Background to the Kurdish Struggle and the American Betrayal in 1963
The
betrayal of the Kurds of Syria by Donald Trump and the United States is only
the latest such betrayal. After having provided the foot soldiers in the fight
against ISIS, losing 11,000 fighters in the process, Donald Trump has
unceremoniously betrayed them to the Turkish dictator Recep Erdogan, whose forces
have been fighting an undeclared war in Turkish Kurdistan since the breakdown
of a ceasefire in July 2015. In essence there have been a continuing series of
wars against the Kurds of Turkey since
1978.
 |
| The destruction of Cizre in Turkish Kurdistan is similar to Israel's destruction in Gaza |
Turkish
armed forces, which we should not forget are an integral part of NATO, have
laid waste to substantial parts of the main Kurdish cities of Diyarbakır, Şırnak,
Mardin, Cizre, Nusaybin, and Yüksekova. See Blood
on Erdoğan’s hands and Palestinian
solidarity cannot ignore the oppression of the Kurds in Turkey
In
1975 the Algiers Agreement between the Shah of Iran and the Iraqi Baathists was
the latest betrayal when the Iranian state, at the behest of the United States agreed
to withdraw support for the Kurdish fight against the Iraqi state.
During
the Iran-Iraq war a genocidal war was waged by Saddam Hussein against Iraqi
Kurdistan. Hundreds of villages were destroyed in Operation Al-Anfil. The most
infamous attack was that on Halabja when
some 5,000 Kurds were murdered with mustard gas and nerve agents after the town
fell to the Iranian army.
 |
| Kurdish women in the Peoples Fighting Units are unique in the Middle East |
At
the time the West poured scorn on the suggestion that the massacre had taken
place because the West supported Iraq against Iran. Indeed the West had
supplied these chemical weapons, which were the later pretext for the invasion
of Iraq in 2003, to the Batthist regime.
It
would appear that the PYD and SDF have reached an agreement with Syria’s Assad
regime which will allow Syrian troops enter Kurdistan in order to prevent the
Turkish invasion. It is a bitter pill to swallow. The Kurds go from the frying
pan into the fire given the bloody record of Assad.
Below
is an article by Jabra Nicol in Matzpen, the magazine of the Socialist
Organisation in Israel on the background to the fighting with the Iraqi army
commanded by the Baathists.
Why
the Kurds Should Be Supported ‒ by A. Sa’id (Jabra Nicola)
October
10, 1963
[This is a translation of an article that was published in
Hebrew in Matzpen no. 11, October 1963]
The
bloodshed in Iraqi Kurdistan is still ongoing; the bloody and terrorist regime
of the Ba’ath party has mobilised two-thirds of the Iraqi army – three out of
five divisions – with half of its armoured force, along with heavy artillery
and jet aircraft, in its dirty war against the Kurdish people fighting for its
freedom.
 |
| Turkey's Destruction in Cizre matches Israel's in Gaza |
This
dirty war began back at the time of Qassem’s rule in 1961.
The
Kurdish people is one of the most ancient peoples in western Asia. For more
than 5,000 years, it has inhabited a territory known as Kurdistan, at present
divided between Turkey, Persia, Iraq, Soviet Armenia and Syria. As early as
1639, Kurdistan was partitioned between the Ottoman Empire and Persia; and
after World War I, it was re-partitioned by the imperialists. At present there
are two million Kurds in Iraqi Kurdistan, two million in Iran, another two
million in Turkey, more than half a million in Syria and close to 15,000 in the
Soviet Union.
These
partitions, as well as other intrigues of imperialism in westernern Asia,
delayed the national development of the Kurdish people and prevented its
independence. The Kurdish people’s struggle for independence and national unification
– the unification of Kurdistan – began at the end of the last [19th] century
and culminated after the First World War. Since the beginning of the present
[20th] century, the Kurdish people has risen about ten times against its
enslavers. In 1919, it rose up under the leadership of Sheikh Mahmoud; and
after a long struggle, English imperialism managed to suppress this uprising in
blood and fire. Under the pressure of the Kurdish people’s struggle, British
imperialism was forced in 1922 to recognise the right of Kurdish people, and
with the consent of the Iraqi government at that time, an independent Kurdish
government was established, whose capital was Al Suleimania. But soon Great
Britain reneged on its obligations, reconquered the Kurdish territory and
overthrew the young state.
In
1929, the Kurdish people rose again, and then once more in 1931. This latter
uprising continued until 1942, and in 1943 the Kurds again rose up in Iraq, led
by Mullah Mustafa al-Barzani, but the uprising failed and Barzani had to flee
with a large number of his supporters and members of his tribe to Iranian
Kurdistan. There they took part in a new uprising, leading to the declaration
of an independent Kurdish republic. But the Iranian government soon managed to
suppress the uprising and put an end to the Kurdish Republic. Again Barzani had
to flee with members of his tribe. The United States having refused to grant
him asylum, he waged fierce battles with the Turkish, Iranian and Iraqi armies
and succeeded to break through the encirclement and reach the Soviet Union. Of
the two thousand fighters, only 650 arrived in the Soviet Union, where they
remained until the July 14 [1958] revolution in Iraq.
This
revolution in Iraq promised the Kurdish people equal rights. The Provisional
Constitution promulgated following the revolution stated that the Iraqi
Republic was “a partnership between the Arabs and the Kurds”. The freedom
fighters led by Mustafa Barzani, exiled in the Soviet Union, returned to Iraq,
and the Kurdish people showed willingness to assist in building the new regime.
 |
| Jihadist fighters from the so-called Syrian National Army fight alongside the Turkish army |
When
Qassem turned to the right, breaking with the forces of the Iraqi left, he also
broke with the Kurds and pursued a policy of brutal national repression against
the Kurdish people. From late 1960, the Iraqi government began supporting the
landlords and the rest of the Kurdish reactionary forces in their war against
the Kurdish peasants and progressive forces. Moreover, the government
encouraged the reactionary press in Baghdad to raise the chauvinist slogan of
Kurdish assimilation. Even the word “Kurdistan” was banned and the territory
was called “Northern Iraq”. The Kurdish people have been denied the right to
study in their national language and to elect their representatives to local
and central government institutions.
The
Kurdish masses are victims of poverty, exploitation, ignorance and disease;
they are discriminated against in all areas of life: political, economic and
cultural. Iraqi Kurdistan has only one primary school for every 3,500 residents
and a high school for every 57,000. There are only 685 books in the Kurdish
language in all Iraqi public libraries.
When
the Kurdish people were forced to revolt against this oppression, the Qassem
government sent the army against them, in the name of “the rule of law and
order”.
The
Iraqi Communist Party, instead of raising the slogan of self-determination for
the Kurdish people, supported the Kurdish people’s rights in very general and
vague terms, but on the other hand regarded the slogan of separation and the
establishment of an independent Kurdish state as an “imperialist plot”. In
March 1962, an article appeared on the events in Iraqi Kurdistan in The
Problems of Peace and Socialism – the journal of the World Communist Movement
– stating:
“The agents of CENTO [the pro-westernern Baghdad Pact] and oil companies have taken advantage of the situation and, relying on British forces in Kuwait, have fomented an armed rebellion against the Iraqi state under the slogans of ‘Defense of Barzani’ and the establishment of a ‘Kurdish State’. They want to carry out the old plan of isolating the northern regions and annexing them to Iran (that is, to CENTO) and, as the Communist Party has rightly argued, this activity, which is part of the general imperialist policy in the Middle East, has created a serious and dangerous situation in Iraq.”
Thus,
instead of supporting the Kurdish uprising, the Iraqi Communist Party contented
itself with “calling on the Qassem government to resolve the crisis in northern
Iraq peacefully” and “in a way that will strengthen the unity of the Iraqi
people against the intrigue of imperialism and reaction.”
This
opportunistic position of the Iraqi Communist Party was an integral part of its
general policy, which was based on support for the Qassem’s regime and resolute
opposition to Arab national unification. Accordingly, it saw the Kurdish
uprising on the one hand as weakening Qassem’s rule, and on the other hand it
viewed the separation of Kurdistan as weakening the Iraqi republic and pushing
Iraq into Arab unification, because it would be very difficult for Iraq to
remain economically and politically independent if it only kept the Arab part
of its territory.
Due
to this opportunistic policy, we are witnessing the current tragic situation in
the anti-imperialist liberation movement in western Asia, a clash between two
anti-imperialist nationalist movements – the Arab and Kurdish movements, both
of which are integral to the general revolution of the colonial peoples.
Recognising
the right to self-determination of the Kurdish people and establishing an
independent Kurdish state would not in any way be detrimental to the Arab
liberation movement; on the contrary, it would help this movement as well as
the [anti]colonial revolution in general. Indeed, an independent Kurdish state
in Iraqi Kurdistan could become a centre and lever for the entire Kurdish
national movement in Iran and Turkey, both of which are members of CENTO; And
this would be an immense revolutionary force against the main imperialist base
in western Asia. On the other hand, it would help Arab national unification,
which is at present one of the major problems of the Arab national liberation
movement.
With
the change in the political situation in Iraq following the Ba’athist coup, the
Iraqi Communist Party does now support the Kurdish uprising and many of the
communist Arab officers actively participate in battles together with the Kurds;
but it still does not raise the slogan “right of self-determination up to
separation” for the Kurdish people. And the Soviet Union supports in its press
and speeches the Kurdish uprising, but on the other hand Soviet aid is still
flowing to the Iraqi government and Aref ’s armies are fighting against the
Kurdish people using Soviet weapons.
The
Kurdish national liberation movement, like any other national liberation
movement, is not without internal class contradictions, reflected in different
political and ideological currents. The danger for the Arab national liberation
movement and the colonial revolution in general does not, therefore, lie in
secession of Iraqi Kurdistan and establishment of an independent Kurdish state,
but in the strengthening of feudal and bourgeois forces in the Kurdish
movement, which tend by their very class nature to link with imperialism. On
the other hand, increasing the power of the masses and proletarian hegemony
within the Kurdish liberation movement could be a major influence on the
national and social liberation movement within Iraq as a whole.
Here
in Israel there has recently begun to be heard from various circles a voice of
support and identification with the Kurdish people’s struggle in Iraq, but the
rationale for this support is questionable and dangerous. Those circles,
notwithstanding their political differences on other topics, view the Kurdish
people’s struggle as an anti-Arab factor that weakens the Arabs and they use it
as a pretext for fostering anti-Arab chauvinist sentiment and intensifying
anti-Arab propaganda. Even circles purporting to be against the existing regime
in Israel and for cooperation between the peoples of the region, such as [Uri
Avnery’s] Ha’olam Hazeh, call for support for the Kurdish rebellion
because it “opens a second front against our enemies” (the Arabs). They see the
Kurdish movement as ally, being a non-Arab counterweight “within the region,
most of whose inhabitants are Arabs”.
We
too side with the Kurdish uprising in Iraq and call for supporting it, but for
entirely different reasons. We see no contradiction between the Arab and
Kurdish national and social liberation movements, but on the contrary: we see
both as mutually complementary, and both as an integral part of the colonial
revolution. The Kurdish uprising in Iraq is not a rebellion against the Arab
masses, who are also fighting for their freedom, but is directed against the
forces that oppress the Arab and Kurds alike. Every success of the Kurdish
people in its current struggle is, at the same time, a success of the forces
fighting against the bloody and terrorist regime that rules Iraq today. Support
for the Kurdish uprising cannot be founded on the current Israeli policy – of
cooperation with imperialism against the liberation movement of the colonial
peoples – but on cooperation with the colonial movement as a whole against
imperialism. If we have to look for allies in the region, we cannot find an
ally in one liberation movement against another. The true allies of the Israeli
masses are all the liberation movements in the region, the entire colonial
anti-imperialist movement.
The
Kurdish liberation movement, the uprising of the Kurdish people, was a major
factor in overthrowing the regime of Nuri al-Sa’id, followed by that of Qassem.
The current Kurdish rebellion will also be one of the most important factors in
overthrowing Aref’s bloody regime. But the Kurdish liberation movement on its
own cannot do so, and cannot bring liberation to the Kurdish people without
close cooperation with all the anti-imperialist forces fighting against the
current regime in Iraq.
