Kurdish Aspect

2010-03-12T18:36:00.003-07:00

Voting process unfair at best

Kurdishaspect.com – By Ardalan Hardi

As I have done in the two previous Iraqi elections, I flew from Denver to San Diego to cast my vote. A month before the election date, I called a friend of mine that I visit while I am in San Diego to see if he knew where the voting location would be and whether anything had changed regarding voter requirements. He was not aware of any changes, but thought voting would be in the same location as the last time.

In previous elections all we had to provide was an American passport showing our original place of birth which verified we were from Iraq and we could cast our vote. To my surprise, when I went to vote this year, the electoral commission representatives refused to let me participate. They told me that in addition to my US passport I would also need to show an official Iraqi document proving the province of my birth. I tried to argue that I have been in the US since 1976 and a US citizen since the early 80s. I have lived in this country for over 30 years and do not have any official Iraqi documents, I stressed that I had voted in the last two elections and the passport I had provided in the past was sufficient documentation. My plea fell on deaf ears. I asked to talk to the person in charge, and the tall, slim, gentlemen in charge of the voting process seemed eager to help me. His name was Shakir Hansih was the polling station manager, I pointed to the stamps on my passport that clearly show I have visited Kurdistan on many different occasions. I explained the only reason I would go back so many times was to visit my family. At first he agreed, and I was elated. I then waited in a line for approximately a quarter of an hour then he came back and told me that I could not vote. He offered no explanation of what made him change his mind. I told him I thought it was absolutely ridiculous to expect me to still have an Iraqi document after 34 years in exile. Very courteously, he apologized, and said there was nothing he could do for me.

I find it ironic that I live in a country were the citizens are encouraged to vote. In fact the US government and many nonprofit organizations go to extreme measures to advertise on Radio and TV so Americans can have a better turn out on Election Day while some Iraqis go to a great deal of personal expense and then are deprived of the most elementary form of freedom - the right to vote.

I still did not give up. I waited while a few Kurdish friends pleaded my case but all was to no avail. Interestingly, my friend noticed that most of the people in charge of the voting stations were Sunni Arabs and all of them were wearing the old Batth flag on their collar. The other thing he noticed was that it appeared the only people being held back from voting were Kurds. It seemed like everyone else had no problem.

My friend, who has been a KDP supporter all of his life, noticed my profound disappointment and said I should not worry, and that he would give me his vote. He knew that I was a supporter of the Gorran List. I didn’t think he was serious. But he came out of the voting booth and pulled out his cell phone to show me a picture of the ballot to prove he voted for Gorran. I was shocked
and proud that he is my friend.

After I got back to Denver, another friend of mine who was with us during the whole voting fiasco called and said that an Arab friend she worked with told her many Sunni Arabs had the same problem and did not have the proper papers, but they still got to vote and most of them were instructed to vote as though they are from Kirkuk even though they were born in the different part of Iraq.

One other point that needs to be made is at the voting station in El Cajon, which is northeast of San Diego, 65 people were hired by the electoral commission to assist with the voting process, and only four of them were Kurds. Out of the four, not one of them was assigned the position of verifying the legitimacy of paper work. So much for checks and balances…... The Kurds were assigned the job of directing people to the queue.

Coming back from California I realized:

KRG representatives in the US did a poor job of informing their constituencies about the documentation requirements needed to vote in this election. I am sure they probably tried, but whatever they did obviously did not work. They did not do a good job of getting the word out. As a result of their mishandling this critical information, I, along with many other Kurds did not get to vote. I also blame myself for not researching the facts more thoroughly before hand. As the old saying goes “God gives every bird it's food, but He does not throw it into its nest”.
It appears some attempts were made to manipulate the voting process especially when it came to Kirkuk. It seemed discrimination played a role in who had the right to vote or not.
Iraq will probably never be the secular Democratic country that the US government expects it to be. Iraqis will most likely vote along the Religious and Ethnic lines until the mistrust that exists among the different factions dissipates and the education levels are raised.

Albeit I am very disappointed in being denied the right to vote, I am still hopeful that the system will gradually improve. Thanks to President Bush I am very pleased that we Kurds, Arabs and Turks, whether Shiite, Sunni or Christian, have the opportunity to vote. It is my hope that by the next election more fair voting practices are in place to allow all Iraqis the privilege of casting their long awaited votes.

In closing, I would like to thank my friend for his wisdom, graciousness, warm hospitality and camaraderie. He reminded me of a long forgotten quote,
“Many people will walk in and out of your life, but only true friends will leave footprints in your heart”.

The one thing I hope all of my countrymen will take heed to is, if our assumption is correct, that whichever political party is in office is working to promote our cause, then it is ultimately more important that our vote is cast rather than who our vote is cast for.

2009-03-28T17:22:00.001-06:00

Maliki’s Overt Message to the Kurdish Leaders

Kurdishaspect.com - By Ardalan Hardi

Abdul Amir Zaidi is the Major General that Iraqi Premier Maliki has appointed as the head of the Arab-led army division in Kirkuk.

I spoke with Aref Qurbani, who is the editor of theKurdish newspaper Aso and also a native of Kirkuk, to get some facts on General Zaidi. Mr. Qurbani said, “the General was a former officer in the Baath party and after the Anfal campaign (Kurdish genocide), the ring that was build around the city of Kirkuk to prevent anyone from entering or exiting the city was enforced by Zaidi.”

In 1996 to 1998 Zaidi headed the 15th brigade of the 1st division of the Iraqi Army and was stationed by Saddam, in the Kurdish towns of Redar and Daraman during Saddam's reign.

Many Kurds believe that Zaidi was directly involved in the Anfal campaign and the disappearance of many innocent Kurdish families.
After the liberation of Iraq, Zaidi was arrested by US forces for having association with the Baath insurgency, but later released.

Now Prime Minister Maliki, of the new democratic Iraq, has sent this former Baath member back to Kirkuk knowing it will create fear among the Kruds.

One has to wonder why Maliki would make such a flagrant move, sending Zaidi to Kirkuk when he is fully aware of the animosity and threat it brings to the Kurdish citizens. Is there no other General in the Iraqi army with a less hideous and controversial background that is qualified to do the job?

By sending Zaidi to a disputed area, such as Kirkuk, Maliki is trying to force the Kurdish leaders to compromise with regard to Article 140. In my opinion, this is an overt message from Maliki to the Kurdish leaders, that should they refuse to compromise on Kirkuk, Maliki will not hesitate to join forces with the Baath party in opposition to the Kurds.

It is unfortunate that Maliki has to use someone with such tyrannical and tainted background like Zaidi to force political hands on the negotiating table.

You would think Maliki who has seen the brutality of the former regime forced upon his own people would know better than to regress to the tyrannical ways of the past.

If Maliki is truly interested in solving the issues in Kirkuk peacefully, let him push for implementing Article 140 of the Constitution of Iraq, which states that after measures are taken to reverse the Arabization policy employed by the Saddam Hussein administration during the Anfal Campaign, a referendum should be held to determine if Kirkuk will stay with the central government or return to KRG.

Assigning a former Baath general to Kirkuk raises more dubiety from the Kurdish people and deepens the chasm that already exists between Kurdish leadership and Prime Minster Maliki .

2008-10-28T20:23:00.008-06:00

Lessons From a Kurdish Poet

Kurdishaspect.com - By Ardalan Hardi

Psychiatrists agree that the first few years of our lives are by far the most important. These years determine what kind of life we will lead in the future and our outlook towards the world.
Recalling on my childhood experiences, I have many cherished memories of my father and how he; educated, cared and taught us many lessons about life. Many of those lessons guide my simple life to this day. Today marks two years since he departed from this world . On the second anniversry of his passing, I can’t help but think of him and the stories he told . He had a great gift of storytelling and an uncanny memory for exceptional tales. Some stories he had read and some he had made up.

My Dad, Ahmed Hardi, was a very well respected Kurdish poet from Sulaymania Sothern Kurdistan (northern Iraq). Dedicated to the Kurdish cause he decided to leave the city and he joined the Kurdish uprising lead by Mala Mustafa Barzani in the late 1960’s.

We settled in a village called Awakurte that was under the control of the Kurdish Peshmarga forces at the time. My dad rented a room from one of the Village farmers we came to know as Mam Ali. Awakurte was on the border of Eastern Kurdistan north east of Sulaymania, before Saddam leveled it to the ground during his Anfal campaign. The village was nestled in the stunning colorful Zagros Mountains overlooking the clear cold gushing Qamishli River that defines the Iran-Iraq border . The landscapes were deemed the acme of beauty. With its stunning, unmatched, breathtaking views this little village seemed millions of miles away from the rest of civilization. The inhabitants in this simple yet devoted Kurdish village were mostly small farmers.

On summer nights everyone would sleep under the moonlight. As a kid I would lay in bed looking at the bright sparkling stars pondering many thoughts. I often wondered if people from the other side of the world saw the same stars as I did. I wondered if there was a ceiling to the sky that could be touched by man and what lies beyond that ceiling? Filled with curiosity, my childhood imagination would take me to distant places of a utopian world of what could be. The sound of crickets, the howling of the distant dogs, the soothing echoes of mountain streams and the whispering leaves of the walnut trees as they were ruffled by the cool breeze in the tranquil moonlight created a poetic melody that could have only been musical tones from God. I would gradually fall asleep to these sounds only to visit another world, the untroubled kingdom of dreams.

Many times at dawn we would wake up to the roaring engines of Iraqi planes bombing Kurdish villages. In panic, my mom would rush us all down to a dug up underground cellar for protection. For a few brief moments those dreams and imaginations of the previous night would be cracked.
Winters in Kurdistan were long and harsh. Fluffy white snow would dress Awakurte like a beautiful bride waiting for spring to begin a new life all over again. From a distance the only sign of life in Awakurte was the streams of smoke that rose from the chimneys. On those cold winter nights our only contact with the outside world was dad’s shortwave, battery-operated radio that he used to listen to the BBC or Radio Europe. Every night there was a battle between dad and the radio antennas. Dad was fighting for better reception and the antennas refused to surrender. Frequently the stubborn antennas would get the best of Dad and in frustration he would set the Radio aside near his pillow where his cotton filled mattress lay. This was also where he slept. He would get up and start pacing the little room only to try again a few minutes later, then the combat would start all over again. The struggle against the antennas would go on until the news hour had passed.

We all lived and slept in one room that was built out of mud. The walls were 3 ft wide. The single metal black door was covered with blankets, hung like curtains to keep the cold out. The door was leading to the balcony that led to 4 steps which took you to the outhouse another 20 feet away. As a kid who came from the city that had plumbing and electricity, this was difficult to get used to.

But there was one thing we all looked forward to in those bitter winter nights and that was Dad’s stories. After dinner, we all huddled ourselves around the wood burning stove that was in the middle of the room that Mom kept going to keep us warm while we eagerly waited for Dad to tell us one of his stories.

One of the stories that has wedged in my mind since child hood was the story of “This too shall pass. The story went like this: A long time ago there lived a King who had a Minister that he firmly relied on and trusted with confidence. One day The King started to question his own judgment of his most trusted Minister so he decided to test the Minister’s loyalty.

To test the Minster’s devotion the King took the Minster and granted him even more power to command and control where he could have easily removed the King from power. But the Minister stayed devoted at all times to the King and the idea of taking the throne never crossed his mind. Then the King took him from all of that prominence and power and accused him of treason, ridiculed him in public and locked the Minister up in prison. The King then planted spies in the minister's cell to see what he had to say, but the minister never once uttered an unfavorable word about the King.

The King finally called for his trusted adviser the minster and said “I gave you all the powers of a King where you could have easily taken over the throne, but you did not. Then I punished you for no reason, ridiculed and imprisoned you, but you remained loyal”. I want to know how this is possible, asked the king?

“Well my King” said the Minister. When I was a teenager my dad sent for me while lying on his death bed and wanted to talk to me about his will. At first, I thought to myself, "my Dad has nothing", We were very poor what could he offer me? But then I thought he is my father no matter what and I went to see him. He said “Son I have nothing to leave for you except this ring”. He pulled this ring off his finger and handed it to me. Inside the gold ring a statement was engraved that read “this too shall pass”. Then my dad looked at me and said “if you ever come to point in your life were you feel alone, disheartened and nothing goes right for you and you think of taking your own life just remember never to give up because “This too shall pass”. He continued, “if you ever succeed and make it to the top where you have all the powers that this world has to offer remember never ever forget where you came from and those you have left behind because,"this too shall pass”. So you see sir, no matter what you gave me or did to me all I had to do is look at the ring that my father has left me to overcome my personal ambitions and depressions. All I had to do is to look at the ring and realize “this too shall pass”.

Every night was a different message from my Dad. Whether it was the story about courageous escape under difficult conditions by of Mustafa Barzani after the collapse of Mahabad Republic, where he and 500 of the Peshmarga fought the armies of Iran, Iraq and Turkey until they reached the former Soviet Union where they became refugees or the story of the bravery of Kaway Asngar were Zahak's rule lasts for a thousand years during which two young men are sacrificed daily to provide their brains to the serpents to alleviate the pain that Zahak felt. Until one day, Kawa, an iron worker whom the king had sacrificed all his twelve sons for the Gods walked up to the Kings palace with his ax and freed the people from the unjust and tyranny. And the story of Abraham Lincoln, a self educated man from a poor family born in a log cabin in the slave state of Kentucky became the President of the United States and abolished slavery ,or the story of a friend and half that taught us what true friendship is all about.

We did not know it at the time but all those late night stories in Awakurte taught us children lessons for the rest of our lives. Whether it was Kurdish history through Mala Mustafa’s bravery, respecting others rights through Lincoln’s "all men are created equal", bravery through Kaway Asngar or patience through "this too shall pass" or conquering and facing ones fear through Uncle Chwanar a children story told of a man that was afraid of darkness. They all were teachings from a great man preparing us for life with all of its ups and downs, brilliant and radiant beauty and sometimes atrocious cruelty.

As a child, I loved my Dad for the stories he told us kids, now that I am much older I love him even more for his profound wisdom and the lessons he taught me through the significances of those stories on how to lead my life as a decent human being.

Today, I live happily in one of the greatest countries in the world, America, with all the gadgets that world has to offer at my finger tips but none of these toys are equal to one of those nights in Awakurte and Dad’s stories.

I am sure he is up there in heaven surrounded by angels telling stories of Kurdish misfortunes, building a case for Kurdish independence.

I wonder if he has persuaded God yet, that Kurds too deserve a state of their own.
Not a day goes by when I do not think of you.

2008-06-04T09:41:00.000-06:00

Is Jalal Talabani one of the few?

Kurdishaspect.com - By Ardalan Hardi

There are very few great leaders in this world that have voluntarily vacated their post for the good of their people. Very few have risen to this legendary status in world history. Great leaders have inspired us to follow their patriotic examples. George Washington, the first President of United States is one of those exemplary leaders. After holding the Continental Army together through eight hard years of war, at war's end he took affront at the notion he should be King; and after two terms as President, he gracefully stepped aside.

Washington manifested himself as the exemplar of republican virtue in America. He was a man with great personal integrity, and a deeply held sense of duty, honor and patriotism. He rejected nepotism and cronyism. One of Washington’s greatest achievements, in terms of republican values, was refraining from taking more power than was due.

Is Jalal Talabani one of the few?

With the precipitous decline in the relationship between Nawshirwan Mustafa and the PUK’s Politburo, the PUK is put into an almost impossible position in securing the future of the organization. The consequence of this war of words between Mala Backtyar and Arsalan Bayiz on one side, and Nawshirwan Mustafa on the other, could jeopardize the future of PUK as a united political organization. It could also derail the current Kurdish achievements within Iraq and the Middle East.

The current internal turmoil within the PUK could put the two opposing political ideologies within PUK (the reformist and those against it) on a possible collision course toward another useless internal war and political division that would most definitely be against the national interest of Kurdistan.

While it is easy to maintain order within the ranks of PUK as long as President Talabani is in office, it will not be easy to maintain order should something happen to Talabani. Neither the PUK nor its leadership can be held together without Talabani’s presence. This fact is very well understood by the PUK leadership and all those who are close to the situation in Kurdistan.

At this critical juncture in the history of Kurdistan, this imminent danger could cause a major catastrophe not just for PUK but also for the Kurdish nation if not addressed. The only person that can simmer this boiling pot and secure PUK unity is president Talabani. The PUK’s survival determines President Talabani’s legacy. Therefore, it is of utmost importance that the President addresses the issues that have been looming over PUK.

In the interest of Kurdish citizens, peace and the stability in Kurdistan, President Talabani needs to bring all parties to the dialogue table and work out their differences. For the sake of our nation, he should persue a real democratic reform. An election should be held for his successor.

What ever the outcome, Talibani should stand behind the newly elected Secretary General 100%. By supporting the new secretary general, he will not only set a democratic standard for others to follow but he will also leave a legacy unprecedented in Kurdish history.

PUK has achieved many great milestones under President Talabani’s reign. Now Talabani has an opportunity that no other Kurdish leader before him ever had. He can voluntarily leave his post as the secretary general of PUK to ensure the preservation of the unity of the PUK and join the few legendary leaders like George Washington.

The question is, “is Talabani capable of refraining from taking more power than is due?” That remains to be seen.

2008-04-12T11:04:00.001-06:00

Birth Pains of an Independent Press

It was only eight years ago that Iraqi Kurdistan saw the birth of its first independent newspaper, Hawlati. Despite numerous obstacles, the paper has managed to survive and thrive. Asos Hardi, who was part of the team that launched Hawlati, looks back at how the independent press in Iraqi Kurdistan came about.

Arab Press - By Asos Hardi

Throughout its existence, the Kurdish press has been one of revolution and resistance. The division of Kurdistan into different states, and the denial of the Kurdish identity by these states, forced all free voices that called for freedom and equality to either go underground and turn to covert resistance, or emigrate. The first Kurdish newspaper was created in Cairo in 1898 by a group of politicians that fled from the oppression of the Ottoman regime.

It is well known that resistance militancy imposes its own conditions on the press, turning it into a tool of revolution and liberation which aims primarily at contributing effectively to mobilizing all energies of the revolution and to guide the various segments of society towards the adoption of the militant resistance discourse. This was also the direction of the "free press" in Kurdistan during the years of resistance and armed struggle.

In Iraqi Kurdistan, the popular uprising in 1991 and the liberation of a large part of the country from dictatorship was a real turning point for journalism, and the Iraqi Kurdish people in general. Since that date, Iraqi Kurdistan has become a de facto free region, governed by Kurdish parties (from here on Iraqi Kurdistan is referred to as Kurdistan).

At this time, the need for an enthusiastic and revolutionary discourse ceased to be a mandatory practice, and the birth of the press as we know it today turned into a necessity required by the transformation of the political and social situation of the Kurdish community. The objective conditions were quite helpful to this respect - in theory at least. We should, however, acknowledge that it was not an easy birth.

The Kurdish political movement was originally multilateral, containing different ideological and political currents ranging from the Marxist left to the nationalistic and Islamic right. However, Kurdish political parties failed to establish a system that would regulate political work in Kurdistan and guarantee the continuation of political pluralism and the peaceful transfer of power. The relative stability of the security situation collapsed soon, and the different political parties began fighting one another. That fight started in 1993 and reached its peak in 1994 when the two major parties, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) and the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) became involved, pushing the Kurdish administration into two separate entities in 1996, which is still the situation today.

It would, however, be unfair to neglect the economic aspect and not mention the deteriorated economic situation of Kurdistan in those difficult years. Kurdistan was suffering from a multilateral economic embargo. As a part of Iraq, it was placed under international embargo after the first Gulf war, and in addition to that under the siege imposed by the Iraqi regime and the neighbouring countries that were seeking the collapse of the Kurdish situation politically and economically. It was difficult - if not impossible - to think of a free press in those circumstances. How could free press arise amid the harsh conditions of the fighting and economic stagnation?
That situation persisted until 1996, when Iraq accepted the UN Security Council resolution No. 986, known as "Oil for Food". The resolution became a clear turning point in economic and political terms: it played a prominent role in improving the economic situation, and also created some movement on the Iraqi market.

The second positive change came in 1998, when American mediation managed to put an end to the fighting inside Kurdistan, and the warring parties signed a peace agreement in Washington.
Due to the above mentioned, the idea of creating an independent newspaper was put off until 2000, that is to say following the relatively large change in the political and economic conditions of Kurdistan. That was when a young publisher and the manager of his firm had an idea. Both had been running a small printing press in the city of Sulaymaniyah (called Randge Print), and had long supported young writers by printing and publishing their works. They also helped disseminate voices and opinions that criticised the political and administrative situation in Kurdistan. The two entrepreneurs decided to talk about their idea with a limited number of young writers (including the author of these lines) by mid-2000. We were convinced by the idea and decided to start working on it.

The beginning was very difficult. Tension between the two major Kurdish political parties was still dominant in the political situation, and they used to look askance at every new project that did not come from their traditional supporters, seeing it as a seditious plot, woven by the rival party. We had to work with care and caution and move in small, but continued, steps. We did not believe in "revolutionary and immediate" change, as the common expression goes. We were well aware of the seriousness of the situation, yet believed that we had a margin of freedom which we had to use in a rational way so that we could secure and try to expand as much as possible.
We decided, as a first step, to try our best to dissipate the suspicions and the fears of the two political parties, seeking for the newspaper a name that was far from all sensitivities and ideological allusions, and making our financial reports public. We chose the Kurdish name "Hawlati", meaning "Citizen", and adopted transparency as a method by publishing our financial reports in full every three months on the pages of our newspaper, so that our financial sources were clear to all.

Without going into too much detail, I think it is necessary to give a brief explanation of the difficulties that we faced then, and still face to some extent:

Subjective difficulties:

1) As I indicated earlier, the biggest dilemma we faced was that we were not professional journalists, which were a rarity in Kurdistan. We were simply people brought together by their conviction of the need to create a free newspaper, an independent source of information and a free platform for the dissemination of different views points. We tried to learn by reading books on journalism, and our own mistakes, many times, turned out as our best teacher. Whenever a foreign journalist visited us, we used to ask for his or her own experience in order to learn from it.

2) Believing in the principle that states: "there is no independence without economic independence", we decided from the outset neither to accept nor ask for any financial assistance from any political party or official source. However, a few months after launching our newspaper, we faced a financial crisis. We then started to address readers and members of the Kurdish community living abroad seeking their help. Fortunately enough, a large portion of readers responded favourably, and a substantial number of those living outside the country decided to provide us with financial assistance each month. We carried on with that help during almost one year, until we reached a stage where we could rely on the revenues of the newspaper, and cease to receive financial assistance.

As for the difficulties that we faced in the journalistic work, I may well summarize them in the following points:

Firstly, the laws and the judicial system. These were, and still are, a big problem for us. On one hand, there is the Publications Act introduced by the former regime with the sole aim to suppress freedoms, and nothing else. On the other hand, we cannot say that the judiciary is fully independent in Kurdistan. The interference of the executive authority and the ruling political parties is quite visible at times.

Secondly, the prevailing political mentality. It is known that the intellectual roots of the Kurdish political parties, as is the case in the Middle East in general, stem from totalitarian ideologies: Marxist nationalism or Islamic, as in recent decades. It is true that the slogans and the political trends have changed a lot, but the remnants of that old mentality still prevail among some. The logic of "with me or against me" remains strong for certain people.

Thirdly, there is a problem related to the culture of society. Although the Kurdish community is more open in comparison to the surrounding communities, it is still a conservative society that does not easily accept the trespassing of cultural taboos. It is not easy for the press to talk about social and intellectual issues that are considered sensitive, such as sex, women, religion, etc.
Last but not least, the difficulty to access information sources was, and continues to be, one of the biggest obstacles to the journalistic work in Kurdistan. Information normally lies with the authorities, which monopolize and prevent the publication of what they deem harmful to their interests.

In short, we have faced various difficulties. We were targeted by accusations bordering the limit of treason, and sometimes subjected to the abuse of existing laws and even convicted. Some of our colleagues have been victims of physical violence and arbitrary imprisonment. There were occasions when all partisan media outlets (newspapers, radio and television) were used to tarnish our reputation and steer public opinion against us, etc. Despite all that, we have been able to stay in the race and put up with all the pressures and constraints. Therefore, I am not pessimistic. The fact that Hawlati's has continued to exist to this day, and through the recent birth of the daily Owinh (Mirror), the second independent newspaper in Kurdistan and for which I work now, is an evidence of the margin of freedom to which I referred earlier, as well as an opportunity to move on towards building an open society. The Kurdish authority, despite all the critical comments we might hold against it, has duly assumed the existence of independent newspapers which sometimes targets it sometimes with pungent criticism. That is not to say that we live in a paradise of democracy and freedom of expression. There is still a lot of work ahead to leave dictatorship and totalitarian rule behind, and to build a democratic, open society.

2008-04-09T20:30:00.000-06:00

3 Kurdish teenagers could stand trial for singing rebel song in US

The Associated Press

ANKARA, Turkey: A lawyer says three Kurdish teenagers could stand trial for allegedly singing a Kurdish rebel song under rebel flags during a music festival in the United States in October.
Defense lawyer Baran Pamuk says the teenagers were part of a 15-member chorus that allegedly sang a song called "Enemy" during a tour of San Diego, Los Angeles and San Francisco. He says an indictment demands their prosecution on charges of spreading the separatist propaganda of the rebel Kurdistan Workers' Party, which is fighting the Turkish state.
Pamuk said Tuesday a court will decide whether to hear the case. The three are aged between 16 and 17.

2008-03-19T15:56:00.001-06:00

Turkish secularism breaches democracy

Kurdishaspect.com - By Dr. Kirmanj Gundi

In its simplest form, secularism can be defined as an ideology, which separates religion from the state affairs. It guarantees the right to be free from religious rule and teaching. It is not against religion, but independent of it. Secularism doesn’t necessarily mean democracy, albeit it can be used as a step toward modernization, and establishing democratic institutions in which equality and equity is fairly observed within the social, political and economic context.

In 1846, for the first time, the British writer George Jacob Holyoake introduced the term “secularism” as a notion of “free thought,” to serve as a “frame of social contemplation.” Later, in his article, Secular Ethics, published in 1896, Holyoake defined secularism as follows:

Secularism is a code of duty pertaining to this life, founded on considerations purely human, and intended mainly for those who find theology indefinite or inadequate, unreliable or unbelievable. Its essential principles are three: 1) The improvement of this life by material means, 2) That science is available providence of men, and 3) That it is good to do good. Whether there be other good or not, the good of the present life is good, and it is good to seek that good.

Basic characteristics of secularism are premised on a conceit of “goodness” where common human beings are granted equal opportunity to develop. Nonetheless, under many secular regimes including Turkey, secularism is perpetuated at the expense of basic democratic principles. Turkey as an Islamic country governed by radical secularism whose guardian is military institution and is against every religious accoutrement.

When Turkey’s parliament lifted the ban of “headscarf” to give women in Turkey an opportunity to exercise their God-given right and wear it if they so desired, the military and radical secularists attempted to vitiate the AKP government and accused President Gul and Prime Minister Ordagan of undermining the Turkish secularism. Giving back the right to citizens to exercise their natural rights is not a breach of secularism, but a modus operandi of a plural and multicultural democracy. It is true that secularism would be enervated if religious indoctrinations were embodied in the Constitution. But similarly, a rigid refusal to allow citizens the right to freely express their cultural and religious beliefs in public, as long as that expression of their beliefs does not violate the freedom of others, transforms ‘secularism’ into “radical secularism,” which creates a culture of intolerance. The legislative body that has denounced the headscarf ban has not meant to change the Turkish Constitution from secular to a theocratic system, but rather to encourage the democratization of Turkish society.

The recent action by the Turkish chief prosecutor against the AKP and current government to ban them from politics is another reminder to the world about how gravely the Turkish justice system is deficient of true justice and therefore lacks moral authority.

The Islamo-phobia that the Turkish Generals have created and used as a vindication to maintain their influence on the political decision-making process and excoriate liberal democracy is a breach of every democratic principle and can only weaken democratic elements. This prevents Turkey from achieving its dream of becoming a respected member of the European Union. For Turkey to embrace its goals, it must not only be seen as a secular state, but also accepted as a democratic nation who respects democratic practices. Only then can Turkish secularism complement a democratic society.

Democracy as a political philosophy is premised on the freedom of speech, freedom of the press, rule of law, freedom of religion, and civil control of the military. It is founded on pluralism and majority rule with the respect to the minority rights. Therefore, for Turkey to grow into a civil society, it must respect human rights, grant genuine civil liberties, and hold its citizens equal before the law.

Turkish radical secularists can no longer claim that they enjoy popular support by “pinning democratic labels upon themselves.” They must allow citizens of Turkey to exercise their democratic prerogatives. To do so, they need to overcome the narrow and exclusionary idea of “Turkishness,” and accept Turkey as a state with citizens, not “Turks,” but citizens from a mosaic of diverse backgrounds and beliefs, which are a legitimate part of the region’s history and its future – one that is made culturally rich and dynamic by virtue of a plural society. Turkey needs to reform its social, political and economic policies across the nation in order to prosper. It cannot live in peace with itself unless it recognizes its own multi-ethnic identity, and its ambition of becoming part of Europe can only remain a distant dream. Turkey must pull itself out of the cycle of fear and hate in order to have a more internal tranquility and better future with its neighbors.

Dr. Kirmanj Gundi is a professor at Department of Educational Administration and Leadership at Tennessee State University in Nashville, Tennessee.
References

About.com. (2008). Agnosticism/Atheism, Secularism 101: Religion, Society, and Politics.
http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/religion/blrel_sec.htm.

Holyoake, George J. (1896). Secular Ethics. Publication English Secularism.

Miller, Lisa (2008). In Defense of Secularism. http://www.newsweek.com/id/112719.
USINFO.STATE.GOV (Website, 2008). What Is Democracy?

http://usinfo.gov/products/pubs/whatsde.

2008-01-11T12:57:00.000-07:00

Text of Kurdistan Journalism Act passed by Kurdistan parliament

Kurdishaspect.com - Translated by Dr Kamal Mirawdeli

Translated from the Kurdish text published by Rozhnama, Sulaymnaiya, daily newspaper in Kurdish, 6 Jan 08, p4

Report: "Text of Kurdistan Media Law passed by Kurdistan parliament and sent to the President of the Region for approval"

In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate
In the name of people
National Assembly of Kurdistan – Iraq

With reference to the power of Clause (1) of Article (56) of Act No 1 of the year 1992 and the request submitted by the Council of Ministers, Kurdistan National Assembly passed the following Act in its meeting No 33 on 11 January 2007.
Parliament Act No 35 of the Year 2007

Journalism Act in Kurdistan

PART ONE: DEFINITIONS AND PRINCIPLES
In these articles the words standing in the first column of the Table set out below shall bear the meanings set out opposite to them respectively in the second column, if not inconsistent with the subject or context:

Article 1:

[In this Act] the following terms below shall bear the meanings set out opposite to them:
1.1Region: Kurdistan region- Iraq.
1.2Syndicate: Syndicate of Kurdistan journalists
1.3Secretary: Secretary of [Syndicate] of Kurdistan journalists
1.4Media (journalism): any journalistic activity in various media channels
1.5Journalist: any person engaged in journalistic work with media channels
1.6Newspaper: any publication under a definite name, that is published periodically, consecutively and regularly and distributed

Article 2:

2.1 Media (journalism) is free and uncensored. Freedom of expression and publication is guaranteed for every citizen within the framework of respecting private liberties and rights of individuals, their privacy, common customs and system in line with law and commitment to the principles of media work according to the UN conventions.
2.2 Journalists are free to obtain the information which is important for citizens and relevant to public interest from diverse sources provided that this will not affect the national security of the region.
2.3 Journalists should protect the sources of their information or news and keep them confidential unless the court decides otherwise in relation to the cases brought to court.
2.4 All natural or moral persons have the right to own and publish a newspaper in line with the power of this Act.
2.5 A newspaper cannot be prevented from publication, or appropriated unless with a court order.

PART TWO
Terms for publication of newspapers, closing down and dissolution

Article 3

For the publication of a newspaper the following terms and conditions must be followed:
3.1 Proprietor or founder will [have to] publish a statement in two daily newspapers in the region in which the name, surname, nationality and residence address of the proprietor or founder together with the title of the newspaper, the language it is published in, the name of the editor and the frequency of its publication are written. This statement will be considered as the declaration of the publication of the newspaper.
3.2 Any stakeholder (person with interest) who has objections to the publication of the newspaper can register his/her objection at the Appeal Court in the region asking for a judicial review. Otherwise the publication of the newspaper will be legally valid.
3.3 The proprietor of founder must submit the statement of foundation to and register it with the Ministry of Culture together with a statement declaring the sources of funding for the publication. The Ministry will have to submit this information to the Syndicate.
3.4 Person publishing a newspaper must be legally qualified to do so.
3.5 It is not permissible to publish two newspapers in the region carrying the same title (name).
3.6 Proprietor or founder must write his name, the name of the editor, the place and time of its publication and the printing press in a visible area of the newspaper and he/she must publish any changes in these within 30 days from the date of the occurrence of the changes.

Article 4

Every newspaper must have an editor-in-chief who will oversee the items published in the newspaper. He must have the following qualifications:
4.1 He must be a member of syndicate of Kurdistan journalists and be fluent in the spoken and written language of the publication.
4.2 Must be a citizen of the region or a permanent resident.
4.3 Editor-in-chief and writer [of an item] have civil and penal responsibility for the publication of the item while the proprietor will have only civil responsibility unless it is proven that he practically contributed to the writing [of the item] then he will have the same responsibility as that of the editor-in-chief.

Article 5

A newspaper is considered dissolved in one of the following cases:
5.1 If it failed to publish after six months from its validation date without a legitimate justification
5.2 If a court order made such a decision
5.3 If it failed to publish for the following periods:
5.3.1 A daily newspaper for three consecutive days
5.3.2 A weekly newspaper for 8 consecutive issues
5.3.3 A bimonthly and monthly newspaper for four consecutive issues
5.3.4 Seasonal periodicals for three consecutive issues

Article 6

With consideration to the guidelines stipulated in this Act, proprietor is entitled to give up his ownership wholly and partly to another person provided that a declaration to this effect is published in a daily newspaper 30 days before the date of this change.

PART THREE
Responses and Corrections

Article 7

7.1 If a newspaper publishes something false, the person who is affected by the published item, his/her inheritors or those who are his/her legal representative can ask for its correction or to respond to the item of news or article. The Editor-in-chief must publish the correction or the response in one of the two issues that are due for publication after they receive the response, in the same place of the newspaper and with the same typeface and size of the [false] item.
7.2 The newspaper is required to publish the correction or the response; otherwise it will be fined with a sum of money no less than 1 million dinars and not exceeding two millions.
7.3 The editor is entitled not to publish the correction or the response he/she receives according to the clauses 7.1 and 7.2 above in the following cases:
7.3.1 If the newspaper had already made accurate and satisfactory correction
7.3.2 If the correction or response sent to the editor was signed by a nickname or written in a language different from the language of the published item
7.3.3 If the content of the response was contrary to law, common custom and morality.
7.3.4 If the response or the correction was sent 90 days after the publication of the item

PART FOUR
Rights and Privileges of the Journalist

Article 8

8.1 Journalists are free and they are under the control of no power in the process of practising their profession apart from the power of law.
8.2 The opinions and views a journalist publishes in a newspaper or the information he reveals, must not cause any disturbance of his life or affect his rights
8.3 The journalist is entitled to refuse to disclose the sources of his information unless this is demanded by a court order
8.4 The journalist is entitled to attend all public conferences, meetings and other activities
8.5 Anyone who insults or attacks a journalist because of his profession will be punished by law in the same way as if he had attacked a civil servant during performing his duties.
8.6 If a radical change occurred in the politics/policy of the newspaper in which a journalist works or if the terms of his contract have changed, the journalist is entitled to terminate his contract unilaterally, provided that he gives a 30 day notice to the newspaper, without this affecting the journalist’s compensation rights
8.7 Media institutions and newspaper managers must abide by all the contractual rights defined in relevant laws in line with contract of media work approved by the syndicate of journalists.
8.8 In case that a journalist has not taken all his holiday entitlements or some of them have been carried over to the new financial year, he will remain entitled to his wages for those days provided that it will not exceed one month’s salary
8.9 In case a journalist falls ill or injured while performing his journalistic tasks, it is the responsibility of the media institution he works for to pay for his treatment.
8.10 If a journalist works during formal holidays, the media institutions employing him should compensate him financially by doubling his wages for these days.

PART FIVE
Legal protection

Article 9

9.1 No legal action must be taken against a journalist accused of an activity related to his work without first notifying the syndicate of the situation
9.2 No investigation is carried out to a journalist or his home or office is searched because of the reason mentioned in (9.1), unless in response to a legal order; the syndicate’s secretary or his/her legal deputy is entitled to be present in the time of investigation
9.3 In any penal investigation the journalist’s documents, written information, statements and books cannot be used as evidence of guilt against him unless they are related to the issue about which a complaint against the newspaper is registered.
9.4 Any information published or written about an official or someone who has been given a public duty cannot be considered an offense if the published item does not go beyond the limit of the work and duty of such persons provided that [the writer or publisher] does have evidence to prove the allegations made.
9.4 After 90 days of the publication of an item, no legal action should be pursued.

Article 10

10.1 Without prejudice to any harsher penalty stipulated in any other laws of the region in respect to clause A and B below, the journalist will be fined no less than three million dinars and no more than ten million dinars with the suspension of the newspaper for six months if he/she published any of the following in any type of the media:
10.1A Any item that causes to disturb security situation in the region and instigate fear among people or incite the commitment of crime or non-application of laws
10.1B Any item that might encourage terror and create hatred and divisions among the elements of society
10.2 The journalist will be fined no less than three million dinars and no more than ten million dinars if he/she published any of the following in any type of the media:
10.2A Insulting religious belief of a certain faith or ridiculing their practices or insulting or hurting a symbol that has become a point of worship and reverence by a certain faith recognised by law
10.2B Any item related to the private life of an individual, even if it is true, if this causes insult to him.
10.2C Any item that stains common customs and morals
10.2D Swearing, profane words and defamation
10.2E Any item that harms the procedure of court and justice unless authorised by court
10.3 A Newspaper that publishes such items, will be fined no less than 10 million dinars and no more than 20 million dinars
10.4 In case a newspaper repeats the publication of such items the court can increase the fine provided that it will not exceed twice the amount stipulated in clauses 10.1 and 10.2
10.5 General prosecutor and the person affected, can ask for prosecution according to law

Article 11

The power of Article 10 does not extend to those publications that are published for scientific purposes by the government institutions, universities and research centres.

Article 12

Items obtained or translated from sources published outside the region will not be exempt from responsibility for offences of publication.

Article 13

No text of law contrary to the power of this law will be applied provided that the application of law No 4 of the year 1988 and its amendments (Law of the Syndicate of Kurdistan Journalists) is taken into consideration.
Final powers

Article 14

The Council of Ministers and relevant bodies must apply the powers of this law.

Article 15

This law will be effective from the date of its application in the Official Gazette of Kurdistan.

Adnan Mufti
Speaker of Kurdistan National Assembly
Necessary reasons for the passing of this Act

Journalism today has a great significance in our Kurdistan society and internationally and it has a broad horizon of freedom available for it and this has entailed drafting a specific law to organise media work in a way that conforms to the spirit of contemporary world and its progresses and makes the citizen aware of the truth of its approaches and events and ensure that the journalists express their views in a way that everyone is respected, for these reasons this law has been passed

2008-01-01T12:05:00.000-07:00

Undermining Kurdish Alliance Would be a Mistake

Kurdishaspect.com - By Ardalan Hardi

The recent collaboration between the US and Turkey regarding Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), leads one to question why the sudden change in US foreign policy. The Kurdish leadership has been a key foundation of US forces stabilizing Iraq’s government. A closer look into the Kurdish issue in Iraq, and the surrounding region, illustrates that the U.S. support against Kurdish issues is nothing new. The ISG report should have been a red flag for Kurdish leadership of the possibility of being used as a pawn.

The Bush administration was harshly critical of the Iraq Study Group (ISG) report when it was first published. However, the recent actions of the White House, now paint a different picture. The Bush administration is silently implementing the recommendations of The Baker Hamilton report when it is very clear ISG report is opposed to Kurdish interests in the region.

The ISG recommends that the United States significantly increase the number of U.S. military personnel, including combat troops imbedded in and supporting Iraqi Army units. The military surge by the Bush administration in 2007 and the redeployment of Peshmarga forces from the north to the central part of Iraq accomplished exactly what the ISG repot recommended. It seems to have had a drastic affect in stabilizing Iraq which has led to decreased sectarian violence and increased stability across Iraq.

Now that Iraq is supposedly more secure, the Bush administration is slowly turning up the heat on the Kurds to further implement the rest of the recommendations by the Baker Hamilton Group.

One of the recommendations by ISG was that “The United States should support as much as -possible central control by governmental authorities in Baghdad, particularly on the question of oil revenues”. The oil dilemma has been one of the major obstacles in achieving the national reconciliation that is viewed by the U.S. as critical to a united democratic Iraq. While the Iraqi constitution fully supports KRG’s right to have a say in the oil revenues that are generated out of Kurdistan, the central government in Baghdad sees it differently. KRG recently signed more than a dozen contracts with foreign oil companies, but the Iraqi Oil Ministry Husayn al-Shahristani insists the contracts are illegal and has threatened to blacklist foreign firms who sign them. Furthermore, after the KRG signed a production-sharing contract with the U.S.-based Hunt Oil Corporation in September; the U.S. State Department spokesman, Thomas Casey, described it as a hindrance to a national oil law. "It's in the interest of everyone in Iraq to see a national set of laws governing the oil and gas industry...we don't think that these kinds of deals are helpful."

With regards to Kirkuk, the ISG recommends that “a referendum on the future of Kirkuk (as required by the Iraqi Constitution before the end of 2007) would be explosive and should be delayed. This issue should be placed on the agenda of the International Iraq Support Group as part of the New Diplomatic Offensive”.

According to article 140 of the Iraqi constitution, the vote on the referendum had been due to be held by the end of 2007 to decide whether the province of Kirkuk with its oil wealth should go under the control of the KRG. The Kurds have insisted on the referendum as a condition for their support of the Shiite-dominated central government in Baghdad. On her recent visit to Kirkuk, Condoleeza Rice deliberately avoided holding a meeting with the Kurdish leadership. This avoidance would seem to confirm the Bush administrations intent to put pressure on KRG to implement the ISG recommendations on national reconciliation. It would seem that some of these tactics have already forced KRG to make further concessions. The recent decision by the Kurdish administration to delay the public vote on the future of Kirkuk, confirms at least one of KRG’s concessions.

Fully aware of the hostility toward the Kurds by surrounding neighbors, the ISG recommended that a Support Group should be created that consists of the states bordering Iraq, including Iran and Syria. Despite the differences between these countries, they all share an interest in making sure that the Kurdish ambition for self rule is crushed. On February 27, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice confirmed that the United States has agreed to join high-level talks with Iran and Syria on the future of Iraq. The unexpected shift in the White House view is just more proof that Bush is silently implementing the ISG report, while publicly disagreeing with it. With the unleashing of the Turkish military on the Kurds, we can see that the ISG report has come full circle.

By opening Iraq’s air space to Turkish warplanes to bomb the Qandil Mountains, under the pretext of attacking PKK, the US is able to kill two birds with one stone. One “bird” is proving to Turkey that the U.S. continues to be their long term ally; unfortunately, the U.S. is alienating the Kurds at the same time. The second “bird” is forcing Kurdish leadership within Iraq into softening their position on article 140, with regards to Kirkuk and the passage of a national oil law. These are considered key issues by the U.S. that will help foster national reconciliation.

In a region where America finds itself with very few friends, the Bush administration is making a colossal mistake in alienating the Kurds who have been one of the strongest supporters of US government in the Middle East.

If the US continues to pressure the Kurdish people in the interest of keeping everyone else in the region happy, it will result in the further deterioration of a relationship that started out with high hopes. The end result will force the Kurds to align themselves with Iran. The Kurds are not interested in being Iran’s ally, nor is it in the benefit of US foreign policy.

The Sunni’s vehemently oppose America, the Shiites are very closely tied to Iran’s Islamic Republic and if we lose the Kurds as allies will loose what little influence we have in Iraq.
The Kurdish leadership should use all that is at their disposal to show that there is no safe Iraq without granting Kurdish rights. They should stand firm on their demands in securing the interest of the Kurdish people they represent. One of the first things that KRG should do is to pull back the Peshmarga forces that are currently helping the US to stabilize Iraq. The Kurdish government should also boycott the Iraqi government until a reasonable treaty is agreed upon by both Iraq’s central government and the US to assure Kurdish rights. Why should the Kurds fight for a secure stabilized Iraq when their rights as a nation are disregarded?

My hope is that the Kurdish leadership can see that what they think is the light at the end of the tunnel is actually a train headed toward wrecking all Kurdish accomplishments. There must be away to stop further implementation of recommendations from the ISG report even if it means sacrificing Iraq’s supposed stability.

2007-12-15T09:42:00.000-07:00

Kurdish Press Law A Threat to Freedom of Expression and Democracy

Kurdishaspect.com - By Ardalan Hardi

The Kurdistan National Assembly, led by President Barzani’s Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), on Dec. 10 passed a Press Law that mandates fines for journalists and news organizations for “insulting officials.” Journalists could face jail time and or fines of up to 10 million Iraqi Dinars. Newspapers would be forced to pay as much as 20 million Iraqi Dinars.

This law is a clear violation of international media standards that jeopardizes freedom of expression and threatens Kurdistan 's democracy. Criticizing public officials should not be a criminal offense.

Hundreds of journalists and intellectuals have scheduled a demonstration against the Press Law to be simultaneously held Friday in Azadi Park in Sulaimaniyah and Mnara Park in Irbil .
In a recent interview, journalist Mem Burhan Qani’ told Kurdish Voice of America: “So far this is the worst law that has been passed by the Kurdistan National Assembly since its establishment.”

Asos Hardi, the editor-in-chief of Awene independent news paper in Sulaimaniyah, told Kurdish Aspect: “The bill was initially drafted by the Kurdistan Journalists Syndicate (KJS) and was modified by some members of the Parliament who took it upon themselves to change some of the paragraphs and articles in the bill.”

Mr. Hardi said, “For the law to take effect, President Barzani has to sign it. If he does, this will follow in the footsteps of dictators and totalitarian governments like the former Baath’s regime, rather than following principles of freedom and democracy that we seek as a nation.”
Mr. Hardi argued, “The previous press law set by the Baath government was better than the one the Kurdish parliament just passed”.

Under the Baath regime’s laws, a reporter who broke laws was solely held responsible for the crime and faced imprisonment. The law passed by the KNA not only holds journalists responsible, but also punishes newspapers. If convicted of vague crimes such as “insulting officials,” newspapers can be closed for up to six months and gives the government the power to seize all of the copies already in circulation.

On behalf of the staff of Kurdish Aspect and all of our contributors, we call on President Barzani to reject the proposed Kurdistan Press Law and send it back to parliament for further discussion.

One of the essential pillars of democratic societies is the freedom of expression. Defending a free press should be a core value of all governments that consider themselves democratic. The role of the media is a primary factor in holding our elected officials accountable and maintaining transparency.

Thomas Jefferson summed it up when he wrote: "Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter."

2007-11-28T23:16:00.000-07:00

Turks’ perplexity with the Kurdish issue

Kurdishaspect.com - By Dr. Kirmanj Gundi

The modern Turkish Republic, like its predecessor, the Ottoman Empire, has been a multi-ethnic state. Nonetheless, the Turkish leadership overlooked such a reality and adopted a new Constitution on which it was founded on the mono-ethnic identity driven from the school of thought of Ataturk, “He is fortunate who calls himself a Turk.”

The Turkish leaders adapted such a thought and integrated it into the new Turkish Constitution, “Everyone bound to the Turkish state through the bond of citizenship is a Turk,” (Turkish Constitution, Chapter Four, Turkish Citizenship, Article 66).

Such an unbalanced Constitution and unrealistic political decisions have created a societal plague that has prevented the Turks from growing into a tolerant society. Consequently, they see no other ethnic groups equal to themselves.

Turkey, as an Islamic entity, is a democratic and secular state on which is founded on “loyalty to the nationalism of Ataturk,” which is based on a mono-Turkish tone; a premise which contradicts every principle of democracy.

For the ambitious Turkish leaders, to have a brighter and more prosperous future with the EU need to ask themselves, will it be possible to achieve their goal without amending Turkey’s Constitution to meet the basic democratic standards where every individual and ethnic group is equally respected?

Turkey’s dream of becoming a member of the democratic EU is a matter worthy of support by all of her friends including the Kurds in all parts of Kurdistan, because Turkish membership to the EU not only benefits Turkey, but also the Kurds and the entire Middle East.

If Turkey could subdue the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) and even dismantle the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), it would only be perceived as if the Turks had won the battle, but not the war. For the Turks to win the peace they should accept the Kurds and try to find a political solution to the Kurdish issue. Using the PKK as a pretext to suppress more than 20 million Kurds in Turkey and threaten the KRG in Iraq will only draw the Turks into a deepened quagmire in which there will be no winner.

The PKK must also relinquish its military campaigns against the Turkish state. It must adopt a new non-violent political means to make its voice heard. The bloodshed of innocent Kurds and Turks must come to an end. However, it can only be feasible when the leadership of both sides get out of the cycle of hate and fear, enemy and war, and see themselves as organs of the same common humanity where together they all will flourish.

Dr. Kirmanj Gundi is a Professor at Tennessee State University-Nashville, Tennessee.

2007-11-20T18:08:00.000-07:00

Mr. President: Kurdish Independence can not be granted by our enemies

Kurdishaspect.com - By Ardalan Hardi

Yaqen News Agency reported that Shimon Peres, the Prime Minister of Israel said, "The establishment of an independent Kurdish state in Iraq is a matter for the Iraqis themselves to decide. But I can say that the implementation of a federal system is the best way to solve the problems besetting Iraq today."

In response president Jalal Talabani said, "Unfortunately it is not possible for the Kurds in Iraq to declare independence because neighboring countries are not agreeable to that." Talabani said that therefore the best thing is to remain in current status of a federation under which the Kurds can rule themselves in the north and participate in governing the other parts of Iraq.

Dear Mr. President if Jewish people would have waited for their neighboring countries to grant them permission to declare independence, Israel would not exist today. In fact even today Israel is not fully recognized by its Arab neighbors. The Israeli leaders had the vision and the courage to fight against great odds for what was in the best interest of their people and after many sacrifices they achieved their ultimate goal of Independence. Are we less than them?

Mr. President Independence is a legal right that we as Kurds are entitled to just like any other nation that lives on this planet and independence is inevitable. No leader or political organization has the right to speak on behalf of the future generations of Kurdistan when it comes to our legitimate right to be free. I respectfully disagree with your view Mr. President. Freedom is not turkey dinner served to us on a platter. Historically, freedom is not something that is given, but a moral right that is earned. One of the greatest leaders of our times Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said “Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed."

I can understand that you feel the time is not right to claim Kurdistan’s Independence in todays political climax in Iraq. The inability to declare Kurdish independence during this most opportune time in history is because our leaders have failed to prepare us and unite us under one umbrella.

Mr. President you are correct, if we wait for our neighboring enemies to grant us independence it will never happen.

"Freedom is not a gift bestowed upon us by other men, but a right that belongs to us by the laws of God and nature." Benjamin Franklin

2007-10-29T09:53:00.000-06:00

My Fathers Pen and Paper

To my Dad Ahmad Hardi

Kurdishaspect.com By Ardalan Hardi

My father was a Kurdish poet.

The greatest gift you could give my dad was pencil and paper. I remember when he came to visit me in 1995 I took him to Barnes and Noble (large book store in the U.S.). Even though he was not fluent in English he went through every aisle in the store. He would pick up a book open it up would read a few words then put it back down. The happiest I have ever seen my dad is when he was surrounded by books.

After we spent four hours in Barnes and Noble, we left with 5 pens and 2 note books. My dad loved good writing pens with blue ink and always had to have blank paper next to him. whether he was sitting on a chair or lying in his bed, his pen and paper were always close by. On the way home he would pick up the note book flip through the blank pages and feel the thickness of the paper look at me and say “this is good paper” then he would put it back down and reach inside his black suit coat and pull out the pens and would say “ I think I am going to like these pens“.
All that evening he paced the living room admiring the pen and paper I bought him. As it got closer to bedtime he slowly walked over to where I was sitting touched my cheek with his two wrinkled fingers gave me a smile of approval and said “thank you Mr. Hardi thank you.”

I loved seeing him happy.

Today is one year since you have left us. I can picture you up there in heaven leaning over your pillow with your blue ink pen underlining an article from Awene newspaper.
I wonder if they provide good Pen and Paper up in heaven?

Not a day goes by when I do not think of you.

If you care to share a memory or a picture of my dad with me please email me at ardalan@kurdishaspect.com

2007-08-25T14:25:00.000-06:00

Iraq's three-region solution Petition

To: Honorable President Bush

George W. Bush, U.S. President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW Washington, DC 20500

Honorable President Bush:

Soon after America went to war, Saddam’s regime was toppled and institutional tyranny was buried in Iraq. Americans were overjoyed by returning freedom to the oppressed Iraqis. America told them it would make their country the beacon of democracy for the larger Middle East. We know changing from democracy to dictatorship can be accomplished overnight, but to move from dictatorship to democracy needs the patience of generations!
Mr. President, Four years of beheadings, suicide bombings, demolition of shrines, and other atrocities should be enough to make the world cognizant of the culture of hate between the Sunnis and Shiites.

Since America has the primary responsibility toward Iraq’s future it can no longer afford to continue to deny the complexity of Iraqi society: first, that there are two major ethnicities, Kurds and Arabs; and second, within the Arab community a bitter religious division exists between Sunni and Shiite factions, and third, these realities exist along with the presence of other minorities. None of these have been taught the initial alphabet of democracy. They either are the oppressor or are being oppressed.

If America abandons its quest to re-establish Baghdad as the strong capital of Iraq and works with the realities on the ground, then other options are easier. Iraq is already a divided society. It no longer makes sense to refuse to honor the all too-evident wishes of the majority of Iraqi people to no longer be yoked together in a state that was initially configured by failed British policy for its colonial interests. Break the country into three autonomous regions and let each respective community take full responsibility for the security of its region. It can be done. Kurdistan is a living example. We must remind ourselves if in the past the Iraqi territorial integrity had been kept together it was done with an iron fist, but the truth of the matter is that its society had never been unified like societies of other nations. Why should we deny that and continue to hope in vain?

The plight of America’s military in Iraq has lessened America’s influence at the global level. And America’s enemies in the region such as Iran and Syria are celebrating the White House’s predicament in Iraq; because, it has given them a free hand to contribute more to Iraq’s chaotic situation without even being slapped on that hand. At the same time Iran has been successfully indirectly fighting America on two other fronts --in Afghanistan and Lebanon, and not very concerned about what America has to say regarding its nuclear ambitions. It does not matter how many rounds of negotiations America sits in with the Iranians and discuss Iraq, they won’t play the role of honest broker in helping America bring the dire situation in Iraq to an end. This is because a barely controlled chaotic Iraq works better for Iranian interests than having a democratic Iraq. Therefore, America should not be optimistic for a viable solution through Iranian mullahs. Instead, America can devise a workable solution for Iraq by dividing it into three regions in order to focus on troublesome areas such as Iran, Lebanon and elsewhere.
The three-region solution can provide a graceful exit, and will give peace and democracy to the peaceful majority of Iraqis. It is still not too late to turn the course of the war around and let the Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis be their own palace guards under a flexible federal government in Baghdad. This is a proper way to implant the seeds of democracy in this turbulent country. It could be the preferred way for America to leave Iraq with her head held high. It is still not too late to do that.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

2007-08-02T13:17:00.000-06:00

US Foreign Policy on Kurdistan Alienates Kurds and Provokes Regional Conflagration

Kurdishaspect.com - By Martin Zehr

The recent exposure of US aid to the Turkish military against the PKK in southern Kurdistan by Robert Novak and the attempts by the Baghdad government to circumvent Article 140 of the Iraqi Constitution is creating a scenario with profound ramifications to the region. There is apparently a profound callousness by the US government regarding the aspirations of the Kurdish people and nation that has resulted in an attempt to placate the Turkish military rather than clearly defining boundaries for Turkish military operations that are unequivocal and inviolable. In an interview, Massoud Barzani, President of the Kurdish Autonomous Region, has stated his profound concern regarding the actions of the Baghdad Government to undermine the guarantee for the Kirkuk Referendum. "The Kurds will never relinquish or bargain over Kirkuk , but we accepted to regain Kirkuk through constitutional and legal methods. But if we despair of those constitutional and legal methods, then we will have the right to resort to other means," Barzani warned.

The recent alignment of the US government in opposition to the Kurdish nation has become more evident in recent articles from neo-cons and administration spokespersons. The response from President Barzani is a singular notification to the US government of the intentions of the Kurdish Regional Government and the armed forces under its control. It also is a warning to Turkey and the current Iraqi government of the position of Kurdish peoples. There is nothing in this interview that might be misconstrued.

The Kurdish question has too long been treated as a subsidiary of the US occupation of Iraq . The fact is that there is NO occupation of Kurdistan . The fact is that the Kurdish people have demonstrated in two referenda their support for independence. The fact is that the Kirkuk Referendum has been established as a democratic means of determining the destiny of Kirkuk under Article 140 of the Iraqi Constitution.

There is little policy coming from the Bush administration that defines its policy towards Kurdistan . But recently, policy analysts at the Middle East Forum and the Jamestown Foundation have increasingly taken positions that are aligned with Turkish military maneuvers in the region. This represents a development that would engage the newly reorganized armed forces of the Kurdish Autonomous Region, the Kurdistan Region Guard Forces. The effort to dissuade and challenge the Baghdad government from enforcing Article 140 is risky and threatens the recognition of the Kurdish nation. The failure of the current administration and the Democratic opposition to detail the policy has created a dangerous scenario.

2007-07-27T17:09:00.000-06:00

Democracy will not come to Kurdistan as long as there are the White “holy” 4-wheel drive convoys….

Kurdishaspect.com - By Werner Nijman in Suleymaniya

We have all seen them…. Suddenly, several white Land-cruisers or Patrol cars appear behind you on the road, with flashing lights, and guards waving to the cars in front of them to get out of their way fast. As soon as the car in front has been frightened, and moved to the side of the road, the white cars with their blackened windows speed past, while the guards in the passenger seat make some offensive or impatient gestures.

Who are these people that seem to have a right to ignore normal traffic regulations, and scare every one out of their way? Who are these “special passengers” that even the traffic police do not want to stop, in stead, often stop other road users who would have the right of way, so that the string of white “holy” cars can speed thru?

The phenomenon of the speeding white big cars seems to be increasing. More and more of those cars seem to have taken to the road.

Why? What is behind this? Why doesn’t police or government do anything to stop this trend of civil disobedience, or better expressed, clear provocation to traffic rules and regulations? Or is it that the authorities can’t do anything to stop this? Obviously, traffic rules are broken, speed records are being broken, both inside and outside the towns, red lights and stop signs from police officers are being ignored, let alone, many lives are in danger by this reckless driving. Actually, lives have been lost because of this arrogant road behaviour. If other road users would behave in the same manner, they would be in serious problems, probably their car will be confiscated, and likely receive huge fines if caught with this bad attitude towards road safety or driving courtesy.

The white “holy” cars with their guards can “legally” stop anywhere they want, even if it is in the middle of a busy intersection, so that the person that needs protection, can easily get in or out of the vehicle. No worries are needed about any other road user, they just have to wait…. The white cars are “untouchable”.Sometimes when a small convoy like this arrives at their destination, the guards will block of the road at the two ends, so that the passenger or passengers of “importance” can go in or out of the car to the house or office, or shop (e.g. buying groceries in Zara Supermarket), without any danger for his life….(!!)Who are these people? Are they so special that even the laws of a civilized society can not touch them?

The tradition has become that if a person has been an important (or less important) Peshmerga, or if he has got high placed family or friends, or if he has made his money thru either a profitable business or corruption(!), the lucky man will then buy himself two or more of those white four-wheel drive vehicles, preferably Toyota or Nissan, top models. Then hire a small army of private guards (some are known to have up to 200 armed individuals providing protection). They all receive some training in how to intimidate people, either with their guns or with their cars, and hey… the right image has been created! Another person with “holy” cars, that demands other people to bow…. Is this the right development to encourage democracy?

It must be added though that some people have those rights on protection, i.e. the president of Iraq, the Prime Minister(s), or some other people of importance. But……….. should people running companies have this kind of treatment? Should people that have retired from fighting Saddam continue with this kind of behaviour that they disliked of the previous regime? Should individuals in general be allowed this kind of “presidential” privileges???

For sure, as long as some individuals can demand or intimidate the majority of the population to make way for them, to vacate the best parking places, to wait in front of a traffic light that is green and make every one else wait, as long as these kind of small “dictators” are roaming the streets of Suleymaniyah, democracy will still be a long way of.

And as demanding priority on the roads isn’t enough, and show the neighbours that they are people of statue, they will block the road in front of their houses with big, concrete blocks, or barricades, and again, the guards with their guns. This way, everyone can know where they live and that they are important!!! But….. will they be important enough for insurgents to be targeted…??? For some reason I doubt that terrorist or suicide killers would regard these so called “home-made” V.I.P.s as valid targets… The only people these home-made people of importance have to fear, are the enemies they have made themselves, by their appalling road behaviour as displayed daily on the public roads of Suleymaniyah.

2007-05-15T23:05:00.000-06:00

Religion and politics

Kurdishaspect.com - By Peter Stitt

In response to the report: "Kurdish Parliament Pushed Through Disputed Religion Law" I must say that religion and politics should be kept very far apart in any society that wishes to behave in a rational manner in its treatment of its citizens.

It is one thing for a political leader to have certain religious convictions but to enshrine such views in a constitution is suicidal madness.

I remember Tariq Aziz the "Christian", and his uneasy relationship with Saddam as Saddam realised he had to pretend to be a Muslim in order to gain support within Arab states. I have seen the atrocities carried out in the name of God in Iran and Afghanistan.

As a man with strong religious convictions myself, I believe wholeheartedly in secularism. You cannot run a national health service, an economy, a ministry of defence etc on religious lines. That is crazy, that is Iran, a redundant backward country that relies upon natural resources to make up for the lack of innovation and imagination of its leadership.

When challenged about such issues Jesus responded "Give to Caesar what
is due to Caesar, give to the Father (God) what is due to the Father." Even two thousand years ago there was a realisation that the secular and the religious should be kept separate. Are the Islamists contradicting the words of one of their most celebrated prophets?

This law should be repealed immediately. Church is church, state is state. When the two come together it invariably ends up with the persecution of minorities, chaos and economic disaster, and international alienation and isolation.

I will gladly pray with Sunni or Shia brothers but I would never subject people to my own beliefs of what is religiously right or wrong. I have no right to do so, I cannot judge another human being. By putting religion into law making people are judging and going against the teaching of Jesus, and Jesus' teaching was precious to Muhammad, peace be upon him.

Can we not learn the lessons they had already learned 2,000 years ago? PUK and PDK, what are you thinking of? You are taking your people backwards.

2007-05-02T19:59:00.000-06:00

The Background of Murdering Dua

Kurdishaspect.com - By Dr. Showan Khurshid

Of course, the act of murdering the innocent girl Du’a was horrific and barbaric. Moreover, Kurdish people in general and specifically Kurdish men, should take responsibility and put their house in order. Anyone coming into contact with the Kurdish youths, who seek asylum in Europe, and witnesses the way they deal with each or with other people of the host countries will realize that there is something amiss. The countless years of abuse at the hand of occupying forces in Kurdistan must have had damaging effect on the Kurdish psyche. Most of these youth suffer because of cultural differences and their incapacity to adapt. Yet, although our own culture, whether its derived from the religions that dominate Kurdistan or other sources, is responsible for and is the manifestation of the miserable condition our people are in, the young men who come to Europe will very confidently dismiss the Western culture as decadent and immoral.[1] It is exactly these values that are translated into honor killing and a host of other mal-practices. Most of our critical writers concentrate only on the Kurdish authorities, yet they ignore the more important aspect of our society, namely, what kind of morality we want to guide our behavior and interaction. [2]
However, I feel that issuing a blanket condemnation against all Kurds, is counterproductive, if the intention is to reform. Many Kurds seem to want change and they want the support of the outside world to do so. There is currently a strong campaign by Kurdish women group as well as male supporters to persuade the Kurdish parliament to drop the Article 7 in the draft Kurdish constitution, which states the laws of Kurdistan should observe the Sharia Laws. So anyone who is sincerely interested in the plight of Kurdish women should lend a strong support to this campaign.
The same day kurdishapsect published the news, I received an email from Mr. Kameel Ahmady – I assume it must have been a group email which included my name coincidently, considering that we never had a direct contact before – I suggested to him to send it to Kurdishaspect.com and also to make a reference to an earlier incident which also involved women and the interaction with Islam. Mr Ahmedy, however, had already sent it and shortly afterward the news appeared on kurdishaspect.com.
The incident in question precipitated in an all out declaration of Jihad against Yazidis by, I think, by Sunni Kurds. Consequently, their temples, important historical and cultural sites, artifacts and literature were mercilessly burnt down and destroyed. It started because a Muslim girl who was trying to escape a forced arranged marriage was in a car with two Yazidi men. The girl was brought back and slaughtered by her relatives and the Muslims demanded the two Yazidi men should be handed in to them – I wonder why there were no similar protests then: that was also an unjust loss of life.[3] In any case, the slaughtering of the Muslim girl did not draw much attention and we do not know what measures were taken against the perpetrators of the murder and the vandals who destroyed a substantial part of the little that has been left from the Kurdish original heritage, after centuries of the Islamic systematic destruction – although this time while Kurdish authorities were in charge. Perhaps, had the Kurdish authorities taken the appropriate measures this incident would not have happened.[4]

On the other hand, our knowledge of the Yazidi culture and the social arrangement is scant. They are definitely a persecuted minority, beleaguered and slighted on every occasion at the hand of Muslims, not only the Arabs who brought Islam, but also by the Kurds who submitted to Islam and turned now against their kinship who stood their ground all these centuries. And like many minority in similar circumstances they became secretive so they do not attracted derision and insult. No doubt, Islam is full of shortcoming and very vulnerable to counterarguments and counter-derision. But as anyone knows, Muslims are also encouraged to attack and kill their critics and with suffering the numerical imbalance, the Yazidis know from their long history that they should compromise.

Despite that we come to know that the Yazidi society suffers serious shortcoming. It has still a caste system. We can also expect that they suffer all the ills that afflict and finally cripple any ideological systems, if not the world – the way Islam is currently besetting the world.
The next shocking aspect of Yazidi culture that I have discovered was the way women are treated. A few months ago, a Yasidi lady published a critical view about the treatment of women within her society. It was clear that Yazidi women are treated even worse than Muslim women. The impression one would get is that the sexual act within the Yazidi marriage does not differ considerably from rape. The man is expected to be as rough as possible without slightest regard to her feelings or humanity. However, here we cannot ignore that such an attitude might have been also influenced by Islam. It might be a case of impressionable victim taking after the aggressor, when the aggressor is not punish and left to make ill-begotten gains and claim glory on top of all that, as Muslims do.[5] It seems that Yazidis have been trying to convey a message to the Islamic neighborhood that although they differ slightly in their religions they share all other values with Muslims, particularly in regard to women, whose sexuality seems to have become the pivot of Yazidi and Islamic men’s honor.

In all ideological system one should expect the maltreatment of the weaker parties. The treatment of women was not in fact much better when Christianity dominated the political life in Europe. In any case, Christianity has generally been subdued and this turned it relatively benign. However, because of an unfortunate historical oversight on the part of philosophers and thinkers of the world as well as the modern superpower, Islam was left intact with all its ideological apparatuses to keep and use subsequently to haunt the world with.

One of the main points that Knowledge Processing, Creativity and Politics (KPCP) and Islam on the Couch (IC) underline is that the central point in the process of the formation and maintenance of political power and thus political history, is how to bring a group of people to subscribe to a unified set of moral rule (USMR). Guiding the behavior of a group of people according to certain set of moral codes means that this group is organized. Now, forbidding certain kinds of behaviors, by the group, means that – provided that there is a leadership, will and resources – the group may stand against those individuals, who favor the forbidden behavior. It is usually these latter types of individuals, whose behavioral dispositions are forbidden, who feel the power of the organized people. Such power would be felt regardless of whether the group displays the other properties and characteristics associated with modern states or not. Thus considering that moral codes and values support certain lifestyle and confront some other lifestyles we should expect people, whose preferred lifestyle may be constrained or outlawed, to stand against and try to prevent bestowing the status of ‘moral’ onto certain rules or values. From this point of view, for instance, having some women struggling for equality means that they want to accord the issue of equality the status of ‘moral’ so that the power of the group (a state, tribe or a political party) is deployed against those who violate the principles of equality. Similarly, having conservatives trying to keep the status quo implies that they want to prevent bestowing the status of ‘moral’ on equality, and to prevent the deployment of group power in the interest of women groups. Thus considering the practical entailments of adopting differing or conflicting moral position, we could underline once again that moral rules and values are always in favor of some lifestyles, and people who adopt these lifestyles, on the one hand, and against some other lifestyles and the people who exhibit them, on the other hand. Accordingly we should expect fierce disagreement over the knowledge involved in the background of these differing moral rules or values (no wonder for instance many Kurdish women activists have been subjected to death threats and other atrocious assaults, at the hands of Islamic groups and the Islamic state of Iran).[6]

As such, therefore, it is not a matter of course or easy to achieve agreement or consensus. This explains why some polities or groups (empire, states, tribes or parties) fall apart or why many potential groups can never be formed. However, as it is pointed out in KPCP and IC, humanity has so far come upon two basic, though contradictory, methods to bring about such an agreement or conformation. One of them is through ideologies, which includes religions, communism, fascism. The other is through liberal democracy. Ideologies, it is said, rely ultimately on using violence. The ideological method consists of decreeing a unified set of moral rules and then stifling or prohibiting ideational challenges against the sanctioned USMR. However, this is not possible through peaceful means alone. That is why all ideologies prescribe, condone, and sometimes even glorify, the use of violence to silence the critics. The need for violence forces ideologies to make concession to violent individuals, thus usually men are exalted over women (see also my new forthcoming article). As such it is expected that the culture of violence prevails. So the horrors of killing Du’a is not unexpected, it happens among Muslims, Yazidis, and all other culture that have not yet moved to liberal democracy method.
Of course, not every ideology is as equally well equipped ideationally to carry out acts of violence. Christianity, despite the fact that it was used as an ideology and employed in the use of violence is less equipped for violence than Islam. Christianity preaches love generally. Islam preaches hate to all non-Muslims. Islam is a perfect tool for a system based on violence. It does not allow even friendship or love between relatives, even among brothers and parents, if they do not share the religion of Islam. Islam even surpasses communism in effectiveness as an ideology. Unlike Islam, communism pride itself on its scientific and intellectual basis and communists usually try to project an image of intellectuals who love debating and discourses. Accordingly communists do not condemn argumentation although they did all what they could to silence or eliminate critics. But Islam regards all those who criticize it as enemy of Mohammed and Allah and thus demands annihilating them explicitly. So in prohibiting what Muslim call Kufr, (views dismiss believing in Allah and Mohammed), they do what other ideologies do, namely eliminating the intellectuals so they can dominate the crowds, usually by using the thugs. Exactly the same way Saddam was doing, but here in Quran this process is also sanctified. (Obviously, this should suggest that the extent and clarity of the statements in the Quran and Hadiths, which are geared for using violence and dismissal of all non-Islamic beliefs, makes Islam unreformable. Had there been a room for reform in Islam it would not have as it is now).
Within a culture based on violence it is all natural for women, who are physical and perhaps emotionally less capable of violence, to be treated unfairly and unequally. Within the culture of violence, one should expect that the weak will be despised and humiliated because, to benefit from the means of violence, one needs also to justify or moralize violence – e.g., in the same manner that judicial process sanction violence sometimes (see KPCP) – and to do so, one will need to depict the potential target of violence as morally inferior and harmful.
Weakness, in men is manifest when the man is not feared by his womenfolk and this can be reflected in having extramarital affair or having relation without the man’ permission. It is therefore also natural, in the course of vicious competition that goes on in the ideological system, that some men will use female sexuality as a means to undermine, blackmail, insult and humiliate their rivals (this strategy was used by Saddam extensively, moreover, in most Islamic countries, it is common, that when a Muslims man tries to insult another, he may mention sex with his rival’s womenfolk).

The problem with Yazidis, on this occasion, in regard to the young women Du’a, I think, is that they must have thought they took more insults and humiliation than they can bear. Firstly, they were subjected to the destruction of their most sacred sites just because of coincidence that an Islamic woman used a car to flee in the companionship of two Yazidi men. Then the authorities did nothing in public to restore the respect to Yazidis. Subsequently, a Yazidi woman elopes. She was given back with all cameras ready to film. However, it seems the Muslims did not think that the humiliation suffered by the Yazidis was sufficient enough, that is why they also killed 23 Yazidi men, under the pretext that she had converted to Islam, which is not likely, because had she converted they would not have allowed her to go back, unless they deliberately wanted to bring about this massive disgrace on the head of Yazidis. Otherwise, Muslims cannot claim that they are outraged because of the killing of a woman. A thing they do continuously.
Of course, the Yazidis are very unfortunate. They are the victim of their own religion which turns them into victimizer of others, in their case their own lower caste and womenfolk. Perhaps, the same thing can be said about Muslims, with the difference that Muslims are also geared to victimize non-Muslims on massive scale. Perhaps, taking these points into consideration, the noblest of causes in our time may be to try to free Yazidis and Muslims from their respective religions.

Yazidis are the victim of Islam. Yazidis, with a religion supporting such bleak morality that underpins social caste system, seem to have become prone to internalize some Islamic values, e.g. disregarding women and accepting violence against women. Perhaps, Yazidis might have thought, that to avoid being slighted at the hand of their oppressors, they should do their outmost to look and act like Muslims in regard to women. However, regardless of whether the Yazidis were manipulated to fall into a trap that disgrace them or not, their act shows deep inadequacy of their culture. No one, for instance, can set up European or Westerners to act in similar way. Some Yazidis destroyed a precious life and thus while they should accept submitting the perpetrators for punishment they should also free themselves from Islamic negative influences and also to free themselves from their own dated religion. It is time that they need to consider liberal democratic values to integrate within the peaceful culture of liberal democracy and become a part of the force that bring peace to other troubled regions of the world, like our own region.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Unfortunately, there is equally important shortcoming on the part of our Kurdish critical writers, their main concern, seems to be the disparagement and scandalization of the Kurdish authorities. They are unaware of the importance of theories to change the vision and attitudes of Kurdish individuals and officials alike. There is little doubt that most of these critics will behave the same way as the officials have been doing if they are given a chance, without changing the intellectual outlook and the social setting. After all, most of these who now turned corrupt were once revolutionaries of reformers and the parties they are running were meant to support Kurdish people and not to dominate them.
The hodgepodge of social theories that dominates the minds of the majority of our people consists of the two subculture of Islam, (I mentioned in the Islam on the couch); to these are added some pragmatism to open up to Western power; moreover, there is still strong Kurdish nationalism, which though moderate in comparison to Arab, Turkish and even Farsi nationalism, it can be used to whip up the power of the main Kurdish parties; on top of all these remain some residues of Marxism which was once all pervasive, although, we Kurds and the Middle Easterners did not benefit from the only potential advantage of Marxism and that is its capacity to undermine religions, while suffering all its disadvantages (see The History of Southern Kurdistan at http://www.kurdishaspect.com/doc0328SK.html). Unfortunately, I have rarely seen any argument to reconcile all these, often inconsistent elements.
[2]There are exception of course, see Dr. Roya Talouee (http://kurdistannet.info/2007/4-2007/28-4/pyawikurd.pdf).
[3] Grimmer atrocities perpetrated by Arab Muslims do not make news; pukmedia.com Arabic section, reports a series of atrocities perpetrated and Fatwas issued by the forces of the Islamic Republic of Iraqi. Ridiculously, among the Fatwas are that women are not allowed to eat bananas, cucumber or ice cream or sit down on the chair. Men should not eat date or sweats because that it feels like sodomy. Among their atrocities is that in the course of execution of a woman they stomped and kicked her head until her face was separated from her skull (http://www.pukmedia.com/arabicnews/29-4-2007/news13.htm).
[4] Ardalan Abdulla (http://www.bopeshawa.com/text-2007/04/03-duaa-pilan.pdf) suggests that the whole this episode may have been set up to discredit Kurds. He wonders why this incident should be recorded by 6-7 people, instead of being carried out in secret as usual. This act happens in all Islamic countries among all Islamic communities in other countries but Kurds are starkly single out for exposure and scandalization. Ardalan Abdualla wonders justifiably how come that the Islamic clerics and Islamic mobs now want to chase and kill the Yazidis for this crime while it is Islam which demands stoning so clearly.
[5] Muslims invaded the occupied the whole Middle East coming from the Arabian Peninsula originally. This act is still the highlight of their pride.
[6] Recently, Houzan Mahmoud was subjected to death threat from Islamic groups. Likewise, Roya Talouee was subjected to horrendous crime in Iranian prisons.

2007-04-05T13:52:00.000-06:00

Leaving Iraq, a Catastrophe to U.S Foreign Policy in the Middle East

Kurdishaspect.com - By Ardalan Hardi

Nearly two-thirds of Americans -- 63 percent -- want U.S. troop’s home from Iraq by the end of 2008, according to a poll taken by USA Today. While these opinion polls are mostly media driven and are used for political mud slinging from both sides of the aisle to sway public opinion in the upcoming elections, the fact remains that we cannot afford to lose in Iraq if we are truly concerned about the future of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Abandoning Iraq is not only a catastrophe for those who supported the U.S. efforts to bring about change in the Middle East as a whole, but also a political blow to American long-term interests and foreign policy in the region.

One of the biggest factors for staying the course is Iraqi oil. Losing Iraq’s oil production to a regional power struggle will have a horrific impact on international markets that will not only affect the U.S. but it could throw the entire free world market in a tail spin with oil prices at levels never seen before. Amy Myers Jaffe in her research paper (presented to The James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy – Rice University) says “Iraq holds an important place in the political development and economic trend of the international oil market both historically and at the present time. Iraq’s stated proven oil reserves of 115 billion barrels -while perhaps somewhat overestimated during the rule of Saddam Hussein - are among the largest in the world. The country’s resource base is considered the second largest in the world, second to Saudi Arabia, and its oil export policy has been a critical element in setting international oil supply and pricing for over 30 years.” Knowing this fact alone should make U.S. politicians think of the consequences before making hasty decisions for unilateral pull out of Iraq.

Yesterday; April 4, 2007 the Associated Press reported that senate majority leader Harry Reid said he wants to cut off money for the Iraq war next year. In recent weeks, the House and Senate voted separately to finance the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but set an end date for combat in Iraq. The House proposal orders all combat troops out of Iraq as of Aug. 31, 2008, whereas the Senate orders some troops to leave right away with the nonbinding goal of ending combat by March 31, 2008. All of this is a temporary solution to a conflict that we cannot afford to let go and which will have an enormous negative impact on our long-term national interest. Our lawmakers should recognize that.

An abrupt retreat would invite a host of problems including an all-out civil war. A civil war that will most definitely draw in Turkey, Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia into the conflict. All of the neighboring states are eager to devour a piece of the pie; Iran with its religious propaganda, Syria with his link to Ba’ath party, the Saudi’s with their supposed concerns for the Sunni’s, and Turkey with its hogwash excuses to protect their relatives in Kirkuk. Turkey’s devious goals to squash Kurdish aspirations are already interfering in Iraq’s internal affairs. All this is happening while U.S. military is present in Iraq. Imagine what will happen if the U.S would pull out.

Those who advocate a quick withdrawal without offering a realistic solution to the crises seem to over look the consequences of the future U.S. national interest and the possibilities of an all-out regional war with a domino affect that will eventually draw us back into a larger war with no credibility.

Finally, if we fail in Iraq, it will be the biggest blow to the prospect of democracy in the Middle East with major political consequences in the future of our foreign policy in that region. Muslim fanatics and al-Qaeda groups will claim victory and will use our failure to increase their presence in the region.

The choices are clear: either we stay the course and continue supporting the current government in Iraq until it can stand on its own two feet or like many others have advocated -- the establishment of federal regions or dividing Iraq into three separate states -- as a good solution for Iraq's security problem and a quick withdrawal of our troops. One thing is for certain: a complete retreat without securing stability in Iraq is not in our national interest and it is like President Bush had said “a recipe for disaster.”

2007-03-27T11:50:00.000-06:00

Peace through dialogue

Kurdish Aspect - By Ardalan Hardi

As a community, the more open we are toward the realm of exchanging ideas, the easier it is to embrace our differences. The majorities of the tribulations that humanity faces are self inflected and are the direct result of isolationism and inability to associate with one another. At the core of the problem is the absence of dialogue. Those ideological disputes from opposing camps that turn into larger wars are a direct result of lack of understanding and interaction between two cultures or societies.

A philosopher once said "where there is no communication, there is death." What frees societies from death, terror and destruction is the ability to talk and listen to others who shares this planet with us. Language is a gift from God to us as human beings. The value of that gift can only be fully appreciated when we make an attempt to reach out to other people, other cultures, other nations and societies. It is then that we will fully realize the importance of dialogue and it is then when we are able to open other doors for exchanging ideas.

Our hope is to continually and always minimize isolationism and enhance the chances for longer life through open and honest dialogue for better co-existence. We hope for a life that is void of extreme dislikes and hostilities, a life in which people are willing to have a open discussion and listen to oneself, in the same way one should have be able to reason and collaborate with other people and cultures. It is that world in which people can have a discussion instead of arguments, love instead of hate that gives a chance to a life in which all of its beauty and its colors can grow and flourish.

In the decade that has been named by many experts as an era of communication technology, one would think it would create an opportunity to associate with each other through dialogue, understanding and acceptance of each other. Yet in today's world the simplest conflicting forces most grievously turn into opposing camps. The political, social, religious, economic, racial and ideological dispute still continues bitterly, and with it brings the repugnant side of mankind and tragedies of wars which reduces everything to ashes.

In our modest way and through the publication of Kurdish Aspect we hope to create the opportunities for much-needed dialogue. Kurdish Aspect will attempt to be a vehicle for promoting issues related to Kurds and Kurdistan within the larger context of Middle Eastern concerns.

We strive to be a voice for open discussion and debate for all those who are motivated to participate in creating a more peaceful world. We want to be link between our different cultures, not only to give you a Kurdish perspective but also to invite your views and insights to the Kurdish issues. What we foresee is a step toward a logical foundation far from antagonism and hatred that defends what we believe in through our pens. At the same time, we are willing to listen to those who disagree with us and think otherwise with respect.

By raising the threshold of both dialogue and compromises, perhaps we can enhance the chances for the better world which we all seek.

For a free issue of the Kurdish Aspect email us at kurdishaspect@yahoo.com

2007-03-15T10:59:00.000-06:00

Kurdish issues and Michael Rubin’s Turkishness

Kurdishaspect.com - by Ardalan Hardi

The problem with most writers that write about Kurds and Turks is that they start with asking the wrong question about the Kurdish issues in Turkey. They almost always tie the Kurdish issues with existence of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). The question always is whether PKK is a terrorist organization or not? The question should be why organizations like PKK come to flourish? In reality the problem is not PKK, but the oppression of the Kurdish nationality within the Turkish State that forces organizations like PKK to be born. Like Simone de Beauvoir said “all oppression creates a state of war.”

If Kurds are given the same rights in Turkey as their brothers enjoy in the Kurdistan region of Iraq, there will be no need for PKK and other groups like them to exist.

It is unfortunate that some one like Dr. Michael Rubin, who has a PhD from Yale University and is educated in the U.S., known for the foundation of rights of liberty, to think the way he does.

Instead of teaching what Dr. Rubin has learned in his education about true democracy in guiding a country like Turkey to peacefully co-existence by encouraging Turkey to respect the rights of all nationalities and acknowledging the core of the problem in addressing a real democratic reform that is non-existent in Turkey, Mr. Rubin suggests military intervention by Turkey across the border to Kurdistan. This obviously will further complicate the Kurdish issue in Turkey and destroy the only part of Iraq that lives in peace.

It would seem that the Turkish glasses through which Mr. Rubin sees the world have blinded his vision. His distorted views do not stop there: he is also against federalism based on ethnic and sectarian division and believes that the creation of Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) increases terrorism in the region. Again, his Turkishness has not only blinded him, but also affected his thinking process. Simple logic tell us that those cultural and national rights that are stricken from a nation, are the core to breeding the utmost radicalism – not the other way around.

The basic sociological experiment tells us those places that have problems with culture and national identities are ripe for creating extremism, including terrorism. Iraq’s history proves that exact point. In the history of Iraq, the Kurdish region has always been in the middle of wars between the central government and the Kurds. This conflict has come to a complete halt since the KRG was established within a democratic Iraq.

Mr. Rubin’s mistaken theory continues and prolongs his misconception without any knowledge when he compares the Kurdistan Region to the Palestinians. Mr. Rubin says “Just as Arafat transformed the Palestinian Authority into a safe haven for terrorists, so too does Barzani.” However, there is a significant difference between Kurdistan Region and Palestine. Anyone with a little brain can see that but the Dr.’s Turkish glasses have clouded his eyesight.

1. Palestine is fighting for independence, while the Kurds are seeking a federal system within Iraq and have accomplished that goal. That is one of the reasons that the Kurdish region is the most peaceful since the creation of Iraq.

2. There are radical groups within the Palestine movement that will not stop at independence alone, but rather ask for elimination of Israel. On a contrary, all political parties in Kurdistan have never once denied Iraq or any other neighboring states of existence. All Kurdish movements in Iraq have always asked for peaceful co-existence within a federalist Iraq.

Hence, I find it necessary to ask the Dr. to take off those Turkish glasses that have clouded the simplest truth about the history of the region and have caused him to lose site of all the knowledge he gained in U.S. universities. Obviously, the Dr. has not learned much in all those years of education about liberty and justice for all. If the Dr. wanted to get a PhD in how to become an oppressor, all he had to do is join the Turkish government and become a true Turk that he appears to be. He could have saved himself lots of wasted years and money.

2007-03-03T05:18:00.000-07:00

Turkey's ex-president Evren probed for Kurd remarks

Reuters - By Gareth Jones

ANKARA, - State prosecutors have launched a criminal investigation into ex-president Kenan Evren, leader of a 1980 military coup, over his call for decentralising power in Turkey, the state Anatolian news agency said on Friday. Evren, 88, told the Sabah newspaper this week he favoured giving more powers to the provinces, and he dismissed fears this would embolden Turkey's Kurds -- "our brothers" -- to push for independence.

Ironically, Evren once denied the very existence of Kurds in Turkey, describing them as "mountain Turks" whose name came from the squelching noise their boots made when walking in the snow. After the coup, he restricted the use of the Kurdish language.

Anatolian quoted prosecutor Mehmet Yurtseven in Evren's home province of Mugla as saying: "I have given the necessary order to the relevant departments. We have begun an investigation. If there is a crime, we will do what is needed."

The agency quoted Ayla Kara, head of Mugla's bar association, as saying she thought Evren should be tried for his remarks because they would give a boost to separatist groups.

Under the post-coup constitution drawn up under Evren and still in force, Turkey has a very centralised political system. Calls for redistributing power away from Ankara are rare because of fears this could reignite Kurdish separatism.

Security forces have been battling rebels of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) in mainly Kurdish southeast Turkey since 1984 in a conflict that has claimed more than 30,000 lives.
In his interview with Sabah, Evren said Turkey had nothing to fear from devolving power to the regions.

TABOOS

"They keep saying Turkey's Kurds would declare independence. They would not. Why would they want to secede if they are given the same rights? We must treat the Kurds as brothers," he said.

Evren broke another Turkish taboo in his interview by saying Ankara should accept the reality of an independent Kurdish state in nearby northern Iraq. Turkey fears such a state would fan separatism among its own Kurds and destabilise the wider region.

Turkish media later quoted Evren saying he had never spoken of setting up a "federation" in Turkey.

As leader of the September 12, 1980, military coup, General Evren presided over the jailing of hundreds of thousands of people, the banning of trade unions and a purge of universities. Torture and other human rights violations were widespread.

He has defended those actions, saying Turkey was heading towards anarchy in the late 1970s as leftists and rightists clashed violently in the streets and on university campuses.

From 1982 Evren served a seven-year stint as president. He then retired to Marmaris in the Aegean province of Mugla and took up painting, mostly shunning the political limelight.

Last year, during the funeral of ex-premier Bulent Ecevit, Evren expressed regret about arresting Turkey's political leaders during the military coup.

2007-02-20T11:30:00.001-07:00

U.S gives a green light to Turkey to attack PKK in Southern Kurdistan

Kurdishspect.com

According to Awene, in the meeting held on January 29th with Masud Barzani, the president of the Kurdistan Regional Government, and his vice president Kosrat Rasul, were told by Joseph Ralston the United States' special envoy on countering the PKK that Turkey has been given a green light from the U.S to attack PKK positions on the Qandil Mountains. The source told Awene that the military invasion will start in the beginning of April 2007.

On February 13, Jangawar, a member of the PKK leadership, told Awene that the U.S and Turkish representatives have drawn up a plan against southern Kurdistan. He said “this plan starts with attacking PKK positions on the Qandil Mountains but their goals are to destroy Kirkuk’s referendum and other Kurdish advancements in southern Kurdistan”.

By giving a green light to Turkey to invade the Kurdistan Region the U.S is hoping to deter Turkey from getting closer to Iran.

2007-02-13T16:55:00.000-07:00

A Kirkuk wake-up call for Kurds

Kurdishaspect.com - by Eamad J. Mazouri

This should be a wake-up call for all the Kurds, their friends and sympathizers around the world and especially in the United States of America.

Throughout their modern history, Kurds have been divided, denied their very existence, oppressed, massacred and even subjected to genocide. The regional governments have always conspired against their very basic human rights. While the same situation is still continuing in most parts of Kurdistan, Kurds in Iraqi Kurdistan have made major strides towards gaining self-determination within the framework of a democratic federal Iraq as the Kurdistan regional government has envisioned, secured and guaranteed in the permanent Iraqi constitution of 2005, that the majority of Iraqi people have voted on and was ratified by Iraqi parliament.

Article 140 provides that by the end of 2007 a referendum to be held by the people of Kirkuk to decide whether they would like to rejoin Iraqi Kurdistan region or not. Regrettably, Turkey has repeatedly stated her wishes to intervene in Iraqi internal affairs by voicing outright objection to the implementation of this article of the Iraqi constitution.

Turkey that has until recently denied the very existence of over 20 million Kurds inside her borders, does not recognize them until now as such, does not believe in a peaceful solution to her Kurdish problem, has spearheaded an evil effort recently, depending solely on her fifth column embodied in ITF inside Iraq in a campaign of lies and deception directed at American public opinion to misguide them about the facts on Kirkuk issue.

A Turkish delegation led by Turkish PM of ruling party Mr. Turan Comez is touring U.S. cities and universities to spread their unsubstantiated claims that have started surfing the internet lately. Not only has that, their efforts been coupled with hiring some pens as well who are unjustly attacking Kurdish people and their government.

The whole campaign is focused on Kirkuk, in an attempt to perpetuate the crime dictator Saddam committed against Kurds. Therefore, I deem it as a duty for every Kurd and their true friends to stand up firmly and aggressively against this unjust campaign waged by Turkish government who the Kurds have always held an olive branch towards them.

Their baseless accusations must be answered by facts concerning the real situation in Kirkuk; how and when Arabization occurred? Who was the real target? How those evacuated are still living in camps in Arbil and Sulaymania unable to return home or recover their properties even after Saddam is gone? How Turkmen in Kurdistan for the first time are granted their full rights and are enjoying them along with the rest of Kurdistan mosaic population of religions and ethnicities? How Kurds have succeeded to build something new in the region in the middle of the ongoing chaos against all odds, based on tolerance a concept that is totally unfamiliar or unrecognized by the countries of the region?

2007-02-07T21:29:00.000-07:00

Whose Kurdistan Is it?

Kurdishaspect.com - by Dr. Showan Khurshid

Among all the news outlets, Awene alone published the news of a Muallah denouncing and cursing a writer, Ismail Berzanji, as an apostate. The apparent reason, according to the writer himself, as noted in Awene, is an article, in which he says: ‘what is the need to make a public holiday out of the commemoration of the death of someone who died one thousand year ago’. It is not clear though why such a statement should get a Mullah’s goat, although it is possible that they may have suspected the writer to be questioning the importance of commemorating the death of Mohammed the founder of Islam, some 14 centuries ago. The author noted that all what he wanted was to criticise the government and that this was not the first time that he was threatened. Further, the author, feeling he is in a helpless position, pleads with the readership to let their conscience be the arbitrator.

Regardless of the importance or validity of the author’s statement. No person of authority (the mullah in this case) should be allowed to condemn people, particularly because such condemnation is tantamount, in the Islamic context, to issuing a death warrant, considering that many a Muslim will wish having such an opportunity to prove they are firm Muslims.

For the multitude of the selfish and arrogant Islamic clerics, being ignorant of any useful science and devoid of creativity, Islam, for what it is, is the only viable means for domination. However, the problem is that the Kurdish authorities are systematically failing to protect the lives of the authors and critics. This is not the first time.

Back in July last year, because of potential court case between Salahaddin Bahaddin the General Secretary of ‘Kurdistan Islamic Union (KIU)’, on the one hand, and Saro Kadir, the head of Media Centre of Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), on the other hand, we come to know about a crime against some individuals, possibly, carried out by Muslims. Salahaddin Bahaddin was initiate a court case against Saro Kadir for libel. In response the Mr Kadir threatened to bring charges against Mr. Bahaddin on the basis that the media campaign waged by KIU resulted in the murder of Shapour and Qabil. Consequently, Salahaddin Bahaddin withdrew his court case and everything went silent again. However, justice was left undone. Unfortunately, we still do not know who were these individuals and what did or say to deserve to be denounced by a religious organisation and to be killed subsequently. The same pattern of events was repeated in the denunciation of Mariwan Halabjai for publishing his book. The episodes show that Kurdish authorities may use justice as a pressure card to intimidate opponents but justice is not the goal. That Islamists can kill those who are not closely protected by the big parties. However, we know that this does not bode well.

We should require Kurdish authorities to take up their responsibilities and prosecute those religious authorities who take laws into their own hand. They behave as though they are ultimate authority of the land we are told that Khomeini’s or bn Laden’s substitute will rule Kurdistan . The laws of Kurdistan allow some freedom of expression. So these Islamic clerics, by issuing these denunciations, are in effect applying different set of laws, which has not been authorised by a recognised political body, like the parliament.

Failure to act will only add to the suspicion that the Kurdish authorities may want to walk the same cheap and dirty line of the majority of Islamic governments who allow some free reign to Islamic terrorism to clear liberals, as long as these terrorist do not challenge the governmental authorities. This in effect will mean that our country will be doomed like all other benighted Islamic countries to decade of underdevelopment and human right abuses and extremism. It is not right that tens of our writers be killed or forced into silence or exile because of the primitive Islamic terrorism. Our liberals, because of the Islamic terrorism, are have no country of their own.

2007-01-30T15:03:00.000-07:00

The Kurds: Between Iraq and a hard place

This article appeared on the MSNBC Hardball Hardblogger

Earlier this month, American forces in Iraq raided an Iranian facility in the Kurdish city of Irbil. Documents and computer files seized in that raid indicate that the facility was being used by members of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in an operation to provide money and weapons to various Shia militia groups in Iraq. The weapons include advanced improvised explosive devices, mortars, newer generation rocket propelled grenades and shoulder-fired surface to air missiles. The advanced IED’s have already killed American troops, and mortars allegedly traceable to Iran have been used in attacks on Sunni areas of Baghdad.

Is the IRGC operating in Kurdish northern Iraq? Of course they are - they’ve been there since at least 1991. Soon after the Iraqi defeat in Kuwait, IRGC officers conducted clandestine and covert operations in the southern Shia area and the northern Kurdish area, and have been active there ever since.

The raid earlier this month on the Iranian facility causes problems for the Kurdish Regional Government and its autonomous region in northern Iraq. Since the Iranians claim that the facility was an Iranian consulate that had been in operation in the Kurdish enclave for years, it created a diplomatic incident. Having served in northern Iraq, including Irbil, and observing Iranian operations, I am skeptical that the facility was, in fact, a consulate. Since the raid, Iraqi foreign minister Hoshyar Zebari, himself a Kurd, has demanded that the United States release the five “consular officials.”

The incident highlights the conflict the Kurds face. They are part of Iraq, but are not Arabs like 80 percent of the population. For almost the entire period that the Baath Party ruled Iraq, they were the target of a genocidal campaign aimed at eradicating their separate identity. During that time, the Kurds – at times out of necessity – developed a close relationship with the Iranians. When Saddam Hussein’s forces attacked the Kurdish village of Halabja with chemical weapons, when the Iraqi army killed thousands of Kurds in the Anfal campaign, the Iranians became the Kurds’ only ally. Iran provided refuge to hundreds of thousands of Kurds, creating a bond that is hard to break and hard to ignore. When no one else seemed to care about their plight, Iran opened its borders to them.

Now that Saddam is gone and the Kurds have established an autonomous region in the north, the Iranians are exploiting that past relationship. After the fall of Baghdad in 2003, the Iranians greatly expanded their presence in the Kurdish north as well as with their fellow Shia Muslims in the south.

The Iranian presence is not a good thing for the American efforts in Iraq. It also presents problems for the Kurds, easily America’s best allies among the Iraqis. The Kurds are balancing their close relationship with America against their close relationship with the Iranians. When more raids like the one in Irbil occur in the future – and they will, given new orders to U.S. forces to no longer “catch and release” Iranian operatives, but to capture and kill them – the Kurds will have to decide which relationship means more. You can’t have it both ways. Just like the Iraqi government of Nuri al-Maliki, they have to decide if they are with us or with the Iranians.

2007-01-29T15:38:00.000-07:00

Ankara bridles at Baghdad's handoff of key oil file to Kurdish authorities

Agence France Presse

ANKARA: Turkey angrily called on Baghdad Monday to retract an apparent decision making the Kurdish authorities in northern Iraq Turkey's sole interlocutors for contract renewals of Turkish firms that ship petroleum products to Iraq. State Minister for Foreign Trade Kursad Tuzmen accused Iraq's central government of breaching bilateral agreements and warned that failure to rectify the situation would force Ankara "to revise certain policies" vis-a-vis its neighbor.

"A unilateral decision such as this points to a change of policy ... We expect an explanation," Tuzmen told reporters in televised remarks. "We expect Iraq to stand by its signature. If it complies with the agreements, the problem will be resolved. ... Our patience has limits. Iraq's failure to comply with the agreements will lead us to revise certain policies."

Ankara became aware of the decision on January 11 through letters sent by the Iraqi state oil marketing agency SOMO to Turkish companies, referring them exclusively to the Kurdish regional government for any contract renewals.

Ankara's attempts since to contact SOMO officials to obtain confirmation and explanations have failed, Tuzmen said.

"Our only interlocutor is the central government," he said, calling on Baghdad to display "serious statesmanship."

Although the issue appears purely economic and bureaucratic, it has political connotations for Turkey: Ankara fears that Kurdish control of northern Iraqi oil resources will boost what it suspects are Kurdish ambitions to break away from Baghdad and, in turn, fan separatism among Turkish Kurds.

The controversy follows stern Turkish warnings to the Iraqi Kurds over the ethnically volatile, oil-rich northern city of Kirkuk, which Kurdish leaders want to annex.

Turkey imports Iraqi oil, which it refines and sends back to Iraq by tanker trucks.

2007-01-21T10:18:00.000-07:00

Turkey’s Threats and Kurdish Constitutional Rights

Kurdishaspect.com - by Ardalan Hardi

The unrealistic approach of Turkey’s meddling in the Kurdish city of Kirkuk and Ankara’s threats on implementing Article 140 of the Iraqi constitution have created a political quagmire in President Bush’s foreign policy in the Middle East region. It is clear that there’s nothing Ankara can do to stop the Kirkuk referendum. Yet Turkish government continues with its warnings and threats to further destabilize the region and derail the recent success of the Kurdish government in Iraq.

Turkey continually uses excuses like (PKK) Kurdistan Workers' Party or the Turks who are Iraqi citizens as a reason to legitimize its interference in Iraq’s affairs. Turkey now claims it acts to protect the Turkomen community in Kirkuk, but what Ankara’s government chooses to overlook is that the Turks that live in Iraq are Iraqi citizens not Turkish. Turkey has no legal grounds to tell the sovereign nation of Iraq how to deal with their citizens. Consider this, the U.S. has a large population of Mexicans that chose to leave their country of origin and live in U,S, By doing so, they gave up their rights as a Mexican citizen. Does Mexico then have a right to tell the U.S, government how to deal with its Mexican population when it comes to constitutional rights? The answer to that is very obvious.

Turks, Arabs, Kurds, and all other minorities in Iraq have to abide by and uphold the laws of the state. That law is the constitution that was voted in by the electorate of Iraq when they went to the polls on October 15 2005 and it was approved by a wide margin nationwide. That constitution includes the implementation of article 140. Article 140 of the Iraqi constitution indicates how to normalize the situation in the city of Kirkuk followed by a referendum on the fate of the province. Turkey has no legal grounds to create more obstacles or intervene in Iraq’s sovereignty.

The Bush administration already has their hands full with the current sectarian violence in the middle of Iraq. Turkey is adding to that problem. Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül has been quoted saying “Iraq is a different country, but this does not mean we will remain aloof to the fate of our relatives there.” Mr. Gül, if this is not just propaganda to keep Iraq in a state of disarray, then why was the Turkish State so aloof when Turkmen of Kirkuk were suffering under Saddam regime in the 1980s? Furthermore, Mr. Gul, how would you feel if President Bashar al-Assad of Syria decided to interfere on behalf of their relatives in Adana, Mersin and Iskenderun towns of Turkey that are ethnically divided between Turks and Sunni Arabs.

Last week Turkish Prime Minster Recep Tayyip Erdogan threatened Iraq and said “Turkey will not sit idle if the Iraqi Kurds have control over the oil-rich city of Kirkuk.” That brought strong criticism by a Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) spokesman who said "we have heard for some time meaningless statements by some Turkish officials with their implied threats and we want to remind them that the Ottoman empire had fallen a long time ago and Iraq is not part of Turkey," told Voice of Iraq.

In my opinion, all these threats and warnings, in addition to wanting destabilizing of the Kurdish achievements in Iraq, Erdogan is trying to please the chauvinist nationalist and the military power to secure the presidential post in Turkey. The threats and changes in Erdogan’s views from the beginning of his term until now are directly tied to the upcoming election in Turkey.

No matter, what happens in Iraq with regards to article 140 it is up to the Iraqi people to decide on the future of Kirkuk and not Mr. Gul, Mr. Erdogan or the Turkish State.

2007-01-14T18:48:00.000-07:00

The only friends Turks have in this world is the Kurds

Sabah.com

Participating in the conference called "Turkey Seeks for its Peace", famous writer Yaşar Kemal said: "Turks only have a single nation to call a 'friend'. Since the Malazgirt War, Kurds and the best friends of Turks."

"The only friend a Turk has is a Kurd"

Giving a speech in a conference called "Turkey Seeks for its Peace" in Ankara, famous writer Yaşar Kemal said: "Turks have a single friend and it is not a secret: since Malazgirt War, Kurds and Turks are each other's best friend."

Stating that Turkey is full of racists who are hiding behind "nationalism" Kemal said: "For the last 25 yearsi there is a "light war" going on in the Southeast Anatolia. There had been many cease fire decisions but for some reason the war does not seem to end. This war has broken Turkey's belly. We have become a country who fights with its own people. More and more we lose dignity in the eyes of foreign nations. No one grant us right any more. We called guerillas 'terrorists' and hoped things would change. Those who went up to the mountains to fight for their rights were in fact university students or graduates."

2007-01-12T17:51:00.000-07:00

Turkish fiery statements rejected- Kurdistan spokesman

VOI - by Chiman Salh

Arbil – Iraq's Kurdistan presidency spokesman rejected on Friday statements recently made by Turkish officials on Kirkuk calling such statements "meaningless."

"We for a while have heard of meaningless statements by some Turkish officials that implied threats and we want to remind them of that the Ottoman empire had fallen a long time ago and Iraq is not part of Turkey," the spokesman said in a statement received by the independent news agency Voices of Iraq (VOI).

The Kurdish statements came in reply to what the Kurds saw as threats made by the Turkish Prime Minster Recep Tayyip Erdogan when he indicated last week that Turkey will no sit idle if the Iraqi Kurds controlled over the oil rich city of Kirkuk.

Erdogan said in a Turkish parliament session that efforts are under way to change the demography of Kirkuk population and Turkey will not tolerate such attempts.These endeavors, the Turkish Premier remarked, may lead to a situation harmer than civil war in Iraq and may affect the region as a whole.

The oil-rich-Kirkuk, 250 km northeast of Baghdad, is a mixed city of Kurds, Arabs and Turkmans.

Iraq's Kurdistan statement urged Turkey to assist Iraq and not to interfere in its internal affairs.

Saddam Execution

2006-12-30T10:45:00.000-07:00

Saddam Execution, What do you think?

Saddam Hussein was executed on Saturday December 30, 2006 for killing 148 Shiia in the town of Dujail.

During the 1980s, entire Kurdish towns were destroyed to ensure that survivors would never return to their homes. According to USAID “Since the Saddam Hussein regime was overthrown in May, 270 mass graves have been reported. By mid-January, 2004, the number of confirmed sites climbed to fifty-three. Some graves hold a few dozen bodies—their arms lashed together and the bullet holes in the backs of skulls testimony to their execution. Other graves go on for hundreds of meters, densely packed with thousands of bodies”.

The United Nations, the U.S. State Department, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch (HRW) all estimate that Saddam Hussein's regime murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent people. "Human Rights Watch estimates that as many as 290,000 Iraqis have been 'disappeared' by the Iraqi government over the past two decades," said the group in a statement in May. "Many of these 'disappeared' are those whose remains are now being unearthed in mass graves all over Iraq."

Many think executing Saddam before he faced the genocidal (Anfal) campaigns against the Kurds and Marsh Arabs means we have not had full justice.

What do you think?

2006-12-22T19:59:00.000-07:00

Kurdish Peshmarga Should Stay Where They Belong

By Ardalan Hardi
Kurdishaspect.com

The New York Times reported on Dec. 14th that the Iraqi government wants to replace the U.S. troops in Baghdad with largely Kurdish Peshmarga forces from Kurdistan, to take primary responsibility for security in the Capital of Iraq.

According to NY Times’ Mowaffak al-Rubaie, Iraq’s national security adviser said that the plan was presented during the President Bush and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki meeting in Amman, Jordan, on Nov. 30 2006.

On a phone interview with, Kurdish Aspect, Sheikh Ja’far Mustafa Minster of Peshmarga Forces in Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) denied that there was such a plan, “The news is baseless” he said from Baghdad.

Meanwhile Hawlati reported on Dec. 20th that the Kurdish leaders have reached an agreement with officials in Baghdad for sending Peshmarga for some especial operations in Middle of Iraq.

The source told Hawlati, "the Kurdish leaders opposed to the idea of sending Peshmarga without a plan to Baghdad and fight unknown enemy, but they agree to send Peshmarga for some special operations in some specific areas,"

Nechirvan Barzani, told reporters on his arrival from Baghdad, "if Prime Minister, Nuri al-Maliki, officially asks the president of Kurdistan to send Peshmarga to the middle of Iraq, then we agree but for some specific purpose,"

The source told Hawlati that Nechirvan Barzani meant "terrorist" groups when he told reporters "specific purpose". The source said that those terrorist groups exist in some parts of Iraq and there are possibilities that they could be attacked and the operation will have a, "clear political purpose"

Yesterday, President Jalal Talabani told Kurdistani Nwe that “Peshmarga is recognized as a legitimate organized military force in the region, therefore the government could benefit by utilizing that force where ever is needed”.

Iraqi government is asking Kurdish forces to do something that neither the Iraqi nor American troops have been able to do: restore stability so that healthy institutions of self-government can begin to develop. Flooding the war zone with Peshmarga forces from the north would be a catastrophe for the Kurdish political future in Iraq. Until now the sectarian violence has been between majority Shiites and Sunnis while the Kurds have been able steer clear of this meaningless slaughter. Moving Kurdish forces to Baghdad will lead to the escalation of violence into the Kurdish region and the current sectarian war might become a Kurd-Arab war. Once Kurdish forces arrive in Baghdad, Shiites and Sunnis may put their disputes aside to fight against the Kurds.

Further more; the current finger pointing of the death squads between Sunni and Shiites will also be directed towards the Kurds. The Kurdish people have already been accused of being the U.S and Israeli agents by the Sunni insurgents and Sadr militiamen. Both groups have constantly rejected Kurdistan federal region. Just recently, Abdulhadi Al Darraji, the representative of the Sadr movement in Baghdad, told Awene, an independent Kurdish newspaper, that they reject KRG and strongly object the article 140 of the Iraqi Constitution, which calls for the normalization of Kirkuk and other disputed areas in Iraq.

Sending Kurdish forces to Baghdad with the hope of putting an end to the bloodshed, is a suicide mission for the Kurds and it could lead to a civil war with no end in sight. It also gives Sadr and Sunni nationalists more excuses spreading their hatred propaganda toward the Kurdish people.

Thus far, Kurdistan has been relatively safe from terrorist attacks. The terrorists have not been able to infiltrate and operate in the Kurdish region. Sending a large number of Peshmarga to the middle of Iraq will weaken the security situation in Kurdistan, and it still may not restore stability in Baghdad.

2006-12-14T23:49:00.000-07:00

Vote for independent of Kurdistan

Online Petition for Kurdish Choices
Kurdishaspect.com

To many Kurds who have found their true identity, Kurdistan resembles a mother that has been suppressed and taken advantage of by four influential men in the Middle East . In this age such a mother should be free to make a choice. In neither part of their ancestral homeland Kurds have been asked about their choices of status quo, federalism, or independence. Unity is a noble idea and should serve all equally. Unfortunately the unity that the governments of dominant ethnic groups advocate has only served them. For this reason over 98% of the Kurdish population in Southern Kurdistan voted for independence in an unofficial referendum in 2004. Many individuals and organizations that support equal right for all believe the Kurds should be allowed to determine their destiny and be given the option of voting for status quo, federalism, and independence in a referendum monitored by the international community. The purpose of this petition is to remind the United Nations about its obligation to defend the right of all nations even the one such as Kurds that are not represented by a state yet. In order to show the free world what the Kurds want, please indicate your choice by signing either an online petition or send us an email or a letter to following addresses:

Please vote here The Undersigned

2006-12-12T18:05:00.000-07:00

The Iraq Study Group report, Good deal for our enemies’ Bad deal for our Kurdish and Jewish friends

Howrie Kirkuki
Kurdishaspect.com

The invasion of Iraq in 2003 was President Bush's greatest accomplishment in the Middle East. Even though many errors have been made since, freeing the people of Iraq from the Saddam's Baa'th regime will be appreciated by our friends for ever.

The Baker-Hamilton group's recommendations, if implemented will reverse the accomplishments and indirectly reward the terrorists and terrorist-sponsor states.
The beneficiaries of these recommendations will be the Saddamist ( the main terrorist group in Iraq), the regimes of Syria and Iran (These two regimes are the main sponsors of terrorist groups like Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in west bank and terrorist bands and militia groups in Iraq), and the Turks (the Turkish government's refusal to support the invasion, their refusal to allow the collision forces to pass through their territory during the war and the Turkish intelligence involvement in terrorist activities to destabilize the Kurdistan region are well known facts).

The three mention countries have no interest in a free and democratic Iraq. Iran and Syria will make every effort to see US fail in Iraq ,which will prevent future US attacks against their regimes and to derail the democratic process in the region. The common goal of the Syrian-Turkish-Iranian governments is to crush the Kurdistan Regional Government (the autonomous Kurdish region in northern Iraq) and to return to pre 1990 era when Saddam suppressed the Kurds.

The biggest losers are the only two loyal friends in the middle-east, the Jews and the Kurds.
Rewarding Terrorist policy will make Middle-East peace process more difficult and strength the Syrian-Iranian hard line policy against Israel. Syria’s continues interference in Lebanon and assassination of Lebanon's leaders along with the Iranian regime's increase support for Hezbollah are putting more pressure on the Jewish state.

The Kurdistan region of Iraq is the only place in Iraq, where US soldiers are welcomed; there are no terrorists, no civil war. The democratic changes and foreign investment are welcomed. The group's report dismisses all of this progress and indirectly recommends dissolving the autonomous region and the federal system in Iraq.

President Bush's Iraq policy may need adjustments and changes, but the Baker-Hamilton's group recommendations are a recipe for disaster, selling out our friends and a victory for terrorists.

2006-11-15T06:46:00.000-07:00

Baathist spy games

By Darya IbrahimSLEMANI

Soma

Media reports of alleged Baathist spies in KRG ministerial posts and Kurdish party ranks takes the region by storm. Are former Baathist spies part of the Kurdistan government?

The Kurdish community was scandalized last month when local newspapers Hawlati and Awena ran sensational reports about Baathist spies working at various levels in the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). The reports alleged that these individuals used to supply information about the Kurdish political parties and activities to the intelligence apparatus of Saddam Hussein’s regime.

The newspapers went so far as to reveal the names of these alleged spies, the individuals on whom they were spying and the remuneration they received for their work. The list of purported spies included figures currently holding high-level posts in the KRG and the two leading Kurdish political parties. According to a report in the 27 September edition of Hawlati, a former Kurdish minister was a spy tasked with assassinating Iraqi President Jalal Talabani.

The report included the copy of a letter from the former regime’s intelligence apparatus
instructing the former Iraqi Vice President to reward “Abdul Ghani Taha Bazaz”, also known as “Mula Ghani”, former KRG Justice Minister. In another letter, “Mula Ghani” allegedly responded, demanding the full amount of money before he went ahead with the assassination plot. The sensational aspect of the spy reports is not simply that they name names, but that they also provide details about the operations they carried out, and the payment they received. The payment sometimes came in the form of oil coupons.

In an interview published in Cawder weekly newspaper on 16 October, Mohammad Haji Mahmoud, secretary general of the Kurdistan Socialist Party and member of parliament in the current KRG cabinet, said: “We can’t say they are spies yet, because some of them were simply working with the Baathists, but they were not spies. We are now calling all of them spies, and this is wrong. This Baathist spies story is not new. These files first appeared in 1991, but the problem was that the newspapers were not allowed to talk about such things as they are now. Back in September 2003, the subject came up again, but nothing was done about it.”

Haji Mahmoud added: “In Algeria, anyone found to be a spy at any time will be thrown out of the country. In some other countries, they may be forgiven. In our country, it is the reverse. There were some people, whom I helped not to be arrested, and a few months later, they became ministers in the KRG. Just a few months ago, the ‘Jash’ [Kurdish word for Kurdish mercenaries who worked for the Baathists] were demanding blood money from those peshmargas who killed members of their family. What’s next? They will demand blood money for the murders at Amna Suraka [former Baathist Security Office in Slemani]?”

According to Haji Mahmoud, the Kurdistan Parliament should strip the suspected spies who are currently in high level positions, of their power and immunity, no matter if they are the head of a party, a member of parliament or a minister.

"They should send them home, and take them to court because so long as they have immunity, the court cannot give them notification or question them. This must start with Parliament.”

2006-11-14T00:23:00.000-07:00

Friends in need

By Basit GharibSLEMANI

Soma

Why the Americans have a hard time keeping friends, but have no trouble making enemies.
The United States builds its relations according to its own political and economic interests, easily abandoning friends if its interests are endangered. This statement will come as no surprise to observers of American foreign policy. In the 1950s and 1960s, the US backed southern Vietnam by launching a war against northern Vietnam. The history of that war is well known. When American interests were endangered and anti-war pressures increased inside America, Henry Kissinger, President Richard Nixon’s National Security Advisor, secretly and without consulting with the government of southern Vietnam, met with Doc To, North Vietnam’s envoy, to sign a cease-fire agreement. When the north Vietnamese forces defeated the forces of south Vietnam, and occupied the south’s capital “Saygon” on 30 April 1975, the American forces immediately withdrew, abandoning tens of thousands of employees and supporters to be slaughtered by north Vietnamese forces. Many similar cases can be found throughout American history. That’s why it’s hard for Americans to keep friends, and all too easy for them to make enemies. When Saddam Hussein’s regime was toppled in the US-led invasion of Iraq, many people in the country welcomed the Americans as liberators and allies. But the welcome party was short-lived. Today, this course has been reversed, and except for the Kurdistan Region, in many places across Iraq, the American forces have more enemies than friends. In April 2003, backed by the Americans themselves, we entered the city of Kirkuk in order to reopen the city’s TV channel. We took with us all the requirements of the channel. We didn’t even take a penny from the Americans. We did that all on our own, despite the fact that the Americans were generously pouring money out at the time. Relaunching the channel at that sensitive period was in the best interest of the Americans. They needed it to communicate directly with the people. During a two-month period, we broadcasted thousands of the American forces’ statements, press conferences and television interviews by the American commanders from Colonel William Mayville, who was heading the reconstruction efforts in the city, to civil authorities, and those who were in charge of the city’s security and others. Yet, we were always the target of the American forces’ tantrums. They constantly attacked us, sometimes arresting our pershmarga guards and confiscating their weapons, which were given to them with the full knowledge of the Americans. In one case, they even used tanks and helicopters. Although we took our complaints to Colonel Mayville, they went on with their violations until they forced us to pack up and leave for Slemani. The Americans’ whimsical behavior came as a surprise to us. We learned eventually that despite all the cooperation they received from us, there were Baathist elements within the staff at the channel, and they had been stirring trouble, sabotaging our relations with the Americans. Their efforts had prevailed; the Americans believed them, instead of listening to us. That’s why it’s easy for the Americans to make enemies and hard for them to make friends. Remarkably, our committed, stateless and oppressed people continue to view the Americans as liberators and allies. We hope that the Americans take this into consideration and put an end to their erratic, interest-oriented behavior, in order to keep our friendship and “not throw us to the wolves,” as the old Kurdish saying goes.

The writer is editor of KHAK magazine.

2006-10-26T23:01:00.000-06:00

Kurdish National Congress is Demanding the Immediate Resignation of General Ralston

KNC Press Release

On August 28, 2006, the US State Department announced the appointment of former USAF General Joseph Ralston as a "Special Envoy for countering the Kurdistan Worker's Party (PKK).”

General Ralston is a vice-chairman of The Cohen Group, a private lobby firm with close ties to the American Turkish Council (ATC) and Lockheed Martin. According to an article in the Washington Post in May of this year, Lockheed Martin acknowledged it was a client of The Cohen Group, and paid some $500,000 to The Cohen Group for services rendered in 2005. General Ralston is also a member of the 2006 Advisory Board of the ATC, as well as a current member of the Board of Directors of Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin is also a member of the ATC. Ralston's appointment came at a time when Turkey was finalizing the sale of 30 new Lockheed Martin F-16 aircraft (approx. $3 billion) and as Turkey was due to make a decision on the $10 billion purchase of the new Lockheed Martin F-35 JSF aircraft. The sale for the F-16's was approved by Congress in mid-October and Turkey's decision in favor of the F-35 JSF was announced on October 25, shortly after Ralston's recent stay in Ankara, ostensibly to counter the PKK.

At the same time, a unilateral PKK ceasefire went into effect on October 1, although it was rejected by both the Washington and Ankara governments’ days before it went into effect. This is in spite of the fact that the PKK prefers to negotiate a political settlement to the Kurdish question in Turkey, and had indicated its willingness to do so repeatedly over the last 13 years and, most recently, in August, with demands that are fully consistent with Turkey's EU accession criteria. Last week, during a question-and-answer period after his address at a meeting of the Eurasian Strategic Research Center (ASAM) in Istanbul, General Ralston, as America's Special Envoy, refused the possibility of applying an IRA-type model to solve the issue of the PKK and the wider Kurdish question in Turkey. General Ralston, as an appointed official of the US government, has indicated there is no possible peaceful, political settlement on the horizon, a policy that goes against the will of the Kurdish people.

Additionally, there continues to be a hostile posture from the Turkish armed forces toward Iraqi Kurdistan, the only peaceful portion of Iraq. In early April, the Turkish army dramatically increased its presence in the Kurdistan region of Turkey to some 250,000-300,000 troops. Many of which were concentrated along the border with Iraqi Kurdistan. By the end of April, during Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice's visit to Ankara, hostile actions against Iraqi Kurdistan began, ostensibly aimed at alleged PKK camps. Attacks included bombings, violations of Iraqi airspace, and infiltration of Turkish special operations forces. To date, the main targets of the Turkish military in Iraqi Kurdistan have been unarmed civilian Kurds and livestock.

The decision to appoint Joseph Ralston, a former military officer with widely-known links to the defense industry, its lobby, and the Turkish lobby, calls into question the sincerity of the American administration in seeking a political solution to the gross repression carried out against the Kurdish people by the Turkish Republic. It also calls into question the sincerity of the American administration in seeking to establish democracy and democratic values in the Middle East. Both of these are magnified by the American and Turkish refusal to seek a peaceful solution which the current ceasefire affords.

By virtue of General Ralston's intimate connections with the defense industry, and with the lobby group of a foreign state that has so far shown itself hostile to any democratic changes for the Kurdish people within its borders, we consider the appointment to be an example of an extreme conflict of interest.

As such, we at the Kurdish National Congress of North America demand the resignation of General Ralston as Special Envoy to Turkey.

Kurdish National Congress of North America
knc@kncna.org

2006-10-22T16:02:00.000-06:00

Dividing Iraq and Creating a Kurdish State

By Ardalan Hardi
Kurdishaspect.com

Previously in his interview with Paul Gigot in the Wall Street Journal President Bush said to partition Iraq would be "a mistake." Bush went on to say "the Iraqi people are going to have to make that decision."

The current government that rules Iraq as a state exists only in name. The division of – Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni – already has happened. Mistake or not it is very much a reality we have to face. If our goal is to reform the Middle East like President Bush suggests, then we have to accept the will of the people of Iraq and accept the inevitable. Democracy is not forcing people to live together that do not want to.

On Oct. 11 the Iraqi parliament approved a law that will allow Iraq to be carved into a federation of autonomous regions. The bill passed the 275-member parliament by a vote of 141 to 0.

In his last interview on Fox News, President Bush said he would reject any recommendation to partition Iraq along ethnic and sectarian lines and that creating semi-autonomous states for Kurds, Shiite and Sunni Muslims would worsen divisions in Iraq. It would seem that Bush is back-tracking from his earlier statement of letting the Iraqi people make their own decision. It is understandable for the president to have reconsidered his earlier comments when it comes to Iraq’s’ future since the U.S. has invested so much money and manpower in freeing Iraq from tyranny. However, to emphatically rule out the partition of Iraq is regrettable.

Staggering violence in Iraq, has now taken 2,791 American lives and according to The Lancet, the British medical journal, 650,000 Iraqi lives have been lost. It is time for a new approach in Iraq.

Many experts agree dividing Iraq is the only way to keep stability in the region and to bring foreign troops home.

Senator Trent Lott, former republican party senate majority leader says “When it comes to curbing Iraq’s sectarian violence, we should remember that Iraq is essentially three peoples — Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites — lumped together long ago by Colonial Britain into the manufactured nation of Iraq. Suppressed by decades of dictatorship, these three peoples still have distinct historical and cultural differences, manifesting themselves again and threatening the stability of the region and the entire world.” He goes on to say “Iraq requires a new plan.”

Peter Galbraith, former U.S. Ambassador to Croatia and author of a new book, The End of Iraq,” says “Iraq has disintegrated into three parts – a pro-Western Kurdistan in the north, an Iranian-dominated Shiite entity in the south, and a chaotic Sunni Arab region in the center.” He goes on to say “There can be no strategy of keeping Iraq together because it is not together.”
U.S. senator Joe Biden says “resolving the problems in Iraq will require separating the various factions there.” He added “the Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis need to have their own mostly autonomous regions in Iraq, that reconstruction assistance should be increased to the country and that most U.S. troops should be withdrawn by 2008.” Biden said this plan would be similar to what was done during the mid-1990s in Bosnia.

President Bush’s desire to keep Iraq as a unified country is hopeless and unworkable. The sectarian violence that has plagued Iraq for last few years is not going to go away like Shlomo Avineri, professor of political science at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, says “There seems to be no power able to hold Iraq together. Attempts to set up a national unity government, in which all groups will be represented, have failed.” Such attempts will probably fail in the future as well, even if they are papered over by some verbal, worthless face-saving formula.”

"Iraq is going the way of the former Yugoslavia. When ethnic and religious groups are unable and unwilling to live together in a country held together by force and lacking any democratic traditions, disintegration may be the only way out."

"Maybe three separate states in what used to be Iraq have a better chance - as occurred in Yugoslavia - of leading to some stabilization and even democratic development."

"By calling the strife in Iraq "sectarian," observers and policymakers are trying to minimize the deep chasms that divide Iraqi society - like calling the bloody wars between Catholics and Protestants in 17th-century Europe "sectarian." But those were not only about theological disagreements; they were about identity, historical narrative and memory."

"The sooner one realizes their force - and their legitimacy within their respective communities - the sooner illusions about abstract democracy and non-existing unity can be replaced by more realistic policies."

However, President Bush maintains that such a move would increase violence in the region and "create problems for Turkey". On the contrary, many, including some Turkish experts, agree that a Kurdish state would be a beneficial to Turkey’s security. Furthermore, Turkey would rather see a democratic Kurdish state rather than another Islamic fundamentalist regime on its border. Moreover, the Turkish economy is already benefiting from a Kurdish regional government developing economy.

Sedat Laciner, director of the USAK says “Contrary to the general belief, there is no fear of the establishment of a Kurdish state among Turkish public opinion. The premise that a possible Kurdish state in Northern Iraq will threaten Turkey is not a majority view in Turkey. On the contrary, a Kurdish state in Northern Iraq may have some advantages for Turkey.”

This week another Republican from Bush's home state has come to the same conclusion. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas expressed her openness to consider the value of breaking up Iraq.

President Bush did the right thing by getting rid of the dictator Saddam. Now it is time to come to the right conclusion by dividing Iraq and getting our troops out of harms way.

A united Iraq does not exist and never will. Forcing unity in a country that does not want to be unified creates a time bomb that could bring further negative ramifications and greater consequences to the future of U.S. foreign policy. It is false to think that a united Iraq keeps U.S. interests at heart when it only benefits those neighboring countries that lack democracy in their own states and are fearful that a true democratic Kurdish state might coerce them to change their ways. By dividing Iraq, at least we will gain the Kurdish nation as an ally in a region where true friends are hard to come by. We might even gain some influence from the Shiite’s in the south.

Like former senator Trent Lott says “I’d rather have 50 percent of something than 100 percent of nothing.”

2006-10-20T19:03:00.000-06:00

Will the Parties to submit the documents?

By Asos Hardi

Awene

I read on the Kurdistan regional government's website that the committee set up to investigate alleged Kurdish collaborators with Saddam Hussein’s regime has asked the United States military and all the Iraqi political parties to hand over Baathist intelligence documents. It is unclear whether this was an official request or just a press statement, but the documents held by US forces and the political parties are central to resolving the issue.

The Kurdish committee cannot impose demands on the US military, but we would like to know whether the committee is at least going to insist that the Kurdish parties submit what documents they have? Kurdistan regional president Massoud Barzani has told the media that the committee has full powers to act, and its head is an independent judge. That raises the question of whether the parties really will open their files, or just hand over some worthless documents. Who is going to make them them? In a country where the security and intelligence agencies are controlled by political parties, what can an independent committee do? It is like a game of snakes and ladders: in theory, we are making progress, but we are always afraid that the dice might land us on a snake and take us back to the beginning of the game.

(Awene is a Sulaimaniyah-based independent newspaper issued weekly by the Awene)

IWPR

2006-10-01T22:50:00.000-06:00

Kurdish phobia that exits in Turkey

Kurdishaspect.com

By Ardalan Hardi

Turkish Daily says the president of Iraq has negotiated with a terrorist organization and any negotiation with terrorist organizations is unacceptable for any state. The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) is considered a terrorist organization by Iraq, the United States, the European Union and Turkey. The article goes on to say Talabani is the first official who confesses that he was in direct talks with the PKK terrorist organization.

In an interview with Newsweek President Talabani said “We are urging the Turkish Kurds to be moderate, to wage their struggle through democratic means.” President Talabani’s attempt to face the PKK issue through diplomatic, democratic process is the only way to establish a peace in Turkey with regards to the Kurds. Since Iraq is a sovereign nation, it has earned the right to makes its own analysis concerning with whom and how it wants to negotiate to resolve the PKK issue peacefully.

Consider the following.

Why is it okay for Turkey to dialog with Hammas when Hamas is listed as a terrorist organization by Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, the European Union, Israel, and the U.S., and is banned in Jordan? However, it is not acceptable for Jalal Talabani, a Kurd and president of Iraq, to talk to PKK. In addition, Talabani’s dialog with PKK is nothing new. It was not long ago when former Turkish president, Turgut Özal, appealed for Talabani assistants to reach a deal with PKK in order to resolve the Kurdish issue. The cease fire of the 90’s was the direct result of those negotiations. Unfortunately Mr. Ozal passed away and those talks ended. In a short period of time, northern Kurdistan was again engulfed in violence.
PKK bases in Iraq are refugee camps that were inherited from the previous Iraqi regime. All of the refugees fled Turkey to avoid political oppression and extreme poverty.
Under the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugeesand 1967 Protocol, a signatory nation must grant asylum to refugees and cannot forcibly return refugees to their nations of origin. According to the international law, refugees are individuals who: are outside their country of nationality or habitual residence; have a well-founded fear of persecution because of their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion; and are unable or unwilling to avail themselves of the protection of that country, or to return there, for fear of persecution.
Iraq’s government is obligated to uphold international law and cannot and should not force the asylum seekers back to Turkey where it is certain they will face execution by Ankara’s government.
In an interview with CNN, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister, rejected calls by an imprisoned Kurdish rebel leader for an unconditional ceasefire by the PKK, saying "a ceasefire is done between states. It is not something for the terrorist organization." Looking back in history we see that for years the U.S. considered PLO to be a terrorist organization. While Menachem Begin stated on more than one occasion that even if the PLO accepted UN Security Council resolution 242 and recognized Israel's right to exist, he would never negotiate with the organization. In the final analysis and for the sake of peace, the U.S. and Israel ended the dead lock that had plagued the Middle East peace process and opened dialogue with Arafat and the PLO.
If Turkey truly wants to end the Kurdish question peacefully, it does not have to have dialogue with PKK. Ankara’s government can pick anyone of the other legal Kurdish political parties within Turkey to negotiate on how to improve economic development in northern Kurdistan, allow real exercise of cultural rights for Kurds, and recognize Kurdish identity in Turkey. By doing so PKK would became a mute point.

It is obvious this attack on President Talabani is just another propaganda scheme by Turkish state to pave the way for invading Kurdish de-facto state.

The problem is Turkey is not interested in solving the Kurdish issue peacefully. This Kurdish phobia that exits in Turkey goes back to creation of Turkish state from Kamal Ataturk and persists to this date. Everyone knows Turkish military is in control of the government in Turkey and in order to maintain their hold on power, they have successfully instilled this fear of the Kurd factor in their citizens to legitimize their own existence.

The statements in Turkish Daily made by Nilgun Gulcan, the so called Turkish think tank, saying the Kurdish leaders in Iraq aim to separate Iraq and to establish a Kurdish state in the north adding “They abuse the PKK problem. They first supported the PKK terrorism in order to make Turkey busy – not to prevent separation of Iraq – and now they want to legalize a terrorist organization. It is unfortunate that a legal president makes negotiations with a terrorist organization.” Gulcan goes on to say “As long as Barzani and Talabani continue to support the PKK terrorism, a possible Turkish military intervention in Northern Iraq would be on the agenda.” This is another validation of the Kurdish phobia that exists in the Turkish state. These allegations are just baseless propaganda to legitimize Turkish military intervention in Kurdistan’s regional government and eliminate any gains’ the Kurds have had in recent history.

Turkey continually uses the PKK card unsuccessfully as a ploy to gain support from the international community for its devious plan.

The EU and US must stand firm against Ankara’s government fraudulent attempts on sabotaging the only part of Iraq that is in peace.

2006-09-30T10:00:00.000-06:00

"New Faces, Old Tunes"

Kurdishaspect.com
Eamad J. Mazouri

To the astonishment of Kurdistan Regional Government, and in an interview with al-Sabah newspaper published 24 September, [Federal] Iraqi Oil Minister Hussein Shahristani said his Ministry is not committed to investment contracts signed by the Kurdistan Regional Government in oil industry. He further stated that Baghdad [Federal] Oil Ministry would review the terms of these contracts.

This unpleasant bolt from the blue brought a swift response from the Office of the Prime Minister of KRG Mr. Nechirvan Barzani in the form of a Statement, blaming Iraqi Federal Government for non-implementation of the Iraqi Constitution, and attempting sabotage Kurdistan’s meticulous efforts to develop the region.

The statement read that, article 115 of the Iraqi Constitution of 2005 gives Regions [Kurdistan] “all powers not stipulated in the exclusive powers of the federal government.” Thus, Oil and Gas are not among the exclusive powers of the federal government.

Also, article 141 of the Iraqi Constitution specifically validates “decisions issued by the Kurdistan Regional Government, including court decisions and contracts” since 1992.
The statement further elaborated that, the people of Kurdistan of their free volition chose to be in a voluntarily union with Iraq on the basis of the constitution. If Baghdad Ministers refuse to put up with that constitution, the people of Kurdistan reserve the right to reconsider that choice.
It appears that no matter what the Kurdistan Regional Government does, it would be considered the wrong choice by those who are trying to turn KRG’s actions around and portray Kurdistan unreasonably and with prejudice as endeavoring to secede and form an independent Kurdistan. A charge that has been overused by Kurds’ opponents inside and outside Iraq but every time refuted by KRG officials. Those suspicious circles in fact are the ones that are seeking the disintegration of Iraq as they have in their mind if they fail to regain the power they had under dictatorship, but currently lost.

Kurdistan Regional Government has over and over again reiterated that Kurdistan opted of her free will to enter into a contract with Iraq to build a democratic federalism based on a voluntary union. The Iraqi Constitution is considered to be that contract or the major portion of it next to Kurdistan constitution.

Today, Kurds are not only major players in the political game in Baghdad, but also are playing a key role in bringing various Iraqi factions together to build the new federal Iraq. It is time for those who are throwing various accusations at Kurds to put an end to their baseless claims and focus instead on the real issues facing Iraq such as security and providing basic services to their citizens. Kurdistan Regional Government has expressed its wish and will in more than one occasion to assist the rest of Iraq to restore that and to share its experience with them.

On the other hand, federalism is not a ready to apply prescription. Every country must follow its own case in point, taking advantage of the accumulated international experience available. However, there is one significant lesson every potential country to be a federal candidate can benefit from. Since federal unions, unlike autonomies are conceptually different in terms of structure. For two regions or more to enter into a contract to form a union, that union usually becomes more powerful and lasting if further authority is retained by the regions and less given to the federal government. The best example here would be the first modern federal system in the world; that is the American model. On the other hand,[ assuming all the power is held by the intended regions, as it suppose to be the case in forming federations]when more concessions are made in favor of the federal government at the expense of the regions, the latter naturally will crave for more powers. Inevitably, persistency will lead to constant demand by regions for more powers that would result in shifting power from the center to the region and ultimately leading to the disintegration of the union. On the contrary, when regions reserve more powers at the outset, through constitutional and judicial channels and over time the power shifts in the other direction, empowering the federal government without threatening the regions as it was the case in the United States of America. Understanding the essence of this equation and accepting it will allow the Iraqi people to make the intelligent choice between building a temporary or a lasting federal union.

Unfortunately, this incident came in a chain of events that we could say started with Saddam’s flag controversy fabricated a few weeks ago, to the federal issue that was discussed in the parliament and put to rest for 18 months, followed by the Kirkuk issue and other Kurdish Arabized regions and now topped by the oil issue.

It is obvious that this charade will not stop unless there is a basic understanding and certain degree of tolerance and trust among Iraqi Arabs on the main issues that have been agreed upon in the constitution. They must understand that agreements are not made today to be retracted tomorrow especially not this one if they need to build a democratic federal Iraq as they claim.
If they have the intention of building something other than that or are trying to go back to dictatorship and coerced union that was imposed on the Kurds against their will, they can do it on their own without the Kurdish participation or blessings. No Kurdish administration or citizen has the stomach to go through that ordeal once again.

It is crystal clear that Kurdistan Regional Government is within its constitutional powers when making deals with international oil companies especially when it comes to exploration rights and new wells. The constitution is very clear in this regard. Current wells would be shared with federal government while the new ones fall under the jurisdiction of KRG. The administration and marketing are another issue and the constitution has dealt with that.

Mr. Shahristani and some other Iraqi federal officials either haven't grasped the concept of federalism or they don't believe in it or are misinterpreting the constitution. In either case, they are echoing the deposed regime's stance when it comes to Kurdish rights in this regard.
For decades the Kurds have fought successive Iraqi governments for their legitimate rights and have sacrificed too many lives. These issues were always the main obstacles in any past negotiations with Baghdad including the former regime of dictator Saddam.

True, these people who are objecting irrationally to Kurdish legitimate rights are different from the ones under the previous regime, but they are playing on the same tunes. Kurds are very familiar with this type of music coming from the past and that is causing a real concern in Kurdistan.

There are some Kurdish red lines here; embodied in the Kurdish demands they have fought hard for to secure them from ousted regime. They could be summed up as: A democratic federal Iraq, return of Arabized Kurdish land to the bosom of Kurdistan including but not limited to Kirkuk, Peshmarga forces, and natural resources of Kurdistan. All of which have been treated fairly with and resolved in the Iraqi constitution of 2005, that has been voted on by the Iraqi people and ratified by the Iraqi Parliament.

However, constitution has not deterred some Arab ultra-nationalists and Ba’athists and those who hover around that axis of evil from coming out every now and then trying to raise an issue as a pretext to attack Kurdistan and her nascent government.

They must know, as the Prime Minister Mr. Nechirvan Barzani emphasized that any violation of any of those principles constitutes a legal and constitutional ground for Kurds to reconsider the union and perhaps walk away if they do not find acceptance and commitment of the very principle of the voluntary union by other parties. Kurdistan's message to them is: A coercive union was imposed on Kurds for over 80 years. The consequences were dire, and the country still is paying the bill. For 15 years now, Kurdistan has been running successfully its own affairs. If you want Kurdistan to join this union or to remain part of this federal union, the framework endorsed in the constitution is a right milieu to make it work.

Don't try to impose any solutions on Kurdistan. Do not object to the rights taken away from us under previous regime that Kurds fought for and sacrificed too much and for too long. If your only concern truly is separation as you claim, you have Kurdistan Regional Governments’ assurances that there are no such plans as long as the Kurds have the right to choose how to be part of that union. That is the only union that would work, last and prosper.

2006-09-29T12:14:00.000-06:00

September 29, 2006

Sunni Arabs, Sadr movement, and Turkmen hold secret meetings

Kurdishaspect.com
Translated from Awene newspaper

Awene - An informed source told Awene that Sunni Arabs, Sadr movement, and Turkmen have held secret meetings to plan against implementation of article 140. The source said except the meetings, statements from those three groups have indications that they have common framework to stand against implementing the article.

The article 140 in Iraqi constitution calls for normalization of the area that has faced Arabization during Saddam regime, including Kirkuk. After normalizations referendum will be carried out to know whether the people of Kirkuk want to join Kurdistan Region. Recently Ali Mahdi, a Turkmen leader had said, "Even if all the high position (of the city's administration) be given to Turkmen Front (his party), we will not agree Kikuk be annexed to Kurdistan region."

Awene is an independent newspaper based in Sulaimania, issued by Awene Company.

2006-09-19T08:25:00.000-06:00

September 19 2006

Insults to the Kurdish people and all Those Who Suffered Under Saddam the Dictator.

By Ardalan Hardi
Kurdishaspect.com

Last week’s comments by Judge Abdullah al-Amiri in court telling Saddam “You are not a dictator” is a disgrace to the position he was sworn to uphold. The prejudice statement alone should immediately disqualify him from his position.

Mr. Amiri, the dictionary says a judge is a person who makes decisions that determine or settle points at issue and is one capable of making rational, dispassionate, and wise decisions. You have shown that you lack all of these qualities. Without hesitation, you took it upon yourself and declared a tyrant Saddam is not a dictator. This is an insult to all those Kurdish and Shiite witnesses who have testified in your court about the torture they had to endure under the former dictator’s regime. Your assertion dishonours all those families’ that hopelessly wait for another mass grave to be discovered so they can bring closure to their missing love ones.
Mr. Amiri, Webster’s dictionary also defines dictator as one holding complete autocratic control or one ruling absolutely and often oppressively. Under Saddam, Iraq was ruled by force, brutality and oppression. For decades the Saddam Hussein's regime has killed, tortured, raped and terrorized the Iraqi people. Amnesty International reported “The people of Iraq suffered systematic and widespread abuses of their human rights for decades. Mass killings, “disappearances,” systematic use of torture, political imprisonment and forced removal from communities were used by Saddam Hussein’s government in an attempt to wipe out all opposition.”

Human Rights Watch comprehensive report “Genocide in Iraq - The Anfal Campaign Against the Kurds,” originally published in July 1993, details the systematic and deliberate murder of at least 50,000 and possibly as many as 100,000 Kurds. The killings occurred between February and September 1988. “Genocide in Iraq” shows that the Kurdish victims were targeted on the basis of their ethnicity. According to Human Rights Watch, "senior Arab diplomats told the London-based Arabic daily newspaper al-Hayat in October [1991] that Iraqi leaders were privately acknowledging that 250,000 people were killed during the uprisings, with most of the casualties in the south."

It is obvious that you, Mr. Amiri, choose to be oblivious to the evidence and your surroundings. Your honor, if an oppressor like Saddam is not a dictator, who is?

The Iraqi people are in need of an independent and honorable judge. One that has high moral standards and that preserves the integrity of the judicial system – which you do not. Since you were a member of Saddam’s Ba’ath party and served as a prosecuting judge in a criminal court under the former dictator’s regime, I can see why you think the way you do.

You were one of them and you have proven that you still are. You bring disgrace to the black robe you wear, to your profession and to the judicial system you pledged to serve.

It is very apparent you are biased toward the tyrant Saddam and your recent statement most impertinently endorses your affinity to the former dictator and his thugs.

A statement from the Kurdish Halabja center in Sulaymania said “We demand the dismissal of the judge at the high tribunal and the nomination of another competent and neutral judge whose ideas are not polluted by the fascist Ba’ath.”

You, Mr. Amiri, are using the trial of Saddam as a podium to advocate your fascist Arab nationalistic propaganda and ignite the insurgency that continues to plague today’s Iraq. It is time for you to step aside and let justice prevail.

The prosecutors should boycott the trial until the demand for a new judge is met and perhaps they should investigate Mr. Amiri’s background to see if he too should be on trial for his crimes against humanity.

2006-09-06T00:00:00.000-06:00

The Flag Controversy in Iraq

By Eamad J. Mazouri

Kurdishaspect.com

For over a week now, there has been a frenzied controversy in Iraq and in the Arab world concerning a decision by the President of Iraqi Kurdistan Region Mr. Massoud Barzani not to allow dictator Saddma’s flag to be flown in Kurdistan. Arabic media selectively and subjectively has taken the issue out of its context and tried unsuccessfully to portray the issue as a step toward separation and declaring an independent Kurdistan. Before delving deeper into the subject, I like to shed some light briefly on the history of flag in general, what it stands for and when and how it changes, using the available resources on the net.
“Brief History of Flag”

“Over 4000 years passed since people first started using flags. Authentic flag design of ancient peoples includes a metal flag from Iran, ca. 3000 BC. The first type of flag was called a vexilloid”. “Vexillology is the scientific study of flags. This word comes from a Latin word which means "guide". First flags or vexilloids were metal or wooden poles with carvings on top. About 2,000 years ago, pieces of fabric or material were added to some vexilloids for decoration. These looked more like the flags we know today.”

“A flag is a piece of colored fabric or material that is used as a symbol, or for sending a signal. Some flags are used only for ecoration. Usually, flags are messages from a person or a group of people.” “People use flags to give others information, such as, who they are. “ “Long ago, knights carried flags into battle because it was hard to know who the knights were when they were dressed up and covered in armor ready for battle! Flags were important because they helped soldiers tell their friends from their enemies in battle.”

“Today, every country in the world has a flag. As governments change, so do their flags. Every state in the United States has a flag, too. Flags are used to give information, signals or stand for special symbols or things. Many organizations or groups like the Girl Scouts or the United Nations have flags. Clubs, sport teams and organizations have their own flags too. The five circles of the Olympic flag represent the coming together of people from five continents in friendly competition. Peace is the message of the olive branches cradling the world in the flag of the United Nations. Some people, like a king or queen, have their very own personal flag. Sometimes it flies over any building or place where they are staying.”

“Flags include symbols that are used to show ideas which would otherwise take many words. Flags are used for wars, as well as for the celebration of special events. On sad occasions, flags are flown at half-mast to honor the dead, and draped over the coffins of national heroes.”
“National flags are not merely symbols of a country. Their colors and designs convey past history and future goals. Flags have powerful connotations. For all the controversy it is interesting to point out that the United States did not even have a standardized flag until 1912!”

History of Iraqi Flag

The flag of Iraq has had four different designs since the establishment of Iraq in 1921.

1-1921-1959

“The original flag of Iraq was adopted in 1921, when the country was formed. It was a black-white-green horizontal tricolor, with a red trapezoid (some variants have a triangle) extending from the mast side. Two seven-point white stars on the triangle denoted the then 14 provinces of the kingdom. The colors chosen for the new flag were those of the Hashemite leaders of the Arab Revolt who provided the country with its first king, and thus it is very similar to the Flag of Jordan, another Hashemite Kingdom.”

2-1959-1963

“Following Abdul Karim Qassim's 1958 revolution that deposed the monarchy, in 1959 Iraq adopted a black-white-green vertical tricolor with, in the middle of the white band, a red eight-pointed star with a yellow circle in its center. The yellow color was considered a Kurdish symbol.”

3-1963-1991

“After the Qassim government was overthrown, a new flag was adopted in July 1963. The new flag had three stripes, of red, white, and black, with three green stars in the white stripe. The green stars were originally placed there for the proposed union with Egypt and Syria (United Arab Republic), which both had flags with two stars in the middle at the time. They would have changed to three if the Union had not fallen apart.”

4-1991-2004

“On 14 January 1991, the flag was changed again. The meaning of the three stars was changed from their original geographic meaning to representations of the three tenets of the Ba'ath party motto, Wihda, Hurriyah, Ishtirrakiyah (Unity, Freedom, Socialism). Saddam Hussein decided to place the words, Allahu Akbar (God is Great) between the stars. It is said (though unconfirmed) that the words on the flag are in Saddam's own handwriting, and many interpreted the change as an attempt to garner support from the Islamic world in the period immediately preceding the first Gulf War.

Although the flag has not "officially" been changed, this design has been largely replaced by the version with modified script. It is presumed that the modified version of the 1991 design will become the official flag of Iraq upon the creation of a new Iraqi Constitution.”

2004 Flag Controversy “

On 26 April 2004 the Iraq Interim Governing Council announced a new flag for post-Saddam Iraq. The occupied government stated that from around 30 competing entries, it had chosen a design by the distinguished Iraqi artist-cum-architect Rifat al-Chaderchi (aka Rifat Chadirji). The flag was white, with parallel blue-yellow-blue bands across the bottom quarter or third; the blue bands represented the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers, and the yellow represented Iraq's Kurdish minority (the reason for this symbolism was unclear, but the flag of Kurdistan does feature a yellow sun). In the middle of the white field was a large Islamic crescent which was, unusually, depicted in a shade of blue.”

Current Flag Controversy

The recent controversy started when Kurdistan President Mr. Barzani declared officially not to hoist Baathists’ flag in Kurdistan. Instead of that the flag of July 14th to be used until the implementation of article 12 of the permanent Iraqi Constitution of 2005. The reasoning behind that decision was the fact that all of the crimes and atrocities were committed under that same flag not only against Kurdish people alone, but the rest of Iraqi people as well, not to mention the war against Iran, the invasion of Kuwait and bombarding neighboring countries with his deadly rockets.

It was under this flag that Saddam’s regime destroyed more than 4500 Kurdish villages, used chemical weapons on Halabja that killed more than 5000 people all civilians, waged the al-Anfal campaign in Kurdistan where more than 180,000 people killed. It was under this same flag that he waged a genocidal war against Kurdish people and the mass graves are the proof on these heinous atrocities.

All the accusations mentioned by the supporters of Saddams flag are baseless, unsubstantiated and far from the truth. However, as a result the row still is in progress and various contradicting and threatening statements have been issued from a variety of offices and governments regarding this matter that has become the topic of the hour in a heated debate. This dispute has dragged in the highest offices of the federal government in Baghdad and was topped today by intervention of the American ambassador to Iraq Mr. Khalil Zade in a statement that reads: these kinds of actions should not be taken unilaterally, instead the issue needs to be resolved through the constitution and the Iraqi national assembly.

Unfortunately and to the astonishment of the Kurdistan Regional Government, some Arab circles and Arabic media came to defend Saddam’s flag. They started an unfair and unjust campaign against KRG and Kurdish people in an attempt to keep the Baathist flag as the national one. First of all, for those who are defending this flag, it is not clear yet which flag they are defending. Is it the one with Saddam’s own handwriting on it? Or is it the same tri-color 3 star but the expression (God is greater) written with Kufic? Or perhaps a different version of that. These people are requested to tell us which one they consider it national. While they talk so much about the legality and the constitutionality of the Kurdish action, they need to be reminded that the change of 1991 and all the ones that followed were neither official nor legal. Neither the Iraqi government nor the Iraqi parliament had a saying in that or approved it.
It is worth mentioning that the flag in dispute has never been hoisted in Kurdistan since 1991, except a modified version of it in Sulaimania region for a short period of time.

This flag has brought nothing on the Iraqi people in general other than destruction, war, mass-killing, genocide, chemical weapons and mass graves. It is hard to believe that there are some Iraqi people out there who would defend such a flag that symbolizes the deposed regime of dictator Saddam and the tyranny of the Baath party that reduced Iraq to rubbles and surviving Iraqi people to live below minimum living standards of the poorest countries of the world, despite the huge human and natural resources of Iraq.

Undemocratic regimes changes, along with them all the emblems and symbols that represent them. There is no single justification for keeping this flag and hailing it as the national Iraqi flag except for those who are trying to cause obstacles in the way of the progress the new democratic federal Iraq is making towards peace, stability and prosperity. One thing is for sure. These attempts are not serving Iraqi people or their gains of rights and freedoms.
After all, let’s keep in mind that flag as a form or symbol while sacred and sacrosanct, it cannot be more sanctified than the essence it represents or embodies. These are the people themselves, their history, rights, liberties, struggle and heritage. It would be wrong to hail the form as holier than essence as some are trying to do. This issue has been dealt with in democratic societies clearly through constitutional process. In non-democratic societies, of course they are still killing the citizen in the name of patriotism, but the new Iraq is not going to capitulate to those who are still defending Saddam’s regime.

Where as the Iraqi permanent constitution of 2005 is silent when it comes to which flag is considered the national flag, it is clear and straight forward in article 12 that the flag and national anthem along with all the national emblems would be regulated by a law where all Iraqi components are reflected. This article should have been implemented long time ago. The Kurds are still waiting for that day.

One of the basis of accusations against Kurds is that this was a step towards separation and the declaration of independence from Iraq. These people realize they are not telling the truth, but they are trying to deceive others. Kurds have participated aggressively in the formation of the Iraqi government; this includes the elections, the draft of the constitution and the federal government in Baghdad. In fact the Kurds have become the stalwart proponent of a federal Iraq. If they feel today they need to declare their independence, they would come and declare it straight out. Kurds have accepted to join Iraqi Arabs in a voluntary union where all are equal, live in peace, harmony and prosperity regardless of their race, religion or sect. To try to coerce the them into an involuntary union as it has been the case for the last 80 years or imposing certain solutions on Kurds or others not going to serve the purpose of building a new democratic federal Iraq. This might be the recipe for the disintegration of Iraq.

Mr. Barzani’s repeated statements should be more than enough to clear the Kurdish position in this regard. It could be summed up as follows: Kurds are not a minority, but rather a divided nation against its will. Like any other nation and according to every international chapter, covenant and treaty they have the right to determine their own fate, including the right to establish an independent Kurdistan on their own land. However, KRG chose federalism within the framework of a democratic federal Iraq based on a voluntary union as the best solution for the Kurdish problem at present. The justification behind that, is the fact that Kurds under such circumstances would be able to have all their rights short of statehood within Iraq while enjoying the protection of a strong sovereign state.

What Kurds are trying to do is to exercise their regional powers that were granted to them by the constitution within that framework not outside it as some are trying to portray them. The constitution is very clear in distributing these powers. Regrettably, some Arabs until this very minute do not believe in federalism and would try anything to undermine it, or perhaps they don’t fathom the core of federalism, subsequently do not differentiate between federalism and autonomy. Autonomy comes from the top to down. The central government grants the territories certain rights. On the contrary, federalism comes from down –up. Regions enter into a national contract where they give up certain powers to create a federal government, without which there will not be any federal government.

Perhaps, one of the best outcomes of this whole controversy , it might lead to speed up the process of implementing article 12 of the constitution where a new flag and a national anthem would be chosen to really reflect the history, geography, struggle, sacrifices and sufferings of all the people of Iraq without any discrimination as previous national symbols were about.

Source:http://chinese-school.netfirms.com/other-article-flags.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Iraq

2006-09-05T23:56:00.000-06:00

Iyad Alawi supports Kurdish President in removal of Baath’s flag

By Ardalan Hardi

Kurdishaspect.om

The decision by President Massoud Barzani to ban the Baath’s flag in the Kurdistan Regional Government has been criticized by some Arab politicians as a move toward independence. These politicians choose to overlook all of the crimes that were committed against the Kurdish people under that so called Iraqi flag. To the Kurdish people, the Baath’s flag is a reminder of Anfal and mass graves. It has always and will continue to be associated with Saddam’s thugs and their crimes against innocent Kurdish civilians. Furthermore, the Baath’s flag has not been hoisted in Kurdistan since Kurdistan’s liberation in 1992.

Those who fuel the fire by suggesting that the leader of the Kurdish region threatened secession are the same people who stood by and watched silently as genocide of the Kurds was being committed by Saddam’s thugs. Most are the same Sunni Arabs that recently insisted that Saddam Hussein must be freed and the charges against him and his co-defendants be dropped so he could reclaim the presidency. They will do and say anything to destroy the recent Kurdish political gains. The reality is that while more than 98 percent of the Kurdish population has voted for independent Kurdistan, the Kurdish leaders have insisted on remaining a part of Iraq.
Yesterday Iyad Alawi, the leader of the Iraqi National Accord (INA), also joined President Barazini in support of removal of Baath’s flag reported Awene, the independent Kurdish newspaper from Sulaymania. Alawi asked all political parties in Iraq to understand and sympathize with the removal of Baath’s flag in Kurdish autonyms region. He also requested the Iraqi parliament take on the removal of the Baath’s flag urgently and discuss a potential new design that would represents all Iraqis.

Article 12: of the Iraqi constitution states “The flag, national anthem, and emblem of Iraq shall be fixed by law in a way that represents the components of the Iraqi people”.

No Kurd should be forced to live under a flag that is associated with thugs of the Anfal campaign (the Kurdish genocide) and the Iraqi constitution clearly affirms that.

Could the world stand seeing a Nazi flag flying in Germany knowing the barbaric and inhuman crimes that were committed under Hitler’s regime? Of course not!

It is time to put that dark chapter of Iraq’s history behind and move forword and face the real issues that concern everyday people in Iraq – economic concerns and security issues – that are tearing Iraq apart.

These hogwash debates are simply attempts to divert the focus on the real issues that face ordinary people in Basra, Bagdad and Erbil.

2006-09-03T23:04:00.000-06:00

Barzani attacks Arab politicians over Iraqi flag

AFP

ERBIL (AFP) — The president of Iraq's autonomous Kurdish region launched a scathing attack on Iraqi Arab leaders Sunday over their opposition to his order banning the national flag from public buildings.
"Those who condemn it are chauvinists, escaping from internal problems," Massoud Barzani told members of the Kurdish regional parliament in the northen city of Erbil.

"They are losers. They are not rulers or statesmen. They can't run their region and they want to make Kurdistan just like their regions. The time of threats is over, no one has the right force his will on the Kurdish people." Barzani was talking shortly after Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Maliki, a Shiite Arab, had ordered that: "The present Iraqi flag should be hoisted on every inch of Iraqi soil until parliament takes a decision about it." This was in response to Barzani's ban on the flag's use in the Kurdish region, where many see the red, white and black national banner as a symbol of Arab nationalism and of ousted president Saddam Hussein's hated Sunni Arab-dominated regime.

"The decision to raise only the Kurdish flag instead of the present Iraqi flag in Kurdistan came after consultation with both President [Jalal] Talabani [a fellow Kurd] and the Iraqi prime minister. I did not take the decision myself," Barzani insisted.

"I ask for a new flag for Iraq to be raised, according to Item 12 of the Iraqi constitution — a new flag and a new national anthem which represents all the components of Iraq," he told the Kurdish assembly. Iraq's new constitution will allow regional governments to strengthen their autonomy, but many Arabs fear a break-up of their country and the row over the flag is seen as proxy for the struggle for an independent Kurdistan.

Referring to atrocities committed under the previous regime, Barzani said "the present flag is not the flag of Iraq, but of the Baath Party and chemical strikes, drainage of the marshes, putting down uprisings and mass graves." On May 7, the rival administrations run by the two Kurdish former resistance groups in the cities of Erbil and Suleimaniyah were united into a single autonomous regional government for Iraq's three northern provinces. Before the merger, some official buildings in Sulaimaniyah province — which was ruled by Talabani's Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) — would hoist the Iraqi flag along with the PUK party flag.

Barzani's administration in Erbil and Dohuk provinces has never flown the Iraqi flag.
Since Saddam's ouster in 2003, Kurdish politicians have taken part in national politics and put their historic demands for independence on hold but, as violence rages around the country, separatist tensions remain high.

In April 2004, the then interim government of Iraq attempted to resolve the controversy over the flag, which is emblazoned with three green stars and the legend "God is greatest", by proposing a new national banner.
A new blue and white design, however, caused much controversy. Some felt the colours were too close to those of the Israeli flag while its crescent motif reminded Kurds of their hated Turkish neighbour. It was swiftly abandoned. Parliament is expected to discuss a potential new design. The 1963 version is painted on Iraqi army vehicles and flies above government buildings in Baghdad.

Most Arab Iraqis accept this design as their national flag, although the design of the Islamic slogan — which was reportedly based on Saddam's own handwriting — has been changed to a generic typeface. "Saddam wrote the words 'God is greatest'. The words are right but they were badly used," said Barzani on Sunday. "The calligraphy used now differs in each region, but some chauvinist Arab regions still keep the handwriting of Saddam as a souvenir. There is no agreement on the kind of calligraphy to use," he said.

"Even the flag that used to be raised in Suleimaniyah did not have the words 'God is greatest' on it." Kurdistan's banner is three red, white and green horizontal bars emblazoned with a golden sun motif. It flies across the Kurdish region over government buildings and military bases.
Some Kurdish official bodies fly Iraq's 1958-1963 flag, which was that of Abdul Karim Qasim's republic after he overthrew the monarchy, rather than the later Iraqi symbol with its Baathist and pan-Arab associations.

2006-08-22T11:54:00.000-06:00

August 22, 2006

Turkey can’t prevent founding of Kurdish state: Galbraith

NTVMSNBC.com

The American advisor to Iraq’s Kurdish leaders said that Kurds in Turkey would choose a Turkey in the process of joining the European Union over other alternatives.

WASHINGTON - Ankara will not be able to prevent the founding of a Kurdish state in northern Iraq, a former senior US diplomat said late Monday.

Peter Galbraith, who is now serving as an advisor to Iraq’s Kurdish leaders, said that even Turkey was coming to the realisation that it could not stop the establishment of a Kurdish state on its borders. However, Gailbraith claimed that the traditional position of seeing an independent Kurdish state as major threat to Turkey was changing.

There was already a Kurdish state established in northern Iraq and that in time it would win its official independence, Galbraith said. The view is developing that the problem could not be solved by occupying northern Iraq, and that such a measure would lead to Turkey being thrown out of Europe and worsening its relations with the US, he said.

2006-08-19T11:42:00.000-06:00

August 18, 2006

Iran shelling Kurdish villages again

Kurdishaspect.com

Friday August 18, 2006 Kurdishaspect.com - Iranian forces have started firing artillery shells at a camp of Kurdish rebels in Qandil area again, killing two civilians.

The shelling started around 9:00 a.m. Friday morning, reported Awene, the independent Kurdish newspaper from Sulaymania.

Many experts believe that Iran and Turkey’s attack on Iraq’s Kurdistan are primarily intended to destroy the achievements of Kurds in that region. Attacking militants from minority Kurdish groups from Iran and Turkey is an excuse to destroy the Kurdish de-facto government in Iraq.
There have been a number of previous claims by Iraqi officials that their neighbors have conducted cross-border attacks.

2006-07-27T10:47:00.000-06:00

July 27, 2006

PKK is not Hezbollah

Kurdishaspect.com

Ardalan Hardi

Turkey says that Israel's recent action in Lebanon to stop Hezbollah attacks means that Turkey should be allowed to take similar steps against Kurdish guerrillas operating from northern Iraq against Turkish forces", reported The Daily Telegraph.

First of all the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and Hezbollah’s ideologies are a world apart. Hezbollah is a neo-Islamic fascism movement that promotes a close-minded fanatic ideology that is not only a threat to Israel but also to the Muslim religion and the world. PKK is working for a democratic change within Turkey in order to free an oppressed voice of the Kurdish people in northern Kurdistan.

Second, while Hezbollah has its own government and army free from Israel and chooses to continually attack civilian targets in and outside Israel, PKK does not go outside Turkey and targets only military installations within Turkey. Third, unlike Hezbollah that refuses to acknowledge the right of Israel to exist – which closes the door on dialog – the PKK, and all political parties in northern Kurdistan, have never once denied Turkish states of existence. Kurds have always welcomed dialog for a peaceful resolution to Kurdish issues. This comparison of PKK to Hezbollah is idiotic. Ankara has continually refused pleas from friends and foes to allow dialog to take place with Kurdish people. Instead, it uses military force as a tool of choice to silence any hint of Kurdish nationalism.

When do people learn that all the guerrilla tactics from PKK and all the military force used by Turkish state will not stop the bloodshed? In fact, it prolongs the malaise of death and destruction? How could we solve our differences if we refuse to talk about them? How could we talk if we refuse to have dialog with those we disagree with? With this form of diabolical, close-minded thinking, how can we expect peaceful resolution to our differences?

When we look at Hezbollah’s refusal of Israel’s state of existence, the Muslim fanatic’s refusal of western ideologies, and the Turkish refusal of the Kurdish problem, we see what creates never-ending wars. No peace will ever come between two different ideologies that pursue humanism unless they are willing to understand, accept – and respect – each others views, opinions and existence. We do not have to agree on everything, but like the old saying we should “agree to disagree”. Until we reach that conclusion as human beings, atrocities and bloodshed will continue.

The Turkish state needs to have the courage to make a move toward peaceful resolution by allowing dialog with Kurdish nation. True democratic systems do not have their own people take up arms against them. If Turkey was a truly democratic state, it would not have that problem. The reason we don’t see that in Sweden, USA, UK and most European nations is because, for most part, everyone has the same opportunities in the pursuit of happiness and equal representation.

The problem with Turkish state is that its approach on handling the Kurdish problem has been to persistently deny the Kurdish identity and to label all Kurdish attempts for peaceful resolution as terrorists. Turkey views the whole Kurdish population as terrorists. Ignorance will not make the problem go way, it only prolongs it. If Turkey destroys PKK tomorrow, the Kurdish problem will still exist. The sooner reality is accepted, the greater the chance for peace.
.

2006-07-14T14:40:00.000-06:00

July 15, 2006

Kurdish genocide denied by Ramsey Clark Saddam’s attorney

Ardalan Hardi

KurdishAspect.com

Recently I ran across a Wolf Blitzer interview with Ramsey Clark that aired on CNN June 27, 2006. Wolf Blitzer asked the former attorney general about Saddam’s trial and his involvement in the Anfal campaign.

Wolf Blitzer: “I want to go through that Anfal campaign, which is the next trial that's supposed to start in August. The organization, Human Rights Watch, with which you are familiar, had a report in 1993 on the Anfal campaign.”
The report said “Saddam Hussein's government was involved in mass executions and disappearances; 50,000 people, 200,000 people in the Kurdish areas. There was widespread use of chemical weapons, destruction of 2,000 villages, arbitrary jailing of tens of thousands of women, children and elderly, forced displacement of hundreds of thousands of Kurdish villagers.” That was according to Human Rights Watch. The report concluded that "while it would be unrealistic to expect President Saddam Hussein to put himself and his closest aides and relatives on trial, a successor government in Baghdad should not shirk from its responsibility to carry out a thorough investigation of these enormous crimes and prosecute all those involved to the full extent of the law." That's Human Rights Watch.... What do you make of it?
Clark: “I think they're wrong and I think in hindsight they would realize they're wrong, that you can't have a fair trial there because security doesn't permit it. And that's what we insisted upon in November of '05. You can't have a fair trial when your lawyers are getting killed, when you can't investigate your case, and you can't go forward. And that's very obvious”.
“If you're going to have a fair trial, you've got to have safety for everybody involved. And you don't have that. And we shouldn't presume innocence. The Defense Intelligence Agency, the DIA, the Central Intelligence Agency, the CIA, and the U.S. Marine Corps have all said that Iraq did not have gasses that were used in Anfal or in Halabja. And they've said that in The New York Times and everywhere else. So we'd better wait and assume innocence.”
“I think the presumption of innocence is not a technical rule of evidence; it's a way of life. You'd better keep your mind open. You'd better not be prejudiced if you want to survive in this life because you're creating prejudice and hatred by threats of execution and by unfair trials”.

How many mass graves have to be uncovered for Mr. Clark to be convinced that his client is one of the worst criminals this world has seen since Adolph Hitler? How many documents, witnesses, videos and pictures does Mr. Clark need to see to realize how ridiculous and hypocritical he sounds? How many documentaries have to be produced before Mr. Clark begins to see the truth? All of this, plus Saddam’s confession in court on ordering the killing of 140 Shiites, and we are asked to wait and not to be prejudiced.

Mr. Clark continually reminds us that the reason more than 200,000 Kurds and thousands of Shiites were brutally, inhumanely tortured and buried alive in mass graves by Saddam and his thugs was because they were “sentenced to death under Iraqi law, and it was for treason against your country in time of war, including an attempt to assassinate the president by the Dawa Party.” However, Clark forgets to mention the laws were created and manipulated by the dictator he is defending.

Let us assume you are right Mr. Clark. All 140 people in Dijal that attempted to assassinate Saddam and 5,000 Peshmarga forces that sided with Iran during Iraq – Iran war deserved to be sentenced for treason and death. What about all those reports of Kurdish and Shiites atrocities, mass graves of harmless women and children that are being discovered daily? What about the 5,000 civilians in Halabja? How could you say Saddam did not have poison gas ability when Physicians for Human Rights, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and every other human rights group that exists today are confirming the use of chemical weapons by Saddam on Kurdish civilians? What about the 4,000 villages that were uprooted from Kurdistan with the inhabitants never to be seen again? If Massud Barzani, the current president of Kurdistan, was guilty for leading the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) forces and siding with Iran, what about the 8,000 innocent Barzani civilians including men, women and children? What was their crime? What about Saddam’s own confession on Iraqi TV? Just one month after Barzani Kurds were taken, Saddam admitted publicly his regime was involved in their disappearance. When asked about his safety, Clark says he “feels pretty safe in Iraq. I'm an American. I can get in and out. I don't live there. My family's not there. I don't have to worry about my family.” That’s right, Mr. Clark, but tens of thousands of Kurds and Shiites families did not have that luxury under the brutal dictator you are defending.

U.S. president Abraham Lincoln once said “Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally” I wonder how you would feel if you were a Kurd from Iraq and lived under Saddam laws and your family disappeared without a trace and you waited more than 15 years to hear something about their status only to find out they were buried alive in a mass grave some where in the dessert near Saudi Arabia. Would you still say the Human Rights Watch is wrong?

Mr. Clark is the same man who defended Karl Linnas, an ex-Nazi concentration camp guard in Estonia who oversaw the murder of some 12,000 resistance fighters and Jews. Clark is the same man who attended the funeral of Slobodan Milosevic and declared: "History will prove Milosevic was right. Charges are just that, charges. The trial did not have facts." Clark also described Slobodan Milosevic and Saddam Hussein as "both commanders" who "were courageous enough to fight more powerful countries.”

Mr. Clark these are not just baseless charges. This was genocide. There are hundreds of thousands of documentations captured by the Kurds from the Iraqi army that are stored at Colorado University in Boulder that prove genocide without a reasonable doubt.You have crossed a moral line and have lost your credibility by defending thugs like Saddam Hussein.

It is worthy of attention that Ramsey Clark is the son of Tom Clark who was also an attorney general under President Truman. President Truman admitted to a biographer that "Tom Clark was my biggest mistake." But Truman insisted: "It isn't so much that he's a bad man. It's just that he's such a dumb son of a bitch”. I wonder if Truman was alive today what he would say about young Mr. Clark.

2006-07-02T11:03:00.000-06:00

Remembering Saddam's Victims

If you have half an hour to spare, this sunny afternoon, watch this PBS documentary, online:

Dr. Mohammed Ihsan is investigating the disappearance more than 20 years ago -- during the early years of Saddam Hussein’s brutal dictatorship -- of 8,000 Kurdish men and boys. “This case is particularly significant,” says FRONTLINE/World reporter Gwynne Roberts. “Their abduction marks the point when Saddam’s regime moved from isolated acts of brutality to mass murder.” ...

Ihsan shows Roberts an eerie September 1983 black and white videotape in which Saddam summons Kurds to hear him denounce the “treachery” of the Barzanis. “They’ve been severely punished and have gone to hell,” Saddam declares. A captive audience obediently applauds. The abduction of the Barzani Kurds was the precursor to Saddam’s infamous Anfal campaign, in which his forces used terror tactics, including poisonous gas, to kill more than 100,000 Kurdish men, women and children.

Ihsan’s expedition gets under way from Arbil, a relatively peaceful and prosperous Kurdish city in northern Iraq. But even here, there is danger. In a bloody, chaotic scene, a suicide bomber kills 70 and injures 120 in a line of young Kurds waiting to join the police.

Via Nick Cohen.

2006-06-22T13:43:00.000-06:00

Anti-terror law quashes peaceful Kurdish protest

Human Rights Watch:
June 22, 2006

The trial tomorrow of three Kurdish activists on anti-terrorism charges after they attempted to stage a peaceful protest near the Iraq border calls into question the Turkish leadership’s commitment to human rights reforms, Human Rights Watch said today in a letter to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

To demonstrate that his government stands by the reform process, Prime Minister Erdoğan must ensure that Ibrahim Güçlü, Zeynel Abidin Özalp and Ahmet Sedat Oğur are released. These three Kurdish activists are scheduled to go on trial tomorrow in the eastern city of Diyarbakir. They were arrested on May 2 as they prepared to walk to the border of Iraq to peacefully protest the recent killings of civilians by security forces in southeastern Turkey and express their concern about tensions between the Turkish government and the Kurdish-led administration in northern Iraq.

The men are being charged under the Anti-Terror Law for “making propaganda for the PKK,” a charge that is all the more ironic in light of the fact that Güçlü has repeatedly and publicly condemned violence by the PKK (the Turkish acronym for the Kurdish Workers’ Party, a prominent illegal armed opposition group). All three are officials of Kurt-Der, a Kurdish association that Turkish authorities closed last month for conducting its internal business in the Kurdish language.

The detention and trial of these activists reflect a broader deterioration of Turkey’s human rights record in recent months, Human Rights Watch said. The Turkish leadership must reverse this negative trend and reaffirm its commitment to human rights reforms, underway since 1999 and driven partly by Turkey’s quest for European Union membership.
...
Human Rights Watch expressed strong concern about the disproportionate use of force by police dealing with protestors, particularly in the southeast, where 19 people have been killed in demonstrations and disturbances since November. The Turkish government must conduct swift investigations into the widespread allegations of torture and ill-treatment of people detained during violence that erupted after funerals in Diyarbakir of PKK militants killed by Turkish security forces.

2006-06-18T15:56:00.000-06:00

Taqtaq, who’s there?
By Darya Ibrahim
Soma
Posted June 18, 2006

Who would have thought that a village as small as Taqtaq could ruffle so many feathers...
Nestled in the hills surrounding the town of Koya, is the small village of Taqtaq, which until recently was just another farming village in the Kurdish countryside. Following the discovery of oil beneath the little village, Taqtaq has become internationally known (at least to those in the oil industry).

Although the Kurds have known about this oil field since the 1960s, due to the political situation it was not explored. In 1995 just before the Kurdish civil war, the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) instructed Genel Energy, a Turkish company, to start drilling the nearby Shiwashok oil field. In 2002, the KRG then signed a deal with Genel Energy and Adax (Canadian-Swiss company) to create a group with the KRG, called 'TTOPCO' Taqtaq operation company, and it was based in Taqtaq.

The group was tasked with preparing the area for the drilling of the Taqtaq oil fields. The project paused briefly during the liberation of Iraq, but recommenced once the Iraqi constitution had been approved.

The constitution allows the region to explore its natural resources: “The regions in the structure of Iraq may use the natural wealth that their region contains.”
Fast-forward to 14 May 2006 to the opening ceremony of the Taqtaq oil fields in the presence of Kurdish Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani and his deputy Omar Fatah. Taqtaq is no longer a sleepy village near Koya; it is a hub of oil industry activity. During the ceremony the various dignitaries offered their opinions on the Taqtaq oil fields.

Dilshad Abdulrahman, KRG Special Projects Supervisor, said: “The project should be completed by the end of this year, by the beginning of 2007 the plant will be producing 200 000 liters of oil a day.”

He added that in a couple of months time, they expected to start work on another two wells in Taqtaq. Abdulrahman then went on to say that some of the oil would be used to power a new electricity plant to help stem the growing shortage of electricity in the region.

Omar Fatah spoke about the importance of such projects for the region and congratulated the group on their hard work, reminding the crowds that it was President Jalal Talabani who put the ball back in motion in September 2005 following the pause taken during the war.

Prime Minister Barzani then spoke about the history of oil in the region saying that it was known in the 1960s that this area had oil: “From the 1960s, we knew that there was oil in this land, but we waited for freedom and our independence to conclude it.”

Barzani then went on to emphasize the importance of the provision in the constitution for the regions to be able to explore and harness the natural resources such as oil or gas in their region. Officials from TTOPCO were also there, Mehmed Sepil, Chief Executive of Genel Energy was keen to thank the KRG for their efforts in this project and he added that the group was hoping to expand beyond its 100 employees creating further jobs in the region.

The exploration and exploitation of oil in the Kurdish region has always been a contentious issue. Neighboring countries and indeed internal neighbors feel threatened by the prospect that the Kurds may actually be able to access and profit from their oil wealth. Saddam Hussein tried to “Arabize” the city and oil of Kirkuk during the notorious Anfal campaign of the 1980s, but he was only following in the footsteps of previous Baath regimes.

Many in the region view the Kurds accessing their oil wealth as a precursor to independence, which in the case of Iraq would deplete its national oil wealth. The external neighbors, namely Iran and Turkey have a two-fold fear of an independent Kurdistan. Not only would it cause unrest among the Kurds in those countries but it also raises the question of Kurdish natural resources (and profits) within their territories. Who would have thought that a village as small as Taqtaq could ruffle so many feathers?

Printed with permission. From Soma
http://www.soma-digest.com/Default.asp

2006-06-06T11:14:00.000-06:00

Another sad story - Red Kurdistan

June 05, 2006
KurdishMedia.com
By Nizameddin Rzayev

As a Kurd born in Red Kurdistan, the Kurdish area tucked away between Armenia and Azerbaijan and speaking very little Kurdish, ever since my childhood I became aware of our certain cultural differences from the rest of people-Azeris and Armenians around us. Although, I grew up speaking Azerbaijani, a branch of Turkic languages and some broken Russian, we still had a lot of strange-sounding, different words in our everyday language which were not used by Azeris. Afterwards I found out that these words were borrowed from Kurmanci which was our original language before being assimilated into speaking Azerbaijani. Some of the oldest community members were still able to speak Kurdish but since they belonged to the past that Soviet citizens had to dispense with in order to absorb “progressive” cosmopolitan communist ideals, they were in no position to pass on our cultural heritage and native language to us. Later my Mom told me that whenever her father and aunt did not want the children and outsiders to understand what they were talking about they switched from Azeri to Kurdish. All this knowledge further inflamed my insatiable, childish curiosity to delve into the mysterious past of my small part of Greater Kurdistan.

When we went to other parts of Azerbaijan and Armenia the locals called us Kurds or “Mountaineers” interchangeably. They sometimes sympathetically made fun of us because of our strict adherence to honor, self restraint and pride. For instance, we would seldom go to police or court if two people had any personal differences, viewing it a less manly means. There would always be older, respected member of our community there mediating to settle any problem. We could speak Azerbaijani fluently but with a distinct accent peculiar to only Kurds. We were on good terms with both Azeris and Armenians until the Karabax war threw us on the same side of battle with Azerbaijanis as their fellow citizens against Armenians.

Armenians evidently made no distinction between Moslem Kurds and Azeris when they captured all districts one by one that made up former Red Kurdistan adjacent to Nagorno Karabax. The irony was that Yezidi Kurds living in Armenia were fiercest Armenian soldiers fighting against their own brethren in Lachin and Kelbajar.

When I come to think about it, I tend to believe that the very same religious affinity with Azerbaijanis had been a big facilitating factor in the linguistic assimilation and loss of national identity of so many Kurds over the decades.

I had so many questions yearning for answer in my head about our Kurdish roots and history that I always bombarded my grandfather who could speak a broken Kurdish and other older people with my never-ending questions. But I was always disappointed not to find any reliable source exploring our national saga partly because any form of asserting national identity under Soviet Union was strongly discouraged and partly because most of the people in this part of Kurdistan had lost their history. The assimilation policy ruthlessly pursued against Kurds by the central government of Soviet Azerbaijan and isolation from their brethren in the “mainland” Kurdistan had done irreparable damage to Kurdish culture and language.

There were two theories voiced by elders as to the history of our community, one being that our grandfathers were moved as a part of 24 Kurdish tribes by Shah Abbas of Iran in 16th century from different parts of Irani Kurdistan and Xorasan to the Caucasus to fortify the borders of Safavids against Ottomans. But my grandfather claimed that we had come to the Caucasus from modern-day Southern Kurdistan (around modern Mosul, Kirkuk cities) 300 years before since our tribes (Ferihkhani) was one of the recalcitrant Kurdish tribes refusing to pay taxes to Ottomans. Thus, our true history was lost in the clouds of history and ruthless fate that befell Kurds in all the parts of our rightful homeland. Later I found out that Kurds had lived in the Caucasus since time immemorial, establishing strong Kurdish dynasties like Sheddadites, Revvadites that ruled big parts of modern-day Azerbaijan in 9th -13th centuries. Thus, there had always been Kurds in Red Kurdistan and other parts of Azerbaijan such as Nakhchevan before we came to settle in these beautiful, picturesque lands.

Kurds had left their indelible imprint on the folklore, music, literature and history of Azerbaijan. Old Mugams such as Kurd-Ovshari, Bayati-Kurd, Kurd-Shahnaz are still considered to be the best examples of classic music in modern-day Azerbaijan. In a famous epoch “Koroglu”, the bravery of “Kurdoglu” (Kurd’s son) against feudal pashas and landowners in redressing their injustices towards the poor and dispossessed is so exulted and praised. The world-famous classic of Azerbaijan literature Nizami Gencevi (1141-1209) devoted his famous poem “Xeyir and Sher” to the good deeds and virtues of a Kurdish girl and her rich farther, praising in so many words her beauty, compassion, generosity towards the helpless “Xeyir” by saving him from hunger and death.

During the heydays of perestroika launched by the last head of former Soviet Union, Gorbachov, there was a renewed interest in Kurdish culture and language. Late Shamil Askerov, a poet, tireless researcher and scholar on Kurdology born in Kelbajar were able to introduce Kurdish language classes in some Kurdish village schools. I remember how proud little Kurdish boys and girls were of new Kurdish words and phrases they had learned in school in my village called Zeylik. Unfortunately those good days were short-lived when the bloody Karabax war put an end to this initiative by dispersing all the Kurds around different corners of Azerbaijan.

Kurds lived in Red Kurdistan made up of four administrative units-Kelbajar, Lachin, Gubadly, Zengilan and part of Jebrail until 1993 when a long lasting bloody conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno Karabax drove all the Kurds out of their ancestral homeland. The founding and abolishment of Red Kurdistan is somewhat shrouded in mystery.

The tale related by our elders had it that Lenin personally gave the order to establish the Red Kurdistan. Nevertheless, there are certain facts that shed some light on the real story of this first-ever Kurdish Autonomy in modern history. Red Kurdistan was officially set up on July 7, 1923 by the decision of a Special Committee (The official Russian name was Kurdistanski Uezd), confirmed on July17 by the Executive Board of the Committee headed by S. Kirov, a high Bolshevik functionary. But the degree of autonomy granted on us paled in comparison to that of neighboring ethnic Armenians in Nagorno Garabax Autonomous Province. Kurdistanski Uezd was dissolved on April 8, 1929 after the Sixth Azerbaijani Congress of Soviets authorized the structural reshuffling of the administrative units.

Again on May 30, 1930 Central Executive Committee of Azerbaijan made the decision to establish Kurdistanski Okrug, Lachin chosen as its capital which also included other Kurdish districts-Zengilan and part of Jebrail rayonys (districts) that had been left out when Kurdistanski Uezd was created. But the Okrug only existed 2 and half months before the Central Executive Committee of Soviets and Council of People’s Commissar liquidated the Kurdistani Okrug on July 23, 1930. Interestingly, liquidation sidestepped the neighboring Nagorno Karabax Autonomous Province mostly because of the influence and strong resistance of Armenian communists in Moscow and Baku.

The role of nationalist Azeri beauracrats in this unjust decision for Kurds was probably substantial since there they had all the interest in the total assimilation of Azerbaijani Kurds and did not face any strong resistance from the mostly uneducated Kurdish Communities. By that time almost half the Kurds (mostly young generation) in this autonomous province had been assimilated into substituting widely-spoken Azerbaijani for their native Kurdish. The different official sources put the size of Kurdish population in Red Kurdistan at 60.000 after the October Revolution (1917) excluding the sizable Kurdish communities in Nakhchevan and other parts of Azerbaijan. To make matters worse, the official census taken in 1921 manipulated the real number of the Kurds by reclassifying those who did not speak Kurdish as a first language as “Azerbaijanis”. It is not surprising since Baku had no interest in the revival of Kurdish culture and national awareness among the young generation.

During this short-lived relative autonomy and a short period afterwards there were several government-sponsored expeditions led by V. Susoev, Chursin, orientalist V. Gurko, Kriyazhin, into the region to study the language, culture of the highlander Kurds.
Several articles on the Kurds of Soviet Azerbaijan were published in a communist newspaper “Zariya Vostoka” as a result of these expeditions.

Conference on national minorities was held in Baku in June 1931. Soviet author A Bukhspan published a very useful detailed booklet on the Kurds of Azerbaijan, traveling to lots of Kurdish villages and settlements in Kelbajar, Lachin and Nakchevan after the Moscow reproved Baku for its neglectful and chauvinistic policy towards the Kurdish minority. Around 30 Kurdish books were published in Azerbaijan between 1930 and 1938 despite the red tape and purposeful neglect by official Baku. Red Kurdistanis were briefly able to take Kurdish summer classes in 1931; the same year the newspaper “Soviet Kurdistan” was founded in Lachin; Kurdish Department was established at Shusha Pedagogical College In 1932 where my late grandfather, Jafar Ahmedov was sent as a teacher. For many years to come he would be deeply involved in the education of mountainous communities of Kelbajar and Lachin. His leadership and commitment to spreading education among the Kurdish villagers earned him a Lenin Order, one of the highest awards of Soviet Union.

This relative revival of Kurdish national awareness was cut short by Stalin’s notorious 1937- 1938 repression that was implemented with unheard of brutality by Mirrcefer Bagirov, the communist leader of Soviet Azerbaijan. The repression resulted in the closing of all Kurdish language schools and publication. Thousands of Kurds from Nakhchivan and Red Kurdistan were deported to Central Asian republics -Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Turkmenistan. My grandfather’s family was one of these unfortunate Kurdish families who were deprived of all their possessions and property, declared the “enemy of people” because of their former landowner’s status, and exiled under inhuman conditions to Central Asia.

Later, some but not all of these families made it back to their homeland after this nightmare period was over. Unsurprisingly, most of the Kurds in Central Asia nowadays are the descendents of those Kurdish families deported from Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia during the repression years.

The deplorable situation for Kurdish culture and self-awareness did not change much even after the repression was eased with Stalin’s death.

Nevertheless, there were sporadic expeditions and published work by Russian kurdologists such as T. Aristova (1957), K. Kromov(1961) Ch.

Bakaev(1960), a Yezidi Kurd by background, that dealt with the dialect and culture of Azerbaijani Kurds despite obstructions of Baku.

Bakhaev found out the presence of considerable concentration of Kurdish communities in other parts of Azerbaijan such as Xachmaz, Ismayilli, Yevlax. He also noted that Kurdish language fluency had remarkably deteriorated among the Azerbaijani Kurds, particularly among the young generation, Nakhchevani Kurds being an exception. Their studies provide some useful but not convincing information on the size of Kurdish population and Kurdish settlements in the country since they extensively relied on official census data.

The policy of wiping out all the traces of Kurdish culture is confirmed by the official census taken in 1959, 1970, 1979, and 1989 in Soviet Azerbaijan which manipulated the size of Kurdish minority of Azerbaijan to a greater extent by reclassifying most of the Kurds as “Azerbaijani”. The result was ridiculously low statistic for the size of Kurdish population in the country: 1,487 Kurds in 1959, 5, 488 Kurds in 1970, 5,676 Kurds in 1979, 12,226 Kurds in 1989. Besides, all the other new settlements in Red Kurdistan that had brunched out from the older Kurdish villages were reclassified as Azerbaijani villages purely because of the fact that the young brainwashed inhabitants in these settlements used Azerbaijani as their first language. (The widely-accepted consensus today is that there are at least 500,000 Kurds in Azerbaijan, a country of 8 million, excluding those who have been completely assimilated whereas the official data only admits the presence of 13-14 thousand Kurds in Azerbaijan)

The biggest disaster was still ahead for Red Kurdistan. The Upper Karabakh War Btween Armenia and Azerbaijan broke out in 1988 after the Armenian nationalists of Nagorno Karabakh and Armenia demanded separation of this autonomous province from Azerbaijan. The long-lasting conflict(1988-1995) had dire consequences for the population of Red Kurdistan: All the Kurdish settlements and districts were occupied by Armenian forces with the military support of Russia. The fierce rivalry for power in Baku and consequent confrontation between the different factions of unorganized National Army rendered Azerbaijani troops completely unable to defend the territories of the Republic, losing all the districts of Red Kurdistan – Lachin (1992), Kelbajar(1993), Zengilan(1993), Gubadli(1993),Cebrayil(1993) to Armenian forces without any resistance. As a result, the inhabitants of this former Kurdish Autonomy were driven out of their homelands and scattered around different parts of Azerbaijan.

Most of the displaced Kurdish population still lives in refugee tents and temporary settlements under harsh circumstances, waiting to turn back to their native homelands for over 13 years. The negotiations between Azerbaijan and Armenia to find a peaceful solution for resolving the conflict has produced no results so far. The Kurdish Cultural Center -“Ronayi”, is virtually unable to promote the Kurdish culture and language among the young assimilated Kurds because of lack of funding and watchful eye of government with evident pressure from Turkey. The dispersal of the Kurdish communities around the different corners of the country further complicates the task of putting up a common front to save our culture and language from the verge of extinction. However, a lot can be done to help revive the Kurdish culture in Azerbaijan by working towards practical goals such as opening Kurdish language courses and schools, providing the material to teach Kurdish, sending the young Kurds of Azerbaijan to study in cities like Suleymani, Hawler of Southern Kurdistan. In this respect, the Kurdish Diaspora in Europe, Kurdistan Regional Government and higher Kurdish officials of Iraq today can play an important role in improving the lot of these communities and facilitating the revival of our cultural heritage on the brink of extinction.

2006-06-02T20:56:00.000-06:00

Kurds making a difference vis-à-vis the wrath of adversaries

May 31, 2006
Kurdishaspect.com
By Eamad Mazouri

I, along with many other anxious observers have been following the column; both Onder Aytac and Emre Uslu are sharing in "The New Anatolian" daily.
What I found, is that many of their articles, while based on sheer imagination and irrational analysis, are also, startling and unsettling.
They shock many onlookers who righteously anticipate impartiality not only from the authors, but also from the moderate Anatolian English language daily, especially the articles titled "The Problems of Kurdish Intellectuals"; Segments I, II, III published May 3rd, 8th and 15th respectively.
In these three articles, the authors are trying desperately to portray themselves as credible, trustworthy and unbiased journalists in pursuit of the naked truth, nothing else, alluding to leave the false impression that they are employing merely scientific methodology and analysis in their research, trying from the goodness of the bottom of their bleeding hearts to steer away the Kurdish intellectuals from the wrong path of thinking, as they call it".
Any perceptive spectator can readily deduce from the content of these malevolent articles, the authors' real rationale in routing Kurdish intellectuals towards desperation, frustration and disenchantment with their legitimate cause not only in Turkey, but in Iraqi Kurdistan and beyond as well. In their futile attempt, and whereas endeavoring to present themselves not only as the true custodians of the Kurdish intellectuals' strategic thought, but also as the proper guardians of the Kurdish people's rights, they are lambasting on every Kurdish leader, organization and even condemning Kurdistan Regional Government and it's nascent democratic experience without sparing anything Kurdish out of this chaos and confusion they are trying in vain to create among the Kurds.
The Kurdish intellectuals on the other hand, should not be surprised or fall an easy prey to these chauvinistic views, poorly shrouded in neutrality coming from these two authors, especially if they have followed some of their previous writings, such as "Civil War and Kurds in Iraq" 7 March, 2006, where both are trying to provoke Arabs and Turkmen's denizens of Kirkuk city in an imaginary tale of a civil war of their own making.
If this is the way moderate and professional Turkish journalism reports the news, then I would have difficulty understanding how the partial making-news approach functions in this industry in contrast to that of the objective one, which I am sure the Turkish media in general is not immune from; If this is a sample of a moderate liberal thinking in today's Turkey, it would be troubling distinguishing that from the loathsome viewpoints and attitudes the Turkish Ultra-Nationalists express towards Kurds and their just plight on daily basis.
At any rate, let's take a closer look at some of the highlights that were underscored in all three phases of these unreliable and misleading articles.
Their whole concept is hovering around the globalization process, its impact on nation states, the power corporations are or will command and the relations between the two, washing it down all the way to the Kurdish great effort for freedom and liberty in relation to the Turkish state.
Any savoir-faire observer, with good grace, could smell the stench of the (Turkish Kurd-phobia) from the very start, the disease that decision makers in Turkey should cure themselves from if they need to have a new beginning to build a democratic society based on recognition instead of denial and forbearance instead of intolerance towards others.
In segment I of their article, both authors state and I quote "that the foremost problem that bedevils the Kurdish intellectuals (and for that matter the Turkish nationalists too)" here the readers need to notice the insertion of the latter sentence is only a pathetic attempt by the authors to vie for some credibility of course" is their inability to misread" I believe this is an error and should be inability to read" the globalization process." The article goes on "they argue" meaning Kurdish intellectuals" that since the globalization process undermines the autonomy of nation states, the Turkish State.. will also be weakened. "Hence "The declining autonomy of the state will enable the Kurdish people to establish an independent Kurdistan." In their views "here lies the problem." Why? They answer, because "states. will not be the sole actors but agents which regulate the global economy rules, and implement the rules to stabilize the territory." The article further states that "The purpose of this defined role of agency is to create an available environment within which the global economy can be maintained and order provided." According to their misleading message, therefore," .how the Kurdish intellectuals read globalization and hope to gain from it is simply a misreading of the nature of the process." Clearly, they are misreading the present and future as they have misread the past. They are trying to feed the Turkish public flawed information in an attempt to incite them against Kurdish population, instead of trying to explore some decent options on how to resolve this conflict as true intellectuals ought to do.
Naturally, they don't forget to refer to the very {evil} source of this misreading. They claim that "The biggest source of this misreading is the situation in northern Iraq." Explaining that" globalization pushes nation states toward democracy" but "if democracy won't sustain the stability of a strategically important state, then the international corporations would support family dictatorships".
By narrating this whole fabricated and unsubstantiated story, the authors finally come to this amusing conclusion, to quote them" .Due to the oil.
importance of Iraqi Kurdistan region. the international corporations are forced to work with Massoud Barzani dictatorship." as if Mr. Barzani was created yesterday by international corporations and he is not the upshot of decades of oppression, sufferings and constant struggle of the Kurdish people and their continuous legendary leadership. Kurds don't think they need Turks to judge their leaders whom they have chosen over a long odyssey of struggle and sufferings.
In this comic article, the two authors who combined their efforts to absurdly entertain their readers, wind up saying "The Kurdish intelligentsia is misreading the process, and they will be eventually disappointed when they finally realize that they got nothing of what they have hoped for."
As it cannot escape our attention, the authors are building this entire fictitious scenario of globalization process to convey to the Kurdish intellectuals a couple of messages.
First, they are seeking an independent state. Second, this is an impossible dream, without even providing them with any other viable option.
I would like to make a few clear statements here. On the first hand, the Kurds are not a minority and they do not see themselves in that light, but rather a divided nation against its will. This vulnerable nation, like any other nation, and much smaller ones, and according to UN chapters, international laws and treaties and every decent norm have the right to determine its own fate. That includes having a homeland. Whereas Kurds in other parts of Kurdistan are coerced into involuntary unions with the respective states of Turkey, Iran and Syria and deprived of their rights, especially those concerning the true participation in the political process, in Iraqi Kurdistan, the Kurdish people have spoken through their parliament since 1992 and decided that the best available option for them is to enter into a voluntary union with Iraqi Arabs and minorities within a framework of a democratic federation. As a realistic approach, this option while allowing them to enjoy most of their rights, it provides them with the protection of a sovereign state. The safeguard they need to breathe freely, build and prosper.
Obviously, Turkish nationalists and those who think like them are not buying this legitimate argument despite the repeated assurances from the Kurdish leadership.
In phase II of their article, the authors are focusing on Kurdish intellectuals efforts to draw attention from the international community to their just cause in order to gain sympathy and support in their quest for a homeland. Surprisingly, they admit that this strategy is effective and has been successful. However, they claim, despite that, the Kurdish argument in this regard is riddled with three flaws:
1) "Kurdish intellectuals don't seem to understand that states do not act based on Romantic fantasies in the international arena. They act as rational actors which calculate the cost and benefits. Moreover, once regional states initiate democratic rules, such as Turkey and hopefully Iraq in the future, the Kurdish intellectuals' claim (of, and I am using their own terminology, living under tyrannical governments, being victimized, suppressed and deceived)loses its base in the international arena".
Once again, they are trying to portray the Kurdish objective as no more than an unachievable dream or fantasia. At the same time insinuating that Kurds have not been deprived, victimized and subjected to ethnic cleansing. According to them, the Kurds' entire tragedy is no more than fabrication woven and staged by Kurdish intellectuals on behest of foreign powers. They describe Turkey as full fledged democracy while Iraq might catch up, forgetting that Iraq today and even at its current circumstances is more democratic than Turkey in every field, especially in political participation, representation, minority rights, and freedom of expression.
It is worth mentioning that regional governments have finally realized the impact of the contribution of the Kurdish intellectuals in influencing the world public opinion regarding Kurds and Kurdistan and they are devising ways to counter that. It wasn't long ago, that I came across an article on a Syrian site written in Arabic that tried to convey the same message as these two are trying, but in a different way or more straight forward. The given article was focused on many articles written by various Kurdish writers, among them one of my own "The Kurds: The Orphans of the World", specifically those written in English, implying that Kurds are merely emulating Jews by exaggerating their tragedies (in their views the whole thing is as fabricated as Holocausts) to make the world feel guilty and earn their sympathy. This is the second time I come across such writings by Kurds' adversaries, which basically means, Kurds are on the right path and they are actually making a change, therefore they should continue to do so.
2) "The victimization argument has been overused to the point that it has lost some of its value for the international community. The victimization argument has been used too many times since the Holocaust. For example, even in the worst cases, like Chechnya in Russia, East Turkistan in China, or Kashmir in India, the international community tends not hear the victimized communities' screams."
Here, the authors basically are claiming that Holocaust, genocides, ethnic cleansing and the use of WMD, are no longer enough to catch the attention of the international community. That, dictatorships and corrupt governments are free to massacre and deprive people without slightest chance of any intervention, simply because the world is worn-out as a result of a steady increase of such events. Therefore, the destitute victims of such atrocities should bring their futile screams to an end; the world is not hearing their shouts and has turned a blind eye to their wretchedness.
"The Kurdish people, especially those in Turkey, are almost "perfect" when compared to those mentioned above."
We can leave the world through its human rights organizations to be the judge of that based on the facts on the ground and especially those in charge of Turkey's accession talks to EU, and their periodical evaluations.
(There is a distressing paragraph, I would like also to quote)" They (Kurdish Intellectuals) should also realize that in Middle Eastern culture, however wrong it may be, as a matter of fact problems are solved within family. Whenever one calls on outside help, they are treated as if they've committed an act of betrayal. Thus tinkering with the international intervention game could only help to increase the hatred of other ethnic groups. Therefore, it's highly likely that Kurds would be considered as betrayers."
I believe this particular paragraph leaves no room for any doubt concerning what the authors are maliciously referring to here. It is crystal clear, that they not only are referring to the Armenian Genocide by the Ottomans during the WWI, but they are justifying that, at the same time, forewarning Kurds as well that the same fate is waiting them as they would be considered traitors, if they persist on demanding their legitimate rights. When one finds such disturbing mentality in today's Turkey, he/she is compelled to wonder not only about its prospect to join EU, but also about the whole democratic reform process.
3) "The tyrannical reign of Massoud Barzani in the de facto Kurdish state in northern Iraq weakens Kurdish intellectuals' argument. The Kurds in northern Iraq don't live under a better democratic regime than the Kurds in Turkey."
Here, let's make room for a neutral individual, a well known scholar and academician to respond to these baseless accusations. In "Informed Comment" under "Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion, published Tuesday, May 09, 2006 "Mr. Juan Cole, a Professor of History at the University of Michigan says; "The New Anatolian article on "western romantic liberal" support for Kurdish independence was quite chilling. It pretty clearly states that if the Kurds appeal to the West for protection (against Turkey, Iran, Syria or perhaps a central government in Iraq), they will be considered as betraying their neighbors, and under the doctrine of self-interest, the neighboring states can feel justified to punish them just short of a Bosnia or Darfur-style campaign of ethnic cleansing, because then, and only then, will the West respond. Onder Aytac is probably right about that, but this kind of mindset explains why the Turkish government is so hated by its own Kurdish population. I spend a lot of time in SE Turkey, and although many people oppose the excesses of the PKK, the undercurrent of anger and cynicism toward the Turkish government is far greater." he further states" However, what Rubin (He means Michael Rubin) and Aytac Both neglect to mention is that Kamel Sayed Qadir was rapidly released from prison after his "conviction". To call Barzani's KDP the equivalent of a "fascist regime", as some have done, is perhaps hyperbole. I see a lot more similarities with Jordan, to be honest. In Jordan, you mess with the King's financial interests and tribal patronage network at your peril.
However, in both Jordan and Kurdistan, there is a relatively wide latitude for criticism within certain bounds, and considerable press freedom.
Certainly Iraqi Kurdistan has a far more open press and civil society than across the border in SE Turkey, or Ankara for that matter, which makes Aytac's article a bit ironic".
While Mr. Cole lent some criticism regardless of its nature to the Kurdish Administration, he continues furthermore to say that" I'm not a "Western romantic liberal" who sees KRG with unvarnished admiration. However, I would gladly settle for a similar degree of personal freedom and human services in any of the neighboring countries. I'm neutral on eventual independence, although Turkey would do well to look at the situation of Kosovo when thinking about the future of Iraqi Kurdistan. There is no more hope of forcing the Kurds back into a nation dominated by Muqtada al-Sadr (who seems to be gradually winning out over SCIRI) than there is of forcing the Kosovars back into Yugoslavia. Turkey and the West are better advised to take no extreme actions, and invest while pretending that Kurdistan doesn't exist. Give the Kurds another 15 years of ambiguous self-rule, and maybe they will work it out."
I believe this is the best response to their reference to Iraqi Kurdistan and KRG and it would suffice our purpose here.
In segment III of their article, these two stooges talk about an irony, claiming that "Despite the fact that Kurdish Intellectuals shape the Kurdish nationalism mostly in reaction to Turkish nationalism, they at the same time imitate Turkish nationalism as a model for Kurdish nationalism."
They shamelessly continue to admit to atrocities committed when building the new Turkey by Attaturk "In fact it is true that the early republican's elites attempted to engineer Turkish nationalism as the glue to keep the multi-ethnic community of the Anatolians together. To a large extent it was a successful project in that more than 30 different ethnic communities of Anatolia today define themselves as Turks. However, this attempt failed to bring the Kurdish community into the boundaries of the designed civic nationalism."
Here, the authors and to a great extent are trying to explore the reasons behind this imitation while failing to give any for the failure of Turkey to Turkify the Kurds when it succeeded with other Anatolian minorities. In their abortive attempt, they fail to come up with any, while mentioning the Nuri Dersimi manifesto called “Discourse to Kurdish Youth" which they claim is an imitation of Attaturk's "Discourse to Turkish Youth." We have no choice but to re-print it here for readers to do the comparison themselves:
"O young Kurd! O son of a brave nation that has for centuries despised
Usurpation! Listen to me! From the Indian Ocean to the Caucasus, in
The high mountains and sunny valleys of Asia Minor and Central Asia,
The light of humanity has brightened the proud foreheads of the
Sublime race that gave birth to you, at its very dawn. Your history is
The history of an unending legend .You are a child of a nation that ha
Fought tirelessly for centuries to live in honor and freedom. Thousands
Of offerings made to the Goddess of Liberty seek a grave; they ask us
To build a memorial in their honor. This memorial is a free independent Kurdistan."
As they reach the conclusion of their iniquitous article, they cannot help but to lash out one more time on Iraqi Kurdistan and its leaders." When the moves and rhetoric of Iraqi Kurdish leaders Massoud Barzani and Jalal Talabani are analyzed together, it can be clearly seen that they try to follow the path of the early Turkish republican elites. For example, in Turkey, in order to show him the nation's respect, Atwater's pictures are present in all government buildings. This Turkish vision of showing respect was imitated by the Kurds in northern Iraq in a funny way." The problem here is not just the ironic position of the Kurdish intellectuals.
They fail to offer an alternative to promote nationalism other than imitating the Turkish model of nationalism. The Kurdish intellectuals seem unaware of the fact that conditions have changed since the Turks successfully implemented Turkish nationalism. What they are trying to advocate today under the name of Kurdish nationalism are outdated arguments that were valid when nationalism was rising. In the era of globalization, advocating ethnic nationalism is running against the current or like selling Ayran (a yogurt drink) in nightclubs."
What kind of a double standard and hypocrisy is this? I cannot understand why and how the presence of Attaturk's images everywhere in Turkey is considered a sign of respect, while that of the Kurdish leaders is a peccadillo and only a "funny" imitation of the Turks, forgetting that the phenomenon is world-wide spread, and everywhere is considered the expression of respect and admiration by the people for their leaders, unless the authors think the experience was originally invented in Turkey and then imported to the rest of the world as it is the case with the most recent silly squabble between Turkey and Greece on who was the original inventor of Baklawa.
The authors claim to have studied the history of their country. However, they fail to remember that even the Turkish nationalism was theorized by Kurds such as the Ziya Gokalp who came from Amed city, who is deemed by majority of Kurds as a turn-coat, or should we let the Wikipedia Encyclopedia tell us who he was? It goes that Ziya Gökalp" was a prominent Turkish ideologue of Pan-Turkism or Turanism. His origin is Kurdish. But he said there is no difference between Kurdish and Turkish people and they are one nation". A concept that can only be described as absurd and ridiculous as the time has shown to both Turks and Kurds alike.
It is obvious that these contemptible writings do not serve the country of Turkey in her attempt to free itself from the complicated past and build a real democracy where all the ethnic and religious elements are recognized.
And they definitely do not help to seal the gap between Kurds and Turks in their search to find a better tomorrow peacefully for their new generations.

2006-05-28T14:02:00.000-06:00

Iraq is a joint Arab-Kurdish country

The true Identity of Iraq

May 28, 2006
By Azad Othman

Iraq is a joint Arab-Kurdish country, a Kurd likewise an Arab, could be elected as president or as foreign minister. Those who reject this clear right of Kurdish people and deny the real identity of the country are neo-Baathists who are against justice, equality, democracy, and federalism.

The Kingdom of Iraq was established in 1921 with its present borders (due to desire of British empire) on wrong foundations such the compulsory annexing of South Kurdistan to Iraq, and upon divisive principles like privileging some groups of Arab Sunni minority and marginalizing the role of the Shiite’s majority population in southern Iraq.

Furthermore, the provocative ideas of “provisional constitutions” of the various Iraqi regimes came to the power in the “Republican era” through military coup d’états aggravated the state.
Finally, racial politics of repressive measures took by the totalitarian Baath regime particularly against the Kurds and Shiites in Iraq, and its aggressive politics against the neighbouring countries resulted destructive regional wars and took the Iraq to a tragic situation.

The main cause of distorting the reality of the identity of Iraq’s state was the racist attitude of the “Arab nationalist groups” who were in power during the royal and republican reign. They claimed and are still claiming that the whole Iraqi population including the Kurds are a part of the “Arab nation”, and they consider the whole land of Iraq including South Kurdistan as a part of the “Arab homeland” or as a part of the Arab national territory. It should be kept in mind that these Arab nationalists are quite aware of the reality that “Iraqi Kurdistan” is a part of Kurdistan which is divided among Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria and that the Kurds in Iraq are part of the Kurdish nation separated by borders, mines, and conventions among these states and within their framework.

Regarding the roots of the real Iraqi identity, there are three axiomatic facts:

First: Iraq consists of Arab Iraq and South Kurdistan. This self-evident fact was deduced by the Fact-Finding Committee sent by the League of Nations in 1925 to the “Wilayet” of Mosul, where South Kurdistan constitute the major part of it. The committee mentioned in its report that the present Iraq comprises the Arab Iraq (Arabic part of Iraq), Jazirah, and Kurdistan and that the northern borders of the Arabic part of Iraq does not go beyond the line which extend from Hit on the Euphrates, Tikrit on the Tigris, until chain of Hamrain mountains (Fadhil Hussain, The Mosul Problem / Arabic, 1977:78). The great historian Abu Bakr al-Khwarizmi also confirmed this issue 1000 years ago (903 – 1002) in the book “Al-Rasa’il” (p.45-46). This fact confirms that Iraq is not merely an Arab or Kurdish country (state); rather, it is a joint Arab-Kurdish country, inhabited also by many other national minorities Chaldeans, Turkmen, Assyrians, Syrians, and Armenians in addition to the Arabs and the Kurds. These minorities have rights and duties similar to those of the Arabs and Kurds. There are also many religions and sects in Iraq. Islam, Christianity, Ezdiis (Yazidis), Sabeans, Yarsan, Alawites, and Judaism. All of these religions and sects have their own rights, which must be respected and acknowledged constitutionally and practically.

The core of the second fact: is that the Arabs of Iraq are part of the divided Arab nation, and the Kurds of Iraq are part of the divided Kurdish nation. Considering the Kurds and other national minorities in Iraq as a part of the Arab nation is simply not true. Nationalistic pride and ignoring others is a detestable racial practice. Not only because it does not harmonize with most basic human rights, but also because it contradicts Islamic shari'a. God created us as peoples and nations to get to know each other, to acknowledge each other, and to cooperate with each other, and not to prefer one nation to dominate others and impose its national identity upon the others, as it is the case in Turkey and Syria. A Kurd or an Arab in Turkey is considered as a Turkish citizen; Kurds or Assyrians in Syria are considered as Syrian Arab citizens and so is fixed in their identity cards. This nationalistic racism contradicts the principles of democracy and civilization, about which the secular regime in Turkey brags. Moreover, it contradicts the concepts of socialism and progressiveness, which the Baath regime in Syria claims to adopt.

The term nation in its modern definition is derived from the French word “nation”, is linked dialectically with the process of state-building in its modern meaning. It has only two meanings in the political science or in the political dictionary since the 19th century:

The first meaning is directly linked to the official entity of people living together within the framework of one country, that is the people of a specific country which has sovereignty and approved international borders regardless of number of ethnic groups, religions, and sects. For example, we say the American nation, the Canadian nation, the Swiss nation, the Indian nation, the Chinese nation, the Egyptian nation, etc. For this reason citizenship called in English “nationality” and in German “Nationalitaet”. The second meaning is linked to the joint historical origin of every people or rather to their joint language and culture. In this regard, we say the Persian nation, the Turkish nation, the Arab nation, the Kurdish nation, etc. Therefore, if the Arabs in Iraq are part of the Arab nation due to the linguistics or cultural denotation, then the Kurds according to the same reason, certainly are part of the Kurdish nation.

The third fact: affirms that a common country or a common religion, or a common sect, or the size of any one national group in every country does not cancel the identity, history, and the culture of the other national groups. It also does not justify putting all of them in the melting pot of the larger national group or changing their national identity. Otherwise, the number of peoples would be equal to the number of religions or of great peoples only. Otherwise for example, all the Swiss people would become German, and thus Switzerland would be considered as a German country, because the population density of German national there would be more than 65% . However, because the Swiss system is federal and democratic the identity of the other national groups: the French (18%) and the Italian (10%) are equally acknowledged exactly as the German national identity. Switzerland is so considered a German-French-Italian country. In this way, the true identity of Switzerland is recognized. None of the German intellectuals or scientific researchers will argue about the roots of this realistic identity. None of them will claim that all of Switzerland or all the Swiss people are German although the majority of its population is German.

In any case ,as far as Kurdistan remains as a part of an federal Iraqi state, Iraq is a joint Arab-Kurdish country, and a Kurd has the right to be elected, just like an Arab, as President or as foreign minister. Those who deny this clear right for the Kurdish people in Iraq are definitely “neo-Baathists” and they are practically against the unity of Iraq, then they are against peace, democracy, and federalism.

Its already three years since the downfall of the totalitarian racist Baath regime on 9 April 2003, the persons who were suppressed or persecuted in Iraq in the previous era are trying - under very difficult internal circumstances and obvious external contention - to build the Iraq of the future, a new Iraq. They are doing this on the basis of voluntary union, parliamentary democracy, and civilized dialogue among all the ethnic groups and segments of the society, based on a permanent constitution, approved by 80% of the people of Iraq. In order to achieve justice and equality so that peace and progress will be guaranteed to all.

* Azad Othman is a political scientist in Berlin-Germany.

Source KRG

2006-05-26T13:39:00.000-06:00

US offered Arabs 'small, friendly' Israel
Associated Press
The United States reached out to hostile Arabs three decades ago with an offer to work toward making Israel a "small friendly country" of no threat to its neighbors and with an assurance to Iraq that the U.S. had stopped backing Kurdish rebels in the north. "We can't negotiate about the existence of Israel," then Secretary of State Henry Kissinger told his Iraqi counterpart in a rare high-level meeting, "but we can reduce its size to historical proportions."

2006-04-30T21:04:00.000-06:00

Coalition Forces and Iraqi Obligations towards Protecting Kurdistan

May 1, 2006
KurdishAspect.com

By Eamad Mazouri

USA {KurdishAspect.com} May 1, 2006 - Ever since the overthrew of dictator Saddam’s regime and the new found liberties and freedoms Iraqi people in general have enjoyed for the first time in their modern history, as well as the turmoil and chaos the country has witnessed following that, the majority of the Iraqi people and their representatives have come to the conclusion that no political group or faction alone is capable to form a viable government without approaching others and engaging them to create a national consensus to build a national unity government. In fact, the Iraqi democratic experience is unique in this regard. For any government in Baghdad to succeed, it needs to move toward all the other elements and factions to build a national coalition, hence reflecting truly the mosaic texture of the Iraqi society as a whole. A general consensus has become absolutely necessary without which no government can do well in Baghdad. It is unique in terms that this government has to be inclusive of the Shiites, Kurds, Sunnis and the rest of the Iraqi ethnic and religious groups who make up the fabric of the Iraqi society despite the outcome of the general election as it has been the case in last few national elections, although constitutionally, two or more groups might command enough vote and seats to be eligible to form a government. In the Iraqi elections, while important for each group the number of seats they win in Parliament, nothing could be accomplished without the engagement of all parties or at least the majority of them. The reason behind that is the fact that general consensus is the key to form a national unity government that would actually be able to function properly and successfully. Fortunately, the very first indications now are that Iraqi leaders have learned their lessons and are thinking along those lines despite the differences amongst them on details. The actions of the new Iraqi government should reflect this concept on all aspects including the protection of its territory against outside aggression.

The Kurd's Obligations and Rights towards Iraq

The Kurds, on the other hand, have come along way to reintegrate and rejoin Iraq after almost 15 years of self-rule where they have enjoyed their own government, elected parliament and all the state institutions necessary to run their own affairs successfully. Like we said one of the major reasons behind their conviction on the federal solution was to benefit from the safeguard a sovereign Iraq could provide them with when it is needed. This is an essential element implied if not expressed in the contract of the voluntary union the Kurds have entered in with Iraqi state.
Most of the unbiased and objective political observers would agree that Kurds in Iraq while were being accused of separatist tendencies by their adversaries on national and regional levels, have indeed became the safety tap of Iraq and the main ingredient of its unity. Their leaders are playing a major role in keeping the country together, creating a general consensus among Iraqis, building a national unity government, contributing to the security and stability of the country, and combating fundamentalism and terrorism.

Today, Iraqi people have finally come to the conclusion to set up such a government. At the same time the Kurds themselves have resolved their differences and agreed to form a regional unity government in Kurdistan. In the midst of all these positive achievements, some irresponsible radical elements who are perhaps acting on behest of others or are dancing on the tunes of some regional powers are taking some dangerous strides inside the country along the flash points areas such as Kirkuk. It is no surprise that these suspicious moves are coinciding with the mass of foreign troops by both neighboring countries Turkey and Iran under various pretexts along the borders with Iraqi Kurdistan.

Kurdistan President Mr. Massoud Barzani has repeatedly reiterated the position of Kurdistan government on the issue of Kurdish rights within these countries and the way the Kurds should lead their struggle.Mr. Barzani maintains that Kurds are not a minority, but a divided nation against its will. Therefore, they have the right to self-determination, including having a homeland like any other nation.

However, in Iraq a true and democratic federalism based on a “voluntary union” has been chosen of the Kurd's free volition as the best way to resolve the Kurdish problem. His message to the Kurds in other parts has been to avoid violence and resort to peaceful means as the only viable method to secure their rights.

Overall, the Kurds and their regional government have performed their role the best they could and satisfied their responsibilities as Iraqi Nationals and Kurdistan as a federated constituent of the federal Iraqi government as the constitution provides.

Now Kurdistan is threatened by foreign armies that according to Newsweek, International Edition “have last week, according to angry Foreign Ministry officials in Baghdad, Turkish commandos briefly crossed 15 kilometers into Iraqi territory”. While Kurds and their government are perfectly capable to defend their people and territory, United States of America, Britain and other coalition forces and according to international norms, UN charter and accords of occupation, are under the obligation to prevent further aggravation of the situation on Iraqi borders. Also, and most importantly, the Iraqi government should fulfill its commitment in protecting and preserving its territories by playing its role as a sovereign state to put off such a crisis, guard Kurdistan and employ all its resources to thwart any attempts to further exacerbate situation and turn the only stable, secure, secular part of Iraq which is Kurdistan into chaos, violence and uncertainty.

2006-04-25T13:30:00.000-06:00

The King is Still Naked

By Ardalan Hardi

April 26, 2006

Now that the Shiite politicians have picked their new nominee, Jawad al-Maliki, for a prime minister to replace outgoing PM Ibrahim al-Jaafari, we can expect another long doldrums state of stalemate in Iraq. I don’t mean to say that nothing will change – obviously it already has. A new government is been formed, the parliament has convened, and it would seem that everything is going smoothly. However, it is optimistic to think that with the changing of the guards the political impasse will end in Iraq.

The Kurds are not going to give up what freedom they have achieved in their current democratic de-facto state after being subjected to series of betrayals by the United States and the largest genocidal massacres of modern times by Saddam Hessian’s Ba’athe’s party.

Even though most Shiites are Arabs the Sunnis treat them as though they are a different nationality. Because of their religious differences, the Shiites always have been considered second class citizens by Iraqi governments and the Arab world. In a recent interview with Al-Arabiya television Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak said “Most of the Shiites are loyal to Iran, and not to the countries they are living in.’’ This is indicative of the Sunni’s true view of the Shiites.

Under Saddam’s Ba'ath party, Shiites were murdered by the tens of thousands. For decades Saddam brutally oppressed the Shiites, who rose up against him after the 1991 Gulf War. Now that the evil dictator is gone, the Shiites are not willing to share power with the Sunnis; after all, the Sunni insurgency of today is the dictator of yesterday that committed all the atrocities against the Shiites and the Kurds.

The Sunni’s in Iraq are threatened by the prospect of Shiites rule. The majority of the Sunni’s are former Ba’athe’s sympathizers with very strong sectarian and Arab nationalistic believes. For centuries they have refused to acknowledge the existence of Shiite’s theology and to this day they believe Iraq is an Arab state and Kurds are nonexistent and should be annihilated.

Maliki and Jaafari both come from the same political ideology – the Dawa party. The group strongly supports the establishment of an Islamic state in Iraq. That contradicts the whole theory of democratizing Iraq.

Adding to all this are the outside influences and sectarian tensions in the Shi’ite alliance. Al-Maliki, like his predecessor, and al-Jaafari's both are equally sectarian in their policies and have strong ties with the Iranian regime and the rebel Muqtada al-Sadder group which is allegedly behind most of the sectarian violence that we see today in Iraq.

Iraq, the country as a whole lacks any one person who has the ability to reunite Kurds, Sunni’s and Shiites under one umbrella called Iraq. Not because of inept leaders but because of the realities of strong differences, dislike and mistrust that run deep between the three different factions.

While it is true some progress has been made toward democracy in Iraq: the constitution, the election, Jaffari’s peaceful steps down from power, the fact the Sunni’s joined the second election and are more willing to participate in the parliament and use dialog to solve their differences. These are all great strides toward democracy in the Middle East as a whole. However, the only force that kept the fragile state of Iraq together, avoided civil war and brought the different factions to the dialog table, is the presence of the U.S. But it will take more than four to five years to build on this foundation. Is the U.S. willing to stay in Iraq for 20 to 30 years? The answer to that is obvious.

Just like Humpty Dumpty Iraq has fallen and all the king’s horses and all the king’s men can’t put Iraq together again.

We can not achieve long term peaceful resolution in Iraq and Middle East as a whole unless we are willing to face the true realties that exist in that unbalanced region.

By blindly stamping approval for al-Maliki so we can pull our troops out of Iraq and claim victory in favor of phony national reconciliation we are just procrastinating what is inevitably going to happen – a divided Iraq.

We all know it does not matter whether it is Jaafari or Maliki that is crowned as Prime Minister, The King is Still Naked.

2006-04-09T11:40:00.000-06:00

Terrorizing terrorism

By Ardalan Hardi

April 9, 2006

The use of the word terrorism by Turkey and its allies on all the unrest that Ankara faces in northern Kurdistan has led to a point where it has lost its meaning. It is one of the greatest impediments to the progress of democracy in Turkey. Instead of accepting the responsibility for the lack of realistic solutions to the Kurdish Question, the Turkish state blames it on others: the Kurds.

The unwillingness of EU to come to terms with the issue and often side with Turkey confirms this moral malaise. Nothing will move forward so long as this nonsense persists. Ankara's inability to handle the Kurdish issue through diplomatic and democratic dialogue just prolongs the problem.

In Iraq, a country that borders Turkey and shares the Kurds as subjects with Ankara, we see all the signs of terrorism. We see atrocities like: beheadings, suicide bombers and dragging of mutilated bodies behind cars by the remnants of from Saddam's era thugs who continue to "entertain" us with their mayhem, courtesy of most television stations. And yet, this activity is called insurgency and not terrorism. The U.S. is willing to have a dialogue with these repentant killers to find a peaceful solution to the stalemate.

There, we also have the Muqtada al-Sadr who continues to terrorize civilians with: bombings drive-by shootings, kidnappings, assassinations, the storming of Sunni mosques and the kidnapping of innocent worshipers and this is called sectarian violence.

When hundreds of thousands of unarmed Kurds protest the brutal living conditions and the human right abuses by Ankara, they are described as terrorists by the so-called "civilized" world, which unfortunately includes the Unites States of America. What a shame! What a travesty! What logic!

The word terrorism has lost its meaning when it is used by Ankara and its so-called allies. This way of looking at terrorism may benefit the so-called "national interests" of Turkey and its supporters, but it has also generated a deep distrust in the U.S. foreign policy and its aims in the Middle East.

In the globilezed world that we live, no country, you would think, would get away with the amount of abuse that is ongoing in Turkey. The Turkish state's definition of terrorism brings shame to the foreign policy of the United States.
If all of the unjust policies that are forced upon people who pursue change through a peaceful process are ignored, then you will have the incentive to create monstrous terrorists like Osama bin Laden.

The protesters in northern Kurdistan are everyday citizens, including women and children that are fed up with Ankara's disregard for humanrights, lies and barbarous approach to handling the Kurdish socio-economic issues.

Abuse of the nature that exists in Turkey breeds hatred, and enmity. If there is no hope in sight for a peaceful solution, we will see more of the same, I am afraid.

2006-04-02T18:57:00.000-06:00

Who is the terrorist?

By Ardalan Hardi
KurdishAspect.com
April 2, 2006

In the last few days members of the Turkish security forces have attacked Kurdish civilians across Northern Kurdistan with vengeance. Hundreds have been arrested and eight have been killed including three children. And what does the Prime Minster of the so-called democratic Turkish state has to say about the civil unrest in Kurdistan? And I am quoting him verbatim: “The security forces will intervene against the pawns of terrorism, no matter if they are children or women. Everyone should realize that", says Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Mr. Erdogan the dictionary describes terrorism, “As the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear.” Now who is the terrorist? 20 million Kurds who have been forced to live under decades of brutality, torture, unjust and ruthless occupation of the Turkish state can not be terrorists. Children are not terrorists but killing them is a terrorist act. No, Mr. Erdogan, you and your state are the terrorists not millions of Kurds who simply want to live like human beings.

Isn’t it every human being’s right to be able to practice, preserve his or her native language and culture? Mr. Erdogan, the Kurdish issue is not going to be solved by more threats and terrorist acts of your security forces, but by understanding what a great American president Thomas Jefferson wrote "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." Like every human being on the face of this earth the Kurds want these very things. Recognition of Kurdish rights and peaceful resolution through dialog is the only road to peace in that reign. Avoiding the reality that stares you in the face, time after time, is nothing but pure self-deception.

Aren’t you the one who calls on Israel and Hamas to establish dialogue in order to revive the Middle East peace process? Last time I checked Hamas was on the same list that lists the so-called “terrorist” PKK as well. Please, Mr. Erdogan, stop making nonsense and pay attention to what you are saying. Not only the Kurds, but the world has had enough of your hypocrisy. Instead of talking maybe you should listen once in a while. Listen to what EU spokeswoman Krszting Nagy said about your country, "The region needs peace, economic development and real exercise of cultural rights for Kurds,” adding that this was not a new problem and was raised constantly by the European Commission in its talks with Turkey.

Unfortunately, like all terrorists you only cherry-pick what is convenient to you and your diabolical plans.

Isn’t it time to place them under a RIP sign?

2006-04-02T18:48:00.000-06:00

The Burning Monument

Saturday, 01 April 2006
Suleimni (Awene) By Bakhtiyar Ali

Until March 16, if anyone would have asked me about the most appalling political event in the past twenty years, I would have answered that it was on August 31, 1996 (when the Kurdistan Democratic Party asked Saddam Hussein's Iraqi forces to help them defeat Patriotic Union of Kurdistan's militias in Erbil.)

But what happened in March 16 was a political and ethical earthquake that was larger than August 31. Firstly, (March 16) marks the day that a generation emerged that can set monuments on fire. Secondly, a power that can shoot at children was born on that day. The most meaningless interpretation is (that the burning of the Halabja memorial) was like burning the history of Halabja, as party media says.

On the contrary, nothing expresses Halabja's history like the burning of the monument. Setting the monument on fire is simply like burning a small faction of the lies that have been repeated for the past fifteen years. It rejects the policy of worshipping the dead while those who are alive are treated like dogs. Halabja actually stood up when the monument was set on fire; it marked a revolution of the town, a revolution of which the public was previously unaware. The irony is that the ones who opened fire on kids and freedom of expression are the same ones now crying for the burnt monument. It is the biggest hypocrisy and ethical crises that you kill me while guarding my statue; that you cry for my past while stabbing me.

The ones who open fire on secondary and university students and shoots at hundreds of unarmed people cannot say they love our statutes more than us. The policy of this (Iraqi Kurdish) administration is that for the sake of the monument they are ready to destroy Halabja; they are ready to kill dozens of people, to detain them and talk about executions.

(Awene is issued weekly by Awene Company in Sulaimaniyah, Iraqi Kurdistan.)

2006-03-29T01:13:00.000-07:00

Back to Barbarism
Bakhtiyar Ali

March 29, 2006

What took place on March 16th in Halabja was anticipated and for it to reoccur is expected.The bullets from authorities to shoot their own citizen without a second thought were forth coming. The great division that has formed between the citizens and the Kurdish authorities is growing by leaps and bounds. Fake pretensions and rubbish dialog to get to the bottom of the issues will not work anymore. This is a realism that has no choice but is forced to go thru thepassage of bloodshed. The Kurdish authorities have come across a huge behavioral crisis that can not be hidden with a smile. There is a point in history of every authoritarian system, where going back is very difficult. It is a point between a calm collective system and a bloody chaotic system. It starts when the mirror of power is tested. At a point when one takes that first step to kill someone. When you take the knife in your hand and decide to use it. When you put killers on the street and call them security forces, from then on the whole system transforms. When self-annihilation starts stopping it is not easy.

All world dictators come into power with great speeches and colorful slogans, but once they have power they suppress and silence the speeches and slogans of the people that put them there. When all the manipulative options are exhausted, force becomes the tool of choice. Now we have come to that bloody point. A point were by ordinary people losing their lives to their government.

When the point of killing is reached, there are only two options: either the killer has to accept theresponsibility of his action, acknowledging fault and pay a heavy price for his mistake, or deciding to continue on a pass to word evil and distraction. There are no other choices than those two. Unfortunately all the indications point us toward the latter choice. In recent past the Kurdish politics has been silent on the major issues that have faced this nation. When we look at Dr Kamal, the attack on Islamic movement in Dhoke, to Halabja book and now the Halabja protest we see a pattern of political silence.

We have judges that sentence a writer to 30 years for writing an article. On the streets we have our police and security forces without adequate training, education and lack of discipline where at any giving moment are ready to use their guns without thinking about their actions. The behavioral crises of the Kurdish political system hit new peaks in Halabja. Now it is obvious the politicsof PUK and KDP is crossing a dangerous line. For the last fifteen years they have refused to face the truth, ignoring the problems as they arise and their quest for personal greed has brought them to a scary dead end.For fifteen years they have ignored pleas from friends and foes alike to a point were they have cornered themselves with no options left but to silencing people with force and violence ultimately becoming butchers of their own people. Their mistakes have led the Kurdish people toward unprecedented disaster and there is no use to have hogwash dialog on reform anymore. Now is the time for both political parties to acknowledge their mistakes that have led this nation toward catastrophe and a devastating dead end. The action of Halabja proves they are out of touch and no longer capable on address the key issues and problems that face this nation anymore. Their only answer to a modern democratic society is the use of force and nothing else. Their empty promises and laughable agendas will no longer be believable or acceptable by the masses. In the last fifteen years these two groups have not been able to solve the smallest problems of the Kurdish society. Yet they were able to become millionaires. Nowthey need to protect their status quo and the only way they know how to do it is by force. They have lost the bridge between them and the new generation and once you lose that connection with your new generation the future can only be a losing one.

My hope is they do not make a huge reckless decision by thinking that their militia will protect them. That has been tried before in history and that sort of power has never been able to defend that kind of system anywhere on this planet

For my last plea I hope the authorities will review history and learn from it. But I don't know how capable they are of understanding and learning from the past. I only ask you this: Who in their right mind thinks by breaking the video cameras and confiscating pictures of the news media will silence 5000 protesters in Halabja or anywhere? Only authorities who have lost touch withreality would have a plan as close minded as this one.

A true democratic political system will send its own cameras into the masses so they could hear the voices and understand the issues and face the grievances that challenge their people. That is why we have to ask them how long you are going to listen to phony voices instead of the true faces of the people. How could you not see that the shooting of protestors during Halabja ceremonies would stay in the minds of the people for generations to come?
This is when a political system is on its last leg hits a dead end and loses its credibility and existence.

After Halabja we can expect the enforcers to come back and visit us on any giving day because those who killed Halabja once again, are here with us and living among us

2006-03-20T14:48:00.000-07:00

Commentary on Halabja 2006

Ardalan Hardi

PUK wants to put a spin on what happened On March 16, 2006 in Halabja. According to a source from Awene and Robert Cole, who were both present at the protest, most of the participants were frustrated students and fed up citizens. The demonstration was not a planed act by a terrorist organization as PUK would like us to believe. The student organizers of the protest announced their intentions to demonstrate prior to the event.

The citizens of Halabja view the Halabja monument as an instrument used by the political leaders for personal gain. In fact, the monument is commonly referred to by the Kurdish people as (dagilay Dizakan) Piggy Bank of Thieves. The protesters believe the political pleaders have been known to elicit sympathy and receive generous donations during Halabja ceremonies and keep the money for themselves, instead of using it to rebuild Halabja.

The protesters who endured years of broken promises and continued frustration were behind the demonstration in Halabja, not any Muslim fanatic group or terrorist organization. It would be smart for PUK to admit their faults and listen to the citizens of Halabja, if they are truly interested in solving the issues.

2006-03-19T14:30:00.000-07:00

High Noon in Halabja

Robert Cole

Kurdishaspect.com

Kurdishaspect.com - March 16 in Halabja is always a special day, as the town gathers to remember the victims of that horrible day in 1988 when 5000 people were gassed by Saddam Hussein. The images of that day never lose their resonance and their lives are never forgotten. Much genocide has been perpetrated since then in places such as Rwanda and the Balkans, no less horrific, but none of these have involved a regime gassing to death the people of its own state. March 16 2006 in Halabja was a truly extraordinary day as the people of that town could no longer contain their anger at the broken promises of foreign and particularly Kurdish politicians to invest the pledged amounts of money, provide better local services, give compensation to the victims families and the survivors, and complete the reconstruction of their town.
The journey to Halabja from any part of Iraqi Kurdistan is a beautiful one. The snow capped mountains on the horizon provide a stunning backdrop. The land is lusher here. The cattle graze happily in rich green fields. As I approached the town just after 9am, the tension and anger was palpable and all graceful images of the setting were rapidly forgotten. The students of the town had promised a demonstration this year. Besides all the broken promises, they were also angry about what they see as the perennial hijacking of their day by Kurdish politicians cynically exploiting the annual ceremony for their own ends while doing little to help the town. It was poignant that the memorial was sealed off from the people of the town by the security forces. The people of Halabja could not go to their own memorial on their remembrance day. The politicians were going to conduct their own ceremonies with invited foreign dignitaries. The local people though had other ideas and were determined to prevent these going ahead.
All up the road entering the town were banners expressing fury. The demonstrators carried placards, some in English, "Victims of Halabja, the Kurdish symbol, are waiting reconstruction". A crowd of thousands marched down towards the memorial. "Azadi, Azadi", Freedom, Freedom, they shouted. Halabja Day had become a fundamental issue of freedom rather than commemoration and that was always going to be dangerous. The crowd made a dramatic surge for the memorial. The security forces with neither training in crowd control nor equipped with riot gear, opened fire. Wave after wave of bullets went into the atmosphere. The air was full of screams and shouting as people scattered in all directions for cover. Three people fell to the ground, clutching parts of their bodies, their bloody wounds superficial from crossfire shrapnel. No direct hits yet.
Eventually the firing stopped and the crowd started to regroup beyond the road leading up to the memorial. Around the monument were peshmerga, the Kurdish army, dressed in smart ceremonial uniform. A military band stood around. They never got to play. On the notice board at the entrance, local people had pasted their posters on top. "The victims of Halabja are the identity of the Kurds. They are awaiting reconstruction funds". A man approached the entrance with a glancing bullet wound to his head, the blood on his neck was starting to dry. "Who shot at us?" he kept screaming. He was ushered away by security staff. Shahu Mohammed Saed, the regional leader of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) swirled around talking urgently into mobile phone. He didnt want the ceremonies to stop He had important guests after all.
I headed for the hospital to check on the casualties. Word was now spreading of the security forces firing on their own people. In response more of the local populace mobilised and poured down the main street towards the memorial. A banner above read "If we want to respect the people of Halabja, let the people responsible be brought to justice at the martyr's graveyards". In a taxi, we drove through the streets where the chemical bombs fell. I remembered the photo of the dead man with his lifeless baby next to him. Little has changed in these streets in 18 years. At the hospital there were fierce denials of any casualties being admitted. The security forces kept close to the doctors. Eyewitnesses had reported that ambulances had come and gone. Emotions were high and it was hard to see where the truth lay.
Checkpoints on the approach roads to the memorial were now turning people away I could not get back. Instead, we headed out to the hills and the tracks where the fleeing people of Halabja in 1988, with safety within reach, were bombed in a second wave of chemical gas. We passed some fine new apartment blocks, rare examples of new building. The taxi driver swore that they had been given to politicians and local officials for them to enjoy or profit from. Whatever the truth, it was clear how estranged some of the local population have become from their rulers.
Above Halabja, I walked around the graves of the martyrs of Anab, the village on the outskirts. There is peace at last for the buried victims here. The mountains are yet closer and the birds sing beautifully. The contrast of this spot with the events in the town could not have been starker. The peace was soon shattered by the sounds of renewed gunfire. This time it went on and on and on. While I was paying my respects to the dead, Shahu Mohammed Saed had tried to address the crowd near the memorial. He never finished his speech as the crowd stormed the museum where they set fire to displays reconstructing the gas attack as well as photographs of victims and glass cases containing the clothes of the dead. I watched a thick cloud of acrid black smoke spin up out of the memorial site. Kurdish security forces shot dead one man and wounded at least eight others
Back at the hospital, large crowds gathered. The air was full of sirens. Denials of casualties were no longer possible. From the roof of the Save The Children office, I watched the drama unfold. The smoke continued to stream from the monument site in the distance. Below, cars sped by ferrying the injured; their horns blowing, people sitting outside the cars on window edges screaming for the way ahead to be cleared. Soldiers came to the office and told me to leave the building immediately. As I left I could smell the burning. I passed the mosque where the body of the young man, was already being washed. Halabja now had a new martyr.
At the town of Said Sadiq on the road back to Suleymania, there was a larger than normal military presence at the checkpoint. I was travelling with journalists from the highly acclaimed independent newspaper, Awena. The soldiers took their films. The authorities sought to destroy all evidence of what went on. A student from another vehicle that had been pulled over, hissed in my ear "there is no democracy" here and he was right that there is no true western style democracy. The soldiers conducting the search were embarrassed and very apologetic for what they were doing. One can still not lose sight of the fact that life is preferable here to several other Middle Eastern states.
As the riot erupted in Halbja many of the Kurdish leaders were attending the opening of the Iraqi parliament in the Green Zone in Baghdad. We have to keep hoping that democracy can prevail in Iraq. For it to do so, and for the sake of the long suffering Kurdish people, let the Kurdish politicians take keen note of March 16, 2006 in Halabja and reconnect with their constituency.

2006-02-26T20:48:00.000-07:00

Cartoon Dispute

A theology like Muslim religion that is worshiped by over a billion people and is approximately 1400 years old can not be shattered by writing a book or cartoon drawings. By the same token the modern world with over 300 years of history that is continuously evolving and transforming will not be affected by few thousand protesters in Afghanistan or Syria.
So let them write and let them protest all they want. After all isn’t that what democracy is all about.

2006-02-26T15:18:00.000-07:00

WHY SHOULD WE SPLIT IRAQ?
kurdishaspect.com

Because of recent talks to put a time table on our troops in Iraq, mounting political pressure, and President Bush’s recent decline in popularity, it is undeniable the president will remove military support from Iraq much sooner than expected and needed. What we as Americans have failed to acknowledge is the right solution. Iraq must be split into two separate countries. This is not a new idea; experts for years have proclaimed this solution and believe it is inevitable.Here are few reasons why:
1. An Arab culture that has created and taught Arab Nationalism for centuries and has given birth to many leaders like Saddam Hussein, cannot be changed to democracy overnight. The heroes of Arab nationalism, like Saddam Hussein and Gamal abd-al-Nasser, failed to accomplish their goal of unifying the Arab world and setting Palestine free. Once Anwar Sadat and Israel started on the road to peace, the idea of utopian Arab nationalism evaporated. That is when Islam fundamentals breed new heroes like Osama bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahari to fill the void created by the fall of Arab Nationalism. With a promise of uniting the Islam world (i.e. the Arab world), regaining Palestine, and eradicating the evil empire, U.S. Religion can be a dangerous tool in the hands of the wrong people. While operating under the Islam umbrella, the Islamic radicals have fooled uneducated non Arab Muslim groups like Ansar Al-Islam into helping them with their terrorizing campaign to unify the Arab world. Arab nationalism and Islamo fascism may be different in ideology but their objectives are the same. Like Martin Kramer said, “Islamism is now what Arab nationalism was then”. In Iraq we see the two main factions that use Islam religion to push their own agendas. These factions are Shiites and Sunnis. Shiites embody Iran’s side of Islam religion, which is nothing but hate toward the west, primarily the U.S. and Israel. In fact, if you go to Baghdad today you get a sense that you are in Iran with Ayatollah pictures hanging on the walls every where. I am sure this is the group that will take over Iraq once our military leaves. The other faction that uses the Islam religion to further its own agenda is the Sunnis. The Sunnis are nothing but the leftover hooligans from Saddam’s Arab nationalist terrorist group. We have seen this through the mass graves of poor innocent Kurdish women and children from Saddam Hussein’s Anfal campaign. The Sunnis used religion to validate their genocide of the Kurds. Today, we see them car bombing, kidnapping and beheading innocent missionaries and truck drivers. These are the groups we are trying to democratize. If we hand Iraq over to these Islamist groups, we are fooling ourselves to believe we are leaving Iraq in the hands of democracy. Martin Kramer says, “So smart people, many of them with experience “handling” Islamists, have been wrong about them time and again. They have told us they know how to talk to Islamists, how to channel them away from violence, how to find common ground. And leaders, governments, and everyday people have paid the price for their errors. It has been the worst precisely in places where Islamists were given the most space to organize, preach, plan, and operate.” If we leave Iraq the way it is, and do not acknowledge Kurdish independence, it would be like subjecting those we liberated (the Kurds) from one horrendous dictator to another. In this process we would leave Iraq without accomplishing one single goal. At the same time, we will have formed a state that will breed terrorists like rabbits for decades to come resulting in repugnant consequences for rest of the free world.
2- Turkey, we are told, is the other reason for not supporting an independent Kurdistan. The belief in Washington is that we might alienate Turkey as an ally. In my opinion, this is the most mind-boggling reason of all. It would be easier to transform Turkey than try to change Iraq into a Democratic state. It is not only in Turkey’s best interest to adapt and transform, but also it is more probable. Turkey benefits politically and economically by civilizing its human rite record regarding the Kurds. The Turkish economy and financial system are joined to rest of Europe and cannot afford to be isolated from the rest of the world. At the same time, I do not believe that Turkey would like to see another Islamic fundamentalism regime become its neighbor. 3- We should ask ourselves when was the last time we saw an American so zealously greeted, embraced openly and welcomed in any part of the world except in two Israel and Kurdistan. Even when the Kurds disagreed with the policies of U.S. representatives, they never threw a stone at an American soldier or burned American flag. Breemaer was the best example of that even though most of his policies sided with Arabs in Iraq. The Kurds never lost their patience and stood by U.S. Today, when an American soldier needs a vacation from the rat race in the south, he goes to Kurdistan. He knows he is safe and appreciated and treated as a liberator in Kurdistan. If you go to a Kurdish barbershop, restaurant or home what you will see on the wall is a picture of President Bush next to somebody’s loved one who lost their life fighting Saddam and his thugs. Where else in the world do you see that much respect, love and adulation toward Americans? 4- If we look at independent Kurdistan from a strategic point of view, we find that U.S. and the Kurds have the same interest. Arabism and Islamo fascism are both enemies of U. S. and Kurds. In fact, more so now since the Kurds have so emphatically supported the west. Most of the Arab world considers the Kurdish people traders. Kurds are a small minority compare to their surrounding enemies. They would not stand a chance alone should U. S. leave without supporting an independent Kurdistan. By supporting independent Kurdistan, we could set a military base in an environment that is friendly and conducive to U.S. A military base could keep an eye on all terrorist movements in Middle East and closely monitor those countries like Iran and Syria that supply those terror groups. Most every Kurd supports this idea. An article written by Babak Dehghanpisheh and Christopher Dickey in Newsweek says, “Top Kurdish officials have practically begged the U.S. military to make itself at home in their land.” Abdel Beg Perwani, a Kurdish member of Iraq's Parliament and deputy head of the defense committee said, “I do not ask that Americans build bases in Kurdistan—I demand it."
In his article “What are We Holding to Together?” Peter W. Glbraith writes, “Iraq's Kurds, Shiites and Sunni Arabs do not share the common values and aspirations that are essential to building a unified state. The country's Kurds are avowedly secular and among the most pro-American people in the world. Almost unanimously they want nothing to do with Iraq.”
Let us not squander this historic opportunity! We have come too far and sacrificed too much to come way empty handed. Let’s hope that our leaders have learned a lesson from Afghanistan. Martin Kramer says, ‘The partnership between U.S. engagement with the Mujahideen in Afghanistan against the Soviets created a false impression among many Americans that the Jihadists were our SOBs. The failure to plot their trajectory has left the door open to the first World Trade Center bombing, and then 9/11
We have two choices:
-We can leave Iraq intact and hand it over to pro Iranian Shiets group. Or-Split Iraq into two countries and gain the Kurds as essential allies.