|
The Halabja Monument as a top-down “chosen
trauma”
5.3.2012
By Saeed Kakeyi
—
ekurd.net |
|
|
|
|

Saed Kakei, Ph.D. Student, Nova Southeastern
University’s Department of Conflict Analysis &
Resolution – PhD Program Read more by the Author
March 5, 2012
On Wednesday, March 16th, 1988, my wife and I were
working in a Turkish delight and Halva production
facility in Kayseri, Turkey, while eagerly waiting
for our UN sponsored immigration process to Canada.
After work, we jointly went to a Turkish police
station, close to our work and resident locations,
to sign our weekly refugee attendance. Unlike
previously experienced harsh treatments, the officer
in charge of the Iraqi refugees in his area on that
date was very polite and sympathetic to us. In fact,
to my surprise, he started talking to us in Kurdish
and asked if I ever visited the City of Halabja in
northern Iraq. Fearing that we might face unforeseen
consequences, I denied speaking any Kurdish and
reiterated to him that we were a Turkman couple from
the multiethnic city of Kirkuk, Iraq.
The officer stood up, went to the door of his office
and closed it. At that very moment, I said to
myself: ‘That’s it. It’s our turn to be beaten,
humiliated, and eventually be deported to Iraq to
face our ultimate fate in the hands of the Iraqi
Ba’athist thugs!’ As I was going through that
fearful episode, the officer came back to me and
hugged me as though I was one of his close
relatives. With tearful eyes, the officer told me in
Kurdish: “Ey bra no! Li me Fermane” (Oh, brother!
It’s our genocide). Still not knowing, I asked him
in Kurdish, “What is going on?” The officer
responded that he just heard on the news that
Halabja was bombed with chemical gases and that
thousands of innocent Kurds got killed just like the
way in which thousands of innocent Japanese died in
in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1948.
At first, I was extremely cautious of expressing any
emotions. But, as the police officer continued
demonstrating his genuine feelings, emotions, and
true Kurdishness, I told him the fact that I was a
Kurd from Kirkuk who left the Iraqi Army to join the
Kurdish Peshmarga (freedom fighter) forces operating
in the rural areas of Halabja area for the past two
years. Also, I related to him that due to increasing
Iraqi usage of chemical gases against the Peshmarga
forces, I had no choice but to grab my wife’s hand
and seek refuge in Turkey. From that day on, the
officer and I became friends. We exchanged family
visits until December 15th, 1988, the day when my
family and I migrated to Canada, and I never saw
that officer again.
Prelude to the gassing of
Halabja
After the demise of the Ottoman Empire during the
WWI, Modern Iraq was created by the European
colonial allies from three semi-independent Ottoman
provinces of Mosul, Baghdad, and Basra. The area was
also known as Mesopotamia, the occupying British
authority had drew up the borders of the modern
State of Iraqi by dividing Kurdistan and, in the
process, annexing the southern parts of Kurdistan to
Iraq by which the Kurds left without any rights to
an independent state. As a result, from 1919 until
1958, the Kurds in Iraq had suffered socioeconomic
and socio-political domination by a succession of a
minority Sunni Arab regimes based in the capital
Baghdad.
After the overthrow of the Iraqi monarchy in 1958,
Britain lost its influence within Iraq and the
destiny of the Kurds was left in the hands of a
consecutive undemocratic, Arab nationalist
governments. Without exception, these regimes, in
their attempts to assimilate the Kurds, refused to
acknowledge the Kurds' basic human needs, far less
the Kurdish demand for self-determination.
Consequently, the Kurdish people in Iraq campaigned
for political rights and
were forced to resort to armed
struggle against the central governments in Baghdad
to secure and serve their distinct national
identity. In so doing, their cause has contributed
to the wider instability in the Middle East. This in
turn has influenced international politics to
consistently refuse to address the Kurdish issue, in
part because the stability of the regional powers
was connected to the political and economic
interests of the United States (U.S.) and the former
Soviet Union.
During the Cold War era, both, the U.S. and the
former Soviet Union were heavily engaged in
supporting dictatorial regimes in the region. The
national interests of the bipolar hegemonic powers
were inconsistently favoured over the fundamental
principles of human rights and, in the process,
turned blind eyes to atrocities committed by their
Middle Eastern state actors. Moreover, this neglect
has allowed some greedy international companies
trading with Iraq to clearly violate international
agreements by supplying prohibited plants and raw
chemical materials to Baghdad which enabled the
proliferation and the production of a vast arsenal
of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) to be used
against innocent civilian Kurds by the executed
Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.
Iraq is not the first state to have used chemical
weapons and the Kurds are not the first victims of
chemical gases. However, it is the first time in
history of mankind to have the WMD been used by a
sovereign state against its own people in an attempt
to suppress an intrastate conflict and to commit the
act of genocide to eradicate an opposing ethnic
minority.
That been said, it is worth mentioning that the
recent history of the Kurds in Iraq comprises of a
long list of tragedies of which only the major ones
have gained international public awareness and
generated varying degrees of international concern.
Only the genocide of Halabja in March, 1988 has
captured the world attention. There have been
numerous other chemical attacks which were not
exposed or investigated by the international
community despite consistent allegations and appeals
by the Kurds. Paradoxically, neither the U.S., as
the world champion for democracy and individual
freedom and liberty, nor the United Nations (UN), as
the legitimate platform of the civilized world, have
raised concerns, let alone condemning such heinous
crimes against humanity.
The U.S. State Department, especially during the
Ronald Reagan era, was silent about Iraq’s use of
chemical weapons against its own Kurdish population
during the eight years of Iran-Iraq war before 1987.
The first Iraqi gas attack on its own Kurdish town
of Penjween, some 40 kilometers northwest of Halabja,
was on November 13, 1983 (Khateri and Wangerin,
2008, p. 9) during which 17 casualties were secretly
reported owing to nerve gases (Lin, 2008). By any
account, the attack on Penjween was a serious breach
of the 1925 Geneva Protocol, but both, the U.S. and
the UN continued to publicly ignore it.
A month after the Penjween poison gas attack, the
Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), one of the two
major Iraqi Kurdish political organizations in
opposition to Saddam Hussein’s totalitarian regime,
was vowed to engage in a year-long fruitless
bilateral negotiations with Baghdad government.
Desperate for a respite after losing one-third of
his military might in the southern Iraqi frontiers
of his war with Iran, Saddam Hussein, tactically
recognized the Kurdish cause with the intentions of
making concessions on the disputed status of the
Kurdish majority Kirkuk province. As for the PUK
leaders who initially earned the sympathies of the
majority of the Kurds, their trilateral combats with
Iraq, Iran, and most devastatingly their long years
of internal fighting with the pro-Iranian leadership
of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) had earned
them unbearable hardship and countless Peshmarga
loses. Therefore, aside from daunting the imminent
dangers of Iraq’s poison gases, the PUK leaders
welcomed Saddam’s recognition despite their
awareness of his intentions to assimilate the Kurds.
The PUK saw a number of possible long-term
achievements to be gained in aforementioned
negotiations. For the first time since 1975, the
Ba'athists officially confirmed that no genuine
autonomy had been granted to the Kurds; that Saddam
Hussein had made concessions to Jalal Talabani, the
leader of PUK and the current President of Iraq,www.ekurd.net
promising him not only to share oil revenues from
Kirkuk province, but also a remapping of the
Kurdistan autonomous region to include eastern side
of the Khasa River that runs horizontally through
the centre of Kirkuk city. However, once the Reagan
administration fully backed the Iraqi regime in its
war with Iran, the PUK-Iraqi Ba’athists’
negotiations reached an impasse in January 1985. As
a result, renewed fighting between the two sides
broke out encouraging the PUK leadership to ally
with Iran and eventually make truce and
reconciliation with the KDP and the other main
Kurdish political parties. This political
reshufflings empowered the PUK-KDP Peshmargas to
inflict severe blows on the Iraqi military operating
in Kurdistan.
Iraq’s reaction to the
KDP-PUK relations with Iran
For decades, the enmity between Iran and Iraq had
seemed to Kurdish politicians as a geopolitical gap
that they could exploit to their advantage. In their
reconciliation efforts with the KDP leadership,
leaders of the PUK were eager to have Iran play a
fair role in managing the balance of power in Iraqi
Kurdistan. Desperate to defeat Iraq, Iran played a
dominant role in subsiding Kurdish factionalism. As
a result, the Iranian sponsored PUK-KDP
reconciliation not only boosted the moral and
military strength of the Peshmarga forces of both
Kurdish factions, but also led to the subsequent
formation of the Iraqi Kurdistan Front (IKF) in
December 1986.
This newly formed political umbrella, IKF, managed
to cover all Iraqi Kurdish opposing political groups
and parties under the slogan of the “Overthrow of
Saddam Hussein and the establishment of a democratic
Iraq and autonomous Kurdistan" (Al-Sharara, 1987).
In fact, with direct Iranian support and occasional
joint operations with small numbers of the Iranian
Revolutionary guards (Pasdaran), the Peshmarga
forces, mainly belonging to the PUK and the KDP,
launched sophisticated attacks deep inside Iraqi
Kurdistan targeting Iraq’s vital economic facilities
and military installations located in Kirkuk and
elsewhere. Such operations invoked Saddam’s wrath.
On March 18th, 1987, Saddam’s Revolutionary Command
Council (RCC) appointed Ali Hassan Al-Majid,
Saddam’s powerful first cousin, as the Secretary
General of the Northern Bureau of the Ba'ath Party
Organization (Human Rights Watch, 1993, p. 62).
Shortly thereafter, the RCC issued decree no. 160,
dated March 29, 1987, authorizing Al-Majid to be the
overlord of northern Iraq with extraordinary powers
“mandatory for all state agencies, be they military,
civilian and security” in order to exterminate the
Kurds in a systematic genocide known as the Anfal
(spoils) campaigns (1993, p. 63). Accordingly, Al-Majid—later
earned the nickname of Chemical Ali—unleashed his
evil wrath to ethnically cleanse Iraq’s Kurdish
population, especially those who were suspected of
having sympathy or association with the Kurdish
liberation movement.
Aside from intensifying the Ba’athist regime’s
Arabization of Kurdistan, Chemical Ali ordered the
Iraqi military to extensively use chemical weapons
against the villages and small cities suspected of
cooperating with the Peshmarga forces.
On April 15, 1987, four fixed-wing planes flew low
over Helladen, Bergallu, Kanitu, Sirwan, Awazic,
Noljika and Chinara, all in Sulaymania province, and
dropped their poison loaded bombs (Ala'Aldeen, 1991,
p. 7). Although the high winds on that day rendered
the exploded poisonous bombs almost ineffective,
still, tens of serious as well as hundreds of
moderate injuries occurred, mainly among women and
young children. A day later, Chemical Ali sent his
planes to Erbil province bombing the villages of
Sheikh Wassanan, Totma, Zeni, Ballokawa, Alana,
Darash and the entire valley of Balisan.
In Sheilch Wassanan alone, a village—in the District
of Rawanduz, Erbil—consisting of 150 houses and a
population of about 500 people, 121 of them were
killed instantly, including 76 children aged between
one day and eight years. 286 of the injured
villagers were able to go to the city of Erbil to
seek medical attention. As they were admitted to the
Erbil Educational Hospital, the Ba’athists rounded
them and took them to a military prison in Erbil
where 202 of them died over a short period because
of their untreated skin burns, lung damages, and
other internal injuries caused by mustard gas. The
remaining 84 victims with moderate injuries were
taken to a military range, not far from Erbil where
they were shot dead and buried in a mass grave (Ala'Aldeen,
1991; Human Rights Watch, 1993, p. 69-71).
Throughout 1987, poison gas attacks of the Ba’athist
regime continued on the Peshmarga strongholds in the
provinces of Sulaymania and Erbil, and also expanded
to target the liberated areas of Duhok
province—bordering Turkey and Syria—as well as the
north-eastern regions of the oil-rich Kirkuk
province. Ironically, while these horrific
atrocities had become a daily reality for the Kurds;
and, while the international community turned a
blind eye to the occurrences of these appalling
crimes, it was clear that the unleashed Ba’athists
would not hesitate to use these WMD
indiscriminately.
Kurdishness and Iraq’s
Arabization Policy
There is no doubt that these poison attacks were
used as a catalyst to terrorize with the aim of
Arabizing the entire Kurdish population in Iraq.
With every air raid or artillery bombardment on
Peshmarga strongholds, every Kurd, including the
majority of the pro-government Kurdish mercenaries,
felt the
irrationality of Ba’athists’
pan-Arab “hate-ness” towards the non-Arab Kurdish
minority. In fact, many Kurds resisted the central
authorities’ tangible as well as psychological
pressures exerted on them to join the ranks of the
ruling Ba’ath Arab Socialist Party (BASP). In so
doing, they argued that the BASP’s ethnocentric
group identity postulated in its central slogan as
“One Arab nation, bearing a Perpetual Massage” does
not correlate with their separate group identity
portrayed as “Kurdishness.” In other words, the
Kurdish argument based its substance on the fact
that if the Ba’athists’ pan-Arab struggle to unite
the Arabs of the twenty-two sovereign nation-states
in a united single state was logical, then the
Kurdish nationalist struggle to unite the divided
four parts of Kurdistan must be logical as well.
Thus, the Ba’athist regime devised its infamous
Arabization policy after the collapse of the 1974-75
Kurdish revolt.
The initial phases of the Arabization policy began
with the deportation of more than 200,000 Fayli
Kurds from central Iraq to Iran and the resettlement
of more than 150,000 Kurds who participated in the
1974-75 revolt to the southern Arab provinces of
Iraq. Parallel to this Kurdish population uproots,
the Ba’athist regime brought thousands of Arab
nomads and Palestinian refugees and settled them in
Kirkuk province while forcing close to 300,000
Kirkuki Kurds to resettle either in Erbil and
Suleimaniya provinces or to be deported to southern
Iraq. The consequence of this state sponsored
neo-racism not only strengthened positions the
Kurdish armed opposition groups, but also seriously
questioned the notion of Kurdish patriotism
vis-à-vis Iraq’s sovereignty and territorial
integrity.
Therefore, faced with the Baghdad government’s
denial of their people’s basic human needs and in
the course of combating Arabization enforced with
poison gases as direct threats to their existing
identity, Kurdish opposition leaders saw no
wrongdoings in letting their Peshmarga forces
cooperate with the Iranian forces against the Iraqi
military targets. Still, instead of addressing its
Kurdish conflict objectively, the Iraqi Ba’athist
regime chose to deal with it subjectively. Saddam
Hussein and his rubberstamp RCC authorized Chemical
Ali to begin prepping then executing the Anfal
campaigns of Kurdish Genocide.
After conducting a national census in October 1987,
Chemical Ali began his ethnic cleansing preps as
following:
1. Aside from offering clemency to the Kurds who
were willing to change their nationality from
Kurdish to Arabic, no other Iraqi ethnic minorities
allowed be identified other than Arabs or Kurds
(Human Rights Watch, 1993, p. 25).
2. Forceful evacuations of all Kurds from the "grey"
areas—25 kilometres away from major cities, towns,
and highways—in which the Iraqi regime had partial
control. In so doing, he razed their homes,
villages, and towns to the ground without allowing
them the rights to rebuild.
3. Impose a total economic blockade on designated
"prohibited zones" where shoot-to-kill orders
applied on every moving creature at distances of 50
kilometres from major cities, towns, and highways
(1993, p. 24).
4. Burn down crops, farms, trees and other plants;
and, seal all water springs with concrete and spoil
the underground water supply.
5. Finally, launch the Anfal campaigns in eight
stages to systematically eliminate everyone who
dares to challenge the government’s Arabization
policy (1993, p. 25).
It became evident that the target was not merely the
Kurdish opposition groups, but the whole population
of Iraqi Kurdistan. Eventually, by the Fall of 1988,
over 4,000 villages were demolished, an estimated
182,000 Kurds “disappeared”, and half a million
people were forced to live in "Protected Camps"
scattered all over Iraq (1993, p. 11).
The Anfalization of the
Jafayeti valley and the gassing of Halabja
Even before the first stage of the village
clearances got underway, the Iraqi regime had
crossed a new barrier in its war against the Kurds.
Throughout 1987, the PUK Peshmarga forces kept up a
steady rhythm of military actions. In early April
1987, the PUK leadership decided to sweep out Iraqi
government forces from the Jafayeti valley, which
runs southeast from Dukan Lake. Edged in by sharp
mountains, the valley was a strategic PUK stronghold
protected by difficult terrain. But, because of its
close proximity to Iraq’s northeastern borders with
Iran, the Iraqi regime had established dozens of
forward military posts in areas leading to the
valley. As Chemical Ali became the supreme commander
of the Iraqi forces in the north, these posts posed
looming dangers on the PUK headquarters. Therefore,
the PUK amassed thousands of its Peshmergas in the
valley and within a few hours had overrun all those
Iraqi forward posts and taken hundreds of prisoners.
While these operations boosted the morals of the
Peshmargas to liberate large expanses of Kurdistan,
they became pulpit for accusing the Kurds with
disloyalty and treason. In the eyes of those who saw
the glass half empty, Iraq’s sovereignty and
territorial integrity was considered to be much more
important than the Arabization, ethnic cleansing,
and the exterminations of its Kurds. Such a
wrongfully predisposed international interpretation
had encouraged the Ba’athist culprits to devise and
execute more deliberate attacks which became known
as the Anfal campaigns to wipe out the Kurds, once
and for all.
In retaliation to the PUK’s Jafayeti valley
advancement, the Iraqi regime began to congregate
its forces to take back the forward military posts
which were lost to the Peshmarga forces in 1987.
Using more toxic nerve gases, the Iraqi regime was
able to sweep through the Jafayeti valley on
February 23rd, 1988. After two weeks of fierce
resistance, the PUK headquarters in the villages of
Sergalu and Bergalu came under siege. Thus, the PUK
leadership took the desperate decision to open a
second front against the Iraqi military. As a
strategic manoeuvre, the PUK leadership chose to
capture the City of Halabja hoping to draw the Iraqi
forces away from the siege of Sergalou and Bergalou.
For the Iraqi regime, however, the fall of Halabja
meant the PUK’s direct access to the manmade Sirwan
Lake which not only provides summer irrigation to
much of Iraq’s northeastern agricultural industry,
but also electricity generated from the dam at the
southern edge of the Sirwan Lake feeding the
provinces of Diyala and Baghdad. In addition, if the
PUK decides to blow up the dam, then most of Diyala
province and Baghdad would be flooded.
As a result, on March 13, 1988, Shawkat Haji Mushir,
a member of the PUK leadership, led 500 Peshmargas
and fought his way towards Halabja while government
forces were busy carrying out the first phase of the
Anfal campaigns in the Jafayeti valley. After a full
day of fierce fighting, the Iraqi forces retreated
from Halabja towards Sulaimaniya city, some 70
kilometers northwest of Halabja. Two days later
(i.e., on March 16th, 1988), the Iraqi regime began
its aerial nerve gases attacks on the Halabja
killing at least 5,000 innocent Kurds instantly and
wounding over 10,000 people.
It is important to clarify events before the gassing
of Halabja and to stress a very important historical
fact that Halabja was not occupied by Iranian troops
before the Iraqi planes bombarded the city with
chemical weapons. The people of Halabja welcomed the
native Peshmargas, including their leader Shawkat
Haji Mushir who himself was from Halabja. Except for
a cameraman and two unarmed individuals, no Iranians
participated in the PUK led liberation operation.
Yet, astonished by the people's loyalty to the
Peshmargas, the Ba’athist regime tried publicly to
link the battle for Halabja and its poison gassing
to the Iraq-Iran war. Once the gassing of the city
caused thousands of casualties and drove the entire
population of the city, some 80,000, to seek refuge
in Iraqi controlled Suleimaniya city with others
running to the borders with Iran, the Iranians came
to the rescue of the victims and entered Halabja.
However, in the process of evacuating the wounded
civilian Kurds, the Iranian regime attempted to take
advantage of the tragic scenes for its political
propaganda. This is on the one hand. On the other
hand, the impotence of the international community
and the lack of condemnation from individual
governments in the face of Saddam's clear violation
of human rights allowed this regime to continue with
its genocide campaigns which ended in January 1989.
Halabja and its effects on
the 1991 Kurdish uprising
Once the Iraq-Iran war in August 1988, the Iraqi
regime not only expanded its operations to
exterminate the Kurds in the North, but also went
after the very allies which supported it in its war
against Iran, mainly Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. After
a year-long of extortion policy towards the Arab
Gulf states, the Iraqi regime invaded Kuwait
claiming the forceful unification of the Arab
countries.
Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in August 1990, not only
caused great International condemnation, but also
prompted the U.S. to use the gassing of Halabja as a
cause to outlaw the Iraqi regime which eventually
was driven out of Kuwait in March 1991 by the U.S.
led International forces in the so-called Desert
Storm Operation.
The aftermath of Desert Storm led to tragic events
in Iraqi Kurdistan. After responding to the U.S.
calls for uprising against the Iraqi regime, the
Iraqi Kurdish population were able to drive out all
Iraqi security forces from Kurdistan, including the
Kirkuk province. For a month-long, Kurds felt the
true meaning of freedom. However, after the American
back-down from toppling the Iraqi regime and,
consequently, permitting the Iraqi regime to go
after its Shiite and Kurdish opposition groups,
Saddam Hussein used all his might to expel close to
three million Kurds who had nowhere to go but the
icy mountains of Kurdistan. In this tragic process,
close to 120,000 civilian Kurds, mainly young
children, elderly, and women lost their lives due to
fields littered with mines, cold weather, and food
shortages. Although the Iraqi regime did not use
chemical weapons in putting down the Kurdish
uprising in 1991, but memories of Halabja and the
fears of being gassed, chemical weapons had greatly
contributed to the mass exodus of the Kurds and the
casualties left behind.
Images of dying and suffering Kurds on the borders
of Iran and Turkey—being broadcasted by
international media all over the world, forced the
U.S. and the UN to intervene on behalf of the
suffering Kurds. By the spring of 1991, the UN
decided to set up a “safe heaven” where Kurds could
be protected from the wrath of the Ba’athist regime
of Iraq. This safe heaven then developed into a
“no-fly zone” in which the Iraqi government could
not authority over. This precipitated the weakness
of the Iraqi regime which eventually withdrew its
governmental institutions from Kurdistan leading to
a political as well as an administrative vacuum.
To fill the gap, the IKF managed to run
internationally observed and acceptable elections in
June 1992 that resulted in the first elected Kurdish
parliament in Iraq’s history. Shortly after the
elections, the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG)
was established to govern the three dominated
Kurdish provinces of Duhok, Erbil, and Sulaimaniya.
Throughout its first four years of duration, the KRG
promised to rebuild the City of Halabja with plans
to bring back its original population scattered
between Iraqi “designated camps” and various Iranian
refugee camps. However, lacking sufficient economic
resources and being under the triple embargos of the
UN on Iraq, the regional powers (i.e., Iran, Syria,
and Turkey) on the KRG, and the Iraqi internal
embargo on the rest of Iraqi Kurdistan, the KRG not
only defaulted on its promises, but lost its control
of the Halabja district to some hard-core
pro-Iranian Iraqi Kurdish Islamic political
entities. Thus, Halabja and the Halabjans became
exploited and fell victim to International,
regional, and domestic politics.
Attempting to erect a sculpture in memory of the
victims of chemical gas, a local Halabjan artist was
shot dead by radical members of the Islamic Movement
of Kurdistan (IMK) in 1994. To add more traumas to
the sufferings of the Kurds, the IKF dissolved
itself because of factional frictions between the
leaderships of the KDP and the PUK. Thanks to the
regional interferences, the KDP-PUK relations
severely deteriorated to the point that the KDP
leadership, in alliance with the Iraqi Ba’athist
regime, drove the PUK leadership out of power in
August 1996. Hence, a bloody internal fight broke
out lasting well over two years.
After the Washington Agreement in 1998, sponsored by
then the U.S. Secretary of State, Medline Albright,
the KDP and PUK agreed to settle their differences
peacefully by which both parties to improve their
separate governments and gradually work towards a
unified KRG. As for Halabja, it remained under the
control of the Kurdish Islamist groups until the
U.S. led invasion of Iraq in 2003.
The U.S. invasion of Iraq
and the construction of the Halabja Monument
When the U.S. invaded Iraq in March 2003, the
centerpiece of its justification was WMD. But its
precise timing was driven, in large part, by the
fifteenth anniversary of the poison gas attack on
Halabja. Short on credible intelligence on Iraq’s
WMD arsenal, the Bush Administration deliberately
used the gassing of Halabja as an international
“chosen trauma” to justify his war on Iraq.
At the Azores summit on March 16, 2003, President
George W. Bush stated that “on this very day 15
years ago, Saddam Hussein launched a chemical
weapons attack on the Iraqi village of Halabja…”
Then, Bush reiterated five reasons for going to war:
“The dictator of Iraq and his weapons of mass
destruction are a threat to the security of free
nations. He is a danger to his neighbors. He’s a
sponsor of terrorism. He’s an obstacle to progress
in the Middle East. For decades he has been the
cruel, cruel oppressor of the Iraqi people”
(Whitehouse, 2003).
During the invasion of Iraq, a series of Tomahawk
missiles were launched against the Kurdish
Ansar-Al-Sunna radical group operating in the rural
areas of the Halabja district. After uprooting this
radical group from the region, both the Bush
Administration and the PUK leadership jointly
claimed to find chemical raw materials identical to
those which believed the Iraqi regime had in
possession.
Needless to say more, the radical Ansar-Al-Sunna was
driven into Iran and later was designated as a
terrorist group operating against the U.S. forces in
central Iraq. With the U.S. help, the PUK was able
to gain control of the region, including the city of
Halabja. A few months after the invasion of Iraq,
the
Coalition Provisional
Authority (CPA) allocated close to US$20 million to
rebuild the fresh water system in the city. But, by
the suggestion of the current Iraqi President Jalal
Talabani and his trusted man, Barham Salih who was
then the PUK factional Prime Minister in Sulaimaniya
province, that money was diverted to construct the
Halabja Monument. Within a few months, the Halabja
Monument was inaugurated on September 15, 2003.
Attended by then Secretary of State Colin Powell,
the Halabja Monument became a showpiece for the KRG
and the newly installed pro-U.S. government in
Baghdad. Foreign visitors were taken to the Halabja
Monument dedicated to the victims of Halabja without
ever seeing the city or meeting its residents.
The Halabja Monument is built on a 1,600 square
meters land. It has a circular shape with a central
tower depicting joined hands reaching for the sky.
At the top of the tower, sixteen palms hold an
invisible steel globe. Each palm representing a day
in the month has been shaped differently to
represent various ages of a human being. Ironically,
the hidden globe represents the world. In other
words, Halabja is an international “chosen trauma.”
Still, the irregular and the unequal heights of the
hands represent different parts of Kurdistan in
geographical terms. At the bottom of the sixteen
hands just above the circular structure of the
Monument, there are several discolored balls. These
identical shapes represent the clouds of chemical
gases which engulfed the city in March 1988.
It is critical to mention that this bizarre Monument
became an added burden for the ignored and suffering
population of the city. On the one hand, it became a
pilgrimage for the novice Kurdish politicians,
especially those who never lived in the district
before; yet, own many pieces of lands leading to the
Monument. On the other hand, none of the promises
made by the KRG officials in the last two decades
were materialized. Adding more insults to the
traumas of the Halabjans, Jalal Talabani reportedly
“had regretted the fact that there were no more
Halabjas because it had put the Kurdish question
internationally on the map” (Amin, 2009).
Simply put, Halabjans are asking to have a
“bottom-up” rather than “top-down” monument with
which they could express and tell their own “chosen
trauma” and not those who are twisting this very
Kurdish trauma for political gains. Nevertheless,
when their demands fell on deaf ears, angry young
Halabjans planned a demonstration to take place on
the eighteenth anniversary of the gassing of Halabja
in 2006. As some Kurdish government officials
entered Halabja city and forced their way to the
Halabja Monument, a group of high school students
tried to block the convoy of the officials from
reaching the Monument. During that protest, two
security guards of the officials opened fire on the
protesting students killing one and wounding several
others. Therefore, enraged residents marched to the
Halabja Monument in protest against the KRG’s
indiscriminate brutality. After another alteration
with some PUK officials at the site of the Monument,
the outraged and crowd entered the Monument burning
everything, including much of the articles and the
exhibited pictures of their relatives.
The Halabja Monument and
the initiative for a Peace and Reconciliation
On my first visit to the Halabja Monument in October
2008, I met with the Director of the Monument, Mr
Sarkhel Ghafar Hama-Khan, who tried to blame the
burning of the Monument on the radical Islamists who
consider memorials and grave yards as non-Islamic
practice. In the meantime, there were couple of
young and energetic men present during Hama-Khan’s
retelling of the burning account. I was told by
those two young men that the main reasons for the
protest on March 16, 2006 was because of their basic
human needs were not met. Their access to clean
water, electricity, and essential public services
were nonexistent. For the people in Halabja, their
human needs were much more important than having a
controversial Monument visited by those who played a
significant role leading to the gassing of Halabja
in 1988. When I argued on the importance of having a
monument to commemorate the victims of Halabja, I
was told by those two men that they were all for a
monument that has a simple shape and truly
represents not only the victims of Halabja, but also
those who lost their lives during the Anfal
campaigns and the Ba’athists’ Arabization policy of
Kurdistan. Also, knowing the actual cost of the
Halabja Monument was almost half of the allocated
US$20 million, Halabjans were baffled by the level
of corruption and political deceits in Kurdistan.
Thereafter, I asked Mr. Hama-Khan if there was any
initiative or program in place to utilize the
Halabja Monument as a touring site for “Peace and
Reconciliation” efforts. The Director responded in
the negative. Then, I began explaining to him my
initiative to form an Iraqi Peace and Reconciliation
Missions (PRM) that would bring all senior Iraqi
military and police officers, especially those who
served under the deposed Iraqi dictator—Saddam
Hussein, so that they could never again obey any
orders to kill or torture their fellow Iraqi
citizens under any circumstances. Also, I provided
that I have a strong endorsement coming from the
current Chief of Staff of the Iraqi Military,
General Babekir Zibari, and some funding for the
initiative coming from the Commanding General of the
U.S. led coalition forces operating in Iraq.
Mr. Hama-Khan’s initial reaction was that organizing
PRM to visit his site for such a humanitarian work
would highly be encouraging. However, knowing most
of the KRG officials responsible for the Halabja
Monument,www.ekurd.net
he reiterated that it would be very difficult to
begin with my initiative without getting their prior
permissions. To my surprise, I later learned that I
needed to meet with two dozen officials working for
three different governments; the central government
in Baghdad, the KRG in Erbil, and the provincial
government in Sulaimaniya.
Once I returned to Baghdad, I met with the then
Iraqi deputy Prime Minister, Dr. Barham Salih who
while he expressed his full support for the
initiative, he also, amiably, cautioned me not to
rush. Dr. Barham Salih highlighted the fact that the
Halabjans had already made their minds not to
forgive let alone reconcile with the perpetrators of
the Halabja tragedy.
On April 01, 2009, as a joint delegation made of
senior Iraqi and U.S. military generals and I, we
visited the Halabja Monument. While there to
evaluate the viability of my PRM initiative, Major
General (MG) Hussein Duhi—the Iraqi Deputy Chief of
Staff for Training—became overwhelmingly emotional
and began openly crying. At that very moment, both,
the Director of the Monument and the Mayor of
Halabja, Mr. Khidir Kareem, in an unprecedented
scene, hugged and comforted MG Duhi. Later, he
recorded a very emotional note in the “Memorial Note
Book” at the Monument as following:
“… I have visited the Halabja Monument to see the
infidel Saddam’s criminal acts of using chemical
weapons against my people in Kurdistan, Iraq. It is
truly a perpetual shame that will continue to hunt
down Saddam, his thugs, and his regime forever.
Viewing aspects of the said tragedy here in this
Monument, I can undoubtedly tell that the actual
traumas of the Kurdish people are much bigger and
more painful than to be comprehended here.
Therefore, on behalf of myself and on behalf of all
members of the new Iraqi Army, I sincerely apologize
to our proud people in Kurdistan and reiterate that
the Iraqi Army will always serve and fearlessly
defend the people of Iraq with all their vital
interests. Never again we will be used to oppress
our own people.
May Allah forgive and sanctify the pure souls of all
those who were victimized in Halabja tragedy and my
condolences go out to their relatives …” (Kakei,
2010).
A week later, our delegation had returned to Baghdad
where each member had submitted a separate
evaluative report to his superiors. Towards the end
of June 2009, I was informed that the Multi-National
Security Transitional Command –Iraq (MNSTC-I) would
support and partially fund the PRM initiative for a
duration of one year. Afterwards, it would be up to
the Iraqi government to fully fund it or not.
Regrettably, the Iraqi Minister of Defense (MoD),
Abdul-Qdir Al-Ubaidi, was not happy with the news of
MG Duhi’s emotional breakdown. As a result, he
decided not to support the PRM. In fact, I was told
by General Babekir Zibari that Al-Ubaidi—in one of
his weekly defense meetings—has told his senior
military subordinates that if they need to
publically be humiliated, then no one will stop them
from doing so. Al-Ubaidi has reportedly also said
that “by joining the PRM visits to the Halabja
Monument, your genuine tears will be seen by Kurds
as crocodile tears” (Kakei, 2010). Thus, after six
long months of waiting for Iraqi funds match the
MNSTC-I, which never allocated, the PRM initiative
came to an end. Accordingly, among other reasons, I
resigned from my position as a senior advisor to the
Iraqi MoD and returned to Canada early in January
2010.
To sum up this narrative, I must say that despite
the controversies related to the Halabja Monument
representing a top-down “chosen trauma.” The
Monument has a great potential to be used as a site
not only for PRM, but also for a critically needed
either Iraqi or Kurdistani Truth and Reconciliation
Commission (TRC). Given the volatility of the
security situation in Baghdad, the notion of
establishing a TRC is too early to be suggested.
But, the need to have a TRC in the relatively stable
Kurdistan region is very critical. There are many
Kurdish tribal chiefs who in one way or another have
been accused of participating in the Anfal campaigns
of Kurdish genocide. Though the KDP and the PUK are
not willing to bring justice to these publically
accused tribal leaders, either a TRC or at least a
PRM could play significant role in healing the
wounds of the Saddam era. Finally, KRG officials
need to listen to the legitimate concerns of the
people in Halabja. Their sorrows and concerns may be
accommodated by modifying the Halabja Monument so
that it can represent a solid and an uncontested
“chosen trauma.”
References:
Ala’Adeen, D. A. (1991). Death clouds: Saddam
Hussein’s chemical war against the Kurd.
Retrieved on February 04, 2012 from: http://www.dlawer.net/?q=node/79
Amin, N. M. (2009). Hawlati Newspaper. Issue No.
376. January 6, 2009. (In Kurdish).
Human Rights Watch (1993). Genocide in Iraq: The
Anfal campaign against the Kurds. A
Middle East Watch Report. New York: Human Rights
Watch.
Kakei, S. (2011). The need for peace and
reconciliation missions in Kurdistan. Sulaimaniyah:
Roshingari Publishing Centre. (In Kurdish).
Khateri, S. and Wangerin, R. (2008). Denied Truths:
The story of victims of chemical weapons
in Iran. Tehran: Center for women and family
affairs. Retrieved on February 03, 2012 from:
www.women.gov.ir/files/en/ebooks/pdf/34.pdf
Lin, S. G. (2008). Riding to War on a Poison Cloud:
How the forgotten city of Halabja became
the launch pad for war on Iraq. Montreal: The Centre
for Research on Globalization.
Retrieved on February 04, 2004, 2012 from: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8311
McDowall, D. (1989). The Kurds. The Minority Rights
Group. Report No. 23.
Al-Sharara, Issue No. 7. (July 1987). Iraqi
Kurdistan Front declaration. (In Arabic).
The Kurdish Focus. Issue No.1. (January, 1989).
Published by the PUK.
Volkan, Vamik (1997). Blood lines: From ethnic pride
to ethnic terrorism. Boulder: Westview
Press.
The White House press briefing. Retrieved on
February 10, 2011, from:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030316-3.html
Saeed Kakeyi, Ph.D. Student, Nova Southeastern
University’s Department of Conflict Analysis &
Resolution – PhD Program,
a longtime contributing writer and
columnist for ekurd.net
Copyright © 2012 ekurd.net. All rights reserved
Top |
The opinions
expressed in this commentary are solely those of the
author
|