No change expected

Iraqis are not fooled by the hype as the brutality of the occupation grinds on regardless of Zarqawi, writes Nermeen Al-Mufti from Baghdad

The death of Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi has not alleviated tensions in Iraq. US and Iraqi troops still patrol main city roads as well as various highways. The roads linking Baghdad to Diali, the province in which Zarqawi was killed, and Al-Ramadi, a city still under attack, are being heavily patrolled. Al-Fallujah, Al-Ratba and Al-Qaem, all to the west of Baghdad, have been under siege for weeks. The only good news in the war-torn country is that the Shia militia in Basra have declared a cease-fire until the World Cup is over.
Iraqis have been in two minds about the death of Zarwaqi. Iraqi resistance brigades described him as a "brother" in Islam and jihad, but when a phone-in radio programme in Baghdad invited response from the public several callers voiced joy at the death of "the terrorist" while others voiced sympathy.
Reprisals were not long in coming. Fifty college students have been shot dead within a week. "Al-Qaeda in the Land of the Two Rivers," the group once led by Zarqawi, is thought to be behind the killing. Among the dead were 20 Turkoman Shias and students whose clothes violated the dress code Al-Qaeda is trying to enforce. Iraqis may have grown used to their countrymen getting killed by booby-trapped cars and "friendly" US fire, but the killing of students was received with a mixture of shock and alarm.
Political analyst Raad Al-Hodeithi was not optimistic. "Zarqawi's death might give President Bush a chance to boost his fortunes ahead of the half-term elections in November, but it will not increase his popularity. The Americans started a wide-scale attack against Ramadi on 10 June, following a siege in which the city's roads to Baghdad and other towns were cut off. This suggests that the White House intends to destroy Iraq and undermine the political process."
President Jalal Al-Talabani has told the nation that an agreement between the government and the resistance was expected soon and that acts of violence would subside by the end of the year. But Abu Ali, who is close to the Islamic Army, is doubtful: "The factions that have opened dialogue with the Iraqi government are not the same ones resisting the occupation. These are factions that search for political posts and perhaps financial interests. The factions of the true resistance have not started and will not start a dialogue unless US forces declare a timetable for withdrawal. We said were weren't going to talk to the government, because we don't recognise it."
Abdel-Aziz Al-Hakim, leader of the Iraqi Alliance, has once again called for a federal system in the south and centre of the country. Speaking in Al-Najaf to a gathering of Shia parties, Al-Hakim pledged to "work through all means to achieve this objective and complete the journey we've started". The gathering was attended by members of the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) and Iraq's Hizbullah. Al-Sadr supporters didn't attend the meeting.
This was not the first time Al-Hakim has called for federalism. In a speech delivered in Al-Suleimaniya late last year, Al-Hakim proffered that, "Federalism is the right choice for the Kurdistan of Iraq. It is also the right choice in the centre and south of Iraq, as well as in Baghdad and other Iraqi cities."
It is noteworthy that a substantial proportion of Iraqis object to Kurdish-style federalism because they don't want to see a regional government having defence and foreign ministers and talking to foreign powers independently from the central government. Many Iraqis see such federalism as a first step towards the partition of Iraq.
As political uncertainty continued, the Association of Muslim Scholars said that various militia and unidentified death squads were still murdering Sunni individuals, including clerics. Meanwhile, the Islamic Party, which takes part in the current political process, expressed satisfaction that Prime Minister Nour Al-Maliki's government freed dozens of Iraqi detainees.
Concerning the political process, the Arab League has postponed a national dialogue conference slated earlier for 22 June without setting a new date for its convocation. Several Iraqi politicians had said that they wouldn't attend the conference if it were held in the Green Zone, calling for the gathering to be held outside the country for security reasons. Masoud Al-Barzani has called for the conference to be held in Arbil, a venue unacceptable to many.
As chaos and mayhem continued unabated, Friday preachers advised relatives of the dead not to claim their remains from the morgue. The reason: four individuals have been abducted and killed when they went to claim the body of a relative.

Iraq's Kirkuk rocked by bombings

The wounded were rushed away for treatment following the attacksAt least 16 people have been killed and dozens wounded in a series of bomb attacks on police in Iraq's northern oil city of Kirkuk.
A police patrol was targeted in the first blast in the city centre at about 0730 (0330 GMT), leaving at least 10 dead, a police official said.
About half an hour later, a suspected suicide car bomber tried to ram the main police headquarters, killing five.
The offices of President Talabani's Kurdish party were also targeted.
In another attack, a district police chief was wounded and his bodyguard killed when two bombs went off outside his house.
Confusion surrounds the exact number of attacks. There are fears the death toll could rise.
The attacks may be part of the revenge promised by al-Qaeda in Iraq for the death of their leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, in a US air strike last week, the BBC's Hugh Sykes in Baghdad says.
Ordinary guerrilla insurgents would not have the resources to organise such a co-ordinated attack, one experienced observer told the BBC.
Attack foiled
In the first attack, eight civilians and two policemen were killed when a bomb exploded in a parked car, Brig Gen Sarhat Qadir was quoted by the Associated Press news agency as saying. Another eight civilians and a police colonel were wounded.
In the second attack, a suicide car bomber attempted to ram into a checkpoint at the police headquarters. Police opened fire and the car exploded. Two policemen and three civilians were killed, Brig Gen Qadir said.
An attempted car bomb attack on the office of President Jalal Talabani's Patriotic Union of Kurdistan party was also foiled. Police opened fire on the car, causing it to explode.
Kirkuk, some 250km (155 miles) north of Baghdad, is home to a mix of Arab, Kurdish and Turkmen inhabitants, all of whom claim ownership of the city and the oil-rich territory around it.
The city has been spared some of the large bombings suffered by other Iraqi cities.
But it has been the scene of frequent attacks on police by insurgents waging war on US-led multinational forces and their Iraqi allies.

Turkey-Iraq discuss Kirkuk status

15:28 - 09 June 2006

"Kirkuk should be given special status," Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said during a meeting with Iraqi Deputy Premier Barham Salih. Erdogan put down Turkey's expectations over establishment of stability and security atmosphere in Iraq after formation of new government in that country and particularly reiterated Turkey's known views pertaining to status of Kirkuk. Erdogan also pointed to the risks in Iraq caused by ethnical structurings [as received], and noted that territorial integrity and unity of Iraq were very important for Turkey. Erdogan and Salih also discussed improvement of commercial relations between Turkey and Iraq as well as the problems in border passes. Salih in his part said Iraq's territorial integrity would definitely be protected, stating that, "Kirkuk is also the problem of Iraq. It will absolutely reach a fair solution." Erdogan also explained Turkey's uneasiness over the PKK issue. Salih in his part said, "PKK is a threat also for us. Turkey's security is our security. Necessary measures will be taken."

Turkish PM says Kirkuk should be given special status

NTVMSNBC
ISTANBUL - Turkey’s Prime Minister has said the oil rich city of Kirkuk in northern Iraq should be given a special status, rather than come under the control just of local Iraqi Kurdish authorities. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan floated the suggestion during a meeting with Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Behram Salih late on Thursday, at which he warned of the risks of establishing a sectarian state in Iraq. Erdogan stressed the importance Ankara gave to the territorial integrity of Iraq and its unity.

Gunmen Attack Bus Near Baghdad, At Least 19 Killed

Raising the specter of further ethnic killings, the Associated Press reported that the gunmen dragged the students out of the bus. The A.P. put a higher death toll on the attack, saying that 19 of the dead were ethnic Turkmen and two were Kurds. Four Sunni Arabs were spared by the gunmen, it reported. full story

Swiss Canton Model Is Perfect for a Federated Iraq

by John R. Thomson and
Hussain Hindawi
Posted May 17, 2006

Human Events Online this March, John Thomson reiterated the compelling case for a decentralized Iraq ["America in Iraq: These Colors Must Not Run"], which we had originally proposed in articles published in February and June 2004. We therefore welcome the recent publication by Sen. Joseph Biden (D.-Del.) and Leslie Gelb in the New York Times of their article, "Unity Through Autonomy in Iraq." Our only question to them and others is "Gentlemen, what took you so long?" ...read article

''Iraq's Impending Fracture to Produce Political Earthquake in Turkey''

17 May 2006
nusual political stability in Turkey faces upheaval from Iraq's impending fracture along sectarian lines. The birth of an independent Kurdish state in northern Iraq will end Turkey's E.U. accession hopes. The collapse of the accession process will strongly undermine the legitimacy of the ruling Justice and Development Party (A.K.P.), making it increasingly vulnerable to political attacks from Turkey's secular establishment. These attacks could prompt the disintegration of the Erdogan government as soon as the end of 2006. ....read article

Iraq sensitivity

Yusuf KANLI
ARTICLE SUMMARYReports from Iraq are not in any way comforting for the Turks, who are very much worried about the possible disintegration of our neighboring country. Continued insurgency on the one hand, failure to forge a national unity government though five months have passed since elections, signs of growing tensions along religious lines, increased cross-border violence from outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) terrorists inside Turkey and the failure of Iraqi government troops and U.S. forces to take action against the PKK presence in northern Iraq remain serious irritants for the policy-makers in Ankara. Contrary to public disclosures, however, Ankara's attention is not focused solely on how to .....read article

Talabani slams Iran, Turkey interference

BEIRUT, Lebanon, May 16 (UPI) -- Iraqi President Jalal Talabani lashed out at neighbors Iran and Turkey for interfering in Iraq's domestic affairs, warning Baghdad could reciprocate.
Talabani was quoted as saying Tuesday in Saudi daily Al-Sharq al-Awsat that "Iraq is not a weak country. The neighbors can create problems for us and we also are capable of causing problems for them."
He said, "if Iran allows itself to interfere in Karbala because it is a Shiite city and Turkey feels it can interfere in Kirkuk, that will open the way for very dangerous consequences."
"In that case," he added, "Iraq will also have the right to interfere in Khozestan in Iran on the grounds that it has an Arab population and the same applies to Alexandrite in Turkey which has an Arab population."
Talabani stressed, however, that Iraq and Iran have had historic relations which were both positive and negative "but there is always room for agreement and also between Iraq and Turkey agreement is possible."
He acknowledged that the two countries have plausible reasons to interfere in Iraq since the Kurdistan Labor Party attacks Turkey from Iraq's Kurdish north; a Kurdish group in Iran has done the same, taking refuge in northern Iraq.
"Nevertheless, we need to find a solution in order to eliminate all the pretexts used by Iran and Turkey to hit Iraqi territories," he added.

U.S.-Iran dialogue

By Tulin Daloglu
May 16, 2006
ANKARA, Turkey. -- Much speculation surrounds the letter Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sent to President Bush. Could he be trying to prevent a pre-emptive strike against his country with pro-active diplomacy? "It really was a kind of philosophical and indeed religious attack on U.S. policies," said Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, brushing aside any suggestion that it could start a direct U.S.-Iran dialogue. But Iran's desire to engage speaks more loudly than the letter itself. read article

The U.S.A. is establishing peshmerge suburbs overnight in the areas vacated by our slain Turkmen brothers and those forcibly expelled from Telafar.

Yeniçağ 16.05.2006

The U.S.A. is establishing peshmerge suburbs overnight in the areas vacated by our slain Turkmen brothers and those forcibly expelled from Telafar.The U.S.A. is killing our Turkmen brothers in Iraq and stroking the Kurds’ backs. There are claims that the Arabs in Telafar City which has been recently bombed by the U.S. military, are migrating to the southern part of Iraq, while the Kurds are establishing suburbs in Northern Iraq’s Kirkuk and Telafar cities overnight. ...read

ICG Urges US to Take Active Role in Kirkuk Issues

Posted GMT 5-11-2006 15:17:17

Ankara -- A leading Brussels-based think tank urged the U.S. yesterday to immediately take active measures to prevent the city of Kirkuk, Iraq from potentially escalating into ethnic clashes, reported news channel NTV.
Joost Hiltermann, the Middle East project director from the International Crisis Group (ICG), said in an address at the Middle East Institute in Washington that Iraqi Kurds are determined to include the oil-rich city under the authority of the Kurdish regional government. He added that these efforts will receive a harsh response from both Arabs and Turkmens.
"The U.S. should stop leaving this issue to Iraqis. This is a mistaken policy," stressed Hiltermann. Recalling next year's planned referendum on the future status of Kirkuk, and mentioning his fears of a possible increase in tension in the near future as Kurdish groups change the demography of the city, Hiltermann suggested that Washington should become actively involved with the issue rather than leaving it for the Iraqis to deal with. The ICG expert also criticized the U.S. for sending mainly Kurdish security officials to Turkmen-dominated cities like Tal Afar.
During his speech, Hiltermann also said that the strong Turkish military and the Turkish government have differing views about relations with Iraqi Kurds. He said that the military looks upon the Iraqi Kurdish political groups more harshly than ruling Justice and Development (AK) Party, which has been in favor of developing economic links and investments in northern Iraq.

Barzani’s speech: Discrepancy between words and reality

Saturday, May 13, 2006
KurdishMedia.com - By Shakhawan Shorash

.....Barzini underlines the importance of freedom of speech and individual freedom, but neither exists in Kurdistan. All is controlled by the ruling party and everyone has to do what the ruling party appreciates. This has been the daily reality for the past 14 years. If journalists and writers criticize a negative phenomenon, they have to respect the party’s unwritten limits and censorship. No direct criticisms toward the party leaders are tolerated. Even indirect or general critics risk punishment, besides encountering sanctions and ill treatment in different ways. Consequently those who prize the party and its historical “victories” are increasing in number, while realistic and honest people are decreasing in number. .... read

Patronage roils Iraqi unity

By Dan Murphy Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor BAGHDAD – Five months after Iraq's last election, the effort to create a national unity government to reconcile warring factions by sharing cabinet posts among Kurds and Shiite and Sunni Arabs is foundering. The latest impediment is squabbling among the dominant Shiites parties.
The country's new Shiite prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, was expected to unveil his cabinet Sunday. Instead, a member of the Shiite Islamist United Iraqi Alliance confirmed it was pulling out of the government, angry at the way seats are being distributed.

Three Iraqs Would Be One Big Problem

By ANTHONY H. CORDESMAN
Published: May 9, 2006
Washington
Skip to next paragraph
Readers’ Opinions
Forum: The Transition in Iraq

SOME pundits and politicians have been floating the idea that America consider dividing Iraq into three ethno-religious entities, saying this would not only stem the insurgency but also allow our troops an earlier exit. They are wrong: fracturing the country would not serve either Iraqi or United States interests, and would make life for average Iraqis even worse.
The first problem is that Iraq does not have a neat set of ethnic dividing lines. There has never been a meaningful census of Iraq showing exactly how its Arab Sunnis, Arab Shiites, Kurds and other factions are divided or where they live. The two elections held since the toppling of Saddam Hussein have made it clear, however, that Iraq's cities and 18 governorates all have significant minorities.
Thus any effort to divide the country along sectarian and ethnic lines would require widespread "relocations." This would probably be violent and impoverish those forced to move, leave a legacy of fear and hatred, and further delay Iraq's political and economic recovery.
Moreover, Iraq is heavily urbanized, with nearly 40 percent of the population in the multiethnic greater Baghdad and Mosul areas. We have seen in Northern Ireland and the Balkans how difficult it is to split cities, and with Iraq's centralized and failing services and impoverished economy, violence and economics cannot be separated. Deciding where Kirkuk, a key oil city, belonged would pit the Kurds against all the rest of Iraq's factions. Basra, the nation's port, is already under the sway of Shiite Islamist militias and could lose all of its secular character if the nation divided. In addition, the nation could not be partitioned without dividing the army, the security forces and the police. The regular military is largely Shiite with a significant number of Kurds. The Ministry of Interior forces are largely Shiite, and the police are hopelessly mixed with militias and local security forces that split according to local tribal, sectarian and ethnic ties. Dividing the country essentially means dividing the army and security forces and strengthening the militias — all of which would lead to more violence.
And of course, there is no way to divide Iraqi that will not set off fights over control of oil. More than 90 percent of Iraq's government revenues come from oil exports. The Sunni Arab west has no developed oil fields and thus would have no oil revenues. The Kurds want the northern oil fields, but have no legitimate claim to them and no real way to export the oil they produce (their neighbors Iran, Syria and Turkey have restive Kurdish populations of their own and thus no interest in helping Iraq's Kurds achieve self-sustaining freedom). Control of Basra would also be an issue, with various Shiite groups looking to separate and take control of the oil in the south.
Dividing Iraq would also harm regional stability and the war on terrorists. Sunni Islamist extremist groups with ties to Al Qaeda already dominate the Sunni insurgents, and division would only increase their hold over average Iraqis. And with Iraqi Sunnis cut out of oil money, Arab Sunni states like Egypt and Saudi Arabia would be forced to support them, if only to avoid having the Islamist extremists take over this part of Iraq.
Iran, of course, would compete for the Iraqi Shiites. The Kurds have no friends: Turkey, Iran and Syria would seek to destabilize the north and exploit the divisions between the two main Kurdish political unions. In the end, these divisions could spill over into the rest of the Middle East and the Arab world, creating a risk of local conflicts and the kind of religious tension that feeds Islamist extremism.
Washington has made serious mistakes in Iraq, and they may lead to civil war. Dividing Iraq, however, is virtually certain to make things worse. It would convey the message that America has been defeated and abandoned a nation and a people. Even if one could overlook the fact the United States effectively broke Iraq and has a responsibility to its 28 million people, it is impossible to deny that leaving behind a power vacuum in an already dangerous region is hardly a viable strategy.
Anthony H. Cordesman, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, is the author of "The Iraq War: Strategy, Tactics and Military Lessons."
Next Article in Opinion (3 of 9) »

Turkmen Painter; Choice, Hope, and Beauty

Profile

gallary

Election Results Fail To Reflect The Realities, Ergec

ANKARA -

''Elections results in Iraq fail to reflect the realities. A large Kurdish population was transferred to Kirkuk, which is an oil-rich city,'' Iraqi Turkmen Front (ITF) Chairman Sadettin Ergec who is visiting Turkey reaffirmed on Thursday.
In an exclusive interview with the A.A. correspondent, Ergec said they arrived in Turkey to get ''moral support''.
Stating that Turkmens were living under tough conditions, Ergec said ''countries neighboring Iraq have an important role to resolve the problems of Iraq since problems may spread to those countries''.
Ergec defended that relations (between Turkmens in Iraq and Turks) recessed after the rejection (by Turkish parliament) of the motion (allowing US troops to enter northern Iraq through Turkish territory --on the eve of Iraq war). -ELECTION RESULTS-
''I think it will be wrong to make assessments based on the results of recent elections since they fail to reflect the facts. On the other hand we expect Turkey to assume a more active role in the future,'' he noted.
Pertaining to the situation in Kirkuk, Ergec reaffirmed a very large Kurdish population was transferred to Kirkuk after 2003 to influence the results of the referendum scheduled by the end of 2007.
''The region is already in a state of excitement. Because of this, we demanded all the Iraqis and not only those living in the Kirkuk province must take part in the referendum,'' Ergec added.

The US betrays the Kurds again: American-Turkish rapprochement over the Iranian crisis

RAGNUM

The growing tensions over Iran are beginning to have an immediate impact on the foreign political stance of Turkey. On the one hand, the US is very much interested in involving Turkey in its anti-Iranian coalition, and on the other, Turkey is very much interested in using this opportunity for strengthening its foreign political positions. And so, they are beginning a big haggle.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has got into the spotlight by her visits to Greece, Turkey and Iraq on her way to Sofia for the April 28-29 informal NATO FM summit. Turkish media called Rice’s visit “a new page in the history of bilateral relations.” Turkish officials said it was very fruitful. In fact, Rice’s 16-hour visit was a good chance for Turkey to further improve its cooperation with the US, particularly, over Iran and the Kurdish rebels.
When in March 2003 the Turkish parliament refused to provide US troops a land corridor for attacking Iraq from the north, the Americans grew cold towards Turkey. They put all blame on Turkish generals and said that, henceforth, they would cooperate with politicians, namely, with the Party of Justice and Development (PJD), an Islamist force that has been in power since 2002. This was in line with the US’ Big Middle East project, where Turkey was supposed to assume leadership as an 'Islamic moderate'.
But the crisis over Iran has made Turkey’s generals relevant again. Since December 2005 the US military officials have been frequent guests in Turkey, and the Turkish generals have gradually restored their status in the country’s internal politics. Even though PJD will be the only ruling party in Turkey, at least, till the autumn 2007 parliamentary elections, and the acting Prime Minister Recep Erdogan has excellent chances to win the spring 2007 presidential race, the Bush administration is improving its relations exactly with the Turkish military.
In March 2006 Chairman of the US Chiefs of Staff, General Peter Pace visited Turkey and met with Chief of Turkey’s General Staff, General Hilmi Ozkok and Prime Minister Recep Erdogan. The sides discussed the problems of Iran, PKK, the internal political situation in Iraq, the visit of a HAMAS delegation to Ankara.
This was exactly the agenda of Rice’s meetings with the Turkish top officials. Rice met with President Ahmed Necet Sezer, Prime Minister Recep Erdogan and Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul. The sides agreed to draft a Common Strategic Vision. In Ankara Rice said that Turkey is the US’ key partner. The brief few-page Common Strategic Vision will consist of three main chapters: (1) fight with terrorism, (2) relations with the EU, (3) Big Middle East project and addenda concerning Cyprus, PKK, Iran, Iraq, the Middle East peace process and relations with Russia. To date, the US has a similar document only with India.
The Turkish public had been well prepared for Rice’s visit. On the eve of the visit, all Turkish media reported that during the last few years the US has been providing the Turkish armed forces with information support, particularly, through the Echelon global surveillance system. Even though most of this information was about PKK (it was this very source that enabled the Turkish armed forces to hold a series of successful operations in Turkey’s south-eastern regions in March-April), Rice did not give a specific yes to Turkey’s request to stifle PKK’s positions in Northern Iraq or to let it do it itself. At the same time, she hinted that the US may close its eyes on this, i.e. on a forthcoming Turkish military operation in Northern Iraq. It’s noteworthy that Turkey launched this operation while Rice was still in its territory. So, we can say that the US has, in fact, given a sanction to it.
One more interesting point of fact is that before coming to Ankara Rice had signaled that she supports Turkey’s position on Cyprus, thereby, creating a favourable climate for her talks in Ankara. Particularly, in Athens she said that Turkey is already a European country and that the Republic of Cyprus should do its best to make Turkey’s EU membership a reality. Ankara made a reciprocal gesture: it turned down Iran’s request for National Security Secretary Ali Larijani’s visit to Turkey. The Turks advised Larijani to put off his visit for early May, i.e. after Rice’s visit. They may well act as a go-between at the talks with Larijani by telling him what the US has said. This is quite typical of Ankara: to get most of the tensions between two allies and to act as a negotiator between them.
Yet one more interesting point of fact is that Turkey had launched its all-time big anti-Kurdish military campaign exactly by the time of Rice’s Ankara visit. Fearing Europe’s anger, Turkey had, thereby, tried to “legitimize” its action. Turkey’s goal is to curb the activity of Kurds in its south-eastern regions, to provoke them into counter-action and, with US acquiescence, to track the fighters down to Northern Iraq and to put an end to them there. This is, in fact, a repetition of campaigns it used to hold in Saddam times.
The events of the last week have confirmed this conclusion. Turkey was holding its military campaign while Rice was talking with Turkish leaders in Ankara and had crossed the Iraqi border when Rice was still in the Turkish capital. During the night of Apr 26-27, after being informed that fighters from the PKK training camps in Khaftanin and Metina (Northern Iraq) were planning to infiltrate into the Turkish territory, the Turkish army launched a preventive attack, threw back the enemy and pursued it into the Northern Iraqi territory. Armed with night vision cameras, the Turkish soldiers liquidated the covers of the Kurds.
The chief of Turkey’s general staff, Gen. Hilmi Ozkok refused to answer any questions. Instead, Ms Rice “calmed down” the Iraqi authorities by saying that Turkey was not going to cause damage to Iraq but was only trying to destroy PKK bases. US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said the same. This means that when in Ankara Rice gave her consent to Turkey’s operation in Northern Iraq. We can’t yet give all the reasons of this consent but, undoubtedly, it was the result of 'horse trading' .
The next day Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul confirmed that Turkish troops had violated the Turkish-Iraqi border but said that the Iraqi authorities' protests were uncalled for (the note of protest handed by Iraqi Ambassador to Turkey Umran Sabah) as “the destruction of PKK fighters in the territory of Northern Iraq is good for Baghdad too.” “For as long as Iraq is unable to guard its own borders, we’ll do it ourselves,” Gul said. This statement shows how confident Turkey is in this matter. It undertakes to 'protect' the border of a neighbor country without its consent and, in the meantime occupies, part of its territory. Obviously, Washington has not only agreed to but also guaranteed Turkey’s actions.
In his turn, the leader of the Iraqi Democratic Party of Kurdistan Masud Barzani attempted to refute the fact of the Turkish invasion into Iraq. This shows that, sacrificed by the US once again, the leaders of Iraqi Kurdistan are trying to save their faces. Meanwhile, the Turkish troops are reported to have gained control over 20-km area in Northern Iraq and to be holding a large-scale operation to destroy PKK fighters. They have already destroyed the Zap training camp near Ahmediye – 30 km deep into Iraq. During the operations Turkish planes heavily bombed the PKK bases. Availing itself of the opportunity, Turkey’s general staff has hurried to deploy a 110,000-strong corps on the border with Iran and to say that this border is fully controlled. This may be part of Turkey’s preparations for the anti-Iranian campaign.
Summing up the results of Rice’s visit to Ankara, we can say that the US is pressing hard on Turkey so as to prevent the recurrence of the Mar 2003 events, but, at the same time, it is catering for some of Ankara’s major interests. According to confidential information, Rice has demanded a straightforward answer from Turkey – “who is it with: with the US or Iran?” The Turkish officials are pretending they have given no specific promises to Washington yet and will act in line with the UN Security Council’s resolution. But there are facts that prove that during its secret talks with the DS and Pentagon and earlier this year with Tel Aviv, Turkey showed that it might well join the US and Israel.
Turkey’s key argument is the fear of its generals that a nuclear bomb in the hands of Iran may break the balance of forces between Ankara and Tehran. Turkish military analysts say that the decades-long peace between Turkey and Iran is fragile and is based on the parity of their armed forces. At the same time, the political rulers of Turkey, namely, the pro-Islamist PJD, fear that strong Iran may be a strong enemy in the struggle for sway in the Muslim world and want to weaken it.
But given the growing anti-American moods and upcoming elections in the country, PJD would still like to get the UN SC’s sanctions for the military campaign against Iran: PJD is careful in its policies and is not going to say yes to whatever the US wants. Meanwhile, Turkey’s General Staff, on the contrary, hopes that joint actions with the US will help it to strengthen its position in own country and to curb the further rise of Islamism there, particularly, to prevent PJD leader Erdogan from becoming president.
This is proved by the following circumstances: (1) a number of scandalous differences between PJD and US officials, particularly, the premier’s advisor Zapsu’s appeal to Washington not to give up PJD and Erdogan; and (2) the frequent visits of US representatives to Turkey. So, we can assume that Rice’s promise of a new strategic partnership treaty soon may well come from an agreement between Pentagon and Turkey’s General Staff. And so, we can accept the view of Turkish analysts about “a new stage” in Turkish-American relations with one proviso: just like several years ago, the US and Turkey will build their relations on the basis of military cooperation. Ankara has two problems the US can help it to solve: Cyprus and PKK. Rice’s Athens statement that Cyprus should do its best for Turkey to become an EU member, the entry of Turkish troops in Northern Iraq (something Ankara has been demanding for three years already) and the US’ connivance in the matter show that Ankara and Washington have, in principle, agreed on their cooperation over several important directions, including over Iran.
The approval of Turkey’s entry into Iraq may also imply that the sides have agreed on Kirkuk. Particularly, the Turkish prime minister and foreign minister told Rice that this town is very important in both internal political and regional terms and one can’t leave it under the control of one ethnic group. By “ethnic group” they obviously meant the Kurds.
There is a strong possibility that Washington is playing a situational game with several players at once. Getting strong support in Iraq in 2003, the US realized once again how important it is to cooperate with the Kurdish Peshmarga. But, obviously, Washington is not hurrying to give the Kurds official independence so as to have something to offer the next time the Kurds may become useful. In case of a campaign in Iran, the US will need not only Turkey, but also Kurds: who will help it to keep up stability in Iraq and to break stability in Iran through local Kurds. There is a strong possibility that Kurds may be used by Iran. And so, by letting Turkey into Northern Iraq, i.e. Kurdistan, Washington has, on the one hand, dealt a card to Ankara but, on the other, secured a card for itself – for promising at later meetings with Kurds that it will urge Turkey to withdraw from Kurdistan if they promise to cooperate over Iran. Ankara perfectly knows that the US’ approval of its campaign in Northern Iraq does not yet mean approval of its deployment in that territory.
So, obviously, in the next 10-15 years the US’ foreign policy will be focused on Middle East, Caspian Basin, Caucasus, Central Asia, South-Eastern Asia. Apparently, the US still needs Turkey as a military and political partner. Besides, Turkey is still the only partner of Israel despite the recent tensions over the PJD’s Islamist policies.
Turkey also needs the US. If Iran gets stronger, and the balance of forces in the region is changed, Turkey will find it hard to keep its positions alone. Turkey is obviously conceding in its relations with the US so as not to face Islamism tête-à-tête. Today it wants Washington just to curb Iran but not to war with it. If a war starts Turkey will find it hard to avoid being involved. But for the time being, it is just trying to capitalize on the regional crisis.
At its regular monthly conference on April 27, Turkey’s National Security Council focused on Turkey’s military campaign against PKK, Rice’s contacts in Ankara and the new government and nuclear program crises in Iraq and Iran, respectively. Particularly discussed was the strategy of Turkish military operations on the other side of the border. It’s noteworthy that after the 5.5-hour conference the Turkish premier had a tête-à-tête meeting with Transport Minister Yildirim, who had just come back from Iran. The council also discussed internal political problems, particularly, the strengthening of the Islamist policy.
Naturally, for us the dynamics of Turkish-American relations are interesting mostly in terms of Turkey’s relations with Russia and its role in the Caucasus. Having decisive rapprochement plans with Turkey, the US, at the same time, demands that Ankara stop its big plans with Moscow. Particularly, when in Ankara, Rice demanded that Gazprom be removed from the 600 mln EUR project to connect the gas networks of Turkey and Greece. She had earlier demanded the same in Athens. Some sources say that Rice proposed replacing the Russian gas by the Azeri one to be imported to Turkey via the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum pipeline. This demand has upset Turkey’s plans to become a mediator between Russia and Europe and to, thereby, show its importance for the EU. But Turkey’s tighter relations with the US may lead to its stronger positions in the Caucasus, particularly, in the South Caucasus.
So, the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum pipelines, to be launched in 2007, will link Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey even tighter. In Ankara the US and Turkey might also discuss the building of a railroad Kars (Turkey)-Tbilisi-Baku, particularly, the possibility of US support in the project. If we add to this the talk that Turkey may be allowed to have a greater say over the South Caucasus, we may well assume that very soon the Russian military bases in Georgia will be replaced by Turkish troops under the NATO aegis. Then, by forcing Georgia to populate the Turkish-Georgian borderline regions with ethnic Turks (Meskhetins), the EU and the US will chain it up to the West, with Ankara gaining bigger influence over Tbilisi’s policy.
Ankara has repeatedly said that it is ready to become a mediator in the Karabakh peace process. This would give Turkey the authority of big regional power. Despite Armenia’s resistance, the US may well involve Turkey in the process, though, initially, just as an observer. In summary, we should note that the unpredictability of the developments over Iran and the further deepening of Turkish-American relations are very negative factors for Russia’s positions in the South Caucasus.

Sen. Biden: Iraq Should be Divided into 3 Regions

01/05/2006
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Iraq should be divided into three largely autonomous regions -- Kurd, Sunni Arab and Shiite Arab -- with a weaker central government in Baghdad, Sen. Joseph Biden (news, bio, voting record) said on Monday.
In an op-ed article in The New York Times, Biden, the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee's top Democrat, said the Bush administration's effort to establish a strong central government in Baghdad had been a failure, doomed by ethnic rivalry that had spawned widespread sectarian violence.
"It is increasingly clear that President Bush does not have a strategy for victory in Iraq. Rather, he hopes to prevent defeat and pass the problem along to his successor," said Biden and co-author Leslie Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations.
Iraq's Sunnis, the driving force behind the insurgency, would welcome the partition plan rather than be dominated by a Shiite-controlled central government, Biden said.
He said the division of Iraq would follow the example of Bosnia a decade ago when that war-torn country was partitioned into ethnic federations under the U.S.-brokered Dayton Accords.
Biden billed his plan as a "third option" beyond the "false choice" of continuing the Bush administration policy of nurturing a unity government in Iraq or withdrawing U.S. troops immediately.
As part of the plan, the United States should withdraw most of its troops from Iraq by 2008, except for a small force to combat terrorism, Biden said.
Under Biden's proposal, the Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite regions would each be responsible for their own domestic laws, administration and internal security. The central

Rice, in Greece and Turkey, Holds Talks on Iraq and Iran

NY TIMES
By STEVEN R. WEISMAN
Published: April 26, 2006
ANKARA, Turkey, April 25 — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice assured Turkish leaders on Tuesday that the United States would step up efforts to stop Kurdish insurgents in Iraq from infiltrating into Turkey, but she cautioned the government not to send troops to Iraq to do the job.....read more

Shiite Militias Move Into Oil-Rich Kirkuk, Even as Kurds Dig In

Control of Iraqi City Has Long Been in Dispute
By Jonathan FinerWashington Post Foreign ServiceTuesday, April 25, 2006; Page A16

KIRKUK, Iraq -- Hundreds of Shiite Muslim militiamen have deployed in recent weeks to this restive city -- widely considered the most likely flash point for an Iraqi civil war -- vowing to fight any attempt to shift control over Kirkuk to the Kurdish-governed north, according to U.S. commanders and diplomats, local police and politicians.
Until recently, the presence of the militias here was minimal. U.S. officials have called the Shiite armed groups the deadliest threat to security in much of the country. They have been blamed for hundreds of killings during mounting sectarian violence in central and southern Iraq since the bombing of a revered Shiite shrine in February.......continue

Assassination On Turkmen Politician in Kerkuk

A Turkmen Politician killed by Kurdish terrorists in Kerkuk.

Sabah Ketene, a memeber of the Turkmen Council and former president Iraq Turkmen Front was killed by three Kurdish militia members by machine gun shot from a black car right front of Ketene's house in Kerkuk at 11:00 am in April 22 2006.

END SECTARIAN VIOLENCE

By Tulin Daloglu
April 18, 2006

Four months after holding its historic national elections, Iraq still has failed to form a government. The parliamentary session that was supposed to be held yesterday has been postponed to a later date. The problem appears to be Prime Minister Ibrahim al Jaafari, but in fact it runs deeper. "Not standing up the government fuels the sectarian violence," said Ambassador Jim Jeffrey, senior adviser to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Iraq. Mr. Jeffrey says the United States has not "put the torch to sectarian violence." He is right -- but not completely...... continue

ITF visits Turkish Polititians

Visit to MHP (Nationalist Action Party)
kerkuk.net 19.04.2006
Iraq Turkoman Front Turkish Representative Ahmet Muratlı visited Mr. Devlet Bahçeli, the Chairman of Milli Hareket Partisi (MHP) in his offices at the party headquarters to invite him to the reception to be held at the Ankara Hilton Hotel to celebrate the 11th Founding Anniversary of ITF.
More Details

Visit to DSP (Democratic Left Party)
kerkuk.net 19.04.2006
Iraq Turkoman Front Turkey Representative Ahmet Muratlı visited Demokratik Sol Parti (DSP) Chairman Zeki Sezer in his offices at the party headquarters to extend him an invitation to the reception to be held at the Ankara Hilton Hotel on the 24th of April to celebrate the 11th Founding Anniversary of the ITF.
More Details

Visit to Hür Parti (Freedom and Change Party)
kerkuk.net 19.04.2006
Iraq Turkoman Front Turkey Representative Ahmet Muratlı visited Hürriyet ve Değişim Partisi (HÜR PARTİ) Chairman Yaşar Okuyan in his offices at the party headquarters to extend him an invitation to the reception to be held at the Ankara Hilton Hotel on the 24th of April to celebrate the 11th Founding Anniversary of the ITF.
More Details

Visit to SHP (Socialdemocratic People’s Party)
kerkuk.net 19.04.2006
Iraq Turkoman Front Turkey Representative Ahmet Muratlı visited Sosyaldemokrat Halk Partisi (SHP) Chairman Murat Karayalçın in his offices at the party headquarters to extend him an invitation to the reception to be held at the Ankara Hilton Hotel on the 24th of April to celebrate the 11th Founding Anniversary of the ITF.

Blame flies over Iraqi leadership stalemate

BAGHDAD, Iraq — Iraqi politicians in the past few days have begun using uncommonly bitter language to blame one another for the impasse over a new government, a development that suggests that stalemated talks are nowhere near success....continue

Why Iraq Was a Mistake

A military insider sounds off against the war and the "zealots" who pushed it

By LIEUT. GENERAL GREG NEWBOLD (RET.)

Two senior military officers are known to have challenged Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on the planning of the Iraq war. Army General Eric Shinseki publicly dissented and found himself marginalized. Marine Lieut. General Greg Newbold, the Pentagon's top operations officer, voiced his objections internally and then retired, in part out of opposition to the war. Here, for the first time, Newbold goes public with a full-throated critique: ..... 1 2 3 Next >>

No civil war, no prime minister

A decision over the Iraqi prime minister position continues to impede the creation of a government three months after elections

Al-Ahram

As opposition within certain currents continued to grow over Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim Al-Jaafari being named to remain in office, more Iraqi forces have joined the chorus this week against Al-Jaafari's nomination. While Iraqi politicians continue to be deadlocked over the issue, sectarian violence with reprisal attacks against both Sunni and Shia continued unabated.
The Iraqi Accordance Front (IAF) -- the biggest Sunni bloc in the assembly -- have clearly now stated that its final decision is not to back Al-Jaafari's nomination. Dhafer Al-Ani, spokesperson for the IAF, reaffirmed Sunday the front's stand against Al-Jaafari. Al-Ani said the front suggested to the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA) -- the biggest Shia bloc in the assembly -- to propose other names for consideration. On Monday, the IAF forwarded a letter to Abdul-Aziz Al-Hakim, head of the UIA, notifying him that "they still have reservations about Al-Jaafari."
Similar statements were made by Kurdish officials who openly criticised Al-Jaafari's political performance, demanding that a new candidate be named by the UIA. Under the Iraqi constitution, the prime minister has to be a member of the bloc that holds the majority of seats in parliament. But there should also be a political consensus on the candidate from other forces sharing power.
The firm Sunni-Kurdish stand against Al-Jaafari prompted the UIA to enter a fresh round of internal talks to resolve the deadlock which has been the main stumbling block barring the formation of a national unity government months after parliamentary elections were held.
On Tuesday, the London-based Al-Hayat newspaper reported that a breakthrough had taken place when the young Shia leader Muqtada Al-Sadr, a staunch proponent of keeping Al-Jaafari, showed signs of backtracking on his support for Al-Jaafari. But there are differences of opinion over alternative names. The Sadrists stated clearly that they do not accept the nomination of Adel Abdul-Mahdi, whose name was put forward by the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), one of the Shia forces under the umbrella of UIA. Karim Al-Bekhati, spokesperson of the Sadrist movement, said the movement backs the nomination of Jawad Al-Maliki, who is considered to be Al-Jaafari's right-hand man in Al-Daawa Party. Other names put forward included National Security Adviser Muwafaq Al-Rubei, Ali Al-Adeeb and Abdul-Karim Al-Enzy also from Al-Daawa.
The breakthrough instigated by the Sadrists came only one day after a meeting was held Sunday of the seven factions comprising the UIA. On Monday, another meeting brought together a panel comprised of Jawad Al-Maliki, Humam Hammodi from SCIRI and Hussein Al-Shahrastani to discuss the issue with Kurdish and Sunni blocs. Monday's meeting, nonetheless, failed to produce a resolution to the issue.
Both Sunnis and Kurdish blocs hold Al-Jaafari responsible for the sectarian tension that is driving the country to the brink of civil war. The crisis reached its peak with the bombing of the Samaraa shrine, which some press reports published in Arab media suggested could have been prevented by Al-Jaafari's government. The reports accused members of Al-Jaafari's government -- particularly in Interior Ministry circles -- of having prior knowledge of the bombing and yet doing nothing to prevent it. A wave of reprisal attacks targeting both Sunni and Shia citizens and religious sites indicated to many that Iraq was segueing into a silent civil war.
Attacks continued unabated this week. On Friday a triple suicide bomb targeting Buratha Mosque in Baghdad left at least 90 dead and 160 injured. It was the first time, nonetheless, that Interior Ministry officials warned of possible attacks on mosques on Friday. Officials said they received intelligence that insurgents were preparing to detonate bombs around the capital. Some Iraqis accuse the Interior Ministry of being complacent in the face of attacks. Others point a figure at occupation authorities, which they believe are responsible for most of the attacks targeting Shia mosques.
During his Friday sermon, Moqtada Al-Sadr accused US troops of being behind the attack in Najaf that claimed the lives of 10 Iraqis last Thursday. "This is not the first time the occupation forces and their death squads have resorted to killings," Al-Sadr was quoted as saying. During the week marking the fall of Baghdad on 9 April 2003, violence continued. On Saturday, a car bomb in Musayib south of Baghdad left at least six people dead -- most of them Shia pilgrims.
Despite escalating sectarian tension, Iraqi politicians continued to firmly deny that the country was gripped by civil war. A statement by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to Al-Arabiya television Sunday, in which he said civil war "almost started in Iraq", angered many Iraqi politicians. Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said Mubarak's comments were not accurate. "It is true that there are some kind of clashes among Sunnis and Shias. But it is not civil war," he told reporters.

What is Iran’s Man in Iraq After?

In an exclusive interview, Tehran’s Hassan Kazemi Ghomi takes on Washington and counters U.S. claims that he and his country are subverting the Baghdad government.

Wednesday, Apr. 12, 2006

What is Tehran’s main man in Iraq up to? The U.S. military, which claims Iranian special forces and intelligence operatives have infiltrated Iraq, insinuates that Hassan Kazemi Ghomi, the charge d’affaires of the Iranian embassy, is intent on undermining Washington's mission in Baghdad. Indeed, U.S. military intelligence and the American-backed Iraqi National Intelligence Service told TIME that Ghomi is a member of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps’ elite Quds Force, a special forces outfit much like the Green Berets, with specialized skills in working with local forces and militias.

Saudi Arabia must act to contain Iraq strife - study

11/04/2006
RIYADH, (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia should try to avert Iraq's fragmentation by lobbying against any premature withdrawal of U.S. forces and by pressing Iran to stop meddling, a report by a security adviser to the Saudi government says.
"A civil war may well be inevitable. Such a development would have the gravest implications for the entire region, especially Saudi Arabia, which shares its longest international borders with Iraq," Nawaf Obaid said in his report on how Saudi Arabia should respond to the situation in Iraq.
The report, released by the U.S.-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, was based on dozens of interviews with military and intelligence officials in the region, and numerous conversations with Iranian officials, Obaid said.......

Analysis: The many faces of Iraq's war

By Martin Sieff
UPI Senior News Analyst
Published April 7, 2006
......... And in the north, largely overlooked, the Kurds supported and protected by U.S. power, have been forcibly exerted their own control over resentful Assyrian and Turkoman minority communities. The Kurd-Turkoman conflict, almost totally ignored in the U.S. media, is particularly significant because Turkey, a key U.S. ally and NATO member and traditionally hostile to Kurdish independence, feels strong ethnic loyalty to the Turkomans from the days of the old Ottoman Empire. As Chaim Kaufmann wrote in the New York Jewish newspaper the Forward Friday, "Not one but two full-scale communal conflicts are raging in Iraq. In the north of the country, the Kurds are fighting several other communities for the oil-rich Kirkuk Province. Further south, Sunnis and Shiites are struggling for control of a roughly 100-mile-deep band of mixed settlement that runs across central Iraq, including Baghdad." ............

other analyses:

• Iraqi govt. suspends plans to disarm militias
• Analysis: The Saudi view of Iraq's war

War in Iraq is a Continuation of the Past

by Tugrul Keskin
In his article, "The Last Exit From Iraq," Joel Rayburn argues that the US is not the first country who occupied Iraq and suggests that the US should take a lesson from the British experience. In the context of his analogy, unfortunately it is accurate information; however, he forgets to include a historical analysis of British colonialism at the beginning of this century and its relationship with the American occupation of Iraq. The American occupation of Iraq is a continuation of British colonialism and today is a reflection of the past. Iraq is an artificial state; it has an artificial national identity based on territoriality, as established under British imperialism. However, if we look at the other countries in the region, most of these countries are not different than Iraq. There is no difference between Iraq and Syria, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Lebanon. The differences between these countries are very similar to differences between Georgia and South Carolina or New York and Washington DC. ....

Shias call on al-Jaafari to quit

Senior members of Iraq's ruling Shia Alliance bloc have for the first time openly called on Ibrahim al-Jaafari to step down as prime minister to break months of deadlock over the formation of a national unity government.

Al-Jaafari warns of US interference

Friday 31 March 2006, 2:49 Makka Time, 23:49 GMT
Ibrahim al-Jaafari, the Iraqi prime minister, has warned against US interference in his country's politics and defended his ties to a Shia militia.

Report To Ministry Of Foreign Affairs

The Iraqi Turkmen live in an area that they call “Turkmenia” in Latin or “Turkmeneli” which means, “Land of the Turkmen. It was referred to as “Turcomania” by the British geographer William Guthrie in 1785. The Turkmen are a Turkic group that has a unique heritage and culture as well as linguistic, historical and cultural links with the surrounding Turkic groups such as those in Turkey and Azerbaijan. Their spoken language is closer to Azeri but their official written language is like the Turkish spoken in present-day Turkey. Their real population has always being suppressed by the authorities in Iraq for political reasons and estimated at 2%, whereas in reality their number’s are more realistically between 2.5 to 3 million, i.e. 12% of the Iraqi population.
Turkmeneli is a diagonal strip of land stretching from the Syrian and Turkish border areas from around Telafer in the north of Iraq, reaching down to the town of Mandeli on the Iranian border in Central Iraq. The Turkmen of Iraq settled in Turkmeneli in three successive and constant migrations from Central Asia, which increased their numbers and enabled them to establish six states in Iraq.
After the liberation of Iraq, the Turkmen had high expectations of the interim administration established after April 9, 2003. The Turkmen expected to see democracy, fairness, and an end to discrimination, the right to self- determination and an end to violence. Unfortunately, the opposite has occurred regarding the human rights situation in Iraq, in particular concerning the Iraqi Turkmen. However, the Iraqi Turkmen should not be seen as a danger to Iraqi sovereignty but as an asset to strengthen Iraqi stability and as a part of the big mosaic of Iraqi unity.
In order to have democracy, stability and tranquillity in Iraq. The Iraqi government must guarantee human rights for all citizens, regardless of ethnicity and reach agreement about these issues with representatives of Kurds, Turkmen and Arabs. Presently the Turkmen have been undergoing campaigns by the Kurds in Turkmeneli in an often more brutal fashion than carried out on Kurds by Saddam Hussein. The Iraqi Kurds are attempting by various methods to eliminate Turkmen identity especially from Kerkuk City in order to dilute them into Kurdish society.
Kerkuk holds strategic as well as symbolic value; the ocean of oil beneath its surface could be used to drive the economy of an independent Kurdistan, the ultimate goal for many Kurds. The Kurds hope to make the city and its vast oil reserves part of an autonomous Kurdistan whereas both the Turkmen and Arabs are fiercely opposing the inclusion of Kerkuk to the autonomous region. Because of Kerkuk’s oil resources and its strategic importance, the fight over the control of the province proved to be one of the focal points of the conflict in northern Iraq. Nevertheless, the two main Kurdish parties, the Kurdistan Democratic Party “KDP” and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan “PUK”, have long considered Kerkuk to be an integral part of a future Kurdish federal region. In contrast the Turkmen of Iraq vigorously oppose the idea of Kerkuk being a part of the Kurdish federal region. Moreover, Turkey has repeatedly expressed concern about Kurdish aspirations over Kerkuk, stating that Kurdish control over Kerkuk could fuel Kurdish nationalism in the region and undermine the rights of Turkmen residents in Kerkuk. This could lead to instability in the region and, possibly, civil war. Kerkuk itself has become almost synonymous with the abusive Kurdasiation campaign.
The Kurds have intensified their Kurdisation campaign in the city of Kerkuk. The Kurdish officials working at the administration of the Kerkuk Municipality have been confiscating real estate and lands belonging to the town administration with a view to granting them to ethnic Kurds newly arrived in Kerkuk and who are not originally from the town. The main objective and intention of the Kurds is to change the demographic structure of the city ahead of the census to be held on the Dec. 31, 2007.
The demands of the Iraqi Turkmen Association in United Kingdom are as follow:
Regarding the British Consulate in Iraq, Kerkuk shall have direct liaison with the Iraqi Turkmen representative in Kerkuk in discussion of matters that are related to Turkmen people. The meeting shall be held without the influence and interference from Kurdish political organisation. Moreover, in order to avoid any misleading, twisting and manipulation of the discussed subjects during the interpretation, the Turkmen would like to provide their own interpreter during the discussion rather than an interpreter being provided by Kurds.
We are glad to provide you with our contact name in Kerkuk, Mr.Ali Mehdi and Mr. Hassan Turan who are currently serving as a Member of the Governing Council of Kerkuk.
For the last few years, all Iraqi Turkmen recommendations and suggestions that have been put forward to the allied forces in and outside of Iraq have never been taken to consideration and have fallen on deaf ears. After the fall of the previous Iraqi regime, the Turkmen had high expectations of the interim administration established after April 9, 2003. The Turkmen expected to see democracy, fairness, and an end to discrimination, the right to self-determination and an end to violence. Unfortunately, the opposite has occurred regarding the human rights situation in Iraq, in particular concerning the Iraqi Turkmen.
The police force and military personnel that are currently serving in Kerkuk shall not be controlled by a specific group of people or political parties. The police force and military personnel from various parts of Iraq shall be deployed and utilised in Kerkuk rather then being controlled by specific militia.
The deployed police force and army personnel in Kerkuk shall be independent and not be a linked to any political party but unfortunately the established police forces clearly orchestrated in the last two elections taking sides in favouring groups that have appointed them.
The total rejection of Article 58 and referendum in Kerkuk on the final status of the city in 2007.
The Turkmen, as staunch believers in firm national principles, strongly reject the articles 58 and clauses in the Iraqi draft constitution that do great prejudice against the Turkmen and their national identity. The Turkmen are extremely worried over efforts aiming to make Kurds a majority in the northern Iraqi oil town of Kerkuk, as U.S. backed Kurdish forces took the city under control.
The fate of the disputed Iraqi city of Kerkuk is vital for all of Iraq and a planned referendum on its status should be held across the country, not in Kerkuk only as intended now. The Turkmen declared that Kerkuk is an Iraqi city and all the people of Iraq should decide on its fate. A referendum to be held only in Kerkuk would not be acceptable and valid since it is extremely easy to manipulate election results in the city.
The issue of Kirkuk’s status is potentially explosive for Iraq, and ethnic conflict over the city could spark violent clashes and even a civil war across Iraq that could eventually lead to disintegration of the country. The Turkmens and Arabs plight for the demographic structure of Kerkuk has been seriously distorted as Kurds, backed by armed Peshmerga forces, have been migrating into the city in large groups claiming to be original residents pushed out of Kerkuk in the past decades as part of the now-ousted Saddam Hussein's Arabization campaign.
Iraq's interim constitution, which is expected to be approved by the country's first post-war permanent Parliament in the coming months, foresees a referendum in Kerkuk on the final status of the city in 2007. Kurds claim the city must be a part of their autonomous region, which currently covers three provinces in the north. Turkmens and Arabs are also vying for control of the city. With a wave of Kurdish immigration to Kerkuk under way for several months, a Kurdish victory in the upcoming referendum is seen as highly likely.
There were serious irregularities in the city in Iraq's parliamentary elections held on Dec. 15 and called for efforts to rewrite flawed voter lists and register true residents of the city in an internationally observed campaign. The United Nations, the Arab League and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) should get involved in the process of registering the genuine residents of Kirkuk’s status is extremely critical because it would either unite or divide Iraq. Moreover, Iraqi independent commission completely shall not be used or involved in any sort of active role for any referendum that might be carried out on in the future of Kerkuk since all the Iraqi independent commissioned are some how biased and affiliated and influenced by specific political party. Also, during the last election the, Iraqi independent commission had proven to be extremely weak, ineffective and was easily bound to the pressure from political parties and they were subjected to manipulation and influences that was created by a specific armed militia.
In conclusion any decision on the future of Kerkuk should be under control of UN and not the Iraqi Government as we all know that the Iraqi Government is controlled by three parties and they have their own strategies. The referendum that is going to be held before the end of 2007 is going to be vital and would have dramatic affect on Iraq in general and Kerkuk city especially. We recommend that the suggested referendum to be organised and run directly by the U.N and the appointee of this referendum to be independent and directly to be appointed by the U.N. Also we want all the observers to be appointed by the U.N and to be independent.
The Kurdization policies, more active role and British government involvement to halt both Kurdish parties from changing the demography of the North of Iraq. The systematic forcible transfer of the Turkmen and Arabs populations aimed at changing the demographic nature of northern Iraq is a policy that is commonly referred to as Kurdization. The two main Kurdish parties’ programme of resettling Kurds families who were brought from brought from other provinces, such as Iran, Turkey, Syria and north of Iraq to replace and dilute the Turkmen and Arab population.
The forced and arbitrary transfer of populations is not permissible under international law and is a crime against humanity. Nevertheless, the both Kurdish parties sought to alter the demographic make up of northern Iraq in order to reduce the political power and presence of Turkmen and Arab and consolidate control over this oil-rich region.
The repatriation of all the Kurds who were brought to Kerkuk and surrounding areas from other provinces, such as Iran, Turkey, Syria and north of Iraq to be return to their original places. Many of them were settled in the houses of the forcibly evicted Arabs and of the high-ranking Ba’ath party members who fled from Kerkuk city after the fall of the Ba’ath regime. The new Kurdish arrivals have been squatting in the governmental and the high-ranking Ba’ath party members’ houses that have been deserted. Also, the squatters have been given original Iraqi identity cards, passport and registered identity showing them as residents of Kerkuk.
The disarmament of the Kurdish militia and the utilization of the UN troops in North of Iraq as a peace keeping instead of the US troops since all the Kurdish militia in north of Iraq whom are terrorizing the population. Human rights organization openly declared that they couldn’t see any difference between the practices of Saddam’s administration and those of the Kurds. Saying the attitudes of Kurdish Peshmerga also damage the US reliability and nobody wants to work with Americans any more, because, the Americans gave power to the Kurds and Shiites. Nobody has any rights except the Kurdish Peshmerga and Shiite militias. The Kurdish rebels still remain armed with weapons and they are enforcing their ideas on the Turkmen, Arabs and Assyrians against their wishes.
The police and security units, forces led by Kurdish political parties and backed by the U.S. military, have abducted hundreds of Turkmen and Arabs and Turkmens in this intensely volatile city and spirited them to prisons in Kurdish-held northern Iraq, according to U.S. and Iraqi officials, government documents and families of the victims. The Turkmen and Arabs were seized off the streets of Kerkuk in joint U.S and Kurdish militia. The Turkmen and Arabs men have been transferred secretly and in violation of Iraqi law to prisons in the Kurdish controlled cities of Erbil and Suleymaniya, sometimes with the knowledge of U.S. forces. The Turkmen and Arabs detainees, including merchants, members of tribal families and soldiers, have often remained missing for months; some have been tortured, according to released prisoners.
The ratification of the new constitution to include that Iraq consists of Arab, Kurds and Turkmen. In the newly formed constitution by the interim government it is clearly stated that Iraq consists of only Kurds and Arabs. The Turkmen have been totally disregarded and we strongly believe that a new Iraq must be inclusive, ethnically and religiously balanced in representing Iraq's three main groups. The Iraqi constitution, which was submitted on Monday, August 22, 2005, is a historic document in Iraq’s history and become the most influential document produced in the Middle East in 100 years. The constitution will have a profound influence on the development of democracy and human rights. Although, it is a step, it takes more than it does gives. We must keep in mind that the constitution was written under the occupation forces and under the influence of the Shi’aa and Kurdish parties, therefore, it remains to be seen how the jurist will interpret and apply the language of this document so that it protects the minorities of Iraq. Minorities that include Turkmen, Assyrians, Yezidis and Shabaks.
A separate federation for Kerkuk
Turkmen are against such a federation. A federal regime not based on solid ground would plunge Iraq and the region into chaos but Turkmens have warned that they would pursue their own path to have a Turkmen region if the process of Iraq going to pieces along ethnic and sectarian differences proves to be irreversible. But the Turkmen right to self-rule is reserved if this process cannot be stopped, the proposed Turkmen region would stretch from the northwest town of Tal Afar near the border with Syria down to Kerkuk and Mandeli, further southeast, close to the border with Iran. With a significant majority of Turkmens living in the Kurdish-controlled region in the north, the Kurdish attempts to consider all non-Kurdish groups as a minority and deny them many rights that they want for themselves in the new Iraq. “Looking at the vast area that is included in the Kurdish region, one can see that close to 40 percent of the population is made up of non-Kurdish people. Still, they call a region with such demographic diversity ‘Kurdistan.
Iraqi Turkmen Association in U.K,
Email msalman@eircom.net
Mofak Salman, Ireland, Dublin

Kirkuk's future could make or break new Iraq

Kirkuk: Arab, Kurdish and Turkmen claims over Kirkuk are couched in explosive rhetoric and sometimes marred by bloodshed like incidents over the new year, but the fate of this northern oil centre could well be a factor in making or breaking US plans to reshape Iraq.
In a classic example of the Arab adage "my brother and I against my cousin and my cousin and I against the stranger," Turkmen and Arabs, both Sunni and Shiites, gathered in Kirkuk Wednesday to protest a recent push by Kurdish leaders for the city's incorporation in a Kurdish autonomous region.
Many came from villages in the predominantly Sunni Arab Hawijah plains west of the city. Some came from Baghdad and from as far south as Nasiriyah and Basra, heeding the call of their tribal kinsmen.
Iraqi flags fluttered alongside blue Turkmen ones and green and black Shiite banners as protesters gathered in the festival square of what they call "the city of brotherhood."
A fiery group of young people broke ranks with what the local US military commander said was a peaceful demonstration and made its way to the city headquarters of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK).
Gunfire broke out, killing four and wounding around 30, with the Americans and Kurds blaming supporters of the former regime of Saddam Hussein for the trouble and the protestors saying the PUK guards shot first.
Two Kurds were stabbed to death Thursday night in Kirkuk and an Arab was killed in clashes with police south of the city.
"The struggle demands sacrifices," said Sheikh Ghassan al-Obeidi adding that the bloodshed marks a line in the sand in what could escalate into a civil war if Kurdish leaders pursue their "posturing and antagonistic tactics."
Sheikh Ghassan and his brothers Burhan and Salem carry the legacy of their late father Sheikh Mizher who commanded all of Iraq's Obeidis and whose ranks include many Shiites that married into the tribe.
"If Kurds continue to believe that Americans are on their side and just think about achieving maximum gains in the short term, then this will lead to a civil war," said Sheikh Ghassan, who resigned in November from a city council set up by US forces last May with representatives from all communities.
He said he had nothing against Kurds, many of whom have blood ties with Arabs, but his main concern was the "militant attitude" of the two main factions -- the PUK led by Jalal Talabani and the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) of Massoud Barzani.
Talabani and Barzani want Iraq's US-installed Governing Council to recognise their vision of a federal state well before the approval on March 1 next year of a Basic Law to govern Iraq during the transition period through 2005.
Kurdish leaders in Kirkuk say their intentions regarding federalism have been clear since 1992.
"I am for a Kurdistan that would include Kirkuk but this must come after normalising the political situation and conducting a census," said Jalal Jawhar, the PUK's chief in Kirkuk.
Jawhar said the census would only come after allowing an estimated 250,000 Kurds, inside and outside Iraq, to come back to their homes in Kirkuk, from which they were driven by Saddam starting in the 1970s in his drive to alter the ethnic makeup of the area in favour of Arabs.
Kurdish leaders in Kirkuk also claim that Saddam chopped off parts of Tamim province around the city and added them to neighbouring Diyala, Nineveh and Salahaddin provinces.
They want this land returned to Kirkuk as part of any eventual settlement.
Enter the Turkmen, believed to be the third largest ethnic group in the city after the Arabs and Kurds out of an estimated population of one million.
The mainly Shiite Turkmen have strong backing from Turkey, which has criticised the Kurdish push for federalism fearing that this might fire up nationalist feeling among its own restive Kurds.
Kirkuk's Turkmen police chief Turhan Yussef wants US troops to take more responsibility for security and to scrap the current system of allocating 40 percent of police jobs to Kurds and giving Arabs and Turkmen 28 percent each.
The United States, which has control of northern Iraq, says its role in Kirkuk is to "facilitate" political discussion among the ethnic groups.
US Colonel William Mayville of the 173rd Airborne Brigade, which patrols Kirkuk and Hawijah, says the violence goes back and forth between Kirkuk's ethnic communities and insists the recent violence is not the start of civil war.
"There are a lot of AK47s out there, and in any country, including Iraq, the heat rises enough, you can get some of the kinetics you saw," he told AFP.
"This is not the start of a civil war but that is not to downplay how serious politically what's going on here is."
But Sheikh Ghassan complains that US forces sometimes succumb to what he says is the Kurds' tendency to play the Saddam card, accusing Arabs in the area of having collaborated with the fallen dictator.
"The Americans sometimes act out of ignorance," he said.

Trouble in Kurdistan

Long the example of how a prosperous Iraq might look, the northern region's ugly side comes to the fore in a series of violent outbursts
By ANDREW LEE BUTTERS/ERBIL

A Hundred Small Saddams

Sunni-dominated Kurdistan is a tolerant refuge for religious minorities, who are free to worship as they please, these groups say. But the ruling parties keep tight rein over the Muslim religious establishment through the Ministry of Awqaf, an institution that was created by Iraq’s British overlords in the 1920s to control mosques, mullahs and what gets said in Friday sermons. The Baathists maintained the Awqaf as a useful tool of coercion, but it was disbanded by the American-appointed Governing Council in 2003 and forbidden by Iraq’s new constitution. Yet Ministries of Awqaf still exist in Kurdistan, and are still used to enforce political orthodoxy. “Instead of one big Saddam, we have a hundred small Saddams in Kurdistan,” says mullah Ahmed Wahab, a member of the Iraqi parliament for the KIU and the head cleric of mosque in Erbil until he was fired by the Erbil Awqaf on the pretext that he held two jobs.

So why are you still here?

As violence in Iraq continues, the United States officially proclaims it will not intervene, writes Nermeen Al-Mufti

Saadeddin Arkej, chairman of the Turkoman Front and member of the elected parliament, is concerned over the political wrangling. "The Kurds have made it clear that they don't want Ibrahim Al-Jaafari because of his position on Kirkuk. Al-Jaafari, for his part, is refusing to discuss Kirkuk until the government takes office."
The Turkomans, Iraq's third largest ethnic group, are afraid the Kurds will end up controlling Kirkuk. In a recent meeting of the Kurdistan parliament in Irbil, Turkoman parliamentarians enquired about the fate of Turkoman detainees in northern prisons. Adnan Al-Mufi, who is the Kurdistan parliamentary speaker, was rather blunt in his reply. Local authorities, he said, simply implement US orders.
Ali Hashem, leader of the Turkoman Front in Salaheddin, describes what happened following the recent murder of a Kurdish National Guard officer in Yankeja, a Turkoman village 75 kilometres south of Kirkuk. In retaliation, a National Guard unit attacked the village, destroying a power station and several water tanks. In the course of two days of collective punishment, two inhabitants were killed, 10 wounded, and dozens of houses, shops and cars wrecked. "The punishment lasted till Sunday, ending only after we got in touch with US forces and the command of the National Guard in Kirkuk."
The inhabitants of Kirkuk and other dominantly Turkoman towns were relieved to know that Al-Sadr followers said they would defend the Arab identity of Kirkuk at any cost, even if they had to "bring all the mujahideen of the Mahdi army to the city."

Iraq's Turn for the Worse Brings U.S. and Baathists Closer

TIME Baghdad Bureau Chief Michael Ware reflects on the changes he sees in Iraq after a two-month furlough.
By MICHAEL WARE/BAGHDAD
Posted Wednesday, Mar. 15, 2006
I've spent the last three years immersed in this conflict, but after only two months away I'm amazed at how quickly this war has mutated into something even worse than it was before. We're now seeing a sectarian element nothing like we've previously seen. Even ordinary families, people who are in no way combatants are suddenly talking about fellow Iraqis in terms of "us" and "them."

Bush Sets Target for Transition In Iraq

Country's Troops to Take Lead This Year

By Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 14, 2006; Page A01
President Bush vowed for the first time yesterday to turn over most of Iraq to newly trained Iraqi troops by the end of this year, setting a specific benchmark as he kicked off a fresh drive to reassure Americans alarmed by the recent burst of sectarian violence.

Iraqi National Guards (ING) (Kurdish Militia) attacks the Turkmen village of Yengije

Iraqi National Guards (ING) (Kurdish Militia) attacks the Turkmen village of Yengije
kerkuk.net 13.03.2006



Since the U.S Forces had handed over the security issue to the Iraqi Forces, the instability had enormously increased. Taking the advantage of the security transfer, the Iraqi National Guards (ING) forces have practiced many atrocities against the Turkmen in the northern of Iraq and particularly in the Turkmen regions of Kirkuk, Tuz Hurmatu, Taze Hurmatu, Altun Kopru and many other Turkmen regions. Hundreds of Turkmen were arrested under false allegations and they were all sent to the prisons in the northern Kurdish controlled cities of Erbil and Suleymania. Moreover, the Turkmen political parties and the Iraqi Turkmen Front offices (ITF) were raided several times. A recent example of the Kurdish atrocities committed against the Turkmen was experienced in the Turkmen village of Yengija. On March 10th, 2006 the Iraqi National Guard Forces (ING) entirely composed of the Kurdish Peshmergas (guerillas) from KDP and PUK Kurdish parties have launched an offensive attack against the Turkmen village of Yengija, located 5 km south of the district of Tuz Hurmatu. The Turkmen district of Tuz Hurmatu is located 84 km south of Kirkuk.One month prior to the attack the ING members were intimidating and threatening the Turkmen citizens in the village. They also convoyed messages to the Turkmen villagers that Yengija would be very soon the new Turkmen Falluja and soon Yengija would be annexed to the Kurdish region. Approximately 6:30 p.m. The ING imposed a curfew and at 7:00 p.m. they suddenly attacked Yengija under false allegations. A Kurdish agent who resides in the village with the Turkmen had put a bullet into his son’s leg and immediately informed the ING that a group of terrorist had entered the village and they shot his son. The sudden and well planed attacked was launched and continued until the next day. Many masked individuals from both Kurdish parties PUK and KDP have convoyed the ING forces during the raid. The following casualties were conducted during the attack:The ING raided the Turkmen houses and killed two Turkmen civilians in front of their families. A thirteen year old disabled teenager (Salman Akbar Hameed) and 35 year old (Kadir Mohammed Uryan) were both killed. Many Turkmen houses were blazed. Many Turkmen vehicles and farming equipments were destroyed and set on fire. The windows of the raided houses were smashed. Furniture and household items were all destroyed. Prior to the raid many Turkmen civilians were taken by the ING for interrogation and were badly tortured. The main water depot of the village was destroyed The main transformers and electricity suppliers were also destroyed After destroying the Turkmen houses and killing the Turkmen civilians the ING have celebrated out of the city by performing the Kurdish dances. Between 6-7 Turkmen civilians were badly injured Many livestock were killed Cash and Jewelry was stolen by the ING members during the raid. The ING members have killed a guard dog in a Turkmen house and covered it with a praying rug to mock and laugh at the dog owner. The dog owner was asked to pray for his dog after also he was badly beaten up by the ING members. Nipples of a milking cow were cut with a sharp knife in front of the owner. The owner was told that, “I will leave you to suffer with your cow”. Ten year old teenager was badly beaten and his front tooth was broken. Many women, children and elderly people were badly beaten and some were badly injured. An old woman was begging the ING member to stop beating her son by asking “please stop beating my son for the sake of God”. She was badly kicked and told by the ING member “I am the God now”. It is strongly believed that the raid is to revenge from the Turkmen in Yengija who had voted for the Iraqi Turkmen Front list (630) during the last Iraqi Elections of December 15th 2005. The Yengija village population is estimated around 15.000 people and they all are Turkmen and supporters of the ITF.The Kurdish intention is to gain control over the Turkmen cities and to force the Turkmen to displacement. The inhumane atrocities committed by the Kurds are not accepted in the new Iraq. On contrary it would create hatred and cause more bloodshed. The Turkmen will not depart their cities and they will continue demanding their legitimate rights by using democratically ways. The Turkmen are the only population which does not have militias and also they do not believe in violence. The Turkmen always were Iraq’s peacekeepers. The Turkmen population in other Turkmen cities are anticipating the same atrocities and asking the Coalition Forces led by the U.S Government to find a solution and to put an end to the Kurdish atrocities. Finally the Turkmen in the village of Yengija demand a full investigation; bring the murderers and raiders to justice and a full compensation. The Media of Iraqi Turkmen FrontUK Representation

Iraqi Turkmen complain of Kurdish attacks

Tuesday, March 14, 2006

ANKARA - Turkish Daily News

The Iraqi Turkmen Front (ITC) representative office in Ankara, in a written statement released on Monday, protested attacks in a Turkmen village near the disputed northern Iraqi province of Kirkuk that they said were committed by a unit of the Iraqi National Guard (ING), which was “entirely composed of the Kurdish peshmergas from the PUK [Patriotic Union of Kurdistan] and the KDP [Kurdistan Democratic Party].”
The ITC said that the attack took place in the Turkmen village of Yengija, approximately 90 kilometers south of Kirkuk, last Friday.
“The ING raided the Turkmen houses and killed two Turkmen civilians in front of their families. A 13-year-old disabled teenager [Salman Akbar Hameed] and a 35-year-old [Kadir Mohammed Uryan] were both killed,” the statement said.
“It is strongly believed that the raid was revenge on the Turkmen in Yengija who had voted for the ITC list [630 votes] during the last Iraqi elections of Dec. 15, 2005. The Yengija village population is estimated at around 15,000 people and they are all Turkmen and supporters of the ITC,” the statement said.
The ITC, an umbrella group for various Iraqi Turkmen groups, was actually not able to achieve success in the Dec. 15 polls in Iraq and managed to win only one seat in Iraq's 275-member National Assembly.
The ITC emphasized in the statement, in which the casualties of the attack in Yengija were explained in detail, that the Yengija attack was a one of “many atrocities against the Turkmen in northern Iraq and particularly in the Turkmen regions of Kirkuk, Tuz Hurmatu, Taze Hurmatu, Altun Kopru and many other Turkmen regions,” that were carried out by the ING.
“Since the U.S. forces handed over the security issue to the Iraqi forces, the instability has increased enormously. Taking advantage of the security transfer, the Iraqi National Guard [ING] forces have carried out many atrocities against Turkmen,” the statement said, and called on the U.S. led-coalition forces “to find a solution and put an end to the Kurdish atrocities.”
PUK representative in Ankara Bahros Galali speaking to the Turkish Daily News, avoided commenting on the ITC statement, saying that he had no information on the existence of such an attack. He, however, strongly rejected the expression of “Kurdish peshmergas” used by the ITC, emphasizing that: “Now all Iraqis, including Kurds and Turkmen, are members of the Iraqi army, they are Iraqi soldiers, but are not separate armed groups based on ethnic origins.”

The Coming Resource Wars

By Michael Klare, TomPaine.com
Posted on March 11, 2006, Printed on March 11, 2006

It's official: the era of resource wars is upon us. In a major London address, British Defense Secretary John Reid warned that global climate change and dwindling natural resources are combining to increase the likelihood of violent conflict over land, water and energy. Climate change, he indicated, "will make scarce resources, clean water, viable agricultural land even scarcer" -- and this will "make the emergence of violent conflict more rather than less likely."