Discussing Latin America’s left and solidarity with Palestine: Interview with Duran Kalkan (Kurdistan Democratic Communities Union)

Duran Kalkan PKK

First published at ANF English.

An interview with Kurdistan Democratic Communities Union (KCK) Executive Council member Duran Kalkan on the relations of South American governments with Turkey, the lessons of past peace processes, the role of self-defence, alliance policy in general and in Rojava in particular, the understanding of socialist revolution, the geopolitical role of China, the resistance in Palestine, the potential of democratic confederalism in the Middle East and the role of Israel in the Kurdish question. The interview was conducted on 24 September 2023.

Venezuelan President Maduro was in Turkey for Erdoğan's swearing-in ceremony. Lula congratulated Erdoğan on his re-election on social media. Cuba has strong economic ties with Turkey. None of these self-proclaimed socialist states criticise Erdoğan for his anti-Kurdish policies. In addition to economic reasons and relations, there are also voices that see Turkey as an anti-American power. How do you evaluate this? What does the PKK expect from the governments and social forces in South America?

Unfortunately, 'statist socialism' is based on state interests and sacrifices ideology to these interests rather than the basic principles of socialism: freedom, equality based on diversity and sharing. The Soviet Union did the same; under the name of 'defending the socialist homeland', it tied everything to the defence of the Soviet Union state; however, this understanding not only failed to protect the Soviet Union state, but also became one of the main reasons for its collapse. The relations of states such as Venezuela and Cuba with the Republic of Turkey should also be considered on this basis. As a movement, we believe that ideological principles should not be tied to political interests; on the contrary, ideology should guide politics. We also believe that it is not possible to build and develop the basic principles of socialism using the power of the state, which is a political and military institution and thus acts directly as an instrument of oppression and exploitation of capital monopolies. For this reason, we take the stance that the principles of socialism should be built and developed not through state rule but through democratic rule, through democratic confederalism, which replaces the "state without a state" expressed by K. Marx.

As for the claim that the state of the Republic of Turkey and the AKP-MHP fascist regime are anti-American, it is impossible to provide any serious evidence to verify this. Tayyip Erdoğan founded the AKP and came to power with the permission and support of the US Administration; his rise to today's one-man dictatorship is the result of the joint planning made in the Bush-Erdoğan meeting of November 5th 2007. The MHP was founded by Alparslan Türkeş, who received counter-guerrilla training in the USA. The Republic of Turkey has been a member of NATO since 1952 and has participated at the forefront of all NATO attacks, notably the war against North Korea. The Turkish army is the second largest in NATO after that of the United States. All military coups in Turkey were carried out with the support of NATO. The military coup of September 12th 1980, which brought about the current Tayyip Erdoğan administration, was also a NATO coup. Since June 1985, the Turkish State has taken the war against the Kurdish guerrillas to NATO on the basis of the operation of NATO's Article 5 and has received active military, economic and political support from NATO until today. In a way, it is NATO itself that is waging the current genocidal war against the Kurdish guerrilla resistance and the people as a whole. The recent negotiations within the scope of Sweden's NATO membership and the "Coordination Against Terrorism" organisation, established within NATO to coordinate the war against the Kurdish guerrillas, are also for this purpose. Is it possible for such a state to be anti-NATO and anti-US?

We do not even need to mention the genocidal massacres carried out by the Turkish state in Kurdistan during the last century, its efforts to change the country’s demographics, its activities to assimilate the Kurdish people, one of the oldest peoples in history, into the broader Turkish culture by banning their unique language and culture. Anyone can uncover these by analysing the history of the last century and following today's developments. What we want to point out here is that the state of the Republic of Turkey is not only anti-Kurdish and practising genocide against Kurds; this state has also been anti-Armenian, Assyrian-Syriac and Greek, and has been practising genocide against these peoples for a hundred years. For example, everyone, including the USA, discusses and takes decisions on the Armenian genocide of April 24th 1915. Of course, it is not acceptable for socialists to choose not to investigate these facts and to refrain from forming opinions and attitudes on this basis.

We do not see any state as a strategic ally. Our approach to states is at the level of tactical relations. We see as strategic allies the forces outside of power and the state, i.e. outside capitalist modernity, and we approach all oppressed and exploited social sectors, especially women, youth and labourers, on this basis. This general approach also applies to the governments and societies of South America. It would be good if the South American governments did not support the fascist-genocidal Turkish state and respect the national democratic struggles of the Armenian, Assyrian-Syriac and Greek peoples, especially the Kurds. Then the Turkish state will not be strong and, therefore, NATO will not be strong. This is a good and useful thing for the whole of South America.

As for all South American social forces, especially women, youth and labourers, they are our ideological and strategic friends and natural allies. Any emancipatory and democratic development they can achieve is our development and success. The success of the Kurdish people and women is their success and strength. For example, the Jin Jiyan Azadi revolution raised by the women of Kurdistan is both the revolution of the women of South America and the revolution for the freedom of all humanity. We consider the brotherhood of peoples and freedom struggles on this basis. The Cuban Revolution and the thoughts of Fidel Castro and Ernesto Che Guevera had a great influence on the emergence of Leader Apo and our birth and development as a movement. Che Guevera's thought and practice have always been a source of inspiration for us, especially in understanding and developing guerrilla resistance. We took the 1968 Youth Revolution as our starting point. Today, the non-state libertarian and democratic struggles of the peoples of South America and the developments they have achieved give us strength and excitement in the same way. We believe that they, too, are so impressed by the struggle of the Kurdish people against ISIS and the Turkish fascist-genocide, and that they embrace this understanding and struggle. On this basis, we wish success to all our friends in South America.

There is an interest in what your movement has learnt from the peace processes in South America. Many movements were liquidated with the peace processes. How do you evaluate your experience as the PKK? What are your conclusions that should be taken into account in relations with states?

Undoubtedly, this question is very important in terms of our practical stance and our ability to survive and make progress. Our experience, our relationship with the state and the search for a political solution was a very new endeavour for us. At the same time, in such an endeavour, we encountered the attack of the international conspiracy and experienced a paradigm shift. In other words, we had to carry out this process with two different paradigms. In particular, we had a certain difficulty in understanding and implementing the practical style and tone of the new paradigm, which was reflected in our negotiations with the state. As some basic lessons of the process we have been going through since the first ceasefire declared by Leader Apo on March 17th 1993, we can state the following:

First of all, we must know very well that the states are liars and deceivers, that they approach such processes tactically, always thinking of taking advantage of them and liquidating the other side, and that they use such processes secretly as a military and organisational preparation process based on their own power. In this regard, we are naive and always well-intentioned, and we can evaluate the other side as we do ourselves. Of course, this is a very serious and damaging mistake. As a matter of fact, since 1993, we have mainly faced four comprehensive attacks by the Turkish State and the NATO-USA behind it. They responded to the ceasefire process we started on March 17th 1993 with a total annihilation attack between June 1993 and August 1998. On October 9th 1998, they responded to the ceasefire process we started on September 1st 1998 with an international conspiracy attack organised and carried out by the USA and the İmralı system of torture, isolation and genocide. From August 2nd 1999, they further responded with political genocide operations, and total attacks between April 14th 2009 to 2012. From the spring of 2013, their response to the ceasefire process we developed, called the "Solution Process", with the "Collapse Action Plan" attack which they started on July 24th 2015. In other words, while we were trying to create suitable grounds for political negotiations and search for solutions, we consistently came up against the Turkish State developing secret plans and preparing for the annihilation attack. It is important that this state of affairs is recognised and taken into account.

Secondly, of course, we ourselves have to make very serious efforts to create a basis for relations and negotiations. We can declare a unilateral ceasefire, we make very intensive propaganda in a positive sense; in short, we try to reassure. This process can sometimes be protracted and intensive. In the end, we may end up believing our own propaganda ourselves, and our mass base may become overly influenced. This can lead to a shift in understanding, to insensitivity, to imprudence – in short, to carelessness. Of course, in the end, the other side makes full use of this situation in its favour. It is necessary to be aware of this situation and to carry out these activities carefully, adjusting the content and tone very well. We must never forget the reality of the state and its aim to dissolve us.

Thirdly, states can sometimes keep these processes very short, choosing to immediately show their true intentions by going on the offensive, while sometimes they can keep them relatively long. Or at least, this is how it may seem to us. For example, the state may initiate the process and then not take any real steps, keeping us waiting in anticipation of their next move, anxiously awaiting a response that will decide our fate. The longer the process goes on, the deeper the state of delusion and heedlessness we mentioned in the second point can become. So much so that a misguided approach can emerge, as if to say 'this is now done'. From our own point of view, we can develop a one-sided view that always looks positively, and consequently downplays the real concerns we face. In other words, states can use this as a basis to draw revolutionary and democratic forces into a process that we may call softening and loosening, and can work consciously and planned in this direction. As a result, serious difficulties can be experienced when faced with a planned and prepared attack. This situation should also be taken into consideration.

Finally, the ideological, strategic and tactical aspects of such relations and negotiations must be adjusted correctly. On the basis of our new paradigm, we approach these relations and negotiations on the basis of the political formula 'state plus democracy'. We base the level of agreement on mutual acceptance of each other. In other words, to the extent that the state accepts our democracy (democratic society or democratic confederalism), we envisage that we will accept the state. On this basis, we want to ensure that the state and democracy exist intertwined, side by side and in a relationship and struggle. All this requires a great deal of clarity and a great deal of effort. In other words, it requires a convincing enlightenment. Because in general, the existing state system is not open to this, it is too closed. They do not want to share the management of society with anyone. They are very much monist and absolute dominators. Today, the whole nation-state system is like this. The genocidal Turkish nation-state is very much like this. Therefore, it is not easy to negotiate and reach a political solution. One of the two important issues here is to take as a basis the creation of one's own society and the emergence of its own government through education and organisation, and to use such negotiations as a means and opportunity for this purpose. In other words, you will always take the development of your own self-power as a basis and never forget it. Secondly, it is only possible to bring states toward this balanced state through a multifaceted and serious struggle. For this, it is necessary to carry out a long-term plan and continuously struggle within and against the system. Expecting that relations and negotiations with states will yield results in a short time, easily and without struggle, is a very serious mistake and a dream. Our practice has taught us this and we are struggling to overcome our own misconceptions on this issue.

For South America, the role of guerrillas and self-defence in the liberation struggle is important. For this reason, the experiences gained in Kurdistan are of interest. What is the importance of the HPG's (People's Defence Forces) resistance against the Turkish army? What innovations does it offer for the understanding of guerrillas? What does it mean to be defined as a self-defence force?

The importance of the HPG resistance emerges in two ways. Firstly, the PKK guerrillas brought modern military science to Kurdish society. All previous resistances, including the KDP and YNK peshmerga, represent traditional popular or peasant rebellion. The most recent attempts at militarisation do not in essence go beyond this situation. The guerrilla, on the other hand, bases its training, organisation, strategy and tactics on the requirements of modern military science.

The second concerns the strength and structure of the Turkish army. It is the second largest army in NATO. It is in continuity with the Ottoman Empire, which was a military system. It is the main founder and sustainer of the Turkish state. Its basic structure is based on suppressing social uprisings and resistance. With its entry into NATO, a very powerful counter-guerrilla system was created within it. It is not democratic, but completely dominant. It does not want to share sovereignty with anyone. It is based on suppressing all kinds of objections with the heaviest use of force, brute force. Therefore, it is not easy to oppose and stand against the Turkish army. All revolts and oppositions before the PKK guerrillas were defeated and crushed in the shortest time. The only force that changed this history is the PKK guerrillas. This is where the meaning and importance of the guerrilla resistance, which was previously organised under the names HRK (Liberation Forces OF Kurdistan) and ARGK (People's Liberation Army of Kurdistan) and restructured itself under the name HPG after the paradigm shift, comes from. For the first time, an undefeated military force is emerging against the Turkish army. In this way, the invincible power and will of the Kurdish people has been formed.

The guerrilla organisations developed under the names HRK and ARGK were guerrilla movements based on the statist paradigm and the goal of establishing a regular army. They were based on classical guerrilla theory and practice and envisaged developing them as rural guerrillas in Kurdistan. However, it was not possible to develop guerilla resistance in Kurdistan as seen in the practices of other countries. This situation was not due to geography or people; the geography of Kurdistan, especially its mountains, were more than suitable for developing the classical guerrilla system. Again, the Kurdish people and youth had more than enough courage and sacrifice to develop guerrilla warfare. What made it impossible to apply the classical guerrilla theory and practice as it was in Kurdistan was the characteristics of the Turkish genocide imposed on Kurdistan. It was simply not possible to stand against this genocidal understanding and attack, which had no other analogue in the world, with normal patriotism, democracy and even revolutionism. Kurdish freedom fighters had to be completely partisan. At the same time, this partisanship had to be formed entirely along the lines of sacrifice. Attempts similar to the practices of other countries did not yield results, and the persistent guerrilla effort led Leader Apo and the PKK to such sacrificial partisanship and guerilla. HRK and ARGK guerrillaism were shaped in the form of such sacrificial guerilla resistance. HPG guerrillaism, which was formed with the paradigm change, was based on deepening this sacrificial line. In short, the Kurdistan guerrillas have raised the measures of freedom fighters to the level of sacrificial militancy. This is how guerrillaism emerged in Kurdistan, which was not defeated by the Turkish army and developed the Kurdish people's will for freedom. For this reason, it was defined as the Kurdish people's will for freedom and self-defence.

Undoubtedly, with its current structure, the HPG guerrillas are a self-defence force of the Kurdish people. It represents the Kurdish people's will for freedom, is formed with its own power and resists external and internal reactionary attacks against the people and protects the existence and free life of the Kurdish people. However, the current structure of the HPG is still incomplete as a self-defence force of the Kurdish people. With its current structure, the HPG is essentially a professional guerrilla force and in this respect it is a pioneer. In order for the Kurdish people to have adequate self-defence, only a professional guerrilla force is not enough. This force is pioneering and very necessary. The existence of this professional sacrificial force is necessary and decisive for people to have self-defence.

However, it is also necessary to create a local guerrilla force based on the masses of the people. In self-defence, the professional guerrillas are the vanguard and the local guerrillas are the basic force. The local guerrilla, as the name implies, is a freedom fighter in its own local area, and consists mainly of people who organise their daily lives. That is to say, it refers to the general state of being "armed at night and wearing a cap during the day". It includes both the organisation and maintenance of civilian life and military self-defence fighting. The self-defence force of the paradigm of democratic modernity consists of two such forces, the arming of the people. The regular army of the states is replaced by the self-defence of democratic confederalism consisting of professional and local guerrillas. In other words, K. Marx's definition of "replacing the regular army with an armed people" comes to life in this way.

What can you tell us about the ongoing conflict in Gaza?

Some time ago, Armenians in Karabakh were facing genocide. People were suffering. Now the same situation is happening in Gaza. But some people talk very cheaply. They always look after their own interests. Like Tayyip Erdoğan when he spoke in Istanbul a few days ago. It was like an election rally for the mayor of Istanbul. He talked about Gaza, he recited prayers, but the calculation behind it was to win the elections in Istanbul, to turn it into election propaganda. The Palestinian people have been brought to such a situation where they are being sacrificed and slaughtered. God damn anyone who sheds blood for material interests. That is definitely not our approach. We do not have an interest-driven approach. We have established friendship with the Palestinian people on the war fronts. Our movement and the Kurdish people have given the greatest support to the Palestinian resistance. We defend the just cause of the Palestinian people until the end. Genocide is being practiced in Gaza and we strongly condemn it. But how much those who say they are acting in the name of the Palestinian people represent these people, how much they think about the interests of the people or how much they have become an extension of other interests; this must be seen and understood well.

Israel is doing everything against the civilian population. This is part of the Third World War, centered in the Middle East, which has been going on for more than 30 years. The only solution to this is Rêber Apo’s philosophy of ‘democratic nation’ and ‘democratic confederalism’. Rêber Apo has already stated that it will be best implemented as a mentality and a policy, as a project that will even solve the Palestinian-Israeli problem. He called it the most serious conflict. This is our stance as a movement. We are against these mentalities and ideological structures that clash in the form of religionism and nationalism. We are ideologically against them. Politically, the Palestinian people are victims of a conflict of interests. We are opposed to this conflict of interests. In this respect, Jewish democrats and socialists criticize the Netanyahu government. We support their struggle and the just cause of the Palestinian people. If the Palestinian people, the Jewish people and the workers of Israel had imagined and based themselves on living together on the basis of their own characteristics in the line of a democratic nation, according to democratic confederalism, and not with two separate nation states and the poison of nationalism and religionism, if such a mentality and policy had developed, these conflicts would have been prevented.

On October 1, there was an action in Ankara which shook the whole Turkish Republic. On October 4, attacks on the basis of Hakan Fidan’s declaration of genocide were launched against Rojava. There was a strong reaction against these. In an attempt to prevent this, the AKP-MHP clung to Palestine and tried to deflect the agenda and hide the truth from Turkish public opinion. That state press, the press directed by the Turkish intelligence service, the center of special warfare, is distorting the facts. It is waging a psychological war. No one should trust them, no one should be a tool for them. Tayyip Erdoğan’s rally in Istanbul was just like that. He turned it into an election rally. It turned out that he was actually negotiating, in the sense of: “You call YPG terrorists and I will call Hamas terrorists”. That is what he openly declared. The October 7 rally revealed who started the war. Tayyip Erdoğan personally took the responsibility. He spoke as the commander-in-chief of the war. No one shell be fooled by this psychological warfare.

No one questions the cause of these conflicts. Instead of asking why there is no ceasefire, why there are no results, they a screaming their opinions at the top of their lungs. The result is always emphasized. Humanitarian aid deliveries, for example. Yes, they are also important, we don’t say anything about that, but we also need to see the causes. If the causes of problems are not found and eliminated, the problems cannot be fixed. In this respect, there have been approaches and evaluations based on very topical, shallow and excessive results. These were not very correct. There is also a historical dimension to the problem. Genocide has been practiced on the Palestinian people for 75 years. We are against this genocide and in favor of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people. But, historically, the Jewish people have also experienced many genocides. A democratic government and free life in their homeland is their right too. We are also against the massacres practiced on the Jews. In this respect, the problem has historical dimensions. It has connections with the development process of the Third World War, which has been going on for more than 30 years. I have mentioned this before and do not want to repeat myself there. There are also important things in terms of ideology and current politics. For example, there is an ideological conflict, deputies of the same ideology clashing with each other. If this ideological approach, that mentality, that is, the nationalist religious mentality, is not overcome, if democratization in mentality and thought does not develop, this strife will always be experienced. There will never be a solution.

In terms of current politics, some debaters stand out. Trade routes; these discussions have developed after the announcement of the energy route from India, Syria, Israel, Cyprus to Greece. This is important. China and Russia wanted to establish relations with Europe through Ukraine, but the war in Ukraine put an end to this. Turkey joined in and liked it. No matter how much the Tayyip Erdoğan administration tried to make the old Silk Road work again, the southern route was finally announced. The states reached an agreement. Turkey was excluded because of Tayyip Erdoğan’s mentality and politics. It was left off this path. The old Silk Road was rendered inoperable. Because there is no confidence, there is no stability, there is war. Even states and the capital did not see it in their own interest. The sycophants say, “Tayyip Erdoğan has brought Turkey to something,” but in reality Erdoğan has brought Turkey to disaster, he has made Turkey lonely. As a result, he got up and started to sabotage.

For example, the Karabakh war was developed by the AKP, by the Tayyip Erdoğan administration. It is trying to open a new road from Central Asia through Turkey. For this, Azerbaijan captured Karabakh. Now it wants to take the Zengezor Strait and connect Armenia directly to Turkey by narrowing Armenia even more, taking territory and pushing Armenia and Iran aside. They also fought back. They did not give the opportunity. It was he who waged the war there. This is also how Hamas started the war. I mean, why did Hamas launch 5,000 missiles all of a sudden? And it did it on October 7th. We need to look at the timing, why it happened, who directed it. Tayyip Erdoğan is trying to open a road in Karabakh by occupying it, and he wants to sabotage the agreed road on the Israeli line and the Palestinian line. There was an attempt of provocation. There is such a struggle here. Those who agreed on the road wanted to clear it. Those outside the planning, Turkey and the AKP administration, wanted to sabotage this road project. That’s why it directed Hamas. Hamas is supported by many circles, Iran also supports Hamas. This is not a secret. But Tayyip Erdoğan definitely has a hand in this latest attack. Tayyip Erdoğan directed Hamas just as he directed IS, which went to Damascus, to attack Kobanê on September 15, 2014, he now directed Hamas to attack Israel and caused such a war to start. It is doing this in order to sabotage that place, to make it unreliable and to make the road supposedly pass through it..

Now, I don’t know if it will yield results or not, but what is this war? We need to know who is fighting this war. Tayyip Erdoğan is in a panic, because his guilt is being exposed. He is the one most involved in this. Secondly, he may have been deceived. In other words, he may have been manipulated. Some forces may have given the impression that you can do this job easily. Tayyip Erdoğan is trying to protect Hamas now that there has been a complete turn against Hamas. First he wanted to sabotage it with Hamas. He realized that the calculations turned out to be different; this time Hamas will be weakened and destroyed, so he is trying to protect it.

We should think like this. When Saddam Hussein’s government attacked Kuwait on August 2, 1990, were the CIA and Mossad unaware of this? What were they doing? Why didn’t they prevent it? Because they didn’t want to prevent it. America started the Third World War based on Saddam’s attack on Kuwait. It brought 150 thousand soldiers to the Middle East. This is how it works. For example, until the attack happened on September 11, 2001, America had supported the establishment of Al Qaeda – didn’t the CIA and MOSSAD know about it? Why didn’t they prevent it? They entered Afghanistan and Baghdad as a result of this. In other words, they did a military occupation. So they wanted to take advantage of it. When they saw those tendencies, they supported them. For example, were the CIA and MIT asleep during the coup attempt on July 15, 2016? Was Hakan Fidan, who is now challenging the Kurds, as the Undersecretary of MIT asleep? He wasn’t. Why didn’t he prevent it in the first place? Because they controlled and strengthened Tayyip Erdoğan with him; 40 days later, on August 26, 2016, they launched an invasion attack against Syria through Jarablus and Iraqi territory through Çukurca. Biden and Masoud Barzani were in Ankara when this attack began. They gave their approval. If this had not happened, if there had not been that coup attempt, if Tayyip Erdoğan had not achieved such power that it bypassed the parliament, he would not have been able to do that.

Even Tayyip Erdoğan knows how many tunnels there are under Gaza. The Israeli army also explains this. But was Mossad, for example, asleep when they were preparing 5,000 missiles to launch an attack? Why didn’t it prevent it? Let’s not say he did it himself, but at least he hoped that he would benefit from something like that. After the July 15 coup attempt, what did Tayyip Erdoğan say? “This is a blessing from God”. And this was “God’s favor” to Netanyahu. Actually, it was not God’s grace but Tayyip Erdoğan’s grace. Tayyip Erdogan gave that grace and brought about this bloodbath. Now, when the calculation at home doesn’t fit the market, this time he is trying to throw Turkey into the fire. He has almost brought Turkey into conflict with the whole world.

Hamas is a Muslim Brotherhood movement and the Greater Middle East Project was actually a project for the Muslim Brotherhood to dominate the Middle East. What did Tayyip Erdoğan say back then? He proclaimed, “I am the co-chairman of this project.” AKP, Hüda Par, Qatar, Morsi, FSA are all part of the Muslim Brotherhood movement called Ahwal-i Müslimin. And Tayyip Erdoğan is also at the helm of it. How is it possible to see Hamas’ relations with Iran and not see its relations with Tayyip Erdoğan? He is definitely the one with the most fingers in this attack, the one who started this conflict process. Israel, America and others were waiting for an opportunity to spoil this path. Perhaps they directed Tayyip Erdoğan from a distance, just as they did with Saddam, so that we would not say anything. And when Tayyip Erdoğan mobilized Hamas to sabotage it, they received God’s blessing.

Now they say they will destroy Hamas. And to destroy Hamas, they want to destroy Gaza. They are practicing genocide on Gaza. What mentality and politics brought the people of Gaza to this kind of sacrifice? What is the role of Hamas in this? What is the role of the Muslim Brotherhood, what is the role of Tayyip Erdoğan? This needs to be seen. Now he is afraid that this will be exposed. Before, he was hiding it, and then, when it was exposed, he openly embraced Hamas. Now he is trying with all his might to save Hamas by saying “there must be a ceasefire”. In other words, he is trying to achieve a ceasefire and save Hamas by loading on humanitarian issues.

Güneri Civaoğlu, while interviewing Rêber Apo at the beginning of 1990, asked him about the situation of Hafez Assad and Saddam Hussein. Rêber Apo replied: “Hafez is approved. Saddam has a case”. Now it seems that there is approval for Iran and trouble in Turkey. If Turkey is not saved from the fascist, colonialist, genocidal mentality and politics of Tayyip Erdoğan and the Republican Alliance, the system he is a part of will put Turkey on the operating table. If they continue with this mentality, Turkey will be damaged, it will lose Cyprus, and even disintegration may be on the agenda. I want to express this here. After a while, the turn will come directly to Turkey. It already has. But when I say Turkey, I mean the AKP and MHP mentality.

A democratized Turkey, a Turkey that creates a solution to the Kurdish question, will never come to such a situation. In this respect, the peoples, laborers, women and young people have a big role to play. Democratic and socialist forces have a role to play. Based only on the results of the conflict, neither the Palestinian people nor the Jewish people can get out of this situation, nor can humanity wage such a righteous struggle. This fight for interests must be opposed, imperialist plunder must be opposed. The Palestinian people, the Jewish democrats and the peoples of the world must oppose this. I am making a call in this regard. We could say that states should be a little bit more democratic and sensitive, but the logic of the power and state system is clear. We need to fight against them. We need to be able to fight more effectively. The development of democratic modernity against capitalist modernity is the development of the line of the ‘democratic nation’ and ‘democratic confederalism’. This is the only solution. If this mentality and politics do not change, if we do not fight on this basis, we will face more genocides and bloodbaths. I have always defended and will always defend the just cause of the Palestinian people. But the laborers of the Jewish people also have their just cause. Provided that they are on the right line and have a democratic approach, we will act together with them as well. Therefore, first the Palestinian and Jewish peoples, socialists, revolutionaries and democrats must solve the problem among themselves. Humanity and democratic circles should also support this. So this is such an effective strategic situation. In other words, a new world, a new alternative world. An alternative world against this power and state system must be developed on this basis. Otherwise, by serving this or that circle of interests in other ways, these problems cannot be solved, nor can a correct humanitarian approach be adopted.

There was the Aydin Youth Movement in Turkey. After the death of a young man in an elevator, there was a movement against the AKP-MHP fascism’s approaches and policies that did not serve the youth. The World Youth Conference is said to be the first of its kind, it therefore is really important. I send my greetings to them and wish success to the youth who are organizing this.

I would also like to make a call to our Kurdish youth. They should participate actively, they should not see themselves alone. They should listen to their comrades and try to understand them. They should bring Rêber Apo, the Kurdish freedom movement, our women’s freedom policy, and the theory of ‘democratic modernity’ to the conference, discuss them well, and represent them. Because youth is the future. The future is in the democratic modernity. The youth who will create the future will create a free and democratic future for themselves to the extent that they comprehend and assimilate the paradigm of democratic modernity developed by Rêber Apo and organize and struggle on that basis.

Rêber Apo once said, ‘We started young, we succeed young.’ On the basis of this slogan, the Kurdish youth owes it to the Kurdish youth to work to bring the youth of the world to a consciousness, responsibility, and organization that will take stronger ownership of their future. Because they were the ones who saw and learned the reality of Rêber Apo before all the youth. We hope and believe that they will represent it well. This will be an important start. The answer to wars like the one in Gaza and similar places will be provided by the youth who take control of the future by becoming conscious and organized on this basis, and who succeed in creating the future along the lines of freedom and democracy. On this basis, I greet you once again and wish you success.