Gulan: How do you interpret the current situation in Iraq?

Landis: The rise of ISIS clearly shocked everybody and neither the Kurds nor the central government in Baghdad prepared for this. This is quite due to the American occupation, where the Americans did most of the fighting and created not only a Kurdish region and looked out to the constitution to protect the Kurdish region, but also that an Iraqi army not based on power sharing between Iraqis, so when ISIS attacked, neither the Iraqi army nor the Peshmerga were prepared to fight the series battles.

Gulan: Isis is outgunned the peshmerga forces as they took control of all the modern weapons that Iraqi forces left in Mosul, so what kind of logistic aids and weaponry do you think should be given to the Peshmerga to fight off ISIS?

Landis: well, clearly this strengths the Kurdish demand for an independent army and that means strengthening the ground work for independence even though the United States and European powers do not want Kurdistan to be independence, they are, in essence, going to have built it up monetarily and institutionally which prepare them for independence and that has been the major debate in most western capitals: should we be partners with the Kurds in a work to defeat ISIS? As long as Maliki was in power, those western governments were very cautious about partnering with the Baghdad government. Now that Abadi is stepping in, obviously the United States do not say no and most of Iraqis now are going to look at the United States to say OK, we got rid of Maliki, now you can pay us arms. I think it is clear that most of the American military thinkers feel more comfortable working with the Peshmerga and the Kurds even though politically it is very complicated for the United States to do this, the same way the question is about the Kurds in Syria, of course, but there, the problem is much more complicated because of the PYD’s connection with the PKK. In theory, the United States does not declare the PYD as a terrorist organization, although it does recognize the PKK as terrorist organization and this allows the United States a certain amount of willingness in dealing with the PYD.

Gulan: Observers think that the situation in Iraq is due to Maliki’s wrong policies, and if Kurds did not have Peshmaraga forces, ISIS would have invaded Kurdistan as well. So to what extent is it really important for Kurdistan to have its independency to lead the war against terrorism in the region?

Landis: I think this is per se psychological that is beginning to win in accordance with Washington, and that is why we have seen that the United States came up with the Peshmerga and using air power to help the Peshmarga which really make a difference.

Gulan: do you think the United States will give peshmarga air forces?

Landis: no, may be some helicopters for moving troops, I don’t expect this as long as Abadi has the confidence in the United States, we will undermine our efforts to power sharing in Baghdad if they go ahead and give air forces to the Kurds, this is going to be a problem; I foresee that we have to give Abadi a chance to reform and try to develop and build up an Iraqi nation. Many people in Washington, of course, believe Iraqi nation is dead, that is finished, that is the fighting with ISIS and the rising to power of ISIS proves that sectarianism has won and that Iraq is finished, but the official policy of the United States is that Iraq is Iraq, that is not going to recognize Kurdish independence, there is going to try to make a power sharing between Sunnis, Kurds, and Shiites, and there is going to destroy independent Sunni power which is ISIS. This is all done in the name of Iraqi naturalism. So in order to pursue this policy, the United States does not give an independent air force and provide a lot of arms to the Kurds, otherwise it undermines the very policy that it tries to carry out in Baghdad and that is it. That is the complication of the United States, of course we need defense, and everybody knows that the Americans and the Kurds are the best ally just as they were as such, they are building their country and the Kurds are the big beneficiary of American occupation in Iraq.

Gulan: do you expect that the US air forces leave their base in Erbil?

Landis: I don’t know. That is a good question and obviously it makes a lot of sense particularly as our relations with Turkey become strain with Erdogan… and because of Syria it makes a lot of sense to have their base, on the other hand, it will become American pressure I think on both Tehran and Turkey…

Gulan: if America builds an air base in Erbil, it will be the same for us, do you agree with that?

Landis: not the same, it will be very good for the Kurds, because it means that Kurdistan is an ally with the United States, and for America, when we invaded Iraq after 9/11, America was worried that it lost Iran and no more bases in Iraq, and after 9/11 with most of the terrorists being in Saudi Arabia, many American feared that they would be pushed out of Saudi Arabia, we had to move our troops that they had the base there since the gulf war out in the Saudi Arabia, and then we had nowhere left in the gulf if we lost Saudi Arabia, we finished. So in a sense, by making Iraq, by getting rid of Saddam Hussein, Americans hope that they would have bases in Iraq, but of course Iraqi government turned out to be not agreeing to America and we don’t have air bases and didn’t stay militarily with the Iraqi government, and Iraq became more pro-Iranian instead, and everybody here in Iraq began laughing at president Bush because his policy turned out to be a failure. So if United States works effectively…, this will go, some way, recovering the failure out of the occupation in Iraq because of these we will have an ally in the region, it will allow us to forge power both in Syria and in Iraq, and it will be independent from Turkey because as you know in 2003 when we tried to use the air base in Incerlik, the Turks refused and America had to put everything in from Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, and the gulf, from the ocean, which complicated everything a great deal. So in essence, I think people in Washington will argue we need a base in Kurdistan, we don’t have any weight reject power over this part of Persian Gulf, and the Turks are not reliable. The Saudis during someday have their revolution on their own, and if there is a revolution in Saudi Arabia, we will have nothing; no Iran, no Iraq, no Saudi Arabia… Kurdistan looks like a stable country in the future, building universities and they are getting educated and they like America which is… there are few people who like America in the Middle East.

Gulan: there are many refugees now in Kurdistan from different parts of Iraq, and also from Syria. The Duhok province declares an emergency state because of this humanitarian crisis, and however Maliki has cut Kurdistan’s share of budget. So how do you think the international community should help KRG in this difficult humanitarian crisis?

Landis: this is your chance, obviously with the terrible situation with Yazidis and the Kurds in general and the rise of ISIS, this is an opportunity for Kurdistan to get international aids, and of course it is very difficult to get the aids because the entire international community is engaged with problems in Congo, Afghanistan, Syria, refugees in Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan… but with the focus on ISIS and US promises of aid, Kurdistan can get out limits and make them to come to Kurdistan…

Gulan: President Barzani made clear for the world that we don’t need soldiers of the western countries to come and fight ISIS because we have Peshmerga forces capable of doing that, but we need weapons and logistic aids. So how do you see this statement, and how this lessens the load on US, Europe, and international community as a whole to combat terrorism?

Landis: this is a message that is used by many, by Syrian opposition; the Iraqi government has the same thing. America is fighting along with the Kurds and has chosen Kurds as their partner, and this is a moment for a Peshmerga to show they are capable militarily. If they can show that they can retake the Sinjar province, and dealing with the refugees in a fair way, and not taking revenge on the Arab fighters who captured the city, if they retake the city in a proper way and be generous, this makes the Americans think that these are people that we want to work with.

Gulan: there are hundreds of Americans and European people in the ISIS terrorist group, these dangerous people hold European and American passports that make them move back to their country and pose threat to their countries. So to what extent is this dangerous, and how far are these countries worried about that?

Landis: well obviously they are very worried. There is a small number of Americans so far. So America wants to see ISIS destroyed in Iraq as they are confident that will help the Kurds, and that they have an ally in a new government in Baghdad with Abadi. They will help the Peshmerga fight ISIS in Iraq. But in Syria the question is much bigger and open because we don’t have a partner in Syria. Many people are saying the Syrian oppositions are your partner, but I think the American military is less in confidence that the Syrian opposition capable of conquering both ISIS and the Assad government, and therefore, it is not clear. Assad of course wants to be an American partner, but I don’t think America is going to do that, and therefore America does not have a policy in Syria to defeat ISIS, and that’s the defect in US policy, recently we don’t have a clear Syrian policy because we don’t know who can win.