Supporting Kurdish independence

[Kurdistani4ever]

A veteran British writer David Hirst says that, Kurdistan is step away from the declaration of the state, and wondered if they will be Kurds the biggest winner of the current circumstances in the region.

British author David Hirst wrote an article entitled "Arab Spring and Khrifam crisis" began his article by asking about a Kurdish state and says, "Do Kurds become the biggest winner of the Arab Spring, with the current circumstances in the region, which has shifted mostly in their favor to declare an independent state?".

He recalls the great loss suffered by the Kurds against the backdrop of Sykes-Picot agreement about 90 years ago, and then points to the political circumstances that are available thus of the Kurds as well as their continuous struggle, he says kurds took advantage of the folly of Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait, in addition to the establishment of no-fly zone in KRG And they benefited from the lessons of the past, to ask themselves as equal partners in the new Iraq.

According to what was written by British author David Hirst, the Kurds are waiting for U.S. war on Iran or the fall of the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria to declare their independence.

And from opinion of the writer, the Kurds in Iraq will rely upon the declaration of their independence and the basis of their belief that Ankara is working to consolidate its relations with Sunni Arabs and Kurds in Iraq, they are aiming their sights towards Turkey, and they have much to offer: from economic integration to mutual security cooperation ... Only if he is convinced the Iraqi Prime Minister, Nuri al-Maliki, and allowed them to create their own state. We have started we see such attitudes from within the perimeter of al-Maliki himself. He pointed to what he wrote editor-Sabah Abdul-Jabbar carp, argues that the time has come to solve the problem of older generation among Arabs of Iraq in response, in the establishment of a Kurdish state.

The writer stressed that the Kurds and the result of circumstances and political instability, regional and international are the losers have always been a result of World War I and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. According to Sykes - Picot of 1916 and promised Britain, France, Kurds state of their own, but Nktta that pledge, and ended up Erd they became minorities subjected to repression in a way or another in the four countries are Iran, Iraq, Turkey and Syria, which shared «their national home» broader.

British author says that the geopolitical reality that crammed between these four forces hostile (Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Syria) play always in their best interest and always happened that crushed revolutions latest of which was in the era of Saddam Hussein, who committed a massacre against using chemical weapons. However did not stop the Kurds from dream b «Independence final», and was penetration first in this direction folly committed by Saddam Hussein invading Kuwait in 1990 and the consequences geopolitical unforeseen killing them, and was the most important of the establishment of the Western alliance area international ban backed by the United Nations in the north Iraq. In this 'safe haven' laid Kurds first step in building the state, to hold parliamentary elections and the establishment of some structures of self-government.

The penetration second by what he says David Hurst, Vndjem for the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, and the resulting new constitutional order in full, is what he referred to carp, and enable the Kurds under this system of promoting this special status and autonomy, with access to more of legislative powers and control over their armed forces, as well as a degree of authority on oil, which constitute the backbone of the Iraqi economy, and that this power was still limited.

The author also says that the President of the Kurdistan region Massoud Barzani awaits U.S. war on Iran, or the collapse of the regime of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria to declare independence Kurdish state.

Google translator used
PUKmedia::: مکتب الإعلام للإتحاد الوطنی الکوردستا

An independent South Kurdistan, will eventually lead to Greater Kurdistan

 

[ima]

Treated like foreigners on our own soil, by people that don't belong in this very same soil

It's because all you fucking CheeseKurd pussies just sit around and take it.

 

[Kurdistani4ever]

The upheavals in Middle East and their impact on the Kurds

By Prof. Ofra Bengo, The Jerusalem Post — Israel
16.12.2012


December 16, 2012

The past hundred years were perhaps the worst in Kurdish history, including division among different states, campaigns of assimilation and even genocide. But the 21st century heralds new and better things.

Parallel to the popular revolutions in the Arab states there was a quiet revolution in the Kurdish lands in Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. In fact the upheavals in the Arab world were a catalyst for things which had been brewing in the Kurdish lands for two decades.

There are similarities and differences between the Arab and the Kurdish revolutions. In the Arab case we are talking about states while in the Kurdish case we are talking about a 30 million-strong non-state entity and community in a state of political flux. In both the Arab and Kurdish cases, breaking of barrier of fear played an important role in the development of the movements, and in both cases popular power has played a crucial role. The new media contributed immensely to the success of both, as well.

Likewise, as in the Arab world, among the Kurds, too, there is a new generation, which may be called the “upright generation,” namely a generation that has regained the Kurdish voice, attained visibility in the international arena and is devoted to the Kurdish cause. Certainly the Kurdish awakening was inspired in some parts of Kurdistan by the Arab one, however, practically speaking it took completely different directions.

Indeed, the parallel timing helps to disguise deeper differences between the Arab and Kurdish revolutions.

While the Arab revolutions have challenged state regimes, those of the Kurds are perceived as a challenge to the territorial integrity and national identity of the state. This is true especially for the Kurds in Iraq but it is becoming more and more the case for the Kurds in Syria and to a lesser extent for Turkey and Iran as well.

The main cause for this development is the bankruptcy of the notion of the nation-state. For the Kurds the nation-state meant the effacing of their identity and their political rights for the greater part of the 20th century, hence the backlash. The weakening of the state versus society as it had occurred in most of the countries of the region also played into the hands of the Kurds.

ANOTHER MAJOR difference between the Arab and Kurdish cases is that while in the Arab states the revolutions bolstered the Islamic tendencies in society and granted legitimacy to political Islam even in secular states such as Tunisia, in the Kurdish case Islamism has not gained moral and political ground. Instead, the ethno-national tendencies carried the day.

This divergence can be explained by the well known fact that among the Kurds political Islam has never put down deep roots. An illustration of this phenomenon are the results of the democratic elections of July 2009 in the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq in which the two Islamist parties won together merely nine out of 111 seats in the parliament.

On another level, while the Arab revolutions brought to the surface cracks and divisions in Arab societies, in the Kurdish case we see an opposite trend, namely greater unity. Thus, if the beginning of the 20th century witnessed the division of the Kurds into four states, after which ties among the different communities were only randomly maintained, the beginning of the 21st century and especially the latest upheavals have brought them closer.

Furthermore, it opened the way for a certain Pan-Kurdism and mitigated somewhat the chronic tendencies to tribalism, internal wars and factionalism. On the whole, while the wars and upheavals in the 20th century brought only catastrophes to the Kurds, the 2003 war and the upheavals in 2011-2012 have opened up new horizons. Similarly, the image of backwardness, passiveness and lethargy that stuck to them for generations has given room to a much more assertive and astute one.

In spite of the fact that the Kurds live in four different countries there is contagious effect, mutual influence and synergy between all four. The transnational movement has gathered momentum thanks to the geopolitical changes in the region, the greater assertiveness of the Kurds, the crucial role of the diaspora, the new media and most importantly the de facto state, the Kurdistan Regional government, which has become the magnet and the model for all the Kurds.

Indeed, the concept of Kurdistan underwent important transformations. While in the past localism of each part was the order of the day, now Greater Kurdistan becomes part and parcel of the new Kurdish discourse.

For the new generation the center is no longer the state but Greater Kurdistan. This is illustrated in such terminology which refers to the communities not according to their states but to their parts in a Kurdistani unit. Thus, North refers to Kurdistan in Turkey, South Kurdistan to Iraq, East Kurdistan to Iran and West Kurdistan to Syria.

AFTER THIS panoramic overview I would like to look briefly at each of the Kurdish regions separately. The repercussions on the KRG are immense, although there was no revolution there modeled on the Arab ones. The developments in the Middle East catapulted the KRG to the position of the actual leader of the other parts of Kurdistan. The KRG’s pivotal role is evident in the conferences it holds where Kurds from all parts of Kurdistan and the world at large participate; in the bases it provides to political groups and the refuge it grants to fleeing Kurds; and finally in its becoming the Mecca for political parties which come for support, consultation or mediation.

The fact that the KRG remained an island of stability and prosperity won it greater legitimacy in the world, especially against the background of the instability in Iraq and the tectonic changes in the region.

All this increased its political maneuverability vis-a-vis its neighbors and forced it hand with regard to Baghdad.

The real revolution took place among the Kurds of Syria who were until quite lately a silent minority, insulated from the rest of the world. Many analysts doubted that such a community, fragmented politically and geographically and which moreover lacked the natural gift of impregnable mountains enjoyed by the other parts of Kurdistan, could indeed muster the power to play any important role in the Kurdish scene.

And yet the unbelievable happened. Within a short while the Kurds of Syria turned into a player to be reckoned with.

How did this come about? The fact that the Kurds of Syria reside in the geographical and political periphery only helped them to take the initiative, far from the watching eyes of the government and the other opposition parties. The Assad regime’s struggle for survival forced him to turn a blind eye to developments in the Kurdish region and even to turn the Kurds into an ally of sorts against the other parts of the opposition. The close ties between the Turkish PKK and the Syrian PYD were further cemented by the souring relations between Damascus and Ankara, pushing Damascus to employ both the PKK and PYD against its short-lived ally. However, the main fuel for the Kurdish movement was years of assimilation, Arabization and the effacing of Kurdish identity, in the double sense of the word.

The developments among the Kurds of Syria had immediate impact on the KRG and especially on the Kurds of Turkey. The fact that the Kurds of Syria managed to take control of the Kurdish towns and villages in the Syrian north opened for the KRG a new horizon never before dreamt of, namely the possibility of reaching out to the Mediterranean Sea via Kurdistan in Syria. For a landlocked region this could be an important step toward independence.

FOR THE Kurds of Turkey, the contagious effect of the “Arab Spring,” especially in Syria, was crucial, as it has impacted the Kurds in Turkey on three different levels. First, the AKP’s vigorous anti-Assad campaign and its support to the Syrian opposition moved Assad to renew his support to the PKK as a quid pro quo. Second, the bolstering of the Syrian Kurds’ position as a result of their takeover of the Kurdish regions in Syria and their demands for a federative system became a source of emulation for the Kurds of Turkey. Third, the border between Turkish and Syrian Kurds became porous, thus strengthening cross-border influences between the two communities.

The most important turn of events among the Kurds in Turkey was the solidification of their movement into two wings: the military and political-popular one.

Since the takeover of the Kurdish region in Syria, the PKK escalated significantly its attacks against Turkish targets. Concurrently, popular resistance a la Ghandistyle led by the PKK and the BDP were reinforced in various forms. These included sit-in demonstrations by mothers whose sons had disappeared, civic Friday prayers in Kurdish conducted in the streets, boycotts of parliament sessions and government mosques and the latest move, the hunger strike by hundreds of Kurdish prisoners.

All this amounted to a severe challenge to the AKP government which has promised time and again to find a peaceful solution to the problem. Ironically, however, under the AKP governments the Kurdish issue became multi-dimensional, full of paradoxes and much more complicated than at any time in the past.

Concerning the Kurds of Iran, it appears as if the upheavals in the region have bypassed them. In fact since the brutal suppression of their uprising during the early years of the Islamic Republic (1979-1983) the Kurds of Iran have continued to oppose the Iranian regimes in various periods, with changing intensity.

And even though they appear to have been politically dormant in the past few years, they have the potential to become a dynamo for deep changes in Iran itself as well as in the other Kurdish regions. They are only waiting for a trigger.

TO SUM up, the past hundred years were perhaps the worst in Kurdish history, including division among different states, campaigns of assimilation and even genocide. But the 21st century heralds new and better things. The Kurds have regained their voice, identity and visibility in the world. Furthermore, the upheavals in the Arab world catapulted them into an important player in the region capable of reshaping its geo-strategic map. If we add to this that in the 21st century the sacred cows of nation-states have lost some of their sacredness, then the Kurds have some hope for optimism and a better future.

Prof. Ofra Bengio is head of the Kurdish Studies Program at the Moshe Dayan Center, Tel Aviv University and author of The Kurds of Iraq: Building a State within a State.The writer is a professor at the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle East and African Studies.

Copyright ©, respective author or news agency, jpost.com

 

[Kurdistani4ever]

Treated like foreigners on our own soil, by people that don't belong in this very same soil

It's because all you fucking CheeseKurd pussies just sit around and take it.

We are still fighting, even considering that we don't have the support of any country worldwide. That's called being a strong-minded warrior, something you have probably never heard of.

 

[Kurdistani4ever]

It is Time for the Turks, Persians and Arabs Draw Lessons from Kurdish History and Say Sorry to the Kurds!

By Hiwa Zandi — Special to Ekurd.net

December 17, 2012

Historically, Kurdistan has attracted geostrategic importance. It is a country that linked Europe, Middle East, South Asia and the Gulf waters together. For any imperial power or invader coming from Europe and wanting to enter Middle East and advance further into Arabia or South Asia, controlling Kurdistan was a top strategic, political and economic priority. Likewise any imperial power or invader coming from Central Asia or South Asia and attempting to advance further into Middle East, Arabia or North Africa or even towards Europe controlling Kurdistan was a strategically important precondition.

For these reasons from the time of Assyrians, Alexander, Islamic caliphs including Amawis and Abbasids, Saljoughis, Ottomans and Safavids, Kurdistan has been a contentious region. These invaders and powers vied for superiority in Kurdistan. The Ottomans and Safavids divided Kurdistan between themselves for the first time in 1514 after a long period of wars when they saw no other alternative.

One thing however remained a historical fact that long-term control of the four corners of Kurdistan by any local or foreign invader never became a reality. In particular, the rigid mountains of Kurdistan have always been under the direct control of the Kurds; restricting anyone laying a foothold.

In the modern period, Kurdistan still maintains its strategic, economic and geopolitical importance. Under the current geographic and demographic circumstances, Kurds and Kurdistan are located in between the Turks, Arabs and Persians, binding their respective countries of Iran, Iraq, Turkey and Syria together. After the division of Kurdistan amongst these artificial States in 1923, control of Kurdistan, in line with its traditional attribute, has always been the major problems of these new States.

Qandil Mountain, currently shielding PKK guerrillas, has remained an indispensable natural fort for the Kurds. In recent history, Turkey, Iran and Iraq have undertaken numerous unsuccessful land and aerial military operations to control the Kurdish mountains and eliminate the presence of Kurdish freedom fighters. These failed incursions have resulted in unwanted massive human casualties.

There is a historical Kurdish saying that states “Kurds have no friend but the mountains”. This saying in fact captures the epic battles of the Kurds from the time immemorial to the period of Xenophon and his 10,000 Greek soldiers retreating through Kurdistan in 401 BC through to the invasion attempts of Holaco Khan the grandson of Genghis khan, the Ottomans and Safavids and the current Kurdish resistance in the Qandil Mountain.

Kurds have always defended their homeland and did not allow anyone gain control over its epicentre the mountainous region of Kurdistan. This derives a metaphorical conclusion that Kurds and their mountains are two inseparable natural elements; one cannot exist without the other. Whether it was Alexander the Great or Genghis Khan, the Arab camel riders or the nomad Turks, the Persian vassals and subservient of the Median Kurds or the imperialists of Europe, Kurdish mountains have always remained under the foot of the Kurds and never fell to the foreign domination.

It seems ironical that these hard core historical facts have not been translated into a political framework that guided the policy makers in bringing peace and stability to the region. It is regrettable that the Turks, Arabs and Persians in particular have not drawn lessons from Kurdish history and are still continuing with the bitter indulgence in the desire of control and occupation of Kurdistan. This behaviour has expectedly resulted in thousands of deaths of not only Kurds but equally their own people. In addition, these States have also wasted tremendous economic resources in attempting to cap Kurdish freedom and independence aspirations which could have been used to develop and modernise the third world status of their nationhood.

In this regard, the Arabs have tried to advance deeper into Kurdistan for centuries. In the contemporary period, this stimulus has not changed. Just weeks ago the previously oppressed Shia Arab led Iraqi government launched the Dijla military operation aiming at reoccupying the Kurdish areas classified as ‘disputed areas’ in the Iraqi constitution. Kurdistan forces retook de facto control of these areas in 2003 after the downfall of Saddam’s regime.

The Iraqi government has not been able to draw lessons from the former Iraqi regime. Saddam’s dictatorial regime could not achieve any success in trying to maintain a long-term occupation of Kurdistan even by conducting a genocide campaign against the Kurds that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Kurds through the infamous 1988 Anfal campaign, using chemical weapon in Halabja, massacre of Barzani in 1980s and many other tragedies. Common sense and human empathy underscores that the Arabs in Iraq would look into mirror and regret the inhumane oppression of Saddam and his Arab army. One would expect that the Iraqi government would come to the Kurds and offer wholehearted apology for the genocide and do anything to redress their grievances. At the same time, this conclusion should also have been reached that attempts of occupying Kurdistan should be a matter of history. Regrettably, it appears this reasonability and conclusion has not prevailed and the occupation mindset has continued.

Similarly, the Turks have been trying to maintain their grip over Kurdistan ever since they abandoned their Central Asian homeland and chose Asia Minor instead in the 11th century AD. Various Kurdish principalities confronted the Turks and challenged them in indulging themselves with the occupation mission. Whilst the Turks have been able to control the Kurdish cities especially after the Ata Turk’s betrayal of the Kurds under the rhetoric of Islamic brotherhood in 1920s, the Kurdish mountains have not fell to their control.

Uprising after uprising maintained the historical character of the Kurds being a free nation and inseparable to their land. The Turkish oppressive regimes continued the Ata Turk’s annihilation and assimilation policy against the Kurds. They proclaimed the Kurds to be ‘mountain Turks’ even though Kurds have lived on their land and mountains for over three millennia, way before the Turks entered the Asia Minor. They massacred Kurds in thousands, destroyed thousands of villages, displaced millions of people and at the same time suppressed the Kurdish culture and language.

The aim of these oppressive policies was to erase the Kurdish identity from the face of their historical homeland. To the misperception this could not occur. Recently, the Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan made a superficial and politically impregnated apology to the Kurds for the Darsim Massacre which is only a partial but painful wound of the past Kurdish tragedies.

Nevertheless, the Turkish government has continued with the occupation of Kurdistan and suppression of the Kurds. Currently, over 8000 Kurdish political activists, council members and parliamentarians are holed in prison, education in mother tongue is prohibited in schools, the Kurdish southeast has left drastically underdeveloped compared with the Turkish northwest, and at the same time the bloody war against the PKK guerrillas has been continued.

The case of Islamic regime of Iran is not anything promising. It has adopted the suppressive policies of the predecessor regime of Shah against the Kurds. Shah had managed to put an end to the Republic of Kurdistan in 1946 with the help of foreign powers. The President of the Republic and other government officials were hanged. Thousands of Kurds were massacred and Kurdish identity was suppressed. The Islamic regime extended this suppression through Khalkhali’s massacre of Kurds after the revolution. Today, Kurdish political prisoners are hanged frequently in Iran just because they demand equal cultural, political and economic rights in Iran. Kurdish education is still banned and publication is heavily restricted.

This is in a circumstance that Kurds have close cultural affinity with the Persians and for most part of history Kurds were the rulers of Iran. Commencing with the Meds that established the Median Empire in the mid ninth century BC, covering a vast region stretching from Mediterranean Sea through to Afghanistan, the Kurdish rule continued through the Partians or Ashkanis, the Sasanis and the Zands. Kurds laid the foundation of an everlasting civilization in Kurdistan and Iran in particular and other parts of the Middle East in general. Kurds have a glorious history in protecting Iran and its people from the foreign intruders and invaders. Having this immense glorious past and rich cultural heritage one would expect that the Persians led Iranian governments would treat the Kurds with dignity and cherish their culture and language. On the contrary, the lust for domination has done exactly the opposite by supressing the Kurdish identity.

With all the sufferings and the changing political dynamic in the region, Kurds expect the Arab, Turkish and Persian governments to use logic and come forward sooner rather than later with their apologetic appeals to the Kurdish nation and return to them what is not rightly theirs; for it may be too late when in near future the winds of change sweeps the chance to do so.

 

[ima]

Treated like foreigners on our own soil, by people that don't belong in this very same soil

It's because all you fucking CheeseKurd pussies just sit around and take it.

We are still fighting, even considering that we don't have the support of any country worldwide. That's called being a strong-minded warrior, something you have probably never heard of.

If you're such a warrior, why aren't you there fighting? You too much of a pussy?

 

[Kurdistani4ever]

It's because all you fucking CheeseKurd pussies just sit around and take it.

We are still fighting, even considering that we don't have the support of any country worldwide. That's called being a strong-minded warrior, something you have probably never heard of.

If you're such a warrior, why aren't you there fighting? You too much of a pussy?

Read my earlier comments. You've asked for this several times, and i have answered you several times.

 

[ima]

We are still fighting, even considering that we don't have the support of any country worldwide. That's called being a strong-minded warrior, something you have probably never heard of.

If you're such a warrior, why aren't you there fighting? You too much of a pussy?

Read my earlier comments. You've asked for this several times, and i have answered you several times.

Oh ya, I remember, you're too busy being a cock jockey.

 

[Kurdistani4ever]

Specially dedicated to Ima.

Peshmerga kicking iranian ass!
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VCja507H8w]1iran islamic army vs kurdish 1980[/ame]

 

[kirkuki]

ima, stop cursing and lamenting. just enjoy the show , you are making too much noise around here.

 

[Meathead]

The Gypsies of the Middle East are demanding their own country? How quaint!

 

[Kurdistani4ever]

The Gypsies of the Middle East are demanding their own country? How quaint!

Having your homeland stolen, makes you gypsy? Perhaps you should start on showing some respect instead. Specially for people that have never harmed you in any way.

What a keyboard-warrior. I know, you wouldn't have the courage to visit Diyarbakir (Amed) And scream something insulting against kurds.

 

[ima]

The Gypsies of the Middle East are demanding their own country? How quaint!

Having your homeland stolen, makes you gypsy? Perhaps you should start on showing some respect instead. Specially for people that have never harmed you in any way.

What a keyboard-warrior. I know, you wouldn't have the courage to visit Diyarbakir (Amed) And scream something insulting against kurds.

You don't have the courage to go there yourself, so stfu.

 

[Kurdistani4ever]

The Gypsies of the Middle East are demanding their own country? How quaint!

Having your homeland stolen, makes you gypsy? Perhaps you should start on showing some respect instead. Specially for people that have never harmed you in any way.

What a keyboard-warrior. I know, you wouldn't have the courage to visit Diyarbakir (Amed) And scream something insulting against kurds.

You don't have the courage to go there yourself, so stfu.

Hey Ima, did you like the video of kurds destroying iranian terrorists?

 

[ima]

Having your homeland stolen, makes you gypsy? Perhaps you should start on showing some respect instead. Specially for people that have never harmed you in any way.

What a keyboard-warrior. I know, you wouldn't have the courage to visit Diyarbakir (Amed) And scream something insulting against kurds.

You don't have the courage to go there yourself, so stfu.

Hey Ima, did you like the video of kurds destroying iranian terrorists?

I don't watch videos. Better luck next time.

 

[Kurdistani4ever]

You don't have the courage to go there yourself, so stfu.

Hey Ima, did you like the video of kurds destroying iranian terrorists?

I don't watch videos. Better luck next time.

So you don't wanna accept the truth? It's alright, gotta hurt seeing your heroes lying in massgraves

 

[ima]

Hey Ima, did you like the video of kurds destroying iranian terrorists?

I don't watch videos. Better luck next time.

So you don't wanna accept the truth? It's alright, gotta hurt seeing your heroes lying in massgraves

Any dead arab is a good arab.

 

[Kurdistani4ever]

I don't watch videos. Better luck next time.

So you don't wanna accept the truth? It's alright, gotta hurt seeing your heroes lying in massgraves

Any dead arab is a good arab.

Iranians are not arabs

 

[Meathead]

The Gypsies of the Middle East are demanding their own country? How quaint!

Having your homeland stolen, makes you gypsy? Perhaps you should start on showing some respect instead.

No, a Kurd has never harmed me, but they did so to my ancestors on my mother's side. Kurds were, and still are to some extent, wondering thieves who hid behind their "Islamization" to be vultures when the Christian Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians were clensed from the Turkish east. The ancestral lands you claim were never yours or even your nomadic tribes.

Cut this shit out, no one with one iota of historical knowledge will believe our your stupid maps.

 

[ima]

So you don't wanna accept the truth? It's alright, gotta hurt seeing your heroes lying in massgraves

Any dead arab is a good arab.

Iranians are not arabs

You're all sand monkeys to me.