Turkey wants northern Iraq

Link won't work..

I am saying that Turkey has a Kurdish group (PKK) seeking independence, and Iraq has a Kurdish population seeking independence. These two groups are rebelling against two separate governments because there is a border between Turkey and Iraq. If Turkey occupies Northern Iraq for an extended period of time these Kurdish groups will join forces because there will be a single occupying power standing in the way of Kurdish independence.

These groups have already joined forces long ago, in fact, their feudal leaders are all one group.. kurdishobserver.com lists all three parties PKK, KDP, and PUK as three legitemate parties. Their map of Kurdistan occupies 1/3rd of Turkey.. Trouble is that the PKK has been declared to be a terrorists organization by most governments that carry any weight.

I suppose they (the leaders) will all escape to Iran, and continue their evil deeds from there while they can.

As best I understand it, Kurdish claims to an independent state are based on the Treaty of Sevres which was signed in 1920 by Turkey and several other countries and major powers following World War One. The section dealing with the Kurds reads as follows:

SECTION III.
KURDISTAN.
ARTICLE 62.

A Commission sitting at Constantinople and composed of three members appointed by the British, French and Italian Governments respectively shall draft within six months from the coming into force of the present Treaty a scheme of local autonomy for the predominantly Kurdish areas lying east of the Euphrates, south of the southern boundary of Armenia as it may be hereafter determined, and north of the frontier of Turkey with Syria and Mesopotamia, as defined in Article 27, II (2) and (3). If unanimity cannot be secured on any question, it will be referred by the members of the Commission to their respective Governments. The scheme shall contain full safeguards for the protection of the Assyro-Chaldeans and other racial or religious minorities within these areas, and with this object a Commission composed of British, French, Italian, Persian and Kurdish representatives shall visit the spot to examine and decide what rectifications, if any, should be made in the Turkish frontier where, under the provisions of the present Treaty, that frontier coincides with that of Persia.

ARTICLE 63.

The Turkish Government hereby agrees to accept and execute the decisions of both the Commissions mentioned in Article 62 within three months from their communication to the said Government.

ARTICLE 64.

If within one year from the coming into force of the present Treaty the Kurdish peoples within the areas defined in Article 62 shall address themselves to the Council of the League of Nations in such a manner as to show that a majority of the population of these areas desires independence from Turkey, and if the Council then considers that these peoples are capable of such independence and recommends that it should be granted to them, Turkey hereby agrees to execute such a recommendation, and to renounce all rights and title over these areas. The detailed provisions for such renunciation will form the subject of a separate agreement between the Principal Allied Powers and Turkey. If and when such renunciation takes place, no objection will be raised by the Principal Allied Powers to the voluntary adhesion to such an independent Kurdish State of the Kurds inhabiting that part of Kurdistan which has hitherto been included in the Mosul vilayet.

source= Treaty of Sevres

The treaty you mention has been made obsolete by the:

1- Expiration of a signatory power: The Ottoman sultanate, and

2- The Treaty of Lausanne

Article 27 of the Treaty of Lausanne states the following:

ARTICLE 27.
No power or jurisdiction in political, legislative or administrative matters shall be exercised outside Turkish territory by the Turkish Government or authorities, for any reason whatsoever, over the nationals of a territory placed under the sovereignty or protectorate of the other Powers signatory of the present Treaty, or over the nationals of a territory detached from Turkey.

It is understood that the spiritual attributions of the Moslem religious authorities are in no way infringed.

If you are going to deny Kurds in Turkey independence based on this treaty then doesn't this section prevent your country from occupying Iraq?

>> nationals of a territory placed under the sovereignty or protectorate of the other Powers signatory of the present Treaty

Irakis are not nationals of a territory placed under the sovereignty or protectorate of the other Powers signatory of the Treaty of Lausanne.

I'm going to bed..

But they are nationals of a territory detached from Turkey. In addition article 30 states:

SECTION II .
NATIONALITY.
ARTICLE 30.

Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipsofacto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.

This would seem to make Kurds living in Iraq, Iraqi citizens.

We can continue this conversation later if you like. Goodnight.

The major bone of contention is that the U.S. wanted to create an "independent" Kurdish militia outside of the supervision of a new Iraqi government. This is the crux of what created the friction between Ankara and Washington in the last three weeks.

According to a recent article in the Village Voice, Turkey itself created a militia organization outside of the regular Turkish army called the "Village Guards". Here is an excerpt from that article:

More than a decade ago, the Guclus and thousands of families like them made their deal with the military, which controlled the region under "emergency rule" and which sought to crush a Kurdish uprising. They became "provisional village guards," and for their allegiance against the Kurdistan Workers Party, a rebel group known as the PKK, they were armed and salaried by the state. Pawns in a game of divide and rule, these guards savagely turned on their neighbors.

Thousands more clans like the Tanguners and Tekins refused to join the militia. They fled. In all, at least 370,000 people were driven from their homes. Thirty thousand others died. Caught between the rebels and the state-sanctioned guards, countless Kurds were thrown in jails where they were raped, beaten, tortured, and starved.

Theirs is one of the great silent tragedies of the 20th century, and though emergency rule was lifted in November, the terror is far from over. Roughly 90,000 armed village guards remain in the countryside. Last year, former emergency rule governor Gokhan Aydiner said reducing the number of village guards was "out of the question." The government says it will allow their ranks to fade away by attrition.

That is happening all too slowly. Displaced families within Turkey are now prevented from returning to their homes because of the militias. If the U.S. military descends upon Baghdad, perhaps as many as 100,000 Kurds fleeing from Iraq into Turkey could face them, too. The Kurdish newspaper Ozgur Politika reported last week that among the Turkish troops heading for the border are 500 village guards belonging a special "Lightning Group." They've been sent, the paper said, for military training, and to prepare for deployment in refugee camps.

"Adding 500 hired guns subject to clan loyalties, with very untransparent lines of command and an institutional history of criminal activities ranging from theft and drug smuggling to rape and murder, is a genuinely awful idea," says Jonathan Sugden of Human Rights Watch. "That's about the worst thing they could do."

If it is objectionable for the Kurds to have a militia independent of the Iraqi government, then surely it is wrong to have a 90,000 strong militia group operating outside of the regular Turkish military for the purpose of supressing the independence movement. From the way the article describes it, the village guards sound a lot like the Protestant paramilitary groups in Northern Ireland.

Good point.

Yet, being as intelligent as you are, you must realize that objections raised to Turkish activities regarding the treaty only have meaning when raised by signatories of the treaty.

The signers have considered the following:

1- The entity in Northern Irak has conspired to violate the treaty of Lausanne, by actively planning to violate the sovereignty of a signer, namely the Republic of Turkey.

2- Turkey has undertaken activities to prevent these planned activities.

3- Prevention of the disintegration of Irak will preserve the treaty

4- The territory of northern Irak no longer is governed by the laws of Irak.

I suggest that the part that really screws those who seek independence for "Kurdistan", is that they have alligned themselves with a terrorist organization and have jointly conspired to violate the sovereignty of the Republic of Turkey.

Anyway, I see from your other post that you are now bringing up anti-Turkish propaganda, and therefore will assume that you are not carrying this discussion in good faith.

Good by, and bad luck to you..

I'm late checking messages today but a follow up to your posting. In the agreement struck with the U.S. both nations agreed to disarm the militias they created at the end of this war. This should de-militarize part of the problem post-war but the issue of Syrian and Iranina interference will continue to hound the region until they are disposed of also.