Category: Iraq

  • Russia Supports Kurdish Future

    Russia Supports Kurdish Future

    by Martin Zehr

    November 11, 2008

    In the latest Presidential election the U.S. has chosen to withdraw from Iraq. There will be an inevitable vacuum in the region. Many expect Turkey and Iran to become dominate in the region. Clearly, in a region that has depended on the U.S. to define the balance of powers for so many years, this is a possibility. Turkey has been pumped up over the years with U.S. military aid and supplies and looks to aggressively define its role. Syria as a Ba´athist power would be most likely to align with the militaristic Turkish regime.

    Iran has social forces in the region but no real military power. Iran´s effort to acquire a nuclear weapon is clearly an attempt to address this. Should some power demonstrate a willingness to act decisively the influences of Hezbollah and Hamas on the ground could be eliminated in a week´s time. Iranian influence is based on its programs for dispossessed populations and military supplies to its sponsored militias. Iran´s performance in the Iran-Iraq war demonstrated that its military capabilities are limited. Iran may be able to influence the political landscape of Lebanon and Gaza, but it is unable to consolidate these gains territorially or economically. Militarily, Hamas and Hezbollah are engaged in a war for the Safavid Empire and its restoration. The Palestinian national question has been subordinated and redefined as an Islamic trust.

    At issue is land power versus military power. Russia presents itself in this context as the dominating Asian power in the region. Economically, Turkey is dependent on Russia depends on Russia for 29 percent of its oil and 63 percent of its natural gas. Turkey´s bubble as a regional power is dependent on its alliance with the United States. Otherwise, it pops and becomes just one of several Islamist powers trying to configure a new caliphate capable of governing. Turkey´s secular status is based on its military rule and is decreasing as the Turkish military accommodates the Islamism of Justice and Development (AK). Russia has obviously faced a contentious Turkey in agricultural trade disputes, energy issues and in Turkey´s supplying Georgia with military equipment.

    Last year Russia opened a consulate within the Kurdish Autonomous Region. The statement by Nechirvan Barzani Prime Minister of the Kurdistan Regional Government declared: “We in the Kurdistan Region believe in friendship and good relations with the international community, and have been trying hard to achieve this, especially with countries like Russia with whom we share a common history.” Russia´s economic and political role in the region is growing. Its recognition of the KRG and its work with the KRG on economic and political issues are significant.

    Moving forward means learning to address old problems with new solutions. Turkey remains a threat poised on the border of the Kurdistan Autonomous Region. Russia is a power that has recognized the Kurdish nation. IntelliBriefs website reports: “Russia has made significant strategic forays in the Middle East especially in countries which were known to be strong military allies of the United States. Today it has both a political and strategic foothold in the Middle East.”

    Russia has not been oblivious to Turkish actions on the border of northern Iraq in its plans against the Kurdish peoples and nation. In 2007, Leonid Ivashov, president of the Academy of Geopolitical Sciences in Moscow, elaborated that such an invasion would create a “hotspot” for Russia close to its borders. He predicted that such a Turkish invasion would create “instability, risks and challenges that would be very hard to deal with.” The Russian parliament passed an appeal in 2007 to the Turkish government calling on it to show “wisdom and restraint,” and warning about possible negative consequences of a cross-border military campaign.

    In the meantime, in October the Turkish Parliament passed 511-18 an extension authorizing Turkish troops to invade Iraq. As indicated in my article “Turkish Troops Enforce Baghdad´s Violation of the Kirkuk Referendum” such an action is simply a means of enforcing what Baghdad is not capable of enforcing itself, the refusal to implement Article 140 of the Iraqi Constitution. It is clear that Russia is a more significant power in the region and has a much longer historical role in the region than the United States. As the United States relinquishes its influence in the region there will be new decisions to be made. One thing is assured: Turkish antipathy towards the Kurdish nation and peoples has shown no indications of changing.

  • Galbraith Backs Ethnically Divided Iraq

    Galbraith Backs Ethnically Divided Iraq

    by Peter W. Galbraith [contact information]

    November 14, 2008

    Ambassador Peter Galbraith, senior diplomatic fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, talked about Iraq on NPR’s All Things Considered on November 12. The transcript is below.

    SIEGEL: Well, our guest today has written in support of the partition of Iraq, the idea of splitting the country up into three countries, Sunni, Shia, and Kurd. Peter Galbraith is a former U.S. ambassador to Croatia and now senior diplomatic fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. And Peter Galbraith, partition, still a good idea?

    Mr. PETER GALBRAITH (Senior Diplomatic Fellow, Center For Arms Control and Non-Proliferation): Well, I don’t actually advocate partition. My point is that the country has already broken up, and the United States should not be in the business of putting it back together. We have, in the north, Kurdistan, which is, in all regards, an independent country except it doesn’t have international recognition with its own army, its own government.

    And now between the Shiites and the Sunnis, there are two separate armies. There’s a Shiite army. It’s the Iraqi army, but it’s dominated by the Shiites. And in the Sunni areas, there’s now the Awakening, a hundred-thousand-man-strong militia. And it is because of the Awakening, and not so much the surge of U.S. troops, that there’s been this enormous decline in attacks by al-Qaeda. But they remain very hostile to the Iraqi government, and the Iraqi government sees them as a bigger threat than al-Qaeda.

    SIEGEL: Are you satisfied by the degree to which the incoming Obama administration – what has been the Obama campaign – sees as the reality of Iraqi politics? Is it close enough to what you see as the reality of Iraqi politics?

    Mr. GALBRAITH: Yes. Of course, it’s very encouraging to me that Joe Biden is the incoming vice president. He has been the prime proponent of a decentralized Iraq. And although in the campaign Senator McCain described his plan as, I think, a cockamamie idea, it is in fact what the Bush administration has done in part. The Bush administration, in 2007, decided to finance a Sunni army, which is the Awakening. And that’s why we’ve had success. Biden would only take this a next step and encourage the Sunnis to form their own region, which would control that army just as the Kurdistan region controls the Peshmerga, which is the Kurdistan army.

    SIEGEL: Iraq has prickly relations with – certainly with two of its neighbors. Turkey is distressed at the possibility of a de facto or truly independent Kurdistan on its border. And the Iranians have, it seems, have been intervening in a variety of ways. Is a decentralized, loosely federalized, some would say partitioned, Iraq, is it capable of actually defending its own interests against bigger neighbors?

    Mr. GALBRAITH: Well, Iraq is not, today, defending its interests. The Iranians wield enormous influence because the United States actually paved the way for Iran’s allies to become the government of Iraq. With regard to the Kurds, actually there’s been a change in attitude on the part of Turkey. There was a time when they thought the idea of an independent Kurdistan, or a de facto independent Kurdistan, was an almost existential threat to Turkey. But increasingly Turks recognize, first, that this is an accomplished fact. It’s already happened. And second that there are opportunities. After all, they share in common they’re secular, they’re pro-Western like the Turks, aspire to be democratic, and they’re not Arabs.

    SIEGEL: Should the Obama administration, once it takes over, should it have a new diplomatic initiative in Iraq? And is there an occasion for some Iraqi version of the Dayton peace conference that addressed the war in the Balkans some years ago?

    Mr. GALBRAITH: Yes. There are two things that the United States can do that would enhance stability in Iraq as it leaves. First, to try and solve the territorial dispute over Kirkuk and other disputed areas between the Kurds and the Arabs, and secondly to work out a modus vivendi between the Iraqi government and the Shiite-led army and the Sunni Awakening as to who will control what territory. And a Dayton-style process, with a tough negotiator like Richard Holbrooke, if he doesn’t end up being secretary of state, I think that’s exactly what the Obama administration should look at doing.

    SIEGEL: So, in that argument, it’s not, let’s try to do away with this conflict between Shia and Sunni and armed groups, but rather, let’s try to negotiate a better, more equitable deal and more stable deal between the two groups that will continue to exist for the near future.

    Mr. GALBRAITH: Precisely. And if we can minimize the things that Sunnis and Shiites are going to fight over, it may be, over time, that they will find it in their interest to have much greater cooperation and that voluntarily they’ll build a stronger Iraqi state. I think it’s unlikely the Kurds would ever join that, but I think it’s quite possible as between the Sunnis and Shiites.

    SIEGEL: Well, Peter Galbraith, thank you very much for talking with us today.

    Mr. GALBRAITH: Well, thank you.

    SIEGEL: That’s former U.S. ambassador to Croatia, Peter Galbraith, who is author of a new book called “Unintended Consequences: How War In Iraq Strengthened America’s Enemies.”

    Ambassador Peter W. Galbraith is the Senior Diplomatic Fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation where his work focuses on Iraq, the greater Middle East, and conflict resolution and post-conflict reconstruction, specifically in the Balkans, Indonesia, Iraq, India/Pakistan, and Southeast Asia. Galbraith has authored numerous books, including, most recently, The End of Iraq (2006).

  • Abduction Turkmen News Reader by Kurdish forces in Erbil

    Abduction Turkmen News Reader by Kurdish forces in Erbil

    By Mofak Salman

    Turkmeneli TV news reader Mr. Timor Beyatli

    Mr. Timor Beyatli is a Turkmen [1] citizen who is employed by the Turkmeneli [2] TV as a news reader at the Arabic section that broadcast from Kerkuk in Iraq. On the 5th of November 2008, Mr Timor Beyatli was on his way to Turkey to participate in conference about Media and Journalism in Istanbul, Turkey.

    On the same day he left the city of Kirkuk to head towards the city of Erbil to get his flight from Erbil airport and an approximately 6.45pm before boarding his airplane he had made his a final call to his family in Turkey informing his family that he would be on his way to Istanbul airport and he would contact them upon his arrival in Istanbul, but unfortunately when the plane was landed in Istanbul he was not among the arrival of passengers.

    In fact he was abducted at the airport in Irbil airport by a Kurdish security force known as the Asayish [3] that belongs to the Kurdish leader of the KDP party Massuad Barzani prior the flight which was at 8.15pm. Mr. Tamur Beyatli was transferred from the Erbil airport to a prison in the city of Erbil for further investigation.

    Also on the 25th November, 2007 Mr. Hassan Turan, a member of the governing council of Kirkuk, was arrested by the Kurdish Asayish at Erbil airport in northern Iraq following his return from participation in the international conference that was held in Istanbul in Turkey under the name of Kudus and International Conjunction .

    In addition to that, on Saturday 27th October, 2007 Qasim Sari Kahya, the Turkmen writer, journalist and Secretary Editor for the Fraternity Club of Kardeslik in Baghdad, was abducted along with another three Turkmen citizens near the Kirkuk General Hospital by a Kurdish security force known as Asayish. Although, several hours later, three of the detainees were released, Mr. Qasim was kept for further interrogation.

    Moreover, Mr. Lokman Nejam Ahmed was born in 1st July 1968 in the district of Telkeef that is linked to the city of city of Mosul. He was arrested on the 8th of July 2007 on the Iraqi/Turkish border Ibrahim Alkhalil by the Kurdish secret police that are known as Asayish while he was travelling from the city of Mosul to Turkey with a group of a Turkmen from the city of Erbil.

    Document shows the kidnapping and arresting the Turkmen in North of Iraq. Parts of confidential State Department documents circulated to the White House, the Pentagon and the U.S Embassy in Baghdad about the abduction of the minority Arabs and Turkmen in Kirkuk and their transfer to the Kurdish north. 

    Because of the public, political, and journalistic outrage and due to the public appeal on TV and radio and Media, Mr. Tamur Beyatli was released on 7th November 2008. He was released without from the detention without formal charges and his case has not been submitted to the court.

    Thus, the Turkmens plight to all the human right organisations, government officials, intellectuals, and Iraqi and Turkish government for immediate intervention to put pressure on the Kurdish police whom are terrorising the Turkmen people in Turkmeneli.

    Turkmen of Iraq also call upon the Iraqi Journalists Union and all Iraqi and international organizations defending the rights of journalists and freedom of the press to move immediately to the authorities of the Iraqi government at the highest levels for the protection of the Turkmen, Arabs and Assyrian from the Kurdish oppression that are carried by Kurdish parties in North of Iraq.

    Mofak Salman

    Turkmeneli Party Representative for Both Ireland and United Kingdom

    msalman@eircom.net

    [1] Turkmen: The Iraqi Turkmen live in an area that they call “Turkmenia” in Latin or Turkmeneli” which means, “Land of the Turkmen. It was referred to as “Turcomania” by the British geographer William Guthrie in 1785. The Turkmen are a Turkic group that has a unique heritage and culture as well as linguistic, historical and cultural links with the surrounding Turkic groups such as those in Turkey and Azerbaijan. Their spoken language is closer to Azeri but their official written language is like the Turkish spoken in present-day Turkey. Their real population has always being suppressed by the authorities in Iraq for political reasons and estimated at 2%, whereas in reality their numbers are more realistically between 2.5 to 3 million, i .e. 12% of the Iraqi population.

    [2] Turkmeneli is a diagonal strip of land stretching from the Syrian and Turkish border areas from

    around Telafer in the north of Iraq, reaching down to the town of Mendeli on the Iranian border in

    Central Iraq. The Turkmen of Iraq settled in Turkmeneli in three successive and constant migrations

    from Central Asia, this increased their numbers and enabled them to establish six states in Iraq.

    [3] Asayish is an unrecognized and illegitimate force that is utilized by both Kurdish parties to terrorize innocent civilian people. They are used to kidnap and kill people who defy the Kurdish aspiration for establishing a Kurdish state.

  • Dear President-elect Barack Obama

    Dear President-elect Barack Obama

    Thursday 13/11/2008

    Ahmad Yilmaz

    Dear President-elect Barack Obama,     
    On behalf of the Iraqi Turkmen community in the United States, we would like tocongratulate you on your election as the 44th President of the United States. In these troubling times, we understand that your presidency will undoubtedly face tough policy decisions at home and abroad – especially in Iraq.     

    Since the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Turkmens (the third largest ethnic group in Iraq) have struggled to have their voices heard in the formation of the new Iraqi government. While the mainstream public has come to recognize Iraq as a nation comprised of only Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds, ethnic minorities of Iraq have become invisible in the eyes of U.S and Iraqi policymakers.     

    Thus, as the next President of the United States, we hope that you and your newly formed administration makes a conscious effort to include Iraqi Turkmens in any rhetoric regarding the future of Iraq and consider our people as an integral piece to a complex puzzle. We look forward to communicating regularly with you regarding matters pertaining to Iraqi Turkmens. Again, we send you our sincerest congratulations.

    Thank you,     
    Ahmad Yilmaz     
    Nov.12, 2008

    M.A – International Relations, University of Chicago     
    Member, Bir Ocak Turkmen Cultural Association – Chicago
    6334 N. Kedzie Avenue
    Chicago , IL. 60659
    Tel : (773) 764 3479
    e-mail : birocakyilmaz@yahoo.com 

  • Turkey and Iraqi Kurds: Conflict or Cooperation

    Turkey and Iraqi Kurds: Conflict or Cooperation

    Istanbul/Brussels, 13 November 2008: Turkey’s newly adroit management of its relationship with Iraqi Kurds has resulted in a tentative victory for pragmatism over ultra-nationalism, but many obstacles remain before relations can be normalised.

    Turkey and Iraqi Kurds: Conflict or Cooperation?,* the latest background report from the International Crisis Group, examines the study in contrasts that has been Ankara’s policy: Turkey periodically sends jets to bomb suspected hide-outs of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) in northern Iraq and expresses alarm at the prospect of Kurdish independence, yet it has now significantly deepened its ties to the Iraqi Kurdish region.

    “Both Turkey and Iraq’s Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) have made a breakthrough in challenging ultra-nationalism”, says Oytun Çelik, Crisis Group’s Istanbul-based analyst. “They should continue to invest in a relationship that, though fragile and beset by uncertainties over Iraq’s future, has become more pragmatic and potentially very fruitful”.

    Ankara’s policy toward Iraq is based on two core national interests: preserving that country’s territorial integrity and fighting the PKK, whose rebels use remote northern Iraqi border areas as staging ground for attacks inside Turkey. From Turkey’s perspective, Iraq’s disintegration wo

    International Crisis Group – 81 Turkey and Iraqi Kurds: Conflict or Cooperation.

  • Kurdish nationalism undermine the rights of Turkmens, Arabs and Chaldo Assyrians

    Kurdish nationalism undermine the rights of Turkmens, Arabs and Chaldo Assyrians

    By Mofak Salman

    After the toppling, the Saddam Hussein, hundreds of Kurdish militias poured into Turkmen city of Kirkuk. The Kurdish militias ransacked the municipality buildings in Kirkuk, government offices, and military buildings. The land deeds for the Turkmen have been taken from the Registry Office intentionally and this makes it difficult for the Turkmen to establish the original inhabitants of the province, large hotels and a historical military barracks in the city (at that time used as a museum), which was built in the Ottoman era, were set alight by Kurdish rebels, along with Turkmen shops and houses, including the land registry office.

    The invasion of Kirkuk in 2003 by the Kurdish militia was a mirror images of the repeated events from 1991during the uprising against Saddam Hussein after Operation Desert Storm. In addition, thousands of internally displaced Kurds and Turkmens were returned to Kirkuk and other Arabized regions to reclaim their homes and lands, which have been occupied by Arabs from central and southern Iraq. These returnees were forcibly expelled from their homes by the government of Saddam Hussein during the 1980s and 1990s.

    The majority of the returning Kurds were not originally from Kirkuk but they have been brought to Kirkuk with the help of the two Kurdish parties in order to change the demography the city and to win the referendum that was planned to be carried out by 31st December 2007 to determine whether Kirkuk
    can formally join the Kurdish administered region, an outcome that Arabs and Turkmen in Kirkuk staunchly opposed this. However, the unresolved issue is the future of Kirkuk an oil rich city in northern Iraq, which is a home to a substantial number of Turkmens, Kurds, and Arabs, which makes it a powder keg.

    However, the Turkmens, Arabs, and Chaldo Assyrians had high expectations of the interim administration established after April 9, 2003. The Turkmen expected to see democracy, fairness, an end to discrimination, the right to self- determination and an end to violence. Unfortunately, the opposite has occurred regarding the human rights situation in Iraq, in particular concerning the Iraqi Turkmen.

    The Turkmen have been undergoing campaigns by the Kurds in Turkmeneli in an often more brutal fashion than carried out on Kurds by Saddam Hussein. The Kirkuk city holds strategic as well as symbolic value for the Iraqi people in general and for the Turkmen especially! The ocean of oil beneath its surface could be used to drive the economy of an independent Kurdistan, the ultimate goal for many Kurds. The Kurdish militias hope are to make the city of Kirkuk and its vast oil reserves part of an autonomous Kurdistan whereas the Turkmens, Chaldo Assyrians, and Arabs are fiercely and staunchly opposing the inclusion of Kirkuk in an autonomous region, because its strategic importance, the fight over the control of the province proved to
    be one of the focal points of the conflict in northern Iraq. Kurdish control over Kirkuk could fuel Kurdish nationalism in the region and undermine the rights of Turkmens, Arabs and Chaldo Assyrians residents in Kirkuk.

    Kirkuk itself has become almost synonymous with the abusive Kurdization campaign, which illustrates the persistency of the designs that the Kurds have on Kirkuk. The fate of the city of Kirkuk has been one of the thorniest issues of Iraq’s constitutional process. Under Article 140 of the document ratified by Iraqis on 15th Oct. 2005, a referendum on the status of Kirkuk was to be implemented in the province no later than 31st Dec. 2007. This was to happen only after the Iraqi government takes measures to repatriate former Arabs residents, resettle Turkmens and Kurds or compensate them, implement the normalization and carry out the census in Kirkuk.

    After the toppling of Saddam Hussein regime, the Kurds intensified their Kurdization campaign in the city of Kirkuk. The Kurdish officials worked at the administration of the Kirkuk Municipality confiscated real estate and lands belonging to the town administration and have granted them to ethnic Kurds who newly arrived in Kirkuk and who were not originally from the town. However, throughout Kirkuk and across hundreds of remote farming villages, the Kurdish political parties did the job themselves. The PUK had openly provided $5,000 to each repatriated Kurdish family. Tens of thousands” of Kurds have resettled in the city and surrounding villages after the toppling of the Saddam Hussein regime, many with the help of the both Kurdish parties.

    The Iraqi Kurds have attempted by various methods to eliminate Turkmen identity especially from Kirkuk City in order to dilute them into Kurdish society. The economic, political, and cultural aspects for the Turkmen have been completely changed when the Kurds brought over 600,000 Kurds to city of Kirkuk. This was clearly organised and orchestrated by both Kurdish parties in order to change the demography of Kirkuk and the Kurdish parties have encouraged and offered financial support to all Kurdish families that were brought from outside Kirkuk. The demographic structure of Kirkuk have changed seriously and distorted as Kurds, backed by armed Peshmerga forces, migrated into the city in large groups claiming to be original residents.

    To prove the veracity of assertion that non Iraqi Kurds have been brought in and installed in Kirkuk as Kurds who were supposedly expelled by the Ba’ath regime is the scandal which was discovered and denounced by the Swedish Migration Minister, Mr. Tobias Billstrom in February 2007. It was discovered that the Iraqi Ambassador to Sweden, a Kurd, and named Ahmed Bamarni had been issuing Iraqi passports to non Iraqi Kurds from Syria, Iran, Turkey and Lebanon.

    It was mentioned by the Swedish authorities that the Iraqi embassy in Sweden alone had issued twenty-six thousands passports to non-Iraqis and that all of these passport holders were supposed to be born in Kirkuk.

    Consequently, thousands of internally, displaced Kurds and Turkmen returned to Kirkuk and other Arabized regions to reclaim their homes and lands, which had been occupied by Arabs from central and southern Iraq. These returnees were forcibly expelled from their homes by the government of Saddam Hussein during the 1980s and 1990s. Mr. Barzani declared that 250,000 Kurds, including Turkmen were expelled from Kirkuk while in actual fact and according to the Ration Card Data Base (considered by the United Nations to be a reliable source for information on the Iraqi population); some 12,000 inhabitants were expelled from Kirkuk under the previous regime, one third being Turkmen.

    On the 10th April 2003, Kirkuk had 810,000 inhabitants and today, four years after the occupation of Kirkuk by the Kurdish militia and the massive influx of Kurds to Kirkuk, the population of Kirkuk is over 1.5 million inhabitants and all newcomers are Kurds. The majority of the returning Kurds were not originally from Kirkuk but they have been brought to Kirkuk with the help of the two Kurdish parties in order to change the demography of the city and to win the referendum by December 2007 to determine whether Kirkuk can formally join the Kurdish administered region.

    The Kurds militia insisted that the constitution requires to carry out a referendum by December 2007 to determine whether Kirkuk can formally join the Kurdish administration region and the Arabs and Turkmens in Kirkuk are staunchly oppose it since the demography of the city has changed dramatically. Since hundreds of thousands of Kurds have moved to the city in the recent years in what Turkmen and Arabs sees as a systematic campaign to change the demographic structure of the city to guarantee a favorable outcome in the upcoming referendum. In addition, how a referendum can be carried out when the country is under occupation, the lack of the security, stability and when the specific groups forced the legislation on the Iraqis.

    James Baker & Lee Hamilton [ ] called for a major delay on a constitutional referendum planned for Kirkuk’s at the end of the year 2007, when the report was stated that the Kurds have altered the city’s demographic makeup by bringing in more than 100,000 of their relatives, holding a census could lead to regional conflict. The risks of further violence sparked by a referendum are great and would be potentially
    explosive, a referendum in Kirkuk city could lead to violent clashes among the ethnic groups and even a civil war across Iraq, that could eventually lead to a disintegration of Iraq and also there is a great possibility the
    intervention and involvement of Iran, Syria and Turkey in Iraq. The Turkish Republic — which has always attributed high importance to independence and liberty throughout its history -has been conscious of the need to preserve and maintain its capability of protecting its sovereign rights, its territorial integrity, stability in the region and its national and international interests and any clashed in Kirkuk would provoke Turkish government.

    The Iraqi Study Group Report on the Kirkuk issue that was submitted by James Baker and Lee Hamilton considered by the Turkmen as a realistic, constructive, well-structured and comprehensive in covered all aspects that related to Iraqi issues and provided new hope for the future of Iraq. It was the upmost important that the reference on Kirkuk status should be delayed as was quoted in the Page Number 45, Recommendation 30 on the Iraq Study Group Report, James A. Baker, III, and Lee H. Hamilton.[ ] Also see
    page 19 of The Iraq Study Group Report, James A. Baker, III, and Lee H. Hamilton.

    The New Iraqi Constitution was written under foreign military occupation and mostly the non -Iraqis and the article 140 imposed that written and imposed by the Kurds and which was added at the last minute to the New Constitution.

    Article 140: The article 140, dealt with very important and sensitive issues, not only for the Turkmen of Iraq but for all Iraqis, except perhaps for the Kurdish minority, as it was written by the Kurds and their foreign
    consultants to suit the Kurds special agenda and self interest, to facilitate for them the kidnapping of Kirkuk, its annexation to the Kurdish Autonomous Region, legalizing for them by the same means grabbing control
    of huge oil wealth of this historical Iraqi Turkmen city and the Turkmens capital city and main cultural centre for at least 900 years.

    One of the anomalies of this article 140 of the New Permanent Iraqi Constitution is that it imposed a fixed time limit for its implementation, stating that it must be completed before 31st December 2007. Furthermore
    this article 140 deals with the normalization process of the situation in Kirkuk governate, a process which consists of three major steps, each one with it is time limit:-

    1- The return to Kirkuk of all its forcefully displayed inhabitants by the Ba’ath Regime during the Arabisation processes of the province by the regime and the recuperation of their confiscated lands and properties to be
    completed before 31st March 2007.
    2- A new population census for the original population of the province to be held before 31st August 2007.
    3- A referendum for the future of Kirkuk to be attached to the Kurdish Autonomous Region or not, to be voted before 31st December 2007.

    This article with its imposed time limits, a supposedly New Permanent Constitution is unheard of: it is a Kurdish innovation in the Iraqi Constitution. Kirkuk itself had become almost synonymous with the abusive
    Kurdization campaign, which illustrates the persistency of the designs that the Kurds have on Kirkuk. The fate of the city of Kirkuk has been one of the thorniest issues of Iraq’s constitutional process. Under Article 140 of the document that was ratified by Iraqis on 15th Oct.2005, a referendum on the status of Kirkuk will be implemented in the province no later than Dec. 31, 2007. This will happen only after the Iraqi government takes measures to repatriate former Arab residents and resettle Turkmen and Kurds or compensate them, carry out the normalization and census. The 140th article expired on the 31st Dec.2007, and according to the Iraqi constitution that was established after the fall of the Saddam Hussein regime, article 140 should not be modified or extended since it was imposed a fixed time limit for its implementation, stating that it must be completed before 31st December 2007, therefore at the end of the 2007 it was automatically expired and had lost its constitutional validity since the article was not fully implemented before the end of the 2007.
    Also the Iraqi constitution clearly stated that any extension or amendment on the article needs an approval of 2/3 of the Iraqi parliament’s members and also the approval of the public in form of a referendum.
    But unfortunately the UN representative in Erbil Mr. Staffan de Mistura recommended extending the expiry date of article 140 for a further six months, this happened when he was invited to the Kurdish parliament. Mr. Staffan de Mistura’s suggestion among the Turkmen was considered unwise and biased, since he failed to pay any attention to the Iraqi constitutional.

    In fact, he bent to the pressure that was applied on him by the both Kurdish parties in northern Iraq, but Prime Minister of Iraq Mr. Nuri al-Maliki did not support the initiative because he stated that any extension of the work to rule 140 after the time limit was unconstitutional.

    The Turkmen public thought it was more beneficial for the UN to open an office in Kirkuk city instead of opening an office Erbil city in north of Iraq, listening to the suggestions, demands and complains of the ethnic groups in Kirkuk and rather than issuing an irrational statement.

    In addition, the article is an Iraqi internal matter and the UN representative was not entitled and had no full authority and constitutional right to change, extent and even to modify any article within the Iraqi constitution. Iraq is sovereign country and it was not under the UN mandate therefore a UN employee working in Iraq had not an authority to suggest, recommend and an extension for any article within the Iraqi constitution without prior consulting his main office and also without obtaining the approval and consent of the people in Kirkuk.

    The Turkmens totally refused the recommendation of Mr. Stephan de Mistura and was totally opposed by the Turkmen, thus the Iraqi Turkmen Front leader Mr. S. Ergerj met with the Mr. Stephan de Mistura regarding the his statements about the postponing the referendum and the ITF leader had expressed his deepest concern about the extension of the Article 140 and also Turkmen political parties condemned the action that was taken by the U.N personal in Erbil Mr. Stephan de Mistura.

    In the middle of July 2008. Iraq’s parliament reached an agreement on the Provincial Council Election Law, particularly with regard to Paragraph 24 of the law, which deals with the election mechanism in the Kirkuk Governorate. The postponement of the elections and adaptation of the division of Kirkuk to the three constituencies that include the proportion of 32 % for Arabs, Kurds, and Turkmen and 4% for Assyrians.

    Turkmen, Arab and Assyrians proposed equal distribution of provincial council seats in the Kirkuk region – which is outside the Kurdish territory. This was vetoed by President Jalal Talabani and his deputy, Adel Abdul
    Mahdi. Before the voting, the Kurds rejected secret ballot whereas the opposition had requested a secret ballot and the members of the Iraqi parliament voted open and secret voting. The majority of members have
    decided for secret voting and the deputy parliamentary speaker Khalid al-Attiyah, a Shiite, said the secret ballot was unconstitutional and accused the lawmakers of “arm-twisting.” On the 22nd of July 2008, decision was made by 127 Iraqi members of parliament they voted in favour of the Provincial Council Election Law, particularly with regard to Paragraph 24 of the law, which deals with the election mechanism in the Kirkuk Governorate. The distribution of power that include the proportion of 32 % for Arabs, Kurds, and Turkmen and 4% for Assyrians.

    The security of the town shall be controlled by the central government rather than the current military forces that are stationed in the town. The security forces that are linked to the political parties have to leave. The
    bill was approved by 127 out of 140 deputies that attended the meeting and 10 of those members decided not to vote. Two of them decided to vote against and one MP submitted a blank ballot paper but the Iraq’s parliament still passed the law. The Kurds, along with the two deputy parliamentary speakers, walked out of the chamber after lawmakers decided to hold a secret ballot on a power-sharing item in the law for the disputed, oil-rich city of Kirkuk. This was vetoed by President Jalal Talabani and his deputy, Adel Abdul Mahdi. Nevertheless, the Kurdish Brotherhood List at the Kirkuk Governorate Council held an extraordinary meeting on the 31/7/2008. The 24 members of the 41-member of the Kirkuk Governorate Council presented a request to the Kurdistan Region Government and the Iraqi parliament to make the governorate part of
    Kurdistan Region as they believe that Article 140 of the Constitution has not been implemented and that Article 24 of the Provincial Council Election Draft Law does not meet their ambitions.

    Whereas the Turkmen and Arabs regarded this extraordinary session as illegal. Also the Turkmen leadership has requested to replace the Kurdish police in Kirkuk with army forces from central and southern Iraq, the
    postponement of the elections and adaptation of the division of Kirkuk to the three constituencies include the proportion of 32 % for both Arabs and Kurds and Turkmen and 4% for Assyrians In the meantime, on the 31/7/2008, a statement by the Turkish Foreign Ministry was released regarding the issue of Kirkuk, which stated that the Turkish Foreign Ministry were concerned and were deeply alarmed about the demand by some members of the governorate of Kirkuk, regarding a Kurdish list to join the Northern Department. The Turkish Ministry of Foreign affairs said in a statement: ‘We in Turkey express our deep concern on what we see and what happened in the governorate of Kirkuk where some members agreed to join the Council in Kirkuk to the
    north of Iraq and Turkey’s position on Kirkuk would not have ever changed in the present and future and the Arab and Turkmen called this moves by the Kurd as a provocation.’

    Mofak Salman

    Turkmeneli Party Representative for Both Ireland and United Kingdom msalman@eircom.net

    [1] Turkmen: The Iraqi Turkmen live in an area that they call “Turkmenia” in Latin or Turkmeneli” which means, “Land of the Turkmen. It was referred to as “Turcomania” by the British geographer William Guthrie in 1785. The Turkmen are a Turkic group that has a unique heritage and culture as well as linguistic, historical and cultural links with the surrounding Turkic groups such as those in Turkey and Azerbaijan. Their spoken language is closer to Azeri but their official written language is like the Turkish spoken in present-day Turkey. Their real population has always being suppressed by the authorities in Iraq for political reasons and estimated at 2%, whereas in reality their numbers are more realistically between 2.5 to 3 million, i .e.
    12% of the Iraqi population.

    [2] Turkmeneli is a diagonal strip of land stretching from the Syrian and Turkish border areas from
    around Telafer in the north of Iraq, reaching down to the town of Mendeli on the Iranian border in
    Central Iraq. The Turkmen of Iraq settled in Turkmeneli in three successive and constant migrations
    from Central Asia, this increased their numbers and enabled them to establish six states in Iraq.