Role of the Kurds Looms Large …

By Ned Rinalducci

Savannah Morning News

Sunday, November 3, 2002

Recent weeks have been replete with debates concerning war with Iraq. Two prominent issues are regime change in Iraq and a post-Saddam Iraq. The role and future of the Kurds of Iraq are important to the discourse on both. However, the superficial analysis of the Kurdish situation and the Bush administration's non-policy on Kurdistan are problematic.

Most Americans know very little about Kurds. The first Bush administration's call to rise up and overthrow Saddam Hussein gained them attention in the Western media, mostly because of Iraq's brutal response to it. Initially, the United States and our allies stood by as the Kurds were crushed. Having encouraged them, we bore some of the responsibility for their defeat. Our embarrassment and the international criticism that resulted led to the establishment of the no-fly zones in the north and south of Iraq.

Kurds are perhaps the world' s largest ethnic group to be denied their own state. The region known as Kurdistan is divided between Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria and is home to over 20 million Kurds. Most would like a united independent state, but different regional powers have acted to suppress those dreams for the past century. While the struggle of Palestinians is front-page news and the movement to "free Tibet" is a cause celebre, few seem to know or care about the Kurds.

The Kurds have an old saying, "no friends but the mountains," which aptly describes the modern history of this ancient people. Kurds were promised independence after World War I, but the claims of the new Turkish state and British oil interests won out over Wilsonian ideals of self-determination. Since then they have suffered literal and cultural genocide, gas attacks and a host of other oppressive actions in the various states were they reside.

In 1972 the Nixon administration sponsored a Kurdish uprising against Iraq at the behest of the Shah of Iran. When Saddam and the Shah made peace, we abandoned the Kurds and left them to the mercy of the Iraqi military. It was no surprise when we abandoned them again in 1991. Although we often hear today American politicians condemning Saddam for gassing Kurdish villages, few in government spoke out at the time.

Now, war is a very real possibility and the Kurds of Iraq are increasingly nervous. The no-fly zones have allowed the Kurds to create an economically and politically prosperous autonomous region in northern Iraq. As tensions between the primary Kurdish groups have decreased, a liberal mini-state has arisen that allows freedom of religion and press, an elected parliament, and stimulated other progressive steps. This, the Kurds will not easily cede.

However, that is exactly what we may ask of them in the name of "territorial integrity," as the U.S. policy is to keep Iraq intact. To accommodate this position, Iraqi Kurds now advocate a federalized Iraq in which they would have limited regional autonomy rather than independence. Turkey, Iran and Syria object to even this seeing it as a threat to controlling their own Kurdish populations.

The Turkish government has officially stated that a Kurdish declaration of independence or moves to secure more autonomy will be crushed by the Turkish military. This could even include Turkish occupation of Kurdish territory if the Kurds attempt to expand their autonomous zone inside Iraq. The US apparently accepts this.

It is not surprising that Turkey is taking a hard line against Kurdish aspirations, for they have been denying Kurds in Turkey their national rights for as long as the Iraqis have. While never resorting to gas attacks, Turkey has shared a policy with Iraq of cultural genocide, historically denying the existence of a separate Kurdish culture.

Although Turkey has recently taken steps that give the appearance of ethnic tolerance, the national disposition remains one of chauvinistic Turkish nationalism with little tolerance for any display of Kurdish identity.

Turkey, a NATO ally that will be extremely important in a war against Iraq, has legitimate concerns about such a war, including the great strain it would place on the Turkish economy. We need to take those concerns seriously.

However, when Turkish concerns focus on Kurds, we need to recognize that Turkey's ethnic politics are antithetical to the desire for freedom from the stifling conditions under which Kurds have been forced to live. While we may need Turkey's support in a war with Iraq, we also need to realize what that may cost the people we are claiming to liberate.

Today the democratic ideals exclaimed by the Iraqi Kurds seem to be aligned with Bush administration objectives for the Middle East. The Kurds do not want this war, but they have started preparing for it and what it will entail. Will the United States once again abandon the Kurdish people, or will we stand up for freedom and democracy for everyone?

Ned Rinalducci, Ph.D. is a sociology professor at Armstrong Atlantic State University. He studies religious and ethnic social movements with an emphasis on the Middle East.