WAR AND PEACE SCENARIOS IN KURDISTAN Kurdish Aspect, CO Nov 1 2007 War in Kurdistan is a risky political game and might be intended to put the so called good and bad Kurds against each other. "Good Kurds, Bad Kurds" became the title of a documentary movie in 2000 by Kevin McKiernan, in which he criticizes the double standard of Washington to assist the currently moderate Kurds in Iraq and oppose the radical ones in Turkey. Washington might have forgotten that the Iraqi Kurds were as oppositional to the system as PKK. Through opportunity for dialogue, the Iraqi Kurds were able to change their methods and participate in the political games with suite and tie instead of mountain baggy pants and Kalashnikovs. PKK fighters could change their attire and tools, if they have the same opportunity. Of course as a product of the Turkish state brutality, PKK is a radical organization and its method and tools are not supported by most Kurds in Diaspora. The reality of the li! ves of the Kurds at home dictates different approaches than what we see fit. Although PKK is willing to compromise and use dialogue instead of Kalashnikov, it is still described by some of the Washington's peripheral ideologues such as Christopher Hitchens as a "Stalinist cult organization". The same ideologue is aware of Turkish ultra nationalism and calls it "Kemalist Chauvinism", unfortunately without discussing the US cooperation with Stalin to end the European fascism and subsequent spontaneous ending of Stalinism through dialogue and development. Even if PKK had advocated the frightening Stalinism, it will not survive once the Kurds in Turkey are treated as equal human beings. Obviously Turkish ultranationalists can not accept to have Kurds as equal negotiating partners, they rather prolong the existence of Stalinism in the region, have every Kurd live in the mountains and join PKK, or fight with them as gladiators to the point of stabbing each oth! er. Since this time Kurds do not seem to be manipulated and us! ed again st each other, Turkey plans to take a more drastic measure by attacking them with full force. I do not see why mobilizing 100,000 soldiers is needed against 3,000 PKK fighters except to prevent the Kurdish success in Iraq and regain control over one part of the lost territory of the Ottoman Empire. This extreme measure might not only unite the ultranationalists and religious right in Turkey, but also strengthen the NATO in the region under the leadership of Washington for a short while. Washington, frustrated with the current war, could welcome another short term attractive offer, and pull out from Iraq. Iraqis will feel impregnated without having a responsible partner and welcome anyone who looks mighty and prays in the same direction. Arab countries, pressured to end their dictatorship by competitive dictatorial organizations, feel incompetent to take care of themselves, let alone their sister country Iraq. Israel, the only tiny Western Democracy in the region, handicapped! by the violence of radical Islamists and own military will not be of any help. Other democratic countries around the world, too slow in seeing the real dangers of the world, might abandon the US, if pressured by their sleepy beauties. So the Turks are tempted to take advantage of the vacuum. Turkey with its 100,000 ready troops could substitute the American soldiers so they can return to their families. United States would not be disappointed even it means losing the support of the Kurds in Iraq. Both democrats and republicans have old ties with the Turkish government and businesses. Those ties are much more valuable than some small connections with the frequently accommodating Kurdish leadership in Baghdad. Some American politicians have recognized that a free Kurdistan is the way out, but many of them do not dare to advocate this reality because of their commitment to Turkey. Its not surprising that the less popular presidential candidates have recommended a three region! solution for Iraq, while the one that have a better chance to! win avo id a serious comment about Kurdistan. Hopefully they gain some insight into the outcome of war and peace scenarios so they can make a better decision. In a war scenario, Kurdistan will lose militarily and Turkey cheers up for a short while. Washington builds new friendly business and military contracts with the winner. The Kurds, used to being stabbed in the back, return to mountains and plea to one of their regional enemies for asylum and protection of their families. These enemies would open their doors to them with joy, so they can pretend in the international community that they value humanity and have nothing against the beaten up and submissive Kurds. Those American interested in human rights and democracy will suffer morally and others will continue business as usual. Even the four infamous countries together can not kill all 40 million Kurds without severe consequences for themselves. The surviving Kurds will become united as one nation against aggressors and build m! utually satisfactory relations with more reliable, neutral, and free countries instead of those who repeatedly use them for their own gain. They will repeat the fighting cycles without pleading to their enemies until they win as the Jews did and Armenian are doing. In a peace scenario, the United States would work with all Kurds including PKK and other leftist organizations to prevent further growth of ultra nationalism and religious extremism in the Middle East. Such cooperation would serve not only the United Sates but also the majority of the Turks and other Muslims in the Middle East. PKK would join the moderate Kurds, denounce Stalinism, and use the same method that Mandela and Gandhi used to free their people. Turkey would accept the Kurds as a nation, with them take a leading role in becoming a true democracy, and prove that even countries with an Islamic background have the potential to appreciate freedom and human rights. Finally the world would recognize that the ! Kurds deserve equal rights and need to have one to four repres! entative s in the United Nations to promote peace.
Article Directory: http://www.articledashboard.com
Jonathan Budd Is An Expert Internet Marketer Who Shows People How To Make Far More Money Then They Are Now With Highly Profitable Cutting Edge Systems At: www.TheProfitMasterminds.com
Source: http://groong.usc.edu/news/msg209243.html
home based business idea, home based small business
No comments:
Post a Comment