out of life's school of war:

[berxwedan]

What with the "confederation" doesn't have a base in reality?

Someone with a brain would've checked what "confederation" means instead of claiming that "nobody knows what it is".

Check this out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederation
(Please look under "List of entities considered to be confederations" and claim again that it doesn't have a "base in reality".)

And then check this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Confederation

"The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, commonly known as the Articles of Confederation, formed the first governing document of the United States of America. They combined the colonies of the American Revolutionary War into a loose confederation."

As I recall, the "American Revolutionary War" that was fought by the confederation, kicked out the English and paved way to the independence of America.

You should take Ocalan more seriously. It's not "tactics within tactics" and it's not a "KDP vs. PKK" issue either. You think that when Kurdistan TV shows "Kurdish intellectual circles in Turkey", this means that PKK is over? Name these "heavy" intellectuals for me.

(I like how you say "Turkey", when you should've maybe said "northern Kurdistan", which is the WHOLE point with "NORTHERNIRAQ.INFO", duh.. And "KDP Iraq"? Call it "KDP-Bashur" instead.)

[Diri]

Hey - Berxwedan - Whats up man???

You sound like a blown up baloon as in arrogant... Maybe you should be a bit more friendly in your comments???

We have a friendly and good atmosphere at this forum - wouldn't wanna change that for Kurds fighting eachother over what party is right and what is not...

Btw.. Osman even called you guys "Turkish MIT" because of your systematic antipropaganda against PKK. Now THAT was something.. Apparently, he even has proof of that. It's a shame that you can't read Kurdish, or I would've asked you to read the articles on http://www.yndk.com..

This is typical thing for a prty leader to say just to crush all opposition against his style of leading... So everybody that dares to disagree with MR APO's ideas is a MIT??? What a dumb thing to say!
Doesn't make much friends for you does it???
And systematic my ass - we are just saying our oppinion when it pleases us - like ALL humanbeings are entitled to in a FREE society and a FREE and DEMOCRATIC party... it is HEALTHY...

Now THAT was something..

You are realy eating in on this bullshit, ha?

And as for:

It's a shame that you can't read Kurdish, or I would've asked you to read the articles on http://www.yndk.com..

How arrogant that sounds - mayeb you should ask before making your judgement??? I do read Kurdish and I bet a lot of other people here can read Kurdish... Some read the Arabic script and some the Latin script...
No need to be so arrogant... We are not your enemies...

And that link doesn't work--- Or else I would have had a look at the site...

SILAV U REZ

(In Turkish, that would be "Selamlar ve Saygilar", just like KKK would be KA-KA-KA..

Just for your information it is written "Silaw û rêz" and as for the "KKK"- in English it is pronounced "KE KE KE" and in Kurdish "KÊ KÊ KÊ"...

[Nistiman]

Welcome Berxwedan,

I smiled when I read your post - it wasn't the contents that me smile, naturally, but rather how quickly you came to "correct" my so-called anti-PKK propaganda.

I don't blame the fact that you write so arrogantly - who wouldn't if they thought they had all the answers?

The Turkish Mit stuff was a bit much, but this isn't the first time you have made accusations against me rather than what I wrote about. But, had I been a member of the god-for saken club I would have taken pride that I were doing it willingly rather than being at their service and promoting their cause unwittingly. [And if you are so concerned that I am a Turkish Mit, send me a PM...]

And about confederation -- I think it is a grand idea, but described by Abdullah Ocalan, it is a joke.

A confederation is not a "PARTY" but a gathering of organizations (KOMA KOMELEN) for a "mutual support" or "common action" (KURDISTAN).

Quote by Berxwedan

But, you fail to expand on what "KURDISTAN" means in the above definition. In Ocalan's idea of confederation the GOAL IS NOT KURDISTAN as any normal person would understand it!!!!

The model of the United Nations based on nation states is not working. The nation state is an obstacle to its development.

Democratic confederalism of Kurdistan is not a state system, but a democratic system of the people without a state.

Democratic confederalism is the expression for the democratic unity of the Kurds who are spread in four countries and scattered throughout the world. It views the tendency to create a nation state based on nationalism as a continuation of an outdated understanding of the nation state.

C'mon Berxwedan. Don't sell this to me. IF the nation state is so damn outdated, Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria should "confederate" THEN tell me that the Kurds should follow suit. NO, no, that would be unfair to those lovely nation states.

Everyone else will have a nation state and the Kurds will dream nicely about confederation and prevent Southern Kurdistan from establishing a nation state.

That is Ocalan's bottom line and it disgusts me.

[Diri]

Nishtîman wrote:

Everyone else will have a nation state and the Kurds will dream nicely about confederation and prevent Southern Kurdistan from establishing a nation state.

That is Ocalan's bottom line and it disgusts me.

You hit the nail there my brother... the problem with APO is that EITHER HE has to be the PRESIDENT of Kurdistan OR there will be NO KURDISTAN!


I am SO disguisted each time I see one of those meaningless programs on ROJ TV - where the MAIN point is to gloryfy that man and people ONLY call to say "bijî serok Apo... " And then they ALWAYS somehow manage to say "Silawan bo gêrîlayên serê chiya, yên binê chiya, yên ser dara û yên di nav chema..."... SOME PEOPLE NEED A REALITY CHECK - APO DOESN'T SUPPORT THE GÊRÎLA! HE SAYS: Lets live as ONE nation (Tukish) with Turkey!

[berxwedan]

Nistiman:

Well, thanks to your link to DozaMe.org here on NorthernIraq.info, it managed to show up on the "referer list". I just clicked it out of curiosity and saw your post.


You assume too much Nistiman. You panic before the ideas of Ocalan. Anything that comes from him is 'bad' according to you. In fact, I know that you will even be against an independent Kurdish state, if it was proposed by Ocalan.

Actually, I would LIKE to think that you "assume" and that you "panic", but I also know that this is not the case, that you are very well aware of the situation, that you know exactly what's going on, but that you have a different ideological inclination, and that you now have an agenda and that you are on a 'crusade', a holy mission to smear everything that has anything to do with the Apoist movement.

Don't say that I'm wrong. We knew this long before Osman Ocalan went out and said "they don't have any other agenda than being anti-PKK". This is his official reason for leaving PWD.

You say:

But, you fail to expand on what "KURDISTAN" means in the above definition. In Ocalan's idea of confederation the GOAL IS NOT KURDISTAN as any normal person would understand it!!!!

KURDISTAN itself is the name of the area where the Kurds live as a nation. Kurdistan's Democratic Confederation, is a Democratic Confederation IN Kurdistan.

This is maybe where we differ. You talk about a "Kurdistan" as if it didn't exist and as if it wouldn't exist until somebody "reaches it". Kurdistan is nothing you can REACH, it is already there. A STATE is something you can reach. A "state" itself is an "administration" that rules over people in the AREA of Kurdistan.

And what is it you don't understand with: "The model of the United Nations based on nation states"? What is the United Nations? It is a confederation of states with a "security council" in which a very few countries have veto. (We could even call it "FORCED" confederation.) It is a "status quo"-ish administration that emerged after the Second World War and in which the "winners" have a say. The winners of the Second World War decided to rule over everybody else with the help of veto's in the security council. The "Status Quo"-ish property of the council can be seen with the division of "West" vs. "East". For every important issue, they cancel each others resolutions in favour of a resolution that is nothing more than a new "Status Quo". And wasn't this what USA was complaining about before the war in Iraq? That the other members of the council tried to maintain the status quo? Is this a model that works?

But, we are realistic. We don't say "Middle Eastern Federation" and we don't say "Communism". We accept the order as it is right now.

What we say is KURDISTAN'S Democratic Confederation. Again: which is a Democratic Confederation that is based in KURDISTAN. What is Kurdistan? It is where a majority of the inhabitants see themselves as Kurds. Which means that we are on our way of "loosing" places like Elazig, Erzurum, Erzincan, Sivas, Gaziantep and so on.. The Kirkuk-issue is the same. If there is no majority of inhabitants that see themselves as Kurds in Kirkuk, then we have lost it. It is no longer "KURDISTAN".

I would like to repeat myself. KURDISTAN is not something you can REACH. It is already there. What you want to reach is an administration based on a "United Nations Model" of a STATE. Which is basically a state that have to be recognized by the United Nations, WHICH WILL NEVER HAPPEN in the case of Kurdistan. Forget this.

So what are you going to do? You have to do something. We have to impose OUR will on occupying forces somehow. We can't achieve this if we don't have control over the "administration". In northern Kurdistan's case, a confederation of workers/teachers/etc unions, political parties, NGO's, media, under the banner of Kurdistan's Democratic Confederation, WILL impose its will on the Turkish STATE (which is a different administration).

In the "clashes of nations", you don't have to have a "STATE" as an administration to play the game. You can seek a "state" as an administration, but that is much harder to achieve, because you are COMPETING with an administration that is already recognized. You can try to grab a piece from that administration, with the help of others, but that will not be free. No one does favours like that anymore. Especially not USA. They are determined to NOT do "nation building" in the M.E. They have said this over and over and over again.

So what southern Kurdistan has ended up with is a "local administration" WITHIN a bigger administration. It is still not a state (a fully independent administration).

Also, in the "democratic confederation", it is aimed to unite different Kurdish "powers" and "administrations" within a Confederation, without forcing any of these powers to give up their "independence" in favour of a centralized administration within the bigger "group".

Kurdistan's Democratic Confederation can consist of exactly anything that is Kurdish (the KRG can be represented just like a village in eastern Kurdistan can be represented). The aim is to decentralize the power and let even villages (through a village council) or cities (through a city council) have a say. You set up common goals, which could be the protection of the Kurdish culture and language and to work together to make Kurds have a say against other models of administrations (other states, UN, EU, USA, etc..) The Confederation is also a "administration" that doesn't recognize "borders" (which means that north, east, west and south can work within the Confederation).

The "KKK" is very "KURDISTANI" because it aims to PROTECT Kurdish interests. What these interests are is something the members of the Confederation must discuss with each other. And it can be called "Kurdistani" only when KURDS discuss issue together, without any interference from outside forces.

We are realistic. It's not about "achieving" something that is already there. We don't want a "state" as an administration, because it will never be recognized by UN, if we don't wreck havoc in the M.E, beating the shit out of everybody that opposes us, let it be Arabs, Turks, Persians or Americans (Israel itself killed almost 200 USMC soldiers in Lebanon in order to show the Americans that they don't like 'outside forces' to interfere). Are Kurds ready to do this? Ocalan himself says this, "If you feel that you can fight professionally, then fight".

The Palestinian Authority is represented in the UN, they have a say, but this is not even given to Kurds. Instead of bashing PKK, why don't you go and demand that Kurds should be represented in the UN? Bashing PKK as your only agenda will never give you a "state". NEVER.

You know this and that's the very thing. You KNOW it and that's why it is an agenda and a systematic anti-propaganda.


Diri:

Booo! Did you get scared now baby boy?

[Diri]

WOW - Berxwedan is just the most childish little man I have yet to meet the likes of...


ABOUT KURDISTAN: You are totally saying the opposite of what most PKK supporters believe in... they believe in a LAND called Kurdistan... not like you say - that where there is a majority of Kurds "That is Kurdistan"... Kurdistan is KIRKUK AND SIWAS AND ENTEP AND HEMDAN AND EVERY other city BY HISTORY...

You can't erase that... a culture as strong as the Kurdish will never fall - unless we all become communist like yourself... What the PKK is saying is(OR IS IT THE TURKISH STATE?? SINCE THEY CONTROLL THAT LITTLE MAN CALLED APO???): No to a KURDISH state - BUt we want to have a GREAT CONFEDERATION that covers all areas of Kurdish land and that has administrative powers... (yes I know you mean the damn village councils and other bullshit) - And this other nonsense that APO is saying about "EUROPEAN LAWS, STATE LAWS AND KURDISH LAWS..." WHAT THE HELL IS KURDISH LAWS??? THERE IS NO SUCH THING! AND I WOULDN'T TRUST THE LAWS MADE AT A LENINIST/MARXIST depriving people of owning their car in favour of collective transport and also many other things such as destroying the Kurdish social structure which is well paralleled by a capitalist system in favour of building a tyrant regime with APO the amn as leader and sole legislator... Forget it - Never gonna happen...

And as far as your knowledge on South Kurdistan - IT WAS GIVEN A SEAT AS A OBSERVER AT THE UN... and NOW IT IS GETTING A FULLMEMBER SEAT! BECAUSE ALL TAH TNEEDS TO BE DONE IS TO OFFICIALLY VOTE FOR THE CONSITUTION - WHICH WILL ENSHRIN KURDISTAN AS A STATE... AND THAT IS MORE THAT APOIST PEOPLE WILL EVER DO FOR KURDS! SO GO FIGURE WHY YOUR HONEY BOY HASN'T DONE SHIT FOR KURDS... ONLY KILLED 37 000 OF THEM AND THEN GONE AND KISSED THE HANDS OF THE MIT AND ASKED FOR FOGIVENESS...

HE HAS INSULTED THE MOTEHRS OF ALL KURDISH MARTYRS - HE HAS OFFICIALLY , BY KISSING THE MIT'S ASS, STATED "FUCK YOU KURDS I JUST WANT TO LIVE"....

SO BOOOOOO TO YOU LITTLE MAN!

[cheryl]

So, berxwedan, what is the difference between Komela and Kongreya? if you say that KGK with all of its members are still existing, and certainly they are since we see news reports about them, how is the new Komela different from the old KGK? in that sense, how does confederation differ from congress?

how does the confederation of KKK have anything to do with a confederation that would include kurdistan? it appears that you are making a leap here without an intermediate explanation linking the two separate entities (i.e. political organization vs. nation).

by the way, the yndk link isn't working.

<<As I recall, the "American Revolutionary War" that was fought by the confederation, kicked out the English and paved way to the independence of America.>>

true, to an extent. the confederation was not unified and did not tend to cooperate with itself. the war was actually won by many individuals who sacrificed of their own substance because they believed in the goal. then there was the federalist period, you may know of The Federalist Papers in which the confederation had to be propagandized in order to ratify a federal constitution and that didn't become truly federal until much later. in fact, the federation was not finally established until after reconstruction, the civil war being the last of the "revolutionary" series of battles. it was the solution to the question of states' rights. learn from history and don't make the same mistakes that others have made. kurdistan has too many enemies close by to waste time on an american version of confederation.

<<Also, in the "democratic confederation", it is aimed to unite different Kurdish "powers" and "administrations" within a Confederation, without forcing any of these powers to give up their "independence" in favour of a centralized administration within the bigger "group". >>

my mind flashes back to the us confederation and it flashes on divisions already existing in the minefield of kurdish politics, and it seems to me there will have to be something more solid than confederation. how about a political platform on which all confederations, congresses, parties and even individual kurds could agree to, which would contain the basic goals of the kurdish people?

<<You set up common goals, which could be the protection of the Kurdish culture and language and to work together to make Kurds have a say against other models of administrations. . .>>

BINGO! what have i been asking for over a year? the political platform idea. where is it and who are the signatories?

i do agree with you on the fact that kurdistan is something which already exists. if it did not, why are so many afraid of it?

<<Israel itself killed almost 200 USMC soldiers in Lebanon in order to show the Americans that they don't like 'outside forces' to interfere>>

nice conspiratorial touch. you don't remember where i was or what i was back then.


<<ABOUT KURDISTAN: You are totally saying the opposite of what most PKK supporters believe in... they believe in a LAND called Kurdistan... not like you say - that where there is a majority of Kurds "That is Kurdistan"... Kurdistan is KIRKUK AND SIWAS AND ENTEP AND HEMDAN AND EVERY other city BY HISTORY... >>

Dîrî, berxwedan does have a point here. in military terms it would be akin to the idea of holding "key terrain." for example, everyone likes to say that it was the coalition that secured south kurdistan under operation northern watch. however this is misleading. you can hold airspace for years and never have any real control of the ground. for that, you need people on the ground, armed, to hold the ground and secure it. therefore it would be far more accurate to say that the coalition held the skies while the peshmerga themselves secured the ground, and securing the ground is the hardest part. berxwedan is also correct in saying that this is the problem with kerkuk today because arabization has changed the demographics of kerkuk. in justice, it should be changed back but we see baghdad opposed to the idea. once upon a time, tikrit was kurdish but i don't see anyone arguing for keeping it as part of kurdistan today because there is no substantial kurdish population.

[Diri]

Yes.. but saying we will loose HUGE cities... with over 300 000 people in them... there is bound to be a 70-80%Kurds in them.. AT LEAST - And what I was talking about wasn't what was Kurdistan 300 years ago... I am talking about what was Kurdistan 100 years ago - Or more precisly - what it was in 1919 - remember that date...

[cheryl]

Dîrî, i understand what you're saying about history, but we may be among the very few who remember history. as a result, kurds still need bodies on the ground who are willing to be counted as kurds. it isn't always easy to say one is kurd. you know what i mean.

1919. . . yes, and every kemalist you speak with will remember it too. they will go on and on about how the allies recreated the borders of the ME at the time. so will others. yet the same ones defend those same imperialist borders to the last man in order to avoid redrawing the borders to acknowledge kurdistan.

although similar borders drawn in czechoslovakia and yugoslavia, which made no distinction for ethnic differences, no longer exist, kurds' enemies in the ME will see to it that no such dissolution of western-drawn borders happen in the ME. that is part of the battle and that is why it is very important to have demographics on your side.

[Nistiman]

Thanks for clearing that up, Berxwedan. Yes, the idea of a "confederation" is very realistic - so much so that it borders on mediocrity. The Kurds want nothing more than to rule themselves locally? And in Southern Kurdistan, where they can create a nation-state, we should impose "confederate law" because Ocalan says so? Thank goodness the Southern Kurds do not take their orders from the KKK.

The fact is, I don't even know where to disagree with you - there are too many holes in what the KKK stands for. Confusion abounds. You are the only person that seems to have the answers. And, frankly, I don't care one way or the other because no one takes Ocalan's ideas seriously anymore. And, these "fundamental" ideas shift like sand in the sea. It is too much to keep up with. I am still getting over the democratic republic thesis. In comparison though, this is a lesser evil.

What I am wondering is that you can go around accusing ME personally of what I have done or haven't done, but what the hell has Ocalan done for the Kurds in the past 7 years and what fruit have his ideas born for the Kurdish people?

Since his arrest, the Apoist movement has stifled all criticism of Turkey and Turkish policies for fear of disrupting the "peace talks" and "surec"; they have forced the poor Kurdish people to act as a lobby for Turkish interests abroad by promoting Turkey's entrance into the EU and having Kurdish personas proclaim "turkey is democratic and there is no torture in Turkey"; and most unforgivably they have denied the solidarity to Southern Kurds in their greatest hour of need and instead allied with Turkish interests once again by opposing the allied war to depose Saddam Hussain and re-starting the armed struggle at a time where it made it convenient for Turkey to meddle in Southern Kurdistan.

What have the Kurds achieved in Turkey in the past 7 years? AFter all of Ocalan's hard work, Turkey is still trying to rid the mountains of guerrillas and Kurds of their hard-earned Kurdishness. Is there one school that teaches Kurdish that has been opened that cannot be closed tommorrow?
Rather than gains, the Kurds now revere Mustafa Kemal and out of every Kurdish mouth is the slogan fit for sheep "Turkish Kurdish brotherhood".

No, thanks.

[Diri]

Thanks for clearing that up, Berxwedan. Yes, the idea of a "confederation" is very realistic - so much so that it borders on mediocrity. The Kurds want nothing more than to rule themselves locally? And in Southern Kurdistan, where they can create a nation-state, we should impose "confederate law" because Ocalan says so? Thank goodness the Southern Kurds do not take their orders from the KKK.

The fact is, I don't even know where to disagree with you - there are too many holes in what the KKK stands for. Confusion abounds. You are the only person that seems to have the answers. And, frankly, I don't care one way or the other because no one takes Ocalan's ideas seriously anymore. And, these "fundamental" ideas shift like sand in the sea. It is too much to keep up with. I am still getting over the democratic republic thesis. In comparison though, this is a lesser evil.

What I am wondering is that you can go around accusing ME personally of what I have done or haven't done, but what the hell has Ocalan done for the Kurds in the past 7 years and what fruit have his ideas born for the Kurdish people?

Since his arrest, the Apoist movement has stifled all criticism of Turkey and Turkish policies for fear of disrupting the "peace talks" and "surec"; they have forced the poor Kurdish people to act as a lobby for Turkish interests abroad by promoting Turkey's entrance into the EU and having Kurdish personas proclaim "turkey is democratic and there is no torture in Turkey"; and most unforgivably they have denied the solidarity to Southern Kurds in their greatest hour of need and instead allied with Turkish interests once again by opposing the allied war to depose Saddam Hussain and re-starting the armed struggle at a time where it made it convenient for Turkey to meddle in Southern Kurdistan.

What have the Kurds achieved in Turkey in the past 7 years? AFter all of Ocalan's hard work, Turkey is still trying to rid the mountains of guerrillas and Kurds of their hard-earned Kurdishness. Is there one school that teaches Kurdish that has been opened that cannot be closed tommorrow?
Rather than gains, the Kurds now revere Mustafa Kemal and out of every Kurdish mouth is the slogan fit for sheep "Turkish Kurdish brotherhood".

No, thanks.

BRAVO! I couldn't have said it better--- my full support for these pure and enlightning words...

[Dilsad]

Hi Everyone,

I have to admit it's a bit late here, so if I don't make too much sense, I apology and will make an effort in the next postings:

I've read this thread, and it seems that everyone is taking such an extreme point of view:
Either "totally against or totally for" APO, while we should be somewhat nuanced.

I feel like I need to bring everybody down to earth:

REMEMBER guys, APo has been in isolation for the past 5 years or so...and Anyone that takes whatever he says to the letter need to re-thinks twice, and wake-up (that goes to everyone).

You can all imagine what type of torture hthey have put him through!
Wasn't him that said at one point that he was a real Kemalist? I mean come one, they have destroyed him, and are I believe using and manipulating him.

Now, to come back on the name change, I do agree with Nistiman that the name is very bad, and with that said, I would hate to see our parties trying to appeal to the west by simply changing their name.
Because if you start with the name, where will you stop? The colors? The politics? The date of creation (becasue god forbid the date fall on 9-11 or the death of Reaggan).
You see the point I'm trying to make..., because I haven't heard anyone coming and saying that we should change PUK before it stands for puke...even though I do puke when I think of it

But let's not go there....

Again with that said, I think the choice of name is just very bad, because there are those exceptions, you can't for example call your party SS or KKK, or puke oops sorry

Anyways, you've got the point I think...

There are moments in one life where you need to remember the good things they've done, specially when they are delusional...for all the other moments of their life you DO NEED to criticize them...and not just one or two...

You would think that the fatc that APO executed 1000 guerillas for wanting to support a national uprising would have upset the people... But not one soul shouted "UNFAIR" or "WRONG DOING".

sorry Diri , I swear I am not trying to pick on you...qusure menere bira

mhm, I remember the leader of the PuK party going and kissing Saddam after the first Gulf War...after the ANFAL campaign where more than 100,000 kurds went "missing" and after halepce....mhm where were all the souls demonstrating in the south of Kurdistan against the PUK leader....
Or was that the other leader in Iraqi-Occupied-Kurdistan? Don't remember they seem to exchange roles every once in a while...good cop bad cop....

As for what did he do in the past 7 years :
AGAIN I am not a FAN of APO, not at all...but let's be fair to the rest of the kurds in turkey (you know that monolithic mass of people who all think the same)...
So reffer to my earlier comment: THE GUY is in Jail!
He sure not gonna do anything for us...what should happen is that they should kick him out from the leadeship and move on...
As far as not helping us in the south...mhm...wasn't it the PUk or the PDK that actually fought against the PKK in the mid 90s...no no wait....was it against each other?
....no no no wait, that was only until recently...when one of the party called for Saddam's help....Ax ax ax, memory is bad and a little short.....

I know I know, I started asking you guys to be nuanced and here I am coming and making jokes about talabani and barzani....you're a bad bad bad boy Dislad... sorry guys...
I just fell like we need to compare that crazy guy on Imrali with the crazy guys in the south...


so peace to everyone!

********************************
Live long and prosper...
1st Officer Tuvak
Starship Voyager.

[Dilsad]

Sorry Guys,...

posting#2....

Just wanted to make sure that I was not biased....adn criticized the anti "apo" only....one may want to read between the lines...and put me in a single category...

Anyways, I didn't put any quote from Bexwedan, cuz to be honest, I didn't read your posting heval, way too long and convoluted...but your style reminds be of a few people I once knew and that would say things like "Eme linge wi biskinin" or "we're gonna break his legs", you have the same whip to your writtings... let's all wake up and stop our cult of personality...
If it's not Apo, it is Barzani, ifnot it is Talabani...

All the same (though very different politics), but the same cult of personality!

Remember that song from Dr. Sivan that I still love:

...Lo me cikir me cikir me xuli li sere xwe kir...(special shout out to all of us) (Peshkeshi me hemiya)
...Nave we Sekretere, Xebeta we ne penc pere...(to/Peshkeshi Apo, Talabani, Barzani)
...Ger pisht bidin Begdaye, Ax ci sherme le daye...(to/Peshkeshi Talabani)
...Ger pist bide Tehrane, bombe dibare wek avaye...(to/Peshkeshi Barzani)
....Dibej Sham shekire, kurdistan sherin tire...(to/Peshkeshi Apo)



That's all I have to say ...for now...

Oh my god, can't wait to hear all the responses...but hey no bad feeling we're all Kurd!

[Nistiman]

You're right Dilshad, it is important not to think in extremes. Ocalan is still a revered leader to many Kurds ... if not for the sake of Ocalan's past, it is for the sake of our fellow Kurds that criticisms should be tempered by the larger Kurdish interest.

In comparison to other Kurdish leaders, the vices of Ocalan do not seem as large. I don't want to say a but, however, I would like you to consider another view point. I'm not sure whether you came across an OP/ED in the Washington Post recently -- which I thought was excellent -- by Fred Hiatt regarding the Post's coverage of the war on terrorism. Hiatt responded to Rumsfeld's critique that the Post was overly sensitive to American abuses in prisons, etc... while not paying due attention to the heinous crimes of the real terrorists. This was Hiatt's response:

"The United States and this administration in particular continually assert the moral right to behave differently than other nations. We will not be bound by the International Criminal Court. We insist that other nations give up their nuclear weapons while we keep our own. ....
The premise of this highhandedness is that the United States is, on balance, a force for good in the world -- a superpower that uses its might not to subjugate others but to allow them to live freely. ...
But any nation asserting such a high calling will be judged by an equally high standard. Are we better than the beheaders, the mass killers, the U.N. peacekeepers raping young girls in the Congo? That's not close to the right question.

Do we behave as well as we claim, as we should, as we expect of others? That's the beginning of the right conversation -- and why it's fair to write more editorials about exceedingly mild Koran abuse at Guantanamo Bay than about the unspeakable mass graves of Hilla."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/12/AR2005061201414.html

You may ask why I quoted this but I feel the PKK continually asserted a moral high ground when it came to the Kurdish struggle - they had a "right" to set up bases and mobilize in Southern Kurdistan (and other parts of Kurdistan) because Ocalan was the leader for all of Kurdistan and the other Kurdish parties were either collaborators or backward. When other Kurdish parties were "realistic" and called only for federalism, the PKK held the moral highground and was brazen enough to be the first party to call for independence. I, for the most part, had accepted the premise that the PKK was different, that it was above party interests and that it would act with the interests of the WHOLE Kurdish nation in mind.

Perhaps, it is because I held PKK and especially Ocalan up to a higher standard that their current policies are especially deserving of criticism.

[Dilsad]

Hello Nistiman,

well that was a well thought response not that I was excpecting less from you...specially with all the good things you've written.

And I do agree with your statements, why should we care about the Koran being trashed into the toilet while the prisoners are being thrown in cells that are their toilets...But the reason why, it's because it struck a very sensitive corde in the muslim world...and the "leaders/dictators" felt like they had to do something then...it's like what Stalin said, "one dead is a tragedy, 1million dead is a number".
So guys being tortured, no big deal, Koran being trashed, it's a tragedy...and it is safe to criticized, I mean who will come and argue about a sacred Book...while you can always re-define what torture is...

On the moral ground issue, I do agree as well, there was a time when they believed that they could do a better job than Talabani and Barzani and they did. In the span of 10-20 years they caught up with them and they really created some institutions in europe and Kurdistan.
They are now going down hill...

And I believe that is why (talking about morals) that some people in the North have objected to the war...How many civilians died during the bombing campain? and are still dying...

Dilsad.