In the sixth part of this in-depth interview with ANF, Cemil Bayik, co-chair of the KCK Executive Council, pointed out that "the future of Rojava and North and East Syria will be determined not by the approach of the coalition forces but by the resistance of the people and revolutionary forces."

The first part of this interview can be read here, the second here, the third here, the fourth here, and the fifth here.

The process in Syria, which started with the attacks on Aleppo on November 27 and gained momentum with Assad’s fall from power, continues. How did these developments happen so fast? How should the attitude of the regime and its former supporting powers, Russia and Iran, be interpreted? Is there an agreement between the bloc led by Russia and the US-led forces? What kind of  new Syria is envisioned?

The process that resulted in the fall of the Baathist regime in Syria was very fast, but the preparations for it had been made long beforehand. Iran and Russia’s lack of resistance, the Syrian army’s unopposed withdrawal, and finally Bashar al-Assad’s exit are contrary to what one would call the normal course of events. Therefore, it is clear that agreements and negotiations have been made beforehand. To be fully capable of understanding this is, of course, needed to assess the situation of each power involved separately.

The starting date of this new process in the Middle East was October 7, 2023. After this date, the US, Britain, and Israel saw it appropriate for themselves to put their plans for the Middle East into practice. In this context, Iran’s power in the region was targeted. Pro-Iranian forces such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis were targeted by the US, Britain, and Israel with a much higher intensity than expected. Israel may have been the striking force, but the main driver of this war is the US. And then again, after the US, Britain is behind this war. Iran found itself in this process unprepared. Just like Russia was surprised during the war in Ukraine, Iran also experienced a similar surprise. In fact, the rest of the world was as surprised as Russia during the Ukraine war. For example, the Turkish generals who were paraded on the screens were saying that Russia would invade and take Ukraine in a few days. Basically, nobody anticipated the US plan, and nobody thought and expected that the Biden administration would quickly dominate NATO again. Everyone thought it was Russia’s and Putin’s plan. Surely Russia had a plan of its own, but it probably realized much later that what it encountered was quite different from what it thought. The same thing happened with the Israeli offensive against Hamas. Everyone thought that there would be a ceasefire in a few days, that it would not even take two weeks. But this was not the case. First Hamas was targeted and weakened, then the direction of the war shifted to Lebanon. Here too, Hezbollah was targeted and weakened. As soon as Hezbollah was broken and the ceasefire with Lebanon was signed, the situation in Syria emerged.

It was crucial that Hezbollah’s power was broken before the situation in Syria emerged. If this had not been done, the developments in Syria would not have been possible in this way. Even if the fall of the regime was planned, it would not have happened so fast. Of course, targeting and weakening Hamas and then Hezbollah has weakened Iran’s power in the region. It was especially Hezbollah’s presence in Syria that was enabling Iran’s influence in the region. Iran was brought to a point where it was left with basically only one option, and that was to go to war as the state of Iran itself. But apparently, this was not seen as useful; Iran did not take this step. So, Iran has perhaps prevented, or at least postponed, a move directly against it. But in any case, Iran has been the power that has suffered the most from this process. It has not only lost its influence in Syria. Its position in Iraq has also been jeopardized.

The new process in the Middle East was initiated with the Hamas attack as a pretext, but already with the war in Ukraine, it became clear that the forces of capitalist modernity, led by the US, wanted to redesign the world system or to accelerate and finalize this work that had already begun. This was the reading of our movement, and it prepared itself on this basis. The button for this was pressed with the Ukrainian war; at least the signs of this were given with the start of this war. It is clear that the Ukrainian war has turned into a quagmire for Russia. By dragging Russia into the war, the US not only broke Russia’s power and questioned its legitimacy but also disrupted the project of an energy route through the north. While Russia was seeking to somehow end the war with Ukraine, it could not go against the US, UK, and Israeli plan and go to war in Syria in favor of the regime. What is being debated now is whether Russia made a deal with the US or not. It is highly likely that Russia made a deal with the US over the Ukraine war. It may have made such a deal with Trump, if not with the Biden administration. Obviously, Russia has tried to come out of this with the least damage or the highest possible gain, taking into account the circumstances. For now, its bases in northwestern Syria are said to have been closed. We don’t know whether they will reopen or whether Russia will be forced to leave. But it is certain that Russia has settled for the lesser of two evils, and its influence in the Middle East and the Eastern Mediterranean has suffered a significant blow.

The Baath regime’s effectiveness in the absence of Iran and Russia was not expected anyway. It had lost its own power and will long ago. The Baath regime had only one way out, and that was to come to an agreement with the Kurds and the North and East Syrian self-administration, to take democratic steps on this basis, and to transform itself democratically. But it failed to show this wisdom. In our opinion, there had been the conditions for this. However, due to the influence of foreign powers and its monist, dogmatic structure, which is close to change, it was not able to do so. As a result, the situation that has emerged in Syria has happened according to the plan carried out within the scope of the redesign of the Middle East. What kind of developments Syria will witness in the future and what kind of system it will be governed by will be determined by the developments within the scope of this plan.

Parallel to HTS’s attacks on Syrian cities, the Turkish state and the affiliated SNA attacked autonomous regions, especially Manbij. How should the parallelism and simultaneity of these attacks be evaluated? What is the current policy of the international powers towards Rojava, North and East Syria?

In this regard, Turkey’s and the AKP-MHP government’s position on the situation in Syria must be addressed. It is clear that Turkey is not given the same role in the redesign of the Middle East as before. It seems that Turkey is trying to strengthen its position by getting involved in the situation in Syria, but it is rather unclear if this will indeed strengthen Turkey’s position. Maybe it can be said that it has been strengthened, but it is not clear whether this will last or not. As I tried to point out at the beginning, the Turkish state’s approach was initially based on opposition to the US, UK, and Israeli plans. Since Turkey was excluded from the IMEC project that was presented at the G20 summit in India, Tayyip Erdoğan’s attitude was one of open opposition. He developed a clear attitude that we would not allow a project in which they were not involved. Before even one month had passed, Hamas attacked. Subsequently, the US, Britain, and Israel used this as a pretext to put into action the plan they had prepared in advance, and thus a new process was entered in the Middle East. Obviously, everything had been arranged and planned in advance. There was only one spark left, and they made Hamas do it through Tayyip Erdoğan. What we don’t know is if Tayyip Erdoğan knowingly let himself be used or if he unknowingly fell for this trick. But they must have realized that this situation was having negative consequences for them, so they made a deal with the US. Now they are acting as a part of the US, Britain, and Israel’s plan for Syria.

It was not unexpected that the Turkish state would attack Rojava. It has prepared its affiliated gangs and mercenaries, which it calls the Syrian National Army, for this purpose. When the new situation in Syria emerged, it turned it into an opportunity and launched a new attack by pushing the SNA, including Turkish soldiers and officers, forward. Again, the SNA is led by Turkish generals, and the aim and goal of the Turkish state is clear. It is to liquidate the autonomous self-administration by invading Rojava. This is the purpose of their attacks.

When the new situation in Syria emerged, the most critical places were Shahba and Til Rifat. There were camps where people who had migrated from Afrin were staying. Iran and Russia had been in the area between these camps and Aleppo, and they left this area to the gangs and withdrew. Til Rifat was completely surrounded. The forces of the SDF then tried to create a corridor and establish a connection with this area. However, they were not successful in this. When this failed, the decision was taken to evacuate the people from that area, and an agreement was made so that the people of Afrin who remained in Shahba and Til Rifat could be evacuated. The Turkish state and the SNA gangs propagandized themselves as if they had taken this area in a war. But in reality, there was no war, and the withdrawal was by agreement. In other places where there were attacks, the resistance of the people and fighters of the SDF continues. It seems that the SDF is putting up a great resistance in Tishrin and Qaraqozakh, inflicting heavy losses on the enemy. As long as the enemy cannot occupy these places, they cannot afford to turn to other places. The Turkish state has realized that it will not succeed against the SDF by relying only on the SNA gangs, so it is putting pressure on HTS and forcing it to also take a position against the SDF.

The future of Rojava and North and East Syria will be determined not by the approach of the coalition forces but by the resistance of the people and revolutionary forces. Until today, all the invasions and attacks of the Turkish state have taken place in front of the eyes of the coalition forces. However, they did not take a stance against this. Without their approval, the Turkish state could not have carried out these attacks. One should not expect anything from them. The peoples of Rojava, North and East Syria, must prepare themselves for war in every sense. Everywhere, people must take their own defense into their own hands. In this way, if the people and revolutionary forces join hands and resist the attacks together, the enemy will never be able to achieve any results. Our people and friends in the other parts of Kurdistan and abroad must also stand in solidarity with Rojava and mobilize everywhere. They must organize demonstrations, shape public opinion, and develop political pressure to stop the attacks by the Turkish state.

The revolution of Rojava is in its 13th year. What level did the structure reach in terms of the system and social cohesion in North and East Syria? How is it possible that it is able to survive despite the attacks and embargoes that continue throughout all of 2024? In light of recent developments, what dangers await the Autonomous Administration and society in the new year? And also, at the same time, what kind of opportunities has the new situation created for the Kurds and their allies in the struggle for a status?

The survival of the Rojava Revolution under all these attacks is something big in itself. This is certainly the result of great effort and work. This must be recognized first and foremost. While regimes are falling and states are collapsing, the attacks on Rojava have been more intense than anywhere else, but the revolution has resisted all these attacks and managed to sustain itself. The Rojava Revolution is like an oasis in the desert. It is extremely difficult to exist as an alternative power in the heart of the Middle East, in a geography where the world’s most decisive powers are making their calculations and are trying to set their plans into action. Of course, not only the fact that the revolution is still standing is valuable, but particularly that it didn’t let go of its goals and principles.

When one evaluates the Rojava Revolution, it is necessary to take into account the circumstances and its unique aspects, goals, and principles. The Rojava Revolution does not work according to the statist paradigm. It does not develop a new socialization by the state from above, as in the real socialist style. It does not transfer all property and powers to the state and attempt the transformation of society by the state. It does not approve of these methods, which real socialism failed to achieve results with, and does not apply them. The Rojava Revolution aims to build a revolution based on the reality of the democratic commune and the free individual and to transform society on this basis. It wants to develop the construction of the revolution based on the transformation of mentality and by involving society. In doing so, it takes women’s freedom as a basis. The construction of socialism and the development of the revolution can only be realized with a new understanding of life to be developed on the basis of women’s freedom, as well as ecological life. The revolution aims to develop the life of democratic modernity against the life of capitalist modernity by building the life of organized democratic society. In order to overcome the nationalist, sectarian, and monist mentality that the nation-state understanding of capitalist modernity has implanted in society, a new understanding according to the democratic nation is being developed.

When one evaluates the Rojava Revolution from the perspective of these basic principles and strategic lines, one can clearly see that significant progress has been made, and important results have been achieved. All the peoples of North and East Syria have succeeded in developing a common life together based on the model of the democratic nation. This experience is a first in the Middle East, and it is gradually becoming a model for the whole of Syria and the Middle East. The second important development is the success achieved in women’s liberation. The development achieved by women in the revolution is far ahead of world standards. By looking at the progress achieved by women in the revolution, it can be predicted that the revolution in the Middle East will develop based on this. As far as this is reflected to us, there is intense work for the construction of the revolution. Everywhere there is work on the basis of organizing social assemblies, communes, and committees. We know that there is a constant effort to overcome the inadequacies in construction. Undoubtedly, attacks, embargoes, sudden migrations, occupations, etc. negatively affect social life. Naturally, the concern for the defense of the revolution against attacks and efforts in this direction comes to the fore. When the future of the revolution is under threat and danger, the defense of the revolution is the most fundamental problem, and concentration must be given here. Right now, the main danger comes from the Turkish state. If the attacks by the Turkish state are broken and frustrated on the basis of the total resistance of society, it is possible for the revolution to develop and set an example for the whole of Syria. The right solution for Syria is based on the experience developed in North and East Syria.

Within the framework of the agreement between the Turkish government, the Iraqi government, and the KDP, the attacks against the freedom movement continue. Also, there were elections in Southern Kurdistan, and the KDP failed to gain the majority to come to power. Internal problems continue in Iraq. Again, the issue of Kirkuk and Shengal (Sinjar) has not been resolved. How did 2024 pass for Southern Kurdistan? How did the occupation attacks affect society? What kind of year awaits the society of southern Kurdistan?

Iraq is one of the places most affected by any development in the Middle East, and it can be expected to be the state most affected by the new situation in Syria, while Iran still remains the main target of the attacks. Iran is the main power targeted in all the attacks, from the attack on Hamas to the fall of the regime in Syria. Iran’s power was broken first in Gaza, then in Lebanon, and now in Syria. Considering Iran’s power and influence over Iraq, it can be predicted that Iraq will be next after Syria. This probability is high. The situation and future of Iraq have become completely uncertain.

There is the Iraqi question that has never been solved. The Baathist regime was overthrown in 2003, but a model that would solve the problems permanently could not be developed. A constitution that solves the problems completely could not be prepared. Mosul and Kirkuk remained problematic regions in the constitution. A solution was tried to be developed, but it was seen that this was not successful. Since a solution that would include the whole region could not be developed, Turkey and Iran tried to take advantage of this. Iran through the Shiites and the Turkish state through the KDP and Sunnis tried to establish influence over Iraq. Now it is seen that lessons have been learned from this, and a regional approach is taken as a basis. Therefore it is expected that an approach towards Iraq will be developed and Iran’s influence will be broken. If this happens, the balance in Iraq will seriously change again. Even the disintegration of Iraq may also come to the agenda. Iran’s reaction to this is unlikely to be the same as in Syria. Because for Iran, Iraq is like the last outpost. Beyond that, the war would spread directly inside Iran. In this respect, a strong reaction by Iran may develop. This increases the possibility of Iraq’s disintegration.

Regarding the mentioned agreement, Iraq should learn a lesson from the situation in Syria. Bashar al-Assad was brought down by Erdogan. Now he wants to control the administration in Damascus. Tomorrow, when a similar decision is made about Iraq, they may put the Turkish state into action here too. With the help of Tayyip Erdoğan, they will either break Iraq into pieces or force it into a situation like Damascus. The administration sitting in Baghdad will have no more authority and power than a governor. It is really surprising that Iraqis do not see this. We do not understand whether all Iraqis do not see this, or whether they see it but cannot get Sudani to say anything. Iraq will not benefit from relations with Turkey. On the contrary, these relations are a great danger for the country. When the Iraqi kingdom was overthrown in 1958, the first thing that was done on the second day of the revolution was to cancel the Baghdad Pact. Because the relations with Turkey had led Iraq to disaster. Now, after all these experiences, for Iraq to re-enter into such a relationship with the Turkish state is to not learn from history and to not read today’s developments correctly.

The KDP and the Barzani clan have completely tied their fate to the Turkish state and the AKP-MHP government. They act according to the aims and plans of the Turkish state, not according to the demands, freedom, and future of the Kurdish people. The only thing they aim for is material gain. They have no concerns or ideas other than material gain. The KDP and the Barzani clan are total collaborators. This collaborative attitude has put southern Kurdistan in great danger. They openly support and legitimize the occupation of the South. While the guerrilla is resisting the occupation, the KDP is giving all kinds of support to the enemy. The KDP intelligence organization Parastin directly supports and participates in all attacks and massacres against patriots in southern Kurdistan by the Turkish intelligence service. Without the support of the KDP, the Turkish state would neither dare to attack guerrilla areas in this way nor massacre patriots in the middle of the cities. All this is happening with the support of the KDP. Not only that, the KDP imposes and threatens everyone else to be collaborators and traitors like itself. It tries to associate everyone with the Turkish state in a collaborative manner. With the plundering order it has established, it has left the people hopeless and without a future. It has taken all the means into its hands and left the people in poverty and uncertainty. Just like in the other occupied parts of Kurdistan, there is a massive migration from the South to abroad. There is no government of southern Kurdistan, as it is portrayed. There is no functioning system. There are no democratic rules and procedures. It is a robbery scheme through which the Barzani clan is looting the people for its own interests.

The KDP approaches the other parts of Kurdistan in the same way it approaches southern Kurdistan. It approaches them according to the plans of the Turkish state. It does not think of the national interests of our people in the other parts but of the material benefits it will gain from its relations with the enemy. This has been its approach to Rojava, the North, and Rojhilat. Everywhere it acts according to the enemy’s plans, it takes an attitude that supports and legitimizes the enemy’s attack. This attitude of the KDP constitutes the biggest danger. We can say that the greatest danger for the people of Kurdistan is not the enemy from outside but the collaborative and treasonous politics developed by the KDP from within. It is this politics of the KDP that makes the enemy dangerous. Of course, the most important issue here is to develop a patriotic attitude against the collaborative and treasonous line developed by the KDP. Primarily, it is necessary to develop such an attitude in southern Kurdistan. All patriotic parties, organizations, and institutions, as well as patriotic individuals, should join forces and unite against the collaborative treason and lead the national democratic struggle.