Self-Determination And Democratisation

The vision of a democratic Middle East

An interview with Duran Kalkan, KADEK Presidential Council

How strong is KADEK today in Northern Iraq? People talk of 5.000 fighters. How does KADEK propose to use these forces?

KADEK¹s armed forces are present in Northern Iraq and also in the Kurdish areas of Turkey. There are more than 5000. The main force is stationed in the strategically important mountainous region of Northern Iraq. In addition to this the PCDK, which supports KADEK, organises amongst the civilian population in the villages and towns. The PCDK is active both above and below the 36 parallel. KADEK's political and military forces are not dependent on any side and therefore free to make their own decisions. KADEK's power is based exclusively on their own people.
KADEK is pursuing a peaceful solution of the Kurdish question by democratic means, and within retains the right to self-defence. KADEK feels itself to be bound in this only to the values of democracy, freedom and friendship between peoples. In this way KADEK represents the free will of the Kurdish people in the democratic arena. In conformity with this it uses its forces exclusively in support of the above mentioned values, and it will continue to act in this way in the future. In pursuit of these aims KADEK will not allow itself to be turned into an instrument of outside interventions or of the forces that support the status quo.
Some Kurdish groups maintain that Turkey harbours a desire to expand its territory, while Turkey says that the map of Kurdistan includes part of the territory of the Turkish state. What do you think about this?

Kurdistan is a geographical concept, and describes an area inhabited by a majority of Kurds. The concept of history was used for the first time by the Seljuk Sultan Sandjar. So in fact it was first used by the Turks. The area designated as Kurdistan was divided by the state boundaries of Iran,Iraq,Syria and Turkey. The Kurdish areas of Iraq, Syria and Turkey were in the past part of the Ottoman Empire, which after World War I Turkey was obliged to surrender to Iraq and Syria upon the insistence of France and Great Britain. Against this background you cannot speak definitely of a desire on the part of Turkey to expand. But we cannot understand why Turkey is frightened by a concept that was used by the Seljuks and the Ottomans, and tries to suppress it. The only reason why the empire of the Seljuks and Ottomans did not fall apart was because it did indeed employ the concept of Kurdistan. On the contrary they united the Middle East and turned themselves into a power to be reckoned with.
The use of the concept Kurdistan is one thing, and the establishment of a state another. The mere use of the concept does not imply the establishment of a state. We think that the Kurdish question can be solved without the establishment of a state, if democracy can be pushed forward within the boundaries of the existing states.


What is KADEK's view of an independent Kurdish state?

The Kurdish people and indeed the other peoples of the region should be able to exercise the right to independent self-determination of their fate. But it will not be possible to achieve this with the politically motivated establishment of more states. We believe that this is only possible through the creation of democratic structures in which freedom of conscience and expression is respected and in which people's general political and social rights are guaranteed. This is relevant not just for Kurdish society and for Turkey but for the whole of the Middle East. KADEK considers that the unity and democratisation of the region on the basis of the peoples¹freedoms to be more important than the establishment of our own state. Given the realities of the region this position seems more practicable and will serve the interests of the peoples of the region much better.

What are the relations between KADEK and the units of Barzani and Talabani? Can you see them ever uniting?

The relations between KADEK and the KDP and PUK are complex. We are all part of the same nation . But of course we also have conflicts as as result of different political and ideological positions. This conflict also expresses the specific problems and experiences of Kurdish society. At the present time there is no collaboration nor is there any particular conflict. Unity between all these forces is possible if common political interests demand it. We will see if such conditions arise in future.


Even if the United States denies that American emissaries have met the leaders of KADEK, how should this report be viewed within the context of current developments? Mustafa Karasu who is a member of the presidency of KADEK, has apparently had talks about the establishment of federal structures. How do these talks effect the current war?

We do not believe that any serious talks or negotiations between KADEK and the United States of America have been held. Whether talks will take place in future we will have to see. It would be too early to make any concrete statements at this stage. However, we have to stress the fact that it was the USA who undertook the biggest attacks on our nation and our movement after the Gulf War in 1991, and kidnapped our leader as part of an international plot of intelligence services and handed him over to Turkey. We believe talks and negotiations with regard to us have taken place between Turkey and the US. A constructive outcome would be positive. There are no contacts and negotiations between KADEK and the USA that would effect the process of the current war. But there is also no particular conflict at this stage.