KERKUK, A CASE OF POISONING, THE CIA PROFILE DATABASE

"I believe that the people in power -- not only political power, but also economic and social power -- will not non-violently give up that power to the people. Power is not a material possession that can be given, it is the ability to act. Power must be taken, it is never given."
~ The Anarchist Cookbook.

By now, everyone has heard of the bombing that took place in Kerkuk on Thursday. KCK issued a statement condemning the bombing, emphasizing that Turkey, Iran, Syria, and their collaborators, are responsible for the bombing in Kerkuk, and that their aim is to separate Kerkuk from Kurdistan. As far as I know, Heval Cuma's offer to help fight in Kerkuk, if necessary, still stands:

Kurdish leaders in Iraq have promised to raise the issue of the northern oil city of Kirkuk which they demand be integrated into a Kurdish autonomous zone after a cabinet is formed. Iran is “trying to help some factions in Iraq work against the Kurdish nation so that Kirkuk doesn’t join the (autonomous zone). This is happening as the new government is being created and the Kirkuk problem is discussed,” Bayik said.

“If the Kurds go to war with the Arabs over Kirkuk we will help them. We don’t just fight for ourselves,” Bayik said adding that such a conflict was “possible.”

Turkey's intent to meddle in Kerkuk was clear in August 2007. In addition, Turkish mercenaries based in Maryland are also operating in Kerkuk.

Thanks to the heval who sent the link, KurdishMedia has a report on a news item that appeared on Kurdistan TV last week:

Last week the Hewler-based Kurdistan-TV Satellite Network reported that a well-known Turkish company has been allegedly sending poisoned food in what many have claimed is a calculated attempt to harm Kurdish citizens in the Iraqi or Southern Kurdistan region. Critics of Turkey find little surprise in this recent allegation claiming that after having publicly failed to justify their torture and even executing of anyone who speaks out for human rights in Turkey, the Turkish government has employed new strategic plan to harm innocent civilians of Kurdish descent.

Turkey, a country that is often falsely labeled as a democracy, has become familiar to many critics for its countless human rights abuses. The government has been regularly condemned by human rights group for imprisoning anyone who speaks or writes about the Kurdish issue in the country.

Recent trade increases between Turkey and the Kurds in Iraq have been viewed as a positive developments in the two group's relations. Turkey is responsible for shipping a very large percentage of foods and other products into South Kurdistan. However, critics say that the Turkish government's policy towards Kurds is unchanged and this recent discovery is proof of that.

Turkish companies ship cooking-oil into South Kurdistan and recent discoveries indicate that it comes with poison. The experts who reported these claims say the recurring incident is far from an accident. The President of the Science Department of the University of Salahadin in the Kurdish capital, Hewler, noted that the food from Turkey containing the poison is a perfect mixture to harm and even kill any person who consumes it.

Critics speculate that there are many reasons as to why Southern Kurdistan could have possibly been a target; a major one being that Southern Kurdistan has become a representation of Kurdish identity and national pride in the region. Critics say it has been Turkey's aim to wipe it out.

Well, if you lie down with dogs, expect to get up with fleas. This is what happens when one relies on an enemy government to provide your food supply and it harkens back to the experiences of many Southern Kurds who fled into Turkey after the 1991 serhildan, only to find that the bread and water supplied by the Ankara regime was poisoned.

Check out some of the photos of Greek police on fire, from Hürriyet. Here's a sample:





Don't you wish . . .

More on the activity in Greece, from the BBC:

When Greeks say no, they mean it in spades.

Rebellion is deeply embedded in the Greek psyche. The students and school children who are now laying siege to police stations and trying to bring down the government are undergoing a rite of passage.

[ . . . ]

The latent Greek contempt for the police, which has now erupted so volcanically, has its roots in the dictatorship, when the police were regarded as the colonels' enforcers and traitors to the people.

[ . . . ]

In an editorial entitled "Anger's teen martyr", Mr Konstandaras wrote that Mr Grioropoulos' blood would be "used to bind together every disparate protest and complaint into a platform of righteous rage against all the ills of our society.

"It will quickly become a flag of convenience for anyone who has a grudge against the state, the government, the economic system, foreign powers, capitalism and so on."

"If Greece had already appeared difficult to govern, it will now be out of control."

"The latent Greek contempt for the police . . . " Ah, now there's the proper attitude to cultivate. Greek police are reportedly out of tear gas and are urgently begging Germany and Israel to renew their supplies. See more at TIME, which describes the area the area in which the 15-year-old Alexandros Grigoropoulos was killed as a neighborhood sort of like Tarlıbaşı:

For Athens police, the Exarchia neighborhood is enemy territory.

Exactly! I like it already.

There's also an update on yesterday's post about the morons at Facebook. Basically, they think "we"--whoever "we"are--are afraid of them. However, they are so fearful of PKK than they can't even mention the term. Instead, they say "those guys".

You would think that Turkish ultra-nationalists would know their own language very, very well. Unfortunately, that is not the case in this situation. I feel so much pity for such a poorly educated ülkücü, that, as an Apocu, I would like to provide a corrected version of poor little ülkücü's statement, so that his friends will be able to understand exactly what he means . . . assuming that their literacy skills are better than his, that is. By the way, I also took the liberty of adding consistent punctuation:

ARKADAŞLAR,

GÖSTERMİŞ OLDUĞUNUZ İLGİ İÇİN HEPİNİZE TEK TEK TEŞEKKÜR EDERİM. FAKAT SESİMİZİ DAHA DA DUYURMAK İÇİN SAĞ TARAFTA BULUNAN PAYLAŞ SEÇENEĞİ İLE GRUBUMUZU PROFİLİNİZDE PAYLAŞA BİLİRSİNİZ.

BİZİM ÖYLE DİĞER GRUPLAR GİBİ BİR KORKUMUZ YOK. ARKADAŞINIZI DAVET ETMEZSENİZ, GRUBA KATILMA GİBİ BİR DÜŞÜNCEMİZDE YOK. [ANLATIM BOZUKLUĞU].

ÇÜNKÜ BİZ GÜCÜMÜZÜ BİLİYORUZ. BU GRUPTA HERKES KENDİNİ BİR BİREY OLARAK TEMSİL EDİYOR.

İŞTE GERÇEĞİN BELGESİ

SİZE İYİ BİR HABERİM VAR ÇÜNKÜ BAZILARI O KADAR KORKMUŞLAR ki KENDİ WEB SİTELERİNDE BİZİM GRUBUMUZUN REKLAMINI DA YAPMIŞLAR.

http://rastibini.blogspot.com/

SÖZDE KENDİLERİNİ SAVUNUP ELİ KANLI OLANLARIN BİZ OLDUĞUNU İMA ETMİŞLER. ONLAR GERÇEKLERDEN KAÇSIN ÖNEMLİ DEĞİL.

BİZ ADIM ADIM AMACIMIZA ULAŞACAĞIZ. ONLAR ÖNDERLİK İÇİN WEB SİTELERİNDE ÖZGÜRLÜK YÜRÜĞÜŞÜ DÜZENLESİNLER BİZ NE DE OLSA ONU ENİNDE SONUNDA İPİN UCUNDA SALLANDIRACAĞIZ.GEBERDİKTEN SONRA İSTEDİKLERİ YERE YÜRÜĞÜŞE GÖTÜREBİLİRLER.


KATILAN VE KATKIDA BULUNAN ARKADAŞLARA TEŞEKKÜR EDERİM
SAĞLICAKLA KALIN

Troy İSUS

[Note to Troy: It's okay to be a poorly educated ülkücü but you don't need to disclose the fact to the whole world.]

I guess they all missed the news that Facebook is a CIA profile database. That information was on Youtube a while ago . . . OOPS!! They can't see Youtube in Turkey! For those of you who can see Youtube, here you go:

In the meantime, I guess the CIA will continue to collect their addresses, hometowns, phone numbers, emails, jobs, birthdates, sexual orientations, interests, daily schedules, relations to friends, pictures, political affiliations . . .

SERKEFTIN!

UPDATE ON TURKISH-FUNDED COUNTER-GUERRILLAS IN IRAQ

In an update on some information published on Özgür Gündem a few weeks ago (for English check here).

Apparently, the Iraqi insurgent group, 1920 Revolution Brigade, has been "rebranded" by the US military in a new marketing campaign to show how well The Surge® is doing:

The updated vocabulary for referring to the 1920 Revolution Brigade, described by a U.S. commander on Saturday, is a sign of the abrupt change in tactics that has seen U.S. forces cooperate with former Sunni Arab enemies.

The 1920 Revolution Brigade was one of the main anti-American Sunni Arab insurgent groups in Iraq in the years after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion and has claimed responsibility for killing scores of U.S. troops in ambushes and bomb attacks.

But for the past several months its members have cooperated with U.S. forces to help drive the strict al Qaeda Islamists out of Sunni Arab areas, part of a new U.S. tactic of cooperating with former Sunni Arab foes against al Qaeda.

Colonel David Sutherland, the U.S. commander in Diyala Province, said his men prefer not to call the group by its name.

"The 1920s as they're called, we call them 'the Baquba Guardians', we call them the 'concerned local nationals'," he said. Baquba is the provincial capital.

"These are patriots who have come forward and have joined the security process. They are working with my soldiers and they are working with the Iraqi security forces," he said.

And they're paid by Turkish intelligence.

The 1920 Revolution Brigade was named by Özgür Gündem as among those Sunni insurgency groups that Turkey was paying and supplying technical and logistical support in order to delay the Kerkuk Referendum.

Now, obviously, it appears that the 1920s have been whitewashed of their "terrorist" past by the US military. It makes me wonder how much the US is involved with black operations in order to put off the Kerkuk Referendum.

Oh, yeah, bear in mind that while groups like the 1920 Revolution Brigade have "kill[ed] scores of U.S. troops in ambushes and bomb attacks," no organization belonging to KCK (i.e. "PKK") has ever killed a single American.

CONTRA-GUERRILLAS AND KERKUK

"Some see the contra-guerilla as separate from the state. This is wrong, say the DHKP-C: in Turkey the contra-guerilla IS the state."
~ DHKP-C.

Early in the year, I posted some information about US-based Turkish mercenaries and some reasons why regimes may turn to a wider use of mercenary forces in the future. Among those reasons were the following:

1. A lack of other means: Many states lack the means to perform their own security effectively. . .

2. Plausible deniability: . . . Some states may wish to pursue policies covertly that would bring harsh and swift retaliation from their enemies if they were overt.Many states wish to pursue policies covertly that if pursued overtly would bring massive opprobrium upon them, from the press, their own electorate, their allies, or the "international community." The use of proxies in pursuing such policies might be one way to avoid such retaliationStateless actors might allow a bit of discretion or separation that would otherwise be impossible.

3. Circumvention of Laws: States may wish to circumvent their own laws or international regulations in the pursuit of certain policies. One solution is to make a deal with a stateless organization that can operate with much more extralegal freedom than can a state organization. . .

4. A Lack of Political Will: There may be times when states are compelled to pursue policies that their populations cannot stomach. . .

While mercenaries may be the new way to go for regimes who want to appear to keep clean hands, there is still the tried-and-true method of using black operatives or contra-guerrillas for similar work, and it looks like that is, in fact, part of the plan.


According to Özgür Gündem, a contra-guerrilla base has been founded in Amed (Diyarbakır) by the Ankara regime. These contra-guerrillas not only will operate against Kurds in the region of Amed and North Kurdistan, but also against Kurds in Iraq, Iran, and Syria.

The goal of the contra-guerrillas is to delay the Kerkuk referendum through black operations. Since Turkey cannot conduct a military operation in the South, it's initiating black operations through this contra-guerrilla group, operating in the same way it did in Semdinli, in the Council of State, and in the Hrant Dink murder. JITEM and the Patriots Movement were behind those operations.

Ostensibly the contra-guerrilla group raised donations from $500,000 per month to $1,000,000 per month for the Iraqi Turkmen Front (ITF). I say "ostensibly," because it's more likely that the "donations" are coming directly from the Ankara regime. In addition, the contra-guerrillas give rewards for each successful ITF operation.

Turkey is working in Iraq with 3 major Sunni radical groups: Ansar al-Sunni Army, Iraq Islamic Army, and the 1920 Revolution Battalion, especially within the last 6 months. Turkey is supplying technical and logistic support to them.

The contra-guerrillas contacted some Arab tribes in Mosul and promised economic assistance to the tribes if they encourage the Sunnis to attack KDP and PUK offices.

Turkey has also been in contact with Arabs in Kerkuk, who had moved there during Saddam's arabization. Turkey organized these Arabs into death squads and provided them with assassination lists of Kurdish leaders. Attacks against Turkmen leaders, including Iraqi Turkmen Front leaders, would be encouraged in order create chaos.

They have assassination plans for some Arab and Turkmen leaders in order to turn Kurds and other peoples against each other and create a basis for the justification of the assassinations of Kurdish leaders.

The goal is to delay the Kerkuk referendum and not to allow Kerkuk to become part of Kurdistan.

BUYUKANIT BRAYS

"Turkish repression of the Kurdish minority in the southeastern part of the country has been severe, with the Turkish armed forces using U.S. weapons in widespread attacks against civilian populations, destroying over 3,000 Kurdish villages in recent years. Turkish forces have periodically crossed into Iraq into the UN safe haven to attack Kurds as well, with the U.S. virtually alone in the international community in backing such illegal incursions."
~ Stephen Zunes, FPIF.

Well, you knew it was only a matter of time, didn't you? The real ruler of Turkey, Yasar Buyukanit, finally came out today in his first press conference since taking up his position as the Turkish chief of general staff and "asked" the government for permission to invade South Kurdistan. And that whole bit about "asking permission" is window-dressing for all those idiots in the West who believe that Turkey is a democracy. From Australia's The Age:

The head of Turkey's powerful military General Staff called for a military operation in northern Iraq to quash Turkish Kurdish rebels hiding there.

"From the military point of view, a (military) operation in northern Iraq must be made," General Yasar Buyukanit told a rare news conference, adding that a political decision from the government was first required to authorise such a step.

More on that from MSNBC and something from TDN.
Bianet gives a rundown on Turkey's Human Rights Foundation's reaction to Buyukanit's press conference:

Evaluating Gen. Büyükanıt's words to bianet, Turkey's Human Rights Foundation (TİHV) chair Yavuz Önen said: "He targeted everybody from academics, the government, the European Union to human rights activists but avoided to mention anything about the policies of United States".

Önen argues, overall, Büyükanıt's speech signals a period of increased pressure and control over the forces of democracy in the country as he aims to block any debate on increasing freedoms and rights, forcing people to self-censorship.

Referring to Büyükanıt's criticism on current legislation and how it scrutinizes the fight against terrorism, Önen voices fears of implementation of legislative changes resembling martial law, which in return would curb the freedoms in Turkey.

That means a virtual return to the State of Emergency. Pretty interesting that Buyukanit doesn't criticize the US. Think about that one long and hard.

Then there was something interesting in Zaman, too:

But there are also strong indications that keeping the Turkish cross-border operation as an option on the table -- despite the possible serious repercussions on Turkey's international image -- is aimed at intimidating the Iraqi Kurds for their plans to annex the oil-rich city of Kirkuk to the Kurdish autonomous region through a planned referendum to be held this year; let alone aspirations to officially set up an independent Kurdish state. Ankara fears any such attempt could encourage its own Kurds to do the same.

In fact, retired Gen. Edip Başer, the appointed Turkish coordinator in the fight against the PKK, told news station CNN Turk on March 9 that Turkey's priority strategically has been to prevent the establishment of a Kurdish state in northern Iraq rather than the fight against PKK terror.

So Baser is expressing the view consistent with Henri Barkey's analysis from 2005 which was mentioned in yesterday's post. It's not only the prevention of an independent Kurdish state in South Kurdistan that the Ankara regime opposes, but control of Kerkuk is also a major issue:

US-Kurdish rift emerges on Kirkuk referendum's timing
Thursday, April 12, 2007

PKK problem cannot be resolved unless Turks, Iraqi Kurds talk, Kurdish official says

Ümit ENGİNSOY
WASHINGTON - Turkish Daily News

U.S. and Iraqi Kurdish officials on Tuesday appeared to be disagreeing on the timing of a controversial referendum for the future of the oil-rich and multi-ethnic northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk, but it was not clear if the rift could eventually derail Kurdish plans to include the disputed area into their semi-autonomous region.

At an Iraq conference here, a senior Iraqi Kurdish official insisted that the referendum be held before the end of this year, as planned by the war-torn country's constitution, but a U.S. State Department official said Washington had no position on the polls' timing.

Turkish diplomats welcomed what they saw as a sign of a change in U.S. policy on Kirkuk, which so far had fully backed the Iraqi Kurdish position.

First of all, the Kurdish official quoted (Qubad Talabanî) is wrong; the PKK "problem" cannot be resolved unless Turks talk with the Kurds that they have been in the process of genociding for the last 80 years, and those Kurds are not the Kurds of South Kurdistan. They are the Kurds of North Kurdistan. Secondly, in reading through the entire article, it would appear that the title is misleading--not unusual--because there is no indication that the US opposes the timing of the Kerkuk referendum. Futhermore, if, as the article states, the US supports a resolution based on the Iraqi constitution, then there is no "rift." The US spokeswoman also remarks that "the outcome should be one that takes into account the worries of all parties." Turkey is not a party to the Iraqi constitution and therefore Turkey should butt out.

Again, the entire problem of Turkish meddling goes back to Henri Barkey's analysis and to the fact that the Turkish state is fascist in nature and is founded upon the premise that Kurds do not exist. To admit that Kurds exist, through the reality of either a de facto or actual independent Kurdish state in South Kurdistan, is to undermine the very foundation of Türkiye Cumhuriyeti--the Turkish Republic--and the entire question of identity within Turkey.

Well, okay, there's also the fact that since its beginning, the Ankara regime has viewed Kurds as untermenschen and now it sticks in their craw that Kurds may be equal enough human beings to make the attempt to govern themselves, to solve their own problems, and to create a democracy of their own liking. All of those are very dangerous ideas because if Kurds in the South can do it, Kurds in the North can do it and Kurds in the East and West can do it.

Dangerous, very dangerous.

There's a good read at Mother Jones on the Israelis in South Kurdistan, and there is a far different conclusion drawn than that which The New Yorker's resident moron, Seymour Hersh, came up with back in 2004. Teaser:

What I found was not the story I had expected. Instead of Michaels being part of a covert operation to set up anti-Iranian proxies in Kurdish Iraq, I discovered that Michaels and his associates were part of an effort by the Kurds and their allies to lobby the West for greater power in Iraq, and greater clout in Washington, and at the same time, by a group of Israeli ex security officials to rekindle good relations with their historical allies the Kurds through joint infrastructure, economic development, and security projects. It was, in other words, a story about influence-building, buying, and profit, albeit with subplots that were equal parts John le Carre and Keystone Kops, and a cast of characters ranging from ex-Mossad head Yatom to a former German superspy, with Israeli counterterrorism commandos, Kurdish political dynasties, powerful American lobbyists, Turkish business tycoons thrown in—not to mention millions of dollars stashed in Swiss bank accounts.

[ . . . ]

In the end, Yatom and Michaels’ business activities may well be evidence, as much as any covert U.S. interests, of the Kurds’ superb gamesmanship, pragmatism, and sense of opportunity—instincts honed to a fine art by a people that, lacking durable proximate allies, has learned how to cultivate the enemies of its enemies. The Mossad’s former Irbil station chief, Eliezer Geizi Tsafrir, told me that like the Israelis, the Kurds regard themselves as an historically stateless people surrounded by hostile nations. Back when Tsafrir served in Irbil, he even helped set up a Kurdish intelligence service, in cooperation with the Barzani patriarch, Mustafa Barzani. “They [the Kurds] approached us, saying they had nobody to help them in the world, and our people had suffered too,” he said. “We supplied them with cannons, guns, anti-air equipment, all sorts of equipment, and even lobbying. The contacts between us, and the sympathy, will last for generations to come.”

Use them if you can.

If you've read Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman's Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, and are familiar with the "propaganda model" proposed in the book, take a look at an analysis of the American media's coverage of the British hostages, from ZNet. You'll find it interesting.

Also, check out the scandal over World Bank chief, Paul Wolfowitz, and how he's helped his girlfriend get a World Bank tax-free salary--significantly greater than Condoleeza Rice's salary--in addition to a State Department salary, at the NYTimes, the BBC, or the Guardian. Another, longer, article from The New Yorker is available from Truthout, and that one also suggests that the Wolfowitz World Bank appointment was made in an attempt to further US interests in Iraq.

MORE ON TURKISH MEDDLING

"Compared to Iran, which has had a long relationship with Iraq's largest community, the Sh'ia, Turkey cannot claim any influence over any of the groups in Iraq except for a segment of the Turkmen, specifically the ITF."
~ Henri Barkey.

There's another blog by a Kurd in the US that I came across today. It appears to be written by a Bakûrî, and can be checked out at Kurdistan.

NPR has report today on the situation between the Ankara regime and the Southern Kurds. Runtime almost 5 minutes.

The height of absurdity is that the Ankara regime is complaining about the deaths of 10 Mehmetciks in the last few days and the absurdity is that if the Ankara regime stopped its operations against the HPG, no one would die. Naturally, the continued sacrifice of Turkish youth is the least of Buyukanit's concerns and we know for a fact it's the least of Erdogan's concerns, as reported last September here and here. Specifically, Buyukanit responded, before the fact, to protests by mothers of dead Mehmetciks by insisting "that there would be no change to the system of military service."

Erdogan's attitude is summed up thusly:

Turkish media on Tuesday attacked the prime minister for comments he made about soldiers killed in battle with Kurdish rebels that commentators considered flippant.

"It's not okay, Mr. Tayyip," the daily Vatan said.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan made the comments Monday during a speech in the western town of Balikesir, during which he was interrupted by a member of the audience who screamed "We don't want any more martyrs!"

Erdogan heard the shout and stopped his speech to respond. "Military service isn't the place to lay down and unwind," he said. "Military service has risks. It is not a touristic place."

Prior to Turkish frustration reaching critical mass, PKK offered a democratic, political solution to end the fighting, including the following points:

The framework for the steps that need to be developed mutually in the second phase for a permanent solution:

1- The acknowledgement of the Kurdish identity and the constitutional guarantee of all identities under the identity of a Citizen of Turkey as the main identity,

2- The lifting of obstacles on the development of the Kurdish language and culture, the acknowledgement of education in the mother tongue and Kurdish acknowledged as the official second language alongside Turkish in the Kurdistan region, and with this to show respect to other minority cultures,

3- The acknowledgement, on the basis of freely practicing politics and organizing, of the right to thought, belief and freedom of expression, the lifting of all social inequalities in the constitution and laws, firstly being those of gender discrimination,

4- A social reconciliation project with the aim of mutual forgiveness of both people’s for the development of a peace and freedom union, on this basis the release of political prisoners including the PKK Leadership, and no obstacles to them participating in politics and social life,

5- The removal of forces in Kurdistan there for the purposes of special war, the abolition of the village guard system and the necessary social and political projects to be developed for the return of displaced villagers,

6- In parallel to the realization of the above articles, the initiation, with a timetable determined by both parties, of the gradual disarmament and legal participation into the democratic social life.

Note also that any continued talk of "separatism" is a function of Turkish propaganda, as the statement concludes with the following:

We would like as a movement to emphasize once again that the right solution is a democratic autonomy within the borders of Turkey. We believe that a solution in the unity of Turkey will be for the benefit of firstly the Kurdish people and all the people of the region.

Emphasizing "once again," meaning that this statement is a repetition of PKK's position. How does a search for a political solution "in the unity of Turkey" equate to separatism? Unless you're a Turkish fascist or you're stupid enough to believe Turkish propaganda. This is the solution that both the Ankara and Washington regimes rejected, along with the fifth unilateral PKK ceasefire, and all this for one very cynical reason: to continue to make money off a very long-running low-intensity conflict, as the appointment of Lockheed Martin's Joseph Ralston proved.

If the Southern Kurdish leadership were serious about the situation of Kurds under Turkish occupation, if they were truly concerned about the genocide that the Ankara regime, with the assistance of the Washington regime, has carried out against the Kurdish people in the North, they would have taken every opportunity to press both issues--that of the democratic resolution and that of the ceasefire. They would have demanded the resignation of Lockheed's Ralston and they would have clamored for an honest broker to be appointed as "special envoy" to coordinate a peace process, instead of coordinating Turkish procurement of more Lockheed Martin hardware.

On the other hand, it might be bit difficult, not to mention embarrassing, to cut Lockheed Martin out of the loop, since it is the corporation that is involved in the US foreign policy decision-making process.

Even Qubad Talabanî is busily trying to usurp the leadership of Northern Kurds by ignoring and bypassing them while speaking of his "Turkish brothers" and pledging his undying love for them:

Kubad Talabani, who is Iraqi President Jelal Talabani's son, also noted the importance of economic relations between Turkey and Iraqi Kurds: “All we seek is a reciprocation of our affection, reciprocation of that brotherly relationship where Turkey continues to help Kurdistan's economic development. Hundreds of Turkish companies have been party to Kurdistan's development. We have seen what a good and solid relationship can do for your economy and for ours.”

He sounds exactly like every other ulusalci on the planet and it is despicable. Throughout that entire article, there is not one mention of the PKK's democratic resolution, no pointing out the fact of total rejection of the ceasefire, not a hint that Qubad knows anything of the recent severe repression of the only legal Kurdish party in Turkey--the DTP.

Yet another opportunity to press the reality of the Kurdish situation under Turkish repression wasted--and all for filthy lucre.

More absurdity lies in the fact that the Ankara regime has been meddling in Kerkuk since their first opportunity to do so, in April, 2003. They meddled again, in July, 2003. Turkish meddling in Kerkuk began during the period of the so-called safe haven, when the Southern Kurds began to govern themselves, from Henri Barkey:

As part of its campaign to contain the contagion effects of the Iraqi Kurds, Ankara increasingly came to rely on Iraq's Turkmen minority. The Turkmen issue is relatively new to Turkey; it was not until the 1990s that Ankara began to articulate demands for Turkmen minority rights in Iraq. Arguing that the Turkmen represent the third largest ethnic group in Iraq, Ankara has taken up the banner for their defense, especially their claims to control the city of Kirkuk.8 As part of this effort, Turkey has been instrumental in the creation of the Iraqi Turkmen Front (ITF), an organization it wants the Turkmen to rally around. Yet the Turkmen are divided: Not only are there those who oppose Ankara's interference and the ITF's heavy hand, but there are also sectarian Sunni-Shiite differences that divide the community.9 Perhaps as many as half of the Iraqi Turkmen are Shiite.

[ . . . ]

Previous governments in Ankara were the primary instigators behind the creation of the Iraqi Turkmen Front, but it is unclear how much influence the government now has over the ITF. Two developments have contributed to the current uncertainty.

First, the ITF and its leaders have succeeded in capturing the imagination of many Turks; they are increasingly perceived in Turkey as an Iraqi Turkish minority deserving of official help, and by making claims similar to those of the Turkish Cypriots, ITF leaders are insinuating themselves into the Turkish mainstream. For the ITF leaders, the current chaos in Iraq is the best possible opportunity to stake their claims and try to improve their status as a separate and important ethnic minority; the ITF is no different than any other ethnopolitical entrepreneur. Hence, when the U.S. assault on the mostly Turkmen city of Tel Afer occurred in September 2004, the ITF launched an information campaign in Turkey that accused the U.S. of committing "massacres and ethnic cleansing" against the Turkmen in the city. Accounts of massive civilian casualties were widely reported in Turkish media outlets and forced the Turkish government to adopt a hard stance against Washington.14 Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Gul even cautioned that, should the U.S. military operation continue, Turkey's relations with Washington would have to be reviewed.15

[ . . . ]

Whereas the government was on solid ground with the country's political mainstream when it pursued the EU accession negotiations, the war in Iraq and the Turkmen question have revealed the deep nationalistic bent of the party. The Erdogan government has been forced to cater to hard-line elements by increasing the level of the rhetoric over Kirkuk, the Turkmen' demands, and Iraq's January 30 elections.18 The ITF fared poorly in the elections, however, thereby diminishing both its influence and Turkey's room to maneuver in Iraq. The ITF garnered 0.87 percent of the 8.5 million votes cast, managing to get only three of its members elected into the 275-person National Assembly. The ITF's poor showing sparked severe criticism in Turkey, and both Erdogan and Gul criticized the ITF leadership for failing to bring its voters to the polls.19

[ . . . ]


The second reason for the uncertainty surrounding the Turkish government's influence over Iraq's Turkmen is the relationship between the Turkish military and the ITF, which is ambiguous. As a result, the extent to which the Turkish government can exercise operational control over the ITF is unclear. The ITF operates in tandem with Turkish Special Forces in Iraq, which are there with U.S. cognizance.20 The Turkish Special Forces have been operating under a 1996 National Security Council Special Political Document that gives the chief of the Turkish General Staff (TGS) the authority to coordinate all of Turkey's activities relating to Iraq and northern Iraq, including the Special Forces. Accordingly, the Turkish Foreign Minsitry also has its representatives assigned to the TGS headquarters in Silopi, southeastern Turkey.

[ . . . ]

Compared to Iran, which has had a long relationship with Iraq's largest community, the Sh'ia, Turkey cannot claim any influence over any of the groups in Iraq except for a segment of the Turkmen, specifically the ITF.

These are the two points that should be brought up by the Southern Kurdish leadership at every opportunity, including media opportunities: First, the Ankara regime's repression of its internal colony Kurdistan, its rejection of PKK's democratic solution and ceasefire, and its continued repression and refusal to engage in dialog with DTP; second, the specifics of the Ankara regime's meddling in Iraqi internal affairs--something Turkey would never tolerate for itself--especially over the Kerkuk issue, since it is the real issue.

By the way, if the former Turkish ambassador speaking in the NPR report thinks that his claim to invade "Iraq" to pursue "terrorists" at will would be an imitation of US policy and, therefore, legitimate, he should consider that the rest of the world views Operation Iraqi Freedom as illegal according to international law.

Hell, even Richard Perle, the Darth Vadar of the neocon movement, admitted as much way back in November, 2003.

TIME FOR OUTREACH

"The greatest menace to freedom is an inert people."
~ Louis Brandeis, US Supreme Court Justice.

The official determination in the retrial application of Ocalan can be found at the Committee of Ministers site, and the examination of the case has been closed.

Basically what this means is that if a country initially violates the rights of a defendant from the moment of remand custody until the completion of trial, then later pays some fines and makes cosmetic changes to its domestic criminal law, that country is free to continue to violate rights.

The system is not working. Or, we might say that the people are not working the system.

However, it also means that we must continue to press the Kurdish cause in as many venues as possible and we must continue to look for new venues through which to do this. Throughout the Diaspora, alliances must be built with other groups who have similar concerns, such as those over freedom of expression rights, minority rights, or opposition to arms sales. These subjects were among those discussed in the UK last week as regards Ocalan's Prison Writings; already a wider discussion is growing on this subject. There is some feedback on the Ocalan book launch from a non-Kurdish academic and community activist. It is published here with permission:

I for one find the Ocalan case fsacinating and thanks for the wealth of info you posted. It raises a host of disturbing questions and one doesn't know where to begin.

You rightly ask: "There needs to be a wide protest over this...many crucially important meetings are likely to be 'cancelled' on 'terrorism' related grounds in the future... Should we allow ourselves to be intimidated when trying to discuss issues academically and on public interest grounds?"

The answers all hinge on the nature of the western state today - serving not the people but big business, which in turn obliges with political funding. The people are allowed to vote once in 4 or 5 years. Thereafter they have no control on politicians or policies. That is called democracy. Parliament is largely a toothless institution. The real decisions are made elsewhere. The few freedoms that remain are gradually being whittled away by the War-on-Terror legislations. Where is the accountability?

Is it any wonder that the state cares little about public protest and the 'public interest' today? Remember that 1.5 million who marched through London against the looming Iraq war? They were ignored both by the state and the media which work hand in hand. It's the 'national interest' that counts - that is, the interests of the rich and powerful. The people may rail against transport plans or upgrading the nuclear deterrent in their millions. Their arguments are ignored.

I think we need to debate propositions like:

- the degradation of the western state and democracy today;

- the double standards used to deal with official friends and enemies (including minorities);

- the selective interpretation of the grand concept of freedom of expression;

- the ineffectiveness of public protest;

- the general decline of a moral culture and of Christianity generally.

You said that "Our best hope for overcoming perpetual fear about both real and imagined threats is to question our leaders and their use of empty slogans that offer little rationale, explanation or historical context..." But where is the media space to question unfair policies? The media are locked in with the state and your views are rarely published. Your article rightly said that dissent and alternative scenarios are unacceptable: "the alleged 'glorification of terrorism' is to stymie creative thinking about alternatives. "

Let me conclude with a view by Anglican activist Kenneth Leech: "Today we live in a society in which the powers that be are beyond rational and moral criticism, beyond shame..." ['Struggle in Babylon, Sheldon Press 1988, p149]

Nevertheless, we must persevere.

Eddie

So here is a non-Kurd who finds the Ocalan case, and by extension the situation of Kurds under Turkish-occupation, as relevant to wider issues that are crucial to fundamental questions of democracy, human rights, the real state of the media, freedom of expression, political activism, and accountability. Especially concerning the media, Eddie has further noted that it serves the powerful; in fact, it is the stage of the powerful elites, through which their worldview is inculcated in the citizenry. The lack of "media space" for dissenting views is highly indicative of the fact that the major media serve the powerful.

Noam Chomsky has asserted, correctly I believe, that political activism and dissent in the US in the 1960s was very effective, and that it was this activism that forced the US to go "underground" in order to further the interests of its elites. This is why the Kennedy administration was able to send the US military openly into Vietnam in the early 1960s, while the Reagan administration had to engage in covert actions in Central America in the 1980s. It is also the reason why the current Bush administration had to engage in a propaganda campaign to go into Iraq. Extending Chomsky's analysis, I think that is also why excuses for the Iraq invasion were manufactured and why they are now being extremely opaque with regard to Iran. In addition, we have the corporate world, specifically the war industry, as part of the foreign policy process if not acting as the actual impetus behind current events. Corporate/governmental control of a compliant media insures that the media serves as advertising in support of these policies.

Basically, it is propaganda.

Eddie seems to agree:

Yet the major (business-serving) media keeps backing state policies and propaganda in Britain, no matter how repressive. They will not challenge controversial pronouncements by politicians and are happy to impose a blackout on news from war-torn Iraq so as not to embarrass the state. Civilians, on the other hand, have to put up with free speech (spin) from the state but are denied this freedom by the same state through a culture of fear imposed through surveillance measures and increased police powers.

Having looked, on occasion, through other language news media--from France, Germany, Spain, for example--the pattern generally seems to be consistent.

I agree with Eddie that we must persevere; we have no other option. How to do that? By networking and joining with others who have similar concerns, and this is a practical way to go, especially in Diaspora, because other like-minded individuals and groups will boost Kurdish activist numbers. Let's face it, Kurdish Diaspora is small to begin with and, then for various reasons, there's a dearth of Kurdish activists; thus it makes sense to join with others to work toward a common goal and to educate others about the reality that Kurds have faced under occupation, and continue to face. This has been a pet idea of mine for some time and over the weekend, I found validation in an interview with Noam Chomsky, from UC Berkeley:

Go back to '62, there was no feminist movement, there was a very limited human rights movement, extremely limited. There was no environmental movement, meaning rights of our grandchildren. There were no Third World solidarity movements. There was no anti-apartheid movement. There was no anti-sweat shop movement. I mean, all of the things that we take for granted just weren't there. How did they get there? Was it a gift from an angel? No, they got there by struggle, common struggle by people who dedicated themselves with others, because you can't do it alone, and made it a much more civilized country. It was a long way to go, and that's not the first time it happened. And it will continue.

[ . . . ]

Take, say, the Civil Rights movement. When you think of the Civil Rights movement, the first thing you think of is Martin Luther King. King was an important figure. But he would have been the first to tell you, I'm sure, that he was riding the wave of activism, that people who were doing the work, who were in the lead in the Civil Rights movement, were young SNCC [Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee] workers, freedom riders, people out there in the streets every day getting beaten and sometimes killed, working constantly. They created the circumstances in which a Martin Luther King could come in and be a leader. His role was extremely important, I'm not denigrating it, it was very important to have done that. But the people who were really important are the ones whose names are forgotten. And that's true of every movement that ever existed.

The entire transcript of the interview, and links to video, can be found here. A Google Video of the interview can be seen here, and it's definitely worth a watch. As one would expect from one of the world's few activists who remembers Kurds under Turkish occupation, he talks about that, too.

By the way, there's an excellent post on the Ocalan book launch scandal at Lenin's Tomb. Bijî Lenin!

In other news, there's more information on HRK's downing of a pasdaran helicopter over the weekend, with one interesting read from ISN. From that article, note the following:

1. Visitors to Qendîl report seeing only some 1,000 gerîlas in the area. PJAK is larger than it's military wing, HRK, because it is primarily engaged in political work. Same as PKK. Also, it's very bad planning to keep all troops in one area. It also means that HRK and HPG are not located primarily in "Northern Iraq."

2. Iran does not permit the free use of Kurdish language. Go to school and find out for yourself. On second thought, maybe we should scratch that idea about going to school; Human Rights Organization of Kurdistan is reporting that the mullah regime has layed off massive numbers of teachers in Iranian-occupied Kurdistan.

3. Turkey's "limited civil reforms" for Turkish-occupied Kurdistan are so limited they are non-existent. References to Kurdish-language radio and TV broadcasts fail to mention that they must be pre-recorded or otherwise "approved" by RTUK. Meaning: All such broadcasts are heavily censored. This is not acceptable. There's also a huge failure to mention the fact that the Turkish government continues with its absurd campaign against RojTV.

4. Any Turkish invasion of South Kurdistan would effectively screw the "surge" in Baghdad, as Kurdish forces would abandon US interests to protect Kurdistan.

5. Credit is due for an acknowledgement of PKK's attempts at creating a peaceful political solution and dialog over the Kurdish situation in Turkish-occupied Kurdistan, but a smack across the head is due for calling the 5-year ceasefire the "second unilateral ceasefire." It was the fourth unilateral ceasefire and it did not end last June, but in 2004.

So much for "experts."

The Times of India is reporting that 13, possibly 14, pasdarans were blown out of the sky by HRK.

Don't forget to take a look at an interesting op-ed on the Kerkuk referendum at Op-Ed News. A teaser:

The prospect for the independence of Kurdistan remains the only bright spot in the future of South West Asia. The fall of Saddam has opened a window of opportunity for the Kurdish people to establish their own state that is secular and democratic. Against them lies the theocratic interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the military dominated Turkey and the Baathist regime of Syria.

[ . . . ]

At the present time there is a coalescing of Kurdish forces as has not been seen before in recent history. The PUK, KDP, PJAK, and Kongra-GEL are working together as never before. The issue of Kirkuk has arisen because of the displacement of Kurds by Saddam and the resettlement by Arabs from other parts of the region. The referendum is significant and worthy of support by the US government.

[ . . . ]

There are many who will oppose it, but they are not voices that deserve any right to have a decisive voice in the matter of the Kurdish right of self-determination. Even Turkmen in Kirkuk recognize the obnoxious role of Turkey in this debate regarding the right of return for Kurds to Kirkuk.

One last item of note: NewrozTV has already begun test broadcasting. For more info, see RojhelatInfo for more. According to Hurriyet, regular broadcasting will begin on Newroz.

Any bets on how long it will take Gul to begin a campaign to shut down NewrozTV? Or will he leave it for Mottaki?

CREATING PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY IN KERKUK

"One clear reason for military invasion by Turkey would be their old ambition to re-annex Mosul 'Vilayet' (province) to its territory. They are still thinking in terms of the old Ottoman empire."
~ Ata Qaradakhi.

It appears that Turkey was indeed attempting to assassinate the governor of Kerkuk back in July 2003, from a little item on TNA:

The US may have been too harsh in its response to its ally Turkey in the July 2003 "sack crisis" in Sulaimaniyah, northern Iraq, but it had "good reasons," according to the account of a U.S. official published Friday.

The crisis took place when 11 Turkish Special Forces soldiers were arrested by U.S. troops and sacks were put over their heads.

The Turks were released after two days, but their arrest unleashed a torrent of criticism in a country where the military is a revered institution. Gen. Hilmi Ozkok, Turkey's former chief of staff, said the arrests had "led to the biggest crisis of confidence ever between Turkish and U.S. forces."

U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European affairs Matt Bryza, in a interview with Sabah daily, stated that the relationship between Turkey and U.S. continues to go on the right path.

When asked about former State Department official Henry Barkey's statement that the Turkish Special Forces troops detained by the U.S. were plotting to kill the governor of Kirkuk, a city whose status is in dispute, he replied, "He's a smart man. Maybe the U.S. was too harsh in its response to its ally Turkey in the sack crisis, but we had good reasons."

When asked why the 11 Turkish soldiers were treated "like al-Qaeda militants," he said, "As I said, he's a smart man. But we had good reasons. Is there any reason to antagonize one of our most important allies in Iraq, as well as in the world, Turkey?"

He also stressed that the U.S administration would continue to block the so-called Armenian genocide resolution, adding that Washington knows it would damage Turkish- U.S relations.

There were two events in 2003 which involved Turkish state efforts at creating instability in Kerkuk with the first in April 2003. Here's a refresher from TIME:

Even as the U.S. works to stabilize a postwar Iraq, Turkey is setting out to create a footprint of its own in the Kurdish areas of the country. In the days after U.S. forces captured Saddam's powerbase in Tikrit, a dozen Turkish Special Forces troops were dispatched south from Turkey. Their target: the northern oil city of Kirkuk, now controlled by the U.S. 173rd Airborne Division's 3rd Brigade. Using the pretext of accompanying humanitarian aid the elite soldiers passed through the northern city of Arbil on Tuesday. They wore civilian clothes, their vehicles lagging behind a legitimate aid convoy. They'd hoped to pass unnoticed. But at a checkpoint on the outskirts of Kirkuk they ran into trouble. "We were waiting for them," says a U.S. paratroop officer.

The Turkish Special Forces team put up no resistance though a mean arsenal was discovered in their cars, including a variety of AK-47s, M4s, grenades, body armor and night vision goggles. "They did not come here with a pure heart," says U.S. brigade commander Col. Bill Mayville. "Their objective is to create an environment that can be used by Turkey to send a large peacekeeping force into Kirkuk."

The second widely reported incident was in July 2003, from the Christian Science Monitor:

More than a week has passed since the US-led arrest and release of a Turkish special-forces team in northern Iraq. But with no US explanation yet, Ankara's still seething.

[ . . . ]

Washington has so far offered only vague justifications for the July 4 arrests. According to unconfirmed Iraqi Kurdish intelligence claims, the 11 men taken into US custody were part of a plot to assassinate the new Kurdish governor of Kirkuk.

Absolute nonsense, say officials in Ankara. Improbable, says the Kurdish governor himself. While far-fetched, the allegations tie in with one of the more inflammatory aspects of Turkey's foreign policy: its support for pro-Ankara elements among Iraq's Turkish-speaking Turkmen minority.

Turkey long feared war in Iraq could lead to an independent Kurdish state in the north of Iraq, with incalculable effects on its own restive Kurdish minority. For years it supported Baghdad as a guarantee of Iraq's territorial integrity. Faced with growing US determination to end Saddam Hussein's regime, though, it deepened relations with the Iraqi Turkoman Front, who were also raided by the US Friday.

Ankara insists its concern for the Turkmens is no different from its support in the 1980s of Bulgarian Turks oppressed under Communism. Patrick Clawson of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, doesn't buy it. "What did Turkey do for Turkoman affected by Saddam's Arabization campaigns around Kirkuk and Mosul in the '80s and '90s? Zip. This is purely political."

Absolute nonsense? Really? Yet the State Department's Matt Bryza not only refuses to deny the claim in TNA's article, he stresses that one of those who initially made the claim was "a smart man." Why is the US admitting the Turkish assassination attempt now? It most likely has to do with US support for the Kerkuk referendum coming up in December. Additionally, the US is not going to relinquish control of Kerkuk's oil to Turkey when State Department policy denies Kurdish control over Kurdish oil in "undisputed" Kurdish territory.

As Col. Mayville observed in April 2003, Turkey's objective was "to create an environment that can be used by Turkey to send a large peacekeeping force into Kirkuk." That remains Turkey's objective today. It is also the reason that a WINEP--no friend of Kurds--spokesman points to Turkey's total lack of concern for attacks against Turkmen by Saddam's regime. The fact is that for Turkey, the Turkmen card is, in reality, a red herring, as is the PKK card. Turkey's goal is the oil of Kerkuk and Mûsil.

While State Department flunkies like Bryza are content to admit the truth when it serves US interests, the use of political assassination by Turkey as a foreign policy tool with which to violate the "territorial integrity" of its neighbors is not considered objectionable by the US government per se. Nor is it objectionable for the US government that Turkey conducts false flag operations within South Kurdistan and Kerkuk. If such operations were to clash with US interests, surely the US would forbid Turkish mercenaries operating from US territory.

But Turkish mercenaries, former Special Team members (Ozel Timler), are in the process of conducting "security" operations from Silopî in Turkish-occupied Kurdistan, a few short yards from the Habur border crossing into South Kurdistan. One of the major shareholders in Black Hawk Security, Inc., is retired Turkish general Koksal Karabay, who happened to be the officer in charge of the Special Team that was "bagged" by US forces on July 4, 2003, according to a report by Yeni Ozgur Politika from July of last year. The former special teams-turned-mercenaries hope to have everything completed at their Silopî base this year, just in time to create trouble in Kerkuk in the months running up to the referendum.

Additionally, Washington-based Black Hawk Security plans to create bases of operations for its mercenaries in Zaxo and Kerkuk, meaning that they have permission to do so from the KRG. Whether the KRG has willingly agreed to this arrangement as part of its efforts to encourage "foreign investment" or whether they have acceded to US demands for a Turkish mercenary presence in South Kurdistan remains to be discovered.

Regardless of the role of the KRG, the presence of Black Hawk Security in the region provides plausible deniability for the Ankara regime "to create an environment that can be used by Turkey to send a large peacekeeping force into Kirkuk" and all of South Kurdistan, effectively recreating the old Ottoman Mosul Vilayet.


Sunday evening reading assignment: There's a fascinating analysis by Chalmers Johnson, a specialist on East Asia, at Harper's. It begins with an abstract:

The United States remains, for the moment, the most powerful nation in history, but it faces a violent contradiction between its long republican tradition and its more recent imperial ambitions.

The fate of previous democratic empires suggests that such a conflict is unsustainable and will be resolved in one of two ways. Rome attempted to keep its empire and lost its democracy. Britain chose to remain democratic and in the process let go its empire. Intentionally or not, the people of the United States already are well embarked upon the course of non-democratic empire.

Several factors, however, indicate that this course will be a brief one, which most likely will end in economic and political collapse.

Military Keynesianism: The imperial project is expensive. The flow of the nation's wealth—from taxpayers and (increasingly) foreign lenders through the government to military contractors and (decreasingly) back to the taxpayers—has created a form of “military Keynesianism,” in which the domestic economy requires sustained military ambition in order to avoid recession or collapse.

The Unitary Presidency: Sustained military ambition is inherently anti-republican, in that it tends to concentrate power in the executive branch. In the United States, President George W. Bush subscribes to an esoteric interpretation of the Constitution called the theory of the unitary executive, which holds, in effect, that the president has the authority to ignore the separation of powers written into the Constitution, creating a feedback loop in which permanent war and the unitary presidency are mutually reinforcing.

Failed Checks on Executive Ambition: The U.S. legislature and judiciary appear to be incapable of restraining the president and therefore restraining imperial ambition. Direct opposition from the people, in the form of democratic action or violent uprising, is unlikely because the television and print media have by and large found it unprofitable to inform the public about the actions of the country's leaders. Nor is it likely that the military will attempt to take over the executive branch by way of a coup.

Bankruptcy and Collapse: Confronted by the limits of its own vast but nonetheless finite financial resources and lacking the political check on spending provided by a functioning democracy, the United States will within a very short time face financial or even political collapse at home and a significantly diminished ability to project force abroad.

For the meat of the article, scroll down to read the Discussion. You might want to keep in mind the news on Lockheed Martin and the rest of the war industry that you've read about here on Rastî, from Sibel Edmonds, and from Richard Cummings.