Edited by: Michael M. Gunter
Published on Sivil Magazine in Hewler, Kurdistan (October 3rd 2009)
Translated to Kurdish By: Sarwar Salar Chuchani (www.sarwarkurd.blogfa.com)
Although the fourth largest nation in the Middle East, the Kurds remain a stateless people whose very future existence is challenged by the states in which they live. Moreover, as history is written by the hegemons—which the Kurds certainly have not been—Kurdish accomplishments have often been ignored or simply appropriated by those who are hegemons. Kurdish belles lettres provide an excellent example. Many are not aware that a Kurdish literature even exists. In truth no records remain of any pre-Islamic Kurdish literature, in part, because much undoubtedly has been lost due to the ceaseless conflicts that have ravished Kurdistan. In addition, many Kurdish authors wrote in Arabic, Persian, or Turkish, while in modern times many Kurds employ Western languages. Such usage obscures the Kurdishness of their literature.
Thus, Kurdish national epics represent an oft-ignored but complex and multifaceted source for understanding and celebrating forgotten, silenced, or repressed Kurdish nationalism. In the beginning of the 16th century, for example, the Kurdish scholar and diplomat Idris Bitlisi (died 1520) composed Hasht Behesht (The Eight Paradises). This volume traced the early history of the Ottoman sultans in Persian. Trusted by both sides, Idris Bitlisi also helped broker important agreements between the Ottomans and the 16 semiautonomous Kurd hukumeti, Kurdish emirates or principalities that possessed many of the characteristics of a state.
Sharaf Khan Bitlisi (1543-1603) was the Kurdish author of the Sharafnama, a very erudite history of the ruling families of the Kurdish emirates. The book was written in Persian, completed in 1596, and is arguably the single most important source for Kurdish history up to that time. The Sharafnama divides its history into four parts. The first deals with five Kurdish dynasties, which have actually enjoyed royalty (saltanat): the Marwanids of Diyarbakir and Jazire, the Hasanwayhids of Dinawar and Shahrizur, the Fadluyids of the Great Lur, the princes of little Lur, and the Ayyubids. The second part lists those dynasties which have had coins struck and the khutba recited in their names. (The khutba is a religious invocation pronounced at the Friday prayer meeting which mentions the Prophet, the first four caliphs, and the current ruler.) The third part numbers the families of hereditary governors (hukkam), while the fourth details the history of the mirs of Bitlis. Clearly, the Sharafnama puts the lie to the claim that the Kurds never have had some sort of independent state.
Composed in Kurdish in 1695 by Ahmadi-i Khani (1650-1706), Mem u Zin is universally considered to be the Kurdish national epic because its introductory parts contain an obvious reference to Kurdish nationalist beliefs: "If only there were harmony among us, if we were to obey a single one of us, he would reduce to vassalage Turks, Arabs and Persians, all of them. We would perfect our religion, our state, and would educate ourselves in learning and wisdom." Since the epic was written at a time when nationalism was unknown in the Islamic Middle East, some even have argued, therefore, that Kurdish is the oldest nationalism in that area of the world. The poem itself runs for more than 2,650 distichs or couplets. Its plot concerns tragic lovers and has been called by some a Kurdish Romeo and Juliet. Mem and Zin were two lovers. Bakir's intrigues caused the death of Mem. Zin then died of grief morning over her lover’s grave. She was buried next to Mem's grave, while Bakir was killed there in revenge. A thorn bush grew out of Bakir's blood and its roots separated the two lovers even in death. The Kurds have seen this separation as a metaphor for the division of Kurdistan victimized by its neighbors.
In modern times repressed Kurdish nationalism has been stimulated by two great patriotic poets, Haji Qadir Koyi (1817-1897) and the much-adored Haji (Piremerd) Tewfiq (1863-1950). A statue of Piremerd stands in the center of Sulaymaniya, the second largest city in today’s largely autonomous Kurdistan of Iraq. Nishtiman (Motherland) was the title of a Kurdish journal published in the mid-1940s during the days of the Mahabad Republic of Kurdistan in Iran. It was received with great enthusiasm by the Kurds and enjoyed a relatively wide distribution. The first issue contained poems, prose, a Kurdish constitution, and articles on Kurdish history. In all, 12 issues appeared. The journal’s motto “Long live greater Kurdistan” illustrated its pan-Kurdish aspirations. In March 1945, the Mahabad Kurds staged a dramatic Kurdish nationalist opera called Daiki Nishtiman. It featured a woman called Daiki Nishtiman, who was the personification of the Kurdish nation. She was abused by three villains representing Iran, Iraq, and Turkey. Eventually she was rescued by her brave Kurdish sons. The opera played for several months in Mahabad and other surrounding towns and made a very profound and emotional nationalist impression on the Kurds. The very term Nishtiman (Motherland) became almost synonymous with that of Kurdistan.
Michael M. Gunter
Professor of Political Science
Tennessee Technological University
Cookeville, TN
USA
*this article was sent by prof Gunter to Sarwar Salar Chuchani
*to read the KURDISH version, click here
Amedi: Kurds have many qualified individuals. They can build a democracy
By: Sarwar Salar Chuchani(www.sarwarkurd.blogfa.com)
Published on Sivil Magazine in Hewler, Kurdistan (September 26th 2009)
1- Mr. Amedi, can you give a brief overview on the Kurdish-U.S relations?
In the past, the US never attributed any importance to the Kurdish problem in neither parts of Kurdistan. In 1970s, the US supported the Kurdish movement, but the support was funneled through the Shah regime. The US never had any direct contacts with Kurds. In the aftermath of Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait, the US intervened and helped Kurds in a humanitarian mission, but again, the US never attributed any political importance to the Kurdish case. In the after math of the liberation war in 2003, the Peshmerges were very helpful to the US military mission in Iraq, but on political grounds, the US views Iraq as a single nation, despite its diverse ethnical make-up. In my view, a long term solution to the Kurdish problem in Iraq is in Erbil and of course Baghdad.
2- How Kurds can become an influential player on the American policy and its decision making centers?
This can be done in the US and Erbil: The Kurdish Diaspora in the US must learn and understand the US culture and the way its political system works. The US is a full-scale democracy. The Kurdish community must understand the American values and press for changes in the US policies when they feel there is a diversion in those values. They must convince American politicians that helping Kurdistan is in US’s strategic interests and in line with American values. In Erbil, there must be a reliable system. Take Israel for instance. If Israel was a dictatorship, its relations with the US would have been similar to the US relations with the Arab states. Because Israel is a western democracy, the US is committed to support it and protect it when it faces threats.
The elections in Kurdistan were very successful. The opposition picked up enough seats to press KDP and PUK to reform. I am very optimistic. I believe the new opposition can start the path to democracy and a Kurdish state, by creating a modern government system. The Americans will certainly support Kurds if they feel that Kurds are committed to democracy and the rule of law.
3- Is there something named “Kurdish lobby” in America? What are the bases of having or creating such a lobby?
As far as I’m concerned, the Kurds have no organized lobby in the US. In the past, the Kurdish parties have hired certain individuals to lobby for their cause in Washington. But in America, paid agents are not well-respected.
A true Kurdish lobby must be independent, and it must emerge from the Kurdish American community. It must be able to finance itself independently. The strength of any successful lobbying group is in its neutrality with regard to the US politics and its understanding of the US interests and in due course, the interests of the nation for which they are lobbying. For example, the Israeli lobby doesn’t support any factions neither in Washington nor in Israel, and it maintains a neutral line when seeking support for Israel in Washington.
But again, Israel is a democracy and a rule of law state. Kurdistan must also establish a democratic government of institutions. The US does not support any militia government.
4- Michael Rubin says Kurds want to by friends in America not to create friends, how you think
The traditional Middle Eastern ways don’t work in Washington. We have to learn American ways. There are people in Washington who will accept money and gifts in return of favors, but those people are not well-respected in the American culture. The American government will listen to an American citizen who is seeking support for Kurdistan, but in line American interests and values, rather than a paid-agent.
Again, the US will not support Kurds, if their government is rotten with corruption and nepotism
5- At the beginning of Iraqi liberation (and or occupation) there was a significant support to KRG, but we now notice that support is declining, what may be the cause?
Perhaps, there was cooperation between the US Army and the Peshmerges, but I don’t think the US ever favored Kurds in Iraq. The US policy of Iraq clearly focuses on its unity. The US will leave Iraq in 2011 per the SOFA agreement and wants Iraqis to solve their problems.
6- KRG can’t do what Iraq and Turkey can do for U.S, so they have priority in American agenda…how KRG can deploy a diplomacy that goes with the Iraqi and Turkish and subsequently American favor?
The only way through which Kurds can survive is democracy, by showing the world that they are a capable nation and have a functioning government that is committed to the Western democracy. Using excuses like “transitioning to democracy from guerrilla warfare” may sound reasonable in Erbil, but it won’t in Washington. Kurds have many qualified individuals. They can build a democracy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
to read the Kurdish version click here
Published on Sivil Magazine in Hewler, Kurdistan (September 26th 2009)
1- Mr. Amedi, can you give a brief overview on the Kurdish-U.S relations?
In the past, the US never attributed any importance to the Kurdish problem in neither parts of Kurdistan. In 1970s, the US supported the Kurdish movement, but the support was funneled through the Shah regime. The US never had any direct contacts with Kurds. In the aftermath of Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait, the US intervened and helped Kurds in a humanitarian mission, but again, the US never attributed any political importance to the Kurdish case. In the after math of the liberation war in 2003, the Peshmerges were very helpful to the US military mission in Iraq, but on political grounds, the US views Iraq as a single nation, despite its diverse ethnical make-up. In my view, a long term solution to the Kurdish problem in Iraq is in Erbil and of course Baghdad.
2- How Kurds can become an influential player on the American policy and its decision making centers?
This can be done in the US and Erbil: The Kurdish Diaspora in the US must learn and understand the US culture and the way its political system works. The US is a full-scale democracy. The Kurdish community must understand the American values and press for changes in the US policies when they feel there is a diversion in those values. They must convince American politicians that helping Kurdistan is in US’s strategic interests and in line with American values. In Erbil, there must be a reliable system. Take Israel for instance. If Israel was a dictatorship, its relations with the US would have been similar to the US relations with the Arab states. Because Israel is a western democracy, the US is committed to support it and protect it when it faces threats.
The elections in Kurdistan were very successful. The opposition picked up enough seats to press KDP and PUK to reform. I am very optimistic. I believe the new opposition can start the path to democracy and a Kurdish state, by creating a modern government system. The Americans will certainly support Kurds if they feel that Kurds are committed to democracy and the rule of law.
3- Is there something named “Kurdish lobby” in America? What are the bases of having or creating such a lobby?
As far as I’m concerned, the Kurds have no organized lobby in the US. In the past, the Kurdish parties have hired certain individuals to lobby for their cause in Washington. But in America, paid agents are not well-respected.
A true Kurdish lobby must be independent, and it must emerge from the Kurdish American community. It must be able to finance itself independently. The strength of any successful lobbying group is in its neutrality with regard to the US politics and its understanding of the US interests and in due course, the interests of the nation for which they are lobbying. For example, the Israeli lobby doesn’t support any factions neither in Washington nor in Israel, and it maintains a neutral line when seeking support for Israel in Washington.
But again, Israel is a democracy and a rule of law state. Kurdistan must also establish a democratic government of institutions. The US does not support any militia government.
4- Michael Rubin says Kurds want to by friends in America not to create friends, how you think
The traditional Middle Eastern ways don’t work in Washington. We have to learn American ways. There are people in Washington who will accept money and gifts in return of favors, but those people are not well-respected in the American culture. The American government will listen to an American citizen who is seeking support for Kurdistan, but in line American interests and values, rather than a paid-agent.
Again, the US will not support Kurds, if their government is rotten with corruption and nepotism
5- At the beginning of Iraqi liberation (and or occupation) there was a significant support to KRG, but we now notice that support is declining, what may be the cause?
Perhaps, there was cooperation between the US Army and the Peshmerges, but I don’t think the US ever favored Kurds in Iraq. The US policy of Iraq clearly focuses on its unity. The US will leave Iraq in 2011 per the SOFA agreement and wants Iraqis to solve their problems.
6- KRG can’t do what Iraq and Turkey can do for U.S, so they have priority in American agenda…how KRG can deploy a diplomacy that goes with the Iraqi and Turkish and subsequently American favor?
The only way through which Kurds can survive is democracy, by showing the world that they are a capable nation and have a functioning government that is committed to the Western democracy. Using excuses like “transitioning to democracy from guerrilla warfare” may sound reasonable in Erbil, but it won’t in Washington. Kurds have many qualified individuals. They can build a democracy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
to read the Kurdish version click here
Lydia Khalil: After years of stagnation, KRG political space starts to open
By: Sarwar Salar Chuchani (www.sarwarkurd.blogfa.com)
Published on Sivil Magazine in Hewler, Kurdistan (September 26th 2009)
1- POLITICAL REFORMS INSIDE KRG:
a- How is your opinion about current KRG politics in general?
KRG politics is moving in a really interesting direction. After years of stagnation and dominance by two political parties we are starting to see the opening up of the political space. Hopefully this trend will continue. Politics in the KRG has local, national and international dimensions and they all affect each other because of the unique status of Iraqi Kurdistan. It makes for a very interesting- though volatile – mix. Politics in the KRG have the potential to set the stage for Iraqi and regional politics.
b- How you see the last parliamentary and presidential elections in Iraqi Kurdistan and what is your opinion about its results?
The Goran’s party showing in the last election was a positive step – it showed that the Iraqi Kurdish people are really focusing on their internal governance – and more importantly- there is a non violent, effective means to get change that is needed.
However- the question remains- will Goran be just another offshoot of the PUK, will they be co-opted by the more powerful parties or will they become a viable opposition?
c- Corruption is a central issue in Kurdistan, some opposition parties say that it can be dealt with by reforms abroad; others say reforms are not enough and we need a radical change to the whole system, how is your viewpoint?
Corruption is indeed a central issue in the KRG and Iraq as a whole. Reform can only be accomplished from within. The best way citizens can hold their government officials accountable is by fostering an open political system where they can vote out corrupt officials if need be and elect new ones. There also has to be extensive bureaucratic reforms. One of the problems in the KRG and other places facing similar issues of corruption is that the government bureaucracy is bloated and there are too many people on the government payroll. The system should be streamlined and the private sector made more robust. The press also has a critical role to play and the Kurdish press is doing a fine job of revealing incidents of corruption and holding officials to account.
2- KRG-CENTRAL GOVT. RELATIONS:
a-what might be the best solution to disputed regions (KIRKUK in particular)? Is Iraqi constitution enough to be the sole mediator between both parties? Or they need regional and international intervention?
As you and your readers know- Kirkuk is an extremely complicated situation. Iraqi Kurds of course want to see Kirkuk incorporated within the KRG but there are many other actors- within Iraq and in the region- that oppose this idea. Though many people want to see a quick solution – I have advocated a “go it slow” approach. We should not advocate a quick solution at the expense of stability. If there is a solution that favors one side over the other, in this current environment, where all sides have not had the chance to process any potential outcome – it could lead to violence. I don’t think that the constitution will be enough – this is a situation that requires international mediation and I think we should let the UNAMI process play out.
b-how you see the KRG leadership’s behavior with the issue of disputed territories since 2003?
Both sides- the central Iraqi government and the KRG- need to find a way to deescalate the current tensions over disputed territories because one mistake could potentially blow up into something that sparks a wider violent conflict. Both sides have made mistakes and you can’t apportion blame to one or the other. The best way to deescalate tensions while a permanent solution is being worked out is to establish strict protocols for communication and movement for both armed forces across the border.
c-if the relations between KRG and IRAQI govt. continue as it’s now, Lydia Khalil is optimistic or pessimistic about the future of that relation? And why?
I am always optimistic a non violent resolution can be reached, but Kirkuk is worrying. I hope to see an alternative process for a resolution that all sides can agree on, but I don’t think we are close to that yet.
3-KRG and IRAQI neighbors and Middle East:
a-what should KRG do about PKK?
The KRG should continue to cooperate with US and Turkish and other regional governments to flush out the PKK from Northern Iraq. Though some Iraqi Kurds feel sympathy to the PKK cause- the reality is that there can be no viable future for the KRG if PKK fighters are present in the territory or if Iraqi Kurdish officials are suspected of aiding or abetting the PKK, even if it is through benign neglect.
b-can Kurdish leadership be regarded as a player in Middle East politics?
What happens in the KRG certainly affects the region and vice versa. The KRG has had a long history of its neighbors meddling in its affairs, but now it seems as if the Iraqi Kurdish government is coming to its own. It is important to remember though that many countries in the region and internationally, will not deal exclusively with the KRG because they do not want to see the break up of the Iraqi state. Affording too much importance to the KRG is threatening to the region because of the so called “Kurdish Question” and prospect for Kurdish independence.
------------------------------------------------
to read the Kurdish version click here
Published on Sivil Magazine in Hewler, Kurdistan (September 26th 2009)
1- POLITICAL REFORMS INSIDE KRG:
a- How is your opinion about current KRG politics in general?
KRG politics is moving in a really interesting direction. After years of stagnation and dominance by two political parties we are starting to see the opening up of the political space. Hopefully this trend will continue. Politics in the KRG has local, national and international dimensions and they all affect each other because of the unique status of Iraqi Kurdistan. It makes for a very interesting- though volatile – mix. Politics in the KRG have the potential to set the stage for Iraqi and regional politics.
b- How you see the last parliamentary and presidential elections in Iraqi Kurdistan and what is your opinion about its results?
The Goran’s party showing in the last election was a positive step – it showed that the Iraqi Kurdish people are really focusing on their internal governance – and more importantly- there is a non violent, effective means to get change that is needed.
However- the question remains- will Goran be just another offshoot of the PUK, will they be co-opted by the more powerful parties or will they become a viable opposition?
c- Corruption is a central issue in Kurdistan, some opposition parties say that it can be dealt with by reforms abroad; others say reforms are not enough and we need a radical change to the whole system, how is your viewpoint?
Corruption is indeed a central issue in the KRG and Iraq as a whole. Reform can only be accomplished from within. The best way citizens can hold their government officials accountable is by fostering an open political system where they can vote out corrupt officials if need be and elect new ones. There also has to be extensive bureaucratic reforms. One of the problems in the KRG and other places facing similar issues of corruption is that the government bureaucracy is bloated and there are too many people on the government payroll. The system should be streamlined and the private sector made more robust. The press also has a critical role to play and the Kurdish press is doing a fine job of revealing incidents of corruption and holding officials to account.
2- KRG-CENTRAL GOVT. RELATIONS:
a-what might be the best solution to disputed regions (KIRKUK in particular)? Is Iraqi constitution enough to be the sole mediator between both parties? Or they need regional and international intervention?
As you and your readers know- Kirkuk is an extremely complicated situation. Iraqi Kurds of course want to see Kirkuk incorporated within the KRG but there are many other actors- within Iraq and in the region- that oppose this idea. Though many people want to see a quick solution – I have advocated a “go it slow” approach. We should not advocate a quick solution at the expense of stability. If there is a solution that favors one side over the other, in this current environment, where all sides have not had the chance to process any potential outcome – it could lead to violence. I don’t think that the constitution will be enough – this is a situation that requires international mediation and I think we should let the UNAMI process play out.
b-how you see the KRG leadership’s behavior with the issue of disputed territories since 2003?
Both sides- the central Iraqi government and the KRG- need to find a way to deescalate the current tensions over disputed territories because one mistake could potentially blow up into something that sparks a wider violent conflict. Both sides have made mistakes and you can’t apportion blame to one or the other. The best way to deescalate tensions while a permanent solution is being worked out is to establish strict protocols for communication and movement for both armed forces across the border.
c-if the relations between KRG and IRAQI govt. continue as it’s now, Lydia Khalil is optimistic or pessimistic about the future of that relation? And why?
I am always optimistic a non violent resolution can be reached, but Kirkuk is worrying. I hope to see an alternative process for a resolution that all sides can agree on, but I don’t think we are close to that yet.
3-KRG and IRAQI neighbors and Middle East:
a-what should KRG do about PKK?
The KRG should continue to cooperate with US and Turkish and other regional governments to flush out the PKK from Northern Iraq. Though some Iraqi Kurds feel sympathy to the PKK cause- the reality is that there can be no viable future for the KRG if PKK fighters are present in the territory or if Iraqi Kurdish officials are suspected of aiding or abetting the PKK, even if it is through benign neglect.
b-can Kurdish leadership be regarded as a player in Middle East politics?
What happens in the KRG certainly affects the region and vice versa. The KRG has had a long history of its neighbors meddling in its affairs, but now it seems as if the Iraqi Kurdish government is coming to its own. It is important to remember though that many countries in the region and internationally, will not deal exclusively with the KRG because they do not want to see the break up of the Iraqi state. Affording too much importance to the KRG is threatening to the region because of the so called “Kurdish Question” and prospect for Kurdish independence.
------------------------------------------------
to read the Kurdish version click here
Michael Gunter: I donot regard PKK as a terrorist organization
By: Sarwar Salar Chuchani (www.sarwarkurd.blogfa.com)
Kurdish version was Published on Sivil Magazine in Hewler, Kurdistan (September 19th 2009)
(*)- How is the Situation and the political weight of Kurds in Iraq & Middle East now in your viewpoint?
The Iraqi Kurds have become a “player” in Iraq and the Middle East as they have become stronger than ever before. However, they are still in a perilous position given the hostility of their regional neighbors and the coming U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. More immediately threatening is the growing strength of the Baghdad government under Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who seems determined to centralize the Iraqi government at the expense of the KRG. Indeed, KRG President Massoud Barzani is not even on speaking terms with al-Maliki since Barzani told al-Maliki that he was beginning to smell like a dictator. Given the horrific history between Baghdad and the Kurds, Barzani had every right to say this.
(*) What are the main pitfalls of Iraqi Kurdish politicians after 2003 and American occupation?
The main pitfall of the Iraqi Kurdish politicians after 2003 has been reaching too far in trying to annex Kirkuk and the surrounding area to the KRG. Since Kirkuk is not just inhabited by Kurds, the needs of its Arabs, Turkomans, and Christians must also be considered. More to the point, however, is that the Arab Iraqis have gradually been regaining their strength and are simply not going to give Kirkuk away to the Kurds. Even if the Kurds somehow took it, it would result in a Pyrrhic victory as the Arabs would never accept it. Kurdish politicians must understand this situation and adequately explain it to their people.
(*) Why Kurds have no friends but mountains most of the time?
The Kurds usually have no friends but the mountains because the Kurdish goals of autonomy or independence challenge the territorial integrity of those existing states (Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria) they inhabit. Furthermore, even states more friendly towards the Kurds such as the United States are not going to support the dismantling of other states because of the dangerous threat to their own security such a doctrine might present.
(*)What are the dangerous threats of Kurdish independence on American security?
Dear Sarwar, The dangers to the US entailed by Kurdish independence of course are just theoretical. However, no state would approve of the doctrine that ethnic groups in an established state can break away and create their own new state because this would in theory threaten the territorial integrity of any and all states including the United States itself.
(*) Should Iraqi Kurds fight Iranian and Turkish Kurds in order to preserve Kurdistan Regional Government and its achievements?
It would be the height of folly and betrayal for the Iraqi Kurds to fight against the Iranian or Turkish Kurds in a misguided effort to preserve the KRG. The Iraqi Kurds actually tried to do this when they supported Turkey against the PKK in 1992 and the result was disastrous on Kurdish morale throughout the world. On the other hand, the KRG cannot be seen as giving outright support to the KRG or PJAK. What is needed is astute diplomacy and compromise on this issue. The KRG must explain and argue that the problem is not the fault of the KRG, but that of Turkey and Iran for their failure to grant their ethnic Kurdish populations their minimal rights.
(*) personally, do you regard PKK as a terrorist Organization?
I do not regard the PKK as a terrorist organization. In the case of the PKK, it is largely a propagandistic term used to brand opponents as illegitimate. When I met and interviewed Abdullah (Apo) Ocalan in March 1998, he admitted that on occasion the PKK had used terrorist tactics, but rightly declared that if you studied history you would see that the real terrorists were the states that had so egregiously mistreated the Kurds over the years. All parties to the Kurdish problem should move beyond mere name-calling and seriously open negotiations in an effort to satisfy legitimate Kurdish demands within the existing borders. This means real democracy for the states in which the Kurds live.
(*)Should Kurds depend on American policy on Iraq? And before that, do you think there is something present to be regarded as American-Kurdish alliance in Iraq?
The Iraqi Kurds have no choice but to cooperate with the U.S, policy in Iraq. The Kurds would not have all the achievements of the KRG they now do if it were not for the United States. Of course, this does not mean that the Kurds cannot diplomatically and discreetly debate and argue behind the scenes when U.S. policy seems to be sacrificing the core goals of the KRG such as federalism for Iraq. Given the long-standing American admiration for the Kurds and the specific gratitude for Kurdish support in the 2003 war to remove Saddam Hussein from power, there is a de-facto U.S.-KRG alliance, which the Kurds can call upon. However, as I have already stated, the Kurds must use this de facto alliance in a diplomatic and discreet manner or risk losing it. After all in geopolitical terms, Turkey and Iraq are more important to the United States than the KRG.
(*)In your opinion, among the Kurdish politicians, who is the most successful player in his role?
Although there are a number of successful Iraqi Kurdish politicians, Barham Salih might be the most successful as he has combined a sense of intelligent and modern governance for the people with the overt backing of the existing leadership, which is now being challenged by Nawshirwan Mustafa’s Change List. In this sense, Barham Salih has not only played a most important and intelligent role in Baghdad as well as the KRG, but he has also done so without challenging what many would see the founding fathers of the KRG. Of course, I am saying this before we know the results of the KRG elections on July 25, 2009, so we will have to await these returns to see what Barham Salih’s future will be.
(*)How you see Kurdish future?
In general, I am cautiously optimistic about the future of the Kurds in general. For the first time in their modern history, the Kurds in Iraq and Turkey at least are cautiously ascending which is the title of my latest book on the Kurds! There are two basic reasons for my cautious optimism. (1). The creation of the KRG in Iraq; and (2). Turkey’s EU candidacy is having the fortuitous side effect of granting that state’s ethnic Kurds their full democratic rights.
Professor Dr. Michael M. Gunter
Tennessee Technological University
USA
-------------------------------------
to read the Kurdish version click here
Kurdish version was Published on Sivil Magazine in Hewler, Kurdistan (September 19th 2009)
(*)- How is the Situation and the political weight of Kurds in Iraq & Middle East now in your viewpoint?
The Iraqi Kurds have become a “player” in Iraq and the Middle East as they have become stronger than ever before. However, they are still in a perilous position given the hostility of their regional neighbors and the coming U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. More immediately threatening is the growing strength of the Baghdad government under Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who seems determined to centralize the Iraqi government at the expense of the KRG. Indeed, KRG President Massoud Barzani is not even on speaking terms with al-Maliki since Barzani told al-Maliki that he was beginning to smell like a dictator. Given the horrific history between Baghdad and the Kurds, Barzani had every right to say this.
(*) What are the main pitfalls of Iraqi Kurdish politicians after 2003 and American occupation?
The main pitfall of the Iraqi Kurdish politicians after 2003 has been reaching too far in trying to annex Kirkuk and the surrounding area to the KRG. Since Kirkuk is not just inhabited by Kurds, the needs of its Arabs, Turkomans, and Christians must also be considered. More to the point, however, is that the Arab Iraqis have gradually been regaining their strength and are simply not going to give Kirkuk away to the Kurds. Even if the Kurds somehow took it, it would result in a Pyrrhic victory as the Arabs would never accept it. Kurdish politicians must understand this situation and adequately explain it to their people.
(*) Why Kurds have no friends but mountains most of the time?
The Kurds usually have no friends but the mountains because the Kurdish goals of autonomy or independence challenge the territorial integrity of those existing states (Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria) they inhabit. Furthermore, even states more friendly towards the Kurds such as the United States are not going to support the dismantling of other states because of the dangerous threat to their own security such a doctrine might present.
(*)What are the dangerous threats of Kurdish independence on American security?
Dear Sarwar, The dangers to the US entailed by Kurdish independence of course are just theoretical. However, no state would approve of the doctrine that ethnic groups in an established state can break away and create their own new state because this would in theory threaten the territorial integrity of any and all states including the United States itself.
(*) Should Iraqi Kurds fight Iranian and Turkish Kurds in order to preserve Kurdistan Regional Government and its achievements?
It would be the height of folly and betrayal for the Iraqi Kurds to fight against the Iranian or Turkish Kurds in a misguided effort to preserve the KRG. The Iraqi Kurds actually tried to do this when they supported Turkey against the PKK in 1992 and the result was disastrous on Kurdish morale throughout the world. On the other hand, the KRG cannot be seen as giving outright support to the KRG or PJAK. What is needed is astute diplomacy and compromise on this issue. The KRG must explain and argue that the problem is not the fault of the KRG, but that of Turkey and Iran for their failure to grant their ethnic Kurdish populations their minimal rights.
(*) personally, do you regard PKK as a terrorist Organization?
I do not regard the PKK as a terrorist organization. In the case of the PKK, it is largely a propagandistic term used to brand opponents as illegitimate. When I met and interviewed Abdullah (Apo) Ocalan in March 1998, he admitted that on occasion the PKK had used terrorist tactics, but rightly declared that if you studied history you would see that the real terrorists were the states that had so egregiously mistreated the Kurds over the years. All parties to the Kurdish problem should move beyond mere name-calling and seriously open negotiations in an effort to satisfy legitimate Kurdish demands within the existing borders. This means real democracy for the states in which the Kurds live.
(*)Should Kurds depend on American policy on Iraq? And before that, do you think there is something present to be regarded as American-Kurdish alliance in Iraq?
The Iraqi Kurds have no choice but to cooperate with the U.S, policy in Iraq. The Kurds would not have all the achievements of the KRG they now do if it were not for the United States. Of course, this does not mean that the Kurds cannot diplomatically and discreetly debate and argue behind the scenes when U.S. policy seems to be sacrificing the core goals of the KRG such as federalism for Iraq. Given the long-standing American admiration for the Kurds and the specific gratitude for Kurdish support in the 2003 war to remove Saddam Hussein from power, there is a de-facto U.S.-KRG alliance, which the Kurds can call upon. However, as I have already stated, the Kurds must use this de facto alliance in a diplomatic and discreet manner or risk losing it. After all in geopolitical terms, Turkey and Iraq are more important to the United States than the KRG.
(*)In your opinion, among the Kurdish politicians, who is the most successful player in his role?
Although there are a number of successful Iraqi Kurdish politicians, Barham Salih might be the most successful as he has combined a sense of intelligent and modern governance for the people with the overt backing of the existing leadership, which is now being challenged by Nawshirwan Mustafa’s Change List. In this sense, Barham Salih has not only played a most important and intelligent role in Baghdad as well as the KRG, but he has also done so without challenging what many would see the founding fathers of the KRG. Of course, I am saying this before we know the results of the KRG elections on July 25, 2009, so we will have to await these returns to see what Barham Salih’s future will be.
(*)How you see Kurdish future?
In general, I am cautiously optimistic about the future of the Kurds in general. For the first time in their modern history, the Kurds in Iraq and Turkey at least are cautiously ascending which is the title of my latest book on the Kurds! There are two basic reasons for my cautious optimism. (1). The creation of the KRG in Iraq; and (2). Turkey’s EU candidacy is having the fortuitous side effect of granting that state’s ethnic Kurds their full democratic rights.
Professor Dr. Michael M. Gunter
Tennessee Technological University
USA
-------------------------------------
to read the Kurdish version click here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
