"Close Doesn't Count..." K.O.M.I.T.E.E. Communique Concerning The Failed Attack In Berlin- Gruenau After the failed attack on the newly-constructed deportation prison in Berlin-Gruenau on April 11, 1995, we weren't sure if we'd release any more statements. Considering the charges being brought against some people and all the uncertainties surrounding everything, we weren't sure if words from us would just lead to the cops making more arrests. It seemed best to as at first to hold off from giving any account of what happened and to see how those affected would react given the situation. But now we have decided that we cannot delay any longer and that we must release a statement to limit as far as possible the political damage. We won't, however, give a detailed account of what happened that night, that's up to the individuals themselves to comment on if they want to. We don't think everyone out there needs to know all the details in order to discuss the politics of our action and act in solidarity with those accused. The point of this text is to look at the serious errors we made, to point these out, and to reflect on them in a self-critical manner, especially so that others can learn from what we did wrong. These errors made led to non-participants being brought into association with our action. We have drawn the necessary lessons from our mistakes: We are ending our project called "Das K.O.M.I.T.E.E.". The motivation for announcing this publicly stems from the political orientation of our project and our responsibility to left-radical politics in general. But before we start, we would like to explain why we started our project of carrying out militant attacks and give a resume of our politics up to now. Our Project: Das K.O.M.I.T.E.E. Since the end of the 1980s and even more so in the 1990s, the radical-left lost more and more of its social relevance from year to year, as the praxis and content became increasingly distant from radical positions. As long as there was a common strength, at the militant level as well, we didn't think it was necessary to always appear on the scene under the same name. As the left began to retreat and the continuity of discussions began to lapse, and as the foundations of common action which had been worked out began to collapse, we decided it was necessary to constitute ourselves as a group in the context of having continuity and openly-stated politics. We assumed that contributions and interventions by groups whose name has become associated with a certain praxis and political orientation were given greater attention within the left, their statements are read and studied more, more so than groups with no obvious continuity. We hoped over the course of time to have a positive influence within the leftist scene and to help establish certain points of orientation. We were well aware of the fact that such an approach carries with it certain responsibilities and precision. False estimations of the political situation, a lack of clarity in political discussion, and reproducing out-dated or false political starting points were all things which we had to be careful to avoid, especially since we hoped to offer some sort of orientation for the left. Why Militant Politics? Considering the status of discussion within the radical left, the silence and refusal to take a stand, we think it's necessary for us to explain why we decided upon militant politics in a period of relatively little movement. We're always hearing the argument that, after the decline of the left-radical movement, just "keeping going" is pointless, but these people don't seem to realize that revolutionary politics here as always been on the margins for the last few decades and never possessed a realistic strategy for overthrowing the conditions. Effective militant praxis is not enough to break through the left's external lack of credibility and internal adaptation and lack of courage. Radical critiques of the present conditions of hierarchy, oppression, and exploitation which do not seek out, utilize, and discover all forms of resistance will sooner or later lose faith in themselves. To stick with our example: A left which, correctly, states that it is a crime to construct and operate deportation prisons, but which does not seek out all possible ways of stopping such construction and operation, loses its perspective and has defeat in its own mind right from the beginning. Our method, if it had been successful, would not have been the only gesture and certainly wouldn't have been the best, but it would have been a lot better than all the complaints about the impossibility of leftist politics in an increasingly right-wing society. We don't think that the left will develop a comprehensive perspective out of feelings of helplessness and the loss of its methods of struggle, rather it should try to draw strength from trying to close the gap between thoughts and deeds, even in bad times. With our name and our praxis, we wanted to make propaganda for the possibilities of direct intervention and attack, possibilities which are open to everyone who is not satisfied with injustice and oppression. We aren't saying militant politics is the only way to go in today's society, but we definitely think it was wrong to put all praxis on ice until we could look for the exactly right strategy. We think further development can only take place in the context of a process of reflection and action. Learning by doing. And someday when the conditions are better, when fundamental critiques of the system are in a broader social acceptance, then it will be damn important to be able to look back on a history where we didn't give up the fight, even during times of adaptation to fundamental mainstream positions. Last but not least, there is also a moral aspect to radical politics: Even if we can't point out the magic solution to everything, we don't want to just sit back and look around and try to sort out our own cozy place on dry land. Our Praxis We didn't want to limit our content to just one theme. We thought about carrying out actions in various sectors, like attacks on fascist organizations, the rise of fascism in the society, sexist roll-back, cutbacks on social spending, and so on. Initially, we oriented our work towards the liberation struggle of the Kurdish people. The important thing was for us, a German leftist group, to act. We saw it as a sign of the bankruptcy of the left that so many radical groups did nothing at all. Some justified this with understandable critiques of the politics of the PKK. But criticisms of the PKK are no justification for a lack of solidarity as far as we're concerned. We saw the German state as the most important partner in Turkey's war of genocide against the Kurds, as we saw it as the duty of the German left to break through their lethargy and actively oppose German policy. Germany is a party to the genocide in Kurdistan - militarily, economically, politically - and is the most trusted partner of the Turkish military, as well as the long arm of counter-insurgency against the Kurdish resistance in Europe. This has not changed. We wanted to push this theme within the left by carrying out a series of attacks on German institutions responsible for the war in Kurdistan. The First Step: The Army Barracks In Bad Freienwalde The first target of our campaign was the October 27, 1994 attack on the Defence Commando 852 barracks of the federal army in Bad Freienwalde in the Markische Oberland area of the former East Germany. We destroyed the barracks with a firebomb attack. In our communique, we wrote: "We chose this piece of army property because it is illustrative of the cooperation and active support which exists between the German army and the Turkish 'security forces', as well as of the foreign and domestic policies of Germany which are directed against the Kurdish liberation struggle." Our communique gave a detailed description of the cooperation which exists between the German state and the regime in Turkey. We don't need to repeat all of that in this text. We also discussed the criminalization of Kurds in Germany and cited that as one significant element of the cooperation between the two governments. Potentially, our action could have helped focus more attention on Germany's own army. True, the development of Germany's foreign policy has not been hard to predict. Particularfy after the most recent development in the Balkans, the first Germany military deployment since the end of World War Two, the German armed forces need to be placed under greater scrutiny. All in all, our first attack was a symbolic action, but there was a great deal of media attention given to it because of the context of solidarity with the Kurdish liberation struggle and the continuing smear-campaigns against the PKK. Therefore, one of our goals, to act as German leftists in solidarity with the Kurdish liberation struggle, was displayed widely in the open. On The Way To Our Second Strike... The German state will continue its attempts to break Kurdish resistance in Germany to the genocide in Kurdistan and to exert great repression. Mass deportations are a guarantee of "domestic security" and are at the core of imperialist refugee policies! The cynical, continuously repeating debates about lifting the ban on deporting Kurds, initially limited to those portrayed to the public as "criminals" who have abused their "guest rights" here in Germany, soon gets conveniently applied to all Kurds. Those who have pushed this line the hardest are Minister Kanther (federal interior minister), Beckstein (Bunzlauerstrasse 23, 90473 Nuremberg, Bavaria), Eggert (Saxony), and Heckelmann (Berlin). Deportation into misery, torture, and death, hanging over the heads of Kurds like Damocles' sword, that should make the Kurds here peaceful. And that's necessary to preserve the economic and hegemonic interests of the German state. In addition to the Kurds, other refugee groups are affected as well. So the mass deportations of war refugees and deserters from ex-Yugoslavia has begun. The deportation agreement with Vietnam. The "return" of Vietnamese nationals as a precursor to economic assistance. Large-scale deportations have to be planned. That requires an adequate capacity of deportation detention facilities, since most refugees don't leave of their free will. To serve this need, a former East German women's prison in Berlin-Gruenau has been converted. With an extra 400 beds, Berlin's deportation detention capacity will be more than doubled. The efficient concentration of the entire deportation process at Schoenefeld Airport and makes deportations as easy as an assembly- line and makes the entire process a lot cheaper. This new deportation prison was a second attack point in our vision. The capacity in the older deportation facilities in Kruppstrasse and in the police stations in Gothaer Strasse and Beimlerstrasse have been overflowing for some time now. Over- crowding and inhumane conditions have often led to prisoner revolts and protests by humanitarian groups. But these protests usually focused on the poor conditions in the deportation detention centers, but they didn't necessarily question deportation as such. Typically of such an mind-set is a certain Albert Eckert, a deputy of the Green Party, who stated in October 1994 that foreigners should only be arrested immediately prior to their deportation. As a "temporary measure" to help solve the problem, the former U.S. army prison in the McNair barracks in Steglitz was filled with 30 deportees. According to press reports from the end of July 1994, the police station in Gallwitzallee in Lankwitz will soon have 80 deportation spaces. We don't know what will come of these sites. In order to head off possible protest, the interior ministry, as was the case with the high-tech prisons in Weiterstadt and Plotzensee, pointed to the many great features of the Gruenau facility: sufficient capacity, common rooms, small-group detention units, a medical ward, sports facilities, translators, social workers, hell, they are even going to expand the courtyard space for the detainees, so that "the deportees can stretch their legs a bit" (Norbert Schmidt, Berlin senate interior ministry spokesman). Refugees about to kicked out of the country should feel good in German deportation prisons, before deserters from Yugoslavia are sent back to sacrifice their lives for nationalist madness, before Kurds disappear in the torture chambers of the Turkish secret police MIT. Finally, these measure not only represent more control to prevent revolts and break-outs, rather they also signify the increased rationalization of the deportation process. In the face of this, protests against poor conditions in the detention centers are mute. We should not be concerning ourselves with more human deportation practices. We are out to abolish deportation detention altogether on the way towards a general right to stay for all refugees! Our contribution to this was to have been blowing up the new prison in Gruenau. A successful attack would have had far more than a symbolic nature. It would have been an effective intervention in the deportation process, at least a temporary halt to the expansion of deportation machinery. The Failed Attack In Gruenau A lot of what the press wrote about that night of April 11 is, in fact, correct. It was merely an unfortunate coincidence that the two cars were discovered at the parking lot in Rabindranathstrasse. One was a stolen vehicle which contained the explosives and other materials for the action, for example a locksmith device which we had with us in case we came across any doors that needed to be opened, and inside the other car were some ID cards and other personal effects. A cop car which just happened to be in the area saw the two vehicles and decided to investigate. The discovery of the two cars and the subsequent search for four individuals were not the result of some careful scheme, rather a major screw-up on our part for being careless about possibly involving non- participants. We won't say any more about that, rather we'll leave it up to those people who are on the run to go public and explain why they are being sought after if that's what they want to do. True, we did want to blow up the deportation prison. The media reported that the construction site was well-guarded. That's not true. There was one guard post in a corner of the site, which was being manned. Despite careful and repeated surveillance missions, we never detected any patrols. A few days after our failed attack, some cops were stationed in a watch tower, but they hadn't been there before. After using a ladder to get over the wall we were able to walk around the entire prison and check everything out. There were no locked doors. For the explosives, we were utilizing 4 propane gas canisters filled with 30kg of an 80:20 ratio mixture of nitric chloride and powdered sugar. We placed the canisters in the cellar of the prison. This would have caused maximum damage to the facility, and according to our calculations, the entire thing would have to then be torn down. Outside, we had painted signs warning of the blast to come and displaying our group's name. These were to be placed at various entrances to the building in order to warn any eventual patrols of guards and to tell them to get to safety. But based on our surveillance, we didn't think that would happen. We had ruled out the possibility of any other persons being harmed by the blast. Media claims that the bombs were armed and that we were walking around with the timers ticking are just ridiculous. Another stupid claim is that our homemade mixture would have had eight times the effect of the Oklahoma City explosion. (In Oklahoma, in the USA, a federal building which housed an office of the CIA, as well as a kindergarten, was destroyed by fascists.) The obvious intent here was to associate us with dead children in Oklahoma. The bomb in the USA was 95% ammonium nitrate (fertilizer) and 5% gasoline or diesel and was hence the "correct" way to make an ammonium explosive, one which is much more powerful than an explosive made of a nitric chloride mixture. The press reports not only reflected the lack of knowledge and the absurd fantasies of journalists, but rather they also hid the interests of the intelligence agencies, from whom they may have originated. The goal was to create a horrible image, one in which anyone could have fallen victim to our action, and thereby to create great distortion. This would then prevent a discussion of the political context of our action and make solidarity impossible. Our Mistakes For carrying out the action in Gruenau, we had decided upon a fixed time schedule. As the day for the action approached, it became clearer to us that we hadn't allotted any time for unforeseen problems or to deal with and collectively solve the latent fears of individual participants. We were missing something, which was nothing new for this group of men; it was left to each individual to his assigned task and thus we each lost sight of the broader task at hand. This was a mistake. All actions, especially one of this dimension, should allow time for intermediate collective decision-making. The goal of the action or some time schedule should not hide the actual situation of the individual participants involved. For the planned action in Gruenau, we were using the same sort of timing devices as during the attack on the barracks in Bad Freienwalde. We had also painted warning signs displaying our group's name. Therefore, before this action was even carried out, we were already making ourselves complicit in a previous attack. Many people probably asked themselves, how could we possibly violate one of the ten commandments of autonome militancy, namely just doing things once in any given manner. Well, here's our "reasoning" on that issue. Long before we planned the Gruenau attack, we had perfected a certain type of timing device whose dependability we could count on. Of course, we could have come up with another method before Gruenau. But, the way we looked at it, if any of us was going to get discovered and busted, then it would probably be on the grounds of the prison itself where the chances of getting away are slim - prisons are good at trapping people. Since we figured the charges for trying to blow up a prison would be pretty heavy, the added stigma of the Freienwalde action would not be too severe. So, we stuck with our trusty old timing device. And, according to this logic which made us already connected to the Bad Freienwalde attack, there was no reason not to write our group's name on the warning signs, Besides, a warning sign with a recognizable group name on it would be taken more seriously. What's more, if the bombing had been a success, the press reports would naturally mention our first action and thereby publicize the political context of our attack. It's pretty clear from all of this that we were operating under a sort of "All or Nothing" logic. As the turn of events and the subsequent pig investigations show, we were very short-sighted. Those people who are now in the cops' sight because of our mistakes now have to deal with problems like membership in a terrorist organization. Without the similar timing devices and the warning signs, that would not be the case. Our approach also entailed unnecessary risks to ourselves as well. All actions should be planned in such a way that, in the event of an arrest before or during the action, no previous actions can be pinned on the person busted. Conclusion In contrast to the picture portrayed by the media, Berlin- Gruenau was not some sort of kamikaze stunt, rather it was a very realistic action. The fact is, though, we produced several serious mistakes during our planning. The biggest one, we think, was not giving ourselves enough time to have the option of bailing out if need be or to solve any sudden problems which might arise. Most of the other mistakes stemmed from this lack of time and the inability to come together and discuss the problems until the best possible solution had been found. We must draw consequences from these mistakes. No amount of regret from us can change the fact that some people are in trouble with the authorities because of us. All we can do is try and limit the damage. We did not live up to the responsibilities which we claimed at the beginning of this text. Our intention was to mobilize the radical-left, but now, just the opposite has happened because of our failure! We will end our political work as the K.O.M.I.T.E.E. This decision is necessary because of the sum total of all the mistakes we made. Continuing to be active politically under this name could potentially cause more harm for those who are already in trouble. We all well aware of the judicial vengeance of Germany's 129a trials, and we know that those accused will be tried according to political opportunity, not evidence. Our decision to disband is by no means a renunciation of militant politics, rather our personal consequences from a debacle. Now, just as ever, we thinks it's important and correct to intervene, with militant means, against the political and military plans of the ruling powers and to point out, prevent, and attack their projects wherever possible. We are very pleased by the initiative of the K.O.L.L.E.K.T.I.V. who have taken up our theme and are carrying it forward. Das K.O.M.I.T.E.E. September 6, 1995 (Translated by Arm The Spirit)