Blog on Kurdistan & Kurds

For a United and Independent Kurdistan

Archive for July 2011

Iran’s ongoing attacks on Qandil mountains

leave a comment »

Iran’s army’s ongoing attacks to PJAK fighters based in South Kurdistan’s Qandil mountains has raised many questions for the ones who want to understand the reasons behind. Why now? Why so big? Why so insistently to uproot the guerillas from their bases up in the mountains. And why USA allows this offensive to an area that it is supposed to protect?

My initial approach was that the reason behind this offensive was to push PKK, PJAK’s sister organization active in North Kurdistan, to yet another insurgency in Northern Kurdistan. Diplomacy in its own way was my comment.

Since then I’ve read many comments mainly from Northern Kurds trying to understand the reason behind the attacks. PKK has also published their own analysis as to why they were being targeted all of a sudden when they were not militarily attacking Iran or not taking sides in the conflict between the West and Iran (link1, link2):

KCK Executive Council Chairman Murat Karayilan remarks that Iran intends to invade the center of Qandil and points out that the operation is “an invasion plan under the cooperation of Turkey and Iran”. Kurdish sources record that Iran and Turkey want to exclude Kurds from the new Middle East design by weakening them with this operation.

According to PKK, or better named KCK (Koma Ciwakan Kurdistan), the offensive of Iran targets all Kurds achieved in Southern Kurdistan. They also say that one Kurdish party was unopenly acting with Iran to uproot them from their bases. This undisclosed Kurdish party is PUK of Talabani. According to PKK, KDP of current KRG president Mesud Barzani is equally targeted.

There are also many similar views of individual commentators on this. Most or all of them point out to the Turkish contribution to the Iranian attacks and extending it to US undisclosed support. They refer to KCK’s claim that the US UAVs fly above Qandil. It is also known that US shares this information with the Turks. Thus, the claim is that the Turks share with Iran what has been shared with them. In short, to many commentators and to PKK itself this offensive is orchestrated by the Turks and Iranians together and includes to some extent the US.

There are also reports that three hundred Turkish troops passed to Iran days before the attack started and that bodies of five Turkish soldiers were seen transported from the conflict zone with a refrigerated vehicle.

All these put aside, there is an ‘intelligence report’ published by Debka Files that the Americans assured themselves a military base in ‘Kurdish Republic’ after the offensive started.

* * *

Very strange attack indeed. The PJAK claim is that about 260 Iranian soldiers have been killed together with some high ranked generals. They say their casualty is eight. A periodical in Iran known to be close to Ayatollah Ali Khamaney has also criticized the performance of the Iranian army (link in Turkish) mentioning the high casualties Iranian army suffers.

Rodi Baz who published his article in (link in Turkish) says the US tests the Kurdish guerillas if they could survive in the region under such an offensive, if they could be considered a player and / or a partner in the future. This belief itself is a hope for many Kurds not basing on any data. Instead the US recently recognized PJAK a terrorist organization.

Nothing in the Middle East politics is as they are seen at first. One has to analyze events with their secondary and tertiary effects in both middle and long-term. For the moment, Kurdish guerillas seem to be defending themselves well in a battle against the highly educated Iranian army. Turkish army suffered a similar defeat few years ago which rocked the morale of the Northern Kurds. If the Iranians lose this battle and retreat it will certainly have a similar effect for the Eastern Kurds.

It will also indirectly affect the self-trust of Kurdistan Regional Government, and the Kurds in Syria. If both Turkey and Iran try and fail invading parts of South Kurdistan, it will after all mean that the South is defendable against the two major and historicak Kurdish enemy states; Turkey and the Iran. It will also mean that both PKK and PJAK could be more active in parts of Kurdistan they fight for.

Well, if the Turks and Persians could be kept busy with their own Kurdish issues, that would also automatically give space for the Southwestern Kurds, Kurds in Syria. Currently, they are on top agenda of both Turks and the Persian Iranians.

Here is a small documentary about PJAK at Qandil mountains:



Written by M. Husedin

30 July 2011 at 4:11 AM

Right time for Kurds to come together

leave a comment »

Kurdistan is hot and while everyone’s attention is mainly concentrated in Soutwest of Kurdistan (Syrian Kurdistan), we must see that it is getting hotter in the North and seems to be some food is being prepared to be served in the South.

I would like to share my analysis of the current map and my expectations for each part.

One nation one flag

Southwest Kurdistan
There is honestly not much the Kurds can predict about the near future of Syria. The picture tells me that, even though the various parties claim otherwise, the Kurdish society there is not well organized. They are unhappy about the Arab rule on them, they show their unhappiness and at the same time their excitement for a change but no Kurdish organization could claim the Southwest such as PKK’s claim in the North or PDK’s and YNK’s claim in the South.


  • Kurds are active,
  • not controlled by non-Kurds,
  • and are one strong known and a possible strong ally for the USA in Syria equation.

Both US and the Assad regime will want to ‘buy’ them. Assad already played its biggest card by giving nationality to about 300’000 Kurds who did not have it. Assad regime’s logical second step will be outside Syrian borders, which can only be pushing PKK to fight in Turkey (Father Assad’s game play). PKK has much experience with its current leaders on being used and in exchange using the ones who tries to use it. More on this under East Kurdistan sub-title.

East Kurdistan
Iran’s attack on Qandil mountains, for me, is to push the PKK to fight in the North against the Turks. Thus, should be read as ‘diplomacy’ in its own way. From Iran’s perspective, this fits very well into the game: make the war in enemies territory. Enemy being Turkey, attack to Qandil can be read as Iran attacking Turkey. This should also be read as defense support to Syria.

Most probably Syria tried to ‘buy’ PKK to restart fighting in the North and PKK has most probably refused it. We can read Iran’s unexpected attack on PJAK in Qandil Mountains as joining the game on Syria’s side. We should also keep in mind that -referring to USA’s intervention map in the region- Iran will be left alone if Syria falls. Iran cannot afford losign Syria.

In short, attacking PJAK forces in Qandil, in my reading, is not an internal East Kurdistan regional issue, but a broader Kurdistan national issue.

North Kurdistan
North is hot with PKK’s (or KCK’s) different actions on the board. PKK has three legs in its activities in Kurdistan and use all at the same time.

  • BDP to challenge the Turkish parliament and the Turkish public,
  • DTK to work on creating a de facto autonomy,
  • and KCK as the national body of Kurdistan organizing itself nationally (North, East, South and Southwest).

KCK (or PKK) also has HPG (Hezen Parastina Gel; People’s Defense Forces) as the guerilla army and uses it mainly as a diplomatic tool but also declares them ready for ‘People’s Revolutionary Warfare’, which will be fought for a Free Kurdistan.

PKK thinks there is good opportunity for the Kurds to benefit from the winds blowing from the Arab world. To benefit from the Arab spring. Although I personally disagree that Arabs and Kurds share the same agenda, I should also have to accept that a weakening Syria, thus the destability occuring there creates an opportunity for the Kurds there and elsewhere. I guess PKK’s tactic is to benefit from the enemies’ attention in the Southwest to win there and in the North.

It is unimaginable for Turkey to remain passive to the happenings in Syria. Turks know well that if a second KRG (Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq) comes into the picture, this will feed Kurdish nationalism to a complete different stage that noone can control. They would like to be a part and do as much possible to manipulate whatever intervention to Syria. In revenge, PKK does its best to prevent Turkey from focusing to Syria, Southwest. In PKK’s strategy map, if Turkey could lose its concentration in the North and the Southwest together, it will gain more power and consecutively Turkey will have to come to some terms.

South Kurdistan
Surprisingly, after many years of silence on this issue, we have seen ambition about independence. Intellectuals and politicians talk and write freely about independence; either directly or for example via showing excitement on the independence of South Sudan. I would not be surprised if such a deal has already been brokered between various parties by the US. I would like to believe that president Barzani’s long diplomatic marathons in Europe mainly but also in the Arab world was to convince the leaders for that and ask for their support.

There is also the announced preparations for a Kurdish National Conference (though I would prefer a Kurdistan National Congress). An independence declaration would be chic after such a national gathering of delegates representing all the Kurds.

* * *

All in all, my reading of Kurdistan map convinces me to say that we need cooperation among Kurdish political organizations, armed forces and intellectuals. Americans are preparing for a Syrian intervention and we can benefit from it only if we are nationally ready for it, not regionally. East Kurdistan will have to wait until the ‘Gods’ decide for Iran’s faith. On the other hand, we have no reason to wait for the same in the North. I support DTK’s declared autonomy, although I disagree to their ideology.

Most important is our success in South Kurdistan: KRG. We should seek for not creating more but expanding its governance to other parts of Kurdistan;nationalizing it 😉

Written by M. Husedin

22 July 2011 at 12:16 AM

Kurdish lobbyists in Washington and southwestern Kurdistan

leave a comment »

Leon E. Panetta was in Turkey in April for five days to discuss the details of a possible US intervention to Syria. David Petraeus is visiting Turkey starting from today, according to Firat News Agency. There is no doubt that the visit is about Syria. It should be clear that the US wants to secure Turkey before going into its yet undisclosed Syria intervention plans. We do not yet know what is in the basket for Kurds in Syria, the southwestern Kurdistan.

Turks do not want the Kurds in Syria to gain rights. This is their main agenda in Syria and this is almost the only subject Turkish columnists write about when it is Syria and a possible US intervention. For this reason alone, they will participate actively at any stage to the events in Syria and want to be a major player. Their fear is that if the Kurds in Syria gain similar rights to those of Iraq the ones in Turkey will be unstoppable in their requests of autonomy. That the world will recognize such a request legitimate This, being the Turkish nightmare for no reason, will eventually lead to a Kurdish indepedence.

There is no doubt from a military and political point of view for the US will want to secure Turkey before going into the Syria file. However, there is the best scenario, and then there is the not-best-scenario and in between everything is negotiable. The Turks negotiate. What about the Kurds? Do we negotiate?

If the Turks follow their agenda, so should do Kurds their own. If we agree that there is one Kurdish nation under heavens, then there is no ‘separate’ Kurdishness between the politically separated Kurds. This is to say, it falls onto the Kurdish lobbyists in Washington to lobby and promote for the protection of and more freedom for their fellow brothers and sisters in Syria.

It is time we lobby for our own rights and support wholeheartedly the awakening in the southwest.

Written by M. Husedin

18 July 2011 at 6:29 PM

David Petraeus’ appointment as the new director of the CIA

leave a comment »

How will it affect the Kurds?

David Petraeus hands over command of US forces in Afghanistan to Lt Gen John Allen. He replaces the incoming US defense secretary Leon Panetta to be the new director of the CIA. This is an important event for Kurds all over Kurdistan and needs to be analyzed together with the nomination of Ray Odierno as the Army Chief of Staff of the US.

Petraeus and Odierno are both smybolic names for Turks in their relationship with the US. Odierno, nicknamed “Çuvalcı Paşa”, the Sacking General by Turks for the famous Hood Event in 2003 in the town of Suleymaniya in South Kurdistan (Northern Iraq). David Petraeus was his boss in Mosul at the time.

The Turks had a liaison office in Kurdish town of Suleymaniya and Kurdish Peshmerga reported to the Americans that they were planning to assassinate some Kurdish high ranked officials. Soldiers from Petraeus’s air brigade under the command of Odierno detained Turkish soldiers and while doing put their heads into sacks. Turkish soldiers, the so-called special forces who showed no resistance or whatsoever, were treated in humiliation and photos of them with sacks on their heads were served to the media. 

Here we talk about two very high American officials at key posts in Washington. They both served in Iraq and in Iraqi Kurdistan and they both know the Kurds and the Kurdish issue very well. Although the new Secretary of Defense of the US, Leon E. Panetta is not a known figure by me, I have hopes that these two generals are advantageous for Kurds in their uprisings in any part of Kurdistan.

In my reading of the events, there is no solid fronts here and there. There is always the political game, the ethics of the commanding generals as well as the conflicting interests of the individuals. There is always enough space for people like us, the Kurds, to look for allies in pursuing their causes. In short, no grounds should be left empty for the enemy.

Kurdish lobbyists should develop and maintain good relationships with these two very important American generals. Not necessarily to ask them to favour the Kurds, no such thing will happen, but to fight back the Turkish propaganda.

* * *

The memory of 1974 betrayal of the US orchestrated by Henry Kissinger is still alive for many Kurds. To prevent similar incidents, keeping memories is one thing, but having friends at the right seats is another thing.

Here is what Christopher Hitchens, a monumental friend of Kurds, wrote about US’s betrayal of the Kurds:

Thus, I might have mentioned Kissinger’s recruitment and betrayal of the Iraqi Kurds, who were falsely encouraged by him to take up arms against Saddam Hussein in 1972-75, and who were then abandoned to extermination on their hillsides when Saddam Hussein made a diplomatic deal with the Shah of Iran, and who were deliberately lied to as well as abandoned. The conclusions of the report by Congressman Otis Pike still make shocking reading and reveal on Kissinger’s part a callous indifference to human life and human rights. But they fall into the category of depraved realpolitik and do not seem to have violated any known law.

Christopher Hitchens and the Kurdish flag on his jacket.

Written by M. Husedin

18 July 2011 at 4:05 PM

Why does Aynur forgive Turkish racists?

leave a comment »

You must have heard that Aynur Dogan was protested by Turkish audience during a jazz concert in Istanbul. Hard to imagine but for singing in Kurdish.

This happens on July 14. The day when 13 Turkish soldiers were bombarded by Turkish Air Force during a confrontation with PKK guerillas, during which PKK has lost two of its guerillas. It needs to be mentioned that PKK and its guerillas are in what they call ‘legitimate defense’ position. They avoid any confrontation with the Turkish troops as much as possible and do not attack back unless directly targeted.

It should be hardly possible for any civilized person to imagine a nonpolitical Kurdish singer singing at an international Jazz Festival being protested for the language of the songs she sings. Well, when it is about Kurds and Kurdish in Turkey this is how it happens.

There is a well written article in Turkish Bianet written in English to which you can access by clicking this link. However, there is one detail of the incident which is not in the copied article but shared in Turkish newspapers. I have some comments about that.

According to the Turkish media, Aynur was interviewed that very same night and she told to the interviewer at the end of their conversation that she forgave the protesters. My mind protests to this. First of all, we need to be clear about what we are talking: racism. The protest of a bunch of Turkish racists. Moreover, it is not that they are against the Jazz Festival continuing without any mourning. They would not be at the festival if they were. The protest is against a Kurdish singer singing in Kurdish.

So then, why does Aynur forgive racists that very same night while still living the shock of the incident?

Aynur’s weak stance against racism tells me the strength of racism in the Turkish society which is the society she lives in. In polarized societies such as the Turks, likes of Aynur would not have many choices. She must have considered her options as follows:

  • Lose the audience option: Take a strong stance against racism and accept being refused from many concerts in Istanbul, and in Turkey general, so retreat to Europe or Kurdistan.
  • Keep the audience option: Retreat, forgive without any apology and imagine this to be survival. Then the question is, until when?

Aynur has the right to approach from commerce point of view. It can be criticized but in the end is an individual’s choice. My question however is a different one. Why is there no society of Kurdish singers in western Turkey to defend their rights and create public pressure against similar incidents. How can they be so defenseless?

Kurds in Istanbul is a reality and it falls upon them to organize themselves for their rights. Forgiving racism should not be an option. It will only encourage the racists for more. If they want to keep audience, they should fight for their ‘space’. If they don’t, they will find themselves unwillingly chosing the first option.

Written by M. Husedin

16 July 2011 at 10:53 PM

Posted in Diaspora

A country I can freely demonstrate

leave a comment »

by M. Husedin

I have come accross an interview with the KRG Peshmarga Minister Jaafar Sheikh Mustafa in which he defended policies of his ministry.

I have some comments on what he said about the minister’s understanding of security. Here is what he said:

“In the Kurdistan region there is protest law and it has been passed by the Parliament,” Mustafa said. “It’s everyone’s right to protest on the condition that they do it legally and have permission. But I’m against a protest that doesn’t have permission or is illegal, even if the protesters have legitimate demands. If the Peshmarga Ministry is asked by the Interior Ministry for help to maintain security, we are willing to help.”

First thing to say is that not everything is law, and second that there are soft and hard approaches in reading and applying the laws.

I remember three of my teeth being broken by the Turkish police, being hospitalized several times after many demonstrations.. I have been beaten on the streets badly by the Turks because I was opposing their brutal regime. This level of use of force usually comes from illegitimate regimes. When one looks at Jaafar Sheikh’s interview it is impossible to not to notice the similar language of that of Turks for example. This is not what we want to see in Kurdistan.

Kurdistan is fought hard and gained hard. This can not be the way forward for Kurds if we are to form our own state.
The security forces that can create this picture does not appeal to me

If the KRG or its ruling parties believe that the demonstrators are mislead, the way to point out such a discussion is not brutally attacking demonstrating civilians. All matters in Kurdistan should be dealt with consensus. Noone can say that Kurdish public cannot discuss matters in legitimate channels. If such channels do not exist, is it not one good reason for the state (via its government or better the parliament) to intervene to create them?

The right to demonstrate should not be allowed to be under the permission of the State unless the demonstrators take arms and attacks the security forces. Even then, the power used in response should be proportional to the attack. When I look at the picture, I can not read any proportionality.

I am sorry Jafaar Sheikh but I must say your reading of the events and the reaction of the forces under your command to the demonstrations were not legitimate.

Written by M. Husedin

15 July 2011 at 12:41 PM

What’s going to happen in Syria?

with one comment

by M. Husedin

The bomb blast in Cyprus chose itself an interesting date (July 11th). Greek president was in Israel tightening the newly formed Israeli – Greek friendship. The explosion was mostly talked of its effect on the energy supply system of the island. However, what exploded had to be more interesting: 98 containers full with munitions dispatched two and a half years ago from Iran to Syria. It was the same day the American Embassy in Damascus were attacked by ‘protesters’. The whole thing and more seems a bit unusual to be called coincidal incidents.

Syria is a particular country for Eastern Mediterranean. Not because it’s an Arab country. That’s not my opinion. It would be way too narrow look to see Syria as one of the many Arab states. Syria is more than that.

The map does not reflect the demography fully but is good enough

Many will read but pass without paying much attention to Syria’s multi-religious, multi-cultural and multi-lingual society. There are Arabs; the Alewite being the ruling elite, the Sunna muslims as the majority and the Christians. Then there are the Druze as a religious minority; Arab speakers but not very much interested in Arab nationalism. And then there are the Kurds.

The Kurds live in northeast and northwest corners of Syria and claim these lands to be a part of Kurdistan (literally KurdLand). There is also the Kurdish population in Damascus and in Haleppo.Kurds in Damascus are mostly ancient settlers of the city and the ones in Haleppo are more recent immigrants. The Kurds have three different faiths they follow: the Sunna Islam (the majority), and two varieties of an ancient Kurdish religion which academics classify under ‘Angels Cult’ name: the Ezidi (or Yezidi) in the northeast tip and the Alevi in the northwest tip. (Alevi Kurds share a different fatih than Alawit Arabs).

Syria under current president’s father’s rule gained a key status in the Middle East politics. Nick named ‘Desert Fox’, Hafez Al Assad was one of the main figures of the Baathist Arap nationalism, but was also known well in positioning his country strategically during the turmoil in the region in seventies and eighties.

One thing Syria managed very well during all the turning points of the recent history; during the fourth quarter of the twentieth century was oppressing its nation. Kurds who lost their identity documents count up to 300’000 today. The regime was not merciless only against the Kurds. Hama massacre in 1982 is still fresh in the memories of many. Arab nationalist movement and most of the Arabs were happy with the Assad ruled Baath regime in Syria and of its politics. It was fighting against Israel and this was good enough. Lebanon, in practice, was under Syrian rule but the Arab world seemed to care little or none. However, the whole perception against Syria changed when the Lebanese prime minister Hariri was killed in a bomb attack.

Syria was not wanted in Lebanon any more and left Lebanon soon after that.

Speaking of Syria, one should mention similar states in the region to better understand the dynamics creating and surrounding the events. One was Tunisia under the rule of Ben Ali and Libya under Gaddafi’s rule and Egypt with Mubarak. Saddam’s Iraq has long gone and is a part of history but before it was gone, especially during the Iran – Iraq war, Saddam’s Iraq qas a leading country for Arab nationalism. All these rulers were iron fisted dictators who named (and name) their states as “republics”. They were in nature secular states but with little or no democracy and with  even lesser freedom for the public vote.

Looking at the picture in MENA today (Middle East and North Africa), we see that it’s the Assad regime which remained. (Libya is a complete different dispute only for its oil reserves. It will take time for the western warring countries to agree with each other to decide who gets what after Gaddafi. Once they agree, Gaddafi will not find a cave Saddam could.)

Syria though, is different than all these mentioned similar states. Syria touches Kurdistan; is an occupant force on about 5 % of Kurdistan.

If a Kurdistan map can be analyzed quickly, it will be seen that Kurdistan itself and the Kurdish people onboard are the one thing Syria shares with Turkey, Iran and Iraq. This has been the curse of Kurdistan from the point of view of the Kurds since these countries’ borders have been drawn by the British and the French. The curse was basically this: All these four countries had their own allies within and outside the region. Even though there was conflict between themselves and between their allies, they also had their agreement on the status quo. The status quo, tied strongly by the global strategy balance, did not allow Kurds to gain rights.

Bu then, things started to change with the turn of the century after the American led invasion of Iraq. I would like to go into a bit of detail on Kurdish politics here to help you to understand the Kurdish sentiments that effects the Kurdish decision making.

Now that the small bit of Kurdistan (about 20%) inside the Iraqi borders enjoys relative independence, this effects the rest of the Kurds strongly. First time during the modern ages Kurds claim their own land under their very own rule. Being Kurd in the other parts of Kurdistan is more or less being prisoned at home and not being allowed to go to the next room. However this time Kurds in one part of Kurdistan live in freedom. When one part gets something, it means that a United and Independent Kurdistan is one step closer. The sentiment among Kurds since the invasion of Iraq is that the curse is broken.

Today though, Kurds in Iraq live in freedom. Kurds in Syria, Turkey and Iraq don’t. If we give the Turkish example; knowing that Kurds in Turkey do not officially exist should tell the story. Or to know that the 24h Kurdish broadcast of the Turkish state owned TRT6 is officially in an ‘unknown’ language. Shortly, Kurdish identity is not recognized in Turkey. In Iran it seems better because at least the identity is recognized. The Kurds are not Persians but Kurds as they are (they are officially Turks in Turkey, not Kurds). In reality though the Shia Persian enmity against Kurds is an ongoing opression.

If one looks from this perspective it is easy to understand why Turkey is so much interested in what goes on in Syria. Turkey has about 50% of Kurdistan (250’000 sqkm) and between 17 and 25 million Kurds. With no rights. Imagine the power vacuum having no right creates in Kurdistan.

Thinking of domino effect theory, it is hard to imagine that if the Kurds in Syria gained similar rights to those in Iraq, the ones in Turkey or Iran would agree on any less. Kurdish agenda has never been to agree to that little though.

In general, Kurds ask for an independent state. They have their own flags, their own antem and their own separate history in the land which they claim to be theirs and name after themselves: Kurdistan (KurdLand).

That’s what makes all affairs in Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran of interest to each other. And of course, when you have interest in any of these countries you find yourself in a position to understand the long unsolved Kurdish issue. And I believe it is the puzzle made in Kurdistan by the British and the French after the I. World War that created the curse mentioned: even if you want more rights for Kurds, say from Washington or Moscow, you would not know how to agree on a deal with other powers who would have their own interests. And so many countries had their own interests in these four countries. And nobody knew how things would evolve once the status quo changed.

After the intervention in Iraq which led to a federation between South Kurdistan and the rest of the Iraq, the status quo changed. The curse finally broke. The fact that it broke once, the Kurds do not believe to it any more. Kurds in any part of Kurdistan only prepare themselves for their turn. They believe that an independent Kurdistan only approaches with the events.

Kurds are very much interested in what’s going on around the countries that have their feet on Kurdistan. Syria is the hot country nowadays.

Bashar Assad, son of the Desert Fox, proved to be an idiot in ruling his country. One should start in ruling his country by reading the history of the land. Bashar made the mistake of imagining a friendship with the ruler of Konstantinopolis (Istanbul). Erdogan, he thought, was a true muslim leader that would have little to do with Europe and rather ally with the East. Turkey under Erdogan’s pragmatist rule proved to be a strong ally of the USA on the other hand.

Israel is having sour relationship with Turkey although it does not seem to be a strategical turning point between the two countries. The trade between the countries has only increased since the ‘one minute’ crisis. A ‘second minute’ crisis seems very unlikely. As a strong gesture on seeking friendship, the Turks pulled their men back from the second Gaza Flotilla.

Israelis however are looking for more allies after the souring relationhip with Turkey. More allies in Eastern Europe and the Black Sea. They have developed new ties with Greece, Hungary, Romania, Ukraine and Georgia. Warming up with the Greeks is going well, and the Greeks seem to value their newly formed relatinship with Israel.

Israel has also found a very significant amount of natural gas in the Mediterranean Sea between Cyprus and Israel. Some of the reserves are in shared seabottom land. Greek Cyrpus being the little brother of Athens, it would be hard to imagine a different relationship between Nicosia and Jerusalem than that between Athens and Jerusalem.

On July 11, there was a massive explosion in Cyprus. Ammunition captured in 98 containers dispatched to Syria from Iran were seized by Cypriots in respect to the UN embargo on Iran.

That was the day the Greek president visited Jerusalem. The day American Secretary of State Hillary Clinton increased pressure on Bashar Assad himself and said he lost his legitimacy and was running out of time.

There is more to write on this story.

Written by M. Husedin

13 July 2011 at 8:50 PM