01
April 2005
1. "Calmy-Rey speaks out for women and minorities", The Swiss foreign minister, Micheline Calmy-Rey has made a plea in favour of women's and minorities' rights on the second day of her official trip to Turkey.
2. "Two more resign from the AKP", The exodus of deputies from their parties continued on Wednesday, with Erzurum deputy Ibrahim Özdogan and Izmir deputy Serpil Yildiz resigning from the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP).
3. "Turkey: Return of asylum-seeker in violation of international law", The Turkish Government should halt the expulsion of asylum-seekers who are either recognized as refugees by the UNHCR or who have filed an asylum claim with that organization and are awaiting a decision. The Government should abide scrupulously by international human rights and refugee law and standards, including the principle of non refoulement, and ensure that no person is returned to a country where he or she would be at risk of serious human rights abuses.
4. "Threatened Lawyer Charged with 'Defamation'", Defamation charges have been brought against lawyer Aygun, for saying "The Gendarme Commander threatened me" in the presence of Tunceli deputies; Gundem representatives were also charged for publishing the remarks.
5. "Turkey complains of Greek harassment in Aegean", The Turkish General Staff accused Greece yesterday of harassing Turkish warplanes while they were practicing routine exercises in international airspace over the Aegean Sea. A statement published on the Turkish General Staff's Web site announced that Greek warplanes had harassed Turkish warplanes on Monday on grounds that the Turkish planes had violated the Flight Information Region (FIR).
6. "Iraqi democracy falters", The past four days have been particularly depressing for those who hoped that the January 30 election would provide the impetus for rapid political progress, and thus serve as a democratic example to the rest of the Middle East.
7. "Kirkuk: Between Kurdish separatism
and Iraqi federalism", An analysis by Dr. Nimrod Raphaeli
of MEMRI
1.1. Swissinfo - "Calmy-Rey speaks out for women and minorities"
30. March 2005
The Swiss foreign minister, Micheline Calmy-Rey has made a plea in favour of women's and minorities' rights on the second day of her official trip to Turkey.
During a visit on Wednesday to the city of Diyarbakir in the mainly Kurdish southeast of the country, Calmy-Rey said that the application of reforms in those areas was still lacking.
"Over the past years, the Turkish government has made big efforts and passed numerous reforms, mainly concerning human rights," she commented after talks with the leaders of a local non-governmental organisation called Ka-Mer.
But she underlined: "I have been told from all sides that they have not been put into practice without hitches".
Calmy-Rey commented that the application of new laws looked
like taking time because mentalities had to be changed.
Minority rights
She wished for "the extension and consolidation" of reforms, particularly in the areas of freedom of speech and women's rights.
As a Swiss from a multicultural and multilingual country, Calmy-Rey said she had been particularly interested in minority rights.
"Experience has shown us [in Switzerland] it is essential for national cohesion that minorities have the means to defend their cultural rights," she said.
Calmy-Rey pointed to progress made in the fields of education and media, commenting that it was a positive sign that television stations could broadcast in several languages and that education could be taught in Kurdish.
But local journalists told the Swiss News Agency that
only one private school gave lessons in Kurdish in Diyarbakir.
Kurdish
And only one private television channel, Gün-TV, had been offering programmes in Kurdish over the past year.
They explained that before that, the channel could only broadcast music or publicity in Kurdish.
As for public television, there were only two weekly half-hour programmes in Kurdish, which contained translated national news dating from the previous week.
Another concern of the Swiss foreign minister during her stay in what is a poor and rural part of the country was economic development.
Calmy-Rey said it had a "big economic delay to catch
up on". After talks with the governor and the mayor of Diyarbakir,
she said there was a "clear need to act" on the issue.
Humanitarian aid
She recalled that Switzerland is supporting several humanitarian aid projects in the region.
The Swiss foreign ministry is contributing SFr3.7 million ($3.1 million) over several years to help fund four NGOs in Diyarbakir.
Ka-Mer, which defends the rights of women victims of violence, received SFr38,000 in 2004.
On the final day of her trip, Calmy-Rey is due to give
an address to Swiss and Turkish business leaders in Istanbul on Switzerland's
position in Europe and its relations with Turkey.
2. - Turkish Daily News - "Two more resign from the AKP"
Pressure on deputy Özdogan fails to persuade him to remain in the party
ANKARA / 31 March 2005
The exodus of deputies from their parties continued on Wednesday, with
Erzurum deputy Ibrahim Özdogan and Izmir deputy Serpil Yildiz resigning
from the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP).
Their resignations bring the number of deputies leaving the AKP to 13, with 357 deputies remaining.
Yildiz, in a written statement released on Wednesday, said the party had moved away from its founding mission with the government's recent domestic and foreign policies and the anti-democratic and unfair practices occurring within the party. “The requests voiced by many of the deputies in line with the people's demands have been ignored. In order not to visit my disappointment on the people, I am resigning from the AKP,” he said.
Efforts to dissuade Özdogan's resignation:
After it became known that Özdogan would hold a press conference at 11:00 a.m., deputies congregated in the Parliament Press Bureau to learn whether or not their friend was resigning.
AKP Erzurum branch president Hüseyin Tanfer, Erzurum Greater Municipality Mayor Ahmet Küçükler and Erzurum Central Mayor Recep Küçükoglu tried to prevent Özdogan from entering the bureau, and only after his associates intervened could Özdogan enter the press section.
Özdogan leveled serious accusations against the AKP government and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan during the press conference. “If I, as the people's representative, cannot talk to the minister or the prime minister, will I just drink tea when I come to Parliament?”
He accused the prime minister of considering improving the health system by issuing fatwa, noting that despite its pre-elections promises, the government had failed to resolve the headscarf issue in its two-and-a-half years in power. “Hundreds of muggings occur in the large cities everyday and the government is doing nothing about it,” said Özdogan.
When asked what he would do next, Özdogan said that
at present he wanted to remain an independent deputy.
3. - AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL - "Turkey: Return of asylum-seeker in violation of international law"
Public Statement / 31 March 2005
AI Index: EUR 44/012/2005 (Public)
Amnesty International is seriously concerned about the well-being of Ahmet Muhammed Ibrahim, a Syrian Kurd who on the eve of March 25 was forcibly returned to Syria by the Turkish authorities despite his claim for asylum still being examined by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). He was handed over to the Syrian authorities who imprisoned him and Amnesty International fears that he may be subjected to serious human rights abuses in Syria. The decision of the Turkish authorities to return him to Syria, before his claim was even fully assessed by the UNHCR, represents a clear breach of Turkey's obligations under international law not to return individuals to countries where they may be at risk of serious human rights violations, including torture or other ill-treatment.
Ahmet Muhammed Ibrahim, a 21-year-old Syrian Kurd, had reportedly fled the Syrian army early in 2004 following the widespread violation of human rights perpetrated against Kurds in Qamishli, north-eastern Syria in March 2004 (see AI report Kurds in the Syrian Arab Republic one year after the March 2004 events, AI Index: MDE 24/002/2005). He went to Turkey where he was detained by security forces on 22 August close to the Syrian border and was remanded to prison in Diyarbakir on allegations of being a member of the Kurdish armed organization Kongra Gel (previously known as the PKK). The lawyer of Ahmet Muhammed Ibrahim has alleged a systematic violation of his client's rights while he was in detention -- including that he was tortured and ill-treated and that he was forced to sign a statement. Nevertheless, a court acquitted him of all charges on 24 March.
However, Ahmet Muhammed Ibrahim was then transferred to the Foreign Nationals' Department of Diyarbakir Police Headquarters. On 25 March he was taken to the border gate at Nusaybin where he was handed over to the Syrian authorities. He has been placed in prison in the town of Qamishli and will reportedly be imminently taken to a prison in Damascus; it is not known what he will be charged with. Amnesty International has documented a pattern of serious human rights violations against Kurds in Syria such as killings, unfair trials and arbitrary detention as well as torture and ill-treatment against detainees, and is therefore concerned for the safety of Ahmet Muhammed Ibrahim.
As Ahmet Muhammed Ibrahim had told the state prosecutor and the court in Turkey that he wished to apply for asylum, the office of the UNHCR in Turkey was in the process of assessing his asylum claim and determining whether he would qualify for refugee status under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (Refugee Convention) and its 1967 Protocol. The International Secretariat of Amnesty International and the Turkish section of Amnesty International intervened in his case before the deportation took place, asking the Turkish authorities not to proceed with their plans as Amnesty International was concerned that Ahmet Muhammed Ibrahim would be at risk of serious human rights violations if forcibly returned to Syria, considering the pattern of human rights abuses targeting Kurds in Syria. The lawyer of Ahmet Muhammed Ibrahim also wrote to the Turkish authorities expressing concerns regarding his possible return. In addition, the UNHCR had reportedly urged that he should not be returned to Syria until his asylum claim had been fully assessed. However, the authorities decided not to respond to these calls, but to proceed in contravention to Turkey's obligations under international human rights and refugee law and standards.
This is unfortunately not an isolated case. Amnesty International has on many occasions expressed its concerns to the Turkish Government regarding cases where individuals have been forcibly returned to countries where they may be at risk of serious human rights violations. In 2003 the authorities returned Hojjat Zamani to Iran from Turkey where he has since been sentenced to death (see Urgent Action 318/03, AI Index: EUR 44/025/2003, 5 November 2003 and updates). In January 2002, Karim Tuzhali was executed in Iran; the Turkish authorities had returned him to Iran in 1998 despite the fact that he had been recognized as refugee by the UNHCR (see Further information on EXTRA 97/98, MDE 13/002/2002, 5 February 2002).
Background
Kurds in Syria have been subjected to serious human rights violations, as other Syrians, but as a group they also suffer from identity-based discrimination, including restrictions placed upon the use of the Kurdish language and culture. In addition, a large proportion of the Syrian Kurds are effectively stateless and, as such, they are denied the full provision of education, employment, health and other rights enjoyed by Syrian nationals, as well as being denied the right to have a nationality and passport. Amnesty International has documented serious violations of human rights in Syria including arbitrary arrest and imprisonment of people solely for the peaceful exercise of their fundamental human rights; "disappearances"; prolonged incommunicado detention; widespread use of torture and ill-treatment in detention; unfair trials; impunity for members of the security forces suspected of perpetrating human rights violations; severe restrictions on freedom of expression and freedom of association; harassment of human rights defenders; and the imposition of the death penalty.
Turkey has ratified the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (Refugee Convention), but operates the Refugee Convention with a geographical restriction, applying the terms of the Convention only to refugees from Europe. As a consequence, non-European refugees have to seek recognition as refugees at the Turkish offices of the UNHCR. However, regardless of the scope of a state's obligations under the Refugee Convention, it must respect the principle of non-refoulement. This principle, which forbids the return of a person to a country where he or she would be at risk of serious human rights violations, is a principle of customary international law, binding on all states. The principle is to be applied without discrimination; be they asylum-seekers of European or non-European origin. The obligation of non-refoulement is further reinforced by the fact that Turkey is a party to the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom. Both of these conventions prohibit refoulement and they apply without discrimination to all persons, European or non-European.
The Turkish Government should halt the expulsion of asylum-seekers
who are either recognized as refugees by the UNHCR or who have filed
an asylum claim with that organization and are awaiting a decision.
The Government should abide scrupulously by international human rights
and refugee law and standards, including the principle of non refoulement,
and ensure that no person is returned to a country where he or she would
be at risk of serious human rights abuses.
4. - Bianet - "Threatened Lawyer Charged with 'Defamation'"
TUNCELI / 01 APRIL 2005 / BIA News Center
Defamation charges have been brought against lawyer Aygun, for saying
"The Gendarme Commander threatened me" in the presence of
Tunceli deputies; Gundem representatives were also charged for publishing
the remarks.
Huseyin Aygun, former president of the Bar Association of southeast province of Tunceli is charged with "defamation" for his complaints about local gendarme command.
Journalists Irfan Ucar and Hasan Bayar are also charged for publishing Aygun's remarks in their newspaper.
The case was initiated following a complaint by the City Gendarme Captain Namik Dursun and will begin on May 13 at the Criminal Court of First Instance.
Aygun, in an interview with Bianet says that he has been charged charges were brought against him even though the statement he gave to the newspaper was published on February 26th.
Complaining About Threats Results in Charges
Aygun, lawyer and the publisher of the newspaper Munzur Haber, had announced at a February 13 press conference at the Elazig Branch of the Human Rights Association that Gendarme Captain Dursun was threatening his life.
Aygun dates the recent attack began to February 3rd when the regiment commander made slanderous allegations towards himself and his profession.
Aygun says that he requested an appointment with the commander which took place on February 7th and the threat was repeated in person.
Lawyer Aygun, Executive Editor of the Ozgur Gundem Newspaper
Irfan Ucar and Managing Editor Hasan Bayar will be tried according to
article 424/4 of the Turkish Criminal Code and will be facing a sentence
of 3 months to one year imprisonment and a fine. It has also been requested
that one sixth of the sentence be increased one third according to
article 273 of the law.
The Newroz Case Continues
The journalist and 14 others are being charged with "insulting and ridiculing the Republic" and "promoting criminal actions" for defending the right to education in the mother tongue during the 2002 Newroz celebrations.
This trial where Aygun is specifically being charged with "criticizing practices in Turkey and Tunceli and leading chants" will continue..
Two Complaints Voided
Owner Aygun and administrator Inan Yilmaz of the "Munzur Haber" newspaper were also investigated for publishing a Human Right's Association report outlining military threats against village leaders in Hozat.
The journalists were being charged with "insult and ridicule" but the investigation was discontinued.
Journalists Aygun and Yilmaz were also reported by the
City Gendarme Command for running a story titled "They Burnt My
House Down". This complaint was also discontinued on January 12.
5. - Turkish Daily News - "Turkey complains of Greek harassment in Aegean"
ANKARA / 1 April 2005
Two Turkish F-4 planes and two Turkish F-16 planes are harassed on the same day by Greek warplanes and flight security of the planes was put at risk due to the harassment, a statement says
The Turkish General Staff accused Greece yesterday of harassing Turkish warplanes while they were practicing routine exercises in international airspace over the Aegean Sea. A statement published on the Turkish General Staff's Web site announced that Greek warplanes had harassed Turkish warplanes on Monday on grounds that the Turkish planes had violated the Flight Information Region (FIR).
Two Turkish F-4s and two Turkish F-16s were harassed in separate incidents on the same day, and the flight security of the planes was put at risk due to the harassment, the statement said.
"According to international agreements, planes belonging to states don't have to file a flight plan when flying in international airspace," the Turkish General Staff said. It also said the Greek Coast Guard had violated Turkish territorial waters near the disputed Kardak (Imia) Rocks on Wednesday. Athens alleged earlier this week that a Turkish Coast Guard boat violated Greek territorial waters near the Kardak Rocks on the same day.
Long-standing disputes over airspace and territorial rights in the Aegean have nearly led to three wars between the two NATO allies since 1974. Greece says its national airspace extends 10 miles but Turkey recognizes only six miles -- the same distance as territorial waters -- often leading to accusations of violations. The dispute over the Kardak Rocks brought Turkey and Greece to the brink of war in January 1996, and the ownership of the Kardak Rocks remains unclear to date.
Yet relations between both countries have improved since
an outpouring of sympathy from Greece was sparked by a devastating earthquake
that struck western Anatolia in 1999.
6. - The Daily Telegraph - "Iraqi democracy falters"
01 April 2005
The elections to Iraq's National Assembly were a landmark in a region where authoritarian rule is the norm. Yet, nearly nine weeks after that poll, the MPs have still to agree on who should be parliamentary speaker and vice-speaker, let alone president, vice-president, prime minister and cabinet member. The past four days have been particularly depressing for those who hoped that the January 30 election would provide the impetus for rapid political progress, and thus serve as a democratic example to the rest of the Middle East.
On Monday, Sheikh Ghazi al-Yawar, interim president and the leading candidate for the job of speaker, turned it down. The next day, the temporary head of the assembly banned reporters, after its session had become a shouting match. Yesterday, Mishaan Juburi, a former Ba'athist nominated for the post of speaker by the Front of the Iraqi Political Forces, a newly formed Sunni umbrella group, was rejected by the main parliamentary group, the Shia United Iraqi Alliance. It is now doubtful whether Shias, Kurds and Sunnis can resolve their differences before the next assembly session on Sunday.
Their failure to agree means that Iraq's faltering march towards full democracy seems set to fall behind schedule. The mid-August deadline for drawing up a new constitution now looks impractical, as does the plan to hold elections under it by the end of the year. There is talk of the whole process being put back by six months or more.
Since January 30, the intensity of the insurgency has diminished. However, the longer those elected squabble, the more the terrorists will be tempted to take advantage of the power vacuum. That, in turn, will compel coalition forces to postpone plans for a gradual withdrawal from Iraq.
A prolonged leadership crisis in which government ministries
cannot function properly is the last thing needed by a country still
prey to widespread violence, still struggling to provide people with
basic services. No one would deny the difficulty of reaching compromises
in a country with deep ethnic and sectarian differences which has been
subject to decades of totalitarian rule. But the give-and-take necessary
for such deals is the essence of the democratic process set in motion
by the January elections. The longer MPs take to learn this lesson,
the more accusations that they are betraying the Iraqi people ring true.
The voters who braved the gunmen's threats nine weeks ago deserve better.
7. - Kurdish Media - "Kirkuk: Between Kurdish separatism and Iraqi federalism"
31 March 2005 / MEMRI - By Dr. Nimrod Raphaeli
Introduction
The City of Kirkuk with its Kurdish, Arab and Turkmen population of 700,000 will serve as a critical test of the ability of the emerging democratic government in Iraq to fashion workable compromises among diverse populations and conflicting demands while preserving the country’s national integrity.
The Kurds maintain that the city is the heart of Kurdistan and should be integrated into the Kurdistan region of Iraq, which currently comprises the three governorates of Dahouk, Irbil and Sulaymaniya. The two minorities in the city, the Arabs and the Turkmen, wish to keep Kirkuk as part of the Governorate of Ta’mim, which is not part of Iraqi Kurdistan. Some key Iraqi political forces, as well as three neighboring countries with Kurdish minorities — mainly Turkey but also, to a lesser extent, Iran and Syria — favor the exclusion of Kirkuk from Kurdish control. The controversy surrounding Kirkuk is well summarized in a statement by the London daily Al-Hayat: "Kirkuk is the jewel in the Kurdish throne and a powder keg with respect to the unity of Iraq." [1]
Recent History of Iraqi Kurdistan
The two principal Kurdish parties, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan under Jalal Talabani and the Kurdistan Democratic Party under Mas’oud Barzani ran a joint list of candidates in the recent Iraqi elections, held on January 30, 2005. The joint list received a little over 25 percent of the votes, which translated into 75 seats in the 275 seat National Assembly. The Kurdish group emerged as the second largest in the new National Assembly, second only to the Shi’ite United Iraqi Alliance, which gained 140 seats.
The two Kurdish parties have not always been on good terms. In fact, in 1994 the two camps battled one another for control of the Kurdish region. In August 1996, Barzani sought the help of Saddam Hussein, who readily sent an army of 30,000 in support of Barzani’s camp. Then, under pressure from the United States, which had been providing air cover under the no-fly zone policy in northern Iraq since the defeat of the Saddam military in Kuwait in 1991, the two Kurdish parties signed an agreement in Washington in 1998 to end the civil war. Under the agreement Kurdistan was divided into two zones: a western zone, with its capital at Irbil, came under the control of Barzani, and an eastern zone, with its capital at Sulaymania, came under the control of Talabani. Each zone had its own government, prime minister and democratically elected parliament. Eventually a joint parliament emerged whose members were also democratically elected. By all accounts, the two Kurdish zones have prospered economically under democratically elected governments. Kurdistan also remains the sole area in Iraq that has been able to shield itself, almost completely, against acts of terrorism. Kurdistan remains a popular vacation spot for many Baghdadis seeking to escape the debilitating heat of the summer months in their city.
The Arabization of Kirkuk
Traditionally Kurdish, the city of Kirkuk began to undergo a process of Arabization in the mid-1930s when the discovery of oil in the city generated a flow of Arabs and Turkmen into the burgeoning oil industry. The process of Arabization, namely the settling of Iraqi Arabs in the city to change its demographic structure, continued throughout the reign of the Hashemite monarchy, but was greatly accelerated under the Ba’thist regime of Saddam Hussein with the introduction of new and extreme measures to destroy Kurdish villages and to force deportation of their people to other parts of Iraq under the "Anfal" operation in the 1990s. [2]
At the height of the Anfal operation, Saddam expelled as many as 150,000 (some say 250,000) Kurds and Turkmen to the southern regions of Iraq and replaced them with Iraqi Arabs. Those who resisted the relocation were dealt with harshly, as evidenced by the mass graves discovered following the collapse of the regime.
As a result of the Arabization policy, hundred of thousands
of Kurds and Turkomen have been forced to live in tents for several
years and many of them, to this day, living in poor conditions waiting
to be restored to their old homes. For the Kurds, this is human rights
issue.
The Kurds insist that the consequences of Arabization must be reversed
by resettling the Arabs in their provinces of origin, primarily in southern
Iraq; this would restore to the Kurds their historical demographic weight.
In the words of Mahmoud Othman, a Kurdish member of the former Iraqi
Governing Council, the annexation of Kirkuk into a Kurdish region is
not meant to "Kurdicize" the city but to remove the relics
of its Arabization. According to Othman, the 1959 census had shown a
majority of Kurds in Kirkuk and that majority should be the sole criterion
in determining its future. [3] By contrast, the Turkmen, working closely
with the Arabs, argue that Kirkuk is a predominantly Turkmen city and
should remain part of a unified Iraq. Turkey supports their claims and
has threatened to use force to frustrate Kurdish claims to Kirkuk.
Kirkuk’s Symbolic Importance
In a statement carried by the Iraqi weekly Al-Shahid Al-Mustaqill ("The Independent Witness") Talabani argued that Kirkuk had "a symbolic importance" because of the ethnic cleansing policies practiced by the previous regime. "Our struggle for Kirkuk," he asserted, "is a struggle for destiny" to restore all the liberated Kurdish areas, including Kirkuk and its surroundings, "to the bosom of Kurdistan." Emphasizing the newly acquired political weight of the Kurds, bolstered in part by their alliance with the United States, Talabani said "the time of betraying the Kurds has gone forever."[4] A photograph of Talabani displaying to Iraq’s Governing Council an early twentieth century-map showing Kirkuk as part of Kurdistan adorns many walls and public buildings in Kurdistan.[5]
Mas’oud Barzani, the other Kurdish leader, has gone even further. In a meeting with members of his party, Barzani has said Kirkuk is "the heart of Kurdistan" and expressed the willingness of the Kurds to go to war "for the sake of protecting this identity and [retaining] the benefits the Kurds have gained since the end of the [2003] war."[6]
In an interview with the London daily Al-Hayat, Barzani stated: "My father sacrificed himself and his revolution in 1974 for the sake of Kirkuk. If we should be forced to fight and lose everything we have accomplished we [still] would not bargain over Kirkuk’s identity—the heart of Kurdistan."[7]
The Legal Foundation for Kurdish Demands
Apart from their historical claims for Kirkuk, the Kurds invoke Article 58 of the "Law of Administration for the State of Iraq for the Transitional Period," also known as the State Administrative Law, of March 8, 2004 which is considered the interim constitution of Iraq, approved by the now-dissolved Iraqi Governing Council.
Article 58 states in part: "The Iraqi Transitional Government … shall act expeditiously to take measures to remedy the injustice caused by the previous regime’s practices in altering the demographic character of certain regions, including Kirkuk, by deporting and expelling individuals from their places of residence, forcing migration in and out of the region, settling individuals alien to the region, depriving the inhabitants of work, and changing nationality."
The article recommends four specific measures:
- Restore the original residents to their homes and property
- Compensate those who were introduced to specific regions [e.g., Arabs in Kurdistan] and resettle them in or near the district from which they came
- Provide compensation for those who lost their jobs by being forced to emigrate
- Allow individuals to determine their own national identity and ethnic affiliation free from coercion and duress [again, this applies primarily to Kurds who were forced to declare themselves as Arabs for the purpose of population census] [8]
The Economic Dimension
There are also practical reasons underlying the Kurdish position with regard to Kirkuk. The city and its surroundings sit on approximately 15-20 percent of Iraq’s vast oil reserves estimated at a minimum of 112 billion barrels of oil. The area could produce as much as 800,000 barrels of oil a day and thus generate a significant stream of income for the Kurdish population in northern Iraq. Should the Kurds secede from Iraq they would need the oil revenues to protect and sustain their independence. Without oil revenues of their own (as opposed to oil revenues earmarked for them by the central government) the Kurds’ room for maneuver would diminish appreciably. Kurdistan’s neighbors – Turkey, Iran and Syria – concerned about the effects of an independent Kurdistan would have on their own Kurdish populations, oppose the Iraqi Kurds having control of these oil revenues. In the eyes of an Iraqi daily, the controversy over Kirkuk has to do with its oil: "Oil alone is the reason for the Kurdish insistence, Arab refusal, Turkmen protests and the regional austerity. If Kirkuk were not an oil city we would not have heard all the historical and geographical arguments from all sides." [9]
While the Kurds could negotiate with the central government an agreement that would guarantee them a reasonable percentage of oil revenues earned by Iraq as a whole and consistent with their size in the population, such an agreement would make them dependent on political forces that could turn against them as the Kurds have often experienced during their affiliation with Iraq.
Appointment of an Independent Committee
The Shi’ite and Kurdish factions in the Iraqi National Assembly have been negotiating a coalition agreement that would establish the form and modalities of the new government and the distribution of its portfolios. Meanwhile, the outgoing government of Prime Minister Ayad Allawi has appointed an independent committee to resolve the issues surrounding the future of Kirkuk. The committee is chaired by the Secretary of the Iraqi Communist Party Hamid Majid Mousa. Mousa recently told the London daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat that his committee had been established "to assure the political forces in Kurdistan that the central Iraqi government is serious and committed to the normalization of the situation in the Kirkuk area in accordance with article 58 of the State Administrative Law." He indicated that the committee will seek to resolve the problems in four steps: eliminating the consequences of Saddam’s dictatorship; mending the (results of) ethnic cleansing, drawing the boundaries of the area, and carrying out a population census, "followed by a referendum of the local population" to gauge their political preferences. [10]
Other Kurdish Demands
The issue of Kirkuk should be considered within the context of other Kurdish demands. Central to these demands is the creation of a federal system of government for the Kurdish region within some structure that would essentially guarantee the Kurds sovereignty in everything but name, and would leave them the option of gaining full independence in the future. The Kurds are asking for guarantees that that federalism will be anchored in the new constitution that has yet to be drafted and should not be arbitrarily changed or abrogated.
Regional Federalism vs. Provincial Federalism
While there is a consensus among most Iraqi political groups about the establishment of a federal form of government to be anchored in the new constitution, there is disagreement as to the exact nature of this federal arrangement. Without exception, the non-Kurdish Iraqi majority favors a federalism based on provinces. Iraq is divided into 18 provinces and, according to this view, each province should have some degree of autonomy within a federal framework that leaves much of the power at the center in Baghdad. Since most provinces, especially those in the north, have a mixture of ethnic groups including Arabs, Kurds, Turkmen, Assyrians, and Christians, this scheme would somewhat limit Kurdish control over three provinces - Sulaymaniya, Irbil, and Dahouk - that have enjoyed political autonomy since 1991. [11]
By contrast, the Kurds have insisted on regional or ethnic federalism that would bring into one region, and one political framework, all the provinces with substantial Kurdish populations, including the oil-producing city of Kirkuk. The idea of the federation of provinces is rejected, according to Jalal Talabani because "throughout their history, the Kurdish people have struggled to prevent the separation of the Kurdish provinces from each other and to protect the integrity of the historical Kurdish borders…" [12]
The Integration of the Peshmerga into the Iraqi Army
The Kurds demand the integration of 100,000 Peshmerga (Kurdish militia forces) into the Iraqi army, meaning that their salaries should be paid by the Iraqi treasury while at the same time restricting the entry of the regular Iraqi army into Kurdistan without the regional parliament’s prior approval. In the words of the Kurdish leader Barzani, "the Peshmerga is a tree that has borne fruit by the blood and tears of a people. It was not established by the order of a state, a political party or an individual. Without it, the Kurds would have had no existence." [13]
Secular Legislation
The Kurds are also persistent in their demand for a secular rather than an Islamist state. They demand that Islam become one source of legislation but not the only one. Ideally, they would like the separation of state and religion. [14]
The Return of Kurds to Their Cities and Villages
While the discussion about the future of Kirkuk is still ongoing the Kurds have been trying to create a new reality on the ground. By September 2004, 80,000 Iraqi Kurds had returned from Iran and another 30,000 had returned from Turkey. [15] It may be assumed that many more have since relocated in the Kurdish region, and Kirkuk in particular, from others parts of Iraq and from across the border. The Kurdish leaders have continually sought a legal process for the return of the Internally Displaced Peoples - IDPs - for without a legal process some of these peoples may take it upon themselves to restore their lost property with extra-legal measures.
Relations Between the Iraqi Kurds and Neighboring Countries
The Kurds understand the potential danger to themselves that would result from military action undertaken separately or jointly by Turkey, Iran, and Syria. Turkey has repeatedly announced that it is committed to the protection of the large Turkmen minority in Kirkuk and has threatened to intervene militarily if Kirkuk should be annexed to Kurdistan or if Kurdistan should declare independence. Turkish concerns about an independent Kurdistan have been echoed by Iran and Syria. All three countries have Kurdish minorities with varying degrees of separatist aspirations. [16] Recently, however, Turkey has shown a new flexibility in dealing with the Kirkuk issue.
A delegation representing both the Turkish foreign ministry and the military high command and headed by Ambassador Othman Kurtuk visited Sulaymaniya in northern Iraq for talks with Jalal Talabani, who was seen at the time as the emerging consensus candidate for the post of president of Iraq. Talabani urged Turkey to refrain from turning its concern about the future of Kirkuk into threats to intervene in Iraq and reminded the Turkish delegation that the Turkmen are Iraqi, not Turkish citizens. On its part, the Turkish delegation agreed with its Kurdish interlocutors about the need to establish a secular regime in Iraq supported by the Kurds and by other important politicians such as Ayad Allawi and the Sunni political leader Adnan al-Pachachi. The two parties have also agreed to try to smooth over their differences. [17]
There are at least three reasons for Turkey to behave with restraint with regard to Iraqi Kurdistan. First, Turkey will have to weigh the consequences of any military action in northern Iraq against the damage this would do to its hopes of obtaining membership in the European Union. Second, at a time of severe pressure on oil supply, oil from Kirkuk could provide Turkey with a reliable source of supply. Third, the Kurds with their well-armed and battle-hardened Peshmerga could provide problems even for the large Turkish military. In the words of the 19th century German General Helmut von Moltke: "It is impossible to triumph over the Kurds when they are united." [18]
As for Syria, it is in no position, at least for now, to undertake any adventure outside its borders. Iran for its part will probably choose to influence the policies of a Shi’ite government in Iraq through subversion and other non-military means. In short, the threats of foreign military action against an independent Kurdistan in the end may prove to be hollow.
Dr. Nimrod Raphaeli is Senior Analyst of MEMRI’s
Middle East Economic Studies Program.