Democratic Confederalism

ABDULLAH OCALAN

DEMOCRATIC CONFEDERALISM

Abdullah Ocalan

Democratic Confederalism

ISBN 978-3942961172

This edition copyright Transmedia Publishing 2015

Text of the second print edition

I. PREFACE

For more than thirty years the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) has been struggling for the legitimate rights of the Kurdish people. Their struggle, their fight for liberation has turned the Kurdish question into an international issue, which affects the entire Middle East and has brought a solution of the Kurdish question within reach.

When the PKK was formed in the 1970s the international ideological and political climate was characterized by the bipolar world of the Cold War and the conflict between the socialist and the capitalist camps. The PKK was inspired at that time by the rise of decolonization movements all over the world. In this context they tried to find their own way in agreement with the particular situation in their homeland. The PKK never regarded the Kurdish question as a mere problem of ethnicity or nationhood. Rather, they believed, it was the project of liberating the society and democratizing it. These aims increasingly determined their actions since the 1990s.

They also recognized a causal link between the Kurdish question and the global domination of the modern capitalist system. Without questioning and challenging this link a solution would not be possible. Otherwise they would only become involved in new dependencies.

So far, with a view to issues of ethnicity and nationhood like the Kurdish question, which have their roots deep in history and at the foundations of society, there seemed to be only one viable solution: the creation of a nation-state, which was the paradigm of the capitalist modernity at that time.

They did not believe, however, that any ready-made political blueprints would be able to sustainably improve the situation of the people in the Middle East. Had it not been nationalism and nation-states which had created so many problems in the Middle East?

Let us therefore take a closer look at the historical background of this paradigm and see whether we can map out a solution that avoids the pitfalls of nationalism and is more suitable to the situation of the Middle East.

II. THE NATION-STATE

When people became sedentary they began to form an idea of the environment they were living in, its extension and its boundaries, which were mostly determined by nature and features of the landscape. Clans and tribes that had settled in a certain area and lived there for a long period of time developed an idea of a common identity and a homeland. The boundaries between what the tribes saw as their homelands were not yet borders. Commerce, culture or languages were not restricted by these boundaries. Territorial borders remained flexible for a long time. Feudal structures prevailed almost everywhere, and now and then dynastic monarchies or great multi-ethnic empires with many different languages and religious communities rose within borders continuously changing such as the Roman Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Ottoman Empire or the British Empire. They survived for long periods of time and through many political changes because their feudal basis enabled them to distribute their power-structures flexibly across a wide range of smaller secondary power centers.

NATION-STATE AND POWER

When the nation-state appeared trade, commerce and finance pushed for political participation and subsequently added their power to the traditional state-structures. The development of the nation-state at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution more than two hundred years ago went hand in hand with the unregulated accumulation of capital and the unhindered exploitation of the fast growing population on the other hand. The new bourgeoisie, which rose from this revolution, wanted to take part in the political decisions and structures of the state. Thus, capitalism, the new economic system, became an inherent component of the new nation-state.

This nation-state needed the bourgeoisie and the power of the capital to replace the old feudal order and its ideology, which rested on tribal structures and inherited rights, by a new national ideology that united all tribes and clans under the roof of the nation.

In this way, capitalism and nation-state became so close that neither could be imagined to exist without the other.

As a consequence of this, exploitation was not only sanctioned by the state but even encouraged and facilitated.

THE STATE AND ITS RELIGIOUS ROOTS

The religious roots of the state have already been discussed in detail (A. Ocalan, The Roots of Civilisation, London, 2007).  Many contemporary political concepts and notions have their origin in religious or theological concepts or structures. In fact, a closer look reveals that religion and divine imagination brought about the first social identities in history. They formed the ideological glue of many tribes and other pre-state communities and defined their existence as communities.

Later, after state structures had already developed, the traditional links between state, power and society began to weaken. The sacred and divine ideas and practices which had been present at the origin of the community increasingly lost their meaning for the common identity and were, instead, transferred onto power structures such as monarchs or dictators. The state and its power were derived from divine will and law, and its ruler became king by the grace of God. The kings represented divine power on earth.

Today, most modern states call themselves secular. They claim that the old bonds between religion and state have been severed and that religion is no longer a part of the state.

This is, arguably, only half the truth. Even if religious institutions or representatives of the clergy do no longer participate in political and social decision-making they still exert influence on these decisions just as they are influenced themselves by political or social ideas and developments. Therefore, secularism, or laicism as it is called in Turkey, still contains religious elements. The separation of state and religion is the result of a political decision. It did not come naturally.  This is why even today power and state seem to be something given, god-given we might even say. Notions like secular state or secular power remain ambiguous.

The nation-state has also allocated a number of attributes that serve to replace older religiously rooted attributes such as nation, fatherland, national flag, national anthem and many others. Particularly notions like the unity of state and nation serve to transcend the material political structures. They are, as such, reminiscent of the pre-state unity with God. They have been put in the place of the divine.

When in former times a tribe subjugated another tribe its members had to worship the gods of the victors. We may arguably call this process a process of colonization, even assimilation. The nation-state is a centralized state with quasi-divine attributes that has completely disarmed the society and monopolizes the use of force.

BUREAUCRACY AND THE NATION-STATE

Since the nation-state transcends its material basis, i.e. the citizens, it assumes an existence beyond its political institutions. It needs additional institutions of its own to protect its ideological basis as well as its legal, economic and religious structures. The resulting ever-expanding civil and military bureaucracy is expensive and serves only the preservation of the transcendent state itself, which in turn elevates the bureaucracy above the people.

During the European modernity the state had all means at its disposal to expand its bureaucracy into all strata of the society. There it grew like a cancer infecting all lifelines of the society.  Bureaucracy and nation-state cannot exist without each other. The nation-state is the backbone of the capitalist modernity. Its bureaucracy secures the smooth functioning of the system, secures the basis of the production of goods, and secures the profits for the relevant economic actors in both the real-socialist and the business-friendly nation-state. The nation-state domesticates the society in the name of capitalism and alienates the community from its natural foundations. Any analysis meant to localize and solve social problems needs to take a close look at these links.

NATION-STATE AND HOMOGENEITY

The nation-state in its original form aims at the monopolization of all social processes. Diversity and plurality need to be fought, an approach that leads into assimilation and genocide. It does not only exploit the ideas and the labor potential of the society and colonize the heads of the people in the name of capitalism. It also assimilates all kinds of spiritual and intellectual ideas and cultures in order to preserve its own existence. It aims at creating a single national culture, a single national identity, and a single unified religious community. Thus, is also enforces a homogenous citizenship. These goals are generally accomplished by the use of force or by financial incentives and have often resulted in the physical annihilation of minorities, cultures or languages, or ended in forcible assimilation. The history of the past two centuries is full of examples illustrating the violent attempts to create a nation that corresponds to the imaginary reality of a true nation-state.

Let us now derive some characteristics of the nation-state using the example of the Turkish Republic.

NATION-STATE AND SOCIETY

It is often said that the nation-state is concerned with the fate of the common people. This is not true.  It is, in fact, the national governor of the worldwide capitalist system, a vassal of the capitalist modernity, which is more deeply entangled in the dominant structures of the capital than we usually tend to assume: The nation-state is a colony of the capital. Regardless how nationalistic the nation-state may present itself: it serves to the same extent the capitalist processes of exploitation. There is no other explanation for the horrible redistribution-wars of the capitalist modernity. Thus, the nation-state is not by the side of the common people – it is an enemy of the peoples.

The relations between any other nation-states and the international monopolies are coordinated by the diplomats of the nation-state. They need the official recognition by other nation-states. Otherwise, none of them could survive. The reason for this can be found in the logic of the worldwide capitalist system. Nation-states which leave the phalanx of the capitalist system will be overtaken by the same fate that the Saddam regime in Iraq experienced, or they will be brought to their knees by means of economic embargos.

IDEOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE NATION-STATE

In the past, the history of states was often equated with the history of their rulers, which lent them almost divine qualities. This practice changed with the rise of the nation-state. Now the entire state was idealized and elevated to a divine level.

NATIONALISM

Assuming that we would compare the nation-state to a living god then nationalism would be the correspondent religion. In spite of some seemingly positive elements, nation-state and nationalism show metaphysical characteristics. In this context, capitalist profit and the accumulation of capital appear as categories shrouded in mystery. There is a network of contradictory relations behind these terms that is based on force and exploitation. Their hegemonic strive for power serves the maximization of profits. In this sense, nationalism appears as a quasi-religious justification. Its true mission, however, is its service to the virtually divine nation-state and its ideological vision which pervades all areas of the society. Arts, science, and social awareness: none of them is independent. A true intellectual enlightenment therefore needs a fundamental analysis of these elements of modernity.

POSITIVIST SCIENCE

The paradigm of a positivist or descriptive science forms another ideological pillar of the nation-state. It fuels nationalist ideology (but also laicism), which has taken the form of a new religion. On the other hand it is one of the ideological foundations of modernity and its dogmata have influenced the social sciences sustainably. Positivism can be circumscribed as a philosophical approach that is strictly confined to the appearance of things, which it equates with reality itself. Since in positivism appearance is reality, anything that has no appearance cannot be part of reality. How does this approach go together with scientific fields like quantum physics or astronomy which concern themselves largely with things that are invisible and do not have an appearance in what we call reality?

Often our traditional patterns of explanation cannot be applied in these cases. Positivism denies this, and thus, to an extent, resembles the idol worshipping of ancient times, the idol constituting an image of reality.

SEXISM

Another ideological pillar of the nation-state is the sexism that pervades the entire society. Many civilized systems have employed sexism in order to preserve their own power. They enforce the exploitation of women and use them as a valuable reservoir of cheap labor. Women are also regarded as a valuable resource in so far as they produce offspring and provide the reproduction of men.  Thus, woman is both a sexual object and a commodity. She is a tool for the preservation of male power and can at best become an accessory of the patriarchal male society.

On the one hand, the sexism of the society of the nation-state strengthens the power of the men; on the other hand the nation-state turns its society into a colony by the exploitation of women. In this respect women can also be regarded as an exploited nation.

In the course of the history of civilization the patriarchy consolidated the traditional framework of hierarchies, which in the nation-state is fuelled by sexism. Socially rooted sexism is just like nationalism an ideological product of the nation-state and of power. Socially rooted sexism is not less dangerous than capitalism. The patriarchy, however, tries to hide these facts at any rate. This is understandable with a view to the fact that all power relations and state ideologies are fuelled by sexist concepts and behavior. Without the repression of the women the repression of the entire society is not conceivable. Hence, capitalism and nation-state can be viewed as the institutionalized rule of the patriarchy. Capitalism and nation-state are monopolies of the exploitative male.

RELIGIOUSNESS

Even if it acts seemingly like a secular state, the nation-state does not shy away from using a mélange of nationalism and religion for its purposes. The reason is simple: Religion still plays an important part in some societies or at least for parts of them. Islam, in particular, is very agile in this respect.

However, religion in the age of modernity does no longer play its traditional role. Whether it is a radical or a moderate belief, religion in the nation-state does no longer have a mission in the society. It can only do what it is permitted to do by the nation-state. Its still existing influence and its functionality, which can be misused for the promotion of nationalism, are interesting instruments for the nation-state. In some cases, religion even assumes the role of nationalism. The Shi’ah of Iran, e.g., is one of the most powerful ideological weapons of the Iranian state. In Turkey, the Sunni ideology plays a similar but more limited part.

C. THE KURDS AND THE NATION-STATE

After the preceding short remarks about the nation-state and its ideological basics we will now see why the foundation of a separate Kurdish nation-state does not make sense for the Kurds.

During the last decades the Kurds have not only struggled against repression by the dominant powers and for the recognition of their existence but also for the liberation of their society from the grip of feudalism. Hence, it does not make sense to replace the old chains by new ones or even enhance the repression.

This is what the foundation of a nation-state would mean in the context of the capitalist modernity. Without opposition against the capitalist modernity there will be no place for the liberation of the peoples. This is why the founding of a Kurdish nation-state is not an option for me.

The call for a separate nation-state of the Kurds results from the interests of the ruling class or the interests of the bourgeoisie, but does not reflect the interests of the people.  It would only mean the creation of additional injustice and curtail the right to freedom even more.

A resolution of the Kurdish question, therefore, can only be found in an approach that weakens the capitalist modernity or pushes it back.

There are historical reasons, social peculiarities and actual developments as well as the fact that the settlement area of the Kurds extends over the territories of four different countries, which make a democratic solution indispensable. Furthermore, there is also the important fact that the entire Middle East suffers from a democracy deficit.

Thanks to the geostrategic situation of the Kurdish settlement area, successful Kurdish democratic projects may even advance the democratization of the Middle East in general. This is what I call democratic confederalism.

III. DEMOCRATIC CONFEDERALISM

The kind of rule or administration we are talking about here, may be called a non-state political administration or a democracy without a state. Democratic decision-making processes must not be confused with the processes we know from public administrations.

States only administrate while democracies govern. States are founded on power; democracies are based on collective consensus. Offices of state are assigned by decree, even though they may be in part legitimized by elections. Democracies use direct elections. The state uses coercion as a means of legitimization. Democracies rest on voluntary participation.

Democratic confederalism is open towards other political groups and factions. It is flexible, multi-cultural, anti-monopolistic and consensus-oriented. Ecology and feminism are central pillars. This kind of self-administration will require an alternative economy to increase the resources of the society instead of exploiting them and to do justice to the versatile needs of the society.

A. DIVERSITY OF THE POLITICAL LANDSCAPE

The contradictions of the society and its composition necessitate political groups with both vertical and horizontal hierarchies. Central, regional and local groups need to be balanced this way. Only they will be able to deal with, each for itself, their special concrete situation and develop suitable solutions for far-reaching social problems. People have the right by nature to express their cultural, ethnic or national identities by means of political associations. However, this right, in order to be exercised, needs an ethical political society.

Nation-state, republic, or democracy:  The democratic confederalism is open for compromises concerning structural or governmental traditions. It allows for equal coexistence.

B. THE HERITAGE OF THE SOCIETY

Then again, democratic confederalism rests on the historical experience of the society and its collective heritage. It is not an arbitrary modern political system but, rather, accumulates history and experience. It is an offspring of the life of the society.

Due to its centralist orientation the state pursues the interests of the power monopolies, which in turn support the state. The state can only preserve its power by means of a strict centralism. Just the opposite is true for confederalism. Here, the society that is at the center of political focus. The heterogeneous structure of the society is in contradiction to all forms of centralism.  Distinct centralism only results in social eruptions.

Within living memory, people have always formed loose groups of clans, tribes or other communities with federative qualities. This way they were able to preserve their internal autonomy. Even the internal government of empires employed diverse methods of self-administration for their different parts, which included religious authorities, tribal councils, kingdoms, and even republics. Hence it is important to understand, that even centralist seeming empires follow a confederate organizational structure. The centralist model is not an administrational model wanted by the society. Instead, it has its source in the preservation of the power of the monopolies.

C. ETHICS AND POLITICAL AWARENESS

The arrangement of the society in categories and terms after a certain pattern is an artificial product of the capitalist monopolies. In a society like that it does not count what you are but what you appear to be. The putative alienation of the society from its own existence encourages withdrawal from active participation, a reaction which is often called disenchantment with politics.

However, societies are essentially political and value-oriented. Economic, political, ideological, and military monopolies are constructions that contradict the nature of society by their pursuit of the accumulation of surplus. They do not create values. A revolution cannot create a new society. It can only influence the ethical and political web of a society.  Anything else is at the discretion of the ethics-based political society.

I mentioned already that the capitalist modernity enforces the centralization of the state. The political and military power centers within the society are deprived of their influence. The nation-state as a modern substitute of monarchy leaves behind a weakened and defenseless society.

In this respect, legal order and public peace only mean the class rule of the bourgeoisie. The central state is the reflection of power and a fundamental administrative paradigm of modernity. This puts the nation-state in contrast to democracy and republicanism.

The idea of a democratic modernity is meant as an alternative draft to the modernity that we know. It builds on democratic confederalism as a fundamental political paradigm. Democratic modernity is the roof of an ethics-based political society. As long as we make the mistake to believe that societies need to be homogenous monolithic entities, understanding confederalism will be difficult. The history of modernity is also a history of four centuries of cultural and physical genocide in the name of an imaginary unitary society. Democratic confederalism as a sociological category is the counterpart of this history. It rests on the will to fight if necessary, as well as on ethnic, cultural, and political diversity.

The crisis of the financial system is an inherent consequence of the capitalist nation-state. However, all efforts of the neoliberals to change the nation-state have remained unsuccessful. The Middle East provides instructive examples.

D. DEMOCRATIC CONFEDERALISM AND THE POLITICAL SYSTEM

In contrast to a centralist and bureaucratic understanding of administration and exercise of power confederalism represents a type of political self-administration where all groups of the society and all cultural identities can express themselves in local meetings, general conventions and councils. This understanding of democracy opens the political space to all strata of the society and allows for the formation of different and diverse political groups. In this way it also advances the political integration of the society as a whole. Politics becomes a part of everyday life. Without this political integration the crisis of the state cannot be solved since the crisis is fuelled by a lack of representation of the political society.  Concepts such as federalism or self administration as they are understood in liberal democracies need to be conceived anew. Essentially, they should not be conceived as hierarchical levels of the administration of the nation-state but rather as central tools of social expression and participation. This, in turn, will advance the politicization of the society. We do not need big theories here, what we need is the will to lend expression to the social needs by strengthening the autonomy of the social actors structurally and by creating the conditions for the organization of the society as a whole. The creation of an operational level where all kinds of social and political groups, religious communities, or intellectual tendencies can express themselves directly in all local decision-making processes can also be called participative democracy. The stronger the participation the more powerful is this kind of democracy. Whereas the nation-state is in contrast to democracy, and even denies it, democratic confederalism constitutes a continuous democratic process.

The social actors, which are, each for itself, federative units, are the stem cells of participative democracy. They can combine and associate into new groups and confederations according to the situation. Each of the political units involved in participative democracy is essentially democratic. In this way, what we call democracy then is the application of democratic decision-making processes from the local level up to the global level within the framework of a continuous political process. This process will affect the structure of the social web of the society in a positive way, whereas the homogeneity the nation-state strives for will remain a construct that can only be achieved by force and the loss of freedom.

I have already addressed the point that the local level is the level is where decision-making is to take place. However, the reasoning leading to these decisions must be in line with global issues.  We need to become aware of the fact that even villages and urban neighborhoods require confederate structures. All areas of the society need to be given to self-administration, all levels of it need to be free to participate.

E. DEMOCRATIC CONFEDERALISM AND SELF-DEFENSE

Essentially, the nation-state is a militarily structured entity. Nation-states are, eventually, products of all kinds of internal and external warfare. None of the presently existing nation-states has come into existence all by itself. Invariably, they have a record of war. This process is not limited to their founding phases but, rather, it builds on the militarization of the entire society. The civil leadership of the state is only an accessory of the military apparatus. Liberal democracies even outdo this by painting their militaristic structures in democratic and liberal colors. However, this does not keep them from seeking authoritarian solutions at the peak of some crisis that is caused by the system itself. Fascist exercise of power is the nature of the nation-state. Fascism is the purest form of the nation-state.

This militarization can only be pushed back with the help of the right to self-defense. Societies without any mechanism of self-defense lose their identities, their capability of democratic decision-making, and their political nature. Therefore, the self-defense of a society is not limited to the military dimension alone. It also requires the preservation of its identity, its own political awareness, and a process of democratization.  Only then can we talk about self-defense.

Against this backdrop, democratic confederalism can be called a system of self-defense for the society. Only with the help of confederate networks can there be a basis to oppose the global domination of the monopolies and the nation-state militarism. We must build up an equally strong network of social confederacies against the network of the monopolies.

This means, in particular, that the social paradigm of confederalism does not involve a military monopoly for the armed forces, which do only have the task of ensuring the internal and external security. They are under direct control of the democratic institutions. The society itself must be able to determine their duties. One of their tasks will be the defense of the free will of the society from internal and external interventions. The composition of the military leadership needs to be determined on equal terms by the political institutions and the confederate groups.

F. DEMOCRATIC CONFEDERALISM VS. DOMINANCE

In democratic confederalism there is no room for any striving for dominance whatsoever. This is particularly true in the field of ideology. Hegemony is a principle that is usually followed by the classic type of civilization. Democratic civilizations refuse hegemonic power and dominant ideologies. Any ways of expression, which cut across the boundaries of democratic self-administration would carry self-administration and freedom of expression ad absurdum. The collective handling of the matters of the society needs understanding, respect of dissenting opinions and democratic ways of decision-making. This is in contrast to the understanding of leadership in the capitalist modernity where arbitrary bureaucratic decisions of nation-state manner are diametrically opposed to the democratic-confederate leadership in line with ethic foundations. In democratic confederalism leadership institutions do not need ideological legitimization. Hence, they need not strive for hegemony.

G. DEMOCRATIC CONFEDERALISM AT A GLOBAL SCALE

Although democratic confederalism focuses on the local level, global confederalism is not excluded. Contrariwise, we need to put up a platform of national civil societies in terms of a confederate assembly to oppose the United Nations as an association of nation-states under the leadership of the superpowers. In this way we might get better decisions with a view to peace, ecology, justice and productivity in the world.

H. CONCLUSION

Democratic confederalism can be described as a kind of self-administration of the people in contrast to administration by the institutions of the nation-state. However, under certain circumstances their peaceful coexistence is possible as long as the nation-state does not interfere with central matters of self-administration. All such interventions would call for the self-defense of the civil society.

Democratic confederalism is not a state of war with any nation-state. However, in the face of attempted assimilation it cannot stand idly by. A Revolutionary overthrow or the foundation of a new state cannot as such create sustainable change. In the long run, freedom and justice can only be achieved in the course of a democratic-confederate dynamic process.

Neither total rejection nor complete recognition of the state is a useful attitude for the civil society and its democratic efforts. Overcoming the state, particularly the nation-state, is a long process.

The state will be overcome once democratic confederalism has proved its problem-solving capacities with a view to social issues. This does not mean, though, that attacks by nation-states have to be accepted. Democratic confederations will maintain self-defense forces at all times. Democratic confederations will not be limited to organize themselves within a single particular territory. They will extend across borders if and when their societies so wish.

IV. PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRATIC CONFEDERALISM

1. The right of self-determination of the peoples includes the right to a state of their own. However, the foundation of a state does not increase the freedom of a people. The system of the United Nations that is based on nation-states has remained inefficient. Meanwhile, nation-states have become serious obstacles for any social development. Democratic confederalism is the contrasting paradigm of the oppressed people.

2. Democratic confederalism is a non-state social paradigm. It is not controlled by a state. At the same time, democratic confederalism is the cultural organizational blueprint of a democratic nation.

3. Democratic confederalism is based on grassroots participation. Its decision-making processes are with the communities. Higher levels only serve the coordination and implementation of the will of the communities that send their delegates to the general assemblies. For a limited time they are both mouthpiece and executive institution. However, the basic power of decision rests with the local grassroots institutions.

4. In the Middle East, democracy cannot be imposed by the capitalist system and its imperial powers that only damage democracy. The propagation of grassroots democracy is elementary. It is the only approach that can cope with diverse ethnical groups, religions, and class differences. It also works well within the traditional confederate structure of the society.

5. Democratic confederalism in Kurdistan is an anti-nationalist movement as well. It aims at realizing the right of self-defense of the peoples by the advancement of democracy in all parts of Kurdistan without questioning the existing political borders. Its goal is not the foundation of a Kurdish nation-state. The movement intends to establish federal structures in Iran, Turkey, Syria, and Iraq that are open for all Kurds and at the same time form an umbrella confederation for all four parts of Kurdistan.

V. PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS FOR THE MIDDLE EAST

The national question is not a phantasmagoria of the capitalist modernity.  Nevertheless it was the capitalist modernity, which imposed the national question on the society. The nation replaced the religious community. However, the transition to a national society needs the overcoming of the capitalist modernity if the nation is not to remain the disguise of repressive monopolies.

As negative as is the over-emphasis of the national category in the Middle East, as severe are the consequences of neglecting the collective national aspect.

Over the past two centuries nationalism has been fuelled in the societies of the Middle East. The national issues have not been solved but have been aggravated, in fact, in all areas of the society.

Instead of cultivating productive competition the capital enforces wars in the name of the nation-state. Internal warfare and international wars aggravate crisis and chaos.

Communalism would be an alternative to capitalism. In the framework of democratic nations it may lead to peace in a region, which hitherto has only been known as a theater for gory wars and genocides.

In this context, we talk about four majority nations: Arabs, Persians, Turks and Kurds. Due to demographic considerations I do not speak of big nations but rather of majority nations. In the same context we may also use the term minority nations.

1. There are more than twenty Arab nation-states today, which divide the Arab community and damage their societies by wars. This is one of the main factors responsible for the alienation of cultural values and the apparent hopelessness of the national Arab question. These nation-states have not even been able to form a cross-national economic community. They are the main cause for the problematic situation of the Arab nation. A religiously motivated tribal nationalism together with a sexist patriarchal society pervades all areas of the society resulting in a strong conservatism and slavish obedience.  Nobody believes that the Arabs will be able to find an Arab national solution to their internal and cross-national problems. However, democratization and a communalist approach might be able to provide such a solution. Their weakness towards Israel, which the Arab nation-states regard as a competitor, is not only the result of international support for Israel by the hegemonial powers. It is, in fact, the result of a strong Israeli civil society. Over the last century, the society of the Arab nation has been weakened by radical nationalism and Islamism.  The essence of a communalist society is not completely unknown, though. There are remnants of a natural society still alive there. Together with democratic-national awareness there might be ways to liberation in the long run.

2. The Turks and Turkmens form another influential nation. They share their ideological concept of power with the Arabs. There is a distinct national awareness and a religiously disguised nationalism. From a sociological point of view, the Turks and Turkmens are quite different. The relations between Turkmen and Turkish aristocracy resemble the tensed relations between Bedouins and Arab aristocracy. They form a stratum whose interests are compatible with democracy and communalism. The national problems are quite complex. The power quest of the nation-state, distinct nationalism and a sexist patriarchal society still prevail and create a very conservative society. The family is regarded as the smallest cell of the state. Both individuals and institutions have internalized these aspects. Turkish and Turkmen communities struggle for power. Other ethnic groups are subjected to a distinct policy of subjugation. The centralist power structures of the Turkish nation-state and the rigid official ideology have prevented a solution to the Kurdish question until today. The society is made to believe that there is no alternative to the state.

There is no balance between the individual and the state. Obedience is regarded as a great virtue.

In contrast to this, the theory of the democratic modernity offers an adequate approach to all national communities in Turkey to solve their national problems. The project of a democratic Turkish confederation would both strengthen the internal unity of the country and create the conditions for a peaceful existence with the neighboring nations. In spite of geographic boundaries today’s modern communication tools allow for a virtual unity between individuals and communities wherever they may be. A democratic confederation of the Turkish communities could be a contribution to world peace and the democratic modernity.

3. The Kurdish society is very complex. Worldwide, the Kurds are the biggest nation without a state of their own. They have been settling in their present settlement areas since the Neolithic. Agriculture and stock breeding as well as their readiness to defend themselves using the geographic advantages of their mountainous homeland helped the Kurds to survive as a native people. The Kurdish national question rises from the fact that they have been denied their right to nationhood. Others tried to assimilate them, annihilate them, and in the end flatly denied their existence. Not having a state of their own has advantages and disadvantages. The excrescences of state-based civilizations have only been taken in to a limited extent. This can be a benefit in the realization of alternative social concepts beyond the capitalist modernity. Their settlement area is divided by the national borders of four countries and lies in a geo-strategically important region, thus providing the Kurds a strategic advantage. Until now, the Kurds have not been able to enjoy a national society in a state of their own. Although there is a Kurdish political entity today in Iraqi-Kurdistan, it is not a nation-state but rather a parastatal entity.

Kurdistan had also been home to Armenian and Aramaic minorities before their genocides.  There are also smaller groups of Arabs and Turks there. Even today many different religions and faiths are living side by side there. Clans and remnants of tribal culture can still be found while there is almost no urban culture there.

All these properties are a blessing for the formation of democratic political groups. Communal cooperatives in farming but also in the water economy and the energy sector offer themselves as ideal ways of production. The situation is also favorable for the development of an ethical political society. Even the patriarchal ideology is less deeply rooted here than in the neighboring societies. This is beneficial for the establishment of a democratic society, in which women’s freedom and equality is to become one of the main pillars. It also offers the conditions for the creation of a democratic environment-friendly nation in line with the paradigm of the democratic modernity. The formation of a democratic federation of Kurdistan, which links economic-ecological communities, is already possible. The emerging entity could become a blueprint for the entire Middle East and expand dynamically into neighboring countries. In this sense, the freedom of the Kurds and the democratization of their society entail the freedom of the whole region and its societies.

4.  The causes for today’s problems of the Persian or Iranian nation can be found in the interventions of historical civilizations and the capitalist modernity. The Zoroastrian tradition is contrasted by the Islamic tradition of the Shi’ah. The earlier Manichaeism did not prevail. The Shi’ah became the official ruling ideology. It pursues its own modernization by way of a synthesis with central pillars of the capitalist modernity.

The Iranian society is multi-ethnic and multi-religious and blessed with a rich culture. All national and religious identities of the Middle East can be found there. This diversity is in strong contrast to the hegemonial claim of the theocracy, which cultivates a subtle religious nationalism. The ruling class does not shrink back from anti-modernist propaganda whenever it serves their interests. Revolutionary and democratic tendencies have been integrated by the traditional civilization. A despotic regime skillfully governs the country. Throughout the Middle East, the Iranian state and its society are the most inconsistent.  Although the Iranian nation-state attempts to neutralize the resulting tensions by redistributing the revenue of the oil industry it is the most probable candidate for collapse.  The negative effects of American and European sanctions are not negligible here.

Despite strong centralist efforts Iran is already a de facto federation today. The formation of confederate structures would correspond to the mix of peoples in Iran including Azeris, Kurds, Baluchis, Arabs, and Turkmens. Women’s movement and communal traditions will play a special role here.

5. The Armenian national question contains one of the greatest tragedies brought about by the progress of the capitalist modernity in the Middle East. The Armenians are a very old people. Throughout history, they shared much of their settlement area with the Kurds. While the Kurds lived primarily on agriculture and animal husbandry the Armenians engaged in arts and crafts and commerce. Just like the Kurds, the Armenians cultivated a tradition of self-defense. Apart from some short episodes the Armenians have never been able to successfully found a state. Christian culture and their faith in salvation give them their identity. Because of their religion they often have suffered repression at the hands of the Muslim majority. Hence, when nationalism began its rise, it appealed to the Armenian bourgeoisie. Soon there were differences with the Turkish nationalists and eventually the genocide of the Armenians by the Turks.

Apart from the Jews the Armenians are the second-largest people that live primarily in the Diaspora.  The foundation of an Armenian state in the west of Azerbaijan, however, did not solve the Armenian national question. The consequences of the genocide can hardly be put into words. The search for the lost country defines their national psyche and is at the heart of the Armenian question. The issue is aggravated by the fact that these areas have been settled by other people since then. Any concepts based on a nation-state cannot offer a solution.  There is neither a homogenous population structure there nor any clear borders as is required by the capitalist modernity. The ideology of their opponents may be fascist; it is not enough, however, to repeat the narrative of the genocide. Confederate structures could offer an alternative solution for the Armenians. The foundation of a democratic Armenian nation in agreement with the paradigm of the democratic modernity promises the Armenians an opportunity to reinvent themselves. It could enable them to return to their place in the cultural plurality of the Middle East.

6. In modern times the Christian Arameans also suffered the fate of the Armenians. They too are one of the oldest people in the Middle East. They shared a settlement area with the Kurds but also with other people. Like the Armenians they suffered from repression by the Muslim majority, which paved the way for European-style nationalism among the Aramean bourgeoisie. Eventually the Arameans too became victims to genocide at the hands of the Turks under the leadership of the fascist COMMITTEE FOR UNITY AND PROGRESS.  The Kurds lent a helping hand in this genocide. As in the case of the Armenians, the Aramean national question can probably be solved in the context of a democratic confederation.

7. The history of the Jewish people is another reflection of the overall problematic cultural history of the Middle East. The search for the background of expulsion, pogroms, and genocide amounts to balancing the accounts of the civilizations. The Jewish community has taken up the influences of the old Sumerian and Egyptian cultures as well as those of regional tribal cultures. It has contributed a lot to the culture of the Middle East. Like the Arameans, the Jews also became victims of the extreme developments of the modernity. Against this backdrop, intellectuals of Jewish descent developed a complex point of view towards these issues. However, this is by far not enough. For a solution of the problems as they exist today a renewed appropriation of the history of the Middle East is needed on a democratic basis. The Israeli nation-state is at war since its foundation. The slogan is: an eye for an eye. Fire cannot be fought with fire, though. Even if Israel enjoys relative security thanks to its international support, this is not a sustainable solution. Nothing will be permanently safe as long as the capitalist modernity has not been overcome.

The Palestine conflict makes it clear that the nation-state paradigm is not helpful for a solution. There has been much bloodshed; what remains is the difficult legacy of seemingly irresolvable problems. The Israel-Palestine example shows the complete failure of the capitalist modernity and the nation-state.

The Jews belong to the culture bearers of the Middle East. Denial of their right to existence is an attack on the Middle East as such. Their transformation into a democratic nation would make their participation in a democratic confederation of the Middle East easier. The joint project of an East-Aegean democratic confederation would be a positive start.

Tensions and armed conflicts in the Middle East make a transformation of the paradigm of modernity seem inevitable. Without a transformation a solution of the difficult social problems and national questions is impossible.

8. The annihilation of the Hellenic culture in Anatolia is a loss that cannot be compensated for. The ethnic cleansing arranged by the Turkish and Greek nation-states in the first quarter of the last century has left its mark. No state has the right to drive people from their ancestral cultural region. Nevertheless, the nation-states showed their inhuman approach towards such issues again and again. Attacks on the Hellenic, Jewish, Aramaic, and Armenian cultures were continuously increased while Islam spread throughout the Middle East. This, in turn, contributed to the decline of the middle-eastern Civilization.  The Islamic culture has never been able to fill the emerging void. In the 19th century when the capitalist modernity advanced into the Middle East it found a cultural desert created by self-inflicted cultural erosion. Cultural diversity also strengthens the defense mechanism of a society. Monocultures are less robust. Hence, the conquest of the Middle East had not been difficult. The project of a homogenous nation as propagated by the nation-states furthered their cultural decline.

9. The Caucasian ethnic groups also have significant social problems. Again and again they have migrated into the Middle East and stimulated its cultures. They have unquestionably contributed to its cultural wealth. The arrival of modernity almost made these minority cultures disappear. They, too, would find their adequate place in a confederate structure.

Finally, let me state again, that the fundamental problems of the Middle East are deeply rooted in the class civilization. They have intensified with the global crisis of the capitalist modernity. This modernity and its claim to dominance do not offer any solutions here, not to mention a long-term perspective for the middle-eastern region.

The future will be democratic confederalism.

Table of Contents

Democratic Confederalism

I. PREFACE

II. THE NATION-STATE

IDEOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE NATION-STATE

III. DEMOCRATIC CONFEDERALISM

A. DIVERSITY OF THE POLITICAL LANDSCAPE

B. THE HERITAGE OF THE SOCIETY

C. ETHICS AND POLITICAL AWARENESS

D. DEMOCRATIC CONFEDERALISM AND THE POLITICAL SYSTEM

E. DEMOCRATIC CONFEDERALISM AND SELF-DEFENSE

F. DEMOCRATIC CONFEDERALISM VS. DOMINANCE

G. DEMOCRATIC CONFEDERALISM AT A GLOBAL SCALE

H. CONCLUSION

IV. PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRATIC CONFEDERALISM

V. PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS FOR THE MIDDLE EAST