Kurds: The Sepia Pawn on the Chessboard - Newstrends
Connect with us

Opinion

Kurds: The Sepia Pawn on the Chessboard

Published

on

The Sepia Pawn on the Chessboard

Kurds: The Sepia Pawn on the Chessboard

Years ago, a dashing and genteel young man called Casanova de Seingalt met a ravishing young lady called Kudi. The young man met Kudi during turbulence, when alliances were a scarce commodity and one needed a paisano to overcome the hellscape. Throughout the blizzard, Kudi stood firm like a totem pole. Knowing full well that one good turn deserves another, the loving young man promised to walk down the aisle with Kudi as compensation for loyalty.

Sadly, the promise made 106 years ago was never kept, even as the unfulfilled promises, heartbreak, and trauma continue to pervade our world.

The fiction above aptly describes the Kurds and the statehood promised by the superpowers on August 10, 1920, under the Treaty of Sèvres, following the dissolution of the Dissolution of the Ottoman Empire. As a result, the Kurds became a stateless nation — a term that refers to ethnic or cultural groups that share a common identity, history, language, or territory but lack their own independent sovereign state.

If stateless nations were to be grouped into pots like FIFA does before a major competition, the Basques, Catalans, Tamils, and Uyghurs would all be in the same pot as the Kurds. While the first three nations are sliced between two countries, the Uyghurs — with a presence in China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan — are like the Kurds: among the largest stateless nations, with 30–40 million people shoehorned into four different countries: Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and Iran, with varying degrees of assimilation and autonomy.

What also makes the Kurdish question a Gordian knot is the fact that they remain the only nation promised a state by the superpowers and overwhelmingly denied.

The ultimate denial has resulted in 18–20 million Kurds in Turkey, 8–10 million in Iran, 5–6 million in Iraq, and 2–3 million in Syria seeking autonomy, recognition, and the preservation of Kurdish culture and education. Kurds abhor oppression and play on the fringe of the political order in their respective countries. The rugged nature of Kurdish topography is not merely a lesson for geography classes in the Middle East; it is also a reflection of a ballsy national character in the face of intimidation by their traducers.

READ ALSO:

This culminated in the emergence of the Republic of Mahabad in 1946 and the hanging of Qazi Muhammad — the arrowhead of the Kurdish cause — in Charchra Square, where the petals of nationhood briefly unfurled but withered before reaching their majestic grandeur.

From Turkey (Bakur), Iraq (Bashur), Iran (Rojhelat), and Syria (Rojava), the trajectory of the Kurds has been marked by revolts and insurgencies against the forces of oppression and intimidation. Despite the inveterate heartbreak, the heart of the Kurds is filled with love and their mind with the spirit of camaraderie.

Pushed to the wall in 2003 against Saddam Hussein — the mastermind and executioner of the Anfal Campaign (1986–1989) against the Kurds — the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) fought alongside the United States, overthrowing Saddam and the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party, defending their historic capital, Kirkuk, and acquiring semi-autonomy.

Also, in 2014, when Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi declared a “caliphate,” giving Islamic State a very firm foothold in Iraq, the Kurds in Syria and Iraq — through the YPJ (Yekîneyên Parastina Jin), an all-female Kurdish military force based in Rojava, northern Syria, and the Peshmerga (“those who face death”), the official military forces of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI) — became allies in arms and went to the trenches with the United States to quench the raging fire of ISIS.

Isn’t it an irony that a jilted bride is fighting alongside the very nation that jilted her?

While the Kurds see this act as a fight for survival to bring about change, the superpowers see the Kurds as a pawn to clip the wings of their enemies.

In order to ensure reconciliation, stability, and growth, the Kurds are gradually being given the opportunity to sing from the same hymnal as their respective governments. While Turkey is doing so through broadcasting and education, Syria has recognised Kurdish alongside Arabic as a national language, repealed discriminatory policies, and begun a gradual integration of Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) institutions into the state structure. For Iraq, the Kurds have long enjoyed a de facto semi-autonomy through the guardrail of the United States since 1991.

READ ALSO:

The Kurdish story is a story of promises not kept, of cavalry called upon to fight, then denied the right to share the spoils. A political scientist sees geopolitics and intentional fragmentation of nations. A brand strategist, however, sees something different pervading the landscape. Their story mirrors the super brand that dominates the market, a challenger brand that unsettles and challenges the status quo, and the flank brand, the habitual pawn in the hands of the super brand, moved anywhere on the chessboard to counter-effect.

The superpowers, like market leaders, don’t focus solely on their area of comparative advantage alone; doing so makes them one-dimensional thinkers. To continue to be relevant in world polity, they have to be three-dimensional thinkers; they think about deepening the market, to negate competition of regional powers (challenger brands), and how to raise the flank brands — the pawn — to knock the sail of the wind of the regional powers (challenger brands) that are usually disruptors. In Nigeria, MultiChoice’s DStv was the market leader in the pay-TV network. The coming of StarTimes disrupted that market segment until DStv responded with a flank brand, GOtv, their pawn to fighting the challenger brand frontally. Also in Kenya, when locally brewed alcohol challenged the dominance of Tusker, East African Breweries Limited responded, introducing their pawn, Senator Keg, to change the market colouration.

As it is, the current face-off between the United States, Israel, and Iran is fixated on the superpower, regional power, and pawn vignette. Already, the United States is seeking a bromance with the Kurds. Reports are everywhere of Donald Trump inviting Iranian Kurdish leader Mustafa Hijri to the White House. In an interview with Fox News, Bafel Talabani of the PUK confirmed speaking with Donald Trump about the Iran war.

For Operation Epic Fury and Roaring Lion, the Kurds — who are the flank brand would be moved like a ballerina on the chessboard by the superpower (Super brand),to counter the challenger brand posture of Iran.But in the end the superpower won’t be a pencil to redraw the map; rather, they would only peck the pawn for a job well done, as oxidation has taken its toll on the chessboard.

Kurds: The Sepia Pawn on the Chessboard

Toluwalope Shodunke ,a Media Practitioner

Can be reached via tolushodunke@yahoo.com

Loading

Advertisement

Opinion

Ortom and His 23 Cars’ ‘Bonus’, by Dele Sobowale

Published

on

Dele Sobowale
Dele Sobowale

Ortom and His 23 Cars’ ‘Bonus’, by Dele Sobowale

“As I talk to you, after I left office, vehicles that were given to me legitimately by government, this government went and seized them in a manner that was not befitting.” – Former Governor Samuel Ortom of Benue State

Last week, former Governor Donald Duke of Cross River declared that military rule was, in many respects, better than civil rule since 1999.

I cannot agree more.

I had the privilege of visiting about seven former military governors before 1999.

No military governor had up to 23 cars assigned to the Governor’s Office or residence.

By contrast, since 1999, a civilian governor with only 23 cars in the office alone would be regarded as extremely prudent.

Many have 50 or more.

Ortom’s 23 cars have triggered a dispute. Governors, on their way out of office, routinely take what they deem as their entitlements and thus render their states poorer than they met them.

Most commentaries on Ortom’s 23 cars have been superficial.

The impression they have created is that only 23 cars were taken away.

Nothing can be further from the truth.

Ortom was not the only beneficiary of that largesse.

It is quite possible that over 100 cars were taken away as parting gifts – with Ortom’s approval – as I will explain shortly.

Ortom revealed the hidden truth by saying, with a straight face, that the vehicles were allocated to him and other members of his administration through the State Executive Council, SEC, after they had been used for more than four years.

It was the worst defence for an assault on public funds ever uttered by a former official.

It provided a window into the minds of top government officials everywhere – irrespective of political party affiliation.

Every State Executive Council, SEC, comprises the governor, the deputy governor, the Secretary to the State Government and commissioners.

All the others are selected or appointed by the governor and, with the exception of the deputy governor, can be removed from office.

In other words, the SEC is created by the governor and can take no independent decision of its own.

READ ALSO:

It is not an autonomous body.

Stripped of the subterfuge surrounding it, the decision to allocate 23 cars to Ortom amounted to the governor deciding to go home with the cars and getting his echoes in the SEC to endorse it.

Ortom, inadvertently, disclosed that more cars than 23 were driven home by his government officials when he claimed that the SEC allocated the vehicles in dispute to him “and other members of his administration”.

Since “the other members of his administration” start with the SEC, it stands to reason that the deputy governor, the Secretary to the State Government, all the commissioners, the Chief of Staff, several Special Advisers, heads of state agencies, etc., were also allowed to go home with cars declared over four years old – even if by one day.

Nobody has documented the number of cars Ortom and “the other members of his administration” took away. Over 100 vehicles might be involved.

That leads to the next question because it strikes at the heart of why poverty is increasing in Nigeria.

IS A CAR FOUR YEARS OLD READY FOR THE JUNKYARD?

Most Nigerians known to me, including those driving corporate official cars, are driving vehicles more than five years old.

Mine is 12 years old and can still break the speed limit anywhere in the world.

I also own a LAGRIDE taxi, now four years old.

The Chinese-made car was offered four years ago at N4.8 million, with a down payment of N1.82 million and the balance to be paid in instalments. Today, the car costs N25 million new, and offers have been made to buy my used one for N11–N13 million.

Obviously, when any government gives away, at far less than market value, to departing officials, the public loses.

Ortom’s 23 cars, as well as the others allocated to members of his administration, would have fetched almost five times what the officials paid for them.

To put the matter in perspective, Benue State would have to pay nothing less than N6 trillion just to replace the vehicles.

Left untouched is the question: What else was taken away – furniture, generators, air-conditioners, borehole pumps?

Outgoing officials are never satisfied with taking cars with them.

“Laws grind the poor, and rich [as well as powerful] men rule the law.” – Oliver Goldsmith, 1728–1774

The other half of his self-defence concerns the legality of the allocations.

That the law is an ass has been well established; so is the fact that what we often call law might be injustice codified.

Strictly speaking, everything Abacha did was supported by laws passed as decrees. Justice was never considered.

Civilian governments also make laws which are inherently unjust to the masses.

READ ALSO:

The regulation allowing some public servants appointed by the governor to take away very useful public properties cannot be regarded as equitable, given the fact that those who served for 30 or 35 years cannot take away a single pin without being prosecuted.

What exactly does an outgoing governor want to do with 23 cars?

MEANWHILE, GOVERNOR ALIA SETS BACK DEMOCRACY IN BENUE

Governor Hyacinth Alia, a Catholic cleric, honourably fought for justice by having the 23 cars taken away by Ortom retrieved.

It is not clear whether other cars allocated by Ortom’s SEC members were also seized.

If not, the measure would appear personal and discriminatory.

It would appear to be partial justice and tainted with vendetta.

Frequently, individuals transiently invested with near-absolute power, like Nigerian governors, cross the thin line between the divine and the ridiculous within a short time.

When Alia, for the second time, blocked Peter Obi from moving freely about in Benue State, he betrayed democracy and the Constitution of Nigeria he swore to uphold.

He failed the democracy test. He even failed the test of advanced education.

His tenure is limited by the Constitution. Obviously, he will become an ex-governor one day – without armed escorts to protect him and clear the way.

He has established a precedent which will make it legitimate for any governor in Nigeria to block his right of passage.

Two examples in Nigerian history should serve as a warning to Alia.

Military Head of State Obasanjo passed the decree under which General Gowon would have been executed in 1976 – if Britain had not granted the deposed leader political asylum.

The same decree, with slight amendment, was used by Abacha to nail his former boss.

He was saved by divine intervention.

Malam El-Rufai, as governor of Kaduna State, had critics living in other states arrested, brought to Kaduna State and detained without bail for days – before media protests got them released on bail.

Today, El-Rufai is in detention by the DSS and ICPC, without bail for almost six months.

The same media, held in contempt by El-Rufai, has now undertaken the campaign to get him released.

As one of our founding fathers, Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe, reminded us before passing to eternal life: “No condition is permanent.”

Governor Alia should climb down from his high horse and apologise to Obi and Nigerians.

 

Ortom and His 23 Cars’ ‘Bonus’, by Dele Sobowale

Loading

Continue Reading

Opinion

2027: Competence, Not Zoning, Should Decide Nigeria’s Next President — Imasuagbon

Published

on

Nigerians should look beyond ethnicity, region and the longstanding debate over rotational presidency when choosing the country’s next leader, according to a chieftain of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Kenneth Imasuagbon.

The former Edo State governorship aspirant said the priority ahead of the 2027 election should be finding a president with the ability to confront Nigeria’s economic, security and infrastructure challenges.

Speaking to journalists in Benin, Imasuagbon argued that presidential rotation is not a requirement of the Nigerian Constitution and should therefore not outweigh the question of competence.

He said voters should be more concerned about replacing poor schools with better ones, improving healthcare and addressing hardship than debating where the next president comes from.

Imasuagbon specifically appealed to voters in the South to support former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, who is contesting the 2027 presidency on the ADC platform.

According to him, Atiku has demonstrated the experience and determination needed to improve the country, describing the former vice president as someone capable of promoting national unity and fairness.

He also accused the Bola Tinubu administration of worsening economic pressure through policies including the removal of fuel subsidy, while expressing concern about the condition of roads, electricity and other infrastructure.

Imasuagbon argued that the next administration must focus on practical improvements in areas such as power, transportation, employment, security and public services.

The ADC chieftain also dismissed the idea that the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) would automatically benefit from its incumbency advantage in 2027.

He maintained that the electorate ultimately determines the outcome of an election, arguing that voters could change the political direction of the country if they were determined to do so.

Imasuagbon further criticised what he described as regional and ethnic considerations in the distribution of political appointments and opportunities, insisting that the next president should give Nigerians across different parts of the country a sense of belonging.

His comments come as political parties and their candidates intensify preparations for the 2027 presidential election.

Loading

Continue Reading

Opinion

Lesson from Dotun Oladipo’s Brave Daughters, by Bamidele Johnson

Published

on

Lesson from Dotun Oladipo’s Brave Daughters, by Bamidele Johnson

 

I hope to grow old. I want to see my kids become real adults, find their own feet, make mistakes, recover from them, and perhaps one day complain that their own children are giving them grey hairs. I want that plainly stated before anything else, as everything that follows might read as a man agreeing to an early exit rather than a man simply being honest about the odds.

I want the decades. I want to become the grandfather who repeats the same stories until nobody bothers correcting him anymore. But wanting a thing and being granted are different things. The last year has made that difference harder to ignore than I would like. I have lost many friends recently to keep thinking that optimism is my natural resting state. Some of these men had better blood pressure than mine, better habits, better everything that is supposed to count. It did not save them.

There is no formula I know that reliably separates the men who make it to 70 from those who do not. Anyone who says he knows one is selling something. So, I do not assume that old age is an already booked destination. Even if I once did, which I doubt, the last three years have cured me of such an illusion. As such, I treat it as a hope rather than an expectation, and I have found that a more honest way to live.

It is exactly why I want something placed on record now, while I am still able to place things on record, rather than leave it for people to guess what my wishes were in the fog of a funeral week. If I do not make old bones, my children are not to be asked to read tributes at my funeral. Not one line, however short, however lovingly written.

This, for me, was settled today rather than re-opened. At Dotun Oladipo’s funeral service, his three daughters took turns to read their tributes to their dad, and I found myself watching them with awe. There was a kind of strength in them that I do not possess. It is the strength needed to stand in front of a hall brimming with grieving adults and speak about a man they have just lost. Forever. Strength, however, is not the same as ease. I could see plainly what that strength was costing them as they read. Their voices caught. Their composure held and then did not hold and then held again through sheer will.

In front of them, in the pews, men and women considerably older than them came undone in ways the girls themselves were somehow managing to resist. I went mightily close. Some of the sobbing was quiet, the type people try to fold into a handkerchief. Some of it was not quiet at all, the kind that announces itself whether or not you want it.

Those young women honoured their father with a grace that is beyond me. What they did was astonishing. So, what I am attempting is an observation of a custom I have now watched wound people. This was not the first time I had watched this particular ritual extract more than it should from people already running on fumes. I saw an earlier and harder version of it at a friend’s wake back in 2015.

The first son was called forward to read his father’s tribute, and he could not do it. He tried, but the words would not come, and he stood there in front of a crowd of mourners, with his grief simply refusing to organise itself into sentences. The officiating minister, rather than releasing him from the task, urged him to continue. I sat fizzing with sorrow and ire. He could not go on and, eventually, the minister accepted, but not before insisting a while longer than it should have reasonably taken. His younger brother was called up next, presumably on the theory that if one grieving son could not manage it, maybe another one could. He flunked it in the same way. Grief does not distribute itself more conveniently among siblings just because a programme has been printed and needs to be followed.

I have turned that memory over many times since, trying to work out why this part of the rites is treated as mandatory in the first place. I have not found a satisfying answer. Maybe it comes from a belief that a child’s words carry more weight than anyone else’s, which may even be true, but weight is exactly the problem when those carrying it are struggling to hold themselves together with nothing but adrenaline and the fear of dissolving in public.

Maybe it is simply inertia, the reason we still do a hundred things at funerals that nobody can explain the original purpose of. Either way, I have stopped looking for the justification. I no longer think one exists that is good enough to weigh against what I watched happen to that boy in 2015.

So, let this stand as my instruction rather than my preference, the kind of thing I would rather state plainly now than leave for my children to infer later from how uncertain I sound when the subject comes up in passing. If I do not get the old age I am hoping for, my children will not be asked to read a single word over my body. Someone else can speak for me. A friend, a stranger with a steadier voice and a smaller stake in the loss, anyone whose grief will not be quite so total that standing upright becomes almost impossible.

My children, of course, will sit in front and fall apart if that is what the day requires of them, but without the microphone. That, at least, is one small mercy I intend to arrange for them while I am still here to arrange it.

Dotun deserved every bit of the send-off his daughters gave him today, and I suspect he would have been the first to tell them to sit down and let someone else carry the weight for a while. He did not get a say in that, as none of us ever do once we are the ones being spoken of rather than the ones speaking. Rest well, Dotun. You raised three young women whose strength I will not soon forget. That alone says everything worth saying about the man you were.

 

Loading

Continue Reading

Trending