| Foreword
This booklet summarises the problem, of Kurds and their demand for autonomy within Iraq. It contains the elaboration of one set of arguments and explanations. It represents the stand taken by the authorities and by Iraqis of Arab origin. Granted that the treatment may not be exhaustive, it has to be admitted that it fulfils a long felt need. Three points emerge from it.
First, it provides to all concerned food for thought. In he a since of official version, the thinking on this subject in most quarters has been confused, being based on rumours and conjectures. The approach to the problem has therefore been emotional rather than objective.
For the first time perhaps, an attempt has been made to furnish facts and figures and to draw logical conclusions therefrom.
Secondly, this also seems to be the first serious attempt at putting forth the point of view of the Government of Iraq and Iraqis of Arab origin. While the beginnings of it can be traced as far back as 1940, the question has remained in the forefront since 1961 in consequence of violence having been resorted to repeatedly by a section of the Kurdish population in this country.
Their protaganists assert that the Iraqi Kurds being landlocked and lacking a government of their own, have not had the facilities and the Occasions for publicity and propaganda. They forget that the present day world is simply teeming with people who are ever eager to take us cudgels on behalf of any real or supposed underdog. This explains why so much has been said and written in support of Iraqi Kurds the world over and so little, if at all, in favour of the Government and the other people of Iraq.
Lastly, nowadays far too many people, from the heads of states down to the man in the street, take uncommonly active interest in the affairs of other peoples and countries, to the unfortunate neglect of their own immediate business. That may be at the root of the pandemonium which has seized the world.
Whereas it is without the least doubt, a domestic problem for the Government and the people of Iraq to solve, the rest of the world is entitled to know something about it. In amplification of the analysis of the problem so ably undertaken by the author, it may be useful and interesting to refer to the complaints and connected demands of the Iraqi Kurds. These have been enumerated in detail by so many other authors elsewhere.
Perhaps the most enthusiastic exponent of the Kurdish cause has been Dana Adams Schmidt, an American journalist who represented the New York Times in the Middle-East. He is the author of "Journey among Brave Men" published by Little, Brown and Company, Boston, U.S.A. Mr Schmidt has been unmistakably overzealous in pleading the cause of the Iraqi Kurds and for this he is not to blame.
He had no choice left after receiving the generous hospitality from his hosts. He has made it abundantly clear that his hunger for adventure was more than satisfied beside the material gain resulting from the sale of the book. In chapter 6, entitled 'The War for Autonomy' (pp. 72-92), Mr Schmidt enumerates the demands of' the Kurds as follows:
"A related complaint was that Kurdish newspapers and magazines have been suppressed... Special Kurdish language broadcasts on Baghdad radio have been cut down... The compaign against the Kurdish language had gone to such farfetched lengths as an order of the Ministry of Agriculture changing the name of the so-called Kurdish wheat to 'northern' wheat.
"Not only had the government refrained from appointing Kurdish officials in the Kurdish regions, or promoting those already in office to higher posts, particularly key posts, but hundreds of Kurdish officials had been dismissed or transferred to the south of Iraq.
"In another attempt to disperse the Kurds, the complaints went on, the training centre for Kurds called to military service had been moved to the southern part of the country.
"There was discrimination also on the economic level, the petitions charged... The Iraqi-Soviet technical assistance treaty included building radio and television stations all over Iraq, but very few in Kurdistan.
"The Kurdish Democratic Party had been persecuted, it was charged..."
Let us now go into those complaints one by one and see how much substance there is.
Iraq is undeniably the only country in the world which recognises and treats Kurdish as an official language in the north. There would surely be a good case for the wheat cultivated by them to be called Kurdish if its counterpart were referred to as Arab wheat!
Language has often led to bitterness and bloodshed, the more recent instance being that of neighbouring India. It is doubtful if it ever yields more tangible results, the language of the majority has to prevail. If somehow the language, culture, etc., of the minority were imposed on a majority, quite an amazing situation would result. How then would the latter react and to what end? Some of the states of Africa constitute a precedent in this context, which have been under white minority rule.
As a result of the political upheavals which this country has gone through lately, the fate of Iraqis of Arab descent with regard to postings, transfers, dismissals, etc.,. has been no better. Statistics on this subject, if available, would prove illuminating, no doubt.
In the face of disturbed conditions and the continuance of subversion in the north, the removal of training centre for army recruits to the south was by all standards a wise administrative step. No country would keep its budding soldiers exposed to propaganda and attempts aimed at creating disaffection and disloyalty. That the Kurds are still freely enrolled, ref creditably on the Government’s policy towards them.
Complaint of economic discrimination and the matter of radio and television centres also calls for statistical backing. Would ever a difference in the number, say, of radio stations for a particular area be a sufficient justification for starting civil war?
Now that the Kurdish Democratic Party openly defies law and order and advocates violence, it is not known how else its members expected to be treated by the Government, in this country or any other.
Volumes have been written on the historical origin of the Kurds. Regardless of where they first came from, they have lived in Central Asia for an unknown number of centuries. They have lea a partly nomadic and partly pastoral existence, when not engaged in fighting inter-tribal feuds or conducting fratricidal warfare among themselves.
Salahuddin (Saladin) was the greatest Kurd of all times. His accomplishments and the resulting greatness rested on the foundation of Arab co-operation. Another Kurd, Karim Khan Zand, sat for a while on the throne of Iran. His successor, Lutf Ali Khan, was promptly deprived of his throne by his own fellow Kurds out of tribal enmity. In fact, it was easier for a Kurdish prince to be a vassal to a foreign overlord than give up his struggle with a rival Kurd. When the Kurds did think in terms of a political horizon beyond the tribe, it was the supranational body of Islam", says Derk Kinnane in his `Kurds and Kurdistan' (O.U.P.).
By virtue of the political fragmentation of Central Asia, the community lives in pockets belonging to Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Syria and the U. S. S. R. Within itself the community is divided into tribes, clans and sub-clans, etc. These would rather destroy each other fighting than unite, live and let live. Mustafa Barazani and his clan may well revive or continue hostilities against the Government of Iraq, just because certain tribes not friendly to him may have co-operated with the said government.
The maps as well as the political geography of the world have undergone so many changes during the last two decades that it would be difficult to keep an account of them. Te refers to the Treaty of Sevres 11929) or even the Treaty of Lausanne (1923) is a waste of breath. So many more treaties have since been made and unmade, that alluding to them in support of one's demand for restoration of sovereignty, or even autonomy, is to ask for the moon.
Who would let the indigenous native of the Americas return to the throne of his forefathers, or allow the Arabs to regain control of Spain and the rest of southern Europe? The Great Mogul might well be turning in his grave at the prospect of his great-grand child being restored to his 'takht' in Delhi. For that matter, the Turks were masters of much of Europe, West Asia and North Africa till yesterday.
Minorities everywhere have to co-operate and coexist with the majority communities. The latter are expected to manage their affairs in a manner so as not to practise fraud or or oppression on the racial and religious groups living in their midst. Human conduct, it has to be realised, is never perfect and in actual practice lapses are bound to occur, on both sides. While the majority community must be understanding and tolerant, the minority on its part has to be patient and co-operative.
The Kurds are the nationals and the citizens of Iraq and would remain so. They may have suffered certain hardships. Their own rashness is as much to blame as the indifference of successive governments. The present rulers can hardly be expected to Undo suddenly what the others did, some of them in the remote past.
In politics as in war, there are no permanent enemies and no permanent friends. There are only permanent interests. It is equally debatable if fear of losing face is a good enough reason for continuing bloodshed. It can never be too late to sit back and do a bit of heart searching and to get together to work out ways and means of improving the lot of the common man, be he a Kurd or an Arab. Destruction of life and property debilitates both and weakens the administration. The only people to feel satisfied with a prolongation of this state of affairs are the enemies of the people and the country.
Ahmad Shakir Shallal, Ph. D. |
