How will the Kurdish independence referendum affect neighboring countries

[livingdead]

I want see his face if he will be confronted with an isolated and destroyed Northern Iraq.

he is happy with status quo but dreams of kurdistan...

 

[TheCamelGuy]

he is happy with status quo but dreams of kurdistan...

Understandable, except their happiness.. lies in our failure, in our depression. That is true when you take the nationalists of both sides whose identity are made up out of their nation.

 

[livingdead]

Understandable, except their happiness.. lies in our failure, in our depression. That is true when you take the nationalists of both sides whose identity are made up out of their nation.

well if you were kurdish you will be exactly like him, saddam tried to subjugate them, the post invasion shia govt simply cound not do a deal with sunnis or kurds...
we are all unhappy with division of british india but its also a failure of leadership... iraq is ripe for partition along sectarian lines, thats only way for lasting peace, unfortunately.

 

[vizier]

It is evident that this type of separation will give boost of motivation for separatists and trigger further separatist activities in Turkey and Iran using this as a blueprint. Northern Syria is already invaded by usa so it has turned to something else already.

Currently north Iraq autonomus kurdish region is acting freely most of the time and even more freely than on the paper signed with Iraqi central government such as making energy deals with Turkey.

After the referandum if it passes considering the separatist threat this region will inevitably face economic blockade from Turkey which it has most relations with. Also there is the possibility of facing Iraqi army from the south. In either case considering its position North Iraqi kurdish government will eventually be forced to give concessions which would be much worse than its current almost free situation. It will be risky and harm all but there wont be much other path left for neighboring countries. It can turn to a long civil war making Iraq lose much more after the battle against isis. Also the possibility of annexation of lands having large kurdish population by Turkey can turn to a threat later on with ongoing war against pkk. However what is certain is that there wont be much alternatives other than economic blockade and an increasing degree of conflict with all parties. The cost of supporting an isolated kurdish region would be too much for Usa so having good relations with usa and israel wont be of much use then.

So after the referandum on the paper it can write free but with the blockade of relations and conflicts with all its surroundings it will not be free opposite of the current situation.

Common population generally act by emotional reactions but leaders should act with reason. If neighboring countries like Turkey, Iran, Iraqi central govt and Syria approach by explaining the conditions and current issues faced by all and limitation of alternatives I think this can be aborted or at least postphoned indefinetely.

 

[-SINAN-]

Turkish government seeks mandate for troops in Syria and Iraq

With days left to controversial independence referendum of Iraqi Kurds, the Turkish government will seek a mandate from the Parliament to send troops to Iraq and Syria after consecutive security meetings where measures to be taken against the Arbil administration have been decided.

The Turkish Parliament is set to hold an extraordinary session on Sept 23 to vote on a mandate that permits the government to deploy troops to its southern neighboring countries, Iraq and Syria, just two days before the scheduled referendum to be held by the Iraqi Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG).

According to the text of the motion already submitted to the Parliament, the government seeks the mandate on the grounds that efforts to break the territorial integrity of Iraq and Syria will endanger Turkey’s national security, in direct reference to KRG’s referendum. It does also recall ongoing fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and its Syrian offshoot, the People’s Protection Units (YPG).

Before the parliamentary vote, Turkey convened the National Security Council (MGK) before the Cabinet meeting on Sept 22 immediately after the return of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan from the United States. Along with Erdoğan, Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım, Chief of General Staff Gen. Hulusi Akar and senior military and civilian officials joined the MGK meeting. Later in the day, President Erdoğan chaired the cabinet meeting to register advisory decisions taken at the MGK meet.

As efforts to convince KRG President Massaoud Barzani to call off the referendum failed, Turkey harshened its opposition in recent days and launched a military drill along the Iraqi border. Turkey, Iran and Iraq did also issue a joint declaration and announced their agreement to take counter-measures in coordination against the Arbil’s independence bid.


Turkey’s natural rights

Before the MGK meet on Sept 22, Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım reiterated Turkey’s position and stressed that Ankara “will not refrain from using its natural rights” regarding the referendum.

“This referendum is an issue of Turkey’s national security. Turkey is determined to use its natural rights originating from international and bilateral conventions and will not hesitate in this,” Yıldırım told reporters in Ankara.

Articles 3 and 16 of the Lausanne Treaty and bilateral agreements between Turkey and Iraq signed in 1926, 1946 and 1983 allow Turkish military intervention, Yıldırım said, recalling that Turkey will never accept changes in the status of Iraq and Syria.

He once again reiterated Ankara’s call to KRG President Barzani to cancel the referendum, stating that it will not bring any benefit to the Kurdish people in the region. “There is still time. The KRG, Barzani should better give it up. A referendum in open violation of bilateral and international law will not bring any benefit to our Kurdish brothers in the region. There are already problems in the region,” he said, citing ongoing fight against terror organizations. “They should avoid adding new problems. “


Inclusion of Kırkuk is “calamity”

The prime minister did also criticize KRG for including oil-rich Kırkuk to the independence vote, describing the move as a “calamity”.

70 percent of this city is originally Turkmen but its demographic structure has been changed, Yıldırım said, recalling the city’s status is still in dispute. “Therefore inclusion of Kırkuk to the vote is another unlawful aspect of this referendum. That’s why Kurdistan Regional Government should give up of this adventure.”

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/tu...-in-syria-and-iraq.aspx?pageID=238&nid=118273

 

[TheCamelGuy]

well if you were kurdish you will be exactly like him, saddam tried to subjugate them, the post invasion shia govt simply cound not do a deal with sunnis or kurds...
we are all unhappy with division of british india but its also a failure of leadership... iraq is ripe for partition along sectarian lines, thats only way for lasting peace, unfortunately.

Foreigners always make this mistake underestimating that there is national unity in Iraq, this is excluding Kurds whom are foreigners. Sunnis and Shias identify with the same nation, culture and borders. Hence there has been no call for separation in the 2006-2008 civil war, neither in the 2014 crisis and there won't be in the future either.

Kurds can go independent, but looks like they fucked that up recently as everyone is against them now. I'm not sure what they should be done with, all I can say is Biji Kak Massoud.

 

[livingdead]

Foreigners always make this mistake underestimating that there is national unity in Iraq, this is excluding Kurds whom are foreigners. Sunnis and Shias identify with the same nation, culture and borders. Hence there has been no call for separation in the 2006-2008 civil war, neither in the 2014 crisis and there won't be in the future either.

Kurds can go independent, but looks like they fucked that up recently as everyone is against them now. I'm not sure what they should be done with, all I can say is Biji Kak Massoud.

i hope you are right... if it is possible to attain peace without partition sure it is better to be united. how flexible are shia political leaders to share political space with sunnis?

 

[Saif al-Arab]

Foreigners always make this mistake underestimating that there is national unity in Iraq, this is excluding Kurds whom are foreigners. Sunnis and Shias identify with the same nation, culture and borders. Hence there has been no call for separation in the 2006-2008 civil war, neither in the 2014 crisis and there won't be in the future either.

Kurds can go independent, but looks like they fucked that up recently as everyone is against them now. I'm not sure what they should be done with, all I can say is Biji Kak Massoud.

Iran is in favor of an independent KRG. Iran throughout all of history has only had influence whenever Iraq has been weak either militarily or economically. A KRG would suit them perfectly which is also why you see many Iranians support a KRG openly. It is obvious. Turkey (read Erdogan) too (despite the crying) is the biggest regional backer of Barzanistan and has been ever since 2003. He has helped KRG for almost 15 years in a row now. Like they care about the integrity of Iraq or Syria (that they themselves violate).

Don't expect anything but barking from them. Besides we Arabs are the only ones that have somewhat successfully dealt with the "Kurdish problem" historically. Unfortunately our leadership is not like in the past (looking at Syria and Iraq here obviously as those are the only Arab countries with significant Kurdish minorities).

Erdogan has for the past 3 years looked silently at almost all of the Syrian-Turkish border (expect for the Western one) being overtaken by YPG/SDF. Now he suddenly has woken up? What kind of joke groups are they to begin with anyway? Houthis and ISIS are 100 times more difficult to defeat yet a large NATO country is paralyzed?

I think that we all know why.

No need to pretend otherwise or not speak the truth here.

Just wait and see. The Mullah's will be the first ones to recognize an independent KRG and afterwards Erdogan will follow suit. Afterwards they will try to gain economic influence in KRG (additional) and try to monopolize the market. If I was Al-Abadi I would test those two countries and see if they are truly against an independent KRG.

 

[Serpentine]

Besides we Arabs are the only ones that have somewhat successfully dealt with the "Kurdish problem" historically.

Bombing Kurdish women and children with chemical weapons like a savage animal is not 'dealing with a problem'. That's what Saddam Hussein did. Also supporting such genocidal actions only means one is not much different from perpetrators.

 

[Saif al-Arab]

i hope you are right... if it is possible to attain peace without partition sure it is better to be united. how flexible are shia political leaders to share political space with sunnis?

There will be no problem as long as Al-Maliki remains without much influence and similar likes (people with a similar ideology, allegiances etc. in other words traitors) and the few pro-Wilayat al-Faqih PMU groups are marginalized politically and military as has been happening lately. Al-Abadi obviously favors this as his allegiance is first and foremost to his own country and not third parties (Mullah's and others). Al-Sadr (once a Mullah drone) saw the light almost 10 years ago and now he is a nationalist politically and his group is the largest and most influential among the PMU. He has been visiting several Arab leaders in the GCC, Egypt, Jordan and other Arab countries lately to once again make it perfectly clear that Iraqi Shia Arabs are part of the Arab family and always will be.

Iraqi Sunni Arabs (historically the elite in Iraq from its inception as a modern-day state and until 2003) are first and foremost Iraqi and Arab nationalists. Always been the case. The Iraqi military was also dominated by Iraqi Sunni Arabs (from the monarchy until 2003) and to this day Iraqi Sunni Arabs dominate the military in comparison to their numbers. Iraqi Sunni Arab (high-ranking generals) have been heavily involved and crucial in all the recent battles against ISIS as have local people. Without them it would have taken much longer and been much bloodier.

Bombing Kurdish women and children with chemical weapons like a savage animal is not 'dealing with a problem'. That's what Saddam Hussein did. Also supporting such genocidal actions only means one is not much different from perpetrators.

You are unaware of Iraqi (Arab as a whole too) history so I do not blame you. I was not referring to this made up history but rather events dating back to the 1950's.

But sure, I believe, as is the case with every Iraqi patriot regardless of sect, that Kurdish trenches should be eradicated and stolen Iraqi land returned forcibly if Barzanistani and other Biji Bijis are not willing to return those lands.

Same story in Syria and I already (openly) declared my support for Al-Assad in this endeavor in Syria.

If it was up to me the Arab League should gather and discuss this topic once again and unilaterally agree on helping the Iraqi government politically, economically and militarily (if needed). If such a thing happened the Kurds (Barzanistani) would stop his daydreams immediately.

 

[TheCamelGuy]

A clear enemy will do us a massive favor, you can clearly see how nationalist stance has been growing in Baghdad. Conflict with Barzanistan would only aid this which is why I support it as well.

@Saif al-Arab

I think it would have a massive psychological boost with nationalists especially Sunnis if the gov were to declare the establishment of the republican guard whom were disbanded in 2003. Many won't understand but that force carries a significant historical value that identifies with struggle and war for a nationalist cause. Then recruit many and you can begin debarzanification.

 

[Saif al-Arab]

A clear enemy will do us a massive favor, you can clearly see how nationalist stance has been growing in Baghdad. Conflict with Barzanistan would only aid this which is why I support it as well.

@Saif al-Arab

I think it would have a massive psychological boost with nationalists especially Sunnis if the gov were to declare the establishment of the republican guard whom were disbanded in 2003. Many won't understand but that force carries a significant historical value that identifies with struggle and war for a nationalist cause. Then recruit many and you can begin debarzanification.

Well, I have been hoping for Barzanistani or his family members and other influential Kurdish personalities to start burning the Iraqi flag and start insulting Arabs, Turkmens and other Iraqi nationalities. Or regular Peshmerga soldiers. So far (from what I have seen) they are only good at bashing the Iraqi army whenever they speak with Western media. I don't understand Kurdish (what a tragedy, I know) but I believe that many ordinary Kurds support such statements. Talking about the local ones as those in the West, as you yourself wrote not long ago, are indeed fantasts of the highest order.

Well, I have been calling for that for ages but I was called a Ba'athi which is not the case. Nationalism, especially given the current ground realities and the ground realities of the region (complex challenges that must be solved by all parties working together and not having different agendas) requires nationalism in order for the people to be truly united and work for a common goal. In fact the clergy in Iraq (whether Sunni or Shia), in particular the influential clerics, should openly make fatwas or voice their support for such projects. Many have done so (in support of the army) which is a good thing and this was praised and supported by the average person.

Nationalism, contrary to the popular belief of foreigners, is not lacking in Iraq or in any Arab country but what is sometimes lacking is for all or at least the majority of the many diverse groups in Arab country x or y (same story in all developing countries) to rally towards the same goals.

If people see that the state is not functioning well or is weak, opportunists will arrive from all corners and attempt to weaken it for their own gains. This is no different anywhere else.

I have been impressed by Al-Abadi (highly educated person, well-articulated and genuinely friendly) but I am not sure that he is the strong leader or as charismatic as say Saddam was. Of course no sane person should wish to follow Saddam's faults but a strong and nationalistic Iraq is very much in the interests of not only Iraq itself but also the Arab neighbors and Arab world. The reasons for that are many but one of them are certain regional opportunists and their groups. Same story with Syria. In fact, in order for Iraq and Syria to defeat common enemies, there is a urgent need for restoration of ties between those two brotherly countries which has been lacking for way too long. I of course blame the Al-Assad family as this was not the case prior to them gaining power of Syria. Iraq and Syria (due to populations that keep rising quickly, land area, natural riches, history and potential) have all the potential to become strong and stable countries once stability is accomplished and big challenges are solved. Such as for instance the "Kurdish problem" in both countries.

Anyway I have already written what I believe about all this in this thread (extensively) and years ago. No need to do it again.

 

[silver_dragon]

New Israeli venture after the flop of ISIS..If kurds believe Israelis love them, they are the most foolish coz...after 30 years from now there will be a breakup of kurdistani for Yazids and that time Israel will support Yazids....Every Semite (Jew) hate Anti-Semite (Non-Jew) by blood no matter how good or bad you are to them..It just doesn't matter.

 

[TheCamelGuy]

Well, I have been hoping for Barzanistani or his family members and other influential Kurdish personalities to start burning the Iraqi flag and start insulting Arabs, Turkmens and other Iraqi nationalities. Or regular Peshmerga soldiers. So far (from what I have seen) they are only good at bashing the Iraqi army whenever they speak with Western media. I don't understand Kurdish (what a tragedy, I know) but I believe that many ordinary Kurds support such statements. Talking about the local ones as those in the West, as you yourself wrote not long ago, are indeed fantasts of the highest order.

Well, I have been calling for that for ages but I was called a Ba'athi which is not the case. Nationalism, especially given the current ground realities and the ground realities of the region (complex challenges that must be solved by all parties working together and not having different agendas) requires nationalism in order for the people to be truly united and work for a common goal. In fact the clergy in Iraq (whether Sunni or Shia), in particular the influential clerics, should openly make fatwas or voice their support for such projects. Many have done so (in support of the army) which is a good thing and this was praised and supported by the average person.

Nationalism, contrary to the popular belief of foreigners, is not lacking in Iraq or in any Arab country but what is sometimes lacking is for all or at least the majority of the many diverse groups in Arab country x or y (same story in all developing countries) to rally towards the same goals.

If people see that the state is not functioning well or is weak, opportunists will arrive from all corners and attempt to weaken it for their own gains. This is no different anywhere else.

I have been impressed by Al-Abadi (highly educated person, well-articulated and genuinely friendly) but I am not sure that he is the strong leader or as charismatic as say Saddam was. Of course no sane person should wish to follow Saddam's faults but a strong and nationalistic Iraq is very much in the interests of not only Iraq itself but also the Arab neighbors and Arab world. The reasons for that are many but one of them are certain regional opportunists and their groups. Same story with Syria. In fact, in order for Iraq and Syria to defeat common enemies, there is a urgent need for restoration of ties between those two brotherly countries which has been lacking for way too long. I of course blame the Al-Assad family as this was not the case prior to them gaining power of Syria. Iraq and Syria (due to populations that keep rising quickly, land area, natural riches, history and potential) have all the potential to become strong and stable countries once stability is accomplished and big challenges are solved. Such as for instance the "Kurdish problem" in both countries.

Anyway I have already written what I believe about all this in this thread (extensively) and years ago. No need to do it again.

Well of course this is true, Abadi is not a strongleader/strongman like Saddam, not as capable of rallying the masses. Others point this out also, such a video shows the same.

Although soft policy is often better in politics, the hard use of language Saddam applied would suit better in a military leader not a political one, otherwise you end up with Saddam's Iraq, North Korea etc. Abadi has managed to improve relations with every country around whilst Saddam put Iraq at war with the US twice which is very stupid, hopefully Abadi gets a 2nd term in next years election.

 

[Fenasi Kerim]

Bombing Kurdish women and children with chemical weapons like a savage animal is not 'dealing with a problem'. That's what Saddam Hussein did. Also supporting such genocidal actions only means one is not much different from perpetrators.

Normal Arab behaviour since the time of the Ummayads. Although the Kurds are a mischievous bunch.

Any news from Iran on this matter?