Revolutionary Greetings for the New Year (MLKP)

Dear Comrades,

After a year of struggles and developments that have tested our resilience, we extend our strongest revolutionary greetings to you all. As we move forward into this new year, we wish you strength, courage, and unwavering morale to face the challenges ahead. Commemorating our beloved martyrs and saluting our honorable prisoners worldwide, we reaffirm our deep internationalist commitment to revolution and socialism. Their sacrifice and resistance continue to guide and inspire our struggle.

In this spirit, we are pleased to share with you our two latest bulletins, along with the launch of a new Kurdish revolutionary media platform www.kurdistanazad.com an important step for the Kurdistan revolution, which passes through historic periods. We share an interview with Comrade Armanc Sores from the MLKP Kurdistan Organization regarding the negotiations between the PKK founder Abdullah Öcalan and the colonial fascist state.

In solidarity,
MLKP Turkey/Kurdistan
International Bureau

***

Interview with Armanc Şoreş from the MLKP Kurdistan Organization

In a four-part interview on the newly founded media platform Kurdistana Azad, Armanc Şoreş from the MLKP Kurdistan Organization discusses the situation in Kurdistan, the development of the Rojava Revolution, and the upcoming dangers. He also addresses the negotiation process between the Turkish colonial state and PKK founder Abdullah Öcalan, as well as the women’s revolution in Rojava, and its defense. At the beginning of the conversation, Şoreş commemorated martyred journalists Nazım Daştan, Cihan Bilgin and Egîd Roj, who had given a global voice to the resistance in Tishrin, and praised the work of Kurdish journalists, whose activities are dangerous but indispensable.

Can the bourgeois Turkish state, the fascist chief Erdoğan, and the clique around MHP leader Bahçeli resolve the Kurdish national question and democratize Turkey? What steps can they take, and how far are they prepared to cross their own boundaries?
To answer this question, we must examine the founding process of the Turkish state. Following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after the First Imperialist War of Partition and the loss of vast territories, including Arab regions and Thrace, a national liberation war began under Mustafa Kemal, one of the commanders of the Nationalist Armed Forces (Kuvayi Milliye). In order to drive out the occupying forces, he formed an alliance with the Kurds, which was reflected in the 1921 constitution in the form of autonomy. However, this alliance was short-lived: the 1924 constitution revoked Kurdish autonomy, and resistance was brutally suppressed. “One nation, one language, one state, one flag” became the official ideology of the newly founded Republic of Turkey. The Turkish state has maintained and even reinforced this fascist and colonial character to this day.
The Rojava Revolution, the Gezi-June-Uprising, the self-governance resistance, and the new foundation for an alliance between the revolutionary and progressive movements of Turkey and Kurdistan, along with the possibility of a united revolution and leadership based on this alliance, sent the Turkish colonial state into a panic. It faced an immense threat and realized it had to consolidate its power. The Gülen movement was liquidated, and the MHP became a partner in this process of power consolidation. The fascist dictatorship was reduced to a one-man dictatorship. A massive wave of liquidations was initiated. You know that the co-chairs, members of parliament, and mayors of the HDP were arrested. Democratic mass organizations were banned. Television and radio stations were censored. Thousands of people were arrested, blacklisted, and imprisoned. The military attacks on the Medya Defense Zones reached the scale of an occupation. Cities like Afrîn, Girê Spî, and Serekaniyê were occupied. Dozens of leading revolutionary, communist, and patriotic figures were murdered. Military bases were established throughout Northern Kurdistan. A massive ecocide was committed. Northern Kurdistan’s natural resources were once again confiscated by Turkish colonialists. The companies Cengiz and Kalyon, which profited from the state power structure, began to establish themselves throughout Kurdistan. The organization of capitalist leaders, MÜSİAD, held a meeting under the motto “Turkey without Terror,” where the economic possibilities of this process were discussed from a colonial-capitalist perspective. New plans were developed to link the capitalist markets of Southern Kurdistan and Iraq with the “terror-free” markets of Northern Kurdistan and Turkey. A policy of destruction, denial, and assimilation was implemented in military, economic, and cultural terms. The economy was used as an arm of the ideological transformation plan.
The same Turkish state launched a comprehensive attack on March 19 against the CHP, the founding party of the fascist republic, which is now part of the bourgeois opposition.
The history of the Turkish state is a history of military coups that further reinforced its fascist character and established it as an instrument of ideological consolidation. The Turkish state has never been democratic, and all gains achieved through major struggles have always had to be fought for anew. All attempts by the AKP to gain popularity among the Kurds were nothing more than an attempt to buy time and forge alliances to consolidate its power. The most serious attacks on the Kurdish national struggle and Kurdistan, however, occurred during the AKP’s rule. But how can it be explained that Bahçeli, who until recently was walking around with a noose in his hand, declared in October: “If the PKK wants to dissolve, Öcalan should come to parliament and speak, and he should be given the right to hope?” Bahçeli was speaking with the wisdom of the state. He recognized that the rivalry between the imperialist blocs of the US and China was intensifying and that US influence in the Middle East was growing. He saw that Assad’s power was about to be lost and that the political space for the AKP-MHP regime was shrinking. The contradictions between the state and the people deepened. The state began to seek new alliances to secure its power. The CHP, which had achieved significant successes in the last elections, became a rival. An alliance with the CHP was therefore no longer possible, and so the Kurdish national movement, the PKK, was seen as the most important opportunity to strengthen both the internal and external fronts. The Turkish government is seeking both economic and political advantages from this.
The PKK had fought and resisted NATO’s second-largest army for years, but the conflict had reached a stalemate. Despite heroic resistance, the PKK recognized that it could not strategically alter the existing situation. The silence of bourgeois states in the face of Israel’s genocidal attacks on Gaza and the inability of popular movements to mobilize sufficiently legitimized these barbaric attacks. These attacks, in a sense, mirror those of the Turkish state against Kurdistan. This explains the atmosphere surrounding Bahçeli’s appeal and Öcalan’s reaction to it. The Turkish state views the Kurdish problem not as a national one, but as a “terrorism problem” that must be solved. The negotiation process of 2013/14 also demonstrated that the AKP never intended to truly resolve the Kurdish question. To this day, nothing has changed. The current situation is different, but the AKP’s vision for the second century of the Republic does not envision a solution to the Kurdish question, but rather the destruction of Kurdish national consciousness, the suppression of armed struggle, and the integration of Kurds as individuals into the colonial system.
To return to your question: The fascist, colonialist Turkish state may be attempting to resolve the Kurdish national question from an extremely backward, bourgeois perspective. It has become clear that a solution is being sought within the state system. A commission has been established in parliament. However, parliament itself is highly controversial. In the fascist chief regime, legislative, executive, and judicial power are concentrated in the hands of Erdoğan and his henchmen. Apart from the early years of the Turkish state, parliament has never been as ineffective and powerless as it is today.
The fact that the Kurdish national question is being discussed in parliament at all represents progress. At the same time, however, it is clear that the colonialist Turkish state cannot find a solution to its national question, even on a civic basis. With the establishment of the commission, part of the negotiating table has been moved from İmralı to parliament. But it is there that the real threat lurks.
The only force that can strengthen the Kurds’ position, both in İmralı and at the parliamentary negotiating table, is organization as well as the determination to take to the streets. At the same time, it is essential that the Turkish people stand with the Kurdish people in every respect. I want to emphasize this again: as long as the Kurdish nation is not free, the oppression and exploitation of the peoples of Turkey will continue to intensify, and corruption and social decay will continue to increase.
Chauvinism is like a poison spreading among nations. The current circumstances can act as an antidote to this poison. All progressive, democratic, revolutionary, and socialist forces must make the best possible use of this situation. Of course, the negotiations are not taking place on equal terms. Nevertheless, it should be clear that this is not solely a Kurdish issue. This is also a problem and a challenge for the peoples of Turkey. Now this challenge must be overcome. From here, we once again call upon the peoples of Turkey, the women, the youth, the revolutionaries, the communists, to commit themselves to this historic task.
This fear also relates specifically to Rojava, where a revolution took place that spread to North and East Syria. This revolution forged democratic and egalitarian alliances with other peoples and religious communities in the region, particularly with Arabs. In the gender struggle, a tactical “peace” in the sense of equality was achieved by making women equal partners in power.
The main actors in this revolution are the people from all four parts of Kurdistan. Northern Kurdistan occupies a special position. Throughout the entire revolutionary process, Northern Kurdistan stood alongside Rojava. At the same time, the most progressive segments of its population participated directly in the revolution. They have gained extensive experience in warfare, organization, and politics.
Thus, the reality exists of a people and a political subject that has passed through this revolutionary school and made enormous strides in knowledge, consciousness, and technology. Therefore, it seems extremely difficult to make progress based on a bourgeois solution.
Assuming a bourgeois-oriented solution to the Kurdish question were reached: Would this mean that the fascist Turkish state would become more democratic? No. There is no dialectical connection between a bourgeois solution to the national question and actual democracy. For example, the Federal Region of Southern Kurdistan, established on a bourgeois basis, has by no means democratized Iraq.
At the same time, it must be emphasized that Kurds live in almost every city in Turkey. Istanbul is, in effect, a Kurdish city. Furthermore, shared values play a central role in the development of revolutionary movements in Kurdistan and Turkey. Particularly in the last 15 years, the relationship between the PKK and the Turkish revolutionary communist movement has opened up and solidified a shared revolutionary horizon.
It is not the bourgeois solution to the national question, but rather this common foundation that should be used to expand the struggle for freedom, equality and justice in Turkey and to weaken chauvinistic and nationalist currents.
There seems to be a subtle difference between Devlet Bahçeli and the AKP. Whether this is a conscious role-playing exercise or a congruence of appearance and reality is not entirely clear. Even assuming such a difference exists, it apparently does not present a contradiction.
A commission has been established in parliament. What is the purpose of this commission appointed by the Turkish state, and what role can it actually play?
Immediately after February 27, 2025, the PKK declared a ceasefire on March 1, 2025, following Öcalan’s call. On May 12, 2025, the PKK declared that it had fulfilled its historic role by leading the Kurds from denial to a state of existence and that the armed struggle had ended. Under these circumstances, it announced its dissolution and stated its intention to continue the struggle on a democratic basis. On July 11, 2025, a group of PKK fighters and leading cadres, under the leadership of Bese Hozat and Behzat Çarçel, demonstrated their resolve by burning their weapons. However, within the PKK, there were no signs of disintegration, panic, or preparations for a return home.
On the one hand, this high level of organization worries the Turkish state. The level of organization among the Kurdish people, the deep distrust of large segments of the Turkish population towards the fascist AKP-MHP dictatorship, the economic collapse, and the transformation of the judiciary into a direct instrument of the regime, all these factors fill the dictatorship with dread. In other words, the current strength and collective capacity of the Kurdish people worry the Turkish state. On the other hand, the term “terrorism” serves as an extremely convenient tool in both domestic and foreign policy to legitimize repression, control political processes, and justify expansionist policies.
In general, nationalism plays a central role in generating societal support for fascist regimes. Since its founding, the Turkish state has pursued the political goal of uniting the Turkish people on the basis of nationalism and pan-Islamism. In this way, it has exploited the structural crisis to restructure itself through crisis management. That is to say, until now, it has essentially been the state itself that has fed on “terror.”
The commission’s chairman, Numan Kurtulmuş, defines its task as “eliminating the scourge of terrorism.” In other words, Kurds continue to be considered terrorists simply because they are Kurds and fight for their national rights. This is precisely where the commission’s work begins. The colonial mindset, practices, and leadership style of the state remain unchanged.
It is obvious that there is neither a genuine will nor a serious interest in a solution at the negotiating table; any potential results are to be obtained by coercion. The situation is therefore characterized not by “cautious optimism,” but by a conscious and deliberate pessimism. The colonialist, fascist Turkish state is clearly pursuing the goal of gaining time with this commission. It is attempting to use the negotiating table as leverage and a weapon against the Kurds, while simultaneously threatening new military operations against Rojava. Nevertheless, a commission now exists, and a Kurdish delegation is also participating in the negotiations.
To consolidate the position of the Kurdish delegation within the Commission and increase its negotiating power, the Kurdish people must intensify their struggle for national, democratic, and collective rights. This determined struggle must focus on a multitude of key demands, including: the abolition of the village guard system, the investigation of enforced disappearances, the prosecution of torturers, the repeal of the anti-terrorism law, mother-tongue education, bilingual state institutions, an end to ecocide, an end to attacks on martyrs’ cemeteries, an immediate halt to the occupation attacks on Rojava and the Medya Defense Zones, withdrawal from the occupied regions, and the punishment of all those responsible.
During the self-governance resistance, the fascist AKP government, for example, employed a concept of total war against the Kurdish population. Will those who burned people alive in cellars be held accountable? Will those who left corpses lying in the streets or in refrigerators for days be punished? Will rapists like Musa Orhan be convicted? Will police officers and special forces who dragged children across the ground and broke their arms be held accountable?
Our people suffered immeasurable hardship at the hands of the colonial rulers. Beyond Zilan and Dersim, the Roboski massacre is a bitter reality indelibly etched into our collective memory. Who, for example, bears responsibility for Ekin Van’s naked body being dragged across the ground? Court records also prove that the National Intelligence Service (MIT) was informed in advance about the massacre of 33 socialists, revolutionaries, anarchists, and members of the SGDF in Pirsus. Why wasn’t this massacre prevented? For us, it’s clear: it wasn’t prevented, but rather deliberately encouraged and orchestrated.
Will the Turkish state be held accountable for these crimes? The demand for accountability will be inevitable, for our people have suffered immeasurably. Nevertheless, they strive for a just and honorable peace. They will not forget their past, but are prepared to make sacrifices. Our people are honorable and will never accept a dishonorable peace.
Turkish workers and laborers must strive for a democratic solution to the Kurdish question and for the establishment of a fraternity based on equality. They must broaden and deepen the struggle for equality and freedom. Instead of focusing on expectations of the commission, they must organize public pressure and actively exert influence on the commission.
I want to emphasize once again that intense struggles are taking place behind, beneath, and above every negotiating table, too. The pressure exerted on the Commission from two sides by the Kurdish nation as a whole, but especially by its workers and laborers, is of crucial importance. The greatest danger at this stage is reducing the struggle to mere diplomacy.
Throughout history, there have been numerous attempts to find solutions to the national question. Abdullah Öcalan recently stated that “separate nation-states, federations, administrative autonomy, and purely culturalist solutions are incapable of doing justice to the historical sociology of society.” The question is whether this paradigm developed by Öcalan has any real chance of being implemented, particularly in Northern Kurdistan?
In the era of imperialist globalization, global capital flows have multiplied, and the world has become an integrated market for capital and production. In the 2000s, the debate was widespread as to whether multinational corporations would replace nation-states. Indeed, there is a contradiction between the integration of capital markets and the existence of nation-states. Capital strives to overcome all borders, yet at the same time depends on the state, on the capitalist state. For the state concentrates social power, protects and defends capital, and functions as the central authority for overcoming obstacles. Multinational corporations and their allies cannot assume this role. Nation-states have not yet lost their function for capital. The relationship is contradictory, but capitalism itself is riddled with contradictions.
It can be argued that nation-states have reached the end of their historical lifespan. However, when we speak of the existential crisis of capitalism and the relevance of socialism, this also means that overcoming the state is on the agenda. Such a process, however, can only be initiated by a revolution. Only in this way is it possible to turn to socialism and simultaneously transition from the state to statelessness. Until then, however, the state will continue to exist.
The right of all nations to exist on the basis of full equality, as well as the right to self-determination, are not historical questions but the subject of current political debates. Not all nations possess the same rights. Against this backdrop, the question arises as to how the Kurdish question can be resolved through a so-called positive, democratic integration of the Kurdish nation into the Turkish state.
Today, integration is often understood as mutual transformation. But what should this transformation look like in concrete terms? Will the Turkish state actually change and reach a level of complete equality with the Kurdish nation? Will the Turkish and Kurdish nations be recognized and defined as two nations with equal rights?
At the same time, there is talk of an allegedly thousand-year-old brotherhood between Turks and Kurds, while central articles of the constitution, which reflect the unequal relationship, are declared inviolable red lines. These very constitutional foundations form the institutional framework of a denialist and colonial understanding of the state.
Where denial prevails, the struggle for nation and culture cannot be seen as a distraction.
In a context shaped by colonialism and systematic denial, portraying the struggle for nation and culture as mere “distraction” or “regression” serves no other purpose than to politically disarm the oppressed and consolidate the dominance of the dominant nation-state.
For over a century, attempts have been made to eradicate Kurdish national existence through massacres, denial, and brutal assimilation policies. Yet, the Kurdish people have not only survived a life-and-death struggle but have also repeatedly reborn themselves, intertwined with their history. The role of the PKK and the guerrilla movement in this process is of central, decisive, and undeniable importance.
The Turkish state itself views Rojava’s autonomous structure as a threat. It is doing everything in its power to prevent Kurdish autonomy there and constantly issues threats. How can a state that acts this way towards Rojava function democratically in Northern Kurdistan? The colonialist Turkish state does not want free Kurds, but rather subjugated subjects. Under these conditions, democratic integration is inconceivable. Democracy for whom?
It is clear that the Kurds are denied access to democracy. On the contrary, the Turkish state is attempting to gain control over democratically autonomous North and East Syria, a project the Kurds have built at enormous cost. Given this reality, the conditions for implementing the paradigm of “peace and a democratic society” are virtually nonexistent.
Let me reiterate: Relations with the Kurds are not based on a fair, honorable, and democratic peace. At this point in the 21st century, a democratic revolution is necessary. We are at a historic turning point where national liberation is inextricably linked to social liberation.
The Kurdish people are putting up strong resistance against assimilation and displacement.
What solution model does the Democratic Federation of the Middle East, as proposed in your program, offer? What role does the Kurdish national question play in this?
The division of Kurdistan continued into the 20th century and was enshrined in the Sykes-Picot Agreement and the Treaty of Lausanne, which tore Kurdistan into four parts. The fact that the Kurdish nation was able to survive despite this fragmentation represents a historically unique phenomenon.
Faced with intensive assimilation policies, systematic denial, and genocidal attacks, the Kurdish people have asserted themselves through massive resistance and repeatedly reorganized. How many truly stateless and fragmented peoples have managed to survive collectively since the establishment of the concept of the state in history? This question deserves deeper analysis.
Returning to your question: We view the solution of national issues from the perspective of regional democratic and socialist federations. This does not preclude individual parts of Kurdistan from pursuing their own path and, if necessary, declaring their independence, nor does it preclude the right of the four parts of Kurdistan to unify.
Of course, a bourgeois solution to the Kurdish question is also possible; South Kurdistan has taken this path. However, the solution we are striving for is a workers’ solution. On the one hand, we are fighting for complete equality with the oppressive nation, and on the other hand, for the joint struggle with the workers and laborers of that nation for social liberation. The goal is the establishment of a union of workers’ and people’s republics.
Under imperialist conditions, true independence is only possible through the overthrow of capitalism and the construction of socialism. The solution to the national question lies in socialism. Our political stance is socialist-patriotic. We are convinced that Kurdish workers and laborers can only achieve true national liberation by combining the struggle for national rights with the struggle against capitalism. The class character of our patriotism is that of the working class, and its goal is socialism. In all four parts of Kurdistan, our aim is to organize workers and laborers with a conscious patriotism along a politically independent path.
The Rojava Revolution is a key example of this. Had it not spread beyond Rojava into North and East Syria, it could not have survived. Today, it can only continue if it expands to Syria as a whole and the entire Middle East. The same applies to Northern Kurdistan.
A Democratic Federation of the Middle East goes hand in hand with the overthrow of colonialism and the establishment of revolutionary power.
The path to the Democratic Federation of the Middle East leads through the overthrow of the occupying and colonial states via democratic popular revolutions and the establishment of revolutionary power. Unlike confederal models, this concept does not primarily rely on a gradual, bottom-up construction, but rather on a revolutionary break with existing regimes, their replacement by people’s republics, and their federal unification.
Confederations aim for transformation, not dismantling. A regional federation of people’s republics, on the other hand, prioritizes the revolutionary overthrow of existing power structures. Thus, the socialist perspective of the Rojava revolution means not only interventions in property relations within Rojava, but also its extension to all of Syria.
The Turkish state, supported by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), is striving to seize power in Syria in order to destroy the achievements of the Kurdish people, such as the Rojava Revolution and the Autonomous Administration. At the same time, it wants to destroy the Kurdish-Arab alliance that has been forged through the organization of Arab tribes. Can it achieve its goal?
A look at HTS’s activities over the past eight months provides a clear answer. At the beginning of March 2025, they began massacring the Alawite population. Thousands of Alawites were killed, women were abducted and sold in markets in Idlib, and tens of thousands fled this violence, becoming refugees.
According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), 1,683 people lost their lives in the attacks on Suweida in July 2025. Emboldened by the stance and public statements of the US Ambassador to Ankara and Special Representative for Syria, Tom Barrack, HTS attempted to enforce its dominance in Suweida militarily, but failed.
No segment of Syrian society, including the Arab population, trusts HTS. A conference was recently held in Hesekê, attended by representatives of all religious communities and population groups in Syria. The Autonomous Administration’s credibility with all peoples was once again proclaimed to the world. The reality revealed by the Hesekê conference regarding a common stance has panicked HTS and perhaps even more so the Turkish state. As is known, Hakan Fidan hastily traveled to Damascus and blocked HTS’s participation in the Paris meeting. On the one hand, there is a stir because of the Hesekê conference; on the other hand, France, Great Britain, and the USA cannot tolerate HTS and the Autonomous Administration sitting at the same table, thereby enhancing the Autonomous Administration’s legitimacy. The Turkish state prevented the Paris meeting because it fears a loss of influence over HTS. The colonialist, occupying Turkish state is pressuring the Syrian Autonomous Administration and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) to integrate into HTS as quickly as possible. Otherwise, it threatens military action. The agreements signed with HTS regarding defense, training, and equipping the army confirm once again the Turkish state’s practices.
Could this alliance nevertheless be shaken? In the days following the Assad regime’s withdrawal, unrest arose among parts of the Sunni Arab population. In the Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor regions, some groups, albeit to a limited extent, allowed themselves to be provoked. However, HTS’s actions did not inspire confidence. At the same time, the Arab populations were never pressured by the Autonomous Administration. On the contrary, they were integrated into the political decision-making structures of their regions and given a share of economic opportunities and resources.
A genuine partnership developed on the basis of democratic and equal relations. In short, the Autonomous Administration has thus far guaranteed the security of the Arab population as well as that of other ethnic and religious groups. Despite the presence of HTS, there are therefore currently no signs of a serious threat to the core of the Kurdish-Arab alliance.
However, the Turkish intelligence service MIT is working specifically to destabilize this alliance and will use all means to create provocations and manipulations.
The Autonomous Administration is ideologically, politically, organizationally, militarily, and economically strong and experienced. It has established a model of peaceful coexistence that cannot be destroyed by a few drones, tanks, or missiles. Nevertheless, it faces the successors of the Ottoman Empire. There is a reason for the saying, “In the Ottoman Empire, the game is never over.” This danger must not be underestimated. It is necessary to further strengthen the organization, consolidate stable alliances, continuously develop military tactics, and resolutely expand its role as a disciplined defense force.
ISIS sold women in markets, raped and abducted them, and committed countless crimes in Sinjar. HTS acted no differently towards Alawite and Druze women. What are the causes of this misogynistic policy, and how should it be countered?
What ISIS did to women in Sinjar, Raqqa, Latakia, Hama, and Afrîn is clearly documented. This was not spontaneous or instinctive violence, but a deliberate strategy, a specific mentality. This is rooted in a patriarchal, reactionary ideology. This practice is not limited to ISIS or its ideological origin, al-Qaeda. The Taliban in Afghanistan also continue to pursue a policy that disenfranchises and enslaves women, robbing them of their identity under the burqa.
This is a strategy of societal subjugation through the oppression of women. Male dominance is constructed through the enslavement of women. At the same time, it must be emphasized that this violence does not stem exclusively from political Islam. It is an expression of a generally male-dominated social order. For example, thousands of women were raped during the Bosnian War, and even in Europe, which sees itself as the cradle of “civilization,” women were historically sold in markets.
To avoid misunderstandings: ISIS and HTS occupy a special position in the area of organized misogyny. Specifically, their attacks are also directed against women’s liberation struggles, such as in Syria, Rojava, Sinjar, and Afghanistan.
Globally, gender inequality is intensifying. In response, bourgeois and fascist states are attempting to subjugate women once again to male domination through new laws. In Turkey, for example, the so-called “Year of the Family” has been declared, birth patterns are to be regulated, and centuries-old inheritance laws are to be altered. The family is being hypocritically sacralized. At the same time, attacks on LGBTI+ are increasing worldwide, deliberately aimed at delegitimizing emancipatory lifestyles and stabilizing the traditional family order.
A gender-equal society can only develop its social and material foundations under socialist conditions.
Our central task as Kurdish communists is to defend the women’s revolution in Rojava, the most progressive example of institutionalized gender liberation, against patriarchal military, political, and ideological attacks. However, this revolution can only progress if it is replicated elsewhere. Therefore, one of our most important tasks is to spread it throughout Kurdistan, the Middle East, and the world.
The goal of the women’s revolution is socialism. Only under socialist conditions can women achieve peace, freedom, and equality. Women’s liberation is impossible without socialism.
Today it is essential to expand women’s self-defense worldwide, strengthen women’s organizations, increase women’s armies and organize a common international struggle against fascism and colonialism.
I express my deepest respect for the Baloch women who have been protesting for days against arrests and enforced disappearances by the Pakistani state. My respect also goes to the women of the “Jin, Jîyan, Azadî” uprising, who are resisting with tremendous courage and fighting to the bitter end. They are a shining example of the united struggle of Kurdish, Persian, Baloch, Turkmen, and Azerbaijani women.
We also draw our strength from the dignified attitude of the women who resist in Iranian prisons, especially in Evin Prison.
The Ba’ath dictatorship was overthrown by the imperialist USA and its allies. What plans do the imperialists, Turkey, Russia, and other regional powers pursue? Is the democratization of the region part of them?
With the collapse of the Ba’ath regime, which had played a strategic role in the Middle East’s balance of power, the Shiite Crescent, which had emerged after 1980, suffered a severe blow. The US-Israeli strategy of encircling Iran shifted from the periphery to the center. Hezbollah was weakened, its command structure severely damaged, and Hassan Nasrallah was assassinated. These attacks on Hezbollah, which for years had played a vital role in Syria with its fighting strength, experience, and discipline, also dealt a heavy blow to Syria. The country lost a crucial military force. Russia’s focus on Ukraine and pressure on Iran exacerbated the situation. Under these circumstances, Assad could not withstand the pressure: he refused to recognize the Autonomous Administration, maintained no diplomatic relations, and cowardly fled. The Shiite Crescent was shattered at its core. Syria, already weakened, was the weakest link in the Shiite axis, but it remained a link to Hezbollah in Lebanon and its Mediterranean ports. With the dismantling of this power structure, the overall political structure of the Middle East entered a new phase, while the USA strengthened its position in the competition among imperialist powers.
On December 8, 2024, a new era began with the capitulation of Damascus to HTS. The strengthening of the US position also meant that the Zionist state of Israel assumed a new role. The Zionist-fascist occupation of Palestine has now reached the level of genocide: Gaza has been razed to the ground. What Hitler did to the Jews in Auschwitz, Israel is now perpetrating against the Palestinian people. At the same time, Israeli forces have entrenched themselves on the Golan Heights, a strategically important region of Syria with vital water resources, giving them air control over Syria.
The actors who installed HTS in Damascus are the US, Great Britain, and France, together with Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. In reality, no Syrian government exists. HTS is an instrument of Western imperialism and part of US strategy. Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar are attempting to profit from this situation for historical, geographical, political, economic, and military reasons, and to bind Syria more closely to Western imperialism.
The fascist, colonialist Turkish state has also set itself the goal of undermining the achievements of Rojava, the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, both within Syria and internationally. It strictly rejects the establishment of a decentralized, politically autonomous Syria. Any progress in favor of the collective rights of the Kurds is viewed as an existential threat. It goes without saying that colonialist forces cannot tolerate the achievements of the Kurdish people in Syria in order to secure their presence in the largest, most organizationally and culturally developed part of Kurdistan. The true expression of millennia-old rhetoric of fraternity is also evident in the relations with Rojava and the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria.
The imperialists’ plans have already been widely discussed, and much more will be said about them. Ultimately, they are preparing for a third world war to strengthen their tactical flexibility and strategic power through alliances and isolationist policies.
Worldwide, but especially in the Middle East, where political power structures are still in flux, a unified imperialist offensive is underway, aimed at disarming armed resistance movements such as the PKK, Hezbollah, and Hamas. The disarmament of the PKK is directly linked to this political situation. The peoples of the region, the oppressed, workers, and women, cannot spontaneously benefit from the conflicts between the imperialists; this contradicts the very nature of the exploitative system.
However, the revolutionary, patriotic, and communist vanguard of the region can indirectly benefit from this imperialist competition. In Russia, the revolutionary movement under Lenin during the First World War used this situation to fight against the weakened Tsarist Russia and to build the power of the workers’ and laborers’ Soviets.
The only reliable friends of the oppressed are the oppressed themselves. The victory over fascism under the leadership of the USSR in World War II created the possibility for an anti-fascist, democratic people’s struggle and victory. The most progressive examples of united international struggles arose during this period. Therefore, the contradictions arising in the new restoration process of the imperialists must be the subject of revolutionary strategy.
Rojava is a crucial example of this. The revolution began as the Rojava Revolution, spread to North and East Syria, and today represents hope and an alliance for all oppressed peoples and faiths in Syria. This alliance must be extended to the Palestinian and Lebanese people. The bourgeoisie’s struggle for equality and freedom is 200 years in the past. Today, the banner of equality and freedom lies in the hands of the oppressed peoples. Today, the bourgeoisie is the epitome of barbarity. Indeed, in Gaza, we see purely bourgeois attitudes and behaviors. If people in the world are still disciplined by hunger, it is a consequence of the accursed nature of capitalism.
Both Israel and Turkey strive for regional hegemony, which can create points of friction. However, these are not ideological in nature. The Turkish state uses its ideological position vis-à-vis Israel as a means of social mobilization, not warfare. Erdoğan publicly presents himself as a champion of Palestine, while Turkish ports remain open to Israel and gas from Azerbaijan flows to Israel via Turkey.
The Cyprus question is frequently discussed: Israel is strengthening its relations with Greece and the Greek Cypriot administration and is striving for dominance in the Mediterranean. Turkey is attempting to gain influence over Mediterranean transit routes and North Africa via Northern Cyprus. This could lead to a conflict over hegemony in the Mediterranean in the medium term, but is not an imminent war.
Zionist Israel is perpetrating massacres and genocide against the Palestinian population in the Gaza Strip, much like the Turkish state does in other regions. Do we, as Kurdish communists, consider the responses to these atrocities so far to be sufficient?
Of course not. We have worked to raise public awareness of this issue in both Bakur and Rojava, but this alone is not enough. In Rojava, there is a clear backlash, particularly against Hamas. Hamas’s support for the occupation of Afrin is deeply ingrained in the collective memory of the population. Our ideological stance towards Hamas is also well-known. At the same time, we supported the Al-Aqsa Flood, in which Palestinian revolutionaries participated against the Israeli occupation. We consider these actions legitimate resistance against the occupation.12wukm
On the other hand, relations between Palestinian revolutionary organizations and the Kurdish people have deteriorated significantly over the years. While Leila Khaled holds a special place in the hearts of our people, unfortunately, no closer relationship exists. The PKK’s stance during this period has also influenced our people. Under these circumstances, we could certainly have adopted a more progressive approach. We are self-critical of our perceived weakness in the eyes of our people. As revolutionary actors in the Middle East, we fully recognize the need to build a unified revolutionary leadership. We must cultivate relationships that serve this goal.
Your party’s statement on the PKK’s 12th Congress has sparked considerable discussion. It has been interpreted as a clear distancing from all alliances with the PKK. As socialist patriots, what would you like to say to these provocative statements and assessments? Have you, as claimed, severed all ties with the national movement and eliminated any basis for an alliance?
During this period, our party published two important statements on this topic, one on March 2, 2025, and the other on May 22, 2025. I would like to reiterate that the PKK has waged a struggle with great sacrifice and heroism. I wish to pay tribute to our comrades Nurettin Sofi and Koçero Urfa, whose martyrdom was recently announced. As already stated in the statements of our Kurdish organization and the Central Committee of the Party, Comrade Nurettin Sofi’s contributions to our presence in Rojava are of great importance. We will never forget this.
In times of war, there are always armistices and temporary periods of peace. After the First World War, Lenin signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, which contained extremely harsh conditions. Socialist revolutionaries accused Lenin of being a German spy, but the signing was unavoidable due to the war-weary population.
Tactical and strategic maneuvers arising from the analysis of concrete conditions are central to revolutionary struggle and politics. However, it is quite another thing to elevate tactics and strategy to a theoretical level or to treat them as a programmatic framework. Experience shows that the “peaceful coexistence” with capitalism in the USSR represented a phase of regression in socialism, associated with bureaucratization, class differentiation, and capitalist development.
In other words, we have criticized the definition of armed struggle and destructive revolutionary conflict as a relic of the past, as well as the updating of the theory of “peaceful coexistence” in the context of antagonistic contradictions such as class and gender and the unresolved national question of full equality.
Consider that anti-fascist and revolutionary parties and organizations that followed the same path in 1990/91 were unable to wage any significant struggle; they had no influence on the class, national, and gender struggles. The struggle is so intense that no organization that does not reach this intensity can truly be politically present. This is true for our region, but is it any different worldwide? No. The situation is the same everywhere. In the face of the existential crisis of capitalism, states no longer have room for transformations based on democratic reforms. The PKK, of course, possesses extensive combat experience and a high degree of organization. However, this level was achieved through guerrilla warfare. And it can only be maintained through it.
These points represent one aspect of our party’s statements and position from March 2nd and May 22nd. Both statements also describe our relationship to the structures and platforms through which the PKK will express itself in new ways. There, we will fight side by side for the collective rights of the Kurdish nation, for democracy and freedom, and reaffirm our solidarity in the struggle, as we have done before. This has been expressed clearly and unequivocally. Contrary to some claims, we have by no means separated.
The statement also emphasizes the need to establish an honorable peace, expand the struggle for democratic rights and freedoms, and be an active participant rather than a passive observer in the process. Our party forces in Turkey and Kurdistan are called upon to fulfill their duties. In its statements during this period, our Kurdistan organization has demanded the defense of the Rojava Revolution at all costs and a just, honorable, and democratic peace policy in Northern Kurdistan. Within our practical means, we are part of the process and also consider ourselves responsible to the Rojava Revolution and the struggle to protect all rights won in Northern Kurdistan. Our position remains unchanged. Frankly, we can only criticize our friends who view our criticism as a turning point. But we are also aware that the fascist, colonialist Turkish state and the imperialists have made great efforts to ensure that this is the case.
I would like to tell you an anecdote about those who have turned against us and betrayed us. The intelligence service (MIT), the gendarmerie, and the police are trying to convince them that there are problems between the MLKP and the PKK. We know that they desperately want this. But we want to emphasize once again that our position is clear: We are the successors of a tradition that upholds revolutionary values. We will fight to the bitter end, even for the smallest chance that might benefit our people in any way. Of course, we know that we still have a long way to go with the Apoist Movement. Our criticism will continue. Just as the PKK or the Apoist Movement have the right to criticize, so do we. Moreover, we consider this a matter of revolutionary seriousness and responsibility. We naturally acknowledge criticism. However, we expect that criticism to be grounded in the concrete reality of the situation.
Is there anything else you’d like to add?
I want to say that attacks on our revolution in Rojava are a daily occurrence. I call on all workers, laborers, oppressed peoples, and women worldwide to show solidarity with the revolution in Rojava and to unite around Rojava. Of course, I also want to extend my call for solidarity and a common struggle with the Palestinian people.
In conclusion, I would like to emphasize once again that ideology is the strongest weapon. In the struggle against colonialism, capitalism, and for gender liberation, ideological education occupies a strategic position. This is the main task of our time. I would also like to emphasize that it is the ideologically educated, politicized, and organized person who will overcome the technical and technological superiority of the enemy. In times when ideological positions are blurring, postmodern ideas are gaining popularity, and liquidationist thinking prevails, ideological determination is of crucial importance.
I commemorate with great love and longing all my comrades who fell as martyrs in the revolutionary struggle, especially the leading cadres of our Kurdistan organization, Bayram Namaz and Zeki Gürbüz, and I would like to emphasize that we are following in their footsteps.