İsmail Beşikçi posted on February 13, 2018 11:32
The Kurdistan Regional Government announced on June 7, 2017 that they would hold a referendum on September 25, 2017. This was a very important decision for the Kurds to determine their own future. After this statement, state and government administrators in Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Syria made statements expressing their views one after the other. In these statements, it was emphasized that this decision was wrong and that it should be reversed. It was explained that the referendum would not be of any use to the Kurds and that this wrong should be reversed. In the same period, European states such as the USA, Germany, France, England, and international organizations such as the United Nations, European Union, Council of Europe, and the Islamic Conference made similar statements.
After the declaration of the referendum, these frequent statements meant the following. You Kurds do not have the right to determine your own future. Only we determine your future. You cannot manage yourself. You have always been ruled by those far ahead of you in culture and civilization. It will be like this from now on. It is neither beneficial nor harmful, neither right nor wrong, what is due and what is not, you are not strong enough to know, measure, understand, comprehend. In this respect, only “we” can determine your future… Undoubtedly, he does not say these things so openly, looking into the eyes of the Kurds, but this is what it means to be constantly voicing them.
Who do we mean by “we”? First of all, we mean the states that jointly put pressure on the Kurds and Kurdistan, such as Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Syria. Secondly, the US, the Russian Federation, (previously, the Soviet Union), which approves the policies of these states towards Kurd and Kurdistan and supports the practices in this direction. We are talking about states such as Germany, France, England, and international institutions such as the UN, EU, Islamic Conference, Arab League. .
Because of all these, it is very important to take a referendum decision and to put this decision into practice on September 25, 2017. No matter what happens after September 25, no matter how extensive betrayal it has faced after October 16, the decision to take the referendum and the implementation of this decision can neither reduce nor eliminate the historical significance of this decision. Thus, the Kurds have demonstrated that they have a national will, that they can make decisions in line with their will, and that they can put those decisions into practice.
Looking at the negative developments after October 16, 2017, there are some opinions that ‘it would have been better if the referendum had not been held’. I think these views are wrong. In any case, it was very appropriate to take the decision of the referendum and to realize it on time.
What Happened After September 25? What Happened After October 16?
Of course, 72% turnout and 93% approval are very important in the Independence Referendum. The Kurds consider this as a deed. They are right. This result is, of course, a deed that can always be asserted.
But the process did not develop after September 25, after October 16, in line with the wishes of 93%, who wanted independence and determined their future. It has developed in line with the wishes of those who say, “You do not have the right to determine your future, only we determine your future”. Each of these states and international institutions separately declared that they did not recognize the referendum and that it should be cancelled. The meaning of 72% participation and 93% approval was never examined. The feelings, thoughts and expectations of the Kurdish people were not cared for. This is an issue that circles that say, “We will not say yes to the process of determining your future after September 25, after October 16, we will always oppose it. Only we determine the future of the Kurds, cancel the referendum… After September 25 and October 16, this is one of the issues that these circles have never talked about.
On October 16, 2017, it was seen that Pavel Talabani, whose duty was to protect an important part of the Kirkuk front, fled the front in the face of enemy attacks by the military units affiliated with Pavel Talabani, and those who wanted to destroy the Kurds and Kurdistan easily entered Kirkuk. Within a day or two, it was seen that Pavel Talabani and a significant part of Talabani’s family made a secret agreement with Hashd al-Shaabi leader Qassem Soleimani and Iraqi security units before 16 October 2017. . On October 17, it was also reported in the media that the Hashd al-Shaabi administrator thanked Pavel Talabani for allowing them to cross into Kirkuk. The Kurds do not have the right to determine their own future, we will not allow it. Those who say that only we can determine the future of the Kurds do not bring these issues to the agenda, nor do they examine the process of cooperation with the enemy. This is the second issue that these circles never talked about or brought up after October 16. But these circles, ignoring the main sellers of Kirkuk, often criticize and accuse Mesut Barzani, the Kurdistan government and the Kurdistan Regional Government by saying, “You sold Kirkuk.”
In fact, this is, in a way, a much more severe defeat than the 1975 defeat. The 1975 defeat was brought to the agenda and cooked up by the Regional Anti-Kurdish Alliance with the support of the International Anti-Kurdish Alliance. The defeat in 2017 came to the fore because of the disagreements within the body of the Kurds, Kurdistan. It is surprising that the Kurds are still unable to put such conflicts on a positive path, which will always bring destruction.
Article 140 of the Iraqi Constitution of 2005 stipulated that a census be held in Kirkuk and other areas detached from Kurdistan within 2 years, and that the future of Kirkuk and other areas torn from Kurdistan would be evaluated according to these census results. In this respect, the Kurds argued that holding a referendum was in accordance with the constitution. There was an understanding that the Iraqi state and government did not do it, carefully avoided doing it, we are doing something. But the Iraqi government did not make this census despite the Kurds’ frequent reminders and agendas. It did not fulfill the constitutional requirements. The regional states were also encouraging and supporting this attitude of Iraq. The applications of the Kurdistan Regional Government to the Federal Court in Baghdad on this matter did not even take place on the agenda, and did not evaluate it. The main reason why the census was not taken was undoubtedly the concern that as a result of the census, the population of the Kurds would become too large, and in some areas they would face an overwhelming Kurdish population. It was a concern that having such official information would contradict the Kurdish and Kurdistan policies.
Despite this, Prime Minister Haydar Abadi often directs the Kurds to “Obey the Constitution”. Turkey, Iran, Syria etc. administrators frequently remind the Kurds of the same. Afterwards, state governments such as the USA, Germany, France, England, and international organizations such as the UN, EU, Islamic Conference often make the same reminder. However, none of these explain to the Iraqi government that Article 140 was also a provision of the constitution, why did you not apply this article of the Constitution, why did you not apply this article and other articles related to the Kurds…. This is the third issue that has never been discussed or brought up after September 25, October 16.
Anti-Kurdish Alliance of the Kurds Against the Kurds
A remarkable fact in this process is that political structures such as Goran, Komel, some of the YNK, PKK/KCK, against those who want to determine their future, against those who want independence, Kurds do not have the right to determine their future, we do not allow this, only we determine it. , is to be with those who say. This is an anti-Kurdish alliance that the Kurds are trying to form against the Kurds.
After October 16, 2017, Hashd al-Shaabi invasions and Iraqi security forces took place in Kirkuk, Tuzhurmatu and other areas separated from Kurdistan. The people had to leave their homes and villages. There were mass migrations. The belongings inside the houses were looted and burned. Despite this, for example, there was no march or rally protesting this persecution on the sides of Sulaymaniyah and Halabja. After October 16, 2017, for example, in mid-December 2017, it was seen that they held protest rallies and marches in Sulaymaniyah and Halabja, against the government of Kurdistan, saying, “We want our salary, we are against corruption.” There were also participants from other segments of the society to the protest organized by the teachers. During this demonstration, there were also those who asked for help from Abadi and invited the Iraqi army to Sulaymaniyah to intervene, shouting the slogan “Abadi, Abadi!”. It was observed that Kurdish businessmen, who are said to be millionaires, called on the poor Kurds to resist in order to overthrow the Kurdish government.
Iraqi Prime Minister Abadi declared that the demonstrations and rallies are legitimate and they support it. He warned that if the demonstrators were harmed, they would intervene in Sulaymaniyah. He made no mention of demolished public buildings. By not drawing attention to the fact that violence was dominant in the process, violence was also legitimate. The statements of Goran, Komel, some of the PUK and PKK/KCK regarding the process were similar to those of Prime Minister Abadi.
There are reports that some public buildings were occupied and burned in these violent events that lasted for 6-7 days. Among these buildings, water distribution facilities and electricity distribution facilities are also seen. It is reported that the 300-year-old Koya archive was also burned. In these violent events, there are news that 6-7 people lost their lives within six to seven days. It is clear that in these events that lasted six or seven days, which were the production of Iran, Iraq and the Hashd al-Shaabi, the main target was the autonomous administration, Hewler, and Mesut Barzani rather than the Kurdistan government. Fighting corruption is of course very important. But is it possible to become a millionaire in the current conditions of Kurdistan, without corruption? Aren’t incidents such as corruption, bribery, and favoritism much more common, intense, and inflated in value in Baghdad and the Iraqi administration? In this context, it is useful to see Ali Javanmerd’s article titled Iran’s Plan B in Kurdistan, published by zernews on December 20, 2017.
First of all, demonstrations and marches organized primarily by teachers remind one of the Mau Mau marches held by the locals in Kenya in 1948, 1949, 1950. In those years, there was also great poverty in Kenya. The natives lived half-starved, half-fed. The lands were operated by the British colonial administration, and the natives worked on these farms as slaves. Most of them were in prison, some of them escaped. Despite this, the people often held Mau Mau (Get Out) marches against the colonial rule. During the marches, some locals only had crutches. The colonial administration, on the other hand, was treating the marchers with rifles. In every Mau Mau march, dozens of people would have been killed, killed. But despite all the absence and pressure, these marches would go on.
But, despite all the cruelty of Baghdad and Hashd al-Shaabi, teachers, civil servants, etc. in Sulaymaniyah. they were not heard to hold a protest rally. A Kurd, Kurdistani attitude was not displayed. Of course you need bread to live. But what good is it to expand material possibilities if there is no national freedom?
Living in cooperation with the enemy is not life. Despite its population, it is not life to live without being part of the world family of nations, and to live in a world where states with a population of even less than one million determine the future of the Kurds… A new generation of Kurds with this understanding will undoubtedly emerge.
Criticism of the Kurdistan Regional Government, the Ministry of Peshmerga, Parastin’, a President Massoud Barzani.
Let’s remember the few days before October 16. Front commanders in Kirkuk were declaring that they would defend Kirkuk resolutely. It was emphasized that Kirkuk would be defended every inch. Columnists were talking about how to defend Kirkuk. In everyone’s statement, there was an expression such as ‘to the last drop of our blood…’. President Massoud Barzani had an emphasis that “even if no one goes to the front, I will be at the front alone”. On September 24, the picture on TV was this. At a table, President Massoud Barzani is sitting in the middle. On one side, President Fuad Masum, on the other, Hero Talabani, Qosret Resul… There is no return from the referendum. All these statements and attitudes give morale boost to all Kurds and friends of Kurds in the East, West, South and North. He was raising hope among the Kurds. We know what happened on and after October 16… There was no resistance. The peshmerga, who was in charge of protecting Kirkuk, fled the battlefield. The peshmerga withdrew in Shengal and other areas separated from Kurdistan. Thus, Kurdism suffered a great destruction and the other areas that had been taken from Kurdistan were again in the hands of Iraq’s Hashd al-Shaabi. If the resistance had taken place for two or three days, the situation could have developed more positively. Even if a resistance in Kirkuk on 16 October was avoided due to the fear of “brakuji”(kurd fighting kurd), a resistance in Shengal could have led to positive developments. Resistance could also slow down the process of collaborating with the enemy.
Collaborating with the enemy during wartime is a very serious crime. There should be administrative and penal sanctions against such a crime. For this, there must be a central bureaucracy and a centralized justice system. How can a centralized bureaucracy and a centralized justice system be established if there is no central army and every political party has an army? It has also been revealed that the Kurdistan Regional Government has not been able to carry out effective and productive work in this regard despite its existence for so many years.
Despite everything, the Kurds must come to terms with this great betrayal in Kirkuk. Without this reckoning, it is not easy to move forward by turning a blind eye to these facts. It is not correct to explain this great betrayal only with Pavel Talabani. It is well known that many people and the environment are involved in this process.
Let’s remember the developments after the occupation of Mosul by ISIS and its occupation of Shengal after June 2014. It was said that all states were training the peshmerga. Frequently in the press, ‘US armed forces train peshmerga’, ‘UK train peshmerga’ etc. We were reading many statements such as ‘Germany is training the peshmerga’, ‘The Turkish army is training the peshmerga’, ‘Denmark is training the peshmerga’… There were dozens of explanations like this. What did this training give to the peshmerga?
The word peshmerga could not be spoken without putting the adjective “hero” in front of it. ‘Peshmerga Gehraman’ Despite all the embargoes, it is also known that all kinds of material and moral opportunities were provided to the peshmerga. In my opinion, Kurds do not need heroes. He needed courageous people with national feelings, awareness of the Kurdish nation and the Kurdish homeland. These feelings, this consciousness cannot be obtained through education or anything. These happen. Having these feelings, consciousness also includes being brave. Courage arises from these feelings, from this consciousness.
It is surprising that the protracted wars did not create such feelings among the Kurds. Because these feelings were absent or very weak, the Kurds took their portable money and jewelry with them in the ISIS attack in 2014, put the children in the car and started to run away. Where are you running to, why don’t you defend your real estate? Is there a friendly force that will understand and welcome you?
All of these are closely related to the inability to form the consciousness of the Kurdish nation, the Kurdish homeland. If such a consciousness develops, he will defend his homeland, and he will not expect this defense only from the peshmerga. Freedom does not come because such a consciousness does not develop, or because it is too weak. It is clearly seen that all these have melted hope among the Kurds.
Living in houses of 300 square meters, driving around in luxury cars, building 15-storey and 30-floor apartments, building hotels, and opening 50-meter and 80-meter roads does not bring freedom. Of course, these are important in city life. But if there is no freedom, they are not very meaningful. If there is no freedom, even if you live in palaces, it has no value, no meaning. It is not right to react to these criticisms because the Kurds are not worthy of them. Like all peoples, the Kurds, without a doubt, are worthy of all the means of life that make life easier and more comfortable. But if there is no freedom, it is not a conscientiously acceptable life to live such a magnificent, pompous, ostentatious life.
In this regard, I think it is necessary to cite an incident between Mele Mustafa Barzani and Peshmerga Commander Isa Suvar. In the 1970s, I heard it from a few friends. The first month or two of the March 11, 1970 agreement. The Kurds are very happy and overjoyed with this achievement. Peshmerga Commander Isa Suvar started to drive around in luxury cars. Mele Mustafa Barzani noticed this. One day said to Suvar: ‘Isa, I see you are always driving around in queues. Everything is not yet complete, we are not yet free. Don’t forget our cave life of yesterday…’
In my opinion, it is also important to draw attention to these relations. In the period of Mele Mustafa Barzani, it was easier for the Kurds to take a war decision and to implement this decision. The Kurds then did not have much opportunities, much property to lose. It is possible to understand this from the conditions of cities such as Hewler, Duhok, Sulaymaniyah, Halabja, Zaho, Akre, Koye at that time. Not so today. The Kurds have become quite rich now. Although this wealth is not evenly distributed in the society, corruption, bribery and nepotism are mentioned, it can be said that those at the bottom of the society also get a share of this wealth. They became property owners. Of course, it is important to protect them.
Despite all this, in these developments, it is much more important to dwell on the period in which the enrichment occurred. It is clear that social and economic enrichment developed in environments where Kurds could govern themselves and govern more freely, and accelerated especially after the formation of the Kurdistan Regional Government. Then it becomes much more important to protect and develop this environment.
While criticizing President Massoud Barzani, it should be emphasized that the healthiest perspective of Kurdistan was put by Massoud Barzani. President Massoud Barzani acquired the perspective of an Independent Kurdistan during the peshmerga he started from the age of 15. In this process, President Barzani, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Syria, later, states such as England, France, USA, Soviet Union / Russian Federation, international institutions such as the United Nations, European Union, Islamic Conference. realized the anti-Kurdish games, that an Independent Kurdistan is the most solid way. In my opinion, it is very important to make an effort to realize this perspective after September 25, after October 16, despite all the painful processes.
This perspective, on the other hand, drew the reaction of the regional states, then the states such as England, France, Germany, the USA, Russia, and international institutions. After the ISIS attack in June 2014 and after the Kurds entered a very tough war against ISIS and were successful, there was an opinion that the world would display a slightly more positive attitude towards the Kurds and Kurdistan. This view proved to be wrong. It turned out that there was no change in my anti-Kurdish World Order.
Nevertheless, it is useful to examine this issue. If President Massoud Barzani had said, “We have been betrayed a great deal,” on the morning of October 16, and made a short speech like, “Despite this, our struggle for Kurdistan continues, I am going to the front, those who want Kurdistan should come behind me…” how did it develop? It is also useful to consider this assumption. It should be important to examine why President Massoud Barzani could not take such a decision.
What September 25, October 16 Shows
What do the events following the September 25 referendum show us? What does the process that developed after October 16 show us? The International Anti-Kurdish Order established in the 1920s during the League of Nations is still standing. After the Second World War, the Regional Anti-Kurdish Order, which was established in addition to the International Anti-Kurdish Order, is still standing and active. In recent years, a third anti-Kurdish alliance formed by the Kurds against the Kurds has begun to appear.
On October 27, 2017, a closed meeting was held at the United Nations Security Council regarding the areas taken from Kurdistan. This meeting took place at the request of Sweden and France. A draft resolution prepared and signed by 15 countries was presented to this meeting. In the first article of this draft resolution, there was the expression “The rights of the Kurds must be respected”. At the request of the UK, this article was removed from the bill at the United Nations Security Council. This shows that the International Anti-Kurdish Order, the Sykes-Picot order is still active and standing.
There were values that made Europe Europe. But today, European states such as England, France and Germany, by violating their own values in the face of the Kurdish/Kurdistan problems, stand by the racist, sectarian, authoritarian and discriminatory states of the Middle East, such as Iraq. Of course, it is important to remind Europe of its own values, to stand by your own values, the values that make Europe Europe. But it seems unlikely that this will turn in a positive direction any time soon. Despite this, it is very important to make these criticisms to European countries.
Peshmerga is affiliated with political parties. The Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan have more than hundreds of thousands of peshmerga. A cumbersome power. Many of them do not have any excitement other than ‘salary’. However, all Kurds, meanwhile the peshmerga, should also have other excitements than ‘salary’. In a society like the Kurds/Kurdistan, who suffer so much persecution, there must be a Kurdish national consciousness, a consciousness of the homeland, a consciousness of Kurdistan, an excitement that comes long before ‘salary’. It seems inevitable that a combat force, a striking force, will be created by reducing the number of peshmerga.
It is important to draw attention to the role of Parastin(resistans) in this process. The frequent visits of Qassem Soleimani to the Talabanis and the inability to notice the secret and open talks is an issue that needs to be emphasized. The failure to notice that Pavel Talabani’s feelings and thoughts cooperated with the enemy is an issue that needs to be examined. The fact that the Peshmerga Ministry still holds Pavel Talabani in office and assigns him to protect the unit he commands, a wide border line reveals the relations that need to be examined. It is not far from attention that all these relations developed with the knowledge of President Massoud Barzani. It is obvious that these developments need to be questioned. The resistances that took place in Pirde, Zumar, Rebia, and Mahmur in the days that started after October 16 could have been shown in other areas as well as in other areas that were cut off from Kurdistan.
The USA is an important state in the future of the Kurds and Kurdistan. But in the USA, democracy does not approach the Kurdish/Kurdistan problems with its values. It stands by the racist, sectarian, authoritarian and discriminatory policies of the Middle East, such as Iraq, in the face of the Kurdish/Kurdistan problems.
The USA has a great role in helping the Kurds to have a status in Iraq. Saddam Hussein’s regime was overthrown as a result of the USA’s armed intervention in Iraq in 2003. The Baath Party, al Muhaberat, the army were disbanded, weapons of mass destruction were destroyed. The dissolution and neutralization of these institutions, which are a great threat to the Kurds, paved the way for the Kurds, and this is how the Kurdistan Regional Government was established. In this process, the role of the USA is of course very important. But today, the USA does not approach the problem with democratic values.
Today, the USA has a policy of neutralizing Iran in the Middle East. For example, it declares Hashd al-Shaabi a terrorist. But the US still invests in Iraq today. However, investing in Iraq means investing in Iran, the Hashd al-Shaabi. When the Kurds make a democratic breakthrough, for example, when they hold a referendum, they react to it, in order to neutralize this referendum, they consider standing with Iran, Hashd al-Shaabi in the war launched by Iran, Iraq and the Hashd al-Shaabi. it digests. On September 26, despite 72% turnout and 93% yes, we do not accept the referendum, said US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. In important historical moments, the USA stands by the states that oppress the Kurds, not the Kurds, not Kurdistan, and supports their repression policies. It is of course important to explain the contradictions of this policy to the United States. However, it seems unlikely that this will develop in a positive direction any time soon. In his article, “USA, Kirkuk, Afrin!”, İbrahim Küreken analyzes this remarkable, contradictory, incomprehensible attitude of the USA that spreads to all directions. (nerinaazad, 24.1.2018)
While criticizing these negative developments and western states, it is also necessary to mention the internal structure of the Kurds, Kurdistan, and the structure of the political parties that do not make concessions to each other and always put their own organizational interests ahead of the general interests of Kurdistan. The fact that the Kurds do not appear to be together in the face of foreign powers also paves the way for such negative developments.
The job falls to the core of the Kurds. In the south of Kurdistan, the Kurds have waged a freedom struggle for many years. This is how the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s passed with wars. However, it is seen that the peshmerga struggle could not create a consciousness of homeland, of Kurdistan. The guerrilla struggle, which started in the mid-1980s and has been going on for more than 30 years, could not create such a consciousness, a consciousness of Kurdistan, a Kurdish language consciousness, a homeland consciousness. Moreover, the PKK/KCK emphasizes that dealing with these issues is backwardness and primitiveness.
However, for the Kurds, this is a very important issue for Kurdistan. It is a vital issue. There is no mention of the unity of the Kurds here. It is tried to be stated that the Kurds do not reach the consciousness of Kurdistan, the consciousness of the homeland, and the consciousness of the Kurdish nation. There is talk of the weakness of national feeling. For example, it is stated that even the consciousness of the Kurdish language does not occur in the North.
These consciousnesses need to develop the most in the Kurds. The Kurds need this the most. Because it is the Kurds who face the heaviest oppression of both the imperial states and the states in the Near East and the Middle East. The actual reverse operation of the process, on the other hand, produces very negative results, anti-Kurdish.
Due to the lack of awareness on these issues, the Kurds develop more intense and tighter relations with hostile forces, not with each other. It is seen that there is a big problem in the relations of a part of the PUK, Goran, Komel, with Iran. It is more correct to consider the relations that the KDP maintains with Turkey as commercial and diplomatic relations. President Mesut Barzani’s visits to Turkey before 25 September 2017 should be carefully considered. President Massoud Barzani always made a statement about an independent Kurdistan, both before these visits, in Turkey and after he returned from Turkey. He did not limit himself according to Turkish policy. This is a very important landmark. However, it would be useful to criticize the Kurdistan Regional Government’s stance of President Massoud Barzani after September 25 and on and after October 16.
Victories, Sorrows, Shame…
The Kurds have not won great victories in the past. There may be a few temporary victories that are not permanent. But the pain is too great. March 16, 1988 is a great pain. Anfal is a great pain. Sulaimani Central Security Headquarters is bitter. Saddam Hussein’s Chambers of Defamation of Women in prisons such as the Sulaimani Central Security Headquarters is an indescribable, very heavy pain. However, the fact that these pains did not create a sense of independence in some Kurds, could not unite the Kurds, and that some Kurds and Kurdish organizations were still united in Iraq.
Auschwitz is known to everyone in the world. However, the Sulaymaniyah Central Security Headquarters, which is at least as inhumane as this, is unknown to anyone. The fact that they could not even introduce such an inhuman institution to the world is a great shortcoming of the Kurds.
Sulaymaniyah Central Security Headquarters is in Sulaymaniyah. On the old Sulaymaniyah side… In this case, the people of Sulaymaniyah are expected to be more Kurd, more Kurdistani. However, it is not like that at all. PUK supporters who still say ‘Iraq’s unity’, supporters of Talabani are no less
It is a very distorted, anti-Kurdish, anti-Kurdistani behavior for some Kurds to oppose the Independence Referendum saying, “This will increase the prestige of Mesut Barzani… The concessions that the Kurds make to the Kurds ultimately enlarge Kurdistan, while the concessions made by the Kurds to the states that oppress the Kurds, not the Kurds, will make Kurdistan smaller and damage the honor of the Kurds. In the future, to be known as “cooperators with the enemy” and to be known as “a people who make their enemies happy” is probably something to be avoided.
There are few or no permanent victories in the history of the Kurds, but the suffering is great. Moreover, these pains do not remain as pain, they turn into shame. Because of these, the Kurds must go beyond all their organizational interests and develop a consciousness in line with the general interests of the Kurds and Kurdistan. This of course necessitates the formation of a high Kurdish/Kurdistan consciousness. Those who reach this consciousness try to overcome negative developments and develop warmer relations with each other.
We do not know or understand some processes that are developing in the Kurdistan Regional Government in the south of Kurdistan. There may be some issues that they cannot tell us, or do not want to tell us. Problems can have such an aspect.
International relations…
International relations do not run on universal values such as equality, freedom and justice. It is based on the rights, interests and gains of states. Although organizations such as the League of Nations and the United Nations have the word “nations” in their names, these organizations have always defended the interests and rights of states. They have never defended the rights of ‘nations’ and freedoms. In this regard, the Kurds/Kurdistan is a striking example. On this subject, for example, there is a huge difference between the writings of İsmail Beşikci and the articles and attitudes of the columnists in the newspapers, radio and television commentators in the daily press. These columnists, commentators, are based on the security of the states. For these, the injustice done to the Kurds/Kurdistan, the rights and freedoms of the Kurds, etc. it doesn’t matter at all. For example, when the Kurds, the Kurdistan Regional Government, announce the referendum decision, articles are written and comments are made such as “Iraq stands against it, because this will undermine Iraq’s security and threaten Iraq’s territorial integrity”. It is said that “Iran will not allow this due to its own security concerns”. They mentioned that Turkey and Syria also made similar statements. The rights and freedoms of the Kurds and the injustice done to the Kurds/Kurdistan are never on the agenda. At most, it is said that this decision is not beneficial for the Kurds either. It is emphasized that states such as the USA, Russia, England, France and Germany will also stand by and defend Iraq due to the commercial and diplomatic relations they have established with Iraq. It is emphasized that organizations such as the United Nations, the European Union and the Islamic Conference will act in the same way.
But this is the case for the Kurds/Kurdistan. For example, this is not the case at all for the Palestinian Arabs. The rights and freedoms of the Palestinian people and the injustice done to the Palestinian Arabs are always brought up on the issue of Palestine. In this regard, the rights/laws of the Jews etc. no emphasis is given. For example, Palestine was the homeland of the Jews, BC. Around 1100 years ago, there was already a Jewish state, etc. is never told. It is never emphasized that Arabic is one of the two official languages in Israel since 1948.
It is obvious that the United Nations approaches the Palestinian problem and the Kurdish/Kurdistan problem with very different standards.
Despite these evaluations, it is of great benefit to address the Kurdish/Kurdistan problems in terms of the rights and freedoms of the Kurds/Kurdistan, not in terms of the security concerns of the states. In academic studies, it will of course be important to draw attention to these issues. It is important to examine why states’ security concerns arise. In political relations, it would be appropriate for the Kurds, in particular, to attach importance to these issues.
The struggle of the Kurds is a situation that needs to be examined why this struggle is not perceived to the world in its essence. Monserrat Guibernau has an article entitled ‘Stateless Nations and Nationless States’. (On and on Nationalism, Compiled by: Işıtan Gündüz, April 2008 trans. Neşe Nur Domaniç, pp. 6-43)
The article is from 1996. The article examines Wales and Scotland, Catalonia and the Basque Country, Quebec and Flanders. The name of the Kurds is also mentioned with a word, but no illuminating information is given about the past and present of the Kurd/Kurdistan struggle. This is primarily about how the Anti-Kurdish World Order is reflected in research, science, and study, or why it is not. It is a remarkable issue that this struggle, which has been going on for nearly a century, has found a place in the press, research and examination. But, secondarily, it is also important to identify the insensitivity of the Kurds towards these processes in general. The article is from 1996. Today, the situation may be developing in a slightly more positive direction.
United Nations Declaration of Independence to the Colonies
It is useful to examine the United Nations General Assembly Resolution dated 14 December 1960 and numbered 1514 in this network of relations.
This resolution of the United Nations General Assembly is referred to as the ‘Declaration of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples’. This 7-item declaration, in articles 1,2,3,5, defends the independence of overseas and transoceanic colonies, 4,6,7. Its articles oppose national liberation movements in adjacent colonies, drawing attention to the concept of territorial integrity. He mentions that the relevant state will be assisted in suppressing such movements. As can be seen, this is a decision that is contradictory in itself and contains contradictory provisions within itself.
In this context, I think it is necessary to evaluate an article by Fuad Hüseyin. This article was published in Hevdem Magazine. (Fuad Hüseyin, Legal General Concept of Self-Determination and the Kurdish Question, Hevdem, issue 7, June 1994, p.32-39)
Regarding this article, Hevdem has made the following explanation at the end of the article. ‘This article has been translated into Kurdish from the English original in the Yearbook of the Kurdish Academy 1990/Yearbook of the Kurdish Academy 1990. Author Fuad Hüseyin had previously published the same article in Amsterdam in 1985 and was published in Italian in Italy in 1987.’
As can be seen, 28-33 years have passed since the first publication of the article. There may have been changes in Fuad Hussein’s thoughts. As a person, I don’t know. I will try to evaluate this article as it was published in Hevdem. If Fuad Hüseyin had other writings on this subject later on, it is of course very important to know these as well. Fuad Hüseyin states the following in his article.
“When we compare the situation of the Kurdish movement with other liberation movements, we see that the Kurdish question does not fall under the category of ‘Colonial Nation’, because the traditional meaning of colonialism is related to the colonization of a colony by overseas countries, which does not apply to the Kurds.”(p. 38)
Fuad Hussein, today, in the Kurdistan Regional Government, . He serves as the Chairman of the Presidential Board. He also participates in some international visits and contacts of the Kurdistan government.
Colonies in Africa, Kurdistan…
In fact, Kurdistan is not even a colony. This phrase means ‘I wish Kurdistan was a colony’, ‘I wish Kurdistan was established as a colony…’. In the 1920s, during the League of Nations, the two great imperial powers of the time, Great Britain and France, and the two rooted states of the Near East and the Middle East, namely the Turkish, Arab and Persian governments, were divided, fragmented, shared and divided. each part of it is occupied by different forces. The main aim is to erase the names of Kurd/Kurdistan from history and from the face of the earth, namely assimilation, denial and destruction. If Kurdistan was a mandate/colonial, the borders of Kurdistan would be drawn. The border is of course very important. The borders of the colonies in Africa were drawn in 1885 with the Berlin Treaty. Since the 16th century, powers such as the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, which tried to invade Africa, settled down in 1885 and tried to legalize their de facto presence in Africa. After the Second World War, the colonies in Africa became independent over these borders. For example, there were no border fights between the colonies after independence.
In Kurdistan, borders cannot be drawn. All three attempts by the Kurds in this regard were unsuccessful. The first was the Kurdistan autonomy agreement signed between Mele Mustafa Barzani and Saddam Hussein on March 11, 1970. The second was Article 140 of the Iraqi Constitution of 2005. In both cases, with the power that Iraq received from the surrounding states, the realization of that agreement, the supreme provision of the constitution, was prevented. The September 25 Referendum was the third attempt. This was opposed by the “whole world” supporting Iraq, Turkey, Iran and Syria.
All the colonies that Fuad Hussein mentioned in his article are independent today. In Kurdistan, on the other hand, there has been no progress despite all the heavy prices paid. Kurdistan is not even a colony. The International Anti-Kurdish Order established in the 1920s continues, it is still standing. It continues in the Regional Anti-Kurdish Alliance, which was established after the Second World War. Moreover, in recent years, a new Anti-Kurdish Alliance formed by the Kurds against the Kurds has emerged.
It may be important to evaluate the aforementioned United Nations General Assembly Resolution with the concept of “overseas countries” in the resolution. But the justification for the decision to grant independence is much more important.
In short, the reason is this. Colonies are ruled by oppression and cruelty. Oppression and oppression hinders the social, economic, cultural and political development of the country, the people. In this respect, it is necessary to give independence to these countries, these peoples, so that they can govern themselves.
Oppression is a much more important concept. Where is oppression and persecution more common? Overseas colonies or adjacent colonies?
In the process of the independence of the colonies in Africa, armed struggle took place in only four countries. 1954-1960 in Algeria, 1973-1975 Portuguese colonies, Guinea-Bissau, Angola and Mozambique. It is also worth mentioning the Eritrean National Liberation Struggle against Abyssinia, which developed in the 1970s and 80s and achieved success in 1993. All the remaining colonies gained their independence during the Constitutional Talks between the imperial countries and the National Liberation Fronts in the colonial countries.
For example, let’s look at the Portuguese colonies, Angola, Mozambique. At least 10 thousand km between Lisbon and these countries. 8 thousand km. There is distance. When there is a deficiency in war equipment, human resources, and the number of soldiers, you have to complete these deficiencies by exceeding 10 thousand km, 8 thousand km. Weather conditions may not always be the same everywhere. Weather conditions may hinder the flight after a certain point.
The situation for Kurdistan is very different. A warplane departing from Baghdad reaches Kurdistan within an hour and begins the bombardment. 350 km. is reached in a very short time. In addition, the second largest headquarters of the Arab army was already in Mosul, that is, inside Kurdistan. In this respect, oppression and persecution can be established more easily here, it is more severe.
Beyond that, colonies in Africa mostly operate on the ocean coasts of countries or in areas where rivers flow into seas and oceans. The army is also effective here, it is not effective in the inner regions. Oppression cannot be permanent. In Kurdistan, it is trying to penetrate into the capillaries of Kurdistan. Oppression-persecution can show its effect continuously. Because of all this, oppression and persecution are much more persistent and severe in adjacent colonies.
Great Britain, France, Portugal etc. We know how they ruled their colonies. None of them used or could not use poison gas against the colonial peoples in their colonies. Even if he intends to use it, it is protected from international pressure, criticism, condemnation, etc. He did not hesitate to engage in such operations. Consider the Saddam Hussein era. Saddam Hussein was systematically and decisively using poison gas against the Kurds. March 16, 1988 Halabja was a genocide. Anfal was a genocide. It should also be known that the Islamic Conference, the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the European Union, that is, the whole world, remained silent against this genocide.
When this genocide took place in Halabja on March 16, 1988, the Islamic Conference was in session in Kuwait. However, no sentence regarding this genocide was included in the final declaration of the Islamic Conference. In countries such as Germany, France, England, Italy, the USA, the Soviet Union etc. We also emphasized that there was no reaction against this genocide in other countries. These show clearly on whom Saddam Hussein was able to undertake such massive operations.
Here, it is known that international relations do not focus on universal values such as rights, law, freedom, equality and justice, but are carried out within the framework of the interests of states. But still, international relations must have a capitalist ethic. Crimes against humanity such as the genocide should not be accepted, these crimes should not be ignored, ignored or ignored. Whoever it is, whether it is a capitalist, an industrialist or a worker, these crimes must be resisted.
We mentioned above that the whole world remained silent on the Kurdish genocide that took place in Halabja on March 16, 1988. What was Anfal? Anfal continued from fall to summer of 1988. The Kurds are driven out of their homes by a raid on their villages. Men and women, young and old, children and children were taken out of their homes, then their houses and villages were burned, and they were put in cars and taken to a concentration camp called Topzava. There were many other collection centers such as Topzava. Later, after suffering a lot of torture and insults, seventy-five people were taken to a prepared pit beforehand and shot. After 75 people were filled in each pit, the pits were closed. Saddam Hussein carried out such operations in Kurdistan during the summer months of 1988. After the end of the Iran-Iraq War on August 20, 1988, it was carried out more widely and decisively. If the democratic states of the West had opposed the Kurdish genocide that took place in Halabja on March 16, 1988, if they had criticized Saddam Hussein and the Baathist government, could Anfal have been implemented?
Arif Kurbani’s work, From Umrean to Topzava (Kirkuk 2004, peyamaazadi, 2007) is an exemplary brochure. This brochure was translated from Kurdish to Turkish by Roşan Lezgin and published by peyamaazadi in 2007.
International Law, Kurds
In his articles on kurdistan-post.eu, Hejare Shamil insists that the independence demands of the Kurds are in accordance with the law of the United Nations and in line with international law, based on the twin agreements of the United Nations. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966 and entered into force in 1976, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The first articles of both conventions begin with the statement, ‘Every people has the right to freely determine their own future’. Such an interpretation can be made according to the place and time. However, it is useful to know that many documents of the United Nations and the Council of Europe contain contradictory provisions.
It is more important to criticize the United Nations’ position by drawing attention to the rationale of the United Nations’ Decree of 14 December 1960 to Grant Independence to the Colonies.
States that exert pressure on the Kurds are much more important in the inability of the Kurds to form a unity among themselves. Partition, fragmentation and sharing has created such a situation. Even very small contradictions among the Kurds are magnified by these states, and attempts to unite the Kurds among themselves are tried to be prevented by every means and method. All these negative developments can only be overcome by becoming aware of them.
Comments are closed.