Good News / Bad News

The good news out of Iraq is that "Iraqi officials said today that they would move to halt the activity of Kurdish rebels who have been striking across the border from northern Iraq, a promise delivered amid a flurry of international diplomatic efforts to prevent a widening conflict between the two countries." The bad news, of course, is that Iraqi officials don't have any practical authority over events in Kurdistan so this is all meaningless.

All throughout the article we're hearing about commitments made by Maliki, calls to Maliki, meetings with Maliki, etc., etc., etc. But Maliki's irrelevant!

Comments

What about Iraq's president, Jalal Talabani. You don't think he has any influence in Kurdistan?

You are so biased against the effort to stabilize Iraq that I can find more balanced information about it in the New York Times. It's like you have the zeal of the convert here. Would you be more balanced if you hadn't originally supported the war?

Posted by Juan | October 23, 2007 2:30 PM

One hopes Maliki doesn't try to do anything, it could simply open a new front in the civil war, this time between the Kurds and Shiites.

If Talabani wants and can do something that would be the only real good outcome here. However, I don't think the PKK answers to the Iraqi Kurds, and I don't think the Iraqi Kurds are going to start shooting at the PKK on behalf of the Turks. (Keep in mind the struggle for Kirkirk - part of that struggle is with Turkomen, no? I don't think they like each other very much.)

Posted by Chuck | October 23, 2007 2:54 PM

If a terrorist group, beyond the reach of the law of the federal government, attacks a neighboring state, does not the state attacked have every right of recourse at their disposal?
Israel was attacked last summer by one such group, why not the same for Turkey?

Posted by Clark | October 23, 2007 3:04 PM

The bad news, of course, is that Iraqi officials don't have any practical authority over events in Kurdistan so this is all meaningless.

Huh? "Iraqi" officials can include Iraqi Kurds, no? The very story Matthew linked includes a quote from Iraq's foreign minister - a Kurd - that Iraq will take action.

Posted by Al | October 23, 2007 4:15 PM

Yes, except in the reality-based community, we all know that Talabani and the other Kurds are lying and aren't really going to do anything about the PKK, except, at the absolute most, tell them to knock it off for a bit until the hubbub blows over.

Posted by bob | October 23, 2007 5:17 PM

Yes, except in the reality-based community, we all know that Talabani and the other Kurds are lying and aren't really going to do anything about the PKK, except, at the absolute most, tell them to knock it off for a bit until the hubbub blows over.

Posted by bob | October 23, 2007 5:17 PM

What about Iraq's president, Jalal Talabani. You don't think he has any influence in Kurdistan?

That's precisely the point, Juan. The Iraqi central government has very little authority over the northern Kurdish territory, which is semi-autonomous and under the control of two Kurdish parties, the KDP and the PUK.

Posted by bza | October 23, 2007 6:26 PM

The issue boils down to one simple equation.

Do the major Kurdish parties believe that if Turkey does an incursion, will it be targeted at THEM or just the PKK?

If they believe the former, they might try to stop the PKK from operating - if they can - and they're the only ones who can, since the US has no particular ability to fight Kurds compared to the Turks, who have been doing it for decades.

Nobody in Iraq but the major Kurdish parties can stop the PKK from operating. Nobody.

The only reason Maliki is making noise is because of the problem that if the Kurdish parties decide to back the PKK against Turkey, it will cause major problems for his government with the US, Turkey, Iran, and even for the simple maintenance of a parliamentary majority. In many cases, the Shia need the Kurds on their side - not that it matters that much any more since many of the Sunni factions have quit the government anyway.

So he'd like to stop the incursion. It's just more trouble for him and the Shia, who don't need any more trouble.

But the reality is he can't do it without the support of the Kurdish parties.

And both the Kurdish parties have issued strong warnings against Turkey invading.

Turkey appears to have rejected the PKK ceasefire offer - which, as I indicated in an earlier thread, was probably bogus anyway.

Apparently Turkey is willing to wait a couple weeks until more talks are done in the first week or so of November. But if those talks don't produce anything concrete, the Turkish military will move because they don't want to lose their advantage of being able to attack before winter sets in in Northern Iraq.

Right now, the US, the Kurds and the Iraqis are trying to delay things long enough to make the Turkish incursion less effective and thus persuade Turkey to postpone it. It's not clear if Turkey will do that.

Things should be decided within the next couple of weeks.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | October 23, 2007 8:14 PM