On occasion of April 4: Tracing leader Ocalan’s Political Journey

The First Bullet Fired at Blind Fate

The first part of this file examined the early stage of leader Abdullah Ocalan’s life. In this section, we address the second and third stages, as he outlines them in his volume "Defending a People."

The Second Stage of the Leader’s Life

Regarding the second stage of his life, leader Abdullah Ocalan writes in Defending a People:

“This phase marks the severance from bourgeois society and its state, initiating the formation of an independent ideological group striving to establish its own contemporary socio-political system…”

The leader divides this stage into two distinct parts:

The First Phase (1972–1984):

This can be described as the awakening of the dispossessed Kurdish people in response to modernity. It can be labeled the first rebellion, the first bullet fired at blind fate, or viewed as a cry of dignity and honor. Öcalan calls it the first campaign of transformation into the PKK.

The Second Phase (August 15, 1984 – February 15, 1999):

This 15-year period is marked by armed struggle and constitutes the second campaign of transformation into the PKK.

In his book The Kurdish Question and the Democratic Nation Solution, the leader delves deeper into the first segment of this second stage of his personal and organizational development. He writes:

 “At the start of 1973, I began laying the groundwork for a group founded upon the thesis that ‘Kurdistan is a colony.’ A separate organization became an inevitable necessity. Yet, our approach was not nationalist… I engaged in verbal agitation and propaganda within the group, as though I were sharing a secret, without relying on any written documentation. This continued until early 1975…

 In the winter of 1975, I began formal ideological propaganda, based on my own understanding and perception. I combined theoretical work with propaganda. I demonstrated the necessary courage and sense of responsibility to form a loosely structured group during our meeting on the shores of the Göbüç Dam, on Newroz 1973, following our protest against the killing of Mahir Çayan and his comrades in the village of Kızıldere on March 30, 1972, as well as my own experience of seven months’ imprisonment in Mamak Military Prison (April–October 1972). To me, the Kurdish reality would be determined by the outcomes of that group’s actions.

The first draft document we produced emerged in 1975. I was standing in a house, speaking as if delivering a speech, while Mehmet Hayri Durmuş jotted down my words with implicit approval. That speech amounted to an extended treatise on the reality of Kurdistan… In truth, our group possessed the most cohesive and disciplined ideological consciousness. We resembled a dogmatic collective with unshakable belief.

The years 1974 and 1975 were marked by engagement with the Ankara Higher Education Democratic Association (ADYÖD), which I led as a critical responsibility. It was the first serious practical application of my theoretical views. The result, in 1976, was a strategic and decisive break from the Turkish left, together with comrades of Turkish origin such as Haki Karer, Kemal Pir, and Duran Kalkan.

In 1977, I symbolically toured Kurdistan to disseminate our message. In March of that year, I publicly articulated our theses for the first time during a conference attended by a large audience, held at the Chamber of Architects in Ankara. Immediately afterward, I began a propaganda tour through Kurdistan. I recall it feeling like a campaign in a real warzone as I completed my journey, passing through Ağrı, Doğubeyazıt, Kars, Digor, Dersim, Bingöl, Elazığ, Diyarbakır, Mardin, Urfa, Gaziantep, and the Ankara corridor.

In 1978, we entered the phase of written publication with the newspaper Serxwebûn. The first issue featured my article, written in the summer of that year, entitled The Path of the Kurdish Revolution, known as The Manifesto.

Shortly after my return to Ankara, news arrived from Antep of the martyrdom of Haki Karer. I can say I was devastated by this. It was undoubtedly a severe blow. But what mattered was to respond appropriately to his legacy. My commitment in his memory was to lead the group toward formal party transformation. That same fall, I personally drafted the initial version of the party’s program.

Another pivotal moment came with the holding of a meeting in the village of Fîs, near Diyarbakır, based on the party program and in memory of Haki Karer. Twenty-two individuals participated; it served as the founding congress. It lasted two days, from November 27–28, 1978. Indeed, the declaration of the PKK and the assertion of our identity marked the end of this historical phase. By then, we had already accomplished what needed to be done—both in light of global and Turkish conditions, and in terms of our group’s concrete practice. What mattered most in those objective conditions was the revolutionary style: to initiate a movement in the name of the ‘working class’ from within the triad of the city, class, and nation-state.

From the year 1979 onwards, I endeavored to take necessary measures along two fronts. On one hand, preparations were made for a long-term guerrilla struggle in the mountains. On the other, I sought to open an alternative outlet for the movement by going abroad. Had this endeavor succeeded, the continuity of the movement would have become a tangible reality.

By mid-1979, I instructed Adham Akjan, who hails from the city of Suruç, to prepare for crossing the border. I experienced a 40-day period of waiting in Urfa, during which I lived in a state reminiscent of that of the Prophet Abraham. During that time, I had shattered many of the idols of modernity and civilization. It was indeed a remarkable encounter to be in the city of Nimrud, at a time when the modern-day “Nimrods” were enraged and prepared for confrontation. I was walking in the footsteps of Abraham and his revolutionary departure. What was happening in Suruç was part of a recurring pattern, often seen in the aftermath of rebellion… A few days later, Adham informed me that conditions were ready for our departure. Much like the Prophet Abraham, I found myself among the Palestinians after a journey that lasted a month or two. I began my days there without knowledge of the language and in the absence of a translator. There was little to cling to for resistance except the significance of the objective.

Only those who have experienced similar conditions can truly comprehend the immense importance of organization and the cultivation of relationships aimed at building a new society. What I experienced within the PKK was a truth rarely understood or appreciated. The first year passed with efforts to meet our logistical needs and to regroup. Prior to the coup of September 12, and specifically in July 1980, we had dispatched the first group back to the homeland under the leadership of Kemal Pir and Masum Korkmaz. The deployment of further groups would continue thereafter. In my view, 1982 had to be a pivotal year for launching a new campaign—particularly due to the torture and death-fast protests in Diyarbakır Prison. Accordingly, we transferred the field campaign’s center to the homeland, to the Lolan region, with the hope of launching it from there. On August 15, 1984, the August 15 Campaign was initiated.

My objective during the period between 1970 and 1980 was the establishment of a vanguard organization and party, and I succeeded in that. My goal post-1980 became the creation of a militant organization and a fighting people, regardless of how long it would take.

In his volume “The Kurdish Question and the Democratic Nation Solution,” leader Abdullah Ocalan elaborates on the second phase of his personal and organizational life, beginning with the August 15 initiative and continuing until February 15, 1999. He states:

"At the unexpected launch of the August 15 Campaign, the Gladio network in Turkey had already eliminated the remaining traces of Turkish revolutionaries through the September 12, 1980 military coup. The campaign was not anticipated. When it materialized, it was initially thought to be a minor leftist adventure, something the conventional military, police, and intelligence forces could easily suppress. However, their failure to neutralize it within the first year led to the issue being escalated to NATO, which in 1985 decided to intervene under Article 5 of its founding treaty."

In March 1987, I began formulating analyses regarding women. The issue of women was increasingly gaining a serious character. With every training session, I took another step toward deepening this analysis. The growing number of young women within our ranks compelled us to develop fundamental responses to the question of women’s liberation.

Between 1987 and my departure from Syria on October 9, 1998, I personally undertook the planning and execution of relentless campaigns, launching them with unwavering determination. We succeeded in advancing the process and enhancing our strength in the struggle. By the end of 1998, it was no longer possible to dismantle our historic campaign in the people's revolutionary war.

Regarding his departure from Syria on October 9, 1998, the leader states in “The Kurdish Question and the Democratic Nation Solution”:

"Upon leaving Syria, I faced two options: the path of the mountains, or the path of Europe. Choosing the mountains would have meant escalating the war, while opting for Europe represented a pursuit of diplomatic and political resolution."

In “The Rome Process,” he remarks:

"There is another strange fact you should know, as it holds significance for the Americans: October 9 is the date of Che Guevara’s martyrdom. The choice of this day is quite telling. Most likely, they chose it to draw a parallel between myself and that great revolutionary figure. It was in their interest to eliminate me on such a day."

He continues in “The Kurdish Question and the Democratic Nation Solution” to recount his journey through Europe, and the subsequent refusals to grant him asylum:

"The Syrian officials sighed in relief once my plane landed in Athens on October 9. We then diverted to Moscow on a private Greek plane. I stayed there for approximately 33 days, supposedly in secret. I chose Moscow out of a belief that, having experienced a seventy-year socialist experiment, they would receive me easily. Despite their collapsed system, I did not anticipate such a level of spiritual poverty. We were faced with the remnants of a bureaucratic capitalism that was even more severe than liberal capitalism. Consequently, we were disillusioned by the stance of our friends in Moscow."

By coincidence, our third course of action was formed by capitalizing on our contacts in Rome, leading to what became a 66-day saga in a Roman hospital—part of a theatrical scenario orchestrated by Italian intelligence.

My second return to Russia was a mistake. After a form of deception, I was placed aboard a cargo plane and flown to Dushanbe, the capital of Tajikistan. We waited in a single room for a week without ever leaving. Then we returned once more to Moscow, and after two adventure-filled and bitterly cold days, we redirected ourselves again to Athens. Allegedly, I was to go to South Africa. Before that, there was a trip to Minsk, from where I was supposed to enter Dutch territory before traveling to Nairobi. Thus, aboard another private plane, I waited for over two hours in Minsk’s freezing weather. But the expected plane never arrived. In the inferno of Nairobi, I was presented with three options:

1. A staged death in a firefight under the pretext of non-compliance with orders,

2. Submitting without resistance to the orders of the American intelligence agency,

3. My handover to Turkish Special Warfare Units, long prepared for this.

The four-month period from October 9, 1998, to February 15, 1999, was extraordinary. No global power aside from the United States could have orchestrated such a comprehensive and sustained manhunt. At that point, the role of the Turkish Special Warfare Forces was limited to transferring me to İmralı by plane under supervision.

The Third Phase of the Leader’s Life

Referring to what he calls the "third phase of his life," leader Abdullah Ocalan writes in “Defending a People”:

"If it may still be called a 'life' in name and essence, this phase began on February 15, 1999, and continues until the end. It is distinguished by the beginning of disengagement from a life centered around the state in general, and modern capitalist life in particular."

He continues: "At the Imrali island prison, I never prioritized myself—not even for a single moment. I struggled to preserve my biological existence within a confined space, enduring breathing difficulties. I did not grieve for myself, but I could not accept the betrayal of the people. Even though all global powers left us without a single glimmer of hope, I created positive ideas and stances for the sake of comrades, the people, and humanity. I succeeded in achieving the impossible. At the very least, one should strive to be worthy of such efforts."

In “The Kurdish Question and the Democratic Nation Solution,” he reflects on this phase:

"The context of imprisonment in Imrali compelled me to comprehend reality with deeper and more comprehensive insight. The proportion of truth within the İmralı context surpassed that of earlier stages. I achieved important milestones: from the abstract to the concrete, from dogma to realism, from apathy to sensitivity and precision, from national statism to democracy, from economism to capitalist modernity (capitalist tendencies, industrialism, and nationalism), from capitalist modernity to democratic modernity, and from idealist history to scientific–philosophical history. I also addressed Islamic mysticism, extensively characterizing the nature of truth and classifying its degrees. Indeed, the fate of nations and societies is intimately tied to these stages of truth, and is determined by the degree of truth established through practical outcomes."

During various meetings with his lawyers in Imrali, leader Abdullah Ocalan sent messages to the people regarding the celebration of his birthday. In one such message during a legal visit on April 7, 2010, he stated:

"My birthday was commemorated. More accurately, the matter is not merely my birthday. The people see it as their own. The issue is not whether I was born in that city, that village, or on that land. The people perceive it as their own birth, their own awakening, and they celebrate it as such. I salute all who went there, who honored the occasion, and who made efforts in this regard. However, they must not empty it of its essence."

a k

ANHA