Peshmerga is a defender of Iraq and Kurdistan: Kurdish President Barzani's view gains support
Shafaq News/ Criticisms and concernsover arming the Peshmerga forces are “unfounded,” as a well-armed Peshmergacould benefit Iraq, indicated a report published by the American magazine Forbes.
According to the report titled“A Well-Armed Kurdish Peshmerga Could Actually Benefit Iraq,” Iraqiofficials are again voicing their opposition over armaments in the Peshmerga’sarsenal in light of a rare US transfer of towed artillery to the Kurdishforces. As with previous criticism of the Peshmerga’s possession of Soviet-eramilitary hardware over a decade ago, this latest criticism is overstated andunfounded.
“Peshmerga is not a threat;Peshmerga is a defender of Iraq, Kurdistan, and humanity,” Kurdish PresidentNechirvan Barzani told a graduating ceremony of Peshmerga officers on October17.
In his speech, Barzani also saidthat the autonomous Kurdish region expects “Iraq to fulfill its legalobligations to support and arm the Peshmerga” since these forces are part ofIraq’s defenses.
The report affirmed that the Kurdishpresident made this remark following public criticism by some in Iraq over theUS transfer of lightweight 105 mm M119 howitzers to the Peshmerga in August,including calls for Baghdad to confiscate the heavy weapons.
The former speaker of Iraq’sparliament, Mohammed al-Halbousi, voiced his opposition to arming local forceswith heavy weaponry in mid-September, insisting such weapons “should beexclusively in the hands of the Iraqi army.”
While he did not explicitly mentionthe Peshmerga, Halbousi was undoubtedly alluding to the August transfer. Heclaimed such weaponry could fuel ethnic conflicts in places such as Kirkuk, oneof the so-called disputed territories between federal Iraq and autonomousKurdistan.
Iraq’s defense ministry subsequentlyconfirmed that a previous Iraqi government had approved the transfer years ago,meaning the US did not sidestep Baghdad when delivering them in August.Washington always awaits Baghdad’s approval before transferring arms to thePeshmerga, and Baghdad has often blocked equipment such as drones. It may welldo the same regarding air defenses the US was expected to supply, anothercapability the Peshmerga sorely lacks as it faces increasing threats fromweaponized “militia drones.”
Based on the report, the fundamentalpoint that criticisms like that of Halbousi miss is that a better-armedPeshmerga could actually enhance Iraq’s security rather than undermine it. Adecade has passed since the vicious Islamic State, ISIS, militant grouprampaged across northern Iraq uncontested after the Iraqi Army melted away. Ifit wasn’t for the Peshmerga, ISIS could well have overrun Kirkuk, itsoilfields, and all those disputed territories Halbousi mentioned with relativeease, just as it had infamously done in Mosul.
It’s worth remembering that theUnited States began its air campaign against Islamic State in August 2014 whenthe group attacked Iraqi Kurdistan. In light of the current artillerycontroversy, it’s somewhat ironic that the first American airstrike against thejihadi group occurred outside the Iraqi Kurdish capital city, Erbil, when USNavy F/A-18 jets destroyed a towed artillery piece. The Iraqi Army had likelyleft it behind when it withdrew from Mosul, enabling ISIS to capture it andattempt to use it against Kurdistan.
The Peshmerga had a lamentable lackof heavy weapons at its disposal to defend its region against ISIS andeventually roll back much of the group’s enormous territorial conquests. TheKurdish forces started the war with little more than vintage Soviet-era T-55tanks captured from Saddam Hussein’s crumbling army in 2003 and some oldartillery pieces from the same period, museum pieces for a modern war.
The year before ISIS’s infamoustakeover, Iraq filed a lawsuit against then-prime minister Barzani and thePeshmerga minister over the region’s possession of these weapons, which, giventheir age and poor condition, were described as “out of service” or even“scrap.” That was at a time when Iraq was rebuilding its army after years ofwar and receiving modern weapons, like US-built M1A1 Abrams tanks, none ofwhich it shared with the Kurdish forces.
The Peshmerga holding the northernfront with the critical support of the US-led coalition proved vital for Iraq’svictory over the self-styled ISIS caliphate established on its soil. IraqiArmy-Peshmerga cooperation in 2016 at the beginning of the Battle of Mosul washailed as “historic” by the Kurdish leadership. Even when the Iraqi Kurds heldan independence referendum the following year, its leadership vowed it wouldcontinue anti-ISIS cooperation with the Iraqi Army, even if Iraqi Kurdistanultimately seceded.
When Iraq cracked down on IraqiKurdistan immediately after the referendum, closing down its internationalairports and pushing the Peshmerga out of Kirkuk and the rest of the disputedterritories, it undone much of this progress overnight. In one infamous case,the Peshmerga destroyed an Iraqi M1 used by “Iran-backed militias” against them.The documented use of Iraqi Army M1s by these “militias” resulted in the tank’smanufacturer, General Dynamics, withdrawing crucial technical support fromIraq, briefly undermining the army’s firepower, the report said.
If anything, that was an apt exampleof the dangers for Iraq’s security of letting certain groups operate heavyweaponry.
While officially part of the Iraqiarmed forces and paid as such, many of these “powerful militias,” initiallyorganized under the umbrella of the Popular Mobilization Units to combat ISISin 2014, are loyal first and foremost to Iran. They have also built up a muchvaster arsenal than the Peshmerga has ever had, including drones, cruisemissiles, and even short-range ballistic missiles. They have fired several ofthe former at Israel during the present Middle East war, in one case killingIsraeli soldiers. Such attacks run the risk of dragging Iraq into this ongoingregional conflict, which most Iraqis do not want.
Meanwhile, the Peshmerga iscontinuing anti-ISIS cooperation with the Iraqi Army in the disputedterritories. They are currently working together to plug the security gaps thathave existed between them since 2017, which ISIS remnants have repeatedly exploited.The constructive cooperation is another example of how the Peshmerga is afactor in Iraq’s stability and contributes to its security.
Consequently, Peshmerga troopsoperating in joint brigades with the Iraqi Army against ISIS in the disputedterritories should have access to some of the more advanced equipment operatedby the Iraqi Army, such as tanks and artillery. Iraq is reportedly finalizing adeal with France to supply self-propelled Caesar howitzers, a much moreadvanced and powerful weapon than anything in the Peshmerga’s currentinventory.
At the very least, Baghdad shouldnot oppose or hinder the US from supplying drones or anything else that wouldenhance the Kurdish force’s capabilities against ISIS and bolster IraqiKurdistan’s security against other threats like drones and rockets. Short-rangeair defenses are essential for protecting critical infrastructure in IraqiKurdistan, such as the Khor Mor gas field, from attack. If Iraq cannot or isn’twilling to help the Peshmerga defend them or supply the necessary weapons forKurdistan to do it by itself, it at least shouldn’t prevent others from doingso.
Washington’s willingness time andagain to provide full transparency on what exactly it’s supplying Erbil leavesBaghdad with little justification to halt future transfers of weaponry requiredto combat specific threats.
The M119 delivery is anything but agame-changer. It is barely a blip on the radar compared to the heavier and moreadvanced weaponry in Iraq’s arsenal. Rather than condemn such transfers, Iraqiofficials and politicians should recognize that a well-armed Peshmerga isn’tantithetical to the national interest. In many ways, it could very well be init.
Disclaimer: The views presented bythe author do not necessarily reflect the official standpoint of Shafaq NewsAgency.
