The Russian idée fixe

By Andriy Movchan

Published date 3 January, 2026

First published at Counterpunch.

“Russia’s defensive war against NATO expansion” — a concept that has become almost axiomatic for many Western leftists. This concept conveniently serves both to rationalize Russia’s actions and to radicalize criticism of their own governments. But what role does Putin himself assign to the supposed NATO threat? A close reading of his key speeches reveals that Putin explicitly denies any danger of a NATO attack on Russia. Instead, all the ruler’s attention and passion are focused elsewhere — on the question of primordial ‘historical justice.’ Putin dusts off millennia-old chronicles, finding in them proof of his reactionary utopia, his imagined historical right to possess Ukraine. Let’s talk about the most underestimated cause of this war — ideological obsession. The Russian idée fixe.

1,300 kilometers. That’s how much longer Russia’s border with the NATO military bloc became in 2022 after two previously neutral countries — Sweden and Finland — joined the alliance. The Baltic Sea effectively turned into an internal sea of NATO. St. Petersburg, Russia’s northern capital, now lies just 148 kilometers from the border of a hostile bloc. What was Russia’s reaction? Did Putin issue a military ultimatum? Threaten a preemptive operation? Concentrate troops on the border? No. None of that happened.

Meanwhile, in the context of Ukraine, the NATO question keeps surfacing in Russian discourse. An even greater role is assigned to NATO in the discourse of the Western left. And this despite the fact that Ukraine was denied membership back in 2008. Germany, France, and many other states openly opposed Ukraine’s accession — when the veto of even one member is enough to block it. The very presence of Russia’s naval base in Sevastopol already made Ukraine’s accession to the alliance barely possible. After the annexation of Crimea and the outbreak of war in Donbas, Ukraine’s NATO membership became even more unthinkable — the existence of territorial disputes and ongoing conflicts automatically closes the alliance’s doors to any applicant.

It turns out that Russia’s northern neighbor joining NATO poses no threat to it — while Ukraine, which had no chance of membership, became the target of a full-scale invasion. How can this be explained? Let’s give the floor to Vladimir Putin himself.

Who is Mr. Ruric?

Let’s go back to February 2024. Moscow. After two years of boycotts by Western media, an American journalist arrives in Russia’s snow-covered capital to interview Vladimir Putin. That journalist is Tucker Carlson — a conservative blogger and supporter of Donald Trump. Skeptical of liberal media explanations for the reasons behind Russia’s invasion, he wants to hear firsthand what drove Putin to launch the largest land war in Europe since World War II. After all, the leader of the world’s biggest nuclear power couldn’t have sent tank columns toward a neighboring capital without serious reasons. Perhaps there was something that pushed Putin to make this difficult decision — something the Western audience doesn’t know? Moreover, Carlson already has his own guesses on the matter: most likely, it all comes down to the Democrats’ administration and their eastern NATO policy, which, he suspects, provoked Russia into this desperate move, leaving it no choice.

“On February 24, 2022, you addressed your country in your nationwide address when the conflict in Ukraine started and you said that you were acting because you had come to the conclusion that the United States through NATO might initiate a quote, ‘surprise attack on our country.” And to American ears that sounds paranoid. Tell us why you believe the United States might strike Russia out of the blue. How did you conclude that?” Tucker Carlson asks his first question.

The question is as precise as it is fair. After all, in the twenty-first century, no state can openly wage a war of conquest without framing it as defense against an external threat. Every aggressor — from Hitler to Netanyahu — has called their war forced, defensive, provoked from the outside, a response to danger facing the state and its citizens. And if Russia sees itself as defending, then surely it must have the strongest possible arguments for doing so. What was threatening Russia? What danger was Putin trying to prevent?

“It’s not that the United States was preparing to launch a surprise attack on Russia, I never said so.” Putin deflects. “Are we having a talk show here, or a serious conversation? I will take only 30 seconds or one minute of your time to give you a brief historical background. Don’t you mind?”

In an attempt to explain to the Western audience his true motives for attacking Ukraine, Putin delivers a 25-minute pseudo-historical lecture. From it, astonished Americans hear for the first time names like the ancient Rus’ prince Rurik, princes Oleg and Yaroslav the Wise, Mongol leaders Genghis Khan and Batu Khan, cossack hetman Bohdan Khmelnytsky, and Empress Catherine II. Putin speaks of the blood and spiritual unity of Ukrainians and Russians, calling them “one people.” He even tries to hand Carlson a stack of seventeenth-century archival letters supposedly proving that Ukrainians are inseparable from Russians.

Any efforts by Carlson to interrupt and return to the main question — what exactly threatened Russia in 2022? — fail. Putin keeps dragging the American back through the centuries, trying to explain how Russia’s enemies “artificially separated” Ukrainians from the one Russian people. All of this, Putin insists, must be understood in order to grasp the deeper causes of the invasion.

For half an hour, the Russian leader, referring to ancient chronicles and medieval charters, tries to convince the American that Ukrainian lands have belonged to Russia from time immemorial. The Ukrainian nation and its statehood, he argues, are artificial — a historical accident, an awkward mistake that it is now time to correct.

‘They want to attack Russia,’ ‘They want to destroy Russia,’ ‘The country faces a military invasion,’ ‘Our citizens could become victims of aggression,’ ‘Our internationally recognized territory is being seized’ — not a single one of these phrases was said, nor could it have been.

Putin himself admits: the Russian Federation as a state faced no threat. The danger loomed over another Russia — the mythological, thousand-year-old Russia encompassing broader “historical” lands. The Russian Federation within the borders of the former RSFSR, once outlined by the Bolsheviks, is merely a fragment of the former great Rus’ territory, including Belarus and Ukraine. The separation and ultimate departure of Ukraine from the imagined spiritual and political space of the “Russian World” — that is the threat Putin seeks to prevent. And at the end of the conversation, he states this to Carlson directly:

“The reunification [of one people] will happen. It never went anywhere,” Putin concludes confidently.

Right to Ukraine

Let’s ask ourselves: if the leader of a warring country delivers a lengthy lecture about the depths of history to explain his motives — does it matter to him? Yes, it does. Nothing matters more. “A serious conversation.”

Putin was given two hours of airtime to explain to the world that he isn’t a villain and is merely defending Russia from the NATO threat. Yet instead, he devotes the bulk of his airtime to what he sees as the most important thing — a primordialist justification of his supposed “right” to possess Ukraine.

What should we call this? An ideological obsession — an idée fixe.

Unlike the thousands of Western Marxists who insist that Russia faces a NATO threat, Putin himself claims nothing of the sort. On the contrary, he denies it outright. No one was planning — or is planning — to attack the Russian Federation. The reason for the war, Putin says, is the “unlawful,” “blasphemous,” and “historically criminal” removal of Russia’s mythical cradle — Kyiv and the surrounding southern Rus’ lands — from its sphere of influence.

Little wonder that Putin shows complete indifference toward Sweden and Finland joining NATO. The reason is simple: they do not belong to the imagined primordial space known as the “Russian World.” People there do not speak Russian; there are no ancient Rus’ churches, no sites of great battles, no sacred artifacts of nationalist mythology. The Finns can hardly be called “one people” with the Russians. But Ukraine is a different story — the possession of which is the idée fixe of Russian imperial nationalism, and of Vladimir Putin personally.

Indeed, the ruler of Russia does see the war as defensive. But in what sense? Simply put, he is not “defending” the Russian Federation within its 1991 borders, but rather the frontiers of an ancient Empire that, in his deepest conviction, were unlawfully and artificially torn away by enemies from the bosom of Russia’s thousand-year-year-old statehood.

Just as Zionist leaders firmly believe that their “right to Judea and Samaria is written in the Bible,” the Russian leadership has come to believe that its right to possess Ukraine is confirmed by the chronicles of Kyivan Rus’ and the letters of Bohdan Khmelnytsky.

For both Israel and Russia, the concept of international law is far too young and has not yet stood the test of time. The UN-based system of international law is only eighty years old; the European treaty on the inviolability of borders — barely fifty. What is this nonsense compared to millennia-old chronicles and sacred texts?

If international law humiliates Russia by denying its “legitimate claims” to the cradle of Russian civilization, then it must be bad international law! If it does not allow the return of historical lands, it serves Russia’s enemies. If it perpetuates the dismemberment of the once-unified Russian Empire, if it allows Ukrainians to leave the bosom of the “Russian World,” then following such law is not only harmful but criminal. This is roughly the logic of the Kremlin elders.

Few would doubt the deep ideological motives driving Israel’s leaders in their permanent war for territorial expansion. Why, then, do the international left refuse to see the similar ideological impulses behind Russia’s leadership?

To ignore how obsessed Putin is with the conquest of Ukraine requires an exceptional kind of blindness.

The concept of a divided people

Perhaps one interview isn’t enough to draw conclusions? Let us turn to Putin’s other key speeches and statements.

Six months before the invasion, in July 2021 — as the world was only beginning to recover from the pandemic and no one could imagine a coming full-scale war — Vladimir Putin published his infamous article “On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians.” In it, he for the first time laid out a comprehensive declaration of his commitment to the primordialist myth, preparing the ideological ground for his future invasion.

In this completely pseudo-scientific article, full of manipulations and false claims, Putin declares that Russians, Belarusians, and Ukrainians are not distinct nations but branches of one Russian people. The main idea running through the entire article is clear: Ukrainian identity was artificially constructed and nurtured by Russia’s enemies to split one people apart and pit its parts against each other.

Ukrainians are denied a separate national identity, their own statehood, and the ability to exercise sovereignty as they see fit. For the first time, Vladimir Putin systematically lays out his views on the proper world order: Ukraine must exist exclusively within the Russian “spiritual and political space.” Any attempt by Ukrainians to leave this sphere will be regarded as an infringement on the integrity of primordialist harmony.

What is this, if not a direct declaration of the ideological motives behind the war?

Some might say: “Perhaps this is just one of many statements. Surely there are others in which Putin pragmatically describes threats to Russia from Western imperialism.” No — Putin has written no other programmatic article. His piece “On the Historical Unity…” remains the sole and defining manifesto of the invasion.

Vladimir Putin repeated the same theses in his keynote speech on 21 February 2022, three days before the invasion began.

“Since ancient times, the inhabitants of the southwestern historical lands of Kyivan Rus’ called themselves Russians and Orthodox,” this is how he begins his yet another pseudo-historical excursus.

Exactly half of his speech is devoted to the ideological argument that Ukraine is an artificial state, created by the Bolsheviks. That Lenin’s criminal mistake in national policy resulted in the excision from the unified Russian Empire of an “ugly creature” — an independent Ukraine. And, apparently, it now falls to Vladimir Putin to correct this fateful mistake.

Yes, this speech also touches on the expansion of NATO’s military influence across Ukraine. But what matters is the context in which it is mentioned. The problem, from Putin’s perspective, is this: Ukraine’s coastal cities were conquered in the eighteenth century by Russian tsarist warlords at the cost of Russian soldiers’ blood, and therefore the presence of NATO bases there would be a mockery of the memory of heroic Russian colonisers.

For the sake of fairness, it should be noted that in two brief paragraphs, Vladimir Putin does mention a possible NATO threat to Russia’s internationally recognized territory. He warns that if the Americans deploy their missiles and strategic bombers in Ukraine, it would be a “knife to the throat.”

But… First, these brief passages are completely lost against the backdrop of his extensive primordialist justification for the war. If defending against a hypothetical NATO military aggression were truly the primary motive, it would clearly have been a higher priority. Second, the scenario of nuclear weapons being deployed in Ukraine and the Americans attacking the world’s largest nuclear power is utterly far-fetched — something Putin himself would acknowledge two years later in the Carlson interview cited above. Third, as already mentioned, when the “knife to the throat” came from Finland, Putin did… nothing!

What are we left with? Putin’s two main encyclicals on the invasion stand as pure distillations of ideology.

Core argument

Perhaps, after four years of war — after the enormous sacrifices made by the Ukrainian people in resisting the invasion, after Ukrainians have demonstrated through every action that they refuse to live under Russian rule — perhaps, after all this, Vladimir Putin has come down to a more pragmatic stance and abandoned his idée fixe of “reuniting the divided people”? No, he remains faithful to his reactionary utopia.

“I have said many times that I consider the Russian and Ukrainian peoples to be one people, in fact. In that sense, all of Ukraine is ours,” Putin declared in the summer of 2025.

That same summer, Donald Trump decided to lift Russia out of international isolation and invited Putin to a summit in Alaska. Offering fairly generous concessions, he hoped that the Russian leader, as a pragmatic politician, would strike a deal and make peace. But Trump was wrong. No deal took place. The FT describes the details of the closed-door meeting as follows:

Putin rejected the US offer of sanctions relief for a ceasefire, insisting the war would end only if Ukraine capitulated… The Russian president then delivered a rambling historical discursion spanning medieval princes such as Rurik of Novgorod and Yaroslav the Wise, along with the 17th century Cossack chieftain Bohdan Khmelnytsky — figures he often cites to support his claim Ukraine and Russia are one nation. Taken aback, Trump raised his voice several times and at one point threatened to walk out. He ultimately cut the meeting short and cancelled a planned lunch…

Let us just reiterate this point. At the very first talks since 2022 between the leaders of the world’s two largest nuclear powers, Vladimir Putin discusses with his counterpart not the ‘encirclement of Russia by NATO bases,’ not American nuclear weapons in Europe, not ‘Russia’s security concerns,’ not intermediate-range missiles or anti-missile defence — in short, none of the issues constantly cited by Western leftists when discussing Russia’s supposedly defensive war against NATO expansion.

No, Putin is preoccupied with entirely different matters. At a high-level meeting with the U.S. president, he invokes medieval legends as the most important argument for recognizing his “right to Ukraine.” Time and again, he launches into long lectures, hoping that Western leaders will finally understand the concept of “one people” rooted in deep antiquity and acknowledge his correctness.

If this isn’t ideological obsession, then what is?

Praxis

One could, of course, assume that this primordialist idée fixe of “reuniting a divided people” goes no further than Vladimir Putin’s quasi-historical lectures at public events — that in practice, Russia is merely acting pragmatically to eliminate external threats. But that is not the case. The ideological tenets of Russia’s reactionary utopia are being fully realized in the course of this war.

Within the past four years, Russia has been swept by a massive ideological campaign aimed at denying Ukraine’s very existence. Pupils in all Russian schools from first grade onwards now attend “Сonversations about important things” — weekly lessons in state chauvinist propaganda. In 2023, school textbooks were rewritten personally by Culture Minister Vladimir Medinsky — one of those exerting strong ideological influence on Putin — to describe Ukraine as an artificial formation created by the Bolsheviks. Dmitry Medvedev, a top official, publicly calls for Ukrainian independence to ‘disappear forever’ against the backdrop of a giant map showing two-thirds of Ukrainian lands annexed by Russia. Television propagandists like Vladimir Solovyov go far beyond simple denial of Ukraine, even calling for the destruction of Ukrainian megacities if their residents do not surrender to the Russian army and accept a Russian identity. Kremlin-linked ultraright philosopher Aleksandr Dugin calls Ukraine “a toxic stain on our territory,” arguing that after full occupation Ukrainian identity will have to be eradicated for decades to prevent its resurgence.

But the most telling embodiment of Vladimir Putin’s primordialist ideas is the policy pursued in the occupied territories. A 2025 UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights report recognized a systematic campaign to wipe off Ukrainian cultural identity in the areas annexed by Russia:

… people in areas under the effective control of Russia continue to face severe restrictions in the realization of their right to take part in cultural life, including the right to use and teach minority languages, history and culture. [There’s] a large-scale campaign to systematically erase Ukrainian history, culture, cultural identity and language, rewriting historical curricula, and repressing local cultural symbols, as well as the general undermining of the linguistic identity of ethnic minorities in areas under the effective control of Russia.

But the core ideological work of eradicating Ukrainian identity is carried out among children from the occupied territories. The Ukrainian language has been removed from school curricula. Children who keep speaking Ukrainian are bullied and their parents pressured. Ukrainian teenagers are recruited into paramilitary groups that indoctrinate them with Russian chauvinism and hostility to Ukrainian identity. Moreover, an entire network of “military-patriotic” camps trains adolescents from the occupied areas in weapons handling, small-unit tactics, drone operation and battlefield medicine — preparing them to fight against Ukraine. The systematic practices of abduction, forced adoption and re-education of children from occupied zones led to the International Criminal Court issuing an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin in 2023.

Are all of the above also supposed to be “provoked defensive measures against NATO’s external threat”? Of course not! What we are witnessing is a consistent policy of territorial expansion and ethnic assimilation of Ukrainians — the literal implementation of Putin’s “one people” doctrine.

Carthago delenda est

Marxists typically view ideological motives for war with suspicion, often resorting to economic determinism or pragmatic explanations, such as the currently popular theory of “offensive realism.”

Nevertheless, when we are dealing with a system in which the supreme ruler concentrates virtually unlimited power and possesses the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, his ideological obsessions become a crucial factor shaping reality.

A close example can be found in the aforementioned reactionary utopia of the Israeli far-right, which has undoubtedly served as the basis for the genocide in Gaza and permanent ethnic cleansing іn the West Bank. Few left-leaning observers would deny the significance of Zionist doctrines in shaping Middle Eastern politics.

So why is the primordialist ideology of Russian expansionism almost entirely ignored by leftist commentators? We can debate at length how Vladimir Putin came to his ideas, at what stage, and for what reasons they radicalized, turning into a driving force behind the war. But to deny their influence on material reality is to sin against the truth.

The left criticizes Eurocentrism. Yet they often fall into its trap themselves, preferring to believe that the elites of Western countries are solely to blame for every single problem in the world. This very assumption underlies the concept of “Russia’s defensive war against NATO expansion.” Such a Eurocentric view entirely strips Russia of agency, ignoring its own internal motives and aspirations.

Putin’s Russia is unquestionably an actor on the world stage. It does not merely respond to external challenges, but imposes its will. It has its own vision of the proper world order — its reactionary utopia. A central element of this utopia, the “one people,” is the subjugation of Ukraine and the radical reshaping of its citizens’ identities, a laboratory of which can be observed in the annexed territories.

The existence of a separate and unsubmissive Ukrainian nation became, for Vladimir Putin, a kind of “Carthage that must be destroyed” — the Russian idée fixe. Without grasping this fact, February 24, 2022 remains incomprehensible—as does the recurring enigmatic phrase about “eliminating the root causes of the conflict.”

Andriy Movchan is a Ukrainian left wing activist who was forced to leave Ukraine due to political persecution by the far-right. He now resides in Barcelona where he devotees himself to media activism, art and journalism. His work focuses on Soviet and post-Sovet context. He can be reached at andriyko22@gmail.com

Israel And Its Supporters Deliberately Foment Hate And Division In Our Society

by Caitlin Johnstone / January 2nd, 2026

I’ve noticed a lot of angry comments underneath my posts these past few days, which bizarrely mention the words “Islam” and “Muslims” completely out of the blue.

“Why don’t you turn your attention sometimes to the genocidal intent of the radical Muslims, or does that suit your racist narrative?” reads one tweet.

“What can you say about Islamic Jihadists Muslims murdering thousands of Christians in Sudan and other parts of Africa?” reads another.

“The muslims must be irradicated,” reads another.

There are too many examples to quote here, but here’s what’s so funny about all this: I haven’t been saying anything about Islam or Muslims on Twitter — I’ve been tweeting about Israel. Hasbarists just babble about Islam when they can’t defend Israel’s actions.

It is not a coincidence that they’ve been doing this. In September of last year, Drop Site News published a leaked polling report that had been commissioned by the Israeli government, which found that while Israel’s reputation is crumbling throughout the Western world, one way to salvage it would be to foment panic about Muslims.

Drop Site reports the following:

“Israel’s best tactic to combat this, according to the study, is to foment fear of  ‘Radical Islam’ and ‘Jihadism,’ which remain high, the research finds. By highlighting Israeli support for women’s rights and gay rights while elevating concerns that Hamas wants to ‘destroy all Jews and spread Jihadism,’ Israeli support rebounded by an average of over 20 points in each country. ‘Especially once the situation in Gaza is resolved, the room for growth in all countries is very significant,’ the report concludes.”

So if you speak critically about Israel online and suddenly find your replies inundated with Zionists shrieking about Islam and Muslims, that’s why. Their research has concluded that convincing Westerners to hate Muslims is easier than convincing them to love Israel.

In addition to committing genocide and starting wars and working to stomp out free speech throughout the Western world, Israel is also doing everything it can to make our society more racist and hateful. A foreign state is actively fomenting division and discord in Western countries, in exactly the way Western empire apologists claimed Putin was doing at the height of Russia hysteria. But because it’s a Western “ally”, nothing is being done to stop it.

In addition to being evil and disgusting, this tactic is also just sloppy argumentation. Deflection is the lowest form of argument. Even if Islam really were as dangerous as they pretend it is and even if Muslims really did present a threat to our society, pointing this out would not address a single criticism of Israel. Yelling “Muslims bad!” does not magically erase Israel’s abuses or address the grievances of its critics; it just diverts attention to another target and says, “Stop looking at Israel’s actions and hate THOSE people instead!”

Mention Israel, and you’ll get hasbarists babbling about Islam, but Islam and Israel are not opposites, and the mention of one has no bearing on the other. One is a worldwide religion with nearly two billion adherents, while the other is a genocidal apartheid state. Framing the issue as a conflict between two diametrically opposed parties is a false dichotomy created by propagandists and manipulators.

And that’s exactly the false dichotomy Netanyahu is trying to feed into when he tells Americans that Israel is in an alliance with Christianity against “radical Shiite Islam” and “radical Sunni Islam,” calling it “our common Judeo-Christian civilization’s battle.” He’s working to foment fear of Islam among Americans to boost support for Israel.

All this to manufacture consent for human butchery and apartheid. Israel could improve its support among Westerners by simply ending its genocidal atrocities in Gaza and ceasing to try to start a war between the US and Iran, but instead, it’s working around the clock to foment racism and division while demanding increased censorship and authoritarianism to stomp out pro-Palestine sentiment throughout Western society.

Israel is doing this because it cannot exist in its present iteration as a state without nonstop violence and abuse. Under the political ideology known as Zionism, peace, justice, truth, and freedom are simply not an option.

FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Caitlin Johnstone has a reader-supported Newsletter. All her work is free to bootleg and use in any way, shape or form; republish it, translate it, use it on merchandise; whatever you want. Her work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece and want to read more you can buy her books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff she publishes is to subscribe to the mailing list on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything she publishes. All works are co-authored with her husband Tim Foley. Read other articles by Caitlin.

Bengal: A Silent Revolution Revives Lost Rice Strains in Ranbahal

Madhu Sudan Chatterjee | 02 Jan 2026


As many as 240 varieties of disappearing traditional rice strains are being cultivated in Jangalmahal, thanks to the efforts of a botany professor.



Prof Anjan Sinha in his field at Ranbahal village of Bankura.


An extraordinary feat in agricultural development is taking place at Ranbahal village under Gangajalghati Block of Bankura district in West Bengal’s Jangalmahal. As many as 240 varieties of disappearing traditional rice strains are being cultivated here. This incredible achievement has been made possible at the initiative of Anjan Kumar Sinha, a resident of Ranbahal village, who is a professor in the botany department at Raghunathpur College in Purulia.

Significantly, this effort is setting a national example, as nowhere else is such a large number of diverse rice varieties being cultivated across the same contiguous area. This is because Sinha has not confined his academic knowledge only to teaching in classrooms. He has disseminated his knowledge among the poor and marginalised farmers of nearby villages. He practically demonstrated to them how to cultivate traditional paddy varieties in dry, unirrigated land, thereby restoring a legacy that has been lost for years.

This initiative is not merely about the nostalgia of preserving heritage, farmers stand to gain more profit from cultivating these traditional crops than from current paddy strains. Furthermore, they require no synthetic fertilisers, thus maintaining the natural character of the soil.

The allure of the aromatic rice also attracts many unknown bird species, which, in a wider sense, leads to the enhancement of local biodiversity.

Ranbahal village is located within the Gangajalghati Block area of Bankura district, 210 kilometres to the west of Bengal capital city, Kolkata. There are no irrigation facilities in Ranbahal and surrounding villages, including Amarkanan, Gobindadham, Gangajalghati. The soil is mostly barren, and cultivation is dependent only on rainwater.

“Our land is infertile here, and there is no provision for any irrigation facility. We have been cultivating paddy for generations, relying solely on rainwater. Until now, we only cultivated the Lal Swarna variety of rice, but farming it was not profitable. Now, we are cultivating traditional rice varieties, such as Kalamkathi, Dudheswar, Bhutmuri and Gobindobhog that have been lost,” Amar Bauri, a marginal farmer from Ranbahal village, told this reporter.

Bauri said Sinha, a resident of their village, provided them seeds for these rice varieties free of cost. “We are now cultivating these aromatic and nutritious rice varieties. We are also getting a good price for it,” he added.

He said the professor showed them how to cultivate these traditional varieties of rice in the fields with his own hands. “He taught us everything, from planting rice seedlings, taking care of them during growth to harvesting. We benefited from learning and implemented it”, he added.

About one km before entering Ranbahal village from Amarkanan, the mixed fragrance of several varieties of aromatic paddy is enchanting. Currently paddy harvesting is in full swing. The captivating aroma has brought back the essence of ancient Bengal, say old timers.

In Ranbahal village, over 200 traditional varieties of rice are either lying harvested in the fields or swaying in the breeze. The fields are also teeming with the arrival of various species of birds. One would not want to go back after a visit to the area. The atmosphere is so pleasant.

How Was This Incredible Transformation Possible?

“I was born and raised in Ranbahal village. I am a farmer’s son and I have witnessed the immense hardship faced by the local farmers”, Prof Sinha told this reporter, standing in a lush paddy field. For generations, the primary crop in this region has been the common Lal Swarna paddy variety. However, due to the inherent nature of the rough soil and chronic lack of adequate irrigation, paddy yields were consistently low. “The farmers were not making profits, yet, out of sheer dedication, they never left their land fallow, " he recalled.

Driven by a desire to use his educational knowledge to uplift his community, Sinha began an ambitious project 15 years ago. He introduced new, traditional varieties of rice to the village. His initiative started small -- on just two bighas of land. Today, his efforts have blossomed into a silent revolution. The successful cultivation of these traditional paddy varieties now spans over a 100 bighas across the area, ensuring better yields and opening a path to prosperity for the struggling farmers of the region.

“Through my studies in botany and my experience as a college teacher, I realised that even this barren land could produce good yields. There was only one way to achieve this – by growing traditional rice varieties that had disappeared over time”, said Sinha.

The professor recalled that he collected these seeds from different parts of the country and initially began cultivating around 80 varieties of rice, planting them in small plots. Success followed. The harvested rice was then preserved as seeds for future use.

He said the initiative began as early as 2008. The following year, a seed bank was established at the site. During the cultivation season, seeds are distributed free of cost among farmers.



Professor Sinha in his seed bank store near the fields.

An organisation named Amarkanan Rural Socio Environmental Welfare Society has been formed with the participation of local farmers. At present, nearly 50 farmers are directly associated with the initiative. This year, more than 200 farmers are cultivating traditional varieties of paddy in their land, he added.

A total of 240 varieties of traditional paddy has been cultivated in the Ranbahal and surrounding villages this year. Among the notable varieties are Kalo Nunia, Kanakchur, Bahurupi, Tulsi Mukul, Sindurmukhi, Boroni, Jamainaru, Sitasal, Dudheswar, Dudhkalam, and Badam Saru. These varieties were widely cultivated in Bengal many decades ago, but had gradually disappeared over time.

“The main characteristic of these traditional varieties is that most of the rice grains are long and aromatic. Only Kerala Sundari produces slightly thinner grains. While Kalo Nunia is distinctive for producing black coloured cooked rice”, said Sinha. He said each of these varieties was known for high nutritional value, making them both agriculturally and nutritionally significant.





Kalo Nunia paddy

Farmers Joy Bauri and Dilip Ghose of Ranbahal village told this reporter that traditional varieties of paddy require significantly less water for cultivation. No chemical fertilisers are used, instead, only organic manure is applied. The cost of cultivation was approximately Rs 1,000 per bigha, while the yield ranged between 4-5 quintals per bigha. They added that the market price of this rice was much higher than that of the commonly cultivated Lal Swarna variety, making it economically viable for farmers.

The initiative is no longer confined to Ranbahal. Farmers from Gobindadham, Gangajalghati, Kapistha, Amarkanan, and several other villages have begun visiting the Ranbahal seed centre to collect seeds and take up cultivation. Farmers from other districts of West Bengal are also coming here to obtain seeds of traditional rice varieties, said Sinha.

He added that one of the primary objectives of conserving these seeds was to enable the development of improved-quality varieties from traditional rice in future, and efforts were currently underway toward achieving that goal.

For his contribution to this initiative, Sinha has also been recognised by the government of India’s agricultural authorities. He received the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers Rights (PPV&FR) Authority Award in 2024, and the prestigious Plant Genome Saviour Community Award in 2019.

Commenting on the cultivation of traditional paddy varieties in the Ranbahal region, Subit Pal, an agricultural expert and director of Bankura District Central Cooperative Bank, described the initiative as a “highly commendable effort”. He hoped farmers from other parts of the district would also be encouraged to adopt cultivation of traditional rice varieties.

The writer covers the Jangalmahal region for ‘Ganashakti’ newspaper in West Bengal.

(All photographs by Madhu Sudan Chatterjee)

Five centuries of mystery: the first map of Europe showing America

A map that was thought to be lost for many years and is said to be about 500 years old is on the agenda again with the claim that it may be the first depiction of the American continent made by Europeans.


ANF
NEWS CENTER
Sunday, December 21, 2025 


The map is attributed to Juan de la Cosa, assistant to Christopher Columbus and owner of the ship Santa María. However, both its origin and its mysterious disappearance, which lasted for centuries, are still controversial.

The map, which dates back to about 1500, is thought to be the first study to show the coasts of the New World, along with Europe, Asia and Africa.

The note on the parchment reads, "Juan de la Cosa made this map in 1500 in the Port of Santa Maria."

Although it is known that the Vikings reached Canada in the 1000s, the systematic exploration of America began with the 1492 expeditions of Christophe Columbus.

The map, which is probably a single copy, was of great strategic value at a time when colonial rivalry was heating up. On the map, the American continent is depicted as the edge of a giant piece of land that is not yet fully known; There are rough lines, green areas and several rivers belonging to North America, the Caribbean and the north of South America.

Despite its incompleteness and errors, it exhibits astonishing accuracy for an era without satellite and GPS, reflecting an early intuition that America might be a landmass separate from Asia.

LOST FOR CENTURIES

The map disappeared for more than three centuries. It reappeared in 1832 when it was purchased by French scientist Charles Walckenaer from an antique shop in Paris. According to the most common view, the map may have been lost among the documents that Napoleon had transported from the Vatican archives to Paris in 1810.

However, the map's accuracy raises doubts for some experts. Some researchers argue that the study could not really have been done in 1500, but may be a combination of different maps produced until 1529. Even the existence of another "Juan de la Cosa" is considered a possibility.

WALDSEEMÜLLER CONTROVERSY

If it is proven that this map is not dated 1500, the title of the oldest map showing "America" will belong to Martin Waldseemüller. Waldseemüller's 1507 map shows the Western Hemisphere as a separate completely surrounded continent for the first time, using the name "America" after Amerigo Vespucci.

According to experts, this debate is not limited to the origin of a map. The question of how many important documents have been lost throughout history and how many secrets the age of discovery still holds is raised again with this map.

More investment in weapons, less in humanity in Europe

Europe's 2026 budgets show that the moral and human cost of defense spending is becoming increasingly heavy. While investment in weapons is increasing, the most fragile regions of the world are being left to their fate.

MUHAMMED KAYA
ANF

NEWS CENTER
Saturday, January 3, 2026


In the US, after Donald Trump dissolved USAID, which ran the federal government's foreign aid and development programs, European states took a similar turn. The 2026 budgets focused on Ukraine and defense spending; It has made serious cuts in health, hunger and poverty alleviation programs in Africa and the Middle East.

The Trump administration closed USAID in 2025, explicitly transferring humanitarian responsibility to other countries. After this step, priorities changed rapidly in European capitals. Britain cut its aid budget at the beginning of the year; Later in the year, France, Germany and Sweden increased their defense spending and cut humanitarian aid. The emerging picture shows that global poverty and hunger are now seen as a secondary issue.

SWEDEN: UKRAINE PRIORITY, FAREWELL TO AFRICA

In June 2025, the Swedish government transferred approximately 1.7 billion Swedish kronor (US$187 million) from its development assistance budget to Ukraine and global humanitarian operations. But this "reprioritization" has meant the dismantling of programs in Africa and Latin America.

On December 8, it was announced that development assistance to Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Mozambique, Liberia and Bolivia will be phased out in order to transfer at least 10 billion Swedish kronor (1.1 billion US dollars) to Ukraine in 2026. In line with this decision, the Swedish embassies in Bolivia, Liberia and Zimbabwe will be closed. Diplomatic relations will be carried out through neighboring countries.

GERMANY: MILITARY SPENDING INCREASES, GLOBAL AID SHRINKS

On November 28, 2025, the German Parliament approved a federal budget of 524.5 billion euros for 2026. The share allocated to the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) remained at 10.05 billion euros; This figure is 251 million euros lower than in 2025.

While the Foreign Office budget increased, the 23 million euro increase in humanitarian aid was not enough to compensate for the 1.3 billion euro cut made the previous year. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Germany has been steadily increasing its military spending since 2022. On the other hand, humanitarian aid to the Middle East, Africa and Latin America is declining.

Ralf Südhoff, director of the Berlin-based Humanitarian Aid Center, sums up Germany's policy shift: "Germany has begun a phased out of Latin America in 2025, reduced its activities in Asia, and now openly says it wants to focus on crises affecting Europe."

The projected humanitarian aid budget of 1.05 billion euros for 2026 is even less than half of the previous year.

UK: CUT GLOBAL HEALTH FOR DEFENSE

The UK is also among the countries that have pruned global aid funds to finance defense spending. On November 11, 2025, it announced that it would donate £850 million to the Global Fund. This figure is 15 percent lower than the commitment in 2022.

Sarah Champion, Chair of the International Development Committee, described this cut as "short-term and visionless": "A lower commitment further loses its real value in conditions of global inflation. However, every investment made in the Global Fund provides extraordinary returns both in the fight against global diseases and in domestic health security."

NORWAY: MORE TO UKRAINE, LESS TO AFRICA

Norway has increased its civilian aid to Ukraine by 2,5 billion crowns, a quarter of its total aid budget. However, the cost of this increase was deducted from the aid to Africa. The 355 million kroner cut in the African budget drew the reaction of non-governmental organizations.

FRANCE AND POLAND: ARMAMENT RECORD, HARD CUT IN AID

France has reduced humanitarian aid by 700 million euros in its 2026 budget. Humanitarian support, especially food aid, was cut by 60 percent. In the same budget, defense expenditures were increased by 6.7 billion euros.

In Poland, military expenditures increased rapidly after the Ukraine war. According to SIPRI data, the ratio of defense spending to GDP increased from 2.2 percent in 2022 to 4.2 percent in 2024. A new record was set in the 2026 budget with 46,9 billion euros allocated to defense. Polish Finance Minister Andrzej Domański defended this increase, declaring security an "absolute priority."

THE VULNERABILITY OF HUMANITARIAN AID IS DEEPENING

First Trump's liquidation of USAID, and then Europe's turn to defense and Ukraine-focused budgets, once again revealed how fragile the state-centered humanitarian aid system is.

Inger Ashing, Managing Director of Save the Children International, emphasizes in her article published on the association's official website that sudden interruptions threaten vital programs: "In an environment of increasing conflict, displacement and hunger, these interruptions reduce the scale of life-saving programs."

Ilaria Manunza, Director of Save the Children Mozambique, said, "Every cut increases the risk of long-term setbacks, especially in the areas of education and child protection. If this trend continues, the gains of the last decade could be reversed."

A 3-thousand-year-old pottery workshop was unearthed in Başûrê Kurdistan

Archaeologists have discovered a well-preserved pottery workshop dating back to the Iron Age in the Pişder Plain in Başûrê Kurdistan. The findings reveal that ceramic production is carried out with an organized and collective system.


ANF
NEWS CENTER
Saturday, December 27, 2025 


Archaeologists from the universities of Tübingen and Munich (LMU) in Germany have unearthed a well-preserved pottery workshop dating back to about 3 thousand years ago in the Dinka Settlement Complex located on the Pişder Plain in Başûrê Kurdistan. The discovery provides important new insights into how ceramic production was organized and how urban life was structured in the Iron Age.



The workshop, which dates back to between 1200 and 800 BC, was found in the lower part of the settlement in the area called "Gird-i Bazar". During the excavations, two ovens that provide upward air flow, tools used in pottery making, production residues and intact sediment layers were found. The findings show that ceramic production is not a household-based activity, but part of an organized and collective system carried out in specialized workshops.

The researchers conducted mineralogical and microstructural analyses on raw clay, finished vessels, furnace linings, furnace filling, and fuel residues used during firing. Reviews revealed that most ceramics are fired at temperatures below 900 degrees Celsius, in oxidizing conditions, and with slow heating methods. This process caused the vessels to acquire reddish hues.

Electron microscopy and spectroscopy analyses indicated low levels of vitrification, while it was determined that different types of vessels and their intended use were largely incorporated into the same production and cooking system. This indicates a modular, standardized and well-organized production chain.

Dr. Silvia Amicone, lead author of the study from the Archeometry Research Group at the University of Tübingen, states that this uniformity observed in production reflects a common technical tradition and a strong collective production identity. According to Amicone, this also points to a centralized management of resources, labor and technological knowledge, and a more complex social organization than expected for the Iron Age Zagros region.



The structural features of the ovens are also remarkable. The kilns, built by mixing local clay with organic materials, consist of a fire chamber and an upper section separated by a perforated floor. This design is similar to traditional kiln types known in Mesopotamia since the 7th millennium BC and reveals the long-term technological continuity in the region.

A post-occupancy examination of the kilns shows that the structures were abandoned over time, not by sudden destruction. Microscopic analysis indicates signs of water exposure and natural wear, with wood likely used as fuel.



The Dinka Settlement Complex has been one of the most extensively excavated Iron Age settlements in the Zagros region since 2015. According to experts, the workshop in Gird-i Bazar shows that craft production was an integral part of the urban fabric and that urban life in the Iron Age had a more organized and specialized structure than previously thought.

The results of the research were published in the Journal of Archaeological Sciences. Excavation and analysis are expected to continue to contribute to a more detailed understanding of the production, labor and technology relations of Iron Age societies.

The social construction of freedom: A theoretical study on Leader Apo's 

(aka Ocalan) understanding of socialism

Leader Apo's understanding of socialism combines ontological and sociological expansion with the concept of socialism. He considers socialism as a project limited to the seizure of power, but as the revelation of the organizational capacity of society.

SİNAN CÛDÎ

ANF  
NEWS CENTER
Thursday, December 25, 2025

The question of social freedom is one of the most central but also one of the most problematic topics of modern political thought. Within the Marxist tradition in particular, freedom has been largely associated with the transformation of production relations and the abolition of class rule. Although this approach has provided a strong theoretical framework for revealing the structural workings of capitalist exploitation, historical experience has shown that freedom does not emerge spontaneously only through the transformation of economic relations.

The fact that relations of domination can be reproduced in different ways even under conditions where class power changes reveals that the issue of freedom requires a deeper theoretical questioning.

It is clear that social freedom should be considered together with the relationship established with existence and the way society understands itself. In other words, freedom is not a political gain to be obtained later; It is a process shaped within ontological assumptions, social relations and practical forms of action. When human and society are considered as fixed essences, freedom is inevitably limited; On the other hand, approaches that comprehend existence as a relational, processual, and historical becoming expand the material and social conditions of freedom.

In this context, Leader Apo's approach to socialism as socialism should not be read as a rejection of classical dialectical materialism. Rather, we should discuss it as an attempt to update it to transcend the limits it encounters with historical experiences. Leader Apo's treatment of ontology, sociology and socialism as intertwined necessities makes it possible to rethink freedom as a problem of social existence that is not limited to the change of power.

We can formulate our question as follows: Can social freedom be established only through the transformation of production relations, or is the understanding of being and social ontology a constitutive component of this process? Around this question, it will be possible to make visible the theoretical and practical blockages caused by the neglect of the ontological dimension while acknowledging the strengths of the classical Marxist understanding of freedom.

In this direction, this article will first deal with the approach of classical dialectical materialism to the problem of freedom and its limits that emerge in historical practice. Then, the relationship between the issue of ontology and freedom will be discussed; the decisive effect of the way of existence of man and society on political practice will be examined.

In the following sections, the necessity of expanding class-centered analyses will be discussed in a sociological framework and Leader Abdullah Öcalan's understanding of socialism based on socialism will be positioned at the intersection of these theoretical discussions. The study will conclude by discussing how dialectical materialism can be moved to a more historical and inclusive framework by adding ontological and social dimensions.

CLASSICAL DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM AND THE PROBLEM OF FREEDOM

Dialectical materialism constitutes one of the most powerful theoretical frameworks of modern social criticism. With Marx and Engels, history was grasped on the basis of material production relations; The engine of social transformation has been defined as class struggle. This approach has transformed freedom from a moral or legal category into a historical problem linked to the transformation of material conditions. In particular, the structure of the capitalist mode of production based on labor exploitation is of central importance in terms of explaining why freedom is systematically restricted.

In the classical Marxist framework, freedom is considered as a historical outcome that will become possible with the abolition of private property on the means of production and the end of class rule. In this context, the state is defined as the oppressive apparatus of the ruling class and it is assumed that it will wither away with the disappearance of classes. In this scheme, freedom is positioned as a social situation that will emerge after the seizure of political power and the transformation of production relations.

Although this approach seems theoretically consistent, historical experience has revealed certain limits. Socialist experiences in different geographies throughout the twentieth century have shown that although radical transformations have been made in the relations of production, freedom has not been established automatically. Far from disappearing, the state apparatus has become more centralized and more interventionist in most cases; domination over social life has been reproduced in different ways. This suggests that freedom cannot be reduced to the transformation of economic infrastructure alone.

At this point, dialectical materialism's understanding of freedom faces two fundamental problems. First, freedom becomes a goal that is often postponed to the future. Existing authoritarian practices are justified as temporary imperatives, and freedom is relegated to a post-revolutionary stage.

Secondly, the human subject is largely defined by its class position; daily life practices, cultural relations, gender regimes and the functioning of power at the micro level are seen as secondary areas. This makes it difficult to grasp how domination permeates the entire social fabric.

The point to be emphasized here is that these limits are not necessary consequences of Marx's theory. The understanding of praxis, which came to the fore in Marx's early texts, is that human beings are not only the product of material conditions; while transforming these conditions, it also reveals that it transforms itself. However, in most of the Marxist tradition, this ontological dimension has taken a back seat to the emphasis on historical determination. Dialectics is often confined to the field of production; freedom has not been considered as a problem that covers the whole of social existence.

Therefore, the dilemma of classical dialectical materialism in the problem of freedom does not stem from its neglect of the material basis, but from its narrow definition of the material. Production relations continue to be decisive; However, the issue of freedom is incomplete if it is not adequately explained how these relations are reproduced through human beings' understanding of existence, social ties and daily practices. This determination makes it necessary to expand dialectical materialism with ontological and social dimensions.

THE ISSUE OF ONTOLOGY: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CONCEPTION OF EXISTENCE AND FREEDOM

The fact that the question of freedom is addressed only on the political or economic level is one of the main limitations of modern social theory. Classical dialectical materialism offers a strong historical analysis by centering on the relations of production; however, it often leaves the deeper connections that humans form with the world in the background. At this point, ontology, that is, the question of being, stands out as a decisive field in terms of understanding the ground on which freedom becomes possible.

Ontology asks the question of how man exists in the world. Man is not just a being who produces, provides labor power or is defined by his class position. At the same time, it has an existence that establishes meaning, develops relationships, and interprets itself and its environment. In this respect, ontology is not just external structures; It shows that human beings reproduce these structures by internalizing them. Without changing the understanding of existence, it becomes difficult for the claim of social freedom to become permanent.

Heidegger's main criticisms of modern philosophy are illustrative here. According to him, modern thought reduces existence to an object; It is based on what can be measured, calculated and audited. This approach compresses man's relationship with the world to a technical and instrumental level. Existence ceases to be a lived and shared process; it turns into a managed and regulated space. Such an understanding of existence makes domination ordinary rather than an exceptional situation.

This ontological contraction is not unique to capitalism. A similar problem is observed in state-centered socialist experiences. Even if the means of production have been nationalized, human existence is still defined through central planning, representation and discipline mechanisms. Freedom turns into a goal regulated from above rather than a constantly produced relationship in social practice. This creates a new area of tension between emancipation and power.

At this point, Leader Apo's approach pulls ontology to the center of political theory. According to him, the problem is not only property relations or class contradictions; How people comprehend themselves and society is a more important problem. When existence is considered as a set of relations in a state of continuous becoming, freedom ceases to be a static state and becomes a practice that is established, disrupted and reconstructed in daily life. In this perspective, freedom undergoes a transformation from a promise postponed to the future to being a responsibility of the present.

This ontological framework also establishes a distant relationship with identitarian or nationalist modes of existence. Fixed identities, unchanging essences and singular historical narratives treat "existence" as a frozen structure. However, an ontologically relational understanding of existence requires people to define themselves through the bonds they establish with others. This makes it possible to think of freedom not as an individual or collective property, but as a process that is constantly re-established within common life.

From this point of view, there is no hierarchical relationship between ontology, sociology and socialism.

Ontology provides the ground for sociological analysis.

Sociology reveals the social equivalent of ontological assumptions.

Socialism, on the other hand, offers a practical orientation that aims to transform these two in the direction of freedom.

When the ontological dimension is neglected, socialism is inevitably reduced to an administrative model.

Leader Apo's intervention is precisely against this reduction.

THE ISSUE OF SOCIOLOGY: THE BOUNDARIES OF CLASS AND PLURAL FORMS OF SOCIAL DOMINATION

Classical Marxist sociology analyzes society basically through the relations between classes. The bond established with the means of production determines the social position of the individual; politics, law, culture and ideology are shaped on this material ground. This approach is extremely powerful in exposing the structural inequalities of capitalist society. However, it has been insufficient to explain all forms of social domination over time.

Although it has lost its homogeneous character, class and class analysis are indispensable for understanding the functioning of modern capitalism. However, when considered on a historical and anthropological level, it does not offer an explanation that covers the whole of society. It is known that hierarchies, gender-based inequalities, religious and cultural forms of domination also exist in pre-state or semi-state societies. This situation shows that domination does not start only with class relations; suggests that it is associated with older, deeper forms of social organization.

Leader Apo's sociological intervention gains meaning at this point.

According to Leader Apo, class is an important form of social domination; however, it is not its first and founding form. The rupture that society experienced with state civilization is not only an economic transformation. It is also a mental, cultural and organizational rupture. Male domination, hierarchical authority, representation relations and centralism were shaped before classification and deepened with classification.

This approach makes sociology not a narrow field of economic analysis. Society is considered both as a result of production relations and as a living structure established through values, norms, habits and daily practices. Domination cannot be observed only in the factory or in property relations; because it is reproduced in the family, language, education and political representation. This makes it insufficient to treat the struggle for freedom only as a class conflict.

In the Marxist tradition, this gap has been tried to be filled in different ways. Gramsci's concept of hegemony, Althusser's analysis of ideological apparatuses, and later cultural Marxist approaches have taken important steps towards overcoming class reductionism. However, these contributions have often been limited to questioning the central state and party model. Social transformation is also designed as a top-down organized process.

Leader Apo's sociological framework, on the other hand, re-centers society. Society is not a passive mass; it is a subject with the capacity for self-organization. Communes, assemblies and local organizations are therefore not only administrative units. They are also constitutive areas of social emancipation. Here, sociology is not content with analyzing the relations between classes; it turns into a field of knowledge that reveals the self-management potential of society.

At this point, the class is not completely rejected; however, it ceases to be the only decisive axis. Class struggle, gender struggle, ecological struggle and the search for cultural freedom are considered as intertwined processes. This approach accepts the fact that social domination is not unicentric and carries the struggle for freedom to a plural ground.

As a result, this sociological expansion does not contradict the basic intuitions of Marxism, but deepens them historically and socially. Class analysis is preserved; but it is repositioned within the holistic structure of society. Here, Leader Apo's contribution is that sociology is not only an explanatory discipline, but a part of the practice of freedom.

SOCIALISM AS SOCIALISM: THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF FREEDOM

In classical socialist theory, socialism is defined by the socialization of the means of production and the abolition of class rule. In this context, socialism refers to a historical stage that will emerge after the overcoming of capitalism. The state plays a central role in this transition process. Planning, distribution and coordination of production are carried out through the state apparatus. The emancipation of society is largely attributed to the success of this central transformation.

Although this approach has produced a strong alternative to the destructive effects of capitalism, it has also produced its own limits over time. Socialism began to be perceived as an economic and administrative model rather than a living re-establishment of social relations. Society has ceased to be a subject and has turned into an object that is decided on its behalf. This situation has led to the consideration of freedom as an administrative issue, not a social one.

Leader Apo's understanding of socialism creates a significant break at this point. According to him, socialism is primarily the revelation of society's capacity for self-organization and decision-making. For this reason, socialism is conceived as a social way of life, not as a form of state or only as an economic system. The concept of socialism becomes decisive here. Socialism is considered as the practice of re-establishing society.

In this perspective, freedom does not emerge automatically with the withdrawal of central power. Freedom is embodied in communes, assemblies and forms of organization of daily life. Economy, politics and culture cannot acquire an emancipatory function without the direct participation of society. Collectivism is not a collectivism that ignores the individual, but a form of relationality in which the individual is strengthened within social ties.

Leader Apo's understanding of socialism does not make his state-centered criticism of socialism based only on historical experiences; it also puts it on an ontological and sociological basis. When human beings are considered as an essentially relational being, freedom is also built in relationships. Therefore, freedom cannot be distributed from a single center. If forms of social organization do not produce freedom, the transformation in property relations alone is not enough.

This understanding of socialism does not invalidate the class struggle; but it makes it part of a wider field of social struggle. Labor-capital contradiction, gender inequality, ecological destruction and cultural domination are considered as different manifestations of the same social crisis. Socialism claims to produce responses to each of these crises at the social level.

As a result, socialism in Leader Apo is not a goal limited to the seizure of power. Socialism is the process of rebuilding society itself. This process requires constant practice and action. Socialism does not consider freedom as a final stop; as a lived experience. In this respect, Leader Apo's socialism offers a perspective of social emancipation that transcends the state and power-centered horizon of the classical left.

UPDATING DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM: PROCESS, RELATIONALITY AND SUBJECT

Dialectical materialism is a powerful way of thinking that grasps historical change through contradictions. This is known. The interaction between material conditions and social consciousness constitutes the basic assumption of this approach. However, this framework is often limited to the production area. Dialectics is identified with the laws of motion of the economic infrastructure. This narrowing is not the fault of dialectics; it stems from a certain historical interpretation of it.

Leader Apo's intervention forces dialectics to think again in the center of process and relationality. Social change cannot be experienced only by resolving the antagonisms between classes. It also takes place through the transformation of human relationships with themselves, with the community and with nature. In this approach, dialectics ceases to be a historical scheme that progresses in closed stages and becomes a continuous becoming.

In classical dialectical materialism, the subject is often considered as the bearer of historical imperatives. The class is the dominant actor on the stage of history. This makes sense in highlighting the importance of collective action; however, it deals with individual and social subjectivation processes in a limited framework. Leader Apo's approach, on the other hand, does not define the subject only with its class position. The subject is conceived as an existence that is established and transformed in practice.

This update does not make material reality secondary; on the contrary, it expands the scope of the material. Economic relations of production are an important dimension of social life; however, it is not the only dimension. Language, culture, gender relations, ecological ties and forms of political participation are also considered as part of material reality. Thus, dialectics is not limited to the labor-capital contradiction; becomes able to analyze the complete contradictions of social existence.

At this point, updating dialectical materialism does not mean bringing it closer to idealism. On the contrary, it aims to go beyond idealistic abstractions and comprehend the concrete multi-layered structure of social life. The material is not limited to the measurable. Social relations, habits and common life practices also have a material reality. This acceptance increases the social depth of the dialectic.

In Leader Apo's approach, dialectics ceases to be a strategy focused on the seizure of power and becomes a method to understand the capacity of society to constantly reproduce itself. Contradiction is not an obstacle that needs to be broken down; it is a dynamic that contains the possibility of transformation. This makes it possible to think of the idea of revolution as a long-term process of social construction rather than a singular moment of rupture.

As a result, this update does not invalidate dialectical materialism, but reworks it in line with historical experience and theoretical needs. Leader Apo's contribution is to transform dialectics from a state, party and class-centered framework into a society and life-centered way of thinking. This transformation makes freedom a social practice of today, rather than a postponed goal.

CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION: THE CONSTITUTIVE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ONTOLOGY, SOCIETY AND FREEDOM

The basic claim is that social freedom cannot be established only by the transformation of production relations. It is clearly emphasized that liberation will not become permanent without changing the understanding of human beings' existence, social ties and forms of subjectivity. This framework aimed to make visible the areas that classical leftist thought could not open historically, without rejecting its founding intuitions.

Classical dialectical materialism is still a powerful theoretical tool to explain capitalist exploitation and class inequalities. However, the fact that it treats freedom as a goal that is often postponed to the future has created a structural distance between it and social practice. State-centered socialist experiences have shown that this distance produces historical as well as theoretical results. The transformation in the relations of production has progressed with new forms of domination when social relations are not transformed.

At this point, the ontological dimension is placed at the center of the study. Human beings are not only in economic relations in the world; it exists in meaning, relationship and practice. Existence is not a fixed state; It is a process that develops in a state of continuous becoming. This understanding does not consider freedom as a completed goal. It makes it possible to understand freedom as a form of relationship that is constantly reproduced in social life. In this sense, ontology ceases to be an abstract field of political theory and becomes one of the material grounds of freedom.

The discussion on the sociological plane also reveals that social domination cannot be reduced to a single axis while maintaining the indispensability of class analysis. Male domination, cultural hierarchies, centralism and representation relations are historical phenomena intertwined with class structures. The emancipation of society requires confronting each of these forms of domination. This makes sociology a constitutive component of the practice of emancipation as well as an explanatory tool.

Leader Apo's understanding of socialism combines this ontological and sociological expansion around the concept of socialism. Socialism is considered as a project limited to the seizure of power and as the revelation of the self-organization capacity of society. Communes, assemblies and local organizations are defined as areas where freedom is produced rather than being instrumental administrative structures. In this context, society ceases to be a passive object and becomes the main subject of liberation.

This approach inevitably brings with it some criticisms. The most common objection is that the class struggle has been pushed into the background. However, what is done here is not to exclude class, but to remove it from being the only explanatory axis. The labor-capital contradiction remains at the heart of modern capitalism; however, social domination cannot be understood in its entirety without taking into account the hierarchies and forms of power that emerged historically before classification.

Another criticism is the claim that this approach means a break with Marxism. It can be argued that the emphasis on ontology and society approaches idealism. However, the material reality is not abandoned here, and the scope of the material is expanded. Social relations, daily practices, forms of organization and common living spaces are also part of the material world. This approach aims to make the repressed ontological vein of Marxism visible again.

Criticisms about the issue of state and power are also important. The emphasis on socialism can be questioned on the grounds that it obscures the problem of central power. However, this criticism reduces power only to the state apparatus. However, in modern societies, power is spread to all of daily life. The seizure of the state does not automatically eliminate these scattered networks of power. Socialism does not hide power; rather, it makes it visible at the local and plural levels.

The treatment of society as the subject of liberation can also be criticized as romanticizing society. Inequalities, reactionary tendencies and conflicts within society may seem to be ignored in this gaze. However, society is not idealized here; on the contrary, it is treated as a field of struggle. Freedom cannot develop through the suppression of tensions; on the contrary, it becomes possible by experiencing these tensions openly.

Lastly, the practical applicability of this approach is questionable. Especially in conditions of crisis, war and authoritarianism, the sustainability of society-centered models can be discussed. However, this objection reflects the limits of the existing political order, not the theory. Historical experience shows that social self-organization can emerge even in the most difficult conditions. As a matter of fact, the Rojava practice shows exactly this.

As a result, when ontology, sociology and socialism are taken together, freedom ceases to be an abstract ideal or a deferred promise and turns into a lived social practice. Leader Apo's contribution gains meaning in the effort to re-establish this unity and offers a serious theoretical update for contemporary leftist thought.

Karasu: As long as the Kurdish problem is not resolved, the habitus of coups will always exist in Turkey

KCK Executive Council Member Mustafa Karasu told ANF about one year of the process that proceeded with Leader Apo's Peace and Democratic Society perspective, the responsibilities of the state and society, and how to fight against anti-solution groups.


ANF
NEWS CENTER
Friday, January 2, 2026

Leader Apo's "Call for Peace and Democratic Society" published on February 27, 2025, created a historical threshold in the course of the Kurdish problem. In the intervening 10 months, the Kurdistan Freedom Movement has taken steps with extraordinary speed and high risk compared to world examples: A ceasefire was declared on March 1, the PKK took the 12th Parliamentary Assembly on May 5-7. It dissolved itself at the Congress, ended the method of armed struggle, on July 11, a guerrilla group of 30 people led by KCK Executive Council Co-Chair Besê Hozat burned their weapons, and on October 26, it was announced that the armed forces had begun to withdraw from Northern Kurdistan and Turkey.

KCK Executive Council Member Mustafa Karasu emphasized the historical, political and social dimensions of this process; From the level of ownership of the Kurdish society to the political climate in Turkey, from the resistance of the war rentier groups to the responsibilities of the state, from the visit of the commission established in the Parliament to İmralı and the interlocutor debates to the attitude of the opposition, from the struggle for Leader Apo's right to hope and physical freedom within the scope of the "second stage" to the role of women and youth, from the increasing interest in Leader Apo's thoughts in the international arena to the steps to be taken for the permanence of peace He answered ANF's questions.

The first part of our interview with KCK Executive Council Member Mustafa Karasu in three parts is as follows:

As a movement, you fit this historical process, which takes years in the examples of other countries, into a few months. What gives you the strength and determination to take these steps? How did you achieve this? How should it be understood to take these steps in an environment where there are many uncertainties and concerns?

First of all, on behalf of our Movement, we congratulate Rêber Apo and all our comrades in prison on the New Year, wish the new year to bring freedom and democracy for our peoples, celebrate the new year of our people, the peoples of Turkey, the Middle East and the world and all the forces of democracy, and wish the new year to bring peace and democracy. 2025 has been a year of hope in this respect. The Peace and Democratic Society Process, which proceeded with the initiative of Rêber Apo, created excitement among the Kurdish people and the forces of democracy. We believe that this process will deepen in 2026 and create a situation in which the physical freedom of Rêber Apo is ensured, the solution of the Kurdish problem is realized, Turkey is democratized, and wars in the Middle East and the world come to an end, and we wish 2026 to be a good year for everyone.

ÖNDER APO HAS BEEN ADVOCATING A POLITICAL SOLUTION, NOT A WAR, FOR 52 YEARS

Rêber Apo's search for a democratic political solution goes back to his interview with Mehmet Ali Birand in 1988. In this interview, Rêber Apo said, "The state should send an official, let's discuss the problems." In 1993, as a response to Özal's soft approaches, he declared a unilateral ceasefire in March. In the second period of this ceasefire, Özal was poisoned and eliminated. Rêber Apo also showed a positive approach to the Erbakan government in 1995. In 1998, it declared a unilateral ceasefire on September 1, after some forces within the army sent a message. Rêber Apo sought dialogue and solutions with the Turkish state throughout the 1990s. In his assessment on August 15, 1998, he emphasized that the time had come for other methods other than seeking to solve problems through war; expressed its preference for a democratic political solution on the anniversary of August 15.

When he was taken into captivity in İmralı on February 15, 1999 by an international conspiracy, he demonstrated his will for a democratic solution. He wanted to evaluate his being in captivity in the direction of a democratic solution. It has created an environment of non-conflict for years by taking the guerrilla forces out of Turkey's borders. With the evaluations he made in this process, he tried to create the theoretical and political basis of a democratic political solution. However, the state did not respond to these radical decisions and steps and insisted on its policy of denial. Rêber made the mistake that the PKK was defeated with Apo's captivity, which led to the continuation of the conflicts.

Rêber Apo again secured a unilateral ceasefire in 2006. Since 2008, negotiations have been held in Oslo for the continuation of the de-escalation and the democratic solution of the Kurdish problem. These meetings continued with state officials both in Oslo and İmralı. In this process, Rêber Apo tried to pave the way for a democratic solution to the Kurdish problem with reasonable proposals. He made calls and announced declarations in this direction.

The result of all these efforts was announced to the public on February 28, 2015 at the Dolmabahçe Palace in Istanbul.

All these facts show that Rêber Apo is looking for a democratic solution at every opportunity; It clearly shows that it aims to end the armed struggle on this basis. However, since there was no change in mentality in the Turkish state and seeing the political conjuncture in its favor, it increased its attacks as of July 24, 2015. However, we resisted all these attacks as a people and as a movement, and we left these attacks inconclusive.

On the other hand, economic, social and political problems in Turkey have worsened. The escalating war in the Middle East and the uncertainties in the political situation it created led the Turkish state to seek a way out of this impasse. Devlet Bahçeli made a call to Rêber Apo in this environment. Since Rêber Apo has been in the understanding that "negotiations, not war, solve problems" for decades, he replied, "I have the power to end the armed conflict process and bring the Kurdish problem to the political and legal ground."

A very righteous struggle is being waged and the realities of the Kurdish problem have been revealed. In fact, our Movement has abandoned the real socialist understanding and the approach of a state for every nation. These facts formed the basis of a democratic political solution. For this reason, we are trying to provide the ground and enable this solution by taking steps in line with Rêber Apo's perspectives. There is a 100-year-old Kurdish problem, we have a 50-year struggle. All these steps should be seen as the result of the effects of 50 years of struggle in Kurdistan, Turkey, the Middle East and the world. We are not talking about a one-year, two-year struggle and the effect it creates. In these 50 years, such values have been created and reality has been revealed that it has become possible to achieve a democratic political solution based on this.

How did these steps affect the political and social climate in Turkey? What kind of developments and changes did it create? How do you evaluate the level of ownership of the Kurdish community in particular?

Undoubtedly, getting out of the conflict environment for more than a year has given the society and the forces of democracy some respite. Because in the war environment, the forces of democracy were constantly kept under pressure. The government was showing every political force it targeted to be related to the PKK and going after it. Attacks and oppressions were legitimized based on the conflict environment. In this process, the CHP and some circles were attacked for other reasons, not by showing them as collaborating with terrorism this time; The CHP's presidential candidate and many mayors have been arrested. These pressures and the practices against Tele1 and Merdan Yanardağ are seen as a policy of limiting the social support for the solution of the Kurdish problem and the non-conflict. This is how some circles evaluate it. A CHP deputy also cited this situation as the reason why social support for the process did not increase. Undoubtedly, such explanations do not express a principled policy, but a political situation influenced by the outside.

STRUGGLE AND ORGANIZATION ELIMINATE ALL CONCERNS

Despite these negativities, an environment has emerged in which the political climate has softened to a certain extent and the pressures on the grounds of terrorism have declined. A ground has been created for the struggle for democracy. Although some circles incite Kurdish hostility, since the AKP-MHP is a part of this process, there has been an objective softening in the society's view of the Kurdish problem and the Kurds. No matter how much they try to hide the truth by saying 'Turkey without terrorism', the society learns that there is a Kurdish problem and that the Kurds have demands. Undoubtedly, the cessation of the war has created relief not only in the economic field but also in the social field.

Although the Kurdish community is bitter with the dissolution of the PKK, it sees that the development and success of the process will bring great benefits to the Kurds and supports the efforts of Rêber Apo and our Movement. Kurdish society has experienced an intense politicization process for a year. Not only the DEM Party base, but all Kurds have been sensitive to the Kurdish problem and democratization. The Kurds have entered into a common agreement for the democratic solution of the Kurdish problem. The Kurds who voted for the AKP also have an approach that wants a democratic solution to the Kurdish problem. Even though they take care of the government, the fact that they are in such a state of mind is a factor that will have a positive effect on the Kurdish society's ownership of the process and its struggle.

The ownership of the Kurdish people is positive. Politics is not done with concerns. Every political goal can be achieved through struggle. Struggle is already a factor that relieves anxiety. The concerns of those who do not embrace the process and do not struggle are empty and meaningless. In this respect, the main task is to struggle, to organize. Only in this way can all kinds of anxiety be eliminated.

We can say that the steps you have taken in this process have unmasked the war rentiers and those who benefit from the war, especially in politics, the media and the academic field. What is the intention of these segments who take an anti-process position? How should these segments be fought?

These segments both benefit from the conflict between the Kurds and the state and are enemies of the Kurds. Undoubtedly, Kurdish hostility has been created by a hundred years of education, culture, press policies and the policies and discourses of political powers. Those who want this war to continue are actually collaborators of foreign powers who want the Kurds and the Turkish state to clash. Don't look at them saying "Homeland-nation-Sakarya"; They are the internal extensions of foreign powers weakening Turkey in constant war and making it a collaborator of their own policies.

They should be exposed as opponents of peace and those who want war. They are those who do not want Turkey's stability. These are war rentiers. In the 1990s, it was stated that they lived with the PKK and Apo rent. The louder they shouted, the more rent they would get. It has not been forgotten how those who were called artists in the 1990s attacked when Ahmet Kaya said, "I will make a Kurdish song". By doing so, they will get the well done of the governments and their bosses; they will achieve a social status in the art world.

Since at least one-third of Turkey's population is Kurdish, opposition to the process means "I will not make peace with my neighbor". These are the segments that have become diseased in decades of education. No matter how they define themselves, they are the fifth column of foreign powers in Turkey.

AS LONG AS THE KURDISH PROBLEM IS NOT RESOLVED, THE COUP HABIT WILL ALWAYS EXIST

In this process, the issue of coup mechanics, which Leader Apo drew attention to and warned many times, was discussed a lot. There have been important steps you have taken to prevent such provocative attempts and to prevent them. Well, do you think that the state has fought enough against these segments? What should the state and the government do about this for the sake of the process?

Rêber Apo expressed the coup mechanics decades ago. As a matter of fact, what Rêber Apo said came true. The July 15 coup is also a situation created by the insolubility of the Kurdish problem. If it is remembered, the so-called Gülenists were very reckless in their hostility to the PKK and Apo. By doing so, they wanted to strengthen themselves and come to power. As long as the Kurdish problem is not resolved, some segments will always try to find a ground for a coup by showing themselves as more anti-Kurdish people. There are always reasons for coups. The main reason for the September 12 coup was that the Kurds raised their demands for freedom and organized in this direction. Now some are uncomfortable with the Kurdish issue being on the agenda. For this reason, these segments may show themselves as those who will not "divide this country" and want to gather strength and stage a coup. As long as the Kurdish problem is not resolved, there will always be a coup habitus, that is, a ground that will lead to a coup in Turkey.

The right struggle with these segments is the socialization of the process. In this respect, the government should be in a position to ensure the socialization of the process with its attitudes and discourses. The fact that the press and other circles under the influence of the press and other circles play a role in the socialization of the process by leaving the old language will also narrow the coup aspirants.

Some of those who are disturbed by the process are Kurds. When the PKK fought, this mob used to say "it harms us by fighting, why is it fighting", and now it carries out counter-propaganda activities by saying "why did it end the war". What is the purpose of these circles? Why does the effort to reconcile, the effort to solve the Kurdish problem bother them so much? What should be the approach of the Kurdish people towards these circles? How should these circles be fought?

There have always been enemies of the sworn Rêber Apo and the PKK. Some people and circles have not been able to digest the fact that Rêber Apo and the PKK have left their mark on Kurdish politics for 50 years and have been influential in all four parts of Kurdistan. Those you call Kurds who are against the process have not contributed anything to the struggle of this people. They have not fought for this people, neither militarily nor politically.

Let us emphasize this: The PKK appeared on the stage of history as a Kurdish poor movement, that is, the Kurmanj movement. Contrary to approaches that see capitalism as a nationalizing force, the PKK has assessed that capitalism has accelerated the Kurdish genocide and has become an apparatus used in the Kurdish genocide. As a matter of fact, practice has shown that capitalism is used by genocidal colonialism to disperse Kurdish sociality. For this reason, opposition to the comprador class, which is the pillar of capitalism, has been a basic attitude in the emergence of the PKK.

BLACK PROPAGANDA MAKERS ARE IN THE CALCULATION OF 'CAN WE FILL THE GAPS LEFT BY THE PKK'

When the de-escalation was achieved in 1999, those who told us that "we are giving up the struggle" made propaganda that "this war is harmful" when the guerrilla war resumed after 2004. Now, when the PKK is dissolved and decides to lay down its arms, these circles are in the impertinence of accusing Rêber Apo and the PKK, which have been fighting for 52 years, of giving up the struggle. Rêber Apo wants to crown the 52-year struggle with a democratic solution. He says that a democratic solution, not a statist solution, will bring a lot of benefits to the Kurds. Won by the classical paradigm and war is won. Insisting on the old paradigm will no longer yield results other than making the Kurds lose; Or no matter how much it is fought, such a solution will be sought in the end. This is Leader Apo's approach.

These circles are trying to portray themselves as those who supposedly want more rights for the Kurds. These segments, who give strength to the Kurdish people's struggle for freedom and do not pay the price, are in the calculation of "I wonder if we can fill the void left by the PKK". So much so that those who do not fight for the Kurds and do not contribute to the Kurds gaining anything are making demagogic statements such as "why don't we have a state?" This is a very simple thought. Even the KDP says "I support this process"; the false statements of these segments such as "why the PKK does not want a state" have no value other than black propaganda and demagoguery. Even such people and circles speak thanks to the results of the great struggle created by Rêber Apo. Undoubtedly, some well-intentioned and honest patriots also show such approaches in response to the denialist policies of the Turkish state.

We are the ones who have been fighting against the Turkish state for 52 years. We are the ones who know this state best. The state also knows us well. Those who fight in the world negotiate and make peace. Today, we are the most experienced and political power in the Middle East. We know the rights and wrongs. Of course, it is our responsibility towards the Kurdish people to create a democratic political solution to the Kurdish problem.

These circles see this; if Rêber Apo succeeds in solving the Kurdish problem, all the black propaganda they have carried out against Rêber Apo so far will collapse. They will no longer have any political value in the face of Rêber Apo's paradigm. Undoubtedly, some collaborators do not want a solution to the Kurdish problem. Because when the Kurdish problem is solved, their cooperation will not pay off.

The Kurdish people know very well what the place of the PKK is in the Kurdish people's struggle for freedom. Rêber Apo is a leadership whose leadership has been tested for 52 years and has always won it over to the Kurds. He is neither deceived nor deceived! The Kurdish people should approach them in the same way as the rentiers and anti-Kurds who do not want a solution to the Kurdish problem in Turkey. They are the natural allies of the anti-Kurdish and anti-process groups in Turkey.

This process is also a process of struggle. They weaken the position of the Kurds by opposing Rêber Apo and the process. These should be seen as groups that weaken the position of Kurds in the name of Kurdishness in this process. The most effective struggle against these circles is to embrace this process, which is carried out under the initiative of Rêber Apo, and thus to play a role in the success of the process by increasing social support for it.

AKP AND MHP'S CONCERNS OVERLAP

At the beginning of the process, it was commented that MHP leader Bahçeli and AKP President Erdoğan acted with different motives and thought differently about the process. Do you think that the People's Alliance has a common approach and policy at this stage?

There are differences in the ideological and political approaches of the AKP and MHP. In this respect, it is understandable that there are differences in their approach to the Kurdish problem. However, the AKP and MHP are in a very close alliance. If their views had not converged on a very important issue such as the Kurdish issue, Devlet Bahçeli would not have made these statements. In this respect, they discussed this process with Tayyip Erdoğan beforehand. Maybe the motives of both may not be the same. However, it should be considered that they are politically united in the start of such a process. Otherwise, a difference that does not create a common agreement on such an important issue would lead to the breakdown of the alliance.

There are evaluations that the AKP is considering maintaining its power longer, while the MHP prioritizes the 'survival of the state and the nation'. Since there has been no contradiction so far, the concerns of the AKP and MHP coincide. A year of practice reveals that they are carrying out this process together. In terms of the progress of the process, the fact that the AKP and MHP, which are one side of the process, are close to each other should be seen as positive in another aspect.

In the context of the steps taken by the state, a commission was formed within the parliament in this process. This commission carried out some activities and finally held a meeting with Leader Apo in İmralı on November 24. How should we generally read the meeting of a delegation of parties in the parliament with Leader Apo? What is the importance of the process turning into a state policy and in terms of interlocutorship?

The establishment of the National Solidarity, Brotherhood and Democracy Commission in the Parliament has been an important step. Although Kurdish is not mentioned in its name, everyone knows that this commission is related to the Kurdish problem. As a matter of fact, the commission met with many institutions and individuals, and speeches were made about the Kurdish problem and its solution in these meetings. The speakers of the parliament were also summoned because it was a very important problem, and they expressed their thoughts on the silence of the guns and the Kurdish problem. The speeches of the speakers of the parliament on the Kurdish question were generally positive. In short, the establishment of such a commission by the parliament on the Kurdish question is an issue of political value. The existence of the Kurdish problem has also been registered by the parliament. Even the fact that they do not allow Kurdish mothers to speak Kurdish has added a dimension to the agenda of the problem. The speaker of the parliament went to Amed and spoke Kurdish to cover up the situation.

IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THERE IS AN INTERVENTION IN CHP AND YENI YOL

The fact that only three representatives of the parties in the commission went to İmralı revealed that the problem was not approached seriously. It is understood that there is an intervention in the CHP and the Yeni Yol group. However, it is still very important to go to İmralı and meet with Rêber Apo. This process went beyond meeting with some state officials and evolved into meeting with the parliamentary commission, which is a political will. Thus, the parliament and politics came into play. This is actually a new stage in the process. The ball is in the political field. Will the parliament and the political field have the right attitude on such an important issue? Turkish politics is in a test. The process started as a state policy; now politics has become a part of this policy. Because if there is to be a solution eventually, the parliament will decide on it and enact the necessary laws. If the peace process is to have a legal framework, it will be the Parliament that will ensure it. Without this process being included in the law and law, there will be neither peace nor a legal and political solution.

The state has known for decades who the interlocutor is in the Kurdish question. Negotiations were already being held with Rêber Apo and the PKK. Now, the parliament has taken the interlocutor and the Turkish society has been told that the interlocutor in the Kurdish problem is Rêber Apo. In this respect, as a result of going to İmralı and meeting with Rêber Apo, the second stage of the Peace and Democratic Society process was passed.

The commission's decision to go to İmralı was conflicting. MHP leader Bahçeli insisted. Then the decision-making session was postponed several times. CHP and Yeni Yol group withdrew. The summary text presented to the Parliamentary commission and the public after the meeting was also widely discussed. The commission members of the DEM Party announced that they did not take part in the preparation of this text and demanded that the entire meeting be reflected in a transparent manner. Likewise, the opposition parties made the same demand. How do you read this whole process? Why was it so crisis-ridden? What kind of misguided approaches were taken in this regard?

The summary text presented to the commission was reflected to the public. In fact, Gülistan Koçyiğit conveyed the essence of what was discussed in İmralı to the press. In this respect, we learned the important issues discussed. The commission consisted of three people. I guess each member had different things to consider important in the meeting. We do not know whether the minutes are published in their entirety in such conflict resolutions. The important thing is that the commission members know. If the representatives of other parties had also left, there would have been no secrets about what was discussed and discussed. It seems that the AKP and MHP reacted in such a way to the fact that other parties did not give members.

There were also reflections other than the summary presented to the commission and what Gülistan Koçyiğit stated. However, it was seen that it was deliberately distorted and reflected. For example, there was no coup debate about the MHP in İmralı, and Rêber Apo made some warnings that the lack of a solution to the Kurdish problem would create a ground for a coup. However, Rêber Apo's evaluations in this direction have been deliberately distorted. It seems that what was said in İmralı was reflected in their relations by some. There were those who expressed doubts about this issue in AKP circles.

TO BE CONTINUED...