Talabani and Barzani underestimated the danger of growing apprehesion in Iraq about Kurd's aspirations

Talabani and Barzani underestimated the danger of growing apprehesion in Iraq about Kurd's aspirations

By Nizar Aghery
January 16, 2009
www.alhayat.com

Translated from Arabic by the www.christiansofiraq.com

" acts which have turned the Kurds image upside down. We have gone from being victims to the perpetrators of
injustice and tyranny."

Kurdish political behavior in Iraq has resulted in growing   criticism and apprehension during the past year. The image of the Kurds long had been established as victims of the Saddam’s Anfal campaign and his chemical weapons.   Many Arabs in Iraq have expressed sympathy with the Kurds as a people who had done nothing wrong to deserve such brutality at the hands of Iraq’s central governments since the establishment of Iraqi which peaked during oppressions of Saddam Hussein. In short, it was a picture which showed that victim was never at fault .

However, this image has been deteriorating in recent years , and is being replaced with another image showing the injustices of the Kurds. The community has made several significant efforts to upset the picture by raising questions about its sincerity and intentions in Iraq.

In fact, change of perception about the Kurds began to take shape after 1991 when the Allies set up the safe zone at   the   latitude 36 of the Iraqi Kurdistan, to separate it from the rest of the country. The perception was completed after the fall of the Saddam's government in 2003 and the establishment of a new Iraqi authority. Since then   Kurds have cooperated with the occupation in order to undermine Iraq and weaken it. Kurdish behavior has been consistent with step by step control   to strengthen their presence in the Iraqi political scene to reinforce the perception of conspiratorial involvement and attempts by the Kursdish leaders   to disrupt Iraq and dismember it. Many have expressed the opinion that Kurds in Iraq have had everything which is not the case for the exceptional circumstances experienced by Iraq after the U.S. invasion. Some considered what happened after the fall of Saddam Hussein's government and the creation of a new state, calling for a federal system was intended to fulfill the ultimate goal of Kurdish secession from Iraq and the establishment of an independent Kurdish state. To this end Kurds have set up a separate government, parliament, have appointed ministers, and have opened consulates in other countries and now they are acting as a state within a state. Such acts have turned the Kurds image upside down. We have gone from being victims to the perpetrators of injustice and tyranny.

We have successfully cultivated anti-Kurdish sentiments, of being demonized and mistrusted primarily due to the practices carried out by the Kurdish parties. These parties have acted, in many cases, which is not the mentality of the oppressed having become freed. The political behavior and attitude by some Kurdish leaders despite of the gains obtained as expressed by the Kurdish parties has been of arrogance. Often seems as if Kurds chose to attack other people’s   freedom at the very moment they regained theirs’. The Kurdish diplomacy suffered many times by the loss of civility and deliberation. There has been no consideration about how Kurdish behavior affected   the special circumstances of various Iraqi groups, of national and religious affiliations; the non Kurd ethnic groups who live in Kurdistan, such as Turkmen, Assyrians, Armenians and others. Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, president of the new Iraq, Hoshyar Zebari, the foreign minister, Massoud Barzani, the delegation of authority in the territory of Kurdistan, members of his family and his party did not ever think about giving the Assyrian or Turkmen high-ranking positions in the government of the province. [translator's comment: Even when they did they used the hand picked official as tool to subjugate the community to further Kurdish supramacy rather than allowing him to serve his community faithfully.]

There has been too much Kurdish leaders dealings with non-Iraqi Kurds.   When Massoud Barzani, Kurdistan's president, decided to lower the Iraqi flag over the government buildings of the territory, or the central government buildings in the region he argued that the «current flag existed when massacres and mass killings were committed against the Kurds, so it is impossible to raise the flag in Kurdistan, as it reflects the tine of a darkest periods in the history of Iraq ». It seemed as if Kurds as a group do not want to be part of Iraq, the flag existed when the Baathist regime committed massacres against all Iraqis, not just the   Kurds.

Because of the intransigency of the Kurdish parties in city of Kirkuk, there was almost a terrible bloody conflict between Kurds, Turkmen and Arabs, because of prevailing uncertainty, mistrust and rancor. Kurdish politicians did not attempt to alleviate the tension and seek a peaceful and calm atmosphere, but their attitude was often characterized by the conviction that Kirkuk was part of the Kurdistan region detached by the Baathist regime which had displaced the indigenous population of Kurds.    Rather than relying on dialogue with other parties to allay their fears and instilling confidence in others by listening to their demands Kurdish parties refused to listen and declared that Kirkuk was a Kurdish city   without any regard for the wishes of other parties who accused the Kurdish parties of bringing Kurds from Turkey, Syria and Iran to strengthen their influence in the city and create a new demographic map which was to their own advantage. This resulted in   demonstrations by the Arab tribes in Najaf and the Middle Euphrates which condemned the attempts to annex Kirkuk to Kurdistan   asserting that confiscation of Kirkuk was «a conspiracy against Iraq, ». Then the problem emerged when Kurdish fighters as part of units of the Iraqi army entered Khanaqin, in areas close to Qrtbh and Jlola. Peshmerga forces as an excuse of good security demanded the evacuation of those areas and the evacuation of the occupied buildings in those towns, because they claimed these buildings belonged to the Government before 2003. This caused conflict between the commanders of the Peshmerga and the Iraqi army, each side issued conflicting statement defending its own claim, in the process Kurdish leaders treated the Iraqi military as if it were a foreign army.

No sooner this crisis abated the problem of the «support councils» began when Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki started forming them to achieve reconciliation between the tribes and to assist the displaced to return to their areas and provide advice to local governments in the areas of development and service projects and to seek to encourage Sunnis to join the security services.

However, the local government of the province of Kurdistan, was quick to accuse Maliki of causing strife in the disputed areas between the Arabs and the Kurds, by trying to monopolize power.

The deportation campaign against Christians in Mosul, over turned the perception of Kurds as caring people and changed their image as prone to violence before the public. The fingers of accusation were directed toward the Kurdish parties of being behind the campaign. Yonadam Kanna, the deputy Christian in the Iraqi parliament, accused the Kurdish units of the Iraqi army of being responsible for committing the crimes that affected the Christians, which led to the displacement of hundreds of them from their areas.

Others went so far as to say that Peshmrkjon», were oppressive tools in the Kurdish arsenal. Another in an Arabic newspaper described part of Iraq as «occupied Kurdish entity in northern Iraq,» who was behind the killing of the Assyrian clergy from various denominations, and the displacement of Assyrians of Mosul.

Osama Najifi MP of the province of Nineveh said that «Kurdish militia is responsible for the displacement of Christians from Mosul, and pushing them to leave the city to the towns controlled by the Kurdish administration to promote the so-called Self-Governing and annexation of the Nineveh Plain to Kurdistan region».

The relationship between the young people the central government and the Kurdistan Regional Government is of caution, mistrust and mutual accusations. This happened when the governments of Iyad Allawi and Ibrahim al-Jaafari joined the government of Nuri al-Maliki, at a time when the Kurdish parties were accusing the central government of shirking its obligations to the Kurdish region by avoiding the implementation of Article 140 of the Constitution, which calls for the normalization of the situation in Kirkuk and other disputed areas, the central government show its resentment about the Kurdish behavior, which in its view is senseless and extremist, particularly in regard to the issues of oil, the Peshmerga and the budget. The fact is that the relationship between the government of Nuri al-Maliki and the Kurdish parties have entered a turning point with   Maliki's call to amend the constitution to strengthen the powers of the central government. The local government of the province of Kurdistan, condemned Maliki and equated him with Saddam Hussein.

Maliki stated that the Kurdistan regional government by signing oil agreements with international companies has ignored the government in Baghdad and has excluded it from the process, also condemned the Regional Government for opening its own consulates abroad. Mahmoud Othman, a Kurd, and independent deputy in the Iraqi parliament, Summed up the situation by saying "that the central government believes that the Kurdistan Regional Government is acting as a nation, and the Kurds believe that Maliki is flexing muscles to return the situation to the era of strong central government, which is based on the strong man in his capacity as head in Iraq."

In short, accusations about the frustration and feelings about the Kurds from many quarters continued and accumulated day after day until they became the general orientation of a large segment of people. And even a lot of anger to the point that were calls to publicly renounce the Kurds and expel them from the political process »discipline» and beat   their hands with an iron fist. There was also demands   for imposition of an economic blockade on the Kurdish region and cut the budget allocated to it from the State Treasury, and   demands that Americans curb Kurdish leaders. They said that "the Kurds rely on U.S. support but when the Americans are put to the test as a choice between Iraq and the Kurdish territory of Iraq they will not hesitate to choose a larger, stronger and more able to serve the interests of the U.S. especially since there is doubt about survival of the Kurdistan territory which is surrounded by enemies waiting to pounce on it given the opportunity."

Seems like Kurdish leaders had these matters in mind when Massoud Barzani, on the New Year day presented «an open letter to the Arab community and official, in order "to remove ambiguities and promote mutual understanding».

Barzani said "Kurds have made an effective contribution in building a civilization in various countries of the region, and have participated in the defense of freedom and independence of the peoples against invasions from outside the region and have provided    leaders such as the famous prominent individual known as Saladin Although Kurds have been often subjected to deprivation, oppression and neglect." Barzani blamed the «chauvinistic views» for driving a wedge between Kurds and Arabs.