Sources from the Iraqi Staff Defense Office told Al-Sharqiya TV that they received instruc­tions to ignore the orders taken by the Chief of Staff “Babkir Zebari” [Kurd].The anony­mous source told the TV sta­tion that offi­cers in the Defense Min­istry and the Inter­nal Affairs Min­istry aware of the Dawa party and the United Iraqi Alliance dom­i­na­tion on both ministries.

Al-Sharqiya links this new devel­op­ment with the visit of the head of Badr Orga­ni­za­tion Al-Amri [see the image attached to the report, Al-Amri is in the pic­ture vis­it­ing Diyala] to Diyala to inspect the armed forces in the province say­ing that Al-Amri took the role of the Army Chief of Staff in Diyala. Iraqi Defense Min­istry denied the above report.

The changes in Amer­i­can pol­i­tics and Obama

The best analy­sis I ever read on Kirkuk, Diyala and Mosul with the Kurds are in race with time to “swal­low” as large area as pos­si­ble is on Al-Akhbar’s “Kirkuk Cri­sis”. Iraqi writer traces the prob­lem to Bremer’s “state man­age­ment” law Arti­cle 53 that says:

- The Rec­og­nized Kur­dis­tan regional gov­ern­ment as the offi­cial gov­ern­ment which ruled the areas since 19 March 2003, sit­u­ated in the fol­low­ing provinces: Duhuk, Sulaimaniya, Irbil, Diyala, Kirkuk and Nainawa [Mosul].

For the Kurds that was agreed upon with the Amer­i­cans, and this is the rea­son behind Barzani call­ing the “par­lia­ment vot­ing” to divide Kirkuk seats among the Arabs, Kurds and Turkomen a “coup”.

The prob­lem is that three of these provinces are not ruled by the Kur­dish gov­ern­ment at that date.

So, why the Kurds choose a mil­i­tary con­fronta­tion now?

Another essen­tial issue played a deci­sive role is the Kurds fear of los­ing an inter­na­tional ally, the Repub­li­can Party as rep­re­sent­ing the U.S…

Another fac­tor is the emer­gence of a new in the Amer­i­can polit­i­cal equa­tion, Obama’s posi­tion uncom­mit­ted to any mil­i­tary or finan­cial responsibilities.