NEWS CENTER – In an interview conducted in the 1990s with an American journalist, Kurdish People’s Leader Abdullah Öcalan stated that they were prepared to halt the war on the condition that human rights and democracy were recognized, arguing that the role of the United States in Kurdistan was inherently dual.

 

The first part of the interview, carried out in the 1990s between Abdullah Öcalan and an American journalist, has been published on the Özgür Düşünceler website. In the interview, Öcalan addresses what the Kurds demand, the human rights violations they have been subjected to, the policy of setting Kurds against Kurds, civilian deaths, the imposition of war on the PKK, the burning of villages, U.S. imperialism, and Washington’s policies toward the Kurds. Emphasizing that a brutal war had been imposed on the Kurdish people, Öcalan underlines that they were ready to stop the conflict provided that human rights and democracy were recognized. Stressing that villages were burned by the Turkish state during the 1990s, Öcalan argued that the ultimate aim was to erase the Kurds from history.

 

At the beginning of the interview, Abdullah Öcalan makes a brief introductory statement before moving on to a question-and-answer format. In his opening remarks, he states: “Is the United States aware that it is behind what may be the most comprehensive war since Vietnam? Does it know how Turkey’s special warfare has been carried out both historically and in the present day? Is it aware that several ancient peoples have been eliminated from history through this special war? The four-thousand-year-old Greek people and culture, and the Armenian people and culture, have been completely eradicated. We constitute the final link in this chain. This is an extremely brutal war. Yet what is truly tragic is that the most terrorist and barbaric state known to history is being dressed in the garb of democracy, while we—who defend a people’s struggle for existence and their right to exist—are labeled the number one terrorists. This is a profound contradiction.

 

I can say that public opinion and intellectual circles in the United States possess a strong sense of reality. It is extremely important to me that they truly understand this war. I spoke earlier of peoples erased from history, and it must not be forgotten that even the name of our people is not officially recognized. There is not a single primary school, radio station, or institution through which our people can express themselves in their own language. To label a struggle aimed at granting this people an identity as terrorism, or to claim that it targets women and children, is the greatest injustice that can be inflicted upon it. Let them recognize our name, grant us schools, radio and television. Let them also recognize human rights and democracy, even minimally. We, for our part, are ready to halt this war as of tomorrow. I believe that the American public is now beginning to understand what this means.”

 

The questions and answers included in the published interview are as follows:

 

When you say ‘give us our name,’ are you referring to the fact that Kurds in Turkey cannot give Kurdish names to their children?

 

They have not been able to do so until now. And this is not the only issue. We are Kurds, and we want the Kurdish reality to be recognized.

 

Have civilians with no connection to the war ever been killed by the PKK?

 

Undoubtedly, there have been deaths. However, I draw your attention to the following: as you noted, the Turkish army did not stop at figures approaching 900,000; it also recruited more than 60,000 village guards from among Kurdish villagers, particularly through collaboration networks. These guards, together with their families, have been armed and have opened fire. If, as a result of exchanges of fire, women and children within these families are killed, we are absolutely not responsible. Why is there such insistence on setting Kurds against Kurds, and why are they being unleashed upon us together with their families? This must be understood. I genuinely feel more sorrow over the deaths of women and children than over the martyrdom of guerrillas. But it must be clearly understood that an extremely sinister war has been imposed upon us.

 

Turkey has condemned you for killing teachers. Is this true or false?

 

It may be claimed that a few teachers were killed. However, these are truly very few cases, and they were not targeted deliberately. This is certain. When some individuals were identified as special intelligence operatives, punitive measures were taken. But we have no specific policy of targeting teachers or any other civil servants. I emphasize this clearly. If we were deliberately attempting to kill civilians, the number of casualties among civil servants alone would reach hundreds daily. This, in itself, demonstrates my point.

 

 

The PKK condemns the Turkish government, yet it is alleged that it has resorted to killing civilians using the same methods in order to legitimize its own cause. How do you respond to this?

 

Could you elaborate on the question?

 

According to you, the Turkish state has killed civilians; according to them, you have killed civilians. If this is the case, how can you justify killing civilians in the name of the distinctiveness of your cause?

 

I can state categorically that the war we have waged is the one in which civilians have suffered the least. Compared to Bosnia, the figures are negligible. Moreover, I stress this explicitly: the Turkish state has long pursued a policy of ensuring that the war takes place among Kurds themselves—a policy dating back to the founding of the Republic, commonly known as “setting one dog against another.” There is no one in Turkey who is unaware of this. Setting Kurds against Kurds is the fundamental principle of Turkey’s special war. The responsibility for the massacre of civilians lies with the Turkish state, and this is widely known. To be precise, there are 2,500 unsolved murders, all of them civilians and all of them patriotic Kurds, documented in human rights reports. In addition, 3,000 villages have been burned, a fact also recorded in human rights reports. Three million Kurds have been forcibly displaced from their homeland, which is likewise documented.

 

Who is responsible for the evacuation and destruction of villages?

 

We do not possess weapons capable of destroying villages. Villages cannot be demolished with such arms. These villages were destroyed by state forces, and this can only be done with heavy weaponry, as all investigations clearly demonstrate. Moreover, the authorities themselves have admitted this. Everyone knows that three million people were displaced, and I call upon them every day not to leave their homeland.

 

Who is responsible for the burning of villages?

 

It is truly the Republic of Turkey. I reiterate: several peoples—the most ancient ones—have been erased from history, leaving not a single village behind. Now it is the Kurds’ turn. They, too, are to be erased from history. I want this to be clearly understood.

 

Kurdish villages are said to have three options: become village guards and risk being killed by the PKK; support the PKK and risk being killed by Turkish security forces; or abandon their homes and leave. What kind of choices are these?

 

None of these options are acceptable to me. However, it is the Turkish state that has implemented this policy with extreme brutality. We have never told any Kurdish villager, “Come and support us by force.” A political movement cannot be supported by coercion; even if it is, such support has little value. The state implemented this policy ruthlessly, stating, “If you do not support state policy, you will either migrate or be eliminated.” Hundreds of thousands of Kurds can be asked about this. Even a simple investigation in Diyarbakır, Adana, or Istanbul would clearly reveal who was responsible for the mass displacement of millions. Fifteen thousand Kurds who supported us are now in Southern Kurdistan—that is all. There is not a single Kurdish villager in Northern Kurdistan who supported us and was not annihilated. All were brutally killed. From our perspective, the issue has never been whether villagers stand with us; it is crucial to frame the problem correctly.

 

What do you think about the United States? What is your view?

 

In modern national liberation wars, the United States is often portrayed in extremely negative terms. I have reflected deeply on this issue. In my view, it is most accurate to speak of two Americas.

 

Could you elaborate on real socialism?

 

Real socialism developed its own perspective against American imperialism, and I was influenced by this view. I still believe that imperialist tendencies exist within the United States. However, it is also necessary to recognize the reality of the other America, which has increasingly captured my attention. The United States may indeed be behind the war waged against us—this is a very troubling reality. Yet this does not require me to adopt an uncompromisingly anti-American stance. A significant segment of the U.S. establishment, for strategic reasons tied to Turkey, has largely disregarded the Kurds. I believe they are now experiencing discomfort over this and increasingly recognize that they are in a position of injustice.

 

The United States has spent millions of dollars in Northern Iraq to protect the Kurds there. Do you regard America as a friend of the Kurds?

 

America’s role in Northern Iraq is contradictory. I do not view it as entirely negative. As with the region as a whole, its role in Kurdistan is dual. I believe there is space for the Kurds within America’s perspective, and I am convinced that it wishes to grant the Kurds a greater role than local regimes do. However, there is a fundamental misconception: the distinction between “good Kurds” and “bad Kurds.” This is both a flawed practice and an inherently erroneous concept. I believe the United States feels the need to correct itself in this regard. It will soon realize that those it labels as “bad Kurds” are, in fact, the “good Kurds.”