This hot from the wire:
Iraq’s Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) decided to postpone by six months a referendum on the future of the city of Kirkuk, Agence France-Presse reported Dec. 17, citing KRG Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani. Article 140 of the Iraqi constitution stipulated that the referendum be held by the end of 2007, but Barzani said it was delayed for "technical reasons."
Let me explain Barzani’s technical reasons involved here.
Back in October the U.S. administration offered the Turks to bomb the Kurdish PKK guerrilla in north Iraq:
While the use of US soldiers on the ground to root out the PKK would be the last resort, the US would be willing to launch air strikes on PKK targets, the official said, and has discussed the use of cruise missiles.
The U.S. offer was politely refused and yesterday the Turks sent 50+ of their own planes:
The overnight bombardment up to 60 miles into Iraq, which included long-range artillery shelling, sent hundreds of families fleeing and added to the volatility of a region once considered Iraq’s most peaceful.
As the US controls the Iraqi airspace, the strike was not possible without its support:
Turkey’s military chief Gen. Yasar Buyukanit said US intelligence was used in preparing Sunday’s strike. "America gave intelligence," Turkish television station Kanal D quoted Buyukanit as saying. "But more importantly, America last night opened airspace to us. By opening the airspace, America gave its approval to this operation."
The US denies this, but acknowledges that it had been ‘informed’ beforehand.
Harpers’ Silverstein has email from a "well-connected former U.S. government official working in Kurdistan." That would be Peter Galbraith who lobbies for the Kurds and urges to partition Iraq. Galbraith(?) writes:
The blowback here in Kurdistan is building against the U.S. government because of its help with the Turkish air strikes. The theme is shock and betrayal. The Kurds see themselves as the only true friend of the Americans in the region, and the only part of Iraq that is working, and are especially hurt by the attack.
…
For Washington to say they didn’t authorize the strike, or to use some other doublespeak bullshit Washington term, just makes people here more angry.
One wonders why Galbraith and the Kurds are surprised by this at all.
The Iraq Study Group report, which Bush seems to implement now, recommended to move the referendum about oil-rich Kirkuk to the 4th of Never. This despite Article 140 of the Iraqi constitution, which demands such a referendum to be held in 2007.
But the Kurds had threatened secession from Iraq over the issue. Kirkuk would give them the financial assets needed to become a sovereign state. Neither the U.S. nor Turkey nor anybody else wants that.
The U.S. supported bombing of several Kurd villages, none of them PKK centers, was to remind the Kurds that others are stronger then they are.
Barzani obviously ‘got the message’, i.e. the technical reasons, in form of a few tons of TNT.
The Kurds always get screwed. A while back the War Nerd took a deeper look at Kurdish history and why this is always the case. He came up with too many words and two main findings:
The Kurds don’t have a country because they have no discipline and plain old bad geographical luck.
There will never be a Kurdistan because there are too many interests around the places where Kurds live. If you want to cut off valuable parts of Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria, i.e. all the future neighbors of a landlocked Kurdistan, you can be sure to have no support.
Why the Kurds even assume that the U.S. or Israel, currently their best friends, would ever really get into that fight is beyond me. What do they expect? A Berlin crisis like air bridge?
The second issue, internal Kurdish fighting, is legendary. Barzani and Talabani, the two main Godfathers of Iraqi Kurds have been fighting each other all their life. On top of that neither of them agrees with the Marxist PKK. The current truce between B. and T. would break immediately if something like a real Kurdish state would really come into reach.
As for the U.S. – the 1921 Treaty of Sèvres over the ruins of the Ottoman empire somewhat envisioned a Kurdish state. The Turks under Atatürk fought against it and, with U.S. support, the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne did away with that.
After the 1991 Gulf War, Bush senior called on Iraq’s Kurds and Shia to rebel against Saddam’s rule. But the promised U.S. support never came and many Kurds got killed.
One wonders why the Kurds and Galbraith have ever expected something different now.
My proposal to them, which I discussed with PKK fighters in Kurdistan years ago, is to first work for an EU like union between the involved states, i.e. T.S.I.I., and then form a Kurdish ‘heritage coalition’ within that union to optimize their position.
Those folks immediately started to quarrel between themselves over my suggestions.
They didn’t ‘get the message’. Turkish bombs, provided from and delivered with U.S. support, seem to have better effects.