Monday, August 9, 2010

Big Peace Promotes The Idea Of Vioence Against Turkey, Syria, And Iran To Secure Kurdish Independence - Excludes Christian Armenia

I thought this was pretty interesting - Big Peace put up a post mentioning a recent World Affairs article by Alexander Benard and J.P. Schnapper-Sasteras that touted the possibilities of the strength and autonomy of the Kurds and how they relate to the stability of Iraq as a whole.  The only problem I had with the Big Peace post is that it seemed to imply that military action was needed to secure the Kurdish regions -the World Affairs article mainly discussed the Kurds in relation to Iraq, but it seems that the summary on Big Peace implied that America needed to support the region militarily in order to protect economic interests in the region.

Big Peace had written the following (included is the picture they had displayed on their website):
President Obama announced Monday that American troops in Iraq will be reduced from 144,000 to 50,000 by the end of this month and that a complete withdrawal will occur by the end of 2011. It still is not clear how the United States will grapple with the Iraqi democracy’s significant instability.

Iraq’s democracy has been controversial from the beginning. However, between the war in Afghanistan and the upcoming midterms we may overlook a critical issue in the quest for a lasting, peaceful Iraq. That critical issue is Kurdistan...

Kurdistan has the potential to be either an enormous asset in Iraqi stability or a constant source of trouble. Kurdish-Arab disputes over control of oil-rich regions and an increased Kurdish nationalism are cause for concern, along with leading Kurdish political families who have been struggling to maintain their own power and may ultimately reject any long term democratic solution.

Recommendations for US policymakers, from encouraging Turkey’s trade with the Kurdish region to opening a consulate in the Kurdish capital, are discussed. Each policy is diplomatic, but would have a greater liklihood of success if combined with military presence.
When I had read this summary of the World Affairs article, I had gotten the impression that Big Peace was supporting military action in Turkey, Iran, and Syria - popular targets for the chicken hawks on the right - by insisting that diplomatic success would require a "military presence."  It is important to note that the map illustrates that Kurdistan stretches into parts of Armenia as well - a Christian nation.

According to the World Affairs article, Kurdistan is "situated in the northern part of the country and bordering Turkey, Iran, and Syria" and that "it would, of course, be unreasonable to expect the Kurds to simply forget about the past campaigns waged against them—not only by Iraq, but also by Turkey and, to some extent, Iran and Syria."

Basically, it sounds as if Big Peace is encouraging military action to secure territory from Turkey, Iran, and Syria (not Armenia) to form an independent Kurdish region to stabilize Iraq.  Benard and Schnapper-Casteras wrote that "Washington might have to privately reassure Ankara that this does not mean that America endorses Kurdish separatism," even though it has been rumored that America had supported the Kurdistan Workers' Party in an attempt to strategically alter the region.

Isn't it ironic that Big Peace seems to encourage violent action?  This isn't the first time either - in their short time in existence, The Midnight Review had pointed out that the Breitbart site has pushed a strong anti-Islamic agenda, and recently encouraged their "pipehitters" to assault the staff of Wikileaks for their recent release of thousands of classified military documents.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please share your thoughts and experiences in relation to this post. Remember to be respectful in your posting. Comments that that are deemed inappropriate will be deleted.