Iraqis resilient but mental health care lacking: U.N.
2009 March 7
by kanan48
BAGHDAD Reuters - Iraqis have displayed surprising resilience to years of bloodshed but mental health problems often go untreated in Iraq the World Health Organization WHO said in a study released on Saturday.
A mental health survey published in the journal World Psychiatry found mental disorders amongst Iraqis are no more prevalent than in peaceful countries contrary to what might be expected given the violence unleashed by the 2003 U.S.-led invasion and years of war before that. “Stress levels are high while mental disorders are comparable to other countries.
This suggests Iraqis have had to develop coping strategies to survive during the past few decades of unrest ” Naeema Al Gasseer the WHO s representative to Iraq said in a statement.
“Stress has had an impact on the entire population and conflict has become almost a normal occurrence.”
The sectarian violence that nearly tore Iraq apart in 2006-2007 has largely subsided but many Iraqis remain traumatized by those years. Despite a steep drop in violence militants still carry out devastating bomb attacks especially in the volatile north.
The study which surveyed 4 332 adults found that 16.5 percent of Iraqis have mental health problems but only 2.2 percent of those had received medical treatment. “This is a matter of great concern…when you consider the emotional distress experienced by so many during the recent past ” Iraqi Health Minister Saleh Al Hassnawi said. “In Iraq there is considerable stigma attached to having a mental illness. We must encourage people to come forward and seek the treatment they need ” The survey also found anxiety and behavioral disorders had afflicted Iraqi women more than men.
Writing by Tim Cocks; Editing by Angus MacSwan
via Reuters. http://kanan48.wordpress.com/2009/03/07/iraqis-resilient-but-mental-health-care-lacking-un/
Saturday, 7 March 2009
Friday, 6 March 2009
The importance of being politically aware among Iraqi Turkmen Youth today
Nevin Bayatli
Published on:
http://www.kerkukmedya.com/articles.php
THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING POLITICALLY AWARE AMONG IRAQI TURKMEN YOUTH TODAY
When young people hear the word politics, it´s almost unavoidable to associate it with governments, politicians, and their hopeless attempts to make false promises to get the people´s vote and their apathy to the needs of their people when they do. These scenarios have been played out far too many times and it is quite disheartening for youth today, who choose to take solace in pop culture and feed off what the mainstream media has to offer them rather than brood over the uncertainties of the future (of course, that is also problematic, but that´s another topic to write about in itself).
It almost seems like a vicious circle that is woven to our social fabric. The negative representations of politics or politicians for that matter and the constant disappointments in governments play a big part in continuing that cycle or in other words "that" way of thinking among young people. Having lived most of my life in Canada, I can´t help but relate my experiences to a western view point throughout our schooling years; young people are taught to understand the importance of governments, laws, and political policies. They are taught to believe that a system of order is essential for any democratic society to function. Yet, when young people grow up to be a participating member of society, they get a dose of reality when they turn on their television or pick up a newspaper to read.
The notion that governments exist to implement a working system for their citizens is utopian understanding that is lost in textbook pages and has no relevance whatsoever on how things unfold in real life. As a result, they eventually come to realize and most of the time accept, the fact that they can never influence a change, as power is only concentrated in the hands of few elites who decide our fate, as well as other nations´.
The purpose of my writing is not to paint a gloomy picture and conclude with the idea that we´re all doomed. Yet, it is a mere attempt to remind young people, including myself, the crucial need for us to adopt a new perspective in our lives, one that is positive and promising and empowers us to be critical thinkers when exercising our political rights.
Despite the fact that politics can be a complicated concept and a very loaded term, it simply means the activity of exercising one´s power. We can be political in so many facets of life, that it makes so much sense to agree with Aristotle’s notion that it is in man’s nature to be political. Even if I walk down the street, wearing a T-shirt that says "Free Palestine"; I´m being political. We live in a world where sports, music, and even food can be used to make a political statement that it would be naive of any young person to assume that they can live their lives and not bother with understanding the current problems that plague our world. The point that I´m making here is that, understanding politics will help us understand our position in a collective global community.
In other words, in order for me to understand why my country is being invaded or why Turkmens are being misrepresented in Iraq, I have to understand who has the control of power, why their political interests are in conflict with ours´ and how we can attain our rights with such limited power. The political situation in the world made more sense to me after 9/11. That´s partly because I was at an appropriate age to understand why things were happening the way they were. After the subsequent invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, and the rise of Islamophobia among Western society, as an Iraqi and Muslim, I had no choice but to be aware about the experiences I might have to face because of my association.
My experiences with politics have always been with trying to understand my identity as an Iraqi Turkmen living in a western society. My political identity is not static. In the sense, to westerners; I´m a middle eastern and to middle easterners; I´m different all together, because I´m culturally more Turkish than Iraqi. Whenever I encountered young Iraqis, they would be surprised to know that Turkmens make up 10-13% of Iraq´s population. Sadly, some of them don´t even know that we exist.
I´m not sure if we´re partly to be blamed for that as Turkmens always lived in exclusive communities or maybe the reason why we became so cocooned in our own communities was because of the after effects of countless regimes trying to silence dissent and try to assimilate us, instead of understanding us. The fact of the matter is, Turkmens in Iraq were always treated like second-class citizens and as a result of that, we never developed a sense of confidence when voicing our thoughts and taking political stance on issues concerning Iraq.
Of course, the despotic regimes and the non-democratic state of Iraq never gave the Turkmens the opportunity to freely make politics in Iraq as previous regimes were almost paranoid that fighting for our rights inherently would mean going against the government or becoming a separatist. However, even as we look back at history or even observe the Turkmens in Iraq today, it would be easy to conclude that Turkmens of Iraq never had separatist ideologies towards Iraq; rather they wished to live in a country that celebrated their Turkish identity and their proud heritage within the lands their ancestors once governed.
I sincerely believe that Turkmens played a great role in the advancement of these regions that is now modern day Iraq. Hence, it is only natural to desire the same success for modern day Turkmens living in Iraq today. Given the fact that we contributed immensely towards the Iraqi society, we have as much of a right to make decisions in Iraq as any Arab or Kurd. The means to achieve that is if we; the young Turkmens, realize our potential and future within Iraq.
n.bayatli@gmail.com
Toronto/Canada
Ret. Turkish major: General Staff behind 2003 motion rejection
Retired Maj. Erdal Sipahi has claimed that the reason behind the parliamentary rejection of a motion that sought permission to deploy Turkish troops in Iraq and to allow US troops to use Turkish soil for deployment in Iraq in 2003 was the General Staff.
"The motion was rejected due to the hesitation of the General Staff. There was a serious problem of trust between Turkey and the United States during negotiations at the time. We would not have entered northern Iraq even if the Turkish Parliament had approved the motion," Sipahi, also a Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) deputy, told Today's Zaman.
The ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government prepared a motion that would cover a period of six months and which sought permission to deploy Turkish troops in Iraq as well as allow US troops to use Turkish soil for deployment in Iraq. The motion was rejected in Parliament on March 1, 2003 because it failed to receive the vote of the required majority. Out of the 533 deputies who attended the voting, 250 voted against the motion while 264 deputies voted in favor; 19 deputies cast a blank vote.
The rejection of the March 1 motion led to disappointment in the United States, prompting the US Army to enter Iraq from the country's south because they were not allowed to use Turkish soil or airspace, causing more US casualties.
Sipahi said he would have been in charge of troops to be sent to northern Iraq if the motion was approved in Parliament, adding that he understood the reasons behind the rejection of the motion after an exchange of views with Deniz Bölükbaşı, a former ambassador and now an MHP deputy who conducted the negotiations at the time.
According to Sipahi, there were four apparent reasons that led to the rejection of the motion in Parliament, the most prominent of which was the uncertainty of the General Staff on prospective cooperation with US forces in northern Iraq.
"The first problem between Turkey and the US erupted due to weapons brought into Iraq by US Special Forces. Weapons taken out of the country were fewer than those brought. When we asked US authorities where the rest of the weapons were, they got angry," Sipahi remarked.
The second crisis of confidence between the two countries emerged, said the retired major, after troops loyal to Massoud Barzani -- the president of the autonomous Kurdish region in northern Iraq -- began to dig trenches in mountains just opposite the Habur border crossing. "Turkey did not receive a clear answer from US officials to questions regarding why these trenches were being dug," Sipahi noted, adding that the meetings between the US Adana consul and outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) leaders in Turkey stretched the patience of Turkish authorities to its limits.
Sipahi went on to say that the third reason behind the quashing of the motion was a secret meeting between US and Iraqi officials held on March 1, 2003, in Arbil on the future of Iraq. This meeting was, according to the retired ambassador, kept secret from the Turkish and US public.
"As the Turkish Parliament was voting on the motion on March 1, the new Iraqi administration was being decided on in a meeting in Arbil. Turkey's only demand from the new administration was to include a Turkmen representative, a demand which US officials first agreed to. The officials, however, refused during the meeting to accept a Turkmen representative in the new Iraqi administration. When this information reached Ankara, the General Staff and Foreign Ministry contacted US officials after to say that their stance during the meeting in Arbil was unacceptable. The motion in Parliament was narrowly rejected," Sipahi remarked.
The fourth factor behind Turkey's dismissal of the motion was strong signals from a number of countries that expressed disturbance over Turkey's presence in northern Iraq.
"The Turkish Armed Forces [TSK] was willing and prepared to enter northern Iraq. We should have entered to have a role in the new structure there. But, no one except Turcomans were willing to see Turkey in northern Iraq. The US and peshmerga forces in Iraq did not want us there -- nor did the EU or the Arab League. Even if Turkey had entered northern Iraq, they would not have let us proceed," Sipahi went on to say.
Turkey retreated from verge of war with US
Sipahi also said Turkey retreated twice from the verge of war with US forces in Iraq soon after the rejection of the motion. "The first incident was when buildings belonging to Turks in northern Iraq were plundered by peshmerga forces. Ankara warned us to be ready for a sudden clash with Iraqi and US forces in Iraq. We were all ready. The tension was lowered following diplomatic contacts between Turkey and the US," he noted.
The second incident of high tension between Turkey and the US was due to the "hooding incident." On July 4, 2003, dozens of US soldiers raided an office used by the Turkish Special Forces in the northern Iraqi city of Sulaimaniya and took 11 Turkish soldiers into custody over allegations that they were planning to assassinate the governor of Kirkuk. The soldiers were led out of their headquarters at gunpoint with hoods over their heads, leading the media to dub the affair the "hooding incident."
Sipahi also expressed concern that US forces would leave some of their weapons in Iraq to the Iraqi army when it withdrew US troops from the country.
"The US will send Iraq new troops even if it withdraws from that country. I mean, things will get messy there once more," he said, adding that Turkey would be in an advantageous spot if the US were to withdraw from Iraq.
06 March 2009, Friday
ERCAN YAVUZ ANKARA
Thursday, 5 March 2009
Arab leader expects Kurdish consensus in Kerkuk
http://www.niqash.org/content.php?contentTypeID=75&id=2398&lang=0
niqash Muhammed Abdullah tue 03 mar 09
The status of the oil-rich province of Kirkuk lies at the centre of a growing tug of war between Arabs and Kurds, which many fear may push the two sides towards conflict. A long-awaited referendum over the province’s status has continuously been postponed, as were recent provincial elections held elsewhere across the country. As part of the Provincial Election Law, a special article related to Kirkuk was issued.
Article 28 stipulates a temporary power-sharing agreement between Kirkuk’s four ethnic groups and the formation of a committee of seven parliamentarians to supervise the power-sharing arrangements, investigate the confiscation of public and private property and to prepare for postponed local elections.
Niqash met Muhammad Khalil al-Jibouri, head of Kirkuk’s Arab List, to inquire about the work of the “Article 23 Commission”, developments in Arab-Kurdish relations and the future of the province.
Niqash: Following your recent meeting with Massoud Barzani, the President of the Kurdistan Region, do you feel that there is any change in the Kurdish desire to annex Kirkuk?
Jibouri: The meeting with Massoud Barzani was an opportunity for a constructive dialogue. We submitted a memo detailing Arab demands, which were the same as those submitted in mid-December to the President of the Republic. Among these demands was a request for a quick intervention to reach solutions on pending issues between the different parties. One of our major demands is that Kirkuk be given a special status with a decentralized administration that enjoys broad authority according to article 122 of the constitution. This is the national project which we believe will provide solutions to Kirkuk’s conflict, in addition to the sharing of power (joint administration) and the participation of all major components according to article 23 of the election law.
Niqash: How do interpret the warning of Nejervan Barazani, Prime Minister of the Kurdistan Regional Government, of potential civil war between the Arabs and Kurds if U.S. troops withdraw before the Kirkuk issue is settled?
Jibouri: I do not believe that an Arab-Kurdish war will erupt if U.S. troops withdraw from Iraq. I also don’t believe that U.S. forces are a guarantor against the eruption of conflict. U.S. troops should leave according to the timetable set out in the security pact between Iraq and the United States. With regard to the outbreak of a civil war between Arabs and Kurds if no settlement is reached, I don’t think that such speculation is realistic because all parties know that conflicts cannot be resolved by violence and wars but rather by respect of the constitution which was approved by the Iraqi people. I want to stress that Arabs in Kirkuk want peace and dialogue; they do not want to spark wars and ignite tension.
Niqash: At the end of 2007, after a one year boycott, you reached an agreement with the Kurds to return to the provincial council. What were the details of this agreement?
Jibouri: The agreement was reached on December 2, 2007. One of the articles stipulated a joint administration of Kirkuk and one of its results was that Arabs were granted the post of deputy-governor and the chairmanship of the judiciary council. All other articles are stated in the election law and we are trying to overcome all difficulties entailed in applying these articles.
Niqash: Iraq's parliament has formed a fact-finding commission to investigate the situation in Kirkuk? Do you expect the commission to succeed?
Jibouri: Everybody in Kirkuk wants the commission to succeed. None of Kirkuk’s components opposed or contested the tasks or the formation of the committee which is composed of two Arabs, two Kurds, two Turkmen and one Keldo-Assyrian. An executive committee formed from all the provincial council components will provide support to the commission in matters related to its work.
Niqash: To what extent do the Americans and British play a role in the conflict? Are they exerting pressures on political blocs?
Jibouri: All issues related to Kirkuk are being dealt with according to mechanisms established by article 23. The biggest role is being played by the United Nations, which is seriously assisting the commission to complete its tasks. Additionally, different roles are being played by other international bodies that have declared their support for the work of the committee. We believe that resolving Kirkuk’s crisis is a key to resolving all other unsettled disputes Iraq. Regarding pressures, until now there have been no local or external pressures exerted on any political or ethnic bloc. All steps taken are in-line with the Iraqi national spirit and its interests and are based on consensus and dialogue to resolve all problems.
Niqash: Kurds want to reclaim the rights of thousands of Kurdish families displaced by the former regime; Arabs and Turkmen say that a number of returning Kurdish families have seized public property and committed violations in the city. How many families do you think were displaced and can you prove the allegations made against those that have returned?
Jibouri: The number of families varies. Arabs and Turkmen give different figures than those given by Kurds on the number of displaced Kurdish families. In all cases, the real numbers are much less than those given by the Kurds. Regarding violations, article 23 has clearly stipulated that the issue of confiscated private and public property after April 9, 2003 should be resolved. In Kirkuk today, all government buildings, dissolved army camps and facilities, sports stadiums and former premises of the Baath Party are under Kurdish control. There are hundreds of cases filed at the Property Claims Commission in Kirkuk regarding such violations.
Niqash: Kurdish parties refuse to register Arabs coming to the city in the electoral register. Will you participate in elections if they succeed in blocking Arab registration?
Jibouri: There is a legal mechanism which will be adopted by the fact-finding commission according to the stipulations of article 23 regarding the registration of voters in the city of Kirkuk. We have submitted to the Arab representatives a working paper containing our viewpoint and our suggestions regarding this issue. None of our suggestions contradict the law and none of them will lead to any unfairness or injustice to other parties. We stress that any citizen who comes to Kirkuk is an Iraqi citizen and should enjoy all the rights and privileges but should also respect his duties as stipulated by the constitution which applies to all Iraqis and everywhere in Iraq.
Niqash: There are rumors of growing conflicts between you and the Turkmen after your return to the provincial council and your meeting with Barzani?
Jibouri: Nobody should tell us who we can meet… we are free to meet with any person we want to meet with. Arab demands are similar to those of the Turkmen in many areas and Arabs have no conflict with other ethnicities. We feel that Kurdish demands are moving closer towards a consensus-based solution.
Niqash: How is it possible to end Kirkuk’s deteriorating security situation?
Jibouri: Terrorism, which targets all areas of Iraq and not only Kirkuk, is behind the deterioration in security. But we believe that allocating 32 percent of security apparatus posts to Arabs and equal ratios to the Turkmen and the Kurds will lead to an improvement in security conditions and the performance of the security apparatus.
Niqash: How do you assess the performance of al-Maliki backed tribal awakening councils in Kirkuk?
Jibouri: Awakening councils are present in the Arab areas of Kirkuk. They have been present for more than one year and they are performing their job in a normal manner. We did not hear and nor do we feel that there is any objection to the work of awakening councils in Kirkuk’s districts. These entities, together with the army and police, have proved that they are capable of safeguarding property and security.
niqash Muhammed Abdullah tue 03 mar 09
The status of the oil-rich province of Kirkuk lies at the centre of a growing tug of war between Arabs and Kurds, which many fear may push the two sides towards conflict. A long-awaited referendum over the province’s status has continuously been postponed, as were recent provincial elections held elsewhere across the country. As part of the Provincial Election Law, a special article related to Kirkuk was issued.
Article 28 stipulates a temporary power-sharing agreement between Kirkuk’s four ethnic groups and the formation of a committee of seven parliamentarians to supervise the power-sharing arrangements, investigate the confiscation of public and private property and to prepare for postponed local elections.
Niqash met Muhammad Khalil al-Jibouri, head of Kirkuk’s Arab List, to inquire about the work of the “Article 23 Commission”, developments in Arab-Kurdish relations and the future of the province.
Niqash: Following your recent meeting with Massoud Barzani, the President of the Kurdistan Region, do you feel that there is any change in the Kurdish desire to annex Kirkuk?
Jibouri: The meeting with Massoud Barzani was an opportunity for a constructive dialogue. We submitted a memo detailing Arab demands, which were the same as those submitted in mid-December to the President of the Republic. Among these demands was a request for a quick intervention to reach solutions on pending issues between the different parties. One of our major demands is that Kirkuk be given a special status with a decentralized administration that enjoys broad authority according to article 122 of the constitution. This is the national project which we believe will provide solutions to Kirkuk’s conflict, in addition to the sharing of power (joint administration) and the participation of all major components according to article 23 of the election law.
Niqash: How do interpret the warning of Nejervan Barazani, Prime Minister of the Kurdistan Regional Government, of potential civil war between the Arabs and Kurds if U.S. troops withdraw before the Kirkuk issue is settled?
Jibouri: I do not believe that an Arab-Kurdish war will erupt if U.S. troops withdraw from Iraq. I also don’t believe that U.S. forces are a guarantor against the eruption of conflict. U.S. troops should leave according to the timetable set out in the security pact between Iraq and the United States. With regard to the outbreak of a civil war between Arabs and Kurds if no settlement is reached, I don’t think that such speculation is realistic because all parties know that conflicts cannot be resolved by violence and wars but rather by respect of the constitution which was approved by the Iraqi people. I want to stress that Arabs in Kirkuk want peace and dialogue; they do not want to spark wars and ignite tension.
Niqash: At the end of 2007, after a one year boycott, you reached an agreement with the Kurds to return to the provincial council. What were the details of this agreement?
Jibouri: The agreement was reached on December 2, 2007. One of the articles stipulated a joint administration of Kirkuk and one of its results was that Arabs were granted the post of deputy-governor and the chairmanship of the judiciary council. All other articles are stated in the election law and we are trying to overcome all difficulties entailed in applying these articles.
Niqash: Iraq's parliament has formed a fact-finding commission to investigate the situation in Kirkuk? Do you expect the commission to succeed?
Jibouri: Everybody in Kirkuk wants the commission to succeed. None of Kirkuk’s components opposed or contested the tasks or the formation of the committee which is composed of two Arabs, two Kurds, two Turkmen and one Keldo-Assyrian. An executive committee formed from all the provincial council components will provide support to the commission in matters related to its work.
Niqash: To what extent do the Americans and British play a role in the conflict? Are they exerting pressures on political blocs?
Jibouri: All issues related to Kirkuk are being dealt with according to mechanisms established by article 23. The biggest role is being played by the United Nations, which is seriously assisting the commission to complete its tasks. Additionally, different roles are being played by other international bodies that have declared their support for the work of the committee. We believe that resolving Kirkuk’s crisis is a key to resolving all other unsettled disputes Iraq. Regarding pressures, until now there have been no local or external pressures exerted on any political or ethnic bloc. All steps taken are in-line with the Iraqi national spirit and its interests and are based on consensus and dialogue to resolve all problems.
Niqash: Kurds want to reclaim the rights of thousands of Kurdish families displaced by the former regime; Arabs and Turkmen say that a number of returning Kurdish families have seized public property and committed violations in the city. How many families do you think were displaced and can you prove the allegations made against those that have returned?
Jibouri: The number of families varies. Arabs and Turkmen give different figures than those given by Kurds on the number of displaced Kurdish families. In all cases, the real numbers are much less than those given by the Kurds. Regarding violations, article 23 has clearly stipulated that the issue of confiscated private and public property after April 9, 2003 should be resolved. In Kirkuk today, all government buildings, dissolved army camps and facilities, sports stadiums and former premises of the Baath Party are under Kurdish control. There are hundreds of cases filed at the Property Claims Commission in Kirkuk regarding such violations.
Niqash: Kurdish parties refuse to register Arabs coming to the city in the electoral register. Will you participate in elections if they succeed in blocking Arab registration?
Jibouri: There is a legal mechanism which will be adopted by the fact-finding commission according to the stipulations of article 23 regarding the registration of voters in the city of Kirkuk. We have submitted to the Arab representatives a working paper containing our viewpoint and our suggestions regarding this issue. None of our suggestions contradict the law and none of them will lead to any unfairness or injustice to other parties. We stress that any citizen who comes to Kirkuk is an Iraqi citizen and should enjoy all the rights and privileges but should also respect his duties as stipulated by the constitution which applies to all Iraqis and everywhere in Iraq.
Niqash: There are rumors of growing conflicts between you and the Turkmen after your return to the provincial council and your meeting with Barzani?
Jibouri: Nobody should tell us who we can meet… we are free to meet with any person we want to meet with. Arab demands are similar to those of the Turkmen in many areas and Arabs have no conflict with other ethnicities. We feel that Kurdish demands are moving closer towards a consensus-based solution.
Niqash: How is it possible to end Kirkuk’s deteriorating security situation?
Jibouri: Terrorism, which targets all areas of Iraq and not only Kirkuk, is behind the deterioration in security. But we believe that allocating 32 percent of security apparatus posts to Arabs and equal ratios to the Turkmen and the Kurds will lead to an improvement in security conditions and the performance of the security apparatus.
Niqash: How do you assess the performance of al-Maliki backed tribal awakening councils in Kirkuk?
Jibouri: Awakening councils are present in the Arab areas of Kirkuk. They have been present for more than one year and they are performing their job in a normal manner. We did not hear and nor do we feel that there is any objection to the work of awakening councils in Kirkuk’s districts. These entities, together with the army and police, have proved that they are capable of safeguarding property and security.
Wednesday, 4 March 2009
Clinton's reward for her unflinching support for zionism
AFPPhoto : Hillary Clinton a rencontré mardi 3 mars le président israélien Shimon Peres
(photo Kahana/AFP)
Hillary Clinton met with Shimon Peres on Tuesday 3rd March 2009.
Tuesday, 3 March 2009
Sunday, 1 March 2009
Pro-Kurdish DTP makes strange demands of European Parliament
The pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP) has asked the European Parliament (EP) to amend a report on Turkey by Dutch Christian Democrat Ria Oomen-Ruijten, particularly paragraphs dealing with the Kurdish question.
A two-page document obtained by Sunday's Zaman was sent last Thursday to members of the EP who have been following the debate on Turkey within the EP, asking them to "have a look at" the DTP's requests.
Making a bizarre comparison between the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and Hamas, the DTP has called on the EP to ask Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to distance himself from Hamas just as the EP report asks the DTP to distance itself from the PKK.
The document also accuses the EP of double standards in dealing with the Kurdish question. The document was titled "Assessment of the Democratic Society Party (DTP) on the Draft Report on Turkey prepared by Ms. Ria Oomen-Ruijten."
The document, prepared by the DTP's Brussels office, draws parallels between Hamas and the PKK and eventually asks the EP to take a similar stance when dealing with the two organizations. Asking for complete deletion of some paragraphs of the report, the DTP expresses its anger over Oomen-Ruijten's characterization of the PKK as a "terrorist organization."
Oomen-Ruijten's progress report on Turkey, which was endorsed by the EP's Committee on Foreign Affairs with a strong margin of support on Feb. 12, is expected to be approved by the EP on March 11. Oomen-Ruijten, one of the most senior members of the EP, has been hailed in recent years for authoring balanced reports on Turkey. Her predecessor, Camiel Eurlings, the previous rapporteur, who was also a Dutch Christian Democrat, was heavily criticized for writing biased reports on Turkey.
While asking Turkey to sort out the Kurdish problem democratically, Oomen-Ruijten has been tough on both the PKK and the DTP. She has criticized the DTP for not distancing itself from the PKK.
The DTP is apparently angry over the call in the report to distance itself from the PKK. In its list of demands from the EP, the DTP's Brussels representatives dub the report's demand as "not objective and reasonable." In an interesting proposal, the DTP calls on the EP to make a similar call to Erdoğan and his party to distance themselves from Hamas. The document says: "So urging the DTP and all its elected members to distance themselves from the PKK is not an objective and reasonable call. If this paragraph is not erased, then another sentence should be added: 'The European Parliament urges Turkish Prime Minister Mr. Erdoğan, [the Justice and Development Party] AKP and its elected members to distance themselves clearly from HAMAS, which is on the terrorist organizations list of the EU'."
The DTP is also unhappy with Oomen-Ruijten's characterization of the PKK as a terrorist organization. Employing logic that is difficult to grasp, the document claims that if the EP shows solidarity with Turkey in the fight against terrorism, it would amount to supporting Ankara in putting Leyla Zana behind bars. "And if you show your solidarity with Turkey in the fight against terrorism, then it means you show your solidarity with Turkey to put Leyla Zana in prison as well," the document says.
In another of the DTP's unique interpretations, the document argues that the Turkish state regards all intellectuals and writers critical of the state as "terrorists": "Because according to the Turkish state mentality, Leyla Zana, other politicians, journalists, intellectuals and those who criticize the Turkish state are 'TERRORISTS.' So this paragraph gives Turkey support to maintain its policies towards the Kurdish issue."
The DTP also calls on the EP to treat the PKK as it treats Hamas. In an analogy with Hamas, the DTP asks the EP to call on both sides (Turkey and the PKK) to declare a bilateral cease-fire, rather than only calling on the PKK. "So we believe that the European Parliament should call for an immediate bilateral cease-fire. The call of the European Union in the Gaza crisis is a good example of promoting a peaceful solution: 'There must be an unconditional halt to rocket attacks by HAMAS on Israel, and an end to Israeli military action.' Even though Hamas is on the terrorist organizations list of the EU like the PKK, we do not see any provocative language in the statements of the EU and the EP in the resolutions on Gaza. But in this report, the language towards the PKK is very provocative, and it does not serve for a peaceful solution to the Kurdish question. There should not be a double standard in the position of the European Parliament," the document concludes.
01.03.2009
News
SELÇUK GÜLTAŞLI
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=168327&bolum=100
A two-page document obtained by Sunday's Zaman was sent last Thursday to members of the EP who have been following the debate on Turkey within the EP, asking them to "have a look at" the DTP's requests.
Making a bizarre comparison between the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and Hamas, the DTP has called on the EP to ask Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to distance himself from Hamas just as the EP report asks the DTP to distance itself from the PKK.
The document also accuses the EP of double standards in dealing with the Kurdish question. The document was titled "Assessment of the Democratic Society Party (DTP) on the Draft Report on Turkey prepared by Ms. Ria Oomen-Ruijten."
The document, prepared by the DTP's Brussels office, draws parallels between Hamas and the PKK and eventually asks the EP to take a similar stance when dealing with the two organizations. Asking for complete deletion of some paragraphs of the report, the DTP expresses its anger over Oomen-Ruijten's characterization of the PKK as a "terrorist organization."
Oomen-Ruijten's progress report on Turkey, which was endorsed by the EP's Committee on Foreign Affairs with a strong margin of support on Feb. 12, is expected to be approved by the EP on March 11. Oomen-Ruijten, one of the most senior members of the EP, has been hailed in recent years for authoring balanced reports on Turkey. Her predecessor, Camiel Eurlings, the previous rapporteur, who was also a Dutch Christian Democrat, was heavily criticized for writing biased reports on Turkey.
While asking Turkey to sort out the Kurdish problem democratically, Oomen-Ruijten has been tough on both the PKK and the DTP. She has criticized the DTP for not distancing itself from the PKK.
The DTP is apparently angry over the call in the report to distance itself from the PKK. In its list of demands from the EP, the DTP's Brussels representatives dub the report's demand as "not objective and reasonable." In an interesting proposal, the DTP calls on the EP to make a similar call to Erdoğan and his party to distance themselves from Hamas. The document says: "So urging the DTP and all its elected members to distance themselves from the PKK is not an objective and reasonable call. If this paragraph is not erased, then another sentence should be added: 'The European Parliament urges Turkish Prime Minister Mr. Erdoğan, [the Justice and Development Party] AKP and its elected members to distance themselves clearly from HAMAS, which is on the terrorist organizations list of the EU'."
The DTP is also unhappy with Oomen-Ruijten's characterization of the PKK as a terrorist organization. Employing logic that is difficult to grasp, the document claims that if the EP shows solidarity with Turkey in the fight against terrorism, it would amount to supporting Ankara in putting Leyla Zana behind bars. "And if you show your solidarity with Turkey in the fight against terrorism, then it means you show your solidarity with Turkey to put Leyla Zana in prison as well," the document says.
In another of the DTP's unique interpretations, the document argues that the Turkish state regards all intellectuals and writers critical of the state as "terrorists": "Because according to the Turkish state mentality, Leyla Zana, other politicians, journalists, intellectuals and those who criticize the Turkish state are 'TERRORISTS.' So this paragraph gives Turkey support to maintain its policies towards the Kurdish issue."
The DTP also calls on the EP to treat the PKK as it treats Hamas. In an analogy with Hamas, the DTP asks the EP to call on both sides (Turkey and the PKK) to declare a bilateral cease-fire, rather than only calling on the PKK. "So we believe that the European Parliament should call for an immediate bilateral cease-fire. The call of the European Union in the Gaza crisis is a good example of promoting a peaceful solution: 'There must be an unconditional halt to rocket attacks by HAMAS on Israel, and an end to Israeli military action.' Even though Hamas is on the terrorist organizations list of the EU like the PKK, we do not see any provocative language in the statements of the EU and the EP in the resolutions on Gaza. But in this report, the language towards the PKK is very provocative, and it does not serve for a peaceful solution to the Kurdish question. There should not be a double standard in the position of the European Parliament," the document concludes.
01.03.2009
News
SELÇUK GÜLTAŞLI
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=168327&bolum=100
Azerbaijan seeking justice for KHOJALI Massacre
February 27, 2009
BAKU, February 27, 2009 (RFE/RL) -- The Azerbaijani government said it is still trying to bring to justice those responsible for the events of the Khojaly massacre, as the 17th anniversary was marked on February 26.
Khojaly is a small Azerbaijani town in which hundreds of people, including many civilians, were killed by ethnic Armenian forces on February 25-26 during the Nagorno-Karabakh War in 1992.
Azerbaijani Deputy Military Prosecutor Ilham Mammadov told RFE/RL's Azerbaijani Service that the arrest of Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic last summer "gave hope that the international justice mechanisms could also be used in respect to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict."
He said 268 names have been submitted to Interpol as suspected war criminals for actions during the Karabakh war, including 38 Armenian citizens accused of killings at Khojaly.
Mammadov said the list includes several Armenian officials "who enjoy immunity now."
Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian was the head of the "self-defense forces" of the unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic when the massacre took place. Armenian officials deny that top-level authorities were involved in the massacre and say Azerbaijani authorities failed to safely evacuate residents from the area during fighting.
http://www.rferl.org/content/Azerbaijan_Seeking_Justice_For_Khojaly_Massacre_/1500606.html
http://www.rferl.org/content/Azerbaijan_Seeking_Justice_For_Khojaly_Massacre_/1500606.html
Saturday, 28 February 2009
The lessons of local elections in Iraq
Abdul Ilah Albayaty,
February 2009
http://brusselstribunal.org/
US foreign policy experts suggested to the Bush administration that the only way to defend American interests in Iraq was by replacing current rejected figures of the political process with new figures that appear independent of the United States. We must recognise that Americans have partially succeeded in this by leaving Maliki without opposition, and obstacles, adopting slogans of the Iraqi resistance movement on the national unity of Iraq.
Maliki has proven to the Americans that he is, by his sectarian nature, more capable than Allawi in pursuing the interests of Iran/US: he saw no contradiction between WALYAT AL-FAQIH — the rule of clerics — that he long used as cover, and close cooperation with the United States. In not wearing the religious turban he can provide loyalty to Iran without creating competition with Al-Sistani and Khamenei, and can also touch the sectarian feelings of Iran while serving the interests of the United States. His signing of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the US is proof.
The United States and their advisers in Iraq — Americans, Israelis or Iraqis — are happy about this situation because what interests them is how to control Iraq after the failed policies of Bush. What matters most to them aren’t the persons, or the support of Iraqis, but world opinion, the image of America, and guaranteeing US imperial interests.
Two trends are involved in improving the image of the United States. The first presents the Iraqi resistance as a barbaric movement concerned only with blood, murder and persecution, and that has nothing to do with the liberation of Iraq. Al-Qaeda and its like and Zionist and imperialist propaganda serve this tendency. The second trend suggests that cooperation could be established between the US and the Iraqi people under occupation or semi-occupation. The most important participants in this trend are Allawi, the Communist Party, Kurdish leaders and the Shia and Sunni parties.
All political analysts know that the American project of cooperation between the US and Israel to encourage the dreams of imperial Iran to tear the region apart and realise the “New Middle East” has failed. One reason for this failure is the exaggeration of the abilities and ambitions of the Iranians and Kurds. These ambitions have not only awakened Iraqi patriotism, but also Iraqi national and Arab solidarity. This has emerged as evident in recent days during the local elections. Their results will not change much, especially since they were conducted under the brutal US occupation, with the US-drafted constitution that threatens the unity of Iraq and under the sectarian quota system, heinous in its composition and terms of reference. Iraq with these elections does not change and remains an occupied country. The only thing noteworthy of these elections is that they reflect the balance of forces and trends at the moment.
The Iraqi resistance boycotted the local elections. It has been very successful in the boycott, but at the same time it decided not to disrupt the elections to let the parties in the political process settle accounts between themselves and allow the forces that think they can somewhat improve the situation in some provinces through the elections perform their task. This tactic was a success:
- The Iraqi resistance has proven that it is not against the use of polls, but boycotts the elections because they take place under occupation and it is the occupation that controls the election results.
- The Iraqi resistance has proven that Iraqi patriots would win every election if they were free and fair, because patriotism is stronger than sectarianism and chauvinism. The proof is the adoption by the majority of candidates of the slogan of the resistance: “Sunni or Shia, we will not sell this country.”
- The Iraqi resistance has demonstrated that resistance is not only a military action but also the political mobilisation of the masses in the various forms of support for armed action and the process of the liberation of Iraq, including the movement of the defence of the rights of individuals or groups of the population, and participation in the popular political struggle in its various forms.
The vote for Al-Hadaba list in Mosul and for Al-Haboub in Karbala put an end to what remained of the attempted US-Israeli-Iranian project of promoting Sunni and Shia sectarianism, Kurdish chauvinism and the communist liberals’ complicity with them. For fear of the victory of the national movement, the pro-occupation movement wanted to reduce the value of this victory by saying that they are former Baathists. So be it. The Baathists, the Nasserists, leftists and Islamists are the best sons of Iraq if they are the defenders of Iraqi patriotism, anywhere they are.
The summary of the election is as follows: the US has managed to scrap their allies, which became cumbersome, for Maliki’s profit. Elections are cut to his measure. But the resistance with its wise tactic has proven that the national movement is the one that will decide the future of Iraq in order that the Iraqi people is sovereign on its territory and over its wealth. Will America recognise this obvious fact or will it continue to hide its head in the sand, leaving its army and its puppets mired in their crimes against Iraq?
February 2009
http://brusselstribunal.org/
US foreign policy experts suggested to the Bush administration that the only way to defend American interests in Iraq was by replacing current rejected figures of the political process with new figures that appear independent of the United States. We must recognise that Americans have partially succeeded in this by leaving Maliki without opposition, and obstacles, adopting slogans of the Iraqi resistance movement on the national unity of Iraq.
Maliki has proven to the Americans that he is, by his sectarian nature, more capable than Allawi in pursuing the interests of Iran/US: he saw no contradiction between WALYAT AL-FAQIH — the rule of clerics — that he long used as cover, and close cooperation with the United States. In not wearing the religious turban he can provide loyalty to Iran without creating competition with Al-Sistani and Khamenei, and can also touch the sectarian feelings of Iran while serving the interests of the United States. His signing of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the US is proof.
The United States and their advisers in Iraq — Americans, Israelis or Iraqis — are happy about this situation because what interests them is how to control Iraq after the failed policies of Bush. What matters most to them aren’t the persons, or the support of Iraqis, but world opinion, the image of America, and guaranteeing US imperial interests.
Two trends are involved in improving the image of the United States. The first presents the Iraqi resistance as a barbaric movement concerned only with blood, murder and persecution, and that has nothing to do with the liberation of Iraq. Al-Qaeda and its like and Zionist and imperialist propaganda serve this tendency. The second trend suggests that cooperation could be established between the US and the Iraqi people under occupation or semi-occupation. The most important participants in this trend are Allawi, the Communist Party, Kurdish leaders and the Shia and Sunni parties.
All political analysts know that the American project of cooperation between the US and Israel to encourage the dreams of imperial Iran to tear the region apart and realise the “New Middle East” has failed. One reason for this failure is the exaggeration of the abilities and ambitions of the Iranians and Kurds. These ambitions have not only awakened Iraqi patriotism, but also Iraqi national and Arab solidarity. This has emerged as evident in recent days during the local elections. Their results will not change much, especially since they were conducted under the brutal US occupation, with the US-drafted constitution that threatens the unity of Iraq and under the sectarian quota system, heinous in its composition and terms of reference. Iraq with these elections does not change and remains an occupied country. The only thing noteworthy of these elections is that they reflect the balance of forces and trends at the moment.
The Iraqi resistance boycotted the local elections. It has been very successful in the boycott, but at the same time it decided not to disrupt the elections to let the parties in the political process settle accounts between themselves and allow the forces that think they can somewhat improve the situation in some provinces through the elections perform their task. This tactic was a success:
- The Iraqi resistance has proven that it is not against the use of polls, but boycotts the elections because they take place under occupation and it is the occupation that controls the election results.
- The Iraqi resistance has proven that Iraqi patriots would win every election if they were free and fair, because patriotism is stronger than sectarianism and chauvinism. The proof is the adoption by the majority of candidates of the slogan of the resistance: “Sunni or Shia, we will not sell this country.”
- The Iraqi resistance has demonstrated that resistance is not only a military action but also the political mobilisation of the masses in the various forms of support for armed action and the process of the liberation of Iraq, including the movement of the defence of the rights of individuals or groups of the population, and participation in the popular political struggle in its various forms.
The vote for Al-Hadaba list in Mosul and for Al-Haboub in Karbala put an end to what remained of the attempted US-Israeli-Iranian project of promoting Sunni and Shia sectarianism, Kurdish chauvinism and the communist liberals’ complicity with them. For fear of the victory of the national movement, the pro-occupation movement wanted to reduce the value of this victory by saying that they are former Baathists. So be it. The Baathists, the Nasserists, leftists and Islamists are the best sons of Iraq if they are the defenders of Iraqi patriotism, anywhere they are.
The summary of the election is as follows: the US has managed to scrap their allies, which became cumbersome, for Maliki’s profit. Elections are cut to his measure. But the resistance with its wise tactic has proven that the national movement is the one that will decide the future of Iraq in order that the Iraqi people is sovereign on its territory and over its wealth. Will America recognise this obvious fact or will it continue to hide its head in the sand, leaving its army and its puppets mired in their crimes against Iraq?
Türk Dünyasının ve Müsülman aleminin ilk Cumhuriyeti Azerbaycan ve ilk Cumhur Başkanı Mehemmed Emin Resulzade´dir
Türk Dünyasının ve Müsülman aleminin ilk Cumhuriyeti Azerbaycan ve ilk Cumhur Başkanı Mehemmed Emin Resulzade´dir
Ali S. Yılmaz
Ali S. Yılmaz
M.E. Resulzade ( 1884 Baki - 1955 Ankara )
( Bir defa yükselen Bayrak bir daha inmez )
Mehemmed Emin Ahund Mulla Ekber Oğlu Resulzade 31 Ocak, 1884 yılında Azerbaycan Başkenti Baki´nin Nohanlı Şehrinde dünyaya gelmiştir. Babası din alimi olmasından ziyade çok aydın bir insan idi. Ona göre, oğlunu bilimsel temellere dayalı bir eğitime teşvik ederk yetiştirmiştir.
1902 de onyedi yaşında olan M.E. Resulzade “ Müsülman Gençlik Teşkilatını kurmuştur”. Daha sonra “Müsülman Demokratik Müsavat Cemiyyetinde” gizli faaliyete başlayarak 1994 yılın sonlarında “ Mir Hesen Mevsim “ ve Hesen Hacıoğlu adlarınd iki arkadaşlarıyla birlikte “Müsülman Sosyal Dimokrat Hümmet teşkilatını kurmuştur. Şair ve yazar olan Resulzade, yazmış olduğu “ Karanlkıta Işıklar “ adlı oyunu 5 Aralık, 1908 de sahneye koyularak Rus hakimiyyetine karşı Milli İstiklal hareketinin temel taşını teşkil eden ilk eseridir.
1908 yılın sonlarında M.E. Resulzade Çar Rus hakimiyyeti tarafından hapis tehlikesile karşı karşıya kaldığından dolayı Baki´yı terk ederek Güney Azerbaycanın başkenti olan Tebriz´e gider ve orada Şaha karşı olan Azerbaycan halkının büyük kahramanı Settar Han ve arkadaşlarıyla göüşür. Daha sonra 1910 yılında bir çok önde gelen Güney Azerbaycanın aydın şahsiyetlerile birlikte “ İran Demokrat Partisini” kurar.
Çar hükumeti İrandaki bu gibi inkilap hareketlerin korkusundan İran Şahından M.E. Resulzadenin ülke dışı edilmesini talep eder. Resulzade tehlikeyi fark ederek Türkiye´ye gider. Orada Yusuf Akçura ve Ziya Gök Alp´lar gibi büyük Türk şahsiyyetler ile tanışır ve bir çok Türk teşkilatlarında çalışarak Güney ve Kuzey Azerbaycan Coğrafiyasında yaşayan Azerbaycan Türklerini tanıtmaya çalışır.
1913 yılında çıkan genel af kararından yararlanarak kendi vatanına dönerek tekrardan daha önce kurmuş olduğu “ Müsülman Demokratik Müsavat partisine katılarak başkanlık görevine başlar. 1917 yılında büyük Rus hakimiyyeti dağılmaya başlar.
Aynı yılın Nisan ayında Baki´de bir kurultay yapılır. Bu kurultayda M.E. Resulzade “Müsavat” partisi Merkez komitesinin başkanı seçilir ve onun teklifi ile Rusyada Federal Devletlerin kurulmasına karar çıkarılır. Böylece bütün Azerbaycan bölgelerinde Azerbaycan Muhtariyet kuruluşuna yönelik Milli hareketler başlar.
1917 yılın sonlarında M.E. Resulzade Rusya parlementosunda Azerbaycan ve Türkistan´dan Millet Vekili olarak seçilir. 27 Mayıs, 1918 de kafkaslarda bulunan bütün parti üyeleri biraraya gelerek Azerbaycan Milli Şurasını teşkil ederler ve ses birliği ile M.E. Resulzade´yi Milli Şuranın sadri olarak ilan ederler.
Ertesi gün 28 Mayıs, 1918 de bütün radyolar ve gazeteler Azerbaycan İstiklaliyetini bütün dünyaya ilan ederler. Böylece Türk Dünyasında ve bütün İslam aleminde ilk olarak bir Türk Cumhuriyeti kurulmuş olur.
7 Aralık, 1918 yılında Azerbaycan parlementosunun açılışında şunları der : “ Azerbaycan, İstiklal Bayrağını yükseğe kaldırmıştır. Böylece, müsülman partileri arasında Azerbaycan idiasında fikir ayrılığı yoktur. Halkın şuurunda Azerbaycan iddiası artık mühkemleşmiştir….. ( Bir defa yükselen Bayrak bir daha inmez).
Ne yazık ki 1920 yılında bu özgürlük ve İstiklal Rusların kızıl orduları tarafından kanlı savaşlar sonucu bastırılmıştır ve kahramanlıklarla dolu bu mücadelede on binlerce Azerbaycan vatandaşı şehid edilmiştir.
Bu olaylar neticesinde M.E. Resulzade Azerbaycanın Lahıç kentinde haps edilmiştir. Haberi duyan Stalin kendisi bizzat hapishaneye gelerek Resulzade´ni serbest bırakır ve onu kendisile birlikte Mosko´ya götürür.
Böylece Stalin 1905 yılında kendisini ölümden ve hapisten kurtarmış olan inkilabçı dostu M.E. Resulzade karşısında tarihi vicdan borcunu yerine getirmiş olur.
Daha sonra 1922 yılında bazı dostları tarafından Liningrad´tan Finlanda´ya kaçırılır ve oradan Türkiye´ye geçer.
Türkiye´de hayatının sonuna kadar milli mücadelesini çıkarmış olduğu bir çok yazılarıyla devam ettirir. Bu yazıları arasında yer alan önemli eserlerinden bazıları :-
- Yeni Kafkasya Dergisi. İstanbul - 1923
- Azerbaycan Cumhuriyyetinin geçmişi, teşekkülü ve şimdiki durumu. İstanbul -1928.
- İtiklal Mefküresi ve Gençlik. İstanbul -1928.
- İnkilabçı Sosyalizmin İflası ve Demokratın Geleceği. İstanbul – 1928.
- Millet ve Bolşevizim. İstanbul -1928.
- Kafkasya Türkleri. İstanbul -1928.
- Fransız dilinde “ Azerbaycan ve İstiklaliyyeti” . Paris – 1930.
- Rus dilinde “ Kafkas problemi ile ilgili Panturanizim. Paris – 1930.
- “ İstiklal “ Gazetesi. Berlin - ( 1932 – 1934 ).
- “ Kurtuluş “ Dergisi – Berlin – ( 1934 – 1938 ).
- Alman dilinde “ Azerbaycan Problemi “ kitabı. Berlin – 1938.
- Polon dilinde “ Azerbaycanın Hürriyet Savaşı” Berlin – 1939.
- “ Azerbaycan Kültür Geleneği “ kitabı. Ankara – 1949.
- “ Çağdaş Azerbaycan Edebiyatı “ kitabı. Ankara – 1950.
- “ Azerbaycan Tarihi “ kitabı. Ankara – 1951.
Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Hastanesinde şeker hastalığından dolayı yatan Mehemmed Emin Resulzade 6 Mart, 1955 yılında gece saatı 10:50 de üç defa “ Azerbaycan …. Azerbaycan …. Azerbaycan diyerek ebediyete kavuşmuştur ve Ankara Asri kabristanlığında defn olunmuştur.
Kaynaklar:
- "Azerbaycan" (Rusca) Gazetesi, No.59, 13 Aralık - Yıl 1918.
- 1954 yılında İstanbulda çıkan "Dünya" gazetesi M.E..Resulzadenin "Stalin ile inkilap" adlı dizi hatıra makalesi.
- Abdülvahab Yurtseverin (1898-1976) İstanbul - Hatıra yazısı.
- “ Azerbaycan " Dergisi, Ankara, No3, 1955.26 Şubat, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
