Category Archives: Kurdish Globe

West must act in Syria for sake of humanity or face a history of ignominy

The tables have drastically turned in the Syria conflict in recent months and Western inaction and indecisiveness has played a significant part.

The U.S. and its European allies have failed the Syrian people and to make matters worse, western diplomats are still bickering internally on how they should respond to the Syrian conflict, when they have had 2.5 years to formulate an approach.

Infamous red-lines have long been crossed, dozens of cities lie in rubble, over 100,000 dead and millions displaced with the rate increasing all the time. Yet the West is still plagued by unease and uncertainty on its moral obligations.

As the Syrian civil war has festered and decayed, more divisive western policy at the outset would have achieved a far quicker political transition, saved thousands of lives, infrastructure and untold suffering.

Now the conflict has become so messy that even the West is startled to respond. A great example is the proposal to arm selected members of the Free Syrian Army (FSA). Both Great Britain and France petitioned vehemently for months to end the EU arms embargo in May. Now that they have gotten their wish, they have got frosty feet. Likewise the US announced intent to supply weapons in mid-June after acknowledging that Bash al-Assad had crossed a red-line (the same murky red line that Assad had passed long ago), yet there are no signs of supplies.

The conflict has become so complex and cloudy that Western powers do not believe that their “light” weaponry would make any different. Yet ironically, Russia and Iran have been arming Assad to the teeth with no remorse.

In the time that the West has stood idle, Syrian has become the battleground for who’s who of Jihadists and foreign fighters. The war is no longer about ousting Assad and freeing Syria from dictatorship, it is now heavily sectarian and to a certain extent a proxy battle for a new Cold War with Russia, Iran and China.

With Hezbollah arms deep in supporting Assad, al-Qaeda spear-heading the rebel onslaught, even the Taliban looking to enter the fray, and add Lebanese, Iranian and Iraqi factions into the mix, Syria has become an even more entrenched minefield.

With Assad fighting back, the rebels literally fighting each other, Islamist forces battling Kurdish fighters and Geneva mark 2 becoming an ever distant mirage, the short-term prospects are bleak.

But the world must forget sectarianism, the new Cold war arena or those jockeying for regional power. The Western powers and the United Nations must act for the sake of humanity if nothing else.

When will enough deemed enough? Just how will history look back on the West and particularly the UN which has been an all but paralysed bystander?

By the time sane powers intervene, there will be little to intervene for. What will Syrians do with no economy, destroyed communities, homes in rubble and their currency worthless?

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc

Political crisis must not compromise ultimate mission of serving Kurds and greater Kurdistan

Leave a reply

Gripped by quarrels, division and uncertainty, the past few months has hardly been a golden period for Kurdish politics.

However, the prospect of parliamentary and presidential elections against the backdrop of a bitter dispute between ruling parties and the opposition over the draft Kurdish constitution which if passed would have allowed Massaud Barzani to serve another 2 terms as President, threatened to severely deepen the political and social divide.

Kurdistan is currently surrounded by regional and sectarian turmoil in Syria, Iraq and Turkey and the last thing it needs is greater disunity or a crisis of its own that would consume much of its energy internally at a critical juncture in its history.

The upcoming elections would certainly serve as a critical gauge for KDP, PUK and Gorran. Any pre-election public outcry, anger or propaganda could easily sway voters. For the KDP and especially with the greater Kurdistan project in full swing, at the current time any president other than Barzani would be unacceptable.

For the PUK, who has seen its votes dwindle since 2009 when Gorran took ascendancy and with the illness to Jalal Talabani increasing visibility of intra-party divide, the next elections are a vital gauge. At a sensitive time, it needs the help of its old-ally in the KDP and thus a strategic deal with the KDP in the current political climate was win-win.

For Gorran, the next elections could either make or break the movement. Whilst it secured a respectable number of votes in 2009, it is not certain whether it can sustain or increase the current voter base. Much of it hinges on the public perception of the ruling parties particularly the PUK and whether those who switched allegiance from PUK to Gorran in 2009 believe that Gorran has delivered sufficiently.

Gorran’s best bet is a public uproar or a political crisis that works against the ruling parties. Certainly there has already been plenty of emotion, animosity and divide to stir tensions in Kurdistan and polarise society.

It was no surprise amidst acute tensions between the opposition and the ruling parties in the past several months that the decision by the Kurdistan parliament to extend the current parliamentary session for two months and specifically to extend the term of Massoud Barzani’s presidency by two years would generate a new storm.

Even the parliamentary session was engulfed with bitter tension and fist-cuffs between rival politicians.

The decision by parliament that was ratified by Barzani creates yet more ingredients for political hostility. Any subsequent protests or public discontent will only raise the stakes.

With no imminent deal in-sight over the constitution, the ruling parties viewed this as best way to maneuverer out of an even greater crisis.

By extending Barzani’s term by two years, KDP get their wish of retaining Barzani at a critical time and PUK are provided some breathing space to politically re-arm ahead of a critical battle with Gorran at the upcoming polls. Of course, in return for their support in extending Barzani’s term as president, the PUK will expect help in kind in retaining the Iraqi presidency.

It also soothes those in the PUK circles who were in favour of amending the constitution.

With the PUK and KDP running on separate lists and with much political jockeying and hurdles around the corner, the next elections remains the game changer for the Kurdish political landscape.

Whilst the parliamentary move will hardly appease all parties, it was deemed the best out of a series of difficult options. It affords some breathing space to strike a consensus on the constitution which if put to a referendum on the eve of elections as originally planned would have almost certainly handicapped Kurdistan politically.

With talk of Gorran, KDP, PUK and other parties, it is very easy to miss the bigger picture. All political parties and politicians are voted solely to serve the Kurds who voted for them and greater Kurdistan. It is important that party agendas do not sway away from the greater needs of Kurdistan.

Kurdistan has grown in strategic and economic power but is still shrouded by disputes with Baghdad, vital energy projects unfinished and a regional flame that is intensifying by the day.

In this light and in the absence of true rivals with broad national support, Barzani remains the key figure and leader for the Kurds.

However, at the same time, democracy entails that no person is indispensable and more importantly beyond the two years any extension must strictly be in the form of legislature voted in by the people.

Either way, as much as politicians can compromise, consult or wrangle, it is the people on the ground that should ultimately decide who governs and how they would like to be governed.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc.

Death of Kurdish protestor adds fuel to Turkish fire

Leave a reply

In last week’s column, the sensitivity of Turkey’s Kurdish peace process and the accompanying democratic initiative was highlighted with a warning that single-bullet can unravel months or years of gains.

The highly unfortunate death of Medeni Yildirim, caught up as protests in Lice near Diyarbakir against the building of a new Turkish military outpost grew violent, is just the kind of spark that can ignite greater strife.

As the recent Arab Spring has highlighted, youths spraying anti-government graffiti, a man setting himself alight or local show of discontent, is all it takes to light the touch paper.

In a similar vein, Turkish anti-government protests have slowly snowballed. The problem with such highly-publicized protests in front of thousands of international cameras is that the government has a small window of opportunity to respond delicately and swiftly. One wrong move, the slightest overreaction or use of force and the smallest of controversial political rhetoric and the situation quickly blossoms into an unmanageable crisis where even if the protests later die down, the government never comes out unscathed.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has enjoyed a decade in power and his achievements, widely acclaimed in Turkey and beyond, are in danger of been eroded.

A year ago, the long disenchanted and marginalized Kurds would have jumped at the opportunity to pour fuel on anti-government protests, a perennial role usually reserved for them. In a twist of irony, the Kurdish south east has been quiet whilst the west of the country has been embroiled in mass protests that have served to polarize and destabilize Turkey.

The Kurdish position is owed to renewed hope and expectation that the Kurdish conflict can be peacefully resolved and that Kurds can finally move away from playing second-fiddle under Turkey’s ultra nationalist foundations.

An encouraging and welcome sign was the protests and outcry that erupted amongst Turks in Istanbul in solidarity with the Kurds over the death of Medeni Yildirim.

The governments violent response in Lice and the growing Kurdish frustration with their lack of impetus in implementing legal steps and reform as part of the peace process, adds more pressure on the government.

The Kurdish south-east has been at its most peaceful in almost 3 decades. Recently, Erdogan was quick to emphasise that the peace process will not be affected by Gezi Park protests, and the two issues have been largely separated.

Managing ever rising expectations is a tough task. Although, many AKP initiatives in resolving the age old Kurdish dilemma were unprecedented, Kurdish expectations have outpaced the piece-meal nature of Turkish concessions.

A stone-throw away lays a prosperous, flourishing and autonomous Kurdistan Region. To the south, even their Syrian brethren are finally rid of the clutches of tyranny.

Why should the long supressed Turkish Kurds measuring such a large segment of society and in a country with EU aspirations and hailed for its democratic principles, continue to settle for less than their legal entitlement?

It is even more ironic that Turks in West of Turkey in living standards, economic conditions and social infrastructure far beyond those of the Kurds complain about the increasing authoritarian nature of Erdogan’s rule and anti-democratic measures.

Imagine the stance of the Kurds who have suffered greatly since the 1920’s under systematic repression, left to endure second class status and lacked at times even the basic of rights.

Perhaps the newfound and much welcome solidarity between Turks and Kurds is a reflection of that irony.

His image may be tarnished, but not all is lost for Erdogan and the AKP, who as much as the protests and media attention would suggest otherwise, still enjoy good support in Turkey and who can still ensure a successful implementation of the peace process.

However, the message is clear, act quickly, decisively and wholeheartedly, before an unstoppable whirlwind engulfs all of Turkey.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc.

The Turkish-Kurdish peace process at a critical juncture

Leave a reply

As ever in the Middle East, the concept of destruction can take mere seconds and construction many years. It may take years, decades or even centuries to strike peace, resolve sectarian, ethnic or political rifts or reach consensus whilst a single bullet, bombing or event can quickly lead back to square one.

In the face of this, with the onset of the historic peace process launched at the turn of the year, Turkey has a unique opportunity to finally end its decades-long military conflict with the PKK and build social, political and economic bridges with its long impoverished and disenfranchised Kurdish population.

The latest peace process with the heavy involvement of imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan was bold, ambitious and commendable but was hardly based on a national consensus. For some Turkish nationalist and secularists who oppose Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, it was even deemed the last straw.

More importantly, the peace process is fraught with a great deal of animosity and mistrust between the PKK and the AKP-led government. To make matters worse, the details of the so-called road-map is riddled with a lack of clarity, including its stages or actual steps that will be implemented.

Just what has Ankara agreed with Ocalan and the PKK in peace negotiations, what is the timetable and what concessions will the Turkish government adopt in reality?

The withdrawal of PKK militants in stages that began shortly after Ocalan’s historic Newroz announcement was a welcome move, but uneasy on the how the government will respond to their side of the bargain, the recent statements from Ocalan, BDP leaders and PKK commander Murat Karayılan have been washed with apprehension and warnings.

BDP leaders have continuously pressed the government for implementing legal reform and ‘second phase’ of the process and have hit-out against the looming deadlock. The idea of a 3 month parliamentary recess at a critical juncture in the process hardly soothed sentiments.

Ocalan himself, the real key to this process, a fact that most Turks resent, is growing weary amidst current progress and lack of perceived reciprocation from the government.

At a sensitive time in the Kurdish-Turkish reconciliation comes the heavy public pressure on Erdogan and the widely publicised Gezi park demonstrations. The heavy handed Turkish response and growing public discontent is contributing to an increasing polarisation of Turkey. The mass nature of the protests and ensuing violence was hardly the tonic for the peace-process.

Ironically, the protests and incidents in Istanbul and western Turkey is what the world has been accustomed to seeing in Turkey’s south eastern Kurdish region. However, this time the Kurds stayed largely out of the protests and the Kurdish region has been calm and in positive anticipation.

The Kurds and the Turkish government must remain commitment to the path of peace regardless of provocations. The threat of sabotage is not one-sided, there are elements on both sides that wish to derail peace.

The last six months have been the most peaceful in Turkey in almost 3 decades, yet both sides remain quick to broadcast and highlight any violations.

Ultimately, actions speak louder than words. Turkey has a unique opportunity to end military struggle that has cost billions of dollars but must match rhetoric with firm legal steps.

Each Turkish rocket, weapon or tank, cost millions of dollars yet the same millions that destroys infrastructure and future generations can help build schools, roads and hospitals.

At a sensitive conjecture in the Middle East, there must be a firm realisation in Turkey that peace and true reconciliation between Kurds and Turkey is not an option but the only solution.

Rhetoric from the AKP government has remained somewhat positive, with Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Besir Atalay even praising the peaceful nature of the PKK withdrawal. Most elements within the Turkish government realise that there is no turning-back and peace is the only way forward.

However, wishes of a majority can be easily drowned by actions of the minority. The smallest of skirmishes or any Turkish casualties and the war may return greater than ever.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc.

Kurdistan to Maliki – your last (last) chance?

Leave a reply

As Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki landed in Erbil to chair a rare but symbolic meeting of the Iraqi cabinet in the Kurdish capital and discuss a number of issues with the Kurdish leadership, expectations appeared high.

However, Maliki has shown political shrewdness when backed against a corner in the past, making concessions, striking agreements, renewing promises and proposing committees when the heat has been on, only to prove that rhetoric prevailed over real action and practical steps.

A delegation to Baghdad led by Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani in May culminated in a decision to form seven committees all geared towards addressing specific issues between Kurdistan and Baghdad which also ended the boycott of Kurdish MPs in Baghdad.

The committees, to be directly by Maliki and Barzani, include ones to oversee reviews of the federal budget, draft oil and gas law, article 140 and overseeing of parliamentary work and Baghdad and Erbil relations.

Kurdistan Massaud Barzani emphasized that the latest round of negotiations are a final chance and that Kurdistan will be forced to seek a “new form of relations” with the central government in Baghdad if negotiations fail to resolve key disputes.

The issues between the KRG and Baghdad have become so deep-rooted, cyclic and predictable that it is hard to see why this time around will be any different.

The Kurdistan leadership has played a role in reaching the current predicament and the lack of progress on historic issues such as disputed terrotories. KRG has rubber-stamped two terms of power for Maliki in return for strategic partnerships.

Yet several years since the first Iraqi elections and over 10 years since the liberation of Iraq, the strategic agreements have not been fully implemented and if anything disputes have become more protracted, entrenched and distant from resolution. Kurdistan should have given a “last chance” to Maliki and Baghdad many years ago.

Maliki was accused of centralist tendencies, inciting sectarian tensions and foot-dragging on constitutional implementation in his first term of power, never mind the second term (or even in a third term if he gets his way).

The relations between Erbil and Baghdad have been shrouded by formation of committees, agreements and political road-maps. But how many more meetings and committees do the Kurd want to participate in?

Kirkuk and disputed territories is a prime example. It is understandable if there are technical delays to implementing complex constitutional articles. But should there be a delay of several months or 6 years? And since there were delays, any sincere government would adopt a plan to meet its legal obligations in the quickest possible time.

This is the same for hydrocarbon law which has gathered dust since 2007, status of Peshermrga forces, national budget etc. In the case of Kirkuk, even a national census, delayed on so many occasions, would have at least marked one achievement. Even that has been sidelined as Baghdad knows it would serve as a de-facto referendum on disputed territories.

Now is the time for practical steps and firm timelines for implementation of issues by the Kurdistan leadership. Until Baghdad resolves disputed territories, KRG and Peshmerga forces have the right to jointly govern and control these regions.

The bitter Sunni protests and the latest cycle of sectarian violence has redrawn sharp lines between Shiites and Sunni and coupled with sectarian polarisation in the wider region, may prove to be even greater than peaks reached in 2007.

Maliki can ill-afford to carry on antagonising ever corner of Iraq (including his own Shiite alliance) and for Iraqi Kurds the time is ripe to seek real concessions. If Baghdad refused to succumb to Kurdish demands when it is at its knees, it will never implement agreements at its peak.

The recent provincial elections only served to highlight the deepening polarisation of the county and weak political picture. Forming a new government and choosing a Prime Minister after elections in 2014 will prove as daunting as ever.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc.

Syrian Kurdish discord threatens to derail historical juncture

Leave a reply

While most of Syria has been embroiled in turmoil and large-scale suffering, the Syrian Kurds have been presented with historic opportunities and the building blocks for unprecedented autonomy.

However, clashes with Syrian rebels, frosty relations with Ankara, not forgetting wide disunity, jostle for power and even clashes between rival Kurdish factions, threatens to derail the Syrian Kurdish project.

For some 2 million or so Kurds in Syria, there are dozens of political parties which tell its own story. Even before the start of the conflict in Syria, the Kurdish movement was largely plagued by disunity and lack of leadership. Unlike other Kurdistani constituents in Iraq, Iran and Turkey, the Kurdish struggle never had the same firm nationalist foundations. Today Syrian Kurdistan is at the forefront of the new Syria and the Kurdish nationalist renaissance.

However, growing hostility and struggle for influence is threating intra-Kurdish conflict at the time when all energies should be fixed on consolidating Syrian Kurdish gains and its future role in Syria.

The Erbil agreement of 2012 sought to paper over the cracks and bring a level of coordination and unity between the PKK leaning Democratic Union Party (PYD) led groups and those with closer links to Massaud Barzani and the Kurdistan regional leadership.

However, the accord has been tainted with suspicion and animosity from the start. The PYD clearly has the upper-hand in power and support, with the Kurdish military arm, the People’s Defense Units (YPG), dominated by the PYD.

Other Kurdish parties have worked to readdress the political imbalance. This clear line of contention culminated in a crisis between the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) leadership and the PYD in recent days after the arrest of 74 members of the Barzani-backed Democratic Party of Syria.

The arrests led to strongly-worded statements from the Kurdistan President and a closing of the KRG border with Syrian Kurdistan.

The statement from Barzani’s presidential office accused the PYD of reneging on the Erbil agreement, marginalising other parties and killing and detaining people.

The statement warned against the PYD to change its attitude and not to “…declare itself the representative of Kurdish people in Syria before elections are held.” Barzani warned the KRG would pursue another course of action if perceived autocratic rule continued.

PYD leader, Muslim Saleh, pointed to disagreements amongst the Kurdish National Council (KNC), which includes the recently formed pro-Barzani Kurdish Democratic Union, for cracks in the Erbil agreement.

Saleh emphasised that the arrested members had received military training in Kurdistan and that they would take action against any armed group not within the PYD led YPG umbrella and that fall under the Supreme Kurdish Council. Saleh welcomed any mediation efforts but warned against Barzani support for rival factions.

There is clearly a mismatch between the PYD’s aim to remain the enforcers on the ground and the KRG and the KNC aim to readdress the balance of both political and military power.

The only way of clarifying the grapple for power is via free and open elections. But even then, without a balanced and unbiased security force, whoever has military power will have a greater say.

Syrian Kurdistan is in great need of the KRG, both for political stability and as an economic and social lifeline. A deterioration of relations within Syrian Kurdistan and with the KRG leadership will be of great detriment to the Region.

The Kurdish military units should unite under one rank and for one purpose, to serve Syrian Kurdish aspirations. Narrow minded political agendas of any party are a backward step in the Kurdish nationalist struggle. With instability and raging civil war on its door step, an uncertain future and hardly firm foundations for its existence or regional backing, Syrian Kurds risk losing a great historical opportunity.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc.

New Turkish oil venture signals growing clout of Kurdistan

Leave a reply

As the Middle Eastern socio-political landscape has unraveled in recent years, it has transformed the one-time frosty relations between the Iraqi Kurds and Turkey into one of the most important alliances in the region.

The Arab Spring and the rapidly changing power makeup of the Middle East may have played a key part, but money and the power of economy have echoed louder. Trade between the Kurdistan Region and Turkey is reaching unprecedented heights, none more so than in the field of energy.

The booming economy of Kurdistan is underpinned by its status as the last great oil frontier. Kurdistan has billion of barrels of oil reserves and remarkably with the majority of the oil not even discovered.

With the oil rush in Kurdistan, Turkey, with an ever-growing thirst for oil to fuel its heated economy, does not want to remain idle while global players capitalise on immense opportunities on its door step.

The growing energy ties between Ankara and Erbil, has not only resulted in strategic and historic contracts between the two governments setting the stage for a rapid rise in trade, but it has slowly led to intertwined destinies of the Turks and Kurds. This drive has led to great unease in Washington, who ironically, only few years ago were frantically trying to reconcile both parties.

The win-win partnership on an economic scale is in tune with the need to redraw strategic alliances and political balance of power in the Middle East. Turkey needs the stable, secular and Western-leaning Kurdistan, in the midst of a Syrian civil war that threatens Turkey at every turn, Shiite domination in Baghdad rekindling animosity and insurgency amongst Sunnis and not forgetting Iran with its nuclear ambitions and its hands deep in regional struggles.

While Syria took center stage in the diplomatic flurries of recent days, leading to the visit of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to Washington, the announcement by Erdogan as he left on the plane for Washington of a partnership between the state run Turkish Petroleum (TPAO) and US giants Exxon-Mobil to jointly explore for oil in Kurdistan, has significant long-term ramifications.

Not only does Kurdistan and Turkey have the basis for direct exports with the implementation of new oil pipelines, but this places Turkey directly at the grass-roots of the Kurdish oil drive.

According to Erdogan “there’s nothing more normal, more natural than Turkey… to take a step that is based on mutual benefit.” In recent months Ankara has strongly defended their agreements with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) and has also in turn backed the Kurdish rights under the current Iraqi constitution.

The Kurdish oil boom is long the source of Baghdad ire, which views control of oil exports and unresolved nature disputed of territories, as the last placenta by which they can reign in and influence Kurdistan. With contracts with some of the biggest oil companies in the world and strategic agreements with Turkey, Baghdad’s unease has gone into overdrive.

In reality, the oil majors and Turkey know fully well the risks. The ire of Baghdad is considered secondary to their lucrative opportunities and the strategic and political benefits that such moves harness.

These parties are essentially choosing Kurdistan over Baghdad and such measures only makes the KRG more confident in its economic growth, its regional standing and in its stand-off with Baghdad.

Baghdad may have been playing hardball over payments to foreign oil companies, constitutional interpretations and national budget as well as over disputed territories, but with its hands full in the fresh Sunni uprising, maintaining a shaky national coalition and national elections around the corner, it needs the Kurds and Nouri al-Maliki’s government may have to rethink its policies on Kurdistan.

Kurdistan’s message is simple, it will drive on with its national programme and lofty goals, with or without Baghdad.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc.

Red lines and lack of action – how the bigger picture in Syria is overlooked

Leave a reply

With the death toll from the Syrian crisis rapidly surpassing 80,000, over 4 million displaced Syrians forced to live in poor conditions and the human catastrophe deepening on a daily basis, the continued discussions in America and Europe about the trespassing of “red lines” and what action should follow is an insult to the suffering of the Syrian people.

When will the conflict be considered a crisis worthy of firm action? When the whole region is embroiled in the conflict, when the death toll surpasses 100,000 or even 200,000 or when most of Syria lies in rubble?

The point is, whilst the regime’s brazen and clear use of chemical weapons, meant that the US “red line” was crossed a long time ago, no matter what tools or apparatus is used by the ever desperate Bashar al-Assad, whether it is Sarin gas, ballistic missile or cluster weapons, the end result is the same – destruction of Syria and mass civilian casualties.

Just as in Iraq when the debate was side-tracked by search for weapons of mass destructions, the West often overlooked the bigger picture. Saddam Hussein, amongst his far reaching terror, systemically used chemical weapons on a mass scale on the Kurds and was by far worse than any weapon. By the same token, the Assad dynasty has ruled Syria with an iron fist for decades. It is not just the Assad actions of the past two years and the recent death tolls, what about the thousands dead before and immense suffering that his dictatorship has produced?

Syria is clearly a different case to Egypt and Libya, it has firm allies in the region in Iran, Hezbollah and sections of Iraq, not forgetting their chief arms supplier and bastion at the UN in Russia. However, the difficulty in knowing how to act or finding common ground to act should be no reason to remain idle for such a lengthy period of time.

US President Barrack Obama’s seemingly blurring red line and back-pedalling of the White House sends all the wrong signals to Iran, North Korea and beyond.

Last week Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan stated that any red line was crossed long ago. Then less than a week later two car bombs allegedly orchestrated by a group with ties the Syrian intelligence ripped through the Turkish border town of Reyhanli slaying 46 people and resulting in scores more wounded. The Turkish elite warned that a red line was crossed, yet another line, but Turkey is unlikely to retaliate.

While somewhat productive talks took place last week between UK, US and Russia, Russia continues to hold the keys to ending the conflict. The conflict has allowed it to come to the fore in a powerful and influential manner, stamping its authority on the UN and the region, while the US has largely taking a back-stage.

With the EU arms embargo in force, the rebels remain crippled by a lack of arms, as Russia and Iran, for their strategic goals, supply the regime with sophisticated weaponry and Hezbollah lends hundreds of its fighters.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc.

Can the Syrian Kurds turn the tide against Assad?

Leave a reply

Syrian Kurds have endured decades of repression and denial and in the case of thousands treatment as virtual foreigners in the lands of their very ancestors. If anyone should have a gripe against the Baathist regime of Bashar al-Assad it is the Kurds, yet the Kurds have remained largely on the side-lines of the two-year bloodshed in Syria.

While much of the West is locked in debate about ways of ending the immense suffering and the protracted civil war in Syria and speeding-up by Assad’s demise, the Syrian Kurds remain a vital card in tipping the balance of war against the regime.

Division and splinter groups are commonplace throughout the Syrian opposition and it’s no different in Syrian Kurdistan, with dozens of Kurdish parties in the political fold, but with the Democratic Union Party (PYD) continuing to orchestrate the greatest influence and military might.

The Kurds with thousands of well-trained militia would be natural partners to court in the overthrow of Assad, yet ironically Syrian rebel groups, namely Jabhat al Nusra, have been battling Kurdish fighters in the north instead.

Most Syrian Kurds, particularly the PYD with long alleged ties to the PKK, have distrusted Arab opposition groups, especially those with Turkish backing, fearing marginalisation in a post-Assad era or seeing their historic autonomous gains wiped away.

It is for this reason that they have tried to remain relatively neutral in the conflict and facilitated indirect understandings with the regime in Kurdish-dominated areas. It was win-win at the time, as Kurds took historical control of most of their region while Assad was spared a further frontline and likely a further depletion of his forces in a confrontation with the Kurds.

The Kurdish priority was to safeguard Kurdish gains, spare violence in Kurdish areas and to leave their fate in their own hands.

The Kurdistan Region leadership succeeded in uniting the various Kurdish factions last year but animosity and distrust in Kurdish circles remains common-place.

However, in recent weeks it appears that the Kurds are increasingly ready to end their neutrality and fight regime forces. This can be seen with the coordination between Syrian rebels and People’s Defense Units (YPG) in the Kurdish dominated Sheikh Makqsud district of Aleppo, where Kurdish fighters have helped to choke the vital supply routes of the regime.

The regime retaliated for this apparent change of heart by the Kurds with a deadly airstrike on the district killing 15 people as well as attacking Kurdish units on the outskirts of Qamishli, with the Kurds launching their retaliatory attacks of their own. A bombing just this week of a Kurdish village in the oil-rich Hasaka province killed 11 civilians, which the Kurdish National Council called a “serious escalation by the regime”.

In addition, in recent days Syrian rebel groups have started attacking army positions in Hasaka and more importantly on Qamishli itself.

It is not clear whether the recent Arab-rebel attacks in Hasaka is in coordination with the Kurds, but judged by recent events, the Arab rebels are unlikely to have a launched an attack that would have risked a Kurdish backlash as seen in the past.

If the Syrian rebels and Kurdish parties can muster a workable and long-term understanding, the liberation of Qamishli and indeed all of north-eastern Syria would form a formidable enclave against the regime.

The PKK is a card that Syria has effectively used against Turkey in the past, and unsurprisingly Syrian support increased for the PKK rebels after Turkey became key actors in the Syrian struggle and provided major support to the Syrian opposition.

Assad successfully split the Syrian opposition and even the Kurds. But the recent change of Kurdish stance on the ground and a truce that has taken hold between Islamist rebels and the YPG forces is perhaps more linked to developments in the peace process in Turkey than direct changes in Syria.

Turkey is on the verge of historic peace with the PKK and significant strides have been taken since the turn of the year to end the armed rebellion and find a long-term solution to the Kurdish question.

The timing of developments in Ankara is noticeable. Turkey, seeking to became a major force in the new Middle East that is been laid, is facing the prospect of a de facto Kurdish state in Syria alongside the already strong and strategically important Kurdistan Region of Iraq. The Kurdish reality on its doorstep has expedited the quest for peace. A lack of long-term peace in Turkey would severely undermine stability in Turkey and its regional influence.

The effect of the PKK peace process can be seen with a thawing of ties between Ankara and the PYD. If the PKK successfully ends its armed struggle, then for Turkey, the PYD and particularly a Syrian Kurdish region will be much more tolerable.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu recently put a list of conditions for any engagement with the PYD, a far cry from a previous stance of no dialogue at all. Although the idea of “pre-conditions” has not gone down too well with the PYD leadership, a level of dialogue is inevitable and somewhat natural and the conditions set when studied are not real obstacles. These conditions include not siding with the Assad regime, avoiding “fait accompli” until a parliament is formed and not supporting terror in Turkey.

The Turkish stance is also linked to its increasing frustration with the prolonged nature of the Syrian war and Assad’s stubborn grip on power. The Kurds, whose areas includes much of the country’s oil wealth, have the strength to turn the tide against the regime and close the one-loop in the north-east of the country that has acted as a breathing space for the regime.

All the while, the West continues to sluggishly ponder their next move in Syria with thousands of Syrian dying each day. While the Western powers have been far too slow to devise a strategy in Syria, Islamist groups who have proved the most coordinated and affective against the regime have filled the vacuum.

As a result of the West’s inaction, there is now a race between Free Syrian Army moderates and the increasingly influential Islamist rebels to take Damascus. The Islamist groups will now have a seat at the Syrian table in the aftermath of the conflict whether the West likes it or not. Failing that, another civil war will mark the end of this one.

As for the Kurds, who are also integral components to any future Syria, a more concrete outreach by Syrian opposition forces and Turkey as well as more recognition and support from Western powers could well mean the pendulum can swing against Assad.

Kurdistan may well be divided, but increasingly the Kurdish borders are been eroded. Future harmony and the attainment of peace in Turkey are linked to Syria and beyond. For example, the PKK will likely maintain a condition that Turkey does not meddle in Syrian Kurdish affairs or adopt any policies against a future Syrian Kurdistan.

Imagine if Kurdish autonomy or rights were not granted in a future Syria and a war broke out, would the PKK and Turkish Kurds stand idle? Could Ankara really intervene in such a situation without aggravating the Kurds? Either way, peace and stability cannot be achieved in any part of Kurdistan, if other parts prove volatile or restive.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc.

Interview with KRG Minister Falah Mustafa Bakir – Head of the Department of Foreign Relations

Leave a reply

The Kurdistan Region, at a crucial juncture in its history, is enjoying increasing strategic and economic prominence, growing global interest and recognition as key constituents of the new Middle East. At the same time, Kurdistan is facing a number of pressing issues such as a crisis of relations with Baghdad and a Syrian civil war on its border.

Bashdar Pusho Ismaeel of the Kurdish Globe spoke with KRG Minister Falah Mustafa Bakir, Head of the Department of Foreign Relations, on a number of key issues.

Kak Falah, thank you very much for your time with the Kurdish Globe. Let’s start with KRG relationships with Baghdad which are at a critical stage. What is your view on the current crisis and what is your demand from Baghdad?

Not only is the current crisis between Baghdad and Erbil at a critical stage, indeed the political process as a whole is in a deep and dangerous crisis. President Masoud Barzani has recalled all the Kurdish MP’s and ministers from Baghdad to come to Erbil for consultations and discuss the possible options that can be taken. This decision is not solely due to the budget being passed without an agreement with the Kurdish MP’s in Baghdad. This decision is only the latest in a string of moves made by the State of the Law bloc and Prime Minister Maliki against the people of the Kurdistan Region. It is no secret that he has opened fronts with not only us but with Iraq’s Sunni Arabs and some of the Iraqi Shi’ite political parties and the main issue which we are all united against is his insistence of making decisions unilaterally with no respect for the constitution, power sharing principles or agreements that he has signed. This will endanger the democratic process and the implementation of federalism in Iraq.

Our demands from Baghdad have been honest and consistent and while we have to be part of the process we are not aware and they are not transparent. Regarding the budget, every year we are humble and transparent in our demands and yet we are painted as if we have excessive demands. What type of unity is Mr. Maliki trying to promote when he does not wish to allocate funds to the Peshmerga, who are part of the Iraqi defense system, protect the borders as well as the internal security of the Kurdistan Region which by extension means protecting Iraq.

In addition, the oil and gas issues are still an issue and it is unfortunate that in 2013, Mr. Maliki still wants the Kurdistan Region to be at the economic mercy of Baghdad. According to Article 117 (3) of Iraq’s constitution, “Regions and governorates shall be allocated an equitable share of the national revenues sufficient to discharge its responsibilities and duties, but having regard to its resources, needs and the percentage of its population.” This is why we have gone ahead with our decision to work towards economic independence so that the people of Kurdistan are no longer at the mercy of one party rule which is sadly the case in Baghdad.

Mr. Maliki controls in addition to the army the security apparatus, the judiciary and even the independent institutions such as the Central Bank and IHEC have been attacked in his attempts to bring those closer to his control.

With Dijla Operations Command established by Maliki and signification mobilisation of forces on both sides, if the situation deteriorates any further, is there a real danger of all-out war between the Kurds and Arabs?

The danger of an all-out war between Erbil and Baghdad is quite remote and rest assured that if any violence were to break out, it would be due to Prime Minister Maliki’s policies and his forces making the first move. Our Peshmerga are stationed for defensive purposes because our history has shown that some of Iraq’s individuals will not hesitate to turn weapons against us in attempts to deflect from their own shortcomings. Mr. Maliki attempts to use Dijla forces and the Iraqi Army not only to threaten our security and stability, but to turn public opinion in Iraq against us and to attempt to deflect from his failure to combat corruption, provide basic services and bring stability to the rest of Iraq after seven years being in charge. Fortunately, the regional situation along with developments on the ground mean that an internal war in 2013 is highly unlikely and Mr. Maliki is slowly realizing that negotiations, not violence are the only way to solve any political disputes between us and Baghdad.

It is now been almost 10 years, a decade, since the fall of Saddam. The Kurds have been patient, but there seems to be no real movement on article 140, a national census, a national hydrocarbon law, oil export payments etc. When will Kirkuk be returned to the Kurds? How patient are the Kurds willing to be on Kirkuk and these other key articles?

Indeed it has been ten years and sadly we have been misled by many on the issue of Article 140. We believed strongly that dialogue, adherence to the constitution and its implementation would eventually take place, but instead we see voices today speaking of Kurdistan’s demands being excessive, when on the contrary we have been extremely patient and could easily have taken full control of these areas ourselves without the need for consensus. We do not want a short term solution rather we need to solve this once and for all, and we believe that the international community as well as the United Nations need to play a more active role in the support of Article 140 and in part they have to be blamed for this issue not being solved so far. For example, the people of the Kurdistan Region have continuously asked for a census to take place across all of Iraq, yet the other political parties keep making excuses. At the same time we are seeing a shift in Sunni Arabs who are starting to also ask for a census in order to be able to ascertain the real numbers of Iraq’s population and from there be able to address their needs.

Our patience is running thin and the recent meetings chaired by President Barzani will result in decisions being made not only regarding the budget but about sidelining Kurds not only from the political process but also denying us our rights enshrined in Iraq’s constitution.

What is your view of the recent wave of Sunni protects in Iraq, is their a danger that the bloody sectarian civil war that peaked in 2007 will be repeated? Does this indicate to you that only way is to create a federal entity for Sunnis?

Iraq’s Arab Sunnis have also been marginalized heavily by Mr. Maliki and his State of the Law coalition and that is why we are constantly in discussions with them and other partners in the Shi’ite community, because the new Iraq belongs to all Iraqis and not to one political party or one sect. There is a real danger of another civil war erupting particularly given Mr. Maliki and his State of the Law members’ comments towards these protesters as well as ignoring many of their legitimate demands. Being a constitutional right, I believe that the Sunni Arabs would be better off with their own federal region and being in control of running their own cities and towns but the decision is up to them and from what I understand some of them do want their own federal region while others think it may be more detrimental for them given their reliance from oil and gas outside their provinces.

The KRG relations with Turkey have been on a rapid rise, with trade, political and energy ties at the forefront. Would you say that as the gap between Kurdistan and Baghdad is growing, that the gap between the Kurds and Turkey is ever closing?

The KRG has an open door policy. The Kurdistan Region would like to establish cultural, economic, political, and educational ties with the international community that mutually benefits both sides, and done within the constitutional framework.

KRG’s policy towards Baghdad and international community is very clear. The KRG has no policy of enhancing its ties with Ankara or any other member of international community at the expense of Baghdad. There are specific reasons behind the fact that our relations with Ankara are growing while we regularly face setbacks in our ties with Baghdad.

Growing relations between Erbil and Ankara are the result of wise and visionary leadership from both sides. The leaders in Kurdistan and Turkey have wisely chosen for establishing mutually beneficial ties that could equally serve the interests of both sides. These relations will benefit all of Iraq.

On the other side, ties between Erbil and Baghdad are not going on the right direction. Unilateral actions by the Federal Government and lack of commitment to the Erbil agreement raise serious questions about the intention of the Federal Government. We are always for strong relations with the federal government, a government that abides by the constitution and believes in partnership and power sharing and in a federal, pluralistic, and democratic Iraq.

The Kurds were often viewed as potentially the “best friends” of U.S.A in the Middle East, however, it appears that Kurds if anything are somewhat frustrated and annoyed with the US. What is your view of current state of relations between America and Kurdistan? Could Washington do more to resolve disputes with Baghdad, and pressure Baghdad to implement constitutional articles? Does America have a balanced approach to dealing with Iraq?

We appreciate the sacrifices made by the Americans in overthrowing the former Iraqi regime and also to the reconstruction efforts following the removal of that regime.

We are for having good relations with the U.S. Our ties with the U.S are not only limited to political interaction between the two sides. American companies and private sector are contributing to the economic developments in the Region, particularly in the field of energy. However, we are not satisfied with the level of American economic presence and we would like to see more involvement form the American investors and businessmen.

Iraq is supposed to be a sovereign country and it has to take its matters on its hands. The prime factor behind lack of progress on solving disputes among Iraqi political parties is lack of political will not lack of U.S interference. Without political will, there will be no genuine solutions to the political crisis facing Iraq.

In the midst of the deadly war to topple Bashar Assad, Syrian Kurds have a unique opportunity to determine and govern their own affairs. How is the KRG supporting their ethnic brethren in Syria? Is the situation in Kurdish areas of Syria viewed as an external affair or a Kurdistani affair by the Kurdistan Region leadership?

We are very concerned about what is happening in Syria and it is important for us for two main reasons. Firstly, we share border with Syria and what happens in Syria affects the Kurdistan Region as well. Secondly, there is a sizable Kurdish population in Syria.

We have always encouraged the Kurdish people in Iran, Turkey, and Syria to find peaceful and democratic solutions to their differences with their respective governments. Our position on the Syrian crisis is very clear. We encourage the Kurds in Syria to preserve their unity and realize their rights in the future state of Syria. We call for an end to bloodshed and violence in Syria and we are for democratic changes through peaceful means.

What is the government’s stance in terms of reforms demanded by the opposition parties, including the draft constitution?

The government and Parliament are empowered by the vote of the people of Kurdistan Region. We do not claim perfection and we are mindful of our shortcomings. The KRG is committed to make meaningful reforms and to improve governance. We have a democratic system and we are making concerted efforts to enhance governance, decrease bureaucracy, and increase efficiency.

Our leadership believes that there has to be a national consensus on the constitution of the Kurdistan Region. The KRG Prime Minister, Nechirvan Barzani has consistently reiterated that the government has no red lines towards the reforms demanded by the people of the Kurdistan Region.

Finally, fast forward 10 years, what kind of a Kurdistan do you see?

It is hard to predict the future but I can proudly say that the Kurdistan Regional Government is making serious efforts and taking meaningful steps to provide a prosperous life for the people of the Region. Domestically, we are trying to provide the highest possible standard of life for our people through building the infrastructure, enhancing our economy and developing our institutions, ensuring the rule of law, promoting civil rights, and investing in our young generation through various programs such as Human Capacity Development Program.

Today there exist international agreements that shape economic relations between countries of the world, and there exists a time frame to implement all these economic agreements whether it is related to industry, trade or services. We should not wait, rather we should act fast in order to attract foreign direct investment.

Externally, our objective is to establish cultural, economic, educational, and political ties with international community. We welcome and value the diplomatic and economic presence of foreign countries in Kurdistan Region. Establishing ties with international community gives us the opportunity to increase understanding not only about our past but also about our vision for future and how international community can contribute to political, cultural and economic developments of our region. We are willing to learn from the experience of international community and ready to utilize their knowledge and expertise in further developing our region.

Our first and last goal is to ensure the rights of our citizens, men, women, youth and children. The individual is the foundation of progress and it is that individual who can guarantee the success of our institutions and consequently of the Kurdistan Region.