|
Turkish/US attacks, undermining Kurdish
self rule
7.1.2008
By Dr Rebwar Fatah
|
|
|
|
January 7, 2008
Turkey’s attacks on southern Kurdistan, using
US-made warplanes, is part of a plot by the US and
Turkey to undermine the Kurdistan de facto state
that has been established in parts of southern
Kurdistan since 1991.[1] Weeks of bombardments have
resulted in civilian casualties, destruction of many
villages and displacement of thousands of people.
However, according to the Turkish General Staff,
even stating that civilians have been killed in
these attacks will serve terrorists. [2] Turkey has
committed these crimes with a tacit approval by the
“democratic world”.
Realising that the international community is not
concerned about the plight of the Kurds, the Turkish
“parliament” discussed other measures, without
giving the details, in addition to the bombardment,
to eliminate the Kurdistan de facto state, known as
the Kurdistan Regional Government. Turkey uses state
terror under the pretext of pursuing terrorists or
separatists. To many Kurds’ surprise, Israel also
started supporting this terror campaign against
Kurds by offering technology to Turkey. [3]
What is the real aim of Turkish/US attacks on
southern Kurdistan? The Kurds in southern Kurdistan
are moving towards the formation of their own
nation-state. The Kurds have shown that they are
able to manage their own security, control their
natural resources, particularly oil, and can put an
effective pressure on the Iraqi government to return
territories detached from Kurdistan, known as
“disputed territories” in the Iraqi constitution.
Moving towards a nation-state may be supported by
the approved Iraqi constitution,www.ekurd.net
which Kurds regard as a
legal agreement between the Kurds and all the Iraqi
political forces. In addition, it has the backing of
the international community, in particular US and
Britain. Now that the Iraqi government has been
re-established - of course with Kurds as one of its
pillars - all these forces purse annulling the
promises that the constitution makes to Kurds.
The Arab and other political forces in Iraq also
want to achieve what Turkey attempts to achieve via
military aggression. The weak Iraqi government is
incapable to deal with the development in Kurdistan
on these fronts, because, unlike Kurdistan, Iraq is
to date in a deep security vacuum, incapable of
containing Kurds. The Iraqi army is no match to the
Kurdish Peshmerga forces, who are currently, in
addition to KRG, keeping the security of areas
controlled by the central government such as
Baghdad, Mosul, Kirkuk and parts of Diyala. However,
using force against Kurds by the Iraqi central
government may not be very far away now. The
improvement of the security situation in the
government-controlled areas may free the Bagdad
government to adopt an aggressive policy toward the
Kurds. This intention has already been expressed by
Iraqi Arab forces, in particular Sunnis. One can
argue that Turkey is acting on behave of the Iraqi
government too.
The Kurdish leadership needs to balance the pressure
from Americans and regional powers against the
demands of the Kurdish pubic who voted for
independence in a referendum in 2004. Although the
Kurdish leadership may be willing to compromise
further on the core Kurdish issues, they fear that
they might lose the control of the Kurdish
population and ultimately jeopardise their own
positions. Nonetheless, the gap between the Kurdish
political leadership and the Kurdish population has
extended to a critical limit. Perhaps the
controversial media-control law that was recently
passed by the Kurdish parliament in order to limit
freedoms of press, consequently resulting in a
public outcry, is the wrong way to control the
population. Instead, rather than trying to control
the population, the leadership must try to represent
it.
In the absence of any other pretext and while the
Kurdistan’s political leadership, under pressure by
the Kurdish population, cannot compromise any
further, the presence of the PKK in southern
Kurdistan may be a helping hand.
The PKK, labelled by the US and EU member states, as
a terrorist organisation, provides a pretext for the
US/Turkey to pursue PKK camps inside southern
Kurdistan. However, the actual aim of Turkish/US is
to undermine the KRG, attempting to pushing it back
to Iraq rather than drifting away as a separate
state. Turkey is coordinating these attacks with the
US and receiving moral and logistic assistance from
it. In addition, the Turkish military arsenal is
mainly American made. In 2006, Turkey ranked sixth
in the world and top in Europe, with $850 million in
contracted sales of US-made weapons systems and
services. During 2003-2006, Turkey signed deals
worth $2.9 billion with U.S. arms manufacturers,
ranking seventh in the world. [4]
Some observers believe that Turkey has a more
regional aims in these recent attacks. It has been
reported that the air attacks with 50 planes in one
night, fuel transfer in the air, using laser
technology to identify and hit targets were all
aimed at sending a message about the strength of the
Turkish Air Force to the region, rather than really
targeting the PKK. [5] One would have thought to
eliminate a “terrorist group”, 50 warplanes would
not be required. This is more like an attack on a
country or a nation, rather than on a group.
Perhaps Turkey is planning to incorporate southern
Kurdistan into its own territory as it seems that
the division of Iraq is now inevitable. This does
appear to be a bizarre idea, but Turkey has proven
that it does not follow logics. Perhaps similar to
Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait which marked the
beginning of the end of his regime, the Turkish
invasion of southern Kurdistan may also mark the
beginning of a new state of Turkey. Such an invasion
would lead to destabilising Turkey and the region as
it would be unpopular with Arab states and Iran. The
Kurds of southern and northern Kurdistan would unite
to fight one oppressor: Turkey. The KRG, which now
acts as a buffer zone between Turkey and government
controlled Iraq would disappear, opening Turkey to
the insurgent groups of Iraq, extending the deep
Iraqi security vacuum to Turkey; the fragmentation
of Turkey would be inevitable.
Where do the Kurds stand in all these developments?
Until recently, the Kurdish leadership and some
intellectuals failed to develop a deep understanding
of the issues facing them. Perhaps that is the
reason why the Kurds do not have a coherent policy
on the anti-Kurdish US/Turkish alliance. For
example,www.ekurd.net
the best the President
of Kurdistan, Massuad Barzani, could do is condemn
these attacks without taking any measures. The
leader, who at one time claimed he would turn
Kurdistan into the graveyard of the Turkish army,
appears powerless in real crises. [6] This is an
indication that Kurdish leadership has not developed
a Kurdistani-strategy, and instead, reacts
hesitantly to looming circumstances. Even Talabani,
the PUK leader and the President of Iraq, believes
that hostility against Turkey is hostility against
democracy. [7]
Media reports suggest that the Iraqi government
agreed to the Turkish/US attacks. Let us not forget,
the Iraqi government has two pillars, Kurds and
Shiia Arabs. Therefore, Kurdish officials in Baghdad
must have agreed to this aggression. The media also
reports that the Iraqi government informed the KRG.
Whether the KRG agreed to this or not, it is for
them to reveal. [8] Let us see if they did.
The KRG spokesman stated, "We call on the Turkish
army to differentiate between the PKK and the
ordinary people. We don't want the conflict between
the Turkish troops and the PKK to turn into a
conflict between the Turkish forces and the people
of Kurdistan." [9] Therefore the Kurdish leadership
is happy with the bombing their territory, while
only pleading for their citizens.
The view of the KRG’s agreement to the Turkish/US
attacks has found more support. No Kurdish minister
in the Iraqi government condemned these attacks. The
Iraqi Foreign Minister, Hoshyar Zebari, a Kurd and a
high ranking member of Barzani’s party KDP, has
expressed his country’s willingness to coordinate
these attacks with Turkey. Perhaps Zebari is a rare
Kurd who would rather pursue the slaughter of his
own people by Turkish/US bombings. [10] There is no
coherent Kurdish foreign policy. Instead, there may
only be a narrow partisan policy, which has nothing
to do with representing Kurdish nation in the
international arena, and consequently, no one will
take the narrow Kurdish political groups’ policies
seriously.
The Kurdish leadership must learn how to deal with
crises. They could have organised an international
diplomatic campaign by sending their delegation to
the democratic world. They could have organised
peaceful demonstrations all over the democratic
world and in Kurdistan. In this way, the Kurds could
have attracted the international attention to the
Turkish/US aggression. The Kurds would have been in
a strong position since neither Turkey nor the US is
very popular in today’s world. Perhaps as the gap
between a corrupt and incompetent leadership and the
population expands to a critical stage, gaining the
support of the Kurdistani population may not be
possible. Over 50 Kurdistani members in the Iraqi
assembly should have been the decisive force in
pushing these matters forward, but they appear to be
incapable in influencing the Iraqi government. Why
did not they take any action?
By contrast, Kurds outside the main Kurdish
political stream have strongly condemned these
attacks and have labelled them as “state terror”.
These voices state that the US has proven yet again
that it is still the old bully of peaceful nations
and is still the same perpetrator of 1975, when
Mustafa Barzani was betrayed. These are low voices
with no political power, but it may represent a
shift in the Kurdish official policy. There is
evidence in the media that the Kurds are about to
move from a romantic to a more realistic
relationship with the US, where they do not
sacrifice their national interests to that of the
US.
End notes
1. The Washington Post, 18 December 2007: The US is
a helping hand in these attacks. “The United States
is providing Turkey with real-time intelligence that
has helped the Turkish military target a series of
attacks this month against Kurdish separatists holed
up in northern Iraq, including a large airstrike on
Sunday.”
The Christian Science Monitor, 19 December 2007:
Turkey has deployed some 100,000 troops along the
border with southern Kurdistan over the summer and
threatened a major cross-border operation – it has
conducted 24 since 1985 – if Iraqi Kurds and US
forces in Iraq did not deal with the PKK. So far
this year, Turkey has conducted a string of
small-scale border crossings, and regularly shells
villages and PKK bases on the Iraqi side of the
border. The 300 troops who went into Iraq Tuesday
have returned to Turkey, according to Kurdish
officials.
2. The Christian Science Monitor, 19 December 2007:
The Turkish General Staff denied Iraqi Kurdish
claims of civilian casualties, saying in a statement
about the Sunday airstrikes that "targets were
determined after a meticulous assessment and they
were not in areas inhabited by civilians. Claims
that civilians were killed serve the PKK."
3. AP, 27 December 2007: Israeli defense contractors
plan to deliver to Turkey, within weeks, 10 unmanned
aircraft that will be used, among other things, in
intelligence-gathering operations against Kurdistan
Workers’ Party or the PKK, reported Associated Press
on 27 December 2007. This is part of the $190
million deal with the Turkish Air Force, signed
several years ago, Israeli crews will provide
training and technical support for the Heron
systems, AP reported.
4. The Congressional Research Center (CRS) report
for Congress details U.S. arms sales agreements and
deliveries to major clients during 1999-2006. Turkey
has not taken part in any substantial outside
conflicts since the illegal invasion of northern
Cyprus in 1974, which has been condemned by the
international community and a United Nations
Security Council resolution condemning it. The
majority of these weapons systems are used
internally to oppress 25 million Kurds of northern
Kurdistan. They have been used in destruction of the
Kurdish villages and maintaining the emergency rule
of northern Kurdistan. They also used in major
attacks on southern Kurdistan. Observers believe
that the US support for Turkish attacks on southern
Kurdistan stems from opening up market for US
weapons system.
5. The Evrensel newspaper, 23 December 2007:
Ertugrul Kurkcu, Bianet's project coordinator,
evaluated the current discourses on the Kurdish
issue, interview with the Evrensel newspaper.
6. Washington Post, 27 September 2002: Turkish
officials have obliquely threatened to send troops
into northern Iraq to thwart Kurdish ambitions
there; a Kurdish leader replied that northern Iraq
would then become a "graveyard" for Turkish troops.
7. The Bugün daily, 02 January 2008, Interview with
Talabani: "In my view, hostility against Erdogan and
his government is equal to hostility against
democracy." "I have said the same thing to people
from the DTP [pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party]
coming to see me. Prime Minister Erdogan wants to
resolve the [Kurdish] problem. But there are
difficulties posed by both those who want to hinder
democratization efforts and the PKK," Talabani said.
8. CNN, 24 December 2004: U.S., Turkish and Iraqi
leaders all held talks 24 December 2007 about the
PKK in southern Kurdistan. President Bush chatted by
phone with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan, while separately two senior Iraq national
government figures met with the head of the KRG
officials. National Security Council spokesman
Gordon Johndroe said they discussed their common
efforts to fight terrorism, and the importance of
the United States, Turkey and Iraq working together
to confront the PKK. Bush has vowed to help Turkey
fight PKK rebels.
9. AP, 16 December 2007: Jamal Abdullah, a spokesman
for the regional government of Iraqi Kurdistan, told
AP Television News: "We call on the Turkish army to
differentiate between the PKK and the ordinary
people. We don't want the conflict between the
Turkish troops and the PKK to turn into a conflict
between the Turkish forces and the people of
Kurdistan."
10. Reuters, 17 December 2007: Hoshiyar Zebari, the
Iraqi Foreign Minister, stated, "We fully understand
Turkish legitimate security concerns over PKK
Terrorism across the border, and our government's
position is very clear on that.”
Kurdishmedia com
Top |
Kurd Net
does not take credit for and is not responsible for the content of news
information on this page
|
® 