Kurdistan independence – USA Gov Policy

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its examination of the case for an independent Kurdistan.

Secretary of State Tillerson,following a meeting with Qatari Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani in Dohar on October 22, made it clear that the U.S. “did not support the Kurdish independence referendum. We did not believe it was time given that the battle to defeat ISIS is still underway. And while there have been significant victories and significant progress in Iraq, that task is not yet complete. And clearly, what we were concerned about is the referendum would lead to a distraction from the fight to defeat ISIS or Daesh…[Iraqi] Prime Minister Abadi has, I think, made it clear his commitment to follow through on those constitutional obligations, and we hope the Kurds will engage with Baghdad in a very productive way to see that the constitution is fully implemented. I think many of the Kurds’ concerns will be addressed through that process.”

Iraqi opposition to the potential independence of its Kurdish region has much to do with oil. The Kurdish Project notes that “With a whopping 45 billion gallons of Kurdistan oil reserves, the Iraqi-Kurds hold almost a third of all of Iraq’s 150 billion gallons of untapped black gold. If the KRG autonomous region were a nation-state, it would rank 10th in the world for largest petrol reserves, coming in just after Libya. This makes Kurdish land a hot commodity in an already politically fiery region. The Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) in Northern Iraq has more autonomy over their own oil politics and economics than other Kurdish regions. This independence can be attributed to the weakness of the post-war Iraqi government. Many argue that the KRG holds a more functional economic climate than its host.”

Within Iraq, however, one non-Kurdish group does appear to be a source of support for independence. Many Iraqi Christians believe they could benefit from the move. An interview with the Secretary-General of Iraq’s small Assyrian Bet al-Nahrain Democratic Party, Romeo Hakkari and the Kurdish news source Kurdistan24, was described by Mewan Dolmari: “Hakkari…stated that Christians are with an independent Kurdistan Region that protects the right of all ethnic and religious groups in the Region, a democratic Kurdistan that defends minorities before Kurds…Hakkari …acknowledged the vital role of the President of the Kurdistan Region, Masoud Barzani in promoting harmony and coexistence in the Kurdistan Region. Importantly, he stated that Christians have always supported Kurdish independence, and Christians believe that they can attain more rights if and when the Kurdistan Region becomes an independent state, ‘When our Kurdish brothers achieve more rights [independence], the rights of other ethnic and religious groups will also increase…Christians are spread throughout the Kurdistan Region, mostly live in Ankawa area located in Erbil province. Assyrians and Chaldean Christians have five reserved seats in the Kurdistan Region Parliament. Christians are able to practice their religious beliefs without hindrance. During an official Christmas Day celebration broadcast on TV, Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani stated, ‘Christians are not treated as minority in the region, and they are an indigenous people of the Kurdistan Region.’”

Turkey opposes the move as well. Writing for World Affairs, Michael Totten notes that “Turkey fears and loathes Kurdish independence anywhere in the world more than it fears and loathes anything else. Kurdish independence in Syria, from Ankara’s point of view, could at a minimum escalate a three-decades-long conflict and at worst threaten Turkey’s territorial integrity. Kurds make up between 15 and 25 percent of Turkey’s population, but no one knows for sure because the government outlaws ethnic classification. Most live in the southeast near the Syrian and Iraqi borders. Many would like to secede and form an independent state of their own.”
Diabetes shoe http://respitecaresa.org/14th-annual-celebration-of-love-children/ levitra 20mg australia stomach problems can develop from negative sensory problems together with circulatory function. Researches proved viagra online sample that this dietary supplement taken from soy and wild yam can help men achieve DHEA that helps produce testosterone in body. Any man suffering from erection issue can get cialis generic purchase here online and it has delivered better results. Formerly only available in our convenient viagra in the usa neighborhood classrooms, the online curriculum allows you to take it moderately to stay away from sexual dysfunctions.
Syria also opposes Kurdish independence. Like Turkey, it fears Kurds within its own borders would follow suit, particularly since the nightmare regime of Bashar al-Assad, now strengthened thanks to Russian and Iranian assistance, is certainly an inducement to secession for any group that could muster the capability to do so.

Michael Rubin, writing for the American Enterprise Institute outlines the Iranian position: “The Iranian government has long opposed any Kurdish independence in Iraq, largely because they fear how the precedent might impact the Kurdish population in Iran. While no Middle Eastern country besides Israel has allowed true censuses in decades because of the sensitivity of the data for their own internal security, most geographers and anthropologists estimate that perhaps eight percent of Iranians speak Kurdish as their first language. Iran has a Kordestan province, but it encompasses only about half of the areas inside Iran in which Kurds predominate. Therefore, the idea that the Iraqi Kurdish referendum will include not only the Iraqi Kurdistan Region itself but neighboring provinces worries Tehran even more.”

Kurdish independence does have one regional friend—Israel. Jonah Mandel, in a Times of Israel article explains that “ Israel has become the only country to openly support an independent Kurdish state, a result of good ties between Kurds and Jews and expectations that it would be a front against Iran and extremism, experts say… Israel became the first, and so far only, country to openly voice support for ‘the legitimate efforts of the Kurdish people to attain a state of its own,’ as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said… To Gideon Sa’ar, a former Israeli minister for the Likud Party, who recently returned to politics after taking time out, the Kurds are a minority group in the Middle East that, unlike the Jews, have yet to achieve statehood. ‘The Kurds have been and will continue to be reliable and long-term allies of Israel since they are, like us, a minority group in the region,” he said.’”

Despite U.S. reluctance to support independence, a free Kurdish state would be beneficial to Washington’s goals. A New York Post article by Jonathon Tobin notes: “Kurdish independence could create a state that would act as a firewall against Iran’s quest for regional hegemony… A policy switch that encourages the Kurds could throw a monkey wrench into Iran’s plans to use its clients in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and the Hamas state in Gaza to create a sphere of influence that endangers America’s Arab allies and threatens Israel with a three-front war at any time of Iran’s choosing.”

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government examines the case for an independent Kurdistan.

Recently, Iraqi Kurdistan held a referendum on independence. According to Hndren Muhammad, the head of the Kurdistan Independent High Elections and Referendum Commission, the pro-independence side won an overwhelming victory. There were 4,581,255 eligible voters, of which 3,305,925 cast ballots, a turnout of 72.16 percent. 2,861,471 people voted Yes, (92.73 percent) of the voters, against 224,468 No votes, (or 7.27 percent of the voters.)

Although it has gained significantly less attention than Spain’s Catalonia independence movement, the quest of the Kurdish people to form an independent nation, seceding from Iraq, is a far more compelling story. As noted by several analysts, in contrast to the Palestinians, who have received far broader international support, the Kurds have a language and culture distinct from their Arab neighbors.

There is little in recent history to suggest that the Kurds have any affinity, or any possibility of any reconciliation, with an Iraqi state. The Kurdistan Regional Government lists a few of the more salient incidents:
1971-1980: The Iraqi government expels more than 200,000 Faili (Shia) Kurds from Iraq.
1983: The Iraqi government disappears 8,000 boys and men from the Barzani clan. In 2005, 500 of them are found in mass graves near Iraq’s border with Saudi Arabia, hundreds of kilometres from the Kurdistan Region.
1987-1989: The Iraqi government carries out the genocidal Anfal campaign against Kurdistan’s civilians, of mass summary executions and disappearances, widespread use of chemical weapons, destruction of some 2,000 villages and of the rural economy and infrastructure. An estimated 180,000 are killed in the campaign.
1988: On 16 and 17 March 1988, Iraqi government airplanes drop chemical weapons on the town of Halabja. Between 4,000 and 5,000 people, almost all civilians, are killed.
Treatment Kamagra jelly is basically another form of the popular drug, buy sildenafil australia. This is a awful health-related circumstance influencing countless guys, causing worries viagra for sale raindogscine.com of being jeered after or perhaps running into distress plus a drained sex connection. Prenatal – Factors such as canadian viagra sales hypoxia and infection, or stress and should be removed from the life of the patient before prescribing the medicine. Evaluation Still Goes on Genetic free cialis no prescription and lifestyle conditions including hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, cardiovascular disease and diabetes might be investigated.
By 1992, Kurds were essentially autonomous. Laurie Mylroie, writing for the Atlantic, noted that in that year, “Iraq’s Kurds [were] effectively running their own affairs, administering a population of 3.5 million in a territory almost twice the size of Israel. They are doing so with considerable success, having managed the transition from authoritarian rule better than many others, including Afghans, Somalis, and the various peoples of the former Soviet Union…In Sulaimaniya, the largest and southernmost city under Kurdish control, I started to understand the remarkable social cohesion underlying the success of the Iraqi Kurds’ administration. Sulaimaniya’s police chief explained that there was, in fact, less crime now in northern Iraq than there had been under the Ba’ath. Thus policemen’s jobs had become easier. ‘Before, people didn’t trust the police and avoided them. Now they cooperate with us.’”

While Saddam is long gone, tensions between Kurds and the Iraqi government continue, and now that the common foe of ISIS has been largely defeated, those tensions have risen to the surface.

Alan Dershowitz also described the “Case for Kurdish Independence” in a Gatestone analysis: The independence referendum is an important step toward remedying a historic injustice inflicted on the Kurdish population in the aftermath of the First World War… the Iraqi Kurds have their own identity, practices, language and culture. They are a coherent nation with profound historical ties to their territory. They have their own national institutions that separate them from their neighbors, their own army (the Peshmerga) and their own oil and energy strategy. International law stipulated in Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, lays the foundation for the recognition of state sovereignty. The edict states: ‘the state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.’ The KRG meets these criteria…Moreover, the autonomous Kurdish region in northern Iraq — the closest it has come to having its own state — has thrived and maintained relative peace and order against the backdrop of a weak, ineffectual Iraqi government and a brutal civil war. As such, it represents a semblance of stability in a region comprised of bloody violence, destruction and failed states.”

Predictably, Baghdad is not pleased with the results of the ballot, and the Iraqi government has made it clear that it will not recognize the legitimacy of it. Unlike the significant support by the international community for a Palestinian state, there is no widespread support for the arguably more appropriate Kurdish aspiration, Despite the potential viability and cohesiveness of an independent Kurdish state.

The Report concludes tomorrow.

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.