Syrian Kurds denied attendance at Geneva II but form their own transitional government

ALLVOICES

Just a day before the Geneva II talks began, the Kurds in Syria declared a provincial government in the northeast area of Syria that they control. The Syrian Kurds wanted to attend Geneva II as a separate delegation from the Syrian National Coalition. They claimed that their demands differ from both those of the Assad government and the opposition that seeks regime change and an end to President Bashar Assad’s rule. The Democratic Union Party (PYD), the dominant Kurdish party in Syria, said Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the United States obstructed their request and hence they were not invited.

The People’s Defence Unit (YPG), the main fighting force in Kurdish-controlled areas, is linked to the PYD. A municipal council will govern an area that includes the cities of Hassaka and Qamishli and will have its own president and ministers of foreign affairs, defense, justice and education, as reported by the Syrian Observatory of Human Rights. Elections are to be held in four months.

According to a report in Russia Today:

The announcement came following a meeting of the Legislative Assembly of the Democratic Autonomous Government of Western Kurdistan, “attended by all members of the Assembly which is made up of 52 parties, civil society organizations, youth and women’s movements and 15 independent individuals,” Firat news agency reported.

The Kurdish drive for more autonomy worries Turkey as Kurds in Turkey have long demanded autonomy as well. The Syrian Kurds are not on good terms with other rebel groups, particularly Islamist fighters who tried to take control of territory held by Kurds last year. The Kurds have for the most part not been attacked by Assad’s forces while they concentrated on other rebel groups. As a result, some accuse the Kurds of being allied with the Assad regime.

There are splits within the Kurds, with the PYD being aligned with the Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK), which has a history of violent struggles with the Turkish government that has killed thousands over three decades. Some other Kurdish parties have agreed to attend the talks as part of the Western-backed Syrian coalition. Neighbouring Iraqi Kurdistan has strained relations with the YPG-ruled Syria: The YPG has stopped rival groups from entering the Kurdish enclave. Syrian Kurds suspect Massud Barzani, the leader of the Iraqi Kurds, of wanting to extend his control into their territory. Publicly, Barzani has said only that he wants to keep the Kurds united.

For its part the Turkish PKK has been quite critical of the opposition, which opposed the presence of the YPG, claiming that the opposition was no better than the Assad regime in that both would marginalize Syria’s Kurdish minority. A statement from the group said:

At a time when all sides are being invited to the conference, the Kurds’ demand for participation has been overlooked, Their [the Syrian opposition’s] attitude is no different from that of the Baath regime. They don’t take seriously the demands of the Kurdish people, just like Turkey’s attitude.

More details of Kurdish attempts to build an autonomous area in Syria can be found in this Reuters article. The city of Qamishli is jointly controlled by Kurds and Assad’s forces. The latter control a nearby military base, the airport and even some of the city center. You can still fly to the city from Damascus. Most of the city is controlled by a Kurdish police force. According to Reuters:

For now, the two sides seem to co-exist. Fighters pass each other like ghosts. At a square in the heart of the city, Syrian soldiers on trucks mounted with anti-aircraft guns drove through a crowd of school children crossing the street, just as a Kurdish patrol drove past on the other side of the square.

In this part of Syria there is already a ceasefire between the two sides that has been agreed to some time before Geneva II. The Syrian Kurds declared anautonomous government last November.

January 24, 2014 | 24 Comments »

Leave a Reply

24 Comments / 24 Comments

  3. @ yamit82:
    I don’t know why you would defend the muslim turks.

    Genocide is “the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group”

    That is just jwhat the muslim turks did to the Armenians.

  6. Israel has strategic interests shared both by the Kurds and Azerbaijanis. Israel has no strategic interests shared by the Armenians.

    Therefore, whatever happens to them is too damned bad. But I don’t intend to lose any sleep over them.

    Self-interest is everything.

    Arnold Harris
    Mount Horeb WI

  10. @ ppksky:

    You have without a doubt bought into the propaganda of the Armenian advocates nobody in that conflict was blameless or totally at fault similar to the Balkan conflicts.

    They have been butchering each other for a thousand years.

    Read the book I suggested you read then make up your mind it’s all footnoted from primary sources.

  11. ppksky Said:

    Since when does resistance to genocide excuse genocide?
    Not only were the Armenians exterminated from Turkey by genocide, but the Kurds were complicit. It’s ironic, the Kurds who helped exterminate the Armenians in Eastern Turkey are now fighting with the Turks for the booty.
    When Muslims fight among themselves for land robbed from non-Muslims, nobody with any sense should take sides.

    Mass Killing and mass murder is not genocide unless it was the intent to eradicate a whole ethnic people and population. In war time shit happens.

    How many Vietnameses, Cambodians, Laoations, Iraqis, Japanese, Germans were killed or if civilians murdered during war? How many Indians and Chinese did the Brits exterminate? The French in Africa, Algeria and Indo China? How many did Mao and Stalin Murder?

    None were considered genocidal. It was a term coined to describe the intent to exterminate by acts and design of the Jewish people. That’s the bar for genocide. Numbers are irrelevant only intent and the Turks cannot be included because they had no official policy to exterminate every Armenian. Is what happened to the Armenian during war different from what the British, French and Americans did to other nations in time of war or national conquests?

    Genocide is “the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group”

  12. Since when does resistance to genocide excuse genocide?

    Not only were the Armenians exterminated from Turkey by genocide, but the Kurds were complicit. It’s ironic, the Kurds who helped exterminate the Armenians in Eastern Turkey are now fighting with the Turks for the booty.

    When Muslims fight among themselves for land robbed from non-Muslims, nobody with any sense should take sides.

  13. yamit82 Said:

    WHY the christianity deception?

    this is an interesting thesis, that christianity was completely created by constantine and that the gospels were manufactured by him at the same time. But how are the christian figures, non biblical, dealt with for the first 300 years? e.g. various notables in Europe, France, etc.?
    I have often felt that the 2000 years of pogroms was to discredit and eradicate the only real witnesses to the LIE. Even today, too much money, etc. is invested world wide in this narrative to allow a few Jews to bring it down.

  14. yamit82 Said:

    Which country with a vested interest and a common border with Syria was not invited???????? And are silent on the matter???

    It is obviously a ludicrous charade, with or without Israel. Imagine the incredible amount of money wasted on this media event. It really demonstrates how those in charge are swindling everyone else.

  15. ppksky Said:

    The Armenians, like the rest of the Christian population in what is now Turkey was well established long before Muhammad was born. It was in Constantinople (later named Istanbul by the Muslims) that Christianity was first legalized in the Eastern Roman Empire. The birth of Christianity had nothing to do with Rome.

    True, There exists no historical record before Constantine with the exception of the NT, which is not historically credible.

    “The christianity cult first appeared in the early part of the 4th century CE. In the year 306CE, the emperor Constantius I (“Constantius Chlorus”) was on campaign in Britain, but he fell ill and died at Eboracum (modern York). His son, Constantine I, was proclaimed emperor by the army, but there were many other contenders competing for the Throne and it was a long time before he was established as sole ruler. The link just given describes the political situation in some detail and, although it embraces the usual christian myths about how Constantine was “miraculously converted to christianity”, the historical details are reasonably accurate.”

    WHY the christianity deception?

  16. ppksky Said:

    Sorry, but the Armenian Genocide is a well established fact of history. The Turkish government carefully engineered the systematic mass murder of Armenians and not for the first time. This act of genocide was predated by the Hamidian Massacres. Turkey will not admit this bit of history and was denied entry into the EU for this reason.

    I have read the most authoritative unbiased historical review of the so called “Armenian Genocide” “The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide” by (Guenter Lewy) and recommend you read it as well; if you are interested in unvarnished historical truth.

    “Guenter Lewy is professor emeritus of political science at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. Guenter Lewy is a greatly respected American historian, “His book, which has Olympian fair-mindedness as well as thorough knowledge of the various sources, now replaces everything else.”—Norman Stone

    Some Amazon reviews:
    “Armenians suffered horribly, died in appalling numbers and were permanently separated from many of their traditional heartlands that they had shared, usually in peace, with local Turks, Kurds and others. Overwhelming evidence also portrays that the Armenians did not suffer alone, that the prosecution of World War I in the Ottoman Empire by its leaders was disastrous for the population at large. Nearly all accounts demonstrate that this was a hard era of state-on-state war, widespread famine, massacre and counter-massacre, and unabated disease.

    Thus, given the breadth of suffering, I find it mystifying that this issue has so neatly cleaved the reading public into two distinct camps: those who interpret the Armenian experience as a genocide not just of a similar impact to the Holocaust, but analogous in its inception and execution; and those who interpret the Armenian experience as an immense tragedy made up of numerous crimes, but one that does not as a whole meet the internationally accepted definition of the term, “genocide.”

    At one extreme are authors and their supporters who, favoring the genocide thesis, take no note of the role of Armenian revolutionary organizations, the attacks instigated by them on local Muslims and Ottoman troops, or the politics of the Ottoman leaders who were concerned with the imminent collapse on their watch of an empire that had lasted nearly 700 years. This group of authors also finds no room in their tomes for mention of Muslim suffering, as if Christian losses somehow counted more. On the other extreme are authors and their supporters who, denying the allegation of genocide, not only attempt to show that Armenian losses were much smaller than even the most modest estimates, but that the decisions that led to the Armenian relocations and massacres were soundly reasoned and valid to such an extent as to absolve the Ottoman leaders completely of responsibility for not only Armenian losses, but Muslim losses as well.”

    Final word

    “As someone who is more than familiar with the subject, WWI events themselves, many books and research on the topic, I can comfortably claim that this book can certainly be considered as the final word on this controversy.

    It is clear that this would not be satisfactory to many who have a vested interest in propagating the myths, and those whose identity is now closely tied to a fabricated history and propaganda.

    Lewy points out that as disturbing as it was the scale of misery suffered by the Armenians during WWI in Anatolia, and the underestimation by the Ottomans of the difficulties of uprooting and moving such a large population, there is no evidence of a plan, policy or intent by the Ottoman government of the time to physically eliminate a whole nation. There is no physical or documentary evidence to support the thesis of a systematic genocide. Period.

    It does take courage to state the facts and the author has done a very significant service in the name of setting the record straight.”

  17. yamit82 Said:

    ppksky

    There was no Armenian Genocide. Mass killings even mass murder but no genocide unless you want to change the definition of genocide. In fact what the Turks did to the Armenians was pretty much what the Armenians did to the Turks when they were able. Unfortunately Turks are more efficient killers than Armenians.

    Sorry, but the Armenian Genocide is a well established fact of history. The Turkish government carefully engineered the systematic mass murder of Armenians and not for the first time. This act of genocide was predated by the Hamidian Massacres. Turkey will not admit this bit of history and was denied entry into the EU for this reason.

    It helps to remember that Turkey itself and its predecessor in the Ottoman Empire was itself the result of the extermination of Christianity in the fall of the Byzantine Empire. The Armenians, like the rest of the Christian population in what is now Turkey was well established long before Muhammad was born. It was in Constantinople (later named Istanbul by the Muslims) that Christianity was first legalized in the Eastern Roman Empire. The birth of Christianity had nothing to do with Rome.

    The Armenians of Turkey and especially in where the Kurds claim a homeland in Eastern Turkey are extinct. They were exterminated.

  18. ppksky

    There was no Armenian Genocide. Mass killings even mass murder but no genocide unless you want to change the definition of genocide. In fact what the Turks did to the Armenians was pretty much what the Armenians did to the Turks when they were able. Unfortunately Turks are more efficient killers than Armenians.

  19. @ bernard ross:

    The list of the participant countries of the Geneva II Conference on Syria was determined on 20 December 2013.[11]

    International organizations

    Algeria, Australia,Bahrain,Belgium,Brazil,Canada,China,Denmark,Egypt,France,Germany,Greece,India,Indonesia,Iraq,Italy,Japan,Jordan,,Lebanon,Luxembourg,Mexico,Morocco,

    Norway, Netherlands,Oman,Qatar,Russia,Saudi Arabia,South Africa,South Korea,Spain,Sweden,Syrian participation,,Switzerland,Turkey,United Arab Emirates,United Kingdom

    United States,Holy See!!!!!

    Which country with a vested interest and a common border with Syria was not invited???????? And are silent on the matter???

  21. the fragmentation of Syria is a good thing for Israel. a balance between the players with no one being strong enough to wage a war against Israel is good. In general, so far, the ascent of the Kurds is good for Israel: they are becoming defacto autonomous. They gain as time goes on.

  24. We need to remember that much of what Kurds claim as Kurdish territory is actually Armenian. Much of this territory was claimed by Kurds only after Armenians were exterminated from it in Islamic genocide committed against them, instigated by, first the Ottoman Empire, and then later by the Turkish government.

    There is an Armenia outside of Turkey, but it is a diaspora, a refuge for what remains after the systematic extermination of the Armenian Genocide.