The last few weeks and months have seen rapid and far-reaching changes in the balance of power in the Middle East. Now this is not a development that comes out of nowhere and arises from a single moment but is part of a larger process that can be called the Third World War. Explain to us how today’s developments were initiated, what they mean, and above all, how they impact the future and what this means for your struggle.

While the enemy’s total fascist, genocidal attacks continue, so does our struggle for freedom with full intensity on all fronts. We, as freedom movement and the people, are resisting against this total fascist, genocidal war. The resistance and struggle for freedom are deepening and spreading.

Rêber Apo¹ likens the period we are in to the last period of the First World War. While some compare it to the beginning of the war and try to understand it that way, Rêber Apo evaluates it the other way round. He compares it more to the end of the world war in 1918. This is an essential assessment that enables us to better understand the state of the war in the current period. It helps to understand the general situation created by the Third World War that has started since the Gulf crisis in the Middle East. It is a war that has been going on for thirty-five years now, and through this analysis, it shows how extensive and violent this war has become here in the region, especially since the AKP-MHP attacks that entered a new phase on July 24, 2015. There may be a massive change.

It is necessary to understand and evaluate the recent developments comprehensively. After the First World War, when capitalism gained a global hegemonic structure, the nation-state structure was implemented in the Middle East. They brought this about by dismantling the Ottoman Empire. At that time, it was the nation-state structures that were in the interest of the capitalist modernity system, and at the center of this was the opening of the Europe-India trade route. The road project was planned as the Berlin-Baghdad-Basra Railway. When the German-Ottoman alliance was formed at the end of the negotiations over it, the Ottoman administration of Abdulhamid II gave the trade route to Germany. Britain, on the other hand, in agreement with France and Russia, seized Ottoman territories starting from Africa and the Gulf and declared war on the Ottomans, thus frustrating the road project. If this road project had not been blocked at that time, Germany would have taken over the trade up to the Gulf. Thus, Germany would have become influential in the India-Asia trade. However, India was a colony of Britain. The capture of India and Asia’s resources by Europe was the main issue of struggle, and this struggle is still going on today.

Current developments have made the process understandable. It has revealed the kind of change that was initiated with the Gulf crisis and the war in the 1990s following the collapse of the Soviet Union. And what kind of ‘New World Order’ the US put on the agenda after the collapse of the Soviet Union. We defined this war as the conflict between the supranational monopoly capitalist system and the nation-state status quoism. Nation-state status quoism and the rigidity of borders weakened the movement of capital and thus reduced exploitation. The nation-state system created by capitalist modernity in the First World War was now inimical to the increased exploitation of globalizing monopoly capital. The Third World War began as an attack by global monopoly capital to change it. It aimed to shatter the status quo of nation-states created in the Middle East and to rebuild the India-Europe energy and trade route. On this basis, there has been a war for already thirty-five years since 1990.

In the Gulf War, the US deployed 150,000 troops to the Middle East, centered in Saudi Arabia. It aimed to control the Gulf all the way to Israel. On the one hand, it was attacking the nation-state status quo in the form of Saddam Hussein’s regime from the very center, and on the other hand, it was putting the Gulf under military control. Thus making the Gulf open for new energy routes. Saddam Hussein was surrounded in Baghdad in 1991, and later on, in 2003, Baghdad was occupied, and Saddam Hussein was eliminated.

After the 2001 Twin Tower attacks, the US military invasion of first Afghanistan and then Iraq developed, capturing Kabul and then Baghdad. In fact, Saddam Hussein’s regime could have collapsed already in 1991, but it did not do so until 2003. This also needs to be assessed correctly. This was due to the fact that the US sovereignty was still weak. In other words, the US still did not have enough influence in the Middle East to overthrow Saddam Hussein’s regime. It was afraid that if it did so, other powers would take advantage of the vacuum and make progress. There was Iran in the east and the PKK in the north. Both forces could have become much more effective in Iraq if Saddam Hussein’s regime had fallen in Baghdad at that time, because the US was weak and the US-based forces were still absent in Iraq.

The United States fought the Gulf War with the alliances it had forged in the world and in the Middle East, and it also relied on the military and technical power it brought to Saudi Arabia. In a period of twelve years, it waited to develop its own influence, to prevent its opponents from taking advantage of the vacuum that would be created in the event of the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime, and developed its influence in the Arab sphere against Iran. At the same time, it also developed the international conspiracy against the PKK.

What it feared most in the event of the fall of Baghdad was that the PKK would become an effective force in Iraq. This is certain. The Kurdish question, or the struggle over Kurdistan, has such a connection with the Third World War. The Kurdish question was created as a consequence during and after the First World War.

The Third World War is a direct continuation of this war, intertwined with the Kurdish question and the freedom movement that developed in Kurdistan. This is a situation that needs to be understood correctly. In fact, as soon as the US overthrew Saddam Hussein’s regime, the basic decision of the administration they formed in Southern Kurdistan and the so-called ‘Operation Hammer Force’ that formed it was that the PKK would not enter southern Kurdistan. And so with the international conspiracy of October 9, 1998, they directly attacked Rêber Apo.

Until 2010, the US waged a war of influence mainly around the Gulf. It invaded Iraq, and on the other side established relations with Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Afterwards, the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ marked an important point. The main aspects of the Arab Spring were the struggle of societies against nationalist dictatorships. Because there was a fierce contradiction and conflict. The global capital system wanted to take advantage of this for its own interests, and Turkey was directly involved in this process. As the US developed its attacks in the Middle East, it gradually turned towards defining the ‘New World Order’ strategy. With the so-called ‘Greater Middle East Project,’ they actually gave Turkey a very big and crucial role. Back then, Tayyip Erdogan even said that he was the co-chair of the ‘Greater Middle East Project.’ He wanted to benefit the most from the process of mobilization of the masses in the Arab Spring. The way was paved for the forces organized in Egypt and Syria, and they quickly mobilized. With the pioneering and support of the US, they formed parties in many areas and came to power. They won the elections in Egypt and organized as the FSA against the regime in Syria. Until 2015, the US and Turkey had such an alliance.

But then, the alliance was broken, particularly because of the situation in Egypt. Taking advantage of the situation, Tayyip Erdogan wanted to turn the ‘Greater Middle East Project’ into the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood, spread it everywhere and take power everywhere. The US was alarmed by this, since it was the US that had created the Muslim Brotherhood. Back then, they had created it in Egypt to fight against the influence of the Soviet Union. With the same aim, they had organized Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. The struggle of the US-led system against the Soviet Union was at the basis of these organizations. The ‘Green Belt Project’ was a big strategy to prevent the Soviet Union from reaching the seas. Thus, organizations were established in all shapes and forms in many countries to serve this purpose. And Turkey was included in NATO for this purpose. As the southeasternmost tip of NATO, the Turkish Republic played an active role in organizing and executing the ‘Green Belt Project’.

The system of capitalist modernity was frightened that the Muslim Brotherhood would take advantage of the opportunities and become influential throughout all of the Middle East. They wanted to benefit from the attacks of the global capital system, which also targeted the status quo. The system, together with the Turkish Republic, severed their work, although not completely.

And now, since October 7, they are concentrating on the Eastern Mediterranean. From 1990 to 2010, the attacks were concentrated on the Gulf and its surroundings, and after 2010, when Syria came to the agenda, it always approached the Eastern Mediterranean. Reaching as far as Lebanon and bordering Israel, Iran had created a ‘Shiite Crescent.’ That is why Qasem Soleimani was eliminated.

As a result, a new period was entered with the Gaza War on October 7th. It aims to make the Eastern Mediterranean suitable for the energy and trade route, to clear the way, to seize it, and to ensure Israel’s security. The US has brought its navy to the Eastern Mediterranean. Just as it brought 150,000 troops to Saudi Arabia by land after the invasion of Kuwait on August 2, 1990, this time it brought its naval forces to the Eastern Mediterranean. It has become the strongest military force there and carried out direct military attacks through Israel. Hamas started this war, but Tayyip Erdogan’s guidance is certain. This is something we already pointed out at the beginning, and it was later confirmed by many circles, but Tayyip Erdogan and his cohorts in Turkey are still trying to cover it up. He is being used like an agent provocateur.

The US and Israel prepared for the attack on Gaza; they just needed a justification. This justification was Hamas’ attack on October 7th. The US attacks in the Middle East have always had similar justifications. For example, on August 2, Saddam invaded Kuwait, which led to the Gulf War. On September 11, 2001, al-Qaeda hit the Twin Towers, which led to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. It has always continued on such grounds. They provoked Putin again, which became the reason for the war in Ukraine. The Hamas attacks also created the grounds for Israel to attack Gaza. There are those who argue that Hamas was directed by Mossad – they also argue that Mossad founded Hamas in order to weaken the PLO, based on some information they supposedly received from the US. Rêber Apo also evaluates it in this way. Hamas was not an uncontrolled, completely anti-Israeli force, but they still made Tayyip Erdogan pull the rope. This became a justification, and they destroyed Gaza. The Gaza war is of great significance. Historically, Jerusalem and Gaza go parallel. Historically it is said: ‘The activity in Jerusalem passes through Gaza.’ Gradually, there is a project aiming at the complete elimination of society in Palestine. Now they allow them to remain as a community for a while, but later they may not allow them; they may gradually eliminate them. They are doing it step by step; they cannot do it all without a doubt.

After Gaza it was Lebanon’s turn. It was obvious that this was going to happen. Turkey provoked Iran and Hezbollah into war with Israel. Turkey’s calculation was that if Israel goes to war with Hezbollah in Lebanon, Iran will also go to war directly, because they first spread the rumor that Hamas is an Iranian organization, and they wanted to get a result from there, but Iran did not claim Hamas. Because it is not like that; Hamas is an organization of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Iran is a Shiite organization. Yes, Iran may have supported other Islamic groups, but the AKP’s relationship with Hamas is much stronger than Iran’s. Their relationship is sectarian, that is, ideological.

Accordingly, they could not draw Iran into the conflict. At least not to the desired extent. Turkey was calculating that if Iran enters the war and resists a little, the two powers of Israel and Iran will balance each other; both would be dependent on Turkey. It planned to maintain relations with both sides, and in this way it wanted to ensure its own effectiveness in the Middle East based on this conflict. As it will be remembered, Turgut Ozal’s whole gimmick in Turkey was the Iran-Iraq war. Without the Iran-Iraq war, there would have been no Ozalism in Turkey. It is said that Ozal was a genius that developed the economy, but this is not the case. Turgut Ozel sold all the dregs of Turkey from the Iran-Iraq war to both Iraq and Iran, because neither of them could trade with anyone else. They couldn’t buy anything from anywhere else, and that reality enabled Turgut Ozal to stay in power for so long. Supposedly he brought economic prosperity to Turkey, but the true reason is as I have stated.

Now, Tayyip Erdogan hoped and calculated that the Iran-Israel war would lead to a similar situation, but this was not the case. Israel’s attacks on Hezbollah were not tactically and stylistically like the attack on Gaza. They hit their technical system and broke their communication. Already in advance it had gathered enough information through its network of agents within Hezbollah. It dealt a serious blow to Hezbollah in a very short time. It was not what Turkey expected. It was not a situation that weakened Israel and led to a prolonged Iran-Israel war. On the contrary, Hezbollah became very weak; thus, Iran’s arm was broken, and Israel gained the strongest possible position. As a result, instead of confrontation, Iran has turned towards reconciliation; it has no strength left for confrontation. This situation has created a panic in Turkey. One needs to be aware of this. The situation of the Hezbollah, both weakened Iran and seriously shook and frightened the AKP. It did not turn out as they had calculated. The AKP even had to fear that Iran would be neutralized and that Israel would be completely paved the way for in the region. Since October 1, Devlet Bahceli’s initiatives have all stemmed from this. Fear and anxiety, and the impact of the blow Hezbollah suffered in Turkey, led to this search.

Indeed, one had to believe that Syria was next; the information had already spread. Iran and Hezbollah had already suffered a blow in Lebanon, but at the same time, in the so-called Astana process, a complex process had emerged in Syria. It was a process that created a Turkish-Russian-Iranian alliance over Syria. It raised the question of how the process in Syria would work and how the global capital system would carry out this process. Particularly because of Russia’s war in the Ukraine. When Biden came to power in the USA at the time, he immediately put Trump’s earlier decision to withdraw from Afghanistan into practice and developed the war in Ukraine.

Now, the importance of the Ukrainian front needs to be evaluated multidimensionally. They sabotaged the Russia-China alternative energy route. The shortest and most profitable overland route was, in fact, the energy route connecting China-India to Europe, to Paris, Berlin, and London from the north of the Black Sea. They sabotaged this with the Ukraine war. It was China’s ‘One Belt, One Road’ project, and it wanted to run it through Russia. This was sabotaged with the Ukraine war. If that had not been the case, the economic influence of China and Russia on Europe would have developed a lot. They were almost becoming dependent. To some extent, Germany and other places had established relations with Russia because of their dependence on natural gas. The US influence on Europe would have weakened; it would have fallen into the background. In terms of its military impact, as Macron put it, NATO was “brain dead,” and they said that they needed a new European army. There were searches between Germany and France in that direction. All this was weakening the US influence in Europe, and they reversed this. They sabotaged the energy route with the Ukraine war and restrained Russia’s relations with China, and they enlarged NATO by adding Sweden and Finland. The US has thus gained, and based on this gain, it carried out the Israeli attacks in the Eastern Mediterranean. This also played a role in Syria. The recent election of Trump has made this even more decisive. Some people say that Biden is trying to do things before he leaves the presidency, before Trump becomes president, but it is not exactly like that. Yes, the US may not be a very deep-rooted state; it is a state of two hundred years, but it is an institutionalized state. Trump won the elections, and Biden is implementing what Trump says; he cannot implement anything else because he is the administration that won.

Trump’s election has had a certain impact on these developments in Syria. For example, it paved the way for negotiations with Russia. Trump was openly saying this in his election propaganda. They negotiated with Russia over Ukraine and Syria. The most critical thing in Syria is Russia’s position. If Russia was in a position to impose a conflict, they could not have attacked Syria like this. They negotiated two things at once. Trump’s election facilitated this bargain, and they agreed. So they agreed on Ukraine, and now they will give it a shape. They also agreed on Syria, and it is not known what Russia will receive. They agreed on Ukraine to a certain extent. They may have also agreed on having a port in the Eastern Mediterranean. Russia may have imposed this. If not, this shows that Russia has fallen into a very weak situation. Because its goal since its existence has been to reach the Eastern Mediterranean. This was the goal of the Russian Tsar; this was the goal of the Soviet Union, because this is the essence of Russian strategy. After the 2010 war, with the weakening of the Bashar al-Assad regime, it became more attached to itself and opened a space for itself there. It seems that there is a two-way deal. They bargained both in the Eastern Mediterranean and in Ukraine. The agreement on Ukraine has also become an agreement on the Eastern Mediterranean. Thus, Russia was included in the energy path. This is the importance of the conflicts in Syria. This is the main meaning of Russia’s behavior, forcing the Assad regime to withdraw, making the Assad regime a bargaining chip. They have not only found a solution to the Syrian question; they have also found a solution to the Russian question on the Eastern Mediterranean route. This means that Russia will also be included in this road project. They had already neutralized the road north of the Black Sea. Now, their contradictions with Russia may decrease more and more. Russia may also be involved in this trade through Syria via the Eastern Mediterranean. Thus, the road project becomes stronger. That aspect is of great significance.

When the system made a deal with Russia, the other front became very strong. Russia was the danger in front of them. After making that deal, they became stronger. With confidence, they gained the power to re-establish an alliance with the Turkish Republic. In fact, it is understood that they included Turkey in such an intervention project in Syria after reaching an agreement with Russia. If they had not agreed with Russia, they could have excluded Turkey, because it was too contradictory, and they would not have been able to get out of it. When they came to an agreement with Russia, the way was cleared for them; just as they used Tayyip Erdogan as an agent provocateur in Gaza, now they used the Turkish Republic as a similar agent provocateur to bring down the Assad regime, the Baath regime. They established relations through the UK; most recently, the NATO Secretary came to Turkey, and they made Tayyip Erdogan pull the string of Hamas. They also had Tayyip Erdogan pull Bashar’s rope. In fact, Turkey was also very influential in the removal of Saddam.

Some people wonder how the Assad regime can fall in twelve days, but of course it is possible with such an alliance. Because the Baath government had no power left, there was Hezbollah, Iran, and Russia. Israel seriously struck Hezbollah and Iran. Russia had changed sides, and so there was nothing left for Bashar al-Assad but to withdraw. He had no chance and power to resist and endure. Maybe he could resist for a day or two more, but he would be crushed. Instead, he found it in his own interest to hand over the administration and flee. This is how the process developed rapidly.

It was said that there would be developments in Syria that would shake the Middle East and the world. Israel had given that atmosphere. Israel was going to hit Hamas, then Hezbollah, Iran, and Damascus, and it was being discussed in which way they would crush them. They turned out to be cunning and gave the role to AKP-MHP. They overthrew them through the Turkish government, which considers itself Muslim. They broke the Turkish-Arab relations and increased their tension. They increased the contradictions between Iran and Turkey. This project led to all this. If they had tried to do the same thing through Israel, they might not have been so successful; there might have been more resistance. If the US had done it itself, there would have been different contradictions. They are doing whatever it takes to develop the contradictions in the Middle East and intensify the clashes. It is imperialism’s policy of divide and rule. It is exactly what the name says, and this is being realized in practice.

Now, if Syria and then Iraq are taken over, Cyprus will be next. The US signed a strategic military agreement with Cyprus last year, and Israel signed one recently. They have been conducting military exercises with the Cyprus administration in the Eastern Mediterranean many times. Most recently, Israel agreed to create a system similar to Israel’s for Cyprus’ air defense. Germany and America did the same thing in Greece. They have made Greece completely ready for this. They created their ports and security systems with F-35s. Now they are preparing Southern Cyprus together. When it is Cyprus’ turn, the issue of Turkey will be on the agenda there. What they want to do directly through Syria, through the Kurds in Syria, may have a partial effect; they may not deepen the contradictions with Turkey through Syria, but they can go after Turkey through Cyprus. There, the system and Turkey will contradict and come into conflict, because Turkey will not be able to keep Northern Cyprus any longer. Northern Cyprus will want to unite with Southern Cyprus. Again, there will be a struggle over the sea area, and they will come into conflict and contradict each other.

The system may not enter into conflict with Turkey over the Kurds. Because it knows that Turkey is very sensitive on this issue. If it enters into conflict from there, nothing will happen in Turkish politics, and it will not be able to influence anyone. It will enter from different directions, but other policies will also come to the agenda from there. For example, it may enter through Cyprus, for example, through the energy route. They will bring different factors to the agenda. Then the Kurdish question will come to the agenda. The Turkish Republic is very well aware of this. This was reflected in Devlet Bahceli’s approach. We don’t know for sure, but it seemed as if Tayyip Erdogan intervened with Devlet Bahceli because Tayyip Erdogan doesn’t want it. Tayyip Erdogan wants only one thing, and that is the continuation of a policy that will keep him in power until his death. Tayyip Erdogan does not need anything else. He has no religion, no nationalism, nothing. He is not a Turk either. That is precisely why he prevented things from getting serious.

This process will take a while, because the system needs time; they need to digest what they have done. One can ask when something like this will happen. Two things can be said about it:

One; they need time, they need to digest, but a permanent system can be established neither in Lebanon, nor in Syria, nor in Iraq. They will take steps towards it, but if the status quo in Turkey and Iran is not resolved, the new Middle East system cannot be formed. The capitalist system cannot establish its own system. It can build the system after it has dealt with them, because both of them will frustrate it. Especially if these two status quoist powers interact with each other, they will frustrate much more. In its current state, they have such an effectiveness.

Second; there is the PKK factor. Just as Turkish nationalism fears the Kurds, the capitalist modernity system fears the PKK because it has the power to take everything away from them. They have such an opposition to Rêber Apo. They are very angry with the paradigm of Rêber Apo.

There was nothing like this in the First World War. The Bolsheviks arrested the government overnight, made a revolution, and kept it going because there were no obstacles. Now it is not like that. The experience of the past hundred years has made the system very sensitive to this issue. Contradictions and conflicts within the system are one thing; contradictions and conflicts between the alternative system and society are another. When the contradiction and conflict with society come up, they reconcile the contradictions and conflicts among themselves. Therefore, it is difficult for them to intervene in Turkey without weakening the PKK; without crushing it or pulling it into their orbit or making it unable to develop an alternative, they are very cautious in this regard.

The current Turkish state seems to have realized this a little bit. They go everywhere and say, “Terrorism is dangerous not only for us but also for you,” and what they call ‘terrorism’ is the thoughts of Rêber Apo. They are discussing this among themselves and thus gaining support. This will continue for a while, but it is not clear how long this situation will last. They want to achieve results with attacks, and if these are frustrated, there may be different developments. This is a struggle; we have to focus on our own strategy, style, and tactics. The more we frustrate their projects, their attacks on this basis, the more we advance. We need to develop a struggle to nullify them. We should not look for a situation that will destroy them or create a complete reconciliation; such expectations are wrong. Neither a destructive approach is right nor an immediate reconciliation approach is right. We must envision struggle; we must find in ourselves the strength, the will, and the persistence to fight. This will be a step-by-step struggle. They will hit us and try to destroy us, but the more we frustrate their projects, the stronger we will become and the weaker they will become.

We search to apply Rêber Apo’s paradigm. This means correctly identifying the reality of struggle, the environment of contradiction and conflict. Europe had dictators that were overthrown, and the Middle East also has dictators. The fall of Saddam Hussein should not be underestimated. Those who were in power in the Middle East for 35 years were overthrown in a short period of time. They were hard-line Arab nationalists, nation-state nationalists. They are keeping the softer ones alive, for example, the monarchies. Now they are clashing with this nation-state status quo nationalism, and the pioneer of nation-state nationalism is the Turkish Republic. This process will be difficult for the system, and it will be difficult for them to reconcile among themselves. The conflictual process will continue.

Footnote: