Transcript Of 1996 NPR Discussion O

[kurd-l at burn.ucsd.edu]

From: Arm The Spirit <ats at locust.etext.org>
Subject: Transcript Of 1996 NPR Discussion Of Kurdistan

"Talk Of The Nation"
National Public Radio
September 11, 1996

(Marty Moskovane)
The Kurdish people have tried to prevent long-standing internal 
rivalries from standing in their way. Unfortunately, though,
these traditional divisions have been played upon by neighboring
states, each for their own interests.

The Kurds are the largest homeless ethnic minority in the world,
and throughout much of their history, the Kurds have had to deal
with conflicts between neighboring countries in the Middle East
and their own internal rivalries. As the fighting heats up in
northern Iraq we ask, who are the Kurds? Is there a solution to
their enduring conflicts?

Today on "Talk of the Nation" we are looking back at Iraq and the 
situation in the Middle East, focusing on the Kurds. The Kurds
are the largest ethnic group in the world without their own
country, with more than twenty million living in parts of Iran,
Iraq, Turkey, and Syria. While statehood has been a dream of the
Kurdish people for many years, the Kurds have been used time and
again by the powers in the region. But, as is evidenced by the
fighting in northern Iraq today, conflict between Kurdish groups
has been very much a part of their history as well. Two rival
Kurdish factions, the Kurdistan Democratic Party, or the KDP, and
the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, or PUK, have been squabbling
with each other since the 1960's. That conflict erupted in 
late August in the safe haven of northern Iraq, which was
established in 1991 after the war in the Persian Gulf.
Iraq was called in by the KDP, which
threw the United States into the conflict by bombing
targets in southern Iraq. Confused? You're not alone. Today on Talk of the 
Nation, who are the Kurds? Why don't they have their own country?
What are their rivalries about, and how have they been used as pawns
by countries in the region and by the United States?

We have several guests who will be joining during us this hour of
Talk of the Nation: Kani Xulam, founder and director of the American
Kurdish Information Network. He came to the States in 1985 from
Turkish-occupied Kurdistan. Also with us, Asad Khailany, founder of the
Kurdish National Congress of North America. He immigrated to the States
from Iraq in 1966 and teaches Computer Science at Eastern Michigan 
University. Also with us is Graham Fuller, senior political scientist 
at the Rand Corporation.

And, joining us now is Bill Montabano, London Bureau Chief with
the Los Angeles Times. He has just come back from northern Iraq. Bill 
Montabano, what can you tell us about what is happening in northern 
Iraq?

(Bill Montabano)
At the moment there's a great deal of exaltation on the part of the 
people who won the battle, the civil war between the factions.
But this is underlying a great deal of consternation because no one is
certain now what will happen next. For five years this place they call 
Kurdistan, which is really the country that never was, has been 
protected by the United States, by over-flights of French, British, and 
American planes, and by the presence of a handful of very
symbolic soldiers in northern Iraq in the city of Zakho. They left when
the fighting began in the region in the capital of Erbil, and people
I talked to are quite frightened of what might happen next. In
August, an Iranian armored column went in and attacked some Iranian Kurds.
In the last days of August the Iraqis supported the attack by one
faction on the capital. And now Turkey has announced that it will send a
large force into northern Iraq to establish a buffer zone there against 
attacks by Kurdish Turks. So the situation is quite unsettled,
and the people are very upset and worried.

(Marty Moskovane)
Do the Kurdish people have opinions about U.S. policy towards
Iraq?

(Bill Montabano)
Yes, they all think that it's up to the United States to solve
their problems. That's what they have thought for a long time, and
that's what they have been thinking for the last five years. The
internal dynamics of their own blood feuds, which are so deeply rooted in
the history of the Kurds, rose up and the two forces which have
collaborated in governing what they call Kurdistan began to fight with one
another. Now they think it's up to the United States, again, to impose
some order there and the hope of a real Kurdistan. But what you see at the
same time are the Iranians and the Iraqis and the Turks, who are now 
regarding this rather tired and eyesore place the way that
neighborhood cats look at a tired swallow.

(Marty Moskovane)
And ready to take advantage.

(Bill Montabano)
Absolutely, unless there's a replay of the history of that
region. Nobody wants an independent Kurdistan except the Kurds, and its 
neighbors, principally Turkey, Iraq, and Iran are prepared to do 
whatever is necessary to stop the creation of an independent
Kurdistan. The United States expressed a humanitarian commitment to the
Kurds after the Gulf War, but never a political one, and that is the missing 
ingredient right now.

(Marty Moskovane)
Asad Khailany, what are the KDP and the PUK fighting about?

(Asad Khailany)
Actually both of them claim that they are working for the Kurdish 
people. The current fighting is mainly between Saddam Hussein and
the Kurdish people. Our U.S. policy was wrong from the beginning.
The strategy toward Saddam Hussein was wrong. As Mr. Montabano
pointed out, the U.S. looked at the Kurdish situation as a humanitarian
issue. They never addressed it as a political issue. As he pointed out 
correctly, the aspiration of every Kurd is to have a Kurdish government. 
There are thirty million of them. The issue cannot be solved just
by avoiding it. We have to go to the United Nations and find a
political solution to the Kurdish problem. The Arabs are against the
separation of the Kurds from Iraqi unity, and they consider the Kurds'
desire to separate a blasphemy. But it is ironic that the same Arab
governments, the same Arab people, cannot live together. We have twenty-two
Arab governments. Yet they expect that Kurds, who are not Arabs, to
live with the Arabs. Nor are they Turks, yet they are expected to live
with the Turks. You cannot force people to live together. We have
examples in Yugoslavia and in the ex-Soviet Union. The Kurds really
depended on the United States's word. The Kurds stood up to Saddam Hussein
when the U.S. Administration asked them to, and we paid a very heavy
price for that, because the U.S. pulled out when we most needed them.

(Marty Moskovane)
Graham Fuller, I know there were attempts by the United States to
broker some kind of settlement between these two rival factions in
northern Iraq. Why were they unable to come to some kind of peaceful
resolution? As our guests have said, the Kurdish people share a desire to
have a country, and yet they don't have one. Why are they unable to get 
together?

(Graham Fuller)
I think it's important to look at their history and realize that
the Kurds are divided among at least four different counties, those
being Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria. Within each one of these states
the Kurds have been forced to conform to the political culture that
exists there. In addition, each one of these states has been determined
to keep Kurds divided among themselves within that state. So it is
not particularly easy for Kurds to cooperate when all these forces
are determined to keep them separated.

(Kani Xulam)
I agree with Graham. Turkey, Iran, and Iraq may have different 
interests, but when it comes to the Kurds, they all see eye to
eye. They all want to make sure the Kurds don't get together and don't
have a united front against all three.

(Marty Moskovane)
How much are things like water, money, and oil making it
difficult for the Kurdish people to work together to create a Kurdish state?

(Graham Fuller)
Actually, almost none of the Kurds today are speaking of an
independent Kurdish state. It is an artificial dilemma to suggest that either
Kurds must live under Saddam Hussein so that they can't break away, or
that, conversely, they need total independence. Everyone, at least
non-Kurds, would hope that the Kurds' own aspirations for political and
cultural autonomy should be able to be met within the confines of existing 
states. The question is really very simple: if existing states cannot 
satisfy the aspirations of their minorities, they're in big trouble. 
When conflict arises between the ruling class and the minorities,
such countries either hire a Saddam Hussein to come and ruthlessly
crush everything, or the state is in turmoil. In this modern era,
modern states that want to be part of the international community can't
afford to have these bleeding sores, incredible bashing of minorities,
or violations of human rights. Nobody's going to want to invest in
them. It's in the interest of the international community to find
solutions within existing states if possible. The Kurds can have a life
within which they can fulfill their political and cultural aspirations.
It's not impossible.

(Marty Moskovane)
Asad Khailany, what does it mean for someone to call himself a
Kurd these days? As we've said, they're spread out among a number of 
different countries, and I don't believe there's a unifying religion or 
language.

(Asad Khailany)
Yes, we do have a unified language, a unified feeling, and we are
a nation. We have a common suffering and oppression. You mentioned
the wealth of Kurdistan. The U.S. President Woodrow Wilson
recommended the creation of Kurdistan. The only reason Kurdistan was not
created was because they discovered oil in Kirkuk. At that time France and
Great Britain forced an annexation of Iraqi Kurdistan with the Arabs to
form an artificial entity which they called Iraq. The situation in
Iraqi Kurdistan is very bad. In the eyes of the Iraqi people and the
Kurdish people, Saddam Hussein has had a great victory. Currently he is
in control, not only in southern Iraq, but in the northern, Kurdish
region as well. The missile attack by the U.S. was a slap on the wrist.
As a military move the U.S. Administration has fumbled in response to
the latest Saddam Hussein aggression. By not hitting him, the United
States was sending Saddam Hussein the message that it was O.K. for him
to reoccupy the protected haven area. But the game is not over yet.
If Saddam Hussein gets away with this aggression, the U.S. will
lose respect and credibility, not only in the Middle East, but in the
entire world. The U.S. should hit him, not only in the south, but in
the Kurdish area as well, and that will be a message to [KDP leader]
Mr. Barzani that his cooperation with Saddam Hussein will not be
fruitful. It would be better to go back to the Kurdish people to help them
all unite.

(Marty Moskovane)
Kani Xulam, more that fifty percent of Kurds live in Turkey, a
very important player in this region of the world. What is Turkey's
position on the Kurdish people?

(Kani Xulam)
For the Turkish Government, the best Kurd is a silent Kurd, one
that doesn't aspire for political and cultural rights of the Kurds or 
challenge the Turkish view of the situation. For example, Article
Three of the Turkish Constitution states that the language of the
country is Turkish, and nothing can be done to change this article. We're
talking about fifty-eight million people living in one country. Kurds are 
rural, and their population is increasing much more rapidly than
that of the Turks in the west. No one has counted the Kurds, because 
Turkish laws are against that. But one-third of the country is Kurdish. 
Just imagine three people living in one house, two of them are
able to speak their language, and the third person is prohibited by law
to do that and is forced to speak the language of the other two. This
is the situation in Turkey, and it is ugly, and wrong.

(Marty Moskovane)
Are terrorists a threat to the Turkish Government?

(Kani Xulam)
I don't call those who oppose Turkish rule terrorists. Turkey has 
called for this violent response. If Turkey wishes, it could
resolve this problem peacefully. The Kurdish leadership has time and
again asked for political resolution of this conflict. It takes two to
tango. If Turkey wants to have violence in the region, it will have
violence from the Kurds. If it wants to have peace in the region, I
believe the Kurds will sit down and talk peace. As the correspondent in
London pointed out, the Kurds look like a tired bird and the cats want
to jump on it and devour it. Turkey wants to do that, but it's not a
solution, because there are too many Kurds to be swallowed by the Turkish
cat.

(Marty Moskovane)
Graham Fuller, this gives one a flavor of the complexity of the
Kurdish situation in the Middle East, the Kurds' aspirations and those of
the surrounding countries as well. With so many different interests
at stake, it seems resolution is impossible.

(Graham Fuller)
There are two ways of looking at this. One is the hopelessly 
complicated one and the other is an effort to look at the root
problems. The hopelessly complicated route is used by defeatists who say
that every state in the region, Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Syria, has its own 
interests and are geopolitical rivals. There are other states in
the region which don't want any democratic movement, particularly in
Iraq, because they're afraid it will bring pressure upon them for the
lack of democracy in states in the Persian Gulf. There are the
geopolitical interests of Israel, of the United States, and there are oil
interests. To make some sense of it we have to get down to a few fundamental 
principles. First, I cannot conceive of any peace or stability in the 
region as long as Saddam Hussein is there because he has a proven
record of aggression, grossly brutal treatment of his own people,
exceptionally bad judgment, and a deep sense of personal revenge. Nobody in
the U.S. policy-making committees explicitly said that Saddam had to go.
He is the source of the problem. We talk about putting him back in the
box and behaving himself, but Saddam is the problem and he really has
to go. Secondly, there is no solution to the Kurdish problem from
anywhere in the region until each of the states with a large Kurdish
population begins to deal directly with that problem in the context of
existing borders. Although the situation in Turkey is not very good for
Kurds right now, I am most optimistic about their opportunities there,
because Turkey has a basically democratic structure, a civil society, and
a fairly free press. These things are not particularly operative for the 
Kurds, because their situation is seen as a delicate security
problem by the Turkish Government. But otherwise, Turkey is reasonably well-
equipped to open up debate. Turkey could solve its problem
without Kurds rebelling and deciding to leave. But they have to make the 
decision to acknowledge the Kurdish problem, and this is painful
for them. If Turkey can't handle it, then Iraq will never be settled,
and an unsettled Iraq means an unsettled Turkey.

(Marty Moskovane)
On the line is Avsin who's calling from San Francisco.

(Avsin)
In response to Mr. Fuller's statement about Turkey being
democratic, if I had spoken Kurdish two years ago in Turkey, they would have
put me in jail. Anyway, I have recently heard from NPR and other stations
that Kurds are an ethnic minority with no state. They have a state.
Their homeland is Iran. Since your panel are experts in the Kurdish
minority, I would like them to tell me what Kurdistan means, and what the
names of their cities and peoples are. They are all old Persians.

(Asad Khailany)
The late Secretary of Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran, Mr. 
Quassemlou, in one of his conversations with Khomeini, it was
made clear that Farsi was the official language of all Iran. Khomeini
wished to prevent Kurds from studying in their own Kurdish language.
When Mr. Quassemlou questioned Khomeini on this, Khomeini said it was
necessary to study in our own language. He said that "we are all Muslims,
there is no difference". So Mr. Quassemlou suggested that they study in 
Arabic instead of Farsi. Khomeini refused, saying that Farsi was
Iran's national language. Later Mr. Quassemlou was assassinated by the
Iranian regime. So I don't hold much hope for Iran as the homeland of the 
Kurds. Kurdistan is a land which is occupied by Iran, Iraq, Turkey, 
Syria, and Armenia. There are only artificial boundaries which
divide Kurdistan. Our people have the same history. Kurds have existed
and have been living there even before the Iranians. For example, the
city of Erbil is 4,000 years old. It is the oldest city in the world
that is still inhabited by human beings.

(Marty Moskovane)
We have another call from Linda from St. Louis.

(Linda)
In light of what has been said about the cat and bird analogy,
would one of your guests comment on what Turkey would say were the reasons
they were letting Kurds from Iraq to cross the border into the safe
haven.

(Kani Xulam)
Turkey never really wanted to take in those refugees. They were
forced to take them. Secretary of State James Baker flew over the area
with late Turkish President Ozal. They didn't want to deal with the
problem because it would galvanize the Kurdish national consciousness
inside Turkey. It would be like Kurds would realize that trusting Arabs, 
Persians, and Turks would not get them anywhere. Turkey was
afraid and wanted to keep the Kurds on leash, and that's why they were
forced to take them in. They sent the Kurds back as soon as the situation
was calm.

(Marty Moskovane)
Let's go to Thomas calling us from San Jose.

(Thomas)
This situation is so fictionalized that it's a potential human
disaster. It seems a mistake to hurry a political solution. What we need is
a purely humanitarian solution. When we tried to force a political 
solution during the Somalia crisis, we had our men dragged
through the streets. There was a huge backlash and the U.S. had to pull out, 
leaving the Somalians and the international relief agencies in the 
lurch. So why can't we have an Egyptian solution and provide
massive foreign aid for the Kurds and also for the millions of other
Iraqi citizens who are starving to death. About a million children have 
starved to death since our bombing campaign during the Gulf War.
So we need massive human rights help, not a political or military
solution.

(Graham Fuller)
There are many things that can be done to alleviate current
suffering, but in the end we have to get down to the root of the problem,
which is a political solution. That inevitably involves the removal of
Saddam Hussein from power. It means urging Turkey to deal more liberally
and with a greater sense of vision with its own Kurdish problem. For
the sake of Turkey's own future this is important. It doesn't have to
mean the division of Turkey. And in Iraq, we should urge the kind of
federal solution that they've talked about in the past but Saddam would
never permit to take place. We can't just continue with a humanitarian 
solution. I think the U.S. should allow the sale of food, medicines, 
and perhaps even lift all the sanctions, but at the same time we
must tell Saddam that he can't move his troops anywhere in the
country. No planes, no tank movement, nothing. We must impress upon him that
there is no military solution to any of his problems.

(Kani Xulam)
The suffering is real. Malnutrition is there. But we Kurds don't 
really want foreign aid. We want our political aspirations to be 
validated. The political problem has to be addressed. With
handouts of food, our cause isn't going to go anywhere.

(Marty Moskovane)
How does the Kurdish cause get validated? Is it through a
political solution, through military involvement?

(Kani Xulam)
No. A little history will help illustrate what I mean. At the end
of the First World War, those artificial countries in the Middle
East were created. Today we seem to accept that they should be there, that
they are sacred, that those boundaries should not be changed. But in
that equation, the Kurds lost, and today we aren't getting our rights
as well. In Turkey, for example, our cultural heritage is at stake.
The Kurds need to have their country just like any other people. The
Arabs are one people but they have twenty-two countries. That's their
choice. But we need to have our own country, carved out from Turkey,
Iraq, Iran, and Syria. But the bottom line is that the will of the Kurds
needs to be respected and accepted. Nobody in Iraq, Iran, or Turkey has
bothered to ask what the Kurds want. What is the will of the Kurds? As a
Kurd, I know the Kurds want a just rule. They may not want to separate
and may prefer to live in Turkey. Turkey is a good country, and to
some extent a great country. If Turkey applies democratic rule across
the board, the Kurds may not want to separate. But that is not there,
and so long as the Kurds are denied their basic rights, Turkey is not
going to solve the problem.

(Marty Moskovane)
Asad Khailany, do you think it would be possible for the Kurds to
put aside their long-standing rivalries and function as a unified
state?

(Asad Khailany)
I think that is a possibility. But, as Graham Fuller correctly
pointed out, Iraq is not going to dissolve as long as Saddam Hussein is
in power. The U.S. strategy was wrong. Saddam Hussein could have
been thrown without sending a single soldier, missile, or aircraft. If
the Kurdish region had a prosperous economy, you would see a lot of
Iraqi units defecting to the Kurdish area. However, the U.S. and the 
regional government worked very hard to see that the Kurdish
experiment in Iraqi Kurdistan would not be successful. The U.S. and the
others, I believe, have sympathy towards the Kurdish people, but they
didn't want even a regional government to be successful. This led to a very
bad economic situation. One of the reasons for the present fighting
between the KDP and the PUK is economic. The KDP had complete control of
the main strategic considerations, and the PUK had the support of
three-fourths of the Kurdish population in Iraq. The PUK didn't have
any economic revenue and thus they could not rule. That was one of
the main reasons for the current conflict.

(Marty Moskovane)
Graham Fuller, you said that peace and statehood for the Kurds is 
impossible as long as Saddam Hussein is in power. Do you have any 
confidence that, if he were removed, that whoever took his place
would have a more sympathetic and humanitarian view towards the Kurdish 
people?

(Graham Fuller)
Once you get rid of Saddam Hussein and a handful of henchmen
around him, most rational Iraqis recognize that their country is an absolute
mess. They have destroyed their own people, institutions, self-
confidence, and everything else. Any halfway democratic institution, for example
a reconstruction of the parliamentary order that used to exist
twenty-five years ago, would allow Iraqis to recognize that a prosperous Iraq 
requires a population that is satisfied. We haven't even talked about 
the Shiite majority which constitutes about sixty percent of the 
population and will play a major role in the Iraqi society. But 
neighboring states like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are terrified
that a greater degree of democracy in Iraq will bring Shiites to power.
Maybe even, they fear, Iran would come in. You can spin all these
horror scenarios to prevent anything from happening. We need some sense
of vision and the faith that a more representative order will bring
a more rational Iraq, an Iraq in which Kurds can function more
successfully than they can now. Kurds presently live under tremendous economic
and political pressure.

(Marty Moskovane)
Let's go to Michael who's calling us from San Diego.

(Michael)
I was a lieutenant for the Third of the 325, which were the first
U.S. troops to come in for the initial operation Provide Comfort in
1991. The Kurds are an incredibly resilient people. I've walked over
the ground where cities had been knocked out. But for America to
actually choose a side at this point is exceedingly difficult. Even in
1991, Mr. Barzani and Mr. Talabani were warring between themselves. At this
point you have one side which has chosen Iraq and the other which has
chosen Iran, and I think it's difficult to ask the United States to pick
a side between those two. It is incipient upon the Kurds to work out the 
differences between the PUK and the KDP before the United States
can intervene in any appropriate way.

(Marty Moskovane)
Is it possible for the U.S. to stay neutral and at the same time
push toward democracy for the Kurdish people?

(Michael)
Graham's point about asking Saddam to not move any forces would
be extremely wonderful, but you really need forces on the ground in
order to do that. Operation Provide Comfort was enabled, one, as one of
your guests pointed out, because the Turks did not want hundreds of
thousands of Kurds on their territory, but also because we were able to use
Turkey as a staging area. We were able to move our forces in there by
truck. We converted an unfinished airfield, and we were able to land
C-130s with supplies for our units farther inland. But at this point,
you have problems on the Iranian border, and I don't think the Iranian
government would easily permit U.S. forces to move into Kurdish Iraq
without problems.

(Graham Fuller)
I do not think the United States should take sides in this
particular quarrel. Rivalries are normal among any political group,
including the Kurds. The point is that the Kurds in northern Iraq have watched
the progressive deterioration of the economic and political situation. I 
think Barzani became fearful that sooner or later they would have
to deal with Saddam Hussein, and concluded that it would be better
to deal now while at least a bargaining position is available, rather
than wait until they are hopeless. This situation doesn't have to exist 
indefinitely between the KDP and the PUK. I would not recommend
that the U.S. take sides, but I would advise that it take vigorous
action denying military force almost entirely to Saddam. It shouldn't
take ground troops to defeat him. We were able successfully during the
Gulf War to destroy almost all of Saddam's army by air action.

(Kani Xulam)
Barzani's collusion with Saddam was preposterous, treacherous,
and callous. If any Kurdish leader should know about what Saddam has
done to the Kurds, he should. His father, his uncles, his tribe were
all decimated. I don't know what Barzani was thinking. But the blame 
cannot be put solely on the Kurds. There's enough blame to go
around. The U.S. didn't want to deal with this problem. On that issue I
agree with A. Rosenthal's op-ed piece in the New York Times. One line
in particular from his most recent article captures the essence of
this conflict: "So long as Turks exist, the stateless Kurds don't
matter." That is the policy that emanates from the State Department, and 
unfortunately, so long as it continues, the Kurdish problem will
be with us.

(Marty Moskovane)
Graham Fuller, is giving the Kurdish people autonomy, statehood,
and democracy in the U.S.'s interest?

(Graham Fuller)
There is a rise all over the world of a search for identity, for 
authenticity of culture and participation in society. Modern
states simply cannot oppress large portions of their societies and
continue to be modern functioning societies. They're vulnerable, their small
groups can wreak havoc on them, nobody will want to invest in them.
These societies are exceptionally unattractive. The pressure is on all
states of the world. If a state can't manage its minorities, it's on its
way out the door. That is going to apply to any state, more and more
in the future, whether they're friends of ours or not. I'm encouraged
and I think Turkey understands this and ultimately will be able to
manage it. Neither Iraq nor Iran are even close to understanding this. These 
states are now at an exceptionally primitive level of political 
development.

(Marty Moskovane)
Let's go back to the phones. We have Roy on the line from
Seattle, Washington.

(Roy)
If they were to draw the borders for Kurdistan at the point where
it is now, would they be able to feed the people or produce a viable
economy?

(Asad Khailany)
Actually, Kurdistan is a very rich country. Two years ago, Iraqi 
Kurdistan produced enough wheat to feed Iraq in its entirety. In
fact, some wheat was exported to Iran. The oil fields of Kirkuk,
Kirmanshah, and Khanikin are all in Kurdistan. Besides that, one of earth's
main scarce resources, water, is plentiful in Kurdistan. Kurdistan
could have a very strong economy.  The U. S. interest is in stability. As long
as the Kurdish issue is not addressed properly, there will not be 
stability in the Middle East.

(Marty Moskovane)
If Kurdistan has all these valuable resources, wouldn't it take
away from Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and all the countries that are using
these resources today?

(Kani Xulam)
That's right. The Middle East is very arid. Today and in the days
to come, water is going to be as precious as oil. Two of the
Biblical rivers, the Tigris and the Euphrates, originate from the land of
the Kurds. I agree with Mr. Khailany that Kurdistan is viable
economically. But he failed to mention the political aspirations of the Kurds.
What is a meaningful life for the Kurds? I don't want to have a tummy
full and a roof over my head and no rights. I cannot, with the present
set of laws, give a Kurdish name to my son or daughter. I cannot
perpetuate the heritage my grandfather left me. That is more meaningful to
me than filling my tummy or having a roof over my head.

(Marty Moskovane)
If Kurdistan were a country, would you go back there to live?

(Kani Xulam)
I would go today.

(Assad Khailany)
When Saddam is overthrown I will go back. I have been waiting
since 1972.

(Marty Moskovane)
Let's go to George who's calling us from Manhattan.

(George)
If it weren't for Saddam Hussein, with all his brutality against
the Kurds, we wouldn't be discussing the Kurds at all. Look at the
way the Turks have been slaughtering them all this time...

(Marty Moskovane)
Well, George, that's an interesting way to put a spin on it.

(George)
We turned a blind eye. As for a unified language, there's Farsi.
Farsi and Kurdish are very similar. Ninety percent is the same. Look at
the names: Talabani, Barzani, they're all Italian or Iranian
sounding. Lastly, how are the Armenians, as a Christian nation, treating
their Turks, as compared with those Islamic countries who are
brutalizing them?

(Marty Moskovane)
Graham, do you agree with George that if Saddam Hussein had not 
terrorized the Iraqi Kurds, that we wouldn't be talking about
them today?

(Graham Fuller)
That's like saying Adolf Hitler played a great role in helping
unite the Jewish people and create a Zionist state. I just can't believe
that Saddam is the chosen deliverance of the Kurdish people.

(Marty Moskovane)
I'd like to ask each of you what you expect in the next couple of
weeks and even up through the next year.

(Assad Khailany)
First of all, I hope Mr. Barzani discontinues his cooperation
with Saddam Hussein. I believe the U.S. still has some muscle in the
area. We can send Barzani a message by attacking Saddam's tanks and
armies in the Kurdish area. From this he will understand that his
cooperation with Saddam Hussein will not be fruitful. He would do better to
go back to the Kurdish people, reconcile with all the parties in the area
and decide on a unified agenda for the Kurdish people in Iraq.

(Kani Xulam)
I'm not prepared to say that Talabani is finished, but I'm
prepared to say that Barzani, by siding with Saddam, has dug his own grave.
Kurdish reliance on outside forces is wrong, and if the Kurds want
liberation they need to rely on themselves.

(Graham Fuller)
First of all, it's imperative that we liberate the economy in
Iraq and allow French, British, Russians, or anyone else who wants, to
come in and invest in the country to open up the economy. At the same
time we have to tell Saddam Hussein that he's not moving any military
forces anywhere, and thus speed his end. Secondly, we have to recognize
we require an internal solution to the Kurdish problem in Turkey and
Iraq. A federal solution is needed in Iraq. And we must urge the Turks
to move as rapidly as possible towards democratic accommodation of
their own Kurds if they want to be stable.

(Marty Moskovane)
Thank you to all our guests. This has been Talk of the Nation,
this week focusing on the Kurds, on National Public Radio.

----
American Kurdish Information Network (AKIN)
2623 Connecticut Avenue NW #1
Washington, DC 20008-1522

Tel: (202) 483-6444
Fax: (202) 483-6476
E-mail: akin at kurdish.org
Home Page: http://www.kurdistan.org
----

The American Kurdish Information Network (AKIN) provides a public
service to foster Kurdish-American understanding and friendship

----
For A Free And Independent Kurdistan!
KURD-L Archives - http://burn.ucsd.edu/archives/kurd-l