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:
Saturday, April 08, 2006
Monday, April 03, 2006
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. ....
Saturday, April 01, 2006
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
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
Thursday, March 30, 2006
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.
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.
Monday, March 20, 2006
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
By ANDREW LEE BUTTERS/ERBIL
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.
Friday, March 17, 2006
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."
Thursday, March 16, 2006
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."
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
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.
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.
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
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."
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."
Wednesday, March 08, 2006
Turkey's vested geopolitical interests
By Tulin Daloglu
March 7, 2006
Last week, Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari paid a one-day visit to Turkey, prompting an angry Iraqi President Jalal Talabani to call the trip "illegal." The Iraqi President said he was troubled that the Prime Minister did not tell other officials who are still negotiating over the new government about it. Yet, when Jalal Talabani, "the" Kurd of Iraq, is disgusted with Mr. Jaafari's visit to Ankara, one could not stop but thinking whether his reaction to the Iraqi prime minister were only a disguise to cover up his irritation of the Turks. continue
March 7, 2006
Last week, Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari paid a one-day visit to Turkey, prompting an angry Iraqi President Jalal Talabani to call the trip "illegal." The Iraqi President said he was troubled that the Prime Minister did not tell other officials who are still negotiating over the new government about it. Yet, when Jalal Talabani, "the" Kurd of Iraq, is disgusted with Mr. Jaafari's visit to Ankara, one could not stop but thinking whether his reaction to the Iraqi prime minister were only a disguise to cover up his irritation of the Turks. continue
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
Iraq on the Brink
Editorial
Published: March 1, 2006
Iraq has moved perilously close to civil war. Everyone who knows anything about the tortured history of that country, cobbled together from disparate parts by British colonial officials less than a century ago, has always dreaded such an outcome.
Fear of civil war stayed the hand of the first President George Bush, when he turned back American troops and left Saddam Hussein in power. It generated much of the opposition to the current President Bush's invasion in 2003. Yet many critics of the invasion, including this page, believed that the dangers from civil war were so dire that American troops, once in, were obliged to remain as long as there was a conceivable route to a just peace.
The only alternative to civil war is, and has always been, a national unity government of Shiites, Sunni Arabs and Kurds. Unless these mutually suspicious groups can work together, the United States will be faced with the impossible task of trying to create a stable democracy that Iraqis have refused to create for themselves.
The chances of putting together such a government grew much smaller with the bombing of a major Shiite shrine in the largely Sunni city of Samarra last week, an attack that literally blew the lid off the simmering animosity between Iraq's two main religious factions. That hatred and distrust had been heated to a high boil by the sharp-shouldered and small-minded maneuvering over the formation of a new government.
To millions of enraged Shiites, all Sunni Arabs suddenly seemed indistinguishable from the Samarra bombers. Seeing that the weak-willed and poorly disciplined Iraqi security forces had utterly failed to protect their revered mosque and shrine, Shiites looked instead to the vicious and brutal sectarian militias run by leading Shiite political parties. They promptly unleashed a torrent of bombings and killings directed against Sunni mosques, mullahs and terrified civilians.
Those bloody reprisals have so far killed hundreds of people. They confirmed Sunni fears that the Shiite-led government would not lift a finger to protect their lives, families, property and mosques from a reign of terror inflicted by militias affiliated with the leading government parties.
The desperately dangerous situation that now prevails in Iraq could never have been created by Sunni terrorists alone, or by the dithering ambivalence of Sunni political leaders, who seem unable to decide from one day to the next whether they are ready to engage in the give-and-take of parliamentary politics. Much of the blame must also go to ambitious and revenge-minded Shiite political leaders, who, for the past year, have thwarted constitutional compromises and given members of their party militias key posts in the government security forces and Interior Ministry prisons. To this day, they continue to resist the formation of a broadly inclusive national unity government.
Some of the worst offenders on this score include the incumbent prime minister, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, who has just been nominated for another term; his crucial ally Moktada al-Sadr, the rabidly anti-American cleric, politician and militia leader; and Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, who heads Iraq's most powerful Shiite party, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq.
If Iraq can still be saved from its consuming hatreds, at least some of these major Shiite leaders will have to rise to the moment and abruptly change their ways. Kurdish leaders can help by pledging to withhold their support for Mr. Jaafari's renomination unless he agrees to a broadly representative national government. And Sunni leaders will have to embrace and take part in such a government, accepting the fact that they are a minority in the population and must get used to playing a secondary, though still significant, role.
If civil war broke out, innocent Shiite and Sunni civilians would suffer first, but the repercussions could spread far beyond Iraq's borders. The Shiite south would be further propelled into the political orbit of Iran, and Kurds in the north would claim independence, probably drawing in Turkey. The oil-free western and central Sunni area would be left impoverished, a potential no man's land that could become a home base for terrorists operating around the globe.
Iraq's elected leaders can still save their country. They must now prove that they want to. Time is rapidly running out.
Iraq has moved perilously close to civil war. Everyone who knows anything about the tortured history of that country, cobbled together from disparate parts by British colonial officials less than a century ago, has always dreaded such an outcome.
Fear of civil war stayed the hand of the first President George Bush, when he turned back American troops and left Saddam Hussein in power. It generated much of the opposition to the current President Bush's invasion in 2003. Yet many critics of the invasion, including this page, believed that the dangers from civil war were so dire that American troops, once in, were obliged to remain as long as there was a conceivable route to a just peace.
The only alternative to civil war is, and has always been, a national unity government of Shiites, Sunni Arabs and Kurds. Unless these mutually suspicious groups can work together, the United States will be faced with the impossible task of trying to create a stable democracy that Iraqis have refused to create for themselves.
The chances of putting together such a government grew much smaller with the bombing of a major Shiite shrine in the largely Sunni city of Samarra last week, an attack that literally blew the lid off the simmering animosity between Iraq's two main religious factions. That hatred and distrust had been heated to a high boil by the sharp-shouldered and small-minded maneuvering over the formation of a new government.
To millions of enraged Shiites, all Sunni Arabs suddenly seemed indistinguishable from the Samarra bombers. Seeing that the weak-willed and poorly disciplined Iraqi security forces had utterly failed to protect their revered mosque and shrine, Shiites looked instead to the vicious and brutal sectarian militias run by leading Shiite political parties. They promptly unleashed a torrent of bombings and killings directed against Sunni mosques, mullahs and terrified civilians.
Those bloody reprisals have so far killed hundreds of people. They confirmed Sunni fears that the Shiite-led government would not lift a finger to protect their lives, families, property and mosques from a reign of terror inflicted by militias affiliated with the leading government parties.
The desperately dangerous situation that now prevails in Iraq could never have been created by Sunni terrorists alone, or by the dithering ambivalence of Sunni political leaders, who seem unable to decide from one day to the next whether they are ready to engage in the give-and-take of parliamentary politics. Much of the blame must also go to ambitious and revenge-minded Shiite political leaders, who, for the past year, have thwarted constitutional compromises and given members of their party militias key posts in the government security forces and Interior Ministry prisons. To this day, they continue to resist the formation of a broadly inclusive national unity government.
Some of the worst offenders on this score include the incumbent prime minister, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, who has just been nominated for another term; his crucial ally Moktada al-Sadr, the rabidly anti-American cleric, politician and militia leader; and Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, who heads Iraq's most powerful Shiite party, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq.
If Iraq can still be saved from its consuming hatreds, at least some of these major Shiite leaders will have to rise to the moment and abruptly change their ways. Kurdish leaders can help by pledging to withhold their support for Mr. Jaafari's renomination unless he agrees to a broadly representative national government. And Sunni leaders will have to embrace and take part in such a government, accepting the fact that they are a minority in the population and must get used to playing a secondary, though still significant, role.
If civil war broke out, innocent Shiite and Sunni civilians would suffer first, but the repercussions could spread far beyond Iraq's borders. The Shiite south would be further propelled into the political orbit of Iran, and Kurds in the north would claim independence, probably drawing in Turkey. The oil-free western and central Sunni area would be left impoverished, a potential no man's land that could become a home base for terrorists operating around the globe.
Iraq's elected leaders can still save their country. They must now prove that they want to. Time is rapidly running out.
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Talabani: Autonomy for Turkmens in Kurdistan!!
Turhan Tisinli,
21.02.2006
Turkmens cannot be quieted by vague promises, and definitely cannot willingly be a part of a country that calls itself by an ethnic name like that of "Kurdistan"; and be partners with a people who have been planning to change their ethnic identity, as recent history tells us about Erbil.People who would like to be partners with Turkmens must first of all stop all the rhetoric about Kurdishness of Turkmen Land in general, Kerkuk in particular. Kerkuk being "Jerusalem of Kurds" (as if Turkmens are the occupying Jews), and similar absurd and unfounded claims by Kurdish parties must stop immediately, all the "peshmerge" forces must be withdrawn from Turkmen Land (Turkmen Eli).Turkmens must be recognized as an equal partner whether in Iraq or whatever unit the Turkmens are going to end up in. My heart is still bleeding for what happened in Telafer to hundreds of innocent people.Ironically, we Turkmens instead of being unified against the unrelenting, and ever increasing threats to our very existence, we are still squabbling about who should have been the "emperor" of the Muslim Nation some 1400 years ago. Unaware of the (successful) attempts to wipe us out of existence, we are still flogging ourselves for our masters' losing the chance to come to power then, all the while we are subjected to life-and-death issues facing us in the presence, this minute to be precise).All the non-Turkmens who were resettled in the Turkmen cities and towns were resettled there for one and only one reason: robbing the Turkmens of their claim to their cities and towns and natural resources, alienate them, and eventually dissolve their presence.Since the construction of Iraq (some 80 years ago), Racist regimes of Baghdad as well as racist Kurdish parties raced with each other to Arabize, Kurdify, or simply "de-Turkmenize" Turkmen cities and towns. Even the defunct IPC resettled the Assyrians and the Armenians near the oil fields and installations and employed them with generous salaries all the while the rightful inhabitants of Kerkuk suffered from poverty and neglect.As the site of one of the few giant oil producing fields of the world, Kerkuk is still a slum-looking town, which lacks the infrastructure it deserves for being the sole life line of Iraq for many decades. Even a simple university was seen too much for Kerkuk. Talking to a Turkmen friend about the issue in the 1970's he said it is good that they didn't, because it would be a good pretext to bring more Arabs to the city, as was the case with Sulaymaniyya University, that was used to introduce Arabs to that Kurdish city.Kerkuk was home for one of the biggest military bases in the country (the Second Brigade, that helped the Kurds in the famous 1959 massacre of Turkmens in Kerkuk) that brought thousands of Arabs and Kurds to the city who eventually chose it as their permanent address.Kerkuk in particular, and Turkmen Eli in general, unwillingly and due to political naivety of Turkmens (who were not allowed to have leaders from themselves), absorbed thousands upon thousands of non-Turkmens that were brought there by British oil industry (Iraqi Petroleum Company), army bases, and other governmental establishments, not because the city lacked local workers, but due to conscious and covert plans to dilute the Turkmen concentration and gradually get rid of them.I appeal to humanity to stop rewarding the Kurds (who undoubtedly suffered a lot in the hands of past Iraqi regimes) at the expense of Turkmens, who suffered many extermination attempts by the same regimes, and ironically at the hands of Kurdish "peshmerge" themselves too.
Friday, February 17, 2006
Bumpy road ahead to Iraq's first full government
16 Feb 2006 13:37:36 GMT
Source: Reuters
By Lin Noueihed
BAGHDAD, Feb 16 (Reuters) - It could be weeks or even months before Iraqis get their first full-term government since the ousting of Saddam Hussein, with political factions wrangling over top ministries and conflicting visions of Iraq's future.
"I think this process will take until at least the middle of next month," said Abbas al-Bayati, a Turkmen Shi'ite Muslim who belongs to the dominant United Iraqi Alliance (UIA).
"There are two main problems: getting all the parties to agree on a government programme, which may take time, and the distribution of portfolios, especially key ministries such as interior, defence and foreign affairs."
BAGHDAD, Feb 16 (Reuters) - It could be weeks or even months before Iraqis get their first full-term government since the ousting of Saddam Hussein, with political factions wrangling over top ministries and conflicting visions of Iraq's future.
"I think this process will take until at least the middle of next month," said Abbas al-Bayati, a Turkmen Shi'ite Muslim who belongs to the dominant United Iraqi Alliance (UIA).
"There are two main problems: getting all the parties to agree on a government programme, which may take time, and the distribution of portfolios, especially key ministries such as interior, defence and foreign affairs."
Shias pick kingpin
Turkoman parliamentarian Fawzi Akram told Al-Ahram Weekly that, "because of the rivalry between Adel Abdul-Mahdi and Al-Jaafari, the United Iraqi Alliance decided to put the matter to a vote. In the vote, which took place at the headquarters of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, Al-Jaafari got 64 votes and Abdul- Mahdi 63 votes... Al-Jaafari has the support of the Al-Sadr group, a block that has 30 parliamentary seats."
AL-AHRAM weekly
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
Iraqi Kurds Take Tough Stance on Kirkuk
Wednesday February 15, 2006 1:01 AM
By PAUL GARWOOD
Associated Press Writer
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Kurdish political chiefs led by President Jalal Talabani warned Shiite leaders Tuesday that a deal on the oil-rich northern city of Kirkuk would be their key demand in talks on forming the country's next government.
Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni Arab leaders met in the most intensive discussions over the next government since Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari narrowly won a ballot last week to be the dominant Shiite alliance's candidate to retain the premiership.
Talabani also met with al-Jaafari's coalition ally, top Shiite political leader Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, whose candidate to be the next premier, Vice President Adil Abdul-Mahdi, lost by one vote to al-Jaafari.
Talabani said his Kurdish coalition's key demand in the government talks concerned Kirkuk, particularly implementation of the constitution's Article 136, which calls for a census to be held there followed by a referendum on whether it should be part of the Kurdish self-ruled Kurdistan region.
``The Kurdish Coalition has no demands except those which are known by everyone regarding the need to implement Article 136 of the constitution ... considering Kirkuk,'' a statement released by Talabani's office said.
Prominent Kurdish politician Mahmoud Othman said the constitution's Kirkuk clause is ``nonnegotiable.''
However, Arabs and Turkomen oppose the Kurds taking sole control of Kirkuk, the center of Iraq's vast northern oil fields. Control of Kirkuk is among the most intractable issues facing Iraq because of the conflicting ethnic claims.
Al-Jaafari, meanwhile, vowed Tuesday to work in ``accordance with the constitution'' and maintain his ``good, long and deep relations with the Kurds,'' particularly Talabani. The two have often been at odds over various issues.
Kurds complain that al-Jaafari's outgoing government failed to honor promises about the status of Kirkuk. Saddam Hussein deported tens of thousands of Kurds from the Kirkuk area and replaced them by Iraqi Arabs.
Talabani also said he wants the next government to include the Iraqi National List of former premier Ayad Allawi, who has close ties with the United States and has been touted as a possible interior minister.
Sunni Arabs oppose hard-line Shiites like current minister Bayan Jabr claiming the Interior Ministry amid accusations Shiite-led security forces have been killing and kidnapping Sunnis in a wave of sectarian violence.
But some Shiite leaders, including allies of radical cleric and al-Jaafari ally Muqtada al-Sadr, also oppose Allawi taking a senior government post, seeing it as a ``red line'' issue. Al-Sadr supporters reject Allawi because he directed Iraqi security forces in campaigns against al-Sadr militiamen in Najaf and eastern Baghdad in 2004 and early 2005.
But in his talks with Talabani, al-Hakim said there were no ``red lines'' on any bloc taking part in the government, a reference to Allawi's group.
The U.S. wants Iraq's various political groups to form a national unity government that gives key positions to Sunni Arabs, who form the backbone of the raging insurgency. Sunni satisfaction with the political process is seen as a way to end the violence.
Much of the battle over the new government will come down to numbers. Talabani's coalition has tapped him to take the presidency again, but he needs two-thirds of the 275-seat parliament to support his nomination.
Al-Jaafari's alliance holds 130 seats, not enough to form a government on its own. The Kurds, Allawi's list and a Sunni Arab bloc hold a total of 133 seats. Any government will be approved only after intense bartering.
Under the constitution, the new president calls on the largest bloc's candidate for prime minister - that being al-Jaafari - to form a Cabinet, which requires a simple majority of the assembly to be approved.
The U.N. Security Council on Tuesday welcomed the final results of the Iraqi election and called on political leaders to form ``a fully inclusive government'' that will strive to build a democratic and united country.
The council condemned acts of terrorism in Iraq and urged those who continue to use violence ``to lay down their arms.'' It said terrorist acts ``should not be allowed to disrupt Iraq's political and economic progress.''
By PAUL GARWOOD
Associated Press Writer
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Kurdish political chiefs led by President Jalal Talabani warned Shiite leaders Tuesday that a deal on the oil-rich northern city of Kirkuk would be their key demand in talks on forming the country's next government.
Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni Arab leaders met in the most intensive discussions over the next government since Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari narrowly won a ballot last week to be the dominant Shiite alliance's candidate to retain the premiership.
Talabani also met with al-Jaafari's coalition ally, top Shiite political leader Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, whose candidate to be the next premier, Vice President Adil Abdul-Mahdi, lost by one vote to al-Jaafari.
Talabani said his Kurdish coalition's key demand in the government talks concerned Kirkuk, particularly implementation of the constitution's Article 136, which calls for a census to be held there followed by a referendum on whether it should be part of the Kurdish self-ruled Kurdistan region.
``The Kurdish Coalition has no demands except those which are known by everyone regarding the need to implement Article 136 of the constitution ... considering Kirkuk,'' a statement released by Talabani's office said.
Prominent Kurdish politician Mahmoud Othman said the constitution's Kirkuk clause is ``nonnegotiable.''
However, Arabs and Turkomen oppose the Kurds taking sole control of Kirkuk, the center of Iraq's vast northern oil fields. Control of Kirkuk is among the most intractable issues facing Iraq because of the conflicting ethnic claims.
Al-Jaafari, meanwhile, vowed Tuesday to work in ``accordance with the constitution'' and maintain his ``good, long and deep relations with the Kurds,'' particularly Talabani. The two have often been at odds over various issues.
Kurds complain that al-Jaafari's outgoing government failed to honor promises about the status of Kirkuk. Saddam Hussein deported tens of thousands of Kurds from the Kirkuk area and replaced them by Iraqi Arabs.
Talabani also said he wants the next government to include the Iraqi National List of former premier Ayad Allawi, who has close ties with the United States and has been touted as a possible interior minister.
Sunni Arabs oppose hard-line Shiites like current minister Bayan Jabr claiming the Interior Ministry amid accusations Shiite-led security forces have been killing and kidnapping Sunnis in a wave of sectarian violence.
But some Shiite leaders, including allies of radical cleric and al-Jaafari ally Muqtada al-Sadr, also oppose Allawi taking a senior government post, seeing it as a ``red line'' issue. Al-Sadr supporters reject Allawi because he directed Iraqi security forces in campaigns against al-Sadr militiamen in Najaf and eastern Baghdad in 2004 and early 2005.
But in his talks with Talabani, al-Hakim said there were no ``red lines'' on any bloc taking part in the government, a reference to Allawi's group.
The U.S. wants Iraq's various political groups to form a national unity government that gives key positions to Sunni Arabs, who form the backbone of the raging insurgency. Sunni satisfaction with the political process is seen as a way to end the violence.
Much of the battle over the new government will come down to numbers. Talabani's coalition has tapped him to take the presidency again, but he needs two-thirds of the 275-seat parliament to support his nomination.
Al-Jaafari's alliance holds 130 seats, not enough to form a government on its own. The Kurds, Allawi's list and a Sunni Arab bloc hold a total of 133 seats. Any government will be approved only after intense bartering.
Under the constitution, the new president calls on the largest bloc's candidate for prime minister - that being al-Jaafari - to form a Cabinet, which requires a simple majority of the assembly to be approved.
The U.N. Security Council on Tuesday welcomed the final results of the Iraqi election and called on political leaders to form ``a fully inclusive government'' that will strive to build a democratic and united country.
The council condemned acts of terrorism in Iraq and urged those who continue to use violence ``to lay down their arms.'' It said terrorist acts ``should not be allowed to disrupt Iraq's political and economic progress.''
Iraq: More trouble brews as new government takes shape
DOHA, Qatar (IPS/GIN) - Six weeks after parliamentary elections, occupied Iraq is still struggling to establish a viable government amid increasing violence and instability.
The results of the Dec. 15 elections have still to be finalized, but it is clear that the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA), a Shia fundamentalist coalition, won at least 128 seats in the 275-seat national assembly. Since 138 seats are required for a simple majority, the powerful group will still have to cut deals with Kurdish or Sunni alliances to form a government.
The Kurdish Alliance won 53 seats. The Turkmen—who claim to represent at least 11 percent of the population of the oil-rich but volatile northern city Kirkuk—are angry that they failed to obtain even one seat in the new parliament. The Turkmen, like the Sunnis around Baghdad, allege widespread election fraud. The Sunni coalition, which boycotted the Jan. 30 election last year and continues to contest the latest election results, won 58 seats.
Former interim prime minister and alleged CIA asset Iyad Allawi managed only 25 seats through his al-Iraqiyah slate, a huge setback to the occupying powers’ plans for a secular Iraq. This means that the government will be dominated by a pro-Tehran Shia alliance, and that Iranian influence will continue to grow in Iraq. On a recent visit to Iran, Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr declared that his Mehdi Army and millions of followers would fight for Iran if it were to be attacked by a foreign power.
In a strange twist of fate, this means that U.S. policymakers are leaning now toward the more secular Sunni groups, some of which claim that Saddam Hussein was a secular Sunni.
U.S. officials, including Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, have been accused by Shia groups of “reaching out” to Sunni Arabs in an effort to counter the growing resistance in Iraq, and in efforts to promote a unified government. Shia leaders see this as an attempt to undermine their power.
“The Americans are so focused on Sunni interests that their motivation goes beyond just promoting national unity,” a UIA spokesman said.
Federalism, which in effect would mean decentralization, with more powers to a Shia south and a Kurd north, has emerged as a major sticking point in any consensus. Sunni and Shia leaders have clearly conflicting views on this. Sunni political groups fear that federalism will lead the Kurds and Shias to split Iraq into three parts. The Kurdish north and the predominantly Shia south are the main oil-producing regions of the country.
Sunni Arab leaders oppose either regional confederacies or federalism. They are attempting to form political blocs with secular Shia and Kurdish groups to counter plans for such federalism.
Disputes continue also over control of ministries. Sunnis continue to oppose Shia control of the Ministry of Interior. Sunni leaders say Shia militias are regularly being used as death squads in Sunni areas of Baghdad and Fallujah. Shia leaders have said they will not surrender any ministry that controls Iraq’s security forces. Shias also control the defense ministry.
“This will be one of the hottest issues,” Sunni leader Hussein al-Falluji said. “We will press this in the negotiations, and if the Shias are not flexible on this, it will be a problem.”
The results of the Dec. 15 elections have still to be finalized, but it is clear that the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA), a Shia fundamentalist coalition, won at least 128 seats in the 275-seat national assembly. Since 138 seats are required for a simple majority, the powerful group will still have to cut deals with Kurdish or Sunni alliances to form a government.
The Kurdish Alliance won 53 seats. The Turkmen—who claim to represent at least 11 percent of the population of the oil-rich but volatile northern city Kirkuk—are angry that they failed to obtain even one seat in the new parliament. The Turkmen, like the Sunnis around Baghdad, allege widespread election fraud. The Sunni coalition, which boycotted the Jan. 30 election last year and continues to contest the latest election results, won 58 seats.
Former interim prime minister and alleged CIA asset Iyad Allawi managed only 25 seats through his al-Iraqiyah slate, a huge setback to the occupying powers’ plans for a secular Iraq. This means that the government will be dominated by a pro-Tehran Shia alliance, and that Iranian influence will continue to grow in Iraq. On a recent visit to Iran, Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr declared that his Mehdi Army and millions of followers would fight for Iran if it were to be attacked by a foreign power.
In a strange twist of fate, this means that U.S. policymakers are leaning now toward the more secular Sunni groups, some of which claim that Saddam Hussein was a secular Sunni.
U.S. officials, including Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, have been accused by Shia groups of “reaching out” to Sunni Arabs in an effort to counter the growing resistance in Iraq, and in efforts to promote a unified government. Shia leaders see this as an attempt to undermine their power.
“The Americans are so focused on Sunni interests that their motivation goes beyond just promoting national unity,” a UIA spokesman said.
Federalism, which in effect would mean decentralization, with more powers to a Shia south and a Kurd north, has emerged as a major sticking point in any consensus. Sunni and Shia leaders have clearly conflicting views on this. Sunni political groups fear that federalism will lead the Kurds and Shias to split Iraq into three parts. The Kurdish north and the predominantly Shia south are the main oil-producing regions of the country.
Sunni Arab leaders oppose either regional confederacies or federalism. They are attempting to form political blocs with secular Shia and Kurdish groups to counter plans for such federalism.
Disputes continue also over control of ministries. Sunnis continue to oppose Shia control of the Ministry of Interior. Sunni leaders say Shia militias are regularly being used as death squads in Sunni areas of Baghdad and Fallujah. Shia leaders have said they will not surrender any ministry that controls Iraq’s security forces. Shias also control the defense ministry.
“This will be one of the hottest issues,” Sunni leader Hussein al-Falluji said. “We will press this in the negotiations, and if the Shias are not flexible on this, it will be a problem.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
