State Racism in Turkey And Kurdish Question   
Hadi Elis. May 16, 2002 

Kurdistan Observer
May23, 2002
 
In spite of the apparent freedom of the Kurdish people in Iraqi Kurdistan to
shape their way of living under the political climate, free from repression of
central government and the imposed restrictions on education, media and press
in the aftermath of the catastrophic second gulf war in 1991 and the
establishment of the de facto semi-independent government in Iraqi Kurdistan (
excluding the period of fratricide from 1994-1998 between PUK and KDP),
there remains many concerns about the way which the Kurdish political parties
operate in this new climate, there is little doubt that the structure of these parties
have undergone little change, where the decisions mostly done at the top of the
pyramid with the rang and file of these parties almost without any effective role
in shaping the political process and the promotion in the party hierarchy still
following tribal and personal considerations and not the efficiency, loyalty,
education or skill of the political candidates. It is not surprising to see very few
new faces in Kurdish politics  in both major parties in spite of possibility of
promoting new blood in these parties in the new climate of freedom. There is
concern that these parties have built barriers between themselves and population
of Kurdistan and that they are out of touch with reality sometimes when they are
trying to express the will of the Kurdish people, and in spite of the apparent
thawing of freeze between the two major parties, one does not need to be to
intelligent to notice the distrust and stubbornness on both sides to put the interest
of all the Kurdish population in Iraqi Kurdistan and not creating their own
historic division of even a part of Kurdistan ( in this case south Kurdistan) into
different regions ( Sulaimany vs. Hawler and Duhok) just to satisfy their lust for
power on the expense of the future of Iraqi Kurdistan. It is shameful that the two
parties failed to reach an agreement to restore the elected Kurdish government of
1992 which they hijacked each in his own way, destroying this historic
opportunity for the Kurdish people , in spite of the direct sponsorship of the only
superpower in the world ( Washington agreement 1998) and their pressures for
these two parties to solve their selfish conflicts. Probably it is good to remind
these parties that they were even not able to meet the smallest clerks of the
American administration in coffee houses before 1991 and that the good fortune
that they enjoy now is because of the effect of the millions of Kurds in the
exodus of 1991 following the glorious uprising of March 1991 .
The Kurdish parties must reform the political process within their parties allow
democratization of the decision making process to encourage new generation of
Kurdish politicians which can present the Kurdish case more intelligently and
more efficiently to the outside world.

Dr. N.Hawramany
Basel/ Switzerland