Free Kurdistan!

[NATO AIR]

Heck of an attractive idea.... would the US have the balls to do it if iraq descended into chaos?

http://www.nationalreview.com/derbyshire/derbyshire200510040800.asp

October 04, 2005, 8:00 a.m.
Free Kurdistan!
A fresh idea.

Pretty much everyone by now agrees that Iraq is a mess. The Lefties and the paleos have been saying so for ages, of course. It’s all the fault of Bush/Wolfie/Chalabi/Sharon. It’s all about oil/revenge (i.e. on behalf of Bush Sr.)/Israel/Halliburton. You know the lines.

We have now reached the stage, though, where the dank, smelly waters of despondency have risen from these perennial Sloughs of Despond (sorry — there is no avoiding rising-waters analogies in Hurricane Season) and are starting to drench the socks and chill the ankles of people who are normally much more upbeat. Even my neocon pals here at NR/NRO admit that Iraq’s a mess, though they still believe we can turn it round. They are all channeling Earl Haig. “If we can just get our cavalry through their lines!” (Translation: “If we can just get the joys of bourgeois democracy into their heads!”) Dream on, guys.

I am going to stand aloof from all this unseemly bickering and try to offer a constructive suggestion. After all, if you have ever attended one of those day-long Case Study brainstorming sessions you get by way of business/administrative/military training, you know that we are pretty much at the point where, after a series of increasingly painful silences, someone pipes up with: “We really need some new ideas here.” Well, here is a new idea.

CONTINUE AT LINK

 

[dilloduck]

Heck of an attractive idea.... would the US have the balls to do it if iraq descended into chaos?

Intersting idea--one that actually offers a solution. I would like to hear Canavars' take on this one since Turkey seems to have the most to lose in this deal.

 

[dmp]

bummer - I was hoping this thread was giving away a country, for free!

 

[ekrem]

Hello. First let me say this:

Before America went into Iraq, "Kurdistan" existed allready in the no-fly Zone at 36 degree North which was established in 1990s.

So such ideas like this Article are not more than actionism.
What was than the outcome of Iraq-War? Freeing an free area?

I can understand that american people are seeking for an "exit-strategy" out of Iraq-chaos.
But i think your governemt has more plans in the Middle-East furthermore than Iraq (namely Iran). And in this strategy Iraq will remain in those boarders that it is today and it was the last decades. No country will accept US-drawn new boarders.
Boarders you have to fight for and sacrifice blood for it, not given as present for Alliances.

Kurds were always the play-balls of foreign Major Powers throughout history.
Coalition with Kurds is temporarily, as it benefits your Government and your plans of Restructuring the Middle East.

As i believe your government will march into other countries besides than Iraq whether Democratic or Republican government, it is sure that Kurdish-US-Alliance will end with "Iraq-job-finished". Or what is "Kurdistan" to play any reason in further US-Middle-East plans ? Kurds are not a regional Power nor anything else.
Perhaps you know more than me.


Problems are much more complicated. Kurdistan is an area surrounded by Anti-Kurdistan states on every boarder in every 4 directions.

- West is Syria, which does not want Kurdistan as an independent state.
- East is Iran which does not want Kurdistan as an independent State.
- South is Iraqi-Sunnites area which will make Kurds bleed for their US-Alliance once American troops will leave the country.
- And North is Turkey, which i will describe later in this post.


This is not an option. And it would lead to more chaos in the region.
Yes, of course you could arm those Kurds to the teeth, but all boarders all airspace would be closen for such a state. Isolated.
American success will be defined whether Amerians fullfill to establish a Democracy in Bagdad with all minorities in the Democracy-process.

Kurds are over-represantated in Iraq. They are not the 2nd largest group there, but they have power as they would be the largest ethnics. They are benefiting from American presence in Iraq. Constitution process was made under participation of Kurds and Shiites. You have to see that all Kurds and Shiite Interests are differing from Sunnites interests.
Sunnites have always been the elite in Iraq (University, Hospitals and soon).


As there is unstability in Rest Iraq major investments go to Kurdistan. But this will change in the near future when in other regions there is stability, too.
And Kurds do not have oil. Oil in North-Iraq is located in Kirkuk. Also in Kirkuk there is major heavy Industry.
Kurds want Kirkuk to become part of Kurdish areas.
And Kirkuk will become the city where Kurds get their Hands burned.

Like Ariel Sharon said: "Arabs have oil but Israelis have the lighter". same thing would be with Kirkuk.

Look here: here is the Kurdish-controlled areas. And Mossul, Kirkuk, Tal Afer are not within Kurdish areas.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/images/kurdistan_2002_control1.gif
Turkey for example says: Kirkuk, Tal-Afer and Mossul are Turkmen (Turcoman)-build cities. These cities are for Kurds no-go places.

Iraqi Kurds complain US blocks bid to control Kirkuk, NY Times

The United States has so far blocked Kurds’ ambitions to control Kirkuk and get a larger share from its oil, says one Kurdish official. 'If they would permit us, we could control Kirkuk but it is forbidden'
http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=2837

And it will remain forbidden. Turkey does not want Kirkuk to become part of Kurdish areas where Turkmens are ruled by Kurds. We are aware of ethnic cleansing.
Same with Tal-Afer which is mainly Turkmen populated. Tal Afer is not within Kurdish areas.
But Kurds, as long America is in the country are trying to "fix and fake" etnic structures in these cities.


Turkey has only one boarder-gate with Iraq. Turkey wants to close this boarder for a long time. But USA does not want it to be closed. Kurds are behind this American stance. This boarder gate leads through Kurdish areas in Iraq and ensures them jobs and trade.
Turkey wants to close this gate and open a new gate which will lead through Turkmen areas by Tal-Afer.


As Turkey-US-Alliance seems to be revived (IRAN huge problem)
http://www.janes.com/regional_news/africa_middle_east/news/jiaa/jiaa051003_1_n.shtml
it will remain as always: Kurds being the playball of Foreign Powers.

 

[dilloduck]

Hello. First let me say this:

Before America went into Iraq, "Kurdistan" existed allready in the no-fly Zone at 36 degree North which was established in 1990s.

So such ideas like this Article are not more than actionism.
What was than the outcome of Iraq-War? Freeing an free area?

I can understand that american people are seeking for an "exit-strategy" out of Iraq-chaos.
But i think your governemt has more plans in the Middle-East furthermore than Iraq (namely Iran). And in this strategy Iraq will remain in those boarders that it is today and it was the last decades. No country will accept US-drawn new boarders.
Boarders you have to fight for and sacrifice blood for it, not given as present for Alliances.

Kurds were always the play-balls of foreign Major Powers throughout history.
Coalition with Kurds is temporarily, as it benefits your Government and your plans of Restructuring the Middle East.

As i believe your government will march into other countries besides than Iraq whether Democratic or Republican government, it is sure that Kurdish-US-Alliance will end with "Iraq-job-finished". Or what is "Kurdistan" to play any reason in further US-Middle-East plans ? Kurds are not a regional Power nor anything else.
Perhaps you know more than me.


Problems are much more complicated. Kurdistan is an area surrounded by Anti-Kurdistan states on every boarder in every 4 directions.

- West is Syria, which does not want Kurdistan as an independent state.
- East is Iran which does not want Kurdistan as an independent State.
- South is Iraqi-Sunnites area which will make Kurds bleed for their US-Alliance once American troops will leave the country.
- And North is Turkey, which i will describe later in this post.


This is not an option. And it would lead to more chaos in the region.
Yes, of course you could arm those Kurds to the teeth, but all boarders all airspace would be closen for such a state. Isolated.
American success will be defined whether Amerians fullfill to establish a Democracy in Bagdad with all minorities in the Democracy-process.

Kurds are over-represantated in Iraq. They are not the 2nd largest group there, but they have power as they would be the largest ethnics. They are benefiting from American presence in Iraq. Constitution process was made under participation of Kurds and Shiites. You have to see that all Kurds and Shiite Interests are differing from Sunnites interests.
Sunnites have always been the elite in Iraq (University, Hospitals and soon).


As there is unstability in Rest Iraq major investments go to Kurdistan. But this will change in the near future when in other regions there is stability, too.
And Kurds do not have oil. Oil in North-Iraq is located in Kirkuk. Also in Kirkuk there is major heavy Industry.
Kurds want Kirkuk to become part of Kurdish areas.
And Kirkuk will become the city where Kurds get their Hands burned.

Like Ariel Sharon said: "Arabs have oil but Israelis have the lighter". same thing would be with Kirkuk.

Look here: here is the Kurdish-controlled areas. And Mossul, Kirkuk, Tal Afer are not within Kurdish areas.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/images/kurdistan_2002_control1.gif
Turkey for example says: Kirkuk, Tal-Afer and Mossul are Turkmen (Turcoman)-build cities. These cities are for Kurds no-go places.





And it will remain forbidden. Turkey does not want Kirkuk to become part of Kurdish areas where Turkmens are ruled by Kurds. We are aware of ethnic cleansing.
Same with Tal-Afer which is mainly Turkmen populated. Tal Afer is not within Kurdish areas.
But Kurds, as long America is in the country are trying to "fix and fake" etnic structures in these cities.


Turkey has only one boarder-gate with Iraq. Turkey wants to close this boarder for a long time. But USA does not want it to be closed. Kurds are behind this American stance. This boarder gate leads through Kurdish areas in Iraq and ensures them jobs and trade.
Turkey wants to close this gate and open a new gate which will lead through Turkmen areas by Tal-Afer.


As Turkey-US-Alliance seems to be revived (IRAN huge problem)
http://www.janes.com/regional_news/africa_middle_east/news/jiaa/jiaa051003_1_n.shtml
it will remain as always: Kurds being the playball of Foreign Powers.

Gotcha--If the US either supports or tries to "declare" and independent Kurdistan it would be meaningless and dangerous. The Kurds follow thier own interests which remain in conflict with it's neighbors and it's borders and autonomy will more likely be determined by the military. It certainly doesn't sound like anything the US wants to be in the middle of but unfortunately that hasn't stopped us before.

 

[ekrem]

Israel is against Kurdistan, too.

Israel prefers a united Iraq. Otherwise it would lead to a new Mullah-style State in the south.


And you always have to remind that Arab world will never accept any Kurdistan out of Iraqi Territory.

I mean, US is Superpower. Other states have areas where they can pressure US, too.

And for real, i do not see any Kurdistan becoming reality.
It would be crushed the same day it is announced as an independent state.