Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Terrorism Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: The PKK
ilpars    7/5/2004 9:56:42 AM
From frontpagemag http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=12016 The PKK The PKK has always been defined not by Kurdish nationalism but by Marxism. Founder Abdullah Öcalan was half-Turkish, as he himself reminded his Turkish commando captors in Kenya in 1999; its other early leaders included ethnic Turks as well as Kurds, but no “workers.” In the “Party Program of the PKK,” adopted at the Fifth “Victory” Congress of January 1995, the organization portrays itself as the vanguard of the new global socialism movement. On the subject of the decline of the USSR, it claimed that Soviet socialism was a rough, wild, even “primitive” deviation. By contrast, its own approach to socialism was “scientific and creative.” The Party’s internal structure also demonstrates its Leninist character. Öcalan’s continuous control was only obtained by ruthlessly eliminating challengers, “the most deviated” of whom, he says, “could only be neutralized.” Even journalist Chris Kutschera, a sympathetic but knowledgeable analyst of the PKK, has acknowledged that five or six of the Party’s original leaders were killed. Three others committed suicide, and others have been driven underground. After training in PLO-run international terrorist camps in Lebanon, the PKK opened its military campaign against the Turkish state in 1984, largely from its secure bases in Syria. By 1990-93 it was able to take advantage of the post-Gulf War environment (specifically, the power vacuum created by the de facto creation of an autonomous Iraqi Kurdistan), and it became a real threat to Turkey’s territorial integrity. The PKK engaged in a massive rural insurgency in southeastern Turkey, which, by 1999, resulted in some 30,000 fatalities. These deaths were mostly insurgents, civilians and anti-PKK village guards -- and almost all were Kurds. Indeed, far more Kurdish civilians have been killed by the PKK than Turks, some as reprisals for suspected collaboration with Ankara, others during clashes with rival clans. Kurds in Europe and Lebanon who disagreed with Öcalan were murdered. Throughout the 1990s the PKK in Iraq enjoyed Saddam’s support and regularly engaged in clashes with local Kurdish forces. At its Fifth Congress the PKK decided to engage in suicide bombings and, by 1997, the group had formed “Suicide Guerrilla Teams.” The early “volunteers” came from the most vulnerable segments of society: young, impoverished, poorly educated women. The group’s ambitions went even further: in November 1996, thirteen PKK members arrested on the Syrian border with the Hatay Province were found to possess antimony, which they thought was uranium. PKK operations in Western Europe are led by relatively well-educated people. They enjoy support from governments and groups in Western countries (Germany, Benelux, Scandinavian states), local governments such as the Basques in Spain, prominent individuals and member parties of government coalitions in Italy, France, Russia, and Greece, and most of the remnants of Germany’s and Italy’s Marxist terrorists. These latter occasionally participated (and were killed or captured) in PKK combat operations. In addition to its key role in PKK propaganda and political support, Europe was and still is the major source of PKK funding. European assessments of the PKK’s income generally placed it at between $200 and $500 million a year for the mid-1990s. The German government has asserted that the PKK collects millions of deutsche marks at its annual fundraising events, and some sources have estimated PKK’s annual income from these along with drug trafficking, robberies, extortion, and emigrant and arms smuggling at $86 million (U.S.). Considering the range of PKK drug trafficking in Europe (Germany, France, Denmark, Romania, Switzerland, Belgium, Netherlands), the group is wealthy indeed. None of this dissuaded such self-proclaimed “human rights” militants as Danielle Mitterand, the radical widow of former French president, from addressing Öcalan as “Dear President Öcalan” in a 1998 letter which ended with: “Looking forward to an initial result, rest assured, Abdullah, that I am committed to be beside you in the bid for peace, Sincerely yours, Danielle Mitterand.” This, then, is the organization the HLP managed to get Judge Collins to allow open support for in the United States in the name of the First and Fifth Amendments. Karen Parker of IED-HLP, an NGO accredited by UNESCO, has called it “an affront to humanitarian law” that Turkey and the United States designate the PKK a terrorist organization. IED-HLP president Ralph Fertig, a retired administrative law judge with the EEO Commission in Los Angeles, claims that the Kurdish civilian population is being “terrorized” by the Turkish armed forces and that the PKK elements are being denied protections they should have under humanitarian law.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
Thomas    RE:The PKK   7/5/2004 10:23:21 AM
1. Now I understand the vigilance of the Jandarma at my favourite holiday spot. 2. I wonder what the recent drug-bust in Denmark has to do with the war on terror. Have You any information on the former Danish member of the european parliament Torben Lund, who supported Öcalan??
 
Quote    Reply

ilpars    RE:The PKK   7/5/2004 10:39:56 AM
I did not find anythinng about his support to Ocalan. There are news about his critism about human rights in Turkey.
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    RE:The PKK   7/6/2004 9:29:51 AM
If you ever need any dirt on him, I've got tons. ôcelan has been supported along with other PKK members by "Enhedslisten" (a conglomorate of former extreeme leftist organisation, including communist as the center of their organisation), member of parliament Søren Søndergaard in particular. This fits with your information, that PKK primarely is a marxist organisation.
 
Quote    Reply

PuckaMan    RE:The PKK   7/6/2004 9:45:27 AM
What the hell is it with Marxist groups? Most become militant, mind you Marxism is just another part of a 'problem' in countries such as Turkey and Peru (Shining Path piss all over PKK in terms of numbers killed). It is unfortunate that some still rally behind a discredited theory and use it as justification for terrorism. Screw the Revolution! Ever heard of passive resistance? But then again, when does peace ever get attention. Seems indicative of the media's addction of blood and excitement, rather than relief and boring old humanity. Pucka
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    PuckaMan   7/6/2004 9:50:38 AM
Have you ever heard of a pacifistic Nazi ?? Or a pacifistic marxist ??? Marxist are inferior intellects that promote their personal agenda through obfuscation, double talk and above everything violence.
 
Quote    Reply

PuckaMan    RE:PuckaMan Thomas   7/7/2004 8:04:12 AM
There are sensible 'Marxists' e.g Marxist historians, who look at history such as the fall of Rome through the eyes of class and wealth distribution. The serious Marxist know that the 'revolutionary Marxism' is a dangerous fraud. Marx himself after seeing where Marxism was going himself said 'I don't want to be a Marxist.' Marxism does unfortunately have appeal to the dissaffected, becasue of all the jingoistic 'class struggle' garbage, hence rebels in Turkey like the PKK morph from cultural struggle etc. into a violent, confusing internationalist 'cause'. Look at all the flavours of Marxism; Communism, Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism, etc. All major prominent groups have produced terrorism, French Communists, the Italians, Baader Mienhof, Shining Path, PKK. Marxism is clearly unsuitable for a societal base. Pucka
 
Quote    Reply

ilpars    Marxism   7/7/2004 9:00:22 AM
IMO, we have not still seen the true Marxism of Marx. Because the civilization did not evolve like Marx have predicted. Maybe 100 years later the civilization will evolve into a position where Marxism will be a good option. So maybe Leninist might be more proper to use for these terorist group. Because armed revolution is Lenin's idea not Marx's.
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    RE:Marxism   7/7/2004 9:35:45 AM
To be quite frank: "Sensible Marxist" is a contradiction in terms. As an economic theory.... Well the less time spend studying it, the less time wasted.
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    RE:The PKK   7/7/2004 9:48:25 AM
Let us on this board make one thing abundantly clear: Terrorism is NOT due to poverty, terrorism exploits powerty to further their nefarious aims. The Nazies were not poor - at least not after their industrial funding was in place. The commies were not poor, they were funded by the German general staff. The Al-Qaida et alia are not poor, they are spoiled rich mens brats. Powerty makes people available for desperate measures, women prostitute themselves, other apply for a meatbomber contract to mention examples. The meatbomber is a PGM with about the level of enlightenment: I'm all for stopping both before they hit something valuable; but the focus is on the launcher. There is a lesson in this: Get at the funding. The ones that eventually will lay AQ in the grave are the bookkeepers and bankers. I wonder what the connection the coming currency reform in Turkey has to do with terrorism???
 
Quote    Reply

celebrim    RE:Marxism   7/13/2004 11:22:31 AM
"IMO, we have not still seen the true Marxism of Marx. Because the civilization did not evolve like Marx have predicted. Maybe 100 years later the civilization will evolve into a position where Marxism will be a good option. So maybe Leninist might be more proper to use for these terorist group. Because armed revolution is Lenin's idea not Marx's." I think that is partly true. Marx certainly did not advocate armed revolution to impose a communist state. In fact, he found the whole idea laughable. But you are missing the fact that the idea of Revolutionary Marxism evolved specifically because Marx's predictions about the future direct ion of world economies proved false. These predictions proved false precisely because they were based on false assumptions. His data was good, he just failed to analyze it correctly. When you say 'the true Marxism of Marx', you make it sound like he had outlined a system under which 'scientific socialism' would function. In fact, Marx had no idea what the future society organized under these principles would look like and not the slightest practical suggestion for how it would function. If questioned about such things, he would brush the question off, noting that he had only discovered the inevitablity of such a society arrising and not the particular details. Marxism isn't something that just failed because the direction of world events happened to not go the way he had predicted. The fact that the world didn't evolve as he expected proved as early as 1900 that he was completely and totally wrong and the society would NEVER evolve along the lines he anticipated. We didn't have to wait for the collapse of the USSR to discredit Marx. Marx was discredited by the end of the 19th century when the enconomies of the capitalistic countries failed to contract. Marxist writers were _forced_ to abandon Marx's original assertions and try to come up with ways of explaining away the failure of Marx's central thesis. The future direction of world affairs was the totality of Marxism. There was no Marxist utopian idea, and in fact he scoffed at utopians. All of Marxism is about his 'scientific prediction' and if the prediction is false everything hanging on it also collapses. However, so long as there are eras of the world in which there is poverty and social stratification, the message of Marxism is very attractive and won't just go away no matter how false it happens to be.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics