English home
Von: "A. Wosni" < >
Betreff:
The sad story
of the Communist Party of Turkey
Datum: Donnerstag, 26. Jänner 2012 18:56
Communist Party of Great Britain © 26 January 2012
HOME CPGB, BCM Box 928, London WC1N 3XX. Email:
weeklyworker@cpgb.org.uk. Tel: 020 8533 6360
Weekly Worker 898 Thursday January 26 2012
Postscript to demise
Esen Uslu recounts the sad story of the Communist Party
of Turkey
Istanbul: May Day
The English version of the
liberal-cum-conservative-Islamist daily Zaman
(Times), Today’s Zaman, recently published an article
about a new
Communist Party of Turkey (TKP).[1] I read it with some
amusement, but
when my comrades from the Weekly Worker enquired as to my
opinion, I
felt obliged to return to a subject on which I have
refrained from
writing for so long.
Let me give a brief history of the TKP. Despite all its
pretence of a
long and glorious history, the party as we knew it in the
70s and 80s
was a quite recent phenomenon. It was formed in the early
70s in a move
known as the ‘leap forward’, after the name of the
monthly newspaper
Atilim, which appeared in the autumn of 1974. The effort
was led by the
remnants of the former external bureau of the central
committee, which
had been defunct for years.
Invented tradition
The article in Today’s Zaman referred to the “TKP
tradition” by using
the name of the website, From Suphi to Bilen the
tradition is alive,[2]
which campaigns for the creation of a new TKP. Mustafa
Suphi was a
founding leader of the TKP, while Ismail Bilen became
secretary general
in 1974. However, such a tradition has never existed - it
is just an
invention.
Suphi was one of those who took part in the Baku Congress
of Peoples of
the East in 1920. Shortly after, in September 1920, the
TKP held its
founding congress and Suphi was elected president of the
party. However,
he and his 15 comrades were murdered on their way from
Russia to Turkey
by the covert forces of the nationalist government. The
brutal killings
have stood as a constant reminder of the nature of the
Turkish regime to
generations of communists.
At this time the imperialist occupation of Istanbul and
other industrial
centres was continuing, and as a result the TKP in
seaboard Turkey and
the TKP in central Anatolia were practically two
different
organisations. Bringing them together in a single, united
party was the
order of day after the independence and unification of
Turkey. But this
was the beginning of the period which saw the compulsory
population
exchange between Greece and Turkey, the repression of
Armenians and
Jews, the uprising in Kurdistan, and the ongoing terror
of the
nationalist government directed against the party. The
TKP never had a
chance to set up a stable organisation, let alone forge a
tradition.
And, of course, the TKP blindly followed the twists and
turns of the
Communist Party of the Soviet Union. To cut a long story
short, in 1937
the Communist International adapted a resolution to
decentralise the
TKP, which practically put party activity on hold till
the end of World
War II.
The party emerged again as an organisation in the late
40s at a time
when Turkey was experimenting with multi-party democracy.
But soon after
the newly formed legal parties were crushed in a new wave
of arrests and
trials, and the TKP’s attempt to reorganise illegally was
wrecked in
1951, when a large number of party comrades, including
leading members
of the central committee, were arrested. After a show
trial they were
sentenced to imprisonment, followed by internal exile.
Some members escaped and joined the external bureau,
which was given a
new lease of life following the meeting of communist and
workers’
parties in 1958. However, until the late 60s TKP activity
was more or
less restricted to daily radio broadcasts from East
Germany, Hungary and
Bulgaria. Although a new wave of working class activity
was building up
in Turkey, the external bureau was completely cut off
from it.
The tension produced by this situation led to splits.
While a handful of
leading members were at the forefront of the new left
movement in the
60s, by the early 70s, almost all members of the central
committee who
remained in Turkey were dead. In view of this the
external bureau
assumed the title of central committee, while its
secretary was now
referred to as general secretary of the party, which had
not had a
congress since the 30s.
‘Leap forward’
So, when orders were passed down from Moscow to organise
once more in
Turkey, the remnants of the external bureau took charge
of the effort
known as the ‘leap forward’.
The broad plan was to work among Turkish migrant workers
across Europe,
using the organisations created as a kind of bridgehead
to make inroads
into mainland Turkey. The migrant workers’ associations
had been divided
into rival bodies taking their lead from various
political parties. But
some quite influential organisations were swayed by the
TKP - it was,
after all, the representative of the political line of
the CPSU.
Apart from the comrades from the migrant communities, a
group of former
members of the Workers’ Party of Turkey (TIP), which was
banned
following the March 12 1971 military intervention, took
part in the
effort. Among them were former members of the Socialist
Youth
Organisation (SGO), which was associated with the TIP,
mainly in the
Ankara region. One of the most well known names from that
organisation
was Riza Yürükoglu, who moved to London during the
post-March 12 terror
days and formed the nucleus of a TKP branch there.
Another grouping that took part in the new organising
effort was also
from the TIP, but mainly from the Istanbul region. It had
its origins in
the students’ organisation, the Federation of Opinion
Associations
(FKF), in the late 60s. The FKF was transformed into Dev
Genç, the
Federation of Revolutionary Youth of Turkey, just before
the March 12 coup.
To their credit these comrades helped organise working
class struggle
during the years of terror, helping to bring together
leading workers in
the trade union movement, especially in Disk, the
Confederation of
Revolutionary Trade Unions of Turkey. They were known as
the Partisan
group, since they published a short-lived newspaper of
that name while
they were in charge of the TIP branch in one of the
central districts of
Istanbul. One of the most celebrated names within that
grouping was
Haydar Kutlu, who was to become the TKP secretary general
in 1983.
We must take a brief detour to mention the new leadership
of Dev Genç.
It organised two armed guerrilla organisations: namely,
the Popular
Liberation Army of Turkey (THKO) and the Popular
Liberation Party-Front
of Turkey (THKP-C). Those short-lived organisations took
part in armed
actions and its partisans were gunned down or hanged in
the terror days.
When a general amnesty was declared in 1974, the remnants
of THKO
gradually came closer to the Maoist movement, while
THKP-C supporters
split into many groups.
One of those splinter groups was organised around the
Genç Öncü (Young
Pioneer) newspaper and a youth organisation called the
GSB, the
Association of Young Socialists. They participated in the
efforts to
organise the TKP in Turkey later than the above-mentioned
organisations,
but they brought a new spate of experienced comrades with
good
connections with the youth movement into the fold.
Those were the main participants of the TKP
reorganisation on Turkish
soil. Some comrades who joined the party in various
European countries
returned to Turkey, and assumed leading roles in illegal
organisations.
The bulk of cadres were from the Partisan group and Genç
Öncü,
especially in the youth movement.
What bound these groups together was the general
political line and
support provided by the CPSU. During the initial days of
the ‘leap
forward’ a document called the third programme was drawn
up. However,
given the experiences of Turkey’s left during the
heightened political
struggles of the late 60s and early 70s, it was already
out of date.
Despite a few weak protests, the third programme formed
the basis of a
coming together of those groups, but in reality it was
not used as a
basis for party activities. The various sections tended
to follow their
own programmes in a pragmatic manner. The third programme
was not a
sufficient basis upon which to amalgamate such a wide
range of groupings.
This lack of theoretical and programmatic clarity started
to show itself
manifestly when the organisation began to grow quite
rapidly. On May Day
1976, the first open demonstration against the regime,
there were less
than 50 members of the TKP within Turkey. However, a year
later numbers
had greatly increased. But the centre was not capable of
handling such
growth either organisationally or ideologically.
What the centre did manage to achieve was the
organisation of the 1977
Konya conference - named after the central Anatolian
town, although it
was actually held in Moscow. The confusion among leading
party bodies,
and the discord between the TKP and CPSU, became apparent
after the
conference. The secretary general’s speech to the
conference contained
references to barricades, etc, which fitted the mood of
the comrades who
had come from Turkey, but many comrades in leading
positions were
followers of the Soviet line and got extremely irritated.
In order to rectify the lack of theory and absence of any
kind of useful
programme comrade Yürükoglu was brought onto the party’s
ideological
bureau, but this quickly led to a split just before the
September 12
fascist coup.
After September 12
The dismal performance of the party during the terror
years partly
resulted from the bringing together of various groups
without paying
adequate attention to ideological unity. Branch
organisations simply
collapsed, and prominent cadres were withdrawn from
Turkey. The idea of
a new, ‘decentralised’ party grew, an idea that
represented
organisational paralysis.
Ismail Bilen died in 1983, and a struggle over the
leadership resulted
in further splits. It was in this situation that the idea
of uniting all
the workers’ parties was proposed, and in late 1987 the
TKP and Workers’
Party of Turkey simultaneously dissolved themselves,
forming the United
Communist Party of Turkey in early 1988 with a view to
organising
legally within the country. The two new leaders of the
UCPT returned to
Turkey in a bid to force the hand of the government and
remove the ban
on communist parties, but they ended up in jail.
Eventually they were released and a legal UCPT was formed
in June 1990.
However, the constitutional court banned the party in
1991 before it had
had the chance to develop any kind of organisational
life. But it had
held its first legal congress in Turkey, where it was
resolved that the
UCPT should itself be dissolved in order to participate
in the formation
of the Socialist Unity Party (SBP), along with remnants
of the Socialist
Workers Party of Turkey (TSIP) and a group split from the
Maoist
Socialist Party.
The SBP limped into life, winning a derisory vote in
local elections,
but in 1995 it too fell foul of the constitutional court.
The remnants
of the organisation took part in formation of the Freedom
and Solidarity
Party (ÖDP), which was formed as a broad church of
various political
organisations maintaining their own independent
organisational
structure. However, gradually one of the groups started
to dominate the
rest, and more splits followed - one of the recurring
features of this
whole sad story.
Another aspect of that sad story was the demise of
Isçinin Sesi
(Workers’ Voice). After the split in 1979, the London
organisation of
the TKP formed a temporary coordination committee, and
started
organising as an alternative party. It was among the
groups that bore
the brunt of the post-September 12 terror.
Isçinin Sesi took part in various attempts to organise in
Turkey during
the upsurge of working class struggle in the late 80s,
and later in the
rejuvenated movement of the Alevi religious and cultural
community.
However, in the days of reaction ushered in by the
collapse of the
Soviet Union it slowly disintegrated, especially after
the untimely
death of its leader.
Legality
Meanwhile, a group that had split from the TIP in 1978
had gathered
around a monthly journal called Sosyalist Iktidar
(Socialist Power). It
had published 11 issues by September 12.
Following the fascist years it reappeared under the name
of Gelenek
(Tradition), which was a major force behind the formation
of the
Socialist Party of Turkey (STP). Like so many others
before it the STP
was banned by the constitutional court in 1993. The same
year the party
was re-formed under the name of Socialist Power Party
(SIP) - a
reference to its 1970s name.
In 2001 the SIP renamed itself the TKP, tapping into the
widespread
desire to see a legal communist party. After many
vacillations it ended
up as a nationalist-socialist organisation seeking
recognition among the
remnants of ‘official communism’ in Europe.
Despite all these aberrations, many small groupings still
survive with
the declared aim of reorganising the TKP in its imaginary
and idealised
former glory. Many of them publish irregular newspapers
or journals,
together with occasional declarations or statements on
traditionally
important dates, such as the anniversary of the
foundation of the TKP,
or of the assassination of its original leaders in 1920.
Prominent among them are Ürün Sosyalist Dergi (Harvest
Socialist
Journal). Other groups that had shown signs of life in
the early 2000s
seem to have gradually weakened and disappeared. The Ürün
group was
noticeable at last year’s May Day demonstration in
Istanbul. It is this
group that recently established the website referred to
above, From
Suphi to Bilen the tradition is alive. In its initial
declaration the
group described itself as “those who worked under the
slogan of ‘Freedom
to the TKP’” and “those who believe in forming a legal
TKP”.
Ürün organised an event commemorating the formation of
the TKP on
September 8 last year. It issued a bulletin in November
and held a
preparatory conference in Istanbul, where it adopted a
draft programme
and rules. Since then the group has declared that it
would hold nine
local meetings in various cities (as I write, six have
taken place).
Zaman article
Let me now return to the article I mentioned at the
beginning. The Zaman
newspaper is not exactly familiar with leftwing jargon,
and its
knowledge of Turkey’s communist movement is more meagre
still.
However, timing is everything. Neither Zaman nor its
English sidekick,
Today’s Zaman, had previously published anything about
the communist
movement in Turkey. So why did this article appear?
Especially one
dealing with the thorny legal issue of two political
parties with the
same name? I believe it was related to the efforts of the
Justice and
Development Party (AKP) government to change the
political balance in
its favour following its success in amending the
constitution.
Previous attempts to reorganise the political scene have
ended in
failure. The strategy of making overtures to the Kurds -
which the
soft-Islamist AKP hoped would lead to the disarming of
the Kurdistan
Workers’ Party (PKK) in return for the granting of some
constitutional
rights - has collapsed, and armed conflict has flared up
again. All
goodwill was lost following the arrest and trial of many
elected members
of municipalities, and moves against the Kurdish-based
Peace and
Democracy Party (BDP), which now stands accused of being
a legal front
for the PKK. The BDP had 35 of its members elected to the
national
assembly as independents in the 2011 elections.[3]
But the AKP is aware that, as things stand, it cannot win
an election in
Kurdistan. It is hoping to see the creation of a new
political force to
stand as a rival to the BDP. And preparations to bring
such a party into
existence have become apparent in recent months. A
prominent leftwing
Kurd, Kemal Burkay, who had been in exile in Sweden, has
now returned to
Turkey amid a positive press campaign. In the 70s he was
a close ally of
the TKP and his organisation, the Kurdistan Socialist
Party of Turkey
(TKSP), has had good relations with the party.
The AKP government’s other strategic aim had been to draw
sections of
the Alevi people into the fold of Islamist-conservative
politics. The
overtures had started with a series of joint ‘workshops’,
where
prominent Alevi leaders and organisations stated their
basic demands.
However, when the government announced its intention to
bring Alevi
clergy under the control of the department of religious
affairs, that
really set the cat among the pigeons and the initiative
collapsed.
However, this has resulted in the further politicisation
of the Alevi
movement, and for the first time in many years Alevi
community
organisations and leaders have started to work with
Kurdish
organisations and leaders. The changing attitude of
Alevis has in turn
helped produce a mood swing amongst the central Anatolian
left in favour
of cooperation with the Kurds. This has led to the
formation of the
Democratic Congress of Peoples (HDK), which has stated
its aim of
becoming a political party.
Amid deteriorating relations with the European Union over
Cyprus, the
AKP believes that it needs to improve its support among
the liberal left
of Turkey. Interestingly, the liberal daily Taraf has
recently featured
a discussion on the viability of Marxist socialism. Four
of the regular
participants have been Halil Berktay, a former Maoist
leader and
historian; Murat Belge, a professor and former ideologist
of the new
left in Turkey; Roni Margulies, a poet and prominent
member of the
Socialist Workers Party in Turkey; and Nabi Yagci, a
former TKP general
secretary. The leftwing novelist, Oya Baydar, has also
been among those
joining the discussion.
The tacit support given by Turkey’s left to the AKP, when
it appeared
under threat from the would-be junta within the armed
forces, helped
bring the AKP victory in the 2010 referendum on changing
the
constitution. However, since then the expectations of a
peaceful
settlement with the Kurds has been replaced by a new
dirty war against
Kurdistan. The Alevis are staunchly opposed to the AKP,
whose oppressive
nature has become apparent in the recent period. That is
why the AKP has
sought to make inroads into the main body of liberal and
leftwing
opinion. As the liberal left starts to show new signs of
life, the AKP
is trying to incorporate the left and former left, and if
necessary play
various sections off one against the other.
I tend to think the article in Today’s Zaman is one
aspect of this
policy. It can also be seen as giving the green light to
moves to create
more confusion within the communist movement through the
formation of
two legal parties with the same.
However, I do not give much credence to the AKP’s
efforts. Nor do I see
any chance of an ‘official communist’ revival. The Zaman
article is in a
sense a postscript to the sad story of the demise of the
TKP l
Notes
1.Today’s Zaman January 10:
www.todayszaman.com/news-268211-as-tkp-shifts-to-neo-nationalist-
line-traditional-socialists-open-new-party-with-same-name.html.
2. See
www.suphibilen.org.
3. The BDP is the successor to the Democratic Society
Party (DTP), which
in 2009 was itself disbanded following a constitutional
court ruling.
Twenty-four DTP members were elected to the national
assembly as
independents in the 2007 general election.