On the alliance between the Turkish oligarchy, the US and Europe
The recent decision of the European Union to commence negotiations over a possible accession of Turkey caused a wave of chauvinist reactions. They inscribe themselves in the pattern of the “clash of civilisations” regarding predominantly Islamic societies as at the same time inferior and dangerous – hence to be fought.
We decidedly refuse this cheap chauvinist mobilisation which in finally will not and does not want to fight the enlargement of the Union, but only serves to degrade the status of the Eastern and Southern European people being integrated within the Union.
On the contrary we are aware that the imperialist-capitalist system has forced millions of Turks to migrate to Europe. Already by now they not only form an integral part of the workforce but also of Europe´s society as a whole. We therefore not only fight for their equal civil and labour rights but also that they are recognised as a constitutive nation of Europe (one without territory).
Our reasons to oppose the accession of Turkey to the EU are different ones:
1) We oppose the entire EU as the main instrument of the European bourgeoisies to implement the liberalist policy directed against the interests of the popular masses. We fight for the exit from the Union with the aim to smash it altogether. Thus to refuse any new accession is the only logic consequence.
2) Especially in Eastern Europe and on the Balkans the enlargement of the Union acquires a neo-colonial character. While their economies are being dismantled, the best pieces are swallowed by multinationals. Whoever resists is being aggressed by all means. The outstanding example was the war on Yugoslavia which not only refused to subordinate to the geo-political interests of the West but also to implement the liberalist dictates of the IMF & Co. But there are other instructive examples like Slovakia during the period of Meciar who took a critical position on both NATO and EU and thus was nearly put under sanctions, or today Lukashenko´s Belarus as well as Moldavia.
3) The planned accession of Turkey is in no way a move to soften the strategic grip the US has been exerting over the country. On the contrary the US is one of the main backers of the accession. Washington wants to use Turkey with is powerful US-led military as a lever within the European Union. In this way they not only want to secure that the EU remains within the American global system but also draw them closer to their aggressive approach to the Middle East.
Nevertheless the historic left is strongly advocating Turkey´s accession in the name of multi-culturalism in Europe and democracy in Turkey. Again and again they demonstrate that they have been transforming themselves in auxiliary forces of the Americanist liberalist capitalist mainstream.
Also in Turkey the historic left as well as the Kurdish national movement has been adopting a pro-EU stance. They hope to be able to use Brussels as a means to at the same time curb the influence of the military oligarchy and to avert what they perceive as Islamist danger.
However, the longed for democratic changes will be only cosmetic ones:
The promised reforms on the Kurdish question will not touch the strategic interests of the military to preserve the full control over Kurdistan as has been the policy not only of the US but also of Germany since the Kurdish uprising broke out in the mid 80s. In several other places like in the Basque country the EU has displayed its support for savage repression and its refusal for the right of national self-determination.
The same is the case with the ongoing repression against the remaining revolutionary movement with thousands of political prisoners who are being tortured. Brussels has already absolved Ankara stating that there is no systematic breach of the basic civic rights in Turkey.
Regarding the sacred secular character of the state there seems to be a transversal united front ranging from the notorious National Security Council (MGK) to the historic left passing by all the EU advocates – while the popular masses increasingly hope to defend their social and political rights by means of the Islamic current.
An astonishing example are the French-type laws imposed only some years ago which ban the scarf in public office and on universities. Already in France these reactionary and anti-democratic laws excluding an oppressed minority which dares to voice dissent must be fought. In a predominately Islamic society they are even worse, armouring the exclusive privileges of the oligarchic secular capitalist elite.
In the last instance it is only the interest of this elite the EU is concerned about. For the social and democratic rights of the popular masses they will not give a shit!
