Syria could look heavenly in comparison to Iraq’s future

“Ever since Lausanne, we have dreamed of establishing a state,” Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) leader Massoud Barzani said in 2016 during a visit to the U.S.

When you look at the borders in the Middle East, Barzani said in March 2016, they only apply on paper. “The region’s realities are mapping something new,” the Kurdish leader said.

Another critical claim he made was when he said he was “ready to pick up a gun to defend Kirkuk” in June 2014.

Barzani’s statements on bloody sectarian fights in the Middle East, remapping of the region and Kirkuk’s defense are striking.

What Lausanne means

First thing’s first: Those who babble about the Lausanne Treaty should understand what it actually stands for.

Laussane is a treaty that was signed at the end of the First World War and withstood the Second World War, remaining a beacon of stability for the region until now.

Barzani’s second point underlines remapping of the Middle East.

It really doesn’t matter what angle you take on this: The end game is a threat to becoming a country like Syria.

In Europe, Czechs and Slovakians shook hands when parting ways.

Catalonians in Spain, the Scottish in the U.K. and the Quebecois in Canada also hold referendums on state separation.

Though not one trigger is pulled there.

Terror groups such as the IRA and ETA are also deactivated today in those democratic countries.

A democratic culture is what promises such a future to us as well.

A culture of violence

Barzani, who comes from the Mecca of cultural violence –the Middle East—said this in March 2016:
 
“I will not go to Iran or Ankara and give them what they want in the talks. I said this in the U.S. as well: We are only responsible for our cause. This time, either we will all perish for independence, or we will take it, even if that means shedding blood.”

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, on the other hand, said his government would not recognize a referendum outcome and that a military intervention would come into play upon a physical threat to the Iraqi people on Sept. 16.
 
However you look at this situation, Syria’s hell comes to materialization in Iraq with this as well.

This is the risk they foresaw coming up after generations when the British Iraqi Commissioner Henry Dobbs and President Mustafa Kemal Atatürk along with his premier İsmet İnönü met for talks on Nov. 24, 1926 in Ankara, 90 years ago while Iraq’s borders were being drawn.

Iraq’s separation is the threat they saw coming.

And now, Barzani says the “Middle East’s map is being redrawn.”

Time for politics

Barzani now wants Kirkuk, too, expanding over the KRG’s borders. A disaster could be born from this as it’s an oil land home to long-established Turkmen and Arab assets.

Syria could look heavenly compared to what awaits the region with such a scenario.
That is why all countries of the region but Israel are against this referendum.
Iran promises to close borders but speaks no word of military intervention.

It is natural for Turkey to reject the referendum, however, even when Baghdad and Iran are cautious with their language, Turkey, too, should remain prudent speaking on military terms.

Policies based on isolation and newfound courage could result badly.
 
So, Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım’s claim that “War is an act between two countries” is on point.

The times call for strong political maneuvers and dense diplomacy.

Wouldn’t it be better if we had maintained good relations with the West, with Egypt or even Prime Minister al-Abadi in order to cooperate at such a time?