Women Bombers Open Gates of Hell in Iraq;
61 Dead, Hundreds Wounded;
Kurdish Mobs Attack Turkmen Offices in Kirkuk
Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that four female suicide bombers killed or wounded 350 persons on Monday. Late reports give 61 as the number of those killed. Al-Hayat says the bombings reminded Iraqis of the bad old days when this level of destruction was a common, almost daily occurrence.
The bombing of an enormous crowd of thousands of Kurds in Kirkuk protesting the recent provincial election bill, which would have evenly divided political representation among Kurds, Turkmen and Arabs, was blamed by a prominent Kurdish figure on the Turkmen. Rumors flew that the crowd had been fired on from a Turkmen building, though police denied them. Then angry Kurds attacked Turkmen political party HQs throughout the city.
Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that the speaker of the Iraqi parliament, Mahmud al-Mashhadani, fainted in the middle of the parliamentary debate on the events in Kirkuk. He had fainted the day before, as well, but had insisted on leaving the hospital to come back to work. Sunni fundamentalist MP Khalaf al-Ulyan of the Iraqi Accord Front alleged that someone had poisoned al-Mashhadani after parliament passed the provincial elections bill (he was implying that Kurdish MPs were trying to murder their Sunni Arab colleagues on the floor of parliament. So much for "reconciliation.")
The bombing in Kirkuk killed at least 23 and wounded 150.
Just logically speaking, it appears that these four bombings were planned out by elements of the Sunni Arab guerrilla movement, which has tighter command and control than is usually realized. Given this modus operandi on this day, it would be odd if the bombing in Kirkuk were done independently by Turkmen.
I discussed the Kirkuk crisis with Ambassador Peter Galbraith on the Lehrer News Hour on Monday evening.
With Turkish Prime Minister Rejep Tayyip Erdogan all but blaming the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) for bombings on Sunday in Istanbul, Turkish-Kurdish tensions are at a boiling point.
McClatchy presents a connected account of the bombings in Karrada, Baghdad and in Kirkuk. Vali Nasr is quoted, "People wrote the requiem for sectarian conflict and AQI too rapidly," said Dr. Vali Nasr, of the Council on Foreign Relations. . ."In the absence of a final settlement, the country is always vulnerable to regression, and we still may end up back where we were."
Antiwar.com gives all casualties of political violence in Iraq on Monday, totalling some 87 dead and 288 wounded.
Labels: Iraq
8 Comments:
By the power invested in my by the overwhelming force of global public opinion, history, reality and moral righteousness, I hereby present Professor Juan Cole with the Bloggers Medal Of Honour.
Good Kirkuk discussion in the link but I would like to make some observations:
The presenter wrongly stated that the law applies to Iraq's 18 provinces. In fact it does not apply to the Kurdish region, which makes the Kurds' blocking of the law even more disgusting.
The recommended 4-way split is for the local officials not the MPs. This is very bad, but the current Kurdish monopoly is even worse.
Mr Galbraith is wrong to assume that the US can swing it for its friends, the Kurds. The USA has failed for the last five years, and it is now in the twilights of its power and influence in Iraq. For example, the US gave the Kurdish Peshmerga militia exclusive control of Kirkuk in April 2003 and has maintained that ever since. One of the items in law instructed the Iraqi government to send proper Iraqi forces to replace the Peshmerga. Maliki has already sent the first battalion although the law is vetoed by the (Kurdish) President, so much for US power.
The best and most likely option is for Kirkuk to declare itself a Region, a status similar to that of Kurdistan now. This option was missing from the admittedly short discussion.
Prof Cole,
Wouldn't it be wise for the US to help broker a deal in the North, at least between the Kurds and the Turkmen? It seems to provide a ready opportunity to also address the Kurdish situation in Turkey. Turks are a minority in Iraq (and a potential Kurdistan). Kurds are the minority in Turkey. Couldn't the US aid a resolution that involved Turkey (with the aim of also resolving the PKK issue in Kurdistan), perhaps linking rights of Turkmen in Kurdistan (political representation, right to speak educate in their language and other cultural rights) with similar guarantees to Kurds in Turkey. If the Kurdistan gov't is able to negotiate that deal with Turkey and the Turkmen that would allow it the movement to turn on the PKK (because it would have leveraged guarantees for Kurds in Turkey) while also providing assurances to Turkey against further Kurdish separatism.
Removing the Turkmen from dispute with the Kurds would also pressure the Arabs to cut a deal (depriving them of Turkmen allies; who, since they seem to be significantly Shia, would not necessarily be otherwise interested in an alliance with Sunni Arabs.)
Does expanding the dispute (to address Turkey's Kurdish question) simply make it more unmanageable? It seems to me that it would allow the resolution of all parts of the dispute between Turkey and Kurdistan (which goes beyond Kirkuk to include the PKK and fears of further Kurdish separatism in Southeast Turkey.)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/29/world/asia/29afghan.html?ref=world&pagewanted=print
July 29, 2008
Canadian Soldiers Firing on Car in Afghanistan Kill 2 Children
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
KABUL, Afghanistan — Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan opened fire on a speeding car, which they feared was about to attack their convoy, and killed a 2-year-old boy and his 4-year-old sister, officials said Monday.
NATO and the Canadian military issued statements that said the soldiers opened fire near the southern city of Kandahar on Sunday after the driver had ignored repeated signals to keep back.
The car came under fire after it drove within 10 yards of the convoy, the Canadian statement said....
Then, I ask, will Barack Obama really be pulling American forces from Iraq or just selected forces as seems likely? What about Afghanistan, where Obama is talking of adding forces?
Where is there a viable candidate who will support peace?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/29/world/middleeast/29military.html?ref=world
July 29, 2008
Air Force Plans Altered Role in Iraq
By THOM SHANKER
The commander of American and allied air forces in the Middle East has completed a detailed plan for how air power would be refocused in Iraq if, as is widely anticipated, the number of American ground troops was reduced in the final months of the Bush presidency and beyond.
The commander, Lt. Gen. Gary North, described a future approach that would rely on jet fighters and bombers to help ensure the safety of American troops who remain behind to train Iraqis as the number of allied ground combat troops decreased....
Missing from the conversations about Kirkuk is oil; it's why the Kurds want it; and it's why Iraqis don't want the Kurds to have it. Nor do the Turks want the Kurds controlling Kirkuk, and I'm not talking about IraqiTurkomen. As for understanding Kirkuk, a good map is absolutely necessary--It's Wolfowitz's "floating on oil" This map showing the Kurdish areas of Northern Iraq and its relation to the illegal "no-fly" zone in 2003 is interesting when compared to this map showing the distribution of major ethnoreligious groups and tribes in 2003. Kurdistan will probably have a fate similar to Armenia: Total dependence on its former enemy: The Turks; but only if it can overcome its dependence on the US, which in reality has zero power to solve any of its problems.
If the Kurds want a state of their own, they must cede Kirkuk. If they try to retain Kirkuk, they will not become an independent state. The Iraqi state is weak now, but it will be much stronger in the future--far stronger than the Kurds--and even in its currently weakened state, the Iraqis are telling the Kurds in easily understood language that they will not be allowed to keep Kirkuk.
prof. cole - hi - could you please explain to me HOW EXACTLY we "know" whether a burka-clad suicide bomber is/was a woman?
who reports this? how is it confirmed after the fact? are the women glorified to their communities and families in the same way that the men bombers are? wouldn't it be easy for a man to put on a burka and wander into a market loaded for bear?
thanks...
john in st.l...
Post a Comment
<< Home