Blog on Kurdistan & Kurds

For a United and Independent Kurdistan

Putin’s Eurasian Union, The USA and the future for Kurdistan

leave a comment »

It is only few weeks since I published the article titled “Is there a future for Kurdistan with Russia?” Below quote is from the mentioned article:

One thing however is for sure, and it is that Russia’s leadership must show its citizens that it is once again a reputed global power. This will require to show some muscle here and there. And this is not good news for Kurdistan.

Not long has passed and Putin wrote an article on his new Eurasian Union project. This is basically Russia reclaiming whatever it can from the ex-Soviet soil, which was the soil of tsar era before the World War I age. Short, Russia follows the same strategy map, still after what the tsars were after.

Here I would like you to read the third chapter (The Partition of Asiatic Turkey) of the book Secret Treaties and Understandings, prepared and published by F. Seymour Cocks, long long ago. You can read the book from this link.

If you have read;

In short in this book, ancient Cilicia and Western Kurdistan was given to the French and rest of the Kurdistan to Russia. If we look at today’s maps, we see that this partitioning of Kurdistan between the French and the Russians is what did not happen at the end of the World War I. Thsu, we can speculate on the interests of these three and their agreement on the borders they agreed upon if things did not go wrong.

* Was what is Eastern Kurdistan in Iran today (Kermanshah, Urmiyah, Sine, etc) left to Russians is kind of unclear in this partitioning. Which power was going to take this part? Or, was it another agreement between the same powers on partitioning of Iran?

The question is not why they had interest in the land of other peoples, that would be stupid, but rather who asked which land and why. Why Russia took only the north of Kurdistan and not further south all the way to the mediterranean. Why did the French took only western Kurdistan and not further north all the way to Azerbaidjan.

Here is what these powers agreed to take from Kurdistan and its periphery with Kurdish political description and geographical naming of the land, which is also clearly the terminology of those partitioners;

  • The French takes western Kurdistan and Adana. Ottoman province of Mossul, an arab city remains with them as well, however Kurdish city of Kirkuk, Sulaymaniah, Hewler and Dohuk is kind of unclear on the partitioning map. Should have been left to Russia because these lands were left to Britain’s mandate, which later became Iraq today. *
  • Russia takes the rest of Kurdistan all the way down to Botan (should include Siirt and around in Kurdistan today, Botan region of Kurdistan) *
  • The British takes central and south of Iraq today.
  • Port of Alexandretta, Iskenderun today remains a neutral port, not pointed out well in this map.

Now, why Alexandretta, Iskenderun is an important point to be mentioned and agreed upon on such a big partitioning? As a Kurdish geostrategy writer my answer is that it is the gateway to Kurdistan and it is Kurdistan’s gateway to the world. Moreover, Kurdistan itself is a gateway Central Asia if thought together with Azerbaidjan.

It is clear that the agreement on such partitioning between these three powers, the one including Alexandretta (of which was named Hatay and annexed to Turkey in 1939):

  1. there was a special interest in Kurdistan, and more importantly:
  2. noone could get Kurdistan in unity

In the same agreement between the Russians and the west (French and British), it is agreed that Russia would get the control of Constantinople, Istanbul today. In short, northern and central Kurdistans to the Russians, its west to the French. It is mentioned in the same agreement that Russia would get Constantinople or Istanbul.

One should have a look at this grand Russia picture and see that Russia would control the access to / from Black Sea and none of the western powers would have access to Central Asia. Central Asia, which is in the center of the map for Putin’s Eurasia Union.

The west has changed in power balance since then. After the Bolshevik revolution Lenin gave up all the claims of tsarist Russia on Kurdistan. The west, namely the French gave up claims on western Kurdistan and Adana.Everything, later on including Alexandretta (Iskenderun) was given to Turkey. It was just Mossul and its Kurdish territories that was later decided by the League of Nations under British hegemony to be left under the British mandate, which has become Iraq. Kurds were clearly to get nothing under the British mandate or Iraq until the US intervened there with the first and second gulf wars.

Thus created modern day Turkey, republic of the Turks and enemy of the Kurds.

Turkey seems to be the lock on an unrealized deal on Kurdistan between Russia and the west. The west agreed on partitioning of the Ottoman land but Lenin spoilt everything.

It is most probably that Lenin’s Russia and the direction this communicst state would take was not known that the west agreed on the sealing of an unrealized geopartitioning deal: the grave Kurdistan and the Kurds burried in to.

It was in 1921 when Lenin agreed with the Turks and ‘secured’ ‘revolution’s border there. Such a shame on Lenin knowingly burrying Kurds for the sake of his revolution and an ideology. Such a pragmatism he himself loved to criticize in his famous polemics.

Then, Soviets collapsed, then Russia started losing in from its Soviet time geographical dominancy with Yeltsin and then Putin rose to power to put and end to the retreat. Now Putin comes back only to reclaim Central Asia. He can not yet imagine of more than this without doing more at home.

What interests the Kurds in this is not what Russia is interested in, not that Russia has interest in Kurdistan. No, not today. It is rather if the USA will stop its interest for Central Asia. Kurdistan would be meaningful for the US only in such a scenario.

There will be more on this in future articles.

Advertisements

Written by M. Husedin

24 October 2011 at 3:07 PM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: