Admittedly, that’s how Hot Air put it, not the article below:
On Friday, the Kurds seized two major oil fields and said they would use some of the production for domestic purposes. The move has intensified a bitter dispute with Baghdad, and tensions with Western countries determined not to see Iraq fall apart.
But the central government’s weak hand, coupled with the pesh merga’s consolidation of their gains and the apparent popular support for the Kurds’ enlargement of their territory, will make it hard to roll back the changes.
…but it’s still true that the central government does want to resume control over the territory that the Kurds have, ah, expanded into; and it’s equally true that the idea that that’s going to happen is the funniest dang thing that I’ve read today. Let me just establish, for the record …No. Even if the country doesn’t fall apart, the Kurds will still see no reason why they should let Baghdad get back control of the Kirkuk oil fields, given that Baghdad will just resume mismanaging the money and the Kurds already have Turkish buyers lined up for that precious, precious crude. And as the WaPo article notes, the inhabitants in the area in question have a keen sense of priorities:
“The Kurds don’t care if you are Sunni or Shiite or Christian; they are practical,” [Mofaq Abdallah Ahmed, local Turkmen farmer] said. “If they stay here, things will be better for everyone.”
Do not underestimate how seductive the promise of long-term stability can to be to somebody who currently lacks it. And, shoot, the Kurds have a representative government and everything. As long as they keep looking like one of our voluntary client states* they’re in a pretty good position to hold what they currently control. Or even, you know, expand a little. After all, Mosul is currently not being run by Baghdad, either…
Moe Lane (crosspost)
*That’s not meant as an insult and I don’t think that the Kurds would take it as one. Especially since I’m using it with the full understanding that the obligations involved run in both directions.
Eh, would you trust Barack Obama to live up to those obligations to your state if you were the client? He’s one helluva a fly in a whole lotta ointments………
What about Papa Bush and Stormin’ Norman? Why the Kurds don’t absolutely despise us is beyond me.
Hmm, you may have a point, I can’t remember exactly what happened then….? That was OHMYGOD it’s been 23 years plus!!!
Frankly, I would trust Barack Obama to deliberately screw them over. And to screw up America’s relationship with them as well.
Just wait and see …
Biggest problem is they’re landlocked.
Many nations have overcome this problem, they will too.
I don’t think that’s going to be a problem, especially since it looks like they may end up sharing a border with Turkey, and thus far Turkey seems to want friendly relations with the Kurds (they’d rather have a Kurdistan as a neighbor, than a bunch of Islamic fanatics).
–
In any event, I think Turkey might end up acting to protect the Kurds if it looks like ISIS is going to get the upper hand, simply because they don’t want a bunch of lunatics for a neighbor.
Ummm.. look closer?
.
Edrogan, the leader of Turkey these days, *is* an islamic fundamentalist…which is why Turkey is in a low-grade civil war … and the Kurds would come in on the secularist side.
.
The only reason he’s letting the Kurds have any slack .. which is the only reason the Kurds are having any success .. is because he’d rather not fight them himself.
.
That said, Turkey would like to remain a European/U.S. client state as well, and .. we have some leverage to keep the Turks from crushing the Kurds after… if we choose to use it.
.
Mew
Agreed.
.
By the way, both top links go to the same page. Just saying.
Dear Baghdad,
.
There is an old saying you might appreciate now. “How does it feel to want?”