Jump to content
Mansur Bakhtiari

What is happening in Kurdistan???

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I'm an Arab Iraqi and the Iraqi Kurds are my brothers in religion, humanity and in the region. And I love my brother @Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī.

My main problem with the referendum is that the KRG at the time the referendum happened, it was controlling what right now is still officially regarded as federal areas. Also, Daesh still exists in both Syria and Iraq and although it is weakened, the region is still unstable and especially Iraq where the central government and the security forces still need strengthening, there is economic problems in all parts of Iraq including the Kurdish ruled regions, and there is political corruptness on a federal and local level, and in the KRG as well, and my brother @Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī knows well about the corrupt nature of some Kurdish politicians especially with regards to nepotism, tribalism and their clan.

Other than that, I believe the KRG should retreat back to 2003 borders, and once the situation is stable, then we must apply the Iraqi consitution to its fullest no matter what we like or want. Article 140 means there has to be a referendum in the disputed areas, and the problem right now is that it is hard to apply this referendum for the reasons stated above. But if Iraq is stable again, insha Allah, then we must apply our own constitution to its fullest.

As for an independent Kurdistan as a state, that is a topic for another day, and although I support self-determination for all peoples, I believe the marja'iyya is against the break up of Iraq. And if the marja'iyya is against something, I tend to put my political viewpoints aside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although an international law supports the right of self determination, it is worth less than nothing without the recognition of other countries, which won't happen unless there is real oppression (for fear of it happening in every territory in Europe - Scotland, Bavaria, Catalonia, etc.).

Unity is something you build, as well as break ups. This secession as was correctly said by Ibn Muneer started a century ago. There have been planning as well as errors from part of the government. But this is not solved by secession. And much less by the abuse of law (bringing women to gove birth in Kirkuk). This only creates a parallel reality full of injustice.

It is interesting, though, that a senior politician of the Iraqi government back in the day, when Americans invaded Iraq, said that in some years there will be a Civil War here. What we saw this week is, indeed, the start of a Civil War. Whether Kurds stay or leave, we all lost.

Edited by Bakir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, E.L King said:

I'm an Arab Iraqi and the Iraqi Kurds are my brothers in religion, humanity and in the region. And I love my brother @Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī.

 

Other than that, I believe the KRG should retreat back to 2003 borders, and once the situation is stable, then we must apply the Iraqi consitution to its fullest no matter what we like or want. Article 140 means there has to be a referendum in the disputed areas, and the problem right now is that it is hard to apply this referendum for the reasons stated above. But if Iraq is stable again, insha Allah, then we must apply our own constitution to its fullest.

 

You see I disagree with you but you are respectful and make sense unlike others...

1. It doesn't make sense that KRG should retreat back to 2003 lines, you see that would mean Khanaqin would go into Federal Iraqi hands. The issue with that is the population of Khanaqin is pretty much 100% Kurdish Feyli and back in 2007 voted to join the KRG. That would undermine that vote. 

2. Not to mention if Abadi is true to really wanting to implement article 140, why is Abadi saying the "referendum is in the past"? This to me alludes to the fact Abadi doesn't respect article 140 and will basically push onto the KRG proper, in which he already has. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

You see I disagree with you but you are respectful and make sense unlike others...

1. It doesn't make sense that KRG should retreat back to 2003 lines, you see that would mean Khanaqin would go into Federal Iraqi hands. The issue with that is the population of Khanaqin is pretty much 100% Kurdish Feyli and back in 2007 voted to join the KRG. That would undermine that vote. 

2. Not to mention if Abadi is true to really wanting to implement article 140, why is Abadi saying the "referendum is in the past"? This to me alludes to the fact Abadi doesn't respect article 140 and will basically push onto the KRG proper, in which he already has. 

1- I personally don't know about Khanaqin, if I am honest with you I only heard about this place when it was on the news due to Iraqi forces rolling in. But if what you say about the vote in 2007 is true, then yes, Khanaqin should be under KRG control. But any other disputed area, that has not been voted on yet, should be returned to the federal government, until a referendum on the disputed areas happens.

2- What I believe Abadi meant was the referendum for independence not about Article 140. If he meant Article 140, then he is sadly neglecting the constitution which is above him and any other politician/official in the country. 

Edited by E.L King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2017 at 11:08 AM, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

The PKK in the city are still fighting and resisting. The PUK fled like cowards and KDP in Makhmur also fled. 

Too bad the PUK does not have the zeal of the ISIS...otherwise they would have destroyed the entire Kurdistan and areas beyond. </sarcasm>

As the saying goes along the lines of- those who do not know history are condemned to repeating it. The region's contemporary history is that of horror and chaos fuelled by mass stupidity i.e. nationalism...turning the region to utter waste and its people to cannon fodders for the interests of the ultimate puppet masters. 
100 years ago Arabs too were supposed to reach the skies once they were liberated from the Ottoman oppression just as Kurds are today. Why then it all ended up with ISIS or Nusra or Alqaida instead? Its because the creation of Arab states were not meant to propel Arabs to the heights of their ideals and dreams, but for the interests of colonial powers. Kurdish case likewise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, King said:

Not necessarily. It is only natural that secessionists will push their agenda when the state is at its most vulnerable.  The likelihood of them having their goals met when the state is even stronger is even weaker.  This is why a secession in Iraq is relatively more like to succeed than say Turkey or Iran which is even less likely so.

 

My thoughts, too, Not to mention that more peaceful means are often met with force/violence by a stronger state. The Catalans aren't having the best of times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On October 16, 2017 at 10:57 AM, King said:

Religion hardly ever trumps cultural/linguistic association and ties

Our Caucasian co-religionists sometimes went out after church to shoot up the villages.

" Sunday Shoots" were very popular, so...yeah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LeftCoastMom said:

My thoughts, too, Not to mention that more peaceful means are often met with force/violence by a stronger state. The Catalans aren't having the best of times.

Catalans are violating the law constantly. KRG are angels in comparison. The bad times you refer to have been the result of their incompetent government. Using the state money to promote an illegal referendum against the state, while using the regional TV and political speeches to support one option in the referendum: Yes. There is no freedom of ideology, but that's not what the rest of the world see.

Moreover, there are proved racist claims against Spaniards made by Catalans Govt Representatives (like the VP of the Govern). Also, official political campaign images saying that Catalans make money and produce for the rest of Spanish who live off of the Government. If it wasn't for Franco, they would have no economic infrastructure. But this is the real face of nationalism, selfishness and greed in its purest form, cautiously decorated with the word "freedom".

The Spanish police did commit errors, brutality was out of place and proved useless. Apart from that, that doesn't justify the secession.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Hi @Bakir I was hoping you would answer.My purpose in bringing this up was not to examine the internal workings / philosophies of a movement. And almost all secessionist movements from a nation-state are considered " illegal". But to show that, peaceful or not, if you try to get out of the nation-state in which you find yourself ,your head is likely to be broken. So this " if they only do it peacefully and when the nation is stable it would be better "...I meet with skepticism. That's all. Whether or not your separation would work out well for  you...different question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/19/2017 at 10:56 AM, IbnSina said:

I take it you also hope civilians die too because the first victims in war are civilians and many civilians have already died. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/18/2017 at 3:47 PM, Wahdat said:

Too bad the PUK does not have the zeal of the ISIS...otherwise they would have destroyed the entire Kurdistan and areas beyond. </sarcasm>

As the saying goes along the lines of- those who do not know history are condemned to repeating it. The region's contemporary history is that of horror and chaos fuelled by mass stupidity i.e. nationalism...turning the region to utter waste and its people to cannon fodders for the interests of the ultimate puppet masters. 
100 years ago Arabs too were supposed to reach the skies once they were liberated from the Ottoman oppression just as Kurds are today. Why then it all ended up with ISIS or Nusra or Alqaida instead? Its because the creation of Arab states were not meant to propel Arabs to the heights of their ideals and dreams, but for the interests of colonial powers. Kurdish case likewise. 

Then your fundamental issue is with the concept of nation-states itself. It's not like Kurds have chosen to be nationalists, the minute the colonial powers drew up the borders; it divided Kurds. Infact I know for my personally, it literally divided my family in two bewteen Iraq and Iran. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/18/2017 at 1:58 AM, Bakir said:

Dialogue and regional demands become more difficult when disobedience translates in violent resistance against the government. Regional authorities in no way should attack the government unless there was significant oppression. One can reasonably argue that the current Kurdish government is an enemy of Iraq and anyone who promoted such movement should be judged by law. Changing the regional government and starting a proccess in which goals are proposed and achieved through dialogue and legality in the proper time will lead to better conditions to both Kurds and the rest of Iraqis.

Illegality, selfishness, greed and nationalism in a time where war and poverty have become part of the lives of iraqis aren't good ingredients to start a secession.

Except it's the Iraqis invading the KRG, forget the disputed areas; they are invading 'KRG propert'. They have already entered the Erbil governornate:

image.png.74bc873a13f95d446afa9a6a2ac9d2de.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Except it's the Iraqis invading the KRG, forget the disputed areas; they are invading 'KRG propert'. They have already entered the Erbil governornate:

image.png.74bc873a13f95d446afa9a6a2ac9d2de.png

Ibadi says they are going to take back the 2003 borders. They don't see it as invading the KRG.

Edited by Dhulfikar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dhulfikar said:

Ibadi says they are going to take back the 2003 borders. They don't see it as invading the KRG.

Abadi*. 

Well they actually claimed pre-2014 borders but even with the 2003 borders, this is a direct infringment of that. Since they have pushed into the Erbil governornate, which is pre-2003 borders. The whole thing is a mess. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Abadi*. 

Well they actually claimed pre-2014 borders but even with the 2003 borders, this is a direct infringment of that. Since they have pushed into the Erbil governornate, which is pre-2003 borders. The whole thing is a mess. 

Does Iraq have it's own rights to claim the 2003 borders? If not then why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Then your fundamental issue is with the concept of nation-states itself. It's not like Kurds have chosen to be nationalists, the minute the colonial powers drew up the borders; it divided Kurds. Infact I know for my personally, it literally divided my family in two bewteen Iraq and Iran. 

My fundamental issue, I guess, is with the inability of folks in the region to look at things consequentially- everyone wants a facebook account, a little flag, an iphone, and certain other things (both real & perceived) to cater to their sense of self/desire...yet never take the consequences of such desires into account- sorta like crackheads chasing a high.
Not only Kurds, but the entire people of the region have been victimized & separated by borders- Turks, Persians, Pashtuns, Punjabis, Arabs, Baloch etc etc. The solution is not more borders but no borders...The current state of affairs is not conducive to a  no-borders reality- that should not mean that we have to work our problems in the region by creating more borders....no matter how sound the justification. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wahdat said:

My fundamental issue, I guess, is with the inability of folks in the region to look at things consequentially- everyone wants a facebook account, a little flag, an iphone, and certain other things (both real & perceived) to cater to their sense of self/desire...yet never take the consequences of such desires into account- sorta like crackheads chasing a high.
Not only Kurds, but the entire people of the region have been victimized & separated by borders- Turks, Persians, Pashtuns, Punjabis, Arabs, Baloch etc etc. The solution is not more borders but no borders...The current state of affairs is not conducive to a  no-borders reality- that should not mean that we have to work our problems in the region by creating more borders....no matter how sound the justification. 

 

Well when you have divided a people across four countries, it's really hard to sell the last part of your statement. The Kurdish people aren't nationalists out of racism or wanting to be nationalist but out of necessity. I cannot cross into my home country without iranian or iraqi papers. 

Plus I agree with your internationalist sentiment, however that assumes states like Iraq or Iran or Turkey are internationalist in nature of have internationalist goals. This is simply not the case, they are all nation-states who are out to maintain their self-interest. You must remember many Kurd sympathetic to the PKK have internationalist sentiments and share a confederalist outlook on things. 

Edited by Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dhulfikar said:

Does Iraq have it's own rights to claim the 2003 borders? If not then why?

It does but it is doing more than that as pointed out. Not to mention article 140 doesn't say take the disputed areas by force or even necessarily that the federal iraqi gov has the right to decide over those areas. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Well when you have divided a people across four countries, it's really hard to sell the last part of your statement. The Kurdish people aren't nationalists out of racism or wanting to be nationalist but out of necessity. I cannot cross into my home country without iranian or iraqi papers. 

Plus I agree with your internationalist sentiment, however that assumes states like Iraq or Iran or Turkey are internationalist in nature of have internationalist goals. This is simply not the case, they are all nation-states who are out to maintain their self-interest. You must remember many Kurd sympathetic to the PKK have internationalist sentiments and share a confederalist outlook on things. 

Reality is contextual- what we do determines the outcome.

In Afghanistan's northern border Turkmen, Uzbeks, and Tajiks are separated from their brethren by borders, and in South Pashtuns and Balouch. Pashtuns however have been the only people in Afg to have tried time and again to unify with their kinsmen across the border and the Pashtuns have caused more harm to themselves first, and then the region. Following the same pattern, this would be the fate of any people in the region that'd fall prey to similar sentimental desires including Kurds.
One way is to follow the Pashtun footsteps, another is to work towards a EU style region where borders dont separate but bring folks together.
I, having grown up in a politically anarchic culture in Afghanistan, consider myself more of an anarchist than an internationalist. And I fully agree with you that both Iran and Turkey are self interested entities/nation-states and I pray for their demise at the proper time. Iran belongs to all and not only Iranians, and so does Iraq, or Turkey.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

I take it you also hope civilians die too because the first victims in war are civilians and many civilians have already died. 

No, what makes you think that? I hope conflicts can be solved without violence always but sometimes it cant. As far as I am aware, all the warmongering came form the kurdish side, from the different military organizations, as an example, see:

https://twitter.com/KURDISTAN_ARMY?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

Also see how they want to make this a shia vs kurds thing, further fueling sectarian hatred in service of israel.

What I did was to just linked to the result of the confrontation and it ended up in humiliation as a result of an unthoughtful plan, no unity within ranks, no respect for the chain of command and because they relied on the outrage of the world and/or the support of israel, just like how some people always rely on someone ells to help them.

Barzani gravely miscalculated the geopoltics of his surroundings and how his referendum vote would affect it, he thought he had a lot of leverage while he had none. The result of his actions in politics is the manifest of his lack of basira and he is not suitable to lead any nation.

Anyways brother, no hard feelings, I just dont agree with you regarding this subject and I also think that we should never serve israels interests, not unless there is a bigger plan at work.

I hope Iraq as a country and as a people, which includes the kurds, can move on from this and start rebuilding the society that currently is in ruins and disorder instead of selfishly starting new conflicts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, IbnSina said:

No, what makes you think that? I hope conflicts can be solved without violence always but sometimes it cant. As far as I am aware, all the warmongering came form the kurdish side, from the different military organizations, as an example, see:

https://twitter.com/KURDISTAN_ARMY?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

Also see how they want to make this a shia vs kurds thing, further fueling sectarian hatred in service of israel.

What I did was to just linked to the result of the confrontation and it ended up in humiliation as a result of an unthoughtful plan, no unity within ranks, no respect for the chain of command and because they relied on the outrage of the world and/or the support of israel, just like how some people always rely on someone ells to help them.

Barzani gravely miscalculated the geopoltics of his surroundings and how his referendum vote would affect it, he thought he had a lot of leverage while he had none. The result of his actions in politics is the manifest of his lack of basira and he is not suitable to lead any nation.

Anyways brother, no hard feelings, I just dont agree with you regarding this subject and I also think that we should never serve israels interests, not unless there is a bigger plan at work.

I hope Iraq as a country and as a people, which includes the kurds, can move on from this and start rebuilding the society that currently is in ruins and disorder instead of selfishly starting new conflicts.

It's crazy you know, you do realise the twitter account isn't an official account right? It's some guy in the diaspora making tweets. I can also show plenty of examples Iraqis making racist comments against Kurds, which I have recieved personally too. However that doesn't represent all Iraqis, just like it doesn't represent all Kurds.

Not to mention you completely negate the fact it was the ISF and Hashd that attacked Kirkuk, not the other way around. They attacked Kirkuk out of nowhere, no warning to the people. Plus they also took over a shia kurdish city of Khanaqin, which is in the KRG proper. It predates 2014.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/10/2017 at 9:55 PM, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

It does but it is doing more than that as pointed out. Not to mention article 140 doesn't say take the disputed areas by force or even necessarily that the federal iraqi gov has the right to decide over those areas. 

Regardless of legality, the use of force should be the last resort, and should only take place when all other channels of dialogue have been completely exhausted.

As for the idea of a confederation, that should also be achieved via dialogue (and I do believe that could be a solution for the future). Independence requires one simple thing: International support, and even support from the iraqi people. That is not achieved by a secessionist movement in the worst moment against Iraq, regardless of nationalist sentiments and needs. I do also believe that from the Kurdish perspective, it is better to achieve any goal by dialogue because such goals sre to be achieved in Iran and Turkey as well. It's not only Iraq. What happens in Iraq does affect the relationship of the Kurdish region in other states, and its ability to negotiate with these states.

I never understood how Mesopotamia managed to live in a constant state of conflict and wars for all its known history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×