Thursday, February 15, 2007


“War is war and this war is the dirtiest and cruellest in the world.”
~ Abdullah Ocalan

An analysis of the current situation in the Middle East appeared on KurdishMedia on Tuesday. Since today is February 15, let's focus on part of that article:

High profile US and Israeli political and intelligence coordinators have been active in Turkey, bringing back memory of the shameless collaboration between the CIA, Mussed and their Turkish counterpart for kidnapping Abdulla Ocalan, the PKK leader who is now in a Turkish jail. Gen. Joseph W. Ralston of US has been conveying Turkish messages pressures to Masud and Nechirvan Barzani, President and Prime Minister of Iraqi Kurdistan, respectively. Their negotiations remain a secret but, predictably, centre round Turkish intentions to bombard Qandil, the stronghold of PKK in Iraqi Kurdistan. Worse still, Ralston might be brokering a deal for the Turks to invade Iraqi Kurdistan to go after the PKK fighters. However, agreeing a deal that would guarantee a win-lose outcome in favour of the Kurd’s arch enemy, would cost the Kurdish leaders dearly. Their cooperation with a hostile neighbour, who has done little to win the Kurd’s trust and good will, would be suicidal.

Senior British diplomats are also lobbying in Kurdistan, among officials and politicians. Their efforts focus on convincing (and adding pressure on) the Kurds for a long delay in implementing the 140th clause of the Iraqi constitution. The clause relates to holding a referendum on future of Kirkuk, which Turkey fears will strengthen the hand of the Kurds and may lead to their ultimate independence. It is only too obvious that the UK Government is secretly engaged lobbying, and brokering deals, on behalf of Turkey at the expense of the Kurds. Interestingly, none of the lobbyists have offered any credible win-win alternatives. Kirkuk is now the core, and symbol, of the Kurdish struggle in Iraq. No Kurdish leader would brave such an irresponsible compromise and expect to survive politically, or get away with it.

Handling PKK

The PKK represents a hugely popular movement in Northern (Turkey’s) Kurdistan. Turkey’s century-long state terror, and 24 year-long systematic anti-PKK military campaign, have done little to weaken the resolve of the 20 million Northern Kurds in their fight for basic human rights. An air strike on a handful of fighters on an isolated Iraqi mountain would be a total waste of exercise, fuel further hatred and complicate future Kurdish-Turkish-US relations. By alignment with Turkey, the US will loose moral high ground and the Kurd’s goodwill. The PKK, on the other hand, will win sympathy, support and refuge. It is highly likely that the well-connected PKK Peshmarga fighters would suffer minimal damage as a result of air or ground attack on Qandil. They would disseminate amongst the 6 million Iraqi Kurds, who would happily accommodate them (encouraged by their leaders or not).

The US, British and Israel lobbyists should be aiming at win-win situations. Ideally, the US should help the elected Turkish politicians to break free from the unaccountable and dictatorial Army Generals. The two have diverging agenda. The former is trusted with delivering on election pledges, including democracy, prosperity, EU membership and a political solution to the Kurdish issue. The Army, on the other hand, is a state-within-state, thrives on corruption, extremism, violence and wars. Unaided, the Turkish politicians are incapable of confronting Army Generals, who approach the Kurdish issue purely from a security point of view. For as long as this remains so, Turkey will suffer on-going political, economic and security instability.

Once again we see that the recommended approach is that of a political solution to a problem that is purely political. However, at this point such a solution is highly unlikely. We have seen Lockheed Martin's General Ralston, on behalf of the US government, reject the fifth unilateral PKK ceasefire and any possible political solution, especially as outlined by Koma Komalên Kurdistan in August 2006. Any hope of seeking an IRA-type solution to the Kurdish situation under Turkish brutality has also been ruled out.

At the same time that Ocalan's reapplication to the ECHR is submitted, the "shameless collaboration" of the US, Turkey, and Israel is re-enacted, a fact which was most apparent last week in Europe, with the detentions and arrests of Kurdish political leaders and intellectuals. These terrorist operations against the Kurdish people took place during Turkish foreign minister Abdullah Gul's visit to the US and the cooperation of the US in the attacks against the Kurds of Europe was confirmed by Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Daniel Fried during a press conference last Thursday. Contrary to the results of a recent US raid on the Kurdish refugee camp at Maxmur, and the UN's census of the camp, which established the civilian nature of Maxmur, Fried reiterated the US government's position that the 11,000 refugees of Maxmur are a threat to joint US-Turkish interests.

The rejection of peaceful overtures by the PKK to solve the situation of the Kurdish people under Turkish occupation, the attacks against the Kurdish people in Europe, the denial of the civilian status of the Maxmur refugees most certainly does resemble the "shameless collaboration" of the enemies of the people of Kurdistan as carried out eight years ago today.

Ultimately the "shameless collaboration" of the US, Turkey, and Israel, as well as the overwhelming silence of the international community in the face of severe Turkish repression of Kurds, all serve to protect Deep State interests--which are intimately tied to the war industry--and prevent an open discussion of the Kurdish situation.

Taking the example of the recent Western discussion on the Armenian Genocide, prompted by Turkey's EU accession interests, a recent vote in the French parliament, and the shameless murder of Hrant Dink by the Deep State, imagine if the Kurdish situation in Turkey, with all of its brutality, were as earnestly debated in the so-called democratic societies. What would such a debate reveal? Whom would be implicated as an accessory to the genocide of the Kurdish people? Where would all the threads lead?

The answers to those questions are the deeper reasons for the "shameless collaboration" that is so active today.




No comments: