PKK attacks oil pipeline

[Saorsa]

Kurdish Group Threatens More Econ Attacks After Pipe - Report


Friday August 8th, 2008
<img width="1" height="1">
ANKARA (AFP)--Kurdish rebels threatened more attacks on economic targets Friday after claiming responsibility for a blast in eastern Turkey that shut down a strategic oil pipeline, an agency close to the rebels reported.

"Attacks on economic interests have a deterring effect (on Turkey)...As long as the Turkish state insists on war, such acts will be naturally carried out," Bahoz Erdal, a commander of the separatist Kurdistan Workers' Party, or PKK, told the Firat news agency.


The PKK claimed responsibility for a blast Tuesday night at a section of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline near Refahiye, in Erzincan province.


The explosion sparked a fire, which continued to burn Friday. The conduit, which supplies oil to Western markets, is expected to remain shut for about 15 days.

The PKK said the explosion was "an act of sabotage" by its militants, details of which would be revealed later, according to Firat.


The PKK, listed as a terrorist group by Turkey and much of the international community, has sabotaged gas and oil pipelines in the past as part of its armed campaign for self-rule in the mainly Kurdish southeast.


Erdal said the pipeline blast and other PKK attacks in recent weeks were in response to an intensified Turkish crackdown against the rebels both inside Turkey and neighboring northern Iraq, where they take refuge.

Turkish military action "has required us to boost our resistance in self-defense," he told Firat.


The Turkish authorities have played down the possibility of a sabotage at the BTC pipeline, and the Anatolia news agency Friday quoted unnamed officials as saying that the PKK might be seeking publicity.


An official from Turkey's state-run oil and gas company, BOTAS, said Thursday that no trace of a sabotage had been found but a definite conclusion could be reached only after the fire at the pipeline was extinguished.


The Refahiye's sub-governor had earlier ruled out sabotage, saying a fault had been detected before the blast.

Inaugurated in 2006, the 1,774-kilometer BTC pipeline is the world's second-longest.


It carries Azeri oil from the Caspian Sea fields, the world's third-largest reserve, to Turkey's Mediterranean port of Ceyhan, from where tankers transport the crude oil to Western markets.


It was pumping about 1.2 million barrels of oil a day before the blast.


Friday August 8th, 2008 Source : Dowjones Business News

<img width="1" height="1">
<img width="10" height="1">.

[spartan]

Nice one!

Could this be in conjunction with the Russian counter attack in the oil/gas pipeline rich country of Georgia?

Then again weren't the US (Georgia's main ally) secretly funding and arming groups like the PKK to undermine Iran in Iranian Kurdistan?

[Saorsa]

Could this be in conjunction with the Russian counter attack in the oil/gas pipeline rich country of Georgia?

I think that's a coincidence. I very much doubt the Russians would be interested in backing a left-wing Kurdish national liberation movement, and I doubt the PKK would want to get involved with them!


Then again weren't the US (Georgia's main ally) secretly funding and arming groups like the PKK to undermine Iran in Iranian Kurdistan?

Turkey is a NATO member and a close US ally, so the US has no interest whatsoever in backing the PKK. I have heard that America's funding insurgent groups in Iran, but if they are US puppet groups you can hardly compare them to the PKK.

I think you're making a few dodgy logical leaps of faith here Spartan.

[Devrim]

Turkey is a NATO member and a close US ally, so the US has no interest whatsoever in backing the PKK. I have heard that America's funding insurgent groups in Iran, but if they are US puppet groups you can hardly compare them to the PKK.

Except that the US does back the PKK:


Relation to United States government and military structures

PJAK is close to the Kurdistan Workers Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurdistan_Workers_Party) (PKK, also called KADEK, Kongra-Gel and KGK), which is described as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._State_Department_list_of_Foreign_Terrorist_Or ganizations) by the United States State Department (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_State_Department).
On April 18 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_18), 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006), US Congressman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Congress) Dennis Kucinich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Kucinich) sent a letter to US president (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_president) George W. Bush (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush) in which he expressed his judgment that the US is likely to be supporting and coordinating PJAK, since PJAK operates and is based in Iraqi territory, which is under the control of US military (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_military) forces.[17] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEJAK#cite_note-kucinich-16)
In November 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_2006), journalist Seymour Hersh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seymour_Hersh) writing in The New Yorker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Yorker), supported this claim, stating that the US military and the Israelis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel) are giving the group equipment, training, and targeting information in order to create internal pressures in Iran.[18] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEJAK#cite_note-hersh_next_act-17)
This is denied officially by both the US and PJAK. In an interview with Slate magazine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slate_%28magazine%29) in June 2006, when PJAK spokesman Ihsan Warya (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ihsan_Warya&action=edit&redlink=1) was paraphrased as stating that he "nevertheless points out that PJAK really does wish it were an agent of the United States, and that [PJAK is] disappointed that Washington (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_the_US) hasn't made contact." The Slate article continues stating that the PJAK wishes to be supported by and work with the United States in overthrowing the government of Iran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Iran) in a similar way to the US eventually cooperated with Kurdish organisations in Iraq in overthrowing the government of Iraq (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Iraq) during the most recent Iraq war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_war).[19] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEJAK#cite_note-slate_pjak-18)
In August 2007, the leader of PJAK visited Washington, DC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington%2C_DC) in order to seek more open support from the US both politically and militarily[20] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEJAK#cite_note-19) but it was later said that he only made limited contacts with officials in Washington.[21] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEJAK#cite_note-20) One of the top officials in the PKK made a statement in late 2006, that "If the US is interested in PJAK, then it has to be interested in the PKK as well" referring to the alliance between the two groups and their memberships in the Kurdistan Democratic Confederation (KCK).


In fact this article downplays it as Koma Civakên Kurdistan (Kurdisatn Democratic Convention is not an alliance, but a PKK controlled front.

The PKK is a vicious anti-worker gang, which dropped its pseudo Marxism years ago and is now openly pro-US.

Devrim

[Saorsa]

My point was that the US is not going to be backing the PKK in it's activities in Turkish Kurdistan. It may back PKK linked organisations in Iraq, Iran or wherever, but you're not seriously suggesting the US is backing the PKK itself in it's national liberation struggle against the Turkish state, a close ally of America. Why would the US promote internal conflict in one of it's closest Middle Eastern allies, perhaps even it's closest?

[Devrim]

Do you think that the PKK really cares 'where' the US is backing them? It is a fact that US weapons continually turn up in PKK hands in Turkey. Now, I am pretty sure that these weapons are being given to PJAK, and not the PKK, but then PJAK is effectively a part of the PKK.

So it is an established fact that the US is indirectly backing the PKK.

As to why they are doing that I can think of a few possible answers. I will give three examples;
a) The people organising it are genuially unaware of the depth of the links between PJAK and the PKK. It is not as if it would be the first time US anaylists had screwed up in the Middle East.
b) They are aware, but look at it as a price they have to pay for their proxy-interventions in Iran.
c) The US is backing the PKK as a potential weapon against Turkey if conflict breaks out over Northern Iraq.

Devrim

[spartan]

c) The US is backing the PKK as a potential weapon against Turkey if conflict breaks out over Northern Iraq.
Well Turkey did temporarily invade northern Iraq which led to strained relations of sorts between them and the US.

[Saorsa]

Do you think that the PKK really cares 'where' the US is backing them?

no, and why should they? If they can get weapons off the US in one area to arm their struggle against Turkish oppression in another area, what's the problem?


It is a fact that US weapons continually turn up in PKK hands in Turkey.

Indian weapons constantly turned up in the hands of the Maoists in Nepal. does this mean India is backing the CPN (M)?


a) The people organising it are genuially unaware of the depth of the links between PJAK and the PKK. It is not as if it would be the first time US anaylists had screwed up in the Middle East.
b) They are aware, but look at it as a price they have to pay for their proxy-interventions in Iran.
c) The US is backing the PKK as a potential weapon against Turkey if conflict breaks out over Northern Iraq.

The third option I find somewhat unlikely, the first option fairly plausible, and the second one also fairly plausible.

The fact of the matter is that the Kurdish nation is oppressed and artificially divided in both Turkey, Iran and Iraq. Why should the national liberation movement not funnel weapons from one arena of the struggle to another?

[Devrim]

The fact of the matter is that the Kurdish nation is oppressed and artificially divided in both Turkey, Iran and Iraq. Why should the national liberation movement not funnel weapons from one arena of the struggle to another?

Well, yes, and why shouldn't the US bomb Iran? The national liberation movement is, as I mentioned above, a vicious anti-working class gang, which is well known for its policies of attacking workers.


The third option I find somewhat unlikely, the first option fairly plausible, and the second one also fairly plausible.

I find it unlikely, but not completely implausible. If the Iraqi Kurds declare independece, which they want to do, Turkey would invade. What would the US then do?

Devrim

[Saorsa]

Well, yes, and why shouldn't the US bomb Iran?

Because that would be an imperialist attack on a Third World country, something we as revolutionary communists are opposed to. All bomb attacks are not the same.


What would the US then do?

I have no idea, but you're right, it may be trying to keep it's options open.

[Devrim]

Because that would be an imperialist attack on a Third World country, something we as revolutionary communists are opposed to. All bomb attacks are not the same.

My point was that the US will do what it perceives is the right thing to protect/further its interests as will the PKK. I don't support it, but then neither do I support the PKK as it protects/furthers its interests. They are both anti-working class.

Devrim

[Saorsa]

They are both anti-working class.

In what way do you think the PKK is anti-working class?

[Devrim]

In what way do you think the PKK is anti-working class?

In what way do you think blowing up oil pipelines has anything to do with building working class power?

In our opinion the PKK is anti-working class in that its nationalist ideology aims to divide the working class, and to tie one part of it to a section of the bourgeois.

The truth of this is shown it this organisations actions. The PKK is an organisation which has in the past run campaigns of deliberately attacking workers and ethnic minorities.

And like any national liberation movement has ended up a tool of local and regional powers.

Devrim

[Saorsa]

In what way do you think blowing up oil pipelines has anything to do with building working class power?The action in itself does not build working class power. But no action in and of itself builds working class power, whether it involved explosives and bullets or leaflets and megaphones. It's the sum of all these actions together that can be said to advance workers power.

Two quotes from Marx that help to shed some light on the issue of national liberation;

I have become more and more convinced - and the thing now is to drum this conviction into the English working class - that they will never be able to do anything decisive here in England before they separate their attitude towards Ireland quite definitely from that of the ruling classes, and not only make common cause with the Irish, but even take the initiative in dissolving the Union established in 1801, and substituting a free federal relationship for it. And this must be done not out of sympathy for Ireland, but as a demand based on the interests of the English proletariat. If not, the English people will remain bound to the leading-strings of the ruling classes, because they will be forced to make a common front with them against Ireland.

- Marx to Kugelmann, November 29, 1869

The way I shall express the matter next Tuesday is: that, quite apart from all ‘international’ and ‘humane’ phrases about Justice for Ireland - which are taken for granted on the International Council - it is in the direct and absolute interests of the English working class to get rid of their present connexion with Ireland. I am fully convinced of this, for reasons that, in part, I cannot tell the English workers themselves. For a long time I believed it would be possible to overthrow the Irish regime by English working class ascendancy. I always took this viewpoint in the New-York Tribune. Deeper study has now convinced me of the opposite. The English working class will never accomplish anything before it has got rid of Ireland. The lever must be applied in Ireland. This is why the Irish question is so important for the social movement in general.
- Marx to Engels, December 10, 1869

If not, the English people will remain bound to the leading-strings of the ruling classes, because they will be forced to make a common front with them against Ireland.

The English working class will never accomplish anything before it has got rid of Ireland.

By struggling for national liberation, the PKK aims to liberate Kurdistan and the Kurdish people from the oppression of the Turkish ruling class. In doing so, it removes a method through which the Turkish ruling class is able to divide the masses, and bring them in behind it and it's policies.

Every national-democratic revolution is a blow to imperialism. Enough blows dealt to imperialism will mean a decrease in the super-profits it can extract from the Third World, and an end to it's aura of invincibility. It's no coincidence that the last big upsurge in struggle and radical politics we've seen in the First World was in the 1960s, at the same time as the NLF were bringing US imperialism to it's knees in Vietnam.

By struggling for national liberation for the Kurdish people, the PKK weakens imperialism, and the global capitalist system. It also removes an anchor from the Turkish proletariat, and opens up a space for it to become increasingly revolutionary.

[Devrim]

The action in itself does not build working class power. But no action in and of itself builds working class power, whether it involved explosives and bullets or leaflets and megaphones. It's the sum of all these actions together that can be said to advance workers power.

I would say that some actions do build working class power i.e. actions of the working class struggling itself, the mass strike, the creation of strike committees.


Two quotes from Marx that help to shed some light on the issue of national liberation;

The period has changed since Marx's time. Marx lived in a period where world communist revolution wasn't possible. The revolutionary wave after the First World War opens the new period. Luxembourg's analysis is far more relevant in this new period.


Every national-democratic revolution is a blow to imperialism. Enough blows dealt to imperialism will mean a decrease in the super-profits it can extract from the Third World, and an end to it's aura of invincibility.

In this period 'national liberation' is impossible. All that a 'successful' national liberation movement can do is to alter the balance of power within the world system that is imperialism today. It is not possible to break out of that system. An 'independent' Kurdistan today can be nothing more than a puppet state of the US and Israel. The PKK recognises this which is why it makes overtures to, and co-operates with these powers.


By struggling for national liberation for the Kurdish people, the PKK weakens imperialism, and the global capitalist system.

How will setting up another US puppet state in the Middle east weaken imperialism?


By struggling for national liberation, the PKK aims to liberate Kurdistan and the Kurdish people from the oppression of the Turkish ruling class.

Phrases like 'the Kurdish people' are in themselves a rejection of class politics. 'The Kurdish people' is in fact a society divided into classes. In the present situation support for the Kurdish people can only be support for the Kurdish bourgeois. And the nationalist parties aren't afraid to play their role against the working class. Witness the KDP shooting down striking workers in the streets.


In doing so, it removes a method through which the Turkish ruling class is able to divide the masses, and bring them in behind it and it's policies.

I would say that things like the PKK's campaign of killing school teachers, or the campaigns against ethnic minorities have played there own part in dividing the working class in Turkey. Yes, the state obviously tries to divide the working class, but the Kurdish nationalists play there role in this. Or do you think that these sort of activities build class unity?

Devrim

[Chapaev]

As the quisling forces of northern Iraq demonstrate, a separate Kurdish state would be detrimental to the interests of the national liberation movement in the region. It is particularly curious why imperialists have eagerly promoted Kurdish terrorist groups in northern Iran. Above all, by separating Kurds from the rest of their neigbhors, the class struggle would be seriously disrupted.

In recent years the PKK has degenerated into a counterrevolutionary group that has largely abandoned its progressive platform.

[Guerrilla22]

Then again weren't the US (Georgia's main ally) secretly funding and arming groups like the PKK to undermine Iran in Iranian Kurdistan?

The US is reportedly arming and training the Iranian sister organization of the PKK, the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan (PJAK). Not the PKK itself.

[Devrim]

The US is reportedly arming and training the Iranian sister organization of the PKK, the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan (PJAK). Not the PKK itself.

I think this is to misunderstand the relationship. PJAK is the PKK in Iran. The idea of it being some sort of fraternal organisation makes it sound like it is on some equal footing. This is not the case.

Devrim

[Devrim]

As the quisling forces of northern Iraq demonstrate, a separate Kurdish state would be detrimental to the interests of the national liberation movement in the region. It is particularly curious why imperialists have eagerly promoted Kurdish terrorist groups in northern Iran. Above all, by separating Kurds from the rest of their neigbhors, the class struggle would be seriously disrupted.

In recent years the PKK has degenerated into a counterrevolutionary group that has largely abandoned its progressive platform.

What a bizarre idea. National liberation is detrimental to 'the interests of the national liberation movement in the region'. You seem to be unable to see the wood for the trees. At least unlike some you can see the trees though.The national liberation movement is wholly reactionary and anti-working class.

Devrim

[Guerrilla22]

I think this is to misunderstand the relationship. PJAK is the PKK in Iran. The idea of it being some sort of fraternal organisation makes it sound like it is on some equal footing. This is not the case.

Devrim

Yes, the relationship does seem a bit confusing, some of the sources I've read claim that they are separate entities that come together under the KCK, yet others claim that the two are essentielly one in the same, sharing the same leadership.