Category: Iraq

Urgent need to address Human Rights Abuses of Indigenous populations in Northern Iraq

Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
Council of Human Rights

2nd Session
10th – 14th August 2009
Switzerland – Geneva

Agenda Item 4a: Implementation of the Declaration at the regional and national levels;

Date: 4 August, 2009
No: Sta.18-H0409
Title: Urgent need to address Human Rights Abuses of Indigenous populations in Northern Iraq

Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Iraq is currently facing a challenging chapter in its history. Establishing and enforcing rule of law, maintaining security and stability and ensuring the fundamental rights of its people, particularly the Indigenous peoples are protected are not easy tasks to achieve. Despite the relative stability established in northern Iraq, there remains a bleak human rights situation in the region that requires the urgent attention of the UN Human Rights Council.

Sectarian conflict, extreme nationalism and a lacking democratic norms have hampered the reconciliation process in Iraq, particularly in northern Iraq. A state of insecurity after occupation has lead to a significant deterioration of human rights conditions of the indigenous populations of Iraqi.

Northern Iraq is a country with a mosaic of multi-ethnic and multi-religious communities. It consists of Arabs, Kurds, Turkmen, Chaldea-Assyrians, Yazidis and Shabaks. The non-Kurdish communities make up the majority of the population. Following the invasion of Iraq, the region was ruled by occupation forces and Kurdish Peshmerga militias. The subsequent administration established in northern Iraq has been disproportionally dominated by Kurdish authorities . Non-Kurdish groups are consistently alienated from political dialogue, with demographic and electoral manipulation having resulted in increased Kurdish domination of the region .

The mass in-migration of Kurdish families to regions, which have been historically populated by Iraqi indigenous populations, resulted in the increased marginalization of non-Kurdish populations, including the Turkmen, as well as significant demographic changes in the region. The peoples have since been subjected to assimilation policies, targeted violence and harassment.

Reports continue to indicate that non-Kurdish communities, their politicians and activists are being suppressed, intimidated, arrested, abused and in some cases executed . Some examples include:

Relating to those of Arab ethnicity, Dr. Sabri Aba Al-Jabbar, from Kerkuk, spoke out against Article 140 and was subsequently kidnapped and killed in late October 2007.4

Relating to the Turkmen, on 27 May 2009, Mr. Saleh Ibrahim was kidnapped by the security agents (Asayish) of KUP. He was exposed to severe torture before he was rescued. On 29 May 2009, Mr. Istabraq Yazaroglu’s home in Taze Khurmatu was subjected to gun shots. Yazaroglu is deputy of the chief of Turkmen Student Union. He played important role in defending Mr. S. Ibrahim. On 1 June 2009, a Turkmen shop was shot by Kurdish police Colonel Abdullah Kadir and his guards. Four were severely injured, the condition of two of them was critical. On 14 May 2009, two Turkmen were shot in the city of Tuz Khurmatu. Mr. Alaa Sabir Mecid was killed and Mr. Abd al-Hadi Kalandar Shahbaz was injured.

Regarding the Chaldeo-Assyrian community, they are frequently exposed to attacks and intimidations in the areas where the Kurdish soldiers dominate.5

The Shabaks of Nineveh face oblivion as a people, targeted politically by Kurdish authorities with claims on their land.6 Mr. Kadhim Abbas, from Shabak minority, who was a fierce opponent of the recent demographic changes in Mosul, was killed at July 13th, 2008.7

Yazidi politicians who are disloyal to the Kurdish authorities are unable to visit their constituencies for fear of assassination. Many Yazidi politicians and activists have been arrested, persecuted and intimidated. Relatives of the Yazidi activists out of Iraq are arrested and intimidated.8

These brutal actions go un-investigated and un-challenged by Iraqi Government authorities, United Nation Office and International human rights organizations. As such we are asking the United Nations to increase their attention and action against human rights abuses in northern Iraq.

Mr. President, while we recognize the harsh challenge of monitoring human rights in current-day Iraq it should be said that it is vital to remain vigilant about human rights situations when peace and stability are at their worst. Therefore in view of the above stated information, we urge the UN Human Rights Council to:

 Increase its monitoring of the human rights situation in northern Iraq, including:
o increased communication and bilateral cooperation between the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and Iraq;
o establishment of UNAMI offices in Mosul city, Nineveh plain, Tuz Khurmatu, Khanaqin and Mendeli regions
 Call upon all relevant Special Procedures Mandate Holders to include the following concerns when reporting back to the UN Human Rights Council in relation to the situation in Iraq:
o Adequate representation of all ethnic and minority groups in regional administrations;
o Impartiality of all police and military bodies in northern Iraq;
o Adequate consideration for all concerns brought forward by relevant stakeholders, including all ethnic groups such as the Turkmen, Chaldea-Assyrians, Yazidis, Shabaks and Arabs.

August 17, 2009
PKK Forces Await Orders from Imprisoned Leader Abdullah Ocalan

Publication: Terrorism Monitor Volume: 7 Issue: 25

August 13, 2009 02:59 PM

By: Wladimir van Wilgenburg

Bozan Tekin, Vice President of the KCK

Reports indicate that Abdullah Ocalan, the imprisoned leader of the Kurdistan Workers Party (Parti Karkerani Kurdistan – PKK), will release a “roadmap” for resolving Turkey’s decades-old Kurdish insurgency on August 15 (see Terrorism Monitor, August 6). Branches of the PKK continue to operate in northern Iraq’s Kurdistan region both on the political and the military levels, despite Turkish military and diplomatic pressure. It seems that the political branch of the PKK is heavily restrained inside Iraq’s Kurdistan region, but military operations against the PKK are unlikely to resume in the near future.

The PKK Waits for Ocalan’s Roadmap

The Kurdistan Democratic Confederation (Koma Civaken Kurdistan – KCK), the umbrella organization bringing together Kurdish militant groups and political branches in Iran (Partiya Jiyana Azad a Kurdistane – PJAK), Iraq (Partiya Careseri u Demokrasiya Kurdistan – PCDK), Syria (Partiya Yekiti ya Demokratîk – PYD), and Turkey (PKK), is waiting for new orders from Abdullah Ocalan. The KCK’s Executive Council operates in the Haftanin, Metina, Zap, Gara, Avasin, Hakurk, and Qandil camps. The PKK also maintains a strong presence in the Mahkmur camp, which is controlled by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNCHR).

According to PKK member Roj Welat, the PKK’s series of unilateral ceasefires is not a new strategy born out of weakness. [1] During this period the guerrillas have refrained from carrying out offensive operations. Welat says it is a strategy to solve the Kurdish issue peacefully, although the Turkish state believes the PKK’s five unilateral ceasefires are a sign of weakness.

KCK vice-president and PKK general Bozan Tekin says they will support the roadmap to the end; “In fact we don’t know what this roadmap is, but Ocalan said he is working on preparing it.” Tekin says it might look like the Basque or Scottish democratic model. [2]

Tekin said the PKK wants its own protection force, the release of the PKK leader and freedom of politics and identity. The PKK is ready to form a Kurdish PKK unit within the Turkish military if a solution is reached. But if Turkey doesn’t accept Ocalan’s roadmap, “we are ready to defend our country till our last drop of blood.” Although Ocalan says he will remain silent if the state doesn’t listen to his “last roadmap for peace,” PKK members emphasize that Ocalan will remain the leader of the PKK and that it’s not a dead-end for the PKK-leader if his proposals are not accepted.

The PCDK Has More Problems with Iraq than the Kurdish Regional Government

Besides the KCK leadership and military forces that operate in the near-inaccessible mountains, there is also a political branch of the PKK that operates in Iraq and the Kurdistan region. This organization is called the Kurdistan Democratic Solution Party (PCDK), which tried to participate in the Kurdistan regional elections of July 25 with its political slate “Hiwa” (Hope). The logo of the list was a combination of the flag of the PKK and the logo of the legal Kurdish opposition party in Turkey, the DTP (Demokratik Toplum Partisi – Democratic Society Party).

The PCDK was banned by Iraq’s Independent High Electoral Commission (IHEC) in June and is considered an illegal party in the Kurdistan Region. Najiba Omar, the female president of the Hiwa list, said they were informed by the IHEC that the list could not operate because the PCDK is not considered a legal party. [3] The Hiwa list believes that the KRG pressured IHEC to ban them.

The PCDK’s offices were also closed down in the provinces of Erbil and Sulaimaniya. According to Najiba Omar, “We cannot have offices in regions controlled by the KRG. We don’t have a problem with the Iraqi government, but with the Kurdish government.” While the PCDK is seeking support among Kurds, it cannot operate in KRG-administered regions; therefore the main headquarters of the PCDK is in Kirkuk.

The PCDK has other offices in Baghdad and Mosul while members operate from their own homes in the Kurdistan region. The PCDK also has party meetings and offices in villages near the border regions controlled by the PKK. Members of the party are not usually arrested, but after protests against the Hiwa list ban in June, some members were arrested for a short time.

The main aim of the PCDK is to change Kurdish society according to the principles of Abdullah Ocalan. The PCDK is suspicious of northern Iraq’s Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), which have dominated the region since 1991. The PCDK is also wary of the new Kurdish “Change list,” a reform party that separated from the PUK and received a number of seats in the new parliament. The Change list will also participate in the Iraqi elections and Kurdistan local elections and could become stronger within the Kurdistan region. However, the PCDK suspects them of being supported by outside forces and thinks they won’t change the policies of the KRG.

The Kurdistan Regional Government’s PKK Policy

Minister Falah Mustafa Bakir, Head of the KRG’s Department of Foreign Relations, says that the KRG will make sure that their territories are not used as a launching pad by the PKK. “For us it’s important to have good relations with our neighbours. We don’t want our people to pay the price, we want a peaceful solution.” [4]

The KRG says it has taken the following measures:

• Cordoning off the mountain areas on the border with Turkey to cut PKK supply routes.

• Stopping foreign and Kurdish journalists from visiting PKK camps near the border regions.

• Closing down offices of the PKK’s political fronts in Erbil and Sulaymaniya.

• Monitoring airports to ensure that no PKK personnel enter or leave the region.

• Preventing PKK demonstrations in KRG territory and curtailing their activities.

• Banning PKK-affiliated political parties.

• Sharing intelligence with Turkey and the United States.

In February a tripartite U.S.-Turkish-KRG intelligence center was established in Erbil, Kurdistan’s political capital, to coordinate efforts and share intelligence in the fight against the PKK (Taraf, July 24). The KRG Foreign Minister says this does not mean that the KRG supports military action against the PKK but that the center only collects information on the PKK.

The Kurdistan government also supports the PKK’s ceasefire; Bakir says the government hopes the ceasefire “will help the peace process and [ensure] stability and we hope this will be maintained.” The KRG is against solving the PKK issue with military actions. “We don’t believe there is a military solution towards the PKK issue; there is no more need for violence or weapons.”

The PKK confirms that it is unlikely that the KRG will send forces to attack the PKK. “There is a red line among Kurds, that there won’t be another brother war [civil war] again. We don’t think this will happen. Kurds have learned from the past,” says KCK member Bozan Tekin. Tekin also denies claims that the PKK gets support from the KRG. “These are lies by Turkey to put pressure on the KRG.”

Independent Kurdish journalist Kamal Chomani says that the Kurdish government fears the PKK as a strong alternative and therefore tries to stop them from operating. [5] However, despite KRG measures, foreign and Kurdish journalists can still visit the PKK through “secret” roads and bypass KRG checkpoints.

The PKK also still manages to organize its own logistics, media campaigns, and support from surrounding villages, because the mountains are impossible to control without a massive deployment of Iraqi or Kurdish military forces. The PKK has checkpoints with PKK flags near the Qandil mountains.

Kamal Chomani says that even during the time of Saddam a complete mountain cordon was impossible. Chomani emphasizes that the triangular area with four borders was never controlled by any force. “This is a haven for rebel forces.”

Members of Peshmerga forces that fought against the PKK in the past confirmed that it would be very difficult to remove PKK forces from the mountains without many casualties. For the moment, the KRG seems more interested in controlling the regions it disputes with Baghdad than in the PKK camps in the border regions with Turkey and Iran.

The Central Government’s PKK Policy

Baghdad’s policy does not differ much from that of the KRG. Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh told a Kurdish newspaper that Iraq is not in favor of military operations against the PKK, nor does it want to close down the Makhmur refugee camp (Rudaw, August 6). “Iraq is against the PKK using its territory, but we don’t support Turkey in performing military operations against this party. We help the KRG to limit and decrease their presence inside Iraq and end their problem with Turkey.”

Although no PKK military forces are located in the territory controlled by the Iraqi central government, the political branch of the movement, the PCDK, has more freedom there than in the region controlled by the KRG. The PCDK headquarters was moved from Erbil to Kirkuk after the closure of PCDK offices in northern Iraq. PCDK official Najiba Omar says this is because, legally speaking, the Iraqi government cannot ban PCDK offices or activities in Iraq.

Assessing the PKK’s Future

The PKK indicates that they will renew their insurgency if the Turkish government does not listen to Abdullah Ocalan. The PKK wants the government to accept a Kurdish identity and release the PKK leader, which is unlikely.

The KRG has successfully curtailed PKK political activities in the Kurdistan region, but cannot eliminate the PKK’s border camps without starting military operations against the PKK, which does not serve their own interests. The KRG maintains the belief that the PKK is not a KRG problem, but an internal Turkish problem. It is unlikely, therefore, that the KRG will attack the PKK.

The Iraqi government might close down PCDK offices in its territory if pressured by the United States and Turkey, which would effectively leave the PCDK dysfunctional and cripple their level of support. The Kurdish and Iraqi governments will continue to share intelligence with Turkey, but will not support military operations against the PKK. The Iraqi army is not trained for counterinsurgency campaigns in the mountains nor does it have a sufficient amount of troops near PKK camps.

Therefore it is unlikely that the PKK will leave Qandil in the near future and will keep pressuring Turkey with attacks to solve the Kurdish issue. The PKK’s military forces and commanders will only leave the mountains if the PKK and Turkey reach a solution. Even the launch of Turkish military operations against the PKK inside Iraqi territory is unlikely to dislodge the PKK and will only result in more media attention for the PKK.

Notes

1. Author’s interview with PKK official Roj Welat in the Qandil mountains, August 5.
2. Author’s interview with PKK vice-president Bozan Tekin in the Qandil mountains, August 5.
3. Author’s interview with head of the Hiwa list, Najiba Omar, in Erbil province, Iraq, August 7.
4. Author’s interview with Falah Mustafa Bakir in Erbil, August 6.
5. Author’s correspondence with Kamal Chomani, a freelance journalist who writes for Livin magazine and the Kurdish newspaper Awena in northern Iraq, August 5.

https://jamestown.org/program/pkk-forces-await-orders-from-imprisoned-leader-abdullah-ocalan/

August 14, 2009
Turkey Seeks Closer Economic and Political Integration with Iraq

Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 155

August 12, 2009

By: Saban Kardas

Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, accompanied by Zafer Caglayan, the state minister responsible for foreign trade, visited Iraq on August 11, as part of an emerging strategic dialogue between Ankara and Baghdad. Prior to departing for Baghdad, Davutoglu held a lengthy press briefing and outlined the contours of the country’s Iraq policy. He said that Iraq is going through a dynamic process and is on the verge of an important transition, and added that Turkey is willing to play a constructive role in this process. He summarized the major goal of his trip as “conveying [to the Iraqis] the principled attitude Turkey has been pursuing on Iraq’s security, peace and future, and reiterating that Turkey stands with the Iraqi people regarding any development affecting the future of Iraq” (Anadolu Ajansi, August 11).

In Iraq, he met his counterpart Hosyar Zebari and other Iraqi officials. During the joint press briefing with Zebari, he repeated his views about Iraq and the future of the region. He emphasized that Turkey’s relations with Iraq are based on four key principles: a common security area, high-level political dialogue, economic interdependence and peaceful coexistence on the basis of their common culture. He maintained that through unhindered cooperation in various areas, the two countries will shape the future of the region together.

Davutoglu said that as a reflection of this shared understanding, Turkey will assist Iraq regarding the provision of sufficient water from its dams on the Euphrates to meet the needs of Iraqi farmers. Zebari reiterated Iraq’s support for Turkey’s fight against terrorism. Turkey and Iraq, with the participation of the United States, have initiated a trilateral mechanism to coordinate measures against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). The latest meeting in this process took place in Ankara last month (EDM, July 29). Zebari, an ethnic Kurd, pledged that the Baghdad government and the Kurdish regional administration in Northern Iraq will implement the findings of the trilateral mechanism.

Davutoglu’s visit occurred within the context of the recently launched “High Level Strategic Cooperation Council” (HLSCC). This concept builds on the intensive diplomatic traffic, which began with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s visit to Baghdad in July 2008, and continued with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani’s visit to Turkey in March, and Turkish President Abdullah Gul’s visit to Baghdad in the same month and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s visit to Ankara in July.

The HLSCC is conceived as an inter-governmental forum to be co-chaired by prime ministers. As part of this process, eight ministers responsible for different fields (foreign affairs, interior, transportation, foreign trade, energy, development, health, and environment and forestry) will maintain communication at bilateral level to develop joint projects. The ministers will meet at least three times annually, while technical delegations will meet quarterly to develop joint action plans to be finalized by the annual prime-ministerial summits (www.orsam.org.tr, August 11). During his meetings in Iraq, Davutoglu also discussed preparations for the next HLSCC, expected to be held during Erdogan’s Baghdad visit in October.

Davutoglu believes that the flourishing ties between Turkey and Iraq under this format represent a new partnership model. The importance he places on this process reflects his view of Iraq as not only a friend and neighboring country with which Turkey shares a common destiny, but also an important strategic partner. Davutoglu explicitly acknowledges that through such channels of mutual cooperation, Ankara hopes to integrate the economies of Iraq and Turkey and create a common area of security (Anadolu Ajansi, August 11).

Meanwhile, the Turkish government also hopes to initiate a similar process with Syria (Cihan, July 23) and the Gulf Cooperation Council (EDM, July 13), as well as promoting a larger role for the Organization of Islamic Countries in the region (EDM, May 28). Through such cooperation schemes, Davutoglu wants to bolster relations among regional countries at governmental and societal levels, starting with Iraq and Syria, and turn Mesopotamia into a prosperous region. In this regard, Davutoglu confirmed in Baghdad that Turkey plans to institutionalize a trilateral mechanism between Ankara, Baghdad and Damascus based on its earlier meetings.

Ankara’s motivation in initiating the Turkish-Iraqi strategic dialogue process is varied, yet the most immediate concern appears to be related to the security situation in Iraq. Ankara realizes that the uncertainty surrounding the future of Iraq beyond the planned withdrawal of American forces might undermine regional stability, hence eventually posing a serious threat to Turkey’s security. The Iraqi national political system still remains fragile and if the various Iraqi groups cannot manage to form a workable political system, there is a risk that Iraq might descend into civil war. Turkey is one of the first countries that would be affected by any instability in Iraq, as demonstrated by its experiences of the aftermath of the first Gulf War and the 2003 Iraq War. Therefore, Davutoglu wants to engage the Iraqi factions to facilitate the formation of national institutions and ease the pain of the transition period, which, if mishandled, could destabilize the country and the entire region. Ankara’s ultimate objective in Iraq is to ensure that the country’s territorial integrity and political unity can be preserved during the transition period, so that regional peace will be maintained (EDM, July 27).

Moreover, Turkey also has important commercial interests in Iraq, which again depend on preserving Iraq’s political stability. As Caglayan stressed, Iraq is Turkey’s fifth largest export market, and this year the bilateral trade volume is expected to reach $7 billion, making a 58 percent increase on the previous year. Turkey expects to boost the bilateral trade volume to $20 billion by 2011. Turkish firms are involved in various infrastructure projects and Iraq is a popular destination for Turkish consumer goods. Turkish contractors have already secured several multi-billion dollar projects in Iraq (Cihan, August 11). Partnership in energy is also another engine of mutual cooperation, as reflected in Maliki’s attendance at the Nabucco Summit in Ankara last month. If Iraq can successfully manage the post-invasion challenges and embark on a steady path towards economic recovery (thanks to its oil and gas revenues), it might emerge as a major market for Turkish businesses, perhaps also aiding Turkey’s own economic recovery.

https://jamestown.org/program/turkey-seeks-closer-economic-and-political-integration-with-iraq/

August 14, 2009
Kurdish mag sparks wrath by urging Jews to return

Dawood Baghestani, Iraqi Kurdish editor-in-chief of "Israel-Kurd", holds a copy of the magazine in Arbil, the capital of Iraq's autonomous Kurdish region. The newly launched monthly magazine has caused a stir in northern Iraq after calling on Jewish Kurds to return to the region. (AFP/File/Safin Hamed)

by Abdel Hamid Zebari

ARBIL, Iraq (AFP) – A new magazine in Iraq’s Kurdistan region has caused furore among conservative Muslims with a rousing call for Jews to leave Israel — and come back to Iraq.

The magazine, “Israel-Kurd”, is the brainchild of Dawood Baghestani, the 62-year-old former chief of the autonomous northern region’s human rights commission.

The glossy, full-colour monthly in Kurdish and English has a lofty mission: to help solve the intractable Israeli-Palestinian conflict by convincing more than 150,000 Kurdish Jews living in Israel to return to Iraqi Kurdistan, Baghestani told AFP.

“The biggest reason behind the complexity of the Palestinian problem is the unjust practices of Arab regimes against the Jews — there are more than 1.5 million Jews originally from Arab countries in Israel,” Baghestani said.

“If the Jews had not been subject to an exodus, the Palestinians wouldn’t have been either,” he said, referring to the flight of 700,000 Palestinians from the newly created Jewish state in 1948 during the first Arab-Israeli war.

“If the situation in our new federal and democratic Iraq, and particularly in Kurdistan, becomes stable, then many Jews would want to return and reduce the number of Jewish settlements in Palestine.”

The latest edition of the 52-page magazine, which has a circulation of around 1,500 copies, features a woman draped in an Israeli flag on the cover.

Inside are stories about Kurdish Jewish traditions and photographs from the first half of the twentieth century, as well as arguments on how a return of Jews would help to build a wealthy and strong Kurdistan.

But many people in Iraq are not buying the argument.

“I’m suspicious. I don’t see the point of this kind of publication,” said Zana Rustayi, a representative of the Islamist Jamaa Islamiya party in the regional assembly.

“The Kurds are part of the Muslim nation, and Kurdistan is part of Iraq.”

Iraq has no relations with Israel, and the country was an implacable foe of the Jewish state under the regime of former dictator Saddam Hussein, who was overthrown by the US-led invasion in 2003.

A Sunni member of parliament in Baghdad, Mithal Alusi, was suspended from parliament and threatened with charges last year after visiting Israel for a conference. The decision was later overturned by the constitutional court.

Dawood Baghestani, Iraqi Kurdish editor-in-chief of 'Israel-Kurd', reads a copy of the magazine in Arbil, the capital of Iraq's autonomous Kurdish region. The newly launched monthly magazine has caused a stir in northern Iraq after calling on Jewish Kurds to return to the region. Photo:Safin Hamed/AFP

Kurdistan does have a warmer history with the Jewish state, however. Many of the current crop of Kurdish leaders have visited Israel in past decades.

Jews lived in Kurdistan for centuries, working as traders, farmers and artisans.

But the creation of Israel and the rise of Arab nationalism in the mid-twentieth century dramatically altered the situation, spurring most of Kurdistan’s Jews to leave.

Baghestani — who has been to Israel four times, including on a clandestine trip in 1967 — denies that he works for the Israelis.

“What I am asking for is enshrined in the constitution: every Iraqi has the right to return to one’s homeland. Jews who were Iraqi citizens were subject to injustice,” he said.

“If every Arab country allowed the Jews to return, ensured their safety and gave them back their land,Palestinian refugees would be able to return to their territory because Israel would not need so much land.”

Mahmud Othman, a Kurdish Coalition MP in Baghdad, disputes this. He says that while relations with Israel may be a nice idea, such a move would not be pragmatic for a region ringed by other Muslim states.

“Kurdistan needs the Arabs. We are living in an Arab country and we are federal region within Iraq. We don’t need a relationship with (Israel), we need a relationship with Arabs, we need a relationship with Iran, we need to be close to Turkey,” Othman said.

“I haven’t heard of any Jews in Israel trying to return to Kurdistan. I think they’re better off there.”

Source: news.yahoo.com, Aug 12, 2009

Southern commander Zvika Zamir teaching a Kurdish fighter how to assemble a Galil rifle (1969)

Source: www.nrg.co.il, ג’קי חוגי | 10/8/2009

August 13, 2009
New Kurdish Leader Asserts Agenda

Joseph Sywenkyj for The New York Times
Last week, a Kurdistan Democratic Party building in Sulaimaniya, Iraq, displayed a poster of Massoud Barzani in his youth, right.

By SAM DAGHER
Published: July 28, 2009
ERBIL, Iraq – The president of the semiautonomous Kurdistan region, Massoud Barzani, on Tuesday rejected proposals by the United Nations to resolve Iraq’s explosive internal border disputes, and reiterated his determination to proceed with a contentious local constitution.

Khalid Mohammed/Associated Press
In Erbil, Iraq, supporters of Massoud Barzani, the Kurdish regional leader, on Sunday celebrated a projected election victory.

Mr. Barzani, newly empowered after winning an estimated 70 percent of the vote in the region’s presidential and parliamentary elections on Saturday, made the remarks in his first interview with the news media since the vote.

“Regrettably, the recommendations of the United Nations are unrealistic,” Mr. Barzani said, referring to a report by the United Nations in April outlining options for the settlement of territorial disputes that threaten Iraq’s fragile stability. They included making Kirkuk Province – including the oil-rich city of Kirkuk that is claimed by Kurds, Sunni Arabs and Turkmens – into an autonomous region.

American officials have repeatedly stated their support for a United Nations-brokered solution.

“We will not accept that the United Nations or anyone else present us with alternatives to Article 140,” he added, referring to the clause in Iraq’s national Constitution that calls for a census followed by a referendum to settle the fate of areas including Kirkuk.

Tensions have been aggravated by the presence of Kurdish troops in parts of the contested areas. The situation worsened in June when the region’s Parliament, overwhelmingly controlled by the two governing parties, including Mr. Barzani’s party, the Kurdistan Democratic Party, approved a draft constitution that enshrined Kurdish rights to the disputed territories.

Although the document states that the final demarcation of the region’s boundaries is subject to Article 140, it is unequivocal in its assertion that the disputed territories are inseparable from the “geographic and historic entity” called Iraq’s Kurdistan region.

Mr. Barzani said one reason he agreed to put off a referendum on the regional Constitution that was to have been held during Saturday’s elections was a request this month from Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and other American officials.

“They asked if it was possible to postpone it because the timing was inappropriate,” he said.

Mr. Barzani said he was determined to put the constitution to a referendum this fall. Such a move would place him on a collision course not only with the central government, which opposes the document in its current form, but also with a new Kurdish political coalition that did surprisingly well on Saturday.

Shaho Saeed, a top official in the coalition, Gorran, said his movement filed a complaint this month with Iraq’s federal court in Baghdad that questioned the legitimacy of the process that the previous regional Parliament adopted to approve the constitution.

Mr. Saeed said Gorran opposed the document because it gave powers to Mr. Barzani “that exceed the powers of Parliament and the judiciary.” Gorran wants the proposed constitution redrafted, he said.

Although the region’s two governing parties, including the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, retain a comfortable majority to form the next government, Gorran appeared to have clinched at least 25 of the new Parliament’s 111 seats, according to preliminary results.

With the two parties expected to remain firmly in control of Parliament, Mr. Barzani said that no one has the two-thirds majority needed to redraft the document.

“The new Parliament has no right to redraft the constitution,” he said. “It is over.”

Mr. Barzani said he welcomed the emergence of an opposition movement like Gorran, but issued a warning to those who might interpret it as a loosening of the grip of the two parties that control the region’s security forces, economy and patronage network.

“If any regional country or even Baghdad interferes in an internal matter, or any individual inside the region conspires against the region’s security and well-being,” he said, “actions will be taken in accordance with the law against those who want to undermine the unity of the Kurdish house.”

July 30, 2009
Ankara’s Facilitator Role Reflects Turkey’s Broader Objectives in Iraq

Ankara’s Facilitator Role Reflects Turkey’s Broader Objectives in Iraq

Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 143

July 27, 2009

By: Saban Kardas

Commenting on the recent controversial contacts between American diplomats and Iraqi Sunni insurgents in Turkey, Turkish government sources have confirmed that Ankara facilitated high-level talks, and maintains that the government in Baghdad was kept informed of these developments (Taraf, July 26). This highlights the Justice and Development Party (AKP) government’s earlier efforts to act as a peace broker between the conflicting parties to promote a comprehensive peace, and use its leverage in the region as an asset in its relations with the United States.

A representative from the political council for the Iraqi resistance told al-Jazeera that they held talks with American officials in Istanbul in March and May and signed a protocol on future talks. Although the spokesperson noted that these talks did not produce any practical results, he claimed that this document showed the acknowledgement of their legitimacy by the United States. The Iraqi government issued a written statement, describing the protocol as interference in Iraq’s internal affairs, and asking for a clear explanation from Washington and Ankara (New York Times, July 23). The State Department spokesperson acknowledged the meetings were part of American efforts to bolster political reconciliation, yet added that they took place with the knowledge of Iraqi officials. CNN also quoted an anonymous administration official who recognized the signing of “a protocol document with the group about logistics for the third round of talks” (www.cnn.com, July 24).

Although Iraqi government sources recognized such talks between American officials and Iraqi insurgents in the past, they were apparently troubled by the reported signing of a protocol. During Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s visit to the United States, this development occupied a major part of his agenda. Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari expressed his disappointment over this development. “How do you expect allies and friends of the government and the political process to meet and negotiate with parties that are accused of terrorism?” he asked. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that she was informed about the talks only recently and argued that the State Department did not authorize the signing of a protocol. She gave assurances that Baghdad would be informed of such meetings in the future. In return, Maliki expressed his satisfaction with these guarantees (www.aljazeera.net, July 25).

As it later transpired, there was indeed a protocol, which was leaked to Iraqi Shiite newspapers (www.worldbulletin.net, July 24; Vatan, July 25). The protocol was signed anonymously by representatives from the American delegation, Iraqi resistance, and the Turkish delegation. Both sides recognized Turkey’s mediation efforts in future rounds of talks in the form of facilitating communication between the American delegation and the insurgents.

Speaking anonymously to the press, Turkish foreign ministry officials confirmed the talks had occurred, but emphasized that Turkey was playing a facilitator role and the initiative was undertaken by the American side. They expressed their surprise at the Iraqi government’s claim that they were not informed about the talks, noting that Maliki was aware of these developments before his trip to Washington (Taraf, July 26).

Indeed, Ankara has actively worked to integrate different Iraqi factions into the legitimate political processes in order to create a viable national system. As part of this policy, Turkey has had long-running relations with the Iraqi Sunni groups. Through its diplomatic initiatives, Turkey was instrumental in convincing the Sunni groups to participate in the December 2005 legislative elections in Iraq (Bugun, December 6, 2005). Likewise, Turkey is believed to have played a key role in convincing the Sunni groups not affiliated with al-Qaeda and former Baathist elements to resolve their differences and oppose al-Qaeda’s terrorist activities (ANKA, July 19, 2007).

Turkey’s connections with Sunni Arabs reportedly created anxiety among Shiite and Kurdish groups (Hurriyet, December 24, 2006). In the past two years, following a redefinition of Turkey’s Iraq policy, Ankara developed comprehensive ties with all Iraqi groups and formations in order to promote Turkey’s economic, energy and strategic interests in the country. The declarations issued following the meetings in February and April 2008 of the Turkish National Security Council laid the foundations of this new policy. Subsequently, Ankara first resumed dialogue with the Kurdish groups in Northern Iraq in an attempt to resolve its own problems with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) (Terrorism Monitor, December 8, 2008). Moreover, Turkey also intensified its efforts to open dialogue with Shiite groups. Turkish diplomats and government officials met with Iraqi Shiite leaders and politicians, which culminated in the visit of the Iraqi radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr to Istanbul in May of this year (EDM, May 5).

Turkey’s facilitation of these talks builds on the AKP government’s efforts to maintain dialogue with all Iraqi groups and encourage them to resolve their differences, as well as insisting on the need for the United States to communicate with all groups in Iraq. In that sense, this policy complements Ankara’s earlier initiatives to facilitate dialogue between Syria and the United States and Israel and its Arab neighbors.

Such efforts reflect Ankara’s perceptions of Iraq, which it views as a future partner, and a gateway to the Middle East. Therefore, Turkey has developed deeper commercial and strategic ties with Iraq, as reflected in its desire to bring Baghdad into the Nabucco project. However, Ankara fears that if political reconciliation cannot be accomplished, especially in the wake of the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq, the country might descend into chaos and instability, with potentially serious consequences for its own security. Therefore, Ankara wants to ensure a stable transformation of the country through a comprehensive dialogue among the various groups. As the Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has expressed on numerous occasions, the key to stability in Iraq depends on strengthening the capacity of its national institutions. In Davutoglu’s view, national institutions such as the army cannot be based on factions, but need to be built on a national identity, which requires a comprehensive national reconciliation (www.dunyabulteni.net, September 22, 2008).

https://jamestown.org/program/ankaras-facilitator-role-reflects-turkeys-broader-objectives-in-iraq/

July 28, 2009