The 1991 Kurdish Revolution

What methods did the group(s) use to express their frustrations and ultimately lead to a revolution?     Kurdish nationalist rebel groups, after much planning and preparation, took over towns in Northern Iraq (or Iraqi Kurdistan) and resisted Saddam government rule. After finding torture rooms smeared with blood and filled with corpses of women and children in government/police headquarters, they slaughtered and brutally massacred members of security forces and intelligence agencies. Believing falsely that at the time, Saddam’s government troops were weak, civilians started to openly show their support for rebel groups, marching in streets and shouting anti-Saddam slogans.     These uprisings in the North caught Saddam’s attention and he eventually retaliated with armed troops, and thus the revolution ignited. How is your revolution similar and/or different to one of the revolutions previously studied?     This revolution is similar to the American Revolution because they are both fighting for their country, their rights and their independence, but for the Kurds, it was a more severe matter because they didn’t have a country. It didn’t exist; it wasn’t on the map.     Compared to the American revolution, the Kurdish revolution wasn’t a successful and romantic affair. The Kurdish revolution was more violent and in return, the Kurds were met with brutal force, their every attempt crushed ruthlessly by Saddam.     To this day, Kurdistan is not yet a country, but America is. This is the big difference. The Kurds will have to keep fighting for their nation to exist once again.     As for the French Revolution, the Kurdish revolution is also partly similar and partly different to it. The people in France wanted to overthrow an inept leader and obtain rights, and that was basically what the Kurds wanted to do as well. However, these two revolutions are still strikingly different as the French revolution was largely successful while the Kurdish one was abortive. The French were able to overthrow the royal family and obtain more rights, while the Kurdish were just met with amazing force from Saddam’s regime and crushed. What was the eventual outcome of the revolution, and did the nation/people become better due to the revolution?     Sad to say, the Kurdish revolution of 1991 was crushed by the forces of Saddam. The Kurdish people were not only back to where they were before the revolution, but they were definitely worse off. First, the city of Basra fell and the army poured kerosene on the refugees and set them on fire.     An article on the Kurdish revolution stated, “There were mass executions of civilians, some of whom were tied to tanks and used as human shields. In Karbala, some of Shiite Islam’s holiest shrines were destroyed. Others were used as centers for murder, torture and rape. In Najaf, residential areas were bombed, and hospital staff and patients were murdered. The homes of suspected rebels were destroyed while the suspects were executed in the streets.”     After the revolution, the Kurds became refugees, and at one point, the number of deaths per day reached an overwhelming 2000 due to typhoid, dehydration and dysentery.     Fortunately, later on, the Kurds were able to establish self-rule in the three northern provinces of Abril, Dohuk, Sulaimaniya, under the protection of a western security no fly zone. Today, this area of Northern Iraq is known as Iraqi Kurdistan, and is quite peaceful, as Saddam is dead and no longer a threat. The war on terrorism occurring in the rest of Iraq has not affected them. Was the revolution justified? Would other methods have worked?     The Kurdish people have long been oppressed and mistreated. They have a population of around 30 million, which is about the same size as the population of Canada, and yet they have no country or homeland. After World War II, Kurdistan was broken up by the British, who back then had colonized it, and its land was distributed to different Middle-Eastern countries. Since then, the Kurdish people have been living as second class citizens in the scattered countries to which their land had been distributed.     A large concentration of them settled in Northern Iraq, but they have been abused atrociously by Saddam’s regime there. Prior to the Kurdish uprising/revolution, Saddam had launched a genocidal campaign called the Al-Anfal Campaign. During this campaign, Saddam wiped out anywhere from 50,000 to 100, 000 Kurdish civilians, in his Nazi-like concentration camps and elsewhere using explosives, artillery, and perhaps most horrendously, chemical weapons. In addition to this campaign, Saddam has also executed, through his secret police personnel, a number of other Kurdish people. Considering the fact that they are so large yet have no country, and also the vast amount of suffering the Kurdish people have gone through, it is definitely understandable and justifiable for them to want a revolution.     However, although we believe that the revolution is justified, we do not consider the means by which the Kurdish rebels undertook the task suitable or even acceptable. Their brutal retaliations against Saddam’s workers were but mirror images of the treatment they despised so much from the dictator. Perhaps if they had opted for more peaceful methods, such as trying to negotiate or just seizing cities without killing the security officers and government men, and granting them amnesty like they had the government soldiers, they might have been able to achieve their goal without so much bloodshed. Does your revolution fit into Brinton Crane's Anatomy of a Revolution?     In the Kurdish revolution, phase one of Brinton Crane’s anatomy of a revolution was nearly fulfilled. The Kurds have been oppressed and treated as second-class citizens in their host countries for many, many years. The Kurds hated Saddam. The revolution wasn’t only made up of the middle class, though. Two groups – the Kurds in northern Iraq and the Shiites in southern Iraq – rose up against the oppressive government of Saddam Hussein.     The Kurdish revolution follows Brinton Crane’s analogy of a revolution only up to half of stage two. The people did rise up against the government and they did have a great battle. The Kurds seized many towns, and killed many people. However, the formation of a new moderate government did not take place.     The fact that the revolution did not follow through with forming a new moderate government means stage three, wherein the political left takes over, did not take place. Later on, the revolution ended, and this part basically followed Brinton Crane’s “Convalescence”. Northern Iraq became a sort of independent state within Iraq, not quite an independent country but better off than they were before. They established their own government that controlled Kurdish affairs within the state, and have been protected from further attacks from Iraq by a Western security no-fly zone. However, unlike what is described in Brinton Crane’s anatomy, there was no strong ruler that came to power during this time.     Overall, the Kurdish revolution did not seem to follow Brinton Crane’s anatomy, as it contradicted it more than it followed it.

Bibliography

Atroushi , Jowanne . "IRAQI KURDISTAN REGION ." www.geocities.com. 6 October 1999. 3 Feb 2008 . "ENDLESS TORMENT The 1991 uprisings in Iraq and its aftermath." www.hrw.org. June 1992. Human Rights Watch. 3 Feb 2008 . "Genocide in Iraq: The Al-Anfal campaign against the Kurds." www.hrw.org. july 1993. 3 Feb 2008 . jones, adam. "Case Study:The Anfal Campaign(Iraqi Kurdistan), 1988 ." www.gendercide.org. 3 Feb 2008 . johns, dave. "The Crimes of Saddam Hussein: 1999 Supression of the 1991 Uprising." www.pbs.org. 3 Feb 2008 . "THE KURDISH UPRISING AND KURDISTAN'S NATIONALIST SHOP FRONT AND ITS NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE BAATHIST/FASCIST REGIME." www.purr.demon.co.uk. 3 Feb 2008 .