LAST NEWS ABOUT KIRKUK/ KURDISTAN

[Anthea]

The Kurdistan Region Security Council (Kurdish:ئەنجومەنی ئاسایشی هەرێمی کوردستان) or KRSC is a high-level national security council in Iraqi Kurdistan.

It was established on 2 May 2011 pursuant to Law 4 of 2011 passed by the Kurdistan Parliament. The body is responsible for inter alia a unified security policy and coordination between security services, military intelligence and existing intelligence agencies.

The council is part of the region's presidency and is headed by a Chancellor appointed by The President of the Kurdistan Region. In July 2012 Masrour Barzani, former head of the Kurdistan Region Security Protection Agency and leading member of the ruling Kurdistan Democratic Party, was appointed as Chancellor by Kurdistan Region President Masoud Barzani.

In wake of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant offensive against the Kurdistan Region in August 2014, KRSC has been coordinating international coalition airstrikes against ISIL positions.

Kurds have been coordinating international coalition airstrikes against ISIL/ISIS

Kurds have been on the ground fighting against ISIL/ISIS

Kurds were more likely to be killed by ISIS than those who dropped bombs

Kurds were less likely to kill innocent civilians than those who drop bombs

Kurdish actions in the war against ISIS saved THOUSANDS of live in Iraq

The reward Kurds have received from the grateful nation of Iraq:

DEATH AND DESTRUCTION

[Anthea]

The U.S. Is Shamelessly Silent as Iraq Crushed Our Allies, the Kurds

With Turkey and Iran pushing them hard, Iraq's leaders move on the Kurds, and there is only silence from the U.S.

After seizing Kirkuk, Iraq’s Prime Minister Heider al-Abadi is doubling down in a bid to occupy all of Iraqi Kurdistan. He has enlisted Iraq’s neighbors, Iran and Turkey, in an insidious effort to subjugate the Iraqi Kurds. The United States barely responded to Iraq’s aggression, looking weak and irrelevant.

Ninety-three percent of Iraqi Kurds voted for independence on September 25, 2017. The referendum was supposed to set the stage for patient negotiations on a friendly divorce between Iraq and Iraqi Kurdistan. Instead Abadi issued an ultimatum and attacked. Kirkuk’s Governor Najmaldin Karim barely escaped assassins sent to kill him.

To stabilize the situation, the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) offered to freeze the results of the referendum and start a political dialogue with Baghdad on the basis of Iraq’s constitution. But instead of a ceasefire, Abadi reloaded and resumed the assault.

Yesterday, Iraqi federal forces were repulsed from two towns. Today, three border crossings were attacked. U.S. officials blithely called the firefight a “misunderstanding.” Kurds vow to defend their homeland against Iraqi aggression. They know from Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship, surrender means death.

What inspired Abadi to disavow dialogue and pursue a military solution?

Abadi’s Dawa Party relies heavily on Iran’s political backing. Iran also supports Shiite militias in Iraq called Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF). The U.S. indirectly supports the PMF; Iraq transferred sophisticated U.S. weaponry to Iranian-backed forces in violation of the Leahy Amendment. Qasem Soleimani, commander or Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, controls the PMF and calls the shots. He could remove Abadi at a moment’s notice.

Weakness is contagious. In addition to Iran, Abadi is subservient to Turkey’s President Tayyip Erdogan. Just last year, Erdogan warned Abadi: “Know your place. First know your limits.”

Abadi went to Ankara this morning. What insidious collaboration are they plotting? Will Turkey suspend oil transfers to the Port of Ceyhan, strangling Iraqi Kurdistan? Will Turkey help Iraq take over the Faysh Khabur border crossing, depriving Iraqi Kurdistan of customs revenue? Are Iraq and Turkey colluding to attack Turkish Kurds in the Qandil Mountains of northern Iraq?

Both Iran and Turkey are preying on Abadi’s weakness. Iraq’s dysfunctional government has created a gap, which allows Iran and Turkey to project power in Iraq at the expense of pro-American Kurds.

America’s silence is shameful. Not only did the U.S. betray the Kurds in Kirkuk. Now the Trump administration is turning a blind eye to Iraq’s continued aggression against the provinces of Iraqi Kurdistan. Ceding to Soleimani puts Iran in prime position in Iraq. It also positions Iran to dominate other countries in the region — Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen.

The United States must support its allies instead of trying to placate its enemies. Instead of strong principled leadership, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson issues meaningless platitudes.

Surely, U.S. officials recognize that the best way to drain the swamp of support for the Islamic State is by creating conditions of freedom. Democracy and human rights are the most effective antidotes to extremism.

Loyalty is critical between friends and allies. Abandoning Iraqi Kurdistan is more than a geopolitical blunder. It puts the U.S. on a slippery slope to defeat and irrelevance, allowing Iran and Turkey to dominate the field.

https://www.alternet.org/world/americas ... Vo.twitter

[Anthea]

Kurds in Turkey mourn losses of those in Iraq

DIYARBAKIR, Turkey — Iraqi Kurds' failed bid for independence — and their subsequent loss of Kirkuk city and other lands in that province that they had controlled for several years — left many Kurds in Turkey feeling crushed as well.

A man in the streets of predominately Kurdish Diyarbakir asked Al-Monitor recently what was happening in Kirkuk. “Last night when I saw the Hashid Shaabi [Popular Mobilization Units (PMU)] lowering the Kurdish flag [on the news], I cried until morning. Where are America and Europe, which were supposed to be supporting the Kurds?” he asked.

The Sept. 25 independence referendum, spearheaded by Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) President Massoud Barzani, passed overwhelmingly. However, not only was the result nonbinding, it inflamed the central government in Baghdad, which this month stormed Kirkuk province and quickly reclaimed about 40% of the areas the KRG had held since 2014, including oil wells, the airport and a military base.

Since then, Diyarbakir's attention has been focused almost exclusively on Kirkuk. Kurds of Diyarbakir who were galvanized by the September independence referendum process cannot understand how Kirkuk fell so easily under the central government’s authority and were shocked by reports of the PMU's swift advances.

Some reports say the KRG was betrayed by leaders of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) political party. Pavel Talabani, the son of recently deceased PUK chief Jalal Talabani, allegedly went behind Barzani's back and made a deal with the Baghdad government. Public anger instantly peaked. Many Kurds said they were sold out by their brethren and pointed to the PUK as the culprit. But there was also some anger directed against Barzani’s Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) by those who said, “OK, so the PUK ran away. Why didn’t you fight?”

The Kurds of Turkey are angry with the KDP, the PUK, the United States and Europe — with everyone involved in the developments in Iraq.

Historian and author Kadir Karagoz, who lives in Diyarbakir and follows Kurdish issues closely, is leveling his criticism at Kurdish politics in Turkey. “Kurds have lost most of their faith in Islamic brotherhood. Most of the northern Kurds [in Turkey] are upset, suspicious of and surprised by the HDP [pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party] and PKK [Kurdistan Workers Party] politics in Turkey. Northern Kurds were all for [Barzani's control of] Kirkuk, but now they are totally confused,” he told Al-Monitor.

Diyarbakir citizen Baki Karaman was also angry, mostly with Kurdish political parties. “The KRG referendum was a glimmer of hope for Kurdistan. We were told that everything was ready for the defense of Kurdistan, and that they [Kurdish leaders] would never give any concessions. But the ensuing bickering and arguments [among the Kurds] over narrow interests quickly led to disappointments among people who thought the land had been lost without any fighting. How can we expect support from America and Russia while we are so divided ourselves? We are in the Middle East, where everything can change with little warning,” he told Al-Monitor.

Before the vote, Kurdish parties established the Initiative for Support of the Independence Referendum to influence perceptions in Turkey. One of the prominent members of the initiative is Sidki Zilan, the official in charge of political affairs of the independence movement. Zilan said Kurds learned lessons from what happened. “We thus learned about the countries around us. The terror in this region is imported from Iran and Syria. … We have to get ready for tomorrow. We can’t simply fold our arms and wait,” he told Al-Monitor.

Bayram Bozyel, the deputy chair of the Kurdistan Socialist Party and a member of the initiative, is among those who are gravely disappointed. He told Al-Monitor, “We are sad, demoralized. We know Kurdish people are justified in the Kirkuk issue. On Sept. 25, the people of Kurdistan voted affirmatively for the referendum. No political power, no official opinion can override the will of the people. We will overcome our weaknesses soon."

Bozyel added, "The occupation of Kirkuk is not the work of Baghdad, but of Iran. America sees Iran as a threat in Iraq. Until [recently], Turkey felt the same. Unfortunately neither the United States nor other international powers adopted the right position against the Kirkuk attack. Their silence is also against their own interests. [The Iran-backed PMU] used the weapons the United States had given it [to fight the Islamic State] against the people of Kirkuk. Weakening Kurdistan means strengthening Iran, which is certainly a threat to the United States and Europe. The Kurds were much shaken by the loss of Kirkuk. But we should not give up. Let’s give our criticism, express our anger, but not give up hope."

Kurds living in Turkey, especially in Diyarbakir, are still trying to understand what really transpired. Some compare the events of today with what they lived through in 1966, when PUK leader Jalal Talabani abandoned the KDP and joined the ranks of the Iraqi state. Baghdad used Talabani against the KDP to deliver heavy blows to the Kurds. Other Kurds feel they are living through a repetition of the 1975 Algiers Agreement. In 1970, Kurds were fighting against Iraq with the support of the United States, which was then allied with Iran. But when Iran and Iraq made a deal in Algeria, Iran withdrew its support from the Kurds. The Kurds have always held Iran and the United States responsible for their losses.

Naturally, everyone has a different view, but one point they all agree on is that the Kurds' biggest weakness is their own disunity. For various reasons, the Kurds have never been able to raise their voices against their political parties. But today, those parties and their leaders cannot avoid charges of betrayal. Somebody will have to assume responsibility for the Kurds' monumental loss.

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/origina ... irkuk.html

[Anthea]

America walks tightrope over conflicts in Iraq and Turkey

This month, a brewing internal conflict between Iraq’s central government and its Kurdish minority burst into the open, threatening to benefit both Iran and ISIS at America’s expense. At the same time, Washington’s ties with Ankara, a longtime partner in the region, hit rock bottom following Turkey’s arrest of local employees of U.S. consulates in the country. As bad as both of these developments are, there is also an opportunity in their convergence. U.S.-Turkish cooperation could help temper the Iraqi crisis and stabilize U.S. ties with both Ankara and the Kurdish capital of Irbil.

The United States and Turkey have been drifting apart for at least five years. Disagreements over how to handle the fallout of the Arab Spring, particularly as the Syrian civil war has raged on, have turned into a deep chasm on almost every dimension of foreign and domestic policy. But arresting employees of U.S. consulates proved to be a final straw, leading the United States to suspend visa services for Turkish citizens and Turkey to reciprocate. With this spat showing no signs of abating, another crisis erupted in the Middle East as Iraqi forces, with Iranian support, moved to retake the city of Kirkuk, which had been under Kurdish control for three years, and which Kurds hoped to make part of a new, independent Kurdish state.

Here, unlike almost everything else, Washington and Ankara actually see eye to eye. Over the past decade, both the United States and Turkey cultivated close relations with Kurdish leader Masoud Barzani. For Washington, Barzani represented an important ally in the fight against ISIS, as well as in the effort to contain Iranian influence in Iraq. For Ankara, Barzani, as a conservative and cooperative Kurdish leader, was an important ally in the fight against the Kurdish separatist movement with which Turkey has been at war for decades. Both countries saw the Kurdistan Regional Government, over which Barzani presided semi-democratically, as an important island of relative stability in the region, and for Ankara in particular it has become an important economic partner.

Despite these relationships, both the United States and Turkey objected when Barzani announced a referendum for Kurdish independence, fearing the results would prove destabilizing. Their opposition failed to stop Barzani from moving ahead with the vote, and the destabilizing results are now apparent for all to see. Since Barzani rushed into the referendum without the support of his two most important foreign backers, when Baghdad chose to challenge his actions militarily, he had no one to fall back on for support. On Oct. 16, when Iraqi tanks rolled into Kirkuk as Kurdish forces withdrew, it represented a humiliating end to Barzani’s dream of Kurdish statehood.

Now, Iraqi forces are threatening to push further into Kurdish-controlled territory, acting with the backing, if not active encouragement, of Tehran. Neither the United States nor Turkey want to see Iraq become any more violent, or Iranian influence extend along Turkey’s borders. Both Washington and Ankara, therefore, have good reason to stop the advance of Iranian-backed militias and much to lose should they fail to support their longtime Kurdish partner.

Close diplomatic and military cooperation between the United States and Turkey would be the best way to support the continued viability of the Kurdistan Regional Government. It would also help keep alive the faltering U.S.-Turkish relationship. The first step would be a joint statement of support for the Kurdistan Regional Government’s territorial integrity in its post-2003 borders. Turkey could then announce that it will end the sanctions it imposed against the Kurdistan Regional Government following its referendum, a punitive measure that no longer has any necessity.

As long as Iranian-backed Iraqi troops seek to challenge the status quo in Iraq, the threat of force will inevitably be part of any negotiation over the future of the Kurdistan Regional Government. Turkish troops are already stationed in northern Iraq, while many of the air assets that the United States could bring to bear in the region are located at Incirlik airbase in Turkey. If Washington and Ankara are seen to be acting in close coordination diplomatically, the threat of joint military action will, by extension, seem all the more credible for anyone watching in Tehran.

For a longer-term solution to stabilizing the region, a new agreement will have to be negotiated between Baghdad and Irbil, one which takes into account the ever-contentious disposition of oil revenues from northern Iraqi fields. Turkey, which controls the pipeline through which this oil is currently exported, has important trump cards to play in any such negotiations. Cooperating with Turkey to mitigate the damage of the Kurdistan Regional Government referendum would be an opportunity to help check ISIS and Iran while demonstrating the continued relevance of the relationship between Washington and Ankara.

Blaise Misztal is the national security director at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

[Anthea]

BAGHDAD (AP) — The Latest on developments in Iraq

The top U.S. general in Iraq says the fallout from last month's Kurdish vote for independence is diverting resources away from the war on the Islamic State group just as the coalition is on the verge of defeating the extremists.

U.S.-backed Iraqi and Kurdish forces, who together have driven IS out of most of the country, are locked in an increasingly tense standoff.

Low-level clashes have broken out as federal forces have driven the Kurds from disputed areas, and on Thursday Iraq's prime minister rejected a Kurdish offer to "freeze" the referendum, an apparent attempt by the Kurds to save face.

Lt. Gen. Paul Funk told The Associated Press: "We don't need Iraqis killing Iraqis when we've got Daesh to kill out in the west," Daesh is another acronym for IS, which still controls territory straddling Iraq's western border with Syria.

Clashes broke out earlier this month when federal forces retook the disputed city of Kirkuk and other areas outside the autonomous Kurdish region that the Kurds had seized when IS swept across the country in 2014. Most of the Kurdish forces withdrew without a fight, but tensions remain.

Turkey's prime minister says the semi-autonomous Iraqi Kurdish region's offer to freeze the results of the referendum on independence won't redress the "devastation" the vote has caused in Iraq.

Prime Minister Binali Yildirim spoke on Thursday, a day after Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi visited Turkey to discuss possible steps against the Iraqi Kurdish leaders.

Yildirim told reporters the two sides discussed the possible opening of a border gate between Iraq and Turkey that would by bypass the Iraqi Kurdish region.

Meanwhile, Turkey's foreign minister, Mevlut Cavusoglu, described the Kurdish "freeze" offer as "insufficient" and called on Kurdish leaders to cancel the results, which overwhelmingly backed independence from Baghdad.

Turkey, which is fighting a Kurdish insurgency on its territory, strongly opposed the Iraqi Kurds moves toward independence. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Wednesday offered Turkish support for the reopening of a pipeline that would allow the central Iraqi government to export oil directly to Turkey, bypassing the Iraqi Kurdish region.

The spokesman for the U.S-led coalition says the fighting between Iraqi government and Kurdish forces has impeded the movement of coalition military equipment in both Iraq and Syria, negatively impacting the campaign against the Islamic State group.

The United States uses the border between Iraq's Kurdish region and Syria to access its Syrian allies, the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces who are battling IS.

Sporadic clashes have erupted over the past two weeks as Iraqi government forces moved to retake territory that was under federal control before IS blitzed across the country in 2014. The clashes have recently moved near the border with Syria.

Army Col. Ryan Dillon told The Associated Press on Thursday that the fighting has "negatively impacted Coalition efforts to defeat ISIS, specifically the inability to move military equipment and supplies to our partners both in Iraq and Syria."

Iran's supreme leader says he supports efforts by the Iraqi government to ensure its "unified sovereignty and territorial integrity."

That's according to a report on the official website for Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The website quoted Khamenei as making the comments during a visit on Thursday with Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi.

Khamenei also reportedly warned al-Abadi about U.S. policy toward Iraq, saying: "Be careful about Americans deceit and never trust them."

Al-Abadi reportedly replied: "We protect the unity and integrity of Iraq with high precision ... we will not allow the danger of disintegration to put our country at risk."

https://www.mydaytondailynews.com/news/ ... 8hKGvkFXK/

[Anthea]

Iraq sets deadline for Kurds to quit Turkey border post

Iraqi forces set a tight deadline Friday for Kurdish fighters to withdraw from an area on the Turkish border that is critical for oil exports, a government source told AFP.

The senior security source, asking not to be named, said Kurdish Peshmerga fighters were being given "a few hours" to pull out of the area around the Fishkhabur border post.

Clashes between the two sides had ceased "with only occasional exchanges of fire", said the source.
Iraqi forces on Thursday mounted a new assault on Kurdish fighters in the disputed oil-rich Zummar area of Nineveh province, triggering heavy artillery exchanges.

In an advance over dusty terrain with armoured vehicles, government forces recaptured villages close to the route of a strategic oil export pipeline linking the Kirkuk fields retaken from the Kurds earlier this month with the Turkish port of Ceyhan.

The Kurds shut down the pipeline during the 2014 sweep through northern and western Iraq by the Islamic State (IS) jihadist group and built their own pipeline further north.

The Fishkhabur region, at the extreme edge of autonomous Iraqi Kurdistan and where the Turkish, Iraqi and Syrian borders converge, is of strategic importance to both Baghdad and the Kurds of northern Iraq.

The Kurds have been defending the Zummar and Rabiya areas of Fishkhabur because they are used by Kurdish forces battling IS in Syria to smuggle out fuel products by tanker trucks to Turkey, according to the Iraqi source.

The UN Security Council on Thursday urged Iraq's government and Kurdish leaders to set a timetable for talks on ending their conflict triggered by a September 25 independence referendum held by the Kurds in defiance of Baghdad.

http://www.gulf-times.com/story/568964/ ... key-border

[Anthea]

Why the US can't afford to lose Iraqi Kurdistan

US relations with the Kurdistan Region of Iraq took a major blow in recent weeks. In the aftermath of the Kurdish referendum for independence, Iraq's security forces, alongside the Shia militias of the Popular Mobilisation Units (PMUs) launched an offensive against the Peshmerga in the disputed territory of Kirkuk, with US acquiescence.

On Tuesday, these forces went as far as launching an offensive on Fish-Khabur area on the Iraq-Turkey border, where Iraqi Kurdistan's most important oil hub is located. Peshmerga forces managed to repel the attack. On Thursday there were further clashes after Baghdad deployed additional forces to the area.

Highly dependent on oil for both economic and political stability, the Iraqi government naturally went after Kirkuk, a strategically vital province with estimated 9 billion barrels of oil reserves, which has been under Erbil's control since 2015. But its push to capture Fish-Khabur risks escalating the conflict into a civil war - something the US cannot afford to allow.

US officials had previously warned the KRG against holding the referendum but failed to convince the Kurdish leadership that they could broker a compromise between the KRG and Baghdad over long-standing disputes. They warned that the referendum would carry risks that the US could not control.

Kurdistan's leadership has expressed disappointment at what it perceives as US indifference and negligence, as the White House asserted that it was not going to take sides. For the general Kurdish public, Washington's acquiescence was a betrayal.

Despite Washington's decision to back Baghdad, it still needs the KRG as an ally in Iraq and the region. Without its help, it risks losing its positions in Iraq and allowing Iran to strengthen its grip on the country.
The precarious US policy in Iraq

Washington's decision to back Baghdad in its dispute with Erbil was based on its strategy to help Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar al-Abadi consolidate power and curb Iranian influence.

But by acquiescing to Baghdad's offensive on Kirkuk, the US inadvertently empowered the Iran-backed militias, which have dominated Iraq's security sphere since the 2014 collapse of the Iraqi armed forces.

The PMUs are supported by large segments of the Shia community in Iraq and will almost certainly alter the political map of the country in forthcoming elections in 2018. While in their ranks there are a number of state-aligned units that do not answer to Tehran, the PMUs are led and dominated by two Tehran-linked militias: the Badr Brigade and Ketaib Hezbollah.

The former was established by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) in the 1980s, and the latter has been designated a "terrorist" organisation by the US. Within the PMUs, there's also Asaib Ahl al-Haq, which was established and armed by Iran and which has launched countless attacks on US military personnel since 2006.

The US does not have many choices for partners in Iraq: factions within the political elite willing to work with Washington are either too weak or too insignificant. The strongest parties and factions tend to be aligned with Iran. The only strong anti-Iran faction is led by the anti-US cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. He leads the powerful Sadrist movement that has traditionally adopted a strong Iraqi nationalist discourse, but the movement is too malevolent for US purposes and is responsible for countless atrocities and attacks on American citizens.

Washington has stuck to al-Abadi, who lacks a sufficiently strong popular and political base, with the hope that Iraq's military gains against ISIL will remedy his shortcomings. But this strategy is fraught with challenges and could unravel even before the elections if his rivals continue to challenge his premiership and build on their own ascendancy.

Al-Abadi on his own cannot stand up to Iran, which is where the KRG comes in. If Washington is serious about wanting stability in Iraq, it has to repair its relations with the Kurds. To do that, it has to ensure the KRG has a stake in the Iraqi state and participates in the Baghdad government, despite recent events. Since 2003, no government has been formed without Kurdish participation.

Baghdad has suffered a credibility and legitimacy deficit because of Arab Sunni disenfranchisement and marginalisation at the hands of the ruling Shia political class. It cannot afford to also lose the Kurds, who have generally enjoyed the role of kingmaker as a consequence of the diffuse nature of power and politics in Iraq and the resulting confessional power-sharing arrangements.

If there is no Kurdish engagement to bolster al-Abadi's position, hardline Iran-aligned factions will almost certainly dominate the government and consolidate their hold on state institutions. To make such an arrangement work both in the short and long-term, equitable, just and sustained power-sharing arrangements must be firmly installed within Iraq's political system.

As it has done historically, the KRG provides the US with strategic depth in a country that is becoming increasingly dominated by actors hostile to its engagements and values. Abadi may not even be in office this time next year. The Kurds can bolster US influence in Iraq but only if Washington prevents continued advances from Baghdad aimed at putting the KRG under economic siege. If this happens, the situation could escalate into another civil war.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinio ... 21497.html

[Anthea]

Fear of retribution by Shiite militia forced thousands from home

ERBIL, Kurdistan Region – Many of those who fled the recent incursion of the Iraqi army and Shiite militia are from Kirkuk, Tuz Khurtamu and the town of Pirde. They are civilians and a mix of Kurds and Sunni Arabs.

They have now taken shelter either in Erbil or Sulaimani city.

They feared retribution from the militia forces for their political affiliation or ethnic and religious background.

Now they similarly fear return to their homes, though most report that their homes and schools have since been demolished by the Hashd al-Shaabi.

http://www.rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/27102017

[Anthea]

Militia leader: Tillerson not qualified to comment on Hashd forces

BAGHDAD, Iraq—Falih Fayyadh, a senior leader in the Iraqi Hashd al-Shaabi militia and advisor on national security says that the US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is not qualified to comment on the Hashd as they are national and legal forces.

“Those comments are rejected and Prime Minister Abadi considered them interference in Iraq’s domestic affairs,” Fayyadh said at a press conference.

“The US Secretary of State is not qualified to comment on the Iraqi Hashd al-Shaabi,” he added. “The Hashd al-Shaabi is an instrumental force and has participated in the victory over ISIS and the defeat of the enemy in all areas in the last three years.”

“That’s the pride of all Iraqis,” Fayyadh said.

Fayyadh’s remarks come following a call by Tillerson on the Iran-backed militia to leave Iraq now that the war with ISIS is winding down.

Fayyadh’s words echo a similar reaction from PM Haider Abadi who said the Hashd were Iraqis and Tillerson “had no right to them what to do,”

“The Hashd al-Shaabi is representative of the Iraqi people who answered a call from the religious authorities and began defending this land and its holy sites,” Fayyadh said.

“We do not allow anyone insult these popular institutions,” he warned.

http://www.rudaw.net/english/middleeast/iraq/271020171

[Anthea]

Peshmerga and Iraqi army meet in Mosul to negotiate possible truce

ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - Kurdish and Iraqi military officials are in a meeting in Mosul under the supervision of the international coalition to tackle a current ceasefire and the clashes of the last few days between both sides.

Former Chief of Staff of the Iraqi army Babakir Zebari, told Rudaw that both the two sides may reach a truce.

Zebari said that Erbil “has never initiated conflict, and has only repelled attacks.”

The two have most recently clashed near Kurdistan Region's borders with Turkey and Syria.

The Peshmerga beat back multiple attacks until Iraqi PM Abadi announced a 24-hour ceasefire on Friday to allow the Kurds and Iraq to work on the deployment of federal troops to the disputed territories.

Part of the meeting is likely to tackle the issue of customs and official border crossings with Turkey and Syria.

http://www.rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/281020172

[Anthea]

Iraq, Kurds negotiate peshmerga pullback

Iraqi and Kurdish commanders held talks Saturday on a withdrawal of Kurdish fighters from disputed areas after a truce was declared in clashes over a key border post, the premier's office said.

"The main task of this joint technical committee is to allow the deployment without violence of federal forces along the borders," Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi's spokesman, Saad al-Hadithi, told AFP.

"Commanders of the federal forces and of the (Kurdish) peshmerga (fighters) are meeting to allow for this redeployment in a peaceful and humane fashion," he said.

On Friday night, Abadi ordered the 24-hour ceasefire as his troops and the peshmerga faced off on the second day of an Iraqi drive to capture the vital oil export point of Fishkhabur on the Turkish frontier.

The two sides -- both armed and trained by the US -- had exchanged heavy artillery fire in the latest flare-up of a crisis sparked by a Kurdish independence vote on September 25.

Hadithi said the aim of Saturday's talks was to negotiate the return to a 2003 "blue line" restricting autonomous Iraqi Kurdistan to the three northern provinces of Arbil, Dohuk and Sulaimaniyah.

According to a Kurdish official, the US-led coalition that has backed both the Kurds and Iraqi forces in fighting the Islamic State jihadist group pushed them towards negotiations.

Since mid-October, Iraqi forces have reclaimed the entire oil-rich province of Kirkuk, stripping the Kurds of a major chunk of their oil revenues and dealing a crippling blow to their hopes of independence.

On Friday, the Iraqi military gave the Kurds an ultimatum to withdraw from the Fishkhabur border area where rival pipelines belonging to the two sides cross into Turkey.

Since the US-led invasion of 2003 and especially in the thick of a lightning advance across northern Iraq by IS in 2014, the Kurds had taken control of the territories disputed with Baghdad.

But Iraqi forces have over the past two weeks recaptured all of the disputed lands, much of its without Kurdish resistance.

Iraqi's constitution adopted during the US-led occupation of 2003-2011 provides for plebiscites in the disputed areas on their possibile incorporation in the autonomous Kurdish region.

Baghdad insists, however, the constitution provides for Iraqi federal control of the country's borders.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/ar ... lback.html

[Anthea]

Donald Trump Has Betrayed the Kurds and Iraq Will Suffer For It

Following the Kurdistan Region’s defeat of the Islamic State militant group (ISIS), we moved quickly to secure our own rights in an independence referendum last month. We seized the opportunity to solidify our role as a stable partner for peace for America and the rest of the world. Yet in a tragic turn of events, our future is now gravely threatened by aggression from our neighbors—and the world’s indifference to our fate.

If we lose so does America and the free world and all is not well on the front line we hold dividing civilization from the savagery of radical Islamic terrorism.

Following our vote for independence, Iraqi and regional backlash escalated with closure of our airspace, an end to financial transactions and arrest warrants for our officials. Emboldened by the total lack of international response, Iraq and Iran’s aggression culminated with an invasion of our territory by the Iraqi Army and their Iranian-backed militant counterparts. These militants include terror-designated groups such as Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC).

These attacks on all fronts, from Sinjar to Kirkuk to Khanaqin, took us by surprise. It was not a complete surprise to the United States, however, which knew the attack was imminent but failed to provide us with a warning or apply adequate pressure to prevent it. Our weakness was partly due to some of our political and military leaders having made a desperate deal with Iran and Iraq, and who retreated their forces without a fight. Had the West provided us with sufficient support, we would not be as susceptible to such lethal manipulation by our common enemies.

When President Donald J. Trump was elected, Kurds were buoyed with new hope. Initially positive signals from his administration prompted babies and businesses to be named after America’s new president.

This support began to wane with President Trump’s opposition to our independence referendum and then turned to outrage when the United States stood by as our lines collapsed under the Iraqi assault. America's policy of not having a policy is all the more confusing, as President Trump only one week ago committed to decertifying the Iran deal and listing the IRGC as a terror organization.

Ironically, the IRGC’s response to this new designation was to use state-of-the-art American weaponry, including M1 Abrams tanks, to attack a key ally—us. President Trump stated that he cannot “take sides,” but allowing your weapons to fall into the hands of terrorists and then giving them free reign to attempt a genocide on our people is certainly far from neutrality.

As these militants burn and tread on America’s flag, invade with American weapons, and behead our Peshmerga, there are crickets. When a football player takes a knee, there is pandemonium.

Comparing the international outrage over our referendum to their deafening silence as we are now attacked by terrorists in revenge, we wonder who will be their partner in destroying the latest monster created by this fatally-flawed foreign policy.

Fortunately, in the U.S. Congress, we have a number of prominent allies on both sides of the aisle, from Rep. Trent Franks to Sen. Chuck Schumer. We just don’t understand why President Trump decided to bet on Iranian-controlled Baghdad, and abandon us to our own fate.

The consequences of this policy will have far-reaching ramifications. Though Syria’s Kurds are a separate entity, we can only wonder what they must think as they see our betrayal, and as their immediate usefulness to the coalition wanes. Curiously, the U.S. recently opposed elections in the Syrian Kurdish enclave, but it is hard to envision the U.S. actively opposing elections held by Assad or the Ayatollah. In the name of unity for Syria, would America also tolerate Iranian-supported militants assaulting the Kurds there?

There appears to be no limit to the Western appetite for dumping cash into the lost cause of Iraq, but they never made comparable investments in our forces. Though we appreciate the $22 million in direct aid for our Peshmerga, it's a paltry sum compared to the $500 million debacle America spent training just several Syrian rebels in a failed unit known as “Division 30.”

While ISIS was flush with more than 2,300 captured American Hummers that were then up-armored and laden with explosives—transforming them into deadly suicide bombs—we were never even provided with sufficient munitions to engage these threats. Baghdad would never approve of direct shipments of weapons or equipment to us, and would withhold our share.

On the battlefront, we lost nearly 2,000 Peshmerga and saw more than 9,000 wounded. Our sacrifices only began there.

The Peshmerga were also the first to welcome war-weary refugees to our Region, which included Yazidi victims of sexual enslavement, Christians who faced crucifixion, and homosexuals who are thrown from rooftops. Unlike some parts of the world, we never expressed misgivings about welcoming some two million refugees from Iraq and Syria’s civil wars—despite refugees now comprising a third of our population.

The last week's Iraqi and Iranian attacks on our territory resulted in 180,000 new displaced persons—and counting. We have yet to ever receive our share of national healthcare and humanitarian resources from Baghdad, and we receive mere token support from the international community.

Still, our Peshmerga will always remain committed to fighting terrorism regardless of the political climate. It is simply much more daunting for them to continue this fight on behalf of Western civilization, knowing that the West will allow them to be denied some of the most basic rights they enjoy.

Our allies have sold out the Kurdistan Region, in a last-ditch effort to win over an Iraqi central government that itself was sold out to Iran long ago, and which will never return to the arms of the West. No amount of American tax dollars or lives will ever make Iraq a united, democratic and stable ally for the civilized world—it’s time to give up on that dream, and to believe in ours for a change.

For America and the West to stand for freedom, they have no other choice than to stand with us. Some of these words are tough medicine for our allies, but without a course correction, the next disaster in Iraq is just around the corner.

Maj. Gen. Aziz Weysi Bani is chief commander of the Zerevani Peshmerga forces, and plays a central role in leading Kurdish operations.

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-ha ... -it-694575

[Anthea]

The stops and starts for Kurdish independence

After Iraqi Kurds held an independence referendum last month, the government in Baghdad — which deemed the vote unconstitutional — sent in troops. It wasn't the first time Kurds have pushed toward independence, only to be beaten.

Why it matters: It's likely not the last time, either. The complicated history behind the regional struggle spans across decades and borders, and Kurdish support for independence are coming to a head, not just in Iraq, but in neighboring countries as well.

Spread between four states

The 1923 Treaty of Lausanne left the Kurdish population split between states.

There are over 2 million Kurds in Syria, 5 million in Iraq, 5 million in Iran, and 18 million in Turkey, per The Economist. (we believe the figures to be far higher)

Between 1991 and 2003, the U.S., Turkey, and Iran pressured Iraqi Kurds to cease calls for independence, fearing the interest would spread throughout the region and cause political chaos. Even now…

Turkey fears such cascading disruption and has battled its own Kurdish population (in particular the PKK, which it regards as a terrorist organization) for decades.

Although Iran condemned Iraqi Kurds' referendum, its Kurdish population celebrated in the streets, and calls for independence are growing there.

Syria, too, rejected the independence vote in Iraq, and has opposed its own Kurdish population's moves towards independence, which bubbled up in 2011.

Although the U.S. opposed last month's referendum, it played a large role in getting Kurdish status recognized in the Iraqi constitution in the early 2000s. The U.S. draws a line at independence though, in part because it depends on Iraq and Turkey in the anti-ISIS fight.

An Iraqi Kurdistan now?

Iraqi Kurdistan operates has operated semi-autonomously from Iraq's central government, with its own military, government, and foreign policy — it's the closest thing to a Kurdish state in recent decades. That status came as a result of the 2003 U.S. invasion, which toppled Saddam Hussein (who had previously committed genocide against Iraqi's Kurds). The new government formalized the Kurdish semi-autonomous government.

Clashes since the independence vote this fall: Following the referendum, Prime Minister Haidar al-Abadi said sending in troops to Kirkuk, a region Kurds have held since 2014, was necessary to "protect the unity" of the country. Instead of statehood, the Kurds got a conflict with the potential to erupt into civil war. U.S. Colonel Ryan Dillon said Friday the Kurds and Iraqis had almost reached a cease-fire deal.

The stops and starts for independence

After the Treaty of Lausanne, an independent Kurdish state was established in Iran, which survived for 2 years with Soviet support.

Iraq jailed Kurdish nationalists in the 1940s.

The first Kurdish-Iraqi war erupted in 1961 and lasted until 1970, with the Kurdish Peshmerga soldiers receiving support from Iran. This conflict ended in an agreement that allowed Kurds de facto autonomy and recognized Kurdish as an official language.

But the agreement fell apart over disputes about territorial ownership of oil-rich Kirkuk, and Iran didn't aid the Kurds due to a deal with Iraq.

Between 1968-1989 Iraq forcibly evacuated Kurds to settlements in the north.

In 1988, Saddam responded to an uprising with executions and poison gas attacks.

In 1991, the Kurds rose up again, and Saddam put them down again. International coalition forces intervened to provide safe havens for the Kurds, and the Kurds set up a government with de facto autonomy.

The 2003 U.S. invasion toppled Saddam and led to Kurdistan receiving recognition as a federal entity.

As Iraqi forces fell to ISIS in 2014, Kurds seized oil-rich Kirkuk, which is technically outside of its borders.

https://www.axios.com/who-are-the-kurds-2500794570.html

[Anthea]

KRG customs, borders operate by federal law, attacks unconstitutional

Article 117 of the Iraqi constitution recognizes the Kurdistan Region and its authority as a federal region. Article 141 of the same constitution recognizes the work and decisions of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) since its foundation in 1992.

The Kurdistan Region established its customs department by a decision from the KRG Finance Ministry and its charter is in line with Iraq’s customs law. This means KRG’s customs meet Article 110 of the Iraqi constitution and the Kurdistan Region has the same customs regulation as the rest of Iraq.

Management of customs is one of shared authority, as stipulated in Article 114, meaning the federal government and KRG manage together, but Article 115 emphasizes that in case of disputes between federal and regional laws, KRG laws will have the upper hand.

Iraq’s House of Representatives passed a law on border crossings points as Law no. 30 by a majority in 2016. Kurdish MPs opposed this move because it treated the Kurdistan Region as a province and the text of the law suited a country of a central government not a federal one as Iraq is. The priority here still remains with the KRG Ministry of Finance, according to Iraq’s own Article 115.

Article 112 also gives the KRG the right to amend how to implement the federal law, which means the federal law will not be put into practice unless passed by the Kurdish parliament because the border crossings and customs are the duties of the regional government.

Therefore what Iraq is asking for—taking control of the border crossings—is a blatant violation of the constitution. The KRG has done nothing to violate the federal law. Its customs zones and border crossings are run according to federal rules and protected by border service authorities who are on the federal government payroll. Until Baghdad cut Kurdistan Region’s budget, customs revenues were sent to the central government.

If the federal court acts on the constitution it will then have to denounce the attacks by the army and Hashd al-Shaabi on the border crossings and their demand of direct rule as unconstitutional.

Article 9 of the constitution reiterates that the armed forces must not interfere in politics or be used to oppress the people of Iraq. But what the Hashd al-Shaabi do today in the name of imposing federal rule and their attempt to take border crossings is against the entire constitution and international law. In their operations backed by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, they have committed crimes against humanity, random killings, burning people’s property, forced displacement, sexual abuse and uprooting more than 150,000 people.

Imposing federal authority here is senseless because this region has been a stable region and under federal regulation. On the contrary, it’s attacks and harassment by the army and Hashd al-Shaabi that has brought instability to the region.

http://www.rudaw.net/english/analysis/28102017

[Anthea]

In Iraq-Kurd talks, final agreement pending Kurdish response: Iraqi general

Peshmerga and Iraqi officials have reached agreements on some points but others are still pending as a 24-hour ceasefire draws to a close.

In a meeting of Kurdish and Iraqi military officials on Saturday, the Iraqis demanded Kurds accept deployment of federal forces to disputed areas and international borders and for the Peshmerga to come under federal control, Rudaw has learned from an Iraqi source.

The two sides met on Saturday after Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi announced a 24-hour ceasefire Friday evening. Kurds went into the meeting hoping to reach a truce. A spokesperson of Abadi said the main goal was to “allow the deployment without violence of federal forces along the borders.”

After the meeting, the chief of staff of the Iraqi army said they reached a mutual understanding with the Peshmerga delegation on some matters but are waiting for the Kurds to respond for a final agreement.

“We have reached a mutual understanding on some points,” said General Othman al-Ghanimi. “But the definitive solution is in the hands of the visiting [Kurdish] delegation.”

The Kurdish delegation has returned to the Kurdistan Region for consultation and will inform the Iraqis of their position by phone, he said.

He added that there is a 24-ceasefire in place and they will take a different position if the two sides cannot reach an agreement.

The meeting was held on midday Saturday in Mosul and it lasted a few hours. The Peshmerga delegation included acting Peshmerga Minister Karim Shingali, commander of Peshmerga’s unit 70 forces Jaafar Sheikh Mustafa, Zeravani commander Aziz Waisi, commander of Makhmour front Sirwan Barzani, and Peshmerga chief of staff Jamal Imniki.

Firsat Sofi, a member of the Kurdistan Regional parliament and legal expert, writing today in Rudaw stated that the Kurdistan Regional Government operates as a federally-recognized region under the constitution.

Iraq taking control of the border crossings is a “blatant violation of the constitution,” he stated, as is using armed forces to resolve a political dispute.

http://www.rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/281020176