The Eighth Front
According to Turkish sources, hundreds of Turkish troops crossed into Iraqi Kurdistan on Tuesday night/Wednesday morning in hot pursuit of Kurdish terrorists. There was some skepticism about whether this incident actually occurred, and it was both affirmed and denied by various Turkish sources in the course of the day. MSNBC showed footage of the incursion, but I don't know if that was stock footage or if it showed today's events accurately (shouldn't they label these things?). A US military spokesman in Baghdad could not confirm the border incursion but said "we are very concerned." As well he should be.
A hot eighth front may have just opened up in the kaleidoscopic Iraq War, which appears to be gradually fulfilling its potential for unravelling the entire Middle East as it was constituted by the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923 in the aftermath of WW I.
How many fronts are there in the Iraq War? The Sunni Arab guerrillas of the center, west and north are themselves fighting a four-front war. They are fighting US troops. They are fighting Shiites. They are fighting Kurds in the Kirkuk region and Ninevah and Diyala provinces. And they are fighting other Sunni Arab forces (Baathists fight Salafi fundamentalists, and both fight tribal levies gravitating to the Americans).
Then there is a muted Shiite front with two dimensions. Radical Shiites attack US forces. And, in Basra, Diwaniya and elsewhere, there is Shiite on Shiite violence as the Badr Corps paramilitary of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (often infiltrated into the Iraqi police) fights the Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr.
So that makes 6-- four Sunni Arab fronts and 2 Shiite fronts.
Then there are the Kurds. Of course they are fighting the Sunni Arabs. But they have also given haven to two terrorist groups. One is the PKK, or Kurdish Worker's Party, which operates in Turkey's eastern Anatolia, blowing things up and killing people. Some 5,000 PKK fighters are holed up in Iraqi Kurdistan, to the rage of the Turkish government in Ankara. The other is PEJAK, an Iranian-Kurdish terrorist group that launches attacks in Iran. Both Iran and Turkey have lobbed mortars and artillery shells over the border into villages of Iraqi Kurdistan as a way of lodging a complaint and making a threat against these Kurdish forces.
So in addition to the Arab-Kurdish front already counted, that makes 2 more fronts, for a grand total of 8. Not all 8 are very active at all times. But all 8 do break out into substantial violence from time to time. And we may have just seen a flare-up in no. 8.
By the way, why does the Bush administration allow its Kurdistan allies to harbor PKK terrorists? I thought that sort of thing was a no-no in the age of the war on terror? Wasn't it even the casus belli for Bush's two big invasions? Or is it all right to do terrorism to Turkey and Iran, but not to the US and Britain? I'm confused.
Labels: Iraq
posted by Juan Cole @ 6/07/2007 12:21:00 AM
|
Facebook
25 Comments:
and doesn't the usa also harbor / give sanctuary to yet another terrorist group - the MEK ( dissident Iranians i think ) ??
hard to keep track of all the players - thanks for staying on top of the situation Professor Cole.
Sir,
Accoriding to TPM Muckraker, the invasion didn't happen.
This will be easier to follow next week when US companies release a new chewing gum with T-War trading Cards. We have heard of the KKK, but the PKK or PEJAK will be big news. Thanks.
Thank you for your always-spot on dose of perspective on these matters. I have been furious at the harboring of Kurdish terrorists since the establishment of the no-fly zones in the aftermath of Desert Storm.
Well if Israel is allowed to invade countries like Lebanon for "national security" and to chase down terrorists when the "territorial government is unwilling or unable to stop them," then the US will not be able to stop Turkey from using the same logic and arguments. Wasn't it glaringly obvious at the Department of State in 2006 that this sort of situation could come up in Turkey-Kurdistan while the US was defending Israeli policy?
You're confused?
I'm Lebanese-American with extensive family contacts in Lebanon, but I'm still just trying to sort out the various Palestinian factions in the new War of the Camps, plus keep all the shifting March 8-March 14 alliances straight.
Now when I read about this eight-front war in Iraq, my eyes glaze over. You lost me on the two Shi'ite factions fighting each other - I know I *ought* to have those guys straight but I don't.
If I can't follow this, how can Mr. and Mrs. Middle America? They don't.
One thing I know - we are in over our heads.
Oh, by the way, my anti-Syrian cousin who confirmed last week that Jund as-Sham is indeed known as Jund as-Sitt, told me this week that "Bahiya Hariri only pays them money to keep them quiet." That seems to be the new line.
is it all right to do terrorism to Turkey and Iran, but not to the US and Britain? I'm confused.
YES! It's quite all right to do terrorism to any country not part of the "coalition" of the "willing". This is what we mean by the "G" in "GWOT". "G" as in "Global". "Global" as in "terrorist organizations of global reach".
In other words, not CIA, not MI6, not Mossad, and not ISI.
~~~
And NO!, you don't seem very confused at all!
Thanks for all your good work.
Juan - Its not really that confusing. The Peshmerga were/are US Mercenaries (in 2003) so it the price we have to pay. Allow the Kurdish Regional Authoity to do what the hell it wants so that we don't loose their support. The fact that they harbour terrorist that attack a NATO ally is totally incidental to Bush
Only Americans and Europeans, including Australians and especially Israelis (and to some extent, Russians) can be victims of terrorism. Everyone else is a potential terrorist, and therefore to fight them you have to use their tactics because, you know, 9/11 changed everything and never before in the history of our country have we faced such a dire existential threat as some homeless guy from Trinadad.
Peters was not involved with this remarkably prophetic document, but he recently hitched up with PNAC and its demands for adding at least 25,000 new soldiers to US forces each year. However, in his AFJ article – aptly named "Blood Borders" – he surpasses his new compatriots. Where they were content merely to usurp existing regimes, Peters has produced a detailed plan for re-ordering whole regions – ruthlessly chopping up Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, and creating new countries such as Greater Kurdistan, a Vatican-like "Islamic Sacred State" out of Mecca and Medina, and a "Free Baluchistan," tearing the oil-rich province away from Pakistan. He'd also lighten Islamabad of its troublesome Waziristan provinces and give them to Afghanistan.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/floyd/floyd26.html
Not to mention almost 4000 MKO terrorist/fighter in Ashraf camp (in Khalis near Baghdad) who are willing to do anything for the will of their "exceptional leader". Recall in 2003, when Sarkozi ordered a raid to their stronghold in France, 12 members were ordered to set themselves to fire in European streets to "protest" French government. BTW, they are the only group that has killed Americans inside Iran (back in early 70s)!
'Wasn't it even the casus belli for Bush's two big invasions? Or is it all right to do terrorism to Turkey and Iran, but not to the US and Britain? I'm confused.'
There's no need for confusion.
One must recall that 'it's better to fight them over there than over here.' 'How' 'they' fight is something 'we' cannot control;' 'where' is all-important. 'Who' is one of those iffy questions, given the 'kaleidoscopic' view of the 'war.' Given the nature of the fragmentation of country, one only needs to twist the barrel of the telescope to find a new orientation and alignment of the pieces within to one's satisfaction.
One is reminded of the older Guess Who tune, the words of which included, 'Coloured lights can hypnotise, Sparkle someone else's eyes.' And, then sung, 'I don’t need your war machines, I don’t need your ghetto scenes.' Of course, in the perspective of one giant acid trip, it is easy to recall that the song originally was aired around about the time of VietNam, sung by a bunch of Canadians from Winnepeg in Manitoba.
One is not to be confused but to reflect on situation as it stands as sort of like one big hallucinogenic experience, the leadership telling everyone what was supposed to be a good trip, with latter-day Iraqi peace-freaks strewing the paths with flower petals and then having everyone sit around on Oriental carpets, munching some honey-laced delicacies, maybe smoking something from a communal waterpipe of peace and harmony. But, as we know, the trip turned quite bad, with all sorts of images impressed on the mind that are still quite disturbing. There is the acid flashback syndrome along the lines of PTSD in which there is a repetition of events at the least opportune or predictable times that are reminiscent of previous 'bad trips,' namely VietNam or even further back to the English occupation of the Middle East.
Unfortunately, this has been the effect of 'Kool-Aid,' something that many might associate with Jonestown in Guyana where Jesus-loving Jim's followers were enticed to commit mass suicide. Even more appropriate are Wolfe's *Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test* and Kesey's *One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest,* in which are described the effects of taking too many strange hallucinogenic substances. The modern-day 'Merry Pranksters' are, of course, the NeoCons who have saturated the national consciousness with the effects of their own trips, good or bad, passing on bad information ('acid') to the unsuspecting, all of whom have now been initiated and indoctrinated into the counter-culture (and destroying Iraq is being counter to the indigenous culture) of our own times.
The dangerous situations being experienced -- by the Americans at least -- are the result of having been taken in by the 'trippers,' they who have not had nor have provided a suitable guide for their mental voyages, resulting people having a kind of psychological anomaly described as, '... experiencing a psychotic episode may report hallucinations or delusional beliefs (e.g., grandiose or paranoid delusions), and may exhibit personality changes and disorganized thinking.'* The Iraqis and others have been amBushed,
their consciousness disturbed or destroyed by a bunch of fellows who thought it might have been funny to 'share' their notions of a 'good time.'
The difference between a mere drug experience and what we have been led to believe to be a 'normal' state of mind is slight, the former perhaps causing the latter. Yet, in the case of Iraq, there seemed to have been no external causation, until one realises that those whose nostalgia overcame them (i.e., they had a collective 'flashback') were up to their old trippy tricks again, only to be later tripped up.
Confused? By what? The asylum taken over by the lunatics? The mass delusion wrought by a great deal of mental confusion brought on by having inexperienced or careless guides during this -- and previous -- big, bad trips? The images of the 'pranksters' and their cohorts whose disoriented views of the World have not produced anything resembling coherence and cohesion? The appeals by those who were naively trapped in their own versions of the 'trips,' now wanting to get out but will always be subject to a tainted substance that they were given, now and forever? The numerous casualties created by the defective minds' intentions, by perceptions of reality were correspondingly warped, by those who have been subsequently promised that more trips will straighten everything out, explain all? (If everyone goes looney, 'looney' will be normal?)
Certainly, the images colliding in the kaleidoscope can be amusing for a while yet when one is expected to constantly view life as distorted images through equally misshapen lenses, the visions' value becoming somewhat negative. True, there was quite a bit of eagerness to share the experience in the beginning but after a while, even the most hardy and ardent experimenters must put an end to their participation, despite the social or group dynamics that might result in alienation or ostracisation, being identified as 'uncool.'
I recall the dayze in 'hippie' San Francisco when there were enough people who had taken enough things who eventually concluded that they had, indeed, seen 'God.' This was about the time of the winding up of the American presence in VietNam, the emergence of the Moonies, and the 'Jesus-Freaks' who had given up drink and drugs for the 'Prince of Peace.' And, my most enduring image is that of a fellow who had burnt his brain so badly that he was inspired to stand on a bench in a park and orate about how he had found THE answers to the Universal problems through being 'born again,' sort of like a phoenix. Perhaps it was the time or the place, but he was mostly ignored, seen as merely part of the street scene. I didn't get his name nor do I recall that he spoke with an affected Texan drawl.
Still, I have often wondered who he was and where he wound up. I have a sneaking suspicion that he was merely on walkabout and went back to where he came from (Texas by way of Cambridge, MA?), taking up politics as a full-time occupation.
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosis
Thanks very much for the IC.
It is quite refreshing, Mr. Cole, to read something on Iraq that goes deeper than us & them.
8 fronts too many. I hope you agree.
There is no distinction to be made between terrorists and those who harbor them...*sigh*...
BTW, pardon my ignorance, but whatever happened to the MEK and the division amongst the Bush administration as to whether or not to employ this terrorist group against Iran? Are they active or not (and, more to the point, if the MEK is operating in the field, are they properly considered to be
operating under U.S. auspices?).
Permit me to make a few comments on the Turkish "invasion" of Kurdistan yesterday. We are working quite near both the Iranian and Turkish borders, and I spoke with our staff yesterday about this incident.
First, what actually happened: Several hundred to perhaps a thousand Turkish forces crossed for a short period in a couple locations - Mizuri Zhori and in an area north of Baradost for sure, and allegedly also near Kani Masi - and were backed up by artillery and planes. In Mizuri and Baradost, the fighting is likely still continuing. They attacked some PKK "bases", although that's a misnomer - PKK travel through the mountains or camp out up there, but they don't maintain formal bases.
Despite the Turkish attempts to lump all Kurds together, the PUK and KDP have long attempted to control the PKK without eliminating them completely. In the early 1990's Barzani was by far the strongest opponent of the PKK, but he has started to chaff under constant Turkish threats and erosion in his own base for harsh military action against PKK. Barzani wants a bargaining chip with Turkey for future negotiations on the status of Iraqi Kurdistan – which I think is foolish. However, it is remarkable that Turkish belligerence has created a situation in which the most conservative Kurdish party is now reluctant to attack the most radical one, even though the PKK attempted to kill many of Barzani’s tribal leaders along the border only a few years ago and there has been severe historical enmity between the two groups.
There’s another issue – even if the KRG wanted to totally eliminate the PKK, many of the best peshmerga units are assigned to the Iraqi Army in Baghdad and elsewhere. The KRG simply does not have the manpower right now.
Additionally, the rise of Kurdish satellite media from Europe and images of Turkish police beating Kurds in Diyarbakir creates a certain amount of sympathy for the PKK among the KRG public and makes it harder for the KRG leadership to openly back Turkey against the PKK. Public opinion is becoming quite strongly anti-Turkish, in contrast to when I first lived there in the early 90's, when public opinion was actually strongly against the PKK and neutral or slightly positive toward Turkey. Most Iraqi Kurds understand that the price for their continued autonomy requires turning on the PKK, but fewer and fewer people are happy about it and there is a lot of real anger at Turkey.
Although the point about the wider simmering conflict is a valid one, I hope people will recognize that these cross-border raids occur with regularity - yesterday's was larger than usual but nothing serious enough for the KRG to put the peshmerga forces on alert. The fact that there was almost no reaction from the KRG indicates that these raids were probably no surprise to the political leadership. Our staff told me that the KRG forces actually got out of the way to let the Turks conduct their operation. The PUK and KDP have frequently collaborated with Turkey against the PKK, and probably did so again yesterday, albeit not very enthusiastically.
They're not terrorists. They're freedom fighters, silly!
The US administration labels the PKK as "terrorist" but it is up against the fact that, from its point of view, northern Iraq is currently the least problematic part of the country. All a Turkish intervention might do is make the north as unstable as the rest of Iraq.
Anyway, there is a good deal of cynicism involved in the so-called war on terrorism. It is simply a device for the Americans and British to invade other countries whenever they feel like it.
From John Robb @ globalguerrillas
"This isn't a civil war, it's manufactured anarchy."
[...]
There's safety in numbers...
Social systems disruption creates the fragmentation that promotes the growth of new guerrilla/militia groups. The more groups there are, the more difficult it is for US forces to focus on any given group (and given the number of attacks from Mahdi army splinter groups, that is working). It also promotes the development of more allies in the open source war, particularly due to a fear of violence from rival groups. This isn't a civil war, it's manufactured anarchy."
[...]
Just because the US administration labels a group terrorist does not mean it takes steps against it. I am not aware of the PKK attacking what the US perceives to be its interests in Iraq. So it is likely to be far back in the queue, especially when the US is barely capable of holding Baghdad against insurgents who are attacking it. The truth is, "the war on terror" is a cynical cover for the US (and Britain) to invade other countries when it feels like it, not some kind of ideological or moral imperative.
At 8:22 AM, SAP said...
Sir,
Accoriding to TPM Muckraker, the invasion didn't happen.
From TPMuckraker:
Jabar Yawir, deputy minister for Peshmerga Affairs in Kurdistan, said: "This afternoon 10 Turkish helicopters landed in a village in Mazouri, which is ... 3 km (2 miles) inside the Iraqi border. They landed with around 150 Turkish special forces."
"After two hours they left and there were no confrontations with the PKK," he told Reuters. He said the village was in a PKK-controlled area.
If the Turks had done this in Laredo Texas or Blaine Washington, would it be an invasion then?
Perhaps it would just be 'sightseeing'
Well, if the region dissolves in anarchy, maybe oil prices will go up and consumption down, which might mean that the Bush administration cares about global warming after all, and has taken the actions needed to combat it, given the way the world actually works?
Just kidding.
This may be the understatement of the century but: Iraq is screwed. And so the rest of the Middle East, for that matter.
--------------------------------------------
By the way, why does the Bush administration allow its Kurdistan allies to harbor PKK terrorists? I thought that sort of thing was a no-no in the age of the war on terror? Wasn't it even the casus belli for Bush's two big invasions? Or is it all right to do terrorism to Turkey and Iran, but not to the US and Britain? I'm confused.
--------------------------------------------
Ofcourse, these are different.
We all know US fights "global terrorism" only - that means terrorism against US/UK/Israel. It should be clearly remembered that people in rest of the world are sub-human. Their lives do not count as much.
Pakistan for eg. knows this well. They clearly differentiate between terrorists against US and terrorists against India. Terrorists against US are hidden to be produced when useful. Those against India are armed, trained and encouraged.
I'm sure Kurds know about this too.
According to HPG's commander, no cross-border operations took place.
Too bad no one here knows Turkish, or you could read it for yourself.
Mizgin, ben turkce okuyorum ama bu sey aç?k tam olarak de?il
Juan
Post a Comment
<< Home