Kurdistan? - Do it right!

Bill White · 2004-01-28 12:02:22

I have always liked [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar … Jan27.html]this columnist. IMHO he offers a nice blend of realpolitick mixed with idealism and plain old American enthusiasm for the idea that we can make the world a better place. He reports this about the status of Kurdish nationalism.

To placate Turkey and disarm Iran politically, the Bush administration has insisted that Iraq's territorial integrity cannot be called into question. But Iraqis know better. They know that the Kurds have great interest in prolonging the status quo of isolation from Baghdad and waiting for things to fall apart in the south. That explains why a high-level delegation from Iraq's Governing Council traveled to the Kurdish city of Salahuddin on Jan. 8 to say this to Massoud Barzani and Jalal Talabani, the principal Kurdish leaders:
"You have earned the right to self-determination and you can declare independence if you want. We will not fight you over that. We will recognize you. What we do not want is a quarrelsome secessionist state inside the belly of Iraq. Decide, and put your heart into your decision."
Kurdish and Governing Council officials say the historic "get in or get out" message was stated bluntly by Ahmed Chalabi and echoed by aides to Abdul Aziz Hakim and Adnan Pachachi. The Governing Council officials consulted the Kurds in advance of their high-level meetings with U.N. and U.S. officials last week.
The Kurdish leaders immediately pledged in Salahuddin to support Iraq's unity and territorial integrity -- but neither agreed to go along to the United States to discuss Iraq's future directly with Kofi Annan or George W. Bush.

For Iraq "to work" President Bush and Paul Bremer need to find the inner strength to truly negotiate with the Kurds and Sistani as human beings who have equal moral worth, even if US military firepower gives the US a significant power edge. IMHO, the only way the Kurds will ever be a willing participant in a unified Iraq is =IF= the Kurds have a genuine and legitimate opportunity to form an independent nation and then they freely choose to join with the other Iraqis.

Leverage and browbeat the Kurds into a federal Iraq and trouble will simmer for decades.

In other words, we US-ians can best achieve a good outcome in Iraq =IF= we can freely let go of our need to CONTROL the outcome. Can Dubya do that? Time will tell.

Cobra Commander · 2004-01-28 18:01:13

The Kurdistan idea certainly has merit, but I expect we'll have problems simmering whatever course is taken.

What we need to do is find a way to get the Iraqis to form the single, pro-US republic that we want, but in such a way as to make them believe that it was their idea. I shall ponder on this further.

Gotta get back in full Machiavelli mode.

Bill White · 2004-02-01 13:47:35

The Kurdistan idea certainly has merit, but I expect we'll have problems simmering whatever course is taken.
What we need to do is find a way to get the Iraqis to form the single, pro-US republic that we want, but in such a way as to make them believe that it was their idea. I shall ponder on this further.
Gotta get back in full Machiavelli mode.

Exactly!

Shaun Barrett · 2004-02-02 00:59:55

Forgive me if this is a dumb question but I haven't studied the situation in northern Iraq in any great detail. (All I know is that Turkey doesn't want an independent Kurdistan; on the contrary, as I understand it they have designs on Kurdish territory. ... I think! )

The last part of the report by that journalist Bill likes says:-

"The Kurdish leaders immediately pledged in Salahuddin to support Iraq's unity and territorial integrity -- but neither agreed to go along to the United States to discuss Iraq's future directly with Kofi Annan or George W. Bush."

This was the Kurds' response to the 'get in or get out' message from the Iraqi Governing Council.
I don't understand this reply. Are they 'getting in' or 'getting out'?
???

Bill White · 2004-02-02 13:25:46

Forgive me if this is a dumb question but I haven't studied the situation in northern Iraq in any great detail. (All I know is that Turkey doesn't want an independent Kurdistan; on the contrary, as I understand it they have designs on Kurdish territory. ... I think! )
The last part of the report by that journalist Bill likes says:-
"The Kurdish leaders immediately pledged in Salahuddin to support Iraq's unity and territorial integrity -- but neither agreed to go along to the United States to discuss Iraq's future directly with Kofi Annan or George W. Bush."
This was the Kurds' response to the 'get in or get out' message from the Iraqi Governing Council.
I don't understand this reply. Are they 'getting in' or 'getting out'?
???

The devil is in the details. . .

An open Kurdish refusal to commit to a federal system would be a de facto declaration of civil war. So the Kurds must openly declare commitment to a unified federal Iraq yet what does commitment to a "federal" system actually mean? How much will the Kurds be subject to the new Iraqi federal government and how much local autonomy will they have over things like Kirkuk oil revenues.

America's ability to broker the final arrangement is being diminshed. Sistani refuses to talk to Bremer and the Kurds are showing reluctance to allow the United States to dictate final terms. The Kurds may well agree to be part of a federal Iraq in the same way Taiwan can acknowledge a "one China" policy - - what "one China" really means and what a "federal Iraq" will really look like is very unclear.

Now that President Bush has openly assured Turkey that the Kurdish region will remain within a unified Iraq and now that al Qaeda detonated those two suicide bombers at the Kurdish headquarters, it will be harder than ever (IMHO) to persuade the Kurds to accept the details of a federal system that will also be acceptable to the Sunnis and Shias (like Sistani).

And, like Cobra says, we need the Kurds to do what we want while thinking it was their idea. That may mean offering a genuinely independent Kurdistan and hope like heck they decline the offer. This is Hoagland's point, I believe. Can the Kurds truly be committed to a federal Iraq unless they first have a genuine choice NOT to be part of a federal Iraq?

Repression by Saddam followed by repression by Sistani isn't much of a choice.

(Maybe we should send my wife - - she is an expert at getting me to do what she wants while making it seem like it was all MY idea!)

= = =

Part Two: Turkey has a sizeable Kurdish minority.

While the Kurds were brutally repressed by Saddam, the Ankara government (Turkey) has also repressed its Kurdish minority. The severity of Turk repression of the Kurds is debated. The Turks say there is very little oppression, the Kurds say the Turks haven't been much better than Saddam in their ethnic cleansing efforts.

An independent Kurdistan carved from Iraq will create pressure for the Kurdish regions of Turkey to secede and join Kurdistan. And Kirkuk oil revenues are the key.

Thus, the Kurds straddle that difficult line terrorist? or freedom fighter?

clark · 2004-02-02 13:30:38

Doing what your wife want's is your idea Bill.

There is truth about the Kurds and the Shitite's found in this idea. Now it's just a matter of figuring out which one is the wife...

Bill White · 2004-02-02 13:53:00

Doing what your wife want's is your idea Bill.

Sometimes I exaggerate (just a little) for effect. :;):

There is truth about the Kurds and the Shitite's found in this idea. Now it's just a matter of figuring out which one is the wife...

That is sort of what they are arguing about. This is also why I said many months ago the US needed to increase significantly its investment in Iraq reconstruction.

Cobra Commander · 2004-02-02 16:40:06

When I first got word of plans for Turkish troops to be used in the occupation I was baffled at the magnitude of such a blunder, given the history between them and the Kurds, but now that I think it over more it could work out well if played right.

To (over)simplify, we have the Kurds flirting with independence, but also that nagging fear of Turkey seizing their land, fairly likely given that an independent Kurdistan may prompt Turkey's Kurdish region to try joining them. The presence of Turkish troops may help to influence them to seek a stronger position as part of Federal Iraq.

Some may see through this, but it isn't our fault. We're acting unilaterally, remember. it's that damned UN doing this to you. Or so the subtext would be.

The Kurds are offered independence, but out of their own security concerns decline.

These kinds of games can backfire, but if done well it could be exactly what the situation calls for.

Of course we're talking about the same Administration that didn't think firing the entire Iraqi army would be a problem. ???

Bill White · 2004-02-02 16:55:50

When I first got word of plans for Turkish troops to be used in the occupation I was baffled at the magnitude of such a blunder, given the history between them and the Kurds, but now that I think it over more it could work out well if played right.
To (over)simplify, we have the Kurds flirting with independence, but also that nagging fear of Turkey seizing their land, fairly likely given that an independent Kurdistan may prompt Turkey's Kurdish region to try joining them. The presence of Turkish troops may help to influence them to seek a stronger position as part of Federal Iraq.
Some may see through this, but it isn't our fault. We're acting unilaterally, remember. it's that damned UN doing this to you. Or so the subtext would be.
The Kurds are offered independence, but out of their own security concerns decline.
These kinds of games can backfire, but if done well it could be exactly what the situation calls for.
Of course we're talking about the same Administration that didn't think firing the entire Iraqi army would be a problem. ???

Hmmm. . .

Wouldn't this require nuance?

Besides, Turkey has already offered troops and we have already said "No" because of Kurdish concerns. That shows such ideas were not in the minds of our planners. Breathtaking naivete' - - especially in Condi Rice.

And now, with the recent suicide attacks, the Kurds will fear both the Turks and the Shia majority. So its not whether a federal state will be formed, its how much autonomy the Kurds get within that federal state and who runs Kirkuk.

Cobra Commander · 2004-02-02 17:17:50

Hmmm. . .
Wouldn't this require nuance?

Indeed it would, of the sort I doubt democratic nations are capable of.

Besides, Turkey has already offered troops and we have already said "No" because of Kurdish concerns. That shows such ideas were not in the minds of our planners. Breathtaking naivete' - - especially in Condi Rice.

Just one of many examples of America's military weakness. We are superb at pummeling an enemy into submission with minimal civilian casualties, but when it comes to occupation and manipulating the population of that occupied nation we're blundering amateurs. This is something I fear we will have many opportunities to improve on in the coming years.

Bill White · 2004-02-02 17:24:46

This is an excellent novel about [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de … ce&s=books]nation building. A Bell for Adano was written in the 1940s.

Columnist Robert Kaplan (he often writes for The Atlantic) has written that if America is to succeed at nation-building we will need lots and lots of Victor Joppolos (the main character) having the rank of colonel and/or major and we will need to fund them liberally and then the Pentagon & the White House will need to refrain from micro-management.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-01-28 12:02:22

Re: Kurdistan? - Do it right!

#2 2004-01-28 18:01:13

Re: Kurdistan? - Do it right!

#3 2004-02-01 13:47:35

Re: Kurdistan? - Do it right!

#4 2004-02-02 00:59:55

Re: Kurdistan? - Do it right!

#5 2004-02-02 13:25:46

Re: Kurdistan? - Do it right!

#6 2004-02-02 13:30:38

Re: Kurdistan? - Do it right!

#7 2004-02-02 13:53:00

Re: Kurdistan? - Do it right!

#8 2004-02-02 16:40:06

Re: Kurdistan? - Do it right!

#9 2004-02-02 16:55:50

Re: Kurdistan? - Do it right!

#10 2004-02-02 17:17:50

Re: Kurdistan? - Do it right!

#11 2004-02-02 17:24:46

Re: Kurdistan? - Do it right!

Board footer