v Kurds:
The Kurds as a nation is a very debatable concept for many historians and politicians. Because of the complication of Kurds and their contain of different religious and ethnical groups, I see that maybe I have to clarify part of the Kurdish image which many of us don’t know. Beside the issue of an independent Kurdish country being discussed repeatedly by the media, scholars, and people.
The historians never agreed on one definition for the Kurdish nation. Some of them refused to consider the Kurds as one nation because of several reasons. Some of those reasons are the absence of one Kurdish language because all those who are being considered as Kurds according to the modern history came from different places and have different religions. That’s why there are more than four Kurdish languages at least (Karmanjia, Soraniya, Thathaiya, and Koraniya) and there are about seven religions (Islam with its two sects, Christianity, Judaism, Alawites, Kakaiya, Yazidia, and Zoroastrian).
And as the Kurds were discriminated by Arabs (Ba’athists sent the Kurds Filis ‘the Shi’ite Kurds’ to Iran in 1969 describing them as ‘non Iraqis’ because they are actually double cursed of being Kurdish and Shi’ite!), Turks, and Persians. But Kurds actually participated in the Holocausts against the Armenians in Turkey (1914-1915) and against the Assyrians in Iraq (Even though, the new definition of Assyrians refer to them as Kurdish Christians).
What makes a nation according to the British Sociologist Antony D. Smith is “Belonging to an ethnicity that has between its individuals common myths about its origin, that are related to a specific land, it has some common cultural specifications, and shared belonging feelings and cooperation between its individuals” (Smith 253)
Or maybe it’s what Stalin claimed the nation to be: “it has a common history, language, land, economical life, and culture that expresses the spirit of the nation”. Which made Stalin hesitate and not cooperate with the Kurds in helping them to make their independency because they don’t actually have one language, ethnicity, or economical life.
Kurds are part of the Iraqi identity even if we will or will not consider them as a nation because they have been always part of a conflict going on in Iraq like the conflicts with Arab nationalists, Ba’athists, and Sunnis. The Iraq conflicts here can defined (as I believe) as the main thing to identify the Iraqi Identity. It’s the real soul of Iraqi Identity.
The historians never agreed on one definition for the Kurdish nation. Some of them refused to consider the Kurds as one nation because of several reasons. Some of those reasons are the absence of one Kurdish language because all those who are being considered as Kurds according to the modern history came from different places and have different religions. That’s why there are more than four Kurdish languages at least (Karmanjia, Soraniya, Thathaiya, and Koraniya) and there are about seven religions (Islam with its two sects, Christianity, Judaism, Alawites, Kakaiya, Yazidia, and Zoroastrian).
And as the Kurds were discriminated by Arabs (Ba’athists sent the Kurds Filis ‘the Shi’ite Kurds’ to Iran in 1969 describing them as ‘non Iraqis’ because they are actually double cursed of being Kurdish and Shi’ite!), Turks, and Persians. But Kurds actually participated in the Holocausts against the Armenians in Turkey (1914-1915) and against the Assyrians in Iraq (Even though, the new definition of Assyrians refer to them as Kurdish Christians).
What makes a nation according to the British Sociologist Antony D. Smith is “Belonging to an ethnicity that has between its individuals common myths about its origin, that are related to a specific land, it has some common cultural specifications, and shared belonging feelings and cooperation between its individuals” (Smith 253)
Or maybe it’s what Stalin claimed the nation to be: “it has a common history, language, land, economical life, and culture that expresses the spirit of the nation”. Which made Stalin hesitate and not cooperate with the Kurds in helping them to make their independency because they don’t actually have one language, ethnicity, or economical life.
Kurds are part of the Iraqi identity even if we will or will not consider them as a nation because they have been always part of a conflict going on in Iraq like the conflicts with Arab nationalists, Ba’athists, and Sunnis. The Iraq conflicts here can defined (as I believe) as the main thing to identify the Iraqi Identity. It’s the real soul of Iraqi Identity.
10 comments:
A good post My Friend,
I learned something new.
I tend to think the Kurds
deserve their own nation - I
think they are the largest ethnic group - 42 million - without their
own country. But, like the rest of the peoples in the Middle East, they have blood on their hands: FGM, honor killings, the Armenian and Assyrian genocides, etc.
Did you see that video of the honor
killing among the Kurdish Yezidis?
Did you ever hear the rumors about Barzani being a member of the KGB?
Thank u. I think they deserve their own independent country too because although they don't have the concept of a nation but that doesn't matter coz we iraqis are a nation with sub nations .. and maybe we're not a nation yet as we can see from the current conflict. at least, they have a shared awareness, this goal to be independent should be considered seriously ..
Unfortunitly, everyday I discover that there's no difference between Kurds and Arabs .. which is v. pathatic.
Well, the Kurds in Northern Iraq/Southern Kurdistan do have their good points. It's safe there at least - they seem to have gotten over their own civil war - the economy is booming - their cities are the most liberal in Iraq - there's some religious freedom - and they seem to keep the crazy fundamentalist types under control.
Compared to Iraq, they are light years ahead. Then again, Iraq is so broken, that might not be saying much.
Of course you are right, the dark side is always present. There was a Kurdish honor killing in Birmingham, England, I think it was, involving a young Kurdish girl who I believe was dating, maybe another Kurdish man.
And I remember reading what one of the girls relatives said in response to the killing (paraphrasing): We are not like the English, we don't date.
And I was thinking, for God's sake,
it's the 21st century.
I don't think "Compared to Iraq, they are light years ahead" .. there's still this war between Iraqi Kurds goin on secretly .. it's safe and in process of develpment? yeah. but that out of the Kurdish power agreement with the Americans ..
I've heard of that story, there r many more, it's pathatic..
You mean the war between the KDP and PUK? I thought they were in the process of unification? All those petrol dollars make for happy campers - A war would interrupt the wealth the oil will bring in to the two parties who run the country like a fiefdom - but still, it's much better than Iraq. And I think Southern Kurdistan will remain safe, as the U.S. isn't going anywhere for a while - Won't shock me if the U.S. sets up permanent bases in Kurdistan.
I agree with u that the Iraqi Kurdistan is much better than Iraq. But I just wanted to clarify this point about this secret war goin on between two kurdish parties. Unfortunitly, Kurds there paid their lives because of those parties even if they aren't involved in this parties' war. Kurds are victims of this war. Turkey and Iran are threating the safety of Kurdistan and any try to strength Kurdistan.
Kudistan is used also as the shelther of the US Army especially if one day Shiites or Sunnis tried to have a large organized army revolting against ths US army.
I agree with you, Sumerian Girl.
The two Kurdish parties need to
have their corrupt stranglehold on the Kurdish government ended. Let's hope some true Democratic factions
take hold there. A monopoly by one group leads to vice and corruption.
Yup, as long as the U.S. is around, Kurdistan is safe - if there was
an exit by the U.S. then Turkey, Iran, and Syria would likely try to section off Iraq including Kurdistan.
There's an old saying, "Nature abhors a vacuum." That also occurs in geopolitics - when one ower weakens, another is there to replace it and extend their influence.
xvzRvx mextil free pills ALTnLo micardis sale NYqhoV microzide without prescription KMzPwo minipress low price ZwCzjj minomycin ed WAAHyz mobic visa/mastercard/amex/echeck ZHlDbc monoket rx
ahsMl4DLt Pala Casino JSWbFQYHt Indiana Casinos kvowX2jUNT Jackpot Casino CSTApmGji Gaming Lx0W3VHoEs Casino Directory l5pb2wkBe9 Bank Casino hHy836YvmK Gaming kKoYnRxNG Casino Lights
Nice post and this fill someone in on helped me alot in my college assignement. Thank you as your information.
Post a Comment