Socialist Action

 

SOCIALIST

ACTION

 

 - home page

 - newspaper
 - subscribe
 - distribute

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. Plays Dangerous

Game With the Kurds

by Gerry Foley  / November 2007 issue of Socialist Action newspaper

 

 

The threat of a Turkish invasion of Iraqi Kurdistan is sharpening a contradiction that has been developing since the U.S. imposed its military domination over the region. But its roots go even further back and are spread wider.

 

Washington's exploitation of the Kurdish struggle for national rights for short-term gains conflicts with its long-term objectives in the region. The U.S. encouraged the Iraqi Kurds in their war with the Iraqi central government in 1970-1975. It is, according to many accounts, supporting the Iranian Kurds today to attack the Iranian central government as a means of putting pressure on it for its own purposes.

 

Kurdish freedom fighters have thus benefited at various times from U.S. hostility to the governments that deny them their national rights. But the U.S. has always betrayed them in pursuance of its longer-term objectives. Its long-term aim is to dominate and exploit the region, and that requires alliances with the most reactionary and oppressive forces.

 

The Kurdish people, who have been divided throughout their modern history between various states, have a long experience of dubious allies. It is expressed in the Kurdish proverb, "The Kurds have no friends but the mountains."

 

In the case of the 1970-1975 war, U.S. documents that came to light later openly avowed that the interest of the U.S. was not that either side win but simply that the war continue. When the Iraqi government conceded to the demands of the U.S. and its ally, the shah of

Iran, the Kurds were abandoned by their false friends and suffered the worst defeat in the history of their national struggle.

 

Today, indications are that the U.S. is definitely, if discreetly, aiding Turkey in its war on the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) guerrillas. Thus, an article in the Oct. 29 Christian Science Monitor quoted the U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. Petraeus, as stating: "I am not going to say anything about what we may be doing with our long-standing NATO ally Turkey, although we clearly are doing things with them. Nor will I say what we are doing with our Iraqi partners to endeavor to stabilize the situation and to ensure that the sides are talking and taking actions to reduce the tension."

 

The U.S. is obliged to be discreet in its suppression of the PKK because of the sympathy of the Iraqi Kurdish population with the national-liberation fighters and because the Kurds have been their most reliable allies in Iraq. The real desire of the Kurdish people of Iraq, however, is national independence. They have made that clear in a number of ways, including a referendum. That is why they sympathize with the PKK.

 

For nearly a century Kurds in all the states among which they have been divided have struggled for national rights, the culmination of which would be a national state in which they could be united. The Turkish state, however, the most powerful in the region, is based on a genocidal policy of liquidating all the non-Turkish nationalities within the territory it rules, of which the largest and the only one capable of resisting this policy is the Kurds.

 

Thus, Turkey rejects any concessions to Kurdish national demands within the Turkish state and views any such concessions in the neighboring states as a threat. It sees its future as dependent on the liquidation of the Kurdish nation.

 

The Iraqi Kurds were able to take advantage of the U.S. conflict with Saddam Hussein after 1991 to establish virtual independence in their area. But even before this, as a result of the Iraqi revolution of 1958, the Kurds gained a cultural autonomy that their compatriots in other states never enjoyed.

 

Publication in Kurdish has always been banned in Turkey and Iran, and in Turkey even speaking Kurdish was outlawed. For many years the contradiction existed that although speaking Kurdish was punishable under the law, the Turkish state denied that the language existed.

 

In fact, the present conflict is a consequence of the Turkish rulers' refusal to offer even the slightest concessions to the Kurds. After his capture in 1999 (which was aided by the U.S.), the PKK leader, Ocalan, abandoned the demand for Kurdish independence and offered to make peace with the Turkish state in return for some purely cultural concessions. The Turkish rulers would not accept even that, and so the PKK slowly went back on a guerrilla warfare footing.

 

The U.S. government has no interest in a conflict with Turkey for the sake of the Kurds, any more than it is prepared to annoy the Turks by offering historical recognition to the Armenians who suffered genocide at their hands. But it remains to be seen if the discreet

collaboration of the United States is going to be enough to satisfy the Turkish  chauvinists and military.

 

Given the history and the political character of the Turkish state, there has always been an fascistic nationalist current capable of whipping up hysteria against the Kurds and eager for expansionist adventures.

 

Also, suppressing Kurdish nationalists is not the only interest that Turkey has in northern Iraq. It has always had the aspiration of annexing this territory, which was part of the Turkish state before World War I and which has important natural resources and a significant minority that speaks a language closely related to Turkish.

 

The threat of a Turkish invasion of northern Iraq is another example of the dangerous juggling game the U.S. became involved in when it occupied Iraq. It is also another expression of the fact that there can be no liberation of the region from imperialist domination without granting full national rights to all the oppressed nationalities.

 

This is also demonstrated positively by the example of the Iraqi revolution of 1958, the most radical anti-imperialist revolution to date in the region.  In its early period, when this revolution was a real threat to the imperialists, it offered national rights to the Kurds. It was only as the revolution degenerated and the Baghdad governments moved to the right and toward reconciliation with imperialism that they started trying to oppress the Kurds again, and opened the way for the Kurds to be manipulated by imperialism.

 

Human Needs, Not Profits!