How will the Kurdish independence referendum affect neighboring countries

[TheCamelGuy]

There are some rumors going on in Turkey, it goes like; After WW1 Turkey left Kirkuk and Musul to Iraq with the condition of those cities being integral part of Iraq. Now, some say if KRG declares independence and Kirkuk stops being an integral part of Iraq. Then Turkey has right to intervene and annex Kirkuk.

Unaware of such treaties, but they don't matter much. A treaty is only valuable if powerful parties or those relevant still recognize that treaty. If Iraq and the US (relevant parties in this case) do not recognize the treaty then it's of no value, especially given that both including every other relevant state is against Kurdish independence. There will not be independence, this referendum isn't going to lead to that, Barzani himself admitted to that as he knows it's unrealistic.

 

[-SINAN-]

A treaty is only valuable if powerful parties or those relevant still recognize that treaty.

%100 Agree.

Unaware of such treaties, but they don't matter much. A treaty is only valuable if powerful parties or those relevant still recognize that treaty. If Iraq and the US (relevant parties in this case) do not recognize the treaty then it's of no value, especially given that both including every other relevant state is against Kurdish independence. There will not be independence, this referendum isn't going to lead to that, Barzani himself admitted to that as he knows it's unrealistic.

I dunno. You know, no country recognizes TRNC except Turkey. Yet, they are functioning as a country since decades.

 

[bsruzm]

Unaware of such treaties, but they don't matter much. A treaty is only valuable if powerful parties or those relevant still recognize that treaty. If Iraq and the US (relevant parties in this case) do not recognize the treaty then it's of no value,

What a grave mistake and ignorance is that to forget UK or you don't count it as a power? US did not invade Iraq alone, remember. So:

"An agreement was signed in 1926 between Turkey and Britain for Turkey to yield its claims to parts of northern Iraq, Turkish territory that was home to one million ethnic Turks.

“Turkey fulfilled its commitments under the 1926 Ankara agreement. The referendum is a matter of fulfilling Iraq's commitment. The government has promised that this will not change. If there is a referendum, Iraq will not fulfill its commitment. Perhaps the Ankara Agreement will have to be discussed again,” Kirkuk Foundation President Erşat Hürmüzlü said.

Don't you wonder why didn't Obama (US) give Abadi a face? To answer that question, you have to focus on Abadi.

Many possibilities, unexpected.

 

[Mucahit]

Guys, you can forget about annexing Kirkuk or Mosul in that matter, it's just not going to happen and even lf it happens it will only destabilize Turkey both economically and security wise instead we should help lraq keep Kirkuk and other Turkmen & Arab areas because l don't think lraq is capable of doing that alone and for the Americans they will most likely want Kurds to hold Kirkuk and the surrounding areas.

l'm afraid lf we or other regional powers don't back up Baghdad the Kurds might try to grab more lands just like they do right now in Syria.

 

[TheCamelGuy]

What a grave mistake and ignorance is that to forget UK or you don't count it as a power? US did not invade Iraq alone, remember. So:

"An agreement was signed in 1926 between Turkey and Britain for Turkey to yield its claims to parts of northern Iraq, Turkish territory that was home to one million ethnic Turks.

“Turkey fulfilled its commitments under the 1926 Ankara agreement. The referendum is a matter of fulfilling Iraq's commitment. The government has promised that this will not change. If there is a referendum, Iraq will not fulfill its commitment. Perhaps the Ankara Agreement will have to be discussed again,” Kirkuk Foundation President Erşat Hürmüzlü said.

Don't you wonder why didn't Obama (US) give Abadi a face? To answer that question, you have to focus on Abadi.

Britain follows US policy in the region, we're not in the 1920's anymore. US replaced British role in the middle east.

It seems to me that you simply want to tell me that Turkey still has the option to annex all those lands if they decide to. There's no use to discussing something as unlikely as this, you can bring it up again when Turkey starts a large OP against YPG in Syria, which is a far easier target than annexing Mosul or Kerkuk which lies far south and would cause problems with nearly everyone in the region, including US.

---

Iraq parliament dismissed Kerkuk governor and is contemplating removing the president of Iraq.

 

[bsruzm]

Britain follows US policy in the region, we're not in the 1920's anymore. US replaced British role in the middle east.

Yeah, sure.

It seems to me that you simply want to tell me that Turkey still has the option to annex all those lands if they decide to. There's no use to discussing something as unlikely as this, you can bring it up again when Turkey starts a large OP against YPG in Syria, which is a far easier target than annexing Mosul or Kerkuk which lies far south and would cause problems with nearly everyone in the region, including US.

I am not simply telling you that but it's one of the possibilities.

Iraq parliament dismissed Kerkuk governor and is contemplating removing the president of Iraq.

Unlikely but you have to protect your country. Ankara expressed its support for the decision made in Iraqi parliament Tuesday to oppose the independence vote, calling on the government in Baghdad to negotiate with the Erbil-based KRG.

 

[TheCamelGuy]

Yeah, sure.
I am not simply telling you that but it's one of the possibilities.
Unlikely but you have to protect your country. Ankara expressed its support for the decision made in Iraqi parliament Tuesday to oppose the independence vote, calling on the government in Baghdad to negotiate with the Erbil-based KRG.

So you want to tell me Turkey is relevant, are u happy now

Go annex what you want

 

[-SINAN-]

Iraq parliament dismissed Kerkuk governor and is contemplating removing the president of Iraq.

He gave some interview to Rudaw, saying that he has been chosen by the votes of the people and only people can dismiss him. He rejected parliaments decision.

There also reports that he placed 200 PKK terrorists in Kirkük.

 

[TheCamelGuy]

nterview to Rudaw, saying that he has been chosen by the votes of the people and only people can dismiss him. He rejected parliaments decision.

Removing him includes halting all salaries to Kerkuk province employees, that means protests are coming.

Kurds are known to back down when USA is not backing them up, hopefully they will not backdown as this needs to escalate.

 

[-SINAN-]

opefully they will not backdown as this needs to escalate.

You mean civil war ???

 

[TheCamelGuy]

You mean civil war ???

Whether to call it civil war or KRG-Baghdad conflict, the Hashd (PMU) is likely to trigger it by responding to KRG aggression and illegal activities. The PMU is a bit of a loose cannon, whilst they follow gov orders they can be triggered quicker due to their leaders being more aggressive and direct which would pull the rest of the ISF in. Clashes in Tuz Khurmatu between PUK Peshmerga and PMU Turkmen units will eventually start again due to the increasing tensions, the PMU is now fully focused on Kerkuk/Hawija and has its hands free unlike the previous months.

US won't come to KRG's aid in such a situation. I'm not calling for war, but escalation in any way is good as the KRG is nothing but a leech. I've been wanting to see these problems grow, some Iraqis will bash me for this and repeat the usual Iraq-Kurdish brotherhood story which they themselves don't understand. That aside when the military gave that many life's to liberate towns from IS there's no reason to let non-Kurds live under a Kurdish dictatorship, overrunning trenches to enter Kerkuk is far easier militarily than OPS such as those in Fallujah, Ramadi and Mosul. Besides, overrunning does not mean removing/killing Peshmerga there, it simply means establishing presence in rightfully Baghdad governed area's. If the KRG decides to respond to such an act with aggression then they're the aggressor.

 

[Mucahit]

Whether to call it civil war or KRG-Baghdad conflict, the Hashd (PMU) is likely to trigger it by responding to KRG aggression and illegal activities. The PMU is a bit of a loose cannon, whilst they follow gov orders they can be triggered quicker due to their leaders being more aggressive and direct which would pull the rest of the ISF in. Clashes in Tuz Khurmatu between PUK Peshmerga and PMU Turkmen units will eventually start again due to the increasing tensions, the PMU is now fully focused on Kerkuk/Hawija and has its hands free unlike the previous months.

US won't come to KRG's aid in such a situation. I'm not calling for war, but escalation in any way is good as the KRG is nothing but a leech. I've been wanting to see these problems grow, some Iraqis will bash me for this and repeat the usual Iraq-Kurdish brotherhood story which they themselves don't understand. That aside when the military gave that many life's to liberate towns from IS there's no reason to let non-Kurds live under a Kurdish dictatorship, overrunning trenches to enter Kerkuk is far easier militarily than OPS such as those in Fallujah, Ramadi and Mosul. Besides, overrunning does not mean removing/killing Peshmerga there, it simply means establishing presence in rightfully Baghdad governed area's. If the KRG decides to respond to such an act with aggression then they're the aggressor.

How did you end up losing non-Kurdish areas in the first place? l heard some towns & villages with shia Turkmen population got under Kurdish control? And how do they manage to keep it?

l saw a post yesterday saying that some American equipment is headed towards Kirkuk to potentially stop any lraqi intervention to Kirkuk and surrounding towns, is that true?

 

[Gothic]

it's easy to figure out , israel supports Kurds to get iran and Turkey closer and this is a lose win - loose situation for Turkey , cause they will put the two together and kick turkey out of NATO.

and they won't let em' in EU either

 

[Endurance]

https://twitter.com/x/status/909093324291747840

 

[vizier]

North iraq kurdish autonomous region is totally dependant on Turkey economically.if independence referandum passes this can turn out to be another version of Crimea referandum and Ukraine. kurdish barzani group seeing the economic dependence card can agree and accept Turkish stationing of troops for security and Turkeys concerns against pkk instead of Iraqi forces taking back control. I think this option is a possibility as well.

Another option is this can be a bait to draw in PMU which Usa and israel sees as a growing threat and an Iran influenced group. This way usa can take action against PMU which will also slow down Syrian operations at the border with Iraq and lose of control at the border. PMU should keep back and focus on Syrian border operations leaving this primarily to Iraqi forces.