Rojava; Non-State Anarchist Dream between Makhno and Ocalan

2020-01-18
Ibrahim Khalil
Global anarchism has a long history of failures, extending from the victory of Marx over Bakunin in the first Internationalism “The Hague 1872,” passing the elimination of General Nestor Makhno revolution; his black army and his anarchist government in Ukraine, 1918-1921, not to mention the contemporary American anarchist death, Murray Bookchin, in 2006 in the United States of America.
In spite of all those persistent failures, however, anarchism appears to be an immortal doctrine. As it keeps on appearing in different locations and in different depictions. With the arrest of Mr. Abdullah Ocalan in 1999 and nearly a year after his forced stay in the Imrali island, it became evident that the throes of anarchism were an imminent harbinger of his new pole birth and indeed it was. Ocalan constructed for himself and his party a new path, with the release of his huge book "From the State of the Sumerian Priests Towards a Democratic Civilization," inspired by the principles of anarchism. Moreover, completely away from the national liberation slogans, armed struggle and greater Kurdistan, on which he founded, called for and fought for.... over the past years.
It is common, that the Syrian revolution erupted and the authority of al-Assad was shaken throughout the country, after nearly a decade of Ocalan imprisonment. The Democratic Union Party, with its "Ocalani" reference, after cursory and sporadic battles against the regime, seizing the reins of affairs within an area that exceeds a quarter the area of Syria, under the name "Rojava," which was later modified to a non-provocative designation, which is "NES." Thus, it was normal and expected that the party would impose its ideological vision, known simply as the "democratic nation" theory, which was derived entirely from Ocalan's new ideas over the entire Kurdish and Syrian lands under his rule.
The party dominated all infrastructure facilities, reorganized and restructured it to suit the new stage. Consequently, it established a working and recruiting military force, organized the security and police forces of all kinds, as well as, rearranged the superstructure of schools, courts, municipalities and even sports and religious centers. In a manner consistent with the literally understood thoughts and words of the captive leader. Thus, new terms appeared, such as: “Canton, Commune, System and Democratic Islam.”
Definitely, all of this took place theoretically, according to the “Anarchist-Ocalani” approach. Therefore, huge sums were spent to hold training courses, print books, hold meetings and recruit loyal employees. However, with one marginalization of the one and most important and essential condition that is the involvement of society, in its broad sense, in the construction process and establishment. Not to mention the ineligibility of most of the “partisan society” members, contributed in leading a revolutionary coup operation, such as those which they confronted for reasons primarily related to upbringing and mentality.
Today, after nearly seven years passing since the theory was put in practice, the remaining Rojava residents wonder: “What have the new anarchists in the Democratic Union accomplished on the ground? Did the "Apo" loyalist, genuinely, absorb Ocalan's anarchist philosophy?” and “did anyone dare study or criticize it without applause, glorification and blind dependency?” Furthermore, if the defeat of the terrorist organization ISIS was a military victory for the party, can it be considered that the presence of this party in control, so far, over a few cities and the developing regions, as an ideological victory in turn?
More important and profound than this is that; Is "Rojava" suitable for the “Ukraine-to-be” of the twenty-first century? Is it qualified to be the basis for launching the new anarchist campaign? Meaning that, are the Kurds, who have been eager for at least a century for the dream of the Kurdish state, seriously prepared to give up that dream in favor of building a liberal anarchist society that run by them without the presence of a state, government, security services or police? Are they capable of that even if they desire it? Especially since they constitute a small portion in comparison to the surrounding, existing and powerful countries?
Finally, I do not find it necessary to say that the success of matters is dependent on the occasion of its time and setting. Likewise, that the attempt to anticipate the future and intensify the movement of history within a narrow scope that bears a glamorous designation such as "revolution," is definitely, not different from trying to squeeze an elephant into a perfume bottle; which is an irrational behavior and it would not be logical for it to succeed, at least in the foreseeable future.