[Prec. per data] [Succ. per data] [Prec. per argomento] [Succ. per argomento] [Indice per data] [Indice per argomento]
Dino Frisullo: Guerra all'Iraq e diritti negati ai kurdi
- Subject: Dino Frisullo: Guerra all'Iraq e diritti negati ai kurdi
- From: ranch at ranchdeiviandanti.it
- Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 16:01:03 +0100
Da parte di: Dino Frisullo, 8 Febbraio 2003 Subject: CONTRIBUTO CRITICO AL CONVEGNO DI IVREA "Guerra all'Iraq e diritti negati ai kurdi" Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2003 From: "dino frisullo" <dinofrisullo at libero.it> To: <ranch at ranchdeiviandanti.it>, <ivreaqaladiza at libero.it> Cari amici di Ivrea, molti esuli kurdi apriranno la manifestazione del 15 febbraio a Roma contro la guerra. Senza se e senza ma. A Diyarbakir duemila donne kurde, davanti alla base aerea di Incirlik i kurdi attivisti dell'Associazione diritti umani, hanno affrontato i bastoni della polizia turca per manifestare contro la guerra. Senza se e senza ma. Un volantino che avete diffuso qualche settimana fa, polemico nei confronti "dei pacifisti", diceva invece (cito a memoria): la guerra è una brutta cosa, MA... MA Saddam Hussein è un dittatore sanguinario, autore alla fine degli anni '80 di una pulizia etnica dei kurdi che ha sfiorato il genocidio, e che prosegue nell'arabizzazione forzata delle aree kurde che ancora controlla. E' vero. Chi può negarlo? Ma quelle armi e quei gas, glieli avevano forniti gli stessi Usa che oggi alcuni leader kurdi d'Iraq considerano liberatori. Gli stessi che li lasciarono nuovamente massacrare nel '91, prima di usarli per giustificare la no-fly-zone e i bombardamenti. Prima di usarli, oggi, per giustificare una nuova spaventosa guerra. In gran parte dal territorio kurdo, in territorio kurdo. Mi dicono che Suleymanye, la bella Suleymanye, si sta spopolando. Zakho è già una città fantasma. La gente fugge prima del diluvio. La gente sa la guerra. La gente kurda è contro questa guerra. Ma il Venerdì di Repubblica titola: "L'alleato kurdo". Sottotitolo: "Viaggio nella periferia ribelle del regno di Saddam. Dove all'ombra della no-fly-zone è nato il libero Kurdistan. Che ora punta sugli Usa..." Pochi giorni fa lo citavo anche in risposta a una mail giustamente angosciata di Annet Henneman. E' drammatico, è terribile che ancora una volta alcuni leader kurdo-irakeni, invece di costruire un'unità e quindi una forza contrattuale kurda contro tutti gli invasori e gli oppressori (Saddam compreso, ma anche l'alleanza turco-americana), cadano nell'eterno inganno di pensare che la libertà viaggi sulle ali dei bombardieri altrui. E' lo stesso inganno che li ha portati a combattersi fra loro, appoggiandosi uno all'Iran l'altro all'Iraq negli anni '80, uno ai turchi l'altro agli irakeni negli anni '90, e poi volta a volta l'uno o l'altro alla Turchia contro i fratelli kurdi del Pkk, che ora ambedue, ospiti della Albright, chiamano terroristi... E' drammatico anche che il vostro amore per questo pezzo di mondo vi porti a dimenticare, come pacifisti, che non si può chiedere l'esilio di un dittatore a un esercito aggressore. Oggi Milosevic fa la parte della vittima nel tribunale dei vincitori, anche perchè una parte del suo popolo (e del pacifismo occidentale) applaudì ai bombardamenti Nato. E nè il suo paese nè il Kosovo possono dirsi liberi e democratici. E generazioni di bambini moriranno dei veleni di quella guerra. Lasciamo da parte il fall-out delle armi "intelligenti" che si useranno in questa guerra, nucleare non escluso. Guardiamo ai giochi in corso. Gli Usa stanno comprando l'alleanza turca con il via libera all'oppressione dei kurdi in Turchia da un lato, all'occupazione turca di una parte del Kurdistan irakeno dall'altro. E gli iraniani non staranno certo a guardare. Nè starà a guardare Saddam, o chiunque gli succeda a Baghdad. La posta in gioco è il petrolio di Kirkuk e Mosul, ma anche lo strozzamento di ogni idea di libertà kurda. Una tenaglia si sta stringendo sull'effimera libertà del Sud Kurdistan. Possibile che non lo vediate? Possibile che i leader kurdo-irakeni (non tutti: il Pc d'Iraq (kurdo) si è espresso a Roma contro la guerra) prestino fede alle promesse americane? Possibile che non si rendano conto che l'interessato messaggio che passa ("i kurdi sono parte della Grande Alleanza") rischia di scavare un solco profondo fra i kurdi e il popolo irakeno, fra i kurdi e il mondo arabo, fra i kurdi e il pacifismo in Occidente, fra i kurdi e quella grande parte dell'umanità, da Mandela ai SemTerra, che non vuole questa guerra? Io spero di vedervi, e di vedere tanti degli esuli dal Sud Kurdistan, il 15 febbraio a Roma. Contro la guerra, e contro Saddam e tutti i regimi e i potenti della terra. Per fermare le bombe, e dare ali alla libertà dei popoli. Senza se e senza ma. Scusandomi perchè sono in inglese e non ho ora il tempo di tradurli, vi allego alcuni documenti utili: un'analisi su "I kurdi e la guerra" della Campagna Pace in Kurdistan avviata in Gb da intellettuali come H. Pinter, N. Chomsky e A. Miller, e tre recentissimi articoli del Glasgow Herald, di KurdishMedia e del NYT sul grande gioco turco-americano già in corso, con decine di migliaia di militari già entrati, in quella parte del Kurdistan. Chiedo ad Aldo di estendere questo messaggio al resto dell'indirizzario al quale è arrivato il vostro, come materiale di riflessione Con amicizia, Dino Frisullo ==---- Peace in Kurdistan (U.K.)- "War and the Kurds": 4 February 2003 As the darkening clouds of war gather over the Middle East it is clear that no-one will be left untouched by the fall out (a phrase chosen carefully). War once unleashed does not discriminate in its choice of casualties; even the much advertised 'smart bombs' are not smart enough to spare the innocents. The Kurdish people, of course, are positioned geo-strategically right in the middle of the coming maelstrom and another tragedy of Biblical proportions could be in the offing for them. A repeat performance of 1991 would indeed be a humanitarian disaster for the Kurds, but this is one scenario that cannot be discounted, since war has a tendency to unpredictable consequences, despite the highly sophisticated control rooms now at the disposal of today's military strategists. While the Kurds of Iraq, unsurprisingly given their past ordeals, have thrown in their lot with the aggressors/liberators (the US-led 'coalition', that incidentally includes NATO loyalist Turkey, remains their only begetter and protector, so they don't have much real choice), the Kurds of Turkey view things rather differently; right now they are facing a tightening of repression under the guise of war preparations and the holding out of no prospects of war gains for them. The people in southeast Turkey are overwhelmingly opposed to a war. They know only too well that the conflict will inflict additional hardship as the economy is further depressed and income from cross-border trade is curtailed, but they also understand that it will mark a setback for advancing their cause of establishing a free and democratic society in the Kurdish region. War conditions will give Turkey free rein to intensify the severe restrictions on basic civil liberties that are already in place. Turkey's paranoia about even the minimum Kurdish self-expression is reflected in its determination at all costs to prevent the break up of Iraq and the setting up of any Kurdish regional administration in Northern Iraq. Unfortunately, Turkey's bargaining power with Washington is rising since the US simply desperately needs to use the bases inside Turkey in its bombing campaign and invasion of Iraq. The Iraqi Kurds may hope that soon they will breathe the air of freedom in their own land, within their 'federal Iraq', to which they officially cling, under Washington's watchful gaze, but who is to say that this post-war air will not be tainted with the residues of depleted uranium, assorted chemical weapons or even the unleashing UK Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon's nuclear option? In this respect by joining the war party so emphatically, the leaders in Suleimaniya and Irbil may be dicing with their people's destiny. Turkey, meanwhile, has been avidly eyeing the oil-rich cities of Mosul and Kirkuk in Northern Iraq/South Kurdistan and has even gone so far as to look into the possibilities of reviving its alleged historic claims on the territory. Such a turn of events could only bode ill for the Kurds. Once Turkish troops are embedded in there it is not likely that they will just go quietly. The coming war could be a long haul. It certainly seems unlikely to be a sharp surgical operation to remove the cancerous tumour that has long blighted the local body politic; there is the prospect that Iraq will collapse into the chaos of gang warfare, replicating unfolding events in Afghanistan only on a much larger scale. Enmities generated are likely to endure for generations. In what is seen by Kurds as a highly provocative measure, the Turkish authorities, under the unoriginal pretext of 'bad weather', have been refusing visitors access to Abdullah Ocalan detained in solitary confinement on Imrali Island. No-one has been allowed to see him for 10 weeks now, a time span which coincidentally matches almost exactly the time that the new government has been in office. This isolation is effectively a form of torture. As long as no independent person, whether his lawyers, his family, or a representative of an NGO, is allowed to see Ocalan, Kurds, only too well aware of what happens to those held inside Turkish jails, will naturally fear the worst. Ocalan has inspired thousands, indeed millions, of Kurdish people with the self-confidence to feel proud about their distinct identity. He commands widespread respect among the people for whom he is a symbol of hope and endurance. Furthermore, his treatment has become a symbol of the neglectful way that the Turkish state deals with its Kurdish population. By deliberately provoking, indeed taunting, popular opinion about Ocalan's health and conditions, confined alone for years in a small, damp, barely legal prison cell, Turkey is sowing discord and stoking the flames of conflict. Under cover of the approaching war, very little pressure from the outside can now be brought to bear on Turkey; their principal ally, the US, has actively encouraged the stepping up of repression by, for example, formally naming KADEK as a proscribed terrorist group, as if the years of peaceful campaigning by the organisation and its forerunner had never occurred. The US is keen for Turkey to get fully onside in the war and is to this end offering between $4 and $15 billion as a sweetener to soften the blows of any dislocation caused by the impact of war in terms of a refugee influx and loss of trade. Ruling AKP party leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan has warned that Turkey will forfeit its right to have a say in the future of Iraq if it does not closely participate in the crusade against Saddam. Evidently, the discrete behind the scenes arm twisting from the US on Ankara has been immense. It wants the use of bases on Turkish soil, but in reality they are on Kurdish soil, at Batman and Diyarbakir, as well as Incirlik. In addition, the US wants permission to station up to 80 thousand troops there in preparation for an invasion from the North. While such negotiations have been taking place, Turkey has been given leverage to toughen up on the Kurds under the pretext of imminent war danger, and, as long as the focus is on Iraq, Turkey will be relatively free from what it always regards as intrusive media scrutiny from the West, thus foiling Europe's tentative moves to encourage a modicum of reforms. Mass international opposition against the imminent humanitarian catastrophe possibly remains the greatest source of hope and illumination as the world moves relentlessly to war. But there is still an opportunity for the more enlightened governments and institutions to wake up even at this late hour to the urgent necessity to change gear and reverse current policies in favour of a process of democratic dialogue. * Peace in Kurdistan is an Campaign for a political solution of the Kurdish question. Patrons: Lord Avebury, John Austin MP, Lord Rea, Lord Dholakia, Baroness Sarah Ludford MEP, John Bowis MEP, Julie Christie, Harold Pinter, Noam Chomsky, Arthur Miller, Edward Albee, Naguib Mahfouz. ==--------------- The Glasgow Herald - "Turkey on alert to stop Kurdish freedom move": 5 January 2003 / by Ian Bruce TURKEY is prepared to move a 100,000-man army into northern Iraq to prevent, by force, the establishment of an independent Kurdish state and seize key northern oilfields if the US launches an attack to topple Saddam Hussein, according to military and diplomatic sources. The Turkish high command confirmed yesterday that substantial reinforcements are being sent to its 2nd army in the south-eastern Malatya province "in light of possible developments that might have implications for regional security and to prevent a possible influx of Iraqi civilians into Turkish territory". Sources in Nato said the troops had been briefed to establish a 50-mile-deep "security belt" inside Iraq to prevent the Kurds declaring unilateral independence from Baghdad, and that special forces units were training for the seizure of the cities of Mosul and Kirkuk - a 200-mile incursion - to gain control of lucrative northern oilfields. Despite reassurances from Washington that the 3.5m Kurds living under the umbrella of the US-UK patrolled northern no-fly zone would not be allowed to take advantage of a war to secede from Iraq, Ankara has decided to take its own precautions. Turkish forces fought a bitter, 10-year guerrilla war against Kurdish rebels within its borders, which ended only two years ago. More than 30,000 people died and both sides accused each other of atrocities and the UN accused Ankara of human rights abuses. The other security concern for Turkey is a flood of refugees. In 1991, more than 450,000 people escaped the fighting over the mountains into its territory, creating a humanitarian and economic crisis for which it was ill-prepared. Another 1.3m fled to Iran. Thousands of guerrillas from the Kurdish PKK "workers' party" also took the chance to sneak through under cover of the exodus to fan the flames of resistance among Kurdish separatists inside Turkey. Cemil Serhadli, the governor of Diyarbakir, the main administrative centre for south- eastern Turkey, said yesterday: "If there is a war and another stream of refugees, then we will stop them before they come to our territory. We would prefer that they be housed within Iraq's own borders." The UN has plans to provide tented shelter and medical facilities at 18 temporary camps - five inside Turkey and 13 in Iraq - accommodating 276,000 people, in the event of war. Turkey, fearful of an Islamic backlash among its own population, has so far publicly granted the US permission to base only 10,000 troops on its turf in the event of war. ==--------------- KurdishMedia - "Turkey as peacekeeper in post-Saddam Iraq?": London / 6 February 2003 The British daily the Times yesterday reported that Turkish troops could patrol a sector of Iraq as part of a peacekeeping operation after a war and the expected ousting of Saddam Hussein. According to the Times, Turkey has already proved its "credentials" in peacekeeping operations through its successful command of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Kabul, Afghanistan. "The Americans are hoping that the promise of a role for Turkish troops in a postwar Iraq might persuade the Ankara Parliament to approve a US troop presence in Turkey," said the Times. "The involvement of Turkey in the US-led coalition is seen as one of the most important elements in the whole American strategy for Iraq, before, during and after a war. Turkey's 70 years of experience in oppressing the Kurds through all sorts of brutal and illegal methods and its "excellence" in "counter-terrorism" has made Turkey a sought after candidate for "peacekeeping" operations during the past years. ==------------- The New York Times - "U.S. in Talks on Allowing Turkey to Occupy a Kurdish Area in Iraq": by DEXTER FILKINS with C. J. CHIVERS ANKARA / February 7, 2003 American diplomats are engaged in delicate negotiations here that could allow tens of thousands of Turkish soldiers to occupy part of northern Iraq behind an advancing American army, Turkish and Kurdish officials said today. A United States official confirmed that the negotiations were under way, but said that the Turks would be restricted to a limited area close to the border and that the numbers discussed by the Turks and Kurds were exaggerated. The plan, which is being negotiated in closed-door meetings in Ankara, the Turkish capital, is being bitterly resisted by at least some leaders of Iraq's Kurdish groups, who fear that Turkey's leaders may be trying to realize a historic desire to dominate the region in a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq. The Kurdish officials say they fear a military intervention by the Turks could also prompt Iran to cross the border and try to seize sections of eastern Iraq. American diplomats and senior military commanders, led by President Bush's special envoy, Zalmay Khalilzad, are said to be encouraging the Kurdish leaders to accept the Turkish proposal. While Washington has strongly supported the autonomous Kurdish region in Iraq over the past 12 years, it is eager to secure the permission of Turkey's leaders to use Turkey's bases for a possible attack on Iraq. The proposed deal between the Americans and the Turks moved closer to fruition today when the Turkish Parliament voted to allow American engineers to begin preparing Turkish military bases for possible use by American troops. A vote on whether to allow American troops to use those bases is scheduled for Feb. 18. The size of each projected military force - American and Turkish - is still unclear. American officials had sought to base as many as 80,000 troops in Turkey. But some Turkish officials have suggested that the American force will be significantly smaller, perhaps no more than 15,000 to 20,000. In negotiations today, Turkish officials said they wanted their forces to outnumber American ones by a ratio of two to one. With a war looming, Turkey has sought assurances from the Americans that the toppling of Mr. Hussein would not result in the establishment of an independent Kurdish state, which it fears would encourage a revolt by Turkish Kurds. Turkey's leaders are determined to prevent a repeat of the Persian Gulf war in 1991, when southeastern Turkey was swamped by a half million Kurdish refugees fleeing attacks by the Iraqi Army. Turkish officials say that pro-Kurdish guerrillas crossed into Turkey along with the refugees, igniting a bloody insurgency that the Turkish military has been battling ever since. But some Kurds are making it clear that they do not want the Turks crossing Iraq's northern border. "We have told the Americans and the Turks that any outside intervention would not be welcomed," said Safeen M. Dizayee, an official with the Iraq-based Kurdish Democratic Party, who took part in the talks. "I hope it would not get out of control. But it could be suicidal to get into something like this if it undermines political stability." A United States official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, confirmed that the Turks were proposing to send troops into northern Iraq but said that their role would be sharply limited. The official said that the Turkish troops would be limited to a portion of Iraqi territory near the Turkish border, and that the forces would focus primarily on humanitarian problems and on discouraging people from fleeing to Turkey. Moreover, he said, the Turkish forces would be under American command and would not be mixing with the Kurdish troops. "It would be in a limited area, close to the border," the official said. One of the aims of the current negotiations, the official continued, was to bring the Kurds and the Turks to an understanding about a possible Turkish intervention. Indeed, there were signs that Iraq's Kurdish leaders were showing a willingness to work with Turkey's new government, which has deep Islamic roots and won a majority of seats in the Turkish Parliament last November. Massoud Barzani, the leader of one of the two major Kurdish groups, the Kurdistan Democratic Party, was said to have felt comfortable with Turkey's leaders during a recent visit there. "He was very impressed with the Turkish government," Fawzi Hariri, a party spokesman, said of Mr. Barzani. "He thought they were genuine and that he could trust them." But statements by Turkish officials suggested that their plans might be more ambitious. A Turkish official confirmed today that his government was planning to send troops into northern Iraq in numbers that would exceed those dispatched by the Americans. The Turkish officials echoed comments made Wednesday by the Turkish prime minister, Abdullah Gul. He suggested that the Turkish Army's role would go beyond humanitarian concerns to protecting Turkish interests in the region. "Turkey is going to position herself in that region in order to prevent any possible massacres, or the establishment of a new state," Mr. Gul told Turkish reporters. The Turkish official, like Mr. Gul, said the Turkish troops would not take part in combat with the Iraqis but would instead seek to prevent the emergence of a Kurdish state in northern Iraq. The official said the Turks could also check any re-emergence of the Kurdish insurgency that operated in southeastern Turkey during the 1990's. The official made it clear that the Turkish troops would protect themselves if they came under attack. In recent weeks the Turks have been building their forces on the border, and some 1,200 Turkish troops are already operating in parts of northern Iraq, mainly to hunt down pro-Kurdish guerrillas who might be trying to cross into Turkey. Mr. Dizayee referred to the various Turkish rationales for intervention as "pretexts." Like many Kurdish leaders, Mr. Dizayee expressed pride in the democratic institutions the Kurds have built during their 12 years of autonomy. He expressed dismay at the prospect that those institutions might be swamped by an American-led military attack. "We think these democratic institutions have set a precedent for the rest of Iraq," Mr. Dizayee said. "If they were undermined, it would reflect badly on the whole operation." The American-led talks appear to be focused on choreographing the nearly simultaneous entry of American combat troops and Turkish soldiers into northern Iraq. One official with the other major Kurdish group, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, said Mr. Khalilzad had called the meeting to give each group its final marching orders for what appears to be an imminent war. One element of the plan, the Kurdish official said, was to ensure that both Turkish and Kurdish forces left the northern Iraqi cities of Mosul and Kirkuk to the American forces. Those cities are the centers of oil production in the region, and Washington plans to grab the oil fields before either Iraq destroys them or the Kurds seize them. The senior official with the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan said the Kurds were eagerly anticipating the arrival of American soldiers, but not that of the Turks. "We regard America as liberators," the official said. "And our neighbors as looters."
- Prev by Date: interrogazione al Ministro degli Interni
- Next by Date: Re: Boicottiamo, l'ultima risorsa....
- Previous by thread: interrogazione al Ministro degli Interni
- Next by thread: Delegaz. Newroz 2003: Partecipa! Invia la scheda!
- Indice: