When we look at the ruins of the Leftist and Marxist march across all parts of Kurdistan, we do not discover merely a passing historical experience that failed to achieve its goals; rather, we stand before a harsh, deeply tragic, and fragmented scene. In it, major internationalist dreams and attractive liberationist slogans were transformed into mere tools of depletion and political and structural reductionism. The bitter truth gradually unfolded as the revolutionary utopia left its place, and the Kurdish elites collided with a solid reality that proved the Left was never the magical savior imagined by the popular consciousness or promoted by successive leaderships. Instead, this path produced fundamental concessions and radical transformations that laid bare the fragility of the intellectual structure of these movements.
In the Turkish arena, we witnessed a radical shift in the course of major Kurdish movements that emerged from the womb of Marxism-Leninism and armed struggle, gradually entering the corridors of settlement and retreating—through revisions of their leader Abdullah Öcalan’s theses—toward concepts of the “Democratic Nation” and institutional political and parliamentary action, surrendering their initial radicalism to retain a minimum level of legitimate political gains. In Syrian Kurdistan, Leftist currents shrank and transformed, under the influence of authoritarian pragmatism and security arrangements, into marginal structures lost between containment and dependency. In Iraq, the Leftist identity faded entirely within traditional Kurdish parties that sank into the mire of narrow administrative and bureaucratic power, converting from radical rebellion movements into de facto authorities managing affairs isolated from their working-class roots. Conversely, the Kurdish Left in Iran remained imprisoned within a closed circle of excessive internal conflicts and bloody inter-factional splits that exhausted its historical cadres between the hammer of central autocracy and the anvil of ideological division. Thus, we find ourselves before a harsh, tragic outcome: decades of monumental sacrifices and squandered blood ended in forced concessions and a structural retreat that emptied the Leftist experience of its liberationist content, remaining the heaviest and most bitter legacy in the modern history of the Kurdish struggle.
The Concept of the Left, Marxism, and Communism from the Perspective of Kurdish Parties and Movements
Kurdish movements and parties demonstrate a deep, distinct understanding of Leftist, Marxist, and Communist thought. They did not view it merely as dry economic theories or imported academic philosophies from European intellectual texts; rather, they reformulated and absorbed it through their own lens and the pressing needs of their national struggle. This absorption materialized in pivotal pillars:
The Left as a Tool for National Liberation and Social Justice: Leftist leaderships and parties did not see it as an internationalist ideology that erased identity, but as a solid organizational and struggle-oriented tool that granted them international legitimacy and linked their just cause to global anti-colonial and anti-imperialist liberation movements, with a focus on doing justice to the peasant and marginalized classes in their societies.
Communism as a Modernist Organizational Alternative to Tribalism: Kurdish elites viewed Communist and Leftist organizations as an effective means to break tribal and traditional constraints that were reconciled with oppressive regimes, and as a way to unite the ranks of youth and intellectuals through cross-tribal and cross-regional party loyalty.
Pragmatic Intersection Between Internationalism and Nationalism: Kurdish parties adapted Marxist concepts to fit their reality. Instead of complete dissolution into proletarian internationalism—which ignores national borders—these parties exploited anti-colonial Leftist discourse to consolidate Kurdish rights and the legitimacy of armed struggle, considering class liberation inextricably linked to the liberation of the Kurdish people as a whole.
Emotional and Elite Commitment: Leftist thought was absorbed at many stages as a doctrine of absolute sacrifice and revolutionary martyrdom. Kurdish leaders and militants saw in this ideology a moral source of inspiration that justified making immense sacrifices in the face of the central apparatus of oppression, detached from realistic calculations aimed at achieving tangible political gains on the ground.
Trajectories of the Kurdish Left and its Geographical Distribution: Iraq, Iran, Turkey, and Syria
Kurdish engagement in the Leftist and Marxist space manifested through multiple geographical and political phases. Each part of Kurdistan took its own path, influenced by the objective circumstances of central regimes and the nature of the local social structure. These trajectories are clarified through the following geographical divisions:
Iraqi Kurdistan — Early Vanguards and the Experience of Historical Leadership: The “Hiwa” (Hope) Organization in the 1940s represented an early stage where the Kurdish national nucleus intersected with progressive ideas opposing British imperialism. Over successive decades, a generation of prominent leaders, such as Jalal Talabani and others, adopted Leftist and Marxist thought as an organizational and struggle reference point, drawing upon the discourse of national and social liberation in the face of successive central regimes, before these forces gradually transformed through long experience into an administrative and ruling reality.
Iranian Kurdistan — The “Komala” Experience and Pioneering Thinkers: The Kurdish Left in Iran engaged in a deep intellectual and struggle process through the founding of the “Komala” organization (Society of Revolutionary Toilers of Iranian Kurdistan) in 1969, which represented a model of Marxist radicalism merged with national and class concerns. This current was led by major figures and thinkers who left a deep mark on political history, foremost among them the spiritual leader and theorist Fouad Mostafa Soltani (Kak Fouad) and the leader and fierce defender of workers and peasants, Sediq Kamangar, alongside advanced intellectual cadres such as Jafar Shafiei. These figures paid for their ideas with massive sacrifices and assassinations in the face of the Iranian apparatus of oppression.
Northern Kurdistan (Turkey) — The Shift from Marxism-Leninism to Parliamentary Work: Major Kurdish movements in Turkey raised the banner of armed struggle and radical (Marxist-Leninist) Leftism through decades of bloody confrontation with the central Turkish state. However, the path gradually ended in the domestication of this Left and its transformation into parliamentary formations and parties operating within the rules of the official constitutional and political game, stripping it of its original, radical liberationist substance.
Syrian Kurdistan — Containment and Institutional Reductionism: Kurdish Leftist political currents and umbrellas gradually shrank, losing their intellectual and practical independence and retreating in favor of political and security arrangements and balances imposed by Damascus. Consequently, the cause was emptied of its national and liberationist content, turning into marginal tools lost between the bounds of authoritarian pragmatism.
Comprehensive Definition of the Left and Historical Origins in the Middle East and Arab Countries
Leftist and Marxist thought emerged in the Middle East at the beginning of the 20th century as a direct response to the profound transformations witnessed in the region. At the forefront of these were the cultural and political shock resulting from Western colonial dominance, the rapid collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and the resounding impact of the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, which presented an alternative revolutionary model challenging the global capitalist system. Socialist and Communist ideas entered the region through the gateways of major cities and urban centers in Egypt, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, where the first nuclei of these movements were formed by intellectuals, students open to European thought, and foreign and local workers concentrated in the oil, port, and transport sectors.
Amid a societal reality suffering from feudal oppression, abject poverty, and structural backwardness, these ideas found broad resonance by championing slogans of social justice, liberating marginalized classes, and opposing colonialism and its local allies. However, this early emergence carried within it the seed of its major crisis: classical Marxist theories were imported verbatim and without critical examination of the complex reality of Middle Eastern societies, which were dominated by tribal, religious, sectarian, and national ties. This superficial ideological engagement transformed the emerging Left into an intellectual importer isolated from its real environment, causing it to drown in abstract internationalist slogans that failed to deconstruct complex local contradictions, later paving the way for these movements to become tools of regional and international conflict far removed from achieving actual liberation for people and countries.
The Nature of Ideological Importation and the Dilemma of Sacrifice Without Gains
The process of transferring Leftist and Marxist thought from its original European environment to Middle Eastern societies constituted a conceptual and structural shock. These theories were imported as ready-made templates without being subjected to critical review or adaptation to the historical and societal specificities of the region. This blind ideological importation resulted in catastrophic repercussions that fragmented the social fabric:
The first feature was a complete rupture with local reality, as imported debates treated societies as if they were classical European industrial entities undergoing a class struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, ignoring the deep dominance of tribal, ethnic, religious, and sectarian bonds.
The second feature was absolute ideologization at the expense of rationality, transforming classical texts into sacred scripts beyond debate.
The third feature was intellectual dependence and external subjugation, turning movements into leverage tools and reflections of Cold War conflicts.
These repercussions culminated in the squandering of energies in futile battles and thrusting thousands of youths into theoretical clashes completely detached from reality.
This reality produced a harsh historical paradox manifested in the massive disparity between the immense sacrifices made by the popular bases and loyal cadres versus the meager actual political results and gains. The path was characterized by the entrenchment of an “economy of uncompensated sacrifice” lacking a clear strategy to turn those sacrifices into tangible achievements, the systematic depletion of youthful energy in the fires of futile conflicts, and the absence of strategic returns, as leaderships confined their concern to perpetuating the ideological battle and maintaining the organization as an end in itself—ending the entire march with heavy losses and zero political return.
These dilemmas crossed national borders to manifest in their ugliest forms within the Lebanese arena during the 1970s and 1980s. Beirut and Lebanese cities turned into a global stage and a major graveyard for Leftist, nationalist, and liberationist movements after factions entered a destructive civil war. This led to sectarian polarization and a transformation into proxies for regional and international conflicts, bringing the Leftist adventure to an end amidst total ruin, with these currents retreating politically and morally defeated.
Actual Reasons for the Collapse and Reduction of the Kurdish Left
The collapse was neither an accidental occurrence nor the result of central regime pressure alone; rather, it was the cumulative structural outcome of deep internal and external causes:
Dominance of Bureaucracy and the Shift to Power: Over time, historical leaderships became entangled in managing administrative files and holding positions, gradually transforming from radical rebellion movements into traditional, miniature ruling structures relying on the very administrative mechanisms against which they had revolted.
Party Subjugation and Regional Dependence: Currents lacked financial independence and sovereign political decision-making. Their fate became tied to the funding of regional capitals and regimes, turning them into pressure cards used when needed and traded away at major settlement tables.
Intellectual Stagnation and the Sacred Text Complex: Parties clung to outdated dogmas while refusing to listen to youthful voices.
Fragmentation and Futile Splits: Party fanaticism and organizational narcissism fractured the Leftist ranks into small political shops and warring factions fighting over fine theoretical details, destroying any capacity to face the critical existential challenges confronting the Kurdish people.
To Whom Do We Complain About This Legacy, and Where Is the Escape After the Fall of Utopia?
When we stand upon the ruins of this long march steeped in blood and immense sacrifices, counting the debris of disappointment represented by decades of struggle that ended in a political vacuum and societal exhaustion, the most bitter existential question arises: To whom do we complain about this heavy legacy, and who bears the burden of this historical loss? Do we direct our complaints and blame toward the leaders who became intoxicated in ivory towers of ideology, turning it into an idol to be worshipped and using the blood of followers as ladders toward their narrow bureaucratic interests? Or do we place the responsibility on society at large and the societal structure that acquiesced to herd mentality and surrendered its leadership to empty, enthusiastic slogans without exercising reason or critical questioning?
The bitter truth indicates that responsibility is shared between both parties to varying degrees: leaders betrayed the intellectual trust and substituted the dream with hegemony and power, while society failed to build the cultural and political immunity required to protect itself from the tyranny of slogans and the allure of illusions.
Because Kurdish society has been accustomed to the mantle of the Left and internationalist slogans for over a century, the danger of an abrupt exit from this ideological space lies in falling into a deadly void or slipping into political nihilism. To avert this danger, the practical and methodical steps that must be taken consist of the following:
Establishing a Culture of Self-Criticism: Breaking the barrier of blind veneration of individuals and texts, and subjecting all historical and struggle-related experiences to courageous, scientific, and objective reviews that expose flaws without fear of destroying illusory idols.
Pursuing Realistic Pragmatism: Shifting from the logic of uncompensated sacrifices and absolute radical slogans toward strategies of civil, institutional action and human rights, where politics is measured by its capacity to protect the citizen rather than drain them.
Focusing on Human and Institutional Development: Directing youthful and intellectual energies toward enhancing education, the knowledge economy, and building solid societal infrastructure capable of facing national challenges with full awareness and independence from external dependencies.
If the traditional Marxist Left is no longer the good demand or the safe haven for the Kurdish people after all these disappointments, where is the true direction? The real destination lies in rational democratic nationalism: adopting a pragmatic political project based on building genuine national institutions, achieving social justice and sustainable development, and protecting identity and pluralism within a state of institutions or fair partnerships—far from the illusions of individual salvation and internationalist utopias. Ideas do not derive their value from the beauty of their slogans or the scale of sacrifices made for them, but from their actual ability to protect human beings, preserve their dignity, and secure their future within their lived, tangible reality.
Note: This text is translated from the original Arabic version… Read the Arabic version:Click here
