papin raymond a lost millatery id number . send by e mail to reply papin raymon-d @yahoo.com

papin raymond a lost millatery id number . send by e mail to reply papin raymon-d @yahoo.com

KURDS condemn US double-cross and recent escalation of violence by Turkey

Despite all the opportunities to resolve the Kurdish conflict in Northern Kurdistan through peaceful and democratic means, Turkey went on with its violence and attacked Southern Kurdistan under the pretext of chasing PKK fighters.

Despite all the opportunities to resolve the Kurdish conflict in Northern Kurdistan through peaceful and democratic means, Turkey went on with its violence and attacked Southern Kurdistan under the pretext of chasing PKK fighters. The PKK has repeatedly declared ceasefires and confirmed that their fighters are now stationed inside Turkish territory.

After decades of assaults the Kurds started enjoying a period of peace and prosperity under the protection of the United Sates and its allies. The Turkish bombing of Kurdish villages and the incursion into Southern Kurdistan likely occurred after a green light was given by the United States. If this is the case, it will be an indication of hypocrisy and betrayal of the Kurds again and will give the wrong message to those who rely on the United States as a primary protector of freedom and human rights around the world.

We at the Kurdish National Congress of North America are asking our government in Washington to pressure the Turkish military to stop its aggression immediately and start negotiation with the Kurds of North Kurdistan, including the PKK.

Public Relations Committee

Kurdish National Congress of North America

we are as kurds should play as role player and america key player.america have one more chance to keep its national interest safe by
combining kurdistan. some europian colonail
fragmantized kurdistan because of thier interest in regiona.allais and kurds have common enemy and they should collabrate in all aspects in order to build independent kurdish state and protecting americans interest in region. however, gamblling is gamblling lets we play it and make sure we are as kurds have great role.

I have contacted Rahetude to disclose their source, I will let you know if they respond to my inquiry.

On a separate note: Kurdish struggle after the revolution in Iran was in large inspired by the Kurdistan Republic. Kurds ruled their region for a while before the regime invaded and recaptured Kurdish regions. This struggle ended with little success and it has not been recorded in history properly. I see little reference to that extensive experience. May I solicit debaters comment on that experience? A description of weak points and strong points and why it did not record any gain for Kurdish people despite all the sacrifices? What could turn it to a success story?

Badradin Saleh is not the author of the book.He is Berhevkar[compiler].Dezgay chap w billawkirdnewy Mukiryani[ Mukiryani printing and publication House] is the publisher. And the book has been printed
in the printing facilities of Department of
Education in Hewlêr. So they all share responsibility of attributing a worthless
poetry to a Kurdish leader, and hereby damaging his memory.
As none of the sources which have published the text in Persian claimed having access to the " Tac-e Kiyani" of
Keyumers Saleh, so it clearly could be
asserted that they derive from the same source , namely retranslation of Badradin Saleh's compiled book from Kurdish into Persian.
Mr.Amir Matin, can compare the text published in Rahetudeh with a text in a site called Kurdish Site, which even states the name of the translator.

The publisher is not responsible for the work of an author. I will contact the author if he can provide link to the original document. It has been asserted that other sources on the topic are translation from Mr. Saleh's book. I do not think it could be asserted as a fact as they may simply use the same original source.

A short note

It is established without slightest doubt that the poetry attributed to Qasim Sadre Qazi in the book compiled by
Badradin Saleh and then retranslated and published in several other sites and publications , not only lacks any literary value, but damages the validity of the whole document.
As both Mr. Badradin Saleh and his publisher Mukryani Publishing house, have been challenged both over the authenticity of their work here and elsewhere,let us wait for their eventual reaction. If they provide Kurdish public opinion with the document in its original form, then the question of "ill" or " good" intensions could be discussed further

Our internal News

On 4.12.1324 [ 23.02.1946] his Excellency the Pêshawa of Kurdistan in Mahabad's
Camia masque after Friday prayers spoke about the importance of unity between
Kurds and Azerbaijanis . He also pointed out to the necessity of cleanliness of public places, providing the means of living for needy people , adult education of men
and women and schooling of boys and girls of Kurdistan. In his speech he specifically concentrated on the task of promoting culture and education.
The audience were responsive to his call and pledged to implement the beloved leader's
advice. They all, young and old expressed their readiness to contribute to education and
promoting culture.

Translated from KURDISTAN , number 19, 25 February 1946

To answer Kak Hassan Ghazi's question, the article in Rahetude to which I provided the link does not present details of the poetry associated to Mr. Sadre Qazi.

Although I am not advocating the validity of this document as I mentioned before, I fail to comprehend the benefit of rejecting it altogether unless if we can demonstrate it has been fabricated with ill intentions. It is a strong point to argue that Mr. Sadre Qazi never published any poetry, but I would like to understand what are few plausible motivations behind such fabrication. In western judicial system, intention becomes a strong factor when evidences are not resolute. No one engages in fabricating a document of such importance without an agenda. I would like to solicit comments about the content and the intention behind its fabrication.

During the time of Kurdistan Republic, Soviet Union officials were suspicious of Mala Mustafa Barzani and believed he is closely associated with Brits. Also, some local tribes were not happy about his presence. Despite all that, he was a key figure and could have a strong impact on the success of the Republic due to reasons mentioned in my earlier post. Therefore, Republic leadership was pressured to defend Mala Mustafa and justify his association with the Republic. The court procedure makes a lot of reference to Mala Musrafa which is quite understandable as the court officials were all military and Mala Mustafa was still at large with his Peshmarga forces and they need as much information they could gather about him.

The will itself contains extremely important points that Barzani forces could have used during the Kurdish struggle after the revolution in Iran as their position and implication vis a vis that experience was quite disastrous in my opinion. Also, we all remember the bitter episode of KDP turning to Saddam for military aid during the no-fly zone period in Iraq and that again is in direct contrast to what the will recommends.

I read the article about the trial of Qazi Muhammad on Rahe Tudeh publication (2005) that Dr Matin posted and it will be nice to post the rest of article in English and try to find whether the claims in the article are contradictory to facts or not.

It will be more productive, if we look at arguments and facts posted and not the persons and their affiliations who kindly spend their valuable time and energy to translate and post these. Let's be positive.

I will post the translation of the part about Mula Mustafa Barzani.

Dr.Amir Matin disassociates himself completely from Tudeh party ,So far so good, but I don't think any one here is after contributors political affiliations.
What is the point here is, relying on a
Persian translation of a text which itself
according to Bedredin Saleh has been translated from Persian into Kurdish.
As it was mentioned by somebody else here
the same text published in Rahetudeh have been published in several Kurdish related sites as well, but no body have thought to put into question that disservice which is perpetuated towards Sadre-Ghazi
Hejar

A Meeting in Mizgewti Sur (Red Masque)

On 29.10.1324 (19.01.1946) at 08::00 hours a meeting was organised by Democratic Party at Red mosque. The meeting was attended by members of Central Committee of Democratic Party, the National Executive Board, representatives of Kurdistan, party branches and several thousand people, according to the capacity of the masque.

In this meeting the people had a great expectation and were looking forward to a great fest, as 2-11-1324 (22.01.1946) is coming closer. In reality this manifestation was a prelude to that day. People were eagerly waited for program to start. At 09:900 two of the national scalds Hejar and Hemin by asking for permission took the floor and read their poetries.

Later Mr. Hassan Dawudi started his speech by thanking the crowd and emphasised the importance of unity, fraternity, education and literacy.

Then His Excellency peshewa of Kurdistan (Qazi Muhammad) took the floor, welcoming all the representatives and participants. He thanked the people of Mahabad for warmly receiving those who had come far.

In his speech he said:

Kurds have been struggling for freedom for the last two hundred years. Post the First World War the Kurds became further fragmented. A section was annexed to Iraq, a section to Syria, a section to Russia, and the greater parts were left to Turkey and Iran. But these acts did not put off the feeling for liberation among Kurds. The Kurds of Turkey and Iran rose very soon for securing their rights and freedom. The enemies started killing the Kurds. When Badirkhani Kurds were dispersed, Babans and Erdelans entered the battle for Kurdish freedom. Sheikh Ubeydulla, Sheikh Said, and Smail Axa ,the Kurds of Turkey and Ararat rose. Several thousand peoples were perished in these insurrections, but no achievement came at hand, and they all died heroically for the sake of freedom. Then Peshewa took up the question of formation of political parties.
He added, up till now several parties have been established in Kurdistan, and have fought for freedom. They have also sacrificed several hundred thousand people in way to freedom. In Diyarbekir two hundred thousand known Kurds were massacred and this struggle continued in Kurdistan until the Royal Army in Kurdistan was forced into disintegration in August 1941.
Be billaw buni du perr agahi
Bu billaw erteshi shahenshahi
[With the distribution of a two paged leaflet, The Royal Army was disintegrated]
The youth of Mahabad set to work, they followed the scared ideal, in caves, in mountains and homes. They got together clandestinely with organised activities. They could open branches of The Party every where. They mobilized every Kurd. They strengthened themselves. Sometime ago they made known their democratic ideal to the world by demanding autonomy within the borders of Iranian state. But the Iranian government replied with threats and harassment, with tanks and airplanes.
He added, the present world is the scene of struggle for existence. Every nation wants to live in liberty, but what about the Kurdish nation? If Kurdistan wants one day arm several thousand youth for defending the beloved motherland, do the Kurds have the capacity to send their sons and the dearest to battle field?
In answering him the representatives of Kurdistan shouted in one voice and declared their readiness to defend the motherland.
Peshewa also took up the question of collecting taxes. He further spoke about the unity, the importance of education in Kurdish language, and literacy. He concluded his remarks by saying: long live those governments and nations who are struggling for the freedom of distracted nations." ....

Translated from original [Middle-Kurdish] into English

Source: KURDISTAN organ of central committee of KDP [during the republic]
Issue Number 22, Monday 4,March 1946

Hi!
This court procedure, published by Rahetudeh is a translation from the book
published by Mukiryanî Publication in Hewlêrin 2001.
The same Persian translation have been published in other places.
A question to Dr.Matin, is the poetry
included in what have been published by Rahetudeh ?

Folloeing my previous post:

Link to the PDF file:

http://www.rahetudeh.com/rahetude/Sarmaghaleh-vasat/PDF/april-2005/gozaresh-ghazi-mohamad.pdf

The will is embedded in the detailed report of the court procedure. I have cross checked the court procedures with few people and sources and in general I have not found major discrepancies. The issue raised by Kak Hassan Ghazi over the validity of details is still outstanding.

I strongly urge other intellectuals to cross examine the document and mention any possible discrepancies or confirm details they are aware of already.

Source of Qazi Mohammad, Saife Qazi and Sadre Qazi court procedure:

Issue 31 of year 1384 of Rahe Tude.

http://www.rahetudeh.com/rahetude/indexfolder/s1-04-2005/index-11-04-2005.html

This issue was published in April 2005.

And NO, I am not a follower, member or sympathetic to Tudeh Party. I read that issue because I became aware of the coverage of Qazi Mohammad court procedure.

Kak Hassan, I noticed your kind attention to mentioning the source, zor sopas. My comment was addressed to Dr Matin and any future contributors.

I should mention the well organized centenary of Kurdish Media event in London in 1998, where the issues of Kurdistan Newspaper of Badir Khan family were displayed by organizers. [I should mention Kak Hakki from East Kurdistan who was the engine behind the event on 23rd April 1998]. See also
http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~siamakr/Kurdish/KURDICA/1999/MAY/tishki.html

We had an offline discussion with Dr Hassanpour about the fate of Mahabad Kurdistan newspaper and the need to find all copies and archive them. Hopefully in the upcoming 110th annivarsary of Kurdish media on 22nd April 2008 (110 years after publication of the 1st Kurdish newspaper), we see a display of them and even a CD Rom of available copies. I hope the event will be held in Kurdistan with the kind attention of Mr Faraydoon Abdul-Kadir who himself was the editor of Kurdistan Niwe in Iraqi occupied Kurdistan.

Dear S.Magi!
I had stated the source of the text of Qazi Muhhamad's speech. It was KURDISTAN,
the Central organ of KDP.
As far as I know that newspaper which was printed in Mahabad used to come out two or three times a week.At least 113 issues
were published, before the demise of the movement. Thanks to efforts of several
Kurdish researchers 66 issues of KURDISTAN
now exists in private hands. I heard not long ago that further issues of Kurdistan
apart from those 66 issues have been found.
There is a plan to reprint all available issues of the paper.

Dear Kak Hassan Ghazi and Dr Matin, thank you for sharing these important documents with the readers. It would be nice to have the reference to sources that these and similar documents have appeared. These can be added to the Wkipaedia entries for Kurdistan Republic and Qazi Muhammad.

Qazi Muhammad was the architect of the Kurdistan Republic model and his speeches and will are like the blueprint and the foundation model for the republic monument. I am astonished to see this project of reconstructing the Qazi Muhammad's model has not been started sooner. We will be lost if we don't accumulate and learn from our past
efforts and make use of the knowledge
and advice of our past leaders and past efforts.

Peshawa Qazi Mohammad highlights few important notes in the will that are unfortunately still not fully addressed by Kurdish nation and its leaders. Focusing on Eastern Kurdistan:

1) Unity: Peshawa is emphasizing so much on unity. Unfortunately, Kurds in Iran are still fragmented. This was the main weakness of Kurdish struggle after the revolution in Iran. We need a political party to emerge in Kermanshah area to mobilize and polarize the people in that region to align them with the Kurdish cause. More importantly, we need a National parliament in exile to bring all Kurdish parties and factions together to present a unified front to the world. All negotiation with global and regional powers should be made through the parliament. Parliament could also elect a small executive team (government) to manage daily activities.

2) National Duty: Recognizing national duty and putting it above and beyond personal agendas. Every Kurd should assert this mentality and do not let leaders sway away from this policy. Unfortunately, Kurdish leaders are often accused of pushing their personal agendas against interest of Kurdish nation. I believe unification will solve this issue to a lot of extent. Kurdish leaders are often more afraid of each other than their enemies. This mentality leads them to making cheap deals with our enemies for political assurance and protection. This is still a problem that Kurdish nation is facing.

3) National Pride: Kurdish issue became global news by PKK in Turkey and KRG in Iraq. KRG success in Iraq boosted Kurdish nation confidence to an unprecedented level. The timing is perfect to take advantage of this momentum.

4) Education. This is still a major weakness. Being literate is good, but Kurds need world-class professionals. In addition to technocrats, Kurds need renowned historians, journalists, lawyers and political analysts. Kurdish parliament could greatly facilitate this by negotiating scholarships with EU and North America and organizing Kurdish professors in diaspora.

On a separate note, I would like to thank Mr. Hassan Ghazi for his initiative of translating important documents of Kurdish Republic. I think the time is right for a book exclusively covering Kurdish Republic. There are still people with living memories of that experience. This luxury will not last long and we owe it to future generations.

For the benefit of readers here, I intend to translate and introduce some of the first hand documents of Kurdistan Republic of Mahabad. The following text is Qazi Muhammad's speech on the 2nd of Rêbendan (22 January 1946) in the ceremony of proclamation of The Republic in Chuwar Chira sequare in Mahabad, printed in two
issues of Kurdistan;the organ of KDP's Central Committee.
Hassan Ghazi

Kurdistan posses a particular geographical situation. The Kurds without being separated in between by other peoples or nations are directly connected to each other. They have been living in Kurdistan and are the national owners of Kurdistan . They have a common past and history together and they share it together. They own such national traditions and habits that no events and harm have been able to unstable their national foundation.
Kurds from ancient times have had many kings, governors and organizations. Right here in the present free Kurdistan, the dynasty of Mokri amirs whose founder was Amir Seyfudin until (the 1020 Hejri= 1611 A.D.) were independently governing with might, successively from Amir Seyfudin, Sarim Beg, Sheikh Haydar, Amir Beg, Amir Pasha till Qobad Khan.
The brave and honored Kurdish nation in all times and eras has faced up any one who had dared to occupy its territory, and has not refrained from any sacrifice.
Whenever they have lost a dynasty and governorship, they have been in struggle and made efforts to take back their independence and have given sacrifices to gain back their freedom at the price of enduring all kinds of hardships and pains. In spite of all of these, they have tolerated all misery and massacres, and have never given up their aims. They have never stopped to regain their freedom. They have been struggling in such a steady and strong spirit that up till now there have not appeared a force which could strangle them all together. When "Mira, the Blind" was killed, the Babans emerged in his place, when the Babans were pacified, Erdelans raised their heads, when Erdelans were overthrown, the Bitlisis rose up, and there were thousands more like them.
In recent times, after the first World war, the Iranian and Turkish dictatorships came to power. They effectively weakened and curbed the language, traditions and national characteristics of the Kurds. They did not refrain from any brutality and mistreatment. They forbade the learning and writing of Kurdish language and even declared wearing our national costumes illegal.
They were not allowing us to enjoy any kind of human rights and concessions. They had curbed the way of leaning science and industry to us. Every day under different pretexts and using different tricks, they put into prisons groups of poor and unfortunate Kurds one after another or sending them into banishment. They were annihilating and killing Kurds and confiscated the toils of this unfortunate and needy nation for themselves, leaving them hungry, thirsty ,with poor clothing.
In August 1941 the angel of freedom destroyed the dictatorship and fascist structure of Reza Khan, and the Kurds once more could breath a little after all those pressures and hardships. They realized immediately how they could use the existing opportunity, and what should they do for their interest and gaining freedom. The honorable and thoughtful men [of this nation] who had been enduring and tolerating hardships for long and were suffering for the plight of this nation, soon realized that it was time for action and they should use the opportunity. This is a day that generation after generation [of Kurds] have been waiting for. They very rapidly, and without hesitation set to work, and established Kurdistan Democratic Party and engaged in the national task. With an observing eye they carefully diagnosed the needs and requirements of Kurds and tried to implement them.
First of all, they attempted to solve the clan divisions. This division was due to tricks and conspiracies of colonialists and dictators for exploiting this nation by using the tactic of "divide and rule". The extent of division was as such that even genuine brothers were at odds, there was no unity in the air. Everything which caused this division and confusion was resolved and people were organized, generally under the banner of Kurdistan Democratic Party. People acted unanimously, we resisted the Persian language which was forcefully imposed on us. We opened girls and boys schools.
We organized evening schools, the teaching books were translated into Kurdish language. Now boys and girls in day schools and adults in evening schools are studying in the Kurdish language, instead of learning Persian in six-seven years, they rapidly could be literate in their own language.
In order to make known the national ability and introducing the cultural and literary life of Kurds and to make our voice heard by the humanity and justice we were in need of printing and publication equipment. That is why we established a printing house, in our town, in our own language; with our own printing facility, journals and newspapers are printed and distributed to make our views known to the world.
Our agricultural products which were not much but valuable for us were taken from us. The hand of colonialism had created a barrier among us and world market. We were able to find a solution, now the business and the economy of Kurdistan is in a good position.
During the dictatorship we had to pay various taxes, there were no health facilities , no doctors or medication. They were not building any hospitals. Now we ourselves are planning to build adequate hospitals soon in order to meet the needs of the health of our country.
We have organized a national defense force which is prepared to defend courageously the motherland. Of course all our success and achievements are thanks to the idea of democracy and is a fruit of the activities of Kurdistan Democratic Party and the support of the democratic world.
That is why we say hail to the founders of Democratic Party.
The Kurdish nation was facing thousands of obstacles and problems on her way. The dictatorial circles were countering our efforts, they did not refrain from any evil deed against us. The clan and tribal division was a great internal headache for us. But none of these problems could stop our drive. We resisted with a great spirit and continued our activities until we gained the independence and freedom of the Kurdish nation.
Of course Kurdish nation continues its struggle against the remaining internal dangers and outside threats, and with the help of God it will triumph .
Today the representatives of all areas and strata of Kurdistan, landowners and villagers, old and young, are gathered here and cry for democracy in one voice. They plan to follow the path of democracy and that is an indication of the power and effect of democracy.
Translated from Kurdistan, Organ of central Committee of Kurdistan Democratic Party
Number 10, 4 February 1946
Number 11, 6 February 1946

Per S. Magi request, I am posting my humble translation of the so called Qazi Mohammad will adressing Kurdish nation. It is possible that the original will is longer and only a portion of it was reprinted in the article I read as there was "..." between two paragraphs hinting at deletion of some paragraphs.

I have to stress that I am uncertain of the credibility of the source and my translation may not be 100% accurate although I did my best.

****************************************

In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

My dear nation, heirs and brothers, my disregarded brothers, my oppressed nation, in these final minutes of my life, I have few advices to offer.

Stop rivaling and pursuing enmity against each other and instead stand united and support each other. Resist your tyrannical enemies. Under no circumstances offer yourself to your enemies. Your enemy will need you until their task of subjugating Kurdish nation is accomplished and will neither have mercy on you nor spare any opportunity to repress you.

Kurdish nation has several cruel, oppressive and powerful enemies. Key to victory of every nation is to stand united and work together. Being united should be Kurdish nation's main trust. A segregated and non-cohesive nation is always under control of its enemy. Kurdish nation lacks nothing compared to other nations and countries. You are more advanced than many free nations in terms of capability, valor, courage and zeal.
...

My recommendation to you is to strongly encourage your children to be educated. That's where Kurdish nation is lacking. Educate yourselves so that you are in par with other advanced nations in the world. You should not be shaken with our execution, as many more people like us need to perish their lives in this journey to achieve our noble goals and aspirations.

Kurdistan is the home to all Kurds. In a Kurdish home, whoever has the capability and expertise takes responsibility for the task at hand and do not see it as a charitable act but as a duty. Similarly, Kurdistan is our homeland and capable Kurds must arise to the occasion and take responsibility for its affaire as a national duty and not a favor. If you find someone capable of accomplishing a task for our nation, let him meet his duties and do not stand in his way and do not create obstacles for him. With great power come great responsibilities. If I did not have enormous responsibilities, I would not be on the execution row today. Do not count Kurdish nation indebt for your services. Saadi writes:

My intention was advice and told you
In God I trust and left you

Servant of Nation and Motherland, Qazi Mohammad

Dr Kirmanshahi raised an important issue regarding the provincial divisions in Iran and its change after the British project of establishing Pahlavi regime in Iran after WWI. According to my sources, the Qajar period, the name for Iran was "mamaleke Mahruseye Iran" (Ar. mamalek = states with prince). It was changed to "keshvar Shahanshahi Iran" (Iran Kingdom Country) around 1925 using "Keshvar" which may have Medes origin. Rezashah removed the self rule "mamalek" with federal tribal state system of "muluk tawayefi" and replaced it with a central dictatorship most probably following British advice and kingdom model. If Americans were the sponsors of Reza shah, he may have adopted the federal system of the United States which was closer to the Iranian decentralized system and past historic model.

Please correct me if I am wrong or missing some provinces. At some point in last century, even Bahrain was the 14th province of Iran. But around the beginning of past century (1900 AD), the name of Kurdish provinces was Ardalan. Other provinces were: Azerbaijan, Baluchestan, Farsistan (i.e. Fars), Gilan, Irak-e Ajami, Khorasan, Khoristan, Kirman, Larestan, Lorestan and Mazandaran. It is interesting to note that there is no province called Tehran, the capital. The Iranian system was a historical "Iranistan model" which Mohammad Reza Shah was afraid of, due to lack of knowledge of Iranian past systems over the past 3000 years.

By 1950, East/West Azerbaijan provinces were formed from Azerbaijan (and Ardelan). Ardalan Kurdish "mamlekat" disappears and Kirmanshah and Isfahan provinces are among the 10 provinces in Iran (see below). Larestan/Lorestan became Khuzestan. Over the 1960-1981 period. The former mamalek/states were further subdivided into smaller and smaller provinces. But the divisions show the historic and geographic link among these provinces.

After 50's, Kurdistan and Zanjan provinces were separated from the 1st province Gilan.
Markazi and Semnan and another province were separated from the 2nd province
Mazandaran. Tehran new province was part of Markazi. The 3rd and 4th provinces remained as East and West Azerbaijans. Ilam and Hamedan provinces were separated from the 5th province Kirmanshah. Lorestan and Boyer Ahmad/Kohkiloye provinces were separated from the 6th province Khozestan. Bushehr (Khalij Fars) province was separated from the 7th Fars province and Hormozgan (Oman sea islands) province separated from the 8th province Kirman. The 9th province remained as Khorasan. Yazd and Chahar Mahal Bakhtiyari were separated from the 10th province Isfahan.

The fate of Sistan/Baluchestan province is missing from my records of 10 provinces, but at some point in past history it has been part of Kirman. After revolution in Iran, the Ardabil province was separated from East Azerbijan and Khorasan was subdivided into smaller provinces. The fragmentation of the Iranian historic states into smaller provinces is still continuing. Should the 20th century fragmentation policy be reversed is a question that should be dealt with by the next regime in Iran if Iran's territorial integrity is preserved.

The historic links between the smaller provinces (e.g. Khuzestan, Loristan links, Kirmanshah, Hamedan and Ilam links and Kurdistan, Zanjan and Gilan links) may be traced in some cases to the ancient past. For the roots of the historical states over the past 2500 years look at the stone carvings and epigraphs of Bistun in Kirmanshah or Persepolis near Shiraz where Kurdistan territory (Media) is mentioned as a country next to Egypt, Armenia and Afghanistan ruled by "King of Countries". See http://www.livius.org/be-bm/behistun/behistun03.html

It is the responsibility of the Kurdish intellectuals to help the Kurdish nation to recover from "historic amnesia" in order to recall its near past (last century) and distant past (40 centuries ago). Such reporting requires patience and tolerance for mistakes and correction of mistakes.

Dr Matin, May I ask you to kindly send the translation of "the will of Qazi Muhammad addressing the Kurdish nation" as a historic document for the readers (to go under scrutiny and authentication).

Dear Amir Matin !
The first charge against SAdre Qazi according to the book I mentioned is as following :
"Nûsînî shêrêkî hemasî gerim bo Mela Mistefay Barzanî u bew shêre be xêr hênan u
pêhellgutinî wekû remzî pîrozî gelî Kurd "
which in English translation would be:
" Writing an bravery warm heroic poetry for Mulla Mustefa Barzani, and with this poetry welcoming and praising him as a symbol of Kurdish victory"
The word "Remz" is an arabic word , widely used in Persian and Middle Kurdish , it denotes the meaning of English symbol , although it can be translated into "key" as well.
My point in the previous post was the text of poetry itself. Attributing it to Sadre Qazi,seriuosly put into doubt the whole document.

A correction to my previous post:

I meant to write that Mala Mustafa Barzani represented South Kurdistan instead of East Kurdistan.

Dear Hassan Ghazi,

I have not seen the book you mentioned, but I have read an article in Farsi in April 2005 that discussed a report written by Sarwan Kiomars Salih on the court procedure against Qazi Mohammad, Saife Qazi and Sadre Qazi. Mr. Salih is the nephew of Shams' husband, Fereidoun Jam. Shams is Shah's sister.

The article matches what you briefly described here and mentions that the first charge (out of four) against Mr. Sadre Qazi as:

Writing a poet for Mala Mustafa Barzani to welcome him and mention him as "key to the victory of Kurdish nation. The article asserts that Mr. Sadre Qazi accepted the charge. I have to clarify that it is very well possible that this article is taken out of the same book that you mentioned, but it is written in Farsi. Your translation mentions Mala Mustafa as "symbol" of Kurdish people's victory. The article I have uses the exact wording of "Ramze Piroozie Mellate Kord". I prefer to translate this to "Key to Kurdish nation's victory."

I personally believe Mala Mustafa Barzani could have been considered as a key to victory at the time, as he represented East Kurdistan, had legendary military capabilities and had a considerable number of Peshmarga forces under his command. Calling someone as "Symbol of Kurdish nation's victory" would have been quite premature and hence unlikely.

The article also publishes the will of Qazi Mohammad addressing Kurdish nation. Are you aware of such will?

Doubts over authenticity of a book which has been presented as defense
text of leaders of Kurdistan Republic in Iran's military tribunal

In 2001 , Mukuryani Publications in Hewlêr published a book (in Middle- Kurdish)under the title "The president of Kurdistan Republic before Iran's Court" . The compiler of this text is Mr. Bedredin Salih . In a preface to the book he says the text is written by a certain Lieutenant Kiyumars Salih who according to compiler have been a reporter of Royal Iranian Army's Journal , and have attended the trail himself.
The book contains 12 point indictement cases against Qazi Muhammed, 3 points against Muhammad Hussein Seif Qazi the vice-president and minister of defense and 4 points against Abolqasim Sadre Qazi the deputy of Iranian parliament during the 14th period of Iranian Majlis and a representative of Qazi Muhammad In Tehran.
No where in the book we see a trace of original text in Persian , and all material is presented in middle- Kurdish "translation". When I read the book , I doubted its authenticity very soon and have drawn the attention of Kurdish readers to that in several TV programs.
In first indictment case against Sadre Qazi " he is accused of writing a warm emotional poetry for Mulla Mustefa Barzani praising him and welcoming him as the symbol of Kurdish people's victory "
As a student of Kurdish Republic's history I had never heard Sadre Qazi to write poetry, but in order to be confident about the case ,I contacted the daughter of Sadre Qazi and his nephew who both are literate persons and have been closely familiar with Sadre Qazi's life and activities . They both witness to the fact that he has never written poetry.
From a literary point of view the piece presented as Sadr Qazi's poetry is very weak and contains words and expressions which have neither been in use in Kurdish writings at that period, nor could be expressed by him.

This two points made me to conclude that the whole book is a falsification, unless the compiler and publisher come out with a satisfactory explanation.
In a recent clarification written by Mr. Bedredin Saleh published in Kurdish Website Dimane [ 31.08.2006] , he explains how he has obtained the document , but is silent about the poetry piece associated to Sadre Qazi
We still do not know if the original poetry was in Kurdish, or he has translated that into Kurdish from Persian?
To my astonishment , in spite of those serious doubts neither the Kurdish writers familiar to the history of Kurdistan Republic , nor Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran have expressed doubts over this document.
I think both the compiler and the publisher in order to shed lights to their work, should publish the original text in their possession , then the policies of the ousted monarchical regime of Iran against the leaders of Kurdistan Republic become clearer further.

I have a question from Kurds in Iran and Kurdish parties in Iran. Assuming that a form of self rule is given to Kurds in Iran tomorrow (e.g. devolution of power). Are they ready to form a national government? We are 60 years after the republic, but I haven't seen any experience of formation of parliament in Kurdish occupied regions in Iran. Why? Or am I missing some facts here?

Look at KRG parliament project in Iraq, or the Kurdish Parliament in exile by Kurds in Turkey. One should congratulate them despite the shortcomings. My question is why there is no efforts by Kurdish parties in Iran (KDPI, Komola, ...) to form such an institution in exile and start debating issues and learn the "culture of debating and tolerance" of the ideas of each other. By "culture of debate", I refer to a beautiful instance of it here where Dr Matin says "let's agree to disagree".

Wouldn't it be nice if the representatives/leaders of Iranian Kurdish parties in Washington had used such statements to show their disagreements instead of reportedly angry outbursts (e.g. reported by Iranian news media such as Baztab)? I think the Kurdish parties in Iran need to start dialogue among themselves more at high levels of parties. It is more than needed than say dialogue with Azeris or Persians. My question is that why KDPI Dr Qasemlou was ready to give his life in a dialogue by Iranian regime, but we didn't see such face to face dialogue between Komola and KDPI leaders in the past where they debate with each other and Kurdish audience read or listen to their positions on different policy issues and arguments and counterarguments, the way the US presidential candidates debates? Am I asking too much or expecting too much from Kurds?

Why Kurds in Iran cannot have a symbolic parliament in exile in one of European cities with representatives from different Kurdish cities and parties, from Kirmanshah to Mahabad? With present teleconference technology, even participants can attend such meeting from thousands of miles away or a very simple text debate format like our debate (thanks to Washington Post Postglobal) can be used.

What I propose to Kurds and US policymakers is to make this their no 1 priority and encourage setting up such initiatives if they want to spend their money on Kurdish democracy project. This is "more important than fax machines" and tvs and ... .

For learning diplomacy dance in a group, one needs a diplomatic dance floor and its culture... I mean "diplomacy cha cha cha ...".

It is very interesting debate and I enjoy how Kurdish and non-Kurdish academic personalities are trying to solve the mysterious of unsolved territorial problems left over from x-Ottoman and x-Persian empires. We might need to open our minds and separate the debate between historical geography, geopolitics and ethnic toleration. The Middle East reconstruction after the Ottoman Empire's fall was an imposed old colonial policy of major powers. They refurbished the area to back their future Middle Eastern policy. Their effects on decision making in courtiers like Persia led to the "Teqsim Erazi of 1931" which in term led to renaming Persia to Iran, and many western Iranian Territories known to people got new names and borders, such as Dilamkan, Rewand, Piran, Shadyan, Qasan, Mukriyan, included in the new area as Azarbajan Qarbi. Now I would like to know whether the Azarbajani's felt their new identities become stronger by just renaming these territories. Is the conflict an ethnical based on an ancient dispute or just initiated since 1930s? How come that the majority in all populated area in West Azarbajan is still Kurdish? Does Azeri's in west Azarbajan like Kurds in Qzwin province accept that they are minority? Let's have a new perspective to this debate as boarder and geography is not a solution. The story of Modern Africa is good evidence that millions of people are displaced and mass killed due to colonial geographic reforms of early 1900s.

Dear Soleiman, we appreciate if these discussions are made available for Kurdish speakers on your gzing.org site or any other site. There is a future plan to
make a more organized version of debates available on a Kurdish site such as Kurdistanmedia.org

HEJAR,

With respect to giving up Mukrian, I was suggesting the impossible hence enforcing the idea that our Kurdish leaders have no choice but working with Azeri Turks. I am in agreement with your recent post with the exception of Naghadah bloodshed. Since there has never been an independent fact finding commission investigating that unfortunate event, let's agree to disagree. Again, I agree that it marked a huge setback for Kurdish struggle and I hope Kurdish leaders work diligently to prevent similar events from ever happening.

In Iraq, Kurdish leaders are working very well to include minorities in their platform. Their next big challenge is to win Turcomans to join them rather than creating obstacles for them. They need to be bold and share the administration to some extent with Turkomans, otherwise it will not happen. There are bad stories coming out of Kirkuk and certainly hope Kurdish leaders to pay more attention to Turkoman inclusion in KRG.

To the Attention of Mr.S.Magi
Hi, My name is S.Chireh,I have a Kurdish site in which I publish articles and literature concerning Kurdish culture and politics.
I appreciate much if I get permission from you and distinguished debaters and other commentators to translate some of the comments here into Middle-Kurdish and post them in the Site ; www.gzing.org
With Kind Regards,
Kurdish electronic Journal Gzing
Editor
S.Chireh

Mutual respect and understanding is the only way to peaceful coexistence
among Kurds and Azerbaijani Turks !

Kurdish Republic of Mahabad was established in Mukiryan territory which is less than half of Kurdish inhabited territories in Iran's geography and for the time being is part of
Western Azerbaijan state administration. The whole "western Azerbaijan" ethnically and culturally could not be considered Kurdish or Azerbaijani. there are areas which are clearly Kurdish , Like Mahabad , there are areas which are mixed and there are clearly Azerbaijani Turkish inhabited areas , based on that when the question of territory comes up to the agenda of elected representatives of both peoples they should negotiate with each other and arrive at some kind of consensus .
To write " Without their [Azerbaijani Turks ] support, a Kurdish self rule in the region will not be viable unless if we give up most of the Kurdish region(Mukrian) located in Azerbaican Gharbi ". From a Kurdish point of view this statement is strange because no one expects kurds to give up most of Kurdish region in Mukiryan. As it was mentiond above the present designation is an administrative division and not a reference to a specific ethnic group.
As Dr. Elturan had mentioned in this debate; there is an Azerbaijani Turkish TV station airing from USA , which contrary to all broadcasting criteria and moral principles spreads lies and fabricated news about Kurdish people and Kurdish political organizations. Most of the time It uses the same terminology and accusations which are part of official propaganda in Iran and Turkey against the Kurds. So far no democratically minded Azerbaijani formations objected openly to this war mongering vis-à-vis Kurds, But certainly this anti-Kurdish expedition is not representative of Azerbaijani feelings towards the Kurdish people .
The task of Kurdish intellectuals and Kurdish political parties should not be a reactive position to such racist and cheap propaganda , rather ,it should be a proactive and open support to
the national rights and identity seeking movement of Southern Azerbaijanis based on mutual respect and understanding and without giving up Kurdish demands and reality.
What I wrote About Naghade was not to "distort the history" , I consider that bloodshed as an ethnic strife which resulted into ordinary , innocent people killing each other, no matter the motives , That bloody incident was a great set back to Kurdish movement . I don't know if Dr. Matin have had the opportunity to read both Kurdish and Azerbijani Turkish accounts about Naghadeh massacre. if he does and if he is open to reason he will see that both groups were to blame.

HEJAR

On the topic of relationship between Azeri Turks and Kurds in Iran:

I have to clarify that many of my best friends are Azeri Turks and I have maintained very close relationship with them. Kurds and Azeri Turks are intertwined in the Iranian Kurdistan and any attempt at creating a Kurdish self-rule enclave in the region should very carefully consider this fact. I personally believe Azeri Turks have the capability to either help creating a strong and viable Kurdish autonomy in the region or simply destroying it. Kurdish leaders should work very hard on this issue to establish mutual understandings and close collaboration and coordination with Azeri Turk representatives. The situation in Iran is much more complicated than Kirkuk, because Azeri Turks are much more populous than Kurds in Iran, have a strong grasp on Iranian government and diverge in religion with primarily Sunni Kurds. Without their support, a Kurdish self rule in the region will not be viable unless if we give up most of the Kurdish region (Mukrian) located in Azarbaiejan Gharbi.

After the revolution in Iran, Azeri Turks remained extremely unsympathetic to Kurdish claims for autonomy and their plight. In several cases, Azeri Turks were quite hostile to Kurds during that period and used to mock Kurds on these demands. I remember not being comfortable to go to Azeri Turk cities fearing to be beaten up if they find out about my ethnicity. Kurds were intimidated and sometimes beaten in Turkish cities located in close proximity of Kurdish cities. You would be safer in Tabriz as it was far from Kurdish cities. Unfortunately, Iranian regime was far more successful in playing the Shiaa card with Azeri Turks than Kurdish leaders in playing the minority rights card with them. To set the record right, I have to disagree with the statement that both Kurds and Azeri are to be blamed equally for the bloodshed in Naghadeh. This is distortion of history to please Azeri Turks and I do not believe it is the right thing to do. Azeri Turks and Iranian regime should accept responsibility for it and other atrocities against Kurds. As far as I personally witnessed Kurds were acting in self defense. Kurds showed a respectable self control during the whole period of conflict with the Iranian regime. While Kurdish cities were being bombed by Iranian Airplanes and rockets and Kurdish villages were being raided and razed, Kurdish youngsters were being arrested and executed by Iranian army, Pasdars and Basijis staffed in large with local Azeri Turks such as Hassani and his gangs, Kurds never launched offensive attacks again neighboring Turkish cities although in many cases they were in their fire range. Kurds never launched a (suicide) bombing campaign in Azeri Turk cities to show the bitter taste of terror that Kurds were experiencing first hand. I think it was an admirable attitude and Kurds should be commanded for that rather than being considered equally responsible. Just look at the nature of resistance in Iraq and Israel with all those suicide bombings taking innocent lives. Fortunately, Kurds in Iran never descended to that level.

Again, I do not attempt at singling out Azeri Turks as Iranian regime played the same game with Kermanshahis and used them against the Kurdish movement if Sanandaj region. In that case although most of the Basijis and Pasdars from Kermanshah were Kurds, they were Shiaa too and regime was successful in playing that card very well completely overshadowing the ethnic identity. Therefore, I argue it is not a question of being Kurd or Azeri Turk, but it is a question of dirty politics played by the Iranian regime.

Today, the Shiaa stock is devaluation very quickly and I do not think government can use it as a strong card anymore. Kurdish leaders in Iran should establish bilateral understanding with Azeri Turks based on the mutual needs for freedom of culture, language and right to self determination and sway them away from ethnicity and religious tendencies that impose an surmountable wall between Kurds and Turks in Iran. It is a hard task but achievable. They should also do their homework and ensure to bring Kermanshah and its surroundings on board with the movement.

I am surprised no one mentioned "Kurdish Republic of Ararat" yet. I have not been able to collect much information about this experience and I appreciate any additional information on this Kurdish Republic and its possible link to Red Kurdistan given it was founded only 4 years after the Red Kurdistan and their existence overlapped.

Apparently, the Kurdish Republic of Ararat was self-proclaimed as independent state in 1927 and survived until 1931. The Republic was founded during a wave of revolution among Kurmanji Kurds in south-eastern Turkey after the Treaty of Sèvres. It was not supported by any foreign support and was not recognized by any international player.

The following link mentions the name of Republic founders and the flag that was used for the Republic.

http://www.worldstatesmen.org/Turkey.html

I don't know why? but I get sensitive when the academics are not accurate with their facts.
Dr Nowicki writes" I mentioned that Qazi Muhammad met with Roosevelt who was the American commander of US in the region"
In reality at that period there were no US
troops in the region{region in the control of Kurdish self rule).
Capitan Archie Roosevelt was a military
attache at US emabbasy in Tehran-Iran, In july 1946 he paid a visit to Azerbaijan and
Mahabad and met with Qzai Muhammad there.
In July 1947 he published a lengthy article
about his trip to Mahabad in The Middle East Journal.
Years later he published a more detailed account of his visit to Mahabad and about conversation with Qazi Muhammad and other leaders of Kurdistan.Two chapters
of his memoirs [ For Lust of Knowing
Memoirs of an intelligence officer , published by Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1988)are devoted to the Kurdish question.
Possibly for Dr. Nowicki's interest, Roozevelt talks about his aquaintance with
Dr. Hashem Shirazi in Tehran in the same memoir.

23 years after 1923 red Kurdistan, the 1946 Kurdistan Republic happened as the "second wave" of Kurdish republic building. All of us are aware that 33 years after 1946 Republic, a bigger wave of Kurdish independence engulfed the Kurdistan occupied regions in Iran in 1979 (Both Mahabad and Sanandaj regions). That is the Iranian revolution.

A question should be why that 1979 wave that had more power, strength and media access than 1946 did not translate into the 3rd Kurdistan republic in the region? The question is that if there was a US or USSR giving support for 1979 Kurdish uprising, would that support translate into better coordination between different Kurdish forces? If the USSR support was lacking in 1946 republic or the US support was lacking for present KRG in Northern Iraq would it have helped or damaged the experience? Could Kurds have come up with a sept 1998 Washington Peace accord to resolve the differences between PUK and KDP.

Let's not kid ourselves, the Iranian Pahlavi dynasty and Iraq royal family were both brought into power by the British in the region. The Brits went as far as bombing the Kurds to force them to submit to the new order in Iraq and Churchil considered the use of chemical weapons against Kurds. When we look at the support of USSR for the 1946 republic, we don't see the Soviets bombing the Iranian forces or considering use of Chemical weapons? Do we? The USSR's limited support for the 1946 republic came at the time when Rezashah and Shah of Iran were fully supported by the British and later American military advisors and orientalists. I mentioned that Qazi Muhammad met with Roosevelt who was the American commander of US in the region. What did he tell Qazi? I am sure, he didn't say we support Kurds.

Let's not forget the context in which these developments happened in the region.
The 1946 Kurdistan Republic was a
"defining moment" for the Kurds despite all its shortcomings.

I go one step further and I argue that if the Kurds want to have a successful nation building experience, they need to bring on board a great power (not neighbours) to the table to support them in the context of the competition among players in the international relations diplomacy game. Qazi was clever to read the international game and try to play the game, but he was not very familiar with the rules of the game. He should have cashed his Kurdish stocks to a limited form of self rule before its values went to zero before Soviet negotiations with Iran end in the Caspian deal.

The Kurds in Iraq are playing the game much better and they have managed to bring a great power to the table to offset the influence of other great players in the region. They are also cashing their stocks as they go on and don't play high risk and as in 1975 putting all their eggs in the basket of the great power.

For Kurds in Turkey, that great power is EU and for Kurds in Iran that great power could be the "United States of America". "Are the Kurds in Iran and Turkey ready to forget about their Mosque/Marx differences and learn the new rules of the game from their cousins in Iraq" and "play the game" is another question. It is like learning to dance to the music with your partner and the music is going on very soon in the region ...

Even this debate and question answering is part of the readiness and maneuvers for starting the diplomacy Polka dance where you need your partner to Polka ...

Sorry I did not have time to read all of Discussion from the most respectfull reseacher. But one thing motivated me to take part on this matter of Kurdish people.
As I looked at titel of subjects, it shows that the discussion circled about the Republik of Kurdistan in 1946 and we read often about that, the old story formulated by Agents and securities Personal. It is a saying that: "The Record is so old, to hearing it allways, it bothers the ears". Now, there is no cold War any more and no Socialist counries, to use it as Target! whay we are not brave enough to tell the truth? I wish that the academic Personalities of Iran, Turky and Arab (Iraq and Syrian)who do not want to see the Kurds receives his right, they should lern at least some thing from ex Foreign secretary of America, in which She confess that they made very bad mistak in the year of 1953 in Iran.

Dear Dr.Amir Matin !
"Debate or debating is a formal method of interactive and position representational argument. Rules governing debate allow groups and individuals to discuss and decide issues and differences....(From Wikipedia,The free encyclopedia)
Of course when one engages in debate accepts and expects "difference of opinion"
What I objected in your previuos comment was ,calling "Kurdistan Republic of Mahabad" a proxy of Soviet Union. This is an accusation repeated time and again by those who are not happy with Kurdish distinct political identity. Of course there were lots of deficiencies with regard to the Kurdistan Republic , which you mentioned some and there are other points which should be clarified further. But the proclamation of Republic itself without thinking about its viability , was an independent decision of Kurds themselves and this aspect actually is the crux of that experience.
You may be aware of the course of events ,when his late Qazi Muhammed in two occasions engaged in negotiations with the shrewd Iranian prime minister Qawamulsaltanhe he was not received as the predident of Kurdish Republic , but as the leader of Kurdistan ( rehber-e Kordestan [in Persian]. What I am trying to say is that the republic was not recognized by any one , and one of its main deficiencies was to be decieved in negotiations with Iranian central government officials.
In recent years there have been lots of discussions in Iran about the experience of Kurdistan Republic . "Cheshm Endaz-e Iran" a review coming out in Persian in Tehran, devoted a special issue to the Kurdish question (autmn 1384=2005) . A certain Ehsan Hooshmand in an essay in that review " A sociological glance to the formation of Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran " tries to put into question the authencity of Kurdish nationalism vis-à-vis Iranian Nationalism and argues the Kurdish leaders at that period were not motivated by nationalistic interests but were after their personal gains. A dozen of essays and articles have been published in refuting Hooshmends claims. One of the problems with his analysis is, that he totally ignoers the construction nature of Nationalism , something that defenders of separate Kurdish political identity should emphesize instead of dreaming of glorious ancient history.
HEJAR

Dear HEZAR,

I would like to remind you that there is a huge difference between ignorance and difference of opinion. You believe the Republic of Mahabad is the greatest thing happened to Kurds and looking at it with critical eyes is "an insult to the pride and honour of Kurdish people." I respect your opinion and do not label your opinion as "ignorance" or "insult." My opinion diverges from yours on this matter as I am noting several deficiencies with regard to the Kurdish Republic of Mahabad. I believe Kurds could do much better and should not take that model as an ideal. The very point of this debate is to critically analyze recent experiences to pave the way for the best possible model to emerge. HEZAR, let's learn from our mistakes rather than repeating them over and over.

I agree that majority of people in Mahabad have deep respect for Qazi Muhammad for many reasons, but most notably because he stayed to take responsibility for the Republic which probably saved many lives in the city and prevented mass torture and extortion. He clearly stayed defiant during the court procedures and offered no consensus. Finally, he willingly offered the ultimate price for the cause proving he had noble intentions, a gesture few leaders have ever demonstrated.

However, the Kurdish Republic of Mahabad had many issues. Qazi founded the Republic after consulting with the Soviet Consul in Tabriz and visiting Baku. Remaining photos of the Republic shows some Kurdish officers wearing uniforms very similar to those of USSR army. Qazi Muhammad never denied that the Republic was funded by the USSR, but clarified that he is not communist and his ideals were too different from the Soviets. McDowall (pp. 244-245) writes that many tribes abondoned Qazi once the sovient support was gone. He also mentions that some Kurds deserted Mahabad, including one of Mahabad's own marshalls, Amr Khan. Qazi was in prison from 15 December 1946 to 31 March 1947 and I have not seen any report of major unrest or mass demonstartion during that periode. The mood in Mahabad was sombre after Qazi was hanged in ChowarChra and again no major unrest or demonstration have been reported. This indicates that even in Mahabad there was not deep rooted participation from the masses. I know we are living in a different era, but remember what happened after Ocalan was arrested. There was massive unrest in most major Kurdish cities including Kermanshah. Many people set themselve on fire, risking their lives, as a sign of protest. I personaly belive Qazi deserves much more respect and attention than Ocalan.

The fact is that today the desire towards an autonomus Kurdish self rule is deep rooted amongst Kurdish people. The political climate is changing and Kurdish leadres can rely on their own people. During the writing of the constitution in Iraq, Kurdih leadres and activists could organize massive demonstrations to support their key claims. US, Shia and Sunni representatives could not easily ignore claims made by Talabani or Barzani if hundreds of thousand demonstraters echoed it on the street. Unfortunately, many leaders are afraid of bringing masses into the street as they fear people can turn against them if they do not act in people's best interest. This does not apply to Qazi as I am convienced he had the most noble intentions, he simply did not have enough time to mobilize the mass before founding the Republic.

Claiming that " Kurdish Republic of Mahabad was a proxy of Soviet Union " and
" Kurdish Republic of Mahabad had more roots in the Soviet Union than in the Kurdish population" is an insult to the pride and honor of Kurdish people and is contrary to all historical facts.
The proclamation of the Republic was contrary to the desires of Soviet Union which wanted Kurds to remain part of the Azerbaijani administration at that time.
So far all sources written about this experience of Kurdish rule in parts of Eastern Kurdistan refer to its popularity among " Kurdish population"
The following is an evidence which substantiate the popularity of the republic among "Kurdish population" even years after of its demise: " When we got ill (in my childhood), my mother would take us to the Qazis' grave in order to heal; it was a shrine and my mother told us that they were martyrs" Amir Hassanpour, in Kurdistan In The Shadow of History, page209, 1997)
It is alarming to be such ignorant about an history which is still in living memory , at the same time speak adamantly about " The failure of Kurds to build their nation-state in fifteen century" ?
Was there any "nation- state " in 15th century any where ?

Hejar

I have no problem with limiting the scope of this debate to modern Kurdish history and state building experience. However, with all due respect, I disagree that analyzing Kurdish far history has no advantage at all. This is an important aspect that gives Kurds legitimacy in eyes of their neighbors. Most of Kurdish neighbors denigrate Kurds, as they are unaware of their roots because of their tainted education. Turks call them mountain Turks, Iraqis and Syrians see them as immigrants and Iranians observe them as third class and backward citizens not worthy of full partnership. Unfortunately, many Kurds accepted those negative perceptions and tried to distance themselves from their Kurdish identities. If we want to understand a nation aspiration, we should first understand what their near and far experiences have been. To stress this fact, I believe the reason Kurds failed to establish an independent state in fifteen century was the fact that they were trapped in their empire building tradition rather than nation-state building.

Returning to the recent history, this mentality is still persisting in Kurdish leadership. Kurdish Republic of Mahabad was a proxy of Soviet Union and consequently could not survive long enough to give Kurds enough time to analyze them. Kurdish Republic of Mahabad had more roots in the Soviet Union than in the Kurdish population and that was the drastic miscalculation as states nurture and survive from their nations. I have heard many instances of abuse of power in that less than a year of experience and there is not a lot of evidence of people rallying around the Mahabad Republic suggesting people were having clouds of suspicion still lingering.

Kurdish leadership should start relying more on Kurdish nation and less on regional and global superpowers. Regional and global powers are important but the main trust should be in the Kurdish nation itself. A model based on regional and global powers can simply not survive.

First of all I would like to suggest the debate be limited to the contemporary history of Kurdistan , because talking about different principalities and dynasties in the past and relating them to the present Kurds as a people and Kurdistan as a territory does not shed any light on present division of the land and its sate of being.
A constructive approach will be the analysis of emergence of Nationalism in present Kurdistan.
S. Magi rightly observes " Kurdish history of even past century is not clear to Kurds" so when it is the case why should we try to apply an essentialist method in order to describe the present ?
On the history of Red Kurdistan there are not enough sources in English to be consulted.The following are a handful of material which could be found on the Net.
1-Kurdistan Autonomous Oblast [Wikipedea]
2-Red Kurdistan , Kurds in the former Soviet Union
www.geocities.com/Athens/9479/kurd-sov.html
3-Two Maps of the Red Kurdistan
4-The Kurds of Azerbaijan
5-Another Sad Story by: Nezzameddin Rzayev
in http://sayinqella.blogspot.com
Monday , July 31,2006

The last mentioned source is a recent memoir like observation written by a person whose parents has been former residents in "red Kurdistan" Rzayev himself have been driven from the enclave by Armenian army during the battle over Karabakh.
According to Rzayev no single Kurd could be found in those areas any longer.
There is no evidence to suggest that the leaders of Kurdistan Republic of Mahabad
have studied or have been extensively aware of the plight of that period of Kurdish self rule in Red Kurdistan. In one of the issues of KURDISTAN , which was the organ the Kurdistan Democratic Party during the Kurdish self rule in parts of Eastern Kurdistan , there is an article about Siyamand Siyamandov a Kurdish Soviet general who have been
praised as a war hero during the second World War.Some of the soviet officers
in Mahabad area who were in contact with Kurdish leadership were of Kurdish origin , including Salahaddin Kazimov who were given the name Kakagha in Mahabad. Salahaddin Kazeimov died in the beginning of 70s in an incident in Baku.
In some sources there is a reference to some Kurdish families from Soviet Union , being resided in Mahabad during the Republic, although I have not seen any evidence to substantiate this claim.
To sum up , it is hardly correct to say that the experience of Kurdish rule in Lachin and Kalbajar was widely known in Mahabad at that time or there was any concern over its demise.

Hassan Ghazi

Two important issues in historic link is noteworthy:

1) "Mitanni" (land of Mit-ra) preserved in ancient Medes capital HangMitanni (I.e. Hamedan) is the missing link between present term Mihan (homeland) and past glory of Mitanni empire (1500 BC). I argue that the term "Mihan" is the transformation of Mitanni. Compare "Mihr" and ancient Mitra.

2) Kurdish history of even past century is not clear to Kurds. For example what was the structure of 1923 red Kurdistan, who were administrating it? Was there any link between 1923 red Kurdistan in Caucasus and 1946 Kurdistan Republic? Was any friend or relative of Qazi Mohammad family in Caucasus affiliated with red Kurdistan?
Or did Qazi Muhammad study the red Kurdistan model, similar to the familiarity of KRG president Barzani with 1946 republic? ....

I agree with the fact that Kurds are a people and a nation with all its characteristics. Kurds are indeed amongst the most outstanding nations in the world with their rich and colorful history of major contributions to human civilizations as described in my previous post.

However, modern Kurdistan as we know it is not and has not been a country and therefore cannot be considered as an occupied country. Kurds have been betrayed many times in far and recent history, but have not been occupied. I believe transfer of power from Medes to Persian was relativity peaceful and Medes contributed as much as Persian if not more to the new empire as stated by Herodotus as well. Even far into the Persian empire history, there are many evidences of recorded history that Kurds fiercely defended Persian empire. Referring to Islamic history and its invasion of Iran as recounted by Arab historians, most of fighter working with Hormozan resisting Arab invasion were identified Kurds and were not referred to as Persians although they were defending Persian empire. This indicates that Kurds were an independent nation but willingly took part in the Persian empire and paid with their lives for it. In the most recent history, Kurds willingly contributed into the Islamic empire and subsequently the Ottoman empire. Saladin is one example who dominated the Islamic empire and recorded major victories, but never pushed for any Kurdish Agenda. During the war between Iranian Safavid and Ottoman empire in 1512 , Kurds took sides and were divided amongst the two rivals and did not push for any independent state. Their aspiration was rather limited to be part of the existing superpowers and play within that platform rather than creating an independent platform. Only after Kurdish land were formally divided in two portions that disrupted their way of life and functioning, Kurds started to feel the pain and the nostalgia grew amongst Kurdish intellectuals leading to the thinking of creating an independent Kurdish state. I argue that the first incident of Kurdish nostalgia and aspiration for a fully independent state started after the Chaldiran treaty between Safavid and Ottoman that divided Kurds for the first time. Ottoman empire was partitioned after the WWI and Kurds were betrayed again and failed to secure an independent state. That was not an occupation either, but rather another betrayal. Kurds were simply too loyal to the past and failed to fully comprehend new geopolitical trends of the move to mini states rather than regional superpowers. The two instances of Red Kurdistan and Kurdish Republic of Mahabad were too small and too short in Kurdish history to be asserted as independent counties that have been occupied later. Therefore, technically we cannot use the term occupied Kurdistan as modern Kurdistan has not been occupied.

Having said that Kurds are a nation and have been subjected to atrocities of genocidal proportions in Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Syria and have full right to establish an independent state to protect their existence and secure their freedom. This the route that KRG must take in Iraq rather than enforing an Iraqi state.

On the question of "Occupation" various arguments and counter arguments could be put forward, but without a theoretical base
and stand point,to discuss that is just playing with words.
In one of the previuos posts a caller has suggested to the debaters not to associate any part of KURDISTAN to existing "nation-states" rather use the designation The [Turkish,IRanian, Iraqi,Syrian]"occupied" part of Kurdistan.
In my rational a practical consequence expected from this argument is an occupied country should be freed from its occupires. But in the post which has given advice to the academics to alter their usage of terminology there was no explanation or theoretical argument for that.
I appreciate if the debaters clearly state their views on the subject.
Is KURDISTAN an occupied country ?

I would like to thank debaters and readers of this blog for engaging in such illuminating discussion. Unfortunately, in the recent Kurdish history, many vital decisions have been made behind closed doors by few leaders, sheikhs, aghast, bags, ... without a comprehensive public debate and as a result often concluded with disastrous outcome. We are entering a new era in Kurdish struggle with flourishing number of Kurdish intellectuals and emergence of advanced communication means such as internet allowing Kurdish luminaries to debate strategic issues and analyze different aspects to form a solid public opinion. This will eventually act as a correcting force limiting leadership corruption and strategic mistakes.

It is worthwhile to clarify that this debate is focused on modern Kurds as Kurds have a long history of building not only states and empires but influential civilizations that left their marks on human civilization. I will offer a brief history of Kurds as for obvious reasons Kurdish history has been left in obscurity by its occupiers.

Kurds are indigenous inhabitants of a strategic area in modern Iran, Iraq and Turkey where most scholars believe to be the birth place of several important aspects of human civilization. Kurds are tracked backed to Hurrians or Khurrites (related to sun in Kurdish) who lived in northern Mesopotamia areas to the immediate east and west, beginning approximately 2500 BC. The largest and most influential Hurrian nation was the kingdom of Mitanni founded by a legendary king called Kirta around 1500 BC. The name Kurd is probably originated from the the name of the first Mitanni King. The Mannaeans (or Mannai, Mannae, Biblical Minni) are another branch of Hurrians. Mannaean's original homeland was situated east and south of the Lake Urumia, roughly centered around modern-day Mahabad. The Mannaean kingdom became strongest during the king Iranzu (ca. 725-720 BC) and hid successor King Aza. Mannaeans and Mitannis were followed by Medes who founded the first Iranian Empire in 7th century BC. The Medes established the foundation of an influential empire, the largest of its day in the region until Cyrus established a unified empire of the Medes and Persians often referred to as the Persian Empire. According to Herodotus, until that point all Iranians were referred to as Mede or Mada. Medes in ancient times intermarried with other Iranians, especially Persians. Thus many modern Iranians are descendants of the Medes. However, they are generally assumed to be the forefathers of today's Kurds. Meds language is similar to the Avestan language, and modern Kurmanci or Kurdish. Herotodus also mentions that "the Medes had exactly the same equipment as the Persians; and indeed the dress common to both is not so much Persian as Median." The "Wise Men from the East" mentioned in the Bible to visit Jesus after his birth, are believed to be representatives of the priestly caste and tribe of the Medes called Magi closely associated to Kurds by many scholars.
Unfortunately, massive propaganda led by late Reza Shah in Iran overemphasized the origin of Iran to Persians and even started Iranian calendar from the inception of Persian Empire. The main reason for such an ignorant decision may be attributed to the fact that Kurds are the main founders of Medes Empire and Reza Shah did not want to publicize the fact Kurds are the founders of the modern day Iran. I believe Medes Empire has far more importance that Persian due to the fact it preceded many western civilizations as opposed to the Persian Empire that was developed concurrently with western civilizations. In another words, Reza Shah chose to undermine Iranian contribution to human civilization because it could have benefited Kurds! This is not a new attitude as historians could find no single monument or inscription from Media itself which is highly suspicious suggesting most of the evidence have been destroyed during Persian rule.
I would like to finish my note by highlighting the fact that Kurdish history and culture has been under constant attack by rival groups and its achievements have been sabotaged and claimed for by occupiers. It is not just our land, but our pride, history and existence that has been violated constantly. The fact is that Kurdish identity survived twenty centuries of ordeals and assimilation attest to its strong foundations. Kurdish unique language and culture and folklore are well alive today. It is our duty to carry the torch and build a modern society based on the principles of freedom and equal rights. Kurds are the best candidate for achieving this noble goal in the troubled middle-east region as Turks, Arabs and Farses are currently bogged down by religious and ethnic issues resulting in irrational behaviours and recent history of violence and maltreatment against their own people and their neighbours. Kurds have a new opportunity at a fresh start to repeat history based on inclusive values as mentioned by Dr. Amir Hassanpour. I believe we are and should be bigger than our occupiers. If we repeat their irrational behaviours and engage in taking revenge we descended ourselves to their levels and limited our potential to their levels. We can go further! Kurds have a clear shot at starting the nucleus of a free and democratic middle-east and lead this movement in the region as our ancestors did. This will take many years, but it can only happen if we have the will.

Thank you all for continuing the debate. I suggest a time off period by debators and I encourage readers to send their illuminating comments and/or questions. The use of "occupied" is a very interesting suggestion, although it may not be applicable in the near future to the part in Iraq which is under control of KRG.

I have been away from the discussion for a few days and see that its focus has shifted considerably. Now is time to pull it to a middle ground: the ground of common sense and practicality. What does the common sense say in regards to what the Kurdish reality is and what envelopes it? First of all, the Kurds are a stateless nation, divided not only by borders imposed by others but also by a variety of religions, confessions, dialects, a mountainous terrain, three different alphabets, colonial languages, political parties, leaders and loyalties of all sorts, and a huge pile of prohibitions on their language, identity and self expression. Although numerous (in tens of millions), divided by such factors, the Kurd are weak. What can unite a nation shattered to its atomic levels to obtain its freedom? This is a real question that we have to keep in mind 24/7.

Secondly, the Kurds are surrounded by some of the most intransigent nationalistic - chauvinistic states (under different disguises = religions, ideologies, republics, democracies of all sorts) that refuse to recognize some of the most basic rights to the Kurds. It seems that the Kurds have the right to get forcefully assimilated (to become Turks, Arabs and Persians), get killed, or stay silent. What do the Kurds have to do to avoid such well charted fates? This also is a real question and staying silent is not a real option in the long run. It is another form of accepting forced assimilation. There are only a handful of conscious Turks who recognize the rights of Kurds. There are lynch -gangs on streets in Turkish cities against Kurdish workers and refugees, almost daily attempts to kill Kurds. What should the Kurds do to defend themselves or avoid getting killed?

Thirdly, the Kurds live in a multi-lingual, multi-religious region. Some of the inhabitants or neighbors of Kurdistan are other minorities such as Azeries, Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Armenians. Of all these minority nations, Azeries are the most antagonistic to the Kurds, they are the ones who are openly organizing to wage a war against the Kurds in Eastern Kurdistan (or Iranian Kurdistan). The mouthpiece of Azeri chauvinists is GunAz TV (southern Azerbaijan TV) based in Chicago and is broadcasting also online. I have been watching it since its inception. Its format is basically talk and talk. Initially its programs were against Persian chauvinism against the Azeri Turks and tried to establish the Turkish-ness of the Sumerians, then that of the Medes etc. But right after the PJAK demonstrations in Maku, Nakhada and Urmia against the isolation of PKK leader Ocalan in Imrali island in Turkey, GunAz TV started advocating to expel Kurds from these Azeri cities and not doing business with the Kurds. Ahmed Obali of GunAz TV even appealed to the President of Azerbaijan Republic to arrest a Kurdish businessman and confiscate his establishment in that Republic. What should the Kurds do to avoid a conflict with Azeries? And if a bloody one starts, what should they do to protect themselves?

Finally, unless the Kurds find ways of uniting and collaborating with each other, they will be passive recipients of the ill-will of their oppressors, poor refugees running to the mountains to avoid death and injury, but subject to being ultimately forgotten one day. Kurds almost always lose focus on the most vital goal in life: TO BECOME FREE!!! All ideologies we subscribe, all paths we take, all methods we adopt SHOULD LEED TO FREEDOM, otherwise they are mere addictions or distracters at best!

Ahmadi Khani (17th century) and the principalities were not nationalists. Analyzing them from the point of view of Marxist theory, it is obvious that they were not and could not be nationalists. The principalities were feudal mini-states, and Khani was a speaker for the Kurdish princes who did not want to unite under the banner of a Kurdish king. However, when Kurdish nationalism emerged in the late 19th century (in the poetry of Haji Qadir Koyi), Khani did become a prophet of Kurdish nationalism (hence my quotation of Marx, which Dr. Nowicki refers to). It took some fifty years after the death of Koyi for a Kurdish nationalist party (Komeley J.K, 1942) to turn the ideas of Koyi into a political platform. But even Koyi, this first ideologist of Kurdish nationalism, could not say farewell to feudalism, and thus his half-hearted bourgeois or "modernist" politics could not match up to that of the French nationalists of 1789 or American nationalists of 1776. If Dr. Nowicki and others like Dr. Vali and Dr. Gunther (see his review of Dr. Vali's book, Essays on the Origins of Kurdish Nationalism) do not understand what I have said, it is quite understandable. They want to remain in the trap of the civic/ethnic dichotomy, which is as old as nationalism itself. They are not willing to grasp even the extensive non-Marxist critique of the civic/ethnic dichotomy. When, à la Dr. Vali, they want to be more "sophisticated," they claim that I am "incoherent" and "inconsistent." I accept the charge. However, what they see is not my incoherence and inconsistency. This "incoherence" is a dialectical approach which is much more complex than their Aristotelean either/or logic.

I have argued in the chapter in the cited book that the distinction between civic and ethnic nationalism is not valid. Both are ethnic; even when civic nationalism cries the equality of citizens before the law regardless of their ethnic, linguistic, religious, gender, and other belongings, the very equality is a project for reproducing inequality. Although some non-Marxists have, like Marx, understood why equality is a right of inequality, those trapped in the civic/ethnic dichotomy, cannot or rather do not want to understand it. And this is in part because they are nationalists of one sort or another. They cannot say farewell to nationalism.

About my incoherence: I have resisted the national oppression of the Kurds all my life, and will continue to do so. However, I do not do it as a nationalist. I will never engage in racist thinking about the Arab, Persian and Turkish peoples, even if there are thousands more Khalkhalis, Saddams, or Ataturks to murder Kurds. As Hejar has pointed out and Dr. Nowicki cannot comprehend, if Khalkhali was an Azeri Turk, you cannot use him as evidence for his anti-Turkism. I myself did not know that he was an Azeri, and, even if I knew, I would not have drawn any conclusions about the Azeri people. I oppose the national oppression of the Kurds, Assyrians, Armenians, Azeris, etc as an internationalist, i.e. totally in conflict with racist politics - a politics which does not comprehend that one does not have to live in the quagmire of nationalism (whether in its "good" civic mold or its "bad" ethnic mold) in order to oppose national oppression.

With his racially coloured lenses, Dr. Nowicki is unable to distinguish between analysis and advocacy. He reads my analysis of the ideas of Khani as "defence of nationalism of Ahmad Khani and Kurdish principality amirs." How can I defend them? According to this racist world view, a Kurd cannot be a Marxist because Marx belongs to a different ethnicity. Of course, Dr. Nowicki would not say the same about a Kurd advocating liberalism, eugenics, conservatism, Nazism, and fascism.

Dr, Nowicki has engaged in considerable ad hominem "argument," and hallucination such as declaring me as a member of Komala and locating me in a family with "white turban." Strongly racist and Islamophobic is his rendering of Kurdish politics as "white turban" and "red turban."

On Dr Shirazi, I just reported what is
in his biography about his JK society membership in the 40s which has been reported by another person in another publication/magazine more recently. I
have read about his later affiliation
with left wing tudeh party. Is this not correct? Can you shed some light
on his JK soceity memembership?

I checked my sources again and it is according to Hassanpour 2003 that says Qazi Muhammad family's origin is not Mahabad, but I mistakenly reported Sanandaj which was wrong. My mistake.
Here is what is written:

"For example, it is common knowledge in Mukri Kurdistan and especially its major urban center Mahabad that the Qazi family , an important actor in the nationalist movement, were Georgians who migrated to the region within living memory." (p147, Vali2003).

But I am only reporting what is written and I appreciate any corrections to have a better understanding.

Regards

Dr.Goran Nowicki !
Although some one here draw your attention to the factual error about his late Dr. Hashem Shirazi, but in your latest post you still try to build your
arguement of a none existant "fact" and that is the role of Dr.Shirazi in Kurdish political development. As I was mentioned here ,Dr shirazi was never a leading figure in Kurdish Movement in Iran. It is true that he had a variety of contacts with kurds inside and outside Iran, But he was never fully trusted by Kurdish underground movement during the Shah's Era!
In the same post you have coined another fact and that is Qazi Muhamad's original bond to Sine (Senendej), something which has never been the case.
Regards.
Hassan Ghazi

Traps in front of intellectuals II

Trying to keep the Nazi terror vs. Stalinist terror out of this discourse and not to be distracted. I see the present criticism of Dr Hassanpour of the "blood and soil" Kurdish nationalism as a result of his gradual conversion to Marxism model. His last comment is a newer recycled version of his debate with Dr Abbas Vali. As pointed out elsewhere by Dr Vali, Dr Hassanpour suffers from "lack of coherence and inconsistency in discourse" in his nationalism arguments.

I refer Dr Hassanpour to his own writing. Where he uses the very same "blood and soil" and ethnic nationalism to argue for the nationalism of Kurdish principalities and Ahmed Khani's in his thesis and the article "the making of Kurdish Identity: pre-20th Century Historical and Literary Sources" pp 106-162 in [Vali2003]. See:

"TERRITORIAL IDENTITY: Identification with a geographical space - village, region, country, or even continent - is uniquitous, to be found in individuals, families, tribes, ethnic groups, or nation." (his paper, p 114 in Vali book)

" .... national development is the process of consolidations of ETHNIC PEOPLES or tribal/rural societies into modern nations (p 44 of Hassanpour dissertation)"

Although he starts the 2003 article by a paragraph from Karl Marx. Amir Hassanpour's present position is in opposition to his past arguments in defence of nationalism of Ahmad Khani and Kurdish principality amirs. I am wondering if now Dr Amir Hassanpour believes that Khani and those principality amirs were also fascist and racist?

"Look, from the Arabs to Georgians, The Kurds have become like towers. The Turks and Persians are surronded by them. The Kurds are on all four corners. Both sides have made the Kurdish people, Targets for arrows of fate. ... "
(Ahmad Khani (1695 AD) quoted by Hassanpour, p118 in Vali book).

I refer the reader to comprehensive reply and counter arguments given to his arguments that even he is denying here, in Dr Abbas Vali's 2003 book "Essays on the Origins of Kurdish Nationalism" i.e. [vali2003]. Personally, I don't spend my time and energy on such philosophical debates. I am sure that even an illiterate Kurdish peasant in Shahu mountains of Kurdistan can tell me the relationship between my "blood and soil" and "Kurdishness" and that is enough for my Occam's razor.

...

Traps in front of Kurdish intellectuals I:

In my debate, I gave two examples of Moftizadeh with Islamic ideologies and Dr Shirazi with left wing ideologies representing more or less the same youth generation of 1946 Kurdish movement, with opposite points of views and from two (occupied) regions of Kurdistan in Iran (Sanandaj in south and Mahabad in North). Dr Hassanpour was a small child at that time and neither I nor Dr Elturan were born in 1946.

Dr Shirazi was one of the few college educated members of JK society that established the 1946 republic and as we know the 1942 JK society was later transformed into KDPI
Party, the party of the 1946 republic. In contrast, Moftizadeh who later quit university was one of the few educated Mullas in Sanandaj Kurdistan region whose centers of education were distributed in Halabja, Biyareh and Khaneqin across the border in Iraq due to the restrictions on Sunni religious schools in Iran of Rezashah. Both these two personalities tried to peacefully mediate between the Kurdish parties and the newly established Islamic regime in Tehran in 1979 and I wrote about their fate.

In my view Qazi Mohammad with his white turban (i.e. Mulla turban) and his Russian military custom was a mild synthesis of both Islamic and left wing ideologies. His reportedly past family origin from Sanandaj region area and his family upbringing in Mahabad was also a mild synthesis of two regions of Kurdistan in Iran. After Qazi Muhammad and especially around Islamic revolution in Iran, the Kurdish movement in Iran was polarized into two radical adoptions of Marxism and what I call Mosqu-ism that contributed to the defeat of Kurdish movement.

Mosqueism and Marxism are the two sides of the divisionist mentality coin that our intellectuals are ready to bet their life and education on and gamble and sacrifice the outcome of generations of Kurds and Kurdish movement. The Marxist intellectual with red turban, the Sunni Mosqueist intellectual with white turban and Shiite Mosqueist intellectual with green turban have divided the three colour flag of Kurdistan and wrapped themselves with one of Kurdish colours.

[Dr Hassanpour has switched his family's white turban with a red turban and I answer his specific comments in another post referring to Dr Vali's replies to him in his 2003 book.]

Kurdish intellectuals have forgotten the focus of the Kurdish cause and Kurdistan has become the battleground of these ideologies and Kurdish intellectuals have become the foot soldiers of this destructive war. It is as if they are "drugged by the opium of ideologies".

This "battle of ideologies" has turned Kurdish sons and daughters against fathers and mothers, turning brothers and sisters against each other. Kurds cannot afford to waste their limited economic and human resources on the realisation of such lofty dreams of "freedom for all the enslaved people in the world" whether they are in Palestine, Israel or Nicaragua. The freedom of Kurdish people and Kurdish solidarity should become the first priority for Kurdish intellectuals. I remind Dr Hassanpour that Kurds "need the enlightenment yellow lamps of intellectuals at home, don't take those lamps and dedicate it to your Mosques or Marxs."

Dear Mr. Amir Hassanpour, Dr Goran Nowicki, Dr Burhan Elturan, Mr. S. Magi ,

before all thanks for your participation in this panel.

I have only started to read the numerous postings and will definetely read the remaining several pages worth of comments.

I have noticed that all four of you are using in my opinion a terminology that needs to be abandonned and I would like to hear your comments on the terminology I have been advocating for, with my friends.

Instead of using "Iraqi Kurdistan", "Iranian Kurdistan", "Syrian Kurdistan" and "Turkish Kurdistan", could you start using the more appropriate terms as follow:

Iraqi-occupied-Kurdistan, Iranian-occupied-Kurdistan, Syrian-occupied-Kurdsitan and Turkish-occupied-Kurdistan.

Instead of saying that you are from north of Kurdistan to a non-kurd that will look at you like this country is somewhere on Mars, which then forces you to say "well, I am from Turkey....", it is so much easier to say "I am from Syrian-occupied-Kurdsitan or Turkish-occupied-Kurdistan". These terms give the geographical location of what your are talking about on top of providing a political context.

I understand that this could be seen as only a "terminology" difference, however, I believe that it does send a very different message to the people you are communicating with. Plus, these are the most accurate terms for describing the various area of Kurdistan to non-kurds. As I do not believe that Kurdistan can be described as "Iraqi-Kurdistan" for example. Kurdistan is not like a simple chain of mountains like the Alps where you would have a French-Alps and Italian-Alps...

Thank You!

To " cultivate nice and friendly relations with Azeris" is not only a wise and rational task , but it is also an unavoidable way for avoiding future uneasiness and confrontation
between the two peoples. Now there is a new wave of national awareness among Azerbaijani Turks , If this "national" awareness distances itself both from political shiaism and Pan-Turkism , there is no reason for it to be at loggerheads with Kurdish identity seeking movement in Iran.
Now there are a lot of fuss about territorial designations on the part of some circles of Azerbaijani exiles , but if the ground is prepared for understanding all the issues between the two sides could be resolved based on consensus.
I am really sorry that Dr. Nowicki tends to imply that I am unaware of Khalkhali's atrocities in Kurdistan, but I assure him that I never give myself the slightest thought to blame the whole Azerbaijani Turkish people for Khalkhali's deeds, just because of his
ethnic belonging.
As for one of the black spots in Kurdish-Azerbaijani Turks history of relation, I reiterate what I said in previous post. What happened in Naghada in 1979 , Both sides are to be blamed for that .
Dr. Nowicki in his latest post concludes " Kurdish parties need "to bury the hatchet" of past grievances and inter party conflicts and learn lessons from the bitter past and move forward"
I think this is a good advice , but he must try to approach those parties directly ,instead of
calling this pen to be affiliated to them.

It was me who wrote "Aryan organization". Please change it to "a modern Kurdish organization".

Thanks Hejar for noting it.

Freedom of speech is everything. Some will say peace & love is important. They will say these are more important than anything else.

However, others will say that his /her country is under invasion and unless the invasion ends, war rules apply.

War for peace. War for Kurdistan!

If peace is something that you reach after a war, (and it is) so we have to fight for a peaceful Kurdistan. Don't we?

It is nice to see friendship being cultivated between Kurds and Azeris and for example the borders beween Kurdish and Azeri regions in Iran are delimited by such efforts based on the results of council elections in Iran. From my personal interaction with Azeris, I group Azeris into 3 groups.

1) Those zealous supportes of the Islamic regime.
2) Those nationalist Azeris following Pan Turkism and Grey Wolvism.
3) Those Azeris who want to live in peace with their neighbours

As Mr Hejar and Dr Hassanpour are both aware, the first group provides the bulk of manpower for suppressing the Kurdish movement in Iran, especially in western Azerbaijan and they exert a lot of influence in Iranian government, diplomatic offices, intelligence, revolutionary guards and economic activities. The second group that you see their propaganda in the Azeri satellite news, not only putting the Kurdish territory under Azerbaijan, but even Tehran itself. The third group do exist, but are a minority compared to the above two groups and that is the reality on the ground.

I don't know how much Mr Hejar has interacted with Azeri or Persians in general. I want to argue that the increase in the influence of Azeris in Iranian regime after the Islamic regime translated into more repression and bloodshed in Kurdistan. I am sure Mr Hejar knows the famous Azeri hanging judge Khalkhali who committed crimes in Kurdistan 25 years ago. Mr Hejar questions Naqadeh bloodshed in this debate, but does he blame Kurds for Khalkhali atrocities in Kurdistan? Or does he blame Sharfkandi, Moftizadeh for being assassinated or tortured by the direct orders of Khamenei?

It is a fact taht Dr Sharafkandi was sent into exile by Shah to Karaj before revolution and in fact he was allowed to do his PhD abroad like Shariati and other oppositions in Iran before revolution. After revolution, the Turkish religious leader of Iran (former president) Mr Khamenei started a campaign of assassinating Kurdish leaders like Dr Sharafkandi even torturing and killing religious leaders of Iranian Kurdistan like Moftizadeh and Rabie who Shah wouldn't dare to touch.

Khalkhali, Khamenei, Ardabili, ... are not isolated cases and show the pattern of behaviour of Azeris in power. Observing this pattern of behaviour and contrasting it with the pattern of Kurdish repression in Turkey, makes me anxious and brings me to this unfortunate conclusion that there will be a confrontation between Kurds and Turks in Iran whether it is between Azeri Shiite supports of regime and Kurds or the Azeri nationalist supporters of Turkey and Soviet Azerbaijan. The third Azeri group does not stand a chance in this balance of power. We are talking about state support, money and Marx's notion of CAPITAL, using Dr Hassanpour's terminology.

When I use "domination", as I said before, I borrow it from Chomsky's notion of domination that interacts with another GB term "control" or "binding/relationship", .... One may want to interpret my term as bloody killing and repression or peaceful government illustrated by KRG towards Torkman. I said fighting and invited the Kurds in Turkey to come and help the Kurds in Iran.

1) To change the focus of PKK from Turkey to another front a) where the chance of success is higher in this front b) and by this also provide this opportunity for Turkey to implement the EU reforms i.e. reducing the Kurdish-Turkish hostilities there c) and for KRG to take root in Iraq and not be distracted by PKK-Turkey confrontation scenarios. There is more than the so called " fascist" name calling behind my argument.

2) To prepare for the Kurdish self defence in Iran instead of Kurdish parties looking at Kurdish parties in Turkey as enemies who are trespassing the Iran Kurdish territory. The focus should be shifted from PARTY TERRITORY and "party ambitions to get into power" to "freedom of our people" regardless of who will be in power. Whether it is a tribe leader or a university educated leader.

3) We need to know who is our enemy and who is our friend; whom we should trust and whom we shoud be weary of, otherwise our fate will be as unfortunate as the fate of Dr Qasemlou. Having dealt with the complexities of Shiite Azeris and Persians, I would rather stick with my Kurdish tribe/nation instead of falling for nice words and being backstabbed. Qazi Muhammad is quoted on Wikipedia: "If an Ajam gives you honney, there is poison in it for sure!"

4) To send this strong message to the Turks and their regional supporter states that Kurds are not sitting idle to watch them trying dominate Kurds again. Kurds will dominate them if they do not stop their chauvinistic attitudes towards Kurds. You deal with them in a position of strength and they respect you and your rights. You deal with them in a position of weakness, and they kick you and abuse you. This is Turkish mentality.

And concerning my 4 scenarios on Iran, I should point out that those scenarios could be the blueprint of the stages of a military invasion of Iran and I am sure those familiar with military doctrine appreciate the thinking behind the milestones of the plan. I don't engage in name calling. "Name calling" only shows the weakness of the other party in a debate. But I will comment in another post about the dangers that the Kurdish intellectuals face in their path.

My advice to Mr Hejar and Dr Hassanpour as affiliates to PDKI (KDPI) and Komala is to initiate this important dialogue in their own party and ask their leaders to initiate this inter party friendly dialogue with PKK and the president of KRG at the same time that they cultivate nice and friendly relations with Azeris and the internationalist socialist friends. Kurdish parties need "to bury the hatchet" of past grievances and inter party conflicts and learn lessons from the bitter past and move forward.

It is regrettable that Dr. Goran Nowicki engages in distortion rather than debate. I rejected the racist project he was advocating. His four scenarios are based on politics of race, blood, and ethnicity. In this project, which is a copy of Nazi politics of "blood and soil," Kurds constitute a single race with an ancient empire of blood and soil (Media), and thus they should unite against other racial/ethnic groups, namely Arabs, Turks, and Persians. This is a project for re-drawing the borders of Middle Eastern states along lines of blood under conditions when all smell Washington's interest in re-drawing the map of the Middle East. I quoted two sentences from Dr. Nowicki's scenarios:

"It is time for Kurds to play the same game with Azeris and with the help of PKK to dominate them. Shiite Azeris are weaker than Turks. PKK wants to have a fight, why you don't join your brothers across the border and fight together."

Rejecting this politics, I wrote:

"There is an alternative to this politics of Kurds and Turks killing each other: there was friendship and solidarity between the Kurdish Republic and Azerbaijan National Government in 1946, and Ismail Besikci has set a standard for solidarity between the two peoples."

Dr. Nowicki rejects this alternative by saying:

"I cannot preach to my Jewish or Polish sister or father who is sent to the Nazi death chambers in Birkenau "love your Nazi German enemy". I will be laughed at. I will be laughed at. I cannot also preach to my Kurdish brother or sister in Iraq or Turkey 'to love the Iraqi or Turkish soldiers' who bombed and razed tens of thousands of villages in Kurdistan of Iraq and Turkey."

It is clear from Dr. Nowicki's writing that he knows about both Besikci and the Azerbaijan National Government of 1946. Therefore, when he confuses, conflates, and equates them with Nazis, I have to say that he resorts to sophistry. It is more than obvious that I have not proposed solidarity between the Kurds and Grey Wolves (Turkey and Azerbaijani equivalents of Nazis) or between Kurds and Ba'thists. Dr. Nowicki's distortions are not, thus, a problem of factual error only. The problem is that he cannot take off his racial and racist lenses; he sees the world, past and present, as a site of the war of races. He cannot see the Nazi party as the architect of WWII and the Holocaust. He blames it on the German people. He treats Nazism as innate in the German people, in their blood, and in their race. This claim is fully racist. In a similar vein, when he preaches to the Kurds that they should not "love the Iraqi and Turkish soldiers" who bombed them, he in fact considers the soldiers, rather than Iraqi and Turkish states, responsible for the atrocities. This means that Turks are eternal enemies of the Kurds, and there are no prospects for solidarity between the Kurds, Arabs, Turks, Persians, Armenians, and others. What would Dr. Nowicki say to Turks like Besikci, Orhan Pamuk, Yesim Ostaoglu, or those in the Turkish Human Rights Association, who in spite of their diverse politics, advocate a democratic approach to Kurdish rights? The experience of the Kurdish and Azerbaijan governments fully negates the racist/fascist scenarios of both the Grey Wolves and Aryanists. The coexistence and solidarity of the two peoples was confirmed and encouraged by the occupying power, the USSR.

Unfortunately, the scenario worked out by the United States and Israel is diametrically opposed to the one in 1946. These powers have encouraged a war between Sunnis and Shi'ites in the entire region, and they are ready, if conditions are ripe, to put into practice some of the scenarios Dr. Nowicki has drafted. These imperialist projects smack of 1933 and 1939. The difference is that there was a remarkable anti-fascist struggle in the 1930s and 1940s. Remember the International Brigade, made up of volunteers from many countries, who went to Spain to help the Spanish people against fascism. The social movements of the time were, however, not able to prevent the Nazis-Fascists from the launching of WWII and the Holocaust. Today, while similar projects are under way, we do not have anything similar to the anti-fascist movements of the 1930s. Fascists, national chauvinists, religious extremists, racists, and their armies and states are on the loose. The future looks bleak.

Dear Dr.Goran Nowicki
The " Naqade Kurdish-Turkish bloodshed" was not a one sided tragedy. Both Kurds and Azerbaijani Turks should be blamed for what happened there 17 years go , As you may be aware its implications still is there. What you have referred to as the participation of Azerbaijani Turks in the structure of the present system in Iran ,it is the true as far as
the ethnic belonging of the people you have mentioned , but this belonging necessarily is not a representation of Azerbaijani Turkish interests, you have never heard a word by such people in favor of identity seeking movement of Azerbaijani Turkish people, on the contrary during the latest uprising in many Azerbaijani cities and townships the manquts
(Azerbaijani's denying their separate identities) blamed the protesters to be instigated from abroad and by foreign circles.
The majority of Azerbaijani related sites and blogs are not friendly towards Kurdish movement, even an Azerbaijani Satellite station openly spreads lies and heinous propaganda against Kurdish movement both in The North and The south of Kurdistan .
and in Eastern Kurdistan. They are engaged in signature collection against Kurdishness of a vast part of present "western Azerbaijan " province in Iran.
Do you think the same language and the same tactics could be constructive and fruitful
from Kurdish side? Do not you think the Kurdish political parties and intellectuals should persuade the democratically minded Azerbaijanis to resist these kind of warmongerings ?
It will interesting to know your ideas on the subject of relations between Kurds and Azerbaijani Turks in Iran !
For your information, there is a blog which promotes friendship and understanding between both communities. If you fine please visit the blog at: www.sayinqella.blogspot.com
Regards. Hejar

I don't know whether Dr Hassanpour has visited Poland. I have visited both Auschwitz and Birkenau concentration camps near Krakow where you can see small hills of toothbrush, eyeglasses and combs belonging to those Jews, Polish and others imprisoned and killed and you can smell death. I cannot preach to my Jewish or Polish sister or father who is sent to the Nazi death chambers in Birkenau "love your Nazi German enemy". I will be laughed at.

I cannot also preach to my Kurdish brother or sister in Iraq or Turkey "to love the Iraqi or Turkish soldiers" who bombed and razed tens of thousands of villages in Kurdistan of Iraq and Turkey. When the 17 August 1998 earthquake in Turkey happened, months after Ocalan's arrest, some of my Kurdish friends from Turkey were glad that God's hand has punished the Turks. I was shocked and instead drafted a letter which was sent to the newly elected President Ahmet Necdet Sezer - a condolence letter and asking him to declare an amnesty for the Kurds so that the Kurds can join in saving those Turks buried under the rubble and join the reconstruction instead of fighting with Kurds. Some Kurdish circles criticized the letter, but what was the Turkish answer over the past 8 years to such peace making efforts?

I was also shocked when one of my Pakistani students expressed joy from watching on TV those innocent Americans jumping from the twin towers in Sept 11. I am a nationalist and I am fully aware of "dark side of the nationalism moon", but I don't agree with Dr Hassanpour's idealism because the Anfal and Turkish destruction of Kurdish villages and people is the reality on the ground. I cannot close my eyes and live in an utopia.

In Iran, the late 70s Naqade Kurdish-Turkish bloodshed is closer to what we may witness in the near future in Iran. The Mohammad Khatami's decree to purge all Kurds from Iran Defence ministry is the striking reality of Kurdish repression in Iran when the Shiites Azeris in Iran have had at least a prime minister (Musavi), president (Khamenei), or leader (Khamenei) in power in addition to ministers, governors and other officials. Dr Hassanpour's comparison of Kurdish repression in Iran with Azeri linguistic discrimination in Iran is a poor argument. No Azeri is expelled from the Defence ministry for being a Kurd. These are the facts on the ground.

I also want to act as a devil advocate here so that:

1) the Kurdish parties "come down from the clouds" and plan for the worst case scenario happening in Iran and seek solidarity with other Kurdish parties in the region instead of seeing them as potential rivals to their imaginary power. Let's join hands together whether we call it fight or defence.

2) The US policymakers who may be following this debate to be warned of the potential violent scenarios that may arise in Iran, if they do not plan ahead and instead create another mess in the region for the people and themselves.

3) Also to encourage the Turks especially in Turkey to take the olive branch hand that PKK and the Kurds have extended to them and don't play game.
As the flames of Kurdish nationalism rises and not addressed properly, destructions worse than the 1999 earthquake can happen to Turkey.

And for other reasons that I would rather not disclose them here ...

Unlike Dr Hassanpour, I have not reached that stage to take arms to fight my enemy and kill them ... . And I assure Dr Hassanpour that following Haji Qadir Koei (1817-1897) that he quotes in his book: "My word is my sword":

Seyf û qelem Sherîkin lem 'esreda, drêxa
Shîrim qelemtrashe u kalanîye qelemdan.

Dr. Amir Hassanour rightly points out : " Treating the Kurds as "Aryans" is
even worse; it cannot be but fascist politics ( I realize that many Kurds are not aware about ties that connect Aryanism and fascism/Nazism) ".
In realty the Aryanism mythology has been used as an instrument and platform to spread hatred and slanderous propaganda against Arabs and Turks, and in the case of Persian chauvinism it has been a tool for deceiving Kurds about a "glorious" past , that the contemporary rulers have denied Kurds.
The ethnicist, racial and racist discourses could never do any good for Kurdish cause.
The only alternative is a humanistic approach based on self respect and respect for the "others" .

One good thing about blogging is the freedom to express, and the diversity of expression it generates. However, there is some unanimity in the writings of many, who depict the Kurdish people's struggle against national oppression in ethnicist, racial and racist terms. One blogger writes:

"It is time for Kurds to play the same game with Azeris and with the help of PKK to dominate them. Shiite Azeris are weaker than Turks. PKK wants to have a fight, why you don't join your brothers across the border and fight together."

I am unequivocally and categorically opposed to this politics, which is no less than national chauvinism, racism, and fascism. I am not accusing any blogger of being a fascist, but, with much regret, some of the writing is mired in this type of politics, which advocates war and bloodshed between Turks, Persians, Arabs on one side and Kurds on the other. Even Azeris, themselves subjected to the national oppression of the Iranian state, are treated as the eternal enemy of the Kurdish people. And treating the Kurds as "Aryans" is even worse; it cannot be but fascist politics (I realize that many Kurds are not aware about the ties that connect Aryanism and fascism/Nazism).
Anyone who reads these blogs and is aware about the history of fascism and "the dark side of the nation" will be seriously alarmed. Here, I see a gloomy picture in which people should engage in killing other peoples because each belongs to a racial, ethnic, or religious group. This smacks of the post-1933 decade. Resurrecting the myth of the "Aryan race," treating the Kurds as an Aryan racial group, and opposing them to Arabs and Turks in racial and ethnic terms is nothing less than fascism. This ethnic politics is already devastating the people in Iraq, it has virtually destroyed the Palestinian people and recently ravaged the Lebanese people and their country.

There is an alternative to this politics of Kurds and Turks killing each other: there was friendship and solidarity between the Kurdish Republic and Azerbaijan National Government in 1946, and Ismail Besikci has set a standard for solidarity between the two peoples. If you can contemplate a unity of all Kurds against all Turks, and invite them to kill each other, why don't you consider Kurdish-Turkish solidarity to change the situation in Turkey? If you can call for the war of all against the Kurds and the Kurds against all, why don't you call for the unity of all against national oppression, for equality, for freedom, for solidarity? It seems this kind of Kurdish or "pro-Kurdish" politics follows the politics of the nation-states: it is easier to kill the other than unite with them.
If states can and do mobilize citizens by appealing to ethnic and racial mythologies, why cannot you appeal to the alternative culture and politics of internationalism? Which one is more difficult to achieve? Which future works? Which vision is bright? It is not an accident of history that this politics has led to admiration for the US and Israel, and their policy of creating a Middle East in which war crimes are branded as "self-defense," and any demand for democracy, freedom, and dignity will be treated as "terrorism." The alternative to this politics is the unity of all the people of the Middle East - Arabs, Armenians, Jews, Persians, Turks, and others - for a better life, better society, better political system, independence, and ending national, racial, and religious oppression.

I did not say "Arian organization" and I do not believe in such notions. I referred to Persian propaganda to please Kurds. Any biologist will tell you that the genetic variations between the 46 chromosomes of human race are so minute and even the amount of similarity between our genome and chimpanzee's is around 98%.

In Scenario 4 that I mentioned (maintaining Iran's integrity), there is a confrontation between Kurds (less than 10 Mil) and Azeris (more than 20 Mil) to dominate each other. That is called power struggle and competition, considering the fact that Azeri Turks have a state with military up north and the Turks have dominated Iran for the past 800 years, even the wives of Reza Shah and Shah were Turkish origin.

In other scenarios that I mentioned, there is the high likelihood for Shiite Azeris to try to dominate Kurds up to Hamedan province or join forces with the Islamic Shiite regime.

Azeri nationalism inside Iran is in
direct conflict with their Safavid Shiism history (unlike Kurds) and to understand it one can contrast the people's reaction in Azerbaijan after the collapse of Pishewari government there in 1945 vs the collapse of 1946 Kurdistan Republic.
Let's not forget that the Iranian leader Khamenei is also Turkish speaker and the Azeris exert a lot of power and influence in the economy/Bazaar of Tehran unlike Kurds. I'm afraid the Iran war will be a religious Shiite vs. secular one.

Things won't be that simple as "brotherhood of Kurds and Azeris" when Iran becomes unstable. Then Kurds will need to confront the need to prepare themselves for the claims of Turks and what they call it "Turk-tazi" (Turkish expansionist), from Urmia to Hemedan. Even Turkey may get involved.

I think KDPI and other Kurdish parties in Iran need to work very quickly on alliance building with Kurdish parties in Iraq and Turkey (KDP, PKK, Pejak and ...) and Iran (Komala and Kurdish Sunni religious opposition) instead of trusting the nice words of secular Azeri.

As an outsider to all these parties, I see major faults in the present Kurdish strategy in Iran and if your strategy is wrong, then you won't win. Kurds in Iran don't have a parliament in exile so that we can debate/parle the Kurdish strategy.
I laid out my thinking/thesis in a very clear, specific and academic fashion, but show me the weakness of my arguments "point by point" and give your alternative anti-thesis so that we can come with a synthesis of both and come up with a new thesis and a "new doctrine" for Kurdish struggle in Iran.

What the Kurdish strategy in Iran should be and what approach towards Kurdish and non-kurdish players in Iran and their neighborhood (Iraq, Turkey)? I look forward to KDPI, Komala ... to lay out this strategy for us or adopt a version
of my thesis.

Dear Mr.Goran Nowicki !
Please do not let the emotion and ethnic
attachment dominate your judjements.
What do you mean by an " Arean Organisation"?, if It means the the unity
of "Arean Race" against others, I am sorry to say we may end up in a position to be given names and belonging to an ideology which proved its racist nature in Europe. Here you are engaged in a seriuos debate, kurds are not after dominatig Azerbaijani Turkish people or anybody else , they want to be accepted by the others and live in peace and prosperity with the others.

Hejar

Thank you Mehmet for your comment. I'm afraid these ideological divisions among Kurds (Left, right, Islamist ...) have caused more damage to our cause than the borders that separates us. Looking with "half full glass" perspective, Ocalan did a good job in waking up the Kurdish struggle in Turkey by focus on Marxism at a time it had its appeal. Whether he was arrested or not, PKK needed to change course after the collapse of Soviet Union. Regardless of who is in control in PKK (or post PKKs), PKK and Kurds in Turkey need to coordinate with KRG, the way that IRP in Ireland is coordinating with Irish government in Ireland.

PKK fighters are excellent guerrilla fighters and I am sure Hezbollah has adopted some of the PKK tactics. Most of PKK are also fluent in Turkish and if Kurds in Iran want to dominate Azerbaijan, then PKK linguistic skills become very handy. We need to learn lessons from our history and our enemies. We know the 1923 "Red Kurdistan" was dismantled into Soviet Azeribaijan and Hassan Qazi also highlighted in this debate the efforts of Azeris in Iran to dominate the 1946 Kurdistan Republic. It is time for Kurds to play the same game with Azeris and with the help of PKK to dominate them. Shiite Azeris are weaker than Turks. PKK wants to have a fight, why you don't join your brothers across the border and fight together. Xosh hati! Xerama! That is my point.

United, Kurds need to fight against the enemy. As the military strategists tell us, "FIGHT AS ONE FIST" and if you can try to concentrate all your forces in one front or the fewer number of fronts. Right now the "center of gravity" for Kurdish fighting should be a Kurdish coup in Baghdad or a future Kurdish ruler in Tehran because these are the opportunities. The US has been making waves in the region and let's ride with the waves instead of being crushed under it. Ankara's turn will come later. I write this based on the knowledge of military strategists that I have studied in books and libraries. I may be wrong.

And US wants a stable order so that the oil flow is not cut and they can do business in the region. Kurds also want stability and doing business. Right.

On Dr Shirazi, I modify my statement by saying he was a member of Komal Jiyan Kurd (JK society). After his first marriage, he later married Esmat Qazi who tragically died after one of his imprisonments. He was arrested 3 times in his life and died 8 years ago in Iranian year 1377 at the age of 79 years . He has written a biography (published in 2001 in Iran) and in it he mentions the meetings of Qazi Mohammad with [Archibald] Roosevelt, Qavam-saltaneh (Iranian prime minister) and British ambassador in Iran. In his life he met with Shah's general Razmara and Moqbili and established clinics in Karaj and Tehran.

To Dr Nowicki: Firstly, thank you for your replies. Secondly, I would like to say that I really don't understand your emphasis (&comment) on turkish speaking PKK and southern Azerbaijan scenario. Could you please write more on that for us to understand your scenario?

My comments:

My opinion about PKK and its possible role in the near future is not as clear as yours. Ocalan proved that he can not be any kind of leader to Kurds, and that he is only busy with his own faith but not the faith of Kurdistan or its people.

Inside the PKK, we have been observing a slightly nationalistic language from the new possible leader, Murat Karayilan. Though we cannot be sure of a nationalist change within PKK, because its ideology is based on an utopic, anti-nationalist "futurist" society. Any revolution inside the PKK against those ruined ideologies will make PKK a better Aryan organization.

After Mr Nowicki's answers, I would like to say that US won't let any chaotic situation in Iran but rather will want to create an order from the ashes of the burned Iran, including the whole Middle East.

If this is going to be the scenario, then we should demolish the enemy territories and the order of the enemy states and do as much damage as we can to provide a safe heaven in our own country.

Humanism was never a reality in the history and it has never existed. One has to be realistic in what he does to win and winning always means the loss of the other party /parties.

We must be clever,intelligent and become as powerful as we can. Even if it looks like that the US politics create a demand for an independent, united Kurdistan, it will be us, not the US army who will have to create a state and govern it.

Having no such experience in our history we have to have a feeling of brotherhood inside the Kurdistan and a strong will of unifying. This is nationalism and the coming futures slogan for all Kurds is 'Kurd u Kurdistan'

Brayeti, Kurdayeti!

What holds for the future of Kurds in Iran? One can predict the future without being a magi or prophet. One's prediction may be approximate or fail. I predicted in my 9 Feb 2003 article "An April's fool Gulf War II", the approximate date of US invasion in Iraq and Kurdistan, based on limited access to facts and mainly on military constraints on the theatre of war. My 22 Feb 2003 prediction about a Kurdish "grand-vazier" in Baghdad has now been realised by the election of Talabani as Iraq's president.. See:

http://kurdistanobserver.servehttp.com/feb2003/22-2-03-opinion-goran-kurd-play-judo.html

What I wrote in this article about the Iraq invasion and Kurdish strategy and the preparations for the war applies almost exactly to a possible invasion of Iran by the US in the very near future (my reply to Mehmet). Additionally all the Kurds and parties in Iran (and region) need to put their acts together and unite around one leadership pole very quickly.

If KDPI's late Qazi Mohamamd was among us, he would have gone immediately to president Barzani, the son of Mula Mustafa and has given his party's oath of allegiance to the president of KRG in Northern Iraq. He would have said "Your father and his followers became soldiers in the republic in which I was the president and I give my party's oath to serve as the foot soldiers in the Kurdistan Republic that you are the president of".

If Ahmad Moftizadeh was also alive, he would have given his oath to Barzani and has argued with Komola leader that "Ka Bira, Kurdistan has not reached the industrial stage that we talk about Communism and Marx. Join the Kurdistan Republic forces to unite our nation first and turn the republic into the industrial stage later, now we should HOLD OUR HOME-BREED HORSES" until we reach the stage to make our HOME-BREED CARS!". President Talabani of PUK, the ally of Komola should also facilitate this alliance building. Once this preparation are done then we can talk about possible US war scenarios in Iran based on the range of military objectives:

SCENARIO 1: No military land invasion and only targeting Iran's nuclear and economic sites buy Israel and the US. Kurds better not to get involved at this stage.

SCENARIO 2: Assuming that the military objective is limited to capturing Western front (Khuzestan to Kurdistan and maybe Azerbaijan) only. KRG Kurdish national guards under cover can help Kurds in Iran to declare a liberated Medes type region with a capital in Kurdistan of Iran. In case Azerbaijan is included, PKK Turkish speaking forces can greatly help in Iran's Azeri parts with an eye to exchanging Azerbaijan with Kurdistan in Turkey.

SCENARIO 3: Assuming that the military objective is to partition Iran into 3 sections: Eastern (including part of Khorasan and Baluchestan) controlled by Afghan government, Western (see 2 + Caspian region) controlled by Kurdistan KRG and Central Persian part with the possibility of leaving a crippled Islamist government in power in central Persian part with no access/control to Caspian or Khuzistan oil.

SCENARIO 4: Assuming that the military objective is change of regime in Tehran and maintaing Iran's territorial integrity. Then Tehran will be the chessboard of competing tribes and armed parties similar to Baghdad. The so called "purest Aryan" Kurds in Iran with the most powerful army among Iranian tribes and parties can bargain and push for power in Tehran. Barzanis will feel more comfortable in Tehran than Talabani in Baghdad and a union of Iranian speaking people based on linguistic borders and national parliaments can be established in the region under the supervision of a Kurd in the next 20 years.

The above scenarios depends greatly on the US strategy in the war that I have no access right now, to assess the possibility of success or failure of each move. But if US is serious about attacking Iran, it should bring on board some experts on Kurdish Iranian society in the caliber of Dr Khalilzad in earlier successful Afghanistan project. Right now the US advisors are dominated by Persian-Iranians, who based on nationalistic feelings argue for Scenario 1 or 4 only and act as Dr Chalabi in the failed Iraq project. One such expert is a Dr/clergy colleague of Moftizadeh who fled to
Sweden with followers in Kurdistan province.

To conclude my comments in this debate, I should add that the US and Kurds should also change the current negative Kurdish perception in Washington from "rival tribes/parties" to the "concert of united force who are full ears to their president/leader." The Persians reminds US that we are the successors of the Persian empire which was actually "ENGINEERED BY ITS MEDES EMPIRE FOREFATHERS."

The Kurds should correct the biased history in Washington and remind US officials and diplomats, that our forefathers were those who engineered the greatest civilisations of Mitanni/Medes in the region. The Mitanni of 1500 BC in Kurdistan influenced the Arabs to the extent that Arabs refer to city and civilization by the borrowed and foreign term Medine/Madani (i.e. city/civil in Arabic) derived from Mitanni/Medan -belonging to the heritage of the forefathers of Kurds.

Biji ko-MA-ri Kursan

I just want to mention an instance in which Dr Hashim Shirazi wrote a letter to the PDKI leadership to release a Kurdish prisoner who was accused of treason and was going to be executed.

The letter was handed by the brother of prisoner to the PDKI in Iran and the prisoner was released. Both brothers are still alive and I cannot disclose their names, but I am sure more senior PDKI members or the family of Qazi family can shed more light on this or maybe if the late uncle of Dr Shirazi was among us.

There are some factuals errors in Mr.Goran
Nowicki's comment.His late Dr.Hasshem Shirazi was never a leading figure in
Kurdistan Democratic Party in Iran, and after the demise of Kurdistan Republic he never joined the PDKI. He was an active and controversial figure. There is no evedience for substentiating his roll in PDKI during Revolution against monarchy.
I think when one engages in a seriuos discussion about Kurdish cause there is no need for construction of none-existing events.

Before answering Mehmet's question on, one needs to have an understanding of the Kurdish struggle in Iran, its weaknesses. I refer to two personalities in Iranian Kurdish movement during Iran revolution. The 1st one is Dr Shirazi from Mahabad who was married to Qazi Mohammad family. The 2nd one is Ahmad Moftizadeh from Sanandaj who was a clergy.

Dr Shirazi was a high ranking KDPI member. He established a dental clinic in Karaj, near Tehran. When Barzanis were sent to exile in Iran after 1975 Alger agreement, they were settled in Karaj and the presence of other Kurdish exile from another late 60's Mahabad uprisings gave a "little Kurdistan" aspect to the district in Karaj that Mola Mostafa and his sons and grandsons lived. These included Massoud Barzani and Nichirvan Barzani the present president and prime minister of KRG in Northern Iraq. The relations between Barzani and Dr Shirazi and his wife were friendly despite KDPI relations with Mola Mustafa. E.g. Barzanis gave a golden coin/medallion to Dr Shirazi's wife on one of their visits to them in Karaj.

In the 60's Ahmad Moftizadeh attended Tehran univ to transform his religious degree into a modern degree, but he quit university. During his short stay in Tehran, he had some meetings with KDPI activists who lived in Tehran.

During the Iranian revolution, the Kurdistan region became unstable and this turned into a full blown war between Iran regime and Kurds that lasted for a few years. The KDPI party of Dr Shirazi came in confrontation with the followers of Moftizadeh who supported the Islamic revolution at the beginning. Mofizadeh is reported to be brother in law of Mohtadi the current leader of Komola in Kurdistan. Komola and KDPI relations were also stormy and the Iranian regime used these divisions between KDPI and left wing Communist Komola on one hand and the naivity of Moftizadeh and his followers to damage Kurdish movement. The Iran regime first dealt with Komala very violently and KDPI followers were rounded up and KDPI leaders Qasemlou and Sharfkandi were assassinated by Iran in 1989 and 1992 in Europe. Before revolution, Sharafkandi was in exile in Karaj.

What happened to Dr Shirazi and Moftizadeh who did not leave Iran? Dr Shirazi was arrested on providing financial support to KDPI and his properties were confisticated. He spent until early 90s in prison serving as dentist there.

Moftizadeh at one point became the self proclaimed governor of Sanandaj, the capital of Kurdistan province, but after Iran military operations, he was forced to flee Sanadaj. He was later arrested by Iran regime for his attempt to open Kurdish and Quran schools and after facing torture in prisons he died in 1992 in a hospital in Tehran as a result of worsening of his conditions.

A very unprecedented large crowd attended his funeral in Sanadaj. Since the death of Moftizadeh, the Sanandaj area has become unstable. I should refer to another cleric in Mahabad area - Ezzedin Husseini - who was against the regime, and was aligned with Komala and fled to Scandinavia. Ezzedin was a sharper clergy-politician to quickly understand the violent nature of Khomaini's regime.

The Iranian Kurdish movement has hardly recovered from bloody campaign of Iran regime (during Rafsanjani) against any potential religious and party leader in Kurdistan and also from the divisions between different groups in Kurdistan. There is a need for another Qazi Mohammad to bring these ideologically differing groups under one umbrella as in 1946.

Asad is risking his own rule and the integrity of Syria on a very high risk game with US and trusting the Iranians.
On May 2005, I proposed in my article on Kurdistan Observer "a new chessboard of the middle east", a solution for reducing the tensions in Iraq and region, but it was not given consideration and Iraq later slided into civil war.

Here is a peaceful proposal to president Asad and president Talabani in Syria and Iraq respectively. I hope they give a thought about living in peace and harmony before we see another war:

"The Kurds in Iraq and Syria are ready to unify with each other, but the Syrians are not ready to give up Kurds for free, despite the troubles Kurds can cause for Syria. What price Kurds in Iraq can pay to Syria to unify Kurds? Is there a way for all the parties in conflict to win? What is a win-win strategy?"

"Is Syria ready to give up its Sunni Kurdish regions in exchange for a major part of the Sunni Arab population and regions in Iraq? If such a deal is made between Iraq and Syria, the Sunnis of Iraq will be happier because they will be part of an Arab government, ruled by an Arab president. Syria will be happy to solve its Kurdish problem and in exchange it will get access to the Arab region in Iraq and extend its frontiers next to the Tigris. Tigris, south of Mosul, can also become the new border between Kurds and Arabs, as has been the case through history."

If US really wants to bring democracy to the region, it should first correct the borders in the Middle East.

The US mistake in Iraq and the region is that bringing democracy to the Middle East is not possible unless the
state borders are adjusted to reflect the historic, linguistic and geographic facts.

A "Diplomacy of Minimalism" approach to adjusting the borders should take precedence over a transformational diplomacy and democracy of Mrs Rice and Mr Bush. That is one of the major reasons for the failure of the US "outdated transformational initiative" in the Middle East.

Dr Rice may need to go to library and check the evolution of transformational/structuralist to the minimalist theories. For those interested in Linguistics, refer to Chomsky's theories on transformational grammar
(in the 60's) into Government-Binding (GB) model and into minimalist (late 90's). Some have argued that GB had an underling layer of political thoughts of Chomsky.
I persoanlly adopt some aspects of GB in my argumentations and I'm sure Chomsky is not happy reading some of the results based on his model.

Another question is the highly expected war between Iran and the western allies. What will be the influence of KRG on the Kurds living in Iran? Is there a chance of simply emerginf these two parts of Kurdistan?

In case of a war between Syria and the western states or Israe alone, is there a possibility of merging this part of Kurdistan under occupation of Syria to KRG?

There are some interesting genetic findings which shed light about the close relationship between the Jews and the Kurds (e.g. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_origins_of_the_Kurds). I have given answer to
your interesting question in one of my articles on Israel and Kurdistan alliance:

http://home.cogeco.ca/~kurdistan2/5-4-04-opinion-kurdistan-isreal-alliance.html

In the article, I discuss the possible link between Mitanni/Median and Jewish people, and I look at the friendly relations between Jewish and Kurdish warrior-King Saladn in 12th century and the friendly relations between Israel and Kurds before and after 1975 Alger agreement. Classified US documents report that Israel suggested to the Kurdish leader in Iraq to declare independence and does not follow US and Kissinger in mid 70s.

In addition Arbil (historic Arbela) the present capital of KRG in Northern Iraq has been the capital of the "Adiabene, the Jewish Kingdom of Kurdistan" during the Parthian era
(i.e. 1st century AD). See: http://www.kulanu.org/links/adiabene.html

To sum up, the Kurds and Israelis have a long history of friendship and this comes in the context of around 3600 years of peaceful cohabiting between the ancestors of present Kurds and Jews in the region. An independent Kurdistan once established will be a natural ally of Israel and will help to mediate the Arab Israeli dispute in a fair way.

Love Turkey as a whole, love Kurds as a brother.

I do think that the Kurds in Turkey have a much stronger hand to play in the region if they help Turkey get into the EU structure. By this they help the Kurds to bring a major power, i.e. EU to the table arguing for Kurdish cause. Kurds fighting alone will have a better chance or fighting with EU human rights protecting them? Just look at the KHRP success stories using EU regulations against Turkey. One fights not for the sake of just fighting (ee the Afghans), but to increase one's bargaining power and get some concessions. One loses in a war if is backed in a corner with no allies.

And this can be realised in a short term period of 5 years. During this 5 years waiting and getting human/linguistic rights, the Iraqi Kurdish government will stabilize and will take root in the region and the pro-Kurdish reforms in Turkey will take root. In my opinion, it will be a mistake if Turkey uses the excuse of PKK to damage the KRG administration in northern Iraq. PKK then will be a pawn in the hands of Turks damaging the interests of Kurds in the region. The Kurds should earn to act in concert. In a concert, you don't always hear the drummer playing or the violin playing all the time. There is a coordination between these players to make a harmonious music. Kurds also need to learn to act in harmony otherwise we have learnt nothing from the inter Kurdish clashes between Kurds in Iran and Iraq around the Alger agreement.

The Irish Republican party and Ireland government are in the more or less same situation as PKK and the Kurdistan Regional Government in Iraq. But Ireland is surrounded by sea and it is a republic having a seat in the UN. KRG is not surrounded by seas but by seas of enemies and has not even an EU observer status.

I once asked the PKK representative in Europe about her views on KRG administration. At that time, KRG was still in its early days and I was not very impressed by her reply. Barzani himself speaks better Kurmanji than Sorani and I believe he cares for his people in Turkey and you can read what his father's advisor Dr Mahmoud Osaman said when the Iraqi prime minister outlawed PKK in Iraq. I was impressed by his defence of PKK in Iraq. It takes time to get your results and one should be smart and patient.

I want to do some reflection after Dr. Goran Nowicki´s suggestion for the kurds in Turkey as "the Kurds in Turkey should target for item 1 (their basic human and linguistic rights) and wait for Turkey to join the EU in the next 10-12 years"
I am sure that, Dr. Nowicki is well aware the Turkish machinery of forced assimilation of Kurds. In the next 10-15 years, heavy pressure of assimilation might have dramatic effects on the Kurdish language and Kurdishness which are already quite weak compare to eastern and southern Kurdistan. In my opinion, EU escapes to describe the Kurdish issue with its proper dimensions explicitly. EU prefers to push the situation on the way of the assimilation, for saving time. Therefore, I find Dr. Goran`s suggestion too optimistic, unless the kurds in North demand more than human rights and linguistic rights during these 10-15 years and manage put these demands, somehow, on the agenda of Turkish-EU relations. Nowadays we, Kurds in the European diasporas, are under a primitive pressure which is directed against our rights of freedom of expression and communications; in the last month a Kurdish discussion group (a part of the Gelawej) was closed down by parsimony, an European web services. As an excuse they said that they can not control the content of the platform because of the language used in the platform is not familiar for them. One does not need to be Einstein to understand that the reason of this decision was the pressure of Turkish government. Now another Kurdish discussion platform connected to the web pages of Rizgari is under heavy pressure of Parsimony. Last week it is practically impossible to follow and attend the discussion in this group too. These are not small cases; this is a crime against the freedom of expression. Someone who thinks that "big developments" drive the history might consider this situation bagatelle, my suggestion for them to think microscopic to understand macro-dynamics. This is what the frame of EU might offer to us, if the Kurds does not create a dissuasive political pressure, not only against repressive Turkish system but also against evading EU. Otherwise, EU may be satisfied by Turkey some Kurdish broadcasting "reforms" in the early morning when only cocks are active, and permission of the private Kurdish courses etc. In the mean time, Kurds will continue to be assimilated under the reform-conditions-and it will be difficult, at that time, to blame them for doing a "forced assimilation". Optimism is positive only if it will be in check with realities.
Kurds in north should ask more than human and linguistic rights immediately, otherwise they will lost in the mist of the assimilation!

regards
HeK

There are some interesting genetic findings which shed light about the close relationship between the Jews and the Kurds (e.g. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_origins_of_the_Kurds). I have given answer to
your interesting question in one of my articles on Israel and Kurdistan alliance:

http://home.cogeco.ca/~kurdistan2/5-4-04-opinion-kurdistan-isreal-alliance.html

In the article, I discuss the possible link between Mitanni/Median and Jewish people, and I look at the friendly relations between Jewish and Kurdish warrior-King Saladn in 12th century and the friendly relations between Israel and Kurds before and after 1975 Alger agreement. Classified US documents report that Israel suggested to the Kurdish leader in Iraq to declare independence and does not follow US and Kissinger in mid 70s.

In addition Arbil (historic Arbela) the present capital of KRG in Northern Iraq has been the capital of the "Adiabene, the Jewish Kingdom of Kurdistan" during the Parthian era
(i.e. 1st century AD). See: http://www.kulanu.org/links/adiabene.html

To sum up, the Kurds and Israelis have a long history of friendship and this comes in the context of around 3600 years of peaceful cohabiting between the ancestors of present Kurds and Jews in the region. An independent Kurdistan once established will be a natural ally of Israel and will help to mediate the Arab Israeli dispute in a fair way.

Regarding to Leyla Zana, I am fully agree with the Mr. Osman.
With her latest comment about the situation of Kurds in Turkey in the EU parliament, Leyla Zana made exactly same mistake as Yusuf Ziya did in 1922 (represent of city of Bitlis in the first Turkish Parliament in 1922). She pictured Turkey as a democratic country for Kurds, and her comment on Turkey was rather toady. What Yusuf Ziya did in 1922, shortly, He did exactly same thing, he mention that Kurds have good relations with Turkish system, and he declare full loyalty to Turkish system, and addressing this comment to European during the Lozan conference. There was neither trace of reality and any critic towards Turkish system, nor a political crumb of intellect in both comments. Yusuf Ziya had no historical example before him when he did his fatal mistake, but Leyla Zana had the tragic story of Yusuf Ziya. Yusuf Ziya was executed by hanging in his city Bitlis by Turkish government. This story is showing that with such sycophants, kurds may reach to gallows but not freedom. Besides, based on her mental performance after 2000, not her heroic resistance before 1999, I believe that Leyla Zana has not enough intellectual and political capacity to be Mrs Kurdica or to reach Nobel prize. Nowadays in North Kurdistan, there are many Kurdish women who are struggling against brutal Turkish system, patriarchal and reactionary Kurdish tradition and some ignorant Kurdish nationalist (especially on the situation of the women in Kurdistan) with their women organization, they are our mrs kurdistanica and our hearts prizewinners

First and formost a few words for those who are not prepared to have a sound discussion on the Kurdish history and its implication for present situation.
I sincerely suggest to the Turkish ethnicists for just a short span of time try to imagine if they had been in the unbareble situation of a large community as kurds how they have been felt and reacted ?
You hardly see any trace of hatred or negation or rejectionist views in the arguments of rational kurds vis-a-vis their
others.
Now I would like to come back to the history of Kurdistan Republic in 1946.
Recently on 16th August on the occasion of the anniversary of establishment of Kurdistan Democratic Party, a ceremony was
held in Hewlêr. Mr. Zalmay Khalilzad The American Ambassador in Iraq was among the guests, in his speech he said that KDP originally have been established in Baghdad. Of course this information is not correct, because KDP was established from Mahabad ,while the Republic still was on the place, and even had a party filial in Iraqi Kurdistan which later merged with
other groupings to become Democratic Kurdish Party.
Now the relation prior, during and after the demise of Mahabad experience between
these two parts of Kurdistan in all spheres of life are so obvious, that no one should bother to hide it or distort that.
I think the time has come for everyone
to see and state the direct effect of kurdish developments over the borders.
Professor Johan Galtung in a recent interview has reitrated his long concieved model of a free Kurdistan within the existing borders. A development which can put an end to the long suffering of the Kurds and at the same time be beneficial to the existing states in the region, namely Turkey,Iran,Iraq and Syria.

Very interesting scenarios; I would speculate that a Shiite state in the south would not be hostile towards the Kurds. With regards to the KRG, they have a semi-successful region setup. Although they need to clean up some internal conflicts and improve the government's efficiency. Furthermore, the KRG needs to increase its positive image for the Kurds not involved in any of the main political parties; this can only occur through real change. Perhaps with time and through external pressure, the KRG will overcome its corrupt image. I do sincerely hope that a viable Kurdish state will emerge from the ashes of Iraq through the most peaceful means.

How do you see possible Kurdish (Independent Kurdistan) relations with a state such as Israel in the context of the Middle East in general?

In answering TJ's question, I assume that the KRG in northern Iraq transforms into an independent republic of Kurdistan in the next 5 years (which is not very unlikely and it may happen much sooner). This transformation or move in the region will change the balance of power in the region. What will happen to the rest of Iraq brings forward different scenarios.

SCENARIO ONE: After Kurdistan independence, Iraq does not disintegrate further into Sunni and Shiite regions. In this case the Shiite can suppress the Sunnis and the Shiite Iraq, Iran and Syria will force Kurdistan to balance itself between the Persian side or the Turkish side and the balance of power will be similar to the Ottoman Persian era of Kurdistan.

SCENARIO TWO: After Kurdistan independence, Iraq disintegrates further into Sunni and Shiite regions. The Shiite region will become an appendix to Iran and threaten the Jordanian and Saudi Arabian kingdoms. The post-integration Sunni region is not viable economically, but it can provide an exit to Kurdistan land locked republic. If the Sunni region merges with Syria, then we will see something like scenario one happening, if it merges with Jordan or Saudi Arabia then again Kurds have an exit to outside.

SCENARIO THREE: Kurdistan is incorporated by force into Iran or Turkey. This will turn Iran and Turkey more unstable.

One should also see what will is happen in Turkey and Iran over the next 5 years. Will Turkey get into EU or will Iran also disintegrates in the coming 5 years. In my opinion, scenario two is the best option on the table for the Kurds and the most stable order among the three. Scenario three is the most unstable order in the region.

Kurds, kurdophilous Westerners and biased academicians, mostly of Kurdish origin spitting into the same pot to discuss (!) Kurdish affairs. Magi asks, another Kurd answers. Wow! What a hypocrisy of the cheapest kind!! Not a single politician or military official of countries that supposedly suppress poor innocent Kurds is invited to answer questions and discuss matters involving everybody in the region. Gentlemen, this is nothing but oral, or should I say written, masturbation, that satisfies only a chosen few, maybe one or two lowly US politicians and accomplishes nothing. Good luck.
B.A.

WHERE IS KURDISTAN? IS IT A MYTH OR A PRODUCT OF WESTERN(US/EU) NEO-COLONIALISTS, USING THE KURDS AS A STEPPING STONE INTO THE MIDDLE EAST.

I KNOW ONE THING, KURDS IN TURKEY HAVE BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL. MAINLY IN TERRORISM, PROSTITUTION, AND ORGANIZED CRIME. NOW WITH LEADERS LIKE TALABANI/BARZANI, WHICH ARE BOTH FEUDAL AND FASCISTS WITH A LARGE PORTION OF THEIR MONEY COMING IN AS EXTORSION AND DRUG/ARMS SMUGGLING, ONE WONDERS WHAT PURPOSE THE A UTOPIAN KURDISH STATE WILL BRING TO THE REGION. PERHAPS A NEW HAMAS/HEZBOLLAH WITH THE ARTICIFIAL STATE VALUES AS ISRAEL MAYBE THE OUTCOME.

But I think we all know that if a so-called Kurdish state will be formed, Kerkuk and Musul will be in Turkish hands...

Can one of the panelists please comment on the following question:
How will the establishment of an independent Kurdistan affect the political dynamics in the Middle East? Specifically, who would be Kurdistan's allies in the region?

To address Osman's comment, I should mention that I have written in another article about Berwari and compared it to the marriage of daughters of Mitanni kings and the Egyptian pharaohs for Mitanni-Egyptian alliance building. Trying hard not to trespass her personal life and her "exercise of free will", I argued that her marriage to a Sunni Arab was helpful in strengthening the relations between Kurdish and Sunni Arab communities in Iraq. Therefore looking at it from our present "Kurdistan republic" debate perspective (whether we argue for a federal or an independent republic) it helps to harmonize the Arab-Kurdish relations not only in Iraq, but in the Arab world. I try to be an optimist
on Kurds and Kurdish issues, and to focus on "the half full glass" instead of seeing it as "half empty glass".

Those in the media should also be careful about bringing this sensitive topic about the "decision of a woman" in the English media which may create a bad image for Kurds and Kurdish society. Especially among the female readers and feminists. Somebody made a decision and got married to a person from another culture and for a marriage to work out it needs a lot of sacrifice and hard work, so let's wish the couple our best wishes.

On Leyla Zana, Dr Elturan will be the best person to comment and the context in which she made those remarks. But a similar remark was made about 85 years ago. As we know, the Kurds in Turkey tried after WWI to establish a Kurdish self rule area in conjunction with Armenia (see Sevres and Lausanne threaties) which was not debated by the panellists here. The representative from Turkey in Lausanne, Ismat Pasha said that "The Kurds and the Turks are the essential components of the Republic of Turkey. The Kurds are not a minority but a nation; the government in Ankara is the government of the Turks as well as of the Kurds." But after Lausanne, the Kurds lost their rights and the policy of Turkish state changed and the "nation status" of Kurds was downgraded to non-existence in present Turkey. The status of Kurds in Turkey is much higher than a linguistic minority and the Kurds as a nation in partnership with the Turkish nation have a stake in present Turkey.

What future holds for Kurds in Turkey in the next 5, 20 and 40 years can be debated from this perspective (I don't debate the future of Kurds in Iraq and Iran). As equal partners in establishing Turkish state, they are entitled to 1) their basic human and linguistic rights 2) a federal status in Turkey and 3) the right to form their own state if they are not happy to live in partnership with Turkey. "The right to divorce".

I think the first 5 years, the Kurds in Turkey should target for item 1 and wait for Turkey to join the EU in the next 10-12 years. The time period that has taken for countries like Poland to join the EU. Joining EU will facilitate the creation of a federal Turkish-Kurdish state in Turkey in the next 20 years and probably in next 40 years, the Kurmanji Kurds in Turkey have decided to join their Sorani southern neighbors in Iraq.

Kurds in Turkey should realize the importance of getting on the EU train with Turkey which will impact all Kurds similar to Scots in the UK. The UK decided to devolve some of its powers to the Scottish parliament after the Scottish National Party candidates like Dr Winifred Margaret Ewing managed to be elected as the Member of European Parliament (MEP) representing Scotland. She earned the title Madame Ecosse (Mrs Scotland) from the work she did on promoting Scotland in Europe. I think if Turkey gets to EU, Leyla Zana could be Madame Kurdica (Mrs Kurdistan) in the EU.

Listen to some Kurdish Music @ www.lawksalih.com.

On The question of formation of Kurdistan Republic in Mahabad (22 January 46- December 46) there are many points that should be mentioned.
First of all the Republic was not recognized Internationaly. No single government in the area recognized it as an sovereign state.
Second point is according to the remaining
documents and memories of participants, the proclamation of the Republic was a response to the desire of Azerbaijani National Government to include the areas under the kurdish rule as part of its administration.
In negotiations with the central government
for finding a legal status for Kurdish and Azerbaijani movements, the Kurds were not seen as an independent partner by Central authorities.
Having mentioned some of the short comings
,it must be clearly stated that the experience of Kurdish self rule in parts of Eastern Kurdistan in the period of 41-46
have been one of the most effective factors in strengthening Kurdish national awareness every where.

Hello, i dont want to dissapoint anyone,
but our nominee for Nobel Prize said, shortly after being liberated from prison, 'we TURKS, love hospitality'. When she was still in Prison she was contradicting one German green MP, saying, 'in turkish prison we are not under neither pressure nor torture. While turkey helding negotiations with EU for the candidature of membership, she was saying, 'The Kurds are not a minority in Turkey'. She was refusing having signed an advertisement advocating Kurdish right in a western Newspaper. I can enumerate more but it is needless.

I mean our nominee is not that old one, that we know or that one we dream she to be. That is sad !

We should be enough strong for not being dissapointed by this and that one. The case of Ocalan should be didactical for all of us. The Kurds neednt fake idols nor fake sauvers. Should I remember you the case of a Kurdish lady,kdp minister, harward alumni married a miserable coward Arab already having 4 wives. That Arab refusing the return of deported Kurds to Kerkuk.

The 1946 republic map covered the land from Persian Gulf to Mahabad (city west of Iran near Urmia lake) and from Mahabad to Mediterranean sea. The population includes Kurds speaking Sorani, Kurmanji, Zaza and other Kurdish tongues and the Shiite Lors. Linguistically, there are three to four major linguistic communities living in Kurdistan each speaking a "North" Western Iranian dialect (contrasting with Persian which is a "south" western Iranian language). Each of these groups desires to maintain its own dialect and language. A federal union of these provinces with its own dialect can form a stronger federal Kurdistan. Such a union is more feasible and realistic than the idealist unification of all Kurdish tongues. This union can be introduced in KRG in Iraq by making the future administration divisions into 3 parts 1) North Kurdish (Kurmanji/Badinani), 2) South Kurdish (Sorani) and 3) Faily. A swiss model or the language law introduced in Quebec in
Canada applies nicely to Kurdistan.

Introducing this linguistic based structure and long term vision ensures a swifter transition to incorporate other Kurdish regions into the republic in the future, whether it is Sorani speakers in Mahabad and Sanandaj in Iran or Kirmanshahi/Lori speaking population in Iran (closely affiliated with Faily Kurds in langage and Dhiite religion) or the Kurmanji North Kurdish speakers in Turkey, Syria and Caucasus. To some extent the subtitling of Sorani Kurdish TV programs in Kurmanji and the captioning of Kurmanji TV programs with Sorani captions also help to bridge the gap. The KRG in Northern Iraq has brought this into reality. The introduction of the linguistic based federalism is the next step that should be planned carefully and implemented by KRG in Northern Iraq.

The Kurdish society is divided between Sunni/Shiite Islam and minorities such as Yizidi and Christian and Jews still live in peace among Kurds.
For dealing with different religions in Kurdistan, ancient Indo-Iranian "separation of religion and politics" is the best solution. Before the introduction of Zorasterism, there existed a religious vs politic separation of powers. This was manifested in the dualism of Mit-ra (i.e. sun god) vs. Varu-na (i.e. sky/rain god) dualism. See:

Mitra-Varuna: An Essay on Two Indo-European Representations of Sovereignty by Georges Dumézil, Derek Coltman, 1990.

Dumézil shows that religious and/or political sovereignty - from India to Rome, from Iran to Scandinavia - is conceived as a dual category: on the one hand the magistic-king (raj, rex), on the other the magi-priest (brahman, flamen).

Mitra is related to present term Mihr (sun) in Kurdish and Varuna is related to planet Uran-us or present Gilan province in north of Iran. Mitra/Varuna concept was the foundation of ancient civilizations of
Mit-anni and Medes in Kurdistan. Both Mit-anni and Mah-abad are derived from the same roots as Mit-ra and Meher. For more historical background on Kurdistan as the birthplace of Mitanni/Medes Indo-Iranian civilizations see:
http://kurdistanobserver.servehttp.com/mar06/12-3-06-opinion-goran-tky-playing-with-fire.htm

This was more past history and I discuss the second part of the question about the future and what may hold for the Kurds in the 5, 20 and 40 years in another post.

Kameel, I completely agree with your statements. My apologies for not conveying my sarcasm better. In addition to the Layla Zana case, last year 20 people were fined for using the letters "Q" and "W" on their Kurdish New Years plaque cards because these letters do not appear in the Turkish alphabet. Again, Turkey follows the Kemalist mindset of the early 1920's and 1930's.

Kurds still live mostly in an agrarian society. Without the self-sacrificing and culture creating and maintaining role of women, Kurdish society would not exist. Clearly most of the material culture (with the exception of planting -the cereal crops- and some stages of harvesting -such as cutting hay and harvesting grains-) is the creation of women.

The entire field of animal husbandry is managed by women and production and preservation of animal products (such as cheese, yogurt and butter, wool and yarn) are done by them. Most -if not all- of weaving and pottery, songs and stories are created and told by women. Needless to say, all of the cooking, cleaning and sewing is done by women.

Kurdish children learn their language from their mothers and older sisters (who help to reduce the burdens of mothers). A great number of Kurdish men have a better education in the language of their colonizers and no longer speak Kurdish to their children. But it is predominantly the Kurdish women who are the informal educators of preschool children, who keep Kurdish language alive. Almost all of the cooking, cleaning and sewing are done by women.

Also, when men temporarily go to cities to earn cash, leaving the women folk behind to tend the fields and household, they are the ones who manage the whole affairs of the family, that is, acting as the head of the family. Saddam knew this fact well, that is why he had hired professional rapists to destroy the pillar that held the Kurdish society.

Unfortunately for performing all such vital tasks, Kurdish woman gets nothing but more oppression. Her representation of her gender in society and administrative levels is near to zero. Slowly she is filling the ranks of teachers and nurses and clerical positions, but this is not enough.

Through organizing (done by the women for the women without the hindrance from men) and access to education (in Kurdish language) should be widened. Kurdish administrations should push for the advancement of women by all means: More university education, more of them should be sent to abroad to get access to higher education. In short, remove the barriers and let them move forward, I would say.

What structures are needed to bridge the gaps among Kurds in terms of language they speak, their religion and other aspects of Kurdish social life. What future for the Kurds?

I assume that the first part of the question concerns itself with the difficulties that inter-Kurdish dialect differences cause and how to standardize Kurdish language. If my assumptions are correct, I would venture to say that one of the biggest barriers separating Kurds from each part is that they do not know each other. The prohibitions imposed by nation states on travel, cultural exchange, communication etc., and isolation imposed by the mountainous terrain have played a big role in alienating Kurds from each other. It is only a handful of the cultural elite who have had the luxury of knowing each other face to face, and that in the comfort of the diaspora, away from Kurdistan. From the 1950's to the mid part of 1990's cross-border cultural exchange was mostly through limited radio broadcasts (Radio Yerevan-Kurdish section, Radio Bagdad and Tehran Kurdish sections). The fact that literate Kurds have used three different alphabets (Arabic, Latin and Cyrillic) to write in Kurdish, has also kept them isolated from each other, too. The biggest handicap, however, is the lack of a formal education system in Kurdish. Colonizers have imposed the language of the dominant nation and prohibited the teaching of Kurdish. These all have facilitated the deepening of dialect differences and assimilation of Kurds into other languages and cultures.
This bleak scene is rapidly changing though. Now Kurds have at least three satellite TV stations that broadcast mostly in Kurdish (and through online also). These broadcasts (of Roj TV, Kurdistan TV and KurdSat TV) are viewed by most of the Kurds. Not only are they informed about social and cultural developments in different parts of their homeland, but also they get to see the images, lives, conditions of each other; they have a taste of each dialect and can -by comparison- perceive the sounds and shapes of the spoken dialects. Directors such as Bahman Qobadi (from Iranian Kurdistan = see his Turtles Can Fly, Marooned in Iraq) and Salim Hiner (from Iraqi Kurdistan = see Lemon Vodka) have also contributed immensely to Kurds getting to know other Kurds via the films. We wish them long life to create more...
Kurdish universities in Iraqi Kurdistan have allowed some access to students from Turkish and Iranian Kurdistan. This has facilitated at least a handful of young Kurds to live and learn from such experiences and learn the dialects. In the same vein, there are more Kurdish publishers and internet distributors of Kurdish books of all sorts, memoirs, poetry, dictionaries and phraseology books. Such access is helping Kurdish academicians in diaspora to keep pace with cultural developments at home. Coordinated bi-lingual translation projects from one dialect into another will also help to bridge the linguistic distance among the Kurds.
Kurdish diaspora in Europe and in capital cities of the overlord states have created several Kurdish Culture Centers which publish periodicals and much needed dictionaries. Kurdish Institute in Paris and in Istanbul have been the most productive of all. Before 1990's such vital functions were performed by Kurds of the former Soviet Union. Kurdology sections of universities in Yerevan, Leningrad and Moscow were famous and are still functional today.
Kurds are very much in need of establishing charitable foundations (with the help of the European and American philanthropists) who can provide financial support for creative and intellectual Kurds to produce and disseminate their works among the Kurds.
All such initiatives require a democratic environment and much freedom to create, but most of all, the use of Kurdish language in formal education of the Kurds. This is a must for the survival and standardization of the Kurdish language.

Kurds are religiously more tolerant than other people of the Middle East. However, they have to learn to treat and protect their Christian brothers and sisters. This definitely would be much needed improvement.
If they organize tightly for independence, avoid inter-Kurdish fights and develop a vibrant democracy, Kurds will have a good chance to survive the bad intentions of their captors...

[QUESTION FINAL] What structures are needed to bridge the gaps between Kurds
in terms of language they speak, their religion and other aspects of
Kurdish social life? What future you foresee for the Kurds in the next 5,
20 and 40 years ahead in terms of statehood and their place in the region?

To some extent, I have answered the question on Kurdish women in an earlier post where I highlighted the progress of Kurdish women in different regions in Kurdistan. I mentioned Leyla Zana who deserves a noble prize (see http://www.kurdistan.org/Leyla/index.html).
Leyla Zana (born 1961) is an example of Turkish repression against Kurdish language that I want to highlight to TJ to grasp and feel the extent of the repression against Kurds in Turkey. Leyla when taking her oath as MP in 1991 used her mother tongue Kurdish, the same language that all Kurdish mothers speak to their children. Amnesty International reported "She took the oath of loyalty in Turkish, as required by law, then added in Kurdish, 'I shall struggle so that the Kurdish and Turkish peoples may live together in a democratic framework.' Parliament erupted with shouts of 'Separatist', 'Terrorist', and 'Arrest her'" [see http://www.amnestyusa.org/action/special/zana.html].

She spent the best parts of her life in Turkish prisons, away from her family, 15 year! In 1994, she was recognized as a "Prisoner of Conscience" by Amnesty International. In 1994 and 1995, she was awarded the Rafto Prize and EU Sakharov prize respectively and Turkey decided to keep her in prison. In 2001 the European Court of Human Rights ruled against Turkey after a review of her trial and Turkey did not recognize the result. I hope I am not making a scientific mistake if I say 2001 was just 5 years ago.

In June 2004 finally Turkey decided to release her. In 1991, she was only 30 years old, and when she was released, she was 43 years old.

As a linguist, I also refer TJ and other readers to the informative 1992 article, "Will Split-Ergativity survive in Kurmanji Kurdish spoken in Turkey? By Dorleijn. Also see Margareet Dorleijn's "The decay of Ergativity in Kurmanci", Tilburg University Press (Studies in Multilingualism 3), 1996.

The decay of ergativity in Kurdish in Turkey is a scientific paper written by a respected colleague of mine. Ergativity is an ancient grammatical feature present in Basque and Hurrian languages. The story of Leyla Zana is not a myth. It is what happened in Turkey.

In terms of Kurdish language rights in Turkey, I believe Turkey is where Iran was 50 years ago and even present Iran is still below the standard norms of human rights where the Kurdish children can learn Arabic in schools, but not their mother tongue Kurdish.

I should also highlight the phenomenon of rape that happens systemically in Iranian prisons against political Kurdish women. Similar things have been reported in Turkey. This is not acceptable not only in a civilized country, but not in any country that practises Islam where the rapist will be hanged.

Despite all these risks, the Kurdish women continue their struggle and this is really amazing to witness.

Discussing the Issues of gender can be difficult as each society has different culture and ways of how people will respond to changes and relationship around the topic of women The issue of kurdish women and ways in which transition from dependent adults is shaped by relationships with family members, the market place, the institutions of the state and most importantly when youth become adults and they faced with contradictory pressures coming from these various.

It is certainly fair to say that conflict over women's rights expresses itself differently according to cultural variations, but the parallels which exist between incidents of this kind in Muslim/kurdish community should be apparent. We see a need to better understand the issues which lie beneath the problems which face Kurdish women movements before simply labelling them according to a popular rhetoric, the commonalities as well as differences across cultures, and work together - men, women - to develop a more open dialogue about gender equality in the Kurdish society.

The concept of self-determination and by looking at inequalities of opportunity and choice between female-inequalities stemming from their social class, their gender and geographical location (whiten all parts of Kurdistan) and their economic statues, its become more understandable that some aspect of kurdish feminism movement did not work in practice, it can be said somehow out date it and tried to exclude the role of men in this very important struggle.

Kurdish society, like other societies, is patriarchal. Western travelers to Kurdistan observed, in the 19th century, that Kurdish women enjoyed more freedom than their Arab, Persian or Turkish sisters. The evidence was (1) the absence of veiling, (2) the relative freedom of women to socialize with men even strangers, (3) mixed, male/female dancing, and (4) the existence of women leaders (tribal chiefs, rulers). Kurdish nationalism has accepted these claims uncritically. Indeed, all these four elements can be found among neighbouring peoples. It would be more accurate to say that Kurdish women were, in the past, equal to their neighbouring sisters in both oppression and absence of rights. And they have participated in the struggle against patriarchy.

However, the picture is more complex. With the founding of the four nation-states in the post-WWI period, they tried to create an ideal "Turkish woman," "Iranian woman," and "Arab woman" to which Kurdish women should match up. Thus, Turkish, Iranian (Persian), and Arab nationalism defined womanhood in ethnic terms (this was not the case in the USSR where Kurdish women were expected to be socialists rather than immerse in ethnicity). Under the conditions, many activist women of the dominant nations engaged in the state-sponsored national oppression of the Kurds. Kurdish nationalists resisted, and tried to create Kurdish womanhood in nationalist terms. Kurdish women were, thus, treated as reproducers or "mothers of the nation," and the source of pure Kurdish culture and language.

The first Kurdish women's organization was founded in 1919 in Istanbul. However, one cannot talk about a Kurdish women's movement until quite recently. In the nationalist project, national oppression overshadowed gender oppression. And until quite recently, many women did not question this patriarchal project.

Today, Kurdish women are an important social and political force. There is, now, a female intelligentsia (writers, poets, artists, journalists, teachers, academics, etc) and professionals (nurses, doctors, engineers, politicians, etc). They are becoming familiar with feminism, and the conflict between feminist consciousness and Kurdish nationalism dates back at least to 1994 when women marched from Silemani to Hewler in protest to the war between KDP and PUK, and women's demand for the reform of personal status laws, and criminalization of honour killing.

Kurdish women have to fight not only indigenous patriarchy and the patriarchy of the state but also resist the emerging "colonial feminism" promoted by the Bush Administration in Iraq. Indeed, Kurdish women have been going through "democracy training" by well-funded anti-feminist groups in the US. While a women's movement was beginning to emerge in Iraqi Kurdistan in the 1990s, the proliferation of NGOs has been an obstacle for the rise of active feminist and women's movements. Kurdish diasporas are also a site of women's struggle against patriarchy. Thus, Kurdish women have the potential of acting as an internationally significant force against indigenous, state, and colonial patriarchies and their anti-feminism. For literature on women in the Kurdish republic of 1946 and women and nationalism, see references in http://fcis.oise.utoronto.ca/~mojabweb/publications/english/pub_english.htm

I would like to respond to Dr. Nowicki's following sentence:
"Kurdish culture is alive and well in Turkey, more than ever and more then anywhere else in the World."

I am shocked to see such a statement from someone in academia. Kurdish cultural rights have indeed improved over the past few years, however, this is not a function of the Turkish state's desires. EU pressures have forced Turkey to "give" such rights to the Kurds. In addition, let us not forget Kemalist policy that exists to this day in Turkey. Do you forget the days of the "Mountain Turks"? How about the Turkish government's systemic "integration" of Kurds? Never mind all of that, it was in the "past." Please take a few minutes to view this short (~10min) documentary by Journeymen Pictures about the current state of affairs in southeastern Turkey.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1825655558139054191&q=Diyarbakir&hl=en

As you can see, "Kurdish culture is alive and well in Turkey, more than ever and more then anywhere else in the World."

Kurds still live mostly in an agrarian society. Without the self-sacrificing and culture creating and maintaining role of women, Kurdish society would not exist. Clearly most of the material culture (with the exception of planting -the cereal crops- and some stages of harvesting -such as cutting hay and harvesting grains-) is the creation of women.

The entire field of animal husbandry is managed by women and production and preservation of animal products (such as cheese, yogurt and butter, wool and yarn) are done by them. Most -if not all- of weaving and pottery, songs and stories are created and told by women. Needless to say, all of the cooking, cleaning and sewing is done by women.

Kurdish children learn their language from their mothers and older sisters (who help to reduce the burdens of mothers). A great number of Kurdish men have a better education in the language of their colonizers and no longer speak Kurdish to their children. But it is predominantly the Kurdish women who are the informal educators of preschool children, who keep Kurdish language alive. Almost all of the cooking, cleaning and sewing are done by women.

Also, when men temporarily go to cities to earn cash, leaving the women folk behind to tend the fields and household, they are the ones who manage the whole affairs of the family, that is, acting as the head of the family. Saddam knew this fact well, that is why he had hired professional rapists to destroy the pillar that held the Kurdish society.

Unfortunately for performing all such vital tasks, Kurdish woman gets nothing but more oppression. Her representation of her gender in society and administrative levels is near to zero. Slowly she is filling the ranks of teachers and nurses and clerical positions, but this is not enough.

Through organizing (done by the women for the women without the hindrance from men) and access to education (in Kurdish language) should be widened. Kurdish administrations should push for the advancement of women by all means: More university education, more of them should be sent to abroad to get access to higher education. In short, remove the barriers and let them move forward, I would say.

[QUESTION] Can you comment on the role of women in Kurdistan society and movement and how can one increase their participation?

In terms of freedom, it depends what is the definition of freedom. The states in which Kurds live, give Kurds very limited linguistic, cultural and social freedoms and Kurds have been discriminated and abused. The Iran of Rezashah (before 1946 Kurdistan republic) and present Turkey went as far as banning the Kurdish dress and language. the Iraqi Kurds were more fortunate because of the league of nation's guarantees after the British mandate of Iraq was over and Kurds were incorporated in Iraq despite their objections after WWI.

In terms of Independence, the 1946 republic experience was a very "idealist" project. The present KRG Kurdistan government in Iraq is a very "realist" government having witnessed the fate of the 1946 republic and the hanging of 1946 republic president Qazi Muhammad by Iranian regime. They are seasoned politicians and not bunch of eggheads, using the terminolgy of Washington. Politicians in Kurdistan like
Dr Othman were closely involved in negotiations between Kurds and Iraq in 1970s for autonomy. The 1975 betrayal of Kurdish movement by Alger agreement, 1988 Anfal and Helabja genocides in Iraq are some of the reasons for this extreme realism in present Kurdish regional government (KRG).

You should have experienced the fate of Kurdish refugees after 1988 Anfal operations who lived in very bad social and economical conditions under tents, some running barefooted to realize the hesitation of Kurdish politicians.

The right mix of idealism and realism is needed for Kurdish policymakers to succeed and therfore I disagree with Dr Elturan about the readiness of Kurdish parties for independece, they are acpable of it; and I also should disagree with Dr Hassnpour on which Kurdish party. My answer is the office of the Kurdistan regional government, the president and its prime minister and parliament.

The stability under KRG Kurdistan government and the yes vote in the unofficial referendum for Independence in Northern Iraq clearly show that the Kurds are ready 100% for Independence. But is independence feasible and sustainable in the region is the question in the minds of Kurdish leaders. They are realists.

If the international community is ready to treat the Kurds as Jews in Israel or Palesinians in Palestine and protect the soverneity of Kurdistan similar to Israel, then all parties in Kurdistan are ready for independence.

All Kurdish parties in Kurdistan desire independence, but they disagree whether such an independent republic is feasible or not. Kurdish parties do not want to repeat the experience of 1946 republic and they need guarantees from international organizations such UN. UN is not doing its job right. Don't Kurds deserve to have at least an observer status in the UN similar to Palestinians? Why this double standard? PLO was granted Observer Status at the UN in 1975 Why UN is willing to invite the PLO chairman to UN in 1975, but not ready to invite Mola Mustafa Barzani to the UN in the 1975? When will UN become ready to invite Massoud Barzani, the present president of the Kurdistan Regional Government to the UN?

The Kurds and Kurdish parties are fully ready for independence, but are the UN and international community are willing to stand by their principles? Kurds are not the ones to answer this question. It is the UN to answer this question. What Kurds ask is why there is no invitation coming for the president of the Kurdistan Regional government from UN? The Kurds ask Mr Annan to answer this simple question.
Mr Barzani as the KRG president
He has been invited to White House in Wasington by US president and to England by British prime Minister.

Kurds also want to know why US who is the Kurdish ally, does not use its influence in the UN to realize this wish? Kurdish parties cannot reply to these questions.

I find it difficult to answer this question. Which Kurdish leadership? KDP or PUK? The rest does not have much voice in moving towards the exercise of the right to secede.

Secession, including unilateral secession, is acceptable (in international law) under certain conditions (one case is the unilateral secession of the US from Britain). Those interested in the history, theory, norms, and conditions of secession may look at the opinion expressed by the Supreme Court of Canada regarding the right of Quebec to secede unilaterally (see full text of the document in http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/1998/1998rcs2-217/1998rcs2-217.html, and see a summary of this document in Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_re_Secession_of_Quebec ).

The right of Iraqi Kurdistan to secede, a right accepted and even cherished in theories and practices of democracy, should have been included in the Iraqi constitution. The Kurdish leadership did not have the will to do this, although it could do it easily during the drafting of the constitution. According to the democratic tradition, a "people" subjected to oppression, no less than genocide in Iraqi Kurdistan, is entitled to secede unilaterally. If the Kurdish leadership compromised on constitutionalizing this right, you can only predict what it will do in exercising it.

Kurdish leadership is not ready to lead Kurdish people to freedom or to statehood. The KDP leadership uses a fiery nationalistic rhetoric to emphasize the right of the Kurds to be free (i.e. to have a free Kurdistan state) one day, but I am afraid the opportunity of catching that "one day" has long passed. At the beginning of the invasion of Iraq the Kurds should have incorporated Kerkuk into Kurdistan's borders and mobilized and armed the entire Kurdish society to defend its gain. However, the Kurdish administration was not ready for this and I have doubt that it can ever be ready to embark on a path towards complete independence and freedom for the Kurds. I will come to this point to cite my reasons.
As to the PUK, the other Kurdish party, it is even less ready to lead the Kurds toward independence, even though it mobilized and armed some of the Kurds and moved into Kerkuk in a spontaneous fashion a little after the US invasion. This move was to increase its power base visa vie the KDP, rather than incorporating Kerkuk into the borders of Iraqi Kurdistan. The Kurds who moved into Kerkuk were victims of Saddam's arabization policy in work over decades. As of now these Kurdish returnees live in a soccer stadium, in tents and in very miserable conditions. What does this example tell us? If one does not do each step of a vital job like shooting for statehood in a systematic and timely manner, one cannot take advantages of brief openings in history for that chance and one misses the boat.
I do not think that Kurdish leaders have a burning desire to be free. Lack of a clear vision and plan for independence, lack of building an infallible infrastructure for independence, lack of readiness to mobilize resources and people for independence have plagued Kurdish leadership. We can expand this list further, but this much will suffice to illustrate our point.
A stateless nation like Kurds who are slated for forced assimilation (their kids grow up to be Arabs, Turks and Persians but not Kurds because they have no right to education in their mother language), who are massacred and exposed to genocide, who are subject to deportations from their homeland, whose geography is bombed, whose forests are burned, whose homes are destroyed, who have to beg other states for a passport or save heaven, should create a well working international diplomacy and propaganda to prepare other nations for its ultimate independence.
Only leaders who are not afraid of their people, who can take risks and prepare every cell of the society for independence can lead to independence.

hello folks,
I hope such dicussions will continue and be more frequent.

I read rapidly the debated topics, However, I shoud copy paste this page on my local disk to read it carefully. I, like most of the Kurds, am aware of the Kurdistan republic in Mahabad but unfortunately very superficially.

Historian should debates these subjects but not in library's halls. I would apreciate more if our national tv-chanells invite the knowledgable historians and alow discussion of such matters in front of millions.

Some retaded racist compare Kurds in their ancesters homeland to the poor chinese immigrants in the United states. Once such a racist columnist in turkish daily Radikal newspaper was claiming that, 'If Kurds demands linguistic right, then turks(immigrants who fled their homeland because of hunger and mostly doing the most dirty jobs) in Hollands should do the same'. Such an enemy ! Such a Logic !

We, Kurds, have right, including armed struggle, to kick the ass of the occupiers. In South Kurdistan, most of the objective are fullfilled. Now it is the turn of the Eastern and Northern Kurds.

[QUESTION] In the context of Kurdish regional government in Northern
Iraq are the Kurdish leadership, organizations ready to be free and
independent? What will it take them to be free?

Amed raises the important issue of the relations between KRG in Northern Iraq
and Turkey and the role that PKK can play.
Turkey is playing with fire. In my article http://home.cogeco.ca/~kurdistan6/2-3-05-opinion-goran-tky-playing-with-fire.html
I look at the Kurdish and Turkish relations and the "cold war hangover" of Turkey.

I argue that any confrontation between the Turks and Kurds will damage their chances for getting on board the EU train. If Turkey joins EU, the Kurds will gain a status in EU too, so the Kurds in Turkey should put on hold the Kurdish separation file and do their best to bring Turkey and Kurds into the EU structure. The Turks should appreciate and acknowledge this period of calm and both Kurds and Turks in Turkey should realize that they are in the same boat heading towards the EU and do not try to shake the boat.

US and the KRG in Northern Iraq should convince Turkish government and Kurds in Turkey that there is a win-win opportunity for both parties. Kurds joining EU will be a golden opportunity for the 3rd Kurdistan republic administration of KRG in Northern Iraq too.

I further argue that by threatening Kurds in Iraq, Turks are going towards a confrontation with the US and Arabs. Any confrontation will de-stablize Turkey and may even cause an early disintegration of Turkey. I.e. why the Turks are playing with fire and damaging their own EU chances.

By conventional wisdom, the 1946 Mahabad Kurdish Republic unrecognized by any nation was not even a state. How it came about and how it ended with a classic bodies-hanging finale, are mere footnotes in the history of international relations. But for Kurds, it has become a defining milestone in the formation of nationhood. Those bodies hanging in the town square were beloved leaders of the Kurdish people. Their only crime was trying to stand on that tiny territory and reach their full height as a nation among other honorable nations. Mahabad Kurdish Republic was bound to fall and as it did the city, the town square, the story and the heroes involved in this ill-fated experiment, all together became a touchstone of Kurdish nationalism, forever remembered and endlessly discussed across the face of Kurdistan, from Kermanshah to Dersim, weaving a national tapestry that disregard internal borders.

Today, Southern Kurdistan offers a realistic chance for a state. Despite a history of catastrophic let downs, today one may claim with confidence that Kurdistan is inevitable. The problem, and its is a difficult one, is how to manage the unfolding and aftermath of this political earthquake. Such is the heightened anticipation of and the international goodwill towards Kurdistan today that he majority of the member states of the UN will recognize Kurdistan at the drop of Uncle Sam's hat, most willingly, even if they have seperate issues with the USA. Israel, EU, Russia, China, even many Arab states will be among them.

There will be conditions. Kurdistan will have good relations with its neighbours. Firstly, it will not be a base of operations for cross-border guerilla raids against Turkish military. Secondly, it will use all its power and influence over fellow Kurds in Turkey, Iran and Syria to cease violent struggle against these states.
Both goals are realistic and attainable.

Once the Kirkuk issue is resolved and Iraq is partitioned, an independent Kurdish state will finally be able to concentrate on eradicating all camps and facilities not under its military control. Should the PKK resist militarily, it will be a repeat of history with Kurd killing Kurd again on the peaks and valleys of the Zagros Mountains, with the US chipping in from the air. But this may not be necessary. The Kurds everywhere in the Middle East, including the PKK, know that Southern Kurdistan can not be gambled with for a Greater Kurdistan. No Kurdish nationalist, no popular movement will tolerate PKK or any other armed faction to incite interference or obstruction from neighbouring states on the path of the Southern Kurdistan becoming an independent state.

However, if madness prevails in Ankara and the Turkish military invades the South in order to deal with all its problems, the PKK, the emerging Kurdish state and the Kerkuk issue all at once, then not only will there be an all out war between Turks and Kurds, but also the existing border between Turkey and Iraq, drawn in 1925, will become null and void. While Turkey is trying to secure Kerkuk, Peshmerga forces will carry out raids inside Turkish Kurdistan. As for the PKK, their ranks too will swell, pushing ever further into central Anatolia, further politicising Kurds and other minorities in Turkey, cutting off the recently completed oil pipeline in Turkey and sabotaging the power lines from dams built in Kurdistan to the Turkish industrial base further West. It will be impossible to imagine many tourists going to Turkey, if it engages in a war against Kurds.

This is a probable scenario, naturally if the USA and the international community stands by and does nothing to prevent a Turkish invasion. A more peaceful and pragmatic solution is for Turkey to be persuaded to offer a real solution to the Kurdish question at home, rather than cause and seek greater troubles abroad. This solution has to be political, and not military. It must involve full amnesty for all Kurdish guerillas and prisoners and must genuinely emrace its Kurdish citizens as full and equal partners in a new Turkey. The Kemalist fiction and rhetoric that Kurds are already fully participating members of society and decently treated citizens "like all other Turkish citizens" doesn't work, doesn't wash anymore. And turkey can't regain its Kurds with a lollipop diplomacy -that is promising a lollipop in return for PKK surrender of arms. It won't work; not after Southern Kurdistan's gains within the Federal Iraq.

Turkey should stop relying so much on the power of its mighty army. Even the USA has come to realise in Iraq the limitations of military force and is now hoping for medium to long term manipulation of social, political and economic forces of the region. If Turkey seeks military adventure in Kurdistan it will damage the plans the USA has for its own future security needs. If Turkey invades Kurdistan, it will fail to hold and digest it and will fall sick with it. With EU dreams destroyed too, the Turkish state will again be the sick man of Europe a la its predecessor, the Ottoman Empire. The USA, the EU, and Russia may well band together and decide for themselves what to do with Anatolia, Kurdistan, Cyprus; and the Straits. It may prove dire and costly for Turkey.

Shexmus Amed

While Kurdish people eagrly want independence, kurdish leaders disgracefuly crying for the unity of Iraq,Iran,Turkey and Syria !I wonder how long it takes for so called Kurdish leaders to realize that not seeking independent for Kurdistan simply is a high treason.
It is not shamful that 40 million people are stateless?How long we have to wait and suffer to gain independence?

Nuradin Waisy
Canada-Toronto

While Kurdish people eagrly want independence, kurdish leaders disgracefuly crying for the unity of Iraq,Iran,Turkey and Syria !I wonder how long it takes for so called Kurdish leaders to realize that not seeking independent for Kurdistan simply is a high treason.
It is not shamful that 40 million people are stateless?How long we have to wait and suffer to gain independence?

Hello all,
I just wanted to mention that the correct name for Kurdish republic in Mahabad in 1946 was (Kurdistan republic) not Mahabad republic as the debaters mentioned.
Thank you for raising this important issue.
Nuradin Waisy
Kurdish freelance journalist
Canada-Toronto

The 1946 republic was established in the era before major industrial developments and social and land reforms in Iran and the so called "White revolution" in Iran encouraged by the US president Kennedy. So I disagree with Dr Elturan in this case.

The tribes in 1946 were stronger than present Iran. The social system in both Iran and Iraq have been transformed by the development of industry and major urbanization and decline of nomadic life style. The development of communication technology and IT after TV and Radio has also provided new media for communication in Kurdistan. The impact of these developments on the Kurdish regional government (KRG) in northern Iraq vs. 1946
republic has changed the landscape for more freedom of expression, more
struggle for women rights. The sponsors have a role in these, but the Diaspora influence and evolution of society has a greater impact.

With the urbanization and expansion of education and universities, the population of Kurdish educated women are on the rise and the presence of Kurdish women pishmerga in PKK, Kurdish women ministers like Nasrin Berwari in Iraq, Kurdish women MPs like Leyla Zana in Turkey and Kurdish
women editors like Dr Tolouei in Iran are all signs of progress in different Kurdish regions. Education, creation of quotas for women in parliament and ministers are positive steps towards more participation of Kurdish women and changing the patriarchal society of Kurdistan.

Over time, this will eradicate any traces of mini-feudal like system left in the structure of Kurdish family.

Answer to Question 3 (The scope of intervention): Contrary to the claims of Cold War historians and Iranian nationalists, the USSR supported the formation of Kurdistan and Azerbaijan autonomous regimes out of self-interest rather than interest in promoting communism or national liberation. The USSR, devastated by Nazi aggression and having lost no less than 18 million of its population, had to confront the US, which was asserting its hegemony over the world, establishing an empire on the ruins of Europe and Japan, and relying on its monopoly of the nuclear bomb. The Kurdish and Azerbaijan regimes were used as a bargaining chip in Soviet confrontations with an aggressive US policy of encircling the USSR, expanding its control over the Far East, and establishing bases in countries such as Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. Under the circumstances, the USSR did not pursue a policy of "regime change" in Iran. It was committed, through a 1942 Tripartite Treaty (with UK and Iran), to maintain the "territorial integrity" of Iran.

By contrast, the 2003 war against Iraq was clearly launched as a project of "regime change." It was part and parcel of the Bush Administration's policy of setting up a Greater Middle East loyal to the US and friendly to Israel. The Bush Administration is, at the same time, officially committed to maintaining the territorial integrity of the Iraqi state, although there are voices calling for its dismantling.

More than half a century has passed from the days of Mahabad Republic and much has changed in all parts of Kurdistan. Iraqi Kurdistan experienced the Anfal genocide at the hands of Saddam regime and was nearly destroyed, and is barely recovering now. Such large scale destruction and trauma has engendered an instinct for day to day survival, forget about such luxuries as rule of law, freedom of expression and association. This mere survival itself came to be viewed as success by the Kurds who went through such extreme experiences. The regime of clergy in Iran executed or assassinated the cream of the crop (the educated elite) of Kurdish society, has waged a war that is still going on in Iranian Kurdistan

Constant wars and destruction have eliminated the continuity needed for accumulation, transformation and institutionalization cycle in Kurdish society. Almost every decade under dictatorship, Kurdistan is destroyed and Kurds have to start from the scratch. This seems to have been the fate of the Kurds in Iran and Iraq (not to mention those in Turkey). Overlord states can bring back feudalism, tribalism and a regime of terror if it serves them. A society open to such manipulation, in my humble opinion, does not evolve, it merely devolves...That is the situation in both Kurdistans I mentioned above.

Both the Soviet Union and US had a minimal impact on social change in Kurdistan. Development of a market system for consumption, connections (cell phones, Internet) with diaspora Kurds (ranging from those in Europe to Australia) or diaspora experience of returning Kurds (seeing democracies at work in Europe) and exposure to foreign mass media (Hollywood movies, TV series) have played more direct roles in modernizing Kurdish minds during this last decade than democracy projects of this or that outsider.

During the last visit to my village, the most frequently asked question was: "Is it true that in US the Police ask the person under arrest that 'he has the right to remain silent and this would not mean that he is guilty?'" I asked my villagers where they had heard this. They told me from US movies on TV (dubbed in Turkish). Kurds are thirsty for a civil democracy and rule of law that recognize their national identity, allow them to develop and use their language and culture. Is this much to ask? Can a society evolve for the better without these basic ingredients?

[QUESTION] How do you compare the two Kurdish government experiences in Kurdistan (1946 vs current KRG in north Iraq) in terms of democratization, e.g., separation of state and mosque,
representative government, rule of law, gender politics, freedom of
expression, or freedom of association. What has been the impact of the
two sponsors on these projects?

Both USSR and US are interested in Kurdish cause as long as it is compatible with their interests in the region and does not harm the interests of their allies in the region. In the 20th century, they have
used Kurds and Kurdish interests as pawns which would be sacrificed for their interests (e.g. potential Iran oil concessions to USSR in 1946 or the Kissinger engineered 1974 Alger Iran-Iraq agreement). In the 21st century, the US has been delaying the formation of the Kurdish republic in Northern Iraq while helping it to become a federal part of unified Iraq, so that the developments don't upset Turkey.

Concerning US sending envoy to Turkey, one should be reminded that in case US attacks Iran, the PKK commando skills and knowlege of Turkish language will be a key factor in stablizing the Azeri speaking regions in Iran. So at this time, the so called "bad Kurds" can be of benefiet to the US.

I should add that the US constraints on Kurds for developing towards independence are much more than the USSR constraints on the 1946 republic. USSR had the same design in Kurdistan as in the end of cold war in Afghanistan
and the establishment of Kurdistan would have brought it closer to the Persian Gulf warm waters. With the collapse of USSR, the US constraints on Kurdish independence should be on decline as long as Azerbaijan, Georgia separate former USSR and Kurdistan territory.

In fact, neither of the sponsors wished or wish to create a Kurdish state. The scope of Soviet intervention in Mahabad Kurdish Republic was limited and the Soviet interests in Kurds was self-serving: securing the supply lines to the Soviets and to have some influence on Iranian government In the beginning of the limited occupation of Iran, Soviet Union tried to curb Kurdish aspirations because it had other priorities and the international situation (the British and later US involvement in Iran) required such restraint of the Kurds. Overall, the Soviets contributed about 1500 rifles, some very limited funds and printing presses and equipments for a radio station that had very limited transmission capacity.

The US intervention in Iraq and Iraqi Kurdistan is stretched over a longer period 1991-2006, but is equally restrained and restraining so that the Kurds not to declare an independent Kurdistan (preserving Iraqi unity is still the major goal of the US). This might be partly due to its long range relations with an important ally like Turkey or to prevent the possibility of direct interventions of Iran, Turkey and Syria in Iraq and Iraqi Kurdistan, should they sense that a Kurdish state is being established at their own expense.

In short, the US has no intention or interest in changing the established international borders to facilitate the establishment of an independent Kurdistan. It wants closer control of over oil producing states, secure the oil transportation routes and stabilize the area in the long run, by promoting regimes that would tolerate ethnic cultural expressions

[QUESTION] What is the scope of intervention of the two sponsors in the
formation of Kurdish statehood?

Vladimir is forgetting to mention that Kurds have - and had - every opportunity and rights presented to them in Turkey, same rights as any other citizen in the Republic's recent history. That includes currently third of the seats in Parliament, a twice-elected Kurdish Prime Minister, numerous Kurdish political parties, thriving Kurdish businesses, billions of dollars of government investment in Kurdish only areas, countless Kurdish singers and celebrities, every mayor and local government official in southwest of Turkey, among many, many other examples.

Kurdish culture is alive and well in Turkey, more than ever and more then anywhere else in the World.

These, are legitimate rights.

Having said that, the 20 year restrictions on broadcast of Kurdish language, which have been lifted, were only placed in the 70s only, and only, AFTER the PKK and other Kurdish terrorists began their bloody campaign to divide the state, which cost over 30,000 lives. This week alone Kurdish groups have detonated over 20 bombs in Turkey, killed 3 and injured dozens. If anyone is committing genocide, it is the Kurds. If anyone is dividing along racial lines, it is the Kurds. The southwest of Turkey, within the past 30 years has become 100% Kurdish, forcing all other ethnic groups elsewhere because they fear for their lives. Not even the police or the armed forces are safe in Kurdish populated areas, which this year have lost many officers to Kurdish terrorist tactics.

Now, somehow, Vladimir would have you believe that Kurds are model citizens, who are persecuted daily just like the Jews of Nazi Germany. That they are artisans, scientist, and Einsteins who are arrested and jailed only because they are Kurds, not because they just blew up a bus, or assassinated a police officer in cold blood while he slept in his home, or just smuggled thousands of kilos of drugs to Europe, or just killed their own sister for getting pregnant without marriage, or ...

Let's look at Iraq, half of the government is Kurdish including the President, and the only safe area is the Kurdish area and everyone else is getting blown up by the terrorists who mysteriously never run out of arms, the same arms that blow up busses in Turkey. Coincidence? More like convenience - create chaos, then establish a state, meanwhile deny everything along the way and blame everyone else, age old tactic.

The truth is that the Kurds are on an incredibly dishonest smear campaign against the Turks and anyone who stands in their way of ripping apart the countries that they live in. Why? For starters, to have the oil in Kirkuk, ship it out via the Turkish port of Ceyhan, control Tigris and Euphrates rivers, thus controlling most of the water and considerable amount of the oil in the Middle East. After all, all the mention above fit perfectly in "Kurdistan". This all has to do with greed and nothing to with freedom, human rights, or any other just cause. That's it, and that's all, nothing more, just money!

To answer the point raised by Ozy, we are not discussing the Iranian republic or Turkish republic here. The point is to see the evolution of Kurdish republic or self-rule movement and to see the foundations of present Kurdish government in northern Iraq. It didn't come out of nothing.

Unfortunatly, There is a lack of understanding about the roots of Kurdish administration in the English speaking media even by top analysts. as if it is "part of a new post cold war fashion" for Kurds to decalre or ask independence. Neither Iranians or Turks can provide these knowlege about the evolution of Kurdish republic from 1923 up to now.

The Kurdish republic movement goes through a transformation from 1923 red Kurdistan to 1946 red-white-green and to present KRG in Northern Iraq. In Iraq, the left-wing red influence on Kurdistan republic has
been on rapid decline and transforming to a more right wing conservative
government to an extent mirroring the sponsoring allies and states. The
1946 Kurdistan republic generation's ideals have been Marxism while the
new generation in Iraq and Iran are more a mixture of capitalist and
socialist. The Marxism is still strong in movements in Turkish part of
Kurdistan which puts it at odds with its Kurdish southern neighbors. The good vs. the bad Kurd policy of the US is also noteworthy.

The Kurds are the most pro-US Moslem population in the Middle East right now and it is natural that US see them as its safe haven for its soldiers in Iraq. The backup plan for an exit strategy from Iraq is Kurdistan stable government.

In order to understand the Kurdish independent movement, one needs to understand how has the sponsorship of the two states (USSR/USA) has shaped the Politics, economy, and culture of the Kurds? How have they shaped Kurdish political culture, and the politics of Kurdish leaders?

The real question is the U.S. position concerning a Kurdish state or federated area. This, obviously, hinges more on control of the Kerkuk oil fields than it does on the inalienable rights of an historic peoples.

I read Washington last week decided to send an envoy to help Turkey and Iran "deal" with the Kurdish rebels. What is the probable outcome of this effort?

Of course at this time in history, an American attack on Iran might force the U.S. to retreat into Kurdistan in order to avoid a massacre of monumental proportions.

The Kurds are getting a good press in the US. I just wonder why the Armenians keep silent, for Kurds were active participants in the Armenian genocide during WWI.

There is no major Kurdish political party which is striving for an independent state. Kurdish parties want legitimate Kurdish rights. But the countries Ozzy mentioned keep destroying Kurdish culture, land and economy. Separatists feeling are created by Iraqi's, Syrians, Iranians and Turks themselves. They are the ones to blaim.

People like cold Ozzy remind me of Nazi Germany that declared that Jews were committing treason. As a result the millions of people got slaughtered. The Kurds have their own small holocausts (Anfal, Dersim, Hassake, Qamislo, etc). Altogether probable a million Kurds got slaughtered by the states mentioned by Ozzy. Even Stalin deported thousands of Kurds. Now who is the fascist Ozzy? I think it's people like you! It's clear you have a racist mentality towards the Kurds! But I think you know that very well.

In a democracy the government listens to the people. If the Kurdish people want their rights and the government isn't listening, it's the government that is commiting treason.

I don't see any similarities between Chinatown and Kurdistan, because Kurds have been living on these lands for thousands of years.

The Kurdish Republic (January-December 1946) and the Azerbaijan National Government (December 1945-December 1946), formed in northwestern Iran, revealed the blind spots of nationalist movements which emerged in the late 19th century in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. They (Kurds and Azerbaijanis) not only demonstrated their ability and desire to determine their own destinies but also to launch a political and economic order that was much more democratic than the state which ruled over them and had oppressed them for a long time. In its short life of 11 months and in the wake of the world's most destructive war, the Kurdish Republic had many achievements: women were encouraged to take part in public life, their access to education/literacy was encouraged; ethnic-religious minorities (Jews and Christians) enjoyed freedom of religion and language rights; print and broadcast media in Kurdish were launched for the first time in Iranian Kurdistan; commerce was promoted; and the population enjoyed a high degree of security and safety. Equally important, friendship and cooperation with the National Government of Azerbaijan was actively pursued. Azerbaijan helped the republic in many ways, especially in education. My father and many people in Mahabad, the capital of the Kurdish republic, recollected that the Kurds who visited Tabriz, the capital of Azerbaijan, were treated with respect and admiration.

The weaknesses of the republic were the limitations of nationalist movements in the East, which evolved under conditions of Western (neo-)colonial rule and dictatorial nation-states but were, at the same time, challenged by new social forces such as the working class, women, modern intelligentsia, and modern media.

The Republic was able to eliminate the brutal national oppression perpetrated by the Iranian state as soon as the power of the central government was removed from this part of Kurdistan. However, the Kurdish leadership failed to take the more difficult step towards democracy, i.e., putting an end to the feudal regime that was dominant especially in the countryside where the majority of the population lived. Even more problematic was the sharing of state power with tribal and feudal lords. Although the republic, in sharp contrast with the autonomous government of Shaikh Mahmud in Iraqi Kurdistan (early 1920s), was led by a political party, i.e., Kurdistan Democratic Party -- a secular and urban organization -- its cabinet and army were filled with feudal lords and a few religious dignitaries. Still, state policy was more in line with bourgeois democracy (albeit a frail one) than feudal rule. It was clear, however, that a serious separation between feudalism and bourgeois democracy (what is called, nowadays, "modernist politics") had not taken place (as it had during the 18th century in the West, in Britain, France, the Netherlands, etc.).

Did anyone bother to ask a Turk, an Iranian, an Iraqi, or a Syrian to join this "debate"? After all, the so called "Kurdistan" in reality is a region of these countries. Is Chinatown in San Francisco another country and is it entitled to be one? No! Any attempt to divide a sovereign state, for whatever reason and by whatever means, would in fact be considered treason, "As in international law".

Obviously, the Kurds are getting way ahead of themselves. The harsh reality is that no nation will just give up a great part of their land and natural resources, then just hand it over to a bunch of dissenters. Particularly not, if for the sole reason of "Kurdish entitlement". Not to mention that these treacherous citizens are supported and affiliated by non-regional entente cordiale who are - in every sense of the phrase - Enemies of the State.

The Kurdish yearning for a "Kurdish Republic" - as de-facto and altruistic as it may sound to misinformed and unaffected Western ears - is just another ethno-centric, fascist movement at the grave expense many others.

If established after many a battles and rivers of blood, it is without a doubt that all Kurds and their allies will certainly be unwelcome in any nation that surrounds them.

It is most likely much more disasterous then this, unless of course, Bush gives them Texas!

In both cases, the sponsorship created sympathy towards and influences from the power that provided it. In 1946 and thereafter, educated and secularly educated Kurds felt sympathy toward the Soviet Union and socialism. Many of them saw socialism as the salvation of the Kurdish nation. This influence continued all the way until the Soviet Union collapsed. Among some Kurdish leftists socialism is still a popular ideology and hope for the future.
As to the "US sponsorship" of Kurdish autonomy in Iraqi Kurdistan, it also created a lot of sympathy for the US and for George Bush administration among the Kurds in all parts of Kurdistan. Due to the limitations of mass media in 1946, most Kurds outside the Iraqi and Iranian Kurdistan did not know what was happening in Mahabad Republic. But today, given the advances in communication technology (Kurdish satellite TV stations, Internet communication and cell phones), Kurds know instantly of all the developments that concerns them.

Not only the US dethronement of the much hated Saddam, but Hollywood and the MTV have also popularized American culture and values in the Middle East and Kurdistan is no exception to this epidemic. Baseball caps, basketball uniforms, expensive Nike shoes are all popular in Iraqi Kurdistan. I also have seen South Korean movies on Kurdistan TV due to detachment of a Korean unit in Iraqi Kurdistan. Turkish pop music and goods also circulate freely there. What is more, all telephone communication and part of electricity is provided from Turkey, at least in KDP dominated areas.

While communism had much bad reputation (due to propaganda mostly) among Muslim Kurds in 1946, there is no such deterrent against the US or Western influence. Given the aggressive intrusion of the global marketing systems, Kurdistan is wide open to any political, cultural and economic influences.

It is hard to tell the impact of US sponsorship on Kurdish leadership in Iraqi Kurdistan. Generally speaking Mr. Mesud Barzani displays more traditional Kurdish values and I suspect is closed to other influences. Although programs on reconstruction efforts in his area of influence as reflected on Kurdistan TV remind me Soviet reportage of progress in various aspects of economy. I speculate that US sponsorship has probably influenced Mr. Talabani and his style of leadership more, given his much malleable nature in politics.

Personally, I think, the most immediate achievements were registered in the field of culture and language. A daily newspaper Kurdistan and several weekly and monthly magazines such as Hawar, Agir and Halala were published in Kurdish (Sorani dialect) and disseminated. School books were printed (although there was not much time to use them in education) a radio station with limited broadcast capacity was established. In the same line, about 60 Kurdish students were sent to the Soviet Union to be trained or educated in needed areas. Although some of these students never returned to Kurdistan, those who did became part of the Kurdish intelligentsia and contributed to the political and cultural developments of the Iranian and Iraqi Kurdistan.

Also, a rudimentary Kurdish army came out of this experience, although based tribal affiliation and faded quickly in the face of Iranian attacks, after the withdrawal of the Russian army from Iran. This Kurdish army also included the famous Barzani fighters from Iraqi Kurdistan. This participation cemented the cooperation and solidarity between the two parts of Kurdistan (namely South Kurdistan or Iraqi Kurdistan and Eastern or Iranian Kurdistan).

Finally, through the Mahabad experience, the Kurds learned the limitations of any gain that could come through outside sponsors (US, Soviet Union, England etc), although out of desperation, Kurds almost always keep accepting such promises or actual help without a longer vision to calculate the consequences. It will serve well to the Kurds in the future to secure means to institutionalize any gain for the Kurdish society and make it permanent.

The 1946 Kurdish republic in its short existence had many achievements. It managed to establish the republic by collaboration between Sorani speaking Kurds in Iran and Kurmanji speaking Kurds from Iraq. Mola Mustafa Barzani (the father of present president of Kurd Regional Government) in Iraq was the commander of the army of 1946 republic.

The 1946 republic incorporated city intellectuals and poets, religious leaders and tribe leaders in one system with the support of Kurdish grass root population. Compared to the longer lived 1923 Red Kurdistan in Caucasus, the 1946 republic is the point of reference for grass root independence movement with the support of a foreign power. Mohamamd Qazi, its president was hanged one year after republic. But this martyrdom of
the president of Republic made the 1946 republic as a turning point in the history of Kurdistan.

The 1946 republic did not have a border with the former Soviet union (USSR), and for contact with USSR was dependent on Soviet backed Iranian Azerbaijan self-rule government. Once the Azerbaijan government fell and its leader escaped, the Kurdish self rule was not logistically feasible any more. It also did not incorporate the Lors and Shiite Kurds in Iran (e.g. in Kirmanshah) or many other Sunni Kurdish cities in Iran (e.g. Sanandaj region) which could have added to its strengths.

Women were not represented in its governing structures and the power and rivalry of tribal leaders was not well coordinated e.g. by establishing a "House of Lords" or "House of Baigs" (tribe-heads) i.e. historic notion of Baig-estan, similar to present Loya Jarga in Afghanistan or present structure of tribal council in Canada.

[QUESTION] What were the main achievements of 1946 Kurdistan republic in Mahabad? What were the weaknesses of the 1946 Kurdistan republic?

Since Kurdistan is situated, on all sides, on the periphery of authoritarian, militaristic and totalitarian states such as Turkey, Syria, Iran and Iraq and since these states collaborate with each other at various levels to keep the Kurds suppressed, any slight change in this tight equation, mobilizes the Kurds for more freedom, and equally, mobilizes these four colonial states to rush to dismantle the Kurdish society and any of its gains.

In 1946 Kurdish Mahabad Republic came to be due to the impact of WWII on the region and the power struggles that ensued: Soviets vs. British wrangling of interest tipped the balance in favor of the Kurds, but for a brief period only (11 months of Kurdish independence in Iranian Kurdistan). Once the world powers got what they wanted, status quo prevailed. Overlord states that suppressed Kurds created -with the help of the US- a host of regional alliances (partly against the Soviets, but definitely against the Kurds). The Kurdish freedom was extinguished, its leader Qazi Muhammed was hanged and new Kurdish social organization was dismantled.

The Gulf war and the Invasion of Iraq thereafter, created another opportunity for Iraqi Kurdistan to assert itself for autonomy. People wanted independence but Kurdish leaders were divided and weak and had no conception of independence in their minds and plans, also with the red signal from the White House, they settled for autonomy. No gain is totally institutionalized and internationalized yet. Kerkuk's (the oil producing city over possession of which the Kurds fought since 1970's) status is not determined, civil war is creeping northwards towards Kurdistan, if the US backs out of Iraq, Kurds are doomed just like the 1946 Mahabad Republic of the Kurds.

As to the consequences: these wars temporarily united the Kurdish leadership and the Kurdish society. What Saddam had destroyed over decades in Iraqi Kurdistan is being rebuilt. Kurdish nationalism is strengthened (partly due to satellite TV stations and the Internet communication) but also partly due to gains of the Iraqi Kurdistan, all other parts of Kurdistan is impacted by these developments.

However, the gains of Iraqi Kurdistan have also mobilized Iran, Turkey and Syria to collaborate closely to minimize the impact of Kurdish gains. Currently, Turkey and Iran are jointly conducting military operations against Turkish Kurds around Kandil Mountains of Iraqi Kurdistan and bombing territories of Iraqi Kurdistan.

Although the Kurds are considered, according to international law, as a "people" or "nation" entitled to the right of self-determination, the formation of the nation-states which rule over the Kurds (Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria)was in part based on the negation of this right. These states have used extreme forms of violence in order to assimilate the Kurds into dominant/official cultures and languages.

Under these conditions, the Kurds have not been able to use the instrument of law (as Quebec nationalists have been doing), and have often looked at regional and international wars as "windows of opportunity."

The two cases, WWII and the US wars against Iraq (1991 and 2003), are different in many ways. The first led, in 1941, to the occupation of northern Iran by the USSR and southern Iran by Britain, and the US army joined them as part of the project of sending logistic aid to the Soviet army, which was resisting the Nazi aggression in Stalingrad, Leningrad and other fronts. While this war among the major Western powers (UK, US, France, Germany, Italy, etc) was going on, popular struggles against fascism and Nazism were going on in these countries and throughout the world. Ideals of freedom, liberty, liberation, socialism, peace, and solidarity were the banners of social movements all over the world. Under these conditions, the emerging Kurdish nationalist groups pronounced ideals of national liberation, socialism, and women's rights. The separation of the state and mosque was not on the agenda, although the leadership took a primarily secular approach.

The 1991 and 2003 wars were part of the policy of the U.S. for establishing its hegemony in the rapidly changing global geo-strategic environment. Under the conditions, the Kurdish leadership in Iraq follows the agenda of the White House and Wall Street.

A visible difference between the two war situations is the treatment of the Kurds and other peoples under occupation by Soviet and American forces. The Soviet Army treated the people with much respect.

It is true that any war and instability (e.g. as a result of revolution or coup) in the region open a new opportunity for the Kurds and the Kurdish leaders have turned the regional "threats" into Kurdish "opportunities". The wars cause extensive destruction in the region, but the wars also provide this window of opportunity for Kurds to gain short lived independence and gain administration skills.

The 1946 Kurdistan republic which lasted less than a year came after WWII. After WWI we also saw the establishment of "red Kurdistan" federal entity (1923-26) which later became part of the former Soviet Azerbaijan. So the present self-rule "Kurdistan Regional Government" (KRG) in Northern Iraq is the third attempt to establish the foundation of a Kurdish state in the region.

QUESTION: Both 1946 and 1991-2006 instances of Kurdish self-rule experiences were, in part, the outcome of changing regional and international relations - WWII and US regional wars. What are the consequences of these two war situations on Kurdish self-rule?

The Kurds are often described as the world's largest "people," "nation,"
or "ethnic group" without a homeland or without a state of their own, a state-less nation or non-state nation. However, the Kurds do have a homeland called Kurdistan, and they have had a long history of statehood, though usually in the form of medieval or, rather, feudal states, mini-dynasties, and principalities, which survived until the mid-nineteenth century.

The centralization of state power in the Ottoman and Iranian empires, which began in mid-nineteenth century, put an end to Kurdish statehood.

In the wake of WWI, the Kurdish region of the Ottoman Empire was re-divided among the newly formed nation-states of Turkey, Iraq, and Syria. None of them recognized the right of the Kurds to self-rule, and
pursued a policy of assimilation, often through extensive violence. One result was revolts, which aimed at establishing an independent Kurdish state or autonomous rule within each country. The early efforts were led by members of the landed aristocracy and leaders of religious orders
(e.g., Shaikh Said 1925 in Turkey, Simko 1920s in Iran, Shaikh Mahmud 1918-early 1920s in Iraq). The first modern type semi-independent state was the Kurdish Republic of 1946 founded by Kurdish nationalists in Mahabad, a city in the west of Iran, in the occupied region by the USSR after WWII. The second experience is the present Kurdish government in Iraqi Kurdistan, which has evolved in the wake of the US wars against Iraq in 1991 and 2003.

It is interesting to compare the two instances of Kurdish self rule in order to understand the local, regional, and international contexts, and the direction that the current Kurdish government is taking. No doubt Kurdish societies have
changed a lot since 1946, and the international situation has changed
drastically.