A Letter to an Hoxhaist about the history of TKP (M-L) on two issues

ABOUT ARTICLE

This article was firstly written as a letter to an ICOR sympathizer Hoxhaist who lives in America, which was misinformed by ESP (Ezilenlerin Sosyalist Partisi, Socialist Party of Oppresseds) members about Ibrahim Kaypakkaya, the history of the TKP (M-L) and MLKP's views on İK. However, this person, did not take my letter seriously and said "I still believe my friends, they wouldn't lie to me", and in a response sent along an article with comment like "I think this article is better on Turkish left". The article mentioned was written by Garbis Altınoğlu, an escapee from MLKP (Marksist-Leninist Komünist Partisi, Marxist-Leninist Communist Party) who went abroad and left organized revolutionary struggle (he was a CC member of MLKP before he left). This was, of course, sad for me, because I really worked so hard to write this letter in English, but in the end it was for nothing. Since then, I saw that westerners don't know much about TKP (M-L), it's history etc., I thought this article could be useful as a brief overview.

I wrote it in English but lollllllll I probably have shittiest English on earth so a friend of mine, Sam, corrected it for me. I want to thank her again for her help.

I have made some little edits because some parts were not that important and/or could be rewritten better. Additionally, I added some new sources which I didn't have before or I forgot to add them when I first wrote it.

In the end there is 3 appendices to the article. Appendix I is collected information about organizations mentioned in article. Appendix II is an answer to a foreigner friend's question, "How did TKP/M-L started PW in Turkey", this is, however, an expanded and edited version, I put the URL of the original conversation at the end of conversation. Appendix III is the message of the TKP (M-L)'s 2nd Party Conference to the ICM, which I also made some minor edits to make it match the original Turkish text.

And as a final note, I actually used "TKP/M-L" in original letter but as you may know, after it's 1st Congress a wing of Party renamed itself as TKP-ML, other keept the older name (the other side also held a Congress a bit later, but there is still no published document about it except an announcement). I'm more sympathetic to TKP-ML side (with some criticisms), so I need to change it but instead of using TKP-ML, I used original founding name of Party, TKP (M-L). Original name can be seen in the personal handwriting of Comrade İK in his notes. After 1994 split, the side which later became MKP, took the name of TKP (M-L). Because of this TKP (M-L) name was not used by pre-2016 split of TKP/M-L. I think though, TKP (M-L) is better to use, because Party's name was states as TKP (M-L) in the times period mentioned in this letter. Some times Party used "TKP/M-L" or "TKP-ML" in the '70's because before 1994, there was no other organization using the same name (there was only DABK [a split off from TKP-ML in 1987], but it's mostly called by DABK from foreign organizations), for that they didn't try hard at consistency on the name back then.

Anyways, I hope you all will like it. I'm open for criticism, etc. in the comments section.

TARİHİMİZDEN ÖĞRENİYORUZ

2019.07.16

---------------

According to your "ESP member comrades," you said: "MLKP/ESP didn't try to liquidate TKP (M-L)", and "they are less critical of İK then other Communists of the time" etc.  When I say insisted taht is a lie, you said: "how can that be, I know that my ESP friends would not lie to me". With full of goodwill let’s assume that maybe they don't know their history. Let's have a look at history and see if they are "misinformed" (or lying to you).

                         

After 1974, with the new round of the rising revolutionary movement, a Second Coordination Committee of TKP (M-L) was elected in 1974-5. Coordination Committee was kinda a Provisional Central Committee for TKP (M-L). Later the leaders of this Committee became the liquidators of 1976 (because abbreviation of Coordination Committee is similar to abbreviation of Central Committee, from now on I'm gonna use "KK" for Coordination Committee and "CC" for Central Committee). The duties of the 2nd KK (just like 1st KK) was:

• Organize a party structure with the People's War perspective,
• Carry the Party to the first congress,
• Prepare a sincere criticism of the Party history.

But they didn't carry out their duties. They constantly postponed the Criticism of Party History to an unknown date. Their plan was to liquidate the party line with a fait accompli and adopt a new line with the mask of "overcome the mistakes of the past".

They started their plan step by step. First, they worked to liquidate the party line in practice. Second, they worked hard to liquidate the party in theory as well. In practice, they did not prepare the party for People's War. They worked to make the party and army cells passive.

When the state's attacks began against the Party in 1976 and comrade Atilla Özkan was martyred in one of these operations, they had barely prepared posters honoring him signed by the party.

Once there was a chance for execution of Fehmi Altınbilek, a counter-guerrilla chief in Dersim (and later in İstanbul), a fascist and one of the people directly responsible for the arrest and murder of Comrade İK along with many other communists, revolutionaries, and patriots. The comrades asked for an order to execute him. Again, the rightist's answer to the comrades was liquidation. They said, "We aren't a political murder organization." ("Maoist Komünist Partisi 1. Kongre Belgeleri: 3 - TKP (M-L)'den MKP'ye Bu Tarih Bizim". Page: 47.)

Next, let's have a look at what Comrade İK had to say. He clearly says that ("The Main Points on Which We Disagree With Shafak Revisionism". Kaypakkaya, Ibrahim. "Selected Works of Ibrahim Kaypakkaya". Nisan Publishing, July 2014.):

"(...) For instance, to abduct and take prisoner an important officer of the enemy army, or to abduct landlords who deserve it and similar enemies of the people and shoot them etc... is not wrong, it is correct, revolutionary and conforms to the Marxist-Leninist line."

I must also mention that, when our party, TKP (M-L), tried to kill Yaşar Değerli, one of the people chiefly responsible for murdering of Comrade İK, one of the worse perpetrators of torture in Dersim and Diyarbakır, a fierce fascist and fierce enemy of revolutionaries, the opportunists wrote that ("Kitle çizgisi ve Yaşar Değerli'ye suikast". Halkın Birliği. June 20, 1978. No: 37. Page: 6):

"Attempting an action against Yaşar Değerli with assassination characteristics isn't correct and isn't useful for our people's struggle today. Contrarily, [it would be an] individual terrorist act which will harm the revolutionary movement."

But their problem wasn't the characteristic of action. Their problem was same just like before: The desire for liquidating and attacking to our party. For this they even contradict themselves ("Bireysel Terörizm Kitle Mücadelesine Hizmet Etmiyor". Halkın Birliği. July 4, 1978. No: 38. Page: 5):

"Marxist-Leninists will not deny individual terrorism as a principle."

And as a final note, the Guerrilla commander of this armed action was Comrade Ali Yılmaz, who was martyred under torture on December 24, 1978. "He gave his life but not his secrets" just like his leader Comrade İbrahim Kaypakkaya!

Remember, the people who rejected basic M-L principles in order liquidate the party line was the forerunners of your "comrades who wouldn't lie to you".

Back to the topic at hand.

In the middle of 1975, TİİKP/Aydınlık revisionists started an attack campaign against TKP (M-L). They branded the party as "Trotskyists" (TİİKP called TKP (M-L) "Trotskyist liquidators" since the beginning [1972] till today). Some of these attacks were later published as a brochure named "Kemalist Devrim" ("Kemalist Revolution"), written by Doğu Perinçek (today he is a fierce enemy of the people, a counter-revolutionary chief of a fascistic "contra" organisaton named "Vatan Partisi" [Party of Fatherland]).

But the KK didn't even respond to these attacks. In 1977, after split with revisionists, only our comrades responded them. For example comrades from Abroad Committee (btw the 2nd KK tried to liquidate this committee and it's activities too, source: CC's  first letter to the Abroad Committee dated July 22, 1976) published a brochure named "Aydınlık Dergisi'nin Devrimci Harekete Yönelttiği İftiralara Bir Yoldaşın Verdiği Cevap" ("A Comrades Given Response to Aydınlık Journal on its Slanders Against the Revolutionary Movement", was a general response to an article published in Aydınlık serial) in 1977. This brochure re-published in 1978 with the title of "Aydınlık Dergisinin Devrimci Harekete Yönelttiği İftiralara Cevap" by Le-Ya Yayınevi (with some little criticisms of this brochure).

Also, like TİİKP/Aydınlık opportunists, many other opportunists too attacked to the party line. They called İK as a revisionist, as a Trotskyist, as a p-b, etc. But just like with the TİİKP's attacks, the 2nd KK didn't feel the need to respond to attacks on the party's founders.  Of course, this makes sense since they were too busy with liquidating the party and preparing to split.

In April 1976, the Second Coordination Committee of TKP (M-L) held a meeting in Iskenderun. The people who participated in this April 1976 Meeting were:

1. İrfan Çelik
2. Hikmet Şenses
3. Ali Taşyapan
4. Aziz Vatan (Amca, Kel [Uncle, Bald])
5. Vaybe (real name: ?)

In this meeting, the 2nd KK adopted a 3-page document. In this document, they declared TKP (M-L) was not a party but a movement which moving forward wanted to be an ML organization (so according to this document TKP (M-L) wasn't a Marxist organization up to this point). Additionally, according to this document, the Party's views about Red Political Power, the United Front, the National question, the socio-economic situation of Turkey (semi-feudal/semi-colonial), guerrilla war, and other views were all discarded. According to this document, in fact, the vast majority of what TKP (M-L) had as a party line up to that point was wrong. 

The views and lines expressed in this 3 paged document (which it must be noted that unlike this document, documents of the TKP (M-L), written by Comrade İK, were almost 300 pages if necessary) weren't adopted via a democratic way but rather they attempted to impose it. A Party's line and views on almost every question can't change from a "KK meeting". It requires a party Conference or Congress in order to enact such drastic programmatic change in a democratic way.

After the April 1976 meeting, comrades in prison under the leadership of the 2 KK member comrades in prison, İstanbul, and Ankara Committee's under BABK (Batı Anadolu Bölge Komitesi, Western Anatolia Regional Committee), cadres in Kars-Ardahan region and half of the cadres in Dersim under DABK (Doğu Anadolu Bölge Komitesi, Eastern Anatolia Regional Committee) and YDBK (Yurt Dışı Bölge Komitesi, Abroad Committee) united against those right-opportunists and expelled them from Party. The split started in May 1976 with BABK's revolt, by August 1976 every committee took its stand on the split.

The 2nd KK's final views on the split were declared in a Circular with the title of "Hatalardan Dersler Çıkartarak İrade ve Eylem Birliğini Güçlendirelim" ("With Taking Lessons from Mistakes, Let Us Strengthen the Willpower and Unity of Action", November 1976) by the "KK of TKP/M-L Hareketi" created by the right opportunists. With the releasing of this Circular in November 1976, the Two Line struggle era officially ended.

In this circular 11 important view of the TKP (M-L) were changed (often into their opposite). To summarize it:

- Socio-economic conditions of Turkey: Originally was "semi-feudal semi-colonial country" but changed to "semi-colonial backward-capitalist with comprador characteristics".

- National Problem: "National problem is the problem land" views changed into "National problem is the peasants struggle against the imperialism and our stand on this has a connections with its positions against imperialism." According to the revisionists, Comrade İK's stand of national problem was wrong, because he (according to them) took his stand on thiss issue as a "line before October Revolution [i.e. emergence of a new era, the era of imperialism and proletarian revolutions]" and "İK made national problem a problem of only that state, not an international issue". First Conference of TKP (M-L) says that:

"[The] theses of our Party on the national problem is correct. Due to statements like what must be the "reaction of class conscious Proletariat of Turkey on the Kurdish national movement" and when it would support or not support the seperation of Kurdish nation, which exists in theses, to claim that "this handling of national problem, handling of it as separate issues of [that] countries and seperating it from struggle against imperialism" is not correct and understanding the issue wrong." ("Konferans Kararları [3/e]". "Komünist" [Central organ of the CC of the TKP (M-L)]. March 1978. No.: 1.)

- On the history of Turkey (especially Kemalism): "The so-called 'National Liberation War' was actually a war of Turks and Greeks and this war was led by comprador capitalists and feudal lords, there was also a stubby anti-imperialist characteristic due to classes who participated war (workers' class and peasantry), but the main and leading class was comprador bourgeoisie and national bourgeoisie was only a secondary trend who participated in it." This view was changed to "Kemalists were provisional allies of world revolution" and they added: "We must remunerate its positive qualities."

- Path of Revolution (the question of Red Political Power): Before, "Power can only be taken step by step from the countryside to cities." According to them this was true, but "our understanding which ignores the importance of struggle in cities was wrong." became the new line. There are hardly words to describe this level of liquidation of the party line and this kind of lying! Let's take a look directly from the words of one of these liquidators, Hikmet Şenses to see what was TKP (M-L)'s views on cities at that times: [to the question of "Why you choiced Kazlıçeşme (a worker dominated region)?"] "Our purpose was to organize workers. Within [the] Movement, in meetings too, there was a talk: 'in İstanbul, the main [base] of [the party] work will be workers class.'" ("Kutsiye Bozoklar: Kelepçeye inat hayat". Erdoğdu Çelik, Mukaddes. Ceylan Yayınları. 1st Printing, 2014. Pages: 57-8.) You liars! Why did you state the party line was wrong in 1976? Because, you were nothing but liquidators!

- Fascism: "the Semi-fascism view was wrong".

- Main Contradiction: "Our views were true but it needs of more research."

- Nature of revolution: They could not come up with any alternative views systematically developed so they accepted the prior view, "Nature of the revolution is the land revolution", till the end of the campaign.

- Evaluation of the history of revolutionary movement (especially TKP): "Our views were correct, but we must point positive sides of the TKP too, like it's fight against the Trotskyism and its acceptance to the Comintern", in other words: "We did not talk good about an economist-menshevik like him. Stalin keept him in ICM, so he must be good at least in some points, and we must add it." This is the true meaning hidden under these excuses.

- United Front: "Our views on UF (a United Front can only be formed after one or more Red political power emerge) was wrong" (this one of course was a positive criticism and was accepted in the 1st Conference as well, but this is of course was a basic level criticism and correct views on this issue in practice applied way before 1976 split).

- Era: "'The era of which imperialism is heading for total collapse and socialism is advancing to world-wide victory' was wrong", "we are living in the era of the imperialism and proletarian revolutions" (this one is a positive point too but same issue mentioned above is same with it too, in practice we never said it after 1974, and later in our 1st Conference on 1978, we officially accepted correct views).

- Party: "WE AREN'T A M-L PARTY, WE ARE A POLITICAL MOVEMENT."

This is how they liquidated a Communist Party and its line!

Previously we mentioned (and will say more about it) TİİKP's attacks against the party. Not only TİİKP launched attacks against the party, other opportunists also took their turn. But this right-opportunist (who you say did not liquidate the party and its line) even tried to unite with THKO, THKP-C/M-L Hareketi and TİİKP in 1976. They were out to merge with any right deviationist trend possible. In this era, let's take a look at THKO's views on İK and TKP (M-L)'s 1972-1973 era ("Modern Revizyonizm, Troçkizm ve Türkiye Devrimci Hareketi". Yoldaş [Central Organ of the THKO]. No: 3 | a summarized republication of a part of this article which it's about '71 Movement: "Devrimcilerin Birliği: Troçkizm ve Sol Maceracılık Revizyonizmden Kaynaklanıyor". Halkın Sesi. December 30, 1975. No: 37. Page: 12.):

"THKO, THKP-C, [and] TKP/M-L was representing organizations of the growing adventurism, Trotskyism and general political movements affected by left[ism]."

So according to this article:

- İK and TKP (M-L) were "adventurist, leftist and Trotskyist"

- TKP (M-L) was equal to p-b groups like THKO (for THKO in its "1971-1975 era") and THKP-C.

Even though their views on İK and TKP (M-L) are that obvious tthey formed a unity platforms with them named "Proleter Devrimcilerin Birliği" (Unity of Proletarian Revolutionaries). Is it possible to unite with them without liquidating the party and party line? When their views heap so much abuse on İK and Our Party, can principled unity be made? No, it can't. And what they wrote in in the ends of 1975 is a clear example of what they really were ("Oportünist ve inkarcı şeflerin dün söyleyip de bugün reddettikleri – Bir belge bir gerçek". Halkın Birliği. December 6, 1978. No.: 50.):

"Aydınlıkites would neither apply their policy in practice, nor they let [someone else] to apply it. They directed their main attack to revolutionary movements in March 12 era. This movement [Şafak] was the movement of the right wing of petty-bourgeoisie. Even though comparing with yesterday [the word used in here, "dün" literally means "yesterday", but can be used as "before" to, in there writer wrote it as "before", -TÖ] (on the cliqueism [within revolutionary movement]) they have been better today, [but] it doesn't seems like they have much intention to change themselves. Which this is preventing their radical marching onward to M-L. When they are confronted with correct ideas, they can take a counter position against it. As conclusion: I'm in faith that they keep their old characteristics. When their ability to change comes into view, it would need a new analyze. It's a movement which have predominant petty-bourgeois sides and contains a proletarian orientation. [underlining ours, -TÖ] 

As for PDA [Proleter Devrimci Aydınlık, Proletarian Revolutionary Light], it was a political movement of the right-wing of petty-bourgeoisie. After March 12, this movement had somewhat of an orientation to the masses. Now it's marching toward M-L. But still, haven't overcome of it's turfism yet. Before PDA had more progressive views compared with others. Their turfist mindset is preventing themselves from a more revolutionary development. 

As for conclusion between HK [Halkın Kurtuluşu, People's Liberation, see Appendix I], HY [Halkın Yolu, People's Path, see Appendix I], AYDINLIK and YURTSEVER GENÇLİK [Patriotic Youth, was a one issue legal youth organ published by TKP (M-L), but with political orientation of KK; in there writer implies the movement -TÖ] there is no difference in character. They all are revolutionary groups which turned their face to M-L. [underlining ours, -TÖ] 

The main character of all of these 4 movements is being predominant of their petty-bourgeois line. [underlining ours, TÖ] 

Our split from AYDINLIK can not be analyzed as proletarian wings split from petty-bourgeois wing. It was a split of the left-wing of petty-bourgeoisie from right wing of the petty-bourgeoisie. 

CONCLUSIONS: 

1. In HK, HY, AYDINLIK, [and] YURTSEVER GENÇLİK predominant line in the past was petty-bourgeois line. All of the 4 groups too are open to M-L. They was bearing elements of M-L within them. In the situation of those days, our Movement, was representative of an current which it's a bit more forward step to M-L. Our orientation was more forward to M-L."

The above quoted document proves their original look at to TKP (M-L). They did not saw it as a M-L line, so they sought unity with all kind of revisionists. Here, is a document commonly signed with Aydınlık, Halkın Kurtuluşu, Militan Gençlik and Yurtsever Gençlik in July 16, 1976 ("Proleter Devrimcilerin Birliği". Aydınlık Yayınları [No: 44]. 1^st Printing, October 1977. Pages: 150-1.):

1. "On the analysis of world [situation] consensus reached. On that [issue] basic ideas were: Conflict between Two Super Powers will inevitably lead to a world war. However, struggle to prevent war still standing on our way. In the struggle within Two Super Powers, American imperialism is the one who is retreating and Soviet social-imperialism is the one who is marching and the main aggressor. Today Three Worlds Theory is an important determination on the analysis of the world [situation]. Against the Two Super Powers World Proletariat must follow the politic of World United Front which takes main [power as] Third World countries and seeks for unity with Second World. 
2. On the analysis of fascism: Fascism can't handle without [it's ties with] imperialist camp and in fact take it's source from the most reactionary imperialist camp. 
3. There is need for more concrete alliances against revisionism, fascism and Two Super Powers. There must be made practical steps to develop unity."

So, let's summarize the history:

- Right after the beginning of attacks against Party led by Aydınlık/Şafak revisionists and other hyper opportunists, the 2nd KK didn't respond to these attacks and didn't defend the party line. Contrarily, they were affected by these rightists and changed the party's views, and liquidated the party line and attempted to liquidate the party itself.

- In the beginning, they called İK and his line as p-b and attempted several times to unite with the very people who called İK as a revisionist and a Trotskyist. But chiefs of the all of those tekke's ("tekke" is the given name to feudal oriented religious clubs) only wanted to protect their interests, and the unity talks collapsed. Firstly these groups break their contacts with Aydınlık, and later between themselves.

- In 1977 they again tried to unite and founded a bloc named "Bloc for the Build Up of the Party of Proletariat" (Proletarya Partisini İnşa Bloku) aka. so-called "Bloc of Three" (Üçlü Blok). This bloc's duties summarily were (original source: "PB ve THKO'nun Ekonomist-Menşevik Parti İnşa Anlayışının Eleştirisi". İhtilalci Komünist. No.: 3. | republication of the full text of the article: "İhtilalci Komünist ve Orak-Çekiç'ten Seçme Yazılar". Pages: 46, 47, 48.):

1. Uniting "proletarian revolutionary pre-party groups" (!) into one pre-party organization,
2. Developing common views in one body, but in this body, these organizations could protect their separate organizational structure,
3. Unity of action.

So, their views on the party are nothing but the union of factions. They tried to found a federation of factions, for this kind of a "party" they tried to liquidate TKP (M-L). And in the end, they got nothing.

And as some final words, Most of the leaders who lead this liquidation movement later turned into open counter-revolutionaries. Let's examine the some of them:

In 1977 Ali Mercan left TKP/ML Hareketi and rejoined to the Aydınlık revisionist clique.  In his self-criticism, he openly swore at comrade İK ("Ali Mercan'ın Özeleştirisi" Halkın Sesi. December 20, 1977. Volume: 3. No: 140):

"In 1972, I had joined a Party devastating faction founded by İ. Kaypakkaya. Theories originated the liquidation was the same with revolution escapees named First Liquidators and "Chest Murder Trial" defendants. There is no difference between First and Second Liquidators. 

(...) İ. Kaypakkaya, using our fellow townsman lead us into a factionist and adventurist current. (...) 

Our understanding of so-called "people's war" was no different than the "Vanguard War" theories of Mahir Çayan. (...) 

We had invented theories to attack the proletarian movement. The origin of our propaganda was lies, gossips, and defamation against persons. (...) Even though we knew it was a lie, we spread the lies that Aydınlıkites planned a plot against İ. Kaypakkaya.
On Kemalism and National Liberation War, we defended Trotskyist ideas. (...)
On the Kurdish national problem, we become tails of Kurdish landlords and big bourgeoisie. We denied the truth that the origin of the National Problem is the peasant problem. We did countless wordplays on the difference between "People" and "Nation". (...) 

(...)
Liquidationism which was revived in the 1974-1975 era turned into mafia gangs. (...) Activities like working in associations, preparing mass actions and generally working in cities viewed as "revisionism". (...) 

(...)"

In 1979, Aziz Vatan (Kel, Amca), one of the theoreticians of the 1976 Liquidators, left the movement. Firstly he organized a faction and when the time his faction came under scrutiny, he was expelled. Finally, in 1980 with his wife, Feryal Sarıoğulları (Zeyno), both of them became Trotskyist.

Aziz Vatan was also one of the participants in the 1973 Provisional Coordination Committee meeting along with Almanyalı Kadir ("Kadir from Germany") and Ali Mercan. The decision that was taken in this meeting was liquidation. As leaders of the party who were not yet arrested, they took no responsibility. They liquidated the party leadership and organized small circles (in order to hide themselves) rather than reorganize leadership. This example would explain the level of liquidation: When İrfan Çelik found Ali Mercan working on a building construction site as a worker in 1975, he hardly encouraged him to join Party.

As we said, Aziz Vatan was one of the theoreticians of the liquidators. He wrote the socio-economic condition document of the liquidators. From 1975 to 1979, he was one of the brain team of TKP/ML Hareketi. These people worked hard to liquidate our party and found tekkes instead.

----------

Also, you said that: "My ESP member comrade say that İK self-criticized for splitting too early from TİİKP."

First of all, in what document did İK says something like that? I'm not asking you to find it, I'm asking directly to ESP: Where is that self-criticism? They must prove it. Just like comrade İK said ("The Origin and Development of the Differences Between Ourselves and Shafak Revisionism: A General Critic of TİİKP (Revolutionary Workers and Peasants Party of Turkey)" [June 1972]. Kaypakkaya, Ibrahim. "Selected Works of Ibrahim Kaypakkaya". Nisan Publishing, July 2014.):

"... As long as you cannot prove this your accusations [... these accusations] will be no more than slander and your name will remain as common slanderers. 

This is the challenge!"

When we look to all of İK's works, we could clearly see that: Comrade İK's views about Shafak revisionists right-opportunism developed just after June 15-16 1970 Workers Revolt. When he first joined the movement, even then, he did not agree on all points. When he saw the true face of right opportunists, Two Lines emerged: The line of revisionists and the line of M-L opposition.

His first written criticism on the party line is dated March 1971. From March 1971 to February 1972, his written criticisms where just for central leadership and not open to all cadres (just a few comrades [which were İbrahim's close friends] knew about the opposition at this point outside the CC). But after the Third DABK (Eastern Anatolia Regional Committee) Meeting in February 1972, the Marxist-Leninist Opposition openly "planted the banner of communism in public"!

Marxist-Leninists summarized their views on the class struggle in Eleven Points at the April 10-12, 1971 dated Central Committee Meeting. In this CC meeting, the right-opportunists rejected these views. For them, the thesis needed "more specific explanations".

What were those views which "needs more specific explanations"? They were the views of M-L's, i.e. "Eleven Principles":

1. Activity in the village areas is primary; activity in the cities is secondary.
2. Armed struggle is primary; other forms of struggle are secondary.
3. Illegal activity is primary, legal activity is secondary.
4. As long as the enemy is stronger than us on a national level strategic defense is primary.
5. Within strategic defense tactical attacks are primary, the tactical defense is secondary.
6. In this period, in the villages, the armed struggle/the guerrilla struggle is primary while other forms of struggle are secondary.
7. ln the cities (large cities) in the strategic defense period consolidation and awaiting opportunities is primary, organizing uprisings is secondary.
8. In an organization, party organization is primary, other organizational work is secondary.
9. Within the other organizational work, armed struggle organization is primary.
10. Reliance on our own force is primary, reliance on allies is secondary.
11. Conditions exist for armed struggle in our country.

Under those principles, M-L's developed their views and after the 3rd DABK Meeting, openly started Two Lines Struggle. How did right-opportunist Shafak revisionists respond to this? Firstly they released a Circular dated February 1972 (right after the Third DABK Meeting dated February 7-8, 1972). In this Circular, the opportunists mainly stole the thesis of M-L Opposition. For example, in an official article named "Kızıl Siyasi İktidarın Kurulması Meselesi Üzerine" (On Problem of the Emergence of Red Political Power) they openly said that: "Comrade Mao Zedong says 'the ability of Red Political Power to withstand attack of the enemy depends on the thriving revolutionary movement in a country' too."

Of course, it was a big lie. They were distorting Comrade Mao like opportunists always do. What was Mao said is the "thriving revolutionary situation", not the power of the revolutionary movement.

Now let's look at "their" "new" and "original" views in the February 1972 Circular, just after the release of the DABK Resolution ("Türkiye İhtilalci İşçi Köylü Partisi Merkez Komitesi Başkanlığının Genelgesi -Şubat 1972" [Circular of the Central Commite Chairmanship of Revolutionary Workers and Peasants Party of Turkey -February 1972]. TİİKP Davası Belgeler-1. Aydınlık Yayınları, May 1975. Page: 90.):

"To start the armed struggle, waiting for a all-country organizing isn't a Marxist-Leninist attitude too. (...) [...] in the bases that we had done minimum party organizing, we can start armed actions (...)"

Why would they do something like that? Did they realize the mistakes that they made? No, not at all! Their main goal was to tell lies and make TKP (M-L) look like nothing but splitters and factionists. Relatedly, after the split, they even sent machine guns to TİİKP's DABK for the same goal (they weren't  used).

They spread lies about M-L's, they tried to exhibit the M-Ls as traitors and splitters from the party a year before. Most probably the ugliest thing they did was trying to kill comrade İK. Yes, those right-opportunists even tried to kill him. Just because the person who took the orders to kill İK, İrfan Çelik (later joined TKP (M-L) in 1972, became secretary of KK in 1975, and later founder of TKP/M-L Hareketi) was actually a friend of İK from university, the revisionist's plot collapsed.

Let's listen from comrade İK ("The Origin and Development of the Differences Between Ourselves and Shafak Revisionism: A General Critic of TİİKP (Revolutionary Workers and Peasants Party of Turkey)" [June 1972]. Kaypakkaya, Ibrahim. "Selected Works of Ibrahim Kaypakkaya". Nisan Publishing, July 2014.):

"For instance, they concocted insidious plans to expel Marxist-Leninist cadre, and after separation was confirmed they explained this factionalism by letting slip the words: 'they were going to be thrown out anyway.' 

They stooped as low as to organize a treacherous armed plot for two colleagues whom they called to a discussion on 26 March 1972 'on protecting unity (!)'."

Those two colleagues were İbrahim Kaypakkaya and Muzaffer Oruçoğlu. Even this plot is documented in TİİKP's trials with a letter written by Halil Berktay to Doğu Perinçek (source: "TİİKP Esas Hakkında Mütalaa". Pages: 114, 115).

After the collapse of their plot in Ankara, İK, MO, and DP meet in Söke-Avşar on March 26, 1972. After this meeting, İK resigned from all of his positions, which in those days, İK was an Alternate Member of the Central Committee of TİİKP and member of the TİİKP's DABK. Muzaffer decided to stay for a party Congress but later he left too.

Right after the split, revisionists began spreading lies (like they always do): "We expelled them from the Party" What a lie! In Durmuş Uyanık's memoirs (one of the founders of TİKP in 1978) he wrote "till the last moment Doğu tried to convince them to stay in the Party". On the other hand Ferit İlsever, one of the chiefs of tekke named Aydınlık, wrote that in his newly published book ("Aydınlık Hareketi: Tam Bağımsız Türkiye Mücadelesinde 50 Yıl". İlsever, Ferit. Kaynak Yayınları. 1^st Print, 02/2017. Page: 157):

"The year was 1970... in Ankara at Political Sciences Faculty we are holding a meeting which hundreds vanguard attended. (...) He [İK] made a speech with the theme of 'Kemalism is fascism'. (...) A year later, we expelled him from the party."

How can a person who has pride fit that many lies into one page?

First of all, there wasn't such a meeting in 1970, it was 1971. And a year later, İbrahim wasn't expelled from the party, he was still an Alternate CC member. And again, he wasn't expelled from the party at all! He directly resigned from the Party in front of Doğu Perinçek.

Not only Ferit, but also Durmuş lies. Doğu did not try to convince İbrahim to stay in the party, in reality, he directly said to him ("Kırmızı Gül Buz İçinde". Cilasun, Emrah (Belgeselden çözümleyen: Aydın, Veli). El Yayınları, February 2009. 1. Baskı. Page: 42. | "İbo - İhtilalin Fidanı". Feyizoğlu, Turhan. Alfa Yayınları. Ekim 2011. 2. Baskı. Page: 228.):

"Actually I could give orders to arrest you. What you had done [against the movement] is devastating, you stabbed the Party from behind in the narrow days. But it is not worth it, so just go away."

Remember, the forerunners of your "ESP member comrades", are the liquidators of 1976, who tried to unite with these liars, opportunists, and potential killers!

---------------

APPENDIX I

Information about groups:

1) THKO, TDKP-İÖ, TDKP, EMEP (HK): "Türkiye Halk Kurtuluş Ordusu", (People's Liberation Army of Turkey, in the early years mostly mistranslated as "Turkish PLA"), founded in 1968 as a focalist Guevarist group by Deniz Gezmiş (1947-1972), Hüseyin İnan (1949-1972), Sinan Cemgil (1944-1971) and Mustafa Taylan Özgür (1948-1969). After 1974 reorganizing era, turned it's face to CPC-PLA line in 1975. In 1978 recognized by PLA as official organization. In the same year, held it's first Conference, dissolved itself and founded TDKP-İÖ (Türkiye Devrimci Komünist Partisi-İnşa Örgütü, Revolutionary Communist Party of Turkey-Build Up Organisation). In 1980, first Congress was held. TDKP-İÖ dissolved itself and founded TDKP. In 1996, founded EMEP (Emek Partisi, Party of Labor; Emek Partisi later closed by the state and they founded "Emeğin Partisi" [literally same meaning], later in 2000's they take the name back) as a "supportive power to class struggle". Officially TDKP remained, but in the practice, all illegal organization liquidated by leadership.

a) Illegal organs:

- Yoldaş/Heval (Comrade): Central organ of the THKO and TDKP-İÖ. It's last issue (No: 17) was the documents of the First Congress of TDKP. Also, a German edition, "Genosse", can be found in IISG.

- Devrimin Sesi (Voice of the Revolution): Central organ of the TDKP. Remained till the 2001, unlike TDKP this publication have go on few years more. It also had published an English version (at least, in internet).

b) Legal organs:

- Halkın Kurtuluşu (People's Liberation): Published from 1976 to 1980 coup. Became the symbolic name of movement.

- Parti Bayrağı (Banner of Party): Published 24 issues from 1978 to 1980 coup.

- Gerçek (Truth): Published in 1980's.

- Evrensel (Universal): From 1990's to today, ongoing.

c) Other languages:

- Kritik an der Bewegung von Aydinlik (Halkin Sesi): Published by HK, can be found in IISG.

- Gegen die Gefahr der faschistischen Diktatur, gegen den Faschismus: Aktionseinheit!: Excerpt from first issue of HK, can be found in Mao-Projekt.

2) THKP-C/M-L Hareketi, TKİH (HY): "Türkiye Halk Kurtuluş Partisi-Cephesi/Marksist-Leninist Hareketi" (People's Liberation Party-Front of Turkey/Marxist-Leninist Movement), a split from THKP-C (People's Liberation Part-Front of Turkey, in the early years mostly mistranslated as "Turkish PLP-F"), founded by Mahir Çayan, Münir Ramazan Aktolga and Yusuf Küpeli trio in December 1970 as a focalist-Guevarist group. In 1974 some prominent members of it reorganized as a CPC-PLA lined group with 8 paged document (criticism of history). They was called as "Sekizlikçiler" (Eightists) and mostly affected by Aydınlık/Şafak revisionists.

In 1977 adopted Three Worlds Theory with all of the other "Maocu" (means Maoist) groups like TİİKP, TKP/M-L Hareketi, THKO. Only TKP/M-L did not accept this counter-revolutionary theory as "general line of international communist movement" (for example this, while regional era, just in two committes, from İzmir and Bingöl Committee's a Three Worldist faction emerged and founded a group named "Demokratik Halk İktidarı İçin Kurtuluş Yolu" [Liberation Path for the People's Democratic Power]). In their general meeting on 1984, THKP-C/M-L's name changed into "Türkiye Komünist İşçi Hareketi" (Communist Workers Movement of Turkey, TKİH). In 1992, with the call of TKP/ML-H, TKİH and TKP/ML-H tried to unite and form a party (TDKP and TİKB rejected this call). Unity talks collapsed on the 1972-1979 era. TKP/ML-H insisted on that it's Maocu era was communist too. Unity talks collapsed but TKİH merged with "Türkiye Devrimci Komünist İşçi Hareketi" (Revolutionary Communist Workers Movement of Turkey, TDKİH), a group which split from TDKP in 1989.

In 1994 they again start unity talks with TKP/ML-H and this talks ended with founding of Marksist-Leninist Komünist Parti-Kuruluş (Marxist-Leninist Communist Party-Foundation [Organisation], MLKP-K). In September 1995 held it's "First Conference of Party and Unity" and with the joining of "Türkiye Komünist Partisi/Marksist-Leninist (Yeniden İnşa Örgütü)" (Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist-Leninist (Rebuild Up Organisation), TKP/M-L (YİÖ), a group which originally split from TKP/ML-H in August 1, 1978), Marksist-Leninist Komünist Parti (Marxist-Leninist Communist Party, MLKP) founded.

a) Illegal Organs:

- Kızıl Bayrak (Red Flag): Central Organ of THKP-C/M-L, published only one issue in March 1976. A German version can be found in IISG.

- Proletaryanın Yolu (Path of Proletariat): Central Organ of TKİH, published from 1980's to 1994.

b) Legal organs:

- Militan Gençlik (Militant Youth): First issue published in April 5, 1976 and in it's 5th issue banned or closed itself.

- Halkın Yolu (People's Path): From December 20, 1976 to May 1, 1978 published 51 issue. In it's last issue called for unite into TİKP.

- Devrimci Halkın Yolu (Revolutionary People's Path): Didn't recognized issue 51 of HY and published their own issue 51 in May 19, 1978. From that date to 1980 coup, published 45 issues and with coup, HY banned in it's 96th issue.

- Devrimci Teori, Proleter Devrimci Teori (Revolutionary Theory, Proletarian Revolutionary Theory): Published it's first issue in September 1977 as theorical organ of the HY. After the split, changed it's name into PDT and published it's 2^nd issue in June 1978. Till 1980 coup, published 6 issues.

- İşçinin Yolu: Legal organ of the TKİH which published in 1990's.

c) Other languages:

- Kritik an "Aydinlik": Can be found in IISG.

3) TİİKP, TİKP, SP, İP, VP (PDA, Shafak, Aydınlık): "Türkiye İhtilalci İşçi Köylü Partisi" (Revolutionary Workers' and Peasants' Party of Turkey, TİİKP), founded by Doğu Perinçek in May 21, 1969 and adopted ML-MZT in late 1969 (in the first it wasn't a "Maocu" party). After the martial law in April 1971, they went underground. Like May 1972, almost all of the leadership of this movement arrested and Party collapsed. In 1974, with amnesty, leadership of the party released from prison. A Provisional CC elected in 1974. Adopted Three Worlds Theory as general line of ICM in 1977 and helds it First Congress in September 9-10, 1977. This congress was a disgrace. Most of the delegates was choosen by central leadership. Just one opposing delegate from DABK tried to elect himself as CC member. Doğu shout to delegates (source: Gün Zileli's memoirs, "Havariler"): "As Chairman of your party, I'm ordering to all of you: Don't vote for this man!"

Like all of the Third Worldist counter-revolutionaries all over the world (for example, PCMLF), Aydınlık opportunists too liquidated it's illegal organisation and found a legal party named as "Türkiye İşçi Köylü Partisi" (Workers' and Peasants' Party of Turkey, TİKP) in January 28, 1978. Those c-r'ies supported martial laws, disclosed names, photographs and residing adresses of revolutionaries in their journal, Aydınlık. Even USA anti-communists sources followed these publications (source: "Türkiye Üzerine Tezler (1908-1998) Üçüncü Kitap". Küçük, Yalçın. Tekin Yayınevi, December 1986. Page: 371). And finally they even supported 1980 coup. They sent letters to Kenan Evren and his gang of fascist generals for asking let them go on their publishings. They are these kinds of counter-revolutionaries, and İbrahim saw their real face since the 1970!

In 1987 they found a party named "Sosyalist Parti" (Socialist Party, SP), when SP banned for "being Kurdist", they founded İşçi Partisi (Workers' Party, İP). In 2011 they founded an alternative party named "Türkiye İşçi Partisi" (Workers' Party of Turkey, TİP; which actually originates it's name from a mid-bourg reformist party founded in 1960's) in case possibility of closing İP by state with Ergenekon Trials but in 2017 they abolished TİP and name of the TİP taken by a group which split from TKP (Aydemir-Okuyan clique). In 2015 they changed their party's name into "Vatan Partisi" (Party of Motherland/Fatherland or Patriotic Party, VP).

a) Illegal organs:

- Şafak (Dawn): From Spring of 1971 to Summer of 1972, 15 issues (15th issue is dated as May 1972). Published in Germany, seperate pages posted to Turkey through post. Duplication copies reproduced in Turkey. Original editions and typographic duplication editions was different, due to copyists design.

- Patriotische Einheitsfront für eine demokratische Türkei (Presseerklärung) (Patriotic United Front for a Democratic Turkey (Press Builletin)): First issue was dated June 29, 1971 (cen be seen here).
- Halkın Sesi (People's Voice): Organ of the PEF in Turkish.
- Proleter Devrimci Yıldız (Proletarian Revolutionary Star): Published by Yıldırım Dağyeli (was vice leader of the TİİKP's Abroad organisation). Published 14 issues.

- Yıldız (Star): It's first issue was published as 15th issue, dated May 1975. Declared itself parallel to "M-L line of Halkın Sesi".

b) Legal organs:

- Türk Solu (Turkish Left): It's first issue dated November 17, 1967. Banned in 1970.

- Devrimci TİP Haberleri (Revolutionary WPT News): Probably 6 issues.

- Aydınlık Sosyalist Dergi (Light Socialist Magazine): From 1968 to 1971 published 30 issue. While in 15th issue magazine split into two wing: Çayan-Belli Group (ASD) and Perinçek group (PDA). Later Çayan and his friends too left the ASD and founded Kurtuluş Sosyalist Dergi (Salvation Socialist Magazine) which it only could publish 3 issues. Last issues of ASD published by Belli and his group.

- Proleter Devrimci Aydınlık (Proletarian Revolutionary Light): Published it's first issue as No 1-15 in monthly format. After the issue no 13-27, turned into weekly. After the martial law in April 1971, banned in it's 40th issue.

- Aydınlık (Light): Reopened as weekly magazine format in November 19, 1974. It's first number is numered as "41", with that it had pointed to older issues. Banned again after it's February 17, 1975 dated 54th issue.

- Halkın Sesi (People's Voice): Published it's first issue in April 15, 1975. From 1975 to 1978, published 151 issues. After it's March 7, 1978 dated last issue, closed itself for daily Aydınlık. Collected in 3 volumes.

- Aydınlık: Reopened as monthly. It's first (55th) issue was dated October 1975. After it's March 1978 dated last issue (85th) closed itself for daily Aydınlık.

- Aydınlık: Reopened as daily in March 20, 1978 and go on till September 12, 1980.

(Note: There is still to many publications published by this movement after 1984 but we don't need to add them because it isn't necessary and have no correlation with this article [even many of them isn't, but still added them for info])

c) Other languages:

- Aydınlık (German): Can be found in IISG, also some issues scanned in Mao-Projekt.
- Die Kurdenfrage - aus dem Plädoyer im Prozess gegen die revolutionäre Arbeiter Bauernpartei der Türkei (RABPT): A part of the "Savunma" by TİİKP defendants about Kurdish national problem in German.
- Can you consolidate a democracy without the assistance of its press?: Multi language (English-German-French) in IISG.
- Aydınlık (French?): Can be found in IISG.
- Aydınlık (English): Announced in 1971, but I haven't seen any issue ever yet.

Also some of the works of Aydınlık movement translated into several languages by their fraternal parties, for example some works translated into French by L'Humanité rouge (PCMLF), even TİİKP Savunma translated into Chinese in 1976.

APPENDIX II 

- @Gonzalo Upholder: Does anyone know of any sources about how TKP/ML - TIKKO started and the people's war was initiated in Turkey?

- @VerdeEsRojo: @halksavasi73 Might know something about this

- Me: Is he asking how they planned or what was the first armed action?

- @GonzaloUpholder: Like what was the process of building up the party and army and united front like? What sort of methods did they use (ie did they start out legal and go underground or were they underground from the start), what were the struggles they faced and how did they overcome them, etc?

- Me: First of all there is no existing United Front in Turkey. Secondly, you can take those informations from İK's works (like General Critic), but for the answer: TKP (M-L) (this was it first name) split from TİİKP, i.e. Shafak revisionists in April 24, 1972. When the time TKP (M-L) founded there was Martial Law since April 1971 in Turkey, so it start illegally, but before that there was some connections made in 1970's at village activities (especially in Kürecik and later Dersim), which some of them followed TKP (M-L) after split with TİİKP.

Dersim cadres were mostly (except 2 or 3 people) are local Dersimian people. Cadres was mostly students, but like I said before, there was connections with peasants too (otherwise it would be impossible to survive).

First armed action of TİKKO (in the first it's name was "Workers' and Peasants' Liberation Fedayeen of Turkey, TİKKF", later renamed as Army) was bombings in protest of the execution of Hüseyin İnan-Deniz Gezmiş-Yusuf Aslan. There was also some warning bombings too against army and police, who were opressing people with their fascist persecution. But first serious action was execution of a collabrator in Kürecik, who worked for Turkish state as an informant on killing of 3 THKO guerrillas at Nurhak mountain (Sinan Cemgil [was one of the leaders of THKO], Kadir Manga and Alpaslan Özdoğan). This execution personally done by İK.

Also there was some attempts made to raid police posts to seize weapons (in İstanbul and in Dersim), but they all failed. In one of them, in İstanbul, Mehmet Zeki Şerit (later massacred by fascist dictatorship under torture in November 24, 1977) shot an "guard" (was a semi-police in Turkey).

In November 1972 first arrests started and later some leader and high cadres arrested one by one. First serious damage was Vartinik siege, in that conflict Ali Haydar Yıldız martyred (January 24, 1973), he was first martyr of TKP (M-L). Ali Haydar Yıldız was a Party member, he was Deputy of Political Commissar of the DABK [political commissar was Muzaffer Oruçoğlu] and Commander of guerrilla units of DABK. There is 3 other martyrs of 1972-3 era: 2nd one is Meral Yakar, first communist martyr woman of Turkey (except Maria Subhi), who martyred in January 25, 1973 after 3 days of her shot accidentally. 3rd martyr was Ahmet Muharrem Çiçek, he was killed by fascists after his capture in March 19, 1973. 4th one is İbrahim Kaypakkaya.

Ali Haydar Yıldız

Meral Yakar (Kinem), source: Demokrat. 1980.01.22. Page: 7.

Ahmet Muharrem Çiçek (Abdullah), source: From an unnoted clipping published in Ahmet Muharrem Çiçek. After his death, TİKKO released a statement and said: "He doesn't have a machine gun, he doesn't have a steel vest [i.e. bullet-proof vest]; but he had a steel made heart who will not bowe his neck in front of ruling exploiter classes. His heart was bumping for people." 

İK at first managed to escape from Vartinik siege at that day, but he was wounded in the neck. After 5 days, İK was also arrested (with espionage of an reactionary named Cafer Atan, later this reactionary killed by MKP in 2000). Another leader cadre, Muzaffer Oruçoğlu, was also managed to escape from Vartinik and went to İstanbul (for reorganize in summer) but in April 22, 1973, with some other cadres, Muzaffer Oruçoğlu too arrested. This was last and final damage to TKP (M-L) in it's 1972-3 era.

I think it can't be said PW started in 1972 because there wasn't organized guerrilla units, only cores of it was founded (in the early years TİKKO never thought as an army but core for an PA in future).

After 1974 general amnesty some high cadres released from prison (even though main leaders [Muzaffer Oruçoğlu and Arslan Kılıç] were kept in prison), they founded 2nd Co-ordination Committee (1st one was founded personally by İK in 1972 with 3 people) in 1974. Name of Co-Ordination Committee was taken from CPI (M-L)'s Coordination Committee, but their duties were different: CPI (M-L) CC's duty was found a party, TKP (M-L) CC's duty was prepare party for congress.

Co-ordination Committee, however, did not prepared Party for PW; in reality, they step by step made preparations to liquidate party. They did many mistakes and in the end they blamed TKP (M-L)'s general line for their mistakes. In April 1976 CC members meet for a meeting and take some decisions. According to them:

-TKP (M-L) wasn't a party, not even M-L, but a political movement which marchs onward to being an M-L.

-In 5 Main Document İK did many mistakes, so general line isn't correct too.

-İK too, wasn't a M-L.

And several other things.

When they tried to impose new line to BABK (Western Anatolia Regional Committee), BABK requested a written document from them and they wrote an 3 paged document (summary of the decisions of meeting). With that İstanbul based BABK firstly opened rebellion flag against revisionists. At that time, BABK Secretary was Süleyman Cihan. Comrades in prison, from Abroad Committee which split from TİİKP in 1974 and joined to TKP (M-L) in same year, half of the Ankara, half of the İzmir, half of the Dersim, Kars-Ardahan etc. take side with Party. Other halfs mentioned in above, almost mostly Antep, almost mostly Maraş, almost mostly Urfa take side with KK. This lead party to it's Regional Era.

At the ends of 1977, Inter-committees Central Leadership founded and in February 1978 1st Conference is held. Actually 1st Conference was planned as an Congress, but due to recent splits ("Kurtuluş Yolu", "Kurtuluş Bayrağı" etc.) they decided to hold a conference instead of congress. Anyways, the Cenference held in Ankara and declared that "we are in a stage of the preparations for PW". But also they said "peacefull struggle is primary".

Due to inter party issues (Enver Hoxha issue, Mao's work issue ["is Mao a classic" problem], 1st CC's some different views from İK etc.), 1st CC couldn't fulfill its leadership duty for preparations. Only in 1980 they found first guerrilla training camp in Dersim, which this camp only lasted for a short period. Also a left opportunist trend split from TKP (M-L) in March 1980 named "TKP (M-L) Geçici Koordinasyon Komitesi" (TKP (M-L) Provisional Coordination Committee) and they blame CC for being rightist, but despite their leftist shouts, their practice was (as expected) highly rightist. Because all of this problems TKP (M-L), also couldn't made enough preparations for a fascist coup. So when the time September 12 fascist coup happened, TKP (M-L) wasn't prepared for it enough. TKP (M-L) also made tactic errors too, did not realized that revolution trend is retreating in Turkey and said "there is still revolutionary situation in Turkey" till 1982-3. Same mistake was made by İK too in 1972.

Anyways, TKP (M-L) helds it's 2nd Conference in 1981, defeated semi-Trotkyist trend within TKP (M-L) (which now they are calling themselves as "Bolşevik Partizan") and elected a new CC.

2nd Conference decided to place CC in rurals (Dersim), but GS (Süleyman Cihan) stayed in İstanbul (this was a big error). In effort to repair İstanbul committee as İK's planned model, he let himself in a trap and arrested (he was trying to learn about an arrested cadre). This was an error made by Com. Cihan which costs it's life, because it was so obvious that this meeting with wife of that cadre was a trap.

When TKP (M-L) learned that Süleyman arrested, it was obvious that fascists will not let him alive, even this truth said directly by Com. Cihan: "They won't catch me alive, and if they, they will not let me alive." When they captured him, police officers at political branch yelled with a joy "We arrested him!", other revolutionaries from different organizations are witness of it. So, to prevent his death, TKP (M-L) tried to start a campaing for saving life of Süleyman (they did not mention about his leadership of TKP (M-L) but they called him as a "revolutionary"). They occupied embassy, published announcements etc. to save Cihan. But junta, with filthy tricks, misinformed people and killed him. They spread gossips like "he is alive, I saw him recently" etc. even though he is already dead. When finally his death confirmed, campaing ended with an announcement titled: "Süleyman Cihan ermordet."

Junta even tried to lost him in custody, they buried him in a "cemetery for people who have no relative" as "unidentified". But in his arrest minutes his name was known and written! His family, in a last ditch effort, looked him in the catalogue of unidentified men and recognized him from this image:

This image, which taken from catalogue, also published in Revolution of RCP, USA; Amnesty International 1985 report etc.

That's how TKP (M-L) lost it's General Secretary under fascist military rule.

Anyways, after the coup Party started armed struggle in Dersim on 1980, but after some time there was only TKP (M-L) in Kurdistan who is still fighting. In 1981, Turkish army declared: "There is an war in Dersim and we're going to war." They sieged Dersim with all their strength. They massacred so many TKP (M-L) partisans militias with most vile methods: They bombed them, stabbed them with bayonets in their sleeps, tortured them with fire, etc.

Even though they couldn't destroy TKP (M-L), they succeed mostly crushing it. In 1983 Arslan Kılıç was released from prison. He was a defender of Three Worlds Theory, but in a CC meeting he elected to secretary generalship of TKP (M-L). He affected TKP (M-L)'s line and deviated it to a rightist line. And after few days, an operation happened, some CC members arrested and Arslan Kılıç left Party with a inter party crisis! He surrendered to state, with a short trial (and in his home province!) and later he had been released. Secretary General of TKP (M-L) did not even arrested Before him one of the Secretary General killed under torture in Diyarbakır (İbrahim Kaypakkaya), other one wanted with a shoot order! After his betrayal, Kazım Çelik elected to secretary generalship. Comrade Kazım Çelik cared trulty for the build up of Party and Army, but he made a big mistake with down kneel in front of DABK splitters. This act costed to TKP (M-L) very dearly: to lost most of the it's 3rd Conference Delegates, it's substitute-delegates, some of his important Party members and it's Secretary General, Kazım Çelik.

Crushing of party's forces on a vast scale, inter-party problems and others errors mentioned above resulted with a second defeat of Party. This era ends in 1984-5 and later reorganize began.

So answer to your question "how TKP (M-L) started to people's war" is this: History forced it, even though (due to subjective reasons) it wasn't enough prepared for it.

That's why at the end of '80's there was a trend existed within party ranks named "Devrimci Partizan", which mostly headed by members of 2nd CC. They declared that armed struggle wasn't affective, we must restart everything because we wasn't prepared enough for it. In other words: Liquidationism.

I hope this would be an answer for your question, for more info about TKP (M-L)'s strategy of PW you can read 5 Main Documents from İK (published in English too which can be found in bannedthought).

And one more thing, İK did some mistakes too, for example his understanding of "PUF can only emerge after the emergence of one or more RPP's" was wrong. A general criticism of errors made by TKP (M-L) (till 1978) can be found in self-criticism of TKP (M-L) in it's 1st Conference.

Sorry for may bad England btw.

[Original unedited version of this conversation can be found in here.] 

APPENDIX III

Message to the Marxist-Leninists and to the International Proletariat

Proletariat of all countries and oppressed peoples!

Revolutionaries, Communists, Comrades!

The vanguard organization of the section of the world proletariat in Turkey, the TKP/ML, has just held its Second Conference in January 1981. This Conference took place under the most difficult conditions of tyrannical oppression and vicious persecution by the ruling classes of Turkey. It has proven that despite all preventative measures and annihilation attempts by the counter-revolutionaries, we communists cannot be held back by any force from moving forward on the road to revolution.

The Second Party Conference marked a very important step to solve the tasks that stand before the proletariat in the ideological and political struggle both internationally and in our country.

In the Second Conference our Party has evaluated and criticized the line which has been carried out since the First Conference. It has identified mistakes and errors. It has prepared itself as the vanguard for the tasks in the coming struggles.

The first focal point on the agenda of our Second Party Conference was concerned with the ideological questions that have deeply shaken the international communist movement.

A. Our Conference has openly condemned the new opportunist front.

This front has formed around the modern revisionist and Trotskyite line which has been systematically propagated since 1978 by the renegade leading clique of the PLA [Party of Labor of Albania -RWN], who, once again, set out to split and destroy the internation al communist movement from within. Our Conference has in the main confirmed the call of the Central Committee of September 1979 ("PLA: The Initiator of a New Ideological Split") to the proletariat of the world concerning this question. Our Conference analyzed the ideological and political roots of the anti-Marxist-Leninist line of the PLA and discussed its historical development. The result of this work at our Conference will soon be made public to the Marxist-Leninists and the world proletariat.

Our Party did not participate in the attacks against Marxism-Leninism and Marxist-Leninist leaders that were launched by the renegade clique of the PLA. It fought against these attacks. However, in this struggle the Party wavered and made mistakes. These mistakes have been for the most part corrected by the decisions of the 8th Plenum of the First Central Committee. And now our Conference has opened the way for the deepening of the struggle against the modern revisionist-Trotskyite line of the PLA.

Our Conference has resolved to wage a militant struggle against all forms of modern revisionism. Trotskyism and opportunism, headed by Khrushchev style modern revisionism, in order to emerge from the ideological chaos in which the international communist movement presently finds itself.

B. The revisionism of the PLA has concentrated its attacks against Marxism-Leninism through attacking the person of Comrade Mao Tsetung. The opportunist and slanderous wind that the PLA has stirred up in the world, has caused uncertainty in a section of the communists of the world. As a result of this, the evaluation of the works of Mao Tsetung and the assessment of the Chinese revolution has been placed on the agenda on the ideological front. Of necessity both the attacks of the opportunists and the desire of Marxist-Leninists to discuss these questions influenced the ranks of our Party. For these reasons our Party also put these points of discussion on the agenda. Our Party has put forward a long-term plan of research and discussion in order to defend this great teacher and the outstanding victories of the Chinese proletariat, against the attacks of the PLA and if there are any, to be able to point out any mistakes. The first stage of this program has been concluded with the Second Conference. Our Conference has finished analyzing the People's Democratic Revolution in China and the views of Mao Tsetung on the people's democratic dictatorship. Our Conference has come to the following conclusions:

Comrade Mao Tsetung is one of the five great Marxist-Leninist teachers. His place is beside Comrades Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin. The evaluation that Mao Tsetung had made mistakes of principle, and for this reason cannot be considered a classic of Marxism-Leninism —exists both within our own Party and internationally. This is a revisionist and Trotskyite deviation and is under the heavy influence of the opportunist attacks of the PLA.

The theses of Comrade Mao Tsetung on the People's Democratic Revolution and the people's democratic dictatorship, both general and particular to China, correspond completely with Marxism-Leninism. These theses further deepen and develop the views of Comrades Lenin and Stalin about the revolution in semi-colonial countries. They embody one of Mao Tselung's contributions to Marxism-Leninism.

C. Our Party sees it as an important task of the present ideological struggle to analyze and learn from both the victories and mistakes of the struggle, of the international communist movement against modern revisionism. With this perspective the evaluation of the 1957 and 1960 Moscow Declarations and the struggle against modern revisionism in this period were placed on the agenda at the Second Party Conference. These questions were also being discussed in the international Marxist-Leninist movement, and a deviation gradually tending to slanders, appeared within this discussion, and has also been reflected in our own Party. According to this deviation, the Moscow Declarations of 1957 and 1960 are in essence documents of modern revisionism. These documents were supposedly a means of propagating Khrushchevite modern revisionism.

Our Conference has condemned this deviation. It has ascertained that the Declarations of 1957 and 1960 were an important turning point in the struggle against the modern revisionism of Khrushchev, in which the Marxist-Leninist line was dominant. In these documents certain concessions were made to the modern revisionism of Khrushchev concerning some questions of principle. However these documents sharpened the awareness of Marxist-Leninists toward Khrushchevite revisionism and activated the struggle against it. To repudiate these facts means repudiating a part of the legacy of Marxism-Leninism, which we must fight decisively against. Our Conference is of the opinion that the Declarations of 1957 and 1960, though in the main Marxist-Leninist, cannot today be considered as the general line of the international communist movement. Our Conference is of the opinion that the unclarities and concessions to Khrushchevite revisionism in the documents from 1957 and 1960 must be cleared up; and that in the main these tasks have been carried out in the letter and nine commentaries from the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, known as the 1963 Polemics. For this reason our Conference declares that the interna tional communist movement must take the 1963 Polemics as a basis to be able to unite around a common line and that these documents, provided that certain shortcomings and errors in them are overcome and developed to cover the ideological questions of the present day, can serve as the platform for the international communist movement.

Finally, our Conference calls on the Marxist-Leninists of the world to take a stand against the new opportunist front headed up by the PLA, which after Khrushchevite-revisionism and the modern revisionism of the "Three Worlds Theory", is trying to disarm the world proletariat.

Our Second Conference calls on the world's Marxist-Leninists to beat back and condemn the hideous attacks of this opportunist front, carried out with the ammunition taken over from the arsenal of Khrushchev and Suslov, on Comrade Mao Tsetung and the victories of the Chinese proletariat under his leadership.

Our Second Conference calls on all the Marxist-Leninists of the world to learn from the struggle of the communist leaders against modern revisionism of the Khrushchevite variety, but also to learn from the mistakes.

Our Second Conference calls on all Marxist-Leninists to unite taking the "Proposal For a General Line of the International Communist Movement" from the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China as a basis; and through comradely discussion and criticism/self-criticism, deepen and raise it to the demanding situation of our day.

Our Party has steeled itself in the struggle against those lines which deviated from Marxism-Leninism and its concrete application to Turkey as developed by our founder Comrade Ibrahim Kaypakkaya.

Our Second Party Conference also led a struggle against the revisionistTrotskyite line that appeared in our own ranks while the ideological problems of the international proletariat were being discussed. In short, this line holds the exact opposite from the decisions taken by our Second Party Conference concerning the evaluation of Comrade Mao Tsetung and the Chinese Revolution. The main thesis of the struggle against this line can be found in the documents of the Second Conference which will soon be published. This struggle is a two-line struggle in the Party which is still not completed. The fact that Marxism-Leninism won out in the first stage of this struggle is a result of the fact that vigilance toward and loyal ty to Marxism-Leninism had the upper hand in our Party and the principles of democratic centralism were applied in practice. Under the leadership of the Second Central Committee our Parly will further deepen this struggle and conclude it with a complete victory of Marxism-Leninism.

Our Party Conference has evaluated the practice of the Party since the First Conference. It has recognized that the Central Committee gradually systematized a right opportunist line.

This right opportunist line has dealt severe blows to the development of the Party both by the ideological vacillations it displayed on the current questions internationally and —which is the more important— by applying a line of pacifism and tailing behind the masses in the class struggle for political power. The First Central Committee could not mobilize our Party to lead the armed struggle of our people and solve the tasks of the preparation of guerrilla warfare. The Party has not developed along with the possibilities that arose with the sharpening class struggle and the upsurge of the revolutionary current. The Party was caught unprepared by the military coup of September 12th which is now carrying out vicious terror in our country. Although it was foreseen that the counter-revolution was moving in the direction of an open fascist dictatorship, the First Central Committee did not develop the revolutionary tactics that correspond to this analysis. It rather kept the Party continuing on the basis of peaceful struggle and the internal work as the main task and in doing so left our impoverished people without leadership.

Our Second Party Conference has corrected this line. It also pointed out the connection of this right opportunist line of the Central Committee with the influence of the revisionist-Trotskyite viewpoint and method of the second line on the Central leadership. The rejection of this right opportunist line takes on decisive importance because of the high level of class struggle that has been attained in our country today. Now our Party will be mobilized to complete the preparations for guerrilla warfare through armed struggle in the rural areas. The daily struggles and the democratic organizing of the working class will now be given the importance that it did not receive in the past years. Leadership will be seized on this question. Our Party will provide a better leadership for the struggle of our people in the People's Democratic Revolution by following tactics which correspond to the revolutionary situation that today finds itself in stagnation but will be developing in the very near future to a higher level.

Proletariat of all countries, and oppressed peoples!

In many countries of the world the working class and oppressed peoples are carrying out courageously a life and death struggle against the worldwide counter-revolution that finds itself in deep economic and political crisis, the main tendency in the world today still is revolution. The class struggle in our country, which sharpened and resulted in the military coup, is only that part of this struggle that is taking place in Turkey. If the working class and the revolutionary people hold the banners of revolution for independence, people's democracy, and socialism high in their own countries; the imperialist and social-imperialist bandits will not have the chance to cover the world with blood through a third war for the redivision of the globe. For this reason our Second Conference calls on the peoples of the world and on the proletariat of all countries: Unite! Hold high the banner of revolution! Fight against the war preparations of the imperialists and social-imperialists with revolution! Expose and condemn these war preparations! Smash all modern-revisionist Trotskyite obstacles in your path!

For this reason our Second Party Conference calls on all Marxist-Leninists of the world to unite along the bright path of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao Tsetung to carry on an open and thoroughly principled debate in order to unite ideologically and through this debate organizationally; and to mobilize the proletariat and its allies in their countries to the struggle for revolution!

LONG LIVE MARXISM-LENINISM!

LONG LIVE THE IMMORTAL WORKS OF MARX, ENGELS, LENIN, STALIN AND MAO TSETUNG!

LONG LIVE THE PROLETARIAN WORLD REVOLUTION!

LONG LIVE OUR SECOND PARTY CONFERENCE!

February 1981

COMMUNIST PARTY OF TURKEY

MARXIST-LENINIST

TKP ML

CENTRAL COMMITTEE

[Taken from: "Statement from the Second Conference of the Communist Party of Turkey Marxist-Leninist (TKPML): Message to the Marxist-Leninists and to the International Proletariat". Revolutionary Worker [Voice of the Revolutionary Communist Party, U.S.A.]. June 5, 1981. Vol.: 3. No.: 108. Pages: 4-5., with minor edit trough compare of Turkish version.]