This is a summary of an article written by Doğu Perinçek, Chairman of the Workers' Party (Turkey), which was published in TEORİ, August 2011.

The peoples of the countries of the Oppressed World are unexceptionally composed of more than one ethnic nationality, because they have not completed their democratic revolutions yet. They are still in the process of merging these different ethnic groups into one nation. In the Oppressed World, those who incline towards solving their domestic ethnic problems with force, inevitably find themselves in imperialist hands. It does not matter which program or ideology they adhere to, it is a code they cannot break. This is especially true of the present age of globalization when imperialism has been on the attack since 1990, to destroy the national states!

In his renowned book titled A Caricature of Marxism: Imperialist Economism, Lenin expressed this inclination of imperialism as “destroying the national states of the oppressed countries of the world, and turning them into sheer colonies, in order to fully exploit them”(1).

The reason behind this is the fact that all national borders of any type are obstacles in the path of maximum exploitation. Thus, economic dependence is not sufficient for imperialism; political independence should also be dispensed with. The countries of the Oppressed World should not have their own customs, public economic enterprises, national banks, institutions and practices which support their agriculture and neither should they possess social institutions which provide security to and raise the price of labour. Such institutions that already exist should be destroyed. The states should be downsized, or even completely wiped off. It is not only the countries of the Oppressed World that should be dealt with; even bigger countries such as Russia and Yugoslavia should be handled in the same manner. Even socialist countries like the People’s Republic of China, which have been the fear of the USA, should be targeted in the same way. For this reason, in this present article, whenever we are talking about the countries of the Oppressed World, we actually mean this broad front of the world. The world has witnessed the phenomenon of partitioning and bringing to submission the Oppressed World, by means of religious and ethnic differences, especially since 1990.

Some countries such as China, India, Vietnam and some South American countries continued their great thrust forward and established regional leagues among them. The existing states of many countries of the Oppressed World, however, entered a phase of, so to speak, virtualization. Even a country like the Soviet Union, which was a super power at one time was dismembered. Yugoslavia was partitioned into 6, or even into 8 pieces (if Kosovo and Vojvodina are included) by means of a civil war and a war with external forces. Czechoslovakia was split up into two by peaceful means . Afghanistan was occupied. Iraq was occupied and was split into three. Libya is in the process of being partitioned. Ethnic and religious conflicts were incited in Syria and NATO is in the verge of interference. The USA has operated all these activities using ethnic and religious separatism. Actually, the process of decolonization through attaining independence against imperialism was completed after the independence of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos in 1975 with Angola, Mozambique Gine-Baissau, Zimbabwe and South Africa later following suit. 

Under the conditions when the US imperialism dismembered the SU and the People’s Republic of China still needed time to take the initiative (1990-2010), the activities towards “independence” on the part of various ethnic groups within the countries of the Oppressed World were directly supported by the USA and were used to colonize the countries of the Oppressed World. There is not a single exception to this rule, while there are many examples proving it: The activities of Croatian, Slovakian, Bosnian, Albanian, Kosovo and Montenegro groups for “independence”; the Barzani-Talabani alliance in Iraq and the Checnic activities in Russia; breaking away Eastern Timor from Indonesia, the activities of Tibetian and Uighur groups in the People’s Republic of China; the separatist Kurdish groups and the clashes between different Muslim sects in Syria at present, various separatist activities in various countries of Asia and Africa have all been supported by the USA and have become tools of imperialism. 

The determining factor in this phenomenon is the use of force. When a “national movement” which calls upon force challenges a bigger power it cannot overcome, it inevitably seeks aid from an even greater power, which is, under present conditions, the US imperialism.

It is a specially vital point that even if that particular “national movement” puts forward a progressive program and adopts progressive slogans, it cannot escape cooperating with US imperialism when the realities of armed struggle demand it. Then it inevitably turns into a reactionary national movement. The 20th Century abounds with such examples. All these examples have proved that all the nationalist movements in the Oppressed World and among the socialist countries have ended up with cooperation with imperialist powers, no matter what their intentions had been. 

    I.2. The Criterion for the Progressiveness of the Nationalist Movements
In the age of democratic revolutions while capitalism was on the rise the criterion for the progressiveness of the national movement was whether it was against feudalism.

In the age of national democratic revolutions when capitalism has transformed into imperialism, however, the sole criterion of the national movement is the position against imperialism. This was put forward by Lenin several times after the Communist International Congress of 1919 and the whole history has proved this. Examples of revolutionary national movements after 1917 were the liberation wars of Turkey, Afghanistan, China, India, Algeria, Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Cuba and the African countries.

Examples of reactionary national movements are the “national movements” which cooperated with the Hitler imperialism (in the SU and the Balkans) in the Second World War. Especially after 1990, these are the Chechen forces collaborating with the US and the Talabani-Barzani movements; the Eastern Timor and the Tamil guerrillas; the separatist movements in Africa; the separatist PKK and the Kurdish separatism in Syria and Iran.

    I.3. Experiences of Socialist Countries
The experiences of Russia and China should be instructive for us.

When we visited China on the invitation of the Chinese Communist Party, we listened to their experiences of solving the national question, in detail. We talked about the issue for hours, with Hua Guo-Feng and Hu Yao-Bang, who succeeded Mao Tse-Tung as the senior state officials of the Party and the state. On the other hand, we travelled over the country for over a month with Keng Biao, one of the mythical revolutionaries of China and U shi-Cien who was a member of the Politburo for long years and also served as the Foreign Minister at one time. We discoursed with İsmail Ahmet , the vice-Chairman of CCP and official of the Sinciang-Uighur region and also Timur Devamet, along with other Uighur and Kazakh officials of various levels. They all outlined the same experience: the organizations which take up arms to solve the national problem in their countries are obliged to cooperate with imperialism. They also voiced admonishing views on the Kurdish question in Turkey.

When we met with Igor Ligachev, who was the second leader of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union after Gorbachev, in the last stage of the Party and who served as the secretary of the “Ideological Bureau” of the Central Committee of the CPSU for long years, in the Etap Marmara Hotel in Istanbul and talked for five hours (2), he also drew attention to the consequences of trying to solve the national question in the countries of the Opressed World by force. Those who adhere to arms, are obliged to come under the control of the imperialist powers, if they insist on using force. It has always been so.

Let us now consider, under the light of these criteria and experiences, the PKK who founded all its organization and program on ethnic grounds and determined all its policies and practices with the aim of establishing a separate state.

We must differentiate between the six stages of the PKK:

1.    1975-1980: The period when it used terror and violence upon revolutionary organizations while the Turkish Gladio overlooked it.

2.    1991-1999: The period when it came under the control of Syria and was connected with Syrian policies and was thus not directly controlled by the US. It had, however, connections with the CIA due to drug trafficking. 

3.    1991-1999: The period when the PKK became a bicephalous organization It was under the control of both the USA due to its forces in North Iraq and also the Muhaberat, because of Abdullah Öcalan abiding in Syria. In my interviews with Öcalan in 1989 and 1991 he openly stated that he could not take a position against Syria.(3) 

4.    When Syria expelled Öcalan upon US pressure, this state of being bicephalous ceased and the PKK wholly came under the control of the USA via its presence in north Iraq. Mr Fatih Yaşlı, in a program on the Ulusal Channel (4), posed a very appropriate question, saying “Why did the US hand over Apo, if they were using him?”(5) The answer is this: To put an end to the bicephalous state of the PKK and to place it under a sole authority again, to stop the Syrian control over the PKK and to establish its own monopoly over the organization. The US succeeded in concluding this manoeuvre by using the Ecevit government in Turkey and took the PKK under its full control via north Iraq.

5.    1999-2004: The period which Öcalan termed as “Walking with the Kemalists”.

6.    Öcalan coming under full control of the USA.

If we are to study these periods further:

    II. 1. PKK before 1980
1.    The PKK used arms against leftist parties, revolutionary organizations; it did not attempt any armed activities against the police and the army. The Turkish Gladio (so-called “Kontrgerilla” in Turkish political terminology) put into practice the theory of “bug-eating bugs” and overlooked these activities or even supported them.

The PKK ambushed and assassinated five important leaders of our party (TİKP-The Turkish Workers’ and Peasants’ Party) before 1980. They were all regional political leaders, popular and respected by the people around them. Besides these, the PKK also injured many other party members; burnt down the trucks carrying the daily Aydınlık, with the help of the police forces. It was not only the members of the Workers’ and Peasants’ Party of Turkey who were killed by the PKK; they also killed over 100 members of other leftist and Kurdish organizations. The PKK turned their weapons against all the socialist organizations with some influence in the South-Eastern Turkey, and were responsible for the death of their members. With all this, the operation of physically eliminating the revolutionary forces of Turkey in the region and opening it up to separatism and inevitably to imperialism and the reactionary forces started.

This operation cannot be explained only with PKK’s hostility towards other socialist organizations. It is obvious that the SuperNATO provoked this hostility and supported the operations. This is why the Öcalan group was called the “MIT (6) in Eastern Turkey”. It is not necessary to name each individual event because what is in question is not just a few events, but almost 200 armed incidents of injury and death in which the blood of many revolutionary people was spilled. It is apparent that behind all these armed operations in a period of three or four years which widely destroyed and supressed the left to a considerable degree was the USA in collaboration with the Turkish governments of the time.

    II.2. The 1981-1990 period of the PKK
2.    PKK’s use of violence starting with 1984 was totally an actualization of Syrian politics. The Muhaberat (7) promised the separatist Kurdish groups such as Rısgari etc which took refuge in Syria, camp areas and to give weapon training in Lebenon, along with support in all respects. İbrahim Güçlü, who was the leader of Rızgari then, personally related all this to me. On the other hand it is an obvious fact that it was Rızgari who were first offered the Bekaa camp but rejected it and that Abdullah Öcalan accepted this role and was given the camp grounds.

The reason why Syria adhered to this means was that the USA was provoking the organization called the Ihvan-I Müslimin (The Muslim Brothers)to armed activities through Turkey. The USA intended to overthrow the Hafez al-Assad regime. The Muslim Brothers organized revolts in Hamah and Hims with the support it took from the Turkish Prime Minister, Turgut Özal. Thousands of people were killed and the Assad regime turned the tables on the US collaborators in Ankara by organizing armed separatist movements in Turkey. Turkey paid the price of provoking subversive activities against her neighbours by the separatist activities in her own country. This kind of behaviour on the part of Assad is, no doubt, unacceptable. In fact the Syrian government offered a self criticism after 1999. However, the main responsibility of this process which led the two countries of the Oppressed World to confront one another was the officials of the Turkish 12th September Military Coup and the Turgut Özal government.

The PKK, on the other hand, has made it its strategy to be a tool in the hands of the governments of various countries since the beginning. The fact that the PKK activities were under the control of Syria also meant that they were not controlled by the US. In fact when Abdullah Öcalan had left Turkey to take shelter in Syria under the control of Muhaberat, he had also left behind its old line of activity provoked by the SuperNato in Turkey. If we carefully analyse the PKK activities between 1984 and 1991, we see retaliatory activities against the Ankara government, the collaborator of the US. This was actually a general Syrian policy .

The USA and the EU always wanted to isolate the PKK in the international arena, between 1980 and 1991. If we look at the Kurdish conferences which took place in Europe and the international affairs controlled by the US, we see that the PKK was never allowed in. For example, during the Kurdish Conference in Paris in 1989, the French police did not allow the PKK sympathisers to come near the conference venue. As a participator of the conference, I personally observed the behaviour of the Western powers towards the PKK in all the stages of the conference. Besides, there are also other incidents to prove this
    II.3. 1991-1998 period of the PKK
3.    Here, we should recall that the US attacked Iraq in 1991 and provoked a Kurdish revolt which the Iraqi state repressed. Upon this, the US prohibited the Iraqi forces to go north beyond the 36th parallel. The combined task force of the Operation Provide Comfort was deployed in Silopi and thus was the Puppet regime actually founded under US patronage in the spring of 1991. The Turkish state was assigned with the task of supporting and guarding this Puppet regime. I was then in Diyarbakır prison and witnessed the sudden change in the PKK discourse. Their analysis was simple: “The US is occupying Iraq in order to create a Kurdish state. Therefore the US is a great supporter and guardian of the Kurdish liberation movement. The US, which provided a land for Kurds in the north of Iraq will do the same with south-eastern Turkey.”

However, besides this sudden turn towards the US, the PKK had Syria to think of, as well, because Abdullah Öcalan was abiding in Damascus. I saw Hafez al-Assad’s picture on Öcalan’s wall, which was rather embarrassing for him. Thus, due to this double loyalty, the PKK had become bicephalous. The main part of the organization and the bulk of the armed force were in northern Iraq and this force had come under the control of the US occupational forces, but since Abdullah Öcalan was abiding in Damascus, he was obliged to carry out Syria’s directives.

    II.4. Öcalan’s Expulsion from Syria
4.    In order to put an end to this bicephalous situation, the US put pressure on the Asad administration so that Abdullah Öcalan was expelled from Syria and was handed over to Turkey on Feb. 15, 1999. Aydınlık ,at the time, when the public opinion was wholly misled, announced that it was CIA who delivered Öcalan to Turkey (8). Öcalan himself stated openly during his trial and elsewhere, that he was under the control of the CIA. The US Foreign Office documents and declarations by the Greek central intelligence also drew attention to the same fact.

The agreement made when Öcalan was handed over to Turkey made it quite clear that he was not to be executed. In reality, the US had placed a bomb in Turkey’s hands. 

According to PKK sources, after Öcalan was put in prison on the Imralı island, he had talks with Kemalist officers and determined his policies along these lines. The PKK publications and the report prepared by Cengiz Çandar, the pro-US columnist based on various sources verify this.(9) On the other hand, the PKK, now in Europe, established relations with the European countries.

Following the US occupation of Iraq in 2003, Öcalan was placed under US patronage again. The US collaborator Turkish government itself placed the leader of the separatist organization in the hands of the US who was making plans to partition Turkey. Consequently, Syria’s control over Öcalan was thus made ineffective and he was wholly left under US patronage. In fact it was not Öcalan but the Turkish governments who were captured.

    II.5. The period when Öcalan “Walked with the Kemalists”( 1999-2004)

        II.5.1. Öcalan defended Atatürk’s understanding of nationalism in Court
Öcalan started to defend new ideas during his interrogation and openly declared these views in court. He wholly rejected his “colony theory” (10) which had been the main axis of the PKK program. He based his ideas on the coexistence of Turks and Kurds. He defined his aim as “a democratic republic based on a national, unitary state”. He even touched upon “considering the democratic republic as the completion of the Kemalist Revolution” and stated that he accepted Atatürk’s understanding of nationalism and that he wholly recognized Ziya Gökalp’s views in his article titled “Turks and Kurds”. While on the one hand he declared a solution towards the completion of the Kemalist revolution, on the other hand he announced that they were ready to take a role in the expansion of Turkey towards Mosul and Kirkuk according to the US plans. 

        II.5.2. Öcalan’s talks with the officers on the İmralı island
Öcalan continued with these views after his trial was over. He had talks with some officers, defending that the Kurdish question would be solved within a unitary state, according to Mustafa Kemal’s policies of 1919-1924. He repeated these views in 2010 after the Ergenekon operation: “When I was brought here, some people came here on behalf of Kıvrıkoğlu, the chief-of staff. I noticed that they appeared very timid. I was surprised and wondered how people representing the chief of staff could be so fearful. I later realized that Kıvrıkoğlu was trying to accomplish certain things without the knowledge of NATO…Kıvrıkoğlu had seen the danger, he was for a solution in unity but they did not let him. They eliminated that team. Ecevit was also honest; he wanted to accomplish good things. But he was passivized.”(11) Öcalan continued to say that among the officers eliminated with the Ergenekon operation were some who wanted to solve the Kurdish question in Turkish-Kurdish unity. What is more important is the views that 
Öcalan defended in 1999-2004 and the activities of the PKK.

        II.5.3. Öcalan’s Views in 2000 on the Kurdish Revolts
“The past revolts were based on primitive nationalism. Some might think I am slipping into Kemalism but anti-Kemalism is not for the benefit of the Kurds. The first Kurdish revolts were influenced by the West: In those times, there were imperialist conspiracies against both the Kurds and the Turks. The leaders of those past revolts could not see this…This conspiracy is still valid….Barzani and Talabani should be regarded with caution. It is those revolts that have brought both the Turks and the Kurds to this point. Doğu Perinçek’s book which talks about the 1919-1924 period should be read (12). Mustafa Kemal was going to give the Kurds all their freedom. ‘Don’t be deceived’, he said. ‘Don’t be deceived by the dream of establishing a Kurdish state or establishing an Armenian state’ he said. He was going to recognize the Kurds all their freedom. It’s true. He approached the subject from a strategic viewpoint. This continued till 1924.”

“The sheikh Said revolt blindly sacrificed the Kurds in return for concessions. Barzani and Talabani sprang out from such circumstances. Kurds’ honour was at stake. Bush and Britain did this. He said ‘I will give them their state’. All this was foolish talk. The result was an insolvable Kurdistan. The result is a tragedy.”

“The 1925 revolt, violence on both sides had a negative effect on the Republic and Kemalism and it was democracy that was injured. Mustafa Kemal’s line up till 1924 is important. When the revolts started the Republic stumbled. Mustafa Kemal knew what he was doing; he knew these collaborators of imperialism.

“The best support for Turkey is to spoil the 1925 Mosul- Kirkuk game…Those who rebelled in 1925 are now in authority. The PKK and HADEP (13) should be cautious about them.

“There is a death sentence pronounced upon me but I am at peace. Because I declared what was right, what was realistic. Because I have now overcome a shortcoming. The revolts were dangerous. If the true character of these revolts could be brought to light, there would not be so much bloodshed and Mustafa Kemal wouldn’t have been so dangerous.”

        II.5.4. Öcalan in 2000 on Kemalism and the Turkish Army
“The leaders of Feudal (Kurdish)tribes couldn’t do anything else than be the auxiliary of imperialism. It now falls on us to correct the past mistakes…Get into contact with the Kemalists, they are also living a process of transformation. Let us together proceed on Mustafa Kemal’s course. It was my shortcoming not to have declared it in the past.

“Confrontation with the Turkish army must be avoided. Otherwise, a solution will be more difficult.”

        II.5.5. Öcalan in 2000 in support of the Turkish Army
“Kemalism should be studied again. I am certain that Kurds have their place in Kemalism. Kemalism is not what it was in 1925. It is being democratized. The Constitution has been amended, the Law concerning the elections and the political parties has been amended; The PKK has also been transforming. The outcome of all this is compromise. As long as I live I will put this into practice.”

        II.5.6. Öcalan in 2000 on armed struggle
“I said that armed revolution was strategically not right, and there has not been armed clashes for one year and this is something positive. Those forces that have stayed in (Turkey) should stay and…should not get involved in armed clashes until peace is made. Around 200 guerrillas might stay but they should serve peace…they should not act like bandits.”

“Peace should be taken up on the level of principles. Millions of people should be organized…We should go to the villages, to the people. The Turkish peasants and the Kurdish peasants are open to this kind of approach. The solution lies here. We should approach the villages not with weapons but with our brains. There should not be an open opposition to the Republic, we should emphasize democracy…Then, even the Army will not oppose this.”

        II.5.7.Öcalan in 2000 on the US and the EU
“It will be wrong for HADEP to try to contact foreign countries. The solution lies inside the country. It will be wrong to contact the US representatives any further. I don’t mean to say that there shouldn’t be any contact, but it is not right to count on the US. For example Diyarbakır and Texas have been declared sister-cities. This is not right The problem should be solved inside the country. The question should be turned into a domestic question and solved in terms of brotherhood and democracy.

“The Turkish-Kurdish issue should be turned into an issue of Turkey

“The reason why I approached the issue so comprehensively is because the international conspiracy has been contrived also against Turkey. 

“…Europe does not want to lose its Kurdish card. Talabani and others have been used in this way. However, we say that no matter if we die in prison or get hanged, we’ll die with our honour in Turkey…Europe is an obstacle on our path. The true solution will be found inside the country… Arrests and losses are not important; what is important is to make an attack of brotherly unity.”

        II.5.8. Öcalan in 2000, on Syria
For democracy and peace Assad’s heritage should be safeguarded. The future will develop on this basis. We may play a positive role in this. There is no need for a conflict between Turkey and Syria. Good neighbourliness between Turkey and Syria will serve the Middle-East.”

        II.5.9. Öcalan in 2000 on Solution
“We are using the concept of Kurdistan in a demographic, historic and cultural sense, just like the scholars.

We will not be separated even by force. All regions of Turkey belong to us. However, the Kurds should be insistent on their language and culture. Nobody can prohibit my language. We are all for a common land and nation. The Kurds had a share in the Gallipoli victory. We all fought to found this Republic and we want our share… Are you going to forcefully lead us to separatism? They get others to act as separatists. We will no longer fall to these tricks…We want unity.”

    II.6.The period following 2004 for the PKK: From “Updating the Lausanne Treaty” to the plot of the Sévres Treaty 

        II.6.1. What has happened in the meanwhile?
Öcalan’s views and solutions between 1999-2004, after he was captured and his later declarations are diametrically opposite. In 1999-2004 he opposed a federative system and autonomy and defended a unitary system (14) He announced that the Atatürk Republic was right to suppress the sheikh Said revolt. What was more important was the practice that Öcalan led the PKK into. He explicated to his attorneys on July 5, 1999 his plans of “putting an end to violence, practicing the technique of leaving behind the phase of armed struggle, pulling the armed forces behind the borders and waiting for the Turkish state to take its position”.(15) Accordingly, the PKK announced that it was going to recede behind the borders and it acted accordingly. The Turkish Armed Forces dealt heavy blows on the PKK during this period and there was a split in the organization. This period lasted for four years. On Öcalan’s directives, the PKK revived armed struggle on June 1, 2004.

During the period known as the February 28 (16), the Army was strong and powerful, therefore Öcalan advocated walking with the Army and the Kemalists. When the US and Israel exerted their authority by force, Öcalan, this time, took his place by their side. We observe that with the US occupation of Iraq and the Gül-Erdoğan partnership gaining strength in March 2003, Öcalan swiftly transferred to the US-Israel-Justice &Development Party (AKP) project.

The February 28 course of events duly gave rise to the Ecevit government but the US responded by plotting the rise of the AKP to power. The Ecevit government was eliminated and the Gül-Erdoğan team was brought to power through a scheme of “early elections”. Now the “co-chair of the Greater Middle East Project”(17) was on the Turkish government!

This was how Turkey was made compatible with the US plans concerning the occupation of Iraq.

        II.6.2. The role in the Ergenekon Scheme
Öcalan, who had talks with some Army officers, approving the Feb. 28 developments and stating that “the Lausanne Treaty should be updated in the face of the possible danger of the Sévres Treaty being updated”, himself took part in the scheme of updating the Sévres Treaty. This process was accelerated with the US-Israel-AKP trio destroying the heritage of the Kemalist revolution. The Ergenekon operation conducted against the Turkish Armed Forces, the Workers’ Party (Turkey) and other patriotic forces, the forces which could prevent the realization of the Greater Middle-East Project were eliminated. This was how the “Democratic Initiative Process” of the AKP was launched.

It is of vital importance for the Turkish Left to determine which forces the PKK has aligned with, within Turkey and in the Middle-East. The PKK is against Syria and Iran, in the Middle-East; it has positioned itself against the enemies of the US and Israel and it has a distinct place in the plans of the US and Israel. 

In Turkey it aligns itself with the institutions that function on US-Israel funds and with the AKP. All these forces join in the program of totally liquidating the Kemalist revolution and the national state, breaking up the nation and partitioning the country. The results of the 12 June elections were obtained with this alliance. The US and Israel, by means of the AKP, legalized the PKK, supressed the patriotic forces and supported the little pseudo-governments in south-eastern Turkey.(18)

    III.1. PKK’s collaboration with the US
The PKK owes its development to the 1991 and 2003 occupations of Iraq.

        III.1.1. Political and legal support
-    The California State Jurisdiction Court decided on October 2001 that the PKK was not a terrorist organization and that its activities could not be prohibited. Thus, now, according to US law the PKK and Turkey are two warring parties. With this judgement of court, the PKK was raised to the level of a liberation organization and it has full liberty of action wherever US laws are effective.

-    The US used the expression “freedom fighters” for the PKK on 17 November 2004.

-    The PKK’s North America representative was arrested by the US police for fraud but instead of being convicted and then deported, he was set free on the testimony of Graham Fuller, the chief of the Turkish department of the US National Security Council and Robert Filner, the Senator of California (19).

-    The Washington Kurdish Institute, run by the PKK is protected and officially supported by the US through Prof. Michael Gunter, one of the leading strategists of the US Foreign Office.

-    With US help the PKK secured opportunity for free activity in Europe. US did not include the PKK among the terrorist organizations until it changed its name to KADEK, which in turn, was not put up on the list when the name PKK was listed as a terrorist organization.

-    The US does not use the opportunities found to catch the PKK members in Iraq, on the contrary, they see to it that they are set free.

-    Some official US institutions occasionally publish maps which show a Kurdistan that stretches as far as Sivas

        III.1.2. Relations and Talks
-    The PKK has been having talks with US military and diplomatic officials since mid 1990’ies. US military representatives are having talks with the PKK in the PKK Headquarters in the Kandil Mountain. The US Foreign Office correspondence has shown that the US authorities have been communicating with the PKK since the beginning of 1994. The letter by the US ambassador dated March 24 1994 proves this (20) 

-    The US-PKK relations are official; they are conducted openly between authorized personages. The Kurdistan National Congress met in January 2002, in Brussels, where the Headquarters of NATO is located, with the permission and support of the US. On US approval, the Belgian government hosted it. Later a team of three PKK members representing the Kurdistan National Congress paid a visit to the US where they were received by some official institutions and had talks with them.

-    Murat Karayılan, the PKK leader declared that he had talks with the US officials in 2003-2004.(21)

-    When Obama visited Turkey in April 2009, on the occasion of his talk with Ahmet Türk, the leader of the Democratic Society Party (22) openly stated that he “did not see the PKK as a terrorist organization. The details of this event were published among the Wikileaks.

        III.1.3. Military Aid
The US consciously overlooked it when their arsenals in Iraq were seized by the PKK in March 2003.

-    The US and Belgium have been supplying arms to the PKK since before 1980. 

-    The Turkish branch of the Gladio working under US instructions sold weapons to the PKK also after 1990. 
-    The CIA saw to it that some weapons both in US arsenals in Iraq and those in the hands of the Iraqi Kurds were handed over to the PKK. This information was verified by the memos of the US Foreign Office. The Wikileaks also contain information that the US forces in Iraq left behind a great number of weapons for the PKK.

-    The US Special Unit Force, Delta Force trained and equipped the PKK (23).

-    The coordination of the PKK forces in northern Iraq has been ensured by a US team of 25 people (24).

        III.1.4. Financial Support
The CIA has passed the bulk of drug trafficking onto the PKK. Öcalan had confessed this, when he was arrested. All the world knows that drug trafficking is conducted under the control of the CIA and the CIA and the SuperNato both support and control it by entrusting it to some terrorist organizations. A member of the PKK explained in a French court that DST, the French Intelligence Service does not prohibit the drug trafficking by the PKK (25).

-    The CIA paid the PKK 125 million dollars showing it as a business payment. The payment was made through a bank to a Syrian PKK member (26).

    III.2. The PKK is chained to the US-Israel Control
It is pointless to worry about whether it is possible for the US to make an operation on Mt.Kandil to wipe out the PKK, because that will not be necessary if the legal activities of the PKK are prevented and the communication between the Headquarters in the mountain and the region is obstructed. Then, the PKK will not be able to survive in the mountain. How the US Army is supporting the PKK is not by overlooking its activities but through an active support.

The US prevention of a military operation by the Turkish Army on northern Iraq is itself an active support. The “secret” agreement consisting of nine articles with the US, signed by Abdullah Gül and the US Foreign Secretary Powell when Gül was the Prime Minister provided this condition besides Turkey’s recognizing the Kurdistan, the establishment of an autonomous administration in south-eastern Turkey which would gradually transform into a federation and the legalization of the PKK and an amnesty to be provided for the PKK leaders.

Obviously, the US, let alone dissolving the PKK, imposed the PKK program on Turkey. The plan of strengthening the PKK by consolidating the political power it had secured by means of the municipalities in its hands and turning this into an autonomous little government was gradually put into effect under everybody’s eyes, by the US and the EU. 

The PKK, by adopting the line of armed struggle against Turkey, obligated itself to cooperation with both the countries of the region and the US. The policy of using the ethnic and religious groups of the region against one another could not stop at a certain point. This policy, at last, found its natural guardian, the US. There is only one condition for the PKK to escape from US control, and that is to put an end to the armed struggle against Turkey, take its place among the popular forces of Turkey and reshape its demands according to the unity and territorial integrity of Turkey.

I have always emphasized that the democratic rights of the Kurds, most of which have already been actualized in practice will enter the legal system of Turkey only if/when they stop the armed struggle which compel them to collaborate with foreign powers and position themselves directly against the US.

To emphasize that the PKK was “socialist” after 1980 was altogether too optimistic. In that period when the PKK was still under the control of Syria, it had only one chance of escaping from US control: giving up the armed struggle and organizing on ethnic grounds. Because its armed struggle was not directed against imperialism but against another country of the Oppressed World, Turkey. The PKK made use of the conflicts among the Oppressed countries and deepened them; following 1991, it openly depended on the US occupation.

The PKK, with its policy of leaning on ethnic separatism and insistence on armed struggle, it chained itself to slavery under the US and Israel. After the US partitioned Iraq in 1991, it becaume obvious that the PKK swiftly tied itself to the Great Israel plan. The countries that the PKK is confronting today are Syria and Iran, in other words, the enemies of the US.

    III.3.The PKK will be brought to head Kurdistan
Some leftist groups point at the conflicts between Barzani, Talabani and the PKK but does the US intend to bring Talabani or Barzani to head the Great Kurdistan?

The US does not have another alternative besides Talabani and Barzani in northern Iraq at the moment, because other Kurdish tribes support the unity of Iraq and they have a considerable armed force but they are for the moment ineffective due to the occupational forces of the US. However, the people who closely know the region are inclined to think that Barzani and Talabani will lose their authority.

However, there is no other alternative to the PKK in south-eastern Turkey and the US knows this. The AKP is organizing the Fetullah Gülen group in a similar organization but they lack the arms. Nevertheless, at every junction the same rumour goes around once more, that the US has at last decided to dissolve the PKK and that the PKK will lay down arms. A reflection of this way of thought is the belief that the PKK is against the US. However, the PKK is actually the unrivalled candidate for the Great Kurdistan plan of the US. Whether it will be realized is another matter; we are only talking about US intentions.

In the heart of US plans for the Middle-East, lies the Great Kurdistan. Since the First Gulf War in 1991, the main target has been creating a new Israel which will extend from Kirkuk to the north of Diyarbakır and even to İskenderun and Latakia. An exit to the sea is of vital importance because its survival depends on this.

The US knows it very well that it cannot control such a vast territory through Talabani and Barzani.

On what grounds does the US accept the PKK as the only alternative?

1.    The size of the population: The Kurds of Turkey are incomparably greater in size than the Iraqi Kurds.

2.    Socio-economic conditions: Feudal relations have been dissolved to a greater extent in Turkey than in Iraq, so it will be easier to control the Iraqi Kurds whose feudal relations and culture are much stronger, via the Turkish Kurds rather than the other way round.

3.    The level of development: The Kurds of Turkey are more modern and more organized.

4.    The PKK has inherited a lot from the military tradition and experience of Turkey. The US can form the military force of Kurdistan only on the PKK.

5.    The Ability to govern: The Kurds of northern Iraq cannot govern the Kurds of Turkey but the Kurds of Turkey can govern them.

The US plans to bring the PKK to head all the Kurds has not remained as a plan but has been put into practice.

What is equally important is that the PKK knows that they cannot achieve their goal without the US.

If we take a look at the events that have taken place after the first Gulf War, we will see that after the puppet regime was established in northern Iraq, the US has supported PKK to establish a political authority in south-eastern Turkey. It was with US support that a de facto Kurdish political authority was established there.

What will never happen from now on is that the US will not give up the PKK. If the US is successful in constructing a new Israel beside the older one, it will bring the PKK to its head. It has already started to do so. There is no reason why the US should not trust the PKK because, while it has a leading position at the head of the second Israel, amidst Iran, Iraq and Turkey, it will not get out of the control of the US or adopt progressive programs.

The only chance for revolutionary programs is the unification of the people of Turkey. The only chance is to stop organizing in ethnic groups.

    III.4. The positioning of the PKK in Turkey
Let us leave aside the conflicts between Turkey and imperialism for the moment and take up the class conflicts in Turkey.

-    The PKK is acting alongside the Association of Turkish Industrialists and Businessmen (TÜSİAD)) and the Economic and Social Research Foundation of Turkey (TESEV)! These organizations have been formed by the large capital of Turkey in collaboration with the mafia and the US, Israel and the EU.

The guests at a dinner in a restaurant in Istanbul on February 18, 2005 are very striking: four Turkish columnists notorious for their US sympathies (Cengiz Çandar, Hasan Cemal, Yasemin Çongar, Ahmet Altan), George Soros, a leading capitalist of the US Jewish and mafia circles; Eric Edelman, the US ambassador and CIA official; Mark Parris, one of the corner stones of CIA-MOSSAD relations; Karen Fogg, the former EU representative in Turkey; Sönmez Köksal, well known in the diplomatic circles in Paris as “the brother-in-law of MOSSAD”; Can Paker, the president of TESEV supported by George Soros and Israel; Cem Duna, the former president of the Turkish Radio-TV.

Additionally, the PKK has inclined towards an alliance with the Fetullah Gülen group, as a result of its cooperation with the US, Israel and the Erdoğan administration.(27) The daily Taraf reported, with great pleasure, Öcalan’s announcement that they were “ready for an alliance”. According to the daily newspaper, Öcalan feels that the Union and Democracy Party (BDP) (28) will now be a party of the whole nation, thanks to the Gülen group.

    III.5. Popular support behind the PKK
Some leftist organizations point at the popular support behind the PKK. This is true but what is not true is to overlook its collaboration with the US just because there is popular support behind it and to leave the organization of the Kurdish labourers to the PKK.

The AKP also has popular support, and not only in south-eastern Turkey but all over the country. Then, does that mean to say that we may hand over the labourers of Turkey to the AKP?

    III.6.Use of force spoils the game
The use of force by the US and Israel which partitioned Iraq and the following Ergenekon and Balyoz schemes of the AKP government resulted in the breaking up and dissolving of the popular forces. Öcalan is doing the task he was assigned. What was a determining factor at this point was the surrender of the Army to the US operation. Surrendering to the schemers of the Ergenekon and Balyoz operations brought about submission and dissolution. Only if Turkey can take a deferent attitude towards the US, can she spoil their game. Only then will the Kurds of Turkey stop relying on the US and the EU and will join in the struggle of the people of Turkey for political power. When it is the time for the people to show their determination and force to spoil their game, a national government will be formed. This national government will stop looking for a solution in Brussels or Washington and will find the solution in the unity of all the people including the Kurds and the Turks.


    IV 1. The theory of basic alignment and revolution in the age of imperialism
The basis of the shortcomings of the Left in Turkey is to reject the basic alignment and class struggle in the age of imperialism. We could say that the Left in Turkey, with the exception of the Workers’ Party has remained in the 19th Century.

As is known, the centre of revolution, in Marx’s age, was western Europe and north America, because these continents of the world had a history of capitalism and Marx and Engels projected that revolution was going to take place in the countries where capitalism had developed, for the production in these countries was collective and took place in big factories. The concentration of private ownership in the hands of a few capitalists conflicted with the collectiveness of production. This conflict corresponded with the conflict between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat from the point of view of class conflict. For this reason, the revolution was to be a result of the class struggle in these countries. In fact, both the 1948 revolutions in the western Europe of the 19th Century and the 1871 Paris Commune were the results of this class struggle and the Paris Commune lasted for only three months.

However, when capitalism acquired an imperialistic character, towards the end of 19th Century, a new world picture arose. The developed capitalist countries had founded a new world system by controlling vast areas of the world through the exportation of capital and their military forces. The world had split up into two camps; namely a handful of imperialist countries and the exploited countries. Lenin and the Communist International called these camps, the Oppressing Countries and the Oppressed Countries. The determining class struggle in the world now was between the Oppressing and the Oppressed countries. While the developed capitalist classes pacified their own labourers with some of their loot, they further deepened their conflicts with the countries of the Oppressed World. The bulk of the working class of the oppressing countries sided with the ruling classes of their countries. This was why Lenin used the expression “Oppressing Nation”.

Departing from this analysis of imperialism, Lenin determined that the theory of revolution of Marx’s time would not be valid any more. The revolution was not going to be the result of the domestic class conflicts any more. The revolution was, now, the solution of the conflict between imperialism and the country it exploited. Thus, Lenin determined before 1920 that the focus of revolution slid from the west to the east, and the 20th Century verified Lenin. The Communist International or the 3rd International was formed on this basis and founded all its programs on this analysis. While the class struggle in countries like Britain, France and the USA was getting milder, the struggle between imperialism and the Oppressed Countries got more acute and revolutions occurred in the countries which were “the weakest link in the imperialist chain”, just as Lenin had foreseen: China, Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and the Eastern European countries under the conditions of war. In fact, the Communist International 
Program drawn up by the Comintern in 1920, named the 1920 Turkish Revolution among the chains of World Revolution.

The organizations of the Turkish Left which we could call “Menshevik” and “Economist”, did not determine that Turkey was a country of the Oppressed World. What is more, they analysed Turkey as if it were one of the developed countries of the 19th Century. Departing from this analysis, they saw Turkey as a kind of “imperialist” country and Kurdistan as a”colony”. The PKK’s theory was, in fact, the same. So, the consequence was to accept Turkey as the main antagonist and to see it plausible to cooperate with the other imperialists such as the US and the EU. 

All the shortcomings of the Socialist Left of Turkey concerning the PKK spring from the refusal of Lenin’s world analysis which has proved right and the acceptance of the theories of the renegades of the Second International.

    IV.2. Territorial Integrity and Socialism
Marx and Engels supported the unification of Germany by the Prussian general Bismarck, in 1871.

Following the 1851 Crimean War, Marx always took an attitude against the Tsarist Russia and the other great powers on the issue of partitioning the Ottoman Empire. Turkey, for Marx, was an oppressed country.

As Lenin pointed out that the two imperialist camps, fighting the First World War, intended to share the world, he stated that only Turkey, China and Albania were fighting to protect their territorial integrity and he supported these countries (29). 

Scholars have pointed out that the Bolshevik Party could carry out the revolution because it was the sole force that would be able to unify Russia at the end of the World War and that was why they could also win the civil war and stay in power.

The Soviet Russia of Lenin and Stalin totally opposed the Sévres Agreement which partitioned the country and supported Mustafa Kemal in all respects; namely, financially, diplomatically and militarily, thus contributing to the achievement of the territorial integrity of Turkey.

On the other hand, İştirakçi Hilmi, the leader of the Socialist Party (Sosyalist Fırka) supported Britain’s plans on Kurdistan and Armenia. ‘Hilmi efendi’ was pretending to be such a big socialist that he was known by the name of “iştirakçi”, in other words, communist.

The true socialists of Turkey, under the leadership of Şefik Hüsnü, the leader of the Workers’ and Peasants’s Socialist Party (İşçi-Çiftçi Sosyalist Fırkası) supported Turkey’s Liberation War. Many members of this party, like Parti Pehlivan, commanded the liberation forces of “Kuvayı Milliye” . Also, it was Nazım Hikmet, a socialist who wrote the epic of the National Liberation War.

The Soviet Union supported the Atatürk Republic against the reactionary sheikh Sait and Dersim revolts (30).

The Chinese revolution following the First World War, all the revolutions in Eastern Europe under the leadership of Tito, Dimitrov, Enver Hodja and Ceauşescu; then the revolutions in Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, all were carried out in the context of protecting the homeland. The anti-fascist, anti-Nazi struggles in Italy and France were all given under the leadership of the communist parties. In the 20th Century the protection of the territorial integrity of the motherland has merged with socialism. Launching into creating a socialist state could not be realised on an ethnic basis. Socialism was successful in the unification of the people on vast lands. Revolutions unified people but counter revolutions split them up.

All the socialist countries and all the communist parties of the world sided against the attempt by the Shah of Iran to use Barzani and Talabani to found a Kurdistan in northern Iraq in 1975 and later in the 1980’ies.

Socialist countries such as China, Vietnam, Korea and Cuba and all the workers’ and communist parties of the world opposed the de facto foundation of a Kurdistan in the north of the 36th parallel. All these leaders, including Chavez and Morales see this US base as an imperialist dagger thrust into the heart of the Middle East.

All the truly socialist parties and the workers’ parties of the world are against the activities that are based on ethnic differences and differences between religious sects; they defend the territorial integrity of the Oppressed countries.

Socialism sees the national question as a part of the struggle against imperialism and the remnants of feudalism and condemns the national movements under the control of imperialism.

Those who support the ethnic separatist movements provoked by imperialism, in the Oppressed World are renegades like “İştirakçi Hilmi”.

Pay attention to such swindlers of socialism: they have no intention and feel no responsibility to unify with the labourers of Turkey. They look up to the successes of the US, the EU and the NATO.

A traitor cannot make a socialist.

All the revolutions in the 20th Century were carried out in the context of protecting the territorial integrity of the homeland, because we are living in the age of imperialism (31).


    IV.4. Co-organization leads to revolution, organizing separately, to counter-revolution
In the 1960ies and 1970’ies the Turkish Left used to organize in the whole of Turkey. The PKK came on the political scene by shattering this tradition.

The only activity of the group then known as “Apocular”(Supporters of Abdullah Öcalan)in south-eastern Turkey was to wipe out the Turkish Left using force and extreme violence as it was stated at the beginning of this study. The sole target of this group was the Leftist organizations in the region.

The organization of the Turkish and Kurdish labourers in separate parties was an imperialist project and it was realized by means of the PKK. Later, the Leftist organizations accepted this new type of organization and in due course theorized it. The point they have reached now is to say that “that region is Kurdistan and the monopoly of organizing in that region is in the hands of the PKK”.

Organizing in separate parties, which was initially seen on a geographical basis, has now started to be advocated and practiced on the ethnic level throughout Turkey. Separate groupings as Kurdish and Turkish have been made within labour unions, professional chambers, in civil societies. The labouring classes are being fractioned. The counter-revolutionary aspect of this type of organization is horrifyingly clear now. Nevertheless, some socialist organizations still bear the hope that the socialist past of the PKK will bring a revival.

The Workers’ Party has never accepted organizing in separate parties on any level; neither on the geographical level nor on the ethnic level. With this view-point, the WP organized its first mass movements in Diyarbakır, Nusaybin, Suruç and Van, in South-eastern Turkey in 1989-90. The WP refused PKK’s offer of 4 possible memberships in the Parliament in return for collaboration with the PKK, before the 1991 general elections when the PKK, under the name of its legal party, HEP joined forces with the republican People’s Party (CHP).The WP participated in the elections separately, gathering hundreds of thousands of people in meetings in many south-eastern provinces. This move by our party was met with the violence of the Turkish Gladio, Kontrgerilla. Many of the regional officials of our party were killed by the Kontrgerilla.

In spite of all this the WP has been continuing to unite with the poor peasants of the region against the feudal landlords. The state authorities and the PKK have sided with the feudal lords. There is an on-going struggle in the region led by the WP against the feudal landlords.


    IV.6. Socialism is built not by splitting our forces but by uniting them
Revolutions have always unified the people whereas counter revolutions have always split them up.

The revolutions of the Soviets, Turkey, Albania, China, Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Romania and other countries of the Oppressed World have always rejected ethnic division and unified the people belonging to different ethnic groups, different religions and sects. The collapse of the Soviet, Turkish, Czechoslovakian revolutions have brought about division.

The PKK lies as to how much “they want unity” will only deceive those who profit from them.

The “regional autonomy” which the PKK advocates is obviously a stage of founding a separate state. When the US plan which intends to transform the borders and regimes of 24 countries including Turkey was announced, Diyarbakır, as Mr. Tayyip Erdoğan declared, was to become the centre of the Greater Middle-East plans. The US is actualizing the plan of creating a second Israel extending from Iraq to İskenderun, Turkey, using Talabani and Barzani, step by step. All the PKK strategies and policies rely on this US strategy.

Turkish people will not accept partitioning. Those who are attempting at partitioning Turkey are in fact creating the conditions for a revolution.

It is the first time that Turkey has entered a revolutionary phase after 1920.The crisis the US is in is getting deeper and deeper. All the imperialist system is in a crisis. The economy of Turkey, the foreign trade deficit which is almost the greatest in the world, unemployment, foreign debts and scarcity of production are all factors which are contributing to a big crisis.

Under these conditions, Turkey will be waging a new struggle for its territorial integrity and once more will be defending her labouring classes. Leading and unifying its people, eliminating all the ethnic and religious differences, the Turkish Left can play a historical role in the approaching revolution.

The rise of the struggle against imperialism in Turkey will inevitably affect the Kurdish people and will draw them in it. This rise will also make it necessary to wipe out the pro-PKK forces. It is also inevitable that all the organizations which make a claim on the representation of the Kurdish people are influenced by this development.                                                        

(1)    V. I. Lenin, Marksizm’in Bir Karikatürü: Emperyalist Ekonomizm, Translated by. Veysel Yıldız, Koral Yayınları, First Publication, 1977, İstanbul.
(2)    For broader information on this interview, see: Doğu Perinçek, Stalin’den Gorbaçov’a –Sovyetler Birliği’nde Kapitalizme Geri Dönüş ve Sosyalist Devrimi Sürdürme-, reviewed 4. edition, Kaynak Yayınları, Feb. 2010, İstanbul, p.23.    
(3)    See: Doğu Perinçek, Abdullah Öcalan ile Görüşmeler, Kaynak Yayınları, enlarged 6th edition, Sept.l 2009, İstanbul, s.124–127.
(4)    The program on the Ulusal Channel on 30 August 2010 with Dr. Serhan Bolluk, Dr. Fatih Yaşlı, Dr. Coşkun Musluk and Arslan Kılıç.
(5)    I decided to write this present article on30 August 2010 after watching the program, “The Kurdish Question-Solution” with Dr. Fatih Yaşlı and Coşkun Musluk.I first started to write it as a letter to them but turned it into an article in July 2011.
(6)    MIT: The Turkish Intelligence Agency
(7)    Muhaberat: The Syrian Intelligence agency    
(8)    See the article titled “What is Behind the Present of Apo?” in Aydınlık, which was written rightafter Öcalan was captured. Aydınlık, 21 February 1999, Issue:605
(9)    see. Cengiz Çandar, Dağdan İniş-PKK Nasıl Silah Bırakır/Kürt Sorununun Şiddetten Arındırılması, TESEV Report, June 2011, İstanbul
(10)    According to the “colony theory”, the territory which the Kurdslived on had been dividen into four and was shared among Turkey, ıran, Iraq and Syria. Perhaps we should remind here that Iraq and Syria themselves were then British and French colonies .The main aspect of the “colony theory” was that it cut off the national question from imperialism and targeted the oppressed nations. Four oppressed countries (Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran) which were not imperialist were declared as colonists and were announced as the main antagonist. Thus, the policies which sprang out of this theory inevitably were constructed on the axis of collaboration with imperialism.. This theory saw Kemalism responsible for everything bad and thus made alliance with imperialism inevitable.    
(11)    Fırat Haber Ajansı(ANF), 19 March 2010, http://www.fı
(12)    The reference is to the book entitled Kemalist Devrim–4 Kurtuluş Savaşı’nda Kürt Politikası.
(13)    HADEP: The legal Kurdish party then, which had close contact with the PKK (transator’s note)
(14)    Cengiz Çandar, Dağdan İniş-PKK Nasıl Silah Bırakır/Kürt Sorununun Şiddetten Arındırılması, TESEV Report, June 2011, İstanbul, p. 58.
(15)    Cengiz Kapmaz, Öcalan’ın İmralı Günleri, İthaki Yayınları, First edition, Ocak 2011, İstanbul, p.86 vd.
(16)    The representatives of the Army on The National Security Council, saw to it that the Council take appropriate decisions directed against the growing threat coming from anti-secular, Islamist forces and following this meeting on Feb. 28, 1997, a period of strict measures against these reactionary forces followed.(translator’s note)
(17)    Mr. Tayyip Erdoğan declared many times that he, as the Prime Minister of the Turkish Republic co-chaired USA’s Greater Middle-East Project.(translator’s note)
(18)    Here the reference is to some municipalities in Southeastern Turkey. .(translator’s note)
(19)    Aydınlık, 13 January 2002
(20)    When Can Dündar published these relying on military sources,,in Daily Milliyet dated 18, 19, 21, 23 January 2003 , with photographs, the US ambassador Pearson, shouted “ all lies” but when the Wikileaks documents were published, it was obvious that the US ambassador was lying. For the Wikileaks document, seez: Taraf, 30 March 2011.
(21)    Radikal, 29 October 2010
(22)    Democratic Society Party: The legal Kurdish party linked with the PKK (translator’s note).
(23)    That the special units of the US Army, the Delta Force troops of 4 thousand personnel trained the northern Iraqi CIA Kurds was reported by European newspapers like Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and Observer and the Daily El Hayat published in London. On the other hand, the information that the Delta Force also trained the PKK'was also delivered to Turkey by the officials of the Russian Federation,. Aydınlık reported this on 14 October 2001 under the title of "Delta Force Prepares PKK for War".
(24)    This information was reported by Doğu Perinçek, the chairman of the Workers’ Party on 23 July 2003 and has not been refuted ever since. See: Aydınlık, 27 July 2003, issueı: 836, s. 8–9.
(25)    Hürriyet, 29 June 2011.
(26)    According to Aydınlık, this information which originated from Russia was verified with the investigations made by Turkish authoritis. The handing over of 125 million dollars by the US to the PKK was included in the file prepared by the Turkish Foreign Ministry and was made an issue by the Turkish Chief of Staff on the meeting with general Myers, the US Chief of Staff . That the CIA handed over 125 millon dollars to the PKK has never been refuted by the US authorities or the PKK (Aydınlık, 5 January 2003)
(27)    Cumhuriyet and Taraf, 9 Aralık 2010.
(28)    BDP: the legal Kurdish party in the Parliament
(29)    “Similarly anyone who does not feel hate towards the German imperialists who want to stifle Belgium, or towards the British, French and Italian imperialists who agreed on looting Austria , and towards the hypocracy of Plehanov and Kautsky who speak about defending the homeland cannot be a Marxist (…) This concept [defence of the homeland] must be accepted in the same sense as it was used for the defence of Iran and China against Russia and Britain and the defence of Turkey against Germany and Russia;, the defence of Albenia against Austria and Italy.”(V. I. Lenin, “Oportunism and theCollapse of the Second International”, Collected Works, 21, p..430.    
(30)    For a broader information, see: Komintern Belgelerinde Türkiye–3 / Kürt Sorunu, compiled by: Doğu Perinçek, translated by Fatma Artunkal-Şule Perinçek, Kaynak Yayınları, Revised 2. Edition, April 1994, İstanbul.    
(31)    For broader information, see: K. Marx, Doğu Sorunu, Sol Yayınları, First edition, March 1977, Ankara; Doğu Perinçek, Lenin, Stalin ve Mao’nun Türkiye Yazıları, Kaynak Yayınları, 3rd edition, July 1992, İstanbul.