Customer Reviews

The Kurdish Predicament in Iraq: A Political Analysis

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

In the first chapter titled "The Past as Prologue", Gunter analyzes Wilgram's book Cradle of Mankind as a way of presenting the reader with a foundation of the divisions that still plague the Iraqi Kurds today. In this chapter, Gunter basically summarizes the findings of Wilgram's book, which was first published in 1914. By summarizing the book, Gunter is attempting to lay down a foundation for which the reader can gain some rudimentary knowledge of the roots of the Kurdish predicament. This chapter is void of any novel insight from Gunter himself because he spends the entire chapter just quoting from Wigram's book. I think that this chapter would have been much more effective if Gunter had actually inserted his own revelations regarding the early Kurdish people. Instead, he cites Wigram's accounts of the early, uneducated Kurds who lacked national cohesion.
The second chapter in Gunter's book compares the two Kurdish leaders Barzani and Talabani, analyzing how their personalities contributed to the Kurdish predicament and the inner fighting amongst the Kurds. I think this chapter is very strong, because Gunter uses the facts that he learned first hand by interviewing members of the Barzani and Talabani families. First Gunter lays out the history of both groups and then contrasts this methodical, conservative leader with the more liberal leader of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), Jalal Talabani. The two leaders are also different in that, Barzani thinks regionally and is more defensive while Talabani thinks globally and takes the initiative. Talabani used to be a member of the KDP, but then Gunter goes on to explain the conflicts that arose, causing Talabani to leave and begin his own group, the PUK. Gunter recounts how, even in these early years, fighting between these two parties remained constant. Gunter summarizes the main problem to be that the Kurds were following two very different leaders, with different outlooks and dissimilar approaches to resolving the Kurdish problem.
Gunter's goal in chapter three is to analyze the Iraqi opposition groups that emerged against Saddam Hussein following the Gulf War. In this chapter, Gunter uses documentary evidence obtained from two interviews with Ahmad Chalabi, president of Iraqi National Congress' (INC)'s executive council, and an interview with General Wafiq al-Samarra'I, the head of the Iraqi military intelligence. Gunter first gives a brief assessment of the opposition to the Iraqi's in the past as a basis for understanding the current opposition groups. Gunter traces the rocky beginnings of the INC at the Joint Action Committee in 1990. He then discusses the national assembly created at the second conference held in Vienna, Austria in 1992. Gunter then discusses the Salah al-Din Conference, which was attended by 90 percent of the Iraqi opposition groups. The US did not want the INC to actually establish a Kurdish state, so the US gave them just enough support to irritate Saddam, but never actually overthrow him. Then Gunter describes the collapse of the INC beginning in 1995.
In chapter four, Gunter goes into detail about the civil war between the KDP and PUK. The previous chapters serve as a nice foundation for the information presented in this chapter. Gunter first lays out the background of the two groups, which I think is slightly unnecessary because he already discussed their history in the previous chapters. After delving once again into the conflict-ridden history of the two groups, Gunter outlines the attempts at conciliation made by the two sides. But Gunter states his belief that the inherent struggle for power between the two parties makes long term peace virtually impossible.
In chapter five, Gunter analyzes how this fighting between the two groups contributes to a power vacuum that has emerged in Iraqi Kurdistan. Gunter claims that an understanding of this power struggle will lead to greater comprehension of the competition between Turkey and Iran over Iraqi Kurdistan. In the long civil war between the Kurdish groups, Turkey has supported the KDP against the PUK and PKK. Iran was guilty of attacking Iraqi Kurdistan in an attempt to find the Iranian Kurds living there. But Gunter resolves that although the political vacuum of Iraqi Kurdistan has drawn Turkey and Iran into conflicts, the situation is not as severe as expected. In this chapter, Gunter claims that the Kurds have never fully developed a sense of nationalism because they did and still are suffering from a type of internal colonialism. Gunter then proceeds to quote other observers of nationalism in other countries and compare their findings to the stunted nationalism of the Kurds. I think that using other people's ideas of reasons and issues surrounding nationalism is a good idea. But I think what makes this chapter weak is that Gunter does not give any background information on the person whose ideas he is using. Instead, he just goes into this person's theories of nationalism, without really even introducing them. Gunter uses examples from Crawford Young, Eugene Weber, E.J. Hobsbawm, Arend Lijphart, and James Mayall before proceeding to the conclusion where he makes his own remarks regarding the future of the Kurds. Although he notes that the inner Kurdish fighting between the KDP and PUK hinders the establishment of democracy amongst the Kurds, he does not believe that the problem is irreversible.
I think that Michael M. Gunter's book, The Kurdish Predicament in Iraq, is a worthwhile and informative book. Gunter presents his information in a logical and clear manner. The set up of the information in the chapters mimics a textbook and are easy to follow and understand. Gunter definitely fulfills his objective of supplying the reader with a better understanding of the Kurdish problem. I think that the information presented by Gunter is significant and he writes about a subject and leaders that are difficult to get accurate information about. The book is mostly factual but also contains a lot of good analysis from Gunter himself.

The subtitle of this book promises "a political analysis", but instead of a coherent argument about the sources of Kurdish oppression and disunity the reader gets a collection of poorly-integrated essays on political issues related to Iraq's Kurds. Nevertheless, Gunter is able to convey two important themes -- the chronic conflict among Kurds and the different regional powers' tendency to use the Kurds for their own ends, betraying them whenever convenient.

The topics Gunter chooses are important: the personalities of Iraqi Kurdistan's two reigning warlords and their 5-year armed struggle in the mid-1990s, the Turkish-Iranian proxy war fought through them, the development of the Iraqi National Congress, and Kurdish nationalism. The last two, while surveyed competently, are not particularly insightful or complete. Gunter is much more interesting when he chronicles the war between Barzani and Talabani and external interference in it. Chapter 4, "The KDP-PUK Civil War", is as coherent as any narrative on that byzantine struggle, while chapter 5 ably summarizes the conflict between Turkey and Iran in Iraqi Kurdistan.

But even these analyses leave the reader dissatisfied. Why have Barzani's KDP and Talabani's PUK engaged in such destructive conflict? Evidence from Gunter's text points to a struggle over the lucrative trade routes between Iraq and Turkey, but Gunter never explores the economic basis of Kurdish disunity. How is power organized within the KDP and PUK? What role did the PKK (Turkey's now mostly-defunct Kurdish insurgents) play in Iraqi Kurdistan? Will the United States, which has promoted unity and autonomy for Iraq's Kurds as long as the disobedient Saddam Hussein holds power, revert to form and assent to renewed oppression when a more pliable regime is installed? This last question is a little unfair since Hussein's demise seemed unlikely when Gunter was writing, but the US role in the region is left so far in the background that we can draw few conclusions about this increasingly central issue.

Despite the book's failings, its emphasis on Kurdish disunity and external meddling could both use a wider audience these days. As the media prepare the public for America's latest hegemonic war in the Middle East, predictably ahistorical and acontexual coverage of the Kurds has reemerged. The authoritarian nature of Kurdish politics in Iraq, the likely reemergence of intra-Kurd violence, and America's normal pattern of support for the Kurds followed hard upon by betrayal could all use some more attention.

The content of the book includes a very brief generic history chapter, with chapters analyzing the events of the 90's. I think the analysis chapters do a relatively good job of handling the material and I found nothing that appeared factually inacurate based on my other readings. The scope of the book is very brief, limited to the 90's, but concise and to the point.

This is an informative book that would make a nice contribution to the reference collection of a regional specialist like myself, but it does not cover enough generalized history of material to be helpful to a random person wanting to learn more about the Middle East or the Kurds. Try the Modern History of the Kurds by David McDowall or After Such Knowledge, What Forgiveness? by Jonathan Randall.