0
0
0
From "Foreign Policy"
https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/01/21/the-worlds-next-country-kurdistan-kurds-iraq/
The World’s Next Country
ERBIL, Iraq — As you walk around the streets of this city of 500,000, you could be forgiven for thinking you’re in the capital of a small but up-and-coming Middle Eastern country. Police officers and soldiers sport the national flag on their uniforms — the same flag that flies proudly on public buildings, and, in a giant version, from a towering pole in the center of town. There’s a national anthem, which you might hear on the national evening TV news, broadcast solely in the local language. You’ll also notice imposing buildings for parliament and the prime minister, as well as the diplomatic missions of a number of foreign states, some of them offering visas.
Yet appearances deceive: This is not an independent state. You’re in Iraq — more precisely, the part of northern Iraq known officially as the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). You’ll be reminded of this fact when you open your wallet to pay for something: the local currency is still the Iraqi dinar (though the U.S. dollar circulates widely). Nor do any of the foreign governments that maintain consulates in Erbil recognize Kurdish statehood; nor, for that matter, does the government of the KRG itself. For the time being, Iraqi Kurdistan is still under Baghdad’s writ.
Emphasis on “for the time being.” In July of last year, KRG President Massoud Barzani asked his parliament to start preparing for a referendum on independence. It was a suitably dramatic response to the stunning disintegration of the Iraqi state under then-Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Earlier, in January 2014, Maliki’s government had cut off financial transfers to the Kurds as part of a fight over control of oil resources, enraging Erbil even as his repressive policies toward Iraq’s Sunni Arabs were fueling the dramatic rise of the Islamic State (IS). Last summer, after IS forces shocked the world by seizing control of Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, the jihadists pushed from there deep into Kurdish territory, at one point getting within 25 miles of Erbil.
[EDITORIAL COMMENT:- Will this be seen as a positive and natural development in the Kurds' centuries old struggle for independence and a "homeland" or as something which is "All Obama's Fault"?]
https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/01/21/the-worlds-next-country-kurdistan-kurds-iraq/
The World’s Next Country
ERBIL, Iraq — As you walk around the streets of this city of 500,000, you could be forgiven for thinking you’re in the capital of a small but up-and-coming Middle Eastern country. Police officers and soldiers sport the national flag on their uniforms — the same flag that flies proudly on public buildings, and, in a giant version, from a towering pole in the center of town. There’s a national anthem, which you might hear on the national evening TV news, broadcast solely in the local language. You’ll also notice imposing buildings for parliament and the prime minister, as well as the diplomatic missions of a number of foreign states, some of them offering visas.
Yet appearances deceive: This is not an independent state. You’re in Iraq — more precisely, the part of northern Iraq known officially as the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). You’ll be reminded of this fact when you open your wallet to pay for something: the local currency is still the Iraqi dinar (though the U.S. dollar circulates widely). Nor do any of the foreign governments that maintain consulates in Erbil recognize Kurdish statehood; nor, for that matter, does the government of the KRG itself. For the time being, Iraqi Kurdistan is still under Baghdad’s writ.
Emphasis on “for the time being.” In July of last year, KRG President Massoud Barzani asked his parliament to start preparing for a referendum on independence. It was a suitably dramatic response to the stunning disintegration of the Iraqi state under then-Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Earlier, in January 2014, Maliki’s government had cut off financial transfers to the Kurds as part of a fight over control of oil resources, enraging Erbil even as his repressive policies toward Iraq’s Sunni Arabs were fueling the dramatic rise of the Islamic State (IS). Last summer, after IS forces shocked the world by seizing control of Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, the jihadists pushed from there deep into Kurdish territory, at one point getting within 25 miles of Erbil.
[EDITORIAL COMMENT:- Will this be seen as a positive and natural development in the Kurds' centuries old struggle for independence and a "homeland" or as something which is "All Obama's Fault"?]
Middle East
War on Terror
Kurds
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 2
0
0
0
Its good to see this topic being spoken up, I support all said..Have to talk more not his another time..
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
The Kurdish people should have a nation of their own. The challenge is how do you create a viable nation-state for a people who claim parts of Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran and a small piece of Armenia.
Iraq really is four countries with a significant area populated by Kurds, in a virtually independent self governing region. While this is the most likely area for the creation of the Kurdish Nation (Kurdistan) in situ, the question of viability remains open given the hostile stance of Turkey, Iran, Iraq, ISIS/ISIL and Syria.
Iraq really is four countries with a significant area populated by Kurds, in a virtually independent self governing region. While this is the most likely area for the creation of the Kurdish Nation (Kurdistan) in situ, the question of viability remains open given the hostile stance of Turkey, Iran, Iraq, ISIS/ISIL and Syria.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
MAJ Alvin B. - Major; "Should" is always such an interesting word when used in this context.
Since the vast majority of the people in the Crimea are "Russian" and WANT to be a part of Russia (and NOT be a part of the Ukraine) does that mean that they SHOULD be allowed to separate from the Ukraine and merge with Russia?
The Kurds have never had their own country and it's a bit high handed to blithely talk about giving away other peoples' land in order to accommodate them.
Mind you, I strongly suspect that the Turks would be very strongly in favor of the establishment of an independent Kurdistan - provided that the Kurds irrevocably abandoned any claim to Turkish territory. Heck the Turks might even be willing to finance the relocation costs of the Kurds who are now living in Turkey.
Of course, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Armenia would also be more than willing to sign on to a deal in support of an independent Kurdistan (and pay the relocation costs of the Kurds) provided that the Kurds irrevocably abandoned any claim to land in Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Armenia (respectively).
So, with only a couple of minor points to be resolved, there is absolutely no impediment to the establishment of an independent Kurdistan.
Of course, failing the reaching of such an agreement to those minor points, the Kurds will simply have to do it the old fashioned way by taking land by force and holding it against all comers.
Since the vast majority of the people in the Crimea are "Russian" and WANT to be a part of Russia (and NOT be a part of the Ukraine) does that mean that they SHOULD be allowed to separate from the Ukraine and merge with Russia?
The Kurds have never had their own country and it's a bit high handed to blithely talk about giving away other peoples' land in order to accommodate them.
Mind you, I strongly suspect that the Turks would be very strongly in favor of the establishment of an independent Kurdistan - provided that the Kurds irrevocably abandoned any claim to Turkish territory. Heck the Turks might even be willing to finance the relocation costs of the Kurds who are now living in Turkey.
Of course, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Armenia would also be more than willing to sign on to a deal in support of an independent Kurdistan (and pay the relocation costs of the Kurds) provided that the Kurds irrevocably abandoned any claim to land in Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Armenia (respectively).
So, with only a couple of minor points to be resolved, there is absolutely no impediment to the establishment of an independent Kurdistan.
Of course, failing the reaching of such an agreement to those minor points, the Kurds will simply have to do it the old fashioned way by taking land by force and holding it against all comers.
(0)
(0)
MAJ Alvin B.
COL Ted Mc - "Should" is indeed an interesting word in this context. hence the reason I chose it. Should and shall are not the same. The Kurds could have a country of their own, if all parties can come to an agreement regarding political recognition, status, land claims, etc, to include the points you mentioned above. However, I am not entirely convinced that any of the associated parties want an independent Kurdistan. If we (USA) had wanted one we could have recognized such during the Gulf War, yet we did not. We could have recognized a separate state at any time over the last 25 years, yet we have not. As with the West Bank and Isreal, there is a great deal of history to overcome on the road to independence.
From my perspective, none of the regional powers, want a Kurdish state. THey might yet tolerate one, however, even that is uncertain. If a truly sovereign Kurdish state is established it will most likely be because it suits the national interests of the Turks, Iraqis and Syrians and the USA.
Some interesting reading...
http://www.economist.com/news/international/21644167-iraqs-kurds-are-independent-all-name-they-must-play-their-cards-cleverly-if-they
http://www.rcssmideast.org/En/Article/251/A-real-chance-to-establish-an-independent-Kurdish-state-#.VnG38vkrIuU
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/politics/2012/05/us-is-the-biggest-obstacle-to-in.html#
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-iran-fears-independent-kurdistan-10950
From my perspective, none of the regional powers, want a Kurdish state. THey might yet tolerate one, however, even that is uncertain. If a truly sovereign Kurdish state is established it will most likely be because it suits the national interests of the Turks, Iraqis and Syrians and the USA.
Some interesting reading...
http://www.economist.com/news/international/21644167-iraqs-kurds-are-independent-all-name-they-must-play-their-cards-cleverly-if-they
http://www.rcssmideast.org/En/Article/251/A-real-chance-to-establish-an-independent-Kurdish-state-#.VnG38vkrIuU
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/politics/2012/05/us-is-the-biggest-obstacle-to-in.html#
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-iran-fears-independent-kurdistan-10950
Iraq’s Kurds are independent in all but name. They must play their cards cleverly if they are to break away completely
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
MAJ Alvin B. - Major; I agree that - effectively - the Kurds have independence (at least on Iraqi territory).
Politically they aren't able to actually proclaim that independence, but the Iraqi government is equally unable to compel the Kurds to do anything that the Kirds don't want to do. The same could possibly be said for the Kurdish areas of Syria.
Potentially both the Turks and/or Iranians could be persuaded to recognize an independent Kurdistan, BUT only if the Kurds renounced any claim to Turkish and/or Iranian territory. As for the Armenians, no one is going to pay them any more heed than they paid the government of Czechoslovakia when discussing how to bring peace to Europe in the 1930s.
Politically they aren't able to actually proclaim that independence, but the Iraqi government is equally unable to compel the Kurds to do anything that the Kirds don't want to do. The same could possibly be said for the Kurdish areas of Syria.
Potentially both the Turks and/or Iranians could be persuaded to recognize an independent Kurdistan, BUT only if the Kurds renounced any claim to Turkish and/or Iranian territory. As for the Armenians, no one is going to pay them any more heed than they paid the government of Czechoslovakia when discussing how to bring peace to Europe in the 1930s.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google