|
Undermining Kurdish Alliance Would be a
Mistake
1.1.2008
By Ardalan Hardi
|
|
|
|
January 1, 2008
The recent collaboration between the US and Turkey
regarding 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,www.ekurd.net
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,www.ekurd.net
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.
Ardalan Hardi. You may reach the author via email
at: kurdishaspect(at)yahoo.com
Top |
Kurd Net
does not take credit for and is not responsible for the content of news
information on this page
|
® 