Orhan Ketene
Jan.20, 2010
Kurds and Turkmens, living together in Northern Iraq for more than a millennium, share many features and values. Beside long historical coexistence and cooperation, both constitute the two main nationalities of the North. They have partnership and neighborly relations that exceed significantly their relations with the Arabs.
Intermarriage is seen on a much wider scale than with Arabs. The economy is another bond that ties both peoples together. Erbil, Kerkuk and Suleymani economies are very much interdependent on each other than with Baghdad.
The best example of cooperation between the two is seen in the Turkmen Atabeg prince of Musul; Imadeddin Zengi and his Kurdish commander Salahaddin Eyyubi, who both changed history during the Crusades.
The last time they fought together was during the Musul Dispute between Turkey and Britain in the twenties of the 20.th century. Both peoples opted to stay with Turkey in opposition to the Arabs whose majority opted to be with Iraq which was under British control. Both of them paid a heavy price for their stand against the British occupiers. The cooperation between the Turkmen resistance leader of Kerkuk Nazim Beg Neftchi and the Kurdish resistance leader of Suleymani, Sheikh Mahmud Berzenji is well known and recorded in history.
After the incorporation of the Musul province into Iraq, the Iraqi governments slowly began to apply the Arabization process. Kurds continued their armed resistance in the mountains against the successive Iraqi governments. Whereas the Turkmens, reluctantly opted for the passive resistance, because their lands could not accommodate any armed struggle. Turkmeneli which stretches from Telafer in the north to Mendeli in central Iraq is a hilly and barren land. Whereas Kurdistan is a mountainous and forested land which is very hard for any army to control.
As a result of Turkmens’ passive resistance, they were marginalized and pushed aside by the successive Iraqi governments.
The Arabization policy started slowly in the thirties and intensified over the years to reach its climax during the Saddam era. In which both Turkmens and Kurds suffered heavily.
The brotherly relations between the two peoples continued. It is well known that some Kurdish families protected Turkmens from criminal communist gangs during the Kerkuk massacre. Also, Turkmen families did protect Kurds fleeing from government prosecution.
In today’s Iraq, the Turkmen and Kurdish educated generations share the same aspirations of a democratic and secular system that wants closer relations with the west, far away from the religious fundamentalism that the Arabs are indulged in.
This shared fate should have produced a cooperation between the two. The Kurds should have made their best effort to include the Turkmens in their struggle against Arabic assimilation and racism.
This effort would have been in the form of recognizing that the Turkmens are their equal partners in Northern Iraq and a fundamental segment of the peoples of the north. They should have recognized Turkmen land, Turkmeneli, from Telafer to Mendeli, and respected their rights in self-determination and even demanded self-governance for the Turkmens just as they wanted that for themselves. They should have accepted that Kerkuk is indeed the cultural and political capital of the Turkmens.
But they didn’t. Instead, the Kurdish politicians followed a wrong strategy that intimidated the Turkmens and pushed them to the opposite side. The Kurds wanted to have it all. They wanted to dominate the whole of northern Iraq and convert it into Kurdistan. Whereas Kurdistan, just like Turkmeneli, is only a part of Northern Iraq.
Since the downfall of the Iraqi monarchy in 1958, the Kurdish politicians’ blind persistence on including Kerkuk into their Kurdistan, have poisoned relations between the two friendly nations to a level unseen before.
They wanted to strip the Turkmens of every national value they had, mainly their towns and cities, especially their capital Kerkuk, by declaring it as the capital or the heart or the Jerusalem of Kurdistan, which is completely unacceptable for the Turkmens.
Moreover, they flooded Kerkuk and other Turkmen cities with hundreds of thousands of Kurds brought from elsewhere and changed the demography of those cities in three years that even Saddam couldn’t accomplish in three decades.
They declared the Turkmens a “small” minority and promised to give them “some” symbolic rights. They even claimed that the majority of the Turkmens were actually Turkmenized Kurds. The Kurdish propaganda flooded the world opinion with disinformation that the Turkmens were a “micro-minority” that doesn’t deserve an autonomy because they live in “small” enclaves here and there. They even reduced the Turkmen history in Iraq from 1500 years to 250 years, dating them back to the latest Ottoman conquest of Sultan Murat IV in the 18.th century.
Virtually, the Kurdish propaganda machine deceived the world about the Turkmens and gave the false impression that millions of Turkmens, who ruled Iraq for thousand years, were actually a minority of a few hundred thousand, scattered across Iraq.
To prove this falsehood about the Turkmens, Kurdish politicians, manipulated the two recent elections in such away that Turkmens were nearly wiped out.
All these efforts to minimize and marginalize this peaceful people, was in fact to confiscate their land which is very rich in oil, minerals and agriculture as well as strategic location.
The result is that the Turkmens are so scared to loose their identity, lands and their beloved city; Kerkuk, that they are forced to cooperate with their former oppressors, the Arabs, who are a mix of ex-Baathists and religious fundamentalists (Shia and Sunni).
The Kurdish politicians’ prevention of a fair Turkmen representation in the parliament pushed Turkmen parties to enter the elections under the banner of Arabian parties. This move is a sign of desperation and is like preferring the jail over execution.
Today, Turkmens have abandoned their demands for autonomy and share in the administration. Their only worry now is how to stop the Kurdish obesity and save their heart (Kerkuk) from falling into Kurdish hands.
This wrong strategy of the Kurdish politicians resulted in loosing a golden opportunity for the Kurds. They lost the valuable support of their natural and strategic partners, the Turkmens, and lead to the isolation of the Kurds from the rest of the Iraqi people. Their only support is from overseas, the US, which will depart one day, leaving the Kurds alone facing the Arab vengeance.
But what if they followed the logical way? What would have happened if they cooperated and worked with the Turkmens?
The situation in Iraq would have been much better and stable. For once, both Kurds and Turkmens with their joint effort as the two dominant powers of the North, would have forced the racist Arabs to abandon their racist policies long before Saddam. They would have both gained autonomy without all this bloodshed and foreign intervention. Both peoples would have enjoyed and prospered under a democratic and secular Iraq. And the most important of all, there wouldn’t be a problem of Kerkuk.
The Kurdish politicians should revise their policies once more before it is too late. The question is: Is it better to continue with their existing policy of intimidating the Turkmens that will end up with a disaster for themselves and for the Turkmens or to accept the Turkmens as their equal partners of the North and have a win-win situation?
The choice is theirs.
Jan.20, 2010
Kurds and Turkmens, living together in Northern Iraq for more than a millennium, share many features and values. Beside long historical coexistence and cooperation, both constitute the two main nationalities of the North. They have partnership and neighborly relations that exceed significantly their relations with the Arabs.
Intermarriage is seen on a much wider scale than with Arabs. The economy is another bond that ties both peoples together. Erbil, Kerkuk and Suleymani economies are very much interdependent on each other than with Baghdad.
The best example of cooperation between the two is seen in the Turkmen Atabeg prince of Musul; Imadeddin Zengi and his Kurdish commander Salahaddin Eyyubi, who both changed history during the Crusades.
The last time they fought together was during the Musul Dispute between Turkey and Britain in the twenties of the 20.th century. Both peoples opted to stay with Turkey in opposition to the Arabs whose majority opted to be with Iraq which was under British control. Both of them paid a heavy price for their stand against the British occupiers. The cooperation between the Turkmen resistance leader of Kerkuk Nazim Beg Neftchi and the Kurdish resistance leader of Suleymani, Sheikh Mahmud Berzenji is well known and recorded in history.
After the incorporation of the Musul province into Iraq, the Iraqi governments slowly began to apply the Arabization process. Kurds continued their armed resistance in the mountains against the successive Iraqi governments. Whereas the Turkmens, reluctantly opted for the passive resistance, because their lands could not accommodate any armed struggle. Turkmeneli which stretches from Telafer in the north to Mendeli in central Iraq is a hilly and barren land. Whereas Kurdistan is a mountainous and forested land which is very hard for any army to control.
As a result of Turkmens’ passive resistance, they were marginalized and pushed aside by the successive Iraqi governments.
The Arabization policy started slowly in the thirties and intensified over the years to reach its climax during the Saddam era. In which both Turkmens and Kurds suffered heavily.
The brotherly relations between the two peoples continued. It is well known that some Kurdish families protected Turkmens from criminal communist gangs during the Kerkuk massacre. Also, Turkmen families did protect Kurds fleeing from government prosecution.
In today’s Iraq, the Turkmen and Kurdish educated generations share the same aspirations of a democratic and secular system that wants closer relations with the west, far away from the religious fundamentalism that the Arabs are indulged in.
This shared fate should have produced a cooperation between the two. The Kurds should have made their best effort to include the Turkmens in their struggle against Arabic assimilation and racism.
This effort would have been in the form of recognizing that the Turkmens are their equal partners in Northern Iraq and a fundamental segment of the peoples of the north. They should have recognized Turkmen land, Turkmeneli, from Telafer to Mendeli, and respected their rights in self-determination and even demanded self-governance for the Turkmens just as they wanted that for themselves. They should have accepted that Kerkuk is indeed the cultural and political capital of the Turkmens.
But they didn’t. Instead, the Kurdish politicians followed a wrong strategy that intimidated the Turkmens and pushed them to the opposite side. The Kurds wanted to have it all. They wanted to dominate the whole of northern Iraq and convert it into Kurdistan. Whereas Kurdistan, just like Turkmeneli, is only a part of Northern Iraq.
Since the downfall of the Iraqi monarchy in 1958, the Kurdish politicians’ blind persistence on including Kerkuk into their Kurdistan, have poisoned relations between the two friendly nations to a level unseen before.
They wanted to strip the Turkmens of every national value they had, mainly their towns and cities, especially their capital Kerkuk, by declaring it as the capital or the heart or the Jerusalem of Kurdistan, which is completely unacceptable for the Turkmens.
Moreover, they flooded Kerkuk and other Turkmen cities with hundreds of thousands of Kurds brought from elsewhere and changed the demography of those cities in three years that even Saddam couldn’t accomplish in three decades.
They declared the Turkmens a “small” minority and promised to give them “some” symbolic rights. They even claimed that the majority of the Turkmens were actually Turkmenized Kurds. The Kurdish propaganda flooded the world opinion with disinformation that the Turkmens were a “micro-minority” that doesn’t deserve an autonomy because they live in “small” enclaves here and there. They even reduced the Turkmen history in Iraq from 1500 years to 250 years, dating them back to the latest Ottoman conquest of Sultan Murat IV in the 18.th century.
Virtually, the Kurdish propaganda machine deceived the world about the Turkmens and gave the false impression that millions of Turkmens, who ruled Iraq for thousand years, were actually a minority of a few hundred thousand, scattered across Iraq.
To prove this falsehood about the Turkmens, Kurdish politicians, manipulated the two recent elections in such away that Turkmens were nearly wiped out.
All these efforts to minimize and marginalize this peaceful people, was in fact to confiscate their land which is very rich in oil, minerals and agriculture as well as strategic location.
The result is that the Turkmens are so scared to loose their identity, lands and their beloved city; Kerkuk, that they are forced to cooperate with their former oppressors, the Arabs, who are a mix of ex-Baathists and religious fundamentalists (Shia and Sunni).
The Kurdish politicians’ prevention of a fair Turkmen representation in the parliament pushed Turkmen parties to enter the elections under the banner of Arabian parties. This move is a sign of desperation and is like preferring the jail over execution.
Today, Turkmens have abandoned their demands for autonomy and share in the administration. Their only worry now is how to stop the Kurdish obesity and save their heart (Kerkuk) from falling into Kurdish hands.
This wrong strategy of the Kurdish politicians resulted in loosing a golden opportunity for the Kurds. They lost the valuable support of their natural and strategic partners, the Turkmens, and lead to the isolation of the Kurds from the rest of the Iraqi people. Their only support is from overseas, the US, which will depart one day, leaving the Kurds alone facing the Arab vengeance.
But what if they followed the logical way? What would have happened if they cooperated and worked with the Turkmens?
The situation in Iraq would have been much better and stable. For once, both Kurds and Turkmens with their joint effort as the two dominant powers of the North, would have forced the racist Arabs to abandon their racist policies long before Saddam. They would have both gained autonomy without all this bloodshed and foreign intervention. Both peoples would have enjoyed and prospered under a democratic and secular Iraq. And the most important of all, there wouldn’t be a problem of Kerkuk.
The Kurdish politicians should revise their policies once more before it is too late. The question is: Is it better to continue with their existing policy of intimidating the Turkmens that will end up with a disaster for themselves and for the Turkmens or to accept the Turkmens as their equal partners of the North and have a win-win situation?
The choice is theirs.
No comments:
Post a Comment