Tweet
Kurdistan Observer,UK
Feb 20 2005
Kirkuk, the capital of South Kurdistan
A crucial first step
By:Adil Al-Baghdadi
Brussels 19 February 2005
[email protected]
The elections in Kirkuk represent not only a great victory for
freedom loving democrats who fought for many decades to highlight the
threat posed by demographic changes to the city after it was emptied
from its Kurdish population, it is a victory for everyone who has an
interest in human rights.
The very fact that barring more than 100,000 Kurds - a figure which
is well below actual number of original Kurds driven out of Kirkuk -
from voting in the much reduced size of Kirkuk governorate would have
posed a great threat to the integrity and credibility of the new
Iraq.
As the Kurdish leadership involved in redressing the ills of the past
know, it would not be an easy task. There are a many powerful players
who do not see it in their interests to recognize, let alone accept
the rightful return of original inhabitants of Kirkuk.
The obstructive stance of Turkey and its ally, the Turkoman Front,
did not make one iota of difference to the task of reversing decades
of oppressive measures, which were aimed at ethnically cleansing this
historically Kurdistani province and characteristically Kurdish city
of Kirkuk.
Turkey and its ally that welcomed and applauded Arabization and the
de-Kurdification of Kirkuk city and its province, have tried to
undermine the inclusion of all of Kirkuk Kurds in the province's
council election at every opportunity.
To this end they funded a campaign of disinformation and paid for
false reports intended to discredit the right of Kirkuk's indigenous
population to reclaim their land and their history, and attempting to
create mistrust when confidence is required, fear when peace is
required and malicious lies when truth is required.
So today is a great victory. But it is only the first battle in the
campaign against falsehood and deception because there is much to do
to undo decades of inhuman and deliberate neglect and marginalization
of Kirkuki Kurds, which Turkey and its ally want to preserve.
The international community has made it clear during years leading to
the conflict in former Yugoslavia, that it finds ethnic cleansing as
an abhorrent and criminal act that should be reversed, and that such
practices destabilise the country which pursues such polices. This
word of warning should have also been extended to the biggest
enthusiast of such practices, Turkey.
The next candidate for EU membership makes no apology for its
relentless campaign to assimilate and Turkify every non-Turkic
element within Turkey, be it 20m-25m Kurds, Armenians, Arabs as well
as Greco-Byzantine history and many more historical and cultural
aspects of this once non-Turkic region of Anatolia.
Forcible assimilation and ethnic cleansing pose a threat to the very
essence of humanity and coexistence between nations, as we know it
and have witnessed in former Yugoslavia, as well as in countries
which Kurdistan is divided among them, namely Iraq, Turkey, Iran,
Syria.
A regional rise in these unlawful practices as a result of Kurdish
achievements will threaten millions of Kurds with increased
oppression and violations of basic human rights, including summarily
arrests, imprisonment, torture and death. Millions more will find
their properties and life at risk from state-sponsored terror aimed
at stifling dissent and moves emulating the gains made by their
brethrens in South Kurdistan.
To tackle this threat with confidence Kurds from all various parts of
Kurdistan and diaspora need to come together to build a strong
consultative body and to act collectively.
The UN has an essential role to play in leading a regional action to
stop physical and cultural crimes against Kurds in other parts of
Kurdistan, and if it is to carry out the role effectively it must do
it in a more vocal way not just as a bystander as in the past.
Turkey's vociferous objection of election results in Kirkuk is on the
one hand part of the plot to maintain the legacies of the past and on
the other to feed the anti-Kurdish Turkish media and sadly the
ill-informed and indoctrinated sections of Turkish public opinion
against the Kurds' lawful, legitimate and genuine results in Kirkuk,
the rightful capital of South Kurdistan. This policy also forms a
cornerstone of Turkey's relentless effort against the right of
self-determination for the Kurds of North Kurdistan.
As the advantages of election results in Kirkuk become apparent, not
just for Kurds, but also for Turkomans, Arabs and
Chaldo-Assyrian-Syriac Christians, the Kurds will want the province
to be reincorporated back to its rightful place, the federalist
region of Kurdistan. Making Kirkuk the capital of South Kurdistan is
not just good for the democracy; it will also insure ever lasting
peace, stability and prosperity for all ethnic and religious groups
in South Kurdistan.
Indeed, elections results in Kirkuk have sent a powerful message to
governments of Turkey, Iran and Syria and the world that tackling and
reversing decades of ethnic cleansing against Kurds and some
Turkomans is a priority and that ignoring the problem will inevitably
bear grave consequences.
However, the other more worrying message for these countries, which
fought the Kurds and never sought their friendship, is that all of
Kirkuk constituents will have a role to play and all will enjoy
political, cultural and all the rights that are associated with a
healthy democratic society.
In the short term, Turkey and its ally in Kirkuk will embark on the
usual campaign of sewing seeds of hate, fear and provocation, but
their current dependence on Ba'thist and anti-Kurds elements can not
be sustained. There are many shifting paradigms and many unknown
variables, but what's certain is that the tide of freedom is sweeping
across the region and it is already blasting the shores of bastions
of tyranny and oppression.
Iraq as a whole and in particular South Kurdistan, with its capital
Kirkuk, have already been blessed by this change, raising
international community's understanding about Kurdish issue and the
absence of freedom in other neighbouring countries including the
other three parts of Kurdistan, North Kurdistan in Turkey, East
Kurdistan in Iran and West Kurdistan in Syria.
Reaching political agreement to protect the rights of Kurds from
continued oppressive measures and cultural assimilation and to
achieve political rights is no easy task in these countries, and
democratic means and peaceful campaigns by Kurds, particularly in
North Kurdistan, need international support in the shape of a UN
resolution.
Kurdish leadership in South Kurdistan, on the other hand, has already
indicated its intention to put the full implementation of Article 58
of the Interim Iraqi State Administration Law1 firmly on the agenda
of the new government of Iraq. More importantly both Kurdish leaders
must make use of their role within Iraq and South Kurdistan to insure
that the Kirkuk model of governance is far more inclusive than all of
Iraq's hostile neighbours and envy of all multi-ethnic societies in
Middle East.
More efforts are needed to maintain the political momentum generated
by the alliance between the two main Kurdish parties and to find the
best way forward that works for incorporating others regions, such as
Khanaqin and parts of Diyala province, Sinjar and some parts of Mosul
back within the boundaries of South Kurdistan with its eternal
capital Kirkuk.
1. Article 58 stipulates that situation in Kirkuk should be
normalized and those brought in as part of Arabization campaign
should be repatriated and Kurds to reclaim their properties and
receive compensation.
http://home.cogeco.ca/~kurdistan6/20-2-05-opinion-adil-kirkuk-capital-of-kurdistan.html
Feb 20 2005
Kirkuk, the capital of South Kurdistan
A crucial first step
By:Adil Al-Baghdadi
Brussels 19 February 2005
[email protected]
The elections in Kirkuk represent not only a great victory for
freedom loving democrats who fought for many decades to highlight the
threat posed by demographic changes to the city after it was emptied
from its Kurdish population, it is a victory for everyone who has an
interest in human rights.
The very fact that barring more than 100,000 Kurds - a figure which
is well below actual number of original Kurds driven out of Kirkuk -
from voting in the much reduced size of Kirkuk governorate would have
posed a great threat to the integrity and credibility of the new
Iraq.
As the Kurdish leadership involved in redressing the ills of the past
know, it would not be an easy task. There are a many powerful players
who do not see it in their interests to recognize, let alone accept
the rightful return of original inhabitants of Kirkuk.
The obstructive stance of Turkey and its ally, the Turkoman Front,
did not make one iota of difference to the task of reversing decades
of oppressive measures, which were aimed at ethnically cleansing this
historically Kurdistani province and characteristically Kurdish city
of Kirkuk.
Turkey and its ally that welcomed and applauded Arabization and the
de-Kurdification of Kirkuk city and its province, have tried to
undermine the inclusion of all of Kirkuk Kurds in the province's
council election at every opportunity.
To this end they funded a campaign of disinformation and paid for
false reports intended to discredit the right of Kirkuk's indigenous
population to reclaim their land and their history, and attempting to
create mistrust when confidence is required, fear when peace is
required and malicious lies when truth is required.
So today is a great victory. But it is only the first battle in the
campaign against falsehood and deception because there is much to do
to undo decades of inhuman and deliberate neglect and marginalization
of Kirkuki Kurds, which Turkey and its ally want to preserve.
The international community has made it clear during years leading to
the conflict in former Yugoslavia, that it finds ethnic cleansing as
an abhorrent and criminal act that should be reversed, and that such
practices destabilise the country which pursues such polices. This
word of warning should have also been extended to the biggest
enthusiast of such practices, Turkey.
The next candidate for EU membership makes no apology for its
relentless campaign to assimilate and Turkify every non-Turkic
element within Turkey, be it 20m-25m Kurds, Armenians, Arabs as well
as Greco-Byzantine history and many more historical and cultural
aspects of this once non-Turkic region of Anatolia.
Forcible assimilation and ethnic cleansing pose a threat to the very
essence of humanity and coexistence between nations, as we know it
and have witnessed in former Yugoslavia, as well as in countries
which Kurdistan is divided among them, namely Iraq, Turkey, Iran,
Syria.
A regional rise in these unlawful practices as a result of Kurdish
achievements will threaten millions of Kurds with increased
oppression and violations of basic human rights, including summarily
arrests, imprisonment, torture and death. Millions more will find
their properties and life at risk from state-sponsored terror aimed
at stifling dissent and moves emulating the gains made by their
brethrens in South Kurdistan.
To tackle this threat with confidence Kurds from all various parts of
Kurdistan and diaspora need to come together to build a strong
consultative body and to act collectively.
The UN has an essential role to play in leading a regional action to
stop physical and cultural crimes against Kurds in other parts of
Kurdistan, and if it is to carry out the role effectively it must do
it in a more vocal way not just as a bystander as in the past.
Turkey's vociferous objection of election results in Kirkuk is on the
one hand part of the plot to maintain the legacies of the past and on
the other to feed the anti-Kurdish Turkish media and sadly the
ill-informed and indoctrinated sections of Turkish public opinion
against the Kurds' lawful, legitimate and genuine results in Kirkuk,
the rightful capital of South Kurdistan. This policy also forms a
cornerstone of Turkey's relentless effort against the right of
self-determination for the Kurds of North Kurdistan.
As the advantages of election results in Kirkuk become apparent, not
just for Kurds, but also for Turkomans, Arabs and
Chaldo-Assyrian-Syriac Christians, the Kurds will want the province
to be reincorporated back to its rightful place, the federalist
region of Kurdistan. Making Kirkuk the capital of South Kurdistan is
not just good for the democracy; it will also insure ever lasting
peace, stability and prosperity for all ethnic and religious groups
in South Kurdistan.
Indeed, elections results in Kirkuk have sent a powerful message to
governments of Turkey, Iran and Syria and the world that tackling and
reversing decades of ethnic cleansing against Kurds and some
Turkomans is a priority and that ignoring the problem will inevitably
bear grave consequences.
However, the other more worrying message for these countries, which
fought the Kurds and never sought their friendship, is that all of
Kirkuk constituents will have a role to play and all will enjoy
political, cultural and all the rights that are associated with a
healthy democratic society.
In the short term, Turkey and its ally in Kirkuk will embark on the
usual campaign of sewing seeds of hate, fear and provocation, but
their current dependence on Ba'thist and anti-Kurds elements can not
be sustained. There are many shifting paradigms and many unknown
variables, but what's certain is that the tide of freedom is sweeping
across the region and it is already blasting the shores of bastions
of tyranny and oppression.
Iraq as a whole and in particular South Kurdistan, with its capital
Kirkuk, have already been blessed by this change, raising
international community's understanding about Kurdish issue and the
absence of freedom in other neighbouring countries including the
other three parts of Kurdistan, North Kurdistan in Turkey, East
Kurdistan in Iran and West Kurdistan in Syria.
Reaching political agreement to protect the rights of Kurds from
continued oppressive measures and cultural assimilation and to
achieve political rights is no easy task in these countries, and
democratic means and peaceful campaigns by Kurds, particularly in
North Kurdistan, need international support in the shape of a UN
resolution.
Kurdish leadership in South Kurdistan, on the other hand, has already
indicated its intention to put the full implementation of Article 58
of the Interim Iraqi State Administration Law1 firmly on the agenda
of the new government of Iraq. More importantly both Kurdish leaders
must make use of their role within Iraq and South Kurdistan to insure
that the Kirkuk model of governance is far more inclusive than all of
Iraq's hostile neighbours and envy of all multi-ethnic societies in
Middle East.
More efforts are needed to maintain the political momentum generated
by the alliance between the two main Kurdish parties and to find the
best way forward that works for incorporating others regions, such as
Khanaqin and parts of Diyala province, Sinjar and some parts of Mosul
back within the boundaries of South Kurdistan with its eternal
capital Kirkuk.
1. Article 58 stipulates that situation in Kirkuk should be
normalized and those brought in as part of Arabization campaign
should be repatriated and Kurds to reclaim their properties and
receive compensation.
http://home.cogeco.ca/~kurdistan6/20-2-05-opinion-adil-kirkuk-capital-of-kurdistan.html