Kurdish Protest at the Dail

by Paula Geraghty Fri Apr 28, 2006 15:13

(c)

by Paula Geraghty Fri Apr 28, 2006 15:18

(c)

by MichaelY - iawm - per cap Fri Apr 28, 2006 15:26

Good stuff - nice pics

Paula, why don't you ask one of the Kurd militants to write a piece on the Kurdish struggle against Turkish militarism for Indymedia....I'm sure many of us are somewhat unaware of exactly what goes on in that forgotten southeast corner of Turkey

Solidarity

by Tank Girl Fri Apr 28, 2006 15:45

Just thought you would like to know that the Kurdish people in Iran are also oppressed and are just as much deserving of support.

"Iran shells Iranian Kurdish positions in Iraq: PUK

4/22/2006 Reuters
By Shamal Aqrawi - ZAKHU, Iraq (Reuters) - Iranian forces shelled Iranian Kurdish rebel positions inside mountainous northern Iraq on Friday to repel an attack, wounding at least four civilians, Iraqi Kurdish officials said.

"This morning Iranian Kurdish fighters infiltrated the border into the Iranian side and the Iranian army bombed the area and repelled them. The shelling hit Iraqi land at Sidakan," said Saadi Pira, an official in Iraq's Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) party.

The governor of the Arbil region, Nawzad Hadi, said four civilians had been wounded in the shelling of the rebels of the Iranian Party of Free Life of Kurdistan (PJAK). Sidakan is about 80 km (50 miles) north of the Iraqi city of Arbil and about 10 km (6 miles) from the Iranian border.

The pro-PKK Firat Web site and a rebel spokesman said six Iranian soldiers and five Kurdish guerrillas had been killed. It was not possible to independently confirm that claim. Iran's Revolutionary Guards have previously clashed with PJAK separatists in Iran's restive western borderlands.

Security experts say PJAK is an Iranian wing of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), whose separatist struggle has regained momentum in southeast Turkey since it called off a unilateral cease-fire in the summer of 2004."

Full story at: http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=12073

by Paula Geraghty Fri Apr 28, 2006 16:36 mspgeraghty at yahoo dot ie

http://www.ilisu.org.uk/
http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/press_releases/2001031411....html

http://www.environmentaldefense.org/documents/2402_NGOp...e.pdf
http://international-friends-of-kurdistan.s5.com/Ilisu%20Dam.htm
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id...=7858

Thanks Michael, I've emailed the Kurdish group.

by John - dunaree2000 Fri Apr 28, 2006 18:24

Interesting to hear their views on the American liberation of Iraq. Kurds in Iraq were the strongest supporters of the war against Saddam Hussein.

by Tank Girl Sat Apr 29, 2006 22:48

Strange. Paula obviously supports the Turkish Kurds and so do the SWP. But the SWP do not support the Kurds who are fighting to overthrow the Iranian dictatorship. The SWP accuse the Iranian Kurds of being US agents just because the Iraqi Kurds have collaborated with the occupation forces. Going on this sort of 'logic' then the SWP should also condemn the Turkish Kurds. It looks like yet another case of the SWP damning anyone who fights the Iranian mullahs.

http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id...=8411

by Tanked up girl - myself Sat Apr 29, 2006 23:40

Just went to that link and it says nothing of the sort. Surely you are not blind to the fact that the kurdish resistance is deeply split with some sections supporting American imperialism, others rejecting it. Surely you also realise that the Pentagon will always be seeking fifth columns in the middle east. This shouldn't stop us from supporting just demands for kurdish autonomy, but we can do that while being frank and open about our criticisms of some kurds alliance with washington. Because washington obviously doesn't give a monkeys about kurdish independence and will obviously drop their cause as soon as it runs out of mileage for the US.

by Anthony G Sun Apr 30, 2006 00:12

I'd agree with the comments by "Tanked up girl". From reading the linked article, I gathered that it's main thrust was that the US is engaged in similar activity to that which preceded the attack on Iraq and that the alarm bells should be ringing for those who are worried about a US attack on Iran. The SWP article doesn't "accuse the Iranian Kurds of being US agents" - either explicitly or implicitly, in my view. Whether the party supports or condemns the Iranian Kurds, I'd have to plead ignorance. I just don't read enough of their material to know either way and my comments above are based solely on a reading of the article at the provided link. (Though I have noticed a general reluctance on their behalf to be too critical of Islam.)

by RobbieS Sun Apr 30, 2006 05:36

I’ve long admired SWP journalism with regard to collation of factual sources, and I’m impressed by the article Tank Girl has linked to. However, based on the subtext, I agree with her analysis to the extent that the author does appear to be favouring the legitemacy of the Iranian nation-state to the detriment of the Kurdish freedom struggle within its borders.

Calling Tank Girl a ‘fibber’ is unwarranted, but Tank Girl’s accusation of ‘caricature’ of the Iranian Kurds of being in the pay of the Coalition only has merit if it’s inaccurate. I’ve no doubt that the reported strategy and plans are real.

extracts from the article and my analysis.

Plan to divide Iran

Marines produce road map to ethnic strife | Washington bankrolls separatist groups.

US and Britain have torn apart Iraq and now they want to do the same to Iran. The US military has been studying ethnic and religious tensions in Iran as part of its preparations for war.

This comes quite close to a defence of the Iranian nation-state. Would the Turkish/Kurdish problem have been described in the same down-played “ethnic and religious tensions”. It's surprising that an SWP commentator would leave causal factors such as culture of domination out of the equation.

“plans for Iraq involved dividing the country into semi autonomous regions dominated by ethnic groups, and distributing government ministries according to sect. The result has been to drive Iraq towards civil war.”

Either independent states, federation of autonomous regions or centralised government (generally dominated by one ethnicity). The SWP author doesn’t preclude the independence option explicitly, but reading between the lines it is not that difficult to tell where their sympathies lie.

[later in the article]
” Many groups representing Iran’s minorities refused to cooperate with the study because they fear the US is planning to break up the country”.

SWP author thinks this reason noteworthy. Iranian nationalism isn’t the same as a principled stand against the great Satan or Imperialist aggressor.

[later].
“Iran is right to fear the presence of US and British troops on its borders with Iraq and Afghanistan. Several bombs have been set off in the southern province of Khuzestan, home to Iran’s Arab minority. The Iranians have accused Britain and the US of being behind the bomb attacks”.

If the author had known about Iran’s persecution of Kurds and other minorities, he might have concluded that Iran is wrong in the attrocities it commits. Perhaps, the complexity would have contaminated the the subtext – Iran as victim (good), US & UK as scheming aggressors (bad). I’ve no doubt that the latter is true, but pedling the former view is either naieve or dishonest.

Some other notes of interest (from memory).

The PKK whom the SWP admire in Turkey, have been estranged from the Kurdish elites in northern Iraq since the latter expelled them from northern Iraq from october 1993 on. This move resulted from Iraqi-Kurdistan’s dependence on Turkey for survival (food-aid and electiricy) at the time.

The Irbil (northern Iraq administration) was genuinely shocked when Turkey launched to mass offensives on its territory (ostensibly against the PKK) in early 1994 and early 1995.

Irbil regime was half Marxist faction and half Liberal till elections in 1994, which the Liberal (KDP) won (by health or by stealth). It’s likely that Coalition support helped secure this victory, and real power lay with Jalal al-Talibani (later to become President of occupied Iraq.

Fearing and knock-on effect of an independent Kurdistan starting from ‘liberated’ northern Iraq, Turkey was opposed to the US invasion of Iraq, and objected to US use of Turkish air-bases for the purpose. In December 2001 I wrote to a friend in the US saying that invasion would be unlikely because of the ethnic subdivions and Turkeys opposition on these grounds.

The neo-con fantastic allegations of Saddam’s links to el-Quaeda were based on his alleged support for Iranian Kurdish rebels (the KDPI). It’s telling that when Iran launched offensives against the KDPI in 1993, up to 200km inside Iraq, it was on both sides of the no-fly-zone, but mostly in Irbil-controlled area. Saddam may later have aided KDPI, but attempts to link the group to el-Qaeda are fanciful. That they now wish to support them is extraordinary double-think.

by pat c Sun Apr 30, 2006 16:16

thanks for that most enlightening contribution. not all opposition groups in iran are saints but for Iranian women, gays, workers and national minorities; the Iran Regime is also a great Satan. This Islamofascist regime should be overthrown and irish socialists should be supporting the organisations that are fighting for a secular socialist iran.

Down with US & British Imperialism, no to any intervention. But also down with the Islamofascist Iranian Junta. Change must happen from within.