Iraqi Kurds Are Doing What the Laws Dictate
Firat answered bianet's questions.
Why is Turkey concerned about the convening of the Kurdish parliament? Should Turkey be concerned?
It should be concerned, because Turkey is always concerned that the Kurds living outside Turkey are better off than the Kurds living in Turkey. It is always disturbed by this fact. It is worried that if the Kurds outside Turkey are better off than Turkey's Kurds, this may lead to a change of regime within Turkey. This is the inevitable reaction of traditionally authoritarian states.
What is happening in Northern Iraq?
What's happening in Northern Iraq is actually the coming to life of a right received 32 years ago.
Kurds in Northern Iraq were granted these rights through the March 11, 1970 Declaration. The El-Bekr government had included these rights in the Temporary Constitution. We are now faced with a situation that has completely risen out of Iraq's internal laws.
This declaration states that, "Iraqi Arab Republic is a federal state, constituting of two main communities, Arabs and Kurds, who have equal rights."
This declaration also states that, "The constitution must consist of the establishing of legislation, execution and law organizations, that will enable the Kurds in Kurdistan to use their national rights."
What do these "internal laws" exactly encompass?
According to this declaration, Iraqi Kurdistan includes the provinces of Suleymania, Kirkuk and Irbil, all the subdivisions and villages within these provinces, and also the mainly Kurdish subdivisions and villages within the provinces of Mousul and Diyala.
According to Iraqi law, the mainly Kurdish regions within Kirkuk and Musul are considered to be within the borders of Kurdistan since 1970. This is not a new issue.
Does this declaration grant Kurds the right of establishing a legislative body?
The agreement reached through this declaration was put into effect on March 11, 1974, by the Revolution Execution Council, with the Decision to Change the Temporary Constitution. The Kurds were granted autonomy and the right to establish a legislative body made up of 80 people.
Did Turkey have any objections at the time these rights were being granted to Kurds?
Could it? These were Iraq's interior affairs. Besides, all these took place in a world shaped by U.S.- Russian forces. But Saddam insisted on not implementing these decisions. And now, there is a new international and interior climate suitable for implementing these decisions. Kurds are bringing into life their deserved rights.
Were the rights of Turkmens recognized through these agreements and laws? Why are Turkmens not in the parliament now?
Of course, the declaration and laws encompassing the Kurdistan autonomous region, state that the ethnic-regional minority rights of communities like Turkmens, Assyrians and Armenians, will be under the assurance of the Constitution. They are also granted equal citizenship rights as Arabs and Kurds.
Assyrians are present in this parliament. However, Ankara, which will not recognize a Kurdish government, has been against Turkmens being in the parliament since the first day this issue was brought on the agenda. On the other hand, it was complaining that Turkmens were being excluded from the parliament. Now that Turkey's foreign minister is saying that they want Turkmens to be in the parliament, the Ankara obstacle has been removed. The Turkmens will be represented in the parliament.
Turkey says that if Kurds declare a flag or announce Kirkuk as the capital, it will consider war?
Turkey would declare war if it is in a situation to declare war on its own. But what will its reason for war be? "Security"? Then, what if the people who live outside the borders of Turkey see Turkey as a threat to their security? The problem, here is not about security, it's about freedom. As Turkey heightens the living standards of Kurds living in Turkey, it will not have such a problem as security. If that happens, Kurds in the region would turn their faces to Turkey, not their backs.
Does Turkey's special interest in Kirkuk have anything to do with oil?
It should. But at Losan, Turkey deserted its rights on Kirkuk oil basins, and later transferred its share that it kept at Losan. So, it shouldn't be able to claim a right. But Turkey may be worried that Kurds could claim a right over the oil basins.
How about the allegations that the U.S. is after an independent Kurdish state?
The U.S. says that it doesn't want an independent Kurdish state. But still, the U.S. would prefer a formation with dispersed authority rather than a strong central state in the region. If Baghdad rejects Kurdish autonomy, the Kurds may seek U.S. patronage.
Would a possible tension in Northern Iraq affect Turkey's pro-Kurdish Democratic People's Party (DEHAP) in the upcoming elections?
I don't think it would. There is discord between DEHAP's approaches and the Kurds in Northern Iraq. (EK/EA/NM)