COLOMBIA: INDIGENOUS MOBILIZE—DESPITE STATE TERROR

from Weekly News Update on the Americas

INDIGENOUS HOLD NATIONWIDE “MINGA,” TWO DIE

On Oct. 10, tens of thousands of Colombian indigenous people began marching to various regional capitals in a coordinated Minga (community mobilization) to demand indigenous rights, protest the government’s economic and social policies–especially a planned “free trade treaty” (TLC) with the US, Peru and Ecuador–and protest President Alvaro Uribe Velez’s attempts to lift a ban on presidential reelection. The Minga–initiated by the Embera people but with the active participation and support of indigenous groups throughout Colombia–was organized to culminate on Oct. 12 in coordination with a national general strike called by labor unions, campesinos, students, leftist activists and others. Oct. 12 was chosen because it marks the arrival in the Americas of a group of European “explorers” headed by Christopher Columbus; for indigenous people, the day commemorates their centuries of resistance against the European invasion.

The government responded to the Minga on Oct. 9 by banning the peaceful marches, justifying the move by claiming that the indigenous mobilization was infiltrated by leftist rebels. On Oct. 10, police used tear gas and clubs against a group of indigenous marchers who were on their way from Santa Rosa de Cabal to Manizales, capital of Caldas department. Despite the attack, some 10,000 marchers reached Manizales on Oct. 11.

Also on Oct. 10, agents of the notoriously brutal Mobile Anti-Riot Squad (ESMAD) of the National Police attacked some 6,000 Embera Chami marchers in Remolino, in the central department of Risaralda. The marchers were on their way from Belen de Umbria to Pereira, the departmental capital. Marcos Soto, a member of the Chami community of Caramba, died, and at least 10 other marchers were wounded. (Adital, Brazil, Oct. 11, 13; Organizacion Indigena de Antioquia-OAI, Oct. 10; La Patria, Oct. 13 via Colombia Indymedia)

On Oct. 11, hired killers shot to death Guambiano leader Francisco Cuchillo, governor of the Canon Rio Guavas indigenous reserve in Ginebra municipality, Valle del Cauca department, as he was preparing to lead his community’s participation in the Minga. (La Jornada, Mexico, Oct. 13 from AFP, DPA; Fundacion Hemera, Actualidad Etnica, Oct. 15 via Colombia Indymedia; Consejo Regional Indigena de Risaralda-CRIR/Consejo Regional Indigena de Caldas-CRIDEC, Oct. 12 via Colombia Indymedia)

In addition to the indigenous Mingas in Pereira and Manizales in the central coffee-growing zone, more than 7,000 Zenu indigenous people from the San Andres de Sotavento reserve and other areas of the northeastern departments of Sucre and Cordoba gathered in Sampues for a 10-kilometer march into Sincelejo, capital of Sucre. (La Jornada, Mexico, Oct. 13 from AFP, DPA; Cabildos Mayores Zenu de Sucre y Cordoba, Oct. 12 via Colombia Indymedia; El Universal, Cartagena, Oct. 13)

CAUCA: NATIVES SEIZE ESTATES

As part of the nationwide mobilizations, indigenous people in the southern department of Cauca began a coordinated series of land occupations. On Oct. 11 some 2,500 Guambiano indigenous people began occupying the Ambalo estate owned by the Estela family in Silvia municipality in an effort to recover their ancestral lands. On Oct. 14 police attacked the community, injuring at least three people: one was hit in the eyes with tear gas and might lose his sight; one suffered a fractured knee, and one woman’s ribs were fractured. (Colombia’s Caracol news agency reported that the community members fought back with sticks, rocks and agricultural tools, and that four community members and a police agent were hurt in the clash.) The Estela family raises fighting bulls on the estate; Guambiano communities are also occupying two other estates, La Gloria and Puerta de Hierro, owned by the same family. (Fundacion Hemera, Oct. 15; Caracol Noticias, Oct. 15; RCN, Oct. 15; El Pais, Cali, posted Oct. 14 on Colombia Indymedia)

On Oct. 12, members of the Kizgo community began occupying Los Remedios estate, also in Silvia municipality. The estate is owned by the Colombian government, which confiscated it from drug trafficker Gilberto Rodriguez Orejuela and co-owner Ana Dolores Avila de Mondragon. The Kizgo community has been trying for more than 15 years to negotiate with the national government for the return of their lands; in 1996 the government promised to buy 400 hectares of land for the community. (Fundacion Hemera, Oct. 15; Autoridades Indigenas de Kizgo, Oct. 14 via Colombia Indymedia)

On Oct. 12, residents of the Paez (Nasa) indigenous communities of Pueblo Nuevo, Caldono, La Aguada, Las Mercedes, Pioya and La Laguna Siberia began an occupation of the El Japio farm in Caloto municipality to press the government to grant them land. Government forces tried to evict them on Oct. 12, but the Indigenous Authorities of Caldono report that the occupation was continuing as of Oct. 13. (Autoridades Indigenas de Caldono-Cauca, Oct. 13 via Colombia Indymedia; EP, Oct. 14)

Elsewhere in Cauca on Oct. 12, indigenous people and campesinos began occupations on the Miraflores estate in Corinto, two estates in the village of Gabriel Lopez in Totoro municipality and lands on a site known as Las Guacas, east of the departmental capital, Popayan. Cauca police commander Col. Luis de Jesus Cely Rincon said army troops from the Codazzi Engineers Battalion of Palmira evicted 200 indigenous people from lands in the community of Media Naranja. Two indigenous people were wounded–at least one of them by a bullet–and had to be hospitalized in Santander de Quilichao; two soldiers were reportedly bruised. (EP, Oct. 14)

WORKERS, CAMPESINOS STRIKE

At least 500,000 Colombians took part in protest marches around the country on Oct. 12 as part of a 24-hour national civic strike protesting the government’s economic and social policies, the planned trade pact and President Uribe’s reelection plans. Some 100,000 people shut down the capital, Bogota, and marches took place in all 32 of the country’s departmental capitals. (LJ, Oct. 13 from AFP, DPA; Vanguardia Liberal, Bucaramanga, Oct. 13; El Informador, Santa Marta, Oct. 13 via Colombia Indymedia; El Heraldo, Barranquilla, Oct. 13)

“Uribe, paramilitary, the people are pissed off,” chanted marchers in Bogota. While opinion surveys have shown the right-wing president maintaining a 70% approval rating since he took office in August 2002, the massive turnout for the protests showed that “support for Uribe is in the media, not in the people,” according to Adolfo Paez, a representative of energy sector workers. “The polls don’t show real life.” (El Diario-La Prensa, NY, Oct. 13 from AFP)

Some 20,000 campesinos, indigenous people, students and workers marched in Neiva, capital of the southern department of Huila; it was the largest march the city had seen in more than 20 years. (Report from Ricardo Ramirez M. posted on Colombia Indymedia, Oct. 13) On Oct. 11 in Guacimo, on the road from Santa Maria to Neiva, the Colombian army tried to stop a caravan of some 1,500 campesinos from reaching Neiva for the protest; they detained three community activists, one of them a minor. In Tolima department, just north of Huila, the army detained 30 campesinos who were organizing for the Oct. 12 strike. (Federacion Nacional Sindical Unitaria Agropecuaria-FENSUAGRO, Oct. 12 via Colombia Indymedia)

Smaller towns and cities saw protests as well. In the southwestern department of Narino, some 3,000 campesinos from rural areas of Barbacoas, Roberto Payan and Magui Payan municipalities marched in the town center of Barbacoas on Oct. 12 to demand drinking water services and alternatives to illegal drug crops. (Caracol Radio. Oct. 13) Another 4,000 campesinos and indigenous people began marching from Mallama to Ricaurte municipality in Narino on Oct. 12.

Some 5,000 African-descended people took part in a march on Oct. 12 in the Pacific coast port city of Buenaventura, Valle del Cauca department, organized by the Process of Black Communities (PCN). Hundreds of people marched from Santa Rosa del Sur municipality to San Lucas in the northern department of Bolivar in support of the national strike and to oppose gold mining by the multinational Kedhada company. (Coordinador Nacional Agrario de Colombia-CNA, Oct. 12 via Colombia Indymedia)

On Oct. 12 in Corinto municipality, in the southern department of Cauca, riot police and army troops used tear gas and firearms against campesinos who were protesting on the road that leads from Miranda municipality. In the village of Gabriel Lopez in Totoro municipality, campesinos blocked the road leading from Popayan, the capital of Cauca, into neighboring Huila department. (Proceso Coordinacion Organizaciones Populares del Suroccidente Colombiano, Oct. 12 via Colombia Indymedia)

Weekly News Update on the Americas, Oct 16

CORDILLERA ORIENTAL: U.S. DRUG PLANE SHOT DOWN

On Sept. 30 leftist rebels shot down a single-engine T-65 Turbo Thrush plane as it was spraying herbicides over northeastern Colombia’s El Catatumbo region. The US embassy in Bogota said the plane’s Colombian pilot died while being taken to a hospital. The embassy is investigating the crash. Gregory Lagana, a spokesperson for the US company Dyncorp–which carries out aerial spraying operations in Colombia under contract with the US State Department–declined to say who the pilot worked for, but said the plane was owned by the State Department.

The plane was shot down between the municipalities of Tibu and El Tarra in Norte de Santander department, near the Venezuelan border, where rebels of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the National Liberation Army (ELN) are active. In a program funded by the US government, Colombia’s Antinarcotics Police sprays the toxic herbicide glyphosate over large swathes of countryside, ostensibly to destroy coca and poppy plants.

A report earlier this year by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy said that despite a record-setting aerial eradication offensive, 114,000 hectares of coca remained in Colombia at the end of 2004–slightly more than the 113,850 hectares that were left over in 2003 after spraying. (Diarios de Urgencia/Resumen Latinoamericano, Sept. 30, with info from Colprensa; Daily Journal, Venezuela, Oct. 2 from AP)

Weekly News Update on the Americas, Oct 9

HIGH COURT OK’S RE-ELECTION

On Oct. 18, Colombia’s nine-member Constitutional Court ruled that a constitutional amendment to allow presidential reelection–approved by Congress in December–did not violate legislative or constitutional norms. Opponents of the reelection amendment had sought to have it overturned, arguing that supporters of President Alvaro Uribe Velez had omitted debates, and that dozens of lawmakers had voted for reelection after their relatives were given coveted jobs in embassies and government agencies. The court must still decide the legality of the Electoral Guarantees Law, which sets out terms to restrict the unfair advantage a sitting president has as a candidate. (New York Times, Oct. 20 from Reuters)

Weekly News Update on the Americas, Oct 23

——

Weekly News Update on the Americas
http://home.earthlink.net/~nicadlw/wnuhome.html

See also WW4 REPORT #114
http://www.ww3report.com/node/1145

See also our last blog post on para terror in Colombia:
/node/1230

——————-

Reprinted by WORLD WAR 4 REPORT, Nov. 1, 2005
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingCOLOMBIA: INDIGENOUS MOBILIZE—DESPITE STATE TERROR 

PERU: INDIGENOUS BLOCK CAMISEA GAS PROJECT

from Weekly News Update on the Americas

On Sept. 30, residents of the districts of Atalaya, Sepahua and Tahuania in the Peruvian Amazon held a 24-hour strike protesting the contamination of the region’s rivers by the Camisea natural gas project. The same day, thousands of Ashaninka, Yine Yame and Shipibo indigenous people, armed with spears and arrows, set up a river blockade in the districts of Tahuania and Sepahua, preventing ships serving the Camisea project from passing through the zone. The indigenous people, backed by Atalaya mayor Dante Navarro and the regional government of Ucayali, are demanding that the government allot 12.5% of the Camisea royalties to Ucayali to compensate for the damages the gas project causes. “We have waited eight months and we have received no response, so the dialogue has run out,” said Edwin Vasquez, president of Ucayali region.

Navarro said the blockade would go on until the government agrees to the royalty demand. “The contamination of the Ucayali and Urubamba rivers has left us almost without fish, the main food source for our people,” said Navarro. Ucayali Natural Resources Manager Edgar Tapia says the increase in river traffic and pollution caused by ships bringing supplies to Camisea has reduced aquatic species in the Ucayali and Urubamba rivers by 60%. “Our rivers have become a trash dump, and the result is that our people are poisoned and with skin diseases,” said Sepahua mayor Nicolas Salcedo.

In less than nine months Camisea’s liquid gas pipeline has ruptured three times. A rupture last Dec. 22 contaminated the Urubamba river and prompted a protest by Machiguenga communities in the area. A Sept. 16 leak in the pipeline in Ayacucho–which followed an Aug. 29 leak in the same region–contaminated the Chunchubamba river and forced the government to declare all Camisea operations in a state of emergency and to evacuate more than 200 families from the community of Tocatten. (Servindi, Oct. 4)

Weekly News Update on the Americas, Oct 9

On Oct. 16 residents of the town of Atalaya took control of the airport there. The communities have also blockaded the new highway linking Atalaya to Satipo. The indigenous people of the region say they will seize the main camp of the Camisea gasfields if their demands for compensation are not met. (Adital, Brazil, Oct. 18)

Weekly News Update on the Americas, Oct 23

——

Weekly News Update on the Americas
http://home.earthlink.net/~nicadlw/wnuhome.html

See also WW4 REPORT #113
http://www.ww3report.com/node/1031

See also our special report on the Camisea project:
/node/1140

——————-

Reprinted by WORLD WAR 4 REPORT, Nov. 1, 2005
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingPERU: INDIGENOUS BLOCK CAMISEA GAS PROJECT 

EASTERN ANATOLIA: IRAQ’S NEXT DOMINO

“Greater Kurdistan” Ambitions Could Spark Regional War

by Sarkis Pogossian

It is now the Sunni insurgency in central and western Iraq that is drawing blood and media attention in Iraq, but the situation in the northern region of Iraqi Kurdistan, at present the most peaceful part of the country, is waiting to explode–and holds far greater potential to internationalize the conflict. The Kurdish people, numbering some 20 million, were left off the map when the victorious allies carved new states out of the ruins of the Turkish Ottoman Empire after World War I. They are now divided mostly between Iraq and Turkey, with smaller populations in Iran and Syria. The emergence of a highly autonomous Kurdistan in northern Iraq has re-ignited ambitions for a “Greater Kurdistan” which would unite Kurdish lands across the borders of these four nation-states.

Jalal Talabani and Masoud Barzani, the two long-ruling rival strongmen of the Kurdish autonomous zone in northern Iraq, have arrived at a power-sharing deal at the behest of the US occupation. With the formation of an ostensibly independent Iraqi government earlier this year, Talabani became Iraq’s president while Barzani was elected president of Kurdistan Regional Government, the newly-unified northern autonomous zone. The Kurdish militia armies controlled by these two strongmen, the peshmerga, openly collaborated with US Special Forces units in the campaign against Saddam’s regime in 2003.

Yet these two apparent clients of US imperialism appear to have forged at least a de-facto alliance with the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), the Kurdish separatist guerilla organization which for over 20 years has been fighting for the liberation of Eastern Anatolia from the rule of Turkey. The PKK is officially recognized as a “terrorist organization” by the US State Department. The war which ensued after it took up arms in 1984, espousing a Maoist-influenced radical Kurdish nationalism, cost over 30,000 lives. The PKK was thought to be in decline since the arrest of its leader, Abdullah Ocalan (code name “Apo”), in 1999. But it now shows signs of a resurgence–and activity in Iran and Syria as well as Turkey and Iran.

Turkey is one of the United States’ most strategic allies, a NATO member bordering both Iraq and the ex-Soviet Union. It was instrumental in policing and encircling both the Soviets and Saddam, and today protects two key pipelines which deliver the oil resources of the post-Soviet Caspian Basin and post-Saddam Iraq to global markets under Washington-led development initiatves: the Baku-Ceyhan and Kirkuk-Ceyhan lines, both terminating at the Turkish port of Ceyhan and crossing hundreds of miles of Turkish territory. This very territory is where the Turkish state is today repressing the cultural rights and national aspirations of the Kurds and other ethnic minorities, and where the declining Ottomans carried out the genocide of over 1 million Armenians in the World War I. It would be an irony of this region, Eastern Anatolia, proved the key to a wider internationalized war, as an unintended consequence of George Bush’s drive to forge a new order in the Middle East.

Turkish Hegemonism and the PKK Resurgence

One Oct. 6, the PKK announced an end to its “unilateral ceasefire” against the Turkish government. The one-month ceasefire had been extended until Oct. 3, the date Turkey started accession talks into the European Union.

“With the start of the negotiations the Kurdish problem is no longer just Turkey’s problem, it is now a basic problem of the EU,” the PKK statement said. “It is certain that the Kurdish people will use their legitimate right of active defense and democratic resistance to protect themselves and their national honor against the increasing operations of destruction by the Turkish state. The lack of any mention in the EU’s negotiation framework agreement of a solution to the Kurdish problem, or even a single word about the continuing low-intensity war, is an endorsement of the Turkish state’s policy of denial.”

Turkey’s pending entry into the EU could bring a long-simmering ethno-nationalist struggle of the Middle East to the European stage. The PKK is officially recognized as a “terrorist organization” by the EU as well as the US. In September, Germany banned the PKK’s paper, Ozgur Politika, and news agencies, which exiled supporters of the guerilla organization had long maintained there. However, the organization continues to maintain its Denmark-based radio station.

Despite the supposed prohibition on dealing with “official” terrorists, the CIA is apparently seeking contacts with the PKK. On Oct. 2, the French daily Le Monde reported that US Central Intelligence Agency officials had carried out talks with “former” PKK leader Nizamettin Tas to discuss the potential for disarmament of the organization. This certainly indicates awareness in Washington of the organization’s growing power, and the criticality of the Kurdish question for the entire region.

In a speech in the Eastern Anatolian city of Diyarbakir in August, Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said, “People are asking me what we are planning to do about the ‘Kurdish problem.'” His answer was “more democracy”–widely perceived as a significant overture for peace.

But local Kurds are increasingly skeptical. The Washington Post reported Oct. 7 that a newly-forming Kurdish political party, the Democratic Society Movement, “appears intent on associating itself with the PKK and its imprisoned founder, Abdullah Ocalan. The new party’s most prominent organizer, former legislator Leyla Zana, made headlines by publicly kissing the hand of Ocalan’s sister. Political professionals argue that, at the grass roots, Ocalan’s abiding potency as a symbol of resistance counts for more in Kurdish politics than the disdain he inspires even among many who wish the Kurds well.”

“There are a lot of people here who feel not only sympathy with him but blood–their brothers’, their sisters’, their sons’,” Mahmut Simsek, an aide to the mayor of Diyarbakir, told the Post. “When you talk about 35,000 dead, 30,000 of them were from the Kurdish side.”

After his 1999 capture in Nairobi by Turkish elite forces acting on a CIA tip, Ocalan was videotaped telling his captors: “I have a hunch I can be of service to the Turkish people and the Kurdish people. My mother is a Turk.” The insurgency ebbed as the PKK seemed to undergo a series of name-changes and factional splits. At the urging of the EU, Turkey began to rethink its rigid intolerance to Kurdish cultural rights. In 2002 its parliament legalized Kurdish-language education and radio broadcasts.

But human-rights groups say Turkey has a long way to go. Reports of torture continue, and have mounted since the PKK resumed armed activities this year. The guerrillas say they returned to arms out of frustration at receiving no acceptable offer of an amnesty, and at the slow and tentative pace of even limited restoration of cultural rights.

Debate on the history of the Kurdish conflict, as well as the Armenian genocide, remains harshly proscribed. On Oct. 9, EU enlargement commissioner Olli Rehn met with Turkish writer Orhan Pamuk at his home in Istanbul ahead of the writer’s December trial for “insulting the Turkish identity.” The 301st paragraph of the new Turkish penal code says “a person who insults Turkishness, the Republic or the Turkish parliament will be punished with imprisonment ranging from six months to three years.” A case was opened against Pamuk after he told a Swiss newspaper in February, “30,000 Kurds and 1 million Armenians were killed in these lands and nobody but me dares to talk about it.”

This same clause was also used earlier this year to convict an Armenian-Turkish journalist Hrant Dink, who received a six-month suspended sentence. The EU has pledged to closely watch these cases.

In September, the European Commission also condemned a Turkish court ruling that ordered the cancellation of an academic conference on the World War I-era massacres of Armenians. “We strongly deplore this new attempt to prevent Turkish society from freely discussing its history,” said EU representative Krisztina Nagy. Turkey’s Prime Minister Erdogan also condemned the court’s decision. But Turkey’s government has fought hard to counter an international Armenian campaign to have the wave of massacres recognized as genocide. Numerous countries around the world have passed resolutions officially recognizing the Armenian genocide–although not the United States.

If the atmosphere remains this intolerant in cosmopolitan Istanbul, it is certainly worse in remote Eastern Anatolia–and the PKK clearly exploits the inevitable backlash. A five-year truce declared by the PKK after Ocalan’s capture officially ended in June 2004, and eastern Turkey has since seen a series of bombings and skirmishes. The truce came in response to Turkish commitments to respect Kurdish language and cultural rights. But there are now signs that recent progress in this area is being reversed. While Kurdish is still not allowed to be taught in state schools (even in Kurdish-majority regions), under the 2002 reform it can be taught in private schools. But in August the directors of Turkey’s eight privately-owned Kurdish-language schools announced that they were closing them due to bureaucratic hurdles, and in response to popular Kurdish demands for the language to be part of the regular curriculum at state schools in the region.

“We took this decision because of…the request for education in the mother tongue at schools,” Suleyman Yilmaz, Kurdish school director in Diyarbakir, told the Kurdish new service Dozame. He said the price of private schools, which receive no government support, put them beyond the means of most students. He also said that while it takes two or three months for most private schools to obtain government permits, it can take up to 18 months for the government to grant permits for Kurdish-language schools. As recently as 1991 it was illegal to even speak Kurdish.

In another sign of growing polarization, Ridvan Kizgin, chairman of the Human Rights Association (IHD) in the province of Bingol, was fined 1,112 lira (US$800) by the Bingol Governorship for using “Cewlik,” the Kurdish name for the province, in an official document. Kizgin had written a letter to the Bingol governor and the Interior Ministry on June 29, discussing the issue of ongoing military operations in the area. He signed it on behalf of “The IHD Bingol (Cewlik) Office.” Kizgin was charged with breaking paragraph 31 of the “Associations Law,” which mandates that all documents from official associations must be written in Turkish. Kizgin is challenging the fine before the courts.

Signs of popular unrest are growing. In May 2003, when a 6.4 earthquake centered in Bingol left thousands homeless, over 125 dead and at least a thousand more missing, hundreds of local Kurds, angered by slow and inadequate aid efforts, took to the streets, hurling stones at army troops, who fired into the air to disperse crowds. In September 2003, over 10,000 Kurds, many chanting “Peace!” rallied in Diyarbakir, urging the Turkish government to make peace with the PKK.

Armed actions are being carried out with greater frequency in both in Eastern Anatolia and western Turkey. This July, a bomb tore apart a minibus in the popular Aegean beach resort town of Kusadasi, killing at least five, although it was uncertain if this was the work of the PKK or Islamic militants. Earlier that month, a bomb hidden in a soda can wounded 21 people, including three foreign tourists, in the resort town Cesme, north of Kusadasi. In April, a bomb in a cassette player killed a police officer and wounded four other people in Kusadasi. The Kurdistan Freedom Falcons Organization claimed responsibility for those bombings, warning that it would keep up attacks against tourist areas. The Falcons were said to be a hard-line breakaway faction of the PKK.

When the new one-month PKK ceasefire ended Oct. 6, violence immediately flared again. On Oct. 9, a landmine went off on a road between between Seydibey and Akcagul in Eastern Anatolia, injuring seven passengers of a minibus.

At least 200 Turkish soldiers have been reportedly killed in clashes with the PKK this year.

Northern Iraq: “Southern Kurdistan”?

The July 14 attack in Kusadasi came one day after Erdogan asserted the right to intervene in northern Iraqi, where an estimated 4,500 PKK fighters have taken refuge.

“There are certain things that international law allows. When necessary, one can carry out cross-border operations… This can be done when the conditions require… We hope that such conditions will not emerge,” Erdogan proclaimed.

Erdogan also renewed his criticism of the US for failing to attack PKK camps in Iraq. A rewrite of an AFP account of his speech on Kurdish Media, a website maintained by independent Kurdish activists in England, tellingly refers to northern Iraq as “Southern Kurdistan.” Notes the rewrite: “Recent calls to the U.S. by Turkey to target the PKK have been ignored by Washington which has its hands full in central Iraq with an insurgency. The US is also unlikely to endanger its strong relationship with Kurds of South Kurdistan by opening a new front against hardened PKK guerrillas in a region administered by the Kurdistan Regional Government.”

The PKK is apparently building a visible presence in northern Iraq. Turkish nationalist politicians have reacted angrily to the opening of a PKK office in Kirkuk, which is said to be flying the flag of the guerilla organization. Mehmet Agar of Turkey’s True Path Party (DYP) called nearly explicitly for unilateral Turkish military intervention in Iraq in comments this summer that invoked Kemal Ataturk, father of Turkish nationalism and founder of the modern Turkish state: “In a globalized world, with an expression inspired by the great Ataturk, the field of defense has now become the entire region. No sensible person can abandon the security of the country to the fine-tuning policies of his friends.”

The PKK has reacted to this bellicose rhetoric in kind. In a June statement, the organization threatened to turn northern Iraq into a “quagmire” for the Turkish army if it launches cross-border operations to rout guerrilla camps there. “We are prepared for a possible attack… We will make it fail and turn [northern Iraq] into a quagmire for the forces that will carry it out,” said the statement, published on the Internet site of the Germany-based MHA news agency, said to be close to the guerilla movement.

Iraqi Internal Minister Bayan Jabr, on a visit to Istanbul in July, insisted that any Turkish cross-border operations would have to receive prior approval of the Iraqi Parliament. Jabr told Turkey’s NTV: “We are ready for cooperation against the Kurdish Workers’ Party or any other terrorist organization. We need to help each other on the issue. However, there is a government and parliament elected in Iraq. [Turkey] is bound to the parliament’s decision.” Jabr also noted that Kurdish peshmerga (militia) have control over the Turkish border.

Iraq’s Kurdish autonomous zone emerged in after Operation Desert Storm in 1991, when the imposition of a “no-fly zone” in northern Iraq effectively ended Saddam Hussein’s ability to carry out counter-insurgency operations there. Kurdish leaders were naturally suspicious of US intentions–the White House had been openly “tiliting” to Saddam when he carried out his brutal “Anfal” (plunder) offensive against the Kurds in 1988, which reached its horrific climax in the genocidal gas attack on the city of Halabja, that left 5,000 dead. But the victory over Saddam’s forces was followed by a 1994-1997 Kurdish civil war between the rival factions led by Barzani and Talabani. While the Talabani’s Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) has generally assumed a more leftist posture than Barzani’s more “traditionalist” Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), the real differences are regional and ethnic. The PUK, with its capital at Sulaymaniya, is made up of speakers of the Surani dialect of Kurdish; the KDP, with its capital at Arbil, claims the loyalty of those who speak the Kurmanji dialect. The civil war was a bitter one, with Barzani even cutting a deal with Saddam at one point for a joint offensive with the Iraqi army against the PUK.

The new PUK-KDP peace and the consolidation of a unified Kurdistan Regional Government may only presage escalated violence between Kurds and other groups in northern Iraq’s ethnic patchwork. Most pivotal are the Turkmen–who are closely related to the Turks, and whose interests Turkey claims to protect. Kirkuk, the center of northern Iraq’s oil industry, is now the center of this struggle.

Kirkuk, where the PKK has established an office, lies outside the Kurdish autonomous zone in northern Iraq, but the city’s Arab and Turkmen residents fear the Kurdish parties seek to annex it and establish it as their regional capital. Under Saddam Hussein, both Kurds and Turkmen were forced from Kirkuk, and their lands and homes redistributed to Arabs who were encouraged to settle there. Since Saddam’s fall, many Kurds and Turkmen have started to return and demand their properties back–sparking a tense three-way rivalry between the ethnic groups. In February 2004, when the Kirkuk offices of the Iraqi Turkmen Front were ransacked by a crowd of Kurds said to be led by PUK militants, the Turkmen Front demanded international peacekeepers be sent into the city. In December 2003, three were killed and dozens wounded when Kurdish gunmen–again said to be from the PUK–opened fire on a protest march of Arabs and Turkmen who chanted anti-Kurdish slogans. In August 2003, a clash between Shi’ite Turkmen and Sunni Kurds for control of a shrine at Tuz Khurmatu resulted in the shrine’s dome–recently rebuilt after having been destroyed by the Saddam regime–being destroyed anew by a rocket-propelled grenade. In subsequent days, US helicopters and armored vehicles broke up Kurd-Turkmen riots in Kirkuk, in which shooting broke out and a police station was torched.

Kirkuk had actually been taken by PUK peshmerga forces in April 2003 (presumably with the aid of US Special Forces). Kurdish Media reported that Turkmen militias in Kirkuk killed fifteen Kurds celebrating the downfall of the Saddam Husein regime April 11. Turkmen also reportedly looted Kurdish homes and shops after peshmerga forces withdrew from the city at US behest.

Many Kurds feel that protecting the Turkmen could become Turkey’s rationale for military intervention. Michael Rubin of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy wrote this October: “The Turkish government has bankrolled the Iraqi Turkmen Front… As Kurds, long displaced from Kirkuk migrated back to the city, the Turkish military, egged on by the Iraqi Turkmen Front, threatened violence. Many Kurds point to the July 2003 infiltration of a Turkish Special Forces team, allegedly on a mission to assassinate Kurdish politicians in Kirkuk, as a sign of malicious Turkish intentions.”

In April 2003, when US Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FLA), senior member of the House International Relations Committee and co-chair of the Caucus on US-Turkish Relations, met with leading politicians in Istanbul, MP Onur Oymen reportedly protested to him that the sign at the Iraqi border reads “Welcome to Kurdistan” rather than “Welcome to Iraq”–and demanded that US forces change it. Turkish officials also protest that Kurdish authorities in Iraq have issued their own passport stamps reading “Kurdistan.”


Iran: Kurdish Unrest and the Shadow of Mahabad

The PKK also seems to be expanding its operations into Iran, which has seen an outbreak of Kurdish unrest in recent months.

Iran’s Interior Ministry blamed the PKK for a July 26 ambush on an army patrol near the northwestern town of Oshnoviyeh, which left four soldiers dead. A civilian woman caught in the crossfire and one of the assailants were also killed, authorities said. “It was terrorists from the PKK who carried out the ambush,” a ministry spokesman said, adding that the Iranian soldiers who died were “martyred.” Local officials said the attack was carried out the Kurdistan Free Life Party (PJAK), said to be the Iranian arm of the PKK.

Tehran and Ankara are linked by an accord calling for cooperation to combat the PKK and the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq Organisation (MKO), an armed Iranian opposition group based in Iraq. But Turkey has accused Iran recently of not doing enough to secure the border.

Provincial deputy governor Abbas Khorshidi said the tensions could be linked to recent events in the nearby Kurdish city of Mahabad, where a young Kurdish man was shot and killed by police in July. Subsequent clashes between residents and police left one police officer dead and resulted in dozens of arrests. “If regional security is upset and there is disorder, we will act very strongly against troublemakers,” Khorshidi warned.

Mahabad has great symbolic significance for the Kurds. Located in northwest Iran’s West Azerbaijan province, it was established in 1946 as the capital of the first and only Kurdish state in history, with Soviet encouragement. However, the Kurdish Republic of Mahabad was put down later the same year. The Mahabad Republic’s military leader was Mustafa Barzani, father of Masoud Barzani, leader of Iraq’s KDP.

The July incident in Mahabad would indeed mean “disorder.” On Aug. 3, the city exploded into rebellion, and the uprising quickly spread to other cities in the region, including Sanandaj, Sardasht, Piranshahr, Marivan, Oshnavieh, Baneh and Divan Darreh. Thousands took to the streets of Saqez, capital of Iran’s Kurdistan province.

The regime dispatched hundreds of special anti-riot units to the region. Backed by helicopter gun-ships, security forces in Saqez fired tear gas into the crowd and began shooting in the air. Young people broke in groups and engaged in hit-and-run skirmishes with the police, building street barricades and burning tires. Chanting “long live freedom,” “death to Khamenei” and “down with the mullahs,” the demonstrators hurled rocks and attacked police stations, government offices and the Revolutionary Guards headquarters, inflicting heavy damage. Several protesters were wounded and at least 30 arrested. Security forces and intelligence agents raided homes in Sanandaj and arrested at least 400.

The MKO’s exiled leader Maryam Rajavi hailed the uprising and urged residents in other areas of Iran to rise in solidarity. “The day is not far when the Iranian nation’s uprising will uproot the religious theocracy under the banner of Islam and herald democracy and popular sovereignty in Iran,” she said.

The uprising was put down within a week. Iranian press reports in the wake of the violence said that authorities had acknowledged 11 dead in the Saqez violence. Iranian authorities said the unrest was not ethnically motivated, but Kurdish leaders disagree. Authorities also said PJAK guerrillas released four police officers they were holding as hostages. But guerilla violence continued.

Turkey’s Zaman Online reported Aug. 23 that dozens of soldiers and guerillas alike had been killed in fighting in Iran in recent days. Zaman charged the US was actually encouraging PKK incursions into Iran from its bases in Iraq, pointing to a supposed PKK statement released in June that said: “As much as the US increases the conflict process against Iran, Kurds will have a much more important position and place in this fight. The US cannot win its struggle against Iran without gaining the support of the Kurds.”

Zaman also cited a quote (not given verbatim) from PJAK leader Haji Ahmadi to the Mesopotamia News Agency (MNA), the press organ of his organization, “that the US operation in Iraq plays an important role in the conflicts in Iran.”


Syria: A Classic Case of “Blowback”

Syria as well is experiencing both Kurdish unrest and signs of PKK activity. This carries a special irony for the Damascus regime, as longtime Syrian strongman Hafez Assad had been a patron of the PKK in a strategy to weaken US ally Turkey. In recent years, the Syrian authorities have clamped down on the group as relations with Turkey have improved. It was outlawed in Syria in 1998, and its leaders expelled. Cooperation with Turkey increased after Hafez Assad died in 2000 and his son Bashar Assad assumed the reins of power. But the cynical strategy of sponsoring the PKK in Turkey while crushing Kurdish ambitions at home in Syria is now resulting in a “blowback” problem for the regime.

In mid-August, just as Iranian Kurdistan was exploding into rebellion, violent clashes between Kurds and police erupted in the north Syrian town of Ein al-Arab. Cars were burned, and stones hurled at police who responded by firing tear gas and making several arrests. Reports said the violence broke out after police halted a march in support of the PKK.

Earlier in the year, the killing of Muhammad Mashouk al-Khaznawi, a Syrian Kurdish leader, provided another occasion for local unrest.

A July account of the case on the website of the Kurdistan Bloggers Union referred to northern Syria as “West Kurdistan”: “A Kurdish Sunni Muslim cleric in Syria who was reported missing last month has died after being tortured… Sheikh Mohammed Maashuq al-Khaznawi had not been heard from since May 10 and was believed to have been detained by Syrian police. The cleric ‘was killed at the hands of Syrian authorities,’ a spokesman for the Kurdish Yakiti party said a statement received by AFP in Beirut. An official from the Kurdish Democratic Party in Syria, Nazir Mustapha, told AFP that doctors in Damascus reported ‘traces of torture’ on Khaznawi’s body. The sheikh was widely popular in Syria and Kurdistan, and was known for teaching that Islam and democracy are compatible. News of his disappearance led to massive demonstrations in Syrian Kurdistan last month. The Kurds in West-Kurdistan and Syria are fighting to have their language, culture and political rights recognised. More news will follow later. Currently the Kurds are getting his body from Damascus.”

A July 2 New York Times account took note of growing tensions in Syrian Kurdistan, and how the tactics the Assad regime has employed there mirror those of Saddam Hussein in their intent if not their brutality.

Tensions “reached new levels” in July after the body of al-Khaznawi was found halfway between Damascus and the Kurdish city of Qamishli, the Times reported. Protesters calling for an international investigation of the killing clashed with security forces, who beat women and fired at demonstrators, Kurdish politicians charged. One police officer was killed, several protesters wounded and dozens more arrested, and Kurdish businesses were looted, they said. Just after the violence, Syria’s governing Baath Party passed on calls to grant Kurds greater rights at its 10th Congress–but the meeting ended with no resolutions on the Kurdish question.

“There is a kind of anxiety and restlessness now,” the Times quoted Hassan Salih, secretary general of the Yekiti Kurdish party based in Qamishli. “We are disappointed with all the unfulfilled promises.”

Syria’s 1.5 million Kurds are the country’s largest ethnic minority, but many have been officially stateless since 1962, when a government census left out tens of thousands of Kurds. They and their children, now hundreds of thousands, were left without citizenship, denied the right to work government jobs or own property. They carry red identification cards labeled “foreigner.”

Syria’s Baath Party is using precisely the same strategy that has resulted in an explosive situation in Iraq’s Kirkuk, according to the Times account: “The government also resettled thousands of Arabs from other parts of the country into areas along the border to build a buffer with Kurdish areas in neighboring Iran, Iraq and Turkey, pitting Kurds against Arabs. A long-running drought has not helped, as many in the farming region, especially Arab sharecroppers, have seen their incomes and tolerance for one another plummet.”

A July 12 analysis of the Baath Party meeting from Lebanon’s Daily Star made clear the dilemma of the Syrian Kurds. The fact that they are disenfranchised by the Damascus regime makes them a convenient football for White House hawks. And their demands for basic political rights are all too likely to be used as a lever for ‘neoliberal’ reform: privatization, austerity and the rest. Or, if tensions finally explode in Syria’s corner of Kurdistan, for actual ‘regime change’ in Damascus. Wrote the Daily Star:

“The regime of President Bashar Assad knows that the Kurds, if they choose to collaborate with the policies of the United States, can seriously threaten the regime’s authority. Under Assad, Syria has seen the introduction of some economic reforms and a modest, though sporadic, loosening of political controls, even as genuine and broad liberalization has yet to materialize. While the Baath conference promised to resolve the issue of the stateless Kurds, estimated at 150,000-200,000 from a total Syrian Kurdish population of some 1.5 million, there remains a possibility that little real change will occur… Free from the grip of Saddam Hussein and thanks to years of self-rule and prosperity, Iraq’s Kurds have gained a new prominence. They became virtual kingmakers after the Iraqi elections in January… Meanwhile, Syrian Kurds continue to face decades-long restrictions, including on the use of their language… Syria had for some time sought to form an ‘Arab belt’ between its Kurds and those in Iraq and Turkey, mindful of the cross-border influence between the communities. However, this desire was considerably undermined by the influence of Kurds from Iraq, so the Syrian Kurds are today increasingly feeling encouraged to demand more rights… If unchecked, the developing situation regarding the Kurds has the potential to provoke a severe backlash. Will Bashar Assad’s regime be able to lower Kurdish expectations and dodge another bullet?”

In addition to the more than 150,000 officially stateless Syrian Kurds, another 75,000 or so are simply unregistered, and are known as maktoumeen, or “concealed,” having almost no civil rights. The article also noted rioting in Qamishli in March 2004 at a football match.

Radical Multiculturalism or Ethnic War?

Even as the organization expands into neighboring states, key to the PKK’s future is whether accommodations can be reached in the organization’s heartland of Eastern Anatolia.

The Economist, writing on Prime Minister Erdogan’s historic visit to Diyarbakir in its Aug. 18-25 issue, noted that he became the first Turkish leader ever to admit that Turkey had mishandled the Kurdish rebellion. Like all great nations, declared Erdogan, Turkey needed to face up to its past.

Erdogan’s visit to the largest city in the Kurdish region followed ground-breaking talks with a group of Turkish intellectuals, seen by some as mouthpieces for the outlawed PKK guerillas (“terrorist group,” said The Economist, accepting the US-EU official designation). In these talks, Erdogan pledged that, despite a renewed wave of PKK attacks, there would be no going back on his reforms. The Kurdish problem, he said, could not be solved through purely military means.

Of course, the opposition is crying treason. “This will inevitably lead to bargaining with the PKK,” fumed Deniz Baykal, leader of the Republican People’s Party. Nationalists within Erdogan’s own Justice and Development party have also responded angrily. The army has so far kept silent, even though some retired generals have called for re-imposing emergency rule in the Kurdish provinces.

Orhan Dogan, another Kurdish leader, fueled the nationalist backlash when he told a newspaper that Turkey would have to negotiate with the PKK and that the group’s imprisoned leader, Ocalan, would walk free one day.

Within hours of returning from Diyarbakir, Erdogan urged media supervisors to allow regional radio and TV stations to broadcast in Kurdish. But the Kurdish provinces remain impoverished, and hundreds of thousands remain displaced by the army’s scorched-earth campaigns against the PKK. The Turkish interior ministry revealed the same week as Erdogan’s Diyarbakir appearance that only 5,239 of a total 104,734 victims who had applied under a new law for compensation had been considered, and only 1,190 were to be paid anything. With the deadline for applications past, the program “is a complete fiasco,” declared Mesut Deger, an opposition Kurdish deputy, who is pressing for an extension.

The Economist warned that “more needs to be done if Turkey’s Kurds are not to be infected by calls for independence by Iraq’s powerful Kurds next door.” The magazine (breaking now with the State Department line) stated that “Mr Erdogan must find a way of giving an amnesty to 5,000 rebels, entrenched in the mountains of south-east Turkey and northern Iraq, that is acceptable to Turks and Kurds alike.”

On Aug. 27, days after Erdogan’s Diyarbakir speech, a clash erupted between Turkish security forces and PKK fighters in rural area of Besiri township of Batman province, leaving three PKK militants dead and another captured. Two days later, one man was killed and five officers were injured during clashes between Kurdish protesters and police in the city of Batman. The violence erupted after some 1,000 Kurds marched to demand the release of the bodies of six men accused of being guerillas killed in recent fighting.

Fighting in Eastern Anatolia this year has at times threatened to spill into Iraq. In mid-April, at least 20 PKK fighters were killed in an assualt by Turkish army troops backed up by US-made Cobra attack helicopters near the Iraq borde. Three Turkish soldiers and a village guardsman were also killed in the fighting in Siirt and Sirnak provinces. Turkish authorities said the guerillas infiltrated Turkish territory from Iraq. It was the largest battle between Turkish forces and the PKK since the five-year truce was called off the previous June.

On April 4, an AFP report on the Kurdish Media website stated that a congress of the guerilla group’s leaders, meeting in “the mountains of Kurdistan,” had officially agreed to change the name of the organization back to PKK after a period of calling themselves KADEK (Congress for Democracy and Freedom in Kurdistan) and KONGRA-GEL (Kurdistan People’s Congress) following the arrest of Ocalan in 1999. The earlier name changes coincided with a retreat from a separatist position. The name change back to PKK, following the expiring of the ceasefire, appears a tilt back in a hard-line direction. April 4 was chosen for the congress because it is the birthday of Ocalan, now serving a life sentence in a top-security Turkish prison.

Official Turkish response to the PKK resurgence points to lingering official intolerance, despite Ankara’s supposed new attitude. Prime Minister Erdogan, speaking in Oslo after the April gun-battle, said: “The PKK cannot speak on behalf of the Kurds, it cannot represent them. The Kurdish problem is imaginary… Turkish citizenship is our common denominator. This is our upper identity.”

The Kurdish problem is by no means imaginary, but it is part of a larger problem of ethnic politics and local autonomy in Eastern Anatolia. The region is home not only to Kurds and Turks, but to an abundance of other smaller groups, including Armenians, Assyrians, Laz, Yazidis and Alevi Sufis (who can be either Kurdish or Turkish, but have a distinct identity by virtue of their spiritual affiliation). Recently, the Zaza (known to the Turks as the Qizilbashi), formerly assumed by ethnographers to be a Kurdish sub-group, are asserting their separate identity and demanding an autonomous homeland in the region of Dersim, to be called Zazaistan.

Many of these smaller groups are equally suspicious of the Turkish state and the PKK, which they feel are both predicated on denying their existence in order to assert the supremacy of their own ethno-nationalist vision. A Kurdish-Armenian alliance against the Ottomans briefly existed in the early days of World War I. But it ended when the Ottoman state successfully played an Islamic card to pit the Kurds against the Christian Armenians, resulting in Kurdish collaboration with the Ottoman army’s massacres. Istanbul played the Kurds and Armenians off against each other–then crushed them both. Despite this shared experience of oppression, the alliance has never been effectively rebuilt.

The stakes in Eastern Anatolia are extremely high. It is one of the most ethnically diverse regions of the world, despite the official fiction that the population is entirely “Turkish.” It borders both the Caucasus and Iraq, as well as Iran, which the US openly seeks to destabilize–and where the CIA doubtless endeavors to exploit local ethnic grievances to make trouble for Tehran. Turkish ethno-nationalist hegemony in Eastern Anatolia is building a backlash–just as a backlash against official Sunni Arab ethno-nationalism has now brought Iraq to the brink of civil war (or perhaps over it). The vying claims of Eastern Anatolia and Greater Kurdistan alike–Turkish, Kurdish, Armenian‚ Iranian, Arab–could help tilt the balance towards a devastating war that would draw in the neighboring powers and potentially engulf both the Middle East and Caucasus. Or, if the various ethnicities of this region can work out some kind of decentralized pluralistic federalism that respects cultural rights and survival for all–and take the radical demand of extending this ethic in defiance of state borders–it could provide a model of autonomous co-existence for a dangerously polarizing, highly geo-strategic part of the world.
——

RESOURCES:

PKK ends ‘unilateral’ ceasefire, Journal of Turkish Weekly, Oct. 7
http://www.turkishweekly.net/news.php?id=20528

“Le Monde: CIA Contacts with PKK,” Zaman, Oct. 3
http://www.zaman.com/?bl=hotnews&alt=&trh=20051004&hn=24802

“Are Turkish Kurds ready for democracy?” Washington Post, Oct. 7
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002545196_turkey07.html

“EU enlargement chief meets with Orhan Pamuk,” AP, Oct. 9
http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2005/10/09/64761.html

“UN condemns Turkey’s cancellation of conference on massacre of Armenians
during Ottoman Empire,” AP, Sept. 23
http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2005/09/23/63565.html

“Iraq: Democracy, Civil War, or Chaos?” by Michael Rubin, The One Republic,
Oct. 30
http://www.theonerepublic.com/archives/Columns/MEF/20051010MEFRubinDemocracy.htm
l

Previous reports from our weblog:

Turkish government threats halt conference on Armenian genocide
/node/523

Turkish intolerance fuels PKK resurgence
/node/901

Terror in Turkey
/node/787

PKK expands presence in Iraq–and Iran?
/node/900

Uprisings rock western Iran
/node/896

More Kurdish unrest in Syria, Iran
/node/950

Kurdish leader assassinated in Syria
/node/706

Syria’s Kurds: pawns or actors?
/node/782

PKK ceasefire in Turkey, new attacks in Iran
/node/990

Kurds clash with Turkish police, one dead
/node/1007

PKK resurgence in Turkish Kurdistan
/node/404

Next: Free Zazaistan?
/node/1122

———————–

Special to WORLD WAR 4 REPORT, Nov. 1, 2005
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingEASTERN ANATOLIA: IRAQ’S NEXT DOMINO 

EASTERN ANATOLIA: IRAQ’S NEXT DOMINO

“Greater Kurdistan” Ambitions Could Spark Regional War

by Sarkis Pogossian

It is now the Sunni insurgency in central and western Iraq that is drawing blood and media attention in Iraq, but the situation in the northern region of Iraqi Kurdistan, at present the most peaceful part of the country, is waiting to explode—and holds far greater potential to internationalize the conflict. The Kurdish people, numbering some 20 million, were left off the map when the victorious allies carved new states out of the ruins of the Turkish Ottoman Empire after World War I. They are now divided mostly between Iraq and Turkey, with smaller populations in Iran and Syria. The emergence of a highly autonomous Kurdistan in northern Iraq has re-ignited ambitions for a “Greater Kurdistan” which would unite Kurdish lands across the borders of these four nation-states.

Jalal Talabani and Masoud Barzani, the two long-ruling rival strongmen of the Kurdish autonomous zone in northern Iraq, have arrived at a power-sharing deal at the behest of the US occupation. With the formation of an ostensibly independent Iraqi government earlier this year, Talabani became Iraq’s president while Barzani was elected president of Kurdistan Regional Government, the newly-unified northern autonomous zone. The Kurdish militia armies controlled by these two strongmen, the peshmerga, openly collaborated with US Special Forces units in the campaign against Saddam’s regime in 2003.

Yet these two apparent clients of US imperialism appear to have forged at least a de-facto alliance with the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), the Kurdish separatist guerilla organization which for over 20 years has been fighting for the liberation of Eastern Anatolia from the rule of Turkey. The PKK is officially recognized as a “terrorist organization” by the US State Department. The war which ensued after it took up arms in 1984, espousing a Maoist-influenced radical Kurdish nationalism, cost over 30,000 lives. The PKK was thought to be in decline since the arrest of its leader, Abdullah Ocalan (code name “Apo”), in 1999. But it now shows signs of a resurgence—and activity in Iran and Syria as well as Turkey and Iraq.

Turkey is one of the United States’ most strategic allies, a NATO member bordering both Iraq and the ex-Soviet Union. It was instrumental in policing and encircling both the Soviets and Saddam, and today protects two key pipelines which deliver the oil resources of the post-Soviet Caspian Basin and post-Saddam Iraq to global markets under Washington-led development initiatves: the Baku-Ceyhan and Kirkuk-Ceyhan lines, both terminating at the Turkish port of Ceyhan and crossing hundreds of miles of Turkish territory. This very territory is where the Turkish state is today repressing the cultural rights and national aspirations of the Kurds and other ethnic minorities, and where the declining Ottomans carried out the genocide of over 1 million Armenians in the World War I. It would be an irony of this region, Eastern Anatolia, proved the key to a wider internationalized war, as an unintended consequence of George Bush’s drive to forge a new order in the Middle East.

Turkish Hegemonism and the PKK Resurgence

One Oct. 6, the PKK announced an end to its “unilateral ceasefire” against the Turkish government. The one-month ceasefire had been extended until Oct. 3, the date Turkey started accession talks into the European Union.

“With the start of the negotiations the Kurdish problem is no longer just Turkey’s problem, it is now a basic problem of the EU,” the PKK statement said. “It is certain that the Kurdish people will use their legitimate right of active defense and democratic resistance to protect themselves and their national honor against the increasing operations of destruction by the Turkish state. The lack of any mention in the EU’s negotiation framework agreement of a solution to the Kurdish problem, or even a single word about the continuing low-intensity war, is an endorsement of the Turkish state’s policy of denial.”

Turkey’s pending entry into the EU could bring a long-simmering ethno-nationalist struggle of the Middle East to the European stage. The PKK is officially recognized as a “terrorist organization” by the EU as well as the US. In September, Germany banned the PKK’s paper, Ozgur Politika, and news agencies, which exiled supporters of the guerilla organization had long maintained there. However, the organization continues to maintain its Denmark-based radio station.

Despite the supposed prohibition on dealing with “official” terrorists, the CIA is apparently seeking contacts with the PKK. On Oct. 2, the French daily Le Monde reported that US Central Intelligence Agency officials had carried out talks with “former” PKK leader Nizamettin Tas to discuss the potential for disarmament of the organization. This certainly indicates awareness in Washington of the organization’s growing power, and the criticality of the Kurdish question for the entire region.

In a speech in the Eastern Anatolian city of Diyarbakir in August, Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said, “People are asking me what we are planning to do about the ‘Kurdish problem.'” His answer was “more democracy”—widely perceived as a significant overture for peace.

But local Kurds are increasingly skeptical. The Washington Post reported Oct. 7 that a newly-forming Kurdish political party, the Democratic Society Movement, “appears intent on associating itself with the PKK and its imprisoned founder, Abdullah Ocalan. The new party’s most prominent organizer, former legislator Leyla Zana, made headlines by publicly kissing the hand of Ocalan’s sister. Political professionals argue that, at the grass roots, Ocalan’s abiding potency as a symbol of resistance counts for more in Kurdish politics than the disdain he inspires even among many who wish the Kurds well.”

“There are a lot of people here who feel not only sympathy with him but blood—their brothers’, their sisters’, their sons’,” Mahmut Simsek, an aide to the mayor of Diyarbakir, told the Post. “When you talk about 35,000 dead, 30,000 of them were from the Kurdish side.”

After his 1999 capture in Nairobi by Turkish elite forces acting on a CIA tip, Ocalan was videotaped telling his captors: “I have a hunch I can be of service to the Turkish people and the Kurdish people. My mother is a Turk.” The insurgency ebbed as the PKK seemed to undergo a series of name-changes and factional splits. At the urging of the EU, Turkey began to rethink its rigid intolerance to Kurdish cultural rights. In 2002 its parliament legalized Kurdish-language education and radio broadcasts.

But human-rights groups say Turkey has a long way to go. Reports of torture continue, and have mounted since the PKK resumed armed activities this year. The guerrillas say they returned to arms out of frustration at receiving no acceptable offer of an amnesty, and at the slow and tentative pace of even limited restoration of cultural rights.

Debate on the history of the Kurdish conflict, as well as the Armenian genocide, remains harshly proscribed. On Oct. 9, EU enlargement commissioner Olli Rehn met with Turkish writer Orhan Pamuk at his home in Istanbul ahead of the writer’s December trial for “insulting the Turkish identity.” The 301st paragraph of the new Turkish penal code says “a person who insults Turkishness, the Republic or the Turkish parliament will be punished with imprisonment ranging from six months to three years.” A case was opened against Pamuk after he told a Swiss newspaper in February, “30,000 Kurds and 1 million Armenians were killed in these lands and nobody but me dares to talk about it.”

This same clause was also used earlier this year to convict an Armenian-Turkish journalist Hrant Dink, who received a six-month suspended sentence. The EU has pledged to closely watch these cases.

In September, the European Commission also condemned a Turkish court ruling that ordered the cancellation of an academic conference on the World War I-era massacres of Armenians. “We strongly deplore this new attempt to prevent Turkish society from freely discussing its history,” said EU representative Krisztina Nagy. Turkey’s Prime Minister Erdogan also condemned the court’s decision. But Turkey’s government has fought hard to counter an international Armenian campaign to have the wave of massacres recognized as genocide. Numerous countries around the world have passed resolutions officially recognizing the Armenian genocide—although not the United States.

If the atmosphere remains this intolerant in cosmopolitan Istanbul, it is certainly worse in remote Eastern Anatolia—and the PKK clearly exploits the inevitable backlash. A five-year truce declared by the PKK after Ocalan’s capture officially ended in June 2004, and eastern Turkey has since seen a series of bombings and skirmishes. The truce came in response to Turkish commitments to respect Kurdish language and cultural rights. But there are now signs that recent progress in this area is being reversed. While Kurdish is still not allowed to be taught in state schools (even in Kurdish-majority regions), under the 2002 reform it can be taught in private schools. But in August the directors of Turkey’s eight privately-owned Kurdish-language schools announced that they were closing them due to bureaucratic hurdles, and in response to popular Kurdish demands for the language to be part of the regular curriculum at state schools in the region.

“We took this decision because of…the request for education in the mother tongue at schools,” Suleyman Yilmaz, Kurdish school director in Diyarbakir, told the Kurdish new service Dozame. He said the price of private schools, which receive no government support, put them beyond the means of most students. He also said that while it takes two or three months for most private schools to obtain government permits, it can take up to 18 months for the government to grant permits for Kurdish-language schools. As recently as 1991 it was illegal to even speak Kurdish.

In another sign of growing polarization, Ridvan Kizgin, chairman of the Human Rights Association (IHD) in the province of Bingol, was fined 1,112 lira (US$800) by the Bingol Governorship for using “Cewlik,” the Kurdish name for the province, in an official document. Kizgin had written a letter to the Bingol governor and the Interior Ministry on June 29, discussing the issue of ongoing military operations in the area. He signed it on behalf of “The IHD Bingol (Cewlik) Office.” Kizgin was charged with breaking paragraph 31 of the “Associations Law,” which mandates that all documents from official associations must be written in Turkish. Kizgin is challenging the fine before the courts.

Signs of popular unrest are growing. In May 2003, when a 6.4 earthquake centered in Bingol left thousands homeless, over 125 dead and at least a thousand more missing, hundreds of local Kurds, angered by slow and inadequate aid efforts, took to the streets, hurling stones at army troops, who fired into the air to disperse crowds. In September 2003, over 10,000 Kurds, many chanting “Peace!” rallied in Diyarbakir, urging the Turkish government to make peace with the PKK.

Armed actions are being carried out with greater frequency in both in Eastern Anatolia and western Turkey. This July, a bomb tore apart a minibus in the popular Aegean beach resort town of Kusadasi, killing at least five, although it was uncertain if this was the work of the PKK or Islamic militants. Earlier that month, a bomb hidden in a soda can wounded 21 people, including three foreign tourists, in the resort town Cesme, north of Kusadasi. In April, a bomb in a cassette player killed a police officer and wounded four other people in Kusadasi. The Kurdistan Freedom Falcons Organization claimed responsibility for those bombings, warning that it would keep up attacks against tourist areas. The Falcons were said to be a hard-line breakaway faction of the PKK.

When the new one-month PKK ceasefire ended Oct. 6, violence immediately flared again. On Oct. 9, a landmine went off on a road between between Seydibey and Akcagul in Eastern Anatolia, injuring seven passengers of a minibus.

At least 200 Turkish soldiers have been reportedly killed in clashes with the PKK this year.

Northern Iraq: “Southern Kurdistan”?

The July 14 attack in Kusadasi came one day after Erdogan asserted the right to intervene in northern Iraqi, where an estimated 4,500 PKK fighters have taken refuge.

“There are certain things that international law allows. When necessary, one can carry out cross-border operations… This can be done when the conditions require… We hope that such conditions will not emerge,” Erdogan proclaimed.

Erdogan also renewed his criticism of the US for failing to attack PKK camps in Iraq. A rewrite of an AFP account of his speech on Kurdish Media, a website maintained by independent Kurdish activists in England, tellingly refers to northern Iraq as “Southern Kurdistan.” Notes the rewrite: “Recent calls to the U.S. by Turkey to target the PKK have been ignored by Washington which has its hands full in central Iraq with an insurgency. The US is also unlikely to endanger its strong relationship with Kurds of South Kurdistan by opening a new front against hardened PKK guerrillas in a region administered by the Kurdistan Regional Government.”

The PKK is apparently building a visible presence in northern Iraq. Turkish nationalist politicians have reacted angrily to the opening of a PKK office in Kirkuk, which is said to be flying the flag of the guerilla organization. Mehmet Agar of Turkey’s True Path Party (DYP) called nearly explicitly for unilateral Turkish military intervention in Iraq in comments this summer that invoked Kemal Ataturk, father of Turkish nationalism and founder of the modern Turkish state: “In a globalized world, with an expression inspired by the great Ataturk, the field of defense has now become the entire region. No sensible person can abandon the security of the country to the fine-tuning policies of his friends.”

The PKK has reacted to this bellicose rhetoric in kind. In a June statement, the organization threatened to turn northern Iraq into a “quagmire” for the Turkish army if it launches cross-border operations to rout guerrilla camps there. “We are prepared for a possible attack… We will make it fail and turn [northern Iraq] into a quagmire for the forces that will carry it out,” said the statement, published on the Internet site of the Germany-based MHA news agency, said to be close to the guerilla movement.

Iraqi Internal Minister Bayan Jabr, on a visit to Istanbul in July, insisted that any Turkish cross-border operations would have to receive prior approval of the Iraqi Parliament. Jabr told Turkey’s NTV: “We are ready for cooperation against the Kurdish Workers’ Party or any other terrorist organization. We need to help each other on the issue. However, there is a government and parliament elected in Iraq. [Turkey] is bound to the parliament’s decision.” Jabr also noted that Kurdish peshmerga (militia) have control over the Turkish border.

Iraq’s Kurdish autonomous zone emerged in after Operation Desert Storm in 1991, when the imposition of a “no-fly zone” in northern Iraq effectively ended Saddam Hussein’s ability to carry out counter-insurgency operations there. Kurdish leaders were naturally suspicious of US intentions—the White House had been openly “tilting” to Saddam when he carried out his brutal “Anfal” (plunder) offensive against the Kurds in 1988, which reached its horrific climax in the genocidal gas attack on the city of Halabja, that left 5,000 dead. But the victory over Saddam’s forces was followed by a 1994-1997 Kurdish civil war between the rival factions led by Barzani and Talabani. While Talabani’s Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) has generally assumed a more leftist posture than Barzani’s more “traditionalist” Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), the real differences are regional and ethnic. The PUK, with its capital at Sulaymaniya, is made up of speakers of the Surani dialect of Kurdish; the KDP, with its capital at Arbil, claims the loyalty of those who speak the Kurmanji dialect. The civil war was a bitter one, with Barzani even cutting a deal with Saddam at one point for a joint offensive with the Iraqi army against the PUK.

The new PUK-KDP peace and the consolidation of a unified Kurdistan Regional Government is openly seen as a step towards actual separatism. In January 2005, as Iraq’s first post-Saddam elections were held, the Kurds also held their own non-binding referendum on secession, which was approved overwhelmingly. It is only the dictates of the White House and the threat of Turkish intervention which restrain the Kurdish autonomous zone from announcing its independence. There are also open designs to annex territory to this autonomous zone.

The new Kurdish unity may presage escalated violence between Kurds and other groups in northern Iraq’s ethnic patchwork. Most pivotal are the Turkmen—who are closely related to the Turks, and whose interests Turkey claims to protect. Kirkuk, the center of northern Iraq’s oil industry, is now the center of this struggle.

Kirkuk, where the PKK has established an office, lies outside the Kurdish autonomous zone in northern Iraq, but the city’s Arab and Turkmen residents fear the Kurdish parties seek to annex it and establish it as their regional capital. Under Saddam Hussein, both Kurds and Turkmen were forced from Kirkuk, and their lands and homes redistributed to Arabs who were encouraged to settle there. Since Saddam’s fall, many Kurds and Turkmen have started to return and demand their properties back—sparking a tense three-way rivalry between the ethnic groups. In February 2004, when the Kirkuk offices of the Iraqi Turkmen Front were ransacked by a crowd of Kurds said to be led by PUK militants, the Turkmen Front demanded international peacekeepers be sent into the city. In December 2003, three were killed and dozens wounded when Kurdish gunmen—again said to be from the PUK—opened fire on a protest march of Arabs and Turkmen who chanted anti-Kurdish slogans. In August 2003, a clash between Shi’ite Turkmen and Sunni Kurds for control of a shrine at Tuz Khurmatu resulted in the shrine’s dome—recently rebuilt after having been destroyed by the Saddam regime—being destroyed anew by a rocket-propelled grenade. In subsequent days, US helicopters and armored vehicles broke up Kurd-Turkmen riots in Kirkuk, in which shooting broke out and a police station was torched.

Kirkuk had actually been taken by PUK peshmerga forces in April 2003 (presumably with the aid of US Special Forces). Kurdish Media reported that Turkmen militias in Kirkuk killed fifteen Kurds celebrating the downfall of the Saddam Husein regime April 11. Turkmen also reportedly looted Kurdish homes and shops after peshmerga forces withdrew from the city at US behest.

Many Kurds feel that protecting the Turkmen could become Turkey’s rationale for military intervention. Michael Rubin of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy wrote this October: “The Turkish government has bankrolled the Iraqi Turkmen Front… As Kurds, long displaced from Kirkuk migrated back to the city, the Turkish military, egged on by the Iraqi Turkmen Front, threatened violence. Many Kurds point to the July 2003 infiltration of a Turkish Special Forces team, allegedly on a mission to assassinate Kurdish politicians in Kirkuk, as a sign of malicious Turkish intentions.”

In April 2003, when US Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FLA), senior member of the House International Relations Committee and co-chair of the Caucus on US-Turkish Relations, met with leading politicians in Istanbul, MP Onur Oymen reportedly protested to him that the sign at the Iraqi border reads “Welcome to Kurdistan” rather than “Welcome to Iraq”—and demanded that US forces change it. Turkish officials also protest that Kurdish authorities in Iraq have issued their own passport stamps reading “Kurdistan.”

Iran: Kurdish Unrest and the Shadow of Mahabad

The PKK also seems to be expanding its operations into Iran, which has seen an outbreak of Kurdish unrest in recent months.

Iran’s Interior Ministry blamed the PKK for a July 26 ambush on an army patrol near the northwestern town of Oshnoviyeh, which left four soldiers dead. A civilian woman caught in the crossfire and one of the assailants were also killed, authorities said. “It was terrorists from the PKK who carried out the ambush,” a ministry spokesman said, adding that the Iranian soldiers who died were “martyred.” Local officials said the attack was carried out the Kurdistan Free Life Party (PJAK), said to be the Iranian arm of the PKK.

Tehran and Ankara are linked by an accord calling for cooperation to combat the PKK and the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq Organisation (MKO), an armed Iranian opposition group based in Iraq. But Turkey has accused Iran recently of not doing enough to secure the border.

Provincial deputy governor Abbas Khorshidi said the tensions could be linked to recent events in the nearby Kurdish city of Mahabad, where a young Kurdish man was shot and killed by police in July. Subsequent clashes between residents and police left one police officer dead and resulted in dozens of arrests. “If regional security is upset and there is disorder, we will act very strongly against troublemakers,” Khorshidi warned.

Mahabad has great symbolic significance for the Kurds. Located in northwest Iran’s West Azerbaijan province, it was established in 1946 as the capital of the first and only Kurdish state in history, with Soviet encouragement. However, the Kurdish Republic of Mahabad was put down later the same year. The Mahabad Republic’s military leader was Mustafa Barzani, father of Masoud Barzani, leader of Iraq’s KDP.

The July incident in Mahabad would indeed mean “disorder.” On Aug. 3, the city exploded into rebellion, and the uprising quickly spread to other cities in the region, including Sanandaj, Sardasht, Piranshahr, Marivan, Oshnavieh, Baneh and Divan Darreh. Thousands took to the streets of Saqez, capital of Iran’s Kurdistan province.

The regime dispatched hundreds of special anti-riot units to the region. Backed by helicopter gun-ships, security forces in Saqez fired tear gas into the crowd and began shooting in the air. Young people broke in groups and engaged in hit-and-run skirmishes with the police, building street barricades and burning tires. Chanting “long live freedom,” “death to Khamenei” and “down with the mullahs,” the demonstrators hurled rocks and attacked police stations, government offices and the Revolutionary Guards headquarters, inflicting heavy damage. Several protesters were wounded and at least 30 arrested. Security forces and intelligence agents raided homes in Sanandaj and arrested at least 400.

The MKO’s exiled leader Maryam Rajavi hailed the uprising and urged residents in other areas of Iran to rise in solidarity. “The day is not far when the Iranian nation’s uprising will uproot the religious theocracy under the banner of Islam and herald democracy and popular sovereignty in Iran,” she said.

The uprising was put down within a week. Iranian press reports in the wake of the violence said that authorities had acknowledged 11 dead in the Saqez violence. Iranian authorities said the unrest was not ethnically motivated, but Kurdish leaders disagree. Authorities also said PJAK guerrillas released four police officers they were holding as hostages. But guerilla violence continued.

Turkey’s Zaman Online reported Aug. 23 that dozens of soldiers and guerillas alike had been killed in fighting in Iran in recent days. Zaman charged the US was actually encouraging PKK incursions into Iran from its bases in Iraq, pointing to a supposed PKK statement released in June that said: “As much as the US increases the conflict process against Iran, Kurds will have a much more important position and place in this fight. The US cannot win its struggle against Iran without gaining the support of the Kurds.”

Zaman also cited a quote (not given verbatim) from PJAK leader Haji Ahmadi to the Mesopotamia News Agency (MNA), the press organ of his organization, “that the US operation in Iraq plays an important role in the conflicts in Iran.”

Syria: A Classic Case of “Blowback”

Syria as well is experiencing both Kurdish unrest and signs of PKK activity. This carries a special irony for the Damascus regime, as longtime Syrian strongman Hafez Assad had been a patron of the PKK in a strategy to weaken US ally Turkey. In recent years, the Syrian authorities have clamped down on the group as relations with Turkey have improved. It was outlawed in Syria in 1998, and its leaders expelled. Cooperation with Turkey increased after Hafez Assad died in 2000 and his son Bashar Assad assumed the reins of power. But the cynical strategy of sponsoring the PKK in Turkey while crushing Kurdish ambitions at home in Syria is now resulting in a “blowback” problem for the regime.

In mid-August, just as Iranian Kurdistan was exploding into rebellion, violent clashes between Kurds and police erupted in the north Syrian town of Ein al-Arab. Cars were burned, and stones hurled at police who responded by firing tear gas and making several arrests. Reports said the violence broke out after police halted a march in support of the PKK.

Earlier in the year, the killing of Muhammad Mashouk al-Khaznawi, a Syrian Kurdish leader, provided another occasion for local unrest.

A July account of the case on the website of the Kurdistan Bloggers Union referred to northern Syria as “West Kurdistan”:

“A Kurdish Sunni Muslim cleric in Syria who was reported missing last month has died after being tortured… Sheikh Mohammed Maashuq al-Khaznawi had not been heard from since May 10 and was believed to have been detained by Syrian police. The cleric ‘was killed at the hands of Syrian authorities,’ a spokesman for the Kurdish Yakiti party said a statement received by AFP in Beirut. An official from the Kurdish Democratic Party in Syria, Nazir Mustapha, told AFP that doctors in Damascus reported ‘traces of torture’ on Khaznawi’s body. The sheikh was widely popular in Syria and Kurdistan, and was known for teaching that Islam and democracy are compatible. News of his disappearance led to massive demonstrations in Syrian Kurdistan last month. The Kurds in West-Kurdistan and Syria are fighting to have their language, culture and political rights recognised. More news will follow later. Currently the Kurds are getting his body from Damascus.”

A July 2 New York Times account took note of growing tensions in Syrian Kurdistan, and how the tactics the Assad regime has employed there mirror those of Saddam Hussein in their intent if not their brutality.

Tensions “reached new levels” in July after the body of al-Khaznawi was found halfway between Damascus and the Kurdish city of Qamishli, the Times reported. Protesters calling for an international investigation of the killing clashed with security forces, who beat women and fired at demonstrators, Kurdish politicians charged. One police officer was killed, several protesters wounded and dozens more arrested, and Kurdish businesses were looted, they said. Just after the violence, Syria’s governing Baath Party passed on calls to grant Kurds greater rights at its 10th Congress—but the meeting ended with no resolutions on the Kurdish question.

“There is a kind of anxiety and restlessness now,” the Times quoted Hassan Salih, secretary general of the Yekiti Kurdish party based in Qamishli. “We are disappointed with all the unfulfilled promises.”

Syria’s 1.5 million Kurds are the country’s largest ethnic minority, but many have been officially stateless since 1962, when a government census left out tens of thousands of Kurds. They and their children, now hundreds of thousands, were left without citizenship, denied the right to work government jobs or own property. They carry red identification cards labeled “foreigner.”

Syria’s Baath Party is using precisely the same strategy that has resulted in an explosive situation in Iraq’s Kirkuk, according to the Times account: “The government also resettled thousands of Arabs from other parts of the country into areas along the border to build a buffer with Kurdish areas in neighboring Iran, Iraq and Turkey, pitting Kurds against Arabs. A long-running drought has not helped, as many in the farming region, especially Arab sharecroppers, have seen their incomes and tolerance for one another plummet.”

A July 12 analysis of the Baath Party meeting from Lebanon’s Daily Star made clear the dilemma of the Syrian Kurds. The fact that they are disenfranchised by the Damascus regime makes them a convenient football for White House hawks. And their demands for basic political rights are all too likely to be used as a lever for ‘neoliberal’ reform: privatization, austerity and the rest. Or, if tensions finally explode in Syria’s corner of Kurdistan, for actual ‘regime change’ in Damascus. Wrote the Daily Star:

“The regime of President Bashar Assad knows that the Kurds, if they choose to collaborate with the policies of the United States, can seriously threaten the regime’s authority. Under Assad, Syria has seen the introduction of some economic reforms and a modest, though sporadic, loosening of political controls, even as genuine and broad liberalization has yet to materialize. While the Baath conference promised to resolve the issue of the stateless Kurds, estimated at 150,000-200,000 from a total Syrian Kurdish population of some 1.5 million, there remains a possibility that little real change will occur… Free from the grip of Saddam Hussein and thanks to years of self-rule and prosperity, Iraq’s Kurds have gained a new prominence. They became virtual kingmakers after the Iraqi elections in January… Meanwhile, Syrian Kurds continue to face decades-long restrictions, including on the use of their language… Syria had for some time sought to form an ‘Arab belt’ between its Kurds and those in Iraq and Turkey, mindful of the cross-border influence between the communities. However, this desire was considerably undermined by the influence of Kurds from Iraq, so the Syrian Kurds are today increasingly feeling encouraged to demand more rights… If unchecked, the developing situation regarding the Kurds has the potential to provoke a severe backlash. Will Bashar Assad’s regime be able to lower Kurdish expectations and dodge another bullet?”

In addition to the more than 150,000 officially stateless Syrian Kurds, another 75,000 or so are simply unregistered, and are known as maktoumeen, or “concealed,” having almost no civil rights. The article also noted rioting in Qamishli in March 2004 at a football match.

Radical Multiculturalism or Ethnic War?

Even as the organization expands into neighboring states, key to the PKK’s future is whether accommodations can be reached in the organization’s heartland of Eastern Anatolia.

The Economist, writing on Prime Minister Erdogan’s historic visit to Diyarbakir in its Aug. 18-25 issue, noted that he became the first Turkish leader ever to admit that Turkey had mishandled the Kurdish rebellion. Like all great nations, declared Erdogan, Turkey needed to face up to its past.

Erdogan’s visit to the largest city in the Kurdish region followed ground-breaking talks with a group of Turkish intellectuals, seen by some as mouthpieces for the outlawed PKK guerillas (“terrorist group,” said The Economist, accepting the US-EU official designation). In these talks, Erdogan pledged that, despite a renewed wave of PKK attacks, there would be no going back on his reforms. The Kurdish problem, he said, could not be solved through purely military means.

Of course, the opposition is crying treason. “This will inevitably lead to bargaining with the PKK,” fumed Deniz Baykal, leader of the Republican People’s Party. Nationalists within Erdogan’s own Justice and Development party have also responded angrily. The army has so far kept silent, even though some retired generals have called for re-imposing emergency rule in the Kurdish provinces.

Orhan Dogan, another Kurdish leader, fueled the nationalist backlash when he told a newspaper that Turkey would have to negotiate with the PKK and that the group’s imprisoned leader, Ocalan, would walk free one day.

Within hours of returning from Diyarbakir, Erdogan urged media supervisors to allow regional radio and TV stations to broadcast in Kurdish. But the Kurdish provinces remain impoverished, and hundreds of thousands remain displaced by the army’s scorched-earth campaigns against the PKK. The Turkish interior ministry revealed the same week as Erdogan’s Diyarbakir appearance that only 5,239 of a total 104,734 victims who had applied under a new law for compensation had been considered, and only 1,190 were to be paid anything. With the deadline for applications past, the program “is a complete fiasco,” declared Mesut Deger, an opposition Kurdish deputy, who is pressing for an extension.

The Economist warned that “more needs to be done if Turkey’s Kurds are not to be infected by calls for independence by Iraq’s powerful Kurds next door.” The magazine (breaking now with the State Department line) stated that “Mr Erdogan must find a way of giving an amnesty to 5,000 rebels, entrenched in the mountains of south-east Turkey and northern Iraq, that is acceptable to Turks and Kurds alike.”

On Aug. 27, days after Erdogan’s Diyarbakir speech, a clash erupted between Turkish security forces and PKK fighters in rural area of Besiri township of Batman province, leaving three PKK militants dead and another captured. Two days later, one man was killed and five officers were injured during clashes between Kurdish protesters and police in the city of Batman. The violence erupted after some 1,000 Kurds marched to demand the release of the bodies of six men accused of being guerillas killed in recent fighting.

Fighting in Eastern Anatolia this year has at times threatened to spill into Iraq. In mid-April, at least 20 PKK fighters were killed in an assualt by Turkish army troops backed up by US-made Cobra attack helicopters near the Iraq borde. Three Turkish soldiers and a village guardsman were also killed in the fighting in Siirt and Sirnak provinces. Turkish authorities said the guerillas infiltrated Turkish territory from Iraq. It was the largest battle between Turkish forces and the PKK since the five-year truce was called off the previous June.

On April 4, an AFP report on the Kurdish Media website stated that a congress of the guerilla group’s leaders, meeting in “the mountains of Kurdistan,” had officially agreed to change the name of the organization back to PKK after a period of calling themselves KADEK (Congress for Democracy and Freedom in Kurdistan) and KONGRA-GEL (Kurdistan People’s Congress) following the arrest of Ocalan in 1999. The earlier name changes coincided with a retreat from a separatist position. The name change back to PKK, following the expiring of the ceasefire, appears a tilt back in a hard-line direction. April 4 was chosen for the congress because it is the birthday of Ocalan, now serving a life sentence in a top-security Turkish prison.

Official Turkish response to the PKK resurgence points to lingering official intolerance, despite Ankara’s supposed new attitude. Prime Minister Erdogan, speaking in Oslo after the April gun-battle, said: “The PKK cannot speak on behalf of the Kurds, it cannot represent them. The Kurdish problem is imaginary… Turkish citizenship is our common denominator. This is our upper identity.”

The Kurdish problem is by no means imaginary, but it is part of a larger problem of ethnic politics and local autonomy in Eastern Anatolia. The region is home not only to Kurds and Turks, but to an abundance of other smaller groups, including Armenians, Assyrians, Laz, Yazidis and Alevi Sufis (who can be either Kurdish or Turkish, but have a distinct identity by virtue of their spiritual affiliation). Recently, the Zaza (known to the Turks as the Qizilbashi), formerly assumed by ethnographers to be a Kurdish sub-group, are asserting their separate identity and demanding an autonomous homeland in the region of Dersim, to be called Zazaistan.

Many of these smaller groups are equally suspicious of the Turkish state and the PKK, which they feel are both predicated on denying their existence in order to assert the supremacy of their own ethno-nationalist vision. A Kurdish-Armenian alliance against the Ottomans briefly existed in the early days of World War I. But it ended when the Ottoman state successfully played an Islamic card to pit the Kurds against the Christian Armenians, resulting in Kurdish collaboration with the Ottoman army’s massacres. Istanbul played the Kurds and Armenians off against each other—then crushed them both. Despite this shared experience of oppression, the alliance has never been effectively rebuilt.

The stakes in Eastern Anatolia are extremely high. It is one of the most ethnically diverse regions of the world, despite the official fiction that the population is entirely “Turkish.” It borders both the Caucasus and Iraq, as well as Iran, which the US openly seeks to destabilize—and where the CIA doubtless endeavors to exploit local ethnic grievances to make trouble for Tehran. Turkish ethno-nationalist hegemony in Eastern Anatolia is building a backlash—just as a backlash against official Sunni Arab ethno-nationalism has now brought Iraq to the brink of civil war (or perhaps over it). The vying claims of Eastern Anatolia and Greater Kurdistan alike—Turkish, Kurdish, Armenian‚ Iranian, Arab—could help tilt the balance towards a devastating war that would draw in the neighboring powers and potentially engulf both the Middle East and Caucasus. Or, if the various ethnicities of this region can work out some kind of decentralized pluralistic federalism that respects cultural rights and survival for all—and take the radical demand of extending this ethic in defiance of state borders—it could provide a model of autonomous co-existence for a dangerously polarizing, highly geo-strategic part of the world.
——

RESOURCES:

PKK ends ‘unilateral’ ceasefire, Journal of Turkish Weekly, Oct. 7
http://www.turkishweekly.net/news.php?id=20528

“Le Monde: CIA Contacts with PKK,” Zaman, Oct. 3
http://www.zaman.com/?bl=hotnews&alt=&trh=20051004&hn=24802

“Are Turkish Kurds ready for democracy?” Washington Post, Oct. 7
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002545196_turkey07.html

“EU enlargement chief meets with Orhan Pamuk,” AP, Oct. 9
http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2005/10/09/64761.html

“UN condemns Turkey’s cancellation of conference on massacre of Armenians
during Ottoman Empire,” AP, Sept. 23
http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2005/09/23/63565.html

“Kurds dream of secession but acknowledge realities of Iraq,” Financial Times, Sept. 8, via Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO)
http://www.unpo.org/news_detail.php?arg=34&par=2945

“Iraq: Democracy, Civil War, or Chaos?” by Michael Rubin, The One Republic, Oct. 30 http://www.theonerepublic.com

Previous reports from our weblog:

Turkish government threats halt conference on Armenian genocide
/node/523

Turkish intolerance fuels PKK resurgence
/node/901

Terror in Turkey
/node/787

PKK expands presence in Iraq–and Iran?
/node/900

Uprisings rock western Iran
/node/896

More Kurdish unrest in Syria, Iran
/node/950

Kurdish leader assassinated in Syria
/node/706

Syria’s Kurds: pawns or actors?
/node/782

PKK ceasefire in Turkey, new attacks in Iran
/node/990

Kurds clash with Turkish police, one dead
/node/1007

PKK resurgence in Turkish Kurdistan
/node/404

Next: Free Zazaistan?
/node/1122

Updates on Kurdish self-determination struggle:

Kurdistan Referendum Movement
http://www.kurdistanreferendum.org/

———————–

Special to WORLD WAR 4 REPORT, Nov. 1, 2005
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingEASTERN ANATOLIA: IRAQ’S NEXT DOMINO 

ALGERIA: WILL REFERENDUM WIPE THE SLATE CLEAN?

by Rene Wadlow

On Sept. 29, 97% of those voting in the Algerian referendum on Peace and Reconciliation voted yes for peace and reconciliation. Was this a necessary act of popular catharsis after some 13 years of violence? Or was it a government-staged show to reinforce its power? Both are real possibilities. It is important to analyze the results carefully as violence-torn countries need to find techniques to write “The End” to cycles of violence and counter-violence and to begin life again with a clean slate. But does such renewal mean that those who have killed and tortured should be free from possible trials? Much of the killing in Algeria—estimates are of over 200,000—took place in rural towns and villages where people knew or thought they knew who was doing the killing. Is it possible to live an ordinary life now side by side with murderers?

Widespread violence in a society generally has deep roots. A good deal of the violence during the years of the government-Islamist conflict was also the result of family feuds, struggles for local power, conflicts over land, criminal killings for control of trade or the drug traffic, lightly disguised as ideological conflict. It would be useful to try to analyze the deep cultural and generational tensions within Algerian society so as to understand better the ferocity of the killings and the pattern of revenge.

As a framework, we can look at recent Algerian history as an unfinished drama divided into three acts. The first act begins in 1962 with independence from France, after a six-year struggle, and the flight of over a million French settlers from Algeria. This first act was dominated by the army formed during the war for independence. The army ruled through a single party—the National Liberation Front (FLN). Houari Boumedienne was in power from 1965 to 1978; Chadli Bendjedid from 1979 to 1992.

The credibility of the army as ruler was slowly eroded by its economic mismanagement, its open corruption, its favoritism for a small circle of officers who divided the economic benefits among themselves. The military controlled the press and other media, and there was no possibility for a structured opposition. It was only in 1988 that country-wide riots broke out over the rise in the price of bread—leaving some 500 dead. The degree of popular discontent was made obvious even to the least observant of the generals. Thus, at the end of Act I, the army decided to hold multi-party elections, even helping to create parties so as to split any opposition into such small groups that none could rule. The two most popular parties would face off in a second round—a strategy thought to preserve the ruling party in power.

Act II begins in 1991 with the first round of elections. Suddenly, the ruling strata became aware of unknown local leaders who had been working in the shadows of local mosques, stores and schools. They came suddenly to the fore chanting “God is Great” and calling themselves the “Islamic Salvation Front” (FIS.) They had long beards, were uneducated in a modern sense and had no standing in the army, nor in the government-run economic firms. The “invisible” had arrived on the scene. After a moment of surprise—as no one in the military had foreseen such a result—the military recognized that elections were a bad idea. If there were a second round, the FIS would most likely have the majority of the parliament, and God only knew what they would do. Therefore the military annulled the elections. There was no second round, and those elected because they had more than 50% in the first round could not hold office. In fact, there would be no parliament. It was not until 1995 that there began a slow introduction of voting for president, parliament and local assemblies—but under close government supervision and without the participation of the FIS.

Following the military’s blocking of the election process, the Islamist groups began a campaign of terror, especially in the countryside where they had sympathizers and where guerrillas could hide in sparsely populated mountainous areas. The government responded to terror with terror, widespread arrests and “disappearances.” Moderates, liberals and the indifferent were caught between the two fires. The national economy, except for oil and gas exports, ground to a halt. In a country where 75% of the population is under 30 years and many have difficulties finding work or adequate housing, the number of discontented grew.

Both the military and the Islamic groups were divided within themselves; the diverse factions in the military had difficulty articulating a coherent policy, and the leadership never had a broad base. Likewise, the Islamic groups were divided among themselves into small, fairly autonomous groups loyal to local commanders. There were some 50 to 60 Islamic extremist groups. Although the Islamist groups drew their strength from socio-economic discontent, they had no coherent socio-economic policy to present except a vague call for Islamic justice and equality. The Islamic guerrillas were reinforced by a floating population of Islamic fighters coming from Afghanistan, Sudan and elsewhere who had no stake in finding a broadly acceptable compromise to tensions in Algeria.

Act III began with the reigning military unable to mobilize public opinion in its favor and trying to bring in as leaders “old-new” men who were not associated with the current policies. The first was Mohamed Boudiaf, a hero of the 1954-1962 war of independence who had been living in exile since 1964. Shortly after his return as president of a governing council, he was assassinated in a public meeting. Who ordered his death has never been clear. But the star of Act III and current president is Abdelaziz Bouteflika, who had been waiting in the wings for nearly two decades. In the mid-1970s, he had been the minister of foreign affairs and a leader in the United Nations for the creation of a New International Economic Order (NIEO).

He was often the spokesperson for the “Group of 77,” as the developing countries were called in UN economic debates. He was a master at the “creative compromise,” or in papering over differences with a good slogan. His first major action as president was the “concorde civile”—the civil pact—which allowed the Islamists who had taken up arms and were living in mountainous areas in the north of the country to reintegrate their villages and cities. Some 5,500 men came down from the hills in exchange for the ability to exercise a growing civil power for Islamist themes, basing themselves on the old slogan “Algeria is my country; Arabic is my language; Islam is my religion.” It is estimated that about 1,000 men refused the civil pact and have made their way to the sparsely populated south of Algeria—the desert frontiers with Niger and Mali, where they are waiting and preaching. The overall level of violence has dropped dramatically, but political violence has not disappeared. There are still revenge killings as well as murders attributed to Islamists.

The Peace and Reconciliation referendum may be the sign of a new departure, of new economic and social policies that benefit the young and the poor. All societies need rituals which bind them together in a common understanding. The political, economic and social trends in Algeria merit close watching.

——

Rene Wadlow is editor of the online journal of world politics Transnational Perspectives (www.transnational-perspectives.org) and an NGO representative to the UN at Geneva. Formerly, he was professor and director of research of the Graduate Institute of Development Studies, University of Geneva

This story originally appeared Oct. 4 in Toward Freedom http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/617/1/

———————–

Reprinted by WORLD WAR 4 REPORT, Nov. 1, 2005
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingALGERIA: WILL REFERENDUM WIPE THE SLATE CLEAN? 

ALGERIA’S AMNESTY AND THE KABYLIA QUESTION

Berber Boycott in Restive Region Signals Continued Struggle

by Zighen Aym

After more 200,000 people dead, 10,000 missing and over 100,000 displaced, the North African country of Algeria held a referendum vote on a reconciliation peace plan on Sept. 29, 2005. The plan—officially dubbed the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation—was proposed by President Abdelaziz Bouteflika, a political oligarch from the country’s first post-independence government. It not only grants amnesty to thousands Islamic militants but also exonerates the security forces of any of human rights abuses committed during the last fifteen years.

Although Algerian government official reports indicated that an overwhelming 97% of the voters approved the plan, many independent news sources failed to back up these numbers. Instead, they reported the trickling of voters to the polling places, contradicting the 80% participation claimed by the Interior Minister, Nourredine Zerhouni, a former ambassador to the USA.

But there is a cultural and regional dimension to the question which has generally been overlooked in media accounts—that of the Berbers, who make up some 30% of Algeria’s population. The Berbers, known to be the first inhabitants of North Africa, are ethnically and linguistically distinct from the Arab majority, and have been carrying out an intermittent civil struggle for the past generation for official recognition of their cultural rights. Their heartland in Algeria is Kabylia, a mountainous region located about 60 miles west of the capital. Its main cities are Tizi-Ouzou and Bejaia, on the Mediterranean coast. The inhabitants call themselves Kabyls, and their identity has been perceived as a threat by both sides in the civil war that tore Algeria apart in the 1990s: the military regime and the Islamist guerillas alike.

Hocine Ait-Ahmed, the leader of the Front of the Socialist Forces (FFS), a Berber-based opposition party, himself a veteran revolutionary leader from the war of independence from France, denounced the vote as a “Totalitarian Tusnami,” and criticized France for claiming the vote was democratic.

Said Saadi, the leader of the other Berber-based political party, the Rally for Democracy and Culture (RCD) called the vote a farce from the beginning to the end. He charged that the vote results were multiplied by four and that electoral fraud has been virtually continuous in Algeria since independence in 1962. He also charged that in Kabylia people from other regions were bussed in to local schools where the voting was taking place to inflate the poll return numbers from.

In total three parties—the FFS, RCD, and Movement for Society and Democracy (MSD)—called for the boycott of the referendum. They accused the president of seeking to consolidate a new dictatorship, and a future plebiscite that will allow him to modify the constitution and remain in power for a third time after 2009. As a result of the boycott, the abstentionism rate was near 90% in Kabylia. Participation levels as low as 7% in Bejaia and 9% in Tizi-Ouzou were reported in the French newspaper Liberation.

In France, where more 700,000 Algerians are eligible to vote, Khaled Sid Mohand of Free Speech Radio News reported no rush to cast ballots. He interviewed an Algerian resident who provided an explanation for the vote: “To forgive the Power in general.” The Power—le Pouvoir—is popular shorthand for the ruling political elite in Algiers, generally ensconced in the military.

The question also remains of whether the vote for the charter will protect Algeria’s rulers and generals from being judged by International Tribunal at The Hague in the years to come.

Several independent newspapers in Algeria called for public debate on the matter. In contrast, government-owned newspapers, TV stations and airwaves were in full campaign swing for the Yes vote. And so was the president’s political alliance, made up of the long-ruling National Liberation Front (FLN), the National Rally for Democracy (RND, an offshoot of the FLN which won a parliamentary majority in 1997, three months after its creation), and the Society of Peace Movement (MSP), a pro-government Islamist party.

Opposition party members and human rights groups denounced the restraints on public debate of the pending charter. The National Association of the Families of the Disappeared was not allowed to campaign against the charter in Algeria and was therefore forced to do so in France. The French paper Liberation reported that a 75 year-old man, Mouloud Arab, the father of one of the disappeared, was arrested and accused of “distributing illegal tracts” for hanging out a brochure that was critical of the charter.

Since the vote, the Algerian government has continued its intimidation and attempts to silence the families of the disappeared, who have been protesting to demand accountability since 1998. The Oran office of SOS Disparus, another advocacy group for the families of the “disappeared,” was reportedly searched Sept. 17 by three police officers who did not show a search warrant. The organization’s leader Fatima Nekrouf has been receiving threatening phone calls warning her to leave Algeria.

Confusing Voters

The vote comes six years after the Project for Civil Concord, also reported to have been approved by 98% of the voters, which gave partial amnesty to the members of armed Islamic groups. This 2005 charter seals it the amnesty definitively. In addition, under the new charter any person or group attempting to bring charges for crimes committed by either fundamentalists groups or the security forces can henceforth be accused of “threatening peace and national security.” The penalties for this crime are to be determined by legislation.

When interviewed by reporters, citizens seem to have misunderstood what they were voting for; many apparently believed they were being asked simply whether they were for or against peace. The details of the charter were generally not addressed in the public debate permitted by the government.

The charter seems to close a dark chapter of Algeria’s post-independence history. But it also asks the still-grieving families to forgive the murders of their family members, the rapes of their daughters and mothers, andthe destruction of their lives. In contrast to the situation in post-apartheid South Africa, the perpetrators have not come forward to ask for forgiveness; they remain unknown and will remain unknown. They are effectively vindicated by being granted immunity.

Critics ask what would prevent them from repeating the same actions in the future? To forgive, it is necessary to know whom you are forgiving. The referendum sought to sweep under the rug the barbaric atrocities committed against Algerian civilians over the past 15 years. Not returning bodies of the disappeared to their families does not bring their grief to an end. It just prolongs it.

Kabylia and its Challenges

Since the “Berber Spring” of 1980, the year the Amazigh (Berber) culture became a popular issue in Kabylia, several obstacles to open political life in the region have been removed. Long gone are the days when the gendarmerie—the paramiltary rural police—could enter a high school and look for Berber inscriptions inside students’ notebooks as they did in 1976 at the Technical High School of Dellys, a coastal city north of Tizi-Ouzou. Several of my follow students were arrested that day. One of them we never saw again.

Long gone are the days when people were arrested for owning Berber-language books, which were only printed at a Berber Academy in Paris. This happened to my neighbor, Ferhat S., in my village in Kabylia. He jumped from the moving military jeep, and got away. He hid for a week in a nearby orchard. His grand-father, a village elder, contacted the gendarmes and promised that his grandson would stop reading or writing in the Berber language. When Ferhat showed up a few days later, his face and arms were covered with wounds and scratches, probably by his fall from the moving jeep onto the gravel road.

The Movement for Berber Culture (MCB), which started out as an underground movement in the early 1970s, was brought into the open with the events of 1980—which began in April with widespread protests after the government prevented Mouloud Mammeri, a renowned Algerian anthropologist and writer, from travelling to Kabylia to deliver a lecture on ancient Amazigh poetry at Tizi Ouzou University. He was stopped at a roadblock and sent back to Algiers.

The political opening in Algeria in the early 1990s saw the creation of the RCD among other opposition parties. But internal divisions weakened the movement for cultural rights in Kabylia. Two RCD leaders affiliated with the Berber Cultural Movement (MCB), Ferhat M’henni and Said Saadi, proclaimed the RCD to be the sole representative of the Berber demands. This was contested by Hocine Ait Ahmed’s Front of Socialist Forces (FFS), Algeria’s oldest opposition party, which broke with the regime shortly after independence. The MCB split into two groups in 1992. The RCD sympathizers in the MCB formed a faction called the MCB-National Coordination. Those politically close to the FFS, formed the MCB-National Commissions. Four years later, Ferhat M’henni left the RCD and created his own MCB faction known as the MCB-National Rally.

Since then, Kabylia has endured series of a year-long of school boycott in 1994, in protest of the government’s refusal to recognize the Berber language, Tamazight, as one of Algeria’s official languages. In 1998 came the assassination of Lounes Matoub, the legendary Berber folksinger who had become a symbol of the cultural struggle—nobody was brought to justice for the slaying, and it remains uncertain if it was carried out by government agents or Islamist guerillas, who had kidnapped him four years earlier. Finally, April 2001 saw a sequel of the events of Berber Spring, with a wave of protests following the death of a Berber youth at the hands of the police in Tizi-Ouzou. Again, the protests were harshly put down. This time, the death toll was more than 100 dead and over 3,000 injured.

These events saw the birth of a popular movement called the Arouch—the plural of Arch, a Berber word referring to a traditional Kabyle form of village-based democratic assemblies. The revitalized movement also saw the drafting of the 15-demand El Kseur Platform. These demands included the full withdrawal of the gendarmerie from Kabylia, compensation to the victims for the behavior of the authorities during the protest marches, awarding the status of “martyr” to the victims, clarification about the crimes committed by the security forces during these events, the drawing up of a regional program for the economic and social development of Kabylia, and official recognition of the Tamazight language.

Under international pressure for the killing of unarmed demonstrators, the government requested an investigation by Mohand Issad, an Algerian Berber who is a respected expert in international law. When he handed in his report, Professor Issad found that the security forces’ version of the deaths were “not satisfactory,” and blamed the gendarmerie units for their use of excessive force against the peaceful demonstrations. No charges were brought against any member of the security forces; instead the government proposed financial indemnities to the families of victims and detainees.

Economic Difficulties and Political Games

The increase of poverty in Kabylia adds to discontent over the Algerian government’s continued refusal to deal with the Berber cultural and language demands. As a result, Kabylia seems set to remain a permanent power-keg that can be easily lit by security agents—serving the political games played the nomenclature in power in Algiers. Unfortunately, the RCD, the FFS, and the recently-created Movement for the Autonomy of Kabylia, headed by Ferhat M’henni, instead of uniting forces, seem to fall into that game.

In the past, when the FFS would participate in legislative, local or presidential elections, the RCD would boycott. And when the RCD would participate, the FFS would boycott—as if they were getting asynchronous orders from the higher-ups in the le Pouvoir in Algiers.

President Boutelfika made Tamazight a “national” language in 2002, allowing its use in media and broadcasting, but refuses to cede to demands that it become an “official” langauge, equal with Arabic, allowing its use in public education. The fifteen demands have yet to be fulfilled. The economic situation in Kabylia has deteriorated, and with the lack of employment, many young Kabyls continue to seek opportunities outside of their native region. France, Canada, and the USA became their dream destination. In France, the number of illegal young Kabyls has been estimated at 100,000. Many perceive that Kabylia is being purposely deconstructed, and its strong community ties torn by this surge in emigration.

During a visit to Algeria in the summer of 2002, I was impressed by a modest youth center that had opened a year earlier in my hometown. I visited the center the next day and found about ten children in a classroom attending a Tamazight summer class. On the second floor, I saw a rehearsal of a theater play in Tamazight. The next day, the chorus group improvised a performance and sang several songs about exile that brought tears to my eyes. When I returned two years later, the building was still there—but the center had closed. Instead, I learned that several wine and beer places had opened, and alcohol was widely available for consumption. The antagonism between the FFS and RCD had entered village life, pitting fellow villagers against each other.

Now, poverty, alcohol, and emigration all add to Kabylia’s troubles. Since the official return to democracy in 1995 after three years of direct military rule, the Algerian government has held 11 elections and plebiscites–but the same political elite centered around the military has held power for the last 40 years. The new charter reinforces this entrenched system rather than breaking it up. Despite the government’s claims, it represents progress neither for Kabylia’s special dilemmas or Algerian democracy generally.

RESOURCES:

“North African Berbers and Kabylia’s Berber Citizens’ Movement,” by Mohand
Salah Tahi, Tamazgha.fr, June 2001
http://www.tamazgha.fr/article.php3?id_article=225,

“‘The Rebel is Dead. Long Live the Martyr!’: Kabyle Mobilization and the
Assassination of Lounès Matoub,” by Paul A. Silverstein, Middle East
Report, Fall 1998
http://www.merip.org/mer/mer208/silver.htm

“Armed Violence and Poverty in Kabylia,” by Meredith Turshen, Centre for
International Cooperation and Security, November 2004
http://info.brad.ac.uk/acad/cics/publications/avpi/AVPI_Algeria.pdf

Algeria Watch on threats against SOS Disparus
http://www.algeria-watch.de/fr/mrv/mrvrepr/membres_sos_disparus.htm

Related story, this issue:

“Algeria: Will Referendum Wipe the Slate Clean?” by Rene Wadlow
/node/1236

From our weblog:

Al-Qaeda announces Algeria franchise
/node/520

See also our review of Zighen Aym’s book, Still Moments: A Story About Faded Dreams & Forbidden Pictures
/node/753

———————–

Special to WORLD WAR 4 REPORT, Nov. 1, 2005
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingALGERIA’S AMNESTY AND THE KABYLIA QUESTION 

FILIBERTO OJEDA RIOS: TARGETED ASSASSINATION?

U.S. State Terrorism in Puerto Rico

by Yeidy Rosa

While his annually recorded speech was being broadcast to radios throughout the island commemorating the 137th anniversary of Puerto Rico’s September 23 Grito de Lares revolt against Spanish colonial rule, Filiberto Ojeda Rios, founder and leader of the revolutionary nationalist EjĂŠrcito Popular Boricua (Boricua Popular Army), and a fugitive for the past 15 years, lay bleeding from a bullet wound to his shoulder that went through the middle of his back, piercing his lung. The shot was fired by a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) sharpshooter from a helicopter circling above. It would be 24 hours before medical professionals and local authorities would be granted access to the scene. Once granted, the 72-year-old would be found lifeless, lying face-down and having slowly bled to death. The killing has drawn criticism even from those who advocate statehood for the island. Calls for an independent investigation of the FBI operation have come from human rights organizations such as Amnesty International, members of the United States Congress, the archbishop of San Juan, and the government of Puerto Rico itself.

September 23, 2005

It has not been officially reported how long Don Luis the rose gardener, as his neighbors in the community of Plan Bonito knew him, had been living clandestinely in the modest farmhouse where the raid took place, in the municipality of Hormigueros. It is known, however, that reports locating him in the southwest Puerto Rican town go back as far as early 2004, when FBI agents met with a former US Navy intelligence officer. The former officer informed the agents that Ojeda Rios was living in Hormigueros and that he often ate at the local restaurant Conejo Blanco, as reported by Juan Gonzalez of the New York Daily News on Oct. 6. The informant went on to state: “All they had to do was set up surveillance at the restaurant, and they could have picked him up. They could easily have taken him alive.”

Instead, a reported 300 FBI agents—at least 20 of whom had been in Hormigueros since Sept. 9 and had staked the farmhouse Ojeda Rios shared with his wife, Elma Beatriz Rosado Barbosa, since Sept. 20—chose to make the arrest. The warrant against Ojeda Rios was for a 1990 bond default while awaiting trial for charges related to the 1983 robbery of $7.2 million from a Wells Fargo depot in Hartford, Connecticut. They chose to make the arrest on the most politically-charged national holiday, not only for independentistas, but Puerto Rican civil society across the political spectrum.

“It is not a coincidence,” stated Hector Pesquera, president of the pro-independence Movimiento Hostosiano, speaking to the Associated Press Sept. 25. “They chose the moment, the date and the political circumstances.” Eduardo Bhatia, executive director of the Puerto Rican Federal Affairs Administration office in Washington D.C. told the New York Times on Sept. 29: “It’s the one day where, regardless of your affiliation, everyone respects the independence movement.”

It was reported in the Puerto Rican daily El Vocero on Sept. 24 that the FBI Hostage Rescue Team and Evidence Recovery Team carrying out the operation were from Atlanta and Florida. Neighbors also report having seen two helicopters. In a press conference, resident Elma Beatriz Rosado Barbosa charged that the FBI shot first, stating in Spanish: “Friday 23 of September, at three in the afternoon, our house was surrounded. Armed men penetrated the property and took by assault our home, hitting it in a brutal and terrible way, shooting with powerful firearms the front wall of the residence.”

Though statements to the AP on Sept. 26 by FBI director Robert S. Mueller, III do not specify who shot first—saying only that an “exchange of gunfire” took place—Luis Fraticelli, FBI special agent in charge for Puerto Rico, told a press conference Sept. 24: “He opened the front door of his house and opened fire on the agents. We went to arrest him, but the gunfire started and we had to defend ourselves.” Fraticelli and Rosado Barbosa do agree, however, that Ojeda Rios had earlier offered to negotiate, stating that he would turn himself in to JesĂşs DĂĄvila, the Puerto Rico correspondent for the New York daily El Diario/La Prensa, whom Ojeda Rios trusted as a mediator and witness. Fraticelli stated in the aforementioned press conference that the negotiations fell apart because the FBI believed the reporter would be taken hostage by Ojeda Rios. An official FBI spokesperson also told the AP on Sept. 26 that Ojeda Rios did want to negotiate.

According to Rosado Barbosa, Ojeda Rios yelled to the federal agents that she was coming out of the house. Though she voluntarily exited the home, she has stated that federal agents violently pinned her to the ground and apprehended her when she refused to kneel. Before being blindfolded by the federal agents, she caught sight of her dog shot dead outside the home. She was detained and released from federal custody unharmed on Sept. 24, and given no information as to the condition of Ojeda Rios. In fact, it would be over 24 hours before the FBI would publicly confirm any information regarding the operation. Addittionally, perimeters were established around the home, including airspace, where residents of Plan Bonito could not leave or enter the community. Local news crews were threatened with deadly force if they approached the scene via helicopters. It was not until Sept. 24 that local authorities were allowed inside the residence, where Ojeda Rios lay face down, wearing a bulletproof vest and armed with a pistol.

In an interview with Democracy Now! on Sept. 24, political analyst and radio host Juan Manuel Garcia Passalacqua charged that the number of spent cartridges found at the scene show that Ojeda Rios shot 10 times while the FBI fired 100 times. Local authorities placed these numbers at 18 and 110, as reported by the Washington Post on Sept. 29. One FBI agent was wounded and airlifted to a hospital. Yet Ojeda Rios received no medical attention. The coroner certified that Ojeda Rios had bled to death from a wound that was not in itself lethal, with Newsday reporting on Oct. 6 that he might have survived had he received medical attention. The FBI has stated that they did not enter the residence for 24 hours—or did they allow medical personnel or local authorities to—while they waited for an explosives expert to fly in from Virginia. Puerto Rico’s Secretary of Justice Roberto Sanchez Ramos rhetorically asked the Washington Post Sept. 29: “How is it that three days after the steak-out, they lack the personnel and equipment to finish the raid?”

Neither the governor of Puerto Rico, AnĂ­bal Acevedo VilĂĄ, nor the island’s chief of police, Pedro Toledo, had been informed by the FBI of the operation.

Filiberto Ojeda Rios

In his Grito de Lares speech this year, Ojeda Rios called for unity among pro-independence groups, asking them to put forward three main issues: to demand that the United States stop military testing and controlling access to El Yunque rainforest; that Puerto Rico’s water supply not be privatized to American or multinational companies, and, thirdly, support for the anti-military and the counter-recruitment movements among Puerto Rican youth. As founder and leader of the revolutionary nationalist EjĂŠrcito Popular Boricua, commonly known as the Macheteros (machete-wielders), Ojeda Rios often issued statements, giving press interviews and appearing with some regularity on Puerto Rican television. He did this while living clandestinely for 15 years after cutting off an electronic monitoring device while awaiting trial for robbery. He left the monitoring device at the door of the offices of Claridad, a Puerto Rican pro-independence newspaper, on Sept. 23, day of the Grito de Lares, 1990.

Originally from the community of Rio Blanco in the agricultural and fishing town of Naguabo, on the eastern coast of Puerto Rico, Ojeda Rios, like many of his generation, had a childhood divided between the island and New York City. As he wrote in the 1988 book Can’t Jail the Spirit: Political Prisoners in the U.S.: “My grandparents, on both my mother’s and father’s sides, were farmers. Their land and agricultural properties were lost and businesses ruined when the established system of production changed hands and the North American sugar monopolies took over the Puerto Rican economic structure. These were years in which many thousands of macheteros (sugar cane cutters) were enslaved by North American absentee companies.”

In this period he “was confronted, for the first time in my life, with all the elements of racism, social discrimination and social oppression that characterized the life of Puerto Rican migrants and which prevail to this day.” As a young adult in New York, Ojeda Rios was a musician and a factory worker. Of this time he states: “It was this contact with brother Puerto Ricans in the factories which finally helped me understand the true nature of exploitation, racism and colonialism. I understood what life in the ghettoes meant; the reasons for being denied decent education, health, and housing services and equal work opportunities. In sum, I was able to establish the connection between workers’ exploitation and the predominating economic system… This understanding led me to oppose the forced military recruiting of Puerto Ricans to be utilized by the United States as cannon fodder in their wars of aggression.”

In 1959, Ojeda Rios’ politics regarding Puerto Rico’s colonial relationship to the United States were formalized when he became a member of the Movimiento Libertador de Puerto Rico. In 1961 he moved his family to Cuba, where he studied political science at the University of Havana and joined the Puerto Rican Movimiento Pro-Independencia (MPI). By 1965, he was the sub-chief of the Permanent Mission of the Movement Pro-Independencia in Cuba. In 1969, Ojeda Rios returned to Puerto Rico. In 1970, he was arrested, accused of being an organizer of the Movimiento Independentista Revolucionario en Armas (Armed Revolutionary Independence Movement or MIRA), an underground organization.

MIRA soon disbanded, as secret files, known as carpetas, a continuation of files kept on “subversives” by the FBI since the 1950s, were opened on all citizens involved in the independence movement, labor unions, community organizing, or any socio-political activity that ran counter the commonwealth status. These files, organized by the federal police and the Estado Libre Associado (commonwealth) administration, were used to blacklist and persecute, preventing independentistas like Ojeda Rios from assuming open roles in the movement. In March 2000, then-director of the FBI, Louis J. Freeh, publicly stated in testimony to New York Rep. JosĂŠ Serrano that the FBI participated in the political monitoring of up to 135,000 individuals in Puerto Rico through the 1970s. Together with ex-members of MIRA, Ojeda Rios became a key organizer within the Fuerzas Armadas de Liberacion Nacional (Armed Forces of National Liberation), or FALN, based in New York.

Los Macheteros

On July 26, 1976, the EjĂŠrcito Popular Boricua was founded under the leadership of Filiberto Ojeda Rios, now based in Puerto Rico. The date chosen coincided with the most significant day on the Cuban revolutionary calendar; the 26th of July Movement, led by Fidel Castro, was the organization that overthrew the Batista Regime, begining with the storming of the Moncada barracks in Santiago on July 26, 1953. It is an official holiday in Cuba, National Rebelion Day.

In a September 2004 document elaborating on the positions of the EPB, titled Los Macheteros y la lucha revolucionaria en Puerto Rico (The Macheteros and the Revolutionary Struggle in Puerto Rico), Ojeda Rios states that the Popular Boricua Army are nationalist revolutionaries, firmly adhereing to the rights legally established by UN Resolution 1514 (XV), which declares that all nations have the right to self-determination; freely determining their political condition, and freely persueing their own economic, social and cultural development. The Macheteros state that Puerto Ricans have a right to use any means accesible to them within their colonial reality, including armed struggle, in order to acheive liberation. The statement distinguishes between reactionary, criminal and agressive violence by the “colonial invaders,” and revolutionary violence that defends “social justice, liberty and equality.” It asserts that revolutionary violence is a defensive and natural response, legitimate and necessary to the decolonization of Puerto Rico.

Though the island has been a territory of the United States since the end of the Spanish-American War in 1898, Puerto Ricans did not become citizens of the United States until March 1917, when President Woodrow Wilso signed the Jones-Shafroth Act. This act, however, only granted Puerto Ricans the “right” to be drafted into the US armed forces. It was not until 1952 that Puero Ricans could elect their own governor or draft a constitution. To date, though Puerto Ricans hold United States passports, they cannot vote in US presidential elections.

Ojeda Rios’ document goes on to state that the sugar-cane cutters of Lares—the original Macheteros—virtually enslaved by the American sugar companies and their appropriation of Puerto Rico’s agriculture even under Spanish rule, were the first to consolidate the Puerto Rican national consciousness in their revolt in 1868. For this reason, El Grito de Lares was considered by Ojeda Rios as the birth of the Macheteros, and of Puerto Rico as a nation. Today, the Macheteros are numbered at about 1,100. The list of charges against Ojeda Rios and the Macheteros includes the shooting of two police officers in 1978 following the deaths of two pro-independence activists at the hands of police officers in an ambush at Cerro Maravilla, the 1979 shooting of a bus carrying 15 US Navy personnel in which two were killed, the bombing of 11 National Guard aircraft, worth $45 million, at the US Air Force Base MuĂąiz in Carolina, Puerto Rico in 1981 in which two marines were killed, a rocket attack on a federal courthouse in San Juan in 1983, and the 1983 robbery of $7.2 million from a Wells Fargo depot in Hartford, CT.

Regarding the 1978 deaths, the New York Times wrote on Jan. 30, 1992 that Senate investigators believe that “Cerro Maravilla was part of an effort by some local and Federal officials to fabricate terrorist acts and discredit the island’s pro-independence movement in order to help advance statehood. The two men were killed not because of their importance as individuals, the investigators say, but because the Romero BarcelĂł administration wanted to make examples of them to show that it would deal harshly with terrorists.” The most recent Machetero actions were in 1998, when the group issued two communiquĂŠs claiming responsibility for the bombing of a “Super-Aqueduct” construction site in Arecibo (a corruption-tainted project in connection with which the campaign manager for the then RossellĂł administration, RenĂŠ VĂĄzquez Botet, and former pro-statehood New Progressive Party secretary general Marcos Morell were indicted for embezzlement of $2.4 million), and a pipe-bomb explosion outside a branch of the Banco Popular in Rio Piedras (one of the bidders in the privatization of the Puerto Rico Telephone Company). Yet, it was the Wells Fargo robbery, of which Ojeda Rios was considered the mastermind, which placed him on the FBI’s Most Wanted List, accused of “domestic terrorism.”

Ojeda Rios was arrested in 1985, charged with aggravated robbery of federally insured bank funds, conspiracy to interfere with commerce by robbery, and foreign and interstate transportation of stolen money. He was released on $1 million bail in 1988 and ordered to wear an electronic monitoring bracelet while awaiting trial. In 1990, Ojeda Rios became a fugitive after removing the electronic monitoring device. In 1992, a U.S. court convicted him in absentia, sentencing him to 55 years imprisonment and fining him $600,000. Only $80,000 of the $7.2 million was recovered; the rest is thought to have been sent to Cuba via Mexico, used to finance the struggle for Puerto Rican independence. In 1985 on January 6, Dia de Los Tres Reyes Magos, the holiday when Puerto Rican children received gifts before the more North-Americanized December 25 was adopted, Macheteros dressed as the Three Kings drove truckloads of presents to Puerto Rican children living in Hartford, CT.

The FBI, which categorizes the Macheteros as a “violent” and “extremist Puerto Rican separatist group” in its 1998 Terrorism in the United States report, defines domestic terrorism as: “The unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or Puerto Rico without foreign direction, committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives.” This is similar to what critics charge the FBI itself with regarding the circumstances of Ojeda Rios’ death.

Reactions, Protests, and Demand for an Investigation

Most Puerto Ricans do not agree with the methods employed by the Macheteros. Yet, the circumstances around Ojeda Rios’ death have united a politically diverse Puerto Rico. Even the harshest critics of the Machetero tactics, from civil society, political sectors, the Catholic church, and international NGOs, are calling for an investigation into his death.

Puerto Ricans from all sectors were kept completely unaware of the operation and its outcome, including high police and commonwealth administration officials. On the night of Sept. 23, before any official comments were released regarding the condition of Ojeda Rios, a crowd of 1,000 demonstrated in front of the U.S. Federal Government Office in San Juan, while 500 others blocked Avenida Roosevelt, a main thoroughfare in the capital city, demanding information from the FBI. At the University of Puerto Rico in Rio Piedras, students defaced a McDonald’s located on campus, while a second one was also reported to have been defaced in San Juan. In New York, a crowd of protestors gathered at Federal Plaza, while demonstrations were also reported in Chicago. On Oct. 8, 1,000 marched in Hormigueros protesting the killing.

The response from prominent political figures, from pro-independence, pro-commonwealth, and pro-statehood parties alike, has been equally critical of the FBI. Governor AnĂ­bal Acevedo VilĂĄ of the pro-commonwealth Popular Democratic Party criticized the FBI for refusing to provide information about Ojeda Rios’ death until Sept. 24, and said Puerto Rican authorities would investigate whether the outcome of the operation was preventable. He called the FBI’s actions as “improper” and “highly irregular,” demanding to know why his government was not informed and the island’s press not allowed to cover the operation.

Acevedo VilĂĄ told reporters Sept. 26 that FBI director Robert Mueller has ordered an inquiry into the fatal shooting. The governor went on to ask Washington for a thorough internal investigation and vowed to conduct his own.

Thomas Rivera Shatz, president of the pro-statehood New Progressive Party, said: “The agents who participated in this disgraceful incident have managed to destroy the image of the U.S. Government with the Puerto Rican people.” He told the Washington Post Sept. 29, “They can’t impose the death penalty on someone who resists arrest… Nobody will believe that a man the age and in the circumstances of Ojeda Rios had superior weapons and resources than the FBI.”

Similarly, pro-statehood strategist Oreste Ramos stated: “The feds have earned everything the independence supporters may say and everything they may do.” He said the slaying of Ojeda Rios was “immoral” and an act of “first-degree murder.”

The Archbishop of San Juan, Roberto Gonzalez Nieves, called the raid “a sinister operation,” while Ruben Berrios, president of the Puerto Rican Independence Party (PIP) and a vocal critic of the Macheteros, called the killing “shameful.”

President of the Puerto Rican Senate, Kenneth McClintock, who openly stated to the Puerto Rican daily El Vocero on Sept. 27 that Ojeda Rios was a criminal, not a hero worthy of a national day of mourning, went on to state: “I am convinced that the FBI used rules of the game, in terms of the politics of public information, that are very different than those used in the States. If an incident similar to the one that occurred in Puerto Rico would have occurred in any of the states of the union, where the FBI waited more than 17 hours before making any public statement, chinches [a tropical insect with a painful sting] would have fallen from Congress, the media, and the citizens of the United States.” US Representatives JosĂŠ E. Serrano (D-NY), Nydia VelĂĄzquez (D-NY), and Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) requested an investigation into Ojeda Rios’ death. The FBI responded, promising a thorough investigation.

Puerto Rico’s Secretary of Justice Roberto Sanchez Ramos criticized the FBI for refusing to allow four local prosecutors to enter the farmhouse after the shootout, promising an investigation by the Puerto Rico Justice Department. In a public statement issued by Amnesty International on Sept. 27, the leading human rights group called for an independent inquiry. The New York Times reported on Sept. 29 that FBI director Mueller communicated to Acevedo Vila that Glenn A. Fine, Inspector General for the US Justice Department, would be asked to conduct a review.

Ojeda Rios’ wake was held at Puerto Rico’s oldest and most respected cultural institution, the Ateneo PuertorriqueĂąo, and his remains were then taken to be viewed at the Puerto Rican bar association, El ColĂŠgio de Abogados de Puerto Rico. The rector of the University of Puerto Rico, Gladys Escalona de Motta, stated in a press release that all students and faculty were excused so as to attend the funeral. A procession of over 1,000 cars followed Ojeda Rios’ body to Naguabo, where he was buried in Rio Blanco, where he was born. It is reported to be the largest funeral procession in the history of the island.

RESOURCES:

Ojeda Rios Message from Lares 2005
http://www.redbetances.com/articulo.php?id=755

Message from Elma Beatriz Rosado Barbosa, Oct. 8
http://www.redbetances.com/articulo.php?id=764

The Economist, Obituary, Filiberto Ojeda Rios
http://www.economist.com/people/displayStory.cfm?story_id=4455267

Democracy Now! Amy Goodman Interview with Passalacqua
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/26/1434229

“The Killing of Filiberto Ojeda Rios,” by FĂŠlix JimĂŠnez, The Nation, Oct. 7
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20051024/jimenez

Amnesty International calls for independent inquiry into shooting of
Filiberto Ojeda Rios
http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=ENGAMR511572005

“Velan su cuerpo en el Ateneo,” El Vocero, Sept. 26
http://www.puertadetierra.com/noticias/velorio/velorio_filiberto.htm

“Killing of Militant Raises Ire In Puerto Rico,” New York Times, Sept. 29
http://www.independencia.net/ingles/nyt_killing_FilOjeda.html

Webpage on Los Macheteros
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/epb-macheteros.htm

“Los Macheteros y la lucha revolucionaria en Puerto Rico,” Filiberto Ojeda
Rios, September 2004
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/puertorico/ojeda-2004.htm

“Political Murder in Puerto Rico,” words of Filiberto Ojeda-Rios, Upside Down
World, Sept. 29
http://www.upsidedownworld.org/puertorico-death.htm

“Dialogue Opens About FBI/Carpeta Questions,” Puerto Rico Herald, April 9, 2000
http://www.puertorico-herald.org/issues/vol4n16/CarpetaQuestions-en.shtml

The New York Times, article on Cerro Maravilla hearings, Jan. 30, 1992
http://home.coqui.net/ciales15/m14.html

Federal Bureau of Investigation, Terrorism in the United States, 1998
www.fbi.gov/publications/terror/terror98.pdf

From our weblog:

Puerto Rico: march for Ojeda Rios
/node/1191

———————–

Special to WORLD WAR 4 REPORT, Nov. 1, 2005
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingFILIBERTO OJEDA RIOS: TARGETED ASSASSINATION? 

#. 114. October 2005

PERU’S CAMISEA GAS PROJECT: ONE YEAR LATER
Indigenous, Campesinos and Civil Society Stand Up to Pipeline Politics
by Yeidy Rosa

GUATEMALA: INDIGENOUS RESISTANCE TO GLAMIS GOLD PROJECT
Maya Municipal Democracy Versus the Mineral Cartel
by Cyril Mychalejko

CIVIL WAR IN IRAQ: ALREADY HERE?
by Bill Weinberg

WORKER UNIONS IN IRAQ: AN INTERVIEW WITH AMJAD ALJAWHARY
by Benjamin Dangl

HOLY LAND OR LIVING HELL?
Pollution, Apartheid and Protest in Occupied Palestine
by Ethan Ganor

From Weekly News Update on the Americas:

COLOMBIA: INDIGENOUS RE-TAKE THE LAND; PARAS STILL ACTIVE
VENEZUELA: GRINGO PROPERTY EXPROPRIATED
ECUADOR: OIL STRIKE SETTLED—FOR NOW
CHILE: THE OTHER 9-11 REMEMBERED
CENTRAL AMERICA: MAYA MOBILIZE TO DEFEND LAND, WATER

Book Review:
GLOBALIZING LIBERATION—AFTER 9-11
Activists Dodge the Tough Questions
by Gavin Sewell and Vilosh Vinograd

“Just because he’s human
He doesn’t like a pistol to his head
He wants no servant under him
And no boss over his head.”

—”Song of the United Front,” Bertold Brecht, 1936

“I don’t want to spend the rest of my life
Looking down the barrel of an Armalite
I don’t want to spend the rest of my days
Keeping our of trouble like the soldiers say
I don’t want to spend my time in hell
Looking at the walls of a prison cell
I don’t ever want to play the part
Of a statistic on a government chart.”

—”Invisible Sun,” The Police, 1981

RIGHT OF RETURN FOR NEW ORLEANS REFUGEES!

WEBLOG: /blog

Exit Poll: Is it civil war yet?

PLEASE EITHER SEND US A DONATION OR ANSWER THE EXIT POLL.

REMEMBER, WW4 REPORT RECEIVES NO FOUNDATION SPONSORSHIP!

WE DEPEND ON YOU!!!

WORLD WAR 4 REPORT
89 Fifth Ave. #172
Brooklyn NY 11217

Or donate by credit card:

Subscribe to WORLD WAR 4 REPORT


PUBLISHED EVERY MONTH TILL PEACE
Reprinting permissible with attribution.
Subscriptions free but donations needed!!!

Continue Reading#. 114. October 2005 

CIVIL WAR IN IRAQ: ALREADY HERE?

by Bill Weinberg

The most recent attack came Sept. 30 at a vegetable market in Hilla, a Shi’ite town south of Baghdad. With a modest toll of eight dead and 41 wounded, the car bomb only rated a story at the bottom of page eight in the New York Times. The previous day’s triple truck bomb attack at Balad—again on a crowded market frequented by Shi’ites—racked up a more impressive 102 deaths, including 18 children, and at least rated a slim one column on the front page of Times. The entity calling itself “al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia” claimed responsibility in an Internet communique. The group’s leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has pledged “all out war” on Iraq’s Shi’ites.

This nearly metronomic ritual of serial mass murder is now hardly newsworthy. And it is but the most obvious sign of Iraq’s disintegration. US commander in Iraq Gen. George Casey told senators in Washington Sept. 30 that the new Iraqi army is in disarray, with the number of “combat effective” battalions—those that can operate without US assistance—having fallen from three to one in recent weeks. As Sunni insurgents seize control in towns along the Syrian border, Shi’ite militias increasingly control the south and even much of the capital. On Aug. 9, one such militia, the Badr Brigades, stormed Baghdad’s municipal building, ousted the mayor at gunpoint and installed one of their own, Hussein al-Tahaan, in his place. On Sept. 18, a Kurdish MP, Faris Nasir Hussein of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, was assassinated by insurgents north of the capital. That same day, 24 bodies were found in the Tigris River—the apparent fruit of a dialectic of assassination by Sunni and Shi’ite death squads. The Shi’ites themselves are violently divided. In Basra, the Badr Brigades and rival Sadr militia have been shooting it out in street skirmishes in recent weeks. In his Senate testimony, Gen. Casey retreated from his July assessment that US forces in Iraq could see “fairly substantial” reductions in 2006.

Prince Saud al-Faisal, Saudi Arabi’s foreign minister, warned Sept. 22 that Iraq is headed towards disintegration. “There is no dynamic now pulling the nation together,” he warned reporters at the Saudi embassy in Washington. “All the dynamics are pulling the country apart.” He urged that he was trying to get this message out “to everyone who will listen” in the Bush administration. He warned that the fracturing of Iraq along religious and ethnic lines would “bring other countries in the region into the conflict.” He concluded gravely: “This is a very threatening situation.”

One who doesn’t appear worried is British left-wing journalist Robert Fisk. He wrote for The Independent Sept. 15: “There will not be a civil war in Iraq. There never has been a civil war in Iraq. In 1920, Lloyd George warned of civil war if the British Army left. Just as the Americans now threaten the Iraqis with civil war if they leave. As early as 2003, American spokesmen warned that there would be a civil war if US forces left.”

If his point is that the US has pitted Iraq’s religious and ethnic groups against each other, it’s an obvious one. If it is that the US military presence is actually playing a destabilizing role, it is an arguable one. But his opening sentence is one of simply bewildering denial.

How interesting that Fisk actually agrees with the sanguine statements of Bush. “The terrorists will fail,” Bush told a Rose Garden press conference Sept. 28. “See, the Iraqis want to be free.” He also, of course, said that “the terrorists” will “do everything in their power to try to stop the march of freedom,” which is why more troops are headed to Iraq ahead of this month’s referendum on the new constitution.

So both the anti-war left and the White House have something invested in denying the reality in Iraq. For the left, the admission of imminent civil war would be a concession to an argument for the continuing occupation. For the White House, it would be an admission of defeat and error. But nothing is to be gained by willful blindness. By any objective standard, there is already a civil war in Iraq.

CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE—FOR ENTROPY

The new constitution, approved by parliament Aug. 29 despite its rejection by Sunni Arab negotiators and MPs, goes before the voters Oct. 15, and everyone is expecting an increase in violence before then. If two-thirds of the voters in any three out of 18 governorates reject the charter in the referendum, it will be defeated. The Sunni Arabs, who appear to almost universally oppose it, make up 20% of Iraq’s 27 million people, and form a majority in at least four governorates.

Behind the Sunni rejection of the constitution’s call for federalism is the question of control over Iraq’s oil wealth. It is articles 109 and 110 that address this issue directly:

Article 109: Oil and gas is the property of all the Iraqi people in all the regions and provinces.

Article 110: 1st. The federal government will administer oil and gas extracted from current fields in cooperation with the governments of the producing regions and provinces on condition that the revenues will be distributed fairly in a manner compatible with the demographical distribution all over the country. A quota should be defined for a specified time for affected regions that were deprived in an unfair way by the former regime or later on, in a way to ensure balanced development in different parts of the country. This should be regulated by law.

2nd. The federal government and the governments of the producing regions and provinces together will draw up the necessary strategic policies to develop oil and gas wealth to bring the greatest benefit for the Iraqi people, relying on the most modern techniques of market principles and encouraging investment.

This seemingly innocuous language masks a nearly irreconcilable struggle. The language about correcting the discriminatory policies of “the former regime” clearly means not only that the Sunni center will lose its role as the favored region, but also that the formerly disfavored regions will receive a disproportionate share of oil revenues for a while. Corrective measures may be warranted, but this can only be seen as threatening by a Sunni Arab population already facing economic agony. And the new system could also be subject to abuses. For instance, the Kurdish north was certainly “deprived in an unfair way” under Saddam. But today it is the most prosperous part of the country—because it was effectively independent throughout the years of sanctions (while still receiving aid under the oil-for-food program), and was spared bombardment by the US. The Sunni center, meanwhile, faces 70% unemployment.

So if the constitution is blocked, Iraq will remain divided. And if it passes, the Sunni insurgency is likely to grow.

The constitutional dilemma also fuels the Sadr-Badr violence in the Shi’ite south. Militant Shi’ite leader Moqtada al-Sadr rejects the constitution, and opposes the occupation. The rival Badr Brigades are the armed wing of one of the principal groups in the current Iraq government, the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), and favor the constitution. Behind this split is the question of Iran’s influence in Iraq: SCIRI is backed by Tehran, while al-Sadr is a Shi’ite Arab nationalist. Al-Sadr fears that federalism could lead to a Shi’ite statelet in the south falling into Iran’s orbit.

And there is plenty of “deep politics” behind the struggle for oil wealth. Kurds and Shi’ites remember massacres and atrocities as well as discrimination at the hands of Sunni Arab-dominated regimes—most recently Saddam’s. The Sunni Arabs, in turn, recall how what is now Iraq was 1,200 years ago the seat of the most powerful Islamic Caliphate, the Abbasids—only to spend the ensuing centuries under foreign rule. As the Shi’ite Safavid dynasty in Iran vied with the Ottoman empire in Turkey, the border between the two shifted back and forth across contemporary Iraq. Ottoman rule was followed by British until independence in 1932. Today, faced with the unlikely of alliance of the pro-Iran SCIRI holding seats in the US-backed Baghdad government, many Sunnis look to the insurgents as the defenders of Arab self-rule.

A second issue is the role of Islam in the constitution. The pending document overturns Iraq’s 1959 “personal status” law which directed cases concerning divorce, custody and inheritance to secular courts. The new document assigns such cases to different shariah courts—Shi’ite or Sunni—depending on the sectarian affiliation of the litigants. This is protested most fiercely by women’s rights advocates, who note that neither version would afford much protection. This debate reveals another fault line—between secularists and fundamentalists of either the Shi’ite or Sunni variety.

Yanar Mohammed of the Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq (OWFI), which opposes both the constitution and the occupation, blames the US for acceding to this policy, and making common cause with fundamentalists. She writes: “Since the beginning of the occupation, the US administration has recognized Iraqis according to their ethnic/nationalist and religious identities. This predetermined polarization of the society around its most reactionary forces has resulted [in] a most lethal weapon, which is a government of division and inequality—a potential time-bomb for a civil war that has already started.”

THE REAL RESISTANCE?

However legitimate the fears and grievances of the Sunni Arabs, the armed insurgents are seemingly the most reactionary forces in Iraq. While they appear not to have any unified leadership, their most extreme exponent is apparently behind the serial mass murder of Shi’ites. In Qaim and other villages along the Syrian border where insurgents seized power early last month, prompting brutal US air-strikes, they declared an “Islamic kingdom.” Presumed Sunni insurgents blew up a gathering of Sufis outside Baghdad in June, killing ten. In the areas they have “liberated from occupation,” Taliban-style interpretations of shariah are being enforced.

Throughout Iraq, women who dare to walk the streets unveiled are having acid thrown at them—even in Baghdad. In Baghdad and Basra, liquor stores and beauty parlors are fire-bombed. These are certainly not icons of liberation, but neither should the penalty for owning or patronizing one be death.

For all their enmity, the Sunni and Shi’ite militants share this harsh cultural agenda. Both Sadr and Badr militiamen are enforcing shariah in the streets of Basra. In April 2004, when the Sadr militia was making headlines by fighting US forces, it wiped out a Roma (“Gypsy”) village, torching homes and forcing residents to flee. Local Shi’ite government authorities applauded the Sadr militia for “cleansing the town,” which had been a hotbed of such “un-Islamic” activities as music and dance.

While these armed insurgents are too frequently referred to as “the resistance,” they are not the only resistance in occupied Iraq. OWFI helped coordinate a campaign that led to a shariah measure being defeated in the interim constitution, and is organizing opposition to the similar measure in the new charter. The Federation of Workers Councils and Unions in Iraq (FWCUI) opposes the constitution and the occupation, and is organizing for workers’ self-management in factories from Basra in the south to Mosul in the north. Its affiliated Union of the Unemployed in Iraq is demanding jobs and restitution for the thousands thrown out of work in the chaos since the US invasion. The Oil and Gas Workers union succeeded through work actions in getting the Halliburton subsidiary KBR kicked out of the installations of Iraq’s Southern Oil Company, where it had been granted a no-bid contract by the occupation authority.

All the leaders of these organizations are under threat of assassination by death squads linked to the regime and insurgents alike. OWFI’s Yanar Mohammed has remained in Iraq in defiance of numerous death threats.

This is the resistance that seeks a democratic, secular future for Iraq, free from either imperialist domination or rule by what they call “political Islam”—reactionary fundamentalism. They oppose sectarianism and the fragmenting of Iraq. It is axiomatic that they receive no aid from Western governments. Unfortunately, too many in the so-called “anti-war” movement in the West are cheering on their deadliest enemies.

LEFTIST DENIAL

The US group Troops Out Now comes closest to taking an open stance in support of the armed insurgents, calling in their literature for the anti-war movement to “acknowledge the absolute and unconditional right of the Iraqi people to resist the occupation of their country without passing judgement on their methods of resistance.”

Does this include truck bombs designed to kill the maximum number of Shi’ite civilians? Posing the question in terms of the abstract “right to resist” is an obfuscation. At a certain point you have to look at the question of who is actually wielding the guns and bombs, and at whom. In this case, the criminal tactics of mass murder are directly tied to the totalitarian ideology of “political Islam.” These are the very forces which seek to exterminate Iraq’s secular left, along with their perceived ethno-religious enemies.

The jihadi insurgents—presumably aided by some remnant Baathists—are aiming their guns and bombs at Shi’ite, Kurdish or secular civilians far more often than at US troops these days. Groups such as Troops Out Now are actually supporting civil war in Iraq.

These groups play a cynical numbers game in order to hide the grim reality of Iraq’s insurgents. For instance, Paul D’Amato of the International Socialist Organization (ISO), another US group supporting the insurgents, has a piece on the group’s wesbite cheering on the Iraqi “resistance” and attempting to absolve it of massively targeting civilians. The piece is favorably cited by the journal Left Hook in an article entitled “Does the Resistance Target Civilians? According to US Intel, Not Really.”

D’Amato’s piece touts the findings of Anthony Cordesman, top wonk at Washington’s elite Center for Strategic and International Studies, who assembled a report from Pentagon data, “The Developing Iraqi Insurgency: Status at End—2004.” But the ISO picks from the data selectively to make its case. The sleight-of-hand relies on an obfuscatory distinction between “targeting” and “killing” civilians. Table 1 in the Cordesman report indicates more than 3,000 attacks in which coalition forces were the target and only 180 in which civilians were the target—but it also indicates around 2,000 civilians killed and nearly 3,500 wounded, with only around 450 coalition forces killed and 1,000 wounded in the same period. D’Amato doesn’t mention these numbers.

So the insurgents are given a pass for exactly the kind of insensitivity to “collateral damage” that we rightly decry in US military tactics. And D’Amato’s piece ran in the March-April issue of the ISO’s journal International Socialist Review—after the insurgents had adopted the tactic of mass murder of Shi’ites, something not reflected in Cordesman’s 2004 figures.

In July, the team that maintains the website Iraq Body Count made a minor media splash when they announced that the number of Iraqi civilian deaths they had arrived at through media monitoring since the US invasion had passed the 25,000 mark. This figure is now used by the anti-war movement to imply 25,000 dead at hands of US forces. (So, often, is the 100,000 figure published in the Lancet medical journal last year, based on the far less cautious findings of a team from Johns Hopkins and Columbia universities that conducted interviews with Iraqi doctors.) However, the Iraq Body Count website states that its toll “includes all deaths which the Occupying Authority has a binding responsibility to prevent under the Geneva Conventions and the Hague Regulations. This includes civilian deaths resulting from the breakdown in law and order…” In other words, this figure includes deaths at the hands of the insurgents.

Thirty percent of those 25,000 deaths occurred during the March-May 2003 “major combat” phase of US operations. This is not surprising, as aerial bombardment is a very effective way to kill large numbers of people, even as “collateral damage.” But since then, the majority of the deaths is attributed to criminal and insurgent violence, with the insurgents claiming an ever-growing share.

So those who cite this figure as representing directly US-inflicted casualties while simultaneously cheering on the Iraqi “resistance” engage in the most disingenuous of numbers tricks—actually attributing deaths by the forces they support to the forces they oppose.

Equally dishonest is the pretension that what is happening in Iraq is anything other than a civil war—a delusion that the anti-war left shares with its enemies in the White House. Amnesty International recently noted that the armed conflict in Colombia—which nobody hesitates to call a civil war—has claimed 70,000 lives over the past 20 years. Obviously, if the current rate of slaughter continues to obtain, the figure in Iraq 20 years hence will be around 200,000. When do we admit this is a civil war?

U.S. LEFT BETRAYS IRAQI LEFT

Behind these intellectual subterfuges is a fundamental betrayal of Iraq’s secular left by the anti-war forces in the US. Whether the US stays in Iraq or leaves, whether the current regime remains in power or is toppled by the insurgents, those fighting for women’s rights, labor rights and other basic liberties in Iraq are going to need our support. And we have a special responsibility to loan that support, as it is our government’s intervention which has plunged Iraq into civil war.

Too much of the anti-war movement seems to assume that once we achieve our aim of a US withdrawal we can wash our hands Pilate-like and walk away. Any notion that we owe Iraqis our support is dismissed with words like “patronizing” and “passing judgement”—as if it were impossible to distinguish between imperialist meddling and citizen-to-citizen solidarity.

The hard-left elements of the anti-war movement—groups like ISO and Troops Out Now—affirm the abstract right of the Iraqi people to resist the occupation, but fail to grapple with the realities of Iraq’s actually-existing armed resistance. The more moderate elements, like United for Peace and Justice, simply dodge the question entirely. They are both oblivious to an active left opposition in Iraq that opposes the occupation, the regime it protects and the jihadi and Baathist “resistance” alike. It is this besieged opposition, under threat of assassination and persecution, which is fighting to keep alive the same elementary freedoms that we fight for against the forces of authoritarianism and fundamentalism here in the US. For all the incessant factional splits in the US anti-war movement, providing this real, progressive Iraqi resistance concrete solidarity is not even on the agenda.

The foremost responsibility of the anti-war forces in the US is to loaning a voice to our natural allies in Iraq, this secular left opposition, the legitimate resistance—and this responsibility is being utterly betrayed.

It is too late to avoid civil war in Iraq. The civil war has arrived. But the question of how disastrous it will be is directly related to that of whether this civil democratic opposition is completely silenced—or crushed—by utterly ruthless armed actors. History has seen these sorts of betrayals before—for instance, in Spain in 1939. We can expect no better of Great Power politics. But what explains the willful blindness on the left?

——

RESOURCES:

Text of the pending Iraqi constitution, online at the Salt Lake Tribune website http://www.sltrib.com/portlet/article/html/fragments/print_article.jsp?article=2 973485

Robert Fisk, “Why is it that we and America wish civil war on Iraq?” The Independent, Sept. 15 http://www.selvesandothers.org/article11523.html

Sarah Ferguson quotes Troops Out Now on the Iraqi “resistance,” Village Voice, March 17 http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0512,ferguson1,62240,5.html

Paul D’Amato, “The Shape of the Iraqi Resistance,” International Socialist Journal, March-April http://www.isreview.org/issues/40/shapeofresistance.shtml

M. Junaid Aam, “Does the Resistance Target Civilians? According to US Intel, Not Really,” Left Hook, undated http://lefthook.org/Politics/Alam041605.html

Anthony Cordesman, “The Developing Iraqi Insurgency: Status at End—2004,” Center for Strategic and International Studies
http://www.csis.org/features/iraq_deviraqinsurgency.pdf

“25,000 civilians killed since Iraq invasion, says report,” The Guardian, July 19 http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5242694-103550,00.html

Iraq Body Count
http://www.iraqbodycount.net

Yanar Mohammed of OWFI on the new constitution
/node/946

“Islamic Kingdom” declared on Syrian border
/node/1062

Iraq “resistance” blows up Sufis
/node/558

Acid attacks on “immodest” women
/node/727

David Bacon, “Iraqi Unions Resist Occupation and Assassination,” WW4 REPORT #113
/node/1026

See also:

Bill Weinberg, “Iraq: Memogate and the Comforts of Vindication,” WW4 REPORT #111
/node/745

———————–

Special to WORLD WAR 4 REPORT, Oct. 1, 2005
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingCIVIL WAR IN IRAQ: ALREADY HERE? 

GLOBALIZING LIBERATION—AFTER 9-11

BOOK REVIEW

Globalize Liberation:
How to Uproot the System and Build a Better World
Edited by David Solnit
City Lights, San Francisco, 2004

by Gavin Sewell and Vilosh Vinograd

The stated goal is very ambitious: “Globalize Liberation was created as a resource of hands-on tools, ideas and examples to aid in our efforts to gain control of our lives and our communities, and ultimately to change the world we live in. It is intended to help individuals, groups, and movements to deepen their understanding of what’s wrong and why, to create a vision of alternatives, and to develop strategies for creating change.”

Globalize Liberation indeed paints a useful picture of the anti-capitalist movement since the Zapatista uprising and Seattle, and several of the essays in the anthology are excellent. But it’s hard to tell for whom this book was intended. It’s not systematic or didactic enough to be effective as an introduction for people with no experience in activism; the essays do a good job of describing our situation but generally don’t argue as if expecting either disagreement or complete ignorance. On the other hand, few of the essays go into enough depth or detail to be revelatory to any veteran activist. Most of the book ambles along in a frustrating gray area.

More importantly, a conceptual flaw is revealed by how much larger Seattle and Chiapas loom in the book than 9-11. Editor David Solnit—leading light of the Bay Area-based group Art and Revolution, which creates many of the giant puppets and props seen at anti-globalization protests in recent years—has assembled contributors similarly seasoned by years of experience in this movement. But, like the movement as a whole, they generally do not address what has changed since September 2001: how the war for resources and labor represented by “globalization” has become an actual shooting war, while US unilateralism has punctured the facade of a seamlessly “globalized capitalism.” Solnit’s 14-page introduction doesn’t even mention 9-11, and only briefly touches on the Iraq war.

The anthology is divided into three sections, “What’s the Problem?,” “How to Change Things,” and, “Ideas in Action.” Not surprisingly, “What’s the Problem?” is by far the strongest section overall. Cindy Milstein of Vermont’s Institute for Social Ecology contributes a clear, concise overview of basic anarchist theory and spirit that could serve as a good introduction to the subject. Citing the classical Russian anarchist Mikhail Bakunin, she expounds on the nation-state and capital as twin pillars of an inherently centralizing and anti-democratic system. Invoking New England town meetings as a “fragment” survival of more human, decentralized models, she poses the movement toward direct democracy as part of a broader historical tendency.

George Caffentzis of the indispensable Midnight Notes Collective offers an original, astute analysis of the World Trade Center attacks. He notes how an economic “liberalization” scheme within Saudi Arabia instituted in 2000 allowed foreigners to buy parts of Islam’s holy land, making a strong case that the attacks were carried out the next year as a direct reaction to this policy. The “liberalization” only expanded after 9-11—prompting further attacks within Saudi Arabia, in a vicious cycle. Caffentzis says the “war on terrorism” is really the “struggle over control of the earth’s oil and gas.”

But even this section insufficiently grapples with how 9-11 has entrenched the imperial system—and diverted the momentum that had been building since the November 1999 Seattle protests against the World Trade Organization. Walden Bello of Focus on the Global South optimistically writes: “Since September 11, global capitalism has continued to lose legitimacy…” Perhaps, but the protest mobilizations against the WTO and World Bank have been smaller since then, and activist energies have been deflected into protesting the Iraq occupation.

Even Chris Hables Gray in his chapter on war and globalization (the last in the “What’s the Problem?” section) barely mentions 9-11. He also writes with optimism that “our current international system is based on nation-states and their decline opens up a real opportunity, actually a necessity, to demilitarize politics.” Again, could be—but the collapse of nation-states in (for instance) the Balkans and Somalia has only meant an increase in militarism and an occasion for US interventionism. The emergence of “non-state actors” on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq has provided a pretext for Washington to suspend the Geneva Conventions, the only minimal legal restraints on state militarism.

In what’s probably the most important chapter of this book for activists, Van Jones goes behind enemy lines and describes what he saw from the inside of the February 2002 World Economic Forum in New York City. (A veteran of the Seattle protests, he was mysteriously invited to the WEF summit as a “Global Leader for Tomorrow.”) One of his observations is worth quoting. Jones found that the ruling elite in the Waldorf-Astoria “loved the protesters. In fact, most attendees took the demonstration—and the huge police response—as an affirmation of their own self-impotence. It was almost as if a bunch of really nerdy kids were chanting and marching around the coolest frat-house on campus.” Jones provides serious food for thought for anyone doing conventional street protest.

The “How to Change Things” section of course provides a greater challenge than delineating what’s wrong—and runs into bigger problems. A good example is longtime nonviolence theorist George Lakey’s essay “Strategizing for a Living Revolution.” In a 25-page essay he gives only one page to consciousness-raising and the creation of a new non-capitalist culture. The rest of his essay explains what you do to build and be effective as a revolutionary organization once you’ve done this. This is an instructive discussion, with case studies including Argentina’s piqueteros and Serbia’s Otpor, providing some very useful material for any existing mass movement. For example, to combat police brutality the kids in Otpor would go to the homes of violent cops and show pictures of their beaten comrades to the neighbors, family, and children. After a few months of doing this they had (peacefully) intimidated most of the Serbian police force into retreating from violent repression. Otpor’s slogan was “It only hurts when you’re scared.” The stories of middle class people joining piqueteros to beat the walls of banks are also inspiring. But these were situations where extreme repression (Serbia) or extreme economic devastation (Argentina) had already galvanized a large people’s movement. Here in the US, we face the bizarre challenge of a downtrodden population which by and large doesn’t feel oppressed. Glossing over the stage of consciousness and culture-building seems like writing a how-to book on horse racing with 24 chapters on how to spend the money you’ll win at the Triple Crown and only one on how to train a horse.

Something of the same lack of pragmatism weakens the essays on the Argentine uprising, the Zapatistas, the U’wa indigenous resistance to Occidental Petroleum in Colombia, and most of the “Ideas in Action” section of the book. None of the essays explore the question of how we translate the concepts of these actions into the realities of the “first word.” Globalize Liberation was published in North America, and was presumably written mostly for North Americans. Could the propagation techniques of the Zapatistas work here? How about the tactics of the Argentine direct-democracy assemblies? How would they need to be modified? Where are these pragmatic questions addressed?

Manuel Callahan’s chapter “Zapatismo Beyond Chiapas” takes an admirable stab at it, but would need another hundred pages to make a serious dent in the problem. Marina Sitrin describes the Argentine struggle in enough detail to be useful and also writes some of the best prose in the book. What Sitrin and Callahan both see as critical are the imagination and flexibility of these movements, their spontaneity and non-traditional, non-hierarchical approaches to organizing. What neither of them have space to get into here are the psychological and social differences between Latin Americans and citizens of the US; what can we wards of a cold, technocratic society do to reverse the erosion of traditions of social solidarity still vibrant south of the border?

Keir Milburn’s essay on creative protest tactics in Italy could answer some of the problems raised by Van Jones. Milburn tells how Italian activists use foam padding and home-made body armor, blurring the lines between violent and non-violent protest. These padded anti-globalization protestors, or “turtles,” could stand their ground against club-wielding riot-cops without having to physically fight them. By blockading without hurting the police they managed to score both tactical and PR victories. This ties in with the kind of creative flexibility Sitrin and Callahan describe in their essays, and it makes for interesting reading on its own. In fact, most of the essays in the last section of the book are interesting; what’s doubtful is how many of them are useful at this stage or our struggle.

Finally, there’s the back cover. In the lower right is a pretend bar-code with stick people escaping from it, as if from behind prison bars, to mock the idea of bar-codes. Bar-codes certainly should be ridiculed, but over on the lower left-hand corner of the book is…a real bar-code. A bar code may be a necessity of getting the book out to a wide readership. But the self-parody may also betray the obvious contradictions that make it easy for most Americans to ignore us and our ideas.

In summary, Globalize Liberation is an imperfectly conceived anthology with some really great essays in it. It is also an attempt to write a kind of book that really needs to be written. It’s much easier to criticize than to create, and editor Solnit and his contributors deserve credit for stepping up to fill a void. We need to forge intellectual weapons against the capitalist establishment, and despite its problems, Globalize Liberation is a sign that we’re trying.

——

See also WW4 REPORT’s coverage of the February 2002 WEF protests in NYC
/static/20.html#nyc1

———————–

Special to WORLD WAR 4 REPORT, Oct. 1, 2005
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingGLOBALIZING LIBERATION—AFTER 9-11 

CENTRAL AMERICA: MAYA MOBILIZE TO DEFEND LAND, WATER

from Weekly News Update on the Americas

GUATEMALA: ROADS BLOCKED IN WATER PROTEST

At least 15,000 people protested in Totonicapan, the capital of Totonicapan department in western Guatemala, on Sept. 6 in opposition to a law under discussion by Congress for the partial privatization of water resources. Starting at 4 AM, thousands of people gathered in the center of the city in a demonstration called by the auxiliary mayors of 48 cantons to demand that departmental governor Juan Armando Chun Chanchavac communicate to Congress the residents’ opposition to the General Water Law. At the same time, about 1,000 protesters blocked the Inter-American Highway for at least six hours in three points–Cuatro Caminos, Xelac and the entrance to San Francisco El Alto–to demand that Congress respond to a petition against the law that was presented to Congress on Aug. 5 with 35,000 signatures. (Guatemala Hoy, Sept. 7, AP, Sept. 6)

On Sept. 7, some 3,000 people in Momostenango municipality, Totonicapan department, destroyed the municipal building, burned the home of Mayor Abel Daniel Xiloj, drove out the police and destroyed three patrol cars of the National Civilian Police (PNC). Some criminal gangs reportedly joined the attacks and looted various businesses. One man, Enrique Ajanel Tzum, was accused of stealing a computer belonging to the town. A mob took him to a cemetery and beat him severely; a brigade of volunteer fire fighters took him to the hospital in Totonicapan. Some 500 PNC Special Forces agents finally brought the situation under control. The violence apparently began when a protest against the Water Law turned into a protest against Mayor Xiloj, who has been accused of corruption; the attacks were reportedly encouraged by his political opponents on the town council.

On Sept. 9 about 20,000 Totonicapan residents again blocked the Pan-American Highway, setting up barricades and burning tires at Cuatro Caminos and kilometers 178 and 186. Protesters told reporters they had brought food for several days and didn’t intend to leave. At the same time, the 48 auxiliary mayors were in Guatemala City talking to congressional leaders, who agreed to suspend discussion of the Water Law while they consulted with various sectors of the population. When they were told about the agreement, the demonstrators sang the national anthem and ended the blockades. “When Totonicapan rises up, Congress trembles,” they said. (Guatemala Hoy, Sept. 7, 9; Diario El Popular, Toronto, Sept. 11)

HONDURAS: INDIGENOUS SEIZE RUINS

On Sept. 10, some 1,500 Maya Chorti indigenous people occupied the Copan Ruins Archeological Park, a popular tourist destination in western Honduras, to demand the government provide them with land. In May 1997, after thousands of indigenous people from throughout Honduras protested in Tegucigalpa for more than a week, the government promised the Chortis more than 14,000 hectares of land worth $6 million in the departments of Copan and Ocotepeque. So far only 2,700 hectares have been distributed. “Our people have the [park] closed because the government has left all the accords unfulfilled,” Chorti leader Cristobal Pineda told the media.

The Mayan ruins at Copan are one of the country’s main tourist attractions, drawing between 200 and 300 visitors a day from the US and Europe who pay $10 each to enter the park, among a total of some 400,000 tourists a year who visit the site. The United Nations declared the Copan Ruins park a world heritage site in 1980. The Chortis are Mayans, descendants of those who built Copan.

On Sept. 14, as the ruins remained occupied and closed to visitors for a fifth day, and Chorti protesters were in the second day of intense negotiations with government representatives, the Honduran Private Enterprise Council (COHEP) issued a communique demanding that the government put an end to the protest. COHEP blasted “the passive and tolerant attitude of the government, which puts at risk tourism and the security of people and property, which are a national priority.”

The town of Copan Ruinas, less than a mile from the archeological site, has 40 hotels, 20 restaurants and 40 stores that sell handicrafts. “We lose $50,000 dollars a day because of the attitude of the Chortis,” complained Dario Dominguez, president of the Copan Ruinas Chamber of Commerce. (AP, Sept. 14, 15; TV Azteca, Sept. 14 from Fuerza Informativa Azteca–FIA; La Hora, Quito, Sept. 11 from AFP)

Late on the night of Sept. 14, the Chortis signed an agreement with the government, and on Sept. 15, they ended the occupation and returned to their homes. Agrarian Reform Minister Henry Acosta said the government pledged to provide the Chortis with a total of $487,000 to purchase land; $277,000 of the total will be paid immediately and the other $210,000 will be paid in 2006, said Acosta. Acosta said the protest caused the government to lose some $55,000 in income.

Acosta, together with Labor Minister German Leitzelar and advisory minister Elias Lizardo, negotiated the agreement on behalf of the government, working out budget adjustments to allow the disbursement. The first lands to be handed over–as early as October, according to the agreement–will be those already occupied by 15 Chorti communities, who will now be able to build permanent structures and install basic services. Under the terms of the accord, a Chorti commission will visit the Finance Secretariat during the week of Sept. 19 to facilitate the disbursement of the funds and prevent delays.

“We hope the government completely fulfills its promises, because if it doesn’t, our people will carry out new occupations of the country’s tourist sites,” warned National Indigenous Council spokesperson Marcelina Interiano. (AP, Sept. 15; La Prensa, Honduras, Sept. 15)

The Chortis have shut down the Copan Ruins park at least three times in the past to demand compliance with the 1997 accords: in October 1998 as part of a national indigenous protest; and in September 2000 and November 2001, when army and police forces violently broke up Chorti blockades at the site.

HONDURAN LABOR LEADER MURDERED

On Sept. 11, unidentified assailants shot to death Honduran union leader Francisco Cruz Galeano in the city of Comayagua as he was returning to his home in the village of Ojo de Agua, just two kilometers north of the city. He was hit by at least 25 bullets. Police have made no arrests. Cruz Galeano was the regional coordinator for the General Confederation of Workers (CGT) in the central Honduran departments of Comayagua, Intibuca and La Paz. CGT general secretary Daniel Duran described Cruz as “an excellent leader, with an enormous social vision, who was carrying out a housing program for poor families in the region.” Duran demanded that the government carry out an exhaustive investigation into the killing and punish those responsible. (La Nacion, Costa Rica, Sept. 11 from ACAN-EFE)

Weekly News Update on the Americas, Sept. 18

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC: CAFTA RATIFIED

The Dominican Republic’s ratification of the Dominican Republic-Central America Free Trade Agreement (DR-CAFTA) became official on Sept. 10 when Dominican president Leonel Fernandez promulgated a measure passed by the Congress to approve the pact. The Senate voted 27-2 on Aug. 26 for approval. The Chamber of Deputies approved the pact on Sept. 6 by a vote of 118-4 with 20 abstentions. (It is not clear when the Senate held a second vote, which was reportedly required for passage.) DR-CAFTA, which is expected to go into effect on Jan. 1, creates a trade zone including Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and the US. The legislatures of Costa Rica and Nicaragua have not yet voted on ratification.

After promulgating the measure, Fernandez left the evening of Sept. 10 for a 10-day trip to the US and Puerto Rico. (El Diario-La Prensa, NY, Sept. 11 from correspondent; Hoy, Santo Domingo, Sept. 7)

Some 20,000 workers have reportedly been laid off since the beginning of the year from the Dominican Republic’s “free trade zones”–industrial parks where tax-exempt assembly plants produce for export–and 33 plants have closed, mostly garment assembly plants. The Federation of Free Trade Zone and Similar Workers (FENATRAZONAS) charged on Aug. 31 that the layoffs result not from unionization efforts in the maquiladoras but rather from the companies’ failure to invest in productivity-enhancing technology. The Senate’s Industry and Trade Committee has asked the government to slow the loss of jobs by applying more equitable electric rates and improving the country’s notoriously unreliable electric system. (Adital. Sept. 1)

Weekly News Update on the Americas, Sept. 11

——

Weekly News Update on the Americas
http://home.earthlink.net/~nicadlw/wnuhome.html

See also WW4 REPORT #113
/node/1034

——————-

Reprinted by WORLD WAR 4 REPORT, Oct. 1, 2005
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingCENTRAL AMERICA: MAYA MOBILIZE TO DEFEND LAND, WATER 

CHILE: COUP ANNIVERSARY PROTESTED

from Weekly News Update on the Americas

On Sept. 11, some 4,000 people marched past the La Moneda presidential palace in Santiago, Chile, to protest the anniversary of the 1973 military coup in which Gen. Augusto Pinochet Ugarte overthrew democratically elected Socialist president Salvador Allende Gossens. The government of Socialist president Ricardo Lagos prepared for the annual protests by deploying 10,000 police agents, and by promulgating a law on Sept. 10 which punishes anyone throwing a Molotov bomb with up to 10 years in prison. The march was peaceful, but when the marchers entered the general cemetery to pay homage to Allende at his tomb, a group of about 100 hooded youths from the Anarchist Revolutionary Center, the Lautaro Movement and the Rebel Youth Front stayed outside and threw rocks and Molotov bombs. Police dispersed the group quickly and arrested about 12 people. (La Jornada, Mexico, Sept. 12)

Violence and looting broke out over the night and into the early morning of Sept. 12 in the neighborhoods surrounding the capital, Santiago. By the time it was over, 16-year old Cristian Castillo Diaz had been killed by a stray bullet at a protest barricade in the Penalolen sector and 120 protesters had been arrested. Castillo’s family blamed police for his death, saying agents fired their weapons in an effort to unblock the street. Another young man was wounded by a bullet in the old southern mining town of Lota.

The police claimed 410 of their agents were wounded, though Interior Minister Francisco Vidal said the number was 38. Those injured included a captain who was shot in the legs and two agents hit by homemade rifle fire. The others were hit by rocks.

Chains thrown at high-tension electrical wires left 70,000 people in the capital area without electricity. Incidents also took place in Valparaiso, where a wine shop was attacked, and in Valdivia, where some 10 people were arrested.

At numerous events marking the anniversary, protesters expressed anger about a bill introduced by the right-wing opposition in Congress to pardon former military officers convicted of human rights abuses. The bill would benefit about 300 convicted officers. Lagos initially spoke favorably about the proposal, but on Sept. 12 stepped back from that position, telling local television he had only meant that it seemed like an important subject to discuss, not that he agreed with it. The presidential campaign period over the next three months is not the best time for Congress to take up such a subject, Lagos said. (LJ, Sept. 13)

The Chilean army marked the 32nd anniversary of the coup with a mass at the Military School, to which Pinochet and his family were not invited. (LJ, Sept. 12)

On Sept. 14, several activists were arrested near La Moneda as they protested the congressional pardon bill. Those arrested included leftist presidential candidate Tomas Hirsch, Group of Relatives of the Detained Disappeared (AFDD) president Lorena Pizarro and several human rights lawyers. The same day, hooded protesters clashed with police inside the University of Santiago. (LJ, Sept. 15)

On Sept. 17, Lagos promulgated Chile’s new Constitution, replacing the one promulgated by Pinochet in 1980. The new document includes 58 changes approved last Aug. 16 by a vote of 150-3, with one abstention, in a joint session of the Senate and Chamber of Deputies. Among the reforms are the elimination of nine senatorial seats which were designated instead of elected–including four seats reserved for representatives of the armed forces–and the elimination of lifetime Senate seats for ex- presidents. The new Constitution also restores to the president the power to remove the armed forces chiefs and the general director of the Carabineros militarized police, and strips power from the State Defense Council, changing it to a consultive body which can only be convened by the president. The new Constitution codifies the length of the presidential term as four years instead of six, and bars reelection to consecutive terms. (LJ, Sept. 18 from AFP, DPA; El Nuevo Herald, Miami, Sept. 18)


PINOCHET WINS ONE, LOSES ONE

On Sept. 14, in a 10-6 decision, Chile’s Supreme Court ratified that ex-dictator Augusto Pinochet can face trial for Operation Colombo, specifically for his role in the forced disappearance of 15 or 16 jailed leftist activists between 1974 and 1977, carried out with the help of the Argentine military. The ruling upheld a July 6 decision by the Santiago Appeals Court. Under Operation Colombo, a total of 119 members and sympathizers of the Revolutionary Left Movement (MIR) were murdered in what was then presented as an “internal purge” among leftist groups.

On Sept. 15, the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court put an end to proceedings against Pinochet for his responsibility in the abduction of 10 leftists in Argentina, Bolivia and Paraguay, and their subsequent disappearance in Chile under Operation Condor, a collaboration between South American military regimes. The decision upholds a ruling by Judge Victor Montiglio, who took over the Operation Condor case when Judge Juan Guzman Tapia retired this past April. Guzman had sought to prosecute Pinochet for Operation Condor, but Montiglio closed the case, arguing that the 89-year old ex-dictator suffers from dementia and therefore the case is without merit. Montiglio’s ruling was upheld in July by the Santiago Appeals Court. Montiglio is also in charge of trying Pinochet in connection with Operation Colombo. (AP, Sept. 15; LJ, Sept. 15, 17)

A former Carabineros officer and National Intelligence Department (DINA) agent, Lt. Col. Ricardo Lawrence, is meanwhile accusing Pinochet of having appropriated money which DINA agents found at the home of MIR general secretary Miguel Enriquez after killing him in an October 1974 gun battle. Lawrence also said Pinochet not only knew about police and military repression, but personally visited barracks and clandestine jails and gave orders.

Pinochet still faces trial in a tax fraud and illicit enrichment case, and recently information came out indicating that the Dutch weapons company RDM paid $1.5 million to Pinochet’s accountant, lawyer Oscar Aitken, in 1998 to seal a sale of 202 used German tanks to the Chilean military that year. (LJ, Sept. 14)

Weekly News Update on the Americas, Sept. 18

——

Weekly News Update on the Americas
http://home.earthlink.net/~nicadlw/wnuhome.html

See also WW4 REPORT #105
http://www.ww3report.com/105/andes/chile/apec

See our coverage of the 30th anniversary coup commemoration in 2003:
/92.html#andean26

See our last report on the Pinochet case
/node/593

——————-

Reprinted by WORLD WAR 4 REPORT, Oct. 1, 2005
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingCHILE: COUP ANNIVERSARY PROTESTED