From lacc at peg.pegasus.oz.au Sat Jun 1 09:23:09 1991 From: lacc at peg.pegasus.oz.au (lacc at peg.pegasus.oz.au) Date: 01 Jun 1991 18:23:09 +1000 Subject: WEST RESPONSIBLE FOR TRAGEDY Message-ID: [THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE IS FROM "THE NEW DAWN", VOL. 1, NO. 2, JUNE 1991. $25 FOR 12 ISSUES. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION WRITE TO: THE NEW DAWN, AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE'S CONFERENCE, GPO BOX 3126FF, MELBOURNE, 3001, AUSTRALIA. ARTICLE MAY BE REPRINTED PROVIDED THAT SOURCE IS CREDITED TOGETHER WITH FULL ADDRESS. * ALL COMMUNICATION SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS *] West responsible for tragedy of Kurds by Fan Yew Teng [The following article was written by Fan Yew Teng and published in Malaysian daily The Star on May 1st, 1991. Fan Yew Teng is a former member of the national parliament in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, where he is well-known as a poet, writer and a politician.] The tragedy of the Kurds is the result of Western geopolitical hypocrisy which dates back to the early decades of this century, with the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire. Almost all the frontiers in the Middle East today were created by treaties dominated by Britain, France and the Soviet Union. Iraq, Syria and Lebanon were all created as the result of settlement based on the Sykes-Picot agreement in 1915 and the British-French compromise reached at San Remo in April 1920. Professor Daniel Yergin has reminded us, in his book, the PRIZE: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power, of "the arbitrary way in which 'nations' had been created and borders in the Middle East overlaid on the map of the defunct Ottoman Empire." Kurdistan - a nation without a state - is in that part of the Middle East where Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran and the Soviet Union are all within a hundred miles of one and other. Kurdistan is now part of these nations and the Kurds form a minority group in five countries. The Kurds are a nomadic people, a loose confederation of some 40 tribes. Before the Western powers found a role for the Kurds in their geopolitical calculations, Kurdistan and the Kurds were conveniently obscured. For instance, there was no mention of the Kurds in A Dictionary of Politics by Florence Elliot and Michael Summerskill, published by Penguin in 1957, and reprinted in 1959. This does not mean that the Western powers did not keep files on the Kurds. For as early as 1948, a CIA report observed, "The mountain tribes known as the Kurds are now and will continue to be a factor of some importance in any strategic estimate of Near East Affairs." In quest of their freedom the Kurds had fought the Turks, Iraqis and Iranians periodically. After a military coup in Baghdad in 1958, Kurdish autonomy appeared to be threatened. The Kurdish tribes in Iraq again engaged in a partisan war in which long campaigns alternated with several cease-fires. The main Kurdish forces were led by Mullah Mustapha Barzani, the most celebrated Kurdish military chieftain. Finally, out of sheer exhaustion, the Iraqi and the Kurds reached agreement on a 15-point settlement in early 1970. However, the potential peace was short-circuited by the Shah of Iran, who had several border disputes with Iraq, including and acrimonious one over the demarcation line in the Tigris River. The Shah feared that the end of the Kurdish rebellion would bring more direct confrontation between Iran and Iraq. He offered the Kurds money and weapons to resume their fight against Iraq. TEMPTING OFFER It was a tempting offer to the Kurds, but they did not trust the Shah of Iran either. Barzani proposed that he would consider the offer only if the United States guaranteed that the Shah would not be permitted to suddenly cut off assistance to the Kurds. The Shah passed the Kurdish request on to the US Government. Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger made an official visit to Iran in May 1972. In Teheran, John Connolly, a close associate of Mr Nixon's, informed the Shah that the United States was wiling to help guarantee the Shah's offer to the Kurds. The CIA handled the American side through its station in Teheran. Mr Kissinger subsequently set up the Washington apparatus for the Kurdish secret war against Iraq - a covert action on which the 40 Committee, responsible for policy approval of all major and politically sensitive covert action programmes, was not consulted. As Dr. John Prados points out, it was to be one of President Nixon's secret wars, to be kept away from the American people, the media and Congress. Mr Kissinger's military aid, Colonel Richard Kennedy, met with one of Barzani's sons, and with the CIA, on the Kurds' request. A staff associate, Alfred Atheton Jr., became the US National Security Council's focal point. The CIA ultimately provided US$16 million worth of military aid to Barzani. Since 1965, the Israelis had also been helping the Kurds. The Shah of Iran's involvement reportedly ran into hundreds of millions of dollars. Armed with this assistance, Barzani raised 100,000 partisan troops in late 1972. The Kurds were able to engage large scale Iraqi forces. In the October 1973 war between the Arab states and Israel, Barzani thought of launching a big offensive against Iraq at the suggestion of Israeli paramilitary advisers who were seeking to take pressure off their own front in Syria. The Americans, for their own reasons, did not think it was a good idea. On Oct 16, 1973, Kissinger instructed the CIA to tell Barzani not to make the attack. Barzani agreed reluctantly. As Prados says, "For the Shah, the Kurds were but a card to play in his dealing with Iraq." After the October 1973 war, Iran and Iraq settled some of their differences, leading to an agreement sealed in March 1975 in Algiers between the Shah and Saddam Hussein, then Iraq's Deputy President. The Shah halted aid to the Kurds, stopped the free passage of CIA arms shipments, and closed his borders to Barzani's men, all at the same time. The next day, the Iraqis launched a large-scale offensive into Kurdistan. On March 10, the Kurds sent an appeal to the US Government through CIA channels: "Our people's fate in unprecedented danger. Complete destruction hanging over our head. No explanation for all this. We appeal to you and the US Government to intervene according to your promises." Barzani also sent a personal letter to Mr Kissinger: "We feel that the United States has a moral and political responsibility toward our people who have committed to your country's policy." Mr Kissinger, who was now the Secretary of State in addition to National Security Council Adviser, did not reply to Barzani's appeals. Questioned about the abandonment of the Kurds, a senior American official reported, to a congressional investigating committee staff member that: "covert action should not be confused with missionary work." HYPOCRISY In the 1980s, the United States switched sides and discreetly favoured Iraq in a war against Iran. The Kurds were again used as "cards" and "mere pawns". Just as in early times, when the Ottoman Empire had frequently played on the Kurds' Muslim loyalties when using them in suppressing Christian Armenians within the empire. And, in reprisal, the Armenians, fighting with the Russian army, engaged in slaughters of the Kurds during World War I. And, after World War II, the British in Iraq and the French in Syria used the Kurds to counter-balance other ethnic groups. Today, after their "victory" in the Gulf War against Iraq, the United States, Britain and France continued to make use of the Kurdish "cards" and "pawns" for their own cynical and selfish geopolitical interests. For instance, the Asian Wall Street Journal of April 22, 1991, moralised about the need to save the Kurds, not realising for a second that its editorial entitled "The Realpolitik of Morality" is a shameless contradiction in terms. The Shah is long dead, but the present rulers of Iran are back once again into the game of instigating the Kurds in Iraq to rebel against the Iraqi Government. As David Halevy pointed out in the Washington Post recently, agents of Iran's intelligence body, the Sawama, following the Iranian National Security Council directives, established closer operational ties with two fighting Kurdish camps in northern Iraq. On March 10, Iranian military convoys supplied small arms, ammunition, anti-tank missiles and anti-aircraft missiles to two Kurdish fighting movements. "Within days of the arms delivery, the Kurdish rebellion had grown." Can Turkey, a member of NATO and an American ally in the recent Gulf War, be relied upon to treat the Kurds any better than they have been treated by the Iraqis? About one-third of the total Kurdish population live in Turkey today. They are not even recognized as a minority but are known as "Mountain Turks"; and they have been forbidden by the Turkish authorities to wear their own distinctive Kurdish costumes in or near administrative centres. TORTURE According to Amnesty International's 1990 Report, the thousands of people imprisoned in Turkey for political reasons included many Kurds, some from the banned Kurdish organisation known as Rizgari (Liberation). In November 1989, Prime Minister Turgut Ozal was elected president of Turkey. At the end of the year, a state of emergency was still in force in eight provinces in south-east Turkey where security forces were engaged in counter-insurgency operations against Kurdish secessionist guerillas. Many human rights violations were alleged to have taken place in the context of the conflict. They included allegations of torture. Can the Turks, whose own invasion and occupation of northern Cyprus in 1974 is still unresolved, offer any genuine and permanent "safe haven" and "comfort" to the Kurds. From kurds at gn.apc.org Sun Jun 2 23:28:23 1991 From: kurds at gn.apc.org (kurds at gn.apc.org) Date: 02 Jun 1991 22:28:23 +0000 (GMT) Subject: WEST RESPONSIBLE FOR TRAGEDY References: Message-ID: Yes, an excellent contribution. Please see also item 7 on this conference 'A Kurdish perspective on the Gulf War', in which the same points are made. From kurds at gn.apc.org Sun Jun 16 19:25:25 1991 From: kurds at gn.apc.org (kurds at gn.apc.org) Date: 16 Jun 1991 18:25:25 +0000 (GMT) Subject: New books on Kurdistan Message-ID: The following message lists two good new books about Kurdistan and the suffering of the Kurdish people. ============================================================== Originally posted by igc:aicoord in ai.general on June 11th. Here is a partial list of new books from Zed Press in London. They have a wide range of books for people interested in human rights and social justice, as well as fiction. Please contact them for any inquiries or purchases: Zed Books 57 Caledonian Rd. London N1 9BU, England Tel: (071) 837 4014 8466 AGHA, SHAIKH AND KHAN: THE SOCIAL AND POLITICAL STRUCTURES OF KURDISTAN by Martin Van Bruinissen This authoritative study of the Kurdish tribes provides a deep and varied insight into one of the largest primarily tribal communities in the world. It covers the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the great Kurdish revolt against republican Turkey, the birth of Kurdish nationalism and the situation of the Kurdish people in Iraq, Turkey and Iran today. Van Bruissen's work is already recognized as a key contribution to this subject. Tribe by tribe, Van Bruissen accounts for the evolution of power within Kurdish religious and other lineages, and shows how relations with the state have played a key constitutive role in the development of tribal structures. This is illustrated from contemporary Kurdish life, highlighting the complex interplay between traditional clan loyalties and their modern national equivalents. This book is essential to any Middle East collection. It has serious implications for the study of tribal life elsewhere, and it documents the history of what has until now been a forgotten people. Dr. Van Bruinessen is a distinguished social anthropologist and a Fellow of the Kurdish Institute in Paris. Hardback version: $60.00 Paperback version: $25.00 INTO KURDISTAN: FRONTIERS UNDER FIRE by Sheri Laizer >From the recent atrocities in Iraq to the systematic persecution suffered by Kurds in Turkey, this marvellous blend of political commentary, folktale and sympathetic observation helps us to understand the people behind the terrible headlines. Sheri Laizer skilfully portrays the drama of a family living close to the border, hearing gunshots and wondering whether a favored son will make it home tonight from a smuggling expedition. She shares the companionship of Kurdish women of the mountains, washing in melted snow. She captures the ambiguity of Kurdish intellectuals entwined in the cultural life of Turkey, a country that refuses to acknowledge their very existence. And she brings out the centuries of tradition behind a people who have given the Middle East some of its greatest heroes, from Saladin onwards. Sheri Laizer is a writer and film researcher, whose published work includes Maelstrom: Poems and Photographs (1981). Hardback version: $45.00 Paperback version:$15.00 From aldopacific at gn.apc.org Tue Jun 18 11:28:19 1991 From: aldopacific at gn.apc.org (aldopacific at gn.apc.org) Date: 18 Jun 1991 10:28:19 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Birthright Message-ID: Yesterday we had a wonderful Indian grassroots environmentalist, Kishore Saint, for lunch at the Centre for Human Ecology, Edinburgh University. He spoke of how village people were starting to learn about ecological reconstruction, and were blocking ecologically damaging "development" projects. He described how, by reducing grazing, dormant rootstock from long ago and seeds allowed trees to regenerate which people had almost forgotton about. As the ecology restored, fodder production provided again for livestock, but in a regulated manner. At the heart of this approach are Ghandian principles, and values very like those described by Indra in his item above on Eunomia. Kishore said, moreover, that what they're trying to do is move beyond the concept of human rights alone, and think in terms of BIRTHRIGHT. We Scots were enthused about this. We reflected on the loss of our own lands in the Highland Clearances 100 - 200 years ago, with the result that most of Scotland is now owned by wealthy English, Arabs, Europeans, etc.. We even speculated that it was time we rediscovered the concept of land-grabs in our own country! After all, half a million of our peoples were moved off their land by direct dispossession or economic pressure, and these now inhabit our urban slums, or were shipped to other lands where as oppressed they became oppressors (of Africans, Native Americans, Aborigines). ".... a thralldom worse than Babylon's was the plight they were in. .... While Britain was rejoicing (victory at Waterloo) they spent their time in grief. In the country that had reared them, no shelter from the wind; the grey strands of their hair were tossed by the cold breeze of the glen, there were tears upon their cheeks and cold dew on their heads. ....What solace had the fathers of the heroes who won fame? Their houses, warm with kindliness, were in ruins round their ears; their sons were on the battlefield saving a rueless land, their mothers state was piteous with their houses burnt like coal. (Iaian Mac a' Ghobhainn, Spiorad a' Charthannais (Spirit of Kindness) I share these reflections in the context of the ongoing plight of the Kurds and s the Shi'ites, and other such goups around the world. We must strive - all of us - to re-establish our human rights and our birthrights, and to recognise one another and uphold one another in gently so doing. Alastair. From kurds at gn.apc.org Thu Jun 20 02:35:52 1991 From: kurds at gn.apc.org (kurds at gn.apc.org) Date: 20 Jun 1991 01:35:52 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Kurdish Song for Alastair Message-ID: Alastair, your poem does indeed awake an echo. Here is a song by Shivan Perwer (who closed the Simple Truth Concert), which he performs to the accompaniment of a saz. It is about the massacre of Kurds at Ararat, called in the poem, Agri. AGRI O fate, treacherous fate Why have you done this to us? You demolished our houses Left our children fatherless What have you done? Eh, fate, traitor Why has this been done to us? Why have you separated our tents Made ruins of our houses Left our wives and children shelterless? You make our friends grieve, our enemies celebrate Traitor, betrayer, faithless Hey brothers, if you look you'll see Agri is marked out again, The great mountain is girdled with cloud The dagger drawn, hugged in its belt Enraged, finding its voice. Once again hatred and anger Agri. Agri Agri weeps blood Agri weeps blood Mercy, O fate, treacherous fate Hey, my brother, the Turkish army came The young Turks with their oppression They went into the towns and villages >From above showered down bombs and bullets Razed towns and villages flat Hey Fate, traitor Carried off all our goods Made orphans of our children Fate, what a betrayer you are Hey traitor, Fate, it must not be like this! Fate is treacherous, no good We'll send our cry out among the Kurds Let them all come to our call Today is the day. When we know our friends from our enemies Passive and uncommitted they can't be Everyone who has honour and purity Let him come to our call Everyone who lacks aim, zeal and sympathy Let him remain clinging to his wife. Fate is evil and treacherous. We will pin our hopes, our expectations on young and old alike, Perhaps some will see tomorrow Perhaps some will not - But I nurture my faith That our brave ones, our lions will rise up, Our heroes will get to their feet To banish this Fate And will dedicate themselves To achieve it, to be brave, The Kurds and Kurdistan Must avenge themselves For the blood which is spilled Treacherous Fate, betrayer The Kurds have no friends! (Translated from Kurdish by Sheri Laizer and quoted in her book 'Into Kurdistan: Frontiers Under Fire'.) From antennae at gn.apc.org Thu Jun 20 23:29:28 1991 From: antennae at gn.apc.org (antennae at gn.apc.org) Date: 20 Jun 1991 22:29:28 +0000 (GMT) Subject: UN changes tune on human rights Message-ID: The duty to oppose human rights abuse, if necessary by force, irrespective of issues of sovereignty, was always part of the UN Charter. A part which till now the UN and its member states have always conveniently forgotten. But this speech five days ago by UN Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar seems to indicate that the United Nations is at long last waking up to its responsibilities. This topic was originally written 11:43 am Jun 19, 1991 by unic in cdp:unic.news /* ---------- "UN'S CHANGING ROLE" ---------- */ DESCRIPTION: ADDRESS BY SECRETARY-GENERAL TO FORUM FOR SECURITY POLICY AT SAINT GALLEN UNIVERSITY, SWITZERLAND SG/SM/4577 17 June 1991 ADDRESS BY SECRETARY-GENERAL TO FORUM FOR SECURITY POLICY AT SAINT GALLEN UNIVERSITY, SWITZERLAND Following is the text of the address by Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar, delivered to the Forum for Security Policy at Saint Gallen University, Switzerland, on 15 June: I am delighted to be here in Switzerland on the occasion of its 700th anniversary, and to be in the town of Saint Gallen, an ancient and distinguished centre of learning. It is also a great honour to appear at a university that has a tradition for educating many of the business leaders of Europe and the world. The experience of Switzerland is one from which the global community can indeed draw great benefit. It is a country that enjoys cultural diversity within national unity, a land of staunch independence but not of isolation, a land-locked nation that has managed to become famous for its international flavour and is host to a number of international organizations. It is also a land of incomparable natural beauty. Moreover, the Swiss are a people whose respect for individual liberty has always been matched by their sense of responsibility. They are a diligent people. They have worked hard for what they have; they have set the highest standards and they intend to keep them. The town of Saint Gallen also has a great tradition. It has been a seat of scholarship as far back as the ninth century, and the library in its main cathedral is world renowned for its collection of rare books. The Domkirche itself is a structure that has long inspired reverence and delight. Your university is appropriately placed within a country that has such high regard for freedom and independence, and in a town that has such a distinguished cultural heritage. For years now, by insisting on high performance and rigorous intellectual discipline from those who studied here, you have emphasized the importance of ethics in the world of commerce and trade. Today we are at a point in world history where international relations are changing. These changes have come about especially, but not exclusively, because of the recent -- albeit tragic -- events in the Persian Gulf. The conflict there proved once again that regional disputes may often threaten the wider peace if they involve elements of global significance. The end of the cold war did not mean an end to belligerency. Iraq's invasion of Kuwait demonstrated that sad reality. Indeed, that stark act of aggression, in which a medium-sized and military powerful country virtually swallowed a smaller and weaker neighbour, was the first time since the founding of the United Nations that one Member State had, by force, completely taken over another sovereign, Member State, and it revealed how dangerous and volatile our world still is, despite the improvement in East-West relations. It also represented the first test in the post-cold-war era of the Organization's ability to fulfil its primary task: the maintenance of international peace and security. At the last General Assembly, the invasion of Kuwait was a major topic. Of 155 speeches in the general debate, by delegates from every corner of the globe, all but one condemned the attack as aggression and a threat to international peace and security as defined by the Charter. This virtual unanimity was very important to the response of the United Nations to the invasion. And, indeed, the Security Council acted in a manner that would have been unthinkable during most of its history, impeded as it had been by the constraints of the cold war. Between the day the Iraqi tanks rolled into Kuwait -- on 2 August 1990 -- and the start of the enforcement action on 16 January 1991, a series of resolutions were adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter. Chapter VII is entitled "Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression". At the same time, numerous diplomatic initiatives were undertaken to avert a catastrophe, including my own visit to Baghdad on 12/13 January. I observed the following six weeks of hostility with a mixture of anguish and regret: with anguish because, as Secretary-General of the United Nations, I was, of course, saddened by the failure of diplomatic efforts, including my own, and the consequent necessity to resort to force; and with regret because I had, until the last moment, hoped that the situation between Iraq and Kuwait could be resolved peacefully. I was deeply concerned, during that period, by the steadily worsening plight of civilian populations of Iraq and Kuwait who, throughout the military operations, were exposed not only to obvious physical danger but to hazards to public health as well. To the extent possible, the United Nations agencies, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and many non-governmental organizations provided what relief they could, dispatching medicines and health teams to the area. As the end of fighting neared, my collegues and I turned to preparations for the future. Contingency plans for a variety of possible United Nations roles -- such as peace-keeping, emergency assistance, reconstruction and environmental clean-up -- were drawn up. An uneasy peace now prevails, and it is important that the international community shows the same determination and efficiency in securing the peace that it exerted in ending aggression. The United Nations, and in particular the Security Council, must assume its responsibilities to that end. It will take some time before the dust settles and a clearer perspective emerges through which the long-term consequences of the past 10 months can be correctly assessed. However, some facts are already apparent. On the positive side, an act of invasion and annexation has been decisively reversed. On the negative, two States have been devastated in the process. Millions of civilians have been reduced to conditions of abject misery, privation and hunger. Moreover, even at such appalling human and material cost, stability in the Persian Gulf region, not to speak of the Middle East as a whole, is still far from assured. The United Nations, for its part, is doing it utmost to relieve the hardship of the refugees and displaced persons in the area. Several United Nations agencies are involved in the effort, and in April, I appointed Sadruddin Aga Khan as my Executive Delegate in the context of a United Nations Inter-agency Humanitarian Programme for Iraq, Kuwait and the Iraq/Turkey and Iraq/Iran border areas. On 18 April, he signed on my behalf, with the Government of Iraq a Memorandum of Understanding, which serves as a framework for a United Nations Humanitarian Relief Programme for the affected area. A United Nations Coordinator for the entire programme arrived in Baghdad on the same day, and shortly thereafter, in early May, United Nations relief teams in the region began to establish "Blue Routes" through which Kurdish refugees could return safely to their homes in northern Iraq. United Nations teams have since set up way stations with food, water and medical assistance to assist returnees. In the villages themselves, United Nations workers have put in place short-term programmes for distributing food, until local markets can re-establish themselves. In the north, United Nations teams are concentrating on providing immediate relief, while in other parts of Iraq they are helping to restore basic services. A World Health Organization (WHO) team is working to combat cholera and malaria. Vaccines, vegetable seed and rice are being brought in. The main concern of United Nations health specialists is to prevent communicable diseases and to restore the pre-existing health care system, while at the same time providing curative care and nutritive rehabilitation. On the agricultural front, helicopters under United Nations auspices have been spraying insecticides in croplands north of the 36th parallel, hoping to avert potential losses of as much as $300 million in crop damage. Of course, restoring stability to Iraq will be costly. Thus, on 12 June, I appealed in Geneva for international assistance of $450 million to finance these humanitarian programmes. Much of that amount remains outstanding. Incidentally, the programme includes the deployment of a contingent of United Nations guards to facilitate the return of refugees and the effective provision of relief. The use of United Nations guards in the context of a humanitarian programme is an innovative approach and is designed to add a much needed element of stability. Meanwhile, we must realize that as Iraq begins to stabilize, it must be permitted to rebuild its own economy. Otherwise, the world community will become responsible for feeding 18 million people. Another important question which must be addressed is the flow of weapons to the region. This problem poses as great a threat as any to long-term stability there. While total disarmament is not practical and would be unwise, a possible first step would be to introduce an effective measure of arms control. The elimination of missiles and weapons of mass destruction throughout the area must be addressed with great urgency. In this connection, I welcome the recent statement by President Bush. Leaders from around the globe have repeatedly emphasized to me that those primarily responsible for arms shipments to the area are, in fact, major Powers. This is not a new development; it has been true for years. Indeed, the arsenal that was at Saddam Hussein's disposal on 2 August 1990 was supplied mostly by the major Powers. Under the formal cease-fire agreement contained in Security Council resolution 687 (1991) of 3 April, the United Nations, and the Secretary-General in particular, were given enormous responsibilities, not the least of which was to destroy, remove orrender harmless the mass destruction weapon capabilities of Iraq. Those capabilities involve chemical, biological and nuclear facilities, as well as that country's ballistic missiles with a range of beyond 150 kilometres. In order to carry out those tasks, as set out in the relevant sections of Security Council resolution 687, I established a Special Commission, which is chaired by Ambassador Rolf Ekeus of Sweden, and is comprised of experts from 21 States. Frankly, I cannot overemphasize the unique and unprecedented nature of the Special Commission's responsibilities. Never before has the United Nations been specifically charged with the functions of inspecting and removing a significant part of a nation's war-making capacity. Never before has the United Nation been responsible for evolving and implementing a regime to verify future compliance. Indeed, these actions carry weighty implications for the future of the Organization and ability to serve the international community. No single State, no matter how powerful, could perform these tasks by itself. Thus, the international community turned to the United Nations and -- for part of the responsibility in the nuclear area -- to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). This is new territory for both organizations. One cannot help but reflect that for years we have been debating how, and to what extent, the United Nations should become involved in real disarmament and verification. Now, within just a few short weeks, events in the Persian Gulf have propelled the Organization into the forefront of disarmament action. I think it is safe to say that the outcome of this complex operation will have a telling impact for years to come on the world community's faith in the ability of the United Nations to perform such tasks with integrity and professional competence. The invasion of Kuwait proved to be a brutal assault, not just by one nation on another, but also an assault on the environment, on human rights, on international communications and transport, and on plans and resources for international1 economic development. The impact on the international economy of the oil embargo against Iraq and Kuwait, and the effect of economic sanctions, caused billions of dollars of damage to developing countries outside the Middle East. The world's peoples must be protected in the future against such wholesale destruction and violence; that is the purpose of the United Nations, after all, as stated so eloquently in the Charter's Preamble: to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war. Meanwhile, our concern with Iraq must not let us overlook the fact that if we are to promote genuine peace and stability in the region, our efforts must extend beyond the Persian Gulf to include the entire Middle East, where, as we all know, the Arab-Israeli conflict had been a source of tension and insecurity for decades. In that connection, the recent visits of United States Secretary of State Baker and Soviet Foreign Minister Bessmertnykh to the area were a significant development. For my part, I have recently designated Ambassador Edouard Brunner of Switzerland as my Special Representative to the Middle East. I trust that his efforts will complement the bilateral initiatives currently under way and that he will also help in promoting dialogue, understanding and trust in an area where, regrettably, suspicion and fear have too long been predominant. Meanwhile, in the aftermath of the Gulf crisis, I think we can draw certain conclusions, both with regard to the Middle East and to the role of the United Nations in international affairs. At the level of principle, the most important development was the strengthening of the international commitment to resist and reverse aggression. It is clear now that, at least in certain circumstances, there is a greater will on the part of the world community to undertake collective action in response to threats to international peace and security. However, we must acknowledge that Iraq's invasion of Kuwait and the events that followed also represented the failure of collective diplomacy. Such a failure cannot be allowed to repeat itself. Innocent millions must not be severely punished for the misdeeds and miscalculations of their rulers. The question of individual suffering and the violation of basic human rights brings into question a wider issue that the world community will have to consider in future years: does the question of national sovereignty, as confirmed by the Charter, conflict with the need to defend against massive violations of human rights? Does the implementation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights transcend national borders? Of course, we cannot radically undermine national sovereignty, since it is one of the pillars upon which international cooperation is based. Yet we must recognize that there is a palpable change in the attitude of the world's peoples towards the belief that abuse and oppression can no longer be shielded from international scrutiny because of claims of national sovereignty. This shift in international standards requires the attention of Governments, as well as academic and professional groups, in order to bring international law more into line with an evolving morality that increasingly decries the massive and deliberate violation of human rights. In looking back at the situation which led to hostilities in the Gulf, I must emphasize that diplomacy can work no miracles, when at least one of the parties to a potential conflict believes that it stands to gain from the use of force. Thus, it is before such a situation develops that the peace-making and peace-keeping capacity of the United Nations needs to be fully engaged, when all the resources of contact, influence and persuasion must be mobilized to prevent war. In the case of the Gulf crisis, the warning bell should have rung long before 2 August 1990. In short, the United Nations must keep constant watch over all points of danger and apply the principles of the Charter with consistency, regardless of changing political alignments. When I refer to the United Nations in this context, I refer in particular to two of its organs: the Security Council, comprised of 15 member States representing every region of the world, and the Secretariat, represented by the Secretary-General. Over the years, primarily because of the cold war, the Security Council did not develop its capacity for effective preventive diplomacy. I have repeatedly suggested that the agenda of the Council should not be limited to items formally inscribed at the request of member States. It should hold periodic meetings to survey the international scene and identify trouble spots where preventive diplomacy might be required. As for the role of the Secretary-General, I have continually pointed out that his resources for gathering independent information are deeply inadequate. One wonders, in that regard, why the resources of modern technology, so awesomely displayed during the hostilities in the Gulf, could not be placed also at the service of peace. These considerations acquire added pertinence if we bear in mind that threats to the peace likely in the future will not have the clear-cut, black-and-white quality that characterized Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. Insidious threats, however, may be as dangerous as overt ones, since they, too, undermine international stability. Moreover, since an international consensus in future crises may not arise as easily or spontaneously as was the case with Kuwait, the world community will have to establish a firm basis for action. If the United Nations is to sustain its revitalized determination to maintain international peace and security, several things must happen. For one, the Security Council must continue to function effectively, which means that the present excellent cooperation among its permanent members, and between them and the non-permanent members, must continue. Of equal importance is that there must continue to be close cooperation between the Secretary-General and the Council. I should like to close with a reference to Aristotle, who once remarked that man was a political animal. What he specifically meant by that remark was that man was a creature best suited to living in polis. The Athenian polis was more than a city-state; it was a state of mind as well. It was a community where all who belonged shared a common sense of freedom with responsibility, where all the citizens banded together for the sake of peace and security. Aristotle believed that human beings would feel most comfortable in such a community. Today, the world community is composed of at least 160 nation States, far more than a single Athenian polis. Still, I would like to think that human beings are, indeed, most comfortable in a community where they can share a sense of freedom with responsibility, where national sovereignty is respected, and even enhanced, by a sense of participation in global activities, and where independent States can join together for the sake of maintaining international peace and security. I am hopeful that our state of mind following the end of the cold war and the war in the Persian Gulf will be such that we will want to join together to avoid future wars, hot as well as cold. And I am certain that if we do join together, that the United Nations will play a key role in shaping our common future as envisaged in the Charter. From kurds at gn.apc.org Sat Jun 29 23:30:04 1991 From: kurds at gn.apc.org (kurds at gn.apc.org) Date: 29 Jun 1991 22:30:04 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Xenophon & the Kurds in 400BC Message-ID: I have been reading the Loeb edition of Xenophon's 'Anabasis'. He describes the perils his army faced when marching (home to Greece) through the mountains of Kurdistan. The Kurds then, as now, were in rebellion against the surrounding powers - the Great King (Artaxerxes) in Babylon and his various satraps. Xenophon's text is a fascinating cameo. If anyone would like to have extracts put up here (I'm sure Loeb wouldn't mind since we're crediting them), let me know and I'll do it. Indra