Sunday, August 20, 2006


"Turkey aims to defeat the Kurds through military aggression, isolation and repression against our movement. We have no other option but to resist such attacks. Resistance is our legitimate right. Resistance is a right enshrined under international law. As long as the Kurdish Question remains unresolved we will resort to our legitimate right to resistance. We will not accept surrender or death."
~ Cemil Bayik.

Kurdish gerîlas of the HPG sent a fiery warning to the fascist regimes in both Ankara and Teheran, late Saturday night, by conducting a successful operation against a natual gas pipeline near Agri. More from the Washington Post:

ANKARA, Turkey -- A suspected Kurdish rebel attack caused an explosion and huge fire on a natural gas pipeline in eastern Turkey, the Energy Ministry said.

The region's governor, Halil Ibrahim Akpinar, said separatist Kurds were suspected of carrying out an attack on the pipeline. He did not say if a bomb was believed to have caused the explosion.

The blast shook houses in nearby villages, the private Dogan news agency reported.

Gas flows to the nearby province of Erzincan were cut, Energy Ministry spokesman Bulent Ismen said.

Paramilitary police sealed off the area and firefighting teams were dispatched to the region.

Turkey has been importing natural gas from Iran through the 1,598-mile pipeline since 2001. Turkish and Iranian officials are reportedly discussing expanding the pipeline for exports to Europe.

Rebels of the Kurdistan Workers' Party, or PKK, previously have sabotaged pipelines as part of their struggle for an autonomous homeland in southeastern Turkey. More than 37,000 people have been killed since the rebels took up arms in 1984.

The group is considered a terrorist organization by Turkey, the United States and the European Union. Turkey is pressing the United States and Iraq to crack down on the rebels, many of whom are based in northern Iraq.

ANF reports that the blast was felt up to 40 kilometers away and a devastating fire was produced by the explosion. Flames from the blaze were seen in Kars and Igdir. The HPG operation against the Turkish and Iranian regimes is a warning to them in response to their recent joint military operations in the region, confirmed an HPG-BIM statement.

More news is available at Reuters and CNN.

As Murat Karayilan said in May, if Turkey or Iran attack any Kurdish factions, guerrilla war will be the result. From the Scotsman:

"If Iran and Turkey continue attacking the bases of the PKK or other Kurdish factions, the PKK will launch a guerrilla war against Turkey because the PKK has forces in Turkish areas," Murat Karayilan, a PKK leader, told a news conference.

Now, if anyone thinks this operation was launched from Qandîl, go find a map and locate all the places mentioned so far. Compare them in relation to Qandîl. The fact is that HPG and PJAK are among the populations of Turkish- and Iranian-occupied Kurdistan.

Turkey and Iran have recently agreed to a joint venture to export Iranian natural gas to Europe via Turkey's pipelines, from

TEHRAN, Aug. 18 (MNA) – The Islamic Republic of Iran is to export natural gas to Europe via neighboring Turkey, said the oil minister upon his return from Ankara late at night on Wednesday.

This, however, is not going to take place through construction of a new pipeline to deliver gas to Europe. The current Iran-Turkey gas pipeline would be a good option to this end. Both sides have decided to consider the issue in the next round of talks in Tehran, Kazem Vaziri-Hamaneh added.

"During this visit, Iran's gas export projects through Turkey were clarified and will soon be finalized," PIN quoted the minister as saying on Friday.

"It was planned to increase the capacity of Iran's pipeline, which is connected to the Turkish pipeline, and export gas to Europe jointly with Turkey," said the minister without elaborating on when exports would begin.

Turkey buys gas via a pipeline from the northwestern Iranian city of Tabriz to Ankara, which was inaugurated in December 2001.

“There are three options to export gas from Iran to Europe via Turkey, of which, Nabucco Project (Turkey-Austria) and the existing pipe are still on the agenda,” Vaziri-Hamaneh said, stipulating 90 percent of Nabucco’s available capacity is going to be assigned for Iranian gas export venture.

“Moreover, five billion cubic meters of existing line between the two countries is to be allocated to us to transport gas to the border point destined for Europe,” the minister elaborated, adding his counterpart expressed his respective government’s willingness to invest in energy field in Iran during the talks held in Turkey last week.

It would appear that Austria is involved in this venture as well. Austria is the main European country involved in European-Turkish plans to resurrect the Ilisu project. The Ilisu project is specifially designed to forcibly displace up to 78,000 Kurds, destroy the ancient and beautiful city of Hasankeyf, as well as all the cultural artifacts of the area. It will also destroy any evidence of mass graves of those who became victims of the fascist policies of the Ankara regime.

Europeans should think twice before engaging in the unethical exploitation of the Kurdish people, something that the Europeans have so far ignored from their own greed. If they continue with unethical policies that severely affect Kurdistan, then it is fitting that they become indirect victims of those policies.

The EU has not been transparent with regard to Turkey's EU accession requirements especially in regard to the political, cultural and human rights of the Kurdish people under Turkish occupation. Instead, the EU has ignored the suffering of Kurds and encouraged them to accept whatever the Ankara regime wishes to grant. All of this has been done for the sake of filthy lucre; in effect, the EU has sold the Kurds in order to turn a buck with Ankara. This is not acceptable.

Meanwhile, back in South Kurdistan, the evil mullah regime continued to bomb Kurdish villages. From the NYTimes:

SULAIMANIYA, Iraq, Aug. 19 — Artillery shells fired from Iran have landed in remote northern villages of Iraqi Kurdistan in the past four days and have killed at least two civilians and wounded four others, a senior Kurdish official said Saturday. Dozens of families have fled the region.

The shells have been aimed at an area around Qandil Mountain, known as a base for militant Kurdish opposition groups seeking independence from Turkey and Iran, said the official, Mustafa Sayed Qadir, a senior member of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, which governs the eastern half of Iraqi Kurdistan.

“A lot of homes have been damaged and livestock killed,” he said. A shepherd was wounded Saturday, and two women were among the three people wounded on previous days, he added.

The government of Iraq is aware of the shelling, which has taken place occasionally in recent months, but has not taken an official position, he said.

The president of Iraq, Jalal Talabani, is the head of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan. He has at times had a close relationship with Iran, especially when he sought Iranian support in the 1990’s against rival Kurdish leaders and Saddam Hussein. But Mr. Talabani is also aware of the Iranian government’s poor treatment of its Kurdish minority. Iranian officials could not be reached for comment Saturday evening.

Iranian officials could not be reached for comment because they were busy on Saturday evening watching their business deal with Turkey go up in flames.

While the Baghdad government and the KRG are unwilling and unable to give a proper response to the aggressors, HPG and PJAK move freely through Turkish- and Iranian-occupied Kurdistan to do just that.

May they go from from strength to strength.


madtom said...

Hi Mizgin

Today I wrote this in an e-mail exchange with another person that has been following events in Iraq. I am reposting it here just to get your reaction, and that of your wise readers. I have blacked out a few words to keep the conversation private.
Don't hold back.

I was aware of your efforts long before today. I did not know you had a blog though. You need to advertise more.

Impressive as your work is, the situation in Iraq is deteriorating rapidly, unless you would be willing to paint American flags on the **** and the ***** so that the people getting the help know where it came from. I'm afraid that it will do little to bridge the sectarian gap that's growing wider every day.

If nothing is done Iraq's civil war will have disastrous implications for Mosul. When the Kurds break away and declare independence they will want to take Mosul with them, the Turks will intervene, the shi'a and the sunnies will all fight and Mosul will be on the front line of Iraqis civil war. think Ramadi, ten times worse.

Turkey already has 50,000 troops massed on the boarder, they claim they are after the PKK in
They have also been "caught" sending weapons to Hizbollah, maybe even cooperating with Iran on their nuclear ambitions.

What I think is happening is that people see Iraq sliding off the map and they are getting ready to
carve out a piece for each.

There has to be some force at work within Iraq that is not either religious ethnic, political, or military to hold Iraq together. Because I think we are running out of options and out of time.

Maybe I'm just paranoid.

srusht said...

Serhildan jiyane,

The harder you hit the joint Turco-Iranian economic enterprises, the more you expose their joint criminal adventure against the Kurdistani people and the humanity.

Dest xwesh gerela y me.

srusht said...

to madtom,

I believe by holding Iraq together, disastrous consequences of civil war cannot be averted.

In contrast, partitioning Iraq, or put it differently: by respecting the right of self-determination for the constituent peoples of Iraq, the current situation of civil war may be ended.

The latter option is additionally more consistent with justice, historical records, and the current international understanding of human rights.

Respect and love.

Mizgîn said...

Partition is what certain people--Peter Galbraith, Leslie Gelb and, more recently, Ralph Peters--have argued for. Galbraith and Gelb even made the comparison to the former Yugoslavia, with Galbraith arguing that if partition were done the right way, Iraq would not have to go in a violent manner like Yugoslavia did.

However, Bush has consistently refused this idea, so the responsibility rests with him and his administration. It's a huge waste, but what I'd like to know is what they feel they would get from forcing a single Iraq. What are their interests here?

Madtom, first of all, I'm not sure about Mûsil. The east side of the river has been majority Kurd for a while, so if the Southern leadership had designs on Mûsil, I would certainly think they might grab the east side. However, Kerkuk is THE big deal. People were talking about Kerkuk last year, with the old people remembering speeches Barzanî Nemirî made about Kerkuk way back in the 1960's. . . early 1960's. So, this is definitely an issue, but I'm not sure about Mûsil. Someone else may know more about that.

Regarding Turkey, I like how your writer says, "they claim they are after the PKK in Kurdistan," because that's how I see it, as a claim. This tends to confirm what the analysis from GSI/D&FA had to say, that Turkey and Iran are simply preparing themselves to carve up South Kurdistan for its resources. Hence the observation of Iraq sliding off the map with the neighbors getting ready to grab what they can.

The part on Turkey being "caught sending weapons to Hezbollah" and cooperating with Iran in its nuclear program are also things that I have said here. It would be nice to know what this person meant about the weapons transfers, because Turkey has been involved with using the cover of "humanitarian aid" (Turkish Red Crescent) for weapons transfers in South Kurdistan and Iraq.

It's not only Turkey that has been involved in Iraq, but the evil Persian Empire as well. This is why I cannot understand why someone did not assassinate al-Sadr right away, because he is one of the biggest menaces and he's had ties to Iran for a long time. He should have turned up dead with a bullet through the head by unknown assailants a long time ago.

The only way that Iraq has ever been held together is by strongmen backed by Western powers. The only thing that hasn't been tried in contemporary times is the idea of partition. Iraq was "partitioned" under the Ottomans, although they were still the ultimate "strongman," the ultimate authority in that arrangement too.

In my opinion, this person is fairly on track. I have to agree with Srusht that partition might work. I think it should be tried, anyway. At this point, there is nothing else to lose.

madtom said...

You want to know why I do not like partition? It's because all of the ME could then have the same excuse, every country in the ME has some population that wants out and the same excuse about the end of WWI and the Ottoman and the British.

If I ask for a final map, one that we, and I mean everyone can agree on, what would it look like and how many years of war will it take to fix it?

Does the US have that many bombs?

Oh and by the way, I am the writer. I would never post any portion of someone else's e-mail to me. I take all my mail as private, I take that very seriously.
This is the part I wrote from a larger exchange that dealt with Mosul were my friends interest are more focused.

And this blog was the source for turkeys actions with respect to Hizbollah and Iran. So you can not use them to reinforce you own post.

Maybe the Kurds have already been sold down the river,

I was thinking that the Kurds would surly try to hold Mosul if for nothing else as a bargaining chip for Kirkuk, but everyone is going to want the oil of Kirkuk Surly the Turks will want it. Iran will take the southern fields so they "might" only have security interest in Kurdistan, But what of the Arabs in Anbar? What do they get, desert sand, good farms...

I see a big fight.

Now maybe the US is going to invite the Turks to take Mosul so as to get the Turks involved, but then how are we going to get them out latter?

You see why I do not like partition, it's an equation that just don't add up for me, so I can not support it.

srusht said...

The state of Iraq was created by the British in 1919 and Faysal was appointed as the king of Iraq in 1921 also by the British.

It was in December 1925 when the League of Nations Council decided to attach the former Ottoman vilayet of Mosul to the state of Iraq BUT on the condition that the British mandate should last another 25 years; and that "the desire of the Kurds [who constituted the majority population of the Mosul Vilayet] that the administrators, magistrates and teachers in their country be drawn from their own ranks and adopt Kurdish as the official language in all their activities will be taken into account."

Britain was to ensure the fulfilment of the two conditions.

( League of Nations: 'Report by the Commission Set up by the 30th September 1924 Resolution to investigate the question of the frontier between Turkey and Iraq – you find it in any good book on the modern states of Turkey and Iraq).

After only 5 years, the Anglo-Iraq Treaty in 1930 ended the British mandate and reinforced the dominance of the Sunni Arab minority over the country.

Partitioning of Iraq, and Mosul becoming capital of South Kurdistan are perfectly compatible with international law and the letter and spirit of the Sevres Treaty of 1920.

The emergence of islamo-fascism as the most formidable security threat to western states following the defeat of Nazism and communism may call into question the revival of Sevres plan for the Kurdish state in northern and southern Kurdistan (see section III entitled Kurdistan of the Sevres Treaty) and reinstating the rights to their rightful owners.

The rise of political islam in Turkey will speed up this process, amen.


srusht said...

[[[[[[[[You want to know why I do not like partition? It's because all of the ME could then have the same excuse, every country in the ME has some population that wants out and the same excuse about the end of WWI and the Ottoman and the British.]]]]]]]]]


ME since 1919 has been on fire. New political boundaries may guarantee lasting peace and stability in the region in the long term. That is well overdue.

heftirik said...

thank you mizgîn!!

and i definitely agree with srıcht on partitioning of iraq, a kurdistan for the kurds is long have been deserved and beyond that it is a necessity! it will happen but if make it sooner we may prevent more bloodshed!!!


madtom said...

Peter Galbraith, advisor in the US to Iraqi Kurdish leaders, said yesterday that Turkey can't block the establishment of an independent Kurdish state, adding that this reality is being understood by Turkish authorities.
Galbraith also stated that a Kurdish state already exists in northern Iraq, claiming that it will soon formally declare its independence. According to news channel NTV, claiming that the conservative Turkish view that sees the establishment of an independent Kurdish state as a threat to Turkey has been changing, Galbraith said, "The dominant view among the Turks is that Turkey's occupation of northern Iraq wouldn't bring a solution but would rather throw the country out of the European Union and damage relations with the US."

Be carfull what you wish for...

Mizgîn said...

Madtom, the proposals for a three-state solution also included something more like confederation, as in the way Switzerland does things.

The problem is that none of this has even been discussed, when it really should have been discussed BEFORE March, 2003. The post-war/reconstruction phase has been totally half-assed and that all stems from pre-war planning, or lack thereof.

You should check out Kanan Makiya's take on the pre-war planning. Peter Galbraith testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in June, 2003, which lends at least SOME credibility to my characterization of the reconstruction as "half-assed."

I think most Americans think that everyone else thinks like Americans, or will behave like Americans, but it's a big mistake to make these assumptions.