Nemat Sharif | Exclusive to iKurd.net
At a time as the Arab conscience is witnessing the beginning of a reawakening, it is worthy of attention, observance and candor. I say this not to criticize or praise, but rather as an observer of the Arab cultural and political reality. A few pan-Arab press play an important role in cultivating and highlighting this renaissance.
Often it has been said that “Intellectuals are the conscience of the nation.” Bold free thinkers prove that the revolution is one of conscience first. We must begin with ourselves in order to match our political positions with our ideas and avoid falling into the political and cultural errors for which we often criticize others for.
I followed with interest the articles of Professor Edward Saeed about the Arabs reviewing their view of the Holocaust and committing to a humanist position towards their tragedies and the psychological complex it impressed on the collective psyche of the Jews. Consequently it imposes a moral position not only on the Jews but on a global scale. This is what will allow the Arabs in general and the Palestinians in particular to take the reins of the moral initiative and present their tragic history to the world which perhaps is no less than that of the Jews despite the historical and social differences.
We may disagree with Dr. Saeed in the details and particulars, but we must appreciate his courage in presenting a new position worthy of the attention of Arab public opinion. The importance of positions increases when they are taken at a crossroads, just as the writings of Dr. Sadiq Jalal Al-Azm more than four decades ago did. His books (‘Criticism of Religious Thought’ and ‘Self-Criticism after the Defeat’) were serious and bold contributions at a juncture pushed the Arab conscience to change. I find that Dr. Saeed’s writings did a similar mission to push the process of Arab renaissance forward.
Perhaps any human group exaggerates in presenting its tragedies and appearing as the biggest victim in the hope of winning public opinion and trying to minimize the tragedy of its enemies to avoid accusations and appear moderate. In both cases, the occurrence of tragic events cannot be denied despite the difference in size. The Jews were not the only victims, but they continue to inflict much tragedy on the Palestinians. The history of the Arabs and their present is not free from inflicting tragedies on others.
Doesn’t the martyrdom of Al-Hussein b. Ali (pbuh), and his followers in Karbala impressed the Shiite psyche and distinguish them from the Sunnis! They commemorate it every year on Ashura to this day. We mention this example as a comparison with the Catholics killing a number of Protestants 400 years ago.
Can the Arabs acknowledge what they did in their history against others? It is very important and takes a great deal of courage and maturity for a nation to be able to review its history and compare to others so that it can elevate its moral position at the present and future among nations. (This applies to Iran and Turkey as well) It is imperative for the nation’s intellectuals and leaders to have the courage and maturity to face its past and present as they stand witness to see what they have done to others.
Is there better time to reviewing history at a time when we are making in our present a history that is no better than the past? Can the Arab conscience acknowledge what happened to the Kurds and Shiites in Iraq of massacres under Saddam Hussein? Perhaps the Holocaust of the Kurds was not as large as the Jewish Holocaust (6 million), but it is certainly no less barbaric.
For example, the number of victims of the Baathist Anfal operations in 1987 and 1988 was no less than 180,000 Kurdish civilians, men, women and children.
Or the loading of 8,000 Kurds from the Baharka and Qushtapa camps near Erbil into military vehicles and sending them to the southern deserts of Iraq to bury them in mass graves or the gassing of Halabja are no less hideous than the massacres of Sabra and Shatila, With the exception of a few writers and intellectuals, the Arab conscience was not moved at that time to denounce it until after the invasion of Kuwait. In the face of the Arab silence and duplicity, the Kurdish leader Massoud Barzani said bitterly to a British journalist “The world does not care if we die, but [cares] how we die.”
The time has come to ask the rising Arab conscience to take a clear and explicit position on the gassing of Halabja, Balisan and Badinan? Where is the Arab position on the Anfal operations? Despite the passage of nearly four decades and the demise of Saddam’s regime, the Arab conscience is still in conflict and may not yet be able to confront contemporary history. It is ironic that a nation cries out for what is happening to it and condones what it does to others. Arabs are crying out for what is happening in Palestine and reconsidering the Holocaust but ignoring the tragedies of the Kurds.
It is unfortunate that many Arabs still write from a traditional nationalist perspective of rulers that oppress others and unable to feel for the oppressed. Giving priority to immediate over long-term considerations is a disaster. The division of Kurdistan is only one fault of colonialists. Several million Palestinians have been suffering for 70 years despite the presence of 22 Arab countries supporting their cause.
The division of Kurdistan, left more than 40 million Kurds suffering for 100 years. Kurdistan was divided and the states of Iraq and Syria were born. Many Israeli Jews from came from Arab countries. Kurds are Muslims and original inhabitants of the region for more than 6,000 years. They have contributed substantially to world civilizations including the Islamic.
If any of the states colonizing Kurdistan have the right to independence, then a fair thinker must give others the same right. Thus, he must give the right to the emergence of a Kurdish state. Dr. Ismail Beşikci (Turkey) in his book “Kurdistan is an International Colony”, defended this right and served many years in prison. Mr. Sayid Al-Qimni (Egypt) said in an interview on YouTube, “We demand Arab unity and we refuse that the Kurds demand a Kurdish state.
See this is our problem (Arameans?) Our problem is as follows: We are with Chechnya in its separation from Russia, we are with the independence of Kashmir from India, and we are with the independence of Bosnia from the former Yugoslavia. We are with all the separatists in the world because they are Muslims, as if they are from our tribe, except here (the Kurds) they are not from our tribe. How do they break up? Anyone who splits we cut off his tongue and cut his neck. If we don’t get rid of this fanaticism, this is unreal, imaginary thing, it is destructive to the homeland”.(YouTube, audio and video, reviewed on 7-2-2025).
It is truly destructive to the homeland! The Iraqi thinker Hassan Al-Alawi, who says, “The Kurds existed 6,000 years before the Arabs, their presence preceded the presence of the Arabs in Kurdistan, they are the ones who have the right to expel the Arabs and not for the Arabs to expel them, and do not forget that because they are Kurds they have remained without rights, and even the rights that were assigned to them, for some reason, have not been implemented.” (YouTube, audio and video, reviewed on 7-2-2025). There are others such as Dr. Tariq Sweidan, Youssef Zeidan and others.
However, recently, a different opinion has emerged that does not rise to the level of belief or expressing the rights of others as he believes in for himself. Dr. Wadah Khanfar says (YouTube, audio and video,) “Our Kurdish brothers are the biggest victim in this region, the Sykes-Pico region, because they came and divided the region and left the Kurds distributed in this region.
If the East, I mean the entire East region, if they agree among themselves on a joint economic and political administration, like Europe did, the Kurds would not have a problem. The Kurds would become an important part of this space, in deed they would be a part in the heart of it, and there would be no Iraqi Kurd, Syrian Kurd, Iranian Kurd, or Turkish. Why? Because you live in a space, as the dream of establishing a European space was impossible before 1945 or 1946. It has now become beautiful for everyone to love, and the German or French travel without borders, just as if I were a Kurd living in Syria or Iraq, I would be able to roam this region and live in it. I would have no problem.” (YouTube, audio and video, reviewed on 7-5-2025).
Individuals and nations go through stages in their history that require them to improve and do their best to contribute to civilization. However, they cannot do this unless they live and grow in freedom without obstacles from others in order to work for and reach what psychology and sociology call ‘self-actualization’. (Self-actualization is the complete realization of one’s potential, and the full development of one’s abilities and appreciation for life, See: Maslow.)
The impulse to improve one’s self is the cause of progress and achievement among individuals and nations alike. Had it not been for this energy inherent in humans, we may have still lived in our forefathers’ caves. Individuals (as well as nations), need respect and confidence in order to work towards achieving his full potential, when accorded an environment free of hindrance and oppression (See Rogers on and the hierarchy of needs).
Europe went through dark periods in its history from fighting, collision and disintegration of empires until it settled on independent nation-states, which from there spread to the world. Later, the European renaissance began. Historically, for Europe, this was the stage of self -actualization. After nearly two centuries, and after the changes in the economy and politics, Europe began to lose its grip on world power.
The era of colonialism and controlling the world began to fade away and Europe began to search for a new European identity and a new grip on power. In short, European nations went through the stages of self-actualization (individuals and nations), as independent nation states provided them with a space of freedom to accomplish what they aspired to. Through its repeated uprisings in the various parts of Kurdistan, the Kurdish nation has gained confidence and respect among the nations, but it remains to have the right circumstances for independence. Only then, truly Kurds can move up toward self-actualization.
Finding or creating a Kurdish or Kurdistan space similar to the European space will resolve the Kurdish issue in all parts of Kurdistan, as this space will allow them to roam and move in Kurdistan east, west, north and south. In Dr. Khanfar’s opinion, this will solve the Kurdish problem. I am not sure how Dr. Khanfar thinks that all four (Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria) countries partitioning Kurdistan can come together to form a Europe-like space for the Kurds? Is it only to avoid ‘independent Kurdistan’? It is absolutely wrong to believe that the Kurdish goal is roaming as nomads in their own land.
Although lacking political entity, the Kurds have all the characteristics of a nation, no less than any other. To explain, we have to compare for example to Arabic nation on two levels. First is that despite the presence of 22 independent Arab countries, parts of the Arab nation lag behind or under occupation. Some rulers do not differ from occupation much.
As for the Kurdish nation, it is still weak and does not enjoy complete independence anywhere. In all parts of Kurdistan (except Iraq), the status of the Kurds is at best comparable to 1948 Arab Israelis. Could the Palestinians accept to join their brothers in Israel? As for the Kurdistan region of Iraq, their situation does not differ much from the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. The difference is that Palestine has 22 independent countries that support it, and Kurdistan has none.
From a Kurdish perspective, the concept of ‘Kurdistan space’ is wrong for the Kurds. If it is not nationalist interest and feelings, then it must be the fear of confronting the future Kurdistan. From the beginning, perhaps rejecting the two-state solution, harmed the Palestinian cause. By comparison, what would have happened to the South Kurdistan (Iraq) if the Kurds would have refused the federal system after the fall of Saddam Hussein, despite the fact that federation is much less than the two-state solution!
In light of the above, we see that the Palestinian political leaders were oscillating between support and silence for years. Thanks to those who cooperated with the Kurds, especially in Syria, when away from the spotlight. Others remained silent in line with their interests with the Arab regimes, especially the Baath regimes in Syria and Iraq.
We understood that. As a liberation movement we were plagued by harsh totalitarian regimes and we went through unenviable situations, as well as the Palestinians. However, In recent years, Khaled Meshal, a prominent politician and former Hamas leader spoke openly about his opinion on the Kurds. Very briefly, he recognizes the grievances of the Kurds and calls on the countries dividing Kurdistan to find appropriate solutions for the Kurds.
He also talked of the ‘right to self-determination’ for the Kurds with conditions. That is, resolving the issue peacefully within those states. This may be an interim solution, but any conditions imposed on self-determination by the countries dividing Kurdistan is not really self-determination. Although this is less than Dr. Khanfar’s opinion, we believe it is more realistic than him. It is clear that the Kurdish space is impossible to exist except in two cases, the first of which is the independent and unified Kurdistan. Or the ‘unification’ of the four Middle Eastern countries that divide Kurdistan.
Is it just as important, as Dr. Saeed said, for the rising Arab conscience to take a clear and frank position on the Holocaust, it is just as important to take a clear and explicit position on the Anfal operations, Halabja, and other massacres? And the right to self-determination of the Kurds. Despite the passage of more than four decades, the Arab conscience, again with the exception of a few free thinkers, is still in conflict and not yet able to confront its contemporary history. It is an irony that a nation cries out for what is happening to it and ignores what it does to others.
Here is an example of a free conscientious thinker. In an interview with former US President Jimmy Carter on YouTube, (Accessed on 9/2/2025), he expressed his views clearly and concisely including his own bias regarding Palestine.
“Q: Why don’t Americans know what you saw?
Jimmy Carter: Americans don’t want to know and many Israelis don’t want to know what is happening inside Israel. It is a terrible human rights persecution that is far transcends what anyone from the outside could imagine. There are powerful political forces in America that prevent any objective analysis of the problem in the Holy Land. I think it is accurate to say that there is not a single member of Congress, I am familiar with, who can talk publicly speak out and call on Israel to withdraw to its legal boundaries or publicize the tragedy of the Palestinians or even call publicly for good faith peace talks. For seven years, we have not seen a single day of peace talks. This is a taboo subject and if any member of Congress speaks about what I just mentioned he will most likely not return to Congress in the next election.
Q: Who are these forces you are talking about?
Well there is a genuine commitment in America which I share as a Christian, and a deep commitment to make sure Israel is safe. Added to that is the powerful influence of a group called American-Israeli lobby called (AIPAC) which performs a completely legal and legitimate task of persuading Americans to support the policies of the government of Israeli. The goal of this group is not to establish peace but to mobilize maximum possible support in America, the White House, and Congress and in the media to support any policies of the Israeli government at any particular time and it is extremely effective.”
All Arabs, without exception, support the Palestinian cause in one way or another. But when faced with the Kurdish issue in any of the countries that divide Kurdistan, they find it difficult to recognize the legitimacy of Kurdish rights, despite that most acknowledge the grievances of the Kurdish people. Few Arab rulers expressed the legitimacy of the Kurdish cause, such as President Abdel Nasser of Egypt and others. We believe that the time has come to call on the free will of people to raise their voices in support of just causes.
Undoubtedly, dictatorships have deepened tribal and sectarian gaps between neighboring peoples over the decades of Iraq and Syria’s history. No one advocates for division or the dismemberment of states. Can you imagine how would it feel to live as a second or third degree citizen under a totalitarian regime?
Why don’t we think about building an entity in which the people choose their rulers and the system of government they desire? Why don’t we think about building relations with neighboring peoples on the basis of equality, mutual respect and common interests in Kurdistan, and its neighbors? Kurdish neighbors especially in Iraq and Syria, like most people, aspire to freedom and to live in peace with their neighbors, Kurds and others.
Nemat Sharif, a political analyst, a contributing writer and columnist for iKurd.net.
The opinions are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of iKurd.net or its editors.
Copyright © 2025 iKurd.net. All rights reserved
Related posts:
The Resurrection (Ba’ath) Party – Before the Iran-Iraq War
Iraq: Revenge and Corruption
Saddam Hussein’s Enemies: Paving the Road to the Invasion of Iraq
The Truth About The Saddam Hussein Affair
Saddam Hussein was a Friend to the West
The Mustashar and the Jash – A View from the Position of ‘Iraqi National Unity’ on the ‘Descendants of Treason’
Iraq – The Cynical Swindle
Iraqi Kurdistan – “Sold Out!” – Part II
