THEIRAQI BA'TH REGIME'S ATROCITIES AGAINSTTHE FAYLEE KURDS
Nation-State
FormationDistorted
TheIraqi Ba’thRegime’sAtrocities Againstthe Faylee Kurds
©2025 Adel Soheil
Publisher: BoD· Books on Demand, Östermalmstorg 1, 114 42 Stockholm, Sweden, bod@bod.se
Print: LibriPlureos GmbH,Friedensallee273, 22763 Hamburg, Germany
ISBN:978-91-8097-027-3
TheIraqi Ba’th Regime’s Atrocities Againstthe Faylee Kurds
Nation-State FormationDistorted
Dedicatedtothe killed Faylee Kurdsand thosewho suffered at thehands of theBa’thists in Iraq
Ethnicityand Language 86
Posht-e-kuhDuringthe Sasanian andthe Islamic Conquests91
Posht-e-KuhDuringthe Walis’ rule 97 Languageand Religion of theFayleeKurds 104
TheTermFaylee; itsMeaning andits FirstAttestation 108 Faylee KurdsinBaghdad 112
6. Qassem,the KurdishQuestion,the Ba’thists andthe Faylee Kurds 123
TheBa’thist Coup againstQassemand theFaylee Kurds132
7.TheBa’thistCoupofJuly, 1968: TheFirst Wave of Mass Expulsionofthe Faylee Kurds 139
TheShu’ubiya:Its Meaning, itsUse andImplications 143 TheNationality Question of theFayleeKurds 147 National Security andNew RestrictiveMeasures156 Events Leadinguptothe Mass Expulsion of the Faylee Kurds159 TheMassExpulsion of theFayleeKurds,1970-197 162
8. Saddam’s Drivefor Homogenisation,1980-1991 Saddam’sRisetoPower 171 Arabisationofthe KurdishPopulation174 ArabisationofKirkukand other“ContestedAreas”179
9. Nation-State Formationand Mass Expulsion, 1980-1991
Conceptual Definitionsand InternationalNorms 189 ReasonsContributingtoMassExpulsions: TheState Security Reason:A)The Economic Position of theFayleeKur 196
B) ThePolitical Activitiesofthe Faylee Kurds199 TheMustansiriyaBombAttack andits Aftermath203 TheSecondWaveofMassExpulsion of theFaylee
Introduction
Thehistory of the relationshipbetween theIraqi Ba’thparty andthe Faylee Kurds, an integral componentofthe Kurdish nation, providesample evidence of pervasiveinsecurity and large-scaleviolationsoffundamentalhuman rights.The Ba’thistsemployeda varietyofstrategicmethods againstthe Faylee Kurdsranging from discrimination andsocial exclusiononthe oneextreme to mass expulsion andgenocide on theother.Theyjustified theirsystematicprosecution and repression of one of themaincomponentsofthe Iraqisociety basedonnationalsecurity.
Theassumptionofthe presidency of Iraq by Saddam Husseinin1979 undoubtedlymarkeda dramatic turningpoint in therelationshipbetween theBa’thists andthe Faylee Kurds. TheBa’thpartyandSaddaminpersonintensifiedtheir animosityagainst theFayleeKurds during conflict-ridden relationships with Iran.FayleeKurds were accusedofbeing of Iranianorigin, or tabaiya, atermthe regime employedto denote individualsitregardedasbeing originally Iranian. Consequently,the Faylee Kurdsweredeemedtobepledging theirallegiancetoIran. They were thereforeregardedbythe regime as afifth columninIraq, whoposed athreattothe security of thestate.These accusationswereonseveral occasionsreiteratedexplicitly andimplicitly in Saddam’s comments andspeechesonthe current domesticaffairs accompaniedsometimes by threat of “uprooting” (ijtithath) thosewho were deemed unfitfor theIraqi societyby “purifying”(tathir),or“cleansing” (tanzif)the Iraqi populationfromthem, or rendering it “homogenous” (mutajanis).
Theextensive Arabisationcampaignwas also part of the Ba’thregime’sideaoferadicating differencesbetween the Iraqipopulace,andtocreateonesingleArabnationinculcated byBa’thistideology. Theultimategoalofthe policy the Ba’thistsadopted sincetheytook power in 1968 wastoform ahomogenous nation-stateout of asociety composed of differentethnicand religious groups.Thispolicyfound its violentexpression underthe rule of Saddam when hundreds of thousandsofthe Faylee KurdswereexpelledtoIranand about22,000 of them were exterminated.
That said,the centralargumentofthisstudy is that the Ba’thregimeinIraq, particularly during theruleofSaddam Hussein, envisionedtocreatea homogenous nation-state throughvarious practicesincluding Arabization, mass expulsionand genocideinorder to acquirenationalsecurity as well as legitimacy forits authority.
Thepolicyofsocialexclusion andoppression of thenondominantethnicand religiousgroups in Iraq wasnot only practicedbythe Ba’thist rulers,its rootcan be traced back to thefoundationofthe modern Iraqistate.Following the dismantlementofthe OttomanEmpireinthe aftermathof WorldWar 1the Alliedpowerssuperimposedthenation-state on Iraq as well as on thecountries in theMiddleEastasa political system,disregardingethnic, religious andsocial particularities. KingFaysal 1, whowas installedbytheBritish in 1921inIraq, together with hisentourage,consistingofexOttomanofficers, were ardent advocatesofArabnationalism. They wereproponentsofIraq’sunityandundertookunderthe Britishaegis,theproject of nationbuildingwhichforthe most part during themandate period entailedignoranceand when necessaryviolent suppression of non-Arab groups’demands TheKurds as thesecondlargest ethnicgroup afterthe Arabs in Iraq,despite theprovision of theSèrvres Treaty concluded in 1920, whichentitledthemtoanindependent state, became incorporated into Iraq followingthe winning of theMosul Wilayat in 1926and thus theconsolidationofthe Iraqistate. Neitherthe pan-Arab in powernor theBritish,favoured a
seriousaccommodationofKurdish aspirations,and this attitude,indeed,byand large, remained so untilthe downfall of theBa’th regime in 2003.
Otherethnicand religiousgroups didnot escape thesame destination. This wasthe case forthe Assyrians, theJews, the Christians,the Shi’ites andnumerousothers. Despite discriminatory treatments andhostile persecutions experiencedbyFayleeKurds during theruleofvarious nationalistand pan-Arab regimes, they succeeded to play a significant role in modern Iraq’s history. They made themselves felt in thefirst placeinthe realms of trade, commerce andpolitics. Severalleading personalitieswithin thetwo main Kurdishparties,theKurdistanDemocraticParty andthe PatrioticUnion of Kurdistan, were Faylee Kurds. They were among thefoundersand promotersofthese partiesand theircommitment to thestrugglefor Kurdish rights garnered significantsupport from theFayleeKurds. Faylee Kurdsmerchants andbusinessmen,particularlythose whohad prosperedeconomically in Baghdad, also provided theKurdish nationalmovementfinancial help.FayleeKurds were also active in otherpolitical parties, mainly in theIraqi Communist partyand to alimited extent in theDa’wa party. Consequently,the regime perceivedthe Faylee Kurdsasa subversivegroup,although they didnot constitute any opposition forceoftheir own. Norweretheyinvolvedinany anti-governmental groupwhenthe regime mountedits atrocities againsttheminApril 1980, giventhatatthe time theregimeprincipally haddestroyedits opponents.
Theargumentofthe nationalsecuritywas paramountin theBa’th regime’s rationalizationofits policytowards the FayleeKurds. Indeed,the conceptofnationalorstatesecurity is closelyinterlinkedwiththe enterprise of nation-state formation. Ethnic dominantgroups claimtoact in the interestsand forthe security of thestate andthe people,and that it is incumbentonthemtoensurethe security of thestate andthe people from othernon-dominantgroups whichthey consider arealorpotential threat.The consequenceofthis
rationaleisoften renderingthe statefreefromthembymeans of mass expulsion, ethniccleansing andevengenocidein ordertoachieve ahomogeneous population.Inthe case of the Kurdsand some otherminoritiesinIraq, thesepractices were also accompaniedbyculturalassimilationand Arabisation. In fact,the security of thestate,and hence, of thoseexercising statepower,isembodied in internationallaw.Asitis establishedbyinternationalnorms,a sovereignstate hasthe righttomassexpulsionaslongasitdoesnot violate internationalobligations.These normsalsolegitimise withdrawal of citizenshipandexpulsionofthosewhothestate regardsasa threat to itssecurity, forexample duetotheir collaborationwitha foreignpower.The security argument wasalready enshrinedinagreements concludedafter World WarIIbetween theAlliedpowers.
At thetimethe mass expulsionorasitwas called “transfer” of minorities, such as ethnic Germansand other minoritiestotheirhomelands,wascarriedout toguaranteethe security of easternand centralEuropestates.1 As an example of population exchange to remove “minorityproblem”in Europe IanBrownliereferstothe transfer of ethnic Germans sanctionedbythe PotsdamAgreementwhich “may be justifiedasa part of thesanctions andmeasuresofsecurity imposedbythe principlemembers of acoalition whichhad fought alawfulwar of collectivedefence againstNazi Germany.”2
Themainconcernofthe Ba’thistswas ensuring theirown securityandthepreservationoftheir power whichtheysought to achievethrough infringement of basicinternationalhuman rights lawand normswhich prohibit arbitraryand unlawful practicesbya stateagainst itsown people.Nevertheless, the ambiguousnatureofthe term security in certaininternational laws renders aclear-cut interpretation of it difficult. It allows
1 Seethisstudy,pp.135-137.
2 IanBrownlie, Principles of Public InternationalLaw (Oxford: ClarendonPress,1998),pp. 564-65.
forvarious interpretationsdepending on thetypeofthe regime andthe agency andthe purpose thereof. It is not to say that theBa’thists actedinaccordance with interpretation of anylaw or were constrainedbysomeothers. Yet, they should have been cognisant that theinternational principles vested in asovereign statethe rightfor protecting national security. This mightexplain thesilence of theregionaland internationalgovernmentsonthe Ba’thregime’spolicy towardsthe Faylee Kurds.
In this studypractices of extremeviolencesuchasmass expulsion, forced assimilation,ethniccleansing andgenocide aredefined as state-lead radicalhomogenisation. It differs from cultural homogenisationwhich is definedinthisstudy as eradicatingoflinguisticdiversity like thepolicyof Arabisationwhich wasimplemented by theSunni Arab rulers in Iraq.
This book is organizedinto10chapters. Chapter1 provides acomprehensive survey of thetheoretical frameworks concerning theformation of nationstate andthe processofhomogenisation of populations. Thesetheoriesare primarilydrawn on studies of modernistscholarsofstate nationformationwhich demonstratethatthe formationofthe modern nation-state in Europe andthe rest of theworld has engenderednationalismand concomitantly ledtothe homogenisation of divers ethnicand religiousgroups, particularly in Europe as afunctionofnation-stateformation. However, in theseand similarstudies of nationstates formationand internationalrelations thequestionofsecurity as an importantelement in thehomogenisationpolicyhas oftenbeen absent or mentionedinpassing.
ThestudyoftherelationshipbetweentheIraqiregimesand theFayleeKurds,and forthatmatter, otherethnicand religious minorities,offersa valuable illustrationofthe significanceofsecurityfor theBa’th regimesintheir endeavours to establisha homogeneousnation-stateand to constructa singlenationalidentity. TheBa’thists’pursuingof strategies of systematic suppression of itsopponents seemed
to be rooted in thebelieve that thegreater thehomogenisation of thepopulation, themoreassured theirsecuritywould be. This chapteralsodiscusses conciselyrelated topics to nationstateformationnamelythe concepts of nation and nationalism, as well as security andgenocide.
Thestudy is conductedwithinthe contextofthe political developmentinIraqsince thecreationofthe Iraqistate in 1921. Chapter2and4illustratetheattitudesoftheSunni Arab rulers towardsother ethnicand religious groups as well as explorethe socio-politicalroots of Arab nationalismfromits inceptionformulatedbySaati al-Husri andits influenceon Michel ‘Aflaq,the principalfounderofBa’th ideology. ‘Aflaq,inturn, influenced thepan-ArabrulersinIraq, as well as SaddamHussein on apersonallevel.Emphasising the rulers’nationalistideology hasthe advantageofhighlighting theroleofagencyintargeting non-dominant ethnic groups in theprocess of nation-stateformation.The study of the relationshipbetween theBa’th regime andthe Faylee Kurds will hopefully be more comprehensible if it is conducted within thestructure andagencyframework.Asitwillbe demonstrated in this book, structureand circumstances allowedfor thepoliciesthe Ba’thistspursued againstthe Faylee Kurdsand otherdissentinggroups in Iraq.
Chapter2 besidesdealingwithArabnationalism it also discussestogether with chapter3 thegenocideofthe Armeniansbetween 1915-16atthe handsthe CUP, the Committee of Unionand Progress, andthe massacre of the Assyriansduringthe Hashemitemonarchyin1933. Examiningthese knownhistoricaloccurrences areprimarily done to demonstratethatthe policy of exclusionand eliminationofunwantedpopulations hasbeen an enduring featureinthe historyofthe nation-statecreationand internationalrelations.Itillustratesaswellthe ideological influenceofthe YoungTurks on theSunni Arab elites as they were ex-Ottomanofficerstrained andeducatedinthe OttomanEmpire. This influencewhich also wascombined withArabnationalismfounditsexpressionintheill-treatment
Thehistory of the relationshipbetween the Iraqi Baathparty and the Faylee Kurds,anintegralpart of the Kurdish nation, provides ample evidence of insecurity and large-scale violations of fundamentalhuman rights.The Baathists employed different strategicalmethodsagainstthe Faylee Kurds rangingfrom discrimination and socialexclusiononthe one extreme to mass expulsion and genocide on theother. They justified their systematic prosecution and repression of one of the main components of the Iraqi societyonthe basis of national security.The animosity towards the Faylee Kurds intensified duringthe rule of Saddam Hussein as they were accused of beingofIranian originand constitutinga fifth column in Iraq, andhence athreat to be removed. As aresult, the Baath regime expelledhundredsofthousands of Faylee
Kurds to Iran and exterminated about 22,000 of them.
TheFayleeKurds have lived in Iraq for centuries and playeda significant role in the history of modern Iraq, and most notably for beingexpelledand killedona vastscale,yet they arestill an unknown community to the outsideworld.This
bookattempts to addressthisshortcoming.
From the introduction.
Cover photo: Monument inBaghdad honouring thekilled and disappeared Faylee Kurds.
