Category Archives: Kurdistan Region

As Kurdistan hits new export levels, where now for foreign oil companies and oil revenues?

Leave a reply

According to recent reports, the oil output of the Kurdistan Region hit an unprecedented rate of 650,000 barrels per day. Dubbed by some as the last great oil frontier, Kurdistan is estimated to have 40 billion barrels of oil reserves that saw a flock of junior to mid-size oil companies and later oil majors to the region.

But in spite of the new oil flows highs and immense revenue potential, Kurdistan still suffers from the ironic predicament of a lack of income.

Successive disputes with Baghdad over revenue sharing and exploration somewhat dampened sentiment in the oil industry. 2014 was highlighted by a lack of budget payments from Baghdad but also crucially the start of independent oil exports. Whilst a deal was reached late last year with Baghdad for Kurdistan to export 550,000 barrels of oil per day for a share of the national budget, disputes with Baghdad have continued with promised payments from Baghdad only trickling through in recent months and substantially less than the $1 billion dollars that is due.

This has a significant impact on the local economy and the payment of salaries, with most of the people still relying on government paid jobs. However, a notable squeeze is felt on the numerous oil companies operating in the region, many with rising debts on their books.

In theory, with stable payment cycles, the Production Sharing Contract’s (PSC) are still very much appealing. Oil companies stand to make an excellent return on their investment, especially if rates of production continue to steadily increase.

But with millions of dollars owed to the likes of Gulf Keystone Petroleum and Genel Energy, the short-term pressures for such companies quickly grow meaning that they have to take on an unrealistic cycle of increased debt to maintain their production levels and operations.

Of course, the substantial monies owed for previous exports could just as quickly transform the fortunes of these companies. A regular payment cycle has been an elusive goal but with the increased export figures from Kurdistan and with further rises in production targeted, Kurdistan is ready to assume the next step in its journey as a major oil player.

This may result in further short-term pressures if the KRG-Baghdad oil deal doesn’t hold up, but Kurdistan now has the infrastructure and potential to easily go at it alone. Ironically, Kurdistan would gain more from selling its current output directly than the 17% that they are supposed to get from Baghdad.

For the foreign oil companies, the long-term outlook is bright and they can reap the rewards from the substantial investments that they have made in Kurdistan but the priority to get to the clearer horizons is negotiate their way through the short-term turbulent waters.

The marked decline in oil prices since mid-2014, although stabilizing and rising in recent weeks, has only increased focus on the importance of a stable revenue cycle.

The region may yet witness a consolidation of the oil industry, a logical step in any blossoming oil industry where many small to mid-sized companies dot the landscape. The Kurdistan Regional Government has a strong interest in ensuring any acquisitions and mergers happen on the terms that protect the region.

OPEC took a risky move by staying relatively idle as oil prices tumbled. There are signs that this may have worked as US oil reserves show signs of decline and the more costly shale extraction begins to slowdown.

But with Saudi Arabian exporting oil at new records, Iranian crude set to return to the market and with Kurdistan exports set to increase further, oil prices will not rocket back to previous heights and should instead settle around the $70-$80 mark.

This is still a significant increase from the lows of January and would be welcomed by Kurdistan and in particular the oil companies in the region.

First Published: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc

Deadly Erbil bombing a reminder for the Kurds of the pains of remaining in Iraq

Leave a reply

Since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, Iraq has experienced nothing but sectarian mayhem, instability and a downward spiral.

While Kurdistan has prospered under security, economic growth, new infrastructure and strategic ties, Kurds need no reminder that they are still a part of Iraq and with all the repercussions and perils that this brings.

On Friday, the Islamic State (IS) managed to infiltrate Erbil where a suicide bombing took place near the US Consulate in the predominantly Christian district of Ainkawa.

Three were tragically killed with 5 wounded sending a stark reminder across Kurdistan that while IS remains on their doorstep, Iraq fails to heal its ever growing sectarian wounds and they remain under the rapidly deteriorating Iraqi state, Kurds can never rest at ease or take their status as the “other Iraq” for granted.

The Kurds have been embroiled in a deadly war again IS, a war that they never asked for and long warned about as the Syrian civil war was left unchecked and as sectarian animosity was stoked by successive policies of Baghdad.

One may be shocked when such acts of terror are committed, but in the anarchy that has ensued since 2003 and especially since the rise of IS in Iraq, the Kurdish security forces must receive great credit that such attacks have been kept to a minimum.

Not only does Kurdistan share borders with the most volatile regions of Iraq, it has also carried the burden of thousands of refugees that have streamed across its borders. Kurdistan has done a tremendous humanitarian job which often is forgotten while knowing that with every stream of people there is always a risk to the region.

If the US needed a wakeup call to provide greater support to their Kurdish allies, then they need to look no further than the carnage a stone throw from the gates of their consulate.

Their security and regional interests are at stake and allies such as Kurdistan must be protected. Kurdistan is remarkably home to a number of religions and ethnicities. The Christian that have inhabited these lands for hundreds of years are some of the oldest Christian populations with some that still speak Aramaic, the language of Jesus.

IS has committed atrocities against Christians, Yezidis and other groups, with their acts designed to stoke mass fear and panic.

The West must support and promote Kurdistan as the bastion of the very ideals in the Middle East they have desperately tried to promote, a multi ethnic and multi religious society living in security, freedom and harmony.

This is not a local or regional fight but a global struggle. Kurds find themselves at the center stage of this battle, and most be supported and armed in their fight.

The continued sensitivity to Iraq’s sovereignty in Washington and beyond is becoming outdated and delusionary. The Western tiptoeing around Baghdad while Kurds make immense sacrifices to protect their diverse social landscape and the security of their people is sending the wrong message to the Kurds.

The Kurds never asked to be a part of Iraq and never asked for the anarchy and bloodshed on their doorsteps. Why should they suffer today for the Western wrongs that created the recipe of the current strife in the first place?

First Published: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc

As oil deal with Baghdad threatens to unravel, Kurdistan must decide – is oil to be their curse or treasure?

Leave a reply

The backdrop to a raging battle with the Islamic State (IS) in Iraq is a raging political battle for control of the vast oil wealth of the country.

The billions of barrels of oil reserves under the Iraqi feet should be a real treasure and a divine gift but it has proven much more of a historical curse.

First misuse of revenues under Saddam Hussein to fund expensive wars and campaigns of repression against the Kurds and now since 2003, with the exception of the Kurdistan Region, Iraq is in a worse state in terms of economy, infrastructure and public services in spite of record revenues in recent years.

Control of oil exploration and revenues has been a real thorn in the relations between Kurdistan Region and Iraq. Several years later, no national hydrocarbon law exists and disputes continue to linger.

Many agreements have been reached between Erbil and Baghdad, often through gritted teeth and bitterness than real compromise or a common vision. As soon as the oil taps have turned on, it hasn’t been long before they were switched off again.

In addition to the rise of IS in large swathes of Iraq, another milestone in 2014 was the first independent Kurdish oil exports and revenues.

It may have sent relations with Baghdad spiraling downwards but certainly for their self-sufficiency and increased autonomy the direction was firmly upwards. Baghdad has sporadically paid Kurdistan’s share of the budget since January 2014 and Kurdistan was forced to take unilateral action but at the same time found itself in legal grey zones.

Finally, a deal was struck in late 2014 between Erbil and Baghdad that brought much optimism. Signs of unity and a willingness to find a true solution to the age old dispute came as IS remained deeply entrenched in Iraq.

The Kurds committed to export 550,000 in 2015 and in return Baghdad would resume over $1billion of monthly budget payments.

However, it didn’t take long for the agreement to become a source of more contention.

The Kurdish government has long complained that they have kept their end of the export bargain but Baghdad, suffering a massive budget deficit due to the crash in oil prices and owing over $21 billion to oil companies alone, was not moved.

Then comes the sheer irony. Kurdistan Region is washed with oil and yet still relies on budget payments from Baghdad. Oil revenues are the last noose or umbilical cord that Baghdad has over the Kurds.

Do the Kurds play the patient game that has borne little fruit or do they cut the umbilical cord and go alone, by receiving revenues directly or going after the buyers of Kurdish oil via SOMO, after all Baghdad has frequently threatened to sue buyers of Kurdish oil.

Kurdistan would receive more revenues than Baghdad would ever give if they exported directly from fields under their control. Then there is the plethora of oil companies in Kurdistan who are suffering due to the oil noose around the region. The capacity and infrastructure is there but the oil companies of course need their own revenues.

Kurdistan has criticized Baghdad for treating them like an oil company then a key part of Iraq. Although both Erbil and Baghdad recently reinforced their commitment to the deal, the government of Kurdistan has a very clear plan B. sells their own oil and receives revenues directly and bypass Baghdad altogether.

It may strike the ire of Washington who has placed firm political conditions on their campaign against IS, but if the disagreement continue unabated, then the immense oil under Kurdish feet continues to feel like a curse when salaries are unpaid, services are disrupted and the economy is hit.

First Published: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc

At the forefront of the war on Islamic State, yet Arab suspicions of Kurds highlight failed state

Leave a reply

Months of fierce fighting and several hundred coalition air-strikes later, the Islamic State (IS) finds itself largely on the defensive, but as a spate of attacks across Iraq clearly showed in recent days, IS is an adaptive and determined organization that is far from a finished force.

As recent Peshmerga advances around Mosul threatened to choke vital IS supply routes, IS militants launched a series of attacks on Kurdish positions to the south of Kirkuk. The aim of the move was to sow new fear amongst the people and show it can still strike at the heart of Kurdistan but also to divert Kurdish forces from the real IS prize – Mosul.

US-led coalition airstrikes have no doubt been in instrumental in keeping IS militants on the back foot, but the protracted and deadly battles have shown the limitations of airpower without an effective ground force.

Kurdistan Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani highlighted this very point, “The question is: is the policy one of containment, or to dislodge and destroy them?” adding, “In order to totally eradicate them, further action must be taken.”

Barzani rejected any notion of the Kurds spearheading an attack to wrest control of Mosul, to avoid any ethnic battle between Kurds and Arabs.

Such fears speak volumes about the fractured nature of the Iraqi landscape. Whilst Kurdish advances have proved pivotal against IS in recent months including protecting areas where the Iraqi army originally fled, some noises in Baghdad and in segments of the Sunni population have viewed Kurdish advances against IS and their defense of disputed territories with suspicion.

The Peshmerga have lost over 700 men since the start of the conflict with thousands more wounded. They have afforded protection to Arab areas not to mention hosting thousands of refugees. Furthermore, Kurds filled a security vacuum and didn’t oust Iraqi forces from Kirkuk and the like. What would have happened to such cities if IS had a free ticket to roam in or indeed if Kurdish forces were not protecting the city in recent days when IS launched attacks on Kirkuk?

As Barzani explained, “there is no loyalty to a country called Iraq. It really is important to find a formula for how to live together within the boundaries of what is called Iraq. Unless a formula is found, there will be more bloodshed and the country will remain a destabilizing factor in the region.”

And here is the problem, whilst Peshmerga have advanced against IS in the north, it is Shiite militias and not really an Iraqi army that have thwarted IS from the doors of Baghdad in Anbar and Diyala provinces.

A number of Sunni tribes are fighting IS but by large the disenfranchised Sunnis have not been enticed to fight IS forces. On the contrary, prior to the IS advance, Sunni dominated areas of Iraq where gripped with protests and violent skirmishes with security forces and some influential tribes welcomed IS with open arms.

Barzani played down any imminent joined attack on Mosul setting the fall of this year as a more realistic target. For any chance of IS to be eradicated, Iraq needs some semblance of an effective national force including the all-important Sunni components in Mosul.

First Published: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc.

As Peshmerga continue advance on Mosul, Kurds repaid with no seat at international anti-Islamic State conference

Leave a reply

When the Islamic State (IS) launched rapid attacks on Mosul, Tikrit and large swathes of Iraq, the well-equipped and sizeable Iraqi army wilted away. Ironically, IS took large quantities of US-supplied heavy weaponry and laid siege on more Iraqi cities and then Kurdistan.

The United States led coalition has spent billions and several hundred air-strikes destroying a large proportion of their own weaponry.

As the Iraqi army evaporated, the Kurds took center stage in the battle against IS. The sacrifices of the Peshmerga have directly resulted in the IS staying largely on the back-foot and on the defensive.

It was highly symbolic that in the same week that Kurdish force took control of several towns and villages in an offensive west of Mosul bringing Mosul center firmly within range, that Kurdistan leadership was not even represented at the international anti-IS conference in London.

Kurdistan forces have gained international-wide coverage and respect as the champions of the war against IS and Western powers, seeing the strategic importance of the Peshmerga in the fight against IS, have supplied heavy weaponry and ammunition to the Kurds.

The Kurds hoped that their ever increasing strategic standing would have enshrined their quest for independence. After all, they were the real defenders of the so-called disputed territories in Iraq, it was their forces that led the push-back against IS and it was their bastion of peace and tolerance that IS wanted to break.

The Kurdish role took on greater significance for the West but yet again it appears that the Kurdish effort is diluted by the Western obsession of a united Iraq. It was as though, Iraqi Prime Ministers Haider al-Abadi presence was all that was necessary.

Baghdad has proven anything but a true representative of the Kurds. When IS attacked Kurdistan and the disputed territories that Baghdad so stubbornly refused to hold referendums over, the Iraqi army was nowhere in sight. In fact, for over a decade Baghdad has refused to fund the Peshmerga forces even though they have protected Iraqi cities amidst al-Qaeda and inter-sectarian conflict, never mind the fight against IS today.

Kurdistan President, Massoud Barzani, who expressed his disappointment at the organizers of the conference, stated “it is unfortunate that the people of Kurdistan do the sacrifice and the credit goes to others.” Barzani highlighted that the Peshmerga “are the most effective force countering global terrorism today” and that “the people of Kurdistan bear the brunt of this situation and no country or party can represent or truly convey their voice in international gatherings.”

Meanwhile, Abadi pleaded for more weapons. The problem is not providing heavy weaponry to the Iraqi army, they have already received plenty. The underlying problem is that sectarian animosity, lack of belief in a national cause and no common loyalty, means that such provisions were quickly wasted.

It is time for the Kurds to receive military assistance and the due credit they deserve. The continuous illusion of US and European powers of a unified Iraq was one of the main reasons for the IS onslaught in the first place. If Iraq as a nation was fractured before the events of 2014, it is now firmly beyond repair.

Stable, secular and pro-Western forces are values and allies that the US should be running to protect and endorse, they have hardly got them in abundance in a rapidly deteriorating Middle East.

With a major assault to retake Mosul mooted for the spring, already hesitant Kurds must be thinking twice of further sacrifices in fighting Baghdad’s war.

First Published: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc.

Bravery, selflessness and sacrifice of the Peshmerga – words are easy, real deeds are not

Bravery, selflessness and sacrifice are easy words on the tongue but on the battlefield in the midst of bullets, mortar fire, machine guns and all sorts of explosive devices, these virtues and actions cannot be portrayed by mere words. We live in a day and age where some people will not sacrifice $50 for their poor neighbor let alone his life for his country, where someone will not intervene in a gross injustice in the streets in front of their very eyes for fear of reprisal.

This week we received the tragic news of another Peshmerga martyr in our family fighting the Islamic State (IS). The dedicated, passionate, loyal and long-serving Peshmerga, Ibrahim Sabir Ismaeel, was killed by a mine-trap left by the ever vicious and inhumane IS forces.

Leaving behind his wife, sons and daughters, not to mention his elderly and grieving parents, the hundreds of Peshmerga such as Ibrahim face the enemy not with mere words but real actions and in the face of the ultimate sacrifice.

I grew up in the devastating war of the 80’s against the Kurds. I may not have fought or held a gun but the tragic circumstances of those years will forever live in my memory. Witnessing the destruction of your village, been left homeless, believing that your father was dead for many years and seeing the bodies of scores of relatives executed by Saddam or killed in battle are not memories that simply vanish.

My father was confined to been disabled from a young age after been severely wounded as a Peshmerga. His mobility, health and sense of enjoyment in life were never the same. But it’s a sacrifice that he and thousands of other Peshmerga have made.

He often tells me the tales of battle of the Peshmerga forces. The tales are harrowing enough to listen to let alone for someone actually in the heat of battle under fierce gun-fire, knowing that with every battle they may pay the ultimate price and never see their families again.

2014 will be year that will serve in the memory of all Kurds much like the massacre of Halabja in 1988 or the Kurdish uprising in 1991. It’s a war that no Kurd asked for and most Kurds never imagined will return to their much scarred and blood-soaked lands.

Kurdistan was an island of peace and stability, far from the destruction and sectarian violence in Iraq or later in Syria. IS may have broken more mothers hearts but not the valor and determination of the Kurds. There are armies much stronger and tougher than IS that failed to break down the will and spirit of the Kurds and IS will be defeated.

As we enter 2015, we hope and pray for a peaceful dawn in Kurdistan and that dark forces such as IS will be swiftly broken and forever purged from these lands.

Our great gratitude, appreciation and debt will forever linger for the brave Peshmerga that sacrifice so much to protect these lands.

First Published: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc.

2014 in review – a year that will long echo in the history of Kurdistan

Leave a reply

2014 proved a remarkable year for Kurdistan that will long serve in the memory and echo for many generations to come.

Kurdistan started the year on a historic footing with oil flowing, stored and read to sell via its new oil pipelines to Turkey. It completed a symbolic quest for self-sufficiency and opened a new chapter in its strategic standing with first oil exports a few months later in May. It finished the year on the attack against the Islamic State (IS) after breaking the siege of Mount Sinjar, just a few months after IS threatened to knock on the doors of Erbil.

These two events demonstrate the turbulence and emotional journey of Kurdistan in the last 12 months.

Independent oil exports were a significant stride for Kurdistan. It threatened to cut the last remaining umbilical cord with Baghdad. The first half of 2014 was tainted with much of the same relations with Baghdad – disagreements, distrust and marginalization policies of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Relations with Baghdad turned so sour that Maliki effectively launched an economic siege on Kurdistan, withholding budget payments.

Iraq may have held national elections on April 30th 2014 but any sense of unity or reconciliation amongst Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds was as distant as ever. Maliki’s State of Law coalition may have won but for the Kurds a third term for Maliki was a firm red line.

The Kurds themselves took several months after parliamentary elections to form their own government owed to changing political realities on the ground.

The real game changer undoubtedly came in June. IS, already prominent in parts of Anbar province, launched a whirlwind attack on Mosul, Tikrit and surrounding areas leaving Iraqi security forces in disarray. As IS took over town after town, not to mention oil installations and vast amounts of heavy weapons, it made mockery of US President Barack Obama’s assessment of groups such IS as minor players just six months prior.

Iraq was shaken with IS threatening to break down the door to Baghdad. The Kurds quickly assumed the security vacuum in Kirkuk and other disputed territories as IS forces closed in. It may have been far from an ideal scenario, but the lands that Kurds failed to get in 11 years of diplomacy and political jockeying, were swiftly in Kurdish control in merely hours.

Add to Kurdistan President Massoud Barzani’s public declaration to hold a referendum and independence never felt so close.

If Maliki’s days were already numbered, then the IS onslaught laid to rest any faint chance of retaining premiership. Such was the frayed relations with Kurds, that even under immense pressure and with Shiite militias effectively the last barrier between IS and Baghdad, Maliki resorted to launching a fierce tirade at the Kurds accusing them of hosting IS and other insurgents.

The Kurdish borders were no longer with Iraq but with the Islamic State. As IS seemed determined to head south, Kurdish forces became complacent and events thereafter will live in the memory much like other atrocities against the Kurds.

The Kurds, caught off-guard, were overrun in Sinjar and several other towns. Religious minorities were already the subject of widespread atrocities after the initial IS invasion in June, but what was to follow shocked Kurdistan and world. Thousands of Yezidis were slain with thousands of women taken captive, not to mention the thousands more that died in harsh conditions on top of Mount Sinjar under searing heat and threat of IS.

IS didn’t stop at Sinjar as it quickly took Zumar, Makhmur and threatened the very doorsteps of Erbil.it was at this moment that IS was no longer a regional problem that could be ignored. It became an international crisis and an international dilemma, even if the Kurds bore the brunt of the battle.

With threat of humanitarian catastrophe increasing by the day, the US and its allies finally intervened in August, a campaign that was later extended to Syria in September, helping Kurdish forces push back heavily armed IS forces.

The first casualty of US intervention was the end of Maliki. An already reluctant US was not going to intervene without their own preconditions for fractured Iraqis.

The struggle and determination of the Kurdish Peshmerga forces received wide coverage across the globe. US and European powers soon felt compelled to supply key arms to the Kurds.

Now the Kurds were at the forefront of the battle against IS that continues valiantly and with much sacrifice to this day. Syrian Kurdish forces were already engaged in deadly battles for many months before, but the latest battle for Kobane was a much different prospect. Surrounded on 3 sides, it was coalition airstrikes that gave much needed relief to Kurdish forces even as Turkish tanks on the border stood and watched on.

So iconic and defining was Kobane for Kurds across the border that it even threatened the end of the peace process in Turkey with the PKK.

The deployment of 150 Peshmerga to help Syrian YPG forces was symbolic in that it eroded borders of Kurdistan as Kurds in Syria, Turkey and Iraq came together.

With such widespread media coverage of Kobane, the bringing together of Kurds across the region and not mention regional and international players involved, Kobane transformed the regional dynamic.

Kurdish forces in Rojava received much acclaim as a bastion against IS in Syria as ties with the US slowly blossomed, much to the annoyance of Turkey whose relations with the US were already strained over Syria.

What 2015 brings for the Kurds is unclear. But top of the list of wishes is the end of IS, protection of their communities and renewed peace. Either way, 2014 will long echo in the history of Kurdistan.

First Published: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc.

With the “wolf at the door”, what does it mean for Kurdish independence?

Leave a reply

Fast approaching 100 years since the Middle Eastern landscape was carved leaving the Kurds as the largest nation without a state, the Kurdish dreams for an independent homeland never wavered.

However, with ubiquitous disputes over oil revenues, disputed territories and share of the national budget already leaving Erbil-Baghdad relations at a new low, the onslaught of the Islamic State (IS) in Iraq transformed the dynamics with the Kurds sharing a 1000km border with a new reality.

The Kurds have picked up the mantle in the fight against IS but for them IS was a product of marginalisation policies of former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki that fuelled another Sunni revolt and years of Western dithering in Syria that helped create the IS phenomenon.

With thousands of Yezidis, Christians and other minorities brutally killed and thousands more taking shelter in Kurdistan, and the Peshmerga taking the brunt of the battle against determined IS forces, the United States and other Western powers finally agreed to arm the Kurdish forces and provide support with air strikes and humanitarian relief.

However, with the US and European powers tip-toeing the diplomatic line, their support has been on the basis of preserving Iraq’s unity and installing a new inclusive government. Do the Kurds forfeit any plans to exercise self-determination and place their faith in Baghdad once more? More importantly will the growing Western motion to arm and bolster the Kurds, lead to an eventual support for an independent state?

Whilst a highly sensitive issue, for many MPs and analysts, the question of self-determination is ultimately one that only the Kurdish people can decide. Rory Stewart, Conservative Member of Parliament for Penrith and The Border, told Rudaw “this is a highly sensitive issue. In the end this must be a question for the Kurdish and Iraqi people. And conducted as sensitively as possible, in a situation of extreme instability. The key question remains the long-term stability and welfare of the people of Kurdistan and the rest of Iraq.”

Stewart, who recently spent time last week on the ground with Kurdish fighters and refugees, highlighted the apparent gulf between  what is needed to support the Kurdish army and to defend Kurdish refugee camps and what is currently been provided. He urged “There is a lot we can still do to provide further military equipment and training, as well as ensure essential supplies are reaching refugee camps to support those fleeing from IS.”

UK Labour MP, Mike Gapes, while pushing for support of Kurds “materially, militarily and politically”, stated “It would be better for the terms and timing and degree of separation to be negotiated and agreed but ultimately the Kurds have the right to self-determination.  The UK and US should respect the will of the people expressed in a democratic referendum.”

Angus McKee, UK Consul General to the Kurdistan Region, explained that the matter of any referendum is up to the Kurdish and Iraqi people to decide, not the UK.

Former leader of the Liberal Democrats, Paddy Ashdown, strongly hit out at the UK hesitation to arm and support the Kurds and urged on a more integrated strategy for containing a wider war that would involve Britain and the US acting as the “handmaidens to Kurdish independence”. Ashdown warned that the borders of the Middle East will be inevitably redrawn and “Sykes-Picot will be out the window and we will see a shape of the Middle East which is much more arbitrated by religious belief than by old imperial preferences.”

Ashdown added, “Support the Kurds by all means we can. They can provide rescue and refuge for the Yezidis. They are secular. They act as a northern bulwark against the advance of Isis.”

The Right Reverend David S. Walker, the Bishop of Manchester, commended the Kurdish role in the fight against IS and in humanitarian operations. Whilst noting the present national boundaries are largely the product not of individual peoples but of former imperial powers in former centuries, he told Rudaw, “I would feel that it is within my remit to say that I would hope and expect that the key issues around self-determination include, alongside economic and political viability, the extent to which there is confidence that a people would govern themselves in ways that protect and respect the rights of minorities – exactly the thing that IS is adamantly opposed to.”

 

Other analysts have warned of the dangers of any separation, Peter Harling of the International Crisis Group, stated “the Kurds are now in a situation where self-determination becomes less a function of their own course of action than Iraq’s general breakdown. This may reduce the price to pay for secession, ultimately. But that price remains steep given the remarkable benefits the Kurds currently derive from their relations with Baghdad, Ankara and Teheran. Actual partition likely would negatively affect all three.”

But for Steven Cook, an analyst at the US think tank the Council on Foreign Relations, recent shifts in the Middle Eastern political landscape mean that Iraq’s Kurds will gain independence “sooner rather than later”.

Even as some major powers have slowly warmed to the idea if not inevitability of Kurdish independence, they have treaded carefully around the diplomatic line. As talk of Kurdish independence accelerated, Philip Hammond, UK Defence Secretary, towed the same line as the US, affirming that the government’s position was to keep Iraq as a unified state.

Germany was quick to support the Kurds in the recent crisis but Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier warned “An independent Kurdish state would further destabilize the region and trigger new tensions, maybe with the neighboring Iraqi state as well.”

US President Barack Obama somewhat reluctantly agreed to military intervention in Iraq but no doubt placed such support on preserving Iraq’s unity, seeing the ouster of Maliki and creating a unified and inclusive government. “The wolf is at the door…in order for them to be credible with the Iraqi people, they’re going to have to put behind them some of the old practices and actually create a credible, united government,” Obama said.

The Kurds are often warned that due to geopolitics considerations, their time has now come. Now Kurds wonder if in the volatile and explosive Middle Eastern plains, whether such a “good” time ever exists.

Even Turkey, who for years staunchly opposed any notion of Kurdish nationalism let alone independence, has slowly removed resistance to Kurdish aspirations.  A Turkish Foreign Ministry spokesman recently declared there was no “unease” about the weapons’ deliveries to Kurds or that it may boost their bid for independence.

In either case, under Western pressure, the Kurds may well have to shelve their plans for any independence referendum for now but either way the Kurdish position will never return to the pre-IS days.

The Kurdish demand for joining new Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi’s government will have grown stronger to include right to sell oil, purchase arms, measures to prevent any centralisation of power as was the case under Maliki and referendums on disputed territories that Kurds now control.

Kurdistan Head of the Department of Foreign Relations, Falah Mustafa Bakir, previously warned “there is a new reality and that requires a new policy and a new approach.”

The greater question for the Kurds remains not on their end of the bargain in keeping Iraq stable and united, but whether Baghdad will truly forfeit ministries such as interior and defense that the Sunnis crave. There is little the Kurds can do but to shut the door on Baghdad if the current Sunni insurgency cannot be quelled lest another deadly insurgency should rise in the future.

Iran has pledged support for al-Abadi and backed the unity of Iraq and the stabilizing of security, but it remains to be seen whether they will exert pressure on Baghdad to cede power to Sunnis.

First Published On: Kurdish Globe
Other Publication Sources: Various Misc

Stuck between an uncompromising Baghdad, well-equipped IS enemy and lack of funding and oil exports, Kurds left to suffer Baghdad’s mess

Leave a reply

As the unfolding humanitarian crisis intensified in Kurdistan, the world can ill-afford to become bystanders once more to massacres against the Kurds or fail to match mere rhetoric with tangible support.

Under great pressure, US President Barack Obama, finally authorised air strikes against ISIS forces threatening the Kurdistan Regional capital of Erbil and the thousands of desperate Kurds from the Yezidi community stranded on Mount Sinjar.

Yet Obama’s reluctance to get involved was all clear to see. Obama hesitated to get involved in what he deemed would be taking sides in a sectarian war as the Islamic State (IS) first took Iraq by storm in June.

However, the IS phenomenon is anything but a local crisis, it’s now a major global concern. The US support of their Kurdish allies has been lukewarm as their obsession of keeping a united Iraq and fears of a Kurdish drive towards independence has led to disconnect with realities on the ground.

“When we have the unique capabilities to help avert a massacre, then I believe the United States of America cannot turn a blind eye,” Obama said. “We can act carefully and responsibly to prevent a potential act of genocide.”

Unfortunately, it is no longer about preventing genocide. With thousands of Yezidis and Christians brutally killed and thousands more Yezidis dead due to thirst and starvation on Mount Sinjar, genocide and massacre has already been committed. It is now only a question of preventing further genocide.

Kurdish suffer from oil exports, Baghdad and IS

The more that Washington treats Iraq as a whole piece, the more that the Kurds suffer. Obama added, “The only lasting solution is reconciliation among Iraqi communities and stronger Iraqi security forces,” making it clear that intervention would be limited.

Obama needs to distinguish between Kurdistan and the general term “Iraqi”. IS was not a problem created by the Kurds but due to years of marginalisation and centralist policies of former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Even under the current IS whirlwind that has taken Sunni rebels to the doorsteps of Baghdad, Maliki was reluctant to reach out to Sunnis and stubbornly refused to relinquish yet another term as Prime Minister. Iraq is broken and the Kurds are facing the greatest blow-back for failings of the state or policies of Baghdad.

A great example is the controversy over Kurdish oil exports. In the hope of preventing the collapse of Iraq, the one-sided US policy that frequently favours Baghdad, continues this notion of Iraqis resolving their issues without assessing the situation on the ground.

The Kurds are owed billions of dollars of payments for their share of the national budget since January. Deputy Spokesperson for the US State Department, Marie Harf, recentlystated “There is no US ban on the transfer or sale of oil originated from any part of Iraq…Our policy on this issue has been clear, Iraq’s energy resources belong to all of the Iraqi people. These questions should be resolved in a manner consistent with the Iraqi constitution.”

The same Iraqi constitution that the US refers to is already clear, it doesn’t need negotiation but implementation.

Now Kurds are deprived of much need oil revenues with a tanker anchored off the shore of Texas, no budget payments and are then expected to fight Baghdad’s war with a lack of weapons or support. “Stronger Iraqi forces” should also translate to stronger Kurdish forces.

Obama stated that the US and its allies had failed to “appreciate” the weakness of the Iraqi security forces. The problem was never a lack of arms but a lack of will tied to growing sectarian splits in Iraq. Funnelling yet more US advanced weaponry is not a solution.

The phobia of keeping Iraq united and not bolstering the Kurds for fear of seeing them breaking away, will lead to more to more massacres under the hands of extremists.

Even as Kurdistan was under great threat, Baghdad was quick to undermine Kurdish leadership with Amer al-Khozai, adviser to Maliki, stating they were “pay(ing) the price for the negative positions it took against Baghdad”. Al-Kohzai urged Kurdistan President Massoud Barzani to “correct his mistakes against the federal government so as to face the terrorism threat that has started to threaten the region.”

Kurdistan has to contend with an uncompromising Baghdad, a determined and well-equipped enemy in IS and lack of international support.

International response

Following US commitment to limited air strikes, the response of EU powers was initially limited to support of humanitarian operations before sentiment within the EU rapidly turned in favouring of arming the Kurds.

France was one of the first EU powers that promised to support the Kurds. In discussions with Barzani, French President François Hollande “confirmed that France was available to support forces engaged in this battle,” before later confirming plans to supply arms to bolster Kurdish forces.

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier admitted in a statement that “It is clear that (humanitarian aid) is not enough and we have to see what we can do beyond that.” Referring to “new horrors”, Steinmeier added “We condemn these despicable crimes, targeted at entire communities, in the strongest terms.”

Meanwhile, UK Prime Minister David Cameron, strongly condemning the “barbaric attacks”, backed US military action as he insisted on the need to help the Yezidis in their “hour of desperate need”. While the UK quickly ruled out military intervention, momentum in recent days has strongly turned to arming the Kurds.

There are growing calls from MPs to bring the matter to UK parliament. Prominent Labour MP, Mike Gapes, voiced criticism of UK government’s response and urged recall of parliament to debate the issue.

UK Labour MP, Tom Watson, stressed that the sovereign view of the parliament was need than unilateral decrees and warned that “We cannot abandon Iraq to the black flags of Isis any more than we could leave Europe to the Kaiser or to his black-shirted inheritors 22 years later.”

Lord Dannatt, the former head of the British Army, warned that history will be their judge and believes that UK has a “moral obligation” to join the air strikes on Iraq and even station troops to create a safe area. Dannatt urged “Parliament needs to be recalled and the West needs to face up to its responsibilities.”

Kurdish need arms not sympathy

The Kurds are more than capable of defending their territory, however, no sheer will or numbers will ever win a war. The Kurds need advanced firepower. The IS is anything but a militia. After taking huge amounts of advanced US sourced military gear from the Iraqi forces, they are now a formidable force.

Kurdistan Head of the KRG’s Department of Foreign Relations, Falah Mustafa Bakir, stated “Christians and the Yezidis must be protected. We do not wish to face this war alone. The international community must act and the US should take its responsibility. We need advanced weapons and ammunition to fight the terrorists.”

Sharing an immense border with IS, Kurdish forces are spread across a wide area. Jabar Yawa, chief of staff and spokesman for the Ministry of Peshmerga, stated “It is a vast area…We need a lot of troops to protect and cover almost 40 kilometres of land.”

In a response to Iraqi Yezidi MP, Vian Dakhil’s passionate cry for help, Obama declared “…today America is coming to help”. It is not just today but the needs of tomorrow that Kurdistan must be provided.

 

First Published On: Kurdish Globe

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc

Is it Time for Rojava and Kurdistan to Unite against Common Enemy?

Leave a reply

Whilst the Islamic State (IS/ISIS) was propelled into the limelight in spectacular manner in Iraq, controlling Mosul, Tikrit and large swathes of territory across Iraq, for the Kurds of Syria their deadly battles with the al-Qaeda offshoot over the past year or so have largely failed to make headlines.

The Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) has ubiquitously engaged in furious battles against IS militiamen across the areas in Syria under Kurdish control. Those Kurdish areas are of strategic importance, as they straddle the Turkish border — and with it some of the most vital border crossings — and are home to some of Syria’s largest oil fields.

Conversely, the battle of the Peshmerga forces in Iraq has been well noted, as they have formed a formidable frontier against IS rebels, all but saving Kirkuk and many other cities from falling to the IS, which recently changed its name from Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

In the same manner as the Peshmerga, the YPG should be acknowledged for its vital role in keeping IS at bay in Syria.

Fresh from their gains in Iraq, a buoyant IS has returned to Syria with a new onslaught on Kobane and other Kurdish towns and villages. However, this time the goalposts have shifted. Armed with significant booty from their Iraq conquests, including Humvees, tanks and artillery — not to mention millions of dollars in funds – IS quickly shifted their guns to the Syrian Kurds once more.

According to Jabar Yawar, secretary general of the Peshmerga ministry, “ISIS has different types of rockets, tanks and other heavy weaponry that they got from the Iraqi army and now they use these weapons to attack Kobane.”

Faced with a barrage of attacks on Kobane from different sides, Kurdish forces have fervently confronted IS forces; but they will ultimately struggle under inferior firepower.  The co-chair of the Democratic Union Party (PYD), Salih Muslim, warned that IS now possesses “heavy weaponry like mortars and tanks, which concerns our forces. We can’t use our weapons against their bulletproof tanks.”

Furthermore, Syrian Kurds have complained at lack of humanitarian aid over the past couple of years and have been hampered under the cautious eyes of Ankara.  YPG spokesperson Redur Xalil called on the international community to “intervene immediately and carry out their duty toward Kobane.”

The Syrian Kurds freed themselves from decades of tyranny and repression and announced self-rule across three cantons. But lack of political unity between the main PYD party and other political parties threaten the existence of the administration in the midst of increasing danger.

The situation has not been helped with lukewarm relations between the PYD and the Kurdistan Region leadership.

There could be no better time for the Kurds to unite and protect the Kurdish population in Syria and also preserve hard-fought Kurdish self-rule. IS is not just an internal matter for the Syrian Kurds: What happens there is very much a problem for the Iraqi Kurds.

Because if Kobane and other major Kurdish cities fall, the IS gets even stronger. That is not good for Erbil, which is also somewhere on the IS priority list of enemies to annul.

For Abdul-Salam Ahmed, co-chair of PYD, Kobane was effectively becoming a factor to “the end of the Sykes-Picot agreement,” the 1916 pact by which the powers of the time redrew the Ottoman Empire borders, essentially dividing the Kurds in the process. Whilst rallying Kurdish unity, Kurdish veteran politician Ahmet Turk emphasized that there is no difference between Kobane and Kirkuk.

PYD head Muslim warned that the unity of the three cantons and ultimately the Syrian Kurdish autonomous region itself depends on Kobane, which he labeled as the “symbol of the Kurds’ identity and resistance.”  He urged Kurdistan President Massoud Barzani to join a common struggle against the Islamic militants, claiming that Barzani “had not fully grasped the nature of ISIS.”

Whilst the Kurdish Region edges towards independence, the importance of a stable, secure and prosperous Kurdistan Region of Syria as a key neighbor cannot be discounted.

To this effect, the Syrian Kurds, who have already imposed compulsory military service, have tried to rally Kurds in Iraq and particularly Turkey. Gharib Haso, an official from the PYD, claimed that “Young Kurds from all parts of Kurdistan are going to Syria.”

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights director Rami Abdul Rahman stated that at least 800 Kurdish fighters had crossed the Turkish border into Syria to join the battle.

“It’s a life-or-death battle for the Kurds. If ISIS takes Ayn al Arab (Kobane), it will advance eastwards toward other Kurdish Syrian areas, such as Hasakah in the northeast,” he warned.

The ultimate success of greater Kurdistan rests with all its four parts. There is no better place to start than with a political alliance amongst Kurdish parties in Syria and the fostering of better ties between the Rojava administration and the Kurdistan Region.

First Published On: Rudaw

Other Publication Sources: Various Misc