The Kurdish Sun Rises

Koshan Ali Khidhir*

Iraq's Kurdistan Region is going from isolation to front and center in the recent crisis in Iraq.

In the recent political crisis facing Maliki's government in Iraq, it seems the calm hand of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) is all that is keeping the tension from escalating into all out conflict. Is this the moment the KRG has been waiting all along for?

Kurdistan Region President Massoud Barzani hosts Iraqi Vice-President Tariq Al-Hashemi while he evades an arrest warrant issued in Baghdad.

The current turmoil engulfing the government of Iraq has put on full display the political might and critical influence of the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq. Frequently shying away from the politics of Baghdad they have in recent days has taken a more proactive, and some would say partisan role, in attempting to resolve and unify the feuding national political blocs while still maintaining autonomy.

The KRG has been pressing for a diplomatic solution to the recent crisis between the D’awa party of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and the al-Iraqiya party of Ayad Allawi, which is currently locked in a boycott of parliament. Since the final days of the United States troop withdrawal, the two major parties have been trading insults and accusations. The tension culminated with an arrest warrant charging the vice-president, and al-Iraqiya party member, Tariq al-Hashemi, with acts of terrorism against political adversaries, and grew more desperate when 16 explosions ripped through Baghdad this week in one of the deadliest and more orchestrated attacks of the year.

While the central government seems to be dissolving, and a rift threatening to inflame sectarian and regional alliances is rearing its head once more in Iraq, the stable hand of the Kurdistan Regional Government seems to be siding with the al-Iraqiya camp and contributing to the national crisis. Al-Hashemi has found political allies and safehaven in the north, where he has fled.

Recent statements by KRG officials are telling in that they refute the directives from the central government in Baghdad and even balk at the institutions of the Maliki government. The Kurdistan Regional President, Massoud Barzani, has refused Maliki’s demands to hand over al-Hashemi and declared, “there is no way we would hand over al-Hashemi to Baghdad. He is our guest.” Fayaq Tofiq, deputy minister of the Interior in the KRG, added more fuel to the political fire when he stated that the KRG would not obey decisions of Iraqi courts unless a specific ruling is affirmed by KRG courts.

Barzani affirmed that Iraqis and Kurds “must not under estimate or tolerate terrorism,” but he also added, “security forces should not be used for political objectives,” a statement which seems to be directed to the Mailki government and the D’awa party.

The State of Law Coalition in the Iraqi Council of Representatives (COR) and other Sh’ia groups are frustrated by the Kurdish position. Ehsan Awadi, a leader in the coalition, equated the reluctance of the KRG to hand over al-Hashemi to a “crime,” demanding that “al-Hashemi should stand trial in Baghdad.” Overall the political tenor in Iraq seems to have reached a peak, and now that Kurdistan appears to be playing partisan politics, a rift could plunge Iraq into talk of federalism again.

Some Kurdish political analysts are also dissatisfied with the region’s involvement, suggesting that Kurdistan should maintain neutrality in the political conflict. Arif Qurbani, a political analyst in Sulymania, said “we (Kurds) should monitor the situation in Iraq, instead of direct involvement or intervention, and we have to strive to obtain our demands during chaotic situations.”

Shwan Mohammed Taha, Kurdish MP in the COR’s Security and Defense Committee said the premonition of Kurdish leaders has come true and that, “tensions between Iraqis will grow more in the aftermath of American withdrawal.” Taha estimates that “if there were no Kurds, the situation of Iraq would worsen.” Therefore, Kurd should play its role “in balancing the situation,” Taha added.

Some political parties have suggested dissolving the current Iraqi government and forming a new government based on a majority. Barzani in his statement called for “an urgent national conference to avoid a collapse of the political process.” It is expected that the KRG will continue to play a central role in any political reconciliation, which may gain them some leverage in the future when issues like the region’s budget, oil revenue, Kirkuk and disputed areas are contested at the national level.

Koshan Ali Khidhir is a journalist, blogger, and student at the University of Kurdistan-Hawler. He has written articles for Global Politician, American Chronicle, Middle East Online, Mideast Youth and others. His blog can be read at: koshanali.blogspot.com

This article has been published on The Majalla, the leading Arab magazine:

http://www.majalla.com/eng/2011/12/article55228615

Erdogan’s Dersim Apology Highly Welcomed by the Kurdistan Region

Koshan Ali Khidhir*

Photo: Today's Zaman

Last week, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has offered an apology for the killings of 13.806 in the southeastern town of Dersim, Tunceli, between 1936 and 1939. The apology came after quarrel or a war of words between Erdogan and the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), according to Today’s Zaman.

The apology has been viewed in diverse perspectives. This article is affected by perspective of officials in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, which I have seen in their official statements.

Most of the officials in the Kurdistan Region have seen this apology as rewriting Kurdish history and restructuring Kurdish issue in Turkey within a new framework, so they highly welcomed this initiative. It is not only about the historical incident. It is the political ones, at this time, that some of the points will be elaborated in this article.

The ruling Justice and Development Party (AK party) and Turkish Prime Minister have been working on a variety of initiatives that sustain its power in the country. As well as, he cuts off roots of conservatives and fascism. That will secure the future of the party and implementation of its visions.

Turkish Premier and his party are working on resolving Kurdish issue in the country, but they are doing it step by step. The apology will not be the final step, and it was not the first one, but it is one of the most radical and rooted one. Meanwhile, premier apologizes for a historical incident, which means they are restructuring not just the future, but also their history. While he apologizes on behalf of other and former governments, it means he sees himself responsible for the country not just for the current government. That is the radical points about this apology.

AK Party tries to avoid excluding different ethnics to have their rights within the Turkish state system. Kurds have been deprived from their substantial rights; therefore, the party could gain enormous support, if they protect the rights of Kurds. AK party has good relations with political parties in Kurdistan Region, especially with Kurdistan Islamic Union, and the two ruling parties Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, and Kurdistan Democratic Party. That will be helpful for the party to have an indirect impact on Kurdish actors in Northern Iraq, and then they affect Kurds in Turkey.

The Kurdistan Region has economic ties and trade, which reaches up to 6$ billion dollars yearly. It is increasing continuously. Turkish Airline has formally opened by the Premier this year. There are Turkish companies, banks, private schools and even universities. This has expanded cultural, economic, and social interaction between Turkey-Kurdistan Region. In the last year, thousands of youths in the region have been travelled to Turkey to spend their holiday. That means Turkey-Kurdistan Region has friendly relations. Regarding future progress towards Kurdish issue in the country, I have to say that Turkey need to take this cooperation ties into considerations.

There is another significant point regarding the apology by Turkish premier, which he apologized in a right time. Turkey does not have any elections in coming weeks or months. It shows the party has not done it for the sake of votes. On the other hand, there are revolutions outside Turkey, even in its neighbor countries, it means that Erdogan reaffirms his support for Kurdish issue, while there is instability in the region, and suppressed ethnics are struggling for their rights. He has done it to claim indirectly that he is going to implement his promises and to change the atmosphere for the rights of different ethnics in Turkey. In addition, it uncovers the Erdogan’s methodology to resolve Kurdish issue, in peaceful means, instead of militarizing the issue. This apology has questions the position of military in Turkish politics again.

For ordinary people in Northern Iraq and in Turkey, Turkish official apology for this incident suggests that the ruling party wants to alter government’s standpoint toward Kurdish issue. This would be seen as a starting point for rewriting the new constitution in Turkey, which secures equal rights for different ethnics in Turkey.

It is expected for premier and AK party to have more initiatives towards the Kurdish Issue in Turkey, especially constituting their fundamental rights within the constitution. If events going on in this way, it will not be just expectations, it will also become reality.

*Koshan Ali Khidhir is a Journalist, Blogger, and Senior Undergraduate Student in Political Science and International Relations at the University of Kurdistan-Hawler. 

This article has been published on



Middle East Online: 

http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=49356



Mideast Youth:

http://www.mideastyouth.com/2011/12/04/erdogan’s-dersim-apology-highly-welcomed-by-the-kurdistan-region/

Van Catastrophe Reaffirms Turkey-Northern Iraq Relations

Koshan Ali Khidhir

Photo: Today's Zaman

“We are so sorry for what is happening in Van” “Donate a Penny, Safe the life of one person,” these quotations are the words of Kurds from Northern Iraq to show their sympathy to their neighbor city, Van, endangered because of series earthquakes.

In the last few weeks, while I have been travelling from one city, district and village to the other ones in Northern Iraq, when I have been watching and reading Kurdish newspapers, magazines, websites and televisions, the main focus is about Van. There are lots of tents in different districts and cities that call for a donation for Van and supporting its displaced people.

This would be a starting point for another way of looking relations between Turkey and Northern Iraq. The essential dimensions about this relation could be summarized in some points? It is rooted in the society, between different members in Turkey and Northern Iraq. It refutes all perspectives and methods that show relations as critical and problematic.

This would be sufficient evidence to the restricted conflict between a group of so called a supporter of Kurdish issue (PKK) and Turkish state. These events uncovered that the conflict is not rooted in the society and has not been structured within Kurds in Northern Iraq. It was and it is just a political struggle of this group to achieve external and internal goals. While Kurds in Northern Iraq supported Van, they evidently declared their support a method for resolving Kurdish question in Turkey, which is resolving this issue through peaceful means.

I have talked with many scholars in this region, they, mostly interested in resolving Kurdish issue in Turkey through a peaceful process. The Kurdish street in the region also has suffered from conflicts between PKK and Turkish state over borders; therefore, they would rather the political resolution for Kurdish issue than military operations.

Kurds in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, Northern Iraq, are mostly benefited from their peaceful and stable region to experience their governance. Therefore, any conflict will endanger their prosperity and the future of this region. Thus, leaders of the region are concerning about improving their relations with Turkish government in different areas of politics, culture and business.

Kurdish leaders, Jalal Talabani, Iraqi President, Massoud Barzani, President of the Region, Barham Salih, current prime minister of the region Nechirvan Barzani, former prime minister of the region’s government, and other high ranked officials are continuously held meetings with Kurdish political parties to convince them on resolution for Kurdish issue in peaceful means. They have also worked to mediate between Kurdish parties, mostly their effective leaders, and Turkish elites. A few days ago Talabani and Salih met some MPs from pro-Kurdish Democratic and Peace Party (BDP), that would be a recent example for their efforts. According to the Kurdish news agencies, the meeting is mostly concerned about resolving Kurdish issue in Turkey through dialogue and peaceful means.

Van has uncovered the roots of the issues. While some Kurdish leaders, who are sincerely striving for Kurdish issue were in meeting with Talabani, but others were involved with hijacking. Real Kurds are those who have donated their money and clothes to other civilians in Turkey, but others are those who thinking about having more attacks and bloodshed. These groups are restricted their goals. Therefore, they will not gain future hearts and political achievements. These are just playing with time and struggling to survive.

I hope, as a Kurd in Northern Iraq, to have a peaceful process of resolving Kurdish issue in Turkey, which has started from AK Party’s reforms and initiatives. Catastrophe like Van would become new page for humanitarian cooperation, if we view these events in a different way.

The author is a Journalist, Blogger, and Undergraduate Student in Political Science and International Relations at University of Kurdistan-Hawler.

This article has been published on

Middle East On line: 

http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=49107

Mideast Youth:

http://www.mideastyouth.com/2011/11/17/van-catastrophe-reaffirms-turkey-northern-iraq-relations/

Kurdistan Tribune:

http://kurdistantribune.com/2011/van-catastrophe-reaffirms-turkeynorthern-iraq-relations/

Kurd Net

http://www.ekurd.net/mismas/articles/misc2011/11/state5583.htm

REVIEW of Kenneth Campbell's "A Tale of Two Quagmires: Iraq, Vietnam, and the Hard Lessons of War"

Koshan Ali Khidhir (Zamanee)


Kenneth J. Campbell, A Tale of Two Quagmires: Iraq, Vietnam, and the Hard Lessons of War, United States: Paradigm Publishers, 2007; 136 pp; ISBN: 978-1-59451-352-7.

Kenneth Campbell is an associated Professor of Political Science and International Relations and Director of the International Relations Program at the University of Delaware. He served with the US Marines in Vietnam and later joined the Vietnam Veterans against the War.


Whether Iraq is another Vietnam or not, is the first question that the author begins with. He shares different perspectives of scholars regarding the similarities and dissimilarities between Vietnam and Iraq. Some scholars affirm that Iraq, similar to Vietnam, was becoming another quagmire for the US that ultimately has to pull out in humiliation defeat. However, other scholars assert that Iraq, unlike Vietnam, US forces will eventually triumph over Iraq. The author claims that Iraq and Vietnam are exactly alike -on the strategic and political level- it was another quagmire for the US As the author mentioned quagmires “are built upon the quicksand of deception, deception about purpose, progress, methods, and exit.” (p. 9)


In this book, the author, who served in the Vietnam War for thirteen months and studied the war for thirty years, shed light on difficulties and torments of the War. Who suffered heatstroke, dysentery, malaria, trench foot, and jungle rot, but while they were fighting they forget about everything and they were fighting for their lives. Counting bodies, was the main strategy of military, and high enemy body counts made their superiors to be happy, in contrast low or no body count made them to be unhappy. As the war burden and soldiers experienced difficult situations, they started to “hate the war” and they just want to go home “alive” (p. 34). The author was to angry about the Vietnam debacle and started to say “I could not live with the lies any longer.” He affirms “Why we were in Vietnam”, the “progress” of the U.S forces and the way they treated the Vietnamese “was a lie.” (p. 37)


In Chapters three and four, the author focuses on the Vietnam War and its lessons. The author is angry about effects of the Vietnam War in the US The author declares that the War divided the US bitterly and deeply, failed two presidents and polarized Congress and paralyzed the courts. The author claims that US political and military leaders deceived the nation about justification of the war. As he uncovers that from 1964 to the mid of 1965s the US wanted Vietnamese military leaders to be capable enough to govern Vietnam under Washington’s guidance. Failing this, the US decided to take direct control over the war. Then, “the Johnson administration manufactured the Gulf Tokin incidents” (p. 45) in order to rally American people to support direct US military intervention in Vietnam. These facts were not officially confessed until thirty years later (p. 45). Moreover, the methods of fighting by the US military were essentially illegal and immoral. In order to obtain intelligence, they were torturing prisoners and detainees, the use of “fists, knives, pistols, and rifle buttes during the interrogation of Viet Cong suspect” (p 49). The author has no doubt that the Vietnam War was not about helping Vietnamese. The US political and military leaders were mainly concerned about beating other super power, the Soviet Union.


The lessons of Vietnam War according to the author classified into five schools of thought, Conservative, Liberal, Far Left, Far Right, and the Military. The Conservative school suggests that the main lesson from Vietnam debacle should be learned was the necessity of realizing the power limits of any nation, even superpowers like the US, to control the course of world event. For the Liberal School of thought, the principal lesson was the long-lasting significance of law, democracy, morality, and personal responsibility. The Far Left school which offers perhaps the most important lesson to be learned, states that poor people, if united, will never defeated by greedy capitalists. The Far Right School suggests that the US must ignore international legal and moral restrictions and use all superior US military power. Finally, the Military School advised US military and civilian leaders never to forget the strategic relationship between military force and domestic political support in initiating, maintaining, and winning a distant, gory war. The author also, mentions two other lessons by scholars, policy analysts, and policy makers. They declared the war with having uncertain purpose decreases nation’s public support as causalities among its troops rise. Public opinion is, also, another essential character, if the public opinion falls, other vital characters in the US political system being falling as well.


The last two chapters are dedicated to the Iraq War. The author declares that Bush administration’s War on Iraq has become another “Vietnam-like quagmire.” Bush’s war in Iraq, he explains, is “a war of choice, not necessity” (p. 73). Therefore, it is illegal and immoral war. Bush had unsound purpose for the Iraq War. Therefore, it is expected that the war certainly produced failed tactics and strategy for fighting the war. The leaders of the war would do their best to reform strategy and tactics, but it will still be a failed war. The author affirms that Iraq War had nothing to do with terrorism. He claims that 9/11 was simply convenient excuse, for neoconservatives, to wage the Iraq War. They desired “for years before 9/11 to invade and conquer Iraq as a prelude “transforming” the entire Middle East into a solidly pro-US, pro-Israel region” (p. 75). Therefore, the reliable evidence is to be found in the writings of scholars, analysts or in the words of neoconservatives. The first attempt by neoconservatives to dominate over the world was in 1992, during the George H. W. Bush Administration. Secretary of Defense, Dick Cheney, ordered Neocon Paul Wolfowitz and Zalmay Khalilzad, to prepare a draft “Defense Planning Guide” that clearly aimed to prevent the rise of any challengers to US global hegemony in any region of the world. But Bush rejected the plan (p. 77). During the Clinton administration years, neoconservatives continued with their plan. Once they were back to power with the George W. Bush administration, they tried to implement their plan to get rid of Saddam Hussein Regime. The author affirmed that “Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz argued for war against Iraq four days after 9/11 at an emergency meeting”; Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz “asserted that there was 10 to 15% chance that Saddam was behind the attack on 9/11” (p. 80).
After the essential victorious march in Baghdad in 2003, then the Bush Administration tried to convince the public opinion of the US that Saddam regime was defeated and Iraqi resistance was just its last throes. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and others in the Administration called Iraqi resistance fighters as terrorists, who were violently fighting US forces. During 2006-2007 as the war rose and US causalities risen, public support for the war declined. Similarly to the Vietnam War, US forces tutored detainees and intentionally killing unarmed Iraqi civilians. For instance “the Bush administration claimed that the abuses at Abu Ghraib were carried out by just a “few bad apples” in the Army” (p.86). But the investigation of Seymour Hersh, a journalist that published his investigation on New Yorker Magazine Web site, revealed that US torture was systematically applied in Iraq, Afghanistan, in Cuba, and in secret interrogation centers around the world (p.86). The sexual abuses of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib can be labeled as a greatest shame to be done by the US Army. Some military analysts observed that the US troops treatment of their enemy in Iraq was fault because they were confused about who were their enemy was strives a spectacular charge as the US troops went through in the Vietnam War.


The author indicates that lessons of Vietnam debacle are reaffirmed in Iraq War. Firstly, if the political purpose of a war contradicts the nation’s potential values, the nation will not be patient about it for a long time. On the other hand, the US should be concerned about the relevance of, and complications of, its actions on international law. Domestically, the importance of protecting US constitutional law, and the significance of multilateralism in foreign policy are viewed to be further crucial issues.


Throughout the basic, the author holds pessimistic view of the Iraq and Vietnam Wars. He accuses the US political military leaders of deceiving the US public regarding reasons of these two wars and the ‘progress’ or ‘success’ they achieved. There is no doubt that some “strategic and political” antecedents of these wars are similar, but the US causalities in Vietnam War were more than ten times that of Iraq. The author provides solid data about Saddam’s regime not having relation with terrorist groups, but he did not shed light on the security situation after the Iraq war, which become flooded of host of terrorist organizations. He did not mention the decision of dissolving Iraqi Army by Paul Bremer, the top US civilian administrator in Iraq, that caused 500,000 man army to be jobless then become terrorists. The author did not mention the interference of neighboring countries in Iraqi politics by supporting Shiite and Sunni entities, which spoiled Iraqi political and security situation. While the author mentions that Iraqi government has been created by the US, he did not mention progress regarding holding elections and the formation of Iraqi government. Thus, it can be said that the author exaggerates when he demonstrates the situation of the US Army in Iraq.




This article has been published on


Global Politician:
http://www.globalpolitician.com/27136-usa-iraq-vietnam-war


Rudaw:  
http://www.rudaw.net/english/book-review/4103.html

The Street that divides two centuries!

Tweet

By: Koshan A. Khidhir

This picture and video story report, is taken from Arbil province. These pictures are showing different sides from Arbil city, but they have some similarities. The similarity here is that these streets are dividing two centuries, and two eras. One of them is industrialization era, and the second one is the era of traditionalism.

“There are many people in Arbil that they have high buildings, but we have just this small house, we are happy. It does not matter how is that, “How we are” is more important” Hiwa, a poor young in these houses

These young said that “every day we are coming to here to sell and by credit cards for mobile, on this ground, to be simple is great”.            

This man who sells lights in front of this high building says “Your question is good, there is no doubt Wallahi there is inequality in Arbil. I cannot buy a small shop, but others have these high buildings”.

Here is a video of a student, He talks about inequality in Kurdistan, especially in Arbil. Then he says, he cannot even talk like reach people’s sons, because they have unequal opportunity for learning.