TUDEH: ‘Only progressive forces can determine Iran’s future’

soL News talked to Mohammad Omidvar, the spokesperson of Iran’s communist TUDEH party, about the recent tide of protests in Iran.

Thursday, 04 January 2018

soL News interviewed with Comrade Mohammad Omidvar, member of the Politburo and Spokesperson of the CC of the Tudeh Party of Iran, which has operated as an underground communist organization following the Islamic revolution of 1979, regarding the recent protests in Iran. The demonstrations started in response to a surge in fuel and food prices in the country, as well as unemployment and inflation. At least 20 people have reportedly been killed during the protests.

Omidvar says that the progressive and democratic forces of Iran must increase their presence in the protest movement of the masses against the reactionary forces, supported by the U.S., Israel and Saudi Arabia, which attempt to hijack the people’s struggle for freedom, democracy and social justice.

soL: What is the context and what are the main drivers behind the current wave of protests in Iran? Can you also comment on the impact of neoliberal economic policies on the current crises?

Mohammad Omidvar: As per our Central Committee’s statements over recent days, the Iranian people’s protest against the regime has its roots in the deep socio-economic crisis in Iran. The neoliberal policies of the Iranian regime over the past two decades – fully supported and indeed praised by the World Bank and IMF – have pushed millions of Iranians below the poverty line and into a life of hardship un-paralleled in our recent history. Rampant inflation, especially the rise in the price of basic commodities beyond ordinary peoples’ means, combined with massive unemployment, especially amongst the youth – which, according to officials in some provinces, is as high as 50% – as well as the continued suppression of peoples’ democratic rights and freedom, have pushed our country to the point of this social explosion in anger against the rule of political Islam.

It is also worth mentioning that, prior to these massive protests, we had increasing workers’ protests in various industries and in different cities across the country against unpaid wages (some of whom had gone over a year without their due pay), widespread privatisation, lack of job security, poor treatment by employers, lack of workers’ rights and a total ban on independent class-oriented trade unions.

Based on the reports, there are different protests with different demands, carried out by different groups, under different slogans. Why do these demonstrations vary from city to city or even between different protests in the same city? While some protests are reacting against the Rouhani government, some others are more vocal about ‘regime change’. In your opinion, what is the necessary path to be followed?

The escalation in peoples’ discontent and anger towards the regimes’ leaders for the deteriorating socio-economic situation and – more importantly – the readiness and willingness of the frustrated masses to take on the suppressive apparatus of the regime, is an important indication of the significant developments in the preparedness of the people in opposing – and waging an open struggle against – the rule of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is understandable that under a brutal dictatorship, organisation and coordination of the huge number of demonstrations – sometimes in more than 50 towns and cities across the vast country – has its own constraints. But the slogans, in the main, voice important economic and political demands by the people, target corruption in all branches of power and declare that all key factions in the thus far prevailing power structure are fully responsible for the deep socio-political crisis in the country.

Contrary to the claims of some leaders of the pro-regime reformists that such protests are “conspiracies” against the Rouhani presidency by the hardliners, we deeply believe that the majority of the people of our country are disappointed and frustrated with the slogans of those whose only objectives are to make some cosmetic and minor adjustments to the current regime. Our people are now demanding fundamental changes in the governance of the country. Today, only those who would like to somehow preserve the current disastrous situation fear the escalation and growth of the people’s struggle.

The experience of the last two decades and several presidential, parliamentary, provincial and local elections that have been held and manipulated under the control and direction of the Supreme Leader, has proved that the people are rapidly moving away from the strategy of making a choice between “bad and worse” and are no longer willing to submit to the manipulation of their demands by the regime and the pro-regime reformists whose roles, these days, are to serve the strategic interests of the regime.  It is also worth mentioning that, from our point of view, the current power structure in Iran centres around the “Supreme Religious Leader” (Vali Faghieh), his close allies in the religious hierarchy, the leadership of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (Sepah Pasdaran) and other security forces.

The class base of the Iranian ruling clique is the big merchant and bureaucratic bourgeoisie. This corrupt and anti-peoples’ power structure has moved towards controlling not only all of the political apparatus but also most of the economic levers – plundering the country’s wealth on a scale not seen in Iran over the past four decades.

Attempts over the past two decades to introduce some superficial reforms and the fashioning of a more moderate face for what, at the end of the day, remains a medieval dictatorship, have failed and therefore it is not surprising that the overwhelming majority of the people in Iran today want to put an end to the despotic theocratic regime; to end the oppression and injustice; and bring about the establishment of human and democratic freedoms and social justice. We believe that these demands can only be achieved through a joint struggle of all the national, democratic and freedom-loving forces in Iran without any foreign intervention.

Of course, Israel-USA-Saudi Arabia trio sees the protest as an opportunity to get rid of the obstacle against their policies in the Middle East, but do protests have a potential to be manipulated and meet the expectations of this alliance or Iranians already put a distance with their demands with the expectations of imperialism? Do you think, Iranian protests are immune to imperialist manipulations which had driven the rightful protest in the early days of Syria into a full-scale proxy war against Syrian people?

The Central Committee of the Tudeh Party of Iran, in its first reaction to the people’s protest against the regime, clearly indicated that under the critical conditions of the current dangerous regional tensions and Imperialism’s desire to control the Persian Gulf and its oil flow, the regional reactionary forces – supported by the Trump administration and the right-wing government of Netanyahu in Israel and the Saudi criminal regime – are seeking to distinctly impact the developments in our country and to replace the current reactionary regime with another reactionary regime.

The support of these forces – i.e. US imperialism, the regional reaction, and the right-wing government of Netanyahu – for the Iranian monarchists and those political groups whose agenda is to cooperate with the most reactionary regimes of the region and to persuade the European states to impose sanctions on Iran’s economy – (thereby exacerbating the misery for the destitute and disadvantaged people of our country) and to encourage foreign states to intervene militarily in Iran, leaves no room whatsoever for any optimism regarding the future designs of such “opposition”.

We have emphasised that the progressive and democratic forces of Iran must increase their presence in the protest movement of the masses – more than ever before – providing proper people-oriented slogans, offering sensible guidance and relying on the legitimate demands of the masses for abolishing the existing suppressive regime and ending the economic deprivation, oppression, injustice and plundering of the natural and human resources of the nation, while sidelining and opposing reactionary and divisive slogans. We believe we must learn from our past experiences and what happened following the 1979 revolution and not allow the heroic struggle of our people for freedom, democracy and social justice to be hijacked by a bunch of reactionary opportunists who do not believe in the people’s rights or democratic freedoms.

During his election campaign, Rouhani presented the nuclear deal as a success story and expected to overcome the problems with imperialist countries as long as Iran integrated to the global capitalist system. While international sanctions were eased, the US didn’t put an end to its unilateral sanctions against Iran. Do you think the nuclear deal was a success story for Iran or not?

Following the agreement in January 2016, our party stated that after years of destructive sanctions imposed on our country by the USA and EU countries, as a result of the ill-advised and adventurist policies of Iran’s Supreme Leader [Ayatollah Khamenei] and his appointees, the negotiations between Iran and the 5+1 group were concluded with an agreement that did not equate to a victory for Iran whatever the claims of the regime to the contrary. At the time, in his radio-TV interview, Hassan Rouhani [Iranian President] said: “…today we have reached a turning point…

As of today, Iran’s nuclear programme is no longer, under any fictitious pretext, a threat to global and regional peace. Rather, Iran’s nuclear programme will serve modern technology in line with the development of the country, and the stability and security of the region…” There is no doubt that the implementation of the agreement was a significant event that had a substantial impact on political developments in our country. There were certain improvements in diplomatic relations between the Iranian regime and the US administration.  However, despite all the propaganda claims of the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) and the assessments of a number of opponents as well as supporters of the theocratic regime, the government of Hassan Rouhani effectively agreed to all conditions limiting Iran’s nuclear industry in return for the lifting of the sanctions and the release of Iran’s assets by the West.

At the time, our Party welcomed the move away from tension and conflict and the lifting of the horrendously damaging economic sanctions, which were badly hurting ordinary people and the economy in Iran. Two years on it must be said that people have seen very little benefits in terms of an improvement in their economic situation as most of the financial benefits have gone straight to the regime’s leaders and their cronies. Under the continuing pressure of the US international banking system, the banking and monetary sanctions were never lifted and, this in effect, maintained the difficulties for Iran’s international trade with the rest of the world and the lot of the vast majority of ordinary Iranians.

What is your Party’s view on external interference in Iran and its danger to the people’s movement? Can you elaborate with reference to the positions taken by Trump, the Israeli government, Saudi Arabia and the forces they support?

After Donald Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia – and subsequently to Israel – in late May 2017, the Persian Gulf and the Middle East are once again witnessing an escalation in tensions that could further destabilise the safety and security of the region and, in our view, have dangerous and destructive consequences for our country. During this visit, Trump clearly indicated his support for the dangerous adventurist policies of the Saudi Arabian leadership and offered Israel a carte blanche in pursuit of its dangerous policies towards the Palestinian people and the region as a whole, singling out Iran as a target. The threatening and belligerent statement of the reactionary Defence Minister of Saudi Arabia that “we will work so that we take the battle inside Iran” was promptly followed by the first bloody terrorist attack to be carried out by Daesh (IS) in Tehran.

Rex Tillerson, the United States Secretary of State, also declared US support for “regime change” in Iran in an intervening speech. Among other indications of the escalation of tensions in the region were attacks by US forces, on the paramilitary forces backed by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) of Iran operating in the eastern regions of Syria. This combined with recent Saudi claims that long-range missiles fired by Houthi rebels in Yemen towards Riyadh are provided by Iran, indicate the high levels of tension and the serious threats facing Iran. It is worth mentioning that the foreign policy of the United States during the Obama administration, with regards to Iran, had considered a special role and position for the Islamic Republic of Iran in the “New Middle East Plan” in which the coexistence and conciliation of Iran’s theocratic regime with US hegemony in the region were articulated.

However, the evidence now suggests that the Trump administration is pushing to impose new conditions and to make specific changes to this framework. This involves a lessening of the role and weight of Iran’s regime in regional developments, in favour of Saudi Arabia. In this context, Tillerson’s recent references to “peaceful regime change” in Iran should be looked at from two angles as regards the new tactics of the US. Firstly, there is the reviving of the failed project of “making alternatives” to act as the “regime’s opposition” by utilising some of the vehemently pro-US forces opposed to Iran’s theocratic regime, such as the monarchists and the People’s Mojahedin of Iran Organisation (MKO).

And, secondly, there is the re-implementing of an aggressive diplomacy to enable US political-security leverage in the region through the fanning of tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia under the well-worn mantra of “fighting terrorism”, and the sewing of divisions between the countries in the region under the false pretext of the confrontation between “Shia” and “Sunni”. And here, it is particularly important to note the contracts for sale of modern military hardware and technology by the US to Saudi Arabia worth $300bn over the next three years.

There have also been credible suggestions made of a secret deal, reached in December 2017, between the US and Israel to confront and take down Iran.

We evaluated the election and coming to power of Donald Trump, and his slogans and policies, to be very worrying. Our concern is not one predicated on the inexperience, narcissism or unpredictability of Trump, but rather the belief that the bringing of Trump to the presidency was a purposeful move by the warmongers and extreme right-wingers in the USA to mobilise and gather together the most reactionary and dangerous forces of the ultra-right around the world. The power structure in the Trump administration – just like the power pyramid structure of the Islamic theocratic regime of Iran – consists of dangerous elements who believe in the waging of war as a means to solving wider issues.

The crises of the regime in Iran are the results of the fundamental contradiction between the economic interests and the freedom-seeking demands of our nation on the one hand and those of the theocratic regime on the other. This is a contradiction which is ever growing and thus naturally the theocratic regime veers from one crisis to another, graver each time. Both Ali Khamenei and Donald Trump are deceitful leaders who would without hesitation lie to their people to stay in power. They would resort to any option to overcome the various crises they face.

The progressive and patriotic forces of our country should not let the interventionist policies and practices of the United States, and its reactionary allies such as the criminal regime in Saudi Arabia and the ultra-right-wing anti-people government of Netanyahu in Israel, determine the future of our country.

We have clearly and repeatedly stated that the Tudeh Party of Iran is strongly opposed to any external interference in our country’s domestic affairs and believe that the future of Iran should only be determined by its peoples and the struggle of its progressive forces to put an end to the despotic regime.


Interview was quoted from SoL international, from this link.

For reading, the related articles of the subject from SoL:

‘The alternative to the mullahs and imams doesn’t have to be the Yankee’

“Iran protests in 10 questions”

Also, from “In Defense of Communism blog”: Iran Protests- Tudeh Party appealing for the release of more than 1500 arrested in Iran

Israel Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon:”In choice between Iran and ISIS, I prefer ISIS”

Speaking at the Institute for National Security Studies’ (INSS) conference in Tel Aviv, Ya’alon sought to clarify that “Iran is our main enemy, after I heard voices saying different things.”

The defense minister was likely referring to comments made by IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot at the conference on Monday, who declared that “there are opportunities in the nuclear agreement with Iran. Hezbollah – that is the most serious threat.”

Tehran, he said, “is a rogue regime with designs on a regional hegemony. Hezbollah is Iran’s proxy, with the ability to declare war. Iran currently has terror infrastructure in place in five continents: Asia, Africa, Europe and both in South and North America.”

Ya’alon doesn’t put much stock in the Russians’ ability to retake Syria from jihadists- including ISIS – who took over large swaths of land. “The Russians thought they’d get to the Euphrates River in three months,” he said, noting the Russian army is not reaching its goals and failing to achieve much in the Golan Heights.

The strategy in Syria, he said, should be “to strengthen local forces with ‘boots on the ground,’ like the Kurds are doing.”



quotes and for full reading for news:


Actually these are quite honest explanations; if thinking in this frame, it can be seen what will come at Syria and Middle East.

Water Wars in Middle East

We can consider as a starting point is the report of Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) headquartered in Washington, DC, “the Middle East’s water problem”, in 1986. In the report, there were such as the prophecies that the drought which begins due to reduced of the rivers flow in the Middle East, will increase, and water will be more valuable than oil included in the results of the research in daily life. The most interesting part of this report was that:
“Nile, Tigris and the Euphrates … In the Middle East, a future war, surely will be the sharing of the waters of three rivers …”

What happened in those years?

Saddam was massacring thousands of Kurds from 1986 until 1989. How Saddam has achieved this bloody power? In 1979, Saddam became president with a covered revolution. The same year, the Islamic revolution happened in Iran. Western countries and lead actor America, had backed the bloody war that lasted eight years of Saddam with Iran. Saddam weapons which have used between 1986-1989 did not fall from the sky, those had been American and European aids.

But, Saddam like every dictator, did not fit in mold. And, he betrayed the feeding him. He invaded Kuwait in 1990. America would not no longer be together with Saddam, and then he started to dance with Russia.

From 1990 in quickly, the statement about Israel’s water problems began to come out successively.

“Israel’s University of Haifa, Prof. Armon Sofer said, it will be war in the Middle East due to the use of water resources.” (Milliyet, 31 October 1990)

“Angry water fights were not new for the Middle East. It was related to the previous several battles three major rivers: the Nile, Tigris, Euphrates.” (Newsweek, 12 February 1990)

“Water scarcity threatens Israel.” (Shalom, Jan. 9, 1991)

“At next years in Jerusalem’s boulevards will not smell rose, and perhaps a country that Israel will be forced to abandon the image of desert bloom eye-catching. As in the old culture and inside the Negev cotton, the holy city needs a lot of water for decoration, but there is no water. (L’Express, August 16, 1991)

“Shimon Peres: Population is increasing. If we can not create the possibility to produce the water, this time we will fight for water.” (Cumhuriyet, 12 June 1991)

“One of the most important reasons of Israel’s invaded Southern Lebanon and the West Bank, these places have the rich water resources. Golan Heights are mountainous, rainy and fertile regions. It can not afford to lose these places in. Also, Israel occupied the portion of Lake Tiberias which belongs the Syria and using the whole lake. Because the sea water treatment process too costly. It even affects the inflation of Israel…

Water power can be used together to win the friendship and trade. But at the same time it is similar nuclear power, if once known by the people that you have it, it awakens in them great respect. Turkey’s water-rich regions of the Southeast. If the events in the Southeast Anatolia expand, also neighborly relations will be even more important.” (Economist, December 14, 1991)

“The Israeli Agriculture Minister Rafael Eitan: water in the region is a ticking bomb.” (Hürriyet, 14 July 1991)

“The Israeli Agriculture Minister Rafael Eitan, warns:” The water level in Lake Tiberias has never been so low any time. Water reserves of Israel under life-threatening.” (Nature, Aug. 1991)

“Israel stated that it is willing to cooperate with Turkey on GAP, Israel is deprived of water resources, but Turkey has rich in water, land and labor.” (Shalom January 29, 1992)
“Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin: I hope that the water problem is not resolved with the gun.” (Sabah, 22 December 1992)

“Western sources have pointed that the water which has begun to become more valuable than oil in the Middle East, can blow the war winds in the region by winning a strategic importance towards the 2000s.” (Cumhuriyet, 23 July 1992)

In the same year the terrorist organization PKK that is so-called defence the rights of Kurds in Turkey, was signature the bloodiest actions. PKK was busting the villages and killing children, elders, teachers and soldiers.

Those who could not live in Turkey, were fleeing to Syria, then were returning with armed again to Turkey. Some of the PKK terrorists were getting training in Germany, Greece, Italy, Belgium and France camps. Almost every west countries support them.

But, for what?

“…Many communities use the water of the Tigris and Euphrates basin or are affected by dams built on the river though. Kurds are the most affected communities. A many important rivers arise in Turkey where the population density consist from Kurds or in the control of Kurdish areas where are in safe Kurdish region in northern Iraq. As the most significant beneficiaries, Kurdish communities have the right to participate in a meaningful way in the decision-making process that will affect them. Therefore, the delegation calls to establish effective mechanisms to all relevant states to Turkey, Iraq and Syria in the region, in all negotiations related to water, the Kurdish minority and such as those affected social groups and water users to ensure the participation of the most important rights…”(1)

This quotes from Kurdish Human Rights Project (established in England) web pages documents. But now it cannot read I don’t know why. What do you think?

Let’s see Turkey’s waters that could not be shared.

UN sees the Middle East as the most problematic region of the world about water.
While Middle East Region has 5% of the world’s population, it has water resources only 1% of world. Moreover, 90% of the water resources (as in the Euphrates and Tigris for example) consist from transboundary waters in this region. Turkey is located in the midst of war, which will be released in this case.

Euphrates River arise from Turkey. After entering Syria going out from Turkey near Birecik, Balik and Khabur River, which are included of main source of the Euphrates, join it. Therefore, 98% of the Euphrates stems from Turkey. However, Syria argues that Balik and Khabur stem from its territory. Syria’s contribution is actually only about 11%. Iraq does not make any contribution to the water of Euphrates River, but Iraq is using 44% section of the river waters. While water contribution to the Euphrates of Turkey is 89%, Turkey is using only around 35% rate. Despite Syria contributed 11% on the Euphrates, Syria is using 21% of the river water. This rate increases with the Southeastern Anatolia Project(21 dams over the Tigris and Euphrates in Turkey) That’s why, Syria and Iraq seriously worried because of this situation. Tigris also arises from Turkey as the Euphrates; is leaving the border with Turkey near Cizre. Hezil waters of the Great Zab which are arising from Turkey, is joining the Tigris in Iraq. Tigris water had contributed to the 40% of Turkey, Iraq ‘s contribution is around 60%. Tigris is after leaving from Turkey, without going into Iraq, it forms 50 for 60 km the border between Turkey and Syria. This waterfront Tigris get Syria to benefit from the contribution of the Tigris water does not eat at all. Syria which get the opportunity to benefit from the Tigris this shore, does not contribute to Tigris water at all.

The problem Iraq and Syria with the dispute Turkey over starts in in the terminology of water. While Turkey claim the Euphrates and Tigris are”transboundary waters” as being right, Syria and Iraq, argue them as “international waters,”. Thus, they are trying to restrict Turkey’s rights of the Euphrates and on the Tigris. While Turkey accepts the amount as it sees fit “allocation of water”, Syria and Iraq, want to share the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates will connect with the agreements states. This difference of opinion creates breaking point of the problem for Turkey.

In fact, Turkey came under obligations on the Euphrates and Tigris rivers in Treaty of Lausanne(1923). It is written in a manner that will protect the interests of Turkey’s water in Lausanne. More particularly, various protocols were signed during the World War 2. After 1946,1947,1976 and 1987. However, these agreements and protocols in Turkey, the Tigris and Euphrates defined benefit industrial and agricultural purposes which prevents Ankara obligations under the put provisions, were not included. About transboundary waters, there is no international rules in a comprehensive and all disputes that can be applied to determine the rights and obligations of the riparian states…

The United Nations and the European Union since 2006, wants to the Euphrates and Tigris waters are “international waters,”; not “transboundary waters”, and publish reports on this issue. The importance of water for the communities and countries, is undeniable. However, while helping a country, if the damage to other countries, this assistance is doubt the innocence.

Already the EU handle the Euphrates and Tigris subject as two separate basins, also Jordan’s basin to include Euphrates, only shows that EU protected the interests of Israel. Indeed, the underlying reason of the base of the attempt to become dependent on foreign of Turkey’s political as well as economic, mainly because water that is seen as a pretext for war after oil. How else could be interpreted that USA is trying to make Turkey economically dependent by using US’s own children IMF and the stepchild UN and the World Bank, and occupy the agenda of Turkey by using another countries data? (2)

Israel has obvious a serious water problem, has not it? This is not about Syria, Iraq or the puppet state Kurdistan, which will established by the United States in the interests of Israel.

There has been water problem which couldn’t been solved between Israel and its neighboring countries which Jordan River stakeholders, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Jordan, for years. The biggest causes of the problem are the drought which has been surrounding the region since 1988, and the withdrawal of the waters of the Jordan River. Jordan River water level has fallen below the red level which is considered to be alert in the framework of the national security concept. In 2001 the level of the river water has fallen below 215 m above sea level. If the every 30 cm level falls is correspond to 10% of Israel’s annual water consumption, is considered, it will be easier to understand the experience of water shortages of Israel. According to the estimates; If the current agricultural production to continue in the coming years in Israel, 210 million cubic meters water will need more than the current drinking water, and 375 million cubic meters water will need more than in the amount of agricultural and industrial, in 2020. (3)

Palestinian’s viewpoint: the words of “Minister for Imaginary Water”

Palestinian Water Authority Chairman Sheddad El Atili is giving a great fight against the water problem in the region. El Atili who is proclaimed himself “Minister for Imaginary Water” complains that Palestinian could not even open a single well without the permission of the Israel…

West Bank hills have the caves and crevices, where filled with the accumulation of rainwater. Groundwaters are creating only natural water source in the region. Israel which uses these reserves since the 1950s, holds the control of the region since the Six-Day War in 1967, and thus holds the military control of resources. While annual per capita is using 57 cubic meters of water in the Palestinian territories, Jewish settlement in the Israelis can use it quintuple the amount of this water. Palestinian Water Authority Chairman Sheddad says:
“I do not have the luxury to waste even a drop in the West Bank. But the situation is worse than in Gaza where the world’s largest prison is. About 2 million Palestinians live at there, due to the blockade Israel has imposed; they are not able to reach the water which deserves the definition of ‘drinking water’.”(4)

Golan Heights where Israel occupied in 1967 war and has been received back a small portion of it in 1973, are creating another problem which is increasingly complex due to related policy the underground and aboveground water sources in the region. According to information which is given by A. Arsan who is Water Works Director of Kuneytr (Syrian town at Syria- Israeli border), the Israeli administration continues to use the Banyas and Kadı River waters which are under occupied Golan region and south of the Sheikh mountain, despite UN decisions.

Despite UN decisions stating that Israel should withdraw from the Golan Heights, 4 dams were built in order to supply the water needs of residents who are placed in this area by Israel. However, because of some dams have been very close to the points on open fire and were built on the rivers which are flowing towards Syria, the water problem grown steadily.

Like a joke: Israel is not aware the dams which built by itself.

Arsan stated that they received a response letter from UN, after Syria brought this problem to the UN. And according to letter, “the other side, so that Israel was not aware of these dams”.

Who cares Genava Convention

According to the Geneva Convention on the use of waters by any occupier position (in this case Golan Heights are in occupied) also is prohibited. Syrian side is accusing Israel of stealing water under this contract. In addition to this, it is known that Israel takes various taxes from Syrians who are living around the lakes that Israel draws water, in return of using the lake water.

As well as the use of 750-800 million cubic meters of water per year of Israel, recently another issue emerged in Syria about the mixing sewage into the waters. Kuneytr Governor Riyad Hijab, drawing attention to a new problem, which will begin to take effect in the coming years, “the Israeli side is burying nuclear waste in the soil of the Golan and in the areas close to Syria,” he says. (5)

Do you still believe the war of the Middle East emerged out from petroleum? Do you still believe the Kurdistan which will established by US is interested in Kurdish rights?

(1) http://www.khrp.org/khrp-news/human-rights-documents/2003-publications.html

(2) Cumhuriyet Strategy Journal

(3) http://akademikperspektif.com/2013/12/31/ortadogunun-su-problemi/

(4) http://www.ntv.com.tr/arsiv/id/25451106/

(5) http://www.haberturk.com/dunya/haber/602277-suriyenin-golan-tepeleri-ile-baslayan-sorunu