Mediaboss Marketing

Erbil, Kurdistan Region of Iraq Fears are growing of a full-fledged war between Turkeys outlawed Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) and forces of the ruling Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in this autonomous region of northern Iraq.

Tensions between the two sides are increasing amid a military standoff on the Iraq-Turkey border, with civilians on both sides strongly rejecting any possible intra-Kurdish confrontation.

The tensions initially began when the KRG-led Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) accused the PKK of assassinating Ghazi Salih, a security official working at the Sarzer border crossing in Duhok province on October 8.

The PKK, however, denied responsibility.

The situation intensified when the PKK on October 29 claimed responsibility for a successful sabotage action on a KRG pipeline to Turkey near Mardin province, suspending oil exports.

The KRG said it strongly condemns the terrorist attack targeting the pipeline and warned it will never allow threats against its interests and the livelihood of the peoples of the Kurdistan Region.

The PKK has an estimated 5,000 fighters stationed largely in Iraqi Kurdistans rugged mountainous areas. The group is designated a terrorist organisation by Turkey, the European Union, and the United States. Decades-long clashes between Ankara and the PKK have led to tens of thousands of deaths in both Turkey and northern Iraq.

KDP President Masoud Barzani accused the PKK of infiltrating Kurdish villages and two days later planting a bomb in Duhok that killed a Peshmerga fighter and wounded two others. The attack was condemned by the US, France, and the federal Iraqi government.

Barzani accused the PKK of disrespecting the KRG by invading villages under its control and imposing taxes on locals infringing on its sovereignty and oppressing residents.

The history witnesses that we have deemed Kurdish-Kurdish war haram [religiously banned], Barzani said on November 2. However, this stance should not be mistranslated and exploited to challenge the legal authority of the Kurdistan region and to try to impose an illegal armed will on the people of Kurdistan.

Barzani also alleged that during the height of the fight against ISIL (ISIS), PKK fighters invaded the border areas and some other places while KRGs Peshmerga forces were battling the armed group on the front lines.

The PKK has dismissed all claims and vowed to defend itself against any move by Peshmerga troops.

The PKK-KRG armed standoff is reminiscent of fighting between the two in northern Iraq in the 1990s that killed hundreds of civilians and troops battling for territorial control. Two decades on, a renewed escalation has sparked panic among locals who live in the border areas and who fear history may repeat itself.

The PKK says the KRGs troop deployments to Duhok provinces Zebari and Gare districts are to attack its fighters. The KRG says the Peshmerga are returning to their own bases now that the anti-ISIL campaign is done.

The KRG is carrying out serious military activities in areas where the PKK is present, Murat Karaylan, a member of the PKKs executive council, told Sterk TV in October, adding the armed group is not seeking war.

According to Karayilan, however, a conflict is going to occur from these provocations, referencing the KRGs buildup of soldiers along the border.

PKK official Murat Karaylan, centre, with fighters on Mount Qandil in 2017 [ANF News]Reving Heruri a KDP lawmaker and head of the Peshmerga Committee in Iraqi Kurdistans parliament dismissed Karayilans claims.

The KDP has the right to carry out activities to protect the lives of our people. We are not going anywhere to fight the PKK, but to protect our people, he told Al Jazeera.

The troop deployments to the border areas of Duhok and Erbil provinces are to secure the lives of locals and to prevent them from fleeing their villages, forced on them by others, Heruri said. We hope no party will make any other mistake to stand in the way of them.

Hundreds of villages have been emptied amid months of fighting between Turkeys military and the PKK. Ankara regularly bombs PKK positions in northern Iraq, and has conducted multiple operations against the armed group along the border.

Chamanke town has become the flashpoint of the Kurd-Kurd confrontation. Aland Amir, mayor of the town where a clash took place on November 4, said 35 villages in the region are occupied by the PKK.

Villagers are not allowed to go back to their areas that have fallen under PKK control, unless they pay them tax, Amir told Al Jazeera.

The PKK has become a serious threat to our region. Our people are always subject to getting killed amid the Turkey-PKK crossfire, he said. Turkish bombs are expected to drop anytime. If the PKK leaves then Turkey will not bomb. The more they stay, the worse our people will go through. We ask them to go back to their country and fight their battle on their land, not ours.

Dilshad Khidir lost his mother, brother, and three cousins in a Turkish air strike on their village of Zargali in Erbil province in 2015. He now lives in Sulaimaniyah provinces Raniya district with his father, who was wounded in the attack.

Khidir said his family has endured much under the mercy of the hovering of planes and bang of bombings, and urged the PKK to leave the surroundings of our village so we can return home and resume our life on our land.

Had the PKK not sheltered in our village, this would not have happened to us, he said.

Khidir said he was happy to see the KRG moving to restore its authority and return services, stability and security to our region.

We do not wish to see any intra-Kurdish conflict. We are sick and tired of war Turkey will never come to our region from hundreds of miles to bomb us if the PKK is not here, he added.

The aftermath of a Turkish air strike that killed Dilshad Khidirs mother, brother and three cousins and destroyed their house on August 1, 2015 in the village of Zargali [Courtesy: Dilshad Khidir]Fayaq Gulpi is head of the Democratic Politics Academia in the Kurdistan region and a former PKK official in close contact with its leadership. He said the KRG has amassed troops at border areas close to PKK bases, something that has seriously worried and angered the PKK.

According to what I have learned from PKK officials, they do not want to engage in any war and they say they never initiate conflict but are ready to defend themselves if attacked, Gulpi told Al Jazeera.

The PKK and the KRG must exercise maximum restraint and put the interests of the Kurdish nations before their own interests. Any conflict will bring a lose-lose situation to both sides. I am smelling a war about to break out.

Gulpi accused Turkey of being a major player in this game and warned the two Kurdish sides must not fall into the Ankara trap.

Turkey has said it is determined to take the measures it deems necessary for its border security no matter where it may be.

At Erbils downtown bazaar, shop owners gather to discuss the possibility of all-out conflict between the KRG and PKK.

Enough with intra-Kurdish war. We are Kurds. We are brothers. We share the same fate and blood. President Barzani has declared Kurdish-Kurdish war haram, so do we, said shop owner Shazad Najat.

Another businessman, Shaaban Abdulaziz, added both Kurdish sides need to bury the hatchet.

A veteran Peshmerga soldier, who refused to be named fearing what he said would be retribution from the PKK stooges who are everywhere angrily said: The PKK is executing a foreign agenda. They do all it takes to abort our achievements and successful experience of ruling in the Kurdistan region. They are a terrorist organisation and the KRG should not engage in any dialogue with terrorists.

If they really fight for the greater rights of the Kurds in Turkey, which they all the time claim of doing, they must take this battle back to their own country, or lay down arms and fight for the rights of Kurds in a democratic process, just as the HDP [the Peoples Democratic Party, the largest pro-Kurdish party in Turkey] does.

Lahib Higel, a senior analyst at the International Crisis Group in Iraq, told Al Jazeera it was unlikely a full-scale war would develop because both sides have more to lose than to gain.

Should a war break out similar to what we saw in the early 90s, it is likely to be devastating for the PKK as it will draw Turkey further in through its support of the KDP, she said.

But Higel added that the government in Baghdad should step in to help restore peace.

The Iraqi government, she said, should seek all possibilities to cease hostilities through dialogue with Turkey, the KRG and PKK affiliates in Iraq.

Original post:
Kurd vs Kurd: Fears of full-scale war rise in northern Iraq - Aljazeera.com

BAGHDAD (AP) Supporters of a firebrand Iraqi cleric shot dead five people on Saturday, according to medical officials, in overnight clashes with anti-government protesters in southern Iraq.

The anti-government demonstrators attempted to bloc the path of a rally supporting Shiite Muslim leader Moqtada al-Sadr. Followers of the populist cleric also wounded 40 others in the clashes, according to two medical officials.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity in line with regulations.

The anti-government protesters were camped out at a main square in the city of Nasiriya, which has been an epicenter of the youth-led protest movement that has sought to sweep aside Iraqs ruling sectarian elite.

Following the clashes beginning on Friday, al-Sadrs supporters stormed Haboubi square, and torched tents pitched in the square.

Al-Sadr leads a powerful political bloc in Iraqi parliament and his supporters had called for a demonstration in support of the leaders call for mass participation in next years nationwide elections.

Anti-government protesters feel betrayed by al-Sadrs flip-flop approach toward them, especially in the last few months when he withdrew support for their movement.

Dozens returned to the anti-government sit-ins site on Saturday morning in support of those protesters killed overnight.

Go here to read the rest:
Clashes with cleric's supporters kill 5 in southern Iraq - The Associated Press

Erbil, Iraq From ancient battles to last weeks deadly clashes between protesters and supporters of cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, Iraqs Dhi Qar governorate has often been referred to as the centre of the countrys rebellion and uprisings.

In November 2019, at the height of the countrywide anti-government protests, its capital Nasiriya was referred to as the heart of the uprising. A symbolic move that for some holds true to this day.

Nasiriya is the fire of the revolution, protester Ahmed al-Tamimi said over the telephone from the citys main protest site, Haboubi Square.

The martyrs went with a flag and they were killed in cold blood this is the revolution of the martyrs, he said, referring to the 129 protesters from Dhi Qar who lost their lives over the course of one year.

Last week eight more demonstrators were killed on the streets of Nasiriya when clashes broke out between protesters and followers of the popular al-Sadr.

The violence coincided with the one-year anniversary of the killing of dozens of protesters in what became Dhi Qars bloodiest incident since the beginning of the demonstrations.

Al-Tamimi, who has been at the centre of Nasiriyas uprising since October 2019, admitted fault on both sides.

They [al-Sadr supporters] had bad people and we had bad people. I cannot say that everyone at [Haboubi] square is innocent, some belong to parties [and] infiltrated the square, said al-Tamimi. What happened was a mistake on both sides.

By Tuesday, Nasiriya protesters were back at the site, albeit surrounded by federal police and at the mercy of a curfew. But unlike Baghdads Tahrir Square, where in October tents were cleared out and roads reopened, Haboubi Square is still alive with demonstrators.

The people of Nasiriya have always been praised for their revolutionary belief, said Sheikh Imad Rikaby of the Rikaby tribe. Like him, Iraq commentators have frequently alluded to Nasiriyas long history of rebellion and revolutionary politics to explain Dhi Qars central role in the protests.

I think the real explanation is likely more mundane and reflects primarily the comparative neglect of the province by the federal government when compared with Basra, said Ben Robin-DCruz, a researcher on Iraqi politics at the University of Edinburgh.

Iraqis rally to mark the first anniversary of massive anti-government protests in the southern city of Nasiriya in Dhi Qar province in October [Asaad Niazi/AFP]But in a nationwide uprising that has seen the killing of more than 600 people at the hands of security forces, collective myths are key in fuelling morale. Nasiriya is known across Iraq for its humble and battle-hardened people.

However, argued Robin-DCruz, their heroic resistance to extreme violence doesnt mean the protest movement was at the heart of the October 2019 movement in terms of organisation and strategic decision-making.

Instead, protesters in the province were the most reluctant to engage in the political process or forge alliances with other political forces.

But some hope a corner was turned this week, opening the way for the Haboubi Square movement to play a role in local decision-making.

On Monday, the leaders of Dhi Qars protest movement handed a list of 13 demands to the team sent to Nasiriya by Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi following the clashes on Friday.

We will reform our organisation, said protester al-Tamimi. We will restructure and clear out the unruly members.

One of the demands, said al-Tamimi, was that the camp would only be removed if mutually agreed upon by both protesters and local authorities. Another point, he added, was the overhaul of the local government.

Our dreams were stolen, the dreams of our children were stolen, said al-Tamimi. There is nothing we have that is functional. No hospital, no school Everything has been destroyed.

On Tuesday afternoon, al-Tamimi was back in what he said was a calm square, intent on rebuilding what had been lost in Fridays clashes.

Read more from the original source:
Nasiriya: City at the heart of Iraqs uprisings and rebellion - Aljazeera.com

As the coalitions footprint in Iraq and Syria diminishes, international support for institutional changes, such as building a local judiciary and a military that can sustain itself, is necessary to ensure the Islamic State group does not return, the No. 2 commander of Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve said.

United Kingdom Army Maj. Gen. Kevin Copsey, speaking during a virtual Middle East Institute event Nov. 30, said the international political microscope needs to stay focused on areas within Iraq and Syria where ISIS remains. The group still operates in rural areas such as the Euphrates River Valley and contested regions near Kurdistan, though it has shifted to survival mode and is focusing more on criminal activity.

Without continued international support, particularly NATO-led efforts on training and maintaining readiness, ISIS could return because of a continued ability to provide command and control and limited financing in these regions, Copsey said.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said the organization is stepping up, enhancing our presence in Iraq to provide more support. The U.S., however, is planning to withdraw about 500 troops from Iraq by Jan. 15, 2021, bringing the total American contingent to 2,500 personnel in the country, Acting Defense Secretary Christopher C. Miller has said.

We need to prevent ISIS from returning, Stoltenberg said on Nov. 30. The best way of doing that is to enable the Iraqi security forces to be able to fight Daesh and to become stronger.

NATO is focused on building the right ability for the security apparatus to hand over to the judicial apparatus, Copsey said. That needs to go hand in hand with trying to resolve all the other security challenges the government faces, of which all the OIR has done is deal with the symptoms. And thats the key thing we need to get after, not the military anymore.

Iraqi military forces are able to conduct day-to-day missions with limited coalition support outside of advising in operations centers. They plan, they exploit any operation. . So that momentum is there, Copsey said. Theres still probably work to do but the day-to-day operations show strong momentum behind it that as we see the twilight of our mission out here I have no doubt that they have the abilities to keep on going.

Continued here:
International Community Must Remain Focused on ISIS in Iraq, Syria - Air Force Magazine

Iranian soldier wearing gas mask during Iran-Iraq War, photo via Wikipedia

BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 1,836, December 2, 2020

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: September marked the 40th anniversary of the outbreak of the eight-year-long Iran-Iraq War, the longest Middle Eastern war of the twentieth century. It took the lives of more than a million people, wrought huge destruction in both countries, and severely harmed their populations and their economic and social resources. Forty years later, it needs to be asked what really caused this war to break out and what lessons have or have not been learned from it.

The prevailing opinion among both scholars and the general public is that Saddam Hussein went to war with Iran in September 1980 out of fear that a Shiite Islamic revolution might occur in Iraq like the one that had taken place the year before in Iran. This framing of the war has led some to view the Iraqi invasion of Iran as a defensive act.

My claim is the opposite: the Shiite threat was not a main factor at that time. The war was not defensive but was aimed at territorial expansion that was nipped in the bud.

Moreover, Saddam saw the Islamic Revolution not as a threat but as an opportunity. It gave him an opening to seize power, and he indeed carried out a coup dtat several months after Khomeinis accession. The war was also an opportunity for Saddam to regain control of the Shatt al-Arab waterway and to seize Irans oil-rich, mostly Arab populated Khuzestan (what he called Arabistan) province. Saddam managed to accomplish that in the first months of the war before getting stuck in the Iranian quagmire.

In my view, the root of the problem lies not in the 1979 Islamic Revolution but in the 1975 Algiers Agreement. According to that agreement, Saddam, who was then the power behind the throne in Iraq, had to cede the Shatt al-Arab to Tehran in return for the suspension of Iranian aid to the Kurds, thus putting an end to the Kurdish revolt. This concession meant losing a strategic asset of the first order and severely restricted Iraqs access to the Persian Gulf.

Saddam himself and his propaganda outlets said the Iran-Iraq War was a result of this agreement. In a speech a few days before invading Iran, Saddam explained that he had had to give up the waterway because of Iraqs weakness at the time, and hinted that he was already thinking about how to regain it. He also presented Irans violation of the 1975 agreement as a casus belli. His biographer, Fouad Mattar, wrote that the decision [to go to war] was taken from the first day of signing the Algiers Agreement on March 6, 1975. Indeed, in October 1979 Iraq had already sent an ultimatum to Iran on restoring its control of the Shatt al-Arab. Hence it can be asserted that there is a direct line from that agreement to the war in 1980.

When the war began, Saddam was confident that he would defeat Iran in a blitzkrieg. He mistakenly thought the Iranian army had been depleted by the new regime and would be no match for him. He was so sure of his victory that he called the war Saddams Qadisiyya, referring to the Arab/Muslim defeat of the Persian Empire in 636 CE.

At the time, Saddam did not view the Shiite problem as an existential danger because he believed he had removed the problem by eliminating the al-Dawa Party. Only in the later stages of the war did he begin to play the Shiite danger as a propaganda card both domestically and abroaddespite the fact that, unlike the Kurds, the Shiites remained loyal to the state and were the mainstay of the serving army.

There is also a paradox in the fact that the Islamic revolutionary regime in Iran did not try to recruit (or at least did not succeed in recruiting) the Iraqi Shiites to its cause in the war yet did so successfully with the Iraqi Kurds, who saw the war as an opportunity to avenge their downfall in 1975 and gain true autonomy. There were even those who spoke of independence.

As soon as Khomeini rose to power, the Kurdish leadership began to cooperate with him against the central government in Baghdad, and it did so all the more during the eight years of the war. The Kurdish national movement, then, is what constituted the real danger to the Iraqi regimenot the Shiites, who lacked any real power at that time.

Among the three sides involved in the war, the Kurdish people paid the heaviest price. Alongside the struggle against Iran, Saddam waged a bloody campaign against the Kurdish population in general, which was perceived to be collaborating with the enemy. In 1983, his forces abducted and killed 8,000 members of the Barzani tribe. In April 1987, Saddam began to use chemical weapons against Kurdish villages. From February to September 1988, he waged the Anfal Campaign (named after a Quranic sura that means spoils of war), which had eight stages and killed about 180,000 Kurds, mostly civilians. The war laid waste to thousands of Kurdish villages and communities as well as the social, economic, and ecological infrastructure of the whole region.

Just as the Kurdish problem was the catalyst for starting the war, it was instrumental in ending it. The Iraqi armys gassing of Halabja in March 1988 terrified Iran, which had no defensive weapons against such a threat. It was the fear that Iraq would use such weapons against Irans civilian population that convinced Khomeini to drink what he called the poisoned chalice and agree to a ceasefire that he had staunchly opposed for eight years.

The Kurdish leadership acted and continues to act on the basis that the enemy of my enemy is my friendwithout internalizing that in the Kurdish case, the more accurate maxim is the enemy of my enemy is also my enemy. The Gordian Knot the Kurds tied with Iran proved over and over again to exact a huge cost for the Kurds as Tehran used them as a pawn in its power struggle with Baghdad. It happened during the Kurdish revolt of 1974-75, when the Kurds forged an alliance with the Shahonly to be betrayed at the critical juncture,and it happened with the outbreak of the Iran-Iraq War as well. The Kurdish leadership joined forces with the Islamic regime despite their prior bitter experience with Tehran, despite the severe oppression of their brethren in Iran, and despite the heavy risk that they would be seen as traitors to their Iraqi homeland in the midst of a fierce war. And like the Shah, Khomeini abandoned the Kurds at the wars end for the sake of an agreement with Iraq. The same blunder was made yet again in September 2017 when, during a referendum on independence for Kurdistan, the Talabani faction forged an unwritten alliance with Iran while fighting the rival Barzani faction. Just as it had years before, Iran betrayedthe Kurds.

Clearly, then, the various Kurdish leaders, in both Iraq and Syria, failed to learn any lessons from their prior experiences with Iran.Again and again they collaborated with regional states and with world powers only to be abandoned at the moment of truthat exorbitant cost to their people.

This recurrent error stems primarily from the geostrategic dilemmas and constraints that drive the Kurds into alliances the tragic outcomes of which are largely foreseeable. To that should be added the internecine feuds that lead one faction to join forces with outside actors as part of the intra-Kurdish struggle; the lack of levers of influence or ability to enlist genuine support in the international arena; and the economic, political, and military dependence that has developed between this non-state actor and surrounding states.

All this leads to the following points:

View PDF

Prof. Ofra Bengio is a senior researcher at the Moshe Dayan Center of Tel Aviv University and a lecturer at the Shalem Academic Center. She has published many studies on the Kurdish issue, the most recent of which is the forthcoming Kurdistans Moment in the Middle East.Email: [emailprotected]

View post:
The Kurds and the Iran-Iraq War: Have the Lessons Been Learned? - besacenter.org