The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [casi] The New York Times: a proposal for ethnic cleansing in Iraq

Dear Nels,


Here a little and easily extendable synopsis of additional material
(including items I posted earlier on CASI).



1) Study: close genetic connection between Jews, Kurds


3)  Turkey responds to activities of Jewish backed Kurdish Credit Bank with
Ziraat Bank

4) Three Iraqs, not one



Study: close genetic "con"nection between Jews, Kurds

      Published: 2003-09-20 14:36

      Study finds close genetic connection between Jews, Kurds
      By Tamara Traubman


      [ISRAEL, 20/9 2003] - The people closest to the Jews from a genetic
point of view may be the Kurds, according to results of a new study at the
Hebrew University.

      Scientists who participated in the research said the findings seem to
indicate both peoples had common ancestors who lived in the northern half of
the fertile crescent, where northern Iraq and Turkey are today. Some of
them, it is assumed, wandered south in pre-historic times and settled on the
eastern shores of the Mediterranean.

      Professor Ariella Oppenheim and Dr. Marina Feirman, who carried out
the research at the Hebrew University, said they were surprised to find a
closer genetic connection between the Jews and the populations of the
fertile crescent than between the Jews and their Arab neighbors. Oppenheim
pointed out that previous research of DNA of Jews, including her own work,
had revealed great genetic similarity between Jews and Arabs, particularly
Palestinians from Israel and the territories.

      The present study, however, involved more detailed and thorough
examinations than previous research. In addition, this was the first
comparison of the DNA of Jews and Kurds.

      Genetic similarity between peoples is measured by comparing the
frequency of genetic mutations among them. This information makes it
possible to reconstruct their paths of migration and to discover their
unwritten history. The present study, however, reveals only part of the
story, since it is based on mutations of the Y chromosome. Since this
chromosome, which determines male gender, is passed only from father to son,
it does not contain information about the mothers' contributions to the
genetic reservoir under study.

      The study's findings are published in the current issue of The
American Journal of Human Genetics.

      The researchers used the DNA of 1,847 Jewish men of Ashkenazi,
Sephardi and Kurdish descent; Muslims and Christians of Kurdish, Turkish and
Armenian descent; various Arab populations; and Russians, Poles and
residents of Belarus.





July 10, 2003 -- PRESIDENT Bush consistently has done the right thing by
ignoring the nay- sayers before, during and after Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Yet he's in danger of making the same mistake his father did at the end of
Desert Storm - doing only half the job.
Just as the failure to press on to Baghdad in 1991 left Iraq and the entire
region with cancerous problems, today's failure to recognize the artificial,
unjust nature of the Iraqi state promises enduring discontent.

Will American troops need to return to Iraq a third time, in another decade?

Speaking of Iraq as a single, integrated country is a form of lying. Its
borders were drawn by grasping European diplomats almost a century ago, with
no regard for the wishes - or rivalries - of the local populations.

Today, the Iraq we're trying to herd back together consists of three
distinct nations caged under a single, bloodstained flag. Our problems are
with only one of those nations, the Sunni Arab minority west and north of

Favored by the British, the Sunni Arabs took power at Iraq's formation and
maintained it through massacre, torture and imprisonment. Saddam Hussein was
the ultimate expression of Sunni Arab tyranny over Iraq's Kurds and

By holding Iraq together with U.S. troops, we merely encourage the Sunni
Arabs - who remain hostile to our presence, whose extremists attack our
soldiers and who still intend to recapture control of the entire country.

We are punishing our friends, rewarding our enemies and alienating the
neutral. President Bush needs to perform radical surgery on Iraq now, while
the world remains in a funk over our success. We still have a window through
which we can thrust major reforms. But the window is closing. Defending the
status quo is deadly folly.

The break-up of Iraq should proceed in two stages.

First, we should provisionally divide the country into a federation of three
states, giving the Sunni Arabs one last chance to embrace reform.

* One state would encompass the Shi'ite region in the south, encompassing
all of the southern oil fields.

* The second would be an expanded Kurdistan, including historically Kurdish
Kirkuk and Mosul, as well as Iraq's northern oil fields.

* The third would be a rump Sunni Arab state sandwiched between the other

* Baghdad would become an autonomous district.

Stop worrying about Shi'ite extremism. If we mean what we say about
democracy, the Shi'ites should be free to choose whomever they want as their
leaders - even fundamentalists. Although the odds of theocratic rule
emerging or enduring in southern Iraq are lower than the media imply, the
Shi'ites, who long have been oppressed and persecuted, should be free to
determine their own future.

Democracy means letting people make their own mistakes. We've made a few
ourselves. The only thing upon which we should insist is strict supervision
to ensure an honest vote.

We must, however, make it clear to Iran that meddling will not be tolerated.

As this column consistently points out, the Kurds deserve freedom and a
state of their own. After the Jews and Armenians, they have been the most
persecuted ethnic group of the last hundred years, always denied an
independent homeland, shot, gassed, driven from their homes - and even
victimized for the use of their native dialects. The world's willingness to
look away from the long tragedy of the Kurdish people is inexcusable.

And consider how strategically helpful a Kurdish state, reliant on U.S.
military guarantees, might be. If the Kurdish people agreed to host our
forces, we could abandon our bases in Turkey, the use of which has been
restricted almost to worthlessness. New airbases amid a welcoming population
would be quite a change in the region. Even the Saudis and the Gulf Arabs
would be on notice.

And what about Turkey? Our "long-time ally"?

I have no personal grudge against Turkey. On the contrary, I've visited the
country many times and even took my wife there on our honeymoon. Istanbul
remains one of my favorite cities. I've argued for years that Turkey was a
vital ally.

But times change. Turkish treachery on the eve of our recent war cannot be

Startled by the swiftness of our victory, the Turks immediately assured us
that it was all a minor misunderstanding, that Turkey wished to remain the
best of friends. Yet Turkey is again becoming the "sick man of Europe,"
plagued by ineradicable corruption, growing Islamic radicalism and a
self-destructive military.

The result of our renewed friendship? Last week, U.S. forces had to break up
a secret Turkish military operation in northern Iraq, arresting a dozen of
Ankara's special operations troops. The Turkish mission? To assassinate the
senior Kurdish leader in Kirkuk. His crime? Cooperating with the Americans.

The Turkish chief of staff, Gen. Ozkok, threw a public tantrum, insisting
that we had created a grave crisis by busting his assassins. Sorry, pal. You
created the crisis. And you just blew any chance you and your government had
of rebuilding bridges to Washington that will bear any real weight.

The Turkish military's scheme to undercut our occupation underscores the
need for the Bush administration to stop thinking small when it comes to
nation-building. Instead of just changing the oil in the old jalopy, it's
time for a fleet of new cars. An independent Kurdistan should roll off the
assembly line first.

The second stage of the division of Iraq would kick in if the Sunni Arabs
still refuse to cooperate: We would declare the interim Iraqi Federation
dissolved, creating three fully independent states in its place, with the
Kurdish and Shi'ite states meeting along the Iranian border to guarantee the
Kurds a corridor to the sea for their oil, gas and trade.

Then leave the Sunni Arabs to rot.

Oh, and there just might be a third step down the road, too. We should not
miss any opportunity to support the longing for freedom of the tens of
millions of Kurds held hostage behind European-imposed borders in Turkey,
Syria and Iran. For Americans serious about human rights and freedom,
Greater Kurdistan must be a long-range goal.

Military operations alone cannot change the Middle East. The European legacy
of phony borders must be demolished, starting in Iraq. Don't betray our
troops again by leaving the job unfinished to please our enemies.

Ralph Peters is a retired Army officer and the author of "Beyond Terror:
Strategy in a Changing World."




July 12, 2003 -- Full marks to Ralph Peters ("Break up Iraq now!" Opinion,
July 10) for his honesty, courage and objectivity - and boldly upholding
true American values. His recognition of Kurdistan's strategic geopolitical
importance and the Kurds' time-honored loyalty to friends is no less

It would be sad if President Bush's place in history were to be tarnished by
his neglect of the Kurds due to irrational reverence for the errors of the
past and his undeserved loyalty to tyrannical and phony "friends" like the
Turkish generals.

Eziz Bawermend
Sydney, Australia


Trying to hold together coalitions of feuding people who hate each other is
not a recipe for success.

Democratic values must be fostered before they can trump religious and
ethnic allegiances.

Turkey should be justly rewarded for its treachery. What it feared most - an
independent Kurdistan - is what it deserves.

John Erickson
Henderson, Nev.


Finally, someone has said what I've been waiting to hear since the fall of
Baghdad. The problems of the Middle East are in no small part the result of
the breakup of the colonial empires of Europe after World War I and can only
be resolved by recognizing the mistakes made at that time.

President Bush has an historic opportunity and, I hope, the resolve to act.

Jeffery Kempf
Auburn, Alaska


Ralph Peters' column about the breakup of Iraq is scary. The same argument
could be made for America.

We could partition Texas, New Mexico and California for the Hispanic
population. The freed slaves could take over the Deep South. Indian
reservations could be a new independent nation.

America does have the same problems as Turkey and Iraq. We always seem to be
able to work them out.

David Bebb
Palm Springs, Calif.



Turkey responds to activities of Jewish backed Kurdish Credit Bank with
Ziraat Bank

Turkey responds to activities of Jewish backed Kurdish Credit Bank with
Ziraat Bank


ISTANBUL - The Turkish government will take precautions against an increase
in banking activities and the purchase of land in northern Iraq. The Turkish
government plans to respond to activities of "Kurdish Credit Bank" which
grants loans to Kurdish people to purchase land belonging to the Arab and
Turkmen people in northern Iraq, by opening a branch of the Turkish
state-owned Ziraat Bank in the region.

The Iraqi Turkmen Front (ITC) Ankara Representative Ahmet Muratli said that
they have discovered that Israel was behind these banking activities in the
region. He said he immediately informed the Turkish government about these
activities several months ago and as a result they persuaded state-owned
Ziraat Bank to become active in the region.

Muratli said that northern Iraq has great importance in terms of both
potential commercial and strategic importance and they applied to the
Turkish Foreign Ministry and Turkish Treasury to establish a branch of the
Turkish owned bank.

Muratli said, "Everyone wants Ziraat Bank or another Turkish bank in the
region. Kurdish, Arab and Turkmen businessmen personally conveyed their
demands to Turkish officials in Ankara."

'Purchasing land in Mosul is encouraged'
Iraq is an oil rich region and has the second largest oil reserves in the
world. Northern Iraq produces approximately 70 percent of all Iraqi's oil
reserves. The Kurdish Credit Bank has subsequently caused worries among the
Turkmen and Arab people.

Muratli said the Kurdish Credit Bank is centered in the city of Suleymaniya
in northern Iraq and the Bank was established through the assistance of
Massoud Barzani, head of the Kurdistan Democratic Party and Jalal Talabani,
head of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan Party. Muratli said they discovered
after exhaustive research that Israel was behind the creation of the Kurdish
Credit Bank.

Muratli said, "Kurdish groups at first wanted to seize the homes and
property of Turkmen and Arab people, who form a majority in the Mosul and
Kerkuk regions, by force. When the Kurdish groups were not successful in
their efforts, they wanted to purchase these homes and property by paying
for it. When we talked with Arab tribes, they said that Jewish Kurds and
Israelis began to purchase property. The Jewish Kurds and Jewish Arabs, who
have obtained long term and interest-free loans from the Kurdish Credit
Bank, began to purchase property, which was allegedly their property in the
past. We are following the developments very closely."

Investment-Development Banking needs specialization and Kurds are not
specialized in this area

Experts on the Kurds in northern Iraq and the Middle East said that Kurdish
groups, who do not have experience in banking, are certainly assisted by
some unidentified groups.

A former Department Head at the Turkish National Intelligence Organization
(MIT), Mahir Kaynak said, "It is certainly necessary for Kurds in northern
Iraq to receive asistance from foreign countries. It is necessary to
establish a bank in the region in order to carry out daily banking
transactions and Turkey must act urgently in this field."

Kaynak said that investment-development banks have a wide experience in this
field and Kurdish groups can establish such a bank with the help of Jewish
businessmen, who are very powerful in world financial markets.

The General Manager and Chief Executive Officer of Ziraat Bank, Can Akin
Caglar said they were researching the new banking laws of the Iraqi Interim
Governing Council very closely. He said Ziraat Bank has been continuing
discussions with Iraqi officials to open a branch in Iraq as a private bank.
Caglar said, "We will determine in time which path we will follow. We
continue to be interested in this country and I hope that we have positive

Cihan News Agency


Three Iraqs, not one

23 October 2003

Daily Times [Pakistan]
By Shlomo Avineri

Saddam's regime was merely the most extreme manifestation of the
harshunderlying fact that Iraq's geography and demography condemned it to
rule bythe iron fist. Nor has Saddam's fall changed this fact

America's mounting difficulties in setting up a coherent form ofgovernment
in Iraq, let alone a democratic one, inspire a question that moststatesmen
consider unthinkable: is it possible that there is no way tore-constitute
Iraq as one state, and that alternative options must beconsidered,
unpalatable as they may appear?

Like so many problems in the re-birth of states wounded bydictatorship -
Eastern Europe is a good example - Iraq's difficulties havedeep historical
roots. To blame everything on the heavy-handedness of theAmericans is too
simplistic and shallow, even if their mistakes have,indeed, been legion.

Iraq was established in the 1920s by the British, who occupied theregion
after the Ottoman Empire disintegrated at the end of WWI. Theirpolicies were
dictated by British imperial interests, and gave noconsideration to the
wishes, interests, or characteristics of the localpopulation.

What British imperial planners did was to stitch together threedisparate
provinces of the old Ottoman Empire and put at their head a princefrom Hijaz
(now a part of Saudi Arabia). The three provinces - Mosul,Baghdad, and
Basra - each had very distinct characters and very differentpopulation

Mosul had a Kurdish majority, with significant Assyrian-Christian
andTurkoman minorities; Baghdad was mainly Sunni; and Basra was
predominantlyShi'ite. Throwing such disparate groups into one body politic
doomed thenewly invented country to decades of strife and repression.

The old Ottoman Empire ruled these three provinces - as it ruled allof its
imperial possessions - through its historically autocratic means.
Thechallenge facing the new Iraqi state was to try to create a
non-despotic,relatively representative form of government in which all
sectors of thepopulation would find an expression of their political will.
This turned outto be an impossible mission. For this reason Iraq - even
before SaddamHussein - always suffered the most repressive regime of any
Arab state.

In a country where Shi'ites form the majority, the Sunnis -traditionally the
hegemonic group in all Arab countries - were totallyunwilling to allow any
democratic process to jeopardize their rule. A Shi'ite insurrection was
brutally put down in the 1920s (with the help of theBritish Royal Air

Similarly, Kurdish attempts at autonomy before WWII were drowned inbloody
massacres of tens of thousands of innocent civilians, and even theAssyrian
Christian minority - a relatively small group, with no politicalambitions -
was exposed to murderous assaults in the 1930s.

Under these conditions, with the Sunni ruling minority constantlyfeeling
threatened, it was no accident that the only attempt in any Arabcountry to
establish something like a pro-Nazi fascist regime occurred inIraq in the
early 1940's under Rashid Ali al-Khailani. The Britishsuppressed this
misadventure, but not before hundreds of Jews in Baghdadwere murdered in a
wild farhood (pogrom) instigated by the short-livedpro-Nazi government.

Saddam's regime was merely the most extreme manifestation of the
harshunderlying fact that Iraq's geography and demography condemned it to
rule bythe iron fist. Nor has Saddam's fall changed this fact: anti-US
violence isnot only an expression of anger at foreign occupation; it is also
a Sunniattempt to abort the establishment of a democratic order that would
putthem - the historical masters - in a subordinate position.

Similarly, one cannot see the Kurds in the north submitting willinglyto a
Baghdad-dominated Arab regime, let alone a Shi'ite one (most Kurds
areSunnis). There is little understanding in the West of how deep the
Sunni/Shi'ite divide runs. Put yourself in pre-1648 Europe, a time when
Protestantsand Catholics slaughtered each other with abandon, and you'll
understand theenmity immediately.

So what can be done? Yugoslavia's example shows that in multi-ethnicand
multi-religious countries deeply riven by conflict, partition andseparation
may be the only way to ensure stability and democratisation.There is no
doubt today that Croatia and Serbia - despite theirdifficulties - stand a
better chance of becoming more or less stabledemocracies than if they were
still fighting for mastery among themselveswithin the Procrustean bed of the
former Yugoslavia.

Nor is federation an alternative - as the terms of the federationitself
become the bones of contention (see Bosnia or Cyprus). Even thepacific
Czechs and Slovaks found it easier to develop their respectivedemocratic
structures through a velvet divorce rather than be joined in anunworkable

The time has come to think the unthinkable, about creating a Kurdishstate in
the north, an Arab Sunni one in the centre around Baghdad, and anArab
Shi'ite state in the south around Basra. Repeating mantras aboutterritorial
integrity - the conventional wisdom of international relations -is
productive only as long as it ensures stability and averts chaos. Again,as
Yugoslavia - and the Soviet Union - showed, once strife replacesstability,
territorial integrity loses its strategic meaning and legitimacy.

This is not a universal prescription for ethnically homogenous states.The
point is simply that there are moments in history when democratisationand
nation building coincide, and that in deeply divided societies theminimum
consensus needed for both to succeed simultaneously is difficult toachieve.
All this may run contrary to conventional wisdom, but who thoughtthat the
USSR would disintegrate? Creative and innovative thinking is neededabout
Iraq; otherwise today's mayhem will continue - and worsen. -
Shlomo Avineri is Professor of Political Science at the HebrewUniversity of

----- Original Message -----
From: "nels bacon" <>
To: "as-ilas" <>; "casi" <>
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 10:11 AM
Subject: Re: [casi] The New York Times: a proposal for ethnic cleansing in

Partitioning Iraq - as proposed by Gelb in the NY Times article
posted below-  was described in Israel's Hebrew press over a decade
ago asa primary goal of the Israeli government.  I wondered
at the time how long it would take for an influential American Israel
Supporter to "propose" it in the US national media.  The partitioning plan
was partially implemented by the US immediately after their first Gulf
War when they established the illegal "No Fly Zones" over Iraq on the
pretense that they were to protect the Kurds in the North and the Sunnis
in the South from Saddam Hussein.

Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit
To contact the list manager, email
All postings are archived on CASI's website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]