تأثیر استراتژی آمریکا بر تحولات کردستان عراق ‏ از سال 1971 تا2014‏

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار گروه جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران.

2 کارشناس ارشدجغرافیای سیاسی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس

چکیده

استراتژی‌های قدرت‌های بزرگ در مناطق ژئوپلیتیکی جهان تابع متغیرهای مختلفی است. این قدرت‌ها در تمام کره زمین به‌دنبال پایداری و حفظ برتری بوده و این روش را به‌واسطه ابزارهای مختلفی اعمال می‌نمایند. یکی از دلایل منابع و ریشه‌های پایداری قدرت‌های جهانی حضور و کنش آن‌ها در گستره جهانی و دخالت و تأثیرگذاری آن‌ها بر فرایندهای جهانی است. با پایان جنگ جهانی دوم ایالات‌متحده به‌عنوان قدرت تأثیرگذار جهانی مطرح شد. رقابت ایالات‌متحده با شوروی، شکل‌گیری بلوک‌های جهانی در دو مقیاس را در پی داشت. لذا دو قدرت شوروی و ایالات‌متحده به‌عنوان بازیگران جدید، استراتژی‌های ژئوپلیتیکی خود را پیگیری کردند. با خروج بریتانیا از شرق کانال سوئز در سال 1971، ایالات‌متحده بازیگر فعال در کنش‌های این بخش از جهان شد. کردستان به‌عنوان بخشی از این فضا، در بخش شمالی عراق تحت تأثیرجریان‌های قدرتی قرار گرفت. در این پژوهش تأثیرگذاری ایالات‌متحده و تداوم آن در دوره‌های بعد در ارتباط با کردستان شمال عراق مورد مطالعه قرار گرفته است. تا الگوی رفتاری یک قدرت بزرگ در یک منطقه ژئوپلیتیکی ویژه تحلیل گردد. ازاین‌رو پژوهش حاضر در تلاش است با روش تحلیلی و توصیفی به این سؤال پاسخ دهد: که استراتژی آمریکا چه تأثیراتی بر تحولات کردستان عراق از سال 1971 تا 2014 داشته است؟نتایج پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که رابطه آمریکا با کردستان عراق از الگوی بی‌طرفی یا مداخله محدود در دوره جنگ سرد تا الگوی تعاملی پس از پایان جنگ سرد پیروی کرده است. استراتژی آمریکا در وضعیت بی‌طرفی اثرات متفاوتی بر توسعه سیاسی، اقتصادی و نظامی‌کردها داشته و در دوره تعاملی توسعه سیاسی، نظامی و اقتصادی کردها را در پی داشته است. این الگوی تعاملی، مسیر توسعه تعاملات همه­جانبه یک قدرت بزرگ را در جنوب غرب آسیا از یک فضای میکرو فراهم کرده است. به‌گونه‌ای که بستر نوعی خودگردانی با اختیارات گسترده در شمال عراق را به​وجود آورده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Impact of U.S Strategy on Iraqi Kurdistan from 1971 ‎to 2014‎

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ebrahim Roumina 1
  • Mohammad TaherBidar 2
1 Assistant Professor of Political Geography,TarbiatModaresUniveristy, Tehran, Iran
2 MA of Political Geography, TarbiatModaresUniveristy, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Introduction
Strategies of great powers follow different variables. These powers are seeking stability and maintaining supremacy in all over the world and apply it through different tools. One of the reasons of sustainability sources and roots of universal powers is their presence and actions in global scope and, their interference and influence on global process. With the end of World War II, the US was raised as global effective power. Competition between the US and soviet led to form global blocks, in two scales. Therefore, two powers of soviet and the US as new players have followed geopolitical strategies. With departure of Britain from the east of Suez Canal in 1971, the US became active player in this part of the world. Iraqi Kurdistan as a part of this context was influenced by power currents. In this research the USA impact and its continuation in the next periods in relation to Iraqi Kurdistan have been studied, so that behavioral pattern of a great power in a geopolitical region is analyzed. Therefore, the current research aims at answering this question with a descriptive and analytical method: what are the impacts of the US strategy on changes of Iraqi Kurdistan from 1971 to 2014?
Methodology
The current research is descriptive- analytic. Data gathering procedure is based on library findings. In the part of gathering from library sources (books, articles magazines, etc.) both internal and external sources have been used. Also in order to gather new data with respect to the relationship between the US and Iraqi Kurdistan reliable sites, which contain documents and action data of the US in Iraqi Kurdistan, have been referred. Since respective data was frequent and wide, information, which assessed research variables, was used and finally analyzed with qualitative method.
Result and discussion
The relationships between the US and northern Iraqi Kurdistan from 1971 to the end of this research is divided into two discrete periods as follows:
The first period: In this period the US actions in northern Iraqi Kurdistan had a pattern of limited and temporary intervention. With Britain decision for departing from the east of Suez Canal in 1971, the US was posed as substituted power. The relationship between the US and Kurdish people in this period followed several considerations: 

Regional considerations specially related to Iran, Turkey, and Arab countries;
Relationships of part of Kurdish people in northern Iraq with Soviet Union;
Baath government and intensifying challenging and controversial behaviors;
USA focus on other geopolitical areas;
Iran and Iraq regional wars.

Regarding these issues, the US relationship with Kurdish people in northern Iraq did not have a wide pattern. This period continued until the Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.
The second period: In this period Kurdish people relationships entered a new phase influenced by regional changes. Over time the US relationship with Kurdistan in northern Iraq was developed. Collection of changes which influenced this process was as follows:

Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait;
USA and its allies invasion of Kuwait and Iraq (Desert Storm War);
End of cold war;
The US geopolitical focus on South West Asia;
Forbidden flight area;
Set. 11 attacks 2001;
USA invasion of Iraq in 2003;
Islamic state of the Levant and Iraq (ISIS).

Influenced by these conditions, Iraqi Kurdistan relationships with the US were developed in three political, economical, and military security areas.
Conclusion
The result of the research showed that origin of Kurdish goals after World War II was focused on Kurdistan in northern Iraq and this idealism was against centralization of the Iraqi central government therefore, the highest stress among regional systems was applied against Kurdish people by the central government. From 1991 regarding global, regional, and local changes, Iraqi Kurdish people could obtain relative options in order to control settled space in Northern Iraq.
A series of developments in northern Iraq show that local idealism relying on trans- regional force during several decades could achieve its goals relatively and success degree of this idealism depend on the function of future changes of the region, the tolerance level of counties with Kurdish populations in neighboring Iraq and Kurdish people and also trans- regional powers actions.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Geopolitics
  • the U.S
  • Iraqi Kurdistan.‎
  1. BBC News. (2015). Iraqi Kurdistan profile – timeline, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-15467672.
  2. Benard, Alexander. (2004). Lessons from Iraq and Bosnia on the Theory and Practice of No-fly Zones. The Journal of Strategic Studies, Vol.27, No.3, September 2004, pp.454. DOI: 10.1080/1362369042000282985.
  3. Celikm, Banu. (2008). Turkish-Kurdish Conflict: An Ethno-Symbolistenergy-player.
  4. Colby, W.E. (1975). Memorandum from Director of Central Intelligence Colby to the President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs (Kissinger), Foreign Relations of the US 1969-1976. VOL. XXVII, Iran, Iraq, 1973–1976, Document 289, Washington, June 4, 1975.
  5. Doucey, Marie. (2011). Understanding the Root Causes of Conflicts: Why It Matters for International Crisis Management.  International Affaires Review. V.XX. N.2, Fall.
  6. Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, Near East Region; Iraq; Iran; Arabian Peninsula, Volume XII. 244. Telegram From the Embassy in Iran to the Department of State in: https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1958-60v12/d244.
  7. Friedman, henry. ( 2014). President Obama Talks to Thomas L. Friedman About Iraq, Putin and Israel(2014), Obama on the World, in: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/09/opinion/president-obama-thomas-l-friedman-iraq-and-worldaffairs.html?_r=0.
  8. Fuller Graham E. & Henri J. Barkey. (1998). Turkey's Kurdish Question Paperback, the Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group Inc.
  9. Ghaemmaghami, Ali. (2013). Turkey, northern Iraq, and Exxon Mobil, Iran- Balkans News [in Persian].
  10. Gunter,T, Michael. (2011). the Five Stages of American Foreign Policy towards the Kurds, Insight Turkey Vol. 13 / No. 2. pp. 93-106.
  11. Hafeznia, Mohammad Reza. (2006). The Impact of Kurdish Self-Governing in the North of Iraq on the Neighboring Countries, Geographical Research Quarterly (Mashhad), Vol. 21, No. 4, winter[in Persian].
  12. http://dfr.gov.krd/p/p.aspx?p=37.
  13. Johns, Dave. (2006). The Crimes of Saddam Hussein  By Dave Johns 1999 Al Sadr Killings, http://www.pbs.org/.
  14. Karimi, Parisa & Gholami, Tahmoures. (2007). U.S and Russian Kurdish politics; Iran's interests and national security. Geopolitical Quarterly. Vol. 13. No. 2. pp: 201-174.
  15. Kaya.K. Zeynep. (2012). Maps into Nations: Kurdistan, Kurdish Nationalism and International Society, London: International Relations of the London School of Economics.
  16. Kazemi, Hojat. (2017). Identity movements, fragile states and the geopolitical crisis of the Middle East. Geopolitical Quarterly. Vol: 13, No.1. Spring. pp: 172-146 [in Persian].
  17. Kissinger, Henry. (1979). the White House Years. London: Weidenfeid and Nicoison.
  18. Lewis.P. Robert. (2008). Prospects for an independent Kurdistan? Monterey California: Naval Postgraduate School.
  19. Malas, Nour and Parkinson, Joe. (2014). Iraq Crisis: Effort to Aid Kurdish Forces Puts Iran, U.S. on Same Side, http://www.wsj.com/Terrill,2006
  20. Mosallanejad, Abbas. (2013). the Crisis Management in Regional Encounters (Case Study: The Imposed War).  Winter. Vol.5. No. 1. pp. 49-65 [in Persian].
  21. Motaghi, Ebrahim. (2008). Geopolitics of Balance and Softness; Case Study: Middle East between 2001 and 2009. International Geopolitical Quarterly. Vol.4. No. 1. Spring. pp: 8- 35 [in Persian].
  22. President Obama Talks to Thomas L. Friedman About Iraq, Putin and Israel(2014), Obama on the World, in: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/09/opinion/president-obama-thomas-l-friedman-iraq-and-world-affairs.html?_r=0.
  23. U.S. Department Of Defense. (2009). Arabs, Kurds Should Take Advantage of U.S. Help, American Forces Press Service,  in: http://archive.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=55294.
  24. Vaezi, Mahmmoud. (2007). Mediation in Theory and Practice, Publishers: Strategic Research Center [in Persian].
  25. Voller, Yaniv. (2012). From Rebrllion to De Facto Statehood: International and Transnational Source of the Transformation of the the Kurdistan National Liberation Movement in Iraq into The Kurdistan Regional Government, London School of Economics and Political Sciences.
  26. Yavuz, uran, (1993). ABD’nin Kürt Kartı, Milliyet Yayınları, İstanbul. pp: 28-29.
  27. Zahed, Fayaz & Soltanifar, Mohammad. (2009). the Concepts of International Crisis Management. Journal of Media and Crisis Management. Vol. 2. No.38. pp: 11-44 [in Persian].