WELCOME TO IWPR'S IRAQI CRISIS REPORT, No. 03, March 12, 2003

IRAQI GROUP OPPOSES US PLANS Exiles support a UN-led transitional authority and an independent Iraqi executive authority. By Julie Flint in Beirut.

ANALYSIS: THE KURDISH-TURKISH CRISIS Turkey is pressing the United States for guarantees to block a Kurdish federal entity in northern Iraq. By Kamran Karadaghi, recently in northern Iraq.

ANALYSIS: SAUDIS ON THE FENCE Given the huge risks, Riyadh will defer its decision on supporting a US-led war until the final moment. By Jamal Ahmad Khashoggi in Jeddah.

IRAQ REINFORCES THE NORTH Kurdish and US sources report Iraqi forces mobilizing at the frontiers of the Kurdish-controlled areas. By Azad Chalak in Suleimaniya, northern Iraq.

GULF STATES SUPPORT While officially against the war, most Gulf states are providing various levels of assistance to US troops in the region. By IWPR Staff.

****************** VISIT IWPR ON-LINE: www.iwpr.net ***************

NOTE: All readers who wish to continue receiving Iraqi Crisis Report after issue number 4, please subscribe directly, at https://www.global-list.com/secure/iwpr/subscribe_pop.asp

*******************************************************************

As an educational charity, IWPR depends on grants and donations. To support IWPR's educational, training and reporting programmes directly, you can now give online, at: http://www.iwpr.net/index.pl?top_donate.html

*******************************************************************

Readers are urged to subscribe free to IWPR's full range of electronic publications on Afghanistan, the Balkans, Belarus, the Caucasus, Central Asia and the Yugoslav war crimes tribunal. To manage your own subscriptions, visit: https://www.global-list.com/secure/iwpr/subscribe_pop.asp

****************** VISIT IWPR ON-LINE: www.iwpr.net ***************

IRAQI GROUP OPPOSES US PLANS

Exiles support a UN-led transitional authority and an independent Iraqi executive authority.

By Julie Flint in Beirut

Non-aligned Iraqi exiles opposed to American plans to occupy their country are stepping up their efforts to gather support for a UN-supervised interim administration that would pave the way for a new, Iraqi democracy free of American control.

The exiles, known as the "Iraqi Group," first made their presence known last month when they appealed to President Saddam Hussein to relinquish power voluntarily in order to save Iraq from war and "a subsequent train of disastrous developments". It was the first such appeal in more than 30 years of his rule in Iraq.

The exiles said Saddam had unleashed "a series of crises and catastrophes that have afflicted Iraq and Arab interests as a whole". They called on the United Nations, the Arab League and Arab governments to do all in their power to bring about a non-violent change of regime.

The appeal was signed by 37 well-known exiles spanning Iraq's entire political, religious and ethnic spectrum. The exiles included five former cabinet ministers - best-known among them former foreign minister Adnan Pachachi - as well as academics, technocrats and journalists. Within days, their demand for Saddam's departure was echoed by one of the elder statesmen of the Arab world, United Arab Emirates President Zayed ibn Sultan an Nahayan - the first Arab leader to restore relations with Iraq after the 1990 invasion of Kuwait.

"Demanding that a leader step down is a completely new thing in Arab politics," economist Mehdi Hafedh, a leading member of the Iraqi Group and a former regional director of the UN Industrial Development Organisation, told IWPR.

"It's difficult to believe that Saddam will accept exile, but I don't rule it out. Dictators like him always insist on staying in power, but are sometimes obliged to step down. Look at Milosevic," he said.

Hafedh said Saddam was showing clear signs of weakness - not least of all in seeking a political rather than a military solution to the current crisis.

"In the past, he has said: 'Let them come!'" Hafedh said. "But now he's playing for the sympathy of the outside world. In his dealings with the UN weapons inspectors, he's backing down very fast. Despite all his noise about resistance, he's in a very desperate mood."

Hafedh said the Iraqi Group opposes America's plans to remove Saddam because "while we don't want Saddam to continue in power, we don't want our country to be destroyed". War could destroy what was left of an economy already burdened by foreign debts totalling more than $90 billion.

Hafedh said he believed there might be a coup of some sort against Saddam - although not before the start of a war. "All things are possible now because Saddam is so weak," he said.

Since making public their appeal, Pachachi and his colleagues in the Iraqi Group have been travelling widely - both within Europe and the Middle East - to gather support for their proposed alternative to an American-controlled Iraq.

The group wants a transitional administration that would work "in cooperation with the UN" - not under the US. Pachachi has said he favours a collective leadership to minimise the possibility of ethnic conflict or argument. They call for an immediate lifting of sanctions against Iraq in the post-Saddam period. They also seek the development of an oil policy to help rebuild Iraq and - coordination with other producing countries - "to achieve stability in international oil markets".

In the longer term, the group calls for elections to a constituent assembly that would draw up a constitution, establish the rule of law, eliminate political oppression and protect "the unity and sovereignty of Iraqi territory".

After widespread dissemination of the group's appeal, and courtship of Pachachi by the US administration, US-backed opposition leaders meeting in Salaheddine in northern Iraq asked the 80-year-old Pachachi to join a six-man leadership council that is expected to have an advisory function after Saddam's removal. This council includes longstanding opposition figures such as Massoud Barzani of the Kurdish Democratic Party and Ayatollah Mohamad Bakr Al Hakim of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq.

Pacachi refused, saying linkage to a US military administration would be both "damaging and unacceptable". He said Iraqis should have executive powers in the post-Saddam period, not merely advisory ones.

Asked for the Iraqi Group's evaluation of the Salaheddine leadership, Hafedh acknowledged that its members had contributed to the struggle against the Iraqi regime. Their failing, he said, was that they were "part of an external project. . . . They are not independent."

Julie Flint, a long-time correspondent from the Middle East and a former IWPR trustee, is coordinating editor of the Iraqi Crisis Report.

 ANALYSIS: THE KURDISH-TURKISH CRISIS

Turkey is pressing the United States for guarantees to block a Kurdish federal entity in northern Iraq.

By Kamran Karadaghi, recently in northern Iraq

With war against Iraq on the horizon and negotiations continuing between Washington and Ankara to allow US troops to open a northern front from Turkey, tension between Kurds and Turks is on the rise.

Iraqi Kurds have deep-seated historical suspicions of Turkey's intentions towards them and fear it wants to prevent them securing federal status in a post-Saddam Iraq - perhaps even to rob them of the gains they have made in 12 years of virtual autonomy.

Ankara says its policy towards its southern neighbour is based merely on its desire to prevent the disintegration of Iraq.

As details of the negotiations between Washington and Ankara have surfaced, Kurds have become more and more nervous. Turkey has set four main conditions for allowing up to 62,000 US troops to deploy on Turkish soil in advance of an invasion:

* Kurds must not be armed with heavy weapons, particularly anti-aircraft missiles. Ankara argues that the Kurds might eventually use these missiles against Turkish planes. It fears they might even end up in the hands of Turkey's own Kurdish rebels in the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK).

* Immediately after the war, Kurdish fighters must be disarmed and integrated into the Iraqi army.

* The Kurds must not be given federal status.

* Iraqi Turkomans must be regarded as the equals of Kurds in any post-Saddam settlement.

Kurds believe these conditions are designed to put an end to their hopes of a federal Iraq after Saddam. In the past, it has been Turkish Kurds who have been seen on television screens burning Turkish flags in demonstrations in European cities. Today it is Iraqi Kurds who are burning Turkish flags in rallies in northern Iraq.

Angry Turks accuse the Iraqi Kurds of being ungrateful. For more than a decade, they say, Turkey has played a crucial role in protecting the Kurds' "safe haven" by providing military bases for British and American planes to enforce a no-fly zone in northern Iraq and by allowing humanitarian aid into the region.

Turks are determined to prevent a repetition of the situation created after the 1991 Gulf war, when tens of thousands of Iraqi Kurds flooded towards Turkey's border. They worry about a re-emergence of the PKK. But most of all they are concerned that a war, possibly resulting in a political vacuum in Iraq, might lead to the creation of a Kurdish federal state in northern Iraq.

The safe haven established with Turkey's help in 1991 - for humanitarian purposes - developed into something quite different: a Kurdish entity with a parliament, government, customs and "diplomatic" missions abroad. Turkey believes that giving Iraqi Kurds federal status would establish the nucleus of a future independent state. It does not believe it can rely on the United States to prevent this and sees the threat of its own military force as its only sure guarantee.

Kurds, and many Iraqis, argue that what happens in northern Iraq is none of Turkey's business anyway. But this logic will not withstand geopolitical considerations. Turkey has a very large Kurdish population that might be inspired by their Iraqi brethren.

The Kurdish issue is a major obstacle in the United States' efforts to secure the help it needs from Turkey to open a northern front in the war against Iraq. Although the most powerful player in the war theatre, America needs Turkey as a partner and an ally not only in Iraq - but elsewhere as well. And despite the unresolved differences, Americans and Turks have agreed on several issues: Turkish troops will not participate in military operations; US troops alone will be responsible for securing the oilfields of Kirkuk and Mosul; Turkish troops will be deployed on a border strip inside Iraq 20 kilometres deep.

The landslide election to parliament on Sunday of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, leader of Turkey's ruling Justice and Development Party, and his imminent installation as prime minister in place of Abdullah Gul, may bring good news for the United States. Erdogan has hinted that he favours going back to parliament to ask for a new vote on basing rights for US troops. But his arrival in power will not solve the problem of the Iraqi Kurds. Only the United States can protect the Iraqi Kurds - and they hope America will reply in kind to their friendship.

Kamran Karadaghi is chief editor of the Iraq service at Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

 ANALYSIS: SAUDIS ON THE FENCE

Given the huge risks, Riyadh will defer its decision on supporting a US-led war until the final moment.

By Jamal Ahmad Khashoggi in Jeddah

In the unfolding Iraq crisis, no two countries have more similar geopolitical considerations than Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Their location, as Iraq's largest neighbours to the south and north, is alone sufficient to explain their opposition to war. Neither has hidden their strong desire to be rid of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, although this in no way conflicts with their rejection of war.

The war President George Bush is itching for will be fought on our borders - not those of Texas. If Saddam has missiles with a longer-than-permitted range, it is Riyadh or Ankara they could target - not Washington. Even if there is only a 5 per cent chance that Baghdad retains doomsday weapons, this is worrying to Saudi officials.

But while seeking to safeguard their country, they have done their utmost not to cause public alarm. They have taken defensive measures, but secretively and without any media coverage that might upset the calm that has so far prevailed on the Saudi street.

Apart from the risk of unleashing the weapons of mass destruction that the Americans insist Iraq has, war threatens to have many other harmful effects on the region.

One is economic recession. The issue is raised at virtually every meeting between Saudis. Like Turkey, Saudi Arabia has a growing unemployment problem and is trying to get out of a slump. Conflict would be certain to compound its economic suffering.

Moreover, Saudi Arabia doesn't want an influx of refugees, nor an unstable Iraq wracked by internecine strife. That might trigger ugly acts of retribution targeting the Sunni community, wrongly portrayed as the power base of Saddam's regime.

The Saudis can also envisage a scenario in which an impatient and trigger-happy Bush administration causes so much "collateral damage", and behaves so high-handedly, that it turns potential allies in Iraq into angry, vengeful and suspicious adversaries.

Worse still, the Saudis can imagine a situation whereby the Americans' entire enterprise is abandoned in failure: having devastated Iraq, they declare that it no longer poses any threat to them or their allies and proceed to withdraw, leaving Iraq's neighbours to pick up the pieces.

This would whet the appetites that various groups in Iraq have for autonomy, threatening to permanently divide the country and turn it into a new Yugoslavia. Saudi Arabia has invested much in developing and improving relations with Iran. The emergence of a Shi'ite mini-Iraq on its borders could create tensions across the Gulf.

Washington's signals about its broader regional intentions are not reassuring. Given the neo-conservatives' hold over the Bush administration, which is ideologically aligned with Israel and doesn't think much of the Arabs in general, it is legitimate to mistrust America's intentions. Having the Americans running the country would be a liability to US allies in the region.

The kingdom's reluctance to hop to America's war drums should not be seen as a sign that it is relinquishing its old alliance with the superpower, which has been tried and tested in adversity. It is most likely that Saudi Arabia will allow its American allies to use its military bases to provide logistical support to the US Central Command. Saudi Arabia doesn't want to commit itself to anything while Washington could still back off from the decision to go to war. Saddam might even do the unexpected and resign.

Until such time, Saudi Arabia - not unlike Turkey - will maintain its hesitant and ambiguous stand toward the war option. Turkey has demanded monetary compensation and various other concessions in return for its participation in the war. Saudi Arabia has a right to demand something from the Americans too - namely, better treatment than it has been receiving since September 11.

Some observers have attributed the Saudi government's lack of enthusiasm for war to pressure from the religious establishment or extremist trends. But their role tends to be exaggerated.

The truth is that the government has the upper hand by far. There is no power that can challenge it if it decides that the kingdom's interests are best served by maintaining its special relationship with Washington. Should Riyadh reach that conclusion, it will do what it deems fit and will find a thousand justifications for the campaign - one of which could be the assertion that it is to "free" Iraq.

Jamal Ahmad Khashoggi is deputy editor-in-chief of Saudi Arabia's English-language Arab News. A longer version of this commentary first appeared in Lebanon's Daily Star newspaper.

 IRAQ REINFORCES THE NORTH

Kurdish and US sources report Iraqi forces mobilizing at the frontiers of the Kurdish-controlled areas.

By Azad Chalak in Suleimaniya, northern Iraq

As the countdown to war continues, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has moved military reinforcements close to the border with the liberated Kurdish region, mirroring a similar build-up on his southern border with Kuwait.

In addition to troop and tank reinforcements on the edge of the 32nd parallel - the limit of the no-fly zone imposed by the US and UK over northern Iraq - the skies over the oil city of Kirkuk only a short distance outside the liberated area have in recent days been covered in a thick, black cloud of smoke.

The reason for the smoke barrier obscuring Kirkuk is not known. Kurdish leaders believe the Iraqi regime may be creating a literal smokescreen in hope of interfering with US satellites and reconnaissance flights over the northern front-line area. But there are also reports that a number of mines planted around the Kirkuk oil wells have accidentally exploded, starting a series of fires.

According to these sources, the mines have been laid in recent weeks by Russian experts working with the Iraqis. Their purpose may be to enable the destruction of the oil wells should Kirkuk be captured by American forces.

Although unconfirmed as yet, these reports were strengthened on Tuesday by claims that the United States had detected movements of explosives towards the Kirkuk oilfields.

US officials said last week that Saddam Hussein had moved Ababil-50 and Ababil-100 missiles north of Baghdad in order to be in a position to threaten the populations of Kirkuk and Mosul - once predominantly Kurdish, but now almost wholly "Arabised" - after a takeover by American or Kurdish forces.

The officials said Saddam had also boosted his southern defences by placing surface-to-surface missiles within range of Kuwait, which is hosting US combat forces. The missiles are mobile and have range enough to reach Kuwait city. The officials said Saddam appeared to be attempting to put in place systems that could threaten US-led invasion forces and local resistance movements - including the Kurdish peshmerga in northern Iraq.

Despite the military build-up along the Kurdish front line, Kurdish officials believe that many army officers - including generals - will desert as soon as war begins and join American and British forces in the liberated area.

But the build-up has deepened the fears of ordinary Kurds, who have suffered so much at the hands of Saddam's regime. They are hoping the war will be short, as the United States and Britain are promising. If Saddam remains in power, and Kurds have to face the consequences of his regime once again, many would try to leave Iraq in order to claim asylum abroad.

Kurds are also concerned about a possible occupation by Turkish troops. Turkey has not concealed its concern that a war to remove Saddam Hussein might result in the disintegration of Iraq and the establishment, in northern Iraq, of a Kurdish state that would encourage new agitation within Turkey's own Kurdish population. The Turks also have historic claims to the oil wealth of Mosul, just outside the liberated area.

Kurdish leaders have expressed outrage over Turkey's desire to send its troops into northern Iraq and hope the United States can persuade Turkey not to enter the liberated area.

Azad Chalak is head of Suleimaniya Radio, in Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq.

 GULF STATES SUPPORT

While officially against the war, most Gulf states are providing various levels of assistance to US troops in the region.

By IWPR Staff

Washington last week ordered 60,000 more troops to the Gulf, bringing the total allied fighting force in and around the Gulf to more than 300,000. Despite anti-war sentiments, authorities are providing basing rights and other support for the US forces, as follows:

BAHRAIN. Headquarters of the US Navy's Fifth Fleet. Although local media highlight the close relationship between Bahrain and its "strategic allies" in the West, government spokesmen deny that Bahraini territory will be used in any military action against Iraq.

Bahrain initially supported a call by the United Arab Emirates for Saddam Hussein's removal from power, but later backed the summit's "total rejection of any attack on Iraq".

KUWAIT. Headquarters of V Corps, the US Army force commanded by Lt. Gen. Scott Wallace that will invade Iraq from the southern front. Kuwait also hosts the 101st Airborne Division. The 101st, with backup from nearly 300 helicopters and 3,800 trucks, is key to a rapid war that will see the near-simultaneous use of massive air bombardment and rapid ground attacks. In all, some 160,000 US troops are currently on Kuwaiti soil.

Germany has almost 100 troops specialized in nuclear, chemical and biological warfare deployed in Kuwait, backed by specialized armoured vehicles that serve as laboratories on wheels. The troops were increased from 60 to 90 at the end of February. Germany says the troops are part of the international war on terrorism - not related to a possible war in Iraq.

QATAR. Hosts the United States' Central Command operations and the HQ of the invasion commander, Gen. Tommy Franks. An air base bear the capital, Doha, will serve as a launching pad for air strikes.

SAUDI ARABIA. Saudi Arabia was the launch pad for war on Iraq in 1991 and since then the US has had base facilities and troops stationed at Prince Sultan air base at al-Kharj, south of the capital, Riyadh. Fearing retaliation from Islamic fundamentalists linked to Osama bin Laden, Saudi Arabia's public position is that it opposes war against Iraq and Saudi soil will not be used as a springboard for attacks on Iraq.

But US officials have said Saudi Arabia is ready to allow US forces to make greater use of Saudi facilities than it can acknowledge publicly. The officials have said the kingdom will permit refuelling, surveillance and battlefield radar aircraft to use Saudi airfields.

The Washington Post reported that the US and Saudi Arabia have a "tacit agreement" that will allow the US to conduct bombing missions from Saudi soil as long as no public announcement is made. Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal denied the report.

There are no details of the exact number of US forces in Saudi Arabia. However, the Washington-based Saudi Information Agency has said several hundred US soldiers have arrived at Arar airport, only 15 kilometers from the Iraqi border, together with Galaxy aircraft carrying heavy equipment "apparently to be used in an eventual war against Iraq".

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES. UAE President Zayed ibn Sultan an Nahayan generated a proposal, floated at the recent Arab summit in Egypt, for Saddam Hussein to leave power voluntarily. The UAE does not host US troops.

 ****************** VISIT IWPR ON-LINE: www.iwpr.net ****************

The reports are also being published on the Web in English, Arabic and Kurdish.

This project is supported by the Polden Puckham Charitable Foundation and International Media Support. IWPR also thanks the following for institutional or development support which has assisted in the launch of this project: the Dutch Foreign Ministry, the Ford Foundation, the Ploughshares Foundation.

For further details on this project, other publications and IWPR educational and media development programmes, visit: www.iwpr.net

Iraqi Project Coordinating Editor: Julie Flint

IWPR Project Development and Support -- Executive Director: Anthony Borden; Director of Operations: Alan Davis; Managing Editor: Yigal Chazan; Senior Operations Manager: Duncan Furey; Associate Editor: Alison Freebairn

The Institute for War & Peace Reporting (IWPR) is a London-based independent non-profit organisation supporting regional media and democratic change.

Lancaster House, 33 Islington High Street, London N1 9LH, United Kingdom. Tel: +44 (0)20 7713 7130, Fax: +44 (0)20 7713 7140 E-mail: info@iwpr.net Web: www.iwpr.net

The opinions expressed in Iraqi Crisis Report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the publication or of IWPR.

Copyright (c) 2003 The Institute for War & Peace Reporting

IRAQI CRISIS REPORT No. 03