ORSAM Rapor No 49: ORSAM SÖYLEŞİLERİ-2 IRAK TÜRKMENLERİ-1
http://www.orsam.org.tr/tr/trUploads/Yazilar/Dosyalar/2011521_orsamturkmenler_bolum1.
mercredi 8 juin 2011
IRAK TÜRKMENLERİ-1
http://www.orsam.org.tr/tr/trUploads/Yazilar/Dosyalar/2011521_orsamturkmenler_bolum1.
IRAK TÜRKMENLERI - ORSAM Rapor
ORSAM Rapor No 49: ORSAM SÖYLEŞİLERİ-2 IRAK TÜRKMENLERİ-1
http://www.orsam.org.tr/tr/trUploads/Yazilar/Dosyalar/2011521_orsamturkmenler_bolum1.pdf
http://www.orsam.org.tr/tr/trUploads/Yazilar/Dosyalar/2011521_orsamturkmenler_bolum1.pdf
ORSAM SÖYLEŞİLERİ-1 IRAKLI ARAPLAR, AZINLIKLAR ve AKADEMİSYENLER-1
ORSAM Rapor No 48: ORSAM SÖYLEŞİLERİ-1 IRAKLI ARAPLAR, AZINLIKLAR ve AKADEMİSYENLER-1
Metnin Tamamı
http://www.orsam.org.tr/tr/raporgoster.aspx?ID=1895
Metnin Tamamı
http://www.orsam.org.tr/tr/raporgoster.aspx?ID=1895
lundi 6 juin 2011
Petition to protest the Iraqi Foreign Affairs Ministry for ignoring the Turkmens
Türkmenim diyen üstüne düşen görevini bilir
This email has been forwarded by Turkmen Info Centre to all Turkmen communities and associations in Canada.
This email has been forwarded by Turkmen Info Centre to all Turkmen communities and associations in Canada.
Best Regards, www.turkmeninfocentre.com
حملة "المليون توقيع" لتنديد وزارة الخارجية العراقية لتجاهلها التركمان في العراق
ومطالبة شعبية لوقف سياسة التهميش القومي للتركمان في العراق
Campaign to collect signatures to protest the Iraqi Foreign Ministry for ignoring the Turkmens in Iraq
İmza toplamak için Kampanya başlattık, Irak Türkmenlerini görmezden gelen Irak Dışişleri Bakanlığı'nı protesto amaçlı
إدخل ووقع من أجل وجودك يا أيها التركماني ونطلب دعم كل انسان خير وغيور على إنسانيته
الكل مسؤول لنشر هذه الحملة دون استثناء وشكرا لكم
dimanche 5 juin 2011
Alleged chief of PKK's money in Europe taken into custody in Paris
Sunday, June 5, 2011
ISTANBUL - Hürriyet
 |
Four Kurds were arrested after French police raided a Kurdish association in a Paris suburb, including the alleged chief of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK’s, money in Europe.
The French police raided the Kurdish association based in Villiers le Bel. Nedim Seven, Bülent Atmaca, Gülay Aydemir and Rahmi Arıc have been taken into custody.
While the police carried out the search, Kurds living in the area gathered in front of the association to protest the raid.
In the aftermath of the raid, the protesters occupied the train station and violent conflicts occurred between the police forces and the protesters. Garbage cans were set on fire and announcements were made at the station to warn the public about the Kurdish protest. Bus and train services have been canceled because of the protests.
The police organized another anti-terror raid on the Evry branch of the Kurdish association. Kurds gathered in front of the association to protest there as well. Four people were injured and taken to hospital. Three people were taken into custody.
The French Communist Party criticized the police raid and also alleged that Nedim Seven is the chief of PKK’s money in Europe.
The PKK is listed as a terrorist organization by Turkey, the United States and the European Union.
The French police raided the Kurdish association based in Villiers le Bel. Nedim Seven, Bülent Atmaca, Gülay Aydemir and Rahmi Arıc have been taken into custody.
While the police carried out the search, Kurds living in the area gathered in front of the association to protest the raid.
In the aftermath of the raid, the protesters occupied the train station and violent conflicts occurred between the police forces and the protesters. Garbage cans were set on fire and announcements were made at the station to warn the public about the Kurdish protest. Bus and train services have been canceled because of the protests.
The police organized another anti-terror raid on the Evry branch of the Kurdish association. Kurds gathered in front of the association to protest there as well. Four people were injured and taken to hospital. Three people were taken into custody.
The French Communist Party criticized the police raid and also alleged that Nedim Seven is the chief of PKK’s money in Europe.
The PKK is listed as a terrorist organization by Turkey, the United States and the European Union.
samedi 4 juin 2011
Iraq-Kuwait Argue Over Competing Port Plans In the Persian Gulf
http://musingsoniraq.blogspot.com
Iraq and Kuwait have been trying to patch up relations for the last eight years. Saddam Hussein was considered an existential threat to the kingdom because of his 1990 invasion, and many Kuwaitis are still caught up in the past, and have been slow to adapt to the new Iraq. Still, the two have been carrying on a series of talks about a wide range of outstanding issues between them. The problem is that every time they seem to make some progress, something comes up, which strains relations. That’s happening currently over two plans to build ports, one in Kuwait and one in Iraq, which have led to a new series of accusations and recriminations.
In April 2011, Kuwait began work on its Great Mubarak Port. It is located on Bubyan Island, just off the coast of Iraq. Kuwait signed a contract with South Korea’s Hyundai to build the port, which is supposed to be completed by 2016 for a cost of $1.1 billion. It will include container docks, deep water harbors, a free trade zone, a rail network, and residential areas. By the end of May, an official from Kuwait’s Ministry of Public Works claimed that 48% of the first phase of construction had already been completed. When finished it will be the largest port in the Persian Gulf.
The problem for Iraq is that it plans on building the Grand Faw Port right across from Kuwait’s Mubarak. On April 15, 2009, Iraq signed a deal with Italy’s Technital to design the port. On April 4, 2011 Iraq’s Transportation Minister laid the corner stone for Faw. Construction is supposed to cost $6 billion. It will have a capacity of 99 million tons of cargo per year, and include a railway line to Europe via Turkey. Iraq wants it to be not only the biggest port in the region, but to make it a major transit point between Asia and Europe, and to compete with the Suez Canal. The government is arguing that it will be cheaper and faster to unload containers at Faw, and then ship them to Europe by rail, then going through Egypt. The entire project is supposed to be finished by 2017. The Transportation Minister has threatened to resign if Faw was not completed. Currently, Um Qasr is the only deep water port in Iraq, but it is old and lacks capacity. Faw is part of Iraq’s grand plan to rebuild and prosper after twenty years of wars and sanctions.
With that vision it should have come as no surprise that Iraq was greatly angered when Kuwait started work on Mubarak. An Iraqi economist claimed that Iraq would lose 60% of its business if Kuwait’s port was built, and warned that plans for the Faw port could be scrapped as a result. The Minister of Transportation said that Mubarak was part of a conspiracy against Iraq, and that the issue should be sent to the United Nations because Mubarak encroached upon Iraqi territorial waters and contravened the international border between the two nations. Basra’s Governor Khalaf Abdul-Samad, claimed Kuwait’s port would devastate his province’s economy, and cost thousands of jobs. The Iraqi Overseas Captain told the press that traffic to Mubarak would push mud into Iraqi ports, affect its fishing, and cause a maritime traffic jam as vessels would have to travel up the same canal to reach both ports. The Iraqi parliament called for a special session on the issue, and there was a small demonstration in Basra on May 18 about it as well. Many other officials made similar comments, reflecting the general surprise and indignation that Iraq felt about Kuwait’s action. At the same time, they are making so many accusations that the only possible positive outcome for them is if Kuwait scraps Mubarak, which is not going to happen.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was forced to act. On May 17, a joint technical committee was created to deal with both ports, and a high level delegation has been put together, which will travel to Kuwait to discuss the matter soon. Since so many have framed the Mubarak-Faw issue of national importance to not only Basra, but the entire country, Baghdad had to become involved.
Kuwait so far has expressed a willingness to talk. Kuwait’s ambassador to Iraq said that his country would negotiate over the ports, and that it would even sign an agreement over the issue. The ambassador stated that Mubarak would not affect Um Qasr or Faw, and that Mubarak was 20 kilometers from any Iraqi docks, not the one or two that Iraqis claimed.
At the same time, Kuwaiti papers and analysts have made some inflammatory statements as well. The head of the Kuwait Center of Strategic Studies told Al Jazeera that Mubarak would benefit both countries. He said Iraq was incapable of building a deep water port, and that therefore Kuwait had to be the supply route for goods heading there. He went on to say that the only reason why Iraq was complaining about Mubarak was that they were pro-Iranian, and Tehran wanted to cause trouble in the region. He even said that Mubarak was safer because it was out of range of Iranian artillery while Faw would not be, as if that was going to be an issue anytime soon. A Kuwaiti paper also interviewed a local analyst who said that Iraq was controlled by Tehran, that Iran was going to annex southern Iraq, and that therefore the Persians were behind all the problems over the ports. Those comments reflect the general paranoia Kuwait, and many other Gulf States have about Iran’s influence, and their trepidation at Shiite rule in Iraq, which they associate with being under the thumb of Tehran.
What has largely been left out of the argument is the fact that Iraq itself can be blamed for much of this problem. It has been talking about building a port at Faw since 2003, with little to show for it. Former Basra parliamentarian Wail Abdul Latif claimed that the province came up with a plan for Faw right after the U.S. invasion. Plans were laid out the following year. An Iraqi news site posted a text of a government document from Iyad Allawi’s time as prime minister in 2004, which said that Baghdad had agreed to the port. Nothing happened until April 2009, when Iraq signed the design contract with Technital. On February 1, 2010, the Transportation Ministry said that it would be laying the corner stone at Faw in a few weeks, but did not do so until April 2011. In April 2010 the Ministry held a ceremony in Basra to announce that construction would start that month, but nothing happened. In fact, Technital will not be finished with its design until the end of 2011, and 2012 is when work is supposed to start. The government still doesn’t have the funding together either. Parliament has not allocated any money, and Baghdad has not raised any foreign capital. A tender is not due to be offered until the end of the year. Like too many major projects in the country, Faw has largely been talk, with little action. Iraqi politicians are acting like it is just about to become reality however, which is why they are so mad at Kuwait.
Many have tried to explain why it has taken Iraq so long to move ahead with the Faw port. The head of the economic development committee in Basra’s provincial council blamed the Transportation Ministry for never getting any money for the project. Others have said individuals and other countries have been bribing officials to hold up work. Another factor was the long delay in forming a new government after the March 2010 election. While any and all of those might have played a role, it’s also true that Iraq has gone through the American administration, and four separate governments since the Grand Faw Port was first discussed, and the only thing they have accomplished is a design contract being signed, and one stone laid down.
Iraq-Kuwait relations are characterized by taking one step towards reconciliation, and then two steps back. The Mubarak-Faw dispute is becoming a huge issue between them, and the two countries are making bold statements about each other. Iraq thinks that Kuwait is purposely undermining their economic future, while Kuwait argues their port will not have a negative affect upon Iraq, and that Baghdad is only making noise because it is controlled by Iran. Neither is quite true, but as long as they stick with those positions the argument can only escalate. Iraq is also in denial about its own lack of capacity and incompetence in following through with its plans for Faw, which have been discussed for the last eight years. The slow pace they are working at could mean that Mubarak will be a fait accompli before Iraq even begins construction on its own port. Rather than escalating the rhetoric, Iraq and Kuwait need to take a step back, conduct some technical studies upon how the two plans will affect each other, and then negotiate some compromises. That may not be possible because the politicians carry so much baggage about each other that it clouds their judgment.
SOURCES
Arab Times, “Kuwait to Offer Guarantees on Port Project?” Iraq Business News, 5/30/11
Aswat al-Iraq, “Kuwaiti port will affect our waters – Maritime official,” 5/25/11
- “Iraqi politicians, officials, reject Kuwait’s Mubarak Port, call for defending Iraq’s rights,” 5/29/11
- “Iraqis won’t allow building of port, affecting Iraq’s economy, MP says,” 5/17/11
- “Minister Threatens to Resign, High Ranking Delegation to Visit Kuwait This Week,” 5/25/11
Aziz, Raber and Smith, Patrick, “Economists: Kuwait port will cut Umm Qasr traffic by 60%,” AK News, 5/14/11
Dredging Today, “Iraq: Transport Minister Unveils Plan for New Grand Faw Port,” 3/28/11
Gulf Daily News, “Italian firm to build Iraq port,” 4/17/09
Hurriyet Daily, “Italian companies to build Iraq’s biggest port,” 4/6/10
Al Jazeera, “Iraq Port Row: New Plans By Kuwait Anger Iraqis,” 5/31/11
Al-Khadumi, Bahaa, “Demonstrations in Basra against Kuwaiti port,” AK News, 5/18/11
Latif, Nizar, “Kuwait trumps Iraq Gulf harbour plan with its own huge industrial port,” The National, 5/24/11
Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, Al-Rafidayn, “Unprecedented Iraqi Escalation Against Kuwait Regarding Construction of Kuwait Port,” MEMRI Blog, 5/27/11
Sowell, Kirk, “Inside Iraqi Politics No. 15,” 5/26/11
Al-Tamimi, Noor, “Proposed Kuwaiti port encroaches on Iraqi territory, says minister,” AK News, 5/26/11
Al-Wanan, Jaffar, “Emergency delegation sent to Kuwait to fight port plans,” AK News, 5/12/11
In April 2011, Kuwait began work on its Great Mubarak Port. It is located on Bubyan Island, just off the coast of Iraq. Kuwait signed a contract with South Korea’s Hyundai to build the port, which is supposed to be completed by 2016 for a cost of $1.1 billion. It will include container docks, deep water harbors, a free trade zone, a rail network, and residential areas. By the end of May, an official from Kuwait’s Ministry of Public Works claimed that 48% of the first phase of construction had already been completed. When finished it will be the largest port in the Persian Gulf.
The problem for Iraq is that it plans on building the Grand Faw Port right across from Kuwait’s Mubarak. On April 15, 2009, Iraq signed a deal with Italy’s Technital to design the port. On April 4, 2011 Iraq’s Transportation Minister laid the corner stone for Faw. Construction is supposed to cost $6 billion. It will have a capacity of 99 million tons of cargo per year, and include a railway line to Europe via Turkey. Iraq wants it to be not only the biggest port in the region, but to make it a major transit point between Asia and Europe, and to compete with the Suez Canal. The government is arguing that it will be cheaper and faster to unload containers at Faw, and then ship them to Europe by rail, then going through Egypt. The entire project is supposed to be finished by 2017. The Transportation Minister has threatened to resign if Faw was not completed. Currently, Um Qasr is the only deep water port in Iraq, but it is old and lacks capacity. Faw is part of Iraq’s grand plan to rebuild and prosper after twenty years of wars and sanctions.
 |
| This map highlights the close proximity between Kuwait's Mubarak port being built on Bubyan Island and Faw where Iraq plans on building a grand port |
With that vision it should have come as no surprise that Iraq was greatly angered when Kuwait started work on Mubarak. An Iraqi economist claimed that Iraq would lose 60% of its business if Kuwait’s port was built, and warned that plans for the Faw port could be scrapped as a result. The Minister of Transportation said that Mubarak was part of a conspiracy against Iraq, and that the issue should be sent to the United Nations because Mubarak encroached upon Iraqi territorial waters and contravened the international border between the two nations. Basra’s Governor Khalaf Abdul-Samad, claimed Kuwait’s port would devastate his province’s economy, and cost thousands of jobs. The Iraqi Overseas Captain told the press that traffic to Mubarak would push mud into Iraqi ports, affect its fishing, and cause a maritime traffic jam as vessels would have to travel up the same canal to reach both ports. The Iraqi parliament called for a special session on the issue, and there was a small demonstration in Basra on May 18 about it as well. Many other officials made similar comments, reflecting the general surprise and indignation that Iraq felt about Kuwait’s action. At the same time, they are making so many accusations that the only possible positive outcome for them is if Kuwait scraps Mubarak, which is not going to happen.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was forced to act. On May 17, a joint technical committee was created to deal with both ports, and a high level delegation has been put together, which will travel to Kuwait to discuss the matter soon. Since so many have framed the Mubarak-Faw issue of national importance to not only Basra, but the entire country, Baghdad had to become involved.
Kuwait so far has expressed a willingness to talk. Kuwait’s ambassador to Iraq said that his country would negotiate over the ports, and that it would even sign an agreement over the issue. The ambassador stated that Mubarak would not affect Um Qasr or Faw, and that Mubarak was 20 kilometers from any Iraqi docks, not the one or two that Iraqis claimed.
At the same time, Kuwaiti papers and analysts have made some inflammatory statements as well. The head of the Kuwait Center of Strategic Studies told Al Jazeera that Mubarak would benefit both countries. He said Iraq was incapable of building a deep water port, and that therefore Kuwait had to be the supply route for goods heading there. He went on to say that the only reason why Iraq was complaining about Mubarak was that they were pro-Iranian, and Tehran wanted to cause trouble in the region. He even said that Mubarak was safer because it was out of range of Iranian artillery while Faw would not be, as if that was going to be an issue anytime soon. A Kuwaiti paper also interviewed a local analyst who said that Iraq was controlled by Tehran, that Iran was going to annex southern Iraq, and that therefore the Persians were behind all the problems over the ports. Those comments reflect the general paranoia Kuwait, and many other Gulf States have about Iran’s influence, and their trepidation at Shiite rule in Iraq, which they associate with being under the thumb of Tehran.
What has largely been left out of the argument is the fact that Iraq itself can be blamed for much of this problem. It has been talking about building a port at Faw since 2003, with little to show for it. Former Basra parliamentarian Wail Abdul Latif claimed that the province came up with a plan for Faw right after the U.S. invasion. Plans were laid out the following year. An Iraqi news site posted a text of a government document from Iyad Allawi’s time as prime minister in 2004, which said that Baghdad had agreed to the port. Nothing happened until April 2009, when Iraq signed the design contract with Technital. On February 1, 2010, the Transportation Ministry said that it would be laying the corner stone at Faw in a few weeks, but did not do so until April 2011. In April 2010 the Ministry held a ceremony in Basra to announce that construction would start that month, but nothing happened. In fact, Technital will not be finished with its design until the end of 2011, and 2012 is when work is supposed to start. The government still doesn’t have the funding together either. Parliament has not allocated any money, and Baghdad has not raised any foreign capital. A tender is not due to be offered until the end of the year. Like too many major projects in the country, Faw has largely been talk, with little action. Iraqi politicians are acting like it is just about to become reality however, which is why they are so mad at Kuwait.
Many have tried to explain why it has taken Iraq so long to move ahead with the Faw port. The head of the economic development committee in Basra’s provincial council blamed the Transportation Ministry for never getting any money for the project. Others have said individuals and other countries have been bribing officials to hold up work. Another factor was the long delay in forming a new government after the March 2010 election. While any and all of those might have played a role, it’s also true that Iraq has gone through the American administration, and four separate governments since the Grand Faw Port was first discussed, and the only thing they have accomplished is a design contract being signed, and one stone laid down.
Iraq-Kuwait relations are characterized by taking one step towards reconciliation, and then two steps back. The Mubarak-Faw dispute is becoming a huge issue between them, and the two countries are making bold statements about each other. Iraq thinks that Kuwait is purposely undermining their economic future, while Kuwait argues their port will not have a negative affect upon Iraq, and that Baghdad is only making noise because it is controlled by Iran. Neither is quite true, but as long as they stick with those positions the argument can only escalate. Iraq is also in denial about its own lack of capacity and incompetence in following through with its plans for Faw, which have been discussed for the last eight years. The slow pace they are working at could mean that Mubarak will be a fait accompli before Iraq even begins construction on its own port. Rather than escalating the rhetoric, Iraq and Kuwait need to take a step back, conduct some technical studies upon how the two plans will affect each other, and then negotiate some compromises. That may not be possible because the politicians carry so much baggage about each other that it clouds their judgment.
SOURCES
Arab Times, “Kuwait to Offer Guarantees on Port Project?” Iraq Business News, 5/30/11
Aswat al-Iraq, “Kuwaiti port will affect our waters – Maritime official,” 5/25/11
- “Iraqi politicians, officials, reject Kuwait’s Mubarak Port, call for defending Iraq’s rights,” 5/29/11
- “Iraqis won’t allow building of port, affecting Iraq’s economy, MP says,” 5/17/11
- “Minister Threatens to Resign, High Ranking Delegation to Visit Kuwait This Week,” 5/25/11
Aziz, Raber and Smith, Patrick, “Economists: Kuwait port will cut Umm Qasr traffic by 60%,” AK News, 5/14/11
Dredging Today, “Iraq: Transport Minister Unveils Plan for New Grand Faw Port,” 3/28/11
Gulf Daily News, “Italian firm to build Iraq port,” 4/17/09
Hurriyet Daily, “Italian companies to build Iraq’s biggest port,” 4/6/10
Al Jazeera, “Iraq Port Row: New Plans By Kuwait Anger Iraqis,” 5/31/11
Al-Khadumi, Bahaa, “Demonstrations in Basra against Kuwaiti port,” AK News, 5/18/11
Latif, Nizar, “Kuwait trumps Iraq Gulf harbour plan with its own huge industrial port,” The National, 5/24/11
Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, Al-Rafidayn, “Unprecedented Iraqi Escalation Against Kuwait Regarding Construction of Kuwait Port,” MEMRI Blog, 5/27/11
Sowell, Kirk, “Inside Iraqi Politics No. 15,” 5/26/11
Al-Tamimi, Noor, “Proposed Kuwaiti port encroaches on Iraqi territory, says minister,” AK News, 5/26/11
Al-Wanan, Jaffar, “Emergency delegation sent to Kuwait to fight port plans,” AK News, 5/12/11
mardi 31 mai 2011
Britain and the US have the obligation to clean up the remains of DU they used in Iraq!
UK to aid Iraq DU removal | ||||
The US has said it has no plans to remove DU debris, despite international recommendations for its retrieval. There is widespread controversy over the use of DU, which some veterans believe has made them ill. One UK adviser on DU welcomed the British announcement as evidence of a fresh approach. A spokeswoman for the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) told BBC News Online: "Legally, we have no obligation to clean up the remains of the DU we used. It's the responsibility of the new regime in Baghdad. "But morally we do recognise an obligation, as we have in the past. We helped in the removal of DU from Kosovo. "We'll be helping in any way we can, specifically by providing money for the clean-up, and by making available records of where the ammunition was fired. Silver bullet "There may not always be any records, for instance where there was a skirmish - but insofar as we have them, we'll make them available."
When a weapon with a DU tip or core strikes a solid object, like the side of a tank, it goes straight through before erupting in a burning cloud of vapour. This settles as chemically poisonous and radioactive dust. Both the US and the UK acknowledge the dust can be dangerous if inhaled, though they say the danger is short-lived, localised, and much more likely to lead to chemical poisoning than to irradiation. Almost all the UK ammunition containing DU was fired from Challenger 2 tanks, the MoD says. It is also used in "bunker-busting" bombs, in some naval armaments, and in the ammunition of A-10 anti-tank aircraft. The MoD could give no figure for the amount of DU used in Iraq: one unconfirmed estimate suggests the total could be about 1,500 tonnes, five times more than was used in the 1991 Gulf war. Long-lived hazard A Pentagon spokesman said on 14 April he believed the US had no plans for a DU clean-up in Iraq. The British initiative is an unusual departure from a common Anglo-American approach.
It recommends collecting DU fragments, covering contaminated points with asphalt or clean soil, and keeping records of contaminated sites. Malcolm Hooper, emeritus professor of medicinal chemistry at the University of Sunderland, is chief scientific adviser to the UK Gulf Veterans' Association. He told BBC News Online: "I welcome what the MoD has said, because it suggests someone may now be starting to say: 'Hang on, perhaps this stuff isn't as benign as we thought'. "And I think the evidence is piling up that DU is not benign at all. The inhalation of these fine dust particles represents a health hazard that was known to the military as long ago as 1974. "The ministry is right to say it has a moral duty to act. I think it has a legal duty as well, in the light of the child cancers and birth defects we've been seeing in Iraq since DU was used in the 1991 war." Many UK and US veterans of that war believe exposure to DU has damaged their health, and in some cases killed their comrades. They also blame it for some of the health problems seen in southern Iraq, though many scientists say there is no known mechanism by which DU could have caused the damage. | ||||
The evidence is piling up that DU is not benign at all 
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)
