Only the Left can disrupt this game August 26, 2006 In the previous Current Agenda we wrote: … an independent left position could be developed on the following four basic themes in the coming months which will be pregnant with a conflict between the pro US reactionarism and the pro US authoritarian nationalism, 1. Rapidly […]
Only the Left can disrupt this game
August 26, 2006
| In the previous Current Agenda we wrote:
… an independent left position could be developed on the following four basic themes in the coming months which will be pregnant with a conflict between the pro US reactionarism and the pro US authoritarian nationalism, 1. Rapidly develop an anti-imperialist line around the axis of resistance against the war and against sending Turkish troops to Lebanon. Based on these four themes, a mid-ranged program must be rapidly developed, and in the direction of this program an all out door-to-door, person-to-person, street-to-street mobilization must be started. In this “Current Agenda” we follow up on this previous summary |
After its failure in Iraq, the US-Israel alliance also flunked in Lebanon. This sent the short term balances in the Middle East tumbling down and caused more stresses in the entire pro American block, including Israel and Turkey. The US-Israel alliance is expected to advocate a civil war in Lebanon while pushing its friendly armies to enter the country, similar to what it did in Iraq. At a regional level in the Middle East, they want to expand the US-Israeli front by forging a large Sunni alliance. Under these conditions it is highly unlikely that Turkey will be content with only the position of a “supplier.” In short, being cornered, the ruling Justice Development Party (JDP-AKP), army and capital are sinking deeper into the quagmire.
USA’s “new” Kurdish plan, a part of the deal to enter Lebanon continues to develop, much to the restlessness of the rulers in Turkey. It seems, this fictitious mechanism of the US, under the name of “Coordinating the PKK,” will also bypass all Turkey’s institutions, replicating how the economy was turned over to the IMF. The pain this will cause is already being felt today. To put it bluntly, cracks already started to appear within the reactionary-chauvinist ranks concerning the Kurdish question.
These developments, when taken together with the tensions due to upcoming presidential and parliamentary elections and seen with the congestions in the economy and the warning signals of a social explosion stemming from impoverishment policies, result in an increasing confusion and pessimism among the ruling elites. At this time, the tremendous potential starting to accumulate in the masses (including all religious groups and political parties) can not be surrendered to political Islam in a country such as Turkey, that is to a great extent, a US-Israeli collaborationist. Similarly, this potential can not be allowed to become a tool for the fake desires of the US collaborationist Turkish army or authoritarian or other wings of nationalism.
***
In order to expect a response from within the laboring masses in the upcoming short period before the elections, the left must build, step by step, an independent line that targets being able to stand up on its own feet. For this reason, any attempt, or even an appearance, of an “alliance” that would result in following the Islamists, authoritarian nationalists or the liberal pro European Unionists should be avoided. Such a left, independent line, presenting a programmatic feature to the demands of the laborers, could be developed in the short term by concentrating on the following four basic themes.
* The most burning of these four themes is the clarification of the main characteristics of the “anti-war” position. First of all, the anti-war stance should expose the collaborationist character of the liberal-Islamic JDP (the governing Justice Development Party), the army, and capital. It is critical to refute the popular ideological arguments spread through the media by this collaborationist bunch.
The anti-war movement should take the anti-imperialist route in the Middle East. This route should not be confused with the backward, anti-western line of Islamism. Therefore, an ideological struggle against the Islamists should be intensified. The links between the war and the policies of the imperialists to colonize the region should be clearly drawn.
The collaborationist reactionaries in our country are up to their eyeballs in material interests with the imperialists. The policies they put forth for the poor is nothing but to make beggars out of them. In the sheria systems of radical Islam, such as in Iran or in Afghanistan under Taliban, oppressive and inequality ridden results of the fake “revolutions” where the alliance between the ulema(1) and the merchant, which in time assumed the collaborationist position of the dynasties, are obvious. For this reason, particularly in the Middle East, an abstract policy of peace means defending the status quo of the reactionaries. The pain, suffering, poverty and oppression resulting from economic and political dependency caused by wars, invasions and colonialism could only be eliminated by independent, people’s democratic governments. This is why the “anti-war policy” should be weaved with a pro-independent, for the people, and a democratic content.
In Turkey, the struggle against reactionarism could only gain a democratic content if and only if reactionarism and collaborationism (demonstrated in the latest issues caused by war) is put on the crosshairs. Otherwise, it would be unavoidable to be a part of the authoritarian policies of the Turkish army. The issues of reactionary organization, weaving of social life with backward values, distancing of education from science etc. should be taken together with the collaborationist policies of the government and should be turned into concrete struggle goals.
* Another continuous theme that should have its place in the short term program of the left is the problem of liquidation of the public sphere. The deep collapse resulting from the liquidation of the public sphere manifesting itself foremost as privatization policies of education, health care, transportation, energy and housing is becoming more serious by time. Even though more substantial implementations of loss of public sphere are expected only after the elections, concrete demands and concrete targets for short term must be established for these issues.
In heath care, the shock effects that will come with the government’s General Health Care Insurance plan scheduled to start in January 2007 could be used as the dynamic for mobilizing the society. Single events in health care could be used to expose the general inadequacy of the health care system demonstrating itself locally, and could be used as a stepping stone for solidifying the local reaction.
In education, the registration period in August is only the beginning of the problems and fee demands that will continue throughout the academic year. In this field, the daily events throughout the year could be as effective as a general campaign on education.
In the field of transportation, energy and housing issues, local governments in particular should be the target. Until now, transportation and energy have not been used as an effective base for struggle. In these fields, concrete knowledge, documentation and reporting should be established for a systematic struggle line.
It is necessary to follow up on the demands and programs, taking local elections into cons
ideration. Only after giving such a persistent struggle and when a widespread opposition has been reached and concrete victories have been won should the main demand of “re nationalization” be raised.
* The Kurdish question, although being the most complex, is the foremost area that directly effects the fate of the left. Because the left is weak in its sphere of influence and due to the pragmatism of too many actors already operating in this area makes it extremely difficult to penetrate it, the Kurdish question is already on very slippery grounds. The main headings have already been established for a democratic solution for the Kurdish question: Before anything else, a just peace should be reached in political and social fields. To be able to do this, first a “general amnesty” must pass; channels of political and social representation need to be opened; legal and constitutional provisions that protect the entire cultural rights of the Kurds and allow them to use their native language freely must be established; an effective struggle against all obstacles preventing the exercise of such rights should be given. An egalitarian, anti-exploitation policy must be organized against the rulers’ policy of intensifying exploitation in the region.
Because it oscillates between causing separations and civil wars on the one hand and allowing oppressions or targeting only reforms on the other, the Kurdish policies of the US is unprincipled and incoherent due to its opportunism. It is also prone to producing very dangerous results for the Kurds. The Kurdish policies of the US could abandon the Kurds any moment. It also lacks any more democratic content either for the region or for Kurds. For these reasons, a very clear line needs to be defended for the Kurdish issue in Turkey. Any and all parties promoting a civil war should be very clearly opposed and exposed. These are only the first steps necessary to show sincerity in raising the above demands. Only when such a mutual trust is secured can a united struggle could be given to deepen the fight for democracy against racism. By creating joint work, actual common organizations, and establishing democratic mass organizations against the war and against the elimination of the public sphere peoples and organizations could be drawn together programatically.
* The key to proposals for solutions that will be based on the themes mentioned above will be “peoples democracy.” This makes the last point of the struggle program categorically different from the previous points because it is dynamic and is directly linked to the course of development of the struggle. In the last instance, a struggle for peoples democracy is a struggle for power; a demand for an egalitarian and a democratic country. It is also directly related to the equality and democracy contents of the daily struggles being waged. Issues such as unlimited right of association; demands for social, cultural, professional, unionisation or political independence; demand of public audit and control; demands for planning at every level, demands for equality etc. should be dealt with under this point.
***
The political Islam in Turkey is trying to collect credit from the rising sympathy in the Middle East towards Islamic resistance on the one hand while epitomizing collaboration with the US together with the ruling party JDP on the other. These contradictory positions, which would discredit its opposite in normal situations, seem to complement each other in this situation. This is very similar to the right wing see-saw which puts “right wing against right wing.” All these developments are occurring because there is no independent and effective left. And yet, only the left can disrupt this whole game. The items we have listed above from our program constitutes a coheseve whole just like the assult program of the rulers and imperialists is a coheseve whole. These items constitute the starting stages of a defense and resistance program. What is needed is for the left to transform this gradually into a peoples program.
(1)Ulema: the body of mullahs who are the interpreters of Islam’s sciences and doctrines and laws and the chief guarantors of continuity in the spiritual and intellectual history of the Islamic community
This article first appeared in the Peoples Voice (Halkın Sesi) magazie #10.
