Greater Kurdistan: a New Actor on Middle ‎East Map?

The Israeli army has stepped up its military activities in Iraq's autonomous Kurdistan Region and is ‎planning to station a number of unmanned aerial vehicles in the area in northern Iraq. Israel…‎
‎00:00:50‎ Aggiunto il 14/08/2011‎
‎ ‎‎By:Andrei AKULOV(SCF)‎
‎12/07/2012‎
Map of Kurdistan
A new non-Arab important actor may soon appear on the Middle East volatile map as the recent ‎events testify. Only this month Kurdistan was visited by Ukrainian (headed by Foreign Minister), ‎Armenian and Canadian delegations. The US team went there in October, Ni Jian, the Chinese ‎ambassador to Iraq, was in Erbil by the end of August. Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu paid a symbolic ‎visit to Kirkuk on August 2, 2012, the first high level visit by Turkish official in 75 years. Much to ‎the chagrin of Baghdad, the visit consolidates Turkey’s acceptance of Kurdistan and the importance ‎it now plays in stabilising the region. The Iraqi Foreign Ministry issued a sharp rebuke to Turkey for ‎violating its constitution as they claimed that Davutoglu had neither requested nor obtained ‎permission to enter Kirkuk. But with Syria provoked into turmoil and US troops out of the country, ‎some believe that Turkey can offer the Kurdistan Region political protection, sufficient technical ‎expertise and access to Western markets for its hydrocarbons.‎
On November 12, 2012 Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani and a delegation of senior officials from ‎the Kurdistan Region concluded a two-day visit to the Islamic Republic of Iran to promote greater ‎cooperation in economic and trade relations. With the volume of trade between the Kurdistan ‎Region and Iran estimated to be around $8 billion this year, both sides agreed to develop relations.‎
In early April, 2012 Kurdistan’s President Massoud Barzani visited the US to meet top officials, ‎including President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. Obama encouraged President ‎Barzani to continue playing a “vital role” in the Iraqi political process… Barzani informed the US ‎leaders about the current political crisis in Iraq and Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki’s “disrespect” to the ‎articles of the Erbil Agreement and the country’s constitution. He warned that if a solution were not ‎found urgently, there was a threat that the country would head toward dictatorship. President ‎Barzani also met with U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, no details released on the talks. He ‎encouraged American business to invest in Kurdistan and launched the America-Kurdistan Business ‎Council, which consists of American companies investing and operating in Kurdistan. Being a guest ‎of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Barzani said in unambiguously that “if a solution ‎to the increasing centralization of power in the prime minister’s hands cannot be negotiated, he may ‎ask the Kurdish Region’s Parliament to consider a referendum to determine the way forward.” The ‎fact that Obama received him alone and not as part of an Iraqi delegation significantly boosted ‎Barzani’s stature as a Kurdish national leader.‎
Long before that, in January 2012 he made no bones about it in an interview with the BBC stating: ‎‎“I like the Kurdistan Region to evolve day by day. But what I really wish is to see an independent ‎Kurdistan”.‎
Economic prospects
Kurdistan regional government (KRG) controls parts of Iraqi Kurdistan estimated to contain around ‎‎45 billion barrels of oil, making it the sixth largest reserve in the world. The prospects in Kurdistan ‎have caught the attention of major oil traders, who are now prepared to risk Baghdad’s anger to ‎gain a foothold in Kurdistan while the region heads towards greater autonomy. US ExxonMobil has ‎made public its intention to sell off the Iraq’s West Qurna 1 oil field stake for the benefit of going ‎to Kurdistan, where it had signed more lucrative oil deals. Chevron and Total oil majors have done ‎the same. The move will exacerbate tensions between Baghdad and autonomous Kurdistan. Kurdish ‎officials say they have a constitutional right to do so, but the central government dismisses the oil ‎transactions as illegal. There is nothing to be surprised about because 60% of Iraqi oil is produced in ‎Kurdistan. In October Kurdistan’s oil has begun to reach international markets in independent ‎export deals that further challenge Baghdad’s claim to full control over Iraqi oil. The Kurds pay ‎little attention to the Iraqi government protests, the real problem is infrastructure. In October trucks ‎were used to transport oil to the Turkish port of Ceyhan because the Kirkuk-Ceyhan oil pipeline is ‎unreliable often hit by explosions. So far, Kurdistan’s export volumes are tiny in comparison to its ‎daily exports via national pipelines, moving around 1,000 tons of oil per day (about 8,000 bpd) to ‎Turkey by truck, but deliveries are on the rise. According to Kurdish industry sources condensate ‎volumes were expected to reach 1,500 tons per day (about 12,000 bpd) soon and more trucks would ‎be made available towards the end of the year.‎
Military and political prospects
After the US invasion in 2003 Masoud Barzani took advantage of America’s support and refused to ‎sign the Iraqi new constitution if the broad autonomy special status was not included. He managed ‎to achieve his goal. The disagreement with Baghdad followed, especially related to the oil rich ‎province of Kirkuk. Barzani warned he would struggle for independence in case no accord is ‎reached. A clash bodes serious bloodshed; the Peshmerga’s strength is estimated to be around 200 ‎thousand, a force to reckon with. So far all efforts by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki to bring ‎the Kurds under strict central government control have failed.
There are 5.3 million Kurds in Iraq, about one sixth of the population of over 30 million, the ‎majority living in Iran, Syria and Turkey with significant Kurdish diasporas communities in ‎Armenia, Georgia, Israel, Azerbaijan, Russia, Lebanon and, in recent decades, some European ‎countries and the USA. The situation in Iraq is quite different from what takes place in Iran, Syria ‎and Turkey. For Instance Iran simply doesn’t recognize the very existence of Kurds as a minority, ‎something aptly played on by the US and Israel.‎
Formed in 2004, the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan (PJAK), an Israel-supported Kurdish ‎guerrilla group, wages armed struggle against Iran. The group had been carrying out attacks in the ‎Iranian Kurdish Province and other Kurdish-inhabited areas, and is closely affiliated with the ‎Kurdistan Workers’ Party operating against Turkey. There were large-scale clashes with Iranian ‎armed forces
In 2011 expected to reignite at any moment. Pursued by Iranian troops some armed formations ‎crossed the Iraqi border with border tensions to follow. Like in the case of the Kurdistan Workers ‎Party (PKK) in Turkey, PJAK leaders say their long-term goals are to establish an autonomous ‎Kurdish region within the Iranian state replacing Iran’s theocracy with a democratic and federal ‎government, where self-rule is granted to all ethnic minorities of Iran, including Sunni, Arabs, ‎Azeris and Kurds. The PJRK certainly doesn’t represent the majority of Iranian Kurds, at least not ‎at present. But it’s a force to count with and it has destructive potential.‎
In Syria President Assad granted the Kurds citizenship and certain rights they hadn’t had before. ‎The troops left the area where the Kurds live granting them a right to defend it. That’s exactly what ‎they’re doing fighting back the anti-government Syrian opposition forces in the vicinity of Turkish ‎border, something that evokes anger in Ankara. Turkey is waging an unrelenting fight against the ‎PKK which is declared to be a terrorist, out of law organization there. The Turkish Kurds have no ‎autonomy and have to fight for their rights. The Turkish tough stance against Syria has its ‎ramifications. On July 30, 2012 Hurriyet published an article called ANALYSIS – Kurdish ‎Nationalism on the Rise, by Semih Idiz devoted to the Kurdish issue in present day Turkey. It ‎reads, “Prime Minister Erdoğan cannot have it both ways. Referring to Sunni Arabs who have risen ‎against the al-Assad regime as “freedom fighters who are combating state terror,” but then turning ‎and calling the equally oppressed Kurds who are making political headway now in the confusion ‎that reigns in Syria “terrorists” is hypocritical.” The author adds as a wrap up, “”What makes it even ‎worse is that Turkey will most likely be unable to do anything to prevent the emergence of an ‎autonomous or independent Kurdish region in Syria, if developments in that country provide the ‎Kurds with another historic opportunity, to complement the one they gained in Iraq.
‎“
The question of Kurdish independence has always troubled the surrounding countries: none of them ‎have ever wanted a Kurdish state. With war going on in Syria, tensions between the Kurdish ‎minority may become a major geopolitical threat. As already mentioned Assad has transferred ‎troops away from the Kurdish provinces. One should give the devil his due – so far Syria is the only ‎state with significant Kurds population to achieve success while tackling the Kurds minority ‎problem. If President Assad falls, Syria will splinter into religiously or ethnically homogenous mini-‎states, one of which will almost certainly be under Kurdish control. Coupled with the recent ‎emergence of a relatively independent Kurdish region in Iraq, this would create something of a ‎league of semi-autonomous Kurdish states between the northeast regions of Syria and Iraq. This ‎combustible state of affairs alarms Turkey, which has waged a bloody, three-decade civil war ‎against its 14 million Kurds. Although it has supported regime change in Syria, the Turkish ‎government has fear of a greater Kurdistan, and can be expected to strenuously resist any attempt at ‎Kurdish unification. Should that powder keg ignite, Turkey could very well drag NATO into a ‎cross-border shooting war with Syria.‎
US connection
The US – Kurds come and go game has its own story. During the Richard Nixon’s tenure Iraq ‎became friendly with the Soviet Union. The US began to fund and encourage the Kurds to fight for ‎their independence against Saddam Hussein as part of a strategy to weaken the Iraqi regime and ‎general policy aimed at containing the USSR. But just as the Kurdish independence movement was ‎near to success it became clear that the stance was part of a political ploy, the United States didn’t ‎really want independent Kurdistan, so the support was withdrawn. The story of US betraying the ‎Kurds is described in the famous book by Stephen Hunter called The Second Salladin released in ‎‎1998. That’s a history lesson that should be remembered by Kurdish leaders dealing with the US.‎
The Turkish parliament’s refusal to join the U.S.- led coalition created to invade Iraq gave Iraqi ‎Kurdistan a strategic boost. Rather than transit Turkey, U.S. forces parachuted into the Harir ‎airfield, north of Erbil. The peshmerga participation cemented an enhanced relationship. Also ‎enhancing Kurdish influence in Washington has been the KRG’s hiring of former U.S. military and ‎political officials to represent them. The Kurdish participation alongside U.S. troops led the Iraqi ‎Kurdish leadership to express a sense of entitlement. The withdrawal of US forces from Iraq and ‎the new political tensions along sectarian lines have also raised questions over whether Iraq would ‎split apart. Some experts believe that the US will only support an independent Kurdish state if ‎Baghdad becomes hostile toward US interests in the region. The would support the Kurds if its ‎relations with the Iraqi government worsened. If so, it would need the support of the Kurds as ‎leverage against it.‎
In June 2006 the new Middle East map (1) prepared by retired US Army Lieutenant Colonel Ralph ‎Peters was published in the June 2006 edition of Armed Forces Journal under the title of Blood ‎Borders: How a better Middle East Would Look. The map was a key element in Mr. Peters’ book ‎Never Quit the Fight, which was released the same year. Although the map does not officially ‎reflect Pentagon doctrine, it has been used in a training program at NATO educational centers like ‎Defense College in Rome. Among other things it reduced Turkish landmass and featured a “Free ‎Kurdistan” that included additional territory taken from Syria and Iraq. Indeed, Iraq was presented ‎as just a fragment of what it is now, carved up to also include Sunnis Iraq and the Arab Shia State. ‎The term New Middle East was introduced to the world in June 2006 in Tel Aviv by U.S. Secretary ‎of State Condoleezza Rice in replacement of the Greater Middle East remaining much the same in ‎substance. This project consists in creating an arc of instability, chaos, and violence extending from ‎Lebanon, Palestine, and Syria to Iraq, the Persian Gulf, Iran, and the borders of NATO-garrisoned ‎Afghanistan. The Middle East, Afghanistan, and Pakistan appear to be stepping stones for ‎extending U.S. influence into the former Soviet Union and the ex-Soviet Republics of Central Asia, ‎the region termed as Russian “Near Abroad.”‎
Israeli connection
Over the years, Israel has provided training, military hardware, and intelligence to Kurds in ‎Northern Iraq, and since the 2003 Iraq war, relations between Israel and Iraqi Kurds have continued ‎to grow, as both sides see that mutual cooperation to serve their best national interest. It is important ‎to note that Israelis have generally demonstrated sympathy toward Iraqi Kurds, and historically ‎there was hardly any enmity between the two sides. By and large, both Israel and the Kurds have at ‎one point or another faced common hostility from Arab states. At present the Israeli army has ‎stepped up its military activities in Iraq’s autonomous Kurdistan Region. In August 2011 Israeli ‎unmanned aerial vehicles were stationed in Iraqi to operate against Iran (2). Barzani gave Israel the ‎green light to deploy them in northern Iraq without gaining the approval of the Iraqi central ‎government in Baghdad, which has no diplomatic ties with Tel Aviv. Israeli intelligence agents and ‎military advisers, equipped with special transmission devices, were reported to be sent to Mosul to ‎train Kurdish security forces. President Barzani has reportedly agreed to the concession in return for ‎the admission of a number of Iraqi Kurd students to Israeli universities. On March 25 the Sunday ‎Times published the article called Israel Spies Scour Iran in Nuclear Hunt (3). As the story goes ‎Israel is using a permanent base in Iraqi Kurdistan to launch cross-border intelligence missions in an ‎attempt to find “smoking gun” evidence that Iran is building a nuclear warhead. According to ‎Western intelligence sources, the Israelis have been conducting such operations for several years. ‎These risky intelligence missions have been intensified to an unprecedented degree in the past few ‎months. On January 9, 2012 in an the article called L’Iran défie L’Amérique (Iran challenges ‎America) French Le Figaro ran a story of Israeli intelligence agency Mossad intensifying its ‎activities against Iran from Iraqi Kurdistan (4). Former Kurdish leader Mustafa Barzani, Masoud ‎Barzani’s father, was considered a friend to Israeli military and defense officials.‎
Conclusion
Kurdistan has all the trappings of a state: independent institutions such as the presidency, the ‎parliament, the constitution and the armed forces (the Peshmerga – hundreds of thousands of ‎seasoned troops) the flourishing economy and the diplomatic ventures. Real borders exist between ‎the Kurdish and Arab parts of the Iraqi state. It also has the flag, the anthem, the language and a ‎strong desire to create Greater Kurdistan independent from Arabs, Persians and Turks. But for that ‎to happen Greater Kurdistan would also have to be a great unifier sharing power inside Iraqi ‎Kurdistan and managing conflicting Kurdish aspirations in Syria, Iran and Turkey. This requires ‎adroit diplomacy and long-term vision. The process of unification is a bumpy road. As mentioned ‎above, the situation of Kurds in Turkey is different from that of Kurds in Iran which is different ‎from that of Kurds in Iraq or Syria. There are also Turks, Arabs, and Assyrians to name but a few of ‎the multitude of peoples in the region. There are also different religions: Islam, Christianity, ‎Judaism, Zoroastrianism, and Yazdani. Unification means getting together different groups with ‎different backgrounds, cultures and visions. Besides the process has two options. A new secular, ‎democratic non-Arab nation may appear to change the volatile Middle East picture. The other ‎outcome is the emergence of a puppet on a string dancing to the tune of the USA, Israel and the ‎West in general, an element the allies Great Game remix. Not all Kurds are adamant in their desire ‎for cessation, there are those who find the very idea of cessation and partition of Iraq is a ‎multifaceted problem with iffy gains.‎
References:‎
‎1. The map published by Armed Forces Journal June 2006 edition as an illustration for the article ‎How a better Middle East Would Look by Ralph Peters: http://www.oilempire.us/new-map.html
‎2. Israel Deploys Drones In Iraq. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bkVQh5CnRI
‎3. The Sunday Times. March 25, 2012, Israel Spies Scour Iran in Nuclear Hunt: ‎http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/public/sitesearch.do?querystring=”Israeli+spies+scour+Iran+in‎+nuclear+hunt”§ionId=7‎
‎4. Le Figaro, January 9, 2012, L’Iran défie L’Amérique: ‎http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2012/01/09/01003-20120109ARTFIG00640-l-iran-defie-l-‎amerique.php.‎

Al. Bez.