypt to Bahrain to Yemen, all across the region.

This has been hugely problematic, because there is this very dominant narrative in sections of the left that the regime is a resistance regime, but this narrative doesn’t match reality. It doesn’t explain the role of the Assad regime, of Assad the father in Lebanon, the massacres of Palestinians in the Lebanese camps that occurred during the 1980s. It doesn’t explain why Bashar Al-Assad worked with the Americans for the extraordinary renditions, when the Americans were handing over suspected terrorists to the Syrian regime basically for torture by proxy. That was throughout the war on terror.

This resistance narrative has persisted, but the thing is that the regime has used this resistance narrative to build popular support, and it did manage to do that both within Syria and across the wider Arab region because it was speaking the same kind of anti-Western, anti-Zionist rhetoric, which was in line with popular sentiment on the street. But a lot of this rhetoric was really to justify internal repression.

For example, you have the emergency law that was put in place, which was ostensibly because Syria was at war with Israel. But really that was the war which suspended all the constitutional rights of Syrian citizens and greatly empowered the security forces, so that was the law that was used to round up and detain dissidents to take them to military courts. But at the same time, the borders with Israel remained quiet, there weren’t serious efforts to liberate the occupied Golan, for example. The Syrian borders with Israel were quieter, more peaceful even than borders that had peace deals with Israel, such as Egypt and Jordan. So the resistance narrative doesn’t match up.

And there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that the Saudi regime or the Turkish regime are funding Daesh, and it seems highly unlikely that they will. If you look at Daesh’s statements, one of its main targets is to bring down the Saudi regime. I think it’s certainly the case that individuals in Saudi Arabia have sent money to Daesh, and Saudi Arabia until fairly recently has played a very negative role in not clamping down on those financial transfers to Daesh from citizens within its territory. But I don’t see any evidence that the Saudi regime itself is funding Daesh, there is enough we can criticise the Saudi regime for without making stuff up.

What has been the role of the United States in supporting forces hostile to the regime?

The United States support for Free Syrian Army militias on the ground has never really been any more than rhetoric. It’s never really given any serious support to them. The main thing that opposition fighters on the ground need is heavy anti-aircraft weapons to defend communities from air force attacks, which are the main cause of civilian deaths inside Syria. The Americans have never sent in those anti-aircraft weapons and their most significant military intervention has actually been to veto other countries from sending in those weapons to FSA fighters. Some things have gone in, lighter weapons, a lot of things like night vision goggles have gone in, but that’s not what these groups need. And also with the weapons that have been going in, it sometimes seems designed to pressure Assad to the negotiating table, to create a stalemate. Some gains will be made as a consequence of that in the battle field, and then the weapon supply dries up, so there’s always this small gains being made, the weapons dry up and then of course the regime makes gains. So it seems that this stalemate is just maintained much of the time.

That seems in stark contrast to the way Russia and Iran are giving support to the Assad regime.

The regime has massive amounts of financial and military support from its backers, both Russia and Iran. There should be strong sanctions on countries sending weapons to the regime.

Where does this leave the revolution, and the self-organisation of those besieged from all sides?

Communities have had to self-organise for survival because as the state’s collapsed in large parts of the country or has been pushed out. People have had to come together to keep life functioning in those areas. And I think this is one of the really remarkable things about the Syrian revolution and the untold story is how people are creating alternatives to authoritarianism in these immensely challenging circumstances when they are being bombed by their own government, they are being bombed by foreign governments, they are under attack from Islamic extremists, they are being starved, they are being gassed. But they are also trying to create ways of organising which are democratic, which is much more community-based, to keep their communities being able to stay in those areas.

In the book you mention how a number of ideas, such as Islamism and anarchism, are part of the debates in how these communities should be organised.

There are so many different ideas going around, and that’s the result of the revolutionary situation. People are really discussing and debating and trying out new ways of organising and new ideas. The self-organised communities are under threat not only from the regime but also by Islamist extremist groups, and in some areas there has been a power struggle, around the councils and within the communities as other groups have also tried to impose structures on the people. Today in Idlib it was the 85th day of protests against Jabhat Al-Nusra in Marat Numan, so the people have been very clear that they don’t want Jabhat Al-Nusra to stay in Marat Numan. They are very clear that they do not want to replace one authoritarian system with another. Idlib is under very heavy bombardment at the moment from the regime, and by Russia, and it’s exactly to destroy these self-organised and democratic communities. They are not ISIS, they are not these extremist groups, they are FSA militias and self-organised communities.

What’s the best way of offering solidarity to the Syrians?

There are serious humanitarian issues that need to be addressed, there are still many communities in Syria which are under siege. The UN set the deadline of 1 June to airdrop to these communities, and that’s deadline’s passed and there’s been no airdrops. Now the UN is saying that it’s wanting permission from the regime, the people responsible for the siege of these communities, to access those areas. Today in Daraya they’ve actually sent in some aid, and what they’ve sent are mosquito nets while the people are starving, it’s an absolutely desperate situation and I think one very important form of solidarity is to call on the UN to call on those governments to ensure that aid gets to those areas.

But we can’t do this all through a humanitarian lens, there has to be a political solution to this problem, there has to be a real and meaningful peace process which is inclusive, and ultimately has representatives from the ground included in it.

In terms of solidarity, there hasn’t been much visible solidarity with Syria and I think that’s hugely problematic that that’s been the case. I think it’s amazing that at the moment when you’re having this massive slaughter, this constant bombardment, there aren’t people in their thousands, in their millions out on the street calling for it to stop.

Is that something that people feel betrayed over?

Of course they feel betrayed over it, and I’m sure they are no longer waiting for solidarity from the outside world, I think those days have long gone.

Do you have hope that the regime will fall, and that something somehow positive can come afterwards?

In many ways the regime has already fallen, because it is completely reliant on foreign powers for survival. It is completely dependent on Iranian and Hezbollah, and Shia militias from Iraq and from Afghanistan and from all over, for ground forces, and on the Russian air force. It’s not managing to take and control territory, and it’s unlikely that it’s going to be able to take back the massive sections of the country which it’s now lost. But I don’t see any quick solutions to this problem. I can’t predict what the future will be, I’m fearful that there will be some kind of partition scenario, some kind of imperial carve-up imposed from outside, it’s so difficult to tell.

But what I would be fairly certain of is that I think that throughout the region the return to the security state is not going to be something which is going to happen. I think the region has changed dramatically and that we’re in a long process of change.

Does Anarchist Movement in Iraqi Kurdistan, Bashur, exist?

By: Zaher Baher
June 2016
I was frequently asked this question in the meetings or interviews. I have always been frank and honest in my reply. I said there are not even an active anarchist group existing there let alone an anarchist movement. I would then be asked the second question ‘why’?
While there have been authority/state committed brutal suppression and repressions, also there was anarchism as a natural rebellious force of human being, so it is illogical to say there was no individual anarchists or no groups existed. There is no doubt that there was always resistance against the state/authority. People considered authority/power as evil forces. People have never seen any common interests with the states/authorities or any benefit from them. In addition, in the history of Iraq and the Middle East under Abbasid Caliphate or before, there were a few rebellion movements: Zoroastrianism, Mazdeism, Babakism and revolutionary movements like Zanj revolts, Kharijites, Karmatians and many more. Although this movement did not label themselves anarchist or communist but in view of many people they were a kind of communitarian, anarchist movements.
If we look into the history of Iraqi Kurdistan, Bashur, after the First World War we can see many reasons of the lack for anarchism and anarchist movement. In my opinion the main factors are the following:
Bashur was a part of Iraqi state, being dependent on the Soviet Union. The Iraqi regime since 1958 until 2003 was in Soviet bloc with the exception for a few years during  1960s.
Only the books, magazines and writings about Marxism, Leninism, Maoism, the entire communist and leftists’ movements in the world and religions were available in Arabic. All those books and writings were published either in Damascus, Beirut or in Moscow. The Syrian Communist Party under its leader Khalid Bakdash has played a big role in translating some of the books and publishing them. In addition, the Syrian’s regime was also in the Soviet Union bloc at least since Hafez Assad come to power.
In regards to the anarchism and anarchist movements in the world, they were described and introduced to us in a much distorted way. All publications about anarchism were written or translated to Arabic by the leftist communists and Russian agents, so they presented anarchism as anti-revolutionary and anti-humanist. They were the only available source showing anarchism as the opposite of what it really is. Anarchism was presented in a repulsive way, showing only it’s anti-state and anti-authoritarian aspect. We were told anarchists are rejecting power/state and leave the society in absolute chaos and disorder. No administration, no law and order, no protection – as a result of that the society would be in danger. These publications explained and described anarchism in the view of Bolsheviks and communists; they wanted to make the idea unpleasant and uninviting.

While they rejected anarchism and attacked it, there was not a single anarchist book or magazine available, not even an article in order for the people to read them before reading the hateful propaganda against anarchism. “The Poverty of Philosophy” by Karl Marx was available, but not the original Proudhon’s work, “Philosophy of Poverty” which Marx criticized. Many writings and propaganda against anarchism existed this way – without access to the ideas they fought.

In such environment, there was no possibility to learn about anarchism or anarchist movement. Consequently people were deprived from the basic knowledge of anarchism.

There were many political parties and people were very loyal to them

Towards the end of 1930s, Iraq and Kurdistan became the fertilized land that brought about many political parties: nationalist, patriotic, religious, liberal and communist. There was a fierce competition among them, struggling for power. They were using deception, propaganda and manipulation to bring people under their influence. Their best members and supporters were absolutely loyal to their parties and their leaders. The dependence of party members on their leaders was absolute. They were ideological fundamentalists. Killing political adversaries – members or supporters of an opposing party – was a legitimate method of ideological dispute. The war all fought against one another, during 1960s, 1980s and 1990s that we have seen is the best example. The loyalty of the party’s members became so serious, they never thought for a second of the integrity of the party polices and its leaders.

In an atmosphere like that, it is hard for new belief and thought to develop. The vast majority of people were divided over the political parties and became very tiny cogs in a very big machine of the political parties, so the parties could manipulate and to use them according to their need. They advised them to vote or not vote, to do this, not to do that, to fight one side, to be in peace with other side. In this situation the members and supporters of them become slaves of the party, they were unable to think, to analyze the situation nor to decide on their own.
Anarchism is founded on the individual’s right to free thinking and to make one’s own decisions, continuous in development and change. Blind loyalty to the power, hierarchy and state makes anarchism impossible to emerge.

Wars, killing and displacing people in Iraq and Kurdistan

Iraq and Kurdistan have not seen peace for over half of century. Iraq has gone through three major wars between 1980 and 2003: Iraq-Iran war, The Gulf War of 1991 and the invasion of Iraq in 2003. All these wars have intensely affected Kurdistan and its people directly or indirectly. This is in addition to the civil war, between Kurdish movement and Iraqi government that launched on 11/09/1961. This war went on and off until March 1991 when the uprising happened in Kurdistan. And from October 1992 to 1997/98 there was fighting among the fraction of Kurdish political parties themselves.
This war brought disaster to Kurdish people from both sides: the Kurdish movement and the central government of Iraq. It killed many innocent people, displaced thousands, maimed many more, destroyed thousands of Kurdish villages. The campaign of Anfal launched by Saddam Hussein between 22/02/1988 to 06/09/1988 resulted in the disappearance over 182,000 Kurdish people and over 5,000 people killed by chemical weapons.
Kurdish people in Iraq experienced the most horrible disasters of war. The suffering and trauma stay in the memory of mine and my father’s generation and cannot be forgotten.
Those of us who grew up in times of wars know how terrible the situation was. The only winners in the wars are the warlords, war traders, the big companies that make weapons and the other equipments of war and most of the time the states too. The outcome of wars to the rest of us is poverty, high prices of the daily necessity, unemployment, homelessness, and displacement, separation, forcing to move out of our lands, and becoming refugees in foreign lands. War can bring more disasters. Where there is war, there is everything except peace, unity and happiness. No doubt in the situation like that, we can only have time to think about our security, safety and running after our daily needs. This is not the moment to develop new ideas, like anarchism; in fact, hard times create more feeling of nationalism, racism and more hatred among people.

In a place where there is war, anarchism is hard to emerge – let alone to gain shape as movement. In a place where there is war, there will be growing number of state lackeys, traitors, betraying its own people. The war also quells dialog between people and restricts their freedom. Because of that not only does anarchism not develop, in fact if there is any anarchists, the war drives them to underground.

Kurdish society and its cultural dependence

Kurdish society in Iraq is rooted in a tradition, being a mixture of the religious and tribal hierarchy. These two elements are the base of the society and its culture. It reflects and preserves the economic structure.

We can see it in every cell of the society. Starting from the family, through nursery, school, university, company, factory, other places of work, administrations, the civil service, and the military to the very top of the society which is parliament and the leaders – all of it is based on hierarchy. In hierarchical organizations or hierarchical society, dependency is very strong. This dependency shapes the thought and mind of everyone. It is very difficult to break centralist approach, created by ever-present hierarchy. Reorganizing the society in horizontal way again is difficult; it needs educational, social, cultural and economic revolution.
In the hierarchical society with the help of its culture, culture of dependency, youngsters have to respect and obey the elders; the workers have to listen to the bosses, students to their teachers. In short the people in the bottom have to look to the top to get advice and order. This also applied to members of political parties, they had to listen to the leaders and carry out whatever they were told to do. Individuals are not independent, as they are supposed to be; they are not confident, they do not have enough trust and faith in themselves. This means everybody, every social group is restricted in thinking and making decisions. They have to obey and be loyal to their superiors and they lose their freedom of individual expression.

This is the cultural climate of Iraqi Kurdistan– Bashur, climate of many powerful tribes, many strong political parties, powerful religious faith and often “honour killings” of women. In such atmosphere individuals do not think, make decisions and sort their own problems out. They rather let others think for them, decide for them and resolve their problems whether they like it or not.
In a climate like this, while the individuals are not free, their thought and mind have been corrupted as well. Therefore, it is difficult for a new idea or thought to arrive, even harder to develop it any further.

Zaherbaher. com

What sort of Uprising do we need in Iraqi Kurdistan?

By; Zaher Baher
Feb 2015
Before the uprising of March 1991 in Kurdistan, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) and the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) armed forces (Peshmarga) virtually did not exist, except for the ones on the borders with Iran and in very remote areas. This new situation resulted from the Iran/Iraq war and the Anfal campaign run by the former Regime that cost the life of over 180 thousand villagers who were evacuated and disappeared with their villages completely destroyed by way of demolition. When the uprising happened, the government forces were kicked out by the mass movement, and then the PUK and KDP with the help of US and Western countries came back. In the short time, they controlled these towns and cities that liberated by people. In May 1992, they formed and shared Administration through a scenario of the fake election. On 05/10/1992 they started fighting the PKK, this lasted about 3 months. In 1995, PUK and KDP became separated and started fighting one another and divided Kurdistan between them.
During the fighting PUK had defeated KDP almost completely, therefore, the head of KDP, Masoud Barzani, asked the former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein for his support.
On 31/08/96, the former regime’s army had arrived Erbil and rescued the KDP. Afterwards, the KDP launched attacks on PUK and managed to control many areas including towns, cities and villages, which were under the control of the PUK previously. The PUK had no choice but to ask the Iranian regime for support, so with the help of Iran, PUK managed to gain control of those places that been lost to the KDP and set up its own administration. After this fighting, PUK and KDP controlled different regions of Kurdistan. KDP set up its Administration in Erbil and the towns around it. PUK set up its own Authority in Sulaymaniyah and the towns around.
In 2003 the former regime fell after the invasion of Iraq by the US and Western countries, nonetheless an extraordinary opportunity was created for PUK and KDP to form Kurdistan Regional Government, the KRG has formed as the result of the election of 2005. The second election after the invasion was in 2009. From 2005 to 2014 both parties (PUK & KDP) were the major powers in KRG. In the last election of 2014, the balance of power slightly changed. The so-called Movement of Change (Goran) that was formed in 2007, came second in the election, it entered the government shared power with KDP, PUK, Islamic organizations and other small parties. However, the corruption, terrorizing of people, disappearances, killing and assassinating of political activists, writers, journalists and women continued.
In short, no serious reforms took place while ’Goran’ shared power with KDP, PUK and the rest. In fact, the situation has got worse. In October of 2015, the KDP sacked all the MPs, Ministers and the heads of Parliament from ‘Goran’, Movement of Change, and were not allowed to return to Erbil. Since then there has been no effective parliament in Kurdistan.

It is People who are in crisis not the KRG:

Kurdish people in Iraqi Kurdistan (Bashur) under the control of KRG have dramatically suffered economically and politically. KRG has failed to pay its employees of 1.4 Millions since October 2015. From this month the teachers are supposed to receive only half of their wage. The KRG blamed the Iraqi central government for not sending the proportion of its annual budget of 17% when due. The KRG supposed to export 550 thousand barrels of oil daily via central government, then the central government should releases the proportion of the . I, the KRG has been selling the oil directly bypassing the central government and kept the money without showing any official record of the detail income, or how it was sold and to whom.
The KRG stated there are also other reasons contributing to the drying up its budget such as the tumbling of oil prices, war with Isis and the cost of having over 1.5 Millions of refugees from Syria and the south/ middle regions of Iraq.
Since October of 2015 trade, market, construction work has all slowed down and all projects have almost been stopped due to running out of money. In addition, thousands especially young people have left Kurdistan heading to Europe. It is difficult for people in Kurdistan to live in such miserable situation under the KRG. Therefore, people do not have any choice other than protesting and boycotting work, mainly in the towns and cities under the control of Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK).
From the start of this month demos and protests of small scale have started in Erbil, the capital of KRG, that controlled by Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP). Many of the offices and schools from primary to secondary have been closed because the teachers and other employees have no money to pay transports fares to reach their workplaces. The prices of everything has risen consequently, many shops and companies have been closed.
Like elsewhere it is the people who are in crisis not the system, not the government. It is people who are lack of confidence, dependant on political parties. It is the people lost faith in themselves and look for a leader to lead them. It is the people who have not learned from previous experiences, they still believe in the notorious and powerful historical lie of Parliamentary election.

We do not need any kind of uprising:

There have been many uprising in different countries in the past. More recently 1979 in Iran, 1991 in Bashur, Iraqi Kurdistan, and in the last five years the “Arab Spring” continues. However, the uprising in all these countries ended up with a terrible civil war or Regime change that in fact was not much better than their former rulers. The reasons for that are simple, either led by political parties or by people with no plan for the post-uprising and eventually tamed by US and Western countries. They mainly wanted to change the power not the society, they wanted the political revolution, not the social revolution, and they wanted to make changes from the top not the bottom of the society. Because of this they easily fell under the influences of the US, and other western countries’ political and neu-liberal economy. In the end, not only have failed to bring real changes, in fact, the post- uprising served the elites, upper class and the interest of the current system much better than previous regimes. The failure also disappointed people and made them not to believe in most of the protest, demos, and even uprising.
At present, there are lots of talks and suggestions among the Iraqi Kurdish especially into the ranks of communists, authoritarian socialists, lefties and the liberals for the uprising. What they want will not bring the better outcome than what has happened in the Arab Countries in my opinion.
In order to avoid that rout and bring the real changes we need to form radical, non-hierarchal local groups that are anti-authority, anti-state and anti-power. We need to organize ourselves in the neighborhoods, factories, work places, schools, universities, on the streets, and the villages. We need to form communes and cooperatives, to set up people’s assembly, citizen assembly, libertarian Municipalism in every village, city, and town. Using direct action and direct democracy in decision making that should be the way of progressing and developing people’s power. We need to do all these independently of the political parties.
Our goals must be to change the society from the bottom to the top, from the political and regime changes to economical, educational, social and cultural changes. We need to work on building people’s power instead of the dictatorship of the proletariat or any other class power.
We do not just need an uprising. We need a kind of uprising that enables us to make real changes in establishing a socialist/anarchist society. This can be done through Democratic Confederalism, Libertarian Communalism.

Is Terrorism actually a threat to the State?

By Zaher Baher

25/10/2015

The latest Paris attack, killing 130 people and injuring over 350 more, again confirms the dangerous world we live in. There is no doubt that Isis and other terrorist groups, including al-Qaida, Taliban, Boko Haram and Al-Shabaab, can be fatal and brutal forces bringing death to many people anywhere across the World including Europe as long as they have a base inside those countries.

Of course, this makes states, both inside and outside Europe to work together very closely in gathering and exchanging information against the groups mentioned above. They also share the same information against civilians, campaign groups, leftists, socialist and anarchist groups.

A quick look at the recent history of terrorism between Sep 2001 and the Paris attack on 13/11/15, and the one in Nigeria and Egypt soon after 13/11, shows us that all these attacks targeted people rather than the state and the current system. Until now, we know that none of these attacks in Europe targeted senior military officers, police chiefs, corporate directors, high-ranking spies, senior government officials or elected politicians (which, by the way, is something I am not hoping for). This is not just the case in Europe, but applies equally to the US, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Lebanon, Turkey, Nigeria, Kenai, Mali, Bali, Bangkok, Tunis, Libya, Syria, Egypt, Israel and Palestine with but one or two exceptions. The attackers, as always target ordinary people, including women, children and the elderly.

Regardless of what happened or how it happened, the media and politicians, as always, try to distort the reality by deceiving people. They still claim it is a war between “us and them”, and, “a clash of cultures and civilizations”, and that, “they are against our way of our life”, and. “they are jealous of us, hate us” and many more.

The media and politicians never ever tell us the truth as to why this terror happens again and again. They never, ever tell us about the state’s terror against its citizens and the citizens of countries they have invaded, militarily or economically.

States, banks, corporations, churches, mosques, along with the media, are all functioning in different ways to protect the current system. They are the dark forces. The media and the rest of these dark forces try, deliberately, to hide the reality of the climate that is breeding terrorists. To blame terrorism only on religious ideology or medieval mindsets is short-sighted and self-serving. It conveniently obscures the fact that the foreign policies of the US, Canada, Australia, UK, Russia and other European countries, are crucial factors. This also means that a resolution of the Palestine question is not an issue. They do not want to admit that the state encourages Islam, the opening of hundreds of Madrassas without involvement in their activities, or any role in their control and inspection. That said, it is not the duty of the state to involve itself with Sharia law and its courts or modernizing the Qur’an which socialises and radicalises young Muslims. The state and the politicians ignore all these as if they do not play a role in breeding terrorism.

The media gets its facts wrong in at least three important respects. Firstly, in general, the terrors of authoritarian Islamists are not against culture and, to a certain extent, not even against other religions but against themselves whether Sunni or Shia and, additionally, against Eyazidis. Secondly, they call these   murderers fanatical Muslims and not the authoritarians they are. The reason for this is quite clears; to defend the power and authority of the state. Behind these terrorist acts lies the true brutality of the authority and domination of the state, corporation, family or any other cells in society. Thirdly, the Media   ignores the fact that the motive of Islamic authoritarians in killing innocent people in Muslim countries is to gain power. But their motives in killing people in US and Western Countries, in fact, is to exact revenge. The clearest evidence was the recent bringing down of the Russian passenger plane.   People in the US, UK and other countries are, frankly, paying the price of the foreign polices of their governments. For instance in Paris, before they started killing people, the attackers chanted Allahu Akbar as they opened fire and also shouted “What you are doing in Syria? You are going to pay for it now”.

A quick look at the history of terrorism shows that the strength of terrorist groups and the state is demonstrated by using terror actions. They both play the same game; they make the people’s movements weaker and weaker and, at the same time, both get stronger. The terror increases the spirit and feeling of nationalism, racism and fascism. It makes the state and its brutal institutions, including police and spies, more attractive to people. A recent Ifop poll published by Le Figaro and RTL Radio found that 84% of French people were prepared to accept more controls and a certain limitation on their liberties in order to guarantee their security. This is the best example to show how terror action impacts the French people. How they fell into the trap of the terrorists and the state!

Islamic authoritarian groups use their savage terror to deceive ordinary people in their own countries by using the actions of the US and the Western countries against them. Meantime, all states, from democracy to dictatorship, use the terror actions as a good opportunity to create more, so-called, anti terrorism laws for “protecting people and their security”. Many of us know these laws are mainly designed to restrict our rights, civil liberties, migration and closing borders on refugees. And these laws, used against activists, seriously threaten the integrity of the state and the system.

In the countries where the terror happens, citizens are the losers when they are killed and then their rights and liberties are abolished or restricted. When the terror happened in Paris, the state announced a state emergency until Thursday, 19/11. Then Parliament extended it for another three months by 551 votes in favour with only three Socialist and three Green Party MPs abstaining. The state of emergency includes; expanding powers to immediately place any person under house arrest if there are “serious reasons to think their behavior is a threat to security or public order”, more scope to dissolve groups or associations that participate in, facilitate or incite acts that are a threat to public order, extending freedom to carry out searches without warrants and to copy data from any computer system found, increasing the capacity to block websites that “encourage” terrorism, extending detention from 24 to 72 hours and banning demonstrations, marches, and protests including the big march, estimated to attract 200,000 people, ahead of the UN Climate Change talks in Paris on 28/11. And now we can see a state of emergency is in place in Brussels whilst nothing is happening there. This is what terrorism actually wants.

Terrorism does not threaten the integrity of the state. In fact, it makes it stronger. The state is continuously conspiring against its citizens so that, when the terror takes place, then it will be easier for the state to implement its brutal agendas and policies, without much resistance. We must not be deceived by state lies and propaganda. We are, as a people, facing two major threats; one from the state and the other from terrorist groups which is why it is important that any demonstrations, marches or protests against terrorism must be, simultaneously, against the state too.

Is the current economic crisis capitalism crisis or ours ?

By Zaher Baher

Oct 2015

Capitalism and its Media have always worked on confusing and deceiving us by introducing reactionary movements, events and experiments as a revolution, that in fact benefit the system rather than us.

For almost a century the Media outlets tried to sell state capitalism to us as socialism. They called Russian bourgeois society a socialist society, for about forty years they tried to tell us what happened in Iran was a revolution. And recently they tried hard to convince us what happened in some of the Arab countries was the “Arab Spring” or “Arab Revolution”. The same applies with regards to an economic crisis. For more than 150 years we have been told that these crisis were capitalism crisis not us. They tell us this to confuse and deceive us as if the capitalists in general have to pay the price, not us. So we should think this crisis is nothing to do with us and we should believe that it is business is as usual.

Many of us cannot form our opinions and analyse things independently and think freely. In other words, we are influenced by the Media. We also think by the brain of somebody else, so that much of our thinking and analysis of issues like economics, politics and social issues are shaped by the Media, famous people and academics that write or talk about them.

During his time, Karl Marx noticed that in the future the duration gap between the crises will get shorter and the crisis time will get longer. However, the whole crisis, whether it remains for a short or a long time has never been the crisis of a capitalist system. It has always remained our crisis. It was us who paid the price by losing our job, consequently becoming homeless as well. We lost many of the achievements that we gained before, and then we became weaker and weaker. It was the capitalism system which escaped the crisis and emerged stronger than before by reorganising itself in a new form and beginning to attack to us.

Although I believe Marx’s entire political theory failed and some parts of his economic theory are questionable, for the problems of his economic theory, he should not be blamed at least for a couple of reasons. First his analysis of the economy in general, especially after the second half of last century onwards, working class and the system, should not be expected. At his time the capitalism system compared to the present one was very weak but the working class movement was more united and stronger than now. Second we should not look to Marx as a God or at least a fortune teller to see his doctrine is correct for now and the future as a medicine for our present sickness. Whoever thinks about Marx this way, is not only unfair to and insulting him, but in fact, him/herself is a parrot just using a brain of somebody who died a long time ago rather than thinking by his/her own brain.

In this article, I am only relying on evidence, statistics on one hand and the current economic, political and social situation under this crisis on the other hand.

I believe it was us that built this system not capitalists; it is us that created money, wealth, capital and everything else. Meanwhile it is us that can live without money, the capitalism system, in a society free of private ownership and power of authority. It is us managing and maintaining every cell in society while capitalists never without using our power, our workforce alone can even make one simple thing, and carry on their normal life and manage maintaining this system even for a minute. It is us actually producing everything, but it is they who benefit. In short it is us all the time holding this system not the capitalists and elites, therefore, whenever and wherever the system became faulty and problematic, it will be us who will be at a disadvantage and pay the price.

What is the economic crisis?      

The Oxford Dictionary definition for the economic crisis is “A situation in which the economy of a country experiences a sudden downturn brought on by a financial crisis. An economy facing an economic crisis will most likely experience a falling GDP, a drying up of liquidity and rising/falling prices due to inflation/deflation. An economic crisis can take the form of a recession or a depression. Also called real economic crisis”

The definition of Google for economic crisis is “   A downturn is part of the economic cycle (sometimes referred to as trade cycle or business cycle) The UK definition of a recession is – negative economic growth for two consecutive quarters. The definition of an economic downturn is less strict than a recession”…..” A situation in which the economy of a country experiences a sudden downturn brought on by a financial crisis. An economy facing … some financial assets suddenly lose a large part of their nominal value”

Many economists believe the current crisis is the worst the world has seen since the great Depression of 1930s.

For Marx “Capitalism IS an economic system that is inherently crisis-prone. It is driven by forces which cause it to be unstable, anarchic and self-destructive”

Marx with Frederic Engels described capitalism in the Communist Manifesto as “a society that has conjured up such gigantic means of production and of exchange, [that it] is like the sorcerer, who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells.”A few questions here are coming up: Has that really happened? The sorcerer no longer controlled the power? When and where after 170 to 180 years we have seen that?

Elsewhere Marx argues that crises “carry the most frightful devastation in their train, and, like an earthquake, cause bourgeois society to shake to its very foundations.” Have we really seen bourgeois society shake to its very foundation?

Whatever the definitions of the crisis, this crisis happened and continues although the apologetic capitalists repeatedly say there will be no more “bust and slum”.

For Marx the causing of the crises are over-production, under-consumption, luck of purchase power and disproportion.

And the only solution from Marx and Engels for the above was democratic economic planning–socialism: “If the producers as such knew how much the consumers required, if they were to organize production, if they were to share it out amongst themselves, then the fluctuations of competition and its tendency to crisis would be impossible. Carry on production consciously as human beings–not as dispersed atoms without consciousness of your species–and you have overcome all these artificial and untenable antitheses. But as long as you continue to produce in the present unconscious, thoughtless manner, at the mercy of chance…crises will remain; and each successive crisis is bound to become more universal and therefore worse than the preceding one; is bound to impoverish a larger body of small capitalists, and to augment…the numbers of the class who live by labour alone”

There is no doubt that the chaotic form of production of the capitalism system and private ownership contradict with workforce of production. This brings crisis with itself which in the end brings disaster to the vast majority of us on one hand and accumulate the huge amount of capital in the hands of a tiny minority on the other hand.

If the causes of crisis is due to over-production and this causes the stagnation of economic, then at present time this ‘reason’ is questionable for me. At present because of the new technologies this problem to certain extent can be resolved by reorganising, making plans in advance before the stagnation starts in the market. No doubt nowadays any major company can find a huge amount of information within second, by using one click they can work out anywhere in the world where they have a branch how much goods, are sold, the profit and loss, the boom period for that particular branch, the number of customers they have, how many workers they have, their work conditions and their performances, and much more. Obviously things have changed very much since when Marx was alive, so they can gather all the above information in a matter of minutes. This may be a reason nowadays as to why the crisis is financially rather than the crisis of the business and trades, although it always ended up with the economic crisis.

However, here I am not attempting to find the causes of crisis but the influences and the implementation of crisis on the vast majority of us. It is true that from here to there a few capitalists, a few companies, banks will be bankrupted or even collapse but whatever happens, the system in general is intact and safe. It looks like an earthquake that comes and goes damaging some area but the rest of the world will remain undamaged.

We usually do not know much about the crisis or we do not feel it until the governments   impose the austerity policy.

Imposing the austerity policy:  

What has been so far introduced to us as capitalism’s crisis, in fact, was neither the crisis of capitalists nor the crisis of the capitalist system. When there are competitions and struggles between the varieties of the corporations, companies happen to cause bankrupting or collapsing some of them. In this situation capitalism through its nation states via its political representative, the parliamentary system imposes austerity on nation and citizens. Their justification for that, as they say, are the economic, is very bad, that without taking a serious measures the entire economy in the country even in the Continent will collapse then we will lose everything.

With this justification their vicious attack from privatising, selling the state ownerships and assets, reducing wages and pensions, sacking workers, reducing and cutting benefits, increasing working hours, imposing the worse work condition, putting up the prices of everything starts, to increase the rent, closing down the public services, forcing the worker to accept any shit jobs while there are millions unemployed in the market.

Austerity, as all of us know, brings so many more problems, like making the unions and working movement much weaker, decreasing corporation tax, increasing crime, racism and fascism, extending the hospital waiting list, homeless and homelessness list and list of eviction and repossessions usually go up.

The crisis situation for which the austerity is imposed brings us terrible packages which we are the only losers. It stays with us and it will be our crisis until   we will be completely aware and conscious about the situation and understanding fully of its causes. Unless we rise up against it by organising ourselves and work collectively to reject the parliamentary system, using direct action and direct democracy to bring back the power from the corporations and their political representative, the government, our crisis will continue and worsen.

In the absence of the above, this system will remain and the economic crisis will stay with us for a long time as well. History has shown us that after each economic crisis the capitalist system became stronger than before by organising itself better and becoming more efficient. Just looking back after the Great Depression what happened in the end of 1920s we can see instead of revolution, in fact, capitalism emerged so strongly it managed to launch WW2. Once the war was over again it managed to create so many small, big, short and long wars: civil wars, religious wars, nationalist wars in so many countries. No doubt these wars made the movement of people weaker and the system much stronger.

If we look at the current crisis closely on the World level and its impact on us we can start from the Oxfam report of 19/01/2015 that says half of global wealth held by 1%. The report shows that the share of the world’s wealth owned by the best-off 1% has increased from 44% in 2009 to 48% in 2014, while the least well-off 80% currently own just 5.5%.And also the report added that on current trends the richest 1% would own more than 50% of the world’s wealth by 2016. The report mentioned that last year, 2014, the 85 richest people on the planet have the same wealth as the poorest 50% (3.5 billion people).

In separate research the Equality Trust, which campaigns to reduce inequality in the UK, found that the richest 100 families in Britain in 2008 had seen their combined wealth increase by at least £15bn.

In this crisis in Europe the riches, the bankers and the companies are getting richer and making more profits while this crisis for us is getting deeper and making us poorer. We see the rate of unemployment has increased. For instance : In Italy the rate of unemployment rose to 12.4%, in Portugal 13% in France 10.5 % in Greece 25.6%, In Ireland 9.7%, in Germany 4.8%, in Spain 22.7% in UK 5.4% and in US 10.3%. The unemployment rate among the young people is much higher; for example, in Greece it is 56%, in Spain 53.5%, in Italy 43.9% and in Croatia 45.5%. According to Joseph Stieglitz, the former deputy of the World Bank, the rate of unemployment among the young African Americans   between 17 and 20 years old who have graduated from high school but not enrolled in college is over 50%.

Although a few of the Banks and big companies have been bankrupted or collapsed, the vast majority of them have benefited from the current crisis. Their profits have gone up compared to previous years. Here is an example of some of them; the profit of Walmart in 2014 was $16.4Bn –an increased of 2% since 2013. The profit of the first season of JP Morgan for this year that disclosed on 14/07/15 has gone up by 5.2% and the Electronic Arts predicts the profit of each of its share go up by $2.85, twice the profit of last year. Amazon online retailers Luxemburg Unit took £5.3bn sale just from British internet shoppers that rose by 14%. . Apple profit for last year increased by 6% to $39.1bn compared to 2013. Costco profit $20.6bn, IBM profit is $12bn, Microsoft profit $22.1bn increased by 1%, Google $14.4bn, the profit increased by 11%. Coca-Cola $7.1bn and Nike $2.7bn, was increased by 8%. These are only a few examples among 10 more of the world’s top corporations that their profits have gone up on our expenses.

In UK according to a report from Sunday Times of 15/04 that listed down the rich people shows the 1000 wealthiest people in the UK are now worth £547bn, not counting what’s in their bank account. The report says “The figure has more than doubled since a total of just under £250bn was recorded in 2005, despite the world economy being gripped by a punishing recession over much of the last decade”. The list also includes 117 billionaires – up from 104 last year.

What we see here should not actually shock or surprise us because; first the rate of corporation tax when Winston Churchill was in power was 97%. When Margaret Thatcher came to power it reduced to 60% and under the Labor and then Conservative gradually reduced to 20%. It was just recently disclosed that the taxpayers are handing businesses £93bn a year by subsiding them and tax break, a transfer of more than £3,500 from each household in the UK. Second the income of ordinary family has since 2008 gone down by 10% and also more than 900,000 people live on food banks. This figure has since last year gone up by 38%. In the meantime the gender pay gap has not closed after 70 years.

While we look at the actual evidence on day to day life with having more than 1.7 million workers on zero-hour contracts, reducing or cutting the benefits, selling the state properties and its assets including social housing , increasing the gap between the poor and the richer, the standard of people’s life lower than 5 years ago, the home owners rate from 70% reduced to 64% and the number of eviction in a day reaches more than 1000 , only between July and September of last year the number of evicted rent payers arrived to 11,000 and 2805 mortgage borrowers lost their homes during the quarter. And also it is expected if life goes on like now, the average UK household will be in debt by £10,000 by end of 2016, the number of Housing Benefit claimants have gone up by 500,000 and the working family claiming housing benefit more than doubled between 2009-10 and 2014-15 and now stands at more than 1.1 million,   the rate of young unemployment among ethnic minorities   went up by 50%, the cost of bringing up a child compare to years before increased by £2,000 ,   one of five UK earn less than living wage and more….How can you say this crisis is capitalism’s crisis not ours? And how can the crisis be “like an earthquake, cause bourgeois society to shake to its very foundations”?

When we have a spirit of defiance and challenge, we do not have to accept anymore of the above. When we resist orders from elites and their states, when we fight back, not surrendering, and believe that we can make changes. When we have the desire and the tendency of rebellion, the consciousness of being used and exploited and, the mentality of resistance that are extremely important for the job to be done. Then, we can freely and loudly say capitalism is in crisis not us.

Yes for Autonomous Self Administration .. Yes for Direct Democracy

Yes for Autonomous Self Administration
Yes for Direct Democracy

Kurdistan Anarchists forum supports creation of people’s self-determination in Bakur (‌North of Kurdistan in Turkey) by all means, but in the meantime we oppose and reject war and arm struggle to achieve this. Simply because in that war, state and its warmongers will win and consequently the people’s struggle and their achievement be defeated which will results in a long-term hopelessness and disappointment?

The announcement of people’s democratic self-administered as an alternative to oppressive Turkey state is a progressive and revolutionary step which deserves solidarity and support from all libertarians (freedom lovers). But using arm struggle and military action to achieve that aim, is a sever mistake. In order to prevent war and military action which empowers dirty plan of State’s Army warmongers, it is essential to rely on People’s social movement to avoid abolition of  the movement and should not  allowed to be a ground of fighting between the army forces to reverse  the self administration of people and its demands and achievements.

Kurdistan Anarchists Forum (KAF)
17/08/2015

Why are Anarchists and Libertarians divided over Rojava?

By Zaher Baher from Haringey Solidarity Group and Kurdistan Anarchists Forum.
14/07/2015

Like leftists and communists, anarchists and libertarians have been divided over Rojava. Some of them are very supportive and optimistic about the future of this experiment and the others are skeptical and suspicious.

There are many factors contributing to this. Some of these factors apply not just to anarchists, libertarians and others, but to the Kurdish people too. So this article may also be the answer to those Kurdish people who frequently ask why they do not receive support from political groups and ordinary people, not just about Rojava, but about any event in any part of Kurdistan.

The main factors are:

First: the attitude of individuals in Kurdish communities who live in Europe and other countries. Although many of us were born or have lived in these countries for a long time, we have not played a big role in introducing Kurdish issues including Rojava to the ordinary people in the countries where we reside, let alone to the anarchists and libertarians.

Of course, I am not talking about those Kurdish who are already members or supportive of the Kurdish political parties who do not like PKK and PYD, but about the supporters of Rojava. A large number of us (Kurdish) have been spread over all Europe and the US. If we want support for Rojava or any other part of Kurdistan, we need to get closer to the people in these countries and consider ourselves a part of this society.

It is a bitter fact that not many of us (Kurdish) think the country we live in is our country, its society our society. We do not think any changes in its politics, economy, education, housing, welfare rights, law & order and many more, directly affect us. We do not believe we are affected by immigration laws, though we are like many more black people and people from different ethnic minorities facing racism and discrimination from police and employers. Regardless of what happens, the majority of us are still silent and do nothing to get together with others to fight back.

While we share all the above issues with the vast majority of the people in any country we live in – and while some of these problems hit us harder – still we remain ignorant. We therefore do not participate in independent local groups, not going to demos, protests, not supporting the workers while they are on strike and on picket lines. We do not take a part in other campaigns to improve communities, whether the campaigns are local or national. So how can we expect non-Kurdish people to know us and support our causes including Rojava?

Second: The way we do our demos and protests. We do not know how to introduce our cause to passers-by or local people. The actual cause that we organize demos or protests for is usually lost among so many irrelevant placards, banners, Kurdish flags and pictures of leaders. We chant some useless and expired nationalist anthems. Because of this our demos and protests fail to deliver our purpose and just remain attractive to ourselves. While this is our way and our manner to introduce our causes to people, how can we expect them to know the exact situation, let’s say in Rojava?

Third: The historical bitter experiences that the anarchist/libertarian movements have had since the first International Workingmen’s Association in 19th century. They were involved heavily and supported by the Association, but were later kicked out and accused. This was followed in 20th century by bloody experiences with Bolsheviks, and then by the Spanish civil war in 1936/37. This history has repeated itself in different countries throughout the last century. Because of these terrible and bloody experiences many individual anarchists and anarchist groups remain very cautious in approaching Rojava.

In Rojava and Bakur (Northern Kurdistan-Turkey Kurdistan) we see a couple of powerful political parties, PKK and PYD, who have been heavily involved with both movements. This makes some anarchists struggle to understand or see the big steps that both movements are taking towards social revolution. They still look at PKK and its movement through the glasses of the end of the last century and beginning of this century. There is no doubt PKK did terrible things at that time: even Ocalan himself acknowledged that there was involvement in terrorist acts toward its own people and people outside of the party.

However, many anarchists do not see there is an internal struggle inside PKK over ideas and principles of anarchism: between the minority who tend towards anarchism and the majority who would prefer to keep the party’s structure as it has always been. I am sure the outcome of this struggle will be positive. It is not realistic to expect that PKK and PYD as a party will give up hierarchical organization. They cannot be transformed into an anarchist organization as a whole. However, a quick look at PKK’s history shows that it has changed and made many positive steps. For example, they do not believe in a nation state and the notion of United Kurdistan; to a certain extent they, or a proportion of them, are anti power, anti authority. They transferred their weight to the towns to keep the struggles among the workers and poor people; they are in the process of abandoning the guerrilla war and are involved in peace processes. They also believe in freedom: in people living together in peace and harmony regardless of their differences in ethnicity, religion, and gender. They are very serious about the environment and ecology issues and also believe in social revolution. They support forming radical local groups, believing in direct democracy and direct action. Not acknowledging the above comes either from arrogance or from simple ignorance and an inability to read the situation properly.

In my opinion the best attitude towards Rojava is “supportive and being critical” at the same time. Criticizing it alone and keeping distance from it does not benefit our current anarchist movement. This attitude again shows incapability of recognizing the reality of the movement, and would bring the blame of history over us. Meanwhile supporting it without criticizing its negative sides again shows that we do not see this movement realistically. Having this attitude, once the movement fails to meet our demands, we will be very disappointed and keep ourselves a far distance from any movement in the future.

Four: Ideological attitude and looking for purity and perfection in the movement. I believe this approach is at best naivety and at worst irresponsible. It is important to recognize this movement as a mass movement; how do we expect perfection in Rojava and Bakur unless we have perfect people? If we had pure, responsible and conscious people we would not need revolution. We need to look into Rojava with its all positive and negative elements. We should support the positive parts and we should be hard on its negative sides, not just to draw the attention of people to what is wrong, but also to support fixing it.

We have not seen a movement like Rojava since the Zapatista’s movement of 1994. What happened in Rojava with all its faults so far is the best we have, especially when we see the outcome of the Arab Spring, and that Rojava took exactly the opposite direction. Up to this point the movement has been stepping in the right direction although facing numerous attacks and threats: war with Isis and other terrorist organizations; the possibility that Assad’s forces will return and invade the region; the possibility of invasion by the Turkish government; the possibility of war with the Syrian Free Army; the reconciliation of neighbouring countries at Rojava’s expense; and the rebuilding of Kobane and the rest of Rojava by the US, Western Countries and their companies and financial institutions. Rojava faces all these threats and many more, so what is the attitude of anarchists and libertarians here? Solidarity and support to take the right direction or keeping distance and ignoring it until it loses whatever has been achieved so far? Which one is the right approach?

Five: Many anarchists and Libertarians come from Marxist or Marxist-Leninist backgrounds. Although these comrades have adopted some anarchist principles, some of their views, approaches and analyses remain Marxist. Therefore, they find it extremely difficult to believe the social revolution can happen in developing countries, especially somewhere like Rojava. This approach is ideological and borderline religious: they believe that if anything is not written in the old books it will not happen. Many of us know the Marxists’ books have confused people and distorted historical struggles about achieving socialism/anarchism. These comrades still use the same Marxist, Marxist-Leninist definition for the working class and the history of development in reaching socialism/anarchism. For this, they have posited five stages societies must go through before our aims are achieved. The five stages are the Primitive society, Slavery, Feudalism, Capitalism then Socialism; and, after these stages, Communism (they even separate socialism from communism). In somewhere like Rojava companies and factories are seldom found; therefore, in the view of the Marxist, there is no working class or proletariat. Rojava has not reached capitalism; how could the revolution start from there? How can dictatorship of the proletariat be set up while there is no proletariat? So any thought or any talk about starting a revolution in Rojava for these comrades is unacceptable.

It is a great pity our comrades cannot consider the exploitation of people throughout history has been the main issue. There have always been class divisions, a tiny minority of elites and the vast majority of people beneath them. So regardless of the many stages mentioned above, one question has always existed, one struggle raised; and this will remain the same until we achieve a classless society.

There has always been an alternative, there have always been grounds of replacing society as we have known it by forming and building a socialist/anarchist society. There is no doubt that societies have developed and progressed throughout history, but the social revolution has nothing to do with this division or to do with the condition that societies should reach capitalism before socialism. The need for revolution lies in exploitation, having people on the top of society with all the privileges and the rest on the bottom with nothing or very little. The basis of revolution lies in people’s consciousness, and their readiness to rise up. In other words, the social revolution can happen in any society, anywhere, regardless of the stage the society is in; but the total victory of any social revolution depends on many factors, whether this revolution happens in Rojava or in any advanced country like the UK or US.

History shows that human beings so far have only seen a couple of stages: societies which are Primitive, and the class society which continues until the present. There is no doubt that the division of human history to reach socialist/anarchist society damaged the social revolution badly. How the leftists and communists throughout the last century and earlier damaged the class struggles and principle of socialism as much as the right wing politicians and their parties is a separate subject. I will write about this soon.

OUR SADNESS WILL BE OUR ANGER, KOBANÊ WILL RECONSTRUCTURE

OUR SADNESS WILL BE OUR ANGER, KOBANÊ WILL RECONSTRUCTURE

Yesterday, nearlaay three hundred people set off from different cities, with
the call of Federation of Socialist Youth Associations; in order to rebuilt
Kobanê, which was tried to be looted by the ISIS. Today, arriving Suruç
(Pîrsus), just before leaving for Kobane, these young people made a press
release in front of the Amara Culture Center in Suruç (Pîrsus). At the end
of the press release, a bomb exploding in the middle of the crowd, silenced
many hearts which had been beating with the hope of reconstruction.

According to the information for now, 31 people died and hundreds are
wounded in the explosion.

After this explosion today, we hear the names of the fallen ones, from the
hospitals of Suruç (Pîrsus). The ones who set off from many different
cities, the ones with great hopes in their hearts, are now the fallen ones,
on the target of the murderers. The people who are going out to the streets
in order to call them to account fort he fallen ones, who are waiting in
front of the hospitals; are threatened with TOMA and the police who arrived
Amara Cultural Center, sooner than the ambulance. In Mersin, in Sert, in
İstanbul… The people who go out to the streets are wanted to be massacred
by murderer state,by the collaborators of the murderers.

The ones who has massacred numerous lives, starting from the first day of
the Kobanê Resistance, are now trying to discourage us by murdering our
siblings.

We are trying to reconstruct a new life against the ISIS, against the state
collaborating with ISIS, against the war politics of the state which never
end. Whatever it costs, we are going to put on our sorrow, as our rage, we
are going to reconstruct Kobanê and recreate a life on this looted
geography!

(Today, two of our anarchist friends named Alper Sapan from Anarchy
Initiative Eskişehir and Evrim Deniz Erol from Urfa were murdered in the
attack.)

Bijî Berxwedana Kobanê! / Long Live Kobanê Resistance!
Bıjî Şoreşa Rojava! / Long Live Rovaja Revolution!