No Turk Should Lead the U.N. or Any International Organization Until Cyprus Occupation Ends

Michael Rubin | The ME Forum

United Nations Secretary General António Guterres’ second term will end on December 31, 2026, but there is not yet a clear candidate to replace him. Initially, Latin Americans expected someone from Central America, South America, or the Caribbean to take the helm, but President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio made clear that none of the announced candidates met their standards for reform and that the United States would not constrain itself with adherence to United Nations tokenism.

Several other candidates soon emerged, most prominently, Emirati official Lana Nusseibeh, former Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, and Kazakhstan President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev. Behind the scenes, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has pushed for a Turk to take the helm, pushing long-time loyalist Feridun Sinirlioğlu, a former interim foreign minister who now serves as secretary-general of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

Erdoğan and his aides have quietly canvassed other leaders, especially among the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, and say privately they have no objection from anyone but France. Erdoğan, however, believes that either through bribery or coercion, he can force Emmanuel Macron’s acquiescence.

Erdoğan is not pushing a Turk simply out of national pride; he regularly seeks to host international events or insert Turks in leadership positions to extend his policy reach and implement his ideological program. In 2011, he announced Istanbul’s bid to host the Olympics.

Turkish officials openly pitched their bid through the lens of religion. Egemen Bağış, a close Erdoğan confidant and bagman, said awarding Turkey the games would allow International Olympic Committee members to prove they were not biased “against a belief group.”

Meanwhile, Turkey’s proposed logo featured mosques and the crescent. Turkey has again applied to host the 2036 games. For the International Olympic Committee to choose it, however, no matter how many Turkish bribes are offered, would be shameful since Istanbul mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu announced the bid before his arrest for the crime of being too popular and posing a political challenge to Erdoğan.

Erdoğan openly pushed for Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu to take the helm of the Organization for Islamic Cooperation in January 2005. Turkish officials pointed to the İhsanoğlu appointment as a sign of Turkey’s increased prestige among Islamic countries. Hikmet Çetin, a Turk who served as NATO’s first Senior Civilian Representative in Afghanistan, took a soft approach to the Taliban; billboards went up around Kabul heralding Turkey-Afghanistan Islamic solidarity, rather than Turkey as a NATO member.

Erdoğan also maneuvered Ahmet Üzümcü to chair the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in 2013 to 2018. Fatih Birol leads the International Energy Agency, and has regularly shilled for Erdoğan’s oil and gas projects, favoring a pipeline through Turkey over safer Greek, Cypriot, and Israeli alternatives.

Sinirlioğlu has the charisma of Michael Dukakis after a double dose of ketamine. His tenure at the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe has been lackluster at best; he has made no reforms and seems to be a gatekeeper to prevent the organization from making any statements or taking any significant action that undercuts Erdoğan’s diplomatic or financial interests. To open the U.N.’s coffers to him would be to invite a corruption scandal on par with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan’s Oil-for-Food program.

Sinirlioğlu is Erdoğan’s man. He was undersecretary during Ahmet Davutoğlu’s tenure as foreign minister. He then served Erdoğan loyally at the United Nations for seven years. When Turkish forces invaded and ethnically cleansed Kurdish-administered regions of Syria, Sinirlioğlu told the U.N. Security Council that he would “flatly reject and strongly condemn any misrepresentation of our counter-terrorism operation as an offensive or aggression.”

He defended the purge of tens of thousands of Turks following the abortive July 2016 “Reichstag Fire” coup by declaring, “We will never forget this villainy.” Four years later, he warned countries engaging with Syrian Kurds that “your red carpets could quickly be stained with blood.” Sinirlioğlu, meanwhile, was silent on Turkey’s safe-haven for the Islamic State and endorsement and support for Hamas. He was likewise silent on İmamoğlu’s arrest, even as other Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe officials spoke up.

In July 2026, Russian pranksters telephoned Sinirlioğlu, with one pretending to be Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. The prankster accused Karekin II, the head of the Armenian church, and asked for Sinirlioğlu’s assistance in helping to remove him. Sinirlioğlu responded, “OK, I’ll do my best; I’ll try.” Such a remark suggests Sinirlioğlu treats Helsinki Principle VII on religious freedom with disdain.

Under Erdoğan, Turkey has become one of the world’s most corrupt countries, on par with Belarus and Egypt. This is due to not only the Turkish leader, but also the silence, cowardice, and complicity of men like Sinirlioğlu.

All of this should disqualify Sinirlioğlu as an individual, but the notion that any Turk should lead the U.N. or any other organization should be a non-starter for other reasons. Turkey has occupied Cyprus for more than a half-century.

The idea that a desire to protect Cyprus’ Muslim minority motivated and justified Turkey’s invasion is nonsense: The bulk of the invasion occurred after the Cypriot crisis had passed and while the two sides were negotiating in peace talks in Geneva. Simply put, Turkey is occupying European Union territory and so long as it does, no Turk should have any leadership position in the United Nations or any international organization, nor should Turkey receive any consideration to host the United Nations.

Michael Rubin is a former Pentagon official whose major research areas are the Middle East, Turkey, Iran and diplomacy. He is author of “Dancing with the Devil: The Perils of Engaging Rogue Regimes” (Encounter, 2014). He is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute AEI. His major research area is the Middle East, with special focus on Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and Kurdish society.

The article first published at meforum.org.

The opinions are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of iKurd.net or its editors.

Copyright © 2026, respective author or news agency, meforum.org

The post Never let a Turk lead the UN or any international organization appeared first on iKurd News.

Salih Zhajlayi | Exclusive to iKurd.net
Translated by iKurd.net from Kurdish Awene.

Was Mam Jalal a Charismatic Leader of the Kurdish People?

From the beginning of the September Revolution, Mam Jalal [Jalal Talabani] emerged as a prominent leader in the Kurdish national struggle, playing a significant role on both the political and military fronts. Mam Jalal had a number of personal qualities that distinguished him from others.

Among them, he was an educated and well-read person. He was fearless, brave, and a fighter. He had the ability to lead military operations, unite and motivate people, and earn their trust. He also had strong diplomatic skills, which made him internationally recognized as a prominent Kurdish leader. He was capable of resolving problems and was an experienced mediator.

He quickly rose to senior positions. When he broke away from Mulla Mustafa in 1964, he was a member of the Political Bureau. It is also said that Mulla Mustafa was very fond of him. When the split took place, Mam Jalal did not join the opposing faction until the final stage of the separation. Eventually, he joined Ibrahim Ahmad’s faction.

When the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) resumed its armed struggle in 1976, he was recognized as the PUK’s Secretary-General and the movement’s elder brother.

Now, the question is this: Do the qualities we have mentioned in connection with Mam Jalal, along with hundreds of other qualities that were part of his personality but which we have not mentioned, prove that he deserves to be remembered as a charismatic Kurdish leader? If not, why not? And what qualities and characteristics should a charismatic leader possess?

First, I will discuss the qualities of a charismatic leader.

First: A charismatic leader must have a clear vision and the ability to see the future. He must be able to create a hopeful picture of the future for his followers.

Second: Courage in decision-making. This means being willing to face opposition and make decisions that can shape the future.

Third: He must be far-sighted. He must be determined and firm in demanding the rights of his people and securing those rights in the constitution. He must not be fooled by verbal promises or consider them sufficient.

To determine whether Mam Jalal was truly a charismatic leader, meaning whether he possessed the qualities of charismatic leadership, what I write below about Mam Jalal will provide the answer to the question raised above.

Some time ago, I wrote an article titled “Two Major Strategic Mistakes Made by Mam Jalal and Two Major Strategic Mistakes Made by President Massoud Barzani,” which I discussed in the fifth part of this series of articles. Now, I want to discuss in detail the two major strategic mistakes made by the late Mam Jalal.

After reading this, you can also decide for yourself whether Mam Jalal was a charismatic leader or the opposite.

I also want to make one thing clear: Making two or more mistakes does not diminish the greatness of either leader. Mam Jalal will always be Mam Jalal, and President Barzani will always be President Barzani. Every person and every leader in the world makes mistakes. No one lives without making mistakes or having shortcomings and imperfections. No one is free from mistakes.

What matters here is acknowledging your mistakes and trying not to repeat them.

Mam Jalal’s First Major Strategic Mistake

Accepting the Position of President of the Republic of Iraq

Following the fall of Saddam Hussein’s government on July 13, 2003, the Governing Council was established under the leadership of Paul Bremer. Mam Jalal was one of its members.

Mam Jalal became Iraq’s first elected president following the 2005 elections. He was also the first president to serve under the permanent constitution, which was approved in 2006.

By the time Mam Jalal became president, the political situation throughout Iraq was extremely difficult, unstable, and chaotic. There was virtually no Iraqi army left. In contrast, the Peshmerga forces were at the height of their strength. Paul Bremer relied on the Peshmerga to provide security throughout Iraq. The Shia and Sunni communities were constantly experiencing internal conflicts. There were also disputes within the Shia and Sunni communities themselves over positions, ranks, and personal interests.

At that time, Mam Jalal was a highly prominent and influential figure. He consistently played a role in bringing people together and maintaining peace among different groups. He was known as the “safety valve.” Paul Bremer also placed great importance on Mam Jalal because he needed him to calm the situation. Mam Jalal, in turn, was capable of playing a positive role and serving as an effective mediator.

If the Kurds had had a well-prepared strategy at that time, with a firm determination to secure their rights, and if Mam Jalal himself had devoted most of his time in Baghdad to securing Kurdish rights, this would have presented a rare historical opportunity to secure Kurdish rights in the new Iraqi constitution.

This was because there was no functioning Iraqi government or established authority at the time, and Paul Bremer urgently needed Kurdish cooperation to consolidate the authority of the coalition forces.

Unfortunately, however, Kurdish leaders were so busy pursuing positions, ranks, and money that they devoted less than half that attention to the rights of the Kurdish people.

Instead of insisting on the return of the occupied and Arabized territories, they were asking for government positions and official titles.

Paul Bremer, the American civil administrator in Baghdad at the time, wrote in his memoirs: “I was very afraid that Massoud and Mam Jalal would ask me for Kirkuk. Fortunately, however, when they came to see me, they asked for money and government positions.”

He said that he was very pleased and satisfied their requests by giving them money.

It is also said that Mam Jalal became angry and frustrated with Paul Bremer because, at first, Bremer was unwilling to accept Mam Jalal as president of Iraq.

Why was it a mistake for Mam Jalal to accept the position of President of Iraq?

Under the constitution, the position of president is largely ceremonial. In other words, the president does not have real decision-making authority. The president’s duties mainly include receiving foreign ambassadors and attending certain meetings and international ceremonies, as well as activities related to the Arab League and Socialist International.

For many years, the Kurds had shed their blood to secure their rights and recover their occupied lands. Yet now, they were accepting the presidency, even though the president is constitutionally required to swear an oath to defend the unity of Iraqi territory.

This directly conflicted with the interests of the Kurdish people.

It is in the interests of the Kurds for Iraq to be divided rather than remain united. Therefore, accepting this position on behalf of the Kurds, especially by Mam Jalal, was like putting a lock on his own mouth and making it impossible for him to demand Kurdish rights, because doing so could conflict with the constitution.

Instead of firmly insisting that all occupied and Arabized territories be returned to the Kurds in accordance with the constitution, Kurdish leaders agreed to the inclusion of the term “disputed territories” in the constitution. In doing so, they themselves cast doubt on whether those Arabized territories actually belonged to the Kurds.

If Mam Jalal had refused to accept the presidency or any other government position, and had not asked Paul Bremer for money, he could have returned to Qal’a Chwalan and remained there. He could have told Paul Bremer:

“We sincerely thank you for overthrowing Saddam Hussein’s government. We also fulfilled our responsibilities and cooperated with you. But now, we must tell you something: We have been shedding our blood for many years over Kirkuk and the other occupied territories. Therefore, the time has come for you to return our rights to us. That is what a position means to me, not the position of President of the Republic.”

At that time, Iraq was engulfed in chaos and internal conflicts. Paul Bremer would have been forced to travel by helicopter to Qal’a Chwalan repeatedly, seeking Kurdish assistance on almost every issue, almost every day.

At that point, even if it had not been possible to return Kirkuk to the territory of Kurdistan or officially determine the borders of Kurdistan, Mam Jalal could at least have negotiated with him to remove the constitutional term “disputed territories,” recognize those areas as Kurdish territories, and establish a new law to determine how they should be dealt with.

Kurdish leaders should have insisted on the implementation of Article 140 of the constitution.

But when Mam Jalal went to Baghdad, he became preoccupied with negotiating positions and money with Paul Bremer. He devoted his time to resolving disputes between Shia and Sunni groups and dealing with one political issue after another. He forgot why he had gone to Baghdad and whom he was supposed to represent.

This is exactly what we are witnessing today.

The Arabs who had been settled on Kurdish lands and had fled following the fall of Saddam Hussein’s government were allowed to return after Mam Jalal became president.

Instead of ensuring that they would never return to the lands they had previously taken from the Kurds, Mam Jalal allowed them to return to please his Arab brothers and preserve Kurdish-Arab brotherhood.

What did Mam Jalal do for the Kurds during his two terms as president, which lasted eight years?

When he visited his own “Jerusalem”, Kirkuk, a city over which so much blood had been shed, he made a statement intended to please the Turkmen and Arabs. He said that government positions in the city should be divided equally among the three communities, with 33 percent going to the Turkmen, 33 percent to the Arabs, and the remaining 33 percent to the Kurds.

With this historic decision, Mam Jalal immediately and without hesitation demonstrated that Kirkuk was not a Kurdish city. He effectively handed over the city’s identity and status to the Arabs and Turkmen. Today, you can see for yourselves that Kirkuk’s governor is a Turkmen.

In addition, he visited the village of Bashir, a Turkmen village that Saddam had burned down, and arranged for it to be rebuilt from the ground up in the name of Kurdish-Turkmen brotherhood.

After all this, look at what is happening in Kirkuk today: An Arab soldier put a rope around the neck of a Kurdish farmer simply because the farmer was defending his own land. Instead of punishing the soldier, the authorities punished the Kurdish farmer and fined him one million dinars.

Now, in Khanaqin, the government is arresting people who have protested against the Arabization of the city.

So let me ask: What are the Kurdish president, ministers, officials, and members of parliament doing in Baghdad? If they do not speak out against such crimes committed against the Kurds, what will they speak out about?

Instead of demonstrating his greatness in the eyes of his own people, Mam Jalal tried to make other countries and those around him recognize the Kurdish people through his own ideas, opinions, and personal reputation.

This, in itself, is a sign of making an entire nation appear smaller by placing its identity and standing under the shadow of one individual.

This was also why Mam Jalal could not sacrifice himself for his people. On the contrary, he sacrificed his people and their land for himself.

Therefore, what is happening to the Kurdish people today is the result of the path Mam Jalal paved for them, a path that those who came after him have continued to follow.

Now is the time to ask: Mam Jalal served as President of Iraq for eight years with the support of the Kurdish people. What did he do for the Kurds?

When you answer that question honestly, you will also find the answer to this question:

**Was Mam Jalal a charismatic leader of the Kurdish people, or was he not?**

Salih Zhajlayi, one of the political figures in Sulaimani city, Iraqi Kurdistan, and formerly the Deputy Head of the General Assembly of the Gorran (Change) Movement, is currently working independently in Sulaimani.

This article was originally published in the Kurdish language in Awene Newspaper on October 29, 2026.

The opinions are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of iKurd.net or its editors.

Copyright © 2026 iKurd.net. All rights reserved.

The post Was Jalal Talabani a Charismatic Leader of the Kurdish People? appeared first on iKurd News.

ERBIL,— Iraq’s Communications and Media Commission says Korek Telecom cannot resume service until it pays 500 billion dinars, close to $330 million, and hands over a federal tax clearance certificate, according to the commission’s chief executive.

The commission’s executive body chief, Baligh Abu Kalal, described the sum as just the opening payment toward a debt load exceeding 2 trillion dinars, roughly $1.3 billion.

The tax clearance, he said, must be issued by the federal Finance Ministry.

Once Korek clears both hurdles, the commission is prepared to finalize a fresh settlement and reopen the company, he said.

He also confirmed the commission has officially requested a leadership shake-up at Korek, a move he said is permitted under its contract.

Subscribers were urged by Abu Kalal to hold on to their existing numbers, since the commission intends to keep the lines active.

Separately, the commission has instructed Korek customers to lock down their online accounts ahead of November 1, the date it says it will begin disconnecting the company’s exchanges.

That cutoff was initially set for late September before being extended a month at the request of parliament’s Transport and Communications Committee.

Customers with accounts linked to multiple numbers were told to register a second carrier’s number as backup, while those limited to one number should transfer to an alternate provider.

The commission also recommended email or authenticator-app backups to keep verification codes flowing, stressing that none of this means customers should abandon their Korek SIM cards.

These requirements come after the Rusafa Court of First Instance in Baghdad ruled on September 28 to void the commission’s June cancellation of Korek’s settlement, keeping the original agreement intact.

Korek praised the ruling and pressed the regulator to resolve the standoff.

The commission pushed back, saying the court decision does not put Korek back in business or undo its other penalties, which it links to the August 2022 expiration of Korek’s mobile license.

The company’s offices stay closed and its outstanding debt to the government remains unchanged, the commission maintained.

Tensions escalated on August 9, 2026, when the regulator disconnected Korek’s network, seized its equipment, and froze company assets, citing breaches of financial and legal terms as grounds for scrapping the settlement.

Korek fired back the same day, arguing the commission’s chief executive lacked authority to void the agreement, and appealed directly to the prime minister for intervention.

On August 20, 2026, commission officers working alongside Iraq’s National Security Service padlocked Korek’s Baghdad headquarters in the Jadriya district along with three retail outlets.

A Rusafa court temporarily halted the regulator’s actions three days afterward, though the commission said the same court later reversed itself on appeal. The crackdown widened to Kirkuk, Nineveh, and Salah al-Din by September 6, bringing the total number of shuttered provinces to eight.

Back in April, the commission had already put Korek’s debt at roughly 1.4 trillion dinars, worth about $1.06 billion at the time, tied to a settlement reached in September 2025, with interest continuing to build.

The roots of the conflict stretch back to a 2007 license auction, where the commission insists Korek still owes $375 million. Korek counters that the payment was tied to receiving the subscriber base of the defunct Iraqna network, something it says never materialized.

Korek Telecom has faced legal and financial disputes for years. The conflict dates back to 2011, when a joint venture between French telecom company Orange and Kuwaiti logistics firm Agility acquired a 44 percent stake in Korek for $810 million.

In 2022, Kuwait’s Agility won a $490 million appeal against the Iraqi Kurdistan government over Korek Telecom.

Company founder Sirwan Barzani, nephew of tribal leader Massoud Barzani, has managed Korek since launching it in 2001, with the company’s value over $2 billion and more than 7 million subscribers in 2015. Mazen Sirwan Barzani holds the post of director of relations at the firm.

Observers have raised doubts about how Korek would cover such a massive bill, and whether the Barzani family, long accused of corruption and of siphoning billions from the region’s oil and trade industries, might lean on public resources to rescue a privately held business.

Critics have repeatedly branded the ruling Barzanis as Kurdish oligarchs who prioritize family enrichment from oil wealth over public service.

According to analysts, Massoud Barzani still wields the greatest influence from behind the scenes, even as his son Masrour serves as the Kurdistan Region’s prime minister and his nephew Nechirvan Barzani holds the presidency of Kurdistan.

(With files from +964 | Agencies)

Copyright © 2026 iKurd.net. All rights reserved.

The post Barzani’s Korek told to pay $330m, change management to resume operations: regulator appeared first on iKurd News.

UNITED NATIONS,— Emirati diplomat Lana Nusseibeh, a candidate for the top job at the United Nations, dodged a direct question on Kurdish independence on Tuesday, even though she has openly backed a Palestinian state.

Asked by Rudaw on Tuesday whether she would back Kurdish statehood the way she has backed Palestinian independence, Nusseibeh offered no clear yes or no.

Instead, she said that as secretary-general she would address every item on the Security Council agenda under the UN Charter and the council’s mandate, and that she would support all peoples seeking freedom and dignity, in line with the Charter.

Nusseibeh, 48, has backed for Palestinian self-determination for years. In February 2024, she told the International Court of Justice that a two-state solution was necessary to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

She repeated that position Monday, after Palestine backed her UN bid, saying her career has focused on a political path that lets Palestinians and Israelis live in security and dignity.

The UAE formally put her forward last week, and all six Gulf Cooperation Council states support her run. She served as the UAE’s UN ambassador from 2013 to 2024 and now holds the title of minister of state.

A win would make her the first woman to run the UN, taking over from Antonio Guterres when his term ends this year.

Human rights monitors criticized Nusseibeh’s bid for the UN’s top job on Tuesday, pointing to her role in promoting the country’s foreign policy and her denial of UAE involvement in fueling Sudan’s conflict.

Her bid faces pushback tied to accusations that the UAE armed and backed Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces, a militia blamed for mass killings in Sudan’s war.

Former Human Rights Watch director Kenneth Roth and other rights advocates called Tuesday for her candidacy to be rejected, saying she has shielded the UAE from those accusations.

The UAE rejects any claim that it supports the RSF. Nusseibeh said Sudan would rank among her top concerns in office, promising to push for accountability and a stop to the fighting.

Opponents have also set up a website called “No to Lana,” urging supporters to email national UN missions and push them to block her appointment. The campaign has driven more than 38,000 emails so far.

Observers noted that the UAE stayed silent and offered no criticism when Syrian leader Ahmad al-Sharaa’s forces attacked Kurds in Rojava, Syrian Kurdistan, in January 2026. The UAE was also silent on the massacre of Druze and attacks on Alawites in 2025.

That month, Islamist militias under Syria’s interim government killed Kurdish civilians in Aleppo and in Rojava. But the UAE was quick to condemn Iran, its foe, after a drone strike targeted Kurds in Iraq, a sharp contrast to its silence on the Syrian attacks on Kurds.

A political analyst Henase Karim told iKurd News “how Nusseibeh could be nominated for the role, if she is clearly nationalist and favors Arab and Islamic interests,”

(With files from Reuters | Rudaw | Agencies)

Copyright © 2026 iKurd.net. All rights reserved.

UAE slams Iran’s attacks on Iraqi Kurds, silent on Syrian Kurds

The post UAE’s UN chief candidate silent on Kurdish state, backs Palestine bid appeared first on iKurd News.

BAGHDAD,— Iraq, Six French nationals convicted of membership in Islamic State (IS/ISIS) were sentenced to life in prison by an Iraqi court on Tuesday.

A seventh French defendant received a 15-year prison sentence, a Reuters witness present at the hearing said.

The defendants were part of a group of 47 French Islamic State suspects moved from detention facilities in northeastern Syria to Iraq last year.

U.S. forces and Iraqi authorities coordinated the transfer under a broader relocation arrangement.

The judge said the convictions and sentences fell under Iraq’s counterterrorism law, which was applied in this case to joining Islamic State and spreading fear.

He said the court chose life imprisonment over the death penalty because the six defendants were young.

The seventh man, who is 23, was sentenced to 15 years, according to the Reuters witness.

Defense lawyer Abbas al-Maliki said the defendants would challenge the sentences before the Court of Cassation.

Proceedings against the French nationals began last month.

Islamic State captured extensive territory in Iraq and Syria in 2014. A U.S.-led coalition and local forces defeated the group’s territorial control in 2019, although some militants remained active after many were detained.

The United States said in January that transfers of Islamic State detainees from Syria to Iraq had begun.

The decision came amid security concerns over detention facilities in northeastern Syria, where Kurdish-led forces had lost control of parts of the region.

In March 2026, a French court handed a life sentence to an Islamic State-linked jihadist for crimes against Iraq’s Yazidi minority, in the first case of its kind tried in France.

(With files from Reuters)

Copyright © 2026 iKurd.net. All rights reserved.

The post Iraq gives life sentences to six French men for IS membership appeared first on iKurd News.

Islamic Slogans and Looting Poisoned France’s Protests

Goran Halabjai | Exclusive to iKurd.net
Translate by iKurd.net from Kurdish Awene.

Events in France and a Few Observations

Over the past few days, many cities across Europe, especially in France, have experienced unrest, and widespread protests have disrupted the peace in those cities. Thousands of students, wage earners, small business owners, and ordinary citizens took to the streets to protest.

As I mentioned, these protests were organized by students, teachers, and wage earners. The reasons included the rising cost of education, cuts to workers’ wages, rising prices, and a declining ability to save money.

In such circumstances, these groups have a legitimate right to make the authorities aware of their difficult living conditions and to pursue some of their demands. They can use peaceful and civil methods to express their dissatisfaction, including holding demonstrations.

It is true that protests in developed countries do not always end as the organizers planned. Often, groups of troublemaking young people infiltrate the protests. By using slogans that have little to do with the protesters’ actual demands, they change the nature of the protest and lead it in the wrong direction.

The motives of these troublemakers fall into two main categories. First, they may be opponents of the groups organizing the protests, whether those groups are political or nonpolitical.

The second possibility is that they are acting on behalf of the authorities to discredit the groups or individuals who organized the demonstrations and thereby undermine the purpose and goals of the protests.

What happened in France and Italy was different. The difference was that these “troublemakers” came from an environment in which civic and democratic action was not valued. I would say that the vast majority of these young people involved in looting were not trying to express dissatisfaction, nor did they sympathize with the protesters. Instead, they saw the situation as an opportunity to loot and chant Islamic slogans.

You may have noticed that, in many places, some young Muslim men shouted “Allahu Akbar” or held copies of the Quran while chanting Islamic slogans. They went so far as to call for Islamic law, or Sharia, to be implemented in that country.

I am not saying that all the looters were Muslim. Undoubtedly, ethnic French people were also among them, but they made up a very small proportion. By looking closely at their facial features, one could identify which ethnic groups they belonged to.

Emmanuel Macron had been waiting for an opportunity to reveal his hostility toward the left. He quickly accused young French leftists of trying to overthrow the French government through looting and violence.

Going forward, it is important for any group organizing a protest to be aware of these troublemakers. Otherwise, instead of achieving its goals, the group may end up being blamed for the unrest.

Those young Muslims must also understand that they will gain nothing through unrest, looting, and chanting Islamic slogans. Instead, they may face prison sentences or be deported to the countries they came from.

Therefore, they should respect the laws, constitutions, and cultures of the countries that have opened their doors to them and given them a better life, a life they might only have dreamed of in their own countries, rather than actually experienced.

Goran Halabjai is a senior Kurdish writer, commentator, and social media figure known for his outspoken and critical views on Kurdish political authorities and Islamic fundamentalism. Halabjai’s FB.

This article was originally published in the Kurdish language in Awene Newspaper on October 26, 2026.

The views expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of iKurd.net or its editorial team.

Copyright © 2026 iKurd.net. All rights reserved.

The post Muslim Rioters in France Turned Protests Into Chaos appeared first on iKurd News.

CAIRO,— Egypt’s parliament on Monday authorized President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi to take “all necessary measures” to help Saudi Arabia defend itself against Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthi movement, potentially drawing Cairo deeper into the regional conflict.

Sisi asked lawmakers to authorize military aid if Saudi Arabia sought assistance against the Houthis.

Their advance threatens the Bab el-Mandeb, a vital maritime passage between the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden that supports shipping routes to Egypt’s Suez Canal.

At least two-thirds of lawmakers supported the measure, according to an official parliamentary statement. The vote took place behind closed doors, and officials did not release the tally. Riyadh has not publicly requested Egyptian troops.

Taher al-Khouly, deputy head of parliament’s legislative committee, told Reuters that Egyptian forces would deploy to Saudi Arabia in coordination with Riyadh and at its request.

The parliamentary measure did not define the form of support Egypt could provide.

The decision faced opposition at home. The Civil Democratic Movement, a coalition of opposition parties, rejected Egyptian involvement in a regional war and called for Cairo to focus on mediation.

The Egyptian Social Democratic Party said its lawmakers would abstain because the government had not explained the mission’s objectives, duration or cost, while maintaining its support for Saudi Arabia.

Egypt has condemned Iranian and Iran-backed attacks on Gulf countries but has not publicly joined direct combat in the current conflict. Egypt has not joined the defense agreement reached in August by Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey.

Ministers from the three countries met in Riyadh earlier this month and agreed to ensure the “rapid deployment” of forces and military capabilities in Saudi Arabia.

Pakistan approved the agreement last week, while Turkey’s parliament began ratification. Senior officials from the three countries met Iranian leaders in Tehran on Monday to seek ways to ease tensions.

Britain said it would send Royal Air Force Typhoon fighter jets to help shield Saudi urban areas and key facilities from Houthi air strikes.

Egypt Limits Its Role to Defense

Parliament postponed the vote last week while Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty and intelligence chief Hassan Rashad traveled to Riyadh to deliver a letter from Sisi to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

Sisi said Egypt’s assistance would focus on defending Saudi territory and borders, not attacking Yemen.

Abdelatty later said Cairo supported efforts to resolve the conflict through diplomacy. Senate Speaker Essam Farid described Egypt’s position as “purely defensive,” aimed at protecting Saudi territory, sovereignty, borders and holy sites.

He said the mission would not extend to an attack on Yemen, describing Egypt as “a shield that protects, not a sword that attacks.”

Egypt joined the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen in March 2015, sending warships to protect Red Sea shipping lanes and about 800 ground troops, although its combat role remained limited.

Egypt sent troops to Yemen during a military intervention in the 1960s. It has not mounted another large-scale overseas ground operation since the 1991 Gulf War.

Yahya Ali al-Rai, speaker of Yemen’s Houthi-controlled House of Representatives, urged Egypt’s parliament to reject the proposal, warning that involvement would threaten Egypt’s national security and domestic stability.

Farid said he had also received a letter from Ahmed Obeid bin Daghr, head of Yemen’s Shura Council, which is aligned with the internationally recognized government.

Bin Daghr endorsed Egyptian assistance for Saudi Arabia, stating that the position represented the wishes of Yemen’s Presidential Leadership Council.

Saudi Arabia is a major political and financial partner of Egypt, providing billions of dollars in aid, central bank deposits and energy supplies under Sisi.

Fighting between the Saudi-led coalition and the Houthis, who control Yemen’s capital, Sanaa, has intensified in recent weeks, becoming a volatile front in the US-Israeli war against Iran.

Houthi attacks on Riyadh’s international airport and state oil company Saudi Aramco have disrupted flights and oil exports.

Aid organizations reported deteriorating conditions in Yemen, where the prolonged conflict has fueled a severe humanitarian emergency.

Reuters reported in September, citing people familiar with the matter, that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had sought US military assistance.

President Donald Trump declined to authorize strikes against the Houthis, the report said, while Washington offered intelligence sharing and targeting support.

(With files from Reuters)

Copyright © 2026 iKurd.net. All rights reserved.

The post Egypt’s parliament approves military support for Saudi amid Houthi attacks appeared first on iKurd News.

LONDON,— A UK Home Office guidance note paints a mixed picture of political freedom in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan Region of Iraq, recording allegations of pressure on opposition figures, protesters and journalists, while stopping short of calling the problems widespread.

The report, used to help British officials decide asylum cases, reviews evidence from human rights groups, news outlets and researchers.

It does not take sides, but it lists a series of criticisms made about the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) and its dominant parties, the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK).

Here are the main concerns it documents.

Opposition figures face pressure

The report says opposition parties do operate and win seats, but opposition politicians and activists have “at times” faced harassment, detention and, in some reported cases, physical abuse by security forces.

It notes that several prominent opposition figures were arrested or prosecuted in 2025, including Lahur Sheikh Jangi Talabani, Shaswar Abdulwahid and Aram Qadr. Authorities said the cases were criminal or security matters. Supporters called them politically motivated and part of a “broader pattern of repression.” Arrests continued into 2026, the report says, and it flags concerns about due process and the independence of the courts.

Protests sometimes broken up

While freedom of assembly is formally recognized, the report says protests, especially those criticizing authorities or demanding unpaid salaries, have at times been restricted, with arrests and security crackdowns.

It cites reports of beatings, tear gas, arbitrary detention and, in some cases, injuries or deaths. One source said protests in KDP-controlled areas are often suppressed unless the party approves them in advance, while the PUK more often allows protests but may break them up if they drag on.

The report does add a caveat: of 510 protests recorded between August 2024 and August 2026, 498 were peaceful, 9 saw intervention and 3 involved excessive force. So crackdowns happened, but in a minority of cases.

Journalists under pressure

Reporters covering corruption, governance, human rights or protests may face intimidation, threats, harassment, arbitrary detention, physical assault and prosecution, according to the report.

It says security forces, courts and politically connected individuals have used defamation laws, national security rules and telecommunications legislation against journalists. Some outlets were raided or closed and equipment seized.

Journalists were detained while covering protests, and some faced extra charges used to prolong detention. The report names cases involving Sherwan Sherwani and Qareman Shukri that drew criticism from international rights groups.

An uneven political playing field

The report cites analysts who say the KDP and PUK dominate the media, security forces and regional finances, giving them a major advantage over weaker, divided opposition parties.

It records claims that public servants are pressured to vote for the ruling parties, and that many citizens believe change at the ballot box is impossible. Still, it notes that the October 2024 elections were described by most accounts as largely fair and transparent.

Media tilted toward parties

Most major outlets in the region are tied to political parties, the report says. Independent outlets have limited reach because of funding problems and harassment by authorities, it adds.

Government still not formed

The report notes that more than 18 months after the October 2024 elections, no new regional government had been formed. Relations between the KDP and PUK broke down over power-sharing, leaving the region under a caretaker cabinet.

What the report concludes

Despite these concerns, the report says the evidence does not show that mistreatment is “sufficiently serious, widespread or systematic” to prove that all opposition supporters face a general risk. Low-level party members are generally unlikely to be targeted, it says.

But high-profile critics, journalists and activists may draw attention from authorities, and each asylum claim must be judged on its own facts, the report says. It also warns that people fearing the state are unlikely to get protection or to be safe by moving elsewhere in the region.

Copyright © 2026 iKurd.net. All rights reserved.

The post UK report flags repression in Iraqi Kurdistan appeared first on iKurd News.

The U.S. should maintain the pressure on the Iranian regime until it collapses

Serwan Zangana | Exclusive to iKurd.net

The ongoing conflict between the U.S. and Iran has changed the world’s direction and redefined the norms of the Gulf region. This war is not merely a product of President Donald Trump; rather, decades of hostility from the Iranian regime have contributed to terror and devastation in the region, mainly because the international community was unable to take a firm stance to prevent the Ayatollahs’ regime from overstepping its boundaries.

In retrospect, the former Iraqi regime under Saddam Hussein waged an eight-year war, which was supported by the U.S., and despite causing severe damage to both Iraq and Iran, the war served as a shield against Iranian Shiism spreading across the region.

After the fall of Hussein’s regime in 2003, the Arab nations attempted to maintain peace with Iran, as the leaders of the region in the past have realized that the price is indeed very high for taking action against the Ayatollahs. Iran has always destabilized regional security and halted every peace process through its armed militias and its self-proclaimed right to fight for Palestine and call for the eradication of the Jewish State.

Apparently, peace does not exist in Iran’s Islamic regime’s philosophy.

The late supreme leader of Iran’s Islamic regime, Ayatollah Khomeini, said during the Iran-Iraq War in 1988, “Your Iranian brothers, in order to defend their country and push back the attacks on the enemy of Islam, have been forced to cross over into Iraq to save the oppressed Iraqi people. Rise up and install the Islamic government that you want.”

From the time of supreme leader Khomeini in the 1980s until today, the radical ideology and the hostile mindset of the Islamic leaders of Iran have not evolved, as they have continuously believed that the creation of life began with the birth of Shiism. The threat of the Islamic regime extends further, as its intention is to dominate the region and expand its radicalized ideology combined with political power to control the main resources of the region.

Now, the U.S.’s silence regarding the Iran-backed Houthi militia’s attacks on Saudi Arabia is becoming a growing concern for other countries, as the threat from Iran cannot be ignored. Egypt is considering a military deployment to assist the Saudis in their battle against the Houthis, as Egypt clearly views Iran’s threat as a major problem to which no nation is immune.

President Trump has been maneuvering with Iran through his inconsistent statements about the conflict and the military’s actions in the region. Obviously, the U.S. is wisely playing the war game with Iran, for the latter is unlike a typical country that can be easily invaded to overthrow its government. President Trump is also benefitting from this conflict, as, according to the Joint Economic Committee, he has gained over $15 million from oil and gas stocks.

The American public in general disapproves of the U.S.-Iran war, and of course, the Democrats are aligning with the public’s opinion for their political purposes. As the U.S. midterm elections are approaching, the Democrats are aiming to gain control of the House of Representatives and the Senate.

However, the U.S. is in a stronger position than it appears to be in its war against Iran, and while the American people, who are being encouraged by the Democrats, are outraged by the billions of dollars being spent on the war, it is a major opportunity for the U.S. to maintain its iron hammer on the Islamic regime of Iran and completely destroy its economy.

Apparently, the U.S.’s sanctions on Iran have an immense impact on the country, as the Iranian president, Masoud Pezeshkian, said, “Never in the 48 years since the Islamic Revolution have we been under such pressure and faced such difficulties.”

But how long will the U.S. remain committed to imposing sanctions on Iran and draining its economy? Militarily, the U.S. has not been able to completely disable the Iranian regime and impact its infrastructure as much as it has economically. Regarding the U.S.’s sanctions on Iran, President Pezeshkian stated that they are “far harder and heavier,” as he compared the economic sanctions to military conflict.

The U.S.-Iran conflict was inevitable, as, for decades, the Islamic regime of Iran has been establishing armed militias and destabilizing the security of the region’s countries, which has also threatened American interests and its closest ally, Israel. The hostility of Iran’s regime is entrenched in its Islamic/Shiite ideology, which has been striving, since 1979, to bring the region under its control.

The existence of the Iranian regime is a permanent threat to the region, as its proxies will always remain vital in the region. In fact, negotiation does not exist in the political Islamic ideology as represented by Iran. The Iran-backed militia, Harakat al-Nujaba, recently declared its opposition to the Iraqi government’s call to disarm the armed militias.

Abdul Qader al-Karbalai, the military deputy for the group, stated, “We affirm that our decision is firm and has not changed regarding our continued non-participation in the political process.” Obviously, the Iraqi Prime Minister, Ali al-Zaidi, is unable to change Iraq’s path, as the majority of government members, who are Shia, are ideologically linked to Iran, which influences the political process in Iraq.

After all, to sustain pressure on Iran and increase the impact, the U.S. should not relent; it must continue to impose strict sanctions on the Islamic regime of Iran and block the airways until it collapses.

Serwan Zangana, a contributing writer for iKurd.net, lives in Virginia, U.S. He serves as a correction officer.

The views expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of iKurd.net or its editorial team.

Copyright © 2026 iKurd.net. All rights reserved.

The post Squeeze Iran Until Its Regime Breaks appeared first on iKurd News.

KARAK, Jordan,— Eight people were killed and 40 wounded when gunmen opened fire during a funeral at Hamoud Church in Karak governorate on Friday, Jordanian officials said.

Authorities described the shooting as a terrorist attack carried out by extremists.

Public Security Directorate chief Major General Abdallah al-Maaytah said most of the wounded remained under medical care as security forces continued searching for the attackers.

The death toll rose from seven to eight by Saturday, the health minister said.

Interior Minister Mazin Al Farrayeh said extremists carried out the attack, but investigators had not determined whether the suspects were linked to known groups inside or outside Jordan. No group immediately claimed responsibility.

Footage broadcast by state-owned Al-Mamlaka television appeared to show three gunmen firing toward the church from a sidewalk before taking cover behind trees and a low wall.

They then ran toward the entrance. Reuters verified the footage using the church’s entrance path, surrounding wall and other details.

Prime Minister Jafar Hassan condemned the attack in a post on X, blaming terrorist ideology and extremism. He said the government would not allow such beliefs to lead society toward violence.

Khaled Burqan, who attended the funeral, told Al-Mamlaka that dozens of people were present when the gunmen fired for several minutes. Another witness, Ihab Ammareen, said he saw injured people collapse to the floor.

King Abdullah visited Karak hours after the shooting and vowed a forceful response. The king said those responsible would face severe punishment and stressed that the attack would not divide Jordanians.

Reuters footage from the church showed blood on the floor near the entrance, where security forces had been deployed.

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres condemned the attack on X, saying violence against civilians and places of worship was unacceptable.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz also condemned the shooting, calling it a brutal attack on a place of worship.

At a government hospital in Karak, people gathered to support the wounded. Hani Al-Mbaydeen said the attack had left the community speechless and urged the state to investigate the origins of extremist ideas and how they reach young people.

Attacks of this kind are rare in Jordan, a relatively stable U.S. ally. Jordanian authorities have repeatedly said they have foiled attempted attacks by Islamist militants in recent years.

Christians make up a minority of Jordan’s population. The country also contains several biblical sites that draw Christian pilgrims from around the world.

Jordan was among the U.S. allies in the region targeted by Iranian attacks this year, following U.S. and Israeli strikes against Iran in February.

In April 2025, Jordan banned the Muslim Brotherhood, the country’s largest opposition group, and moved to seize its properties and assets.

(With files from Reuters)

Copyright © 2026 iKurd.net. All rights reserved.

The post Islamist gunmen’s attack on Jordan church leaves 8 dead: video appeared first on iKurd News.