The Kurdish question is one of the biggest unresolved questions of selfdetermination in the Middle East, indeed in the world Sarah Parker reports. FORTY million Kurds have ancient roots in the area in and around the Zagros Mountains, but they have no state of their own. Such a state did not fit with the needs of the victorious powers who established the present Middle Eastern state system on the wreckage of the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I.
Kurdish lands are occupied by the states of Iran, Iraq Syria and Turkey, and the Kurdish populations suffer varying degrees of oppression as minorities in all those states.
Since 1991 two Kurdish parties, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and the Kurdistan Democratic Party have run an entity in Northern Iraq first known as the Kurdish Autonomous Zone and now known as Kurdistan
This area was first set up as a no-fly zone after the uprising at the end of the Gulf War by the people of the area who never accepted their forced inclusion by the British within the Iraqi state.
They saw an opportunity to
escape Baathist tyranny as
Sadaam had been defeated by
the US and Britain. They
believed that if his troops
stayed in the area there would
be mass killings in revenge for
their opposition to the Iraqi
government, including recent
large scale desertions by soldiers who did not want to be
killed on behalf of the
HERERESA.
The Baathists defeated the uprising after the US allowed them to use their attack hellcopters to crush the rebels and 3 million Kurds fled north east and north west, many arriving at the borders of
The US was embarrassed as they had encouraged the uprising. They were also concerned to protect Turkey from destabilisation, as such a huge influx could have strengthened the Turkish Kurds' fight for liberation.
Since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the former KAZ has further developed as a semiautonomous area, in many ways distinct from the rest of
As US politicians and military fight over what to do with the Middle East in general, and Iraq in particular, these distinctions are important. The US is determined to keep bases in Iraq, and feels that Kurdistan is more friendly than the rest of Iraq. Break up of Iraq
There has been much talk about breaking up Iraq, but such a course might cause more problems than it would solve.
Already the Shias and Iran have a considerable grip on the south and west of Iraq. Can the US compromise with them, or will they up the Donald Rumsfeld's replacement, ex CIA boss Robert Gates, meets up with Barzani and Talabani People in the Kurdish areas are angry at the rampant corruption, nepotism and disorganisation of their rulers. stakes and continue to confront Iran?
Can the US come to an agreement with any of its former friends amongst the Baathists and other Sunnis? Would a Kurdish protectorate give too much power to the US's Israeli allies? And how could a separate Kurdish entity be controlled?
At present controlling Kurdistan may seem easy, as the US and Britain's best allies have so far seemed to be Barzani and Talabani, the leaders of the KDP and PUK respectively, but this may not continue.
Although relieved to be rid of the Baathist government, and to have escaped the open warfare of the rest of Iraq, people in the Kurdish areas are angry at the rampant corruption, nepotism and disorganisation of their rulers. They resent the lack of jobs for ordinary people, the constant shortage of fuel for heating and cooking in sub-zero winter temperatures
There is not at present any effective opposition, and people are obviously reluctant to see internal strife that might give openings to Iran, Syria, Turkey or hostile political forces in Iraq. But still a search is underway for a way of changing things.
Significantly, Nawshirwan Mustafa, one of the longstanding central leaders of the PUK, has recently resigned from the party, as have four other top leaders. More people may to follow. Possibly they hope to give some leadership to those who wish to see change for the better and a fairer distribution resources.
Organising an opposition, agreeing on a programme, and reaching a situation where they can exert sufficient power to compel reform and the running of an anti-corruption campaign, let alone a situation where they could change the present leadership, who are supported by the US and Britain, and 200,000 or so tribal militia, is an extremely difficult task, yet the present impasse cannot continue for ever. lations is the question of Turkey. They have not forgiven the Turkish state its refusal to help them open a second front in 2003, but still need them as a strategic military ally and a market for weaponry. So Turkey's hostility to any increase in power of the Kurdish entity, and eagerness for help in crushing the PKK, whose guerrillas still inflict annoying losses on the Turkish army must be taken into account.
The PKK seems to think that the US might be less hostile now because of the alliances in Iraq. But they would be foolish to imagine that the US can tolerate any organisation that retains any independence of thought or action on behalf of oppressed group. The US just seeks to use enemies of its enemies, and is likely to grind them up in the process.
Given the very difficult situation in Kurdistan, including Iran, where of course sadly the regime seems quite happy to keep oppressing the national minorities and do its best to drive them into the arms of the US and Britain, it is hard to make suggestions for how socialists can make a difference directly in the region.
Limited support
A recent article in Socialist Review suggested that the Kurds should look to democratic and progressive forces in the region for solidarity.
But it is unfortunately true
that only a tiny minority of such forces have ever supported the right of the Kurds to self-determination.
Of course any such allies
would be helpful, but at the
end of the day strong selforganisation will be needed,
in a way that can challenge
the new order that the US is
trying to forge in the Middle
This dilemma faces other
oppressed nations under late
capitalism - any country you
care to name would face huge break with the existing order. Such breaks would only have a chance of success in an environment where the struggle for socialism was strong in many other places and where there was an enormous level of international solidarity.
US and British operations in Iraq are trashing the environment and giving rise to a huge flight from Iraq.
For some years there has been a big Kurdish diaspora, both across the Middle East and in Europe, and at present there is also a huge outflow of people, thought to be some 3,000 people a month at present, mainly Iraqi but also Kurdish, from Iraq, because of the disaster that is taking place.
The US and European governments are not really acknowledging this, presumably because it adds another huge political problem to their Iraq strategy.
But where these refugees are in Europe and fighting deportation and marginalisation, and seeking to draw attention to what is happening in Iraq, at least socialists can assist with these campaigns.
In Britain there is a campaign to stop deportations to Iraq which has had some modest success and is still growing. There may well also be a strong response to the recent government announcement that they intend to make ESOL courses harder for asylum seekers to access in
2007 by cutting courses and
making the remaining ones
more expensive.
group which the
Campaign to Stop
Deportations to Iraq has links
with is already campaigning
with ESOL teachers against
these proposals in
Nottingham, and just before
Christmas the UCU
announced it would run a
campaign. It is holding a
public meeting at its
Britannia Street offices on 15
January at 4-6 to which those
interested are invited.