babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » The Next Iraq War - Kurdistan

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: The Next Iraq War - Kurdistan
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 23 November 2004 06:42 AM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
the new yorker

the independent

quote:
No stable Arab government in Baghdad­ -- not that one is emerging ­-- would accept the Kurds' conditions for remaining part of Iraq.

The first Kurdish demand is for control of the oil city of Kirkuk, whose Kurdish majority was reduced or eliminated. The Arabisation programme, an Arab version of Zionist land confiscation, dispossessed Kurds and replaced them with Arab Shia settlers. All Kurds say Saddam's ethnic cleansing must be reversed, the Shia compensated and sent back to the south and Kirkuk incorporated into the Kurdish administrative area.

Another red line means reversing Saddam's provincial boundary changes that merged parts of Kurdish provinces into Arab governorates. Restoring the pre-Saddam boundaries would add as much as 25 per cent to the existing Kurdish zone above the Green Line that they have controlled since 1991. It would also give the Kurds significant mineral wealth.

Another red line has been drawn around the Iraqi armed forces: no Iraqi army may enter the Kurdish zone without the approval of the Kurdish parliament. A whole generation here ­ and the young are a majority ­ has never seen an Arab soldier or policeman. Those old enough to remember would be more adamant in preventing their return.

Two million of the four million Kurds living in the Kurdish regional government zone signed a petition demanding a referendum on independence.


quote:
Government jobs, I was told, now go almost exclusively to Kurds. The new governor and the police chief are Kurds, and all the television networks are in Kurdish; the Arabs are being driven out of the city, and they have no one powerful to back them—the long list of Arab complaints bore a striking resemblance to the predicament of the Kurds in Kirkuk under Saddam. To these men, the Kurds were now the benefitters. “There’s more injustice now than under Saddam,” a bearded, tough-looking man named Ethir Muhammad insisted. “Even if Saddam did these things, what’s our guilt? We did nothing to them.”

From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 30 November 2004 08:34 AM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
boston globe

quote:
The rising tensions spilled over last week as the corpses of Iraqi soldiers, many of them Kurds, continued to pile up in the streets of Mosul. Most of them were killed by single gunshots to the head. Some were beheaded. The prime suspects are Arab Islamists allied with local Ba'athists, operating in the Old City on Mosul's west bank.

A resurgent Ba'ath Party has made deep inroads in a population already sympathetic to Arab Islamist movements, American officials say. These same officials fear that intensified presence of powerful Kurdish paramilitaries could provoke the alliance of Ba'athists and Islamists to declare open war on Mosul's Kurds and escalate ethnic violence in the city.

Ba'athists and Islamist terror groups like that led by Jordanian Abu Musab al Zarqawi have united in Mosul to try to provoke ethnic war among Sunni Arabs on one side and the city's minorities on the other: Kurds, Turkomen, Assyrian Christians, and Yezidis.

US forces have relied on the two major Kurdish parties for much for their intelligence.

But the strategy risks destabilizing the city's fragile ethnic equilibrium. Kurds have greatly expanded their sphere of influence on the east bank of the river. Assyrian Christians and Kurds cooperate closely with the US military in the city, while Arabs have mostly stayed away from jobs in the security forces.



From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 01 December 2004 08:34 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Stop wondering whether civil war will erupt in Iraq. It already has.

quote:
Most news accounts portrayed the fighting in Mosul -- the result of an insurgent counteroffensive in the wake of the American assault on Fallujah -- as part of a conventional narrative of insurgents versus combined U.S. and Interim Government forces. The reality is rather more troubling. The town's 5,000-strong police force, commanded by and largely composed of Sunni Arabs, melted away in the face of the Sunni Arab insurgency, with some policemen going over to the other side. Peter Galbraith, reporting for the December issue of the Prospect before fighting broke out, noted that the leadership of the Mosul police department was widely believed to be collaborating with the insurgency, and that the city's Kurdish community had already for this reason created parallel governance and security institutions for the neighborhoods in which they reside. When American forces entered the city to retake it from the insurgency, the Iraqi forces at their side were, in turn, Kurdish peshmerga fighters brought in from the surrounding area.



From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 01 December 2004 09:32 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It is believed the "Iraqis" raping and pillaging alongside US invaders in Falluja were also from Kurdish northern Iraq which is how the US ensured they would remain loyal.

The US is employing one of the most reviled and evil tools of colonialism: ethnic hatred.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 01 December 2004 10:11 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I feel awful for them all, including the Kurds, whom the Americans have toyed with and betrayed before and who face even more opposition from the other side, the Turks, who are nervous about their own adjoining Kurdish region.

I wish the Kurds would recognize that they are, inevitably, going to be deserted again by the U.S., sooner or later. Damn.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 01 December 2004 02:39 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And when it happens, if they've been helping kill Arabs up to that point, they're gonna be meat. Of course, given the way they're treated anyway they may feel they don't have a lot to lose.
From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 01 December 2004 02:44 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Rufus, it is heartbreaking. For about a decade, they had really managed to get a good little thing going there -- heavily dependent on Western protection, yes, but from the interviews I heard and read, their leaders were canny about that. And they built a society from that wreckage.

Och, it is to weep.

I like the Kurds. I think we should give them a Kurdistan. They are very quick studies.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 17 December 2004 07:59 AM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
boston globe:

(as an aside, is it just me, or is there suddenly consistently interesting international coverage in the globe?)

quote:
The Turkomen Front -- an umbrella group with close ties to Ankara -- wants to hold provincial elections in January, before more Kurds move to Kirkuk and shift the demographic balance conclusively in their favor.

Last month Kurdish leaders won a surprising accord from a range of Arab parties who agreed to seek the postponement of provincial elections in Kirkuk even as national elections proceed in January. The Kurdish parties argued that there should be no provincial elections as long as Kirkuk's population reflects the demographic engineering of Hussein. They want elections in Kirkuk only after the city's ethnic balance has been "normalized," although what that means in practice is a subject of dispute among Kurds, Turkomen, and Arabs.



From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 17 December 2004 08:16 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm sure this is just a footnote to this story, but do you think it's possible that we get relatively good direct coverage from the Kurdish areas because it is safer for journalists to go there and stay for a while?

Another wrinkle: last week, Sir Springer linked us to a fascinating site about the Assyrian diaspora. I had not known that what we now think of as the Kurdish regions were contested turf among them, the Assyrians, and the Armenians, the latter two groups apparently the losers in those confrontations, which go back a century and a half at least.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 19 February 2005 07:00 AM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
tomdispatch.com

quote:
The second intractable problem concerns the Kurdish demand that the present boundaries of the Kurdistan Autonomous Region (KAR) consisting of three provinces -- formed during the Baathist rule in 1974 -- be expanded to include the oil-rich Tamim province. The fact that the Kurdistan Alliance secured 48% of the vote (due to the poll boycott by most Sunni Arabs and many Sunni Turkmen) in the simultaneously held elections to the region's Provincial Council has emboldened the Kurdish leaders.

Any enlargement of the KAR will be opposed bitterly not only by local Arabs and Turkmen but also by neighboring Turkey. It fears that the oil revenue from Tamim will make the KAR economically vibrant and pave the way for the declaration of an independent Kurdistan. That in turn will inspire Turkish Kurds in southeastern Turkey to revive their armed struggle for independence.

But, intoxicated by their electoral success, Iraqi Kurdish leaders are likely to turn a deaf ear to the concerns of Turkey or the fears of their ethnic Arab and Turkmen neighbors. So there is trouble brewing ahead within Iraq on ethnic lines -- Kurds versus Arabs and Turkmen -- that threatens to spill over into adjoining Turkey. In other words, Bush's much trumpeted electoral turning point is likely to bring in its train even more severe problems than existed before.


democratic underground

quote:
As reported on February 8, 2005 by Aaron Glantz of Inter Press Service, Jalal Talabani, the Kurdish candidate for president or prime minister of Iraq, has made clear that repatriation of all Arabs who settled in Kirkuk since 1975 is a non-negotiable point for a Kurdish-Shia governing coalition. Considering that the Kurds are expected to win between 50 and 70 seats of the 275-seat Iraqi Governing Council, it will be hard to ignore the Kurds' demands outright.

In fact, current Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's political party has reportedly struck a deal with the Kurds whereby the Kurds will support Allawi for Prime Minister and Allawi's party will support Talabani for President. Together, this Kurdish-Shia coalition is expected to be able to neutralize the coalition of Shiite factions backed by Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani.

Immediately following Iraq's elections, Turkey's foreign minister, Abdullah Gal, not-so-subtly implied that if Iraq's Kurds tried to annex Kirkuk as part of Kurdistan, Turkey would be forced to respond, probably militarily.

Until it was taken as part of the 1923 Lausanne Treaty, Kirkuk was within Turkey's borders. As such, Turkish nationalists still lay claim to Kirkuk as part of Turkey.

Turkey's concerns about an independent Kurdish state are not unfounded. On election day in Iraq, the Kurdistan Referendum Movement set up outside official polling paces in Kurdistan and polled Kurdish voters on the issue of an independent Kurdistan. According to a KRM press release on February 8, nearly 99% of those polled voted for independence. In Kirkuk, the result was nearly 100%.



From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
swallow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2659

posted 19 February 2005 12:16 PM      Profile for swallow     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Until it was taken as part of the 1923 Lausanne Treaty, Kirkuk was within Turkey's borders. As such, Turkish nationalists still lay claim to Kirkuk as part of Turkey.

Until the 1923 Lausanne treaty, so was Baghdad, so it's hardly relevant. In 1923, India was part of Britain, but that does not give Britain a claim to Bombay.

Seems to be there's never going to be even a chance of peace until the Kurds get a guarantee of self-government. They've had it for a decade now, and if they're supposed to submit to Iraqi authorities, then they have to be given protections in return, like a veto on letting in the Iraqi army.


From: fast-tracked for excommunication | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 19 February 2005 12:47 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The subtext to all this is the Turkish repression of the Kurds -- sorry, Turks whose ancestors had Kurdish as their mother tongue -- which is extreme and extensive and a serious blot on Turkey.

The extent of this can be seen by the fact that they have a 10% threshold for parties to win seats in the Turkish Parliament. Before the last election, most parties in the Turkish Parliament realized they were going to fall below the 10% hurdle. A few brave souls wanted to lower it to the European norm of 5%. This would also have helped Turkey gain admission to the ERuropean Union, which has repeatedly expressed concern over Turkey's attitude to minority rights (that is, the Kurds.) But no, the majority voted to keep the 10% threshold and commit suicide. Other than the Islamic party, all the parties in that Parliament fell below 10%. Only two parties won seats (the second having failed to make 10% in the previous election.)

All to keep out the minority rights party, supported by Kurds and one smaller minority group, which gets around 7%. Their offence? They talk about minorities, when we are all Turks here.

This entire situation is going to get hotter. I'm with the Kurds.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
idahopotato
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8251

posted 19 February 2005 04:16 PM      Profile for idahopotato        Edit/Delete Post
As much as we must sympathize with the Kurd demands for a homeland this will never happen. With Kurds in Turkey(14 million), Iran(6.5 million), Iraq (4.8 million), and Syria (1.1 million) any move to a Kurd homeland would bring tremendous instability to the region. True, the borders of most the the region fellows the old colonial treaties, but any change would require many years of negotiations. Turkey would hold a veto by not allowing access to a sea port. Russia would oppose a Kurd homeland since it would openup demands from their minorities. The U.S. can not protect the Kurds, forever.

[ 19 February 2005: Message edited by: idahopotato ]


From: idaho u.s.a. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 19 February 2005 04:24 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I like the Kurds. I think we should give them a Kurdistan.

This seems like a very un-skdadl-like thing to say.

"We" do not have any Kurdistans to give away.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 19 February 2005 04:57 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That was me in my United Nations manifestation.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 19 February 2005 05:48 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Kurds absolutely have the right to national self-determination. I have long thought that that right, which has so far led them to "go along" with the American occupation, was going to cause major problems when it starts to assert itself.'

They've been fighting a series of guerilla wars for a long time now. They're good at it. Just wait 'til they start training their sites on American soldiers . . . This could get messy.


From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
swallow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2659

posted 20 February 2005 01:06 PM      Profile for swallow     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Haroon Siddiqui: A Golden Chance for the Kurds
From: fast-tracked for excommunication | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 25 July 2005 06:32 PM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
iraq: bush's islamic republic (ny review o' books)

quote:
Days after the Kurdistan National Assembly convened in June, it elected Kurdistan Democratic Party leader Masood Barzani as the first president of Kurdistan. Before so doing, it passed a law making him commander in chief of the Kurdistan military but then specifically prohibiting him from deploying Kurdistan forces elsewhere in Iraq, unless expressly approved by the assembly. (Kurdistan retains some 50,000 peshmerga under the direct control of the Kurdistan government.) The assembly also banned the entry of non-Kurdish Iraqi military forces into Kurdistan without its approval. Kurdish leaders are mindful that their people are even more militant in their demands. Two million Kurds voted in a January referendum on independence held simultaneously with the national ballot, with 98 percent choosing the independence option.

Kurdistan's leaders would like Iraq to be a loose confederation in which Kurdistan makes its own laws, retains its own military, the Iraqi military stays out, and Kurdistan manages its own oil and water resources. Although Iraq's interim constitution, the TAL, talks of "federalism," it has been implemented so as to create no more than a confederal relationship between Kurdistan and the rest of Iraq. The Kurdish leaders would accept its continuation provided the text was clarified to assure Kurdistan's ownership of petroleum in the region and if the status of the disputed region of Kirkuk were resolved.

While the Shiite religious parties accepted the TAL when it was promulgated in 2004, the Kurds now believe they don't mean it. When he swore in his cabinet on May 3, 2005, Shiite Prime Minister Jaafari eliminated the reference to a "federal Iraq" from the statutory oath of office; this so angered Barzani that he forced a second swearing-in ceremony. Some Shiite drafts for Iraq's permanent constitution would sharply restrict Kurdistan's autonomy and demote Kurdish from its current status at the federal level as an official language equal with Arabic. The Kurdish leaders also worry that the Shiites will try to eliminate Kurdistan's current ability to modify the application of national law in Kurdistan; they fear that the Shiites will, at least, stop secular Kurdistan from rejecting the imposition of Islamic law.



From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 22 September 2005 07:27 AM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
new york review o' books:

quote:
The historically contentious Kurds entered the negotiations with advantages that neither the Americans nor the Shiites fully appreciated. Barzani assembled a unified delegation that included Christians, Turkomans, Yezidis, Islamists, and Communists. Shrewdly, he obtained a mandate from Kurdistan's parliament that gave him no room for compromise on the region's basic demands: the supremacy of Kurdistan law over federal law, acceptance of the peshmerga, the Kurdish guerrilla army, as the official military force of the region, control of natural resources, and a formula to resolve territorial disputes, particularly the control of Kirkuk. Most important, the Kurds did not need a constitution at all, since their autonomous state already existed.

The Kurds viewed the Iraqi constitution largely as if it were intended for a foreign state. As a result, they were not prepared to block a deal because of concerns to protect secularism and gender equality for others as long as any objectionable provisions about either one did not apply to Kurdistan. (The Kurds were also reluctant to defend these principles after US diplomats had already agreed to the more Islamic formulations.) The Shiites were mostly willing to concede that the Kurds (and any other region) could legally opt out of many provisions of the constitution because they knew this to be the price of having the constitution endorse Islamic law.

Sunni Arab negotiators now seem to accept the reality of Kurdistan, but they argue that a federal arrangement south of the Kurdish border will mean the breakup of the country. In my talks with them, they seemed to hope that they could somehow return to the days when Sunni Arabs ran Iraq and were the major beneficiaries of its resources. Today a centralized Iraq would be one in which Shiites dominated Sunni Arabs, especially if the Kurds (who are mostly Sunni) refused to be part of such a state.

Kurdish nationalism will not go away. It may be, however, that Kurds will settle for the indefinite continuation of their de facto independence (as allowed by this constitution) and not pursue the riskier option of formal independence. So long as Kurds feel they are under pressure to join in a closer union with Baghdad, the more intense will become their demand for legal independence.

Of the 115 army battalions, sixty are made up of Shiites and located in southern Iraq, forty-five are Sunni Arab and stationed in the Sunni governorates, and nine are Kurdish peshmerga, although they are officially described as the part of the Iraqi army stationed in Kurdistan. There is exactly one mixed battalion (with troops contributed from the armed forces of the main political parties) and it is in Baghdad. While the officer corps is a little more heterogeneous, very few Kurds or Shiites are willing to serve as officers of Sunni Arab units fighting Sunni Arab insurgents. There are no Arab officers in the Kurdish battalions, and Kurdistan law prohibits the deployment of the Iraqi army within Kurdistan without permission of the Kurdistan National Assembly.

Most Kurdish leaders say that if the constitution fails, the next talks will be about partition. An independent Kurdistan is no longer unlikely. Arab Iraqi leaders understand that the Kurds want out, and are increasingly weary of having to pay the price for keeping them in. Even Saleh al-Mutlaq, the Sunni negotiator, has said in a recent interview, "If the Kurds want independence, they should ask for it." Every Shiite leader whom I asked about the issue—including Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Chalabi—said that they would support Kurdistan's independence if that's what the Kurds want. Some Arabs bluntly told me that, at this stage, they would prefer that Kurdistan left.



From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 22 September 2005 07:41 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Thanks for the reminder, WW. I've been reading this series of Galbraith's, but haven't see this last one yet.

Just from scanning the excerpt you quote, I'm thinking that this is a fairly fast shift in opinion among the other Iraqi players. And I'm wondering what the Turks are thinking of this. (So maybe I'd better read the article, eh? )


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 19 October 2005 08:00 AM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
the carve-up of iraq will spawn a redivision of the middle east, the guardian:

quote:
Syria, once the nub of the Sykes-Picot carve-up, is again in the frontline, alone among Arab states to be exposed to the Iraqi contagion in both its Kurdish and Shia dimensions. Thanks to the sudden, self-inflicted weakness of Iraqi Ba'athist rule, it was Iraqi Kurds who, in 1991, achieved the first great, contemporary breakthrough in the Kurdish struggle for self-determination. Syrian Kurds now sense similar weakness in their own, deeply troubled Ba'athist regime. If it collapses amid generalised chaos, many will push for secession and amalgamation with their brethren in north Iraq.

On the Shia front, if sectarian identity is to become the organising principle of Arab polities, Syria is the most vulnerable to the convulsions that it will unleash. A small minority, the Alawites, has in effect run the country for more than 40 years. It is a predominantly Sunni society, which, historically, represents an even greater anomaly than the Sunni minority rule, also in Ba'athist guise, that the majority Shias and Kurds dispensed with in Iraq. A Sunni majority restoration will become unstoppable if, with the eventual break-up of Iraq, its disempowered Sunnis turn to Syria, of which, but for Sykes-Picot, a great many would long have been citizens anyway.



From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
edwin
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10564

posted 19 October 2005 10:33 AM      Profile for edwin        Edit/Delete Post
Just remember to keep the following in the back of your minds: The Kurds know who supplied Sadam Hussein with chemical weapons and who maintained a silence – hell they actively ran cover; remember the bee pee bullshit. The Kurds are not loyal to the US.
From: canada | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Red Menace
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10711

posted 20 October 2005 05:11 AM      Profile for Red Menace     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Another aspect of this that has not got a lot of media attention is the potential for the US getting involved in a conflict with the PKK, who have bases and perhaps thousands of guerilla fighters ('peshmerga') in Iraqi Kurdistan.

The Turkish government has been pressuring the US on this for awhile now, and according to the Reuters report quoted below, Rice promised to cooperate with Turkey on this during her visit to Turkey in September:

quote:
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L22697713.htm

Turkish newspapers said on Thursday the U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had told Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul in talks in New York that the U.S. administration agreed with Turkey's stance on the PKK.

"It is a problem of timing, not a problem of principle," newspapers quoted Rice as telling Gul.



From: Vancouver | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
outlandist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10253

posted 30 October 2005 02:23 PM      Profile for outlandist        Edit/Delete Post

From: ontario | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
outlandist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10253

posted 30 October 2005 02:43 PM      Profile for outlandist        Edit/Delete Post
The Kurds of Iran are tolerated as long as they stay quiet. If Iran covertly supports Shiites in a civil war[as opposed to the jockeying for position occurring now] The US may well covertly support Iranian Kurds.

Turkey has a policy of forced assimilation of Turkish Kurds,essentially denying the Kurds their identity.The Turks have much at stake regarding an Iraqi civil war if it empowers the Kurds.

Syria essentially tolerates their Kurdish minority to use as a stick to poke the Turks with.

All Kurdish areas have resistance movements.No doubt Kurds in Iraq have ulterior motives and may well be arranging Iraqi politics to benefit an independent Kurdistan in future.

Between an Iranian backed Shiite south and a Kurdish north,both harbouring long term greivances against the Baathist Sunnis,the use of a failed Iraqi election to consolidate regional power and advance Shiite and Kurdish agendas remains a real possibility.


http://iraqithoughts.blogspot.com/2005/07/constitution.html


From: ontario | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 31 October 2005 02:22 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by outlandist:

Turkey has a policy of forced assimilation of Turkish Kurds,essentially denying the Kurds their identity.The Turks have much at stake regarding an Iraqi civil war if it empowers the Kurds.


If I am not mistaken, Turkey has softened it policy substantially in recent years, in line with the EU entry requirement. I think there is even some Kurdish language programming in Eastern Turkey.

One of my Kurdish friends was delighted when the US Puppet Iraqi-President spoke Kurdish in the UN. He thought he would never see the day when it would happen.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
outlandist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10253

posted 31 October 2005 12:39 PM      Profile for outlandist        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:


If I am not mistaken, Turkey has softened it policy substantially in recent years, in line with the EU entry requirement. I think there is even some Kurdish language programming in Eastern Turkey.

One of my Kurdish friends was delighted when the US Puppet Iraqi-President spoke Kurdish in the UN. He thought he would never see the day when it would happen.


I watched an interview with the Iraqi President on BBC.When asked whether he was de facto manoevering Iraq to facilitate an independent Kurdistan,he was less than forthcoming with his response.


From: ontario | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
cco
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8986

posted 31 October 2005 01:25 PM      Profile for cco     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:

If I am not mistaken, Turkey has softened it policy substantially in recent years, in line with the EU entry requirement. I think there is even some Kurdish language programming in Eastern Turkey.

Well, this is from six days ago: Turkish court fines 20 people for using letters W and Q

quote:
The court in the southeastern city of Siirt fined each of the 20 people 100 new lira for holding up the placards, written in Kurdish, at the event last year. The letters Q and W do not exist in the Turkish alphabet, but are used in Kurdish.

Under pressure from the European Union, Turkey lifted bans on teaching and broadcasting in Kurdish in 2002, but bureaucratic resistance has delayed implementing the reforms.



From: Montréal | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 01 November 2005 01:41 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by outlandist:

I watched an interview with the Iraqi President on BBC.When asked whether he was de facto manoevering Iraq to facilitate an independent Kurdistan,he was less than forthcoming with his response.


My friend is much more forthcoming on this issue, but I am sure was very happy with the President's "diplomatic" response.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 01 November 2005 01:42 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by cco:
Well, this is from six days ago: Turkish court fines 20 people for using letters W and Q


Excelent source. Thanks.

They also recently adjusted the Turkish zoological dictionary to eliminate some animal names, which were identifed regionally with ethnic groups, like an Armenian Armadillo, or some such thing, as an hypothetical example.

Your piece indicates that people are Kurds are having demonstration now, and apparently not disappearing outright, and instead harrassed into silence through bureagratic legalism, which is improvement of a kind, I guess.

[ 01 November 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca