TURKISH INVASION, TERROR, AND OCCUPATION OF SOUTH KURDISTAN

"Indeed, it is more than a bit ironic that the major recurring threat to society and political stability in Turkey over the past 60 years, the "Deep State," was actually enabled by the country's Western allies, and first of all, America."
~ Chris Deliso.

Check out Gordon Taylor's recent post at Progressive Historians:

For a lot of very young kids in the mountains of Iraqi Kurdistan, today really is Spain 1937. On Friday, 22 February, the Turkish Army began yet another ground operation into lands which its enemy, the PKK, refers to as the Medya Defense Zones; i.e., those steep and remote regions which adjoin the extreme southeast border between Turkey and Iraq. Fighting is reportedly intense, and the conditions, in freezing snow-covered mountains, as bad as anything that can be imagined. So far the Turks claim 79 "terrorists" killed, while the PKK says they have lost 2. The PKK claims some 22 Turkish soldiers have died, and they report the downing of a Cobra helicopter near the River Zab. (If true, the latter would definitely be a coup. And it is not, it should be noted, the first time that the PKK has taken out a helicopter.) First touted as a "major" incursion, it now appears that only a limited number of elite mountain troops, equipped with snow camouflage and winter uniforms, are taking part. These are undoubtedly picked men, all volunteers and probably all career soldiers--not draftees like the eight unfortunate young men who were captured by the PKK in October and ended up being imprisoned by their own army after they were repatriated.

[ . . . ]

Meanwhile the Bush administration, going on in its dazed, robotic way,continues to incorporate the PKK, a tiny group which has never attacked Americans, into its Global War On Terror. Both the EU and the United States, it should be noted, officially regard the PKK as a "terrorist" organization. Since the Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, visited Washington in November 2007, the U.S. also officially regards the PKK as a "common enemy".

[ . . . ]

Satellite maps tonight (1:20 AM, 2/24) show a large weather system that has come off the Mediterranean, now covers northern Syria, and soon will be in Iraq. Forecasts for Mosul call for rain, and rain in Mosul means snow in Kurdistan. Meanwhile, the Kurds of southeast Turkey, having held mass demonstrations repeatedly in the past three months, are planning another for Diyarbakir on Monday, February 25. It should be a big one.

Let's hope so.

Make sure you also check out Hevallo's recent posts on HPG's call for serhildan and his photos and video of today's protest in Amed (Diyarbakır).

Yeni Özgür Politika has a roundup of war news, all in Turkish. However, scroll down for Rastî weekend posts for most of that information.

Included is a body count which shows 22 Turkish soldiers killed on the first day of the war and 42 more killed in the last two days for a total of 64 Turkish soldiers killed total. Among the dead are included one major, a first lieutenant, a master sergeant, and a "skilled" sergeant. Names of the dead have also been released and are included in the YÖP article.

In another YÖP article, HPG Headquarters Commander Bahoz Erdal says the body count for the five days of the war is at least 81.

HPG reports three guerrilla şehîds.

Land Forces Commander İlker Başbuğ met with American military officials and peşmêrge commanders in Silopi on Sunday. As noted in the YÖP article (and in weekend comments), a convoy of some 70 American military vehicles, including M1 Abrams tanks, Bradley Fighting Vehicles, and armored Humvees left Musel for Duhok.

The WaPo has an article on the situation for civilians in the area of South Kurdistan near the border. In spite of quoting ridiculous Turkish general staff numbers--and you do know who to believe now, don't you?--it's clear in the article that the deployment of tanks in the area is meant simply to terrorize the civilian population:

"Whenever the children hear the military operations, they feel frightened," said school headmaster Aoni Mashaghti. "Most of the women came to school to take their kids out. Whenever they hear any sound of bombardment, the school becomes empty."

Hawzan Hussein, who lives in a community of about 160 families, said people are worried because some of the Turkish targets are so close to their homes.

The explosions "have become a daily scene that frightened me with the possibility of hitting our house any time," the 25-year-old said.

Associated Press Television News footage from the border area showed Turkish tanks dug into barren hillsides, with armored vehicles taking positions in towns.

Yeah, barren hillsides and occupation of towns. You're sure to find oodles of guerrillas in those places. The firing of tanks and artillery in this area, as well as Turkish military occupation of Southern Kurdish towns, has no other purpose but terror, which is exactly what we should expect since the world's greatest terrorist states are coordinating and conducting this war.

For more on civilians caught in the areas of Turkish aggression, check Goran's new article at MideastYouth:

Turning eyes to Turkey, one will be disturbed to say the least at the various issues at hand with regards to Turkey’s long history of human rights abuses and oppressive policies. The Kurds in Turkey have been the primary victims of these policies who have suffered everything from harsh assimilation campaigns, displacements and various forms of ethnic cleansing. During the 1990s alone, nearly 4000 Kurdish villages in Turkey were completely destroyed leaving the people homeless and forced to move to large cities where they rarely were able to adapt to the new life. Results of these internal displacements can be seen with a simple visit to the impoverished Kurdish southeast where unemployment rates reach unbelievable highs of 60 - 70%. In addition to economical as well as other problems (cited by human rights organizations) such as torture, unexplained disappearances, black operations in which innocents are killed and even the banning of the Kurdish language in Turkey and lack of cultural rights, the Kurds have also been limited a political voice. Many Kurdish politicians have been imprisoned sometimes for decades for simply speaking out for Kurdish rights. Resulting factor in all this: Many have turned to an arms struggle, which has haunted the country for over two decades.

[ . . . ]

First and foremost, although the Turkish military claims to have inflicted damage on rebel camps, no claims could be confirmed. Instead, footage and reports of the area are showing that the only damage being done is to the civilian villages in the region. (See a video reporting on the region at Real News.) Contrary to the Turkish claims, the Iraqi Kurdish leadership has said it believes Turkey’s expansion of the war into northern Iraq is not against the PKK Kurdish rebels, but instead against all Kurds as demonstrated by the attacks on the villages, and in particular, the Iraqi Kurds’ own political gains and autonomy in the region.

Of course, those conducting state terror against the Kurdish people, and their lapdogs in official media, have never made reference to the PKK's ceasefire and offer of a peaceful, democratic solution--and one that is in accord with Europe's EU requirements for Turkey's accession--both of which were offered in 2006.

If you possibly can, take some time to listen to a recent interview with Chris Deliso and Daniel Ellsberg by Scott Horton from the Stress blog.

In Part 1, Scott interviews Chris on the situation in the Balkans and promotes Chris' recent book, The Coming Balkan Caliphate: The Threat of Radical Islam to Europe and the West. Rastî readers may remember that Chris wrote an excellent article about the Ralston conflict of interest. What you may not know is that Chris took a bit of a break to write the Ralston article while rushing to get his Balkan Caliphate manuscript to the publisher.

Let me also take a moment to point out that the whole Yugoslav war was overseen by none other that The Cohen Group: William Cohen was the Secretary of Defense at the time; Marc Grossman was the Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs; and Joseph Ralston was the Vice Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff.

As the only English-language journalist living in Macedonia, Chris has first-hand knowledge of everything that's going on there. In the interview, among other things, Chris talks about the nature of the UN peacekeeping mission in Kosovo, saying that the missions are a very lucrative business and that in the 10 years that the UN has had a mission in Kosovo, the roads are still unpaved or filled with potholes. According to Chris, "Kosovo is a corporation; it's not a country and it's a very corrupt one."

Well, what do you expect when The Cohen Group's involved?

In the second part of the interview, Daniel Ellsberg--who's been speaking out on behalf of Sibel Edmonds--joins the interview and the discussion of Kosovo and the Balkans delves into its connections with the Turkish Deep State and the Deep State's heroin industry. Ellsberg argues the case for Turkey having a nuclear weapons program. He talks more about Sibel's case, too.

Interesting stuff and highly recommended. The Part 1 mp3 can be downloaded here (runtime: 28.20). Part 2 of the interview can be found here (runtime: 49:08).

There is also a webpage for Part 1 and Part 2.

RALSTON, IRAN, PJAK

"The PJAK has proved to the people that it can successfully organize itself and fight for its rights based on its own strength."
~ Abdul Rahman Haji Ahmadi, President of PJAK.

First of all, I want to point out an excellent new article on the Ralston-Lockheed Martin conflict of interest vis-a-vis the PKK. First carried at Voices of Tomorrow, I noticed that the hevals at KurdishInfo have also picked it up. After noting Turkey's atrocious human rights record against the population of its internal Kurdish colony, and mentioning the assistance (military and otherwise) that the Southern Kurds have given the US in Iraq, Heval Goran comes to the point:

Despite these facts, the U.S. Administration remains curiously quiet in regards to their Turkish NATO ally and is only further arming an ever-growing conflict. The threats coming from Turkey have become a major cause of concern for Iraqi Kurds who have more to lose when considering their political achievements in Iraq.

With the PKK ceasefire, a chance for a political settlement between Turkey and the Kurds has never been so close. The U.S. could play a pivotal role in finding a peaceful solution. However, with current U.S. foreign policy, Iraqi Kurds may soon be forced to abandon the significant help they are providing the U.S. and the Iraqi army to engage in a long conflict of their own.

Very well done, so I urge a careful perusal of the entire article.

Britain's Independent had an article this morning citing the US raid on Hewlêr as the reason for Iran's seizing of some British sailors. Later in the day, the NYTimes reports that one of the Iranians, that "persons unknown" had seized, has suddenly been freed. Will the Americans now have to cough up the Iranians they took in Hewlêr, after totally disregarding their Kurdish "allies" and trespassing in Kurdish territory?

The NYTimes explains that the American activity in Iraq with regard to Iranian officials, who are in the country with the knowledge and permission of either the Kurds or the Baghdad government, has made life even more difficult for Baghdad in its dealings with the neighbors. The US is purposely making the situation worse for the Iraqis.

About those "persons unknown," the NYTimes reports that those involved with the investigation believe the "persons unknown" to be affiliated with the CIA:

The Iraqi police stopped a car with four passengers that was following the car in which the kidnappers had placed Mr. Sharafi. The four men were taken to the police station. They said they worked for an Iraqi security service, but when pressed, the security services denied that the men worked for them in any official capacity, Mr. Zebari said.

“We went to our security services and said, ‘Do they work for you, do you have him?’ They denied it,” Mr. Zebari said. “We went to the American military, the intelligence services — they all denied they had him. But my advice to my government was to keep the four in detention, until the diplomat was released,” Mr. Zebari said.

The four men remain detained in a Ministry of Interior facility, Mr. Zebari said. Although Mr. Zebari was uncertain who kidnapped the man, others familiar with the case said they believe those responsible work for the Iraqi Intelligence Service, which is affiliated with the Central Intelligence Agency.

IraqSlogger reports that Kurdish pêşmerge have clashed with the Mahdi Army in Baghdad:

On Saturday, Kurdish forces clashed with member of the Mahdi Army, in the al-Amin area of Baghdad, Slogger sources report. The clashes reportedly resulted in a number of civilian deaths.

Kurdish forces, known as the Pesh Merga, operating under the aegis of the security plan, captured captured a hig-ranking Sadrist, and three of his assistants in the area near Baghdad al-Jadida, eyewitnesses say. In response, Mahdi Army forces attacked the Pesh Merga, sources relate, and the Pesh Merga responded harshly.

Eyewitnesses report that the Pesh Merga are also reported to be deploying in the Western areas of Baghdad (Karkh) within Sunni areas like Ghazaliya and Saidiya.

The Pesh Merga are operating under orders to act only on two conditions: if they are ordered to raid certain houses, or if they were attacked. Eyewitnesses report that when Iraqis approach them with a tip about militant activity, the Kurdish forces decline to act, saying that they do not have any orders to do so.

With little experience in the kind of warfare practiced under the security plan, and orders not to act unless attacked, another source reports that the Pesh Merga are the brunt of many jokes in the capital, and that some residents taunt them directly. A month ago, Slogger sources reported that residents of the Karrada district pelted Kurdish forces with rocks.

Here's something I've been wanting to get to . . . Last week, Democracy Now interviewed another Seymour Hersh-wannabe about PJAK. Although this wannabe, Reese Erlich, admits that PJAK and PKK are parts of the same organization. Anyone who knows anything about PKK already knows that. In fact HRK, the armed wing of PJAK, is commanded by many Kurds from Turkish-occupied Kurdistan who are long-time veterans of the liberation struggle. However, Erlich is at a loss to explain the US relationship with PJAK. The reason for that would be that there isn't one, much less is there any relationship between PJAK and Israel, as Erlich asserts. Remember what Heval Cuma said late last year:

American authorities want to have contact with PJAK, and as a matter of fact they do have contact with PJAK. But to say that the United States is supporting the PJAK is not right. PJAK is until now continuing their struggle just with the support of the Kurdish people and the PKK. If the US is interested in PJAK, then it has to be interested in the PKK as well. The PKK is the one who formed PJAK, who established PJAK and supports PJAK.

Translation: If the US is interested in supporting PJAK, it must be interested in supporting PKK. If the US is interested in assisting the Kurdish cause under Iranian occupation, it must be interested in assisting the Kurdish cause under Turkish occupation. The fact is, the US does neither.

It's interesting that Erlich notes, after a discussion of PKK/PJAK, that KDP-I and Komala "have Peshmurga guerrilla groups, but they are not engaged in armed activity against the United States." The implication that Mr. Wannabe makes is that PKK/PJAK are engaged in armed activity against the US. I challenge anyone to find an incident in which either PKK or PJAK has ever "engaged in armed activity against the US." There is no such incident, unlike other organizations such as, oh, I don't know. . . . MEK?

Of course, we can never forget who it is that has armed and trained the fascist Turkish regime in its genocide against the Kurdish people, can we?

Erlich tries to gloss over the support for PKK by Kurds under Turkish occupation:

There have been horrendous crimes committed by the Turkish government against the Kurdish population and for some, the P.K.K. is seen as a legitimate resistance organization.

Some? Try "most," pal. Nice try too, with the "cult" accusation plucked straight out of Turkish and American propaganda.

Basically, what Erlich, Hersh, and every other American "progressive" is trying to do is use the Kurdish people and their legitimate political and armed resistance for their own anti-Bush, anti-American agenda. These so-called people care as much for the Kurdish people as the US-backed fascist Turkish regime, the fascist mullah regime, the formerly US-backed Iraqi Ba'athist regime, or the current Syrian Ba'athist regime.

(Speaking of the Syrian Ba'athi, Erlich sounds more like a Ba'athi Syrian apologist on the Paşas' payroll--sort of like Sami Moubayed--than anything else.)

The bottom line is, for those who are too dense to figure it out, that these "progressives" don't give a damn at all about the Kurdish people. The same goes for right-winger propagandist Michael Totten and his ilk, who consistently push the KDC and DC view of South Kurdistan with never a mention of the very serious problems the ordinary people of South Kurdistan face. Serious problems like severely limited basic services, corruption, nepotism, destruction of the agricultural sector, lack of housing, lack of jobs--and all of this in the face of "Dream Cities," malls that no one but the elites can afford to shop in, and predatory foreign "investment" that is more accurately described by the term "exploitation."

Erlich's propaganda totally disregards the statement of PJAK's President, Abdul Rahman Haji Ahmadi, published one week before the Democracy Now interview:

The people of Kurdistan deserve a fair settlement, which allows all of them to live together on a basis of freedom and equality. As it seems now, however, there is a contradiction in the policies of the USA and its allies towards Kurdish movements in the respective parts of Kurdistan; the Kurds in Iraqi Kurdistan are regarded as allies in the war on terror, whereas the political demands of the Kurds in Iranian Kurdistan are being ignored. And there is, furthermore, the attempt to de-legitimize the Kurdish movement in Turkey.

Nowhere in the world is peace more necessary than in our region. In particular, the Kurds in Turkey, Syria and Iran want, finally, a basic resolution of the Kurdish conflict. Democratic rights for the Kurds could positively effect the peace process in the Middle East. Military aggression against the Kurds however would intensify the already unstable political and social situation.

There you have it from Heval Abdul Rahman Haji: US policies are opposed to legitimate political demands of the Kurdish people still under occupation. Note that he mentions that not all Kurds "want the intervention of outside powers." This brings us back to Goran Sadjadi's article, the point of which also highlights US opposition to a political solution for the Kurdish people--at least those under Turkish occupation--through the Ralston/Lockheed Martin conflict of interest and the continued rejection of the PKK's democratic solution and its fifth unilateral ceasefire by the US and its regional lapdog, Turkey.

Good try, but not good enough.

UPPING THE ANTE

“Control your own destiny or someone else will.”
~ Jack Welch.

UPDATE ON US RAID IN HEWLÊR:


NPR has an audio report on the incident from Hewlêr. According to pêşmerge, there was a stand off between them and a three-HUMVEE convoy of American forces outside the Hewlêr airport, which lasted about an hour. The pêşmerge surrounded the Americans and aimed their weapons at them, holding them in place because they were in Kurdish territory without authorization.


Bijî pêşmerge!

Very interesting, so please give the report a listen. Sounds like the KRG is really pissed off.

Since the news topic of the day seems to be Iran, let's continue with the same thing by first focusing on the situation in Iranian-occupied Kurdistan, from HULIQ:

Despite its wealth of oil and natural-gas reserves, Iran has faced a gas crunch as people turn up the heat this winter.

Partial or total energy cutoffs were reported in 11 provinces, with residents of colder western provinces worst affected, and exports to Turkey were suspended for five days.

The National Iranian Gas Company issued a statement on January 2 warning of shortages and asking Iranians -- including Tehran residents -- to moderate their consumption or face cuts.

There are energy shortages in 11 provinces, with partial or total cuts that include Kurdistan in western Iran, the northwestern Zanjan Province, and the provinces of East and West Azerbaijan.

[ . . . ]

In Saqqez, in Kurdistan Province [Iranian-occupied Kurdistan], residents gathered outside the district governor's office on January 4 to protest eight days without sufficient gas supplies.

From there, some 200 protesters went to the city council, then to the town's central square, by which time they numbered about 1,000, according to advarnews.com. Protesters demanded that the government resolve such fundamental problems instead of attending to its high-profile nuclear program.

Fakhredin Heidari, the parliamentary representative for Saqqez and Baneh, wrote to President Mahmud Ahmadinejad on January 3 to complain about the situation.

Heidari reminded Ahmadinejad that on his last visit to Saqqez, the president responded to public outcry by promising that shortages would not happen again "this year." The lawmaker recounted the death of a family of five due to a faulty heater that they were forced to use because of a lack of gas.

Heidari asked whether Ahmadinejad would respond similarly if it were his family and that of the oil minister who had to spend the night in the cold.

He also accused gas authorities of "giving away" natural gas to states who side with Iran's opponents in the nuclear standoff, leaving none for Iranians.

Heidari struck a note that the president himself has played in many of his speeches since taking office 1 1/2 years ago -- that of social justice. The lawmaker questioned the justice of a situation in which "the negligence of some officials" leaves Saddez residents "shivering in the cold" or burning to death in their homes.

Lawmaker Amin Shabani, from Sanandaj in Kurdistan Province [Iranian-occupied Kurdistan], argued on January 5 that Oil Minister Kazem Vaziri-Hamaneh should be questioned in parliament if the gas shortages continue -- particularly in the country's colder western provinces. He said many western areas had experienced weeks of gas shortages or cutoffs.

Shabani said that such areas are living "entirely the opposite" of Ahmadinejad's reported campaign pledge to bring "oil to the people's tables" and oil wealth into Iranian homes. He said gas exports should be cut until domestic needs are met. He invited Vaziri-Hamaneh to visit Kurdistan "one day" and -- in his words -- "feel the cold...and properly answer how helpless people are to live" in near-freezing temperatures without gas, gasoline, or oil.

The crisis appears to have eased for now. Shabani said recently that there are currently sufficient supplies for the city of Sanandaj, and intermittent but less severe cuts in Saqqez and Baneh, according to ILNA on January 8.

But Shabani also warned ominously of a "100-percent possibility that with another cold wave, people in cold regions will face a fuel crisis."

So, there you have it. Energy resources necessary for survival in the fierce winter of Kurdistan are the first to be cut off as Iran suffers a fuel shortage, along with other regions filled with restive minorities. No doubt the fuel shortages are causing problems in those South Kurdistani towns bordering Iranian-occupied Kurdistan, since many of them purchase winter fuel from Rojhelat.

There are a couple of other articles describing the politics behind Iran's fuel shortage and these politics contribute to the sufferings of the Kurds and other minorities. The first is from the LATimes:

Iran's oil industry has raked in record amounts of cash during three years of high oil prices. But a new U.S. campaign to dry up financing for oil and natural gas development poses a threat to the republic's ability to continue exporting oil over the next two decades, many analysts say.

The campaign comes at a moment of unique vulnerability for Iran's oil industry, which also faces challenges from rising domestic energy consumption, international isolation, a populist spending spree by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and trouble closing contracts with foreign oil companies — a recipe for potential disaster in a nation with one of the world's largest reservoirs of oil.

[ . . . ]

If Iran were to suddenly stop exporting its 2.6 million barrels of oil a day, such as in the event of a military strike, world oil prices probably would skyrocket. But a gradual decline might be offset by other OPEC members, analysts say, particularly as Iraq increases its oil production and Saudi Arabia carries out plans for significant increases in its production capacity.

The US has had sanctions against Iran since 1979 and the seizure of the US Embassy in Teheran when the Islamic regime came into power. Now, however, it is applying more pressure to financial institutions, and not only to those based in the US but to international institutions as well. At the moment, the tactic seems to be working:

"Banks are constantly doing risk assessments about what kind of business they want to be involved in," Stuart Levey, Treasury undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, said in a telephone interview.

"There's a lot out there suggesting that there's an element of coercion involved. But I think that for a lot of these executives, the main thing driving them is they really don't want to be involved in facilitating terrorism or proliferation or any other crime."

More than two decades of U.S. sanctions have had little effect on Iran's oil industry — U.S.-based companies have been replaced, largely by Europeans. But this new attack on financing has rapidly started to dry up potential loans on dozens of projects, according to oil industry insiders in Tehran and the West.

Any "element of coercion involved" is coming from the US, and if the American definition of terrorism as described in the US Code were consistently applied, not only would worldwide financial institutions have to cut off business with Iran, but with the US, too.

What are the possibilities that the current US tactic will backfire?

The LATimes article glosses over the possibility that China will involve itself with the further development of Iranian oil production facilities, saying "U.S. officials already have warned that they will seek to hold China accountable under Washington's unilateral sanctions laws if it proceeds with a $16-billion project to develop Iran's North Pars gas field." But China may not bow so easily to US pressure as banks do. For more on that, there's a detailed discussion at Political Affairs.net:

Iran facing a increasingly hostile US and Europeans has turned to Russia and China for investment and technical know-how for its oil and gas industries. China has the needed financial muscle and enough thirst for energy to disregard American pressures. China is already investing heavily in Iranian oil fields, securing for itself a portion of the oil and gas reserves. China with 1.3 billion people and fast growing economy is already the second largest oil consumer in the world. If China’s economic growth continues, it is estimated that by 2020 China’s energy needs will increase by 150 percent.

“China's expectation of growing future dependence on oil imports has brought it to acquire interests in exploration and production in places like Kazakhstan, Russia, Venezuela, Sudan, West Africa, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Canada. But despite its efforts to diversify its sources, China has become increasingly dependent on Middle East oil. Today, 58% of China's oil imports come from the region. By 2015, the share of Middle East oil will stand on 70%. Though historically China has had no long-standing strategic interests in the Middle East, its relationship with the region from where most of its oil comes is becoming increasingly important.”[8]

Last year China signed oil and gas contracts worth over $100 billion with Iran. China is heavily involved in developing the huge Yadavaran oil field. “If completed, the deal will allow China to buy 150,000 barrels of Iranian crude a day at market rates for 25 years as well as 250 million tons of liquefied natural gas. Under an initial agreement signed by the Sinopec Group in October 2004, China could pay Iran as much as $100 billion for the stake and the purchases of oil and gas over 25 years.” [9] Interestingly Royal Dutch Shell Plc works as technical consultant for Sinopec on Yadavaran field.

On 25 December 2006, National Offshore Oil Corp of China announced the signing of a $16 billion memorendom of understanding to develop Iran’s North Pars gas field and build liquefied natural gas (LNG) plants in Iran. The project is expected to take 8 years to complete.

The article goes on to describe Russia's interest in Iran's energy resources along with its desire to set up an OPEC-style organization which would include a number of Central Asian republics, Ukraine, and Belarus. Iran was granted observer status with the SCO in 2005 and has since applied for full membership.

Let's review, from yesterday's post:

The US does not want democracy in Iran, either. It wants regime change. Regime change does not equal democracy. Regime change does not stabilize the region, but it does stabilize US hegemony.

From the Political Affairs.net article:

The current US strategy is to starve the Iranian oil and gas industries of new investments, thereby reducing the Iranian government’s revenues which are hoped will in turn reduce Iran’s ability to maintain not only its armed forces, but also the government’s social obligations to its people (subsidies, salaries, etc.). It is hoped that this combined with international isolation and (with the help of Saudi Arabia) a reduction in oil prices (OPEC crude basket price: $51.25 per barrel on 8/1/07) will not only cripple the Iranian economy, but also (possibly) lead to a regime change. All attacks on the economy was being presented under the guise of stopping Iran from developing WMDs, and in particular Nuclear weapons.

It's a very high-stakes game of poker the US is playing with Iran. What if Iran were to Washington's bluff? What if Iran "were to suddenly stop exporting its 2.6 million barrels of oil a day," but not as a result of a military strike but because it chose to remove its oil from the world market and sell only to SCO countries, namely China? What if it granted more development contracts to China, guaranteeing a certain percentage of oil to be sold to China over the next 25 years, as in the Yadavaran development project? What would happen to Europe with such a scenario?

This would be a sort of counterbalance between regional hegemonies, given that Western oil companies are busily trying to finalize their 30-year, 75%-profit deal in Iraq, as Britain's The Independent reported last weekend.

Is that what the new "surge" in Iraq is all about? If not, why are US senators "grilling" Condoleeza Rice over the lack of progress with Iraq's oil law?

Iraq's government is hammering out an oil law to regulate foreign investment. But it has been held up by disagreements over how revenues will be divided between provinces and the central government, and over who will have authority to sign contracts with foreign companies.

Sununu said he had been briefed on the oil law recently by members of the White House National Security Council, and had received a top-secret briefing from individuals he did not identify.

[ . . . ]

The contract issue is vital to Iraq's future as a solution favoring the regions would devolve power over its most valuable resource to the majority Shi'ites and the Kurds whose regions are home to the country's most coveted oil fields.

[ . . . ]

Ethnic Kurds whose region includes the country's northern oil fields including the giant Kirkuk field have signed some contracts with foreign oil companies, spurring confusion over who has the authority to ink contracts.

Rice said the oil law would not give the Kurds such authority.

"Even though the Kurds might have been expected ... to insist that they will simply control all the resources themselves, that's not what the oil law does," Rice said.

Are the Başûrî going to be left out in the cold like the Rojhelatî? We'll all know the answer to that when the oil law is made public. In the meantime, there's Iran, China, and Russia . . . and "A 16-year cycle of treachery" at the hands of the US.

How many more cycles of treachery must come and go before the Başûri leadership learns to build alliances with its brother and sister Kurds still under occupation, before all other alliances?

DISHONOR

Now they say that pêşmerge are not going Baghdad. More "clarification" is available at Iraq the Model. Apparently the current claim is that majority Kurd Iraqi Army units will be going to Baghdad, which still means that Kurds are being sent to die for Arabs.

That flag is not flying.

I have a better idea: Americans love Arabs, so they should be the ones to go die for them. Additionally, the American oil imperialists have taken over from their cousins, the British oil imperialists in the continuing struggle to hold together a monstrosity called Iraq, that was created specifically to ensure Western control of Iraqi oil.

That's the reason that the US refuses to recognize the Arabization of Kerkuk, too.

It seems that overnight the Americans raided the Iranian consulate in Hewlêr, indicating the level of distrust and total disregard the US has of the Başûrî Kurds. More from the Washington Post.

Why aren't the Americans going after Turkish JITEM for all the trouble they have been stirring up in Kerkuk?

This military raid reminds me of the time a couple of years ago that the US bombed Salahaddin University behind the backs of Kurdish authorities for absolutely no reason.

In South Kurdistan, the entire population keeps an eye on all suspicious people and activity, and reports everything to authorities immediately--Kurdish authorities, naturally. This community effort is the secret to security success in South Kurdistan, so it's a very suspicious thing that the Americans do not trust a population that actively works with each other to ensure their own security.

Furthermore, the implication of the US raid is that Kurds have a hand in the insurgency.

Shame, shame. This disgusting insult against the honor of a people who have insured that no Americans have died in South Kurdistan since the beginning of the war, cannot be tolerated.

US out of South Kurdistan . . . NOW.