Three Shiite Provinces Apply for Autonomy in Iraq

zaman.com ^

[BigDoom]

09.27.2004 Monday

Three Shiite Provinces Apply for Autonomy in Iraq

Three Shiite provinces under the control of British forces in southern Iraq followed the example of the Kurdish region in the north and applied to the Bagdat (Baghdad) administration in order to be recognized as an "autonomous territory".

The local administrators of Basra, Amara, and Nasiriye agreed that they wanted to unify and be granted autonomy. Basra Governor, Hasan Rasid reported that they sent their demands to interim Iraq Prime Minister Iyad Allawi. This development, confirmed also by the speaker of the parliament in Amara province, increases the disintegration anxieties of Iraq.

The State Administration Law approved by the Iraq Interim Government allows for the formation of autonomous regions by combining at least three provinces. However, Kerkuk (Kirkuk), due to a statute protecting its mixed ethnic makeup, and Baghdad, due to it being the capital, are not able to be included in any of the autonomous territories.

Suleymaniye, Erbil and Duhok provinces in northern Iraq compose the Kurdish Autonomous Territory. The Kurdish territory, having limited sources of income, reportedly intends to conquer Kirkuk in order to obtain its oil wealth.

Basra province, like Kirkuk, sits atop vast oil reserves of Iraq. Three million people live in the territory that is also home to Iraq's only seaport. Iraq Kurdistan Democratic Party (IKDP) leader Mesut Barzani's newspaper, Taakhi, endorsed the Shiites' initiative and called it a "righteous decision".

The developments are especially worrying to Iraqi Turkmen, who feel that the disintegration of Iraq has begun. The Iraq Interim Government will make the final decision on the matter in the upcoming days.

The provinces resisting against the coalition forces in Iraq will become isolated provided that the region controlled by the Shiites in southern Iraq obtains autonomy.

[BigDoom]

never....

[RedBloodedAmerican]

Ruh roh. Lead to civil war?

[OXENinFLA]

I smell Iran................

[johnb838]

What is zaman.com ? I think we're already at war with Iran and Syria, just nobody wants to play on their home turf so Iraq is the battleground.

If three Shi'a provinces secede, they go in the Iranian column. I agree with you, this cannot be allowed to happen.

[Kennard]

Follow the money; follow the oil. Religion is just a cover, a story, a pretext.

The oil wealth is the birthright of every Iraqi

[SunkenCiv]

Cool. Iraq should be partitioned.

[Austin Willard Wright]

"Cannot be allowed?" So much for the claim that this is a war for liberty, self-determination, and democracy.

[BigDoom]

What is zaman.com

Zaman, was established in 1986 by Feza Publications Inc. and based in Istanbul, is among top five national daily newspapers in Turkey with an average 400.000 circulation.
It's been the first Turkish daily newspaper online (http://www.zaman.com) since 1995
Zaman (translated 'time') has special international editions for 10 foreign countries predominantly printed in their own native alphabets and languages. Those countries include Australia, Azarbaijan, Bulgaria, Germany, Romania, Kazakhstan, Kyrghizstan, Macedonia, Turkmenistan and USA.
There are Zaman bureaus and correspondents in major world capitals and cities like Washington DC., New York, Brussels, Moscow, Jerusalem, Baku, Frankfurt, Ashkabad, Tashkent, and Bucharest.
In addition to Zaman, Feza Inc. owns Aksiyon (Action), a leading weekly news magazine and Bisiklet (Bicycle), a children's monthly and CHA, a major Turkish news agency.
As an independent daily newspaper, Zaman is acknowledged of its serious, fair and balanced reporting. It has won numerous national and international awards, especially for its modern page layout and contributions to inter-cultural understanding through its foreign editions.

A normaly friendly to US and Israel newspaper. News is real, also reported by Haarez and Al f**king Jazeera

[xzins]

In the long run, divide and conquer is the best strategy. "Iraq" is a figment of some bizarre, early 1900's, British imagination.

Maintaining membership in some conferacy of iraq is not a bad idea insofar as it lessons concerns of our Turkish ally.

[sharktrager]

To be honest, there will never really be stability in Iraq if the different regions are expected to unify. Much as in Yugoslavia, these are groups that have never peacefully co-existed except when under the thumb of a tyrant.

[kabar]

I have no problem with it. The Kurds have done the same thing in the North. Iraq should be a federal republic to recognize and protect the rights of the various factions. If they are not included that way into the new Iraq, we will have another Yugoslavia, which broke apart painfully into several countries.

[greasepaint]

Iraq was invented in 1920 by Winston Churchill.

[BigDoom]

I've no problem with it right now, too. But in the end it's about an islamic Republic in the south, under iranien control and with sharia law. So, I will have a real big problem in the near future. Because that will never happen as long as we are in Iraq.

[sharktrager]

Oh, they got along...courtesy of the mass graves.

The fact is, as has happened whenever the west has tried to create a nation where one has not existed before, the result has been disastrous.

Look at Africa. The nations with constant violence are also those that were created despite a long history of warring tribes within the new borders.

There is a reason none of these "nations" existed prior to the last century.

[kabar]

But in the end it's about an islamic Republic in the south, under iranien control and with sharia law.

I serioiusly doubt that will be the case. Iraq remains a secular society regardless of the area of the country. Iranians are not arabs and I don't think they will have much influence in Iraq. The memories of the Iran-Iraq war remain.

[AB AB AB]

"Cannot be allowed?" So much for the claim that this is a war for liberty, self-determination, and democracy.

Ohh!!! (Slaps forehead.) I see it all so clearly now. Our mideast policy has actually been secretly under the control of an anonymous FReeper, who has now outed himself so that we can for the first time clearly see what our national leaders' real motivations have been all along!

Thank you for finally enlightening me.

< / sarcasm>

[evad]

So much for the claim that this is a war for liberty, self-determination, and democracy.

Who made that claim?

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Guess its just "Three Shiite's to the wind" eh?

Sorry, couldn't resist.

[Austin Willard Wright]

And your view is....?

[Austin Willard Wright]

Dubya will resist partition (which should have been undertaken in 2003) until the bitter end. The DOD/DOS types will not budge from the idea of a unified/democratic/Iraq.

[goldstategop]

The Shiites like the Kurds want to unify in a federal state that will give them more clout with the federal government. Its not a move to secede. 80% of Iraq's population wants to choose the country's next government and they will get the chance in January.

[SunkenCiv]

I agree with Austin "'Danger' Powers" Willard Wright, in that Iraqis should be able to exercise self-determination. Building an Iraq with a pluralistic polity may not be workable. I doubt however that the Shiite areas want anything other than separation. I don't think they want autonomy as a step on the road to conquering the entire country. I also don't think that they'd want to submerge themselves in the Iranian theocracy. Theocracy, yes, but not under Iranian control.

Moslem countries don't typically like dissent, don't tolerate it. Kurdistan's independence is opposed by State because the Turks are against it. Since the Turks haven't been particularly helpful in the breach (lately), the US needs to arrange something.

The EU doesn't want Turkey in, period, regardless of what happens with Cyprus.

The Turks on Cyprus agreed to the brokered, negotiated agreement for reunification, which was then summarily rejected by the Greeks on Cyprus.

The US should change its policy toward the TRNC, or recognize Turkey's annexation of the Turkish area of the island, and get the support of the Moslem countries for that, and for Kurdish independence at the same time. I don't in reality think this would work, so it may not be worth trying (it would be worth floating to the Turks though, after the US election), but in an ideal world...

[AB AB AB]

OK, I admit it. I am also part of the secret FReeper foreign policy engine secretly controlling the President, the Congress, the Department of State, the Pentagon, and of course the entire military industrial complex.

[KantianBurke]

Mega bump to post #7.

[monday]

"Who made that claim?"

Bush, Powell..several others.

[evad]

"Who made that claim?"
Bush, Powell..several others.

That's incorrect.
The Bush administration has NEVER claimed that to be our reason for the war in Iraq.

I challenge anyone to link a reputable source to them making that statement.

[monday]

"The Bush administration has NEVER claimed that to be our reason for the war in Iraq."

It was among the reasons, the others being Iraq's support for terrorists, and Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Bringing Democracy, Freedom, and self determination is the reason why we are still there trying to "nation build". If all we wanted to do was take out Saddam Hussien, we would be out of there by now.

[evad]

"The Bush administration has NEVER claimed that to be our reason for the war in Iraq."

It was among the reasons, the others being Iraq's support for terrorists, and Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Bringing Democracy, Freedom, and self determination is the reason why we are still there trying to "nation build". If all we wanted to do was take out Saddam Hussien, we would be out of there by now.

Monday, those may be secondary "perks" but we did not go to war with Iraq to provide them liberty, self-determination and democracy. I know you, or anyone else, can't provide a reputable source for any administration comment or claim to the contrary because it doesn't exist. Also, I know it is unconstitutional for us to go to war for any other reason than a threat to our own national security, even though it was done under the Clinton administration.

So back to the original claim by the original poster.

So much for the claim that this is a war for liberty, self-determination, and democracy.

And I repeat, "Who made that claim?"

It's rhetorical since I know that claim wasn't ever made.

[monday]

pppffffttt.....whatever..sheesh.....

[evad]

pppffffttt.....whatever..sheesh.....

LOL..good enough...works for me

[RightWhale]

The boundaries of the Middle East are more or less arbitrary. Iraq may be partitioned, but the autonomous regions will be reorganized again later by force and annexation.