Blog on Kurdistan & Kurds

For a United and Independent Kurdistan

Archive for September 2011

Is a Kurdistan possible?

leave a comment »

One of the questions I receive from many people when I speak about the independence of Kurdistan is whether a Kurdistan possible? Following my argumentation and excitement on the issue the question will, in most cases, start by asking whether I believed Kurdistan would be united and independent one day. Well, yes, I definitely believe to that but I would rather be cautious in saying when in time it would be a reality.

Up to five years ago the approach in questioning my enthusiasm would be different. I was, rather arrogantly, asked many times if why I would insist on calling myself Kurdish, not Turkish. The argumentation would be mentioning the passport I had to carry… or pointing out the fact that there was no Kurdistan on the map or on any international document, etc. Today these arguments are not being told any more. Seems like there is progress on the Kurdish side in convincing the international community for the Kurdish cause.

Kurdistan flag, shared colours of the Iranian people, all the way to Northern India

Talking about the independence, I see two obstacles Kurds have to overcome if they want to free their land from the occupying states, get united, and become independent. These two obstacles are:

  1. Coming together
  2. Convincing the world powers for a Kurdistan

The first one is the internal phenomenon of the Kurds and the second one external. Addressing these two, however, is the problem of Kurds themselves; a problem the Kurdish politicians need to address. In light of this understanding the Kurds need to redefıne their cause with new terms as the way forward.

Well, if the Kurds are a reality, and if ‘-stan’ simply means land, then the KurdLand, Kurdistan, the land of the Kurds should be real. This means questioning of the possibility of a Kurdistan is rather questioning the possibility of a Kurdish state ruling Kurdistan. Then, looking at the KRG example, the Kurdistan Regional Government of Northern Iraq, we can answer the question with a strong “Yes! A Kurdistan is possible”.

Kurds can come together, establish a state of their own and govern themselves while very well establishing their own international relations. The big question, then, is whether a United Kurdistan is possible. Well, if the Kurds can manage to come together under a Kurdistan National Congress, build a Kurdish economical development plan and continue their diplomatic efforts then the world powers and the rest will very likely be convinced for a Kurdistan.

The answers to the problems lie almost always in the questions arise and this is true for Kurds and Kurdistan.

These are all true but internal explanations. The rise of Kurdistan cannot be explained solely by the dynamics of Kurdistan. It either has to create itself a meaningful space in the current relations of the region and the world, or redefine the map to create a new world where it will have its own meaningful space. This new world must be within the logic of possibilities of what is today, what will be in the future.

Firstly, the people and the statesmen of the world have to be made to see and understand that Kurdistan itself in its current situation is a cause of instability for the region. Although the Kurdish fighters seldomly attack the pipelines passing through and around Kurdistan, the possibility of such attacks are already being considered behind, for example, drawing illogical routes for a pipeline. Look at the picture below of a pipeline carrying oil from the Caspian to the Mediterranean. It would be half long and 100% secure if there was an independent Kurdistan.

The Kurds’ struggle for independence is clearly the reason for such a stupid pipeline. However, the pipeline is still insecure if the Kurds are not recognized in their homeland (note: the map very poorly reflects the real Kurdish populated area; it’s far wider to the west than seen here)

Of course what a United and Independent Kurdistan can offer to the world is not only the security of one or two pipelines. However, the example given here is the picture of a world where Kurdistan is pushed out of the table. To understand what the Kurds can offer we need to look to another map, one that needs redrawing of the current one.

Kurdistan on the left and Iran’s demographic map on the right. In the North and Northwest of the Iranian map Kurds are in yellow and the Azeris in purple. The alliance of these two neighbouring people would mean a direct and secure path to the Mediterranean for oil and gas of the Caspian and Central Asia

In such a new map the whole energy reserve in Central Asia and the Caspian reaches to the international markets securely by bypassing the Russian dominance as well as the insecurity the current political instability creates.

I should write here that when analysts write or talk about the current status quo, the one which the Kurds should not fit in with an independent state is in fact a false term if we were to read the history of the Middle East. In this history we would see the rise of the Persian Empire within the Median Empire, the push of them by Alexander the Great, the rise of the Romans to balance them, and this continuing with the Byzantines and their perverted child, the Ottomans. If this can be understood, then the current status quo would be put in its place as a temporary balance of this part of the world until it recreates its own natural balance with its own dynamics. Before going any further, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the current status quo is false, temporary and has to fade away with the political rise of the people that inhabited this part of the world for more than five millenia.

Below is a quick summary of the Western part of this historical and now dead status quo:

  • Almost all the Eastern Mediterranean coast was inhabited by the Greeks before the rise of the Persians, including almost all of the Anatolia, which is the central, northern and western parts of modern Turkey today. Greeks and the Phoenicians (today’s Lebanon) were doing the trade in the Mediterranean seas. After the rise of Persians to power and conquering of the ancient Hellenic geography, Greeks could never return to a similar bright era.
  • Persians were pushed back by Alexander the Great. His empire could not last long after his death but created a new world.
  • Romans took the stage and conquered Egypt and connected it strategically to their empire. The borders of the Roman state excluded Kurdistan but included Armenians in their North. The balance between the Western powers and the Persians was created at this time.
  • The falling apart of the Western and the Eastern Romans did not change the strategy map. Eastern Mediterranean and Egypt were ruled by the Eastern Romans, which later became the Byzantium Empire.
  • The Byzantiums left the stage to the Turkish tribes coming from the East, from Central Asia. Ottoman strategy map was almost identical to the Byzantian one, which was a continuation of the Roman one. Basically it was still the same power balance between the West and the East. The Turks and the Persians concluded to the same status quo shortly and this lasted until the end of the Ottomans.
  • In the beginning of the 20th century, neither the Turks nor the Persians were powers of the old. They both left the stage to non-regional powers, the British initially, then the USA. This was the end of the Grand Status Quo of more than two and a half millenia.

Even after the division of the empire, the power balance occurred between the Persians and the Romans has been the status quo between the west and the east for more than two millenia, from the early centuries of the Roman Empire until the beginning of the twentieth century, the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

On the grand scale mentioned, it looks like the current mini status quo of the last century we talk about today seems to be a result of not knowing what to establish when the real owners of the land did not rise to power. Remember, the current political map is not the creation of the current ruling states, they are rather creation the British Empire at the end of the World War I. However, Kurdistan emerges and its emergence should be analyzed and understood together with the mentioned history of the region.

Now, if one reads the events around Islamic Republic of Iran in the last two decades, it can be said that the fight of the Persians today is to regain power to declare dominance on what was once a Persian Empire, which seems very unlikely.

The balancing power for them was the occupant of Anatolia, and modern Turkey is far from being such a power as the Romans, Byzantians or the Ottomans. It can be said, then, that the Persian rulers of the Islamic Republic of Iran has a point in dreaming so. Thankfuly and for the good of the Kurds, this is wrong.

Wrong for several reasons. Firstly, Persian Empire had its economical strength coming from the Eastern trade routes. Very few people know today that the Persians came to power within the palaces of the Median Empire, which belonged to the ancestors of the Kurds and which once united all the Arian people under one flag (Arian = Iran, same word). The Persians established their Empire on the political and economical unity this empire created in the region. The ancient map connected Persia with India, Afghanistan and all the way to China today. This is not the case today. Secondly, in the past status quo, it was the luck of the ambitious rulers of the Persians that the Greek were not united and could not stand against such a strong state. Whether modern day Turkey can be compared to the ancient Greeks of the time, I am not sure.

Not in the sense that the Turks are united and strong. No, Turks are not militarily strong enough to challenge the rise of a powerful Persian state. They have no air defense system to give an example. Then, are the Persians right in dreaming of a reconquer? No. The real point to make about the Turks is that it is not Turkey that would defend against such a rise, but rather the power behind Turkey, the power that gives Turkey its power: the NATO, the USA. Iran, if compared to USA is like a domestic cat compared to a tiger.

In short, I see no possibility for the rise of a Persian State as it emerged from within the Median Empire. Also, remember, in the current map Iran is sieged by the USA. Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf, Iraq, Turkey, Georgia are all under American dominance.

Well, here I should write again about the Median Empire, which once upon a time made a Union of the Arians. The word iran is the word arian transformed in time. We do not care about using the word if Hitler perverted it. It is our history. Arians = the Iranian people of today. This includes the Kurds, Persians, Balloch, Tajik and the Pashto. Their map is roughly Eastern Turkey, Northern Iraq, Iran excluding its North which is South Azerbaijan, Afghanistan excluding its Turkic Northwest, Pashtonistan province of Pakistan and Ballochistan with its parts in Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan.

I do not claim that Kurds will unite all these people, but can trigger a new vision that will inevitably affect the struggles of these people.

The world and the Kurds are used to think of Kurdistan as a problem of Turkey or Iraq. Those who are a little bit interested in the subject know of about 2,5 million Kurds in Syria and about 11 – 12 million more in Iran. What I am trying to say is that Kurds are more than they appear to be in regards to the impact their independence can create in the region.

Kurds should not be thought in regards to their problems with Turks, Arabs or Persians. It has to be said that this is a perverted look at the Kurds. The Turks do not live in the Kurdish land nor have a historical relation that makes up the Kurdish dynamics. They are quite outsiders to Kurdistan. Same goes for the Persians or the Arabs. The Persians however, even though they are one of the troublemaking people for the Kurds, have their place in the dynamics I have mentioned, as do the Balloch or the Pashto.

In a future article I will write about the Arian people, the Iranian people of today which once formed the Median Empire under the lead of the Kurdish tribes, Magu being the significant one. The Magu, which is the root word for the word ‘magic’ in modern day English.


Written by M. Husedin

23 September 2011 at 10:48 PM

On Turkey, Israel, MENA and the future of Kurdistan

leave a comment »

I have to start by writing that I do not explain the events in MENA (Middle East and North Africa) with Jewish conspiracies and have never done so. Jewish people have suffered so much and in my opinion their main motivation in their decision making for the State of Israel comes from such a background which I shared in my previous post. I strongly suggest everyone to separate the Jewish people, the jewish citizens of Israel and the statesmen and stateswomen of the Israeli state. 

* * *

The ‘seemingly conflict’ between Turkey and Israel is an interesting one. On one hand all the events since Erdogan came to power in Turkey is set up to make us think that Turkey is not in good terms with Israel. On the other hand, during the same period, Turkish foreign policy in MENA has followed a convincing path that Turkey was into developing a new equation in the region by developing peaceful and sincere new economical and political ties with neighbouring states. This was the ‘zero-problem’ policy of Turkey’s foreign affairs minister Ahmet Davutoglu.

I guess all sounds familiar to the reader. I am not convinced to this simplicity.

I must say I followed the developments always keeping in mind the plaquets Erdogan received from the Jewish lobby in New York and Washington prior to establishing his AKP (Justice and Development Party). (No, do not go into Jewish conspiracies. My reading is that Erdogan at the time was trying to convince the Jewish lobby that his Islam was not anti-Jewish)

I do not believe anything in Erdogan and his team’s mind has changed since then. Erdogan and his team are not anti-Israeli, not anti-Jewish and definitely not anti-American. They are pro-Western, a strong member of the NATO pact and a reliable ally for the USA in the region.

I can hear you pointing the relationship with Iran (the nuclear talks, etc) and previously with Syria. I say, these were all the elements of a game. I say, all is orchestrated by the US foreign policy makers and the Turks were careful in keeping their policies in more or less parallel lines with the American policies for the region.

If you are not convinced I will give you Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Syria as example. Do you believe this was an out-of-the-line visit in US foreign policy making that served to no purpose?

Here is how I read the events: if Pelosi’s visit had never happened, stupid Assad would never eat the bait and get that close to the Turks. Do not look for direct connection between events, but rather concentrate on the physchological atmosphere they create. It was after this event that Assad the stupid, not his father the Desert Fox dropped his guards and was convinced to a new possible policy of the Turks.

The Syrians must have thought like that: “if there is a crack in the American politics, then we might have a good chance to make a move forward”. And, what a chance! The Turks had already had a convincing few past years with Erdogan in developing a new relationship with the region. If there was no crack in the States (which was later confirmed by the election of the hero, Obama), Turks, as a strongly-attached-to-the-West-country, would not dare develop such new policies. It had to be real from a reel-politique point of view. Of course, read this together with the re-recognition of Gaddafi by the West, rise of India & China and shift-of-power in the world analysis.

But if one wants to win the hearts of the muslim people of MENA, one also had to be in negative terms with Israel. Voila, one minute crisis with Israel and many more smaller but supporting stories. We have to say that more than stupid Israeli far right wing politicians were natural players of such a game and they played their game well by just being themselves.

But hey, did this effect the economical relationship between Turkey and Israel, only to be a bit convincing? Not according to a report published by American Friends of Tel Aviv University.

What, then?

I believe all turns around Iran. The global economical shift from West to East was not unforeseen before it started happening. I remember this being my first comment on global power game, before reading Zbigniew Brzezinski’s Grand Chessboard; American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. No stupid state becomes the history’s biggest ever superpower and USA is definitely not a superpower by chance, so to say.

Brzezinski’s strategy game demands the US concentrates on Eurasia, not MENA. Though, since the book has been published Russia stretched its arms to at least to secure what was left of a grand empire. China joined the game as a second candidate of a superpower game, which is yet only powerful enough to secure its supplies to feed its exports based economy. The US could not get much from Middle Asia other than occupying Afghanistan, which itself is a huge strategical move, just to mention. Turkic countries have been left to Russia and China peacefully. Azerbaijan, which Brzezinski pointed out in bold in his book, however is still an unshared pie. What have I left out? Ah, ok, Iraq. Has been occupied and reengineered!

Look at the map and tell me what you see? Afghanistan, Iraq, Azerbaijan.. they are all around Iran, surrounding Iran

Now we are talking of two countries: Turkey and Syria. Turkey is the only neighbour left out in the above paragraph and Syria is the only state-ally Iran has in the region. (I exclude Russia being an ally. Big powers will not be allies but rather play their own games).

As I mentioned, right from the beginning I was watching in surprise how the Desert Fox Haffez Assad’s son ate the bait that Turkey was changing its position from being a western-ally-in-the-region-country to a country-in-the-region-looking-for-regional-power. Without moving one step away from the West! (This analysis excludes what the Turks think for themselves)

My reading suggests me that the current scenario is to raise the support of the Arab crowd for Erdogan’s leadership. Once this seen intact, the energy will be transformed into a peacemaking with Israel. And once this secured (which I believe will be easy to) the crowds will be silent to a joint attack of Western powers and Turkey (and Jordan) to Syria. Then, there will not be much remaining on the path to a grand attack to Iran.

* * *

What should the Kurds do? Concentrate in creating and strengthening their political establishment in Kurdistan and among themselves. A peace with the Turks would help concentrate on Southwestern Kurdistan (Syrian Kurdistan). Any peace deal with Turks should / have to / must include the recognition of a Kurdistan National Congress as the body of all the Kurds in the world. Such a body should equally look for global recognition, including a status in the UN.

As for what to do in Southwest Kurdistan (Syrian Kurdistan), I have written my opinion previously.

A map of Kurds under Syrian occupation

Written by M. Husedin

16 September 2011 at 5:07 PM

Israel Needs a New Kurdish Policy

leave a comment »

I have come accross this article today which is in line with what I commented only two days ago. Wanted to share with you..

pIsrael quite properly moved quickly to quash reports that in response to worsening ties with Turkey, it planned to start helping the PKK.  Jerusalem has tried for years to persuade the world there’s no such thing as a “good” terrorist  organization, and adopting a pet terrorist group of its own would completely destroy this argument. Moreover, […]/p

via Israel Needs a New Kurdish Policy.

Written by M. Husedin

13 September 2011 at 11:22 AM

Is Israel alliable for the Kurds?

with 3 comments

It was after 2003, when the USA once-and-for-all changed the status quo in the Middle East when it occupied Iraq and supported an almost independent autonomy for South Kurdistan, Northern Iraq that the Kurds thought of an alliance with Israel. They had the millenia lasting good relationship with the Jewish people in their bag and trusted that this never-forgetting people would remember this history. Besides rumours and conspiracy theories and to the dismay of Kurds, it did not happen.Not that only it did not happen, Israel continued providing all possible war machines and technology to Turkey for its fight against Kurds. Turks on the other hand continued to believe to an Israeli support to Kurds.

One needs to distinguish the Jewish people, the Israeli state and the Israeli citizens from each other. Kurds are among the rarest in doing so. Even though many Kurds, then in the far left Turkish movement, went to Lebanon to fight alongside the Palestinians to fight against the “western imperialist” Israeli state, none has ever become anti-semitist. This has something to do with the Kurdish culture they were born into and got their cultural codes about life. Almost none of them today are against an Israeli state.

In my parents village for example, one family is even today named after the land they occupy, the Jewish Ibrahim. The land belonged to a Jewish family. The family itself moved to another land according to what the elderly tells, now believed to be Israel. Their memory is saved in another family’s name, as a rememberance. Not that they occupy a particular part in the tellings of the old days, they were never really a part of the community, but the fact that their past presence is kept as a name itself is something to be said. There was never negative feelings among the Kurds against the Jewish people. This is what differentiates the Kurds from the rest of the Middle East. Anti-semitism is in the DNA in the Middle East so to say, including the Turks.

Returning back to what I was telling, the Kurds, apparently, based their political assumptions not on any political analysis but on many similar stories all around Kurdistan. Today however, an analysis has to be made in relation to future Israeli – Kurdish alliance for the Kurds themselves and also for the Israelis.


In my opinion yes. Any Jewish Israeli citizen I met has no particular negative thoughts or feelings against the Kurds. Though I must say I have not met any Jewish Israeli citizen of Western immigrant background. They might have a different view of the Middle East and the Middle Easterns, even though they have also become Middle Easterners…

Israel’s ‘survival policy’ in the region is one important issue that Kurds need to understand if they want to gain Israel to their side. This ‘survial policy’ of Israel is how I analyse when I try to understand how the Israeli Statesman decide for their policies. On one hand, Israel is a last (and a first) and seemingly a successful homeland for the Jewish people. On the other hand, they have no where else to go. Here one needs to remember who the founders of Israel were, those who gave to today’s Israel its foundations: the survivors of holocaust, of the post World War II era Europe.

It was may be only Hitler’s 3rd Reich Germany that committed the genocide, but it was all over Europe that the Jewish could not live any more, and more importantly these people were not wanted in anywhere in Europe any more (Haven’t they lost their European citizenships when they left for Israel? Can they return?). The remainings of a genocide, the survisors of holocaust were simply expelled to today’s Israel. They had nowhere else to go. They still have nowhere else to go. That’s why Israel is so important to them, not any two thousand year old history. Two thousand year old history stories are fairy tales when it comes to the dynamics determining Israel’s political decisions.

Once this is understood I see no reason why the Kurds can not position themselves as allies with the Israeli state. The Jewish people globally being a separate story, the Israeli citizens can be taken as the starting point to disseminate the Kurdish cause. They can be told about the benefits of having the Kurds as a neighbouring state. At the same time, existing diplomacy channels can be supported with new HR and a new ideology. Such a team can try to establish a relationship with the Israeli state based on principles. Principles that can be put on paper and followed by both parties.

It can be said that the Israelis would have nothing to lose on the table, that they would not feel loyalty to any such document. I do not believe so if Kurds can position themselves according to what they can offer realistically. Of course this is not in the sense of selling oneself to the other. It would be prostituting oneself, not politics.


There is not much at the moment the Kurds can offer to Israel other than being loyal to an agreement, though this has proven to be a historical mistake for the Kurds. They have been suffering from such an agreement they signed with the Turks about four hundred years ago. However, a future Kurdistan and its alliance could be the most valuable asset that noone else could offer to the State of Israel. For that, the Israeli politicians and the statesman and stateswoman need to show some effort to convince the Kurds to their reliability. Israeli politicians are not to be trusted with their current understanding and naming of the Kurds.

With the likes of Avidgor Lieberman no reproachment between two people can be possible. Ones who takes the Kurds as ever begging people like the African villager children asking for ‘whatever’ when you pass by their villages with the 4WDs. Israelis need to learn first to respect the Kurds. Second, they should stop providing arms to the enemies of Kurds, namely to the Turks. Turks, who do not like the Jewish people…

In short, there can be no alliance between Israel and various Kurdish factions unless Israel changes its view of the Kurds, develop a future vision with Kurdistan and changes its current Middle East policy based totally on this perception… no alliance not even in thoughts unless Israel starts seeing the Kurds and their future Kurdistan strategic to itself. Else, Israel will always want to use the Kurds much like Henry Kissinger did in the 70’s against Saddam in support of the Iran Shah regime…

Written by M. Husedin

11 September 2011 at 10:25 PM

About repositioning the blog

with 3 comments

Dear readers,

For the moment the blog receives a little more than 10 clicks per day at peak days, usually Wednesdays and Thursdays. In my opinion, having about 20 usual readers at this stage is a success. However, I am having difficulty in positioning the articles I am writing for this blog and I would like to share this with you.

In the beginning I wrote:

With this blog I wish to promote not only Kurdly thinking to fellow Kurds but also a free and independent Kurdistan to the world.

Now I am not quite sure if this statement corresponds to what I have observed after starting writing in English. First of all I discovered that there is strong intellectual ‘Kurdly thinking’ among English writing Kurds. Thus, my first claim fails and it has to be changed. Promoting “a free and independent Kurdistan to the world” sounds well to the ears but I realized, in the presence of, say, e-Kurd or other main news agencies of Kurds sounds a strong but funny claim from an individual unknown blogger.

Where should my articles stand in the English writing Kurdish internet world, which I like to say Kurdistan of Internet (Internet Kurdistan). Very apparently there are even many different attempts of further putting internet to the use of the Kurdish freedom struggle from both young generation and their a little bit older brothers and sisters. Where should my articles and the blog itself stand among these, which itself is a part of.

In short, I am having the difficulty of putting my various analysis into words. I cannot decide for a clear audience as the readers of the blog. Just to give you an example, I would like to write about the ‘seemingly conflict’ between Turkey and Israel, but to who and why?

May be as the reader you will say to yourself but this does not satisfy me as the writer. First of all, I do not like writing self-proving articles, this to mean the writer writes to return in time and claim he has foreseen what happened in the recent times of that future. This type of articles are the most useless to me. Instead, I like to write articles that create the calculated change in the targeted broad or limited audience, thus affects what’s happening and make themselves look ‘useless’ if read in the future.

Nonetheless, I will continue writing articles. I just need some time to decide clearly where this blog will position itself in terms of targeted audience. Once this issue solved and a new ‘statement’ written, there will be more periodical articles published. Periodical in the sense “following the events the blogger is interested in commenting”.

Keep visiting the blog time to time; perhaps once a week or every ten days to read what a fellow Kurd thinks about what’s going on in Kurdistan, its neighboring region and the world.

Written by M. Husedin

10 September 2011 at 12:45 PM

Posted in Uncategorized

A Letter to President Barack Obama on the recent Turkish-Iranian aggression against Kurdistan-Iraq

leave a comment »

By Kirmanj Gundi

President Barack Obama The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20500 August 27, 2011 Dear Mr. President:

When America decided to invade Iraq and topple its tyrannical regime, America was in need of assistance from all of its friends in the region, particularly America’s long time ally, Turkey. To expedite the toppling of the regime, America asked Turkish authorities for permission for American ground forces to pass through Turkey and into Iraq. The American request was denied and America received a cold shoulder from Turkish authorities.

During that crucial period, to facilitate America’s success in toppling Saddam Hussein’s despotic regime, the Kurdish leadership put the Peshmarga forces under the US military command. Kurdish leaders have done their due diligence to promote America’s mission in Iraq whether through mediating between/among Arab political rivals to create better unity in Baghdad or by participating in the US military undertaking against militants. The people of Kurdistan embraced American forces and welcomed them with flowers while they were barraged with bullets in other parts of Iraq.

The stability that the people of Kurdistan along with their leadership have established during the past two decades has helped America to move forward in Iraq in completing its mission. Nonetheless, Kurdistan and its people have found themselves under a hybrid state of violence and political mistreatment by Baghdad, and occasionally have seen hostilities from Iran and Turkey through air and ground invasions. Consequently, many innocent people including women and children died. Villagers were forced leave their villages and became internally displaced.

The recent Turkish-Iranian joint air and ground onslaught against Kurdistan-Iraq under the pretext of going after the PKK and PJAK is a clear violation of International laws that support sovereignty of statehood, and violates the UN Declaration of Human Rights, and democratic principles.

Sadly enough, it was American-made jet fighters the Turks flew in their raids on Kurdistan, and murdered innocent people. In one incident, a whole family of seven was cut into pieces. This flagrant violation could not have happened without America’s prior knowledge of the Turkish raids. What is even more tragic is that the Turkish government, jointly with America’s archenemy, Iran, conducted this recent military operation against defenseless Kurds.

Mr. President, US made fighters were used to murder citizens of Kurdistan at a time when Kurdish people and their leadership have been the most supportive of Americans in Iraq, and one of the few in the larger Middle East. The people of Kurdistan have always looked up to America and expected America to provide viable support in the face of external aggression. Therefore, instead of being complacent about Turkish internal oppression of the Kurds and Turkish aggression towards the Kurds in Kurdistan-Iraq, America could play a better role in finding a political solution to the Turkish-Kurdish conflict. America as an occupying force of Iraq is responsible for securing Iraq’s borders.

While Turkey uses the PKK as a pretext for its aggression against the peace-loving people of Kurdistan-Iraq, the reality is that there remain some twenty-five million Kurds in Kurdistan-Turkey, who, since 1924, have been faced with Turkish policies of constitutional genocide, which attempts to eradicate Kurdish identity as a different ethnicity. The Turkish Constitution in Chapter Four, I. Turkish Citizenship, Article 66 (as amended on October 17, 2001), vividly states “Everyone bound to the Turkish state through the bond of citizenship is a Turk.”

This Article advocates constitutional genocide against all those who carry national identities other than Turkish identity. The fact is that the PKK is a product of this racist and inhuman Constitution. While it may be convenient for Turkey to declare those it oppresses as “terrorists,” others see it as a legitimate struggle for ethnic and national freedom. Under this Constitution, there is no place for the Kurds to claim their God-given “national and democratic rights” in Turkey. If they do, the intolerant Turkish mentality stigmatizes them as “Terrorists.” Interestingly, one could ask which side, through its acts defines the “definition” of terrorist, the Turkish state that constitutionally has a policy of systematic genocide against one of the ancient peoples in the world or the PKK that has a national agenda for its oppressed people? The PKK was forced into an armed struggle to stop the genocidal Turkish policies in Kurdistan-Turkey. Additionally, the PKK, occasionally, had ceased all its activities against the Turkish state to promote dialogue with The Turks. It has always been the Turkish stubborn stand that preferred military solution to the Kurdish cause in Turkey.

Mr. President, Turkey needs to realize the reality in which Turkey lives. The truth is that the issue is not the PKK, but rather it is an issue of some twenty-five million Kurds, who have been buried alive under the myopic Turkish Constitution. Let’s hypothetically assume the Turkish raids on Kurdistan eliminate the PKK, even then Turkey must realize that it cannot exterminate the Kurdish cause. Thus, it is wise for the Turks to come to terms with this reality and end the cycle of hate and distrust. They must accept the historical reality that the Kurds have been living in their ancestral lands, which were partitioned and made parts of the modern Turkish state (and other states), and have their own national characteristics that must be respected.

What the Kurds in Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria struggle for is totally in tune with the United States’ Declaration of Independence, to achieve “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Therefore, it is expected of America that America use its influence to help the people of Kurdistan especially in Turkey and Iraq where America can play a more effective role in finding a solution to the Kurdish plight. In Turkey, the Turks should be encouraged to look for a political solution to the Turkish-Kurdish uproar. In Iraq, America could do more to influence the implementation of the Article 140 to normalize the Arabized and sequestered parts of Kurdistan.

America’s support for Turkey has emboldened Turkish authorities to, under the US tutelage, violate international norms, and transgress human integrity. To end this succession of cynicism in Turkey, America can influence the Turks to amend their Constitution in which the Kurdish national and democratic rights are recognized and revered. As long as Turkey adheres to the Turkish “status quo,” it would be difficult for the people of Kurdistan in Turkey, or Kurds in other parts of Kurdistan to live in peace.

Mr. President, in your speech in the Turkish Parliament on April 6, 2009, you applauded the Turkish reform for greater democracy. You encouraged the Turks to have dialogue with the Kurdish leaders in Iraq, which indeed made a noticeable difference in Turkish behavior vis-à-vis the Kurds in Kurdistan-Iraq. However, you put Al-Qaida and the PKK on the same scale without referring to the inherently racist Turkish Constitution. Therefore, we ask you Mr. President, to call for a similar stand you displayed in your speech for the Kurds in Iraq by encouraging Turkish authorities to establish dialogue with the Kurds in Turkey so the Turkish-Kurdish bloodshed ends. In view of the fact that there exists conflict between the Turks and Kurds in Turkey”the region may never be able to see peace and tranquility”and Turkey may continue its internal oppression of the Kurds and trespass internationally recognized borders and violate the rights of Kurds beyond Turkey’s borders.

Further, since “unfortunately” Kurdistan is still a part of Iraq, it is the US responsibility to protect the people of Kurdistan. Thus, any violation against Kurdistan should be considered as a violation against Iraq. Particularly, with regard to the Iranian aggression, we ask that America protect its Kurdish friends in the face of America’s die-hard enemy, Iran.

In conclusion, we implore that the US provide protection for the people of Kurdistan from external aggression. Further, we ask that America help the Kurdish leadership to strengthen democratic institutions in Kurdistan, and promote principles on which the Kurdistani society could be transformed into a functioning civil society in which human integrity is preserved and freedom of speech including freedom of the press is respected. May God continue to bless America and Kurdistan with His love and wisdom.

We shall continue to pray for your success.

Sincerely yours,

Kirmanj Gundi

Department of Educational Administration and Leadership
Tennessee State University

Written by M. Husedin

04 September 2011 at 3:07 PM