In the run-up to the NATO summit in Madrid, concessions have been made to Turkey for the accession of Sweden and Finland. In an interview with ANF, PYD politician Aldar Xelîl pointed out that these concessions and the decisions taken at the summit are part of the concept against the Kurdish people. According to Xelîl, this is a fundamental decision of NATO, which cannot be justified by Turkish wishes alone. Rather, the Turkish state is acting as an instrument in a NATO war. With the accession decision for Sweden and Finland, an indirect commitment has also been made to an invasion of northern Syria.

At the NATO summit in Madrid, decisions were taken that are directed against the achievements of the Kurdish people. How do you assess these decisions?

The Turkish state wants to destroy the Kurdish people and has been at war with them for decades. The Kurdish people and their liberation movement are putting up an epic resistance to defend their existence and freedom. The following fact must be seen: If NATO had not actively supported the Turkish state, the Kurdish people would be in a different situation today and would have already realised their wishes for freedom. It is NATO that has been fighting against the Kurdish movement since 1984 until today and wants to destroy the Kurdish people. It has become a basic principle that all countries are involved in this war, that is the standard and the regulation. In times when decisions have been taken against the Kurdish people, NATO has also always renewed its decision in every way and has shown this with different methods.

The role of Sweden is an important detail. Already with the assassination of Olof Palme, an international concept has been set in motion against the Kurdish liberation movement. What do you say about Sweden being involved again?

That is indeed remarkable. When the classification of the PKK as a terrorist organisation was first discussed, Sweden was also involved. With the fatal assassination of the then Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme, a defamation campaign was launched against the Kurdish movement. Two years ago, the Swedish prosecution dropped the case and presented an individual perpetrator who had nothing to do with the Kurdish movement. As a result, a new decision has been taken against the movement. What started in Sweden in 1986 is now being implemented again in connection with Sweden.

Essentially, the issue is that NATO is against the Kurdish liberation movement. For Sweden and Finland to join, NATO merely renewed its decision-making. To become part of NATO, Sweden had to sign a declaration of commitment to the war against the Kurds. The fact that the PKK was held responsible for the murder of Olof Palme in 1986 had a devastating effect on the Kurdish community. A new atmosphere was created and this suspicion weighed on the movement for decades. Self-criticism and apology would have been appropriate, at least recognition of Kurdish existence could have taken place. Instead, Sweden plays the same role today as it did then and provides the basis for the renewal of the NATO decision against the Kurds.

Why does NATO rely on a concept against the Kurdish people's struggle for freedom?

A few years ago, member states called NATO brain-dead. Now NATO is to be revived and the Kurdish people's struggle for existence has to be used as an excuse. Sweden and Finland should have taken a stand and stood up for democratic standards. If NATO was really a defence mechanism against existing dangers, they should have insisted on it.

This is about a democratic movement demanding freedom for the Kurdish people and standing up for all humanity. Above all, the forces in Rojava have achieved something with their successful fight against ISIS that no other power in the world has been able to do. The greatest fight against terror and fascism has been waged here. Similarly, a democratic revolution has taken place here. Now the Kurdish people and their liberation movement are being sacrificed to NATO interests in order to satisfy the Turkish state. NATO and the Western countries have once again united with the Turkish state against the Kurdish people's demands for freedom. However, this is not only at the request of Turkey, rather it is a fundamental decision of NATO. It is wanted that the Kurdish liberation struggle does not succeed. The Turkish state is the instrument used in this war.

Parallel to the NATO summit, Erdogan has again threatened to occupy northern Syria. Can it currently be assumed that this invasion has met with international approval?

The Turkish state and the AKP government are determined to occupy the region of northern and eastern Syria. Erdogan has openly announced this time and again, including showing a map at a UN meeting showing the occupation zone extending thirty kilometres inland. No one has spoken out against it, which is tantamount to approval. This is why the Turkish state wants to carry out the invasion. At the NATO summit, an indirect commitment was made with the accession decision for Sweden and Finland. The green light has been given. That is the starting position for us. NATO has made its decision.

It is important for us to develop our defence system. We can only resist. For this, society must organise itself together with professional struggle associations and become a revolutionary struggling people. We should not ask ourselves who supports the invasion or not. This is the Turkish strategy. If there is no approval today, it will come tomorrow or in a month or next year. The Turkish state is determined anyway. The fact that there has not yet been a large-scale attack may be due to our good preparation. Besides, the Turkish army has immense problems in the Zap, Avaşîn and Metîna regions, and the plan for Shengal has not worked out so far either. Nevertheless, it is clear that the Turkish state wants to occupy our territories.