A Leauki's Writings
Published on April 12, 2010 By Leauki In War on Terror

Israel National News:

According to recent media reports, Israeli military and intelligence agents are currently operating in Iraqi Kurdistan. Their primary role, according to reports, is to train elite Kurdish commandos in guerrilla warfare and anti-terror tactics. The Kurds - whose country is currently occupied by Iraq, Turkey, Iran and Syria - are reportedly again, after many years, accepting Israeli assistance in their struggle for independence.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/135877

Today's Zaman, Turkey:

This state of mind was once again provoked with reports suggesting that Israeli military and intelligence agents are currently engaged in covert operations in the Kurdish section of Iraq. They are reported to be training Kurdish commandos in guerrilla warfare and anti-terror tactics. Under normal circumstances, this information is not newsworthy. Every armed force has an elite special operations unit. However, the intention behind this training is poisonous: Kurds feel that their country is being invaded from all directions by states like Turkey, Syria, Iran and Iraq, and they are getting ready to end the occupation of these “imperialist” forces! That is why they are accepting Israeli assistance in their struggle for reunification and full independence.

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/columnists-206620-is-israel-training-kurds.html

Interestingly enough the Turkish columnist adds this:

The Kurds fought for independence from Iraq, Iran and Turkey. Some Kurds committed terrorism against Turkey. It is going too far to call their “country” “occupied.” What country? It would be sufficient to suggest that the 40 million Kurds are a separate nationality for whom a case can be made for self-determination. This is in contrast with the Palestinian Arabs, who are not a separate nationality and for whom no case has been made for self-determination, only asserted, and who in any case have a state of their own in Palestine, called Jordan.

It seems only natural that Israel would help a fellow non-Arab nation whose territory is ruled by mostly Israel's enemies. I don't have to repeat what Saddam Hussein did to the Kurds, but I think it should be mentioned that Kurds living in Syria have none of the luxuries the "oppressed" "Palestinians" have (massive aid transports, Internet access etc.). The "Syrian" Kurds are really opressed but they are not Arabs and hence the world doesn't care.

Kurdistan has always been a bigger issue than Israel. More people have died in the conflicts created by Arab attacks against and Turkish rule of Kurds then in the Arab wars against Israel. Solving the Kurdistan issue would evidently solve a much bigger problem and also address some real oppression for a change.

I don't for a moment believe that the west will ever address this issue, but if it did, I think this would be a good solution:

1. Syria will have to give up its Kurdish territories.

2. Turkey will have to give up its Kurdish territories.

3. Turkey will also have to give up its (historically Arab and Aramaean) Iskenderun district.

4. Finally, Turkey will have to give up its Armenian territories.

5. In exchange the rest of Turkey can join the EU.

6. All Kurdish territories and Iskenderun will be annexed by Arbil (Iraqi Kurdistan).

7. Arbil will then decide whether it wants to remain in a union with Arab Iraq or become independent.

This will solve several problems.

First, declaring the Kurdish territories in Syria officially "occupied" by Syria will give anti-Syrian forces a very good diplomatic weapon. Oddly enough the United Nations consider the Golan Heights "Israeli-occupied" despite the fact that the natives (Druze and Alawites) are (or can be) Israeli citizens with full rights but consider the Kurdish territories in eastern Syria a part of Syria proper, despite the fact that the natives there live under military rule and have no civil rights (and no Syrian passports).

Second, Iskederun is ruled by Turkey and claimed by Syria. By giving the territory to a Kurdish state, as a harbour and autonomous province (for the mixed Arab/Aramaean/Turkish/Armenian population) would settle the issue once and for all. Neither population group would be preferred and the annexation should be arranged in such a way as to guarantee total autonomy for the province except in matters of defence (which will be handled by Kurdistan) and harbour rights (there must be a harbour available for Kurdish use).

Third, "Turkish" Kurds obviously do not want to be part of Turkey. Turkey fears the Kurdish terrorist group PKK (which is supported by Syria and therefor obviously not fighting for Kurdish independence, just for a different foreign ruler). By creating a buffer state between Turkey and Syria, PKK terrorists will either have to attack Kurdish targets (and hence create more enemies for themselves), cease operations or integrate into a real Kurdish military.

Fourth, and this has nothing to do with Kurdistan per se, Turkey still rules over territories that were originally (after WW1) meant to be part of Armenia. If those territories become officially Armenian, it could only have a positive effect on the conflict between Armenia and (Turkic) Azerbaijan.

Fifth, European conservatives fear a primitive Muslim EU member. By removing the south-east of Turkey, the remaining Turkish state will be more European, somewhat more religiously mixed (Christian Greeks and Jews live mostly around Istanbul), more urban, and more civilised (the south-east is a rather backward part of Turkey). It will also be smaller by population and hence have less influence in Europe than it currently would have.

Sixth, the only Kurdish government sits in Arbil in northern Iraq. Despite its problems, that government works.

Seventh, Arbil has become more autonomous over the last few years. At some point Kurds will ask themselves whether they really want to be part of a majority Arab state. Currently they have to be part of Iraq because they have no other way out (Iran is hostile to them, Syria is hostile to them, Turkey can be problematic at times). But ultimately Kurdistan could become an independent country for the Kurdish nation.

 


Comments
on Apr 12, 2010

...

on Apr 12, 2010

You did not mention Iran in this mix (as far as Iran's portion of Kurdistan).

I agree with you that I do not see the West taking a stand on it.  Besides, the PC aspects of Kurdistan, there is also the issue that for the most part, they are just not violent enough (sad to say, the squeaky wheel still gets the grease).

Turkey will never go for it (Syria may out of necessity if the Baathaist ever lose power in the country). If Iraq continues on its current course, the Iraqi Kurds may decide that a share of power in a prosperous nation is better than trying to hack out a country with enemies all around.  But the final solution (or the ignoring of the problem) will be by the nations involved, and not from any outside caring. as you indicate.

on Apr 12, 2010



You did not mention Iran in this mix (as far as Iran's portion of Kurdistan).



Iran is in a flux. I wouldn't know whom we would be dealing with.

Syria is different. Even if the current Alawi Baathist regime would fall, it would be replaced with some other Arab nationalist or Sunni extremist government and would remain an enemy of the civilised world.




I agree with you that I do not see the West taking a stand on it.  Besides, the PC aspects of Kurdistan, there is also the issue that for the most part, they are just not violent enough (sad to say, the squeaky wheel still gets the grease).



They might be violent enough, but they are not whiney.

You get sympathy by whining loudly.

1. Shout "Death to the Jews" and "victory will be ours, Allah wills it".

2. Attack.

3. Lose.

4. Whine.

5. Get sympathy and money.

6. Repeat.

The world sides with the one party, Allah sides with the other.




Turkey will never go for it (Syria may out of necessity if the Baathaist ever lose power in the country).



Turkey can be bought.

In exchange for giving up the territory Turkey would get EU membership, the Euro, Schengen membership, very profitable trade agreements with the new Kurdish state, licences for several oilfield, one or two military bases in the new state, and extraterritorial rights for Turkish state property.

Syria should simply be treated as a worthless enemy country. That's what their government considers the correct moral way to deal with someone who one thinks is occupying territory illegally.




If Iraq continues on its current course, the Iraqi Kurds may decide that a share of power in a prosperous nation is better than trying to hack out a country with enemies all around.  But the final solution (or the ignoring of the problem) will be by the nations involved, and not from any outside caring. as you indicate.



Since Arbil would annex all those Kurdish territories, it will initially be Iraq that represents the new country. Kurdistan, with a population of 25 million, would then be an equal (in population) partner within Iraq (there about 25 million Arabs in Iraq). The new, much enlarged Iraq, could then remain a union of two states or split up. So Kurdistan would not have to be isolated. Plus Turkey would not be an enemy and they would have access to the Mediterraenean Sea and thus to Europe (and Israel).

This plan might also solve the problem of the Assyrian minority in Iraq. There are about 1.5-2 million Assyrians, mostly around Mosul and in Arbil. There is no way they would ever get their own state but could be given an autonomous territory between the two states of the union. (The territory would be strangelooking though.)

Or, if Kurdistan and (Arab) Iraq do split up, the Assyrians could chooose which state they want to join (with their land).



on Apr 12, 2010

Turkey can be bought.

It is every Thanksgiving.

But it will be interesting to see if a common good/sense can over ride a national pride.  I doubt the scenario will ever come about (I do not see the EU being so bold), but it would be a stabilizing effect in at least part of the region.

on Apr 12, 2010

But it will be interesting to see if a common good/sense can over ride a national pride.  I doubt the scenario will ever come about (I do not see the EU being so bold), but it would be a stabilizing effect in at least part of the region.

The conservatives have just won the elections in Hungary.

Islamophobia (fear and hatred for Islam instead of fear and hatred of terrorism) is growing too. (The two are not related, the islamophobes have their own right-wing parties.)

Between conservative majorities, social democratic oppositions, the new right who hate Islam, the old right-wing extremists who hate Jews, and socialists who love Muslims and hate Jews, accepting Turkey into the EU but without the Kurdish parts (which can easily be sold to Europeans as being "more Islamic" or "less European", the latter of which they are), will soon be the only thing everyone can still compromise on.

Kurdish independence can be sold to the idealists among the left as well as to the hawks on the right.