Voice of Revolution - Issue No. 2 (October 94)

THE LESSONS OF THE 20 JULY GENERAL ACTION 

On 20 July 1994, a "general action" took place in which 4 million workers and government employees participated across Turkey. The workers thus proved that they are prepared for more advanced forms of action.

The actions on 20 July should have been organised just as a "general action with the aim of warning", as far as the leadership of the trade union confederations are concerned. The union bosses, who stressed this, were, in this way, aiming at suppressing, from the beginning, the demand for a general strike and resistance expressed by every workers' action and meeting. It was obvious that "the general action" came onto the agenda as a result of the growth of the workers' fightback. However, the union bosses wanted to manipulate it as a means of keeping the workers' movement and their demands at a backward level.

Despite all this, participation by workers on July 20th was high and production was stopped in many places, especially in Istanbul, which was the heart of the general action. Also in Ankara, Izmir, Bursa, Luleburgaz, Izmit, Soma-Aliaga, Golcuk, Eskisehir, Kayseri, Mersin, Aydin, Çorum, Samsun, Kesan, Bandirma, Trabzon and Divrigi millions of workers, government employees and labouring masses stopped production for either a few hours or a day, and in some places, took part in street demonstrations and meetings. In Turkey-Kurdistan, which laged behind the west of Turkey, in Diyarbakir, Malatya, Gaziantep, Adiyaman, etc. the Kurdish workers and labourers joint the action in various ways.

The main slogans chanted by the workers and labourers were these: "Long live general strike and general resistance", "Workers and government employees hand in hand to the general strike", "Jobs-bread-freedom", "Tansu (the prime minister) To America", "Government must resign", "Down with fascist dictatorship", "Long live the brotherhood of the peoples", "Death to fascism, fredom to the people", "No to price increases", "Right to unionise with strike and collective agreement", "General strike is our right".

Despite their relative weakness, all forces of the TDKP organised in factories, unions, government employees and youth units tried to carry out activities so as to turn the "general action" on 20 July into a genuine general strike and resistance.

This significant workers-labourers' action was evaluated from various aspects in "Devrimin Sesi" (The Voice of Revolution), the central organ of the TDKP, dated July 1994, no 179, with the title "The 20 July has once again proved the necessity of a general strike and resistance with the style of workers and labourers":

"The general action on 20 July has been an action in which the participation in general was high and production in many places was stopped. However, with the struggle it has shown, it laged behind the aim of repulsing and repressing the economical and political offensives carried out by the state and capital, against the working class and the labouring people as a whole. It did not reflect the true potential of the struggle of the working class, nor its anger.

However the workers of the Bakirkoy (a district of Istanbul) branch of Sumerbank (a public enterprise), cargo workers, leather, road and cement workers who were marching towards Kartal (one of the districts in which there is a meeting point) displayed a determined attitude despite the fierce attacks of the police. Together with this, the steps taken by the people in some districts towards joining the workers' struggle have been the harbinger of a general strike and resistance in the style of the workers and labourers."

According to Devrimin Sesi, the police attacks on the Sumerbank workers and on some others were not a coincidence. These attacks expressed the attitude of the state and capital towards the direction where the workers' struggle can advance. On the other hand, the actions (in Istanbul) were not sufficient to turn the 20 July into a day of strong resistance and struggle for the working class and the labouring people.

"However, the action was held by destroying the barricades of the union bosses and bureaucrats and by confronting the attacks of the dictatorship. That has demonstrsated the determination of the working class and labouring masses in the struggle and also the greatness of the anger they gathered. But only some advanced sections of the class were able to succeed in taking this anger into the streets. 

The attack of the petit-bourgeoisie to stunt the class movement: 

The government employees, too, made stoppages in several places. However, the threats of the chairman of the councils led by the reactionary Welfare Party (which is trying to pull the discontent and the reaction of the people to its side through religious motives) to the workers of "not to join the action" proved to be effective. The role of the petit-bourgeois reformism was big in that.

"With the influence of the petit-bourgeois reformism, the stoppages coul not take place in the name of 'not to give any chance to the Welfare Party'. The petit-bourgeois administrators openly announced in many places that they were opposed to going into the streets. Hence, they played the role of action breakers. The line that was advocated by the former Dev-Yol (Revolutionary Path) circles has once again exposed the difference between the petit-bourgeois and revolutionary communist lines in the struggle for freedom and democracy, and the class base of this difference. This difference is that between the working class and the petit-bourgeoisie and between their political lines."

This phenomenon displayed by the action on 20 July is an attack of the petit-bourgeois reformism to deform and stunt the workers' movement, and to establish ideological hegemony on it. It also wants the movement of the class to tail after it. The class conscious vanguard worker shoul never forget this fact."

"Having such an attitude, the petit-bourgeoisie has forgotten that it has, for the last six-seven yesars, been taking up the struggle in the shadow of the workers' movement and denied this fact. Having summoned up courage from the actions of the working class in the recent years and been benefiting from the possibilities of the class movement, the petit-bourgeoisie has openly declared that it is, today, on the same platform with the union bosses and bureaucrats and they complement each other."

"The fact that the 'general action' of 20 July could not be turned into a strong general strike and resistance has once again demonstrated that the influence of the union bosses and bureaucrats on the working class has not been eradicated. The barricade, in front of the workers' movement, put by this gang including the petit-bourgeois officials, has to be destroyed."

According to Devrimin Sesi, the main conclusions that need to be drawn by the advanced worker from these attempts and attitudes of the petit-borgeois administrators are these:

"The most significant conclusion to be drawn is to preserve the independent political attitude of the working class; to realise the differentiating points of other labouring masses from itself; and to demonstrate the ability of being the leader of all of them. The vanguard workers have to oppose the efforts of the petit-bourgeoisie to destort the unity and the action of the class and to have the class tailed after it. Because this is a question of which class and leadership will be at the centre of the struggle. Will the struggle of the working class and labouring masses expand to apopular revolution or will it be confined to the limits of the system, with the destroying effects of the reactionary reformism of the petit-bourgeoisie? That is the question that needs to be answered. From this point of view, these two different attitudes are far from reflecting only 'the differences on opinions'. What is being discussed is the different political lines of two different classes."

"One of the key questions of the stuggle for revolution and democracy is the alliance of the working class with the forces that can be its allies and its winning them to its front of struggle. However, the working class has to preserve its independent political attitude meticulously and ensure its internal unity first. The winning of other labouring masses to the struggle depends essentially on that."

Having stressed that the platform of union branches that were created in the fight against the collaborating line of the union centres have a significant role to play, what is said is this:

"In no ways can a premium be given to the efforts of the petit-bourgeoisie of breaking the class movement from its roots, being afraid of spreading the movement in factories and of blocking this tendency under the name of the democracy platforms (*), etc. The advanced workers have to know and realise that the struggle goes on not only between the working class and the bourgeoisie but also, in a different form, between the labouring people's classes. A workers' movement that does not arm itself with this aspect, will not show the necessary progress in succeeding the tasks taken over. Nor will it show the political alertness against the efforts to pull the class movement backward and to deform it." 

The tasks that could not be accomplished:

In this article it is said that there is a task that could not be accomplished by the vanguard worker, honest unionists and by the ordinary worker who wants to struggle.

"The task was that of taking the action of 20 July into the streets by destroying reactionary barricades; of turning the 'general action' into a true general strike and resistance; and of creating a new progress in the class movement. It is necessary to see that the main reason why this task could not be accomplised is the deficiency of the work within the factories. 

The facts and phenomena have once again proved that the work within the factories is the determining factor in the struggle. If an action is not based on the factories, not organised in there, then it cannot mobilise the main body of the working class, have the capability and the possibility of repulsing the offensives of the capital and of obtaining economic, political and social gains for the working class and all the labouring people.

Another task of the vanguard worker is this:

"While focusing its energy and attention in the factories, the working class also has to display the capability and the courage that will change the trend of the whole movement, by acting with courage at significant turning points. The class conscious vanguard worker should once again realise the importance of educating its class brothers and sisters, of winning and advancing them. That is one of the most significant lessons of the 20 July.

"The 20 July is now in the past, the problems for which the working class struggled are left unresolved and growing daily. The struggle of the working class for the general strike and the causes of this can not be put behind with this general action of 20 July. The class conscious vanguard workers and honest unionists should not let the union bosses and bureaucrats to manipulate the action of 20 July to cover the demand of the working class for a general strike and widespread resistance." 

_____________________ 

(*) Dev-Yol (Revolutionary Path): It was one of the pre-12 September 1980 coup petit-bourgeois revolutionary organisations of Turkey that had a middle-path line. The remnants of this organisation today are advocating mainly a reformist and denying line. 

(*) Democracy Platforms have recently been formed, besides the workers' unions, in some cities in Turkey, consisting of the representatives of the unions of government employees, civil servants and of chambers that have not yet obtained legal union rights. 

THE DILEMMA OF THE BOURGEOISIE AND THE DEBATE ON "CULTURAL RIGHTS" 

An article in Denge Sores'li Kurdistan, the central organ of the TDKP-Kurdistan Organisation, dated July 1994, deals with the debates on "cultural rights" that have recently been brought onto the agenda with regards to the Kurdish question. In that article, it is established that the dilemmas of the ruling classes of Turkey regarding the "Kurdish question" has grown, bringing with it international dimensions.

"The bourgeoisie, reaction and the government is not convincing, despite their efforts to reflect the Kurdish struggle for freedom as 'the terror of the PKK' and to get support for such ideas by mobilising all possibilities both nationally and internationally. They are also becoming more and more isolated owing to the reaction of the oppressed masses on the national and international scale, to the fascist national oppression and to the racist-destructive policy in Kurdistan. Another reason is that it is becoming harder for the bourgeoisie and reaction to maintain the support for the increasing naked force. 

In recent days, the main theme of the meetings held by Demirel, the president, with the party leaders, has been the debate on 'what kind of steps can be taken regarding the Kurdish question'. When the US and the European countries bring to the agenda, beside other things, the closure of the DEP(*), its MPs being arrested, the ban on the Kurdish language and the attacks against the 'civilian population', and when they draw attention to 'the need of taking a flexible position on these matters', all leaders of the bourgeois parties embrace, with a complaining manner, the demagogy of 'the independence and indivisibility of Turkey'. It proves that the external troubles of the Turkish state have grown much more when compared to the previous period." 

The imperialist bourgeoisie needs "the defence of human rights" more today in order to maintain the system in Turkey. When considered with other indicators, the following two developments indicate that the imperialists have increased the "inculcations" towards the fact that it would be wiser to soften the traditional Kurdish policy:

The European Conference for Security and Cooperation and the European Council have decided to send delegations to Turkey in order to investigate human rights violations and the situation of the DEP's members of parliament.

John Shattuck, the vice foreign secretary of the US, met with the chairman of the Parliament, the Minister of Law and the chief authorny general of the State Security Court in Ankara and announced that they wanted "the trial of the DEP's MPs without arrest and the cultural rights of the Kurds to be recognised".

According to the Denge Sores, Prime Minister Ciller's statement during her journey to France is far from being convincing, which stated that 'a Kurdish TV, newspaper or school is possible; but the official language and school will be Turkish'. "It was, essentially, stated to divert the agenda and the aims of the struggle of the working class and the labouring masses". On the other hand , this statement itself is a reflection of the vehement debates and meetings that have recently begun within the government and state institutions. All these facts are considered as the signs that the opposition has increased and the following conclusions have been drawn:

"The state is now in a position that it can no longer carry out its traditional Kurdish policy in old forms. Because the people's struggle for freedom has put the bourgeoisie and the dictatorship into a dilemma in Kurdistan and made it difficult for them to reign by denying the existence of the Kurdish people. The dictatorship and government continue their offensives without stopping with hundreds and thousands of soldiers and police. They force uninhabitancy by means of tortures and bombings. They implement forced settling in accord with the decision of the General Staff, which is "...the acceleration of the purification of the region from the civilians and of the migration of the inhabitants to the west (of Turkey) and to other regions". Despite all these they cannot ensure abandonement of the Kurdish labourers and masses from the demand of their national rights.

The depening economical crisis and the piling political problems are compelling the Turkish ruling classes "to do something" and to seek for a "solution" which will not give any harm to the system or ensure the least damage. Despite the frictions within them and the statements that 'no steps will be taken which would mean a concession to the terrorists', they all have, in this or that way, realised that the 'old way' can no longer work. They have also realised that hundreds of trillions of warfare appropriations and the continious operations carried out with the rethorics 'nearly finished' are not sufficient to get a nation to surrender. The main policy of the dictatorship and the government is, no doubt, based on denial and distruction. This policy will not be abandoned with all its conclusions, unless the struggle of the Kurdish and Turkish workers and labourers reaches to a level which will make this policy completely invalid. However, the bourgeoisie, having learnt from the international experiences, knows that the Kurdish people obtaining limited rights in language and in cultural areas within the system is preferable to their obtainment of the national liberation. It is possible for the bourgeoisie to take this step if it is obliged to."

The concerns of the imperialists to the "Kurdish question" is not new. They are in difficulty in supporting the policy of the Turkish state towards the Kurds as a whole. However, what is essential, in terms of the imperialists, is their own interests.

"Both the US and the European imperialists are trying to keep the Kurdish people dependent, to have an influence on Kurdistan and to keep the dependent statutes of Turkey by blocking the united, anti-imperialist struggle of the Kurdish and Turkish peoples. In reality, the imperialist concern for the Kurdish question is not for human rights -they are violating these rights everyday. Their concern, in terms of each imperialist state, is originating from the desire to manipulate national contradictions in order to establish, consolidate and maintain their hegemony in the region.

The imperialists, mainly the US and Germany, on the one hand, consider it necessary to keep Turkey in hand and the 'solution' of the Kurdish question within the present statutes of Turkey through the 'recognition of the cultural rights'. They, on the other hand, find it corresponding to their interests to keep the alternative of a dependent Kurdistan available. That is why they are interested in the 'Kurdish question' and talk about the rights of the Kurds in the realm of so-called defence of human rights.

The Kurdish people does not need imperialist lawyers (defenders). On the contrary, our people has to keep away from the trapping approaches and plans of the imperialists. It has to rely on the support and the struggle of the world proletariat and labourers, mainly the Turkish people and the working class of Turkey. There is no doubt that the obtainment of cultural rights, free use of the language, the Kurdish school, TV and newspaper or, for instance, the ruling classes being compelled to recognise some political rights, cannot be refused just because the imperialist bourgeoisie wants these rights to be recognised in terms of its interests. When utilised correctly, the obtainment and use of these rights are important -as reforms- to march forward, for a people with the statutes of slavery. The use of these rights would serve the progress of the struggle for freedom and social emancipation, in the hands of the workers and labourers.

If the Kurdish people continues the struggle without forgetting the fact that genuine liberation expresses the emancipaion of the workers and labourers from the capitalist slavery and without falling into the traps of the compromising Kurdish bourgeoisie, which is seeking for imperialist support, it will not give a chance to the continuation of national slavery by means of the changes in statutes within the system. US, British, German and French imperialism, today, are trying to penetrate into the struggles of the oppressed dependent peoples in order to dominate their lives. The Kurdish workers and labourers, having taken this situation into account, must utilise the contradictions between the imperialists, or between the imperialists and their servants. They must advance the struggle against them. This should involve not believing the so-called independence plans of the Kurdish reformist bourgeoisie, who are relying on imperialism, or their deceptive relationship with imperialism under the name of diplomacy. The way to do this lies in massively rising against the economical political, national, etc. oppressions of the bourgeoisie and the government, and in combining this struggle with the struggle against imperialism. It is necessary to struggle to obtain the cultural rights; but it is a well-known fact that such rights are insufficient. The struggle for national freedom must be tied to the struggle for revolution, without rejecting individual reforms. It must broaden to become a workers-peasants' revolution and be directed to the aim of the elimination of the bourgeois dictatorship and capitalism.

When the Kurdish workers and labouring masses act accordingly (with such a conception), "they will see the imperialist traps clearly. They will have the possibility to utilise, in a revolutionary manner, the crisis in which the dictatorship is engulfed and to take further steps to reach to the aim. They will also broaden the possibilities of marching towards genuine emancipation, in a line where reforms are utilised for revolution, by making ineffective the Kurdish reaction and the reformist-burgeois policy tied to it."

"Such an attitude has to be that of the Kurdish workers before anyone. Only this attitude can prevent the debates on 'cultural rights' from diverting the aim." 

__________________ 

*DEP (Democracy Party): It is a bourgeois-reformist party consisting of the Kurdish MPs mainly elected from Turkey-Kurdistan. It has recently closed down by the Constitutional Court with the reason of "devisive behaviour". Because it was talking about the oppression on the Kurdish people and advocating some changes within the capitalist system, on the present statutes of Turkey-Kurdistan through reformist-parliamentarist means. Nowadays, some of the party MPs are being tried, with a threat of execution. 

ON THE MIDDLE-EAST, CAUCASUS AND BALKANS AND THE STRUGGLE AGAINST IMPERIALISM

(This article of which the first part has been published in the previous issue is summarised from Devrimin Sesi, the central organ of the TDKP, dated May '94, number 177.)

In the history of civilisations and of imperialism, the Balkans has been one of the most important regions of turmoil and war . The big powers, especially in the last century, have been the provacateurs of the conflicts among the Balkan countries. They have also shown interest in having the regional nations and peoples submitted, and controlled by their hegemony in the region.

The roots of the contradictions among the Balkan countries, and of the problems, originated from the contradictions that lie in the historical fight for hegemony. The fact is that the contradictions that prevent stability and peace in the region and lead to conflicts and wars between the neighbouring nations and states are not, on their own, insoluable contradictions. However, the Balkan peoples and states cannot prevent from falling into meaningless (reactionary) enmities and wars. There is no doubt that the main reason for that lies in the hegemony of the imperialist countries established on the regional peoples. It also lies in the frequent inter-imperialist fights for hegemony, demanding changes in the "status-quo".

The present violent national wars and frictions in the Balkans are, in reality, not frictions or the settling accounts among the regional nations and peoples. On the contrary, they are frictions between the imperialist states which are after hegemony and influence, and between their collaborator national reactions. This fact does not change, despite the fact that the ones which are, at present, in conflict and war are the regional national forces whilst the imperialist countiries seem in a "peaceful position". The imprialist countries are presently carrying out "their work" by means of their collaborators. It is known that the turmoils and wars in the Balkans are explained to be "temporary", originating from"the prevention of the forces of the old regime to the transition to the free market and democracy". There is no doubt that such "explanations" of the imperialist governments tend to deceive the workers and labourers and to prove the external interventions to be "right".

There is only one acceptable reason for the special interest of the imperialist countries to the Balkans and for the tense, turmoil and wars in the region becoming fare ground: The dragging of the Balkan peoples into a profound deception and the big capitalist countries making use of this deception to seize the Balkan countries completely. It is quite obvious that the imperialist states stand behind the turmoils and wars in the Balkans.

There are two main reasons why the Balkans are important in the fight of the big capitalist powers for hegemony: Firstly, the Balkans is the most advanced market among the backward dependent regions. Secondly, it is one of the few regions that have the greatest military-strategic importance in the inter-imperialist struggle for hegemony.

Beside their economic importance for the capitalist monopoliies and imperialist states, the Balkan countries have also greater importance in terms of their political and military position. The Balkans is in a region where the world trade routes and energy transport lines are intersected. It is, at the same time, a region overlooking these routes and lines (Suez-Gibraltar). Therefore, when the re-devision of the world is on the agenda, in striking, controlling and defending the Middle-East, Mediterannean, North Africa, Caucasus and even Europe, it becomes the most important foothold for controlling three continents.

For over 30 years, the Balkan peninsula, except Albania, had been divided into the English-American and the Soviet Russian spheres of influence. The collapse of the Soviet Russia has opened new spheres of influence to the English American imperialism. It has also led to the attack of the German imperialism, which was waiting in shadow, and to its emergence as a power that has a say in the Balkans. Germany has penetrated into the English American "status-quo", become dominant in Slovenia and Croatia and a power in Albania, Romania, and Bosnia-Hersegovina. That inevitably led the Anglo American governments, which had constituted a barricade against the Soviet Russia for thirty years, to enter into a bolder struggle. In just the same way, these countries have backed, even though concealed, the Serbian reaction, strengthened their relations with Macedonia, Albania and Bosnia-Hersegovina, and have not sacrificed the international public opinion. Russia, in the mean time, has not stayed aside of this struggle for hegemony. Neither has it abstained from emerging as a focus increasing its pressure on Romania and announcing its brotherhood with Serbia.

As the facts have proved, in the conflicts in Yugoslavia, the European countries -except Britain- including Germany have taken position on one side and the Anglo American and Russian imperialists, even though with adverse plans, on the other. The reasons why the conflicts in the Balkans have turned into chronic ones lie, no doubt, in these groupings and attempts that constitute the corresponding form of imperialist intervention and wrangle to the existing "relations".

The big imperialist states acting with the UN "resolutions" that suggest "peaceful solution" to the warring sides and use arms "jointly" from time to time should not mislead anyone. It is true that these states act in "alliance" in the intervention to the Balkans, as , in general, is the case everywhere. However, this "aliance" consists of adverse interests and includes "damaging" demands against each other.

If the behind door participants of the turmoils and wars in the Balkans are the big powers, how can they intervene together? How can, for instance, the US war planes bomb the Serbian positions whom they back? On what basis can Germany threaten Croatia, its collaborator?

The answers to these questions lie in the following two phenomena: Firstly, although the process is developing towards international open conflicts, the inter-imperialist contradictions have not yet deepened or harsened to the point that will lead to a complete break away, an open confrontation against each other or to open blockings as enemy blocks. The economical and political phenomena compel the imperialist governments to ally in their interventions against the oppressed nations and peoples. They, on the other hand, are compelled to carry out their contradicting interests and fight for devision by means of their collaborators and of policies covered with diplomacy of pseudo "peace" and "democracy". Secondly, the attempts of the regional rectionary forces to expand and strengthen against each other have contradicted the general interests and the policies of the imperialist powers backing them. Therefore, the necessity of bringing these reactionary forces into "line" compels the interventionist powers to act as "the United Nations".

The fight of the imperialist states for the hegemony in the Balkans is not limited to the present interests or to the possibilities of exploitation and of profit. The chief imperialist countries have , for a century, been implementing their Balkan policies according to the needs of their strategy for the redevision of the world. The policy pursued by the Anglo-American, German, French and Russian imperialists is to become the dominating power in the Balkans; to use their hegemony in the region as a base for their fights in other regions ; and to obtain a strategic foothold when the time comes for the definitive settling of accounts. 

Turkey's Balkan Policy and Imperialism

Turkey is one of those rare countries that does not have good relationships with any of its neighbouring countries. It has been, especially since the World War II, pursuing a policy of tension and war in the Balkans, as it is the case with all its neighbours. Owing to its policy and attitude, the reaction of Turkey has got important and dangerous problems and conflicts with the bordering Greece and Bulgaria. Its problems with Greece on the Aegean continental shelf, Cyprus, the Turkish and Greek minorities, and with Bulgaria on the Turkish minority have been, until recently, the most significant "external" problems in the "western" border of Turkey. The incidents took place in the Balkans in the early 1990s and the imperialist intervention have led Turkey to incite the contradictions and conflicts in the region and to create new problems.

The reactionary forces in Turkey have not only pursued a general policy provoking war in the Balkans, but also incited an interantional offensive, and sent troops to the region. On the other hand, it has escalated its conflicts with Greece and its threatening it with war has become a line.

Turkey has been, especially for the last five-six years, pursuing a line of intervention in all the problems and conflicts in the Balkans. It has become one of the diplomatic and military pawns of the Western countries, mainly of the US, as is the case in the Middle-East and Caucasus.

The extract of the image that the Turkish bourgeoisie and reaction want to create in Turkey's public opinion, regarding their interventions and attempts in the Balkans, is this: Turkey will become a political power in Bulgaria, Yugoslavia and Albania. Hence, it will get the possibility to restrict the influence of Russia in the region and to compete with it. It will siege Greece by allying with Albania, Bosnia and Macedonia. Finally, by basing on "the Economic Cooperation of the Black Sea" it will seize new and profitable markets in the Balkans. Having had such a strong position in the Balkans, Turkey will be taken into consideration by the allied big powers and have a say everywhere as a big leading country that has guaranteed its security. That is the brief picture drawn by the Turkish government and diplomacy to the people of Turkey regarding the situation of the country and its possibilities in the Balkans.

However, the bourgeoisie and the reaction of Turkey, in fact, know that reaching these aims, in the present relationships, is a hollow daydream. Because they also know that the Balkan countries are more developed than Turkey and that the imperialist states did not leave any sphere of hegemony to Turkey.

There are two main objectives of the attempts of Turkey in the Balkans: the first one is to seize the superiority against the collaborator reactions in the region; to have the possibility to market itself with a higher price; and if possible, to realize regional alliances against Greece and Russia and to get the support of other imperialist countries for its attempts. The second objective is to prevent the working class and the people from acting as a class and people; to spread in the ranks of the people nationalist and imperialist sentiments and animosity towards other nations; to make people accept the bourgeois-imperialist interests as "national interests"; and to render the repression and terror in the country continuous and efficient.

There is no doubt that the bill of the crisis the system is in, of aggressive foreign policy and of the armament, its inevitable consequence, will be shifted on the shoulders of the workers and labourers.

THE DUAL OFFENSIVE ON THE UNIONISTS SIDING WITH THE CLASS 

The offensives of capital on the workers and labourers are intensifying in Turkey, day after day, in the form of privatisation, subcontracting and dismisals. Besides that, the unionists on the side of the workers are also face to face with the offensives of the trade union bosses and bureaucrats.

The advanced workers and honest branch leaders came together a few years ago and formed the workers' platforms of union branches against the offensives and the compromising attitudes of the confederation centres. 

The following article gives examples of how the honest unionists who support the workers. are being attacked. It has been taken from the 20th issue of a weekly current affairs and interpretation magazine called GERCEK (the Reality) dated 13 August 1994. It is published in Turkey and has a circulation of over 10 thousand both in Turkey and Europe. 

The steps taken by the workers' platforms in line with the economic and democratic demands of the working class led to the intensification of the offensives of the union bosses and bureaucrats on the unionists siding with the workers. 

At the Izmir workers' assembly of Turk-Is (the biggest of the three union confederation in Turkey), Bayram Meral, the chairman of Turk-Is, and other bureaucrats did not refrain from openly reflecting their anger, when Sukru Gunsili, the branch leader of TUM-TIS (Transport Workers Union) said that the solution of the problems of the class lie in a general strike and resistance. Meral said, pointing to Gunsili, "how can Turk-Is defend this friend who is attacking us, if he is taken by the police?"

While the union bosses and bureaucrats were not doing anything against privatisation, subcontracting and dismisals aof the workers, the sensitive unionists, branch leaders and advanced workers organised meetings. With the initiative of the Istanbul branch of the workers' platform, 40 union branches made a call to the leadership of Turk-Is 'to go on a general strike'. 

Such attitudes as siding with the class have bothered capital. Munir Ceylan, the chairman of Petrol-Is (Oil Workers Union), has been sentenced to a 20-month-imprisonment and banned from working as a unionist because of his 'divergent' attitude towards the Kurdish question and his efforts to lay claim to the problems of the class.

Owing to his statement, Atilay Ayçin, the chairman of Hava-Is (Airport Workers Union), too, has been sentenced to a 20-month-imprisonment. In addition, the leadership of Turk-Is has got angry with Ayçin's call upon them to resign and opened an investigation about him under the pretext of not having joined in the actions on 20 July, while nothing has been done about others.

Hatice Gorgu, the chairperson of no. 1 branch of Tek Gida-Is (Tobacco, drink and food industry workers union) and a member of the executive committee of the Istanbul branch of the workers' platform has also been the object of the union bosses'rage. She has been banned, by the general centre of the union, from working as a professional unionist. The workers stated that it was not only an attack on Hatice Gorgu but also on the working class.

These are not the only examples of the dual offensives on the unionists siding with the class. Sabri Topçu, the chairman of TUMTIS (transport workers union), Yurdal Senel, its secretary, and tens of others are still being tried owing to their opposition to the Gulf War. Many others have been punished for joining the Mayday celebrations.

Riza Turgut, the chairman of the Istanbul branch of Seluloz-Is (cellulose workers union) and a member of the executive committee of the Istanbul branch of the workers' platform, and Ercan Atmaca, the chairman of the no.1 Istanbul branch of Yol-Is (road and construction workers union) and th espokesman of the Istanbul branch of the workers' platforms have been warned of being 'undisciplined' by the general centres of their unions." 

------------------------------- 

They are not the only ones who are being subjected to the offensives of capital. There are 104 prisoners of conscience (except those from illegal organisations) in Turkey where there is no freedom of speech (the number worldwide is 700). Social scientists like Haluk Gerger, Ismail Besikçi, Fikret Baskaya, Ragip Zarakolu,etc. journalists, publishers, unionists and even the members of the parliament (one independent and four from DEP) are among them. Newspapers -and even legal parties- are being closed down or being compelled to pay fines of hundreds of millions of Turkish lira. All these, as Haluk Gerger, who is in prison now because of a message he sent to the commemoration of the execution of Deniz Gezmis, stated, are the indicators of the crisis of the ruling classes to reign. 

COMMUNIST PARTIES AND ORGANISATIONS MET IN ECUADOR 

15 communist parties and organisations met in Ecuador for a four-day-conference at the end of July. Holding this conference had been decided at the meeting of 13 parties and organisations in Europe, last year in November. The items on the agenda were these: 

* The present crisis of capitalism and the situation of the workers' movement; 

* Revisionism; and 

* The fundamental features and the valid norms of the organisational platform of the international movement.

It was announced that the conference of the fraternal parties will be the principal -but not superior to the decisions and wills of the individual parties- organ where the ideological, political and organisational problems of the proletarian and communist movement are discussed and joint decisions and solutions are reached on some certain themes . It was also decided to form a coordination committee elected by the conference and to publish a theoretical magazine as a means of improving the ideological discussion and unity and the international solidarity.

On the last day of the conference it was decided to launch a campaign for Francisco Caraballo, the general secretary of the Communist Party of Colombia-ML and the commander of its military wing,EPL, and for Hamma Hammami, the spokesman of the Workers Communist Party of Tunisia, who both have recently been arrested.

The following proclamation and the statements of the solidarity with Francisco CARABALLO and Hamma HAMMAMI were produced at the end of the conference. 

COMMUNIST PROCLAIM TO THE WORKERS AND PEOPLES 

In the last decades, the communist and workers' movement has been badly hit. The process of capitalist restoration that generalised with the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and that has developed in events such as those of Eastern Europe, in the ex-USSR, the treason in Albania, etc. are part of the action of imperialism and all reactionary, revisionist and pro-capitalist forces. The historical limitations, inexperience, the lack of development of theory, the underestimation of the contradictions that belong to the socialist society, bureaucratism and isolation of the Communist Party from the workers and peoples intervened as causes by which communists, workers and peoples could not defend their conquest and avoid capitalist restoration. We could not either avoid the upraisal of a new bourgeois class, with the mask of "socialist", that took power and destroyed socialism.

After the last and general assault of imperialism and capitalism, which pretended to wipe out Marxism-Leninism, scientific socialism, communism, proletarian revolution and anti-imperialism, we are rising again in all continents. Communists are born again in each workers' strike, in each popular mobilisation, in each struggle of the working class and peoples for freedom and democracy, in each youth revolt and in each guerrilla group. We reorganise, unite, draw lessons from what has happened and continue to march forward.

We will not give up our endeavour until we accomplish our historical mission.

We are the millions of human beings in struggle. We, the workers continue to be the main producers of all wealth, everywhere and under the different conditions in which the means of production develope. Nothing in essence will change as long as others live from our sweat and as long as we cannot achieve the transformation of this society into a higher type. 

What type of innovation, what type of technical-scientific revolution can displace us as the main axis of the contemporary society? All scientific and technical advances and discoveries do not absolutely change the proletarian nature. Neither do they avoid the means of production continue to be in capitalist hands. The richness produced by our work has been and continue to be the material base for all scientific and technological developments.

The class struggle cannot be abolished, neither will it disappear as long as the existance of private property on the means of production maintains. Yet, we shoul take into account these scientific and technical developments, learn how to control and use them in the benefit of the peoples and revolution.

No other social class or stratum can achieve these objectives. This is a proletarian task. The proletariat is the most revolutionary class in the society, with the highest practical spirit, able to unite and to lead other exploited classes and strata in the struggle against capital.

We are present and active in the present day epoch. We, the working class and the peoples have not set aside a single instant from the struggle for our objectives. Nothing substantial has changed from the epoch as Lenin defined it. It continues to be the epoch of imperialism and proletarian revolutions. (...)The fundamental contradictions of the epoch remain the same.

Imperialism and the bourgeoisie fiercely attack Marxism-Leninism and proclaim its invalidity. We ask: If this theory is useless, why to attack it so fiercely? Simple, because they know that this theory is up to date and standing. Marxism-Leninism is based on the continuously developing scientific knowledge, on social development of experiences and on progressive human thought. It is a theory with a revolutionary character which represents the historical interests of the proletariat and of all humanity. It progresses dialectically; breaks barriers and engenders the new. We Marxist-Leninists are conscious of our weakness in comprehension, application and development of Marxism-Leninism. That is a question of our own limitations; a question that we will surpass. The historical experience has demonstrated the vitality of Marxism-Leninism. If there are outphased and obsolote ideologies and theories that belong to the past, these are the bourgeois ones. Marxism-Leninism is the present and the future.

According to their class interests, revisionists and opportunists of all shades brought about anti-communist conclusions. They want to preserve their position as "great leaders" and their privilages; they want to handle the workers' movement to avoid that the workers take their destiny into their own hands; and thus serve the bourgeoisie, causing a great damage to the working class. On the opposite, communists struggle against these deviations, and put apart these servants of the bourgeoisie, and help the working class to rely on its own forces and advance.

Revisionism is a danger for the revolutionary process, for the communist parties and for the construction of socialism. Revisionism and opportunism of all shades continue to be a danger against which the struggle cannot be relegated or underrated. 

(...) 

Communist parties are the indispensible instruments to organise revolution in each one of our countries. We as a whole, are the International Conference of the Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organisations, the real alternative of the working class and peoples. The flame of the proletarian revolution and the hope of the peoples continue to be in the hands of the communists. 

(...) 

Imperialism has always been and will continue to be the source of aggression and plunder wars. in the recent years Iraq, Somalia, Panama, Yemen, Ruanda, ex-Yugoslavia, ex-USSR, Haiti, etc. have been sceneries of the aggressive, racial and reactionary wars. We denounce the truly character of these wars. It is required to organise and support popular movements against these imperial war policy. We, the workers, peoples and communists should be at the head of this struggle. 

(...) 

We combat for revolution. We defend the revolutionary violance of the peoples in seizing power. That demands fom us to learn how to use all forms of struggle.

We ratify our decision to hold aloft the Marxist-Leninist banner, to fight for its application and to convert our parties and organisations into a political, social and organisational alternative, both national and internationally. Our parties and organisations restate our pledge to fight on the side of the working class and peoples for the proletarian revolution and for the independence and soveigrenity of the peoples, together with democrats, patriots and progressive persons, and to oppose to capitalist and imperialist domination.

We hold alive the spirit of the Paris Commune, the October revolution and all revolutionary processes and experiences, based upon the principles elaborated by Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin. 

(...) 

PROLETARIANS OF ALL COUNTRIES, UNITE! 

August 1994, Quito-Ecuador

Communist Party of Germany (KPD) 

Communist Party of Colombia-ML 

Communist Party of Chile (Proletarian Action) 

Communist ML Party of Ecuador 

Communist Organisation October of Spain 

Workers Communist Party of France 

Organisation for the Construction of the Proletarian Party of Italy 

Communist Party of Mexico-ML 

Communist Party of Labour of Dominican Republic 

Revolutionary Communist Party of Turkey (TDKP) 

Red Flag Party of Venezuela 

Revolutionary Communist Party of Upper Volta 

SHOW SOLIDARITY WITH F. CARABALLO AND H. HAMMAMI 

The parties and Marxist-Leninist organisations, signing below, meeting in Ecuador, express our communist solidarity with comrade Francisco Caraballo and his fellows detained by the Colombian army.

Caraballo, first secretary of the Communist Party of Colombia (ML), commander of the Popular Liberation Army, of the Simon Bolivar Guerrilla Coordination, revolutionary fighter since his early youth, embodies a communist militant model. His self-denial has always been exemplary and at all times he has placed the interests of the Colombian revolution above any other consideration.

Francisco Caraballo is also an ardent internationalist who proclaims the unity of the world communists, as an indispensible factor to cement active solidarity of the peoples of the world in the common struggle against imperialism and reaction. 

His arrest is a harsh blow to the Colombian revolution, a blow that we resent directly. Notwithstanding, we are convinced, that following his first secretary and commander example, the Colombian communists and the EPL combatants will be able to overcome this cruel blow, redouble their revolutionary ardour and to march forward by the revolutionary path, taking into account his words:

"We, the EPL commanders and fighters, have been peace partizans; but the political realm itself and the blows of the reaction have compelled us to become armed man."

We show our solidarity with Francisco Caraballo and his comrades, along with all Colombian fighters and their people. 

------------------------------------------------ 

After having been detained by the Tunisian police, Hamma Hammami, the spokesman of the Workers Communist Party of Tunisia, has been subjected to heavy physical and moral tortures and left to rot in the worst conditions in dungeon. Various human rights organisations have protested, several times, at the situation of the prisions in Tunisia and the ill treatments towards comrade Hammani.

The only accusation directed to him by the authorities is "to be a member of a banned political organisation". That means the violation of a principal right, namely the right to oppose a regime which is the enemy of the people.

Up to now, in Tunisia, in many African countries and in France, various activities have been carried out to protest against the attacks and the ill prison conditions to which comrade Hammami has been subjected and to demand his release.

We demand the release of Hammami and call upon all progressive forces to raise their voices to rescue Hammami from the paws of the reactionary regime in Tunisia.

Ecuador, July 1994