Question:
Why does Barzani insist on holding the referendum on the separation of the Kurdistan province, although there is no international and regional approval for this referendum? Is not the referendum in the present circumstances against the interests of the Kurds themselves? Is the referendum expected to take place? If the referendum is held and the majority approved, is it possible to establish a Kurdish state in the region? Jazakum Allah Khairan.
Answer:
There is a saying that if the ruler took a decision against the interest of his country, it means that the ruler is an agent, and that this decision has been dictated by another state for its own benefit … This statement closly matches the Kurds in the Kurdistan region, The clarification of this is as follows:
1 – Any conscious politician understands how difficult it is for the Kurds to have a state. In fact, the bid to establish a state for the Kurds in the current international circumstances is damaging to the Kurdistan province, not only political and moral damage, but also material damage. For the issue is not the establishment of a state for Kurds in Iraq, and if that were the case, it could be possible…
The regime that was set by the Americans after the occupation of Iraq, which became known as the Bremer Constitution, this regime has made Iraq a federal of provinces in a fragile link with the center, until the authority of the Kurdistan region became stronger than the central government in Baghdad in terms of governance and conduct in the region! The disbelieving colonial countries bear in their minds the seeds of dividing and dismantling any Muslim country they occupy, and they only wait for the right opportunity, all this is in hatred of Islam and Muslims … We stated in a previous answer to question dated 12/8/2014:
“-America since its occupation of Iraq in 2003 continues to work to create Iraq’s disintegration; the Constitution that Bremer placed on the sectarian basis and schools of thoughts has put quotas for sects and school of thoughts…He split it between the President and the head of Parliament and the Prime Minister, and because the prime minister is the one who has the executive power, and because Bremer made it a sectarian position it became a post of provocation and incitement for the other components….the manuscript of the constitution itself states that the government is federal over regions, and the powers of the regions are strong. Therefore, America has succeeded in creating the circumstances for the dismantling of Iraq into three regions…”
The province is practically a state lacking embassies and membership of the United Nations and other similar formalities … As for the practical terms, the Kurdistan region is a state within a state and is effectively detached from the central state, since Iraq as a single state has been distanced! Therefore, the Kurdistan region is not in need of a state inside Iraq for it is practically a state …And as we have said, the issue is not the establishment of a Kurdish state within the borders of the Kurdish region in Iraq and that it has nothing to do with other Kurdish areas outside Iraq, this is not the case. Instead, if any state of the Kurds is created, it will automatically attract behind it heavy storming movements by the Kurds in the region, so that the Kurdish state does not stand at the Territory Kurdistan… Therefore, if it happens it will be a painful blow, especially for America and its agents in Turkey, Iran and Syria. So, any politician knows that the creation of a state for the Kurds, whether in Turkey, Iraq or Syria, this creation is currently not tolerated by the international or regional conditions, and it is not likely to mean that Kurdish politicians, including Al-Barzani, do not realize this. Rather, as aforementioned, the idea of creating a Kurdish state in current situations may lead to a reshuffle-and-deal and uncontrollable movements in the region, especially the Kurdish region. Which, as we have said, will harm them not only morally and politically but materially, and therefore Barzani’s decision is against the interest of his country in the current situations … This is the first part of the saying.
2- With regards to which state is that behind Barzani’s decision, and the fact that the decision is in the interest of that state, the evidences are clear in this, and it is not difficult to point the finger to figure which state that is. The announcement of the referendum to create a separate state from Iraq, this declaration can not be issued by Barzani amid an American opposition and opposition from the states of the region surrounding Kurdistan region who are loyal to America. And he can not be strengthened to confront these internationally and regionally opposing forces, unless there is another major state that supports Barzani and encourages him to take this decision. For the Kurdistan region, in its entirety, is too weak to stand up to those states, especially America, which controls the whole of Iraq. It is not difficult, as we said earlier, to realize that this great state that stands behind him and instructs him to make such decisions is Britain. Barzani’s family has been linked to Britain since the late Ottoman State. Barzani inherited this link from his father, Mustafa Mulla Barzani, and before him his uncle Ahmed Barzani and before them Abdul Salam Barzani, who led a Kurdish armed rebellion against the Ottoman State from 1909 to 1914 with an overt support from Britain. Thus, the family has a long-standing link with Britain… If we were to follow the positions from the referendum, we would find that the British position was in favour of the referendum decision, even with what Britain is known by of evil style and deception:
For example, Barzani met with Frank Baker, the British ambassador in Iraq on 24/8/2017 to express Britain’s support for him. The Kurdish website “Rudaw” reported on 24/8/2017, the news of these meetings, “During Barzani meeting with the British ambassador in Iraq, the guest expressed his country’s understanding of the rights of the people of Kurdistan, and briefed the President of the Kurdistan Region on the British position to hold the referendum”. The meaning of understanding in the diplomatic language is support, and the meaning of informing him about the British position without mentioning anything is also support. That is, the British position is positive towards Barzani’s decision, rather it is supportive of him and asking him to continue despite the opposition of America and pro-American countries in the region…
Another example, the official of foreign relations in the Kurdistan region Falah Mustafa said to Kurdistan 24 that “Britain is not against the referendum, and does not oppose the Kurdish aspirations.” Mustafa’s speech came after the meeting of British Secretary of State for Middle East and North Africa, Alistair Burt with Kurdish officials in Erbil. The British Secretary of State for the Middle East and North Africa, Alistair Burt arrived on Sunday to Erbil to discuss with the Kurdish officials on several files. The Kurds plan to hold a referendum on the independence of the Kurdistan region from Iraq on 25 September in an initial step to establish an independent state. (Kurdistan24 Arbil, 5/9/2017)
Thus, Britain is the country behind the referendum decision issued by Barzani.
3 – As for Britain’s interest in this decision, it has been sequential since Trump won the election and the rushing of British Prime Minister May to visit Trump on 26/1/2017 and congratulate him in Washington … At that time, Trump praised May and so did May, but each had a purpose different from the purpose of the other! As for Trump, he wanted Britain to do its best to dismantle the European Union, so it can break its ties with Europe without bluffing. At the same time, spending efforts to create an atmosphere for the dismantling of the European Union, especially in France and the Netherlands, which were on the verge of elections. As for May, she wanted trade agreements from Trump to exploit them in new pressures on EU countries to win concessions when it exits the union. During the visit, Trump and May focused on their intended purposes. May, as the english custom, had tried to conceal her commercial purpose in devious ways, but Trump’s lack of diplomacy and his open remarks did not enable May to conceal her intentions…
Thus, when the pro Europe parties won in the elections of The Netherlands and France, in addition to that Germany strongly supports the European Union and gives it a substantial share of attention, made Trump realize that Britain was interested in concluding trade agreements with America and did not give the subject of dismantling the European Union the strong attention as Trump wants and all this led to Trump’s reaction, the result of which was striking Britain in “Qatar” by that siege and boycott! We have already explained this in answer to question we issued on 23/7/2017, where we said: “With regards to Britain: British Prime Minister Theresa May’s early visit to Washington on January 26, 2017 and her eagerness to sign a trade agreement with Washington would serve as a model for other EU countries to encourage them to leave the EU. Thus, Britain restored its attachment to the United States and was very much in favor of the Trump administration, but after the American hopes of dismantling the European Union were shattered, as evidenced by the victory of the pro Europe parties in the elections of the Netherlands and France, Trump’s positive view of Britain declined as he wanted it to lead the process of dismantling Europe, and when London’s Brexit was not repeated in Paris and Amsterdam, America has come back to tarnish the international interests of Britain in a shocking manner to London. America is pushing its agent, Sisi, to increase support for Hafter without any regard to the interests of Britain in Libya, and America pushed its agents in a semi shocking way to pressure on Qatar, which is Britain’s spear head in the Arab and Islamic region…” End.
All this made Trump lose his temper and rushed to visit Saudi Arabia and held that summit and then hit Britain by the siege and the boycott that happened to Qatar.
4- Here, it was necessary for Britain to disrupt some of the interests of America in the region, so it had resorted to that decision to call Barzani to a referendum to annoy America and its agents. And of course, Britain can only disrupt America, for it has no ability to confront America publicly, but it can disrupt and annoy, especially if it chooses an appropriate condition and an effective work as it found in the referendum of Kurdistan. Britain was keen that Barzani follows the course to its extent because the present situation is a hot for America as well as for its agents; Turkey, Iran and Syria because of the armed actions that are taking place … therefore Barzani remained insistent on the referendum and Britain propagandized for the referendum that it would achieve an independent state for the Kurds in the Kurdistan region. And as its usual in cunning and deception, Bratian is not concerned with the interests of the Kurds as much as they achieve its own interests, and the history of Britain with the Kurds is full of these things!
We said in answer to question dated 1/4/2009:
“… Britain had promised a Kurd state to Mahmood Al-Hafeed in 1919 C.E in exchanges to fighting the Ottoman forces in Sulaimaiyyah. Al-Hafeed’s men fought, killed their own Othmani brethern and expelled them, but of course Britain not only backed away from its promises, it also exiled al Hafeed to its colony -India. Again at the the Sèvres treaty in 1920, Britain insisted with the Ottman state to include a clause regarding the state of Kurdistan only to frustrate Khaleefah Mohammad Waheeduddin. At this treaty, it was the delegation of the Khaleefah that was negotiating. When Britain succeeded in destroying the Khilafah and installing its own man Mustafa Kemal as the president of the Republic of Turkey, and after it signed the Lausanne treaty with it in 1924, Britain refused to include the Kurd state clause simply because it had already achieved its aim, which indeed was to destroy the Khilafah State, therefore this promise had now become redundant! It was Britain that instigated the Kurdish nationalistic sentiments and slogans as well as all other nationalistic ‘aspirations‘ in the entire region and it was Britain again that also exploited these sentiments and exhorted them to fight and rebel against the Islamic State so that Britain could achieve its aims. It then used all such elements who cooperated with it and used them as its agents and installed them as rulers and leaders in those countries…” This is how Britain is in cunning and deception…
5- Thus, Barzani insisted on holding the referendum on 25/9/2017, so that he has a state! He did not bother with the international or regional positions rejecting the referendum, even from some Kurds themselves, instead he stated: (The Kurdistan region reiterated on Wednesday its rejection of the postponement or cancellation of the referendum on independence from Iraq scheduled for September 25, despite international and regional efforts to dissuade Erbil from this step, and the rejection of the central government in Baghdad for this referendum and its results.
The Supreme Council for the referendum in the Kurdistan region, during a meeting chaired by President Massoud Barzani, yesterday, discussed the results of the Kurdistan delegation’s vist to Baghdad, in the subject of the referendum, as well as the results of Barzani talks with Matisse in Erbil, the day before yesterday. Barzani’s adviser said: President Masoud Barzani said that the referendum will not be postponed at all and will be as scheduled on Thursday 25th September corresponding to 2nd Dhu al-Hijjah 1438 AH – 24 August 2017 CE – Dubai – al-arabiya.net). This is with the understanding that the international and regional opposition to the referendum was totally clear:
A – America rejected the referendum from the first day Barzani announced the holding of the referendum, where he announced on 7/6/2017 that a referendum for the establishment of an independent Kurdish state would be held in the Kurdish areas of Iraq on 25th September. America responded through US presidential envoy to the international coalition, Bert McGurk: “We do not think the referendum should happen in September because it would be destabilizing. Having a referendum on such a fast timeline, particularly in disputed areas, would be, we think, significantly destabilizing.” (AFP, 8/6/2017)
Recently, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on 11/8/2017 in a telephone conversation with the President of the Kurdistan region Massoud Barzani, expressed “Washington’s desire to postpone the referendum on the independence of the region and its support for the continuation of talks and negotiations between the region and Baghdad.” The US sent its Defense Minister James Matisse to Baghdad on 22/8/2017 to meet with the Iraqi Prime Minister Abbadi and then to go to Erbil to meet Barzani and to Ankara on 23/8/2017 to move Turkey Erdogan, the active arm in the region…
B – The regional states loyal to America have also rejected… The spokesman for the Prime Minister Saad al-Hadithi said “Any decision that concerns the future of Iraq must take into consideration the constitutional texts as it is an Iraqi decision, Iraq is constitutionally defined as a democratic, federal and a full sovereign nation… All Iraqis must have their say over the future of their homeland. No party can determine its fate independent of others.” (Free American 9/6/2017).
Turkey has announced its opposition to the referendum and the declaration of independence of Kurdistan from the first day, so the Turkish Foreign Ministry issued a statement describing the decision of the presidency of the province as “a grave mistake and threatens the unity and territorial integrity of Iraq” (Free American 9/6/2017) … Erdogan announced after a meeting with US Defense Secretary Mattis and said: “The decision of the referendum is wrong” (Al-Jazeera 24/8/2017)… As well as Iran announced, on Saturday, 11 June 2017, shortly after the declaration of the referendum, that it strongly opposes the referendum to be held in Iraqi Kurdistan next September. Stressing that Tehran has a clear position on the unity of the Iraqi territories. Spokesman of the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Bahram Qasimi, said: “The unilateral and far-reaching decisions that are part of the national and legitimate criteria, will lead to more problems and the worsening security situation in Iraq.” (15/6/2017 http://afkarhura.com) The Free Ideas website http://afkarhura.com/?p=6839 published on 7 September 2017, a statement by the President of the Iranian Shura Council, in which he said: “The president of the Islamic Consultative Council in International Affairs, Hussein Amir Abdullahian, confirmed that the referendum in the Kurdistan of Iraq will cause a new crisis.”
Furthermore, America has followers within Kurdistan, including the Kurdish Goran movement (the change party) and the Talabani’s National Union Party. The Goran movement has opposed the announcement Barzani referendum, said Hoshyar Abdullah member of the movement in the parliament of Kurdistan “the movement of change is still on the same opinion that the timing of the referendum is wrong and this agenda is a personal and partisan agenda of Massoud Barzani” stressing that “the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) is a pawn and not a player.” (Elaph, 5/8/2017)
Also, the President of the Republic of Iraq Fuad Masum, who is from the Talabani’s National Democratic Party rejected the referendum, saying: “the presidency came on the shoulders and votes of the Kurds and is not equivalent to a drop of their blood and sacrifices and will not allow the “Masum” Dream of establishing their state and will respond to it on the day of the referendum”. The Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) said in a statement describing Masum’s statement as “a dangerous statement and a bad message to the world’s countries impede the results of the referendum and reduce it”. (Previous source)
Despite this regional international opposition, Barzani insists in holding the referendum and declares that he will not delay it even by one minute, as we mentioned above. All this because of the British driving for the subject of the referendum as we have showen in our review of the situation.
6 – Now that we have reviewed the events of the referendum with the various influencing factors… We can answer the expectations for the subject of the referendum… The most likely for this, and in the light of what we have shown is the following:
A. In all cases, it is not anticipated that a state for the Kurds is to be established in the legal sense of the states, because the American project for Iraq is for Iraq to be a federal state of provinces with a fragile link between the regions and the center. Which means, in the practical terms there is a separation in the ruling managment of Iraq, whereas fomally it remains a federal state of provinces called Iraq …This is the American project for Iraq since the occupation in 2003, during which it was carrying the seeds of dividing and dismantling Iraq, without declaring it to be official states, but to do so in due time. Bremer, the US governor of Iraq, has then put the Constitution of the federal provinces in Iraq, ending the status of Iraq as one strong state with central authority to be replaced with a fragile federal state, where the authority of the provinces is stronger than the authority of the center! So that Iraq is prepared, at a time that America can and sees it to be of its own interest, it is prepared to officially make Iraq several states… As for now, the American project is a state of the federal provinces in Iraq in a fragile link with the Center … We have issued a previous answer to question dated 12/8/2014 which stated:
“-America since its occupation of Iraq in 2003 continues to work to create Iraq’s disintegration; the Constitution that Bremer placed on the sectarian basis and schools of thoughts has put quotas for sects and school of thoughts…He split it between the President and the head of Parliament and the Prime Minister, and because the prime minister is the one who has the executive power, and because Bremer made it a sectarian position it became a post of provocation and incitement for the other components….the manuscript of the constitution itself states that the government is federal over regions, and the powers of the regions are strong. Therefore, America has succeeded in creating the circumstances for the dismantling of Iraq into three regions…”
Thus, the current American policy does not want states in Iraq, but rather a loose federal state, divided in practice and remaining as a state in form. Therefore, it is unlikely in the current circumstances to partition Iraq legally, but Iraq remains according to the Bremer project practically devided and its provinces are stronger than the center! At least in the foreseeable future.
B – Since the announcement of the referendum is a British order to vent the British predicament because of what happened to Qatar, then the referendum will be canceled if America helped to remove the boycott from Qatar or even relieve it in an appropriate manner to save its face…
C – America can cancel the referendum if it wants to, because it is the only country controlling Iraq. Whether the cancellation of the referendum is done directly from America, or by moving the Kurdish movements loyal to it in Kurdistan, or by moving Turkey and Iran against the region and, rather, against Barzani even if it becomes necessary to use material pressure. The Chief of Staff of the Iranian Army, Mohammad Baqri, visited Turkey for the first time since the establishment of the Republic of Iran in 1979. The visit took place on 15/8/2017, and lasted three days. He was received by Turkish President Erdogan at the presidential compound in Ankara and the meeting lasted 50 minutes, as reported by Turkey’s official Anatolia agency, demonstrating the importance of the matter. The Iranian chief of staff was accompanied by the ground forces commander and the commander of the border guards along with several senior Iranian military commanders, the official IRNA news agency reported. The spokesman for the Iranian Foreign Ministry Bahram Qasimi described the visit of the Iranian Chief of Staff Mohammad Baqri to Turkey and his meeting with his Turkish counterpart as a “leap” and “an integral step in the relations between the two countries …” (Mehr Iranian Agency 12/8/2017). So, it is likely that this visit was to coordinate on any material work in the region, if necessary to cancel the referendum or remove any meaningful results … what gives preponderance to this is that the US Secretary of Defense visited Ankara on 23/8/2017 after the visit of the Iranian chief of staff…
D- If America fears that there may be a heated disturbance as a result of item (c), America may not prevent the holding of the referendum, but without having any effective or meaningful result. And that the referendum shall not entail any measures of an independent nature.
7- Finally, it is truly painful that the Islamic bond, which had been cherished by Muslims, Arabs and non-Arabs, this bond the Kaffir colonizers have succeeded in alienating it from Muslims’ life and was replaced by rotten bonds; demolition shovels that made Muslims scattered: the wars among them are rampant, and the brotherhood is absent!
Nationalism is a shovel for the destruction of the Ummah, as it was yesterday a shovel for the demolition of the Islamic state. And here is the Kafir colonizer continues to use this tool to destroy what remains of the Ummah’s entity if it can … And then make the Muslim countries a battlefield for the great powers and a means for shedding Muslims blood, and brothers hitting the necks of each other! Islam has prohibited all that, and it emphasized the unity of Muslims, and their brotherhood, the Almighty said:
وَاعْتَصِمُوا بِحَبْلِ اللَّهِ جَمِيعًا وَلَا تَفَرَّقُوا وَاذْكُرُوا نِعْمَتَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ إِذْ كُنتُمْ أَعْدَاءً فَأَلَّفَ بَيْنَ قُلُوبِكُمْ فَأَصْبَحْتُم بِنِعْمَتِهِ إِخْوَانًا وَكُنتُمْ عَلَىٰ شَفَا حُفْرَةٍ مِّنَ النَّارِ فَأَنقَذَكُم مِّنْهَا كَذَٰلِكَ يُبَيِّنُ اللَّهُ لَكُمْ آيَاتِهِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَهْتَدُونَ
“And hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided. And remember the favor of Allah upon you – when you were enemies and He brought your hearts together and you became, by His favor, brothers. And you were on the edge of a pit of the Fire, and He saved you from it. Thus does Allah make clear to you His verses that you may be guided.”
(Al-i-Imran: 103)
And Allah (swt) says:
إِنَّمَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ إِخْوَةٌ
“The believers are but brothers”
(Al-Hujurat: 10)
Also, Islam has prohibited all forms of Assabiyah: nationalism, patriotism and tribalism…etc. Amr ibn Dinar said: I heard Jaber bin Abdullah says: We were with the Prophet ﷺ during an expedition and a man from the Muhajirin kicked a man from the Ansar. The Ansari called out, “O Ansar!” And the Muhajir called out, “O Muhajirin!” The Messenger of Allah heared it and said,«مَا هَذَا؟» “What is this?” They said, “O Messenger of Allah, a man from Muhajirin kicked a man from the Ansar. The Ansari called out, “O Ansar!” And the Muhajir called out, “O Muhajirin!”” The Prophet ﷺ said: «دَعُوهَا، فَإِنَّهَا مُنْتِنَةٌ» “Leave it, its rotten”. (Narrated by Bukhari).
And Abi Mijlaz, narrated from Jundab ibn Abdillah albajali who said: The Prophet ﷺ said:
«مَنْ قُتِلَ تَحْتَ رَايَةٍ عُمِّيَّةٍ، يَدْعُو عَصَبِيَّةً، أَوْ يَنْصُرُ عَصَبِيَّةً، فَقِتْلَةٌ جَاهِلِيَّةٌ»
“Whoever fights for a cause that is not clear, advocating tribalism, getting angry for the sake of tribalism, and he is killed, then he has died a death of Jahiliyyah.” (Narrated by Muslim)
Muslims lived for hundreds of years, glorified by their Deen, strong by their Lord, and unified by the brotherhood of Islam. So, among the companions of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ there was Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman, Ali, Salman al-Farsi (the Persian) and Bilal al-Habashi (the Abysinaian) … They were the servants of Allah, brothers, striving for the sake of Allah … So, Omar the Arab entered Al-Quds (Jerusalem) as a conquer, Salahuddin the Kurdish liberated Al-Quds from the Crusaders, and Abdulhamid the Turkish preserved it from the desecration of the Jews … Thus, Muslims are dignified, and so should be whoever has a heart or who listens while he is present in mind.
إِنَّ فِي هَٰذَا لَبَلَاغًا لِّقَوْمٍ عَابِدِينَ
“Indeed, in this [Qur’an] is notification for a worshipping people”
(Al-Anbiya: 106)
18th Dhul Hijjah 1438 AH
9/9/2017 CE