Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

More problems in Iraq
Birmingham Post-Herald ^ | 01/13/04 | Editorial

Posted on 01/13/2004 10:11:20 AM PST by Holly_P

The Bush administration has yet another, although this time not unanticipated, problem on its hands in Iraq. In meetings with Paul Bremer, the U.S. administrator of Iraq, the Kurds have demanded almost complete autonomy from the Iraqi central government that is supposed to take over June 30. That likely would amount to de facto partition of Iraq, but going in, the United States is committed to preserving the integrity of the Iraqi state. The Kurdish areas, we insist, will remain part of Iraq.

The problem is, in a sense, of the United States' own making. By enforcing the no-fly zone over northern Iraq, the United States protected Kurds from the depredations of Saddam Hussein. During those 12 years, the Kurds developed their own local governments, militias and taxing authority.

The result is that the most stable, prosperous and U.S.-friendly parts of Iraq are the Kurdish areas.

Aside from our commitment to keeping Iraq intact, Kurdish autonomy poses other problems. The Shiites in the south might insist on autonomy, too, further partitioning the country. And Turkey and Iran, both with substantial Kurdish minorities, fear that autonomy will lead to the Iraqi Kurds declaring an independent state and agitating for a Greater Kurdistan.

Turkey, in particular, wants the United States to keep a lid on Kurdish nationalism. It fought a 15-year war against Kurdish insurgents that came to an uneasy end only in 1999. The Turks are valued U.S. allies in the region, and their prime minister, Tayyip Erdogan, is certain to have Kurdish autonomy at the top of his agenda when he visits President Bush later this month.

Secretary of State Colin Powell says, "Our position is to let the Iraqis work this out." But since the former regime's way of working things out with the Kurds was to gas and bomb them into submission, the Kurds aren't likely to fully trust a government in Baghdad anytime soon.

Complicating matters further is the question of who gets the revenues from two major oil fields now under Kurdish control.

Bush advisers must be muttering over and over to themselves, "The war was the easy part." And they're right.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: iraq; kurdishstate; kurds; rebuildingiraq; selfrule
The result is that the most stable, prosperous and U.S.-friendly parts of Iraq are the Kurdish areas.

This is good news (not new though) to me.

My uncle has been in Iraq for a few months and his unit is steadily moving north. The last I heard they are going to an area near Mosul.

The further north he gets the safer he is, in my opinion.

With so many different factions in Iraq demanding autonomy, I don't see any solutions.

1 posted on 01/13/2004 10:11:20 AM PST by Holly_P
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58; farmfriend
Ping
2 posted on 01/13/2004 10:14:17 AM PST by Holly_P
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Holly_P
The far northern section of Iraq has been under autonomous Kurd control for almost a decade. Clarity has never developed due to major Kurdish infighting and the intervention of Turkey to quel spill-over into their own Kurd population.
3 posted on 01/13/2004 10:18:03 AM PST by XHogPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Holly_P
It is troubling. We don't want to alienate the Turks, but fundamental fairness would seem to require that the Kurds get their own homeland. I believe the best solution is a loose confederation of autonomous regions. Iraq is really just a fictitious entity, a legacy of the aftermath of WWI, and there is no natural bond for keeping it as a nation-state.

The need for preserving an intact Iraq as a "counterweight" to Iran may become less necesary if that country opens up, too.
4 posted on 01/13/2004 10:20:46 AM PST by LN2Campy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Holly_P
A republic of Iraqi states, maybe, with Federal government in Baghdad? This would allow Kurds and others to maintain current political infrastructure. Works fairly well over here.
5 posted on 01/13/2004 10:27:24 AM PST by wayoverontheright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wayoverontheright
A republic of Iraqi states, maybe, with Federal government in Baghdad? This would allow Kurds and others to maintain current political infrastructure. Works fairly well over here.

My thinking too. Wouldn't that make the liberals squeal that we are trying to make Iraq into the U.S.

As you said, it works here.

6 posted on 01/13/2004 10:38:26 AM PST by Holly_P
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Holly_P
They got over the factional differences in Afghanistan...they can certainly do it in Iraq.
7 posted on 01/13/2004 11:25:08 AM PST by Solson (Our work is the presentation of our capabilities. - Von Goethe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wayoverontheright; Holly_P; LN2Campy
A republic of Iraqi states, maybe, with Federal government in Baghdad? This would allow Kurds...

Seems to be the current drift of events. Kurd infighting may very well prevent it though. Three of the largest Kurd-Iraq groups can be found at these links:

And finally, a clarify book from Amazon: The Kurdish Predicament in Iraq: A Political Analysis

8 posted on 01/13/2004 11:26:03 AM PST by XHogPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson