| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| Hezbollah, PKK and American Hypocrisy |
| 2007-10-31 |
| Gwynne Dyer, Arab News Fifteen months ago, the armed wing of Lebanon’s Hezbollah party, listed as a terrorist organization by the United States and most other Western countries, attacked Israel’s northern border, capturing two Israeli soldiers and killing eight more. Israel replied with a month of massive air attacks all across Lebanon that destroyed much of the country’s infrastructure, leveled a good deal of south Beirut, and killed around a thousand Lebanese civilians. Washington, London, Ottawa and some other Western capitals insisted that this was a reasonable and proportionate response, and shielded Israel from intense diplomatic pressure to stop the attacks even when Israel launched a land invasion of southern Lebanon in early August, 2006. The operation only ended when Israeli casualties on the ground mounted rapidly and the Israeli government pulled its troops back. So what would be a reasonable and proportionate Turkish response to the recent attacks by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), listed as a terrorist organization by the United States and most other Western countries, from northern Iraq into southeastern Turkey? More than forty Turkish civilians and soldiers have been killed in these attacks over the past two weeks, and a further eight Turkish soldiers were captured. Well, it would be unreasonable for Turkey to bomb Iraq, where the PKK’s bases are, for any more than one month. It would be quite disproportionate for the Turkish Air Force to level more than a small part of Baghdad — say, 15,000 homes. Ideally, it should leave Baghdad alone and restrict itself to destroying some Kurdish-populated city in northern Iraq near Turkey’s own border. Moreover, when the Turks do invade Iraq on the ground, they should restrict themselves to the northern border strip where the PKK’s bases are. What’s that? Washington is asking Turkey to show restraint and not attack Iraq at all? Even after the Kurdish terrorists killed or kidnapped all those Turkish people? Could it be that Turkish lives are worth less than Israeli lives? Never mind. At least the United States officially classes the PKK as a terrorist organization and refuses to let its officials have any contact with it. But what’s this? There is a parallel terrorist organization called the Party for Free Life in Kurdistan (PJAK), essentially a branch office of the PKK, also based in northern Iraq, which carries out attacks into the adjacent Kurdish-populated region of Iran, and the United States does not condemn the PJAK? It even sends its officials to have friendly chats with the PJAK terrorists? How odd! The PJAK’s leader, Rahman Haj-Ahmadi, paid an unofficial visit to Washington last summer. One of his close associates, Biryar Gabar, claims to have “normal dialogue” with US officials, according to a report last Tuesday in the New York Times — and the American military spokesman in Baghdad, Cmdr. Scott Rye, issued a carefully structured nondenial saying that “The consensus is that US forces are not working with or advising the PJAK.” Biryar Gabar also said that PJAK fighters have killed at least 150 Iranian soldiers and officials in the past three months. That’s a lot more people than the PKK have killed in Turkey in the same time, and yet neither Washington nor any other Western country has expressed sympathy for Iran. Could it be that Iranian lives are worth even less than Turkish lives? And here’s something even more peculiar. Iran, like Turkey, is already shelling Kurdish villages on the Iraqi side of the frontier that it suspects of sheltering or supplying the PKK/PJAK. How come President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney simply ignore these actions, when they have been working hard for the past year to build a case for attacking Iran? As Pat Buchanan noted on MSNBC’s “Hardball” last week: “Cheney and Bush are laying down markers for themselves which they’re going to have to meet. I don’t see how.” The US military “assets” for an attack on Iran are all in place, so it can’t be that. Maybe the delay means that Bush and Cheney are having difficulty in persuading the military professionals to go along with this hare-brained scheme. Most senior American military officers see an attack on Iran as leading to inevitable failure and humiliation for the United States, and the last thing the White House wants is a rash of US generals resigning in protest when it orders the attack. On the other hand, Bush is still the commander-in-chief, and how many American generals resigned when he committed the somewhat lesser folly of invading Iraq? Only one, and he did it very quietly. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #9 Gwynne Dyer is male. He's also increasingly off the rails over the past few years. Think of Andrew Sullivan with a military record. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2007-10-31 22:05 |
| #8 Dr. Dyer, quit your day job. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2007-10-31 16:30 |
| #7 Could it be that German To a rational person, even though the Brits ran an 'Empire' with subject people [and we have all witnessed what those subject people, particularly in Africa have done with their independence], in the circa early 1940s based upon the behaviors of the Germans, YES. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2007-10-31 12:42 |
| #6 "... (PJAK), essentially a branch office of the PKK, also based in northern Iraq, which carries out attacks into the adjacent Kurdish-populated region of Iran, and the United States does not condemn the PJAK?" As much as Dwyer is a pompous pain in the ass that historically projects opinions as fact, it’s difficult to refute the central point of this argument. PJAK is, by most accepted definitions, a terrorist organization. Turning a blind eye isn’t necessarily the same thing as condoning their practices. But it’s not a quantum stretch to speculate that there may be more of a cozy relationship here. In fact, one has to wonder if some of the dough that the USDoS said was going to “un-named” political organizations that promote political reform in Iran has found it’s way into the coffers of PJAK. |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2007-10-31 09:47 |
| #5 Most senior American military officers see an attack on Iran as leading to inevitable failure and humiliation for the United States And she knows that because |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2007-10-31 08:13 |
| #4 alt.dye.dye.dye.gwynne |
| Posted by: twobyfour 2007-10-31 03:01 |
| #3 Could it be that Turkish lives are worth less than Israeli lives? Frankly, yes. The Turks have indulged in genocide and made their state one of an increasingly Islamist nature. Synagogues are being bombed and little is being done to halt the encroaching Muslim prediliction for shari'a law. One need only examine how many mosques are being bombed in Israel for some sort of contrast. Could it be that Iranian lives are worth even less than Turkish lives? Wow! We've got ourselves a regular frickin' female Einstein, here. Yes, Iran has committed or caused so many direct violations of international law and crimes against humanity that their people rate right up there with pond scum. Too bad for decent and honorable Persians, but there's this niggling little issue with overthrowing an oppressive government or being tarred with the same brush. Tough effin' noogies. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-10-31 02:53 |
| #2 Gwynne Dyer should STFU. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2007-10-31 01:06 |
| #1 OP-ED > UN MUST MAKE ISRAEL GIVE UP NUKES, OR ACCEPT SYRIAN, IRAN PROGRAMS. You just know Israel is gonna agree. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2007-10-31 00:52 |