Turkish Attacks, Backed by U.S., Undermine Kurdish Gov

Turkey's attacks on southern Kurdistan, using US-made warplanes, is part of a plot by the US and Turkey to undermine the Kurdistan de facto state that has been established in parts of southern Kurdistan since 1991. Weeks of bombardments have resulted in civilian casualties, destruction of many villages and displacement of thousands of people. However, according to the Turkish General Staff, even stating that civilians have been killed in these attacks will serve terrorists. Turkey has committed these crimes with a tacit approval by the "democratic world."

Realizing that the international community is not concerned about the plight of the Kurds, the Turkish "parliament" discussed other measures, without giving the details, in addition to the bombardment, to eliminate the Kurdistan de facto state, known as the Kurdistan Regional Government. Turkey uses state terror under the pretext of pursuing terrorists or separatists. To many Kurds' surprise, Israel also started supporting this terror campaign against Kurds by offering technology to Turkey.

What is the real aim of Turkish/US attacks on southern Kurdistan? The Kurds in southern Kurdistan are moving towards the formation of their own nation-state. The Kurds have shown that they are able to manage their own security, control their natural resources, particularly oil, and can put an effective pressure on the Iraqi government to return territories detached from Kurdistan, known as "disputed territories" in the Iraqi constitution. Moving towards a nation-state may be supported by the approved Iraqi constitution, which Kurds regard as a legal agreement between the Kurds and all the Iraqi political forces. In addition, it has the backing of the international community, in particular US and Britain. Now that the Iraqi government has been re-established - of course with Kurds as one of its pillars - all these forces purse annulling the promises that the constitution makes to Kurds.

The Arab and other political forces in Iraq also want to achieve what Turkey attempts to achieve via military aggression. The weak Iraqi government is incapable to deal with the development in Kurdistan on these fronts, because, unlike Kurdistan, Iraq is to date in a deep security vacuum, incapable of containing Kurds. The Iraqi army is no match to the Kurdish Peshmerga forces, who are currently, in addition to KRG, keeping the security of areas controlled by the central government such as Baghdad, Mosul, Kirkuk and parts of Diyala. However, using force against Kurds by the Iraqi central government may not be very far away now. The improvement of the security situation in the government-controlled areas may free the Baghdad government to adopt an aggressive policy toward the Kurds. This intention has already been expressed by Iraqi Arab forces, in particular Sunnis. One can argue that Turkey is acting on behave of the Iraqi government too.

The Kurdish leadership needs to balance the pressure from Americans and regional powers against the demands of the Kurdish pubic who voted for independence in a referendum in 2004. Although the Kurdish leadership may be willing to compromise further on the core Kurdish issues, they fear that they might lose the control of the Kurdish population and ultimately jeopardize their own positions. Nonetheless, the gap between the Kurdish political leadership and the Kurdish population has extended to a critical limit. Perhaps the controversial media-control law that was recently passed by the Kurdish parliament in order to limit freedoms of press, consequently resulting in a public outcry, is the wrong way to control the population. Instead, rather than trying to control the population, the leadership must try to represent it.

In the absence of any other pretext and while the Kurdistan's political leadership, under pressure by the Kurdish population, cannot compromise any further, the presence of the PKK in southern Kurdistan may be a helping hand.