Category: Iran

The Coming World Crisis

“Chapter 7 – The Coming World Crisis

[…]

Before the nations of the world ultimately embrace a system of global government, they must first have a reason to do so. Humanity, convinced that permenant world peace cannot be attanied without the creation of a powerful world authority capable of pretecting countries from one another, will eventually sacrifice the current world order – seeing no
alternative. Significant strides have already been made in this directionsince the turn of the century, end if history repeats itself, further “progress” will be made soon.

Two world wars have already been fought in the twentieth century. In each case, an aggresive power was used to ignite a crisis that drew in the rest of the world; and both times the aggressor was defeated. After each war, as supranational organization was established for the alleged purpose of
promoting world peace, first the League of Nations, then the United Nations. Each organization has brought us one step closer to the realization of a one world government. The United Nations today is the closest thing to world government that humanity has ever known. Unlike the incomplete League of Nations, which consisted of only 63 countries and did not include the US, the United Nations consists of 159 nations, nearly every country in the world. Its infrastructure is all-encompassing and includes the World Court, the UN peace-keeping forces, and specialized organizations ranging from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank to the World HealthOrganization (WHO). It oversees dozens of additional agencies ranging from UNESCO to UNICEF, covering virtually every aspect of life. The UN lacks only the power to implement and enforce its strategies.

Could a third world war be used to finally lead mankind to accept a New World Order? If so, how might such a war begin? Who would be its main players? And what would be the outcome? To answer these important questions we must examine those areas where current events and the blueprints of the conspirators coincide with what the Bible teaches must yet take place.

A Possible Scenario

I believe that insiders will initiate a world crisis only if they feel it isnecessary to get the public to accept their New World Order. The mere threat of a major world conflict could be enough to scare the public into accepting such a change-especially when coupled with the existing problems of world hunger and global debt, and the created panic over the environment. As their campaign slogan openly proclaims, “Global Problems Demand Global Solutions!” Historically, however, wars have been effective in advancing the cause of
world government; the fact is, major changes occur more easily during times of crisis.

Unlike the previous world wars in which Germany was the main instigator, the world’s next major conflict will undoubtedly be sparked by the hotbed of tensions surrounding the Middle East. If not Iraq a second time, then perhaps Iran or Syria.

This writer believes that Syria might play a significant role in ushering in the New World Order, if not as an instigator of war, then as a middle man for negotiating peace. It is too critical a nation to remain on the sidelines for very long and, contrary to popular belief, Syria -not Iraq- is the most powerful Islamic military state in the Middle East. It therefore merits close watching.

During the past several years, Syria appears to have been laying the groundwork for its own attack against Israel. Syrian troops now hold long sought after positions in Lebanon and have been prepared for such an invasion since early 1984. According to the USA Department of Defense publication, Soviet Military Power, Syria has also become the site of the largest Soviet arms build-up in the Third World, having contrasted for 19 billion dollars in military hardware. It currently boasts the largest number of Soviet military advisors of any Third World country. (1)

The Syrian government, meanwhile, has effectively turned the tables by falsely warning its people of a coming Israeli attack on Syria, although Israel has repeatedly denied such allegations. (2) According to the Jerusalem Post during one of Syria’s propaganda campaigns several years ago it took a personal statement from Israeli Prime Minister, Yitzak Shamir, to maintain peace. Shamir voiced his “incomprehension” at Syrian “nervousness”, “which, he said, had triggered several strong Soviet warnings to Israel in recent days.” (3) I beleive the Syrian government was deliberately misleading its people in order to justify its own “pre-emptive” strike against Israel down the road. For these reasons, I have chosen to use Syria as our example in this scenario (although a similar scenario could beconstracted using Iraq, Iran, or even Libya).

If the powers-that-be were to move Syria against Israel, it would be Syria’s fatal mistake, planned this way by the conspirators in order to precipitatea world crisis. Unlike previous invasions, the Jewish state this time would have almost no time to respond. Its back would be to the wall quickly as Syrian MIGs would strike over Jerusalem within 4 minutes. Israel would be faced with a very difficult decision -either allow itself to be conquered, or else launch its nuclear arsenal against Syria and possibly Iraq. In late 1986, “London’s Sunday Times printed an article stating that Israel may havea stockpile of as many as 200 nuclear warheads.” (4) So we know that a nuclear exchange is a very real possibility.
There is an Old Testament prophesy concerning Damascus, the capital of Syria, which has yet to be fulfilled. Isaiah proclaimed: “See, Damascus will no longer be a city but will become a heap of ruins.” (Is. 17:1). As it is, Damascus is the oldest standing city in the world, never having experienced mass destruction. This prophesy must be fulfilled some time before the return of Christ.

Having lost several thousand of its military advisors in the exchange and with world opinion seemingly turned against Israel for her use of nuclear force, the Soviet Union could seize this opportunity to do what it has long desired – move against Israel. Arab pressure on the Soviets to invade Israel would add to the temptation.

If the Soviet Union came to the rescue of Syria, it would suddenly find itself on opposite sides with the United States. What could happen next is unthinkable. Mankind will have been brought to the brink of destruction.

Wicked man high places have been contemplating such a crisis for years. In a letter to the Italian revolutionary leader Giuseppe Mazzini dated 15 Agust 1871 Albert Pike, the leader of the Illuminati’s activities in the United States and the head of the Scottish Rite Freemasonry at the time, describeda distant final war, which he felt would be necessary to usher in the New World Order. (5) According to Pike, this conflict between two future superpowers would be sparked by first igniting crisis between Islam and Judaism. He went on to write:

We shall unleash the nihilists and the atheists and we shall provoke a great social cataclysm which, in all its horror, will show clearly to all nations the effect of absolute atheism, the origin of savagery and of most bloody turmoil. Then, everywhere, the people, forced to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization; and multitudes, disillusioned with Christianity whose deistic spirits will be from that moment on without direction and leadership, anxious for an ideal but without knowledge where to send its adoration, will receive the true light through the uiversal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out into public view; a manifestation which will result from a general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and Atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time. (6) (*)

Should such a crisis be permitted to occur, the amount of destruction would be staggering. Humanity would tremble with fear believing that man is about to destroy himself. For even if Soviet Union or the United States were eliminated as military powers, over 30 countries would still have nuclear capacity. It would be a time of despair and mass confusion. Add to this the resulting chaos of global financial markets, which are already on the brink of disaster; the economic turmoil would only contribute to the world’s state of panic.

(1) US Department of Defense, Soviet Military Power, 1986 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1986), 133

(2) Post Diplomatic Correspondent, “Jerusalem incomprehension at Syriannervousness,” The Jerusalem Post, (12 April 1984): 1, col. 1-2.

(3) Ibid.

(4) “Israel’s Nuclear Prowess – A Leak by Design?” US News and World Report(10 November 1986): 8.(5) Salem Kirban, Satan’s Angels Exposed (Roseville, GA: Grapevine Books, 1980), 158-161(6) Myron Fagan, The Illuminati-CFR, Emissary Publications, TP-107, 1968.
This letter between Pike and Mazzini is now catalogued in the British Museum in London (According to Salem Kirban, Satan’s Angels Exposed, 164). Parts of this letter are also quoted in “Descent Into Slavery” by Des Griffin

(*) It is a pure coincidence that the most powerful figures of the Middle East are Freemasons? Have they been destined to trigger the conflict about which Albert Pike wrote? A prominent Arab Christian leader recently informed me that according to his contacts in Lebanon, King Assad of Syria and King Hussain of Jordan are both Freemasons. If this is true, we could be closer to the New World Order than people realize. (He was uncartain about whetherSaddam Hussain belonged to the same secret society.)

A few months ago, the son of this same Arab Christian gave me a masonic document – a membership certificate – which he found in Lebanon, issued by a Phoenician Lodge located in Lebanon. However, the document notes that the Lodge is under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Jordan, which is under the authority of the Arab Supreme Council. For at least several centuries,Jordan has been a bastion of secret societies in the Middle East and has much more influence in the regions behind-the-scenes politics than most people realize. The same masonic symbol appearing on our dollar bill and found at ancient occult worship sites throughout the world, the all-seeing eye, is prominently displayed on the certificate.

Source: “En Route to Global Occupation” by Gary H. Kah, 1991, [Huntington House Publishers, Lafayette, Louisiana]

Tanrıyı Kıyamete Zorlamak – Kağan Kurt – 1.Bölüm by HoneyMedia

September 17, 2011
US Wary of Turkey’s Financial Dealings With Iran

US Wary of Turkey’s Financial Dealings With Iran

Dorian Jones | Istanbul

Turkey and its U.S. and European allies could be on a collision course over Iran. Despite international efforts to isolate Iran over its disputed nuclear program, Turkey has deepened trade and financial relations with Tehran. A Turkish state bank recently helped transfer a multi-billion-dollar payment to Iran. The deal comes in the face of Washington’s calls on Ankara to stop cooperation.

The Turkish state-owned Halkbank recently has helped India transfer part of a $5 billion payment to Iran for oil deliveries. The intervention of the Turkish bank is a major boost to Tehran, according to Turkey-Iran expert Mehrdad Emadi.

“This money was very badly needed and it actually had caused shortage of hard currencies in Tehran,” said Emadi. “So in that sense, it actually gives a new lease of life to regime.”

The Indian payment had been delayed by increasingly tightening Western sanctions on Iran. The West suspects Iran is developing nuclear weapons. Iran says its program is for peaceful energy development.

Jamshid Assadi of France’s Burgundy Business School says Washington is increasingly successful in stopping Western financial dealings with Tehran.

“The sanctions is much harder for Iran, in the financial flows because the financial networks are much globalized. And when it’s globalized, American banks are very powerful on it. For financial transactions, it’s very difficult,” said Assadi.

In a recent a visit to Turkey, senior U.S. treasury official Roger Cohen spelled out Washington’s concerns. “As trade increases, as financial ties expand, it runs counter to the international community’s desire to constrain Iran and to ensure the choice that has been put to the Iranian leadership between continued defiance and integration with the international community, is as sharp as possible,” he said.

Cohen cited Iran’s Mellat bank, which operates in Turkey, as helping to foster Tehran’s nuclear program. Despite Western calls for its activities to be restricted, the Turkish branch recently announced increased profits and growth.

Washington has reportedly warned Turkish banks operating in the U.S. that they could face prosecution if they violate Iran sanctions. According to a diplomatic source, at least one Turkish bank is under investigation by U.S. authorities.

But Ankara has mostly refused to abide by sanctions on Iran. Bilateral trade has continued to grow.

Turkish politician Volkan Bozkir, who heads the parliamentary foreign affairs committee, dismisses U.S. threats.

“Countries should be careful in warning Turkey [that] it’s the not the country of 10 years ago. Is there any rule in the world that the U.S. can impose any sanctions without any U.N. support or legal institutions? It’s only the U.N. which can impose sanctions. We will abide with the U.N. sanctions.”

Still, Ankara is wary of harming relations with Washington, says former Turkish diplomat Murat Bilhan, especially when it come to military alliances.

“Turkey does not feel any threat from Iran, but I would definitely say Turkey would not hurt Turkish-American relations just for the sake of Iran. Because Turkey does observe the interest of the United States, as you have seen that in the missile shield,” said Bilhan.

Bilhan is referring to Ankara’s decision to allow the placement of U.S. radar on its territory as part of NATO’s anti-ballistic missile system aimed at detering Iran. The decision was praised by Washington this week and condemned by Tehran.

via US Wary of Turkey’s Financial Dealings With Iran | Middle East | English.

September 17, 2011
Turkey may work with Iran against Kurdish rebels

Turkey may work with Iran against Kurdish rebels

September 17, 2011 02:01 AM

By Daren Butler

Reuters

ISTANBUL: Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan has signaled Turkey could launch a joint operation with Iran against Kurdish militants’ main base in northern Iraq, according to reports in Turkish newspapers Friday.

In August, Turkey carried out a series of air and artillery strikes against Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) rebels in northern Iraq and the interior minister said this week a ground operation could be launched any time against the guerrillas there, depending on talks with Iraq.

The military action was triggered by an increase in PKK attacks in southeast Turkey in which dozens of security personnel were killed.

Speaking to reporters while traveling to Tunisia on a north African tour, Erdogan said the minister’s comment had been a slip of the tongue that had been corrected, and that there would be no forewarning of any such operation.

“Things like this are not said, they are done,” the Hurriyet daily quoted the prime minister as saying. The same comments were reported by other newspapers in Turkey.

“The chief of the general staff has completed assessments in the region [southeast Turkey] together with force commanders,” he said.

Speculation about a ground offensive was fuelled when Erdogan met military chiefs before he departed on his trip to North Africa.

When asked in Tunisia about relations with Iran and cooperation against the PKK, Erdogan said: “It’s going well. We may act together at Qandil.”

The Qandil mountains are on the Iraq-Iran border and the main PKK bases are located in those mountains, a part of Iraq’s autonomous Kurdish region around 80-100 km south of the Turkish border.

Kawa Mahmoud, a spokesman for the Kurdish regional government in northern Iraq, told Reuters it did not give Turkey approval for any military operations in its territory.

“No government would accept this … using force would expand the areas of tension and would not serve the interests of the countries,” he said.

Iran, Turkey’s southeastern neighbor, said this month its troops had killed or wounded 30 members of the PJAK (Party of Free Life of Kurdistan), an offshoot of the PKK that is reported to have launched ambushes on the Iranian side of the border.

The Turkish military has said its strikes against the PKK in Iraq in August killed 145 to 160 militants. The PKK has only referred to a few casualties and the figures could not be independently confirmed.

A Turkish diplomat has been in Iraq for talks with the government this week as Ankara seeks more cooperation against the PKK from Iraq, whose large Kurdish minority, concentrated in the north, is politically influential.

Turkey has launched several cross-border air and ground operations in northern Iraq in a conflict that first erupted in the 1980s. The PKK is fighting for greater autonomy and Kurdish rights, having earlier sought a separate state.

More than 40,000 people have died in the conflict and fighting has escalated over this summer.

The last major incursion was in early 2008, when Turkey sent 10,000 troops, backed by air power, into northern Iraq.

Erdogan’s comments also indicated a tougher approach on the Kurdish issue generally after government efforts to negotiate a solution failed to yield a result.

A version of this article appeared in the print edition of The Daily Star on September 17, 2011, on page 8.

via THE DAILY STAR :: News :: Middle East :: Turkey may work with Iran against Kurdish rebels.

September 17, 2011
The Turkey-Iran Pact

A hot war has been raging in northern Iraq since mid-July, and despite the casualties and the drama, it has gone virtually unreported by the international media.

The war was launched on July 16 by Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) troops in an effort to crush Iranian rebel Kurds who have sought refuge in the 12,000 foot high Qandil mountains that form the border between Iran and Iraq.

It began with cross-border shelling by Iranian artillery, air strikes, and several attempted ground incursions into Iraq by Iranian forces. But within ten days, NATO-ally Turkey openly joined the fray.

On whose side did Turkey fight? On behalf of the secular, pro-Western Free Life Party of Kurdistan (PJAK), whose bases in northern Iraq were under assault from the Islamist regime in Tehran? Think again.

The Turkish military sent 20 tanks into Iran at the invitation of the Iranian regime to support the flailing Iranian attack against the rebel Kurds. They also dispatched 300 Turkish Special Forces troops to Iran to conduct intelligence missions into the Qandil mountains using Heron surveillance drones purchased from Israel.

PJAK leader Rahman Haj Ahmadi told me that the Turkish drones were the most effective weapon the Iranian military used against them. “This limited our ability to move, but it didn’t matter much since most of our positions were underground,” he said.

The Turkish incursion marked just the latest instance of Turkey’s ongoing military and strategic alliance with Iran, an alliance that ought to give NATO allies pause, starting with the United States.

I first learned of the Turkey-Iran military alliance while on a reporting trip to PJAK bases in the wild mountains of northern Iraq four years ago. As we gazed up at an Iranian Revolutionary Guards base set atop the 12,000 foot peaks of the Qandil mountains, a PJAK guerilla told me that Iran and Turkey had established a joint military headquarters in Urmiyeh, Iran, to coordinate their military strikes against the Kurds.

“The goal of the Iranians is to drive us from the border area,” rebel leader Biryar Gabar told me. “They want to turn this area into a no-man’s land, so they can use it to smuggle weapons and Islamist guerillas into Iraq to fight the Americans.”

Despite all the help from Turkey, the IRGC has suffered a dramatic rout at the hands of the PJAK fighters, who repeatedly attacked IRGC bases inside Iranian Kurdistan in response to the Iranian attacks on their bases inside Iraq. Except for the initial onslaught, in which eight IRGC were killed, the IRGC troops were badly mauled.

According to accounts in the local media, PJAK fighters killed more than three hundred IRGC troops during the clashes. They even managed to kill the commanding general of IRGC troops in the region. We know this because he was given a public burial in Qom along with several other officers. The Iranian state-run media acknowledged they had been killed in the fighting.

After two weeks of running battles, PJAK was claiming victory. “Now everyone can see how powerful PJAK has become,” Ahmadi told me. “For Kurds, Qandil has become like Mecca, a sacred place. This is where we have shown our strength.”

Earlier this month, PJAK announced a unilateral ceasefire and called on the Iranian regime to negotiate their demands for Kurdish rights. PJAK is seeking to establish a democratic federation in Iran, not a separate state or separate province for the Kurds, as PJAK secretary general Rahman Haj Ahmadi told me when we met in Stockholm this summer.

The response from the IRGC was almost immediate. Instead of a ceasefire, they launched repeated shelling of PJAK bases and villages inside Iraq, killing three fighters, including the deputy commander of all PJAK forces. PJAK claimed its forces killed 107 IRGC fighters and destroyed two tanks, 5 vehicles and 1 bulldozer in counter-strikes against IRGC bases inside Iran. The shelling continues even as I write these words.

During the latest round of fighting, PJAK showed off NATO-issue weapons they claimed they had taken from dead Iranian troops, including Western-made night vision goggles, GPS systems, anti-tank missiles, and BKC guns. PJAK has claimed for some time that Iran’s ally Turkey has provided NATO weaponry to Iran that has been turned against the Kurds, in direct violation of the North Atlantic Treaty.

This story is important to Americans for several reasons.

First, PJAK is a secular, pro-Western Iranian opposition group that ought to be a natural ally of the United States in any effort to put pressure on the Iranian regime. Their fighters are well- organized and highly-disciplined, and despite Iranian regime efforts to paint them as terrorists, they have never attacked civilians. In fact, PJAK sees itself primarily as a political group, not a military organization.

Second, PJAK has been effectively defending Iraq’s challenging northeastern border with Iran from IRGC and al Qaeda infiltration since the U.S.-led coalition ousted Saddam Hussein in 2003. U.S. military officers I have interviewed in Iraq acknowledged to me the importance of PJAK’s presence in guarding the border.

Third, the virtual silence from Baghdad even as Iraqi territory was being attacked and Iraqi citizens were being killed, shows just how successful the Iranians have been at intimidating the government of prime minister Nouri al-Malaki.

But most important is that it reveals Turkey’s strategic and military alliance with the Islamic Republic of Iran. At the joint headquarters they have established in the northwestern Iranian city of Urmiyeh, Turkish generals offer strategic advise to their Iranian counterparts and Turkish counter-insurgency specialists train IRGC troops — actions that ought to an outrage to the entire NATO alliance.

Under the direction of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his AKP, Turkey has increasingly dropped all pretence of remaining a friend and ally of the West. Instead, Erdogan seems intent on throwing in his lot with the Islamists in a bid to restore the Muslim caliphate Ataturk abolished in 1924.

In his latest attempt to claim leadership of the Muslim world, Erdogan thumped his chest in front of Arab leaders in Cairo on Tuesday, demanding that Israel “must pay the price for the crimes it committed.” He was referring to the response of Israeli commandos, armed with paint ball guns, who intercepted the MV Mavi Marmara off the coast of Gaza last year.

After an Israeli commander was eviscerated by the “civilians” on board the “humanitarian” ship, Israeli soldiers opened fire, killing nine activists on board. What Erdogan and most of the media won’t tell you, is that the entire “peace flotilla” operation was orchestrated by Turkey’s MIT intelligence agency on Erdogan’s personal orders, sources familiar with the Israeli investigation have told me.

Turkish intelligence officers trained the people on board the Mavi Marmara in close combat techniques, and helped them to gather knives, steel bars and other weapons to inflict the great damage on the Israeli commandos. The viciousness of their attacks was documented in video footage seized by the IDF after they took control of the ship.

Erdogan is now saying he will dispatch the Turkish navy to escort future flotillas to Gaza. (Iran promised to do the same last year but backed down after Israel made clear that it would intercept blockade-runners no matter who escorted them).

Will NATO members wake up to the “new” Turkey in their midst, intent on advancing the Islamist cause, even to extent of providing military support to the Iranian regime?

Stay tuned.

By Kenneth R. Timmerman
Frontpage Magazine

September 17, 2011
Iran-Turkey: dueling demagogues

Benny Avni

Here’s a tip for Lee Bollinger, the Columbia University president: If you want to hobnob with the most outrageous guest in town for next week’s UN extravaganza, get hip and call the Turkish mission — because Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmedinejad may no longer be your man. The up-and-comer is Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

They’re rivals in another important sense: Both non-Arab Mideasterners dream of resurrecting glorious empires of yore; both are using hostility to Israel to win regional favor — and both are jockeying for position in Syria, now the region’s weakest link.

Democratically elected and popular, since his pro-market policies have turned Turkey into an economic powerhouse — Erdogan is eclipsing Ahmadinejad — reviled for mismanagement, economic decline and cruel oppression. (But beware the declining power: Mideasterners often turn to adventurism when they’re pressured at home — and Iran is closing in on an atomic-missile capability.)

Erdogan this week launched a triumphant Mideast tour, preaching to adoring crowds in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya about the evils of Israel and the West. He also threatened a naval confrontation with Israel, scaring American, European and NATO officials, all of whom are begging Ankara to chill out a bit.

Meanwhile, the attention-starved Ahmadinejad made a grand “concession” to America, gallantly announcing that he’d free the two US hostages (Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal) long held on flimsy espionage charges — then had to lock horns with Tehran’s judiciary, which no longer fears his authority, in an effort to make good on his promise.

But the Iran-Turkey power game spreads far beyond such gestures. The most important arena of confrontation is Syria.

Iran has long propped up President Bashar al-Assad, but has started to distance itself from his rule. Tehran needs Syria too much — especially as a conduit to Hezbollah, its proxy army in Lebanon. Relying solely on the Assads is too risky a bet, so the mullahs are preparing for the morning after.

As Tehran watcher Meir Javedanfar wrote this week, if Assad falls and a civil war ensues — the now-ruling minority Allawites against the majority Sunnis — “Iran is extremely unlikely to play the part of spectator.”

Neither is Turkey. Its southern border is bustling with activity as businessmen, troops and opportunity seekers prepare for the day Syria becomes a Turkish protectorate.

Yet Erdogan after some tough recent statements against Assad, his former ally, is zigzagging again.

On his first appearance in Cairo this week, Erdogan all but ignored the Syria situation. Even worse, anti-regime Syrian activists accuse Ankara of handing over former Syrian Army Lt. Col. Hussein al-Harmoush to Damascus.

Harmoush fled Syria months ago and was making tough anti-regime statements from the relative safety of a Turk-protected refugee camp near Syria’s border. Yesterday, Syria announced his detention in Damascus. (Ankara denies sending Harmoush, or any Syrian, back “against their will.”)

Is Turkey with Assad or against him? Is it backing the pro-democracy rebels or just the Islamists? The answer is that — like Tehran — Ankara’s playing all sides against the middle.

Incidentally, so does Saudi Arabia: Riyadh is hoping to use its petrodollars to prop up a powerful political ally in post-Assad Syria. But money isn’t enough. In Syria, as in the rest of the Arab Mideast, the dominant powers are once more non-Arabs: The Persians and the Turks.

Conspicuously missing from this high-stakes Syrian poker table are America and the Europeans — still hiding behind feckless diplomacy and meaningless moralistic statements.

To his great credit, Robert Ford, the US ambassador to Syria, is constantly siding with pro-democracy forces. But that won’t buy us a seat at a table where everyone else antes up with real resources.

And the Mideast region is too volatile to leave to the graces of the increasingly dangerous Turks and Persians.

beavni@gmail.com

www.nypost.com, September 16, 2011

September 17, 2011
Iran and Turkey major exporters to Kurdistan

The Globe

The Haji Omaran border crossing where goods come into Kurdistan Region from Iran.

The Kurdistan Region depends on neighboring countries Iran and Turkey for many of its goods. According to experts, the Kurdistan Regional Government cannot end these trade relationships to pressure either country to end the bombardment of the Region.

The Kurdistan Region depends on neighboring countries Iran and Turkey for many of its goods. According to experts, the Kurdistan Regional Government cannot end these trade relationships to pressure either country to end the bombardment of the Region.

Iran and Turkey are the Region’s main suppliers of goods and trade is around $10 billion dollars a year, and rising. Around 80 percent of goods in Kurdistan Region come from either Turkey or Iran.

Kurdistan Region has around 1,200 foreign companies investing in the Region, and more than half of these are Turkish. The Region also has dozens of Iranian companies.

Economic expert and Deputy Head of the Kurdistan Region Economy Relationships, Faisal Ali, says if the Region broke off trade relations with these two countries, there would be dire consequences because “The only entry point for the Region to import materials would be the central and southern parts of Iraq whose goods are mostly Turkish and Iranian!”

Other than clothes and consumer items, Iranian and Turkish companies build apartments and roads. After 20 years of KRG, the Region still relies almost exclusively on imported goods and raw materials, making it a net importer.

Economic expert Dr. Dler Shawes believes the economy and businesses should be organized under specific theories and principles.

“The absence of such theories and principles means the Region has a weak policy regarding its economy and business. This has also made the Kurdistan Region a net consumer, which depends mainly on Turkey, Iran, Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia,” said Shawes.

Most goods come over the border crossings with Iran and Turkey, but some goods come through Erbil and Suleimaniya airports.

“Any consumer country cannot have a strong economic infrastructure. This economic situation caused KRG to have a weak political stance towards neighboring countries as well,” said Ali.

Ali also said it is impossible to close the border crossings, as it would cause hardship on the people of Kurdistan Region. “Prices would go up and people would face huge problems.”

While the Kurdistan Region practices these policies in its economy and and there is negligible local investment, the Region is rich in terms of oil and other natural resources, such as fertile land.

Many of the villages were abandoned when the government started employing many in the public sector. According to Shawes, KRG should implement policies to encourage investment in rural areas and have people move back to the villages.

“If the government had cared about the agricultural and industrial sectors in recent years, the Kurdistan Region would now be able to stop trade relations with one of these two countries and use it as political pressure to stop bombardments,” said Ali.

Some experts believe Iran and Turkey would be hard pressed to find other countries to export their goods to, as Kurdistan provides an excellent and convenient market.

Shawes thinks differently and points out Turkey has also a strong economic relationship with Europe, some eastern countries and Gulf countries. “Although Kurdistan Region is a location for those two countries in terms of business, economy, culture, politics and other aspects, Iran also has strong business ties with Russia, Azerbaijan and some other countries.”

via KurdishGlobe- Iran and Turkey major exporters to Kurdistan.

September 14, 2011