MIDDLE ISRAEL: WHAT ARE THE KURDS DOING WRONG?
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Kurdistan Flag ( Source )
Let every nation know,” vowed John Kennedy in his inaugural address, “that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.”
Donald Trump’s amendment of this brave statement – “every nation except the Kurds” – is obviously a disgrace, but lamenting his betrayal can be no substitute for the introspection in which the Kurds must engage, and which Zionist experience can inform.
Faced with their most recent abandonment, Kurdish nationalists must first ask themselves why they are repeatedly betrayed, and then draw several lessons from Zionist history.
BETRAYAL HAS been a fixture of Kurdish life for a century. Their first betrayers were the European powers that promised Kurdish statehood in the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres, only to abandon this commitment in the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne.
Then came the Soviets, who backed the Kurdish Republic of Mahabad which existed in northwestern Iran in 1946, until the Red Army withdrew from Iran and abandoned its Kurds to their devices.
Then came Iran, whose shah first encouraged the Kurds’ revolt in Iraq in the 1970s, but abandoned them in 1975 to Saddam Hussein’s fury, in return for territorial concessions over the Shatt al-Arab waterway.
Then came the US, whose betrayal of the Kurds began not with Trump but with George H.W. Bush, in 1991, when he encouraged Iraq’s Kurds to confront Saddam, only to stand by when Saddam quelled their revolt.
That such geopolitical misfortune keeps befalling the Kurds is puzzling enough, but it is altogether mind-boggling considering the assets they possess.
The Kurds are big, numbering some 40 million people scattered contiguously along a landmass the size of Japan, which connects Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. Ethnically non-Arab, the Kurds speak their own language and take pride in literature that harks back centuries.
In others words, the Kurds deserve national determination no less than the French, the Saudis and the Vietnamese, especially at a time when Lilliputian nationalities like Estonia, Kosovo and East Timor have their own states.
Yes, the Kurds did obtain one autonomous region, in northern Iraq, in the wake of last decade’s removal of Hussein. However, the autonomy, which is roughly the size of Maryland and is home to less than one-fifth of all Kurds, has failed to capitalize on this decade’s upheaval across the Arab world. In fact, it did the opposite of that – and that is where Zionist history’s first lesson to Kurdistan’s freedom fighters comes in.
Important Related Articles Here on The Newstalkers
1. Why I Support The Kurds, The Indians Of The Middle East.
2. The Kurdish-Israel Relationship: Former Covert Israeli Forces 'Training Kurds In Iraq'
Tags
Who is online
96 visitors
Faced with their most recent abandonment, Kurdish nationalists must first ask themselves why they are repeatedly betrayed, and then draw several lessons from Zionist history.
(Note: This article is from The Jerusalem Post)
Yes, the Kurds did obtain one autonomous region, in northern Iraq, in the wake of last decade’s removal of Hussein. However, the autonomy, which is roughly the size of Maryland and is home to less than one-fifth of all Kurds, has failed to capitalize on this decade’s upheaval across the Arab world. In fact, it did the opposite of that – and that is where Zionist history’s first lesson to Kurdistan’s freedom fighters comes in.
Kurds did nothing wrong.
The wrong which is apparent is the hate and ignorance that dwells within the Trump and those who support him.
Yes, that's what currently stands in the way. (Well, also the leaders of Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria-- the 4 countries currently occupying theKurdih homeland).
But before Trump?
Before Trump the influence of Russia was weaker. That has changed.
THE FIRST thing Zionism struggled to do was to unite the Jews.
The congress that launched the Zionist project was but the beginning of a Sisyphean effort that was fiercely opposed by most of the day’s rabbis, both ultra-Orthodox and Reform, who were joined in this by communists, socialists, Bundists and Yiddishists.
It took decades, but by the time Zionist leaders decided to declare statehood, they were supported by almost every Jew in the world. Without that massive support, the Jewish state might have never been born.
The Kurds today are even more disjointed than the Jews were in the days of Theodor Herzl. Their rifts surfaced most tragically two years ago, when the Kurdish autonomy held an independence referendum while split between then-president Masoud Barzani and his rival, Bafel Talabani.
Barzani claimed 93% voted “yes,” but his failure to harness a major Kurdish leader’s support before making such a major gamble proved fatal. Detecting and also exploiting Kurdish disunity, Iranian-backed Iraqi forces stormed oil-rich Kirkuk, snatched more than a third of the Kurdish autonomy’s territory, and seized much of the oil that was its main source of income.
I think that's an excellent analysis, but I thought Barzani was a character in the movie The Godfather.
IMO, one of the problems with uniting the Kurds is that various groups of Kurds live in four different countries each group faces it's own problems.
As Perrie pointed out a few years back Barzani and Talabani held an independence referendum and results is Barzani really blew it when he was not able to gain the support of major Kurdish leaders..Very poor planning on his part but the Kurdish people are the ones that suffered.
On another note, I'm going to post a letter written by a U.S. Army Special Operations soldier to Kurdish Soldiers.
This is how many of our real warriors feel about deserting the Kurds.
If you feel this isn't appropriate for this article please feel free do delete it Krish.
A letter to Kurdish soldiers from a US military wife
Updated 2:12 PM ET, Thu October 17, 2019
This article was written by the wife of a Special Operations soldier, who has served throughout the Middle East. CNN is not revealing her identity at her request. The views expressed in this commentary are her own. View more opinion at CNN.
Dear Kurdish soldiers,
That sounds nice, but we don't do that. We do pretty well, but we don't do all of that. Not even close, really. Think about it: any price? Any burden? Any hardship? etc.? I don't think so. That would never be supportable politically, financially, or under international law.
If that were all true, many tens of millions of Americans would be conscripted into the armed forces. We would have marched into Russia, China, or North Korea decades ago. We would have cleaned out Central and South America of all the dictators and warlords they have endured. Every country in Africa would regularly enjoy free and fair elections.
None of that has happened, so let's not pretend that America has been solving everyone's problems for 60 years and the Kurds are the sole exception.
In the early years of Barack Obama's administration, we saw the Green Revolution in Iran . What a great opportunity to demonstrate our commitment to assuring the survival and success of liberty. But Obama went out of his way to order our people not to help them and then turned his back on both the revolution and the regime's human rights abuses, all in the name of signing a really dreadful nuclear treaty.
Heck, even in Syria, there was Obama's infamous red line of using chemical weapons that he warned Syria not to cross. And then the line was crossed, the weapons were used, and Obama ignored it.
So Trump is now somehow the one president who is not willing to pay any price, bear any burden, and so on? I don't think so.
Are we - the United States - supposed to unilaterally create nations for every ethnicity that wants one? Will that include carving out sections of Spain for Catalons and Basque? How about Flanders from the Netherlands? Moravia from Czech Republic? Khmer in Vietnam? Just Google "separatist movements in [pick your region of the world, e.g. Asia, Europe, etc]." You'll be amazed at how many there are.
There has been so much outrage about the Kurd situation, but that outrage is based on the idea that Trump violated a standard of behavior - i.e. intervention with zero accountability - invented last week and applied only to him.
You're comment reminds me of a poem by Ogden Nash:
The Purist - by Ogden Nash
I give you now Professor Twist, A conscientious scientist,
Trustees exclaimed, "He never bungles!"
And sent him off to distant jungles.
Camped on a tropic riverside,
One day he missed his loving bride.
She had, the guide informed him later,
Been eaten by an alligator.
Professor Twist could not but smile.
"You mean," he said, "a crocodile
Did any of those fight alongside the American troops, protecting them, helping them? Were promises ever made to them?
If you think about it, there are plenty of situations where we cooperate with someone - maybe it's a whole country, or insurgents, or rebels, or some marginalized ethnic group - in a certain situation. That doesn't mean we help them with every situation for all time.
We cooperated with Kurds to defeat ISIS. That doesn't mean we owe them military assistance in establishing their own country.
Latest thing I read this morning is that Mitt Romney thinks there needs to be an investigation of the pullout.
Romney then returned to the idea that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan might have given Trump an ultimatum that was met with acquiescence.
“Are we so weak and inept diplomatically that Turkey forced the hand of the United States of America? Turkey!?” Romney said. “I believe that it’s imperative that public hearings are held to answer these questions, and I hope the Senate is able to conduct those hearings next week.”
Also keep in mind that 129 House republicans joined democrats condemning Trumps abandonment of the Kurds on Wednesday.
Face it Tacos..... you and a bunch of other Trump lovers here on this site are on the wrong side of the argument, and very much in the minority of this issue. You can deflect all you want, but on this specific matter, with this specific ally, at this point in time, you are defending the indefensible.
OK. So? Investigate it.
So the argument here is that because a bunch of Republicans chimed in with a certain point of view, that should convince me? Do you normally think of these people as wise, thoughtful people whose guidance we should follow? Somehow I doubt that. But today, they're paragons of wisdom, right?
I don't love Trump. I happen to in favor of injecting American human beings into harm's way as little as possible.
I'm in favor of rolling back regulations where possible, repealing draconian laws that have needlessly been on the books for years, and I'm in favor of pulling out troops whenever we can. It saves lives and money. Those lives can go back to their families and that money can be spent on other things like health care, infrastructure, or tax refunds (a boy can dream).
It seems to me like some people have no upper limit to the lives and money (always other people's lives and money) they are willing to spend because of politics.
The majority and their opinion can kiss my whole entire ass. I think for myself, thank you very much. I don't need the majority to tell me what's right.
However, if you do need a majority to tell you what's right, check out this poll that shows 57% of Republicans support Trump's decision to pull out of Syria . Does that change your mind? Should it?
is that why you choose to believe the minority ?
Did you read the comment you are replying to? I made it clear, I thought, that I work out my own opinions. It doesn't depend on what a majority or a minority think. Also, if majorities are important to you, I linked to a poll showing that a majority of Republicans support the move to withdraw from Syria. So, whatever majority you like, you have a choice.
what are you talkin about...
read the comment i'm commenting to...
WTF !
Look, back when i didn't go to college, i majored in Mining, dug deep into cavernous labyrinths with cards cataloged like catalogs with cards, in them, and found what i claimed, now
Mine.
So Y oui' give the Kurds the Shaft(not Mine) because the Minority
Hating Trump, isn't in the minority the majority of the time the Trump hating majority, hates.
.
if u haven't noticed, the majority of the people who believe i'm here to please the majority of the people, are not polling my direction to sway a way i might lean when meeting a vegan to dissuade what i red the meeting should be about, as deemed essential by the minority i figure should be the authority figure on which i watch, as disfigure is figured into how i make my indecision, as to waht major minority faction is a fraction of my minor concerns a majority of the time while in general, it is admirable, to be an independent thinker, as i am, on occasion,
and not just of thought and reason if you were thinking my thought and reason was decided by those who choose not to make a choice , as i prefer to decide upon my indecisions that slice incisions into my mind, while i don't, cutting deep while i slice pizza into square pies for those not outgoing into that deform for those in lock step uniform for what is popular, as popularity is for those who can't recognize true self worth, as i'm worthless than many, while worth no more than the majority that know more than i don't know more than, as the minority report
is reporting it is all fake news the majority is stuck shafted with in my Mine, i lease, so as to never own what the vast majority of the minority is reported to not
own. Their opinions.
I'll never beat an opinion like a rented mule, and make an ass out of what i rhode scholarly in on,
a minority of the majority thinks i'm an ass, i'm just to stubborn to give a horses ass,
unless i take a poll and determine what the Majority of the Minority reports, in on,
then i call Bovine excellent excremeant for all my detractor beaming without star light trekking my trek,
which follows all others in every direction whence it comes to thinking like them
don't ya think ...?
Latest thing I read this morning is that Mitt Romney thinks there needs to be an investigation of the pullout.
Romney then returned to the idea that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan might have given Trump an ultimatum that was met with acquiescence.
“Are we so weak and inept diplomatically that Turkey forced the hand of the United States of America? Turkey!?” Romney said. “I believe that it’s imperative that public hearings are held to answer these questions, and I hope the Senate is able to conduct those hearings next week.”
Face it Tacos..... you and a bunch of other Trump lovers here on this site are on the wrong side of the argument, and very much in the minority of this issue. You can deflect all you want, but on this specific matter, with this specific ally, at this point in time, you are defending the indefensible.
There are a few Republicans who still seem to be in a cult-like cabal of trump-worshippers-- who believe the Bone-Spur-Challenged one can do no wrong!
However there are many Republicans who are waking up to the very real danger trump's hasty action poses to America:
Fox news is reporting that the Senate Majority Leader, Republican Mitch McConnell has this to say:
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell rebuked President Trump’s withdrawal of troops from Syria on Friday, calling it a “grave strategic mistake” in an op-ed that claimed the move had set back the U.S. fight against Islamic terrorism in the region.
“Withdrawing U.S. forces from Syria is a grave strategic mistake.
It will leave the American people and homeland less safe, embolden our enemies, and weaken important alliances,” McConnell, R-Ky., writes.
“Sadly, the recently announced pullout risks repeating the Obama administration’s reckless withdrawal from Iraq, which facilitated the rise of the Islamic State in the first place.”
Nope-- wrong again!
Don't you ever actually read the news?
[Deleted]
It has nothing whatsoever to do with "intervention with zero accountability".
Rather, the outrage is due to the fact that the Kurds have been one of out best (if not the best) allies in the fight against ISIS. They've taken thousands of casualties.
We promised have their back innorthern Syria-- thn we stabbed them in the back by deserting them
Its about betraying an ally.
Amd about American honor.
[Deleted]
Intervention should always be connected to accountability. Or do you want a president just injecting our military into sovereign countries anywhere and anytime based on his own whims?
Yes, and for that good work, they were armed and trained by the best in the world. They used those arms and that training to take and control land they didn't control before. It looks like they'll have to give some of it up, but they are definitely in a stronger position now than they were 5 years ago.
Yes. In the fight against ISIS. We never promised to defend them indefinitely against Syria, Turkey, or Iraq, and we never promised to help them become an independent country.
That alliance does not extend to some kind of blank check for American military support. It doesn't mean we have troops in Syria forever or that we take up arms against a NATO ally so that we can carve a brand new country out of three or four other existing sovereign countries. That's the kind of thing you're asking for and there is no international legal justification for it. Nor is there a moral justification in demanding that American lives and capital be spent on this kind of nation-building.
'you are defending the indefensible'
That's what he does mostly
Bay of Pigs proved him very, very, wrong.
Kennedy was great to the Cuban brigade, they screamed for our help; but no US military force came in to back them up.
Then there is Vietnam.
Maybe use a better example than Kennedy.
Further errors in the article.
There is no Kurdish nation. There is no Kurdistan, and there never will be unless you want the US to engage in a genocide that would make our enemies proud.
So Bush Sr, Bush Jr, and Obama didn't betray the Kurds in Iraq? Do tell. But Trruuummmmppppp!!!!!!
Jump on board the European train betrayal train special. The Kurds were not the only ones promised their own countries. How many Arab groups were promised countries for their support; only to be betrayed?
Just a little history that the article leaves out. So throw Truman into the mix of betrayers as well. Of course we were the Iranian's allies, not the Kurds; but it was still a betrayal by the US to keep Iranian oil.
Anyone else see a reoccurring them here? The Kurds are always in someone else's country. Usually doing a foreign occupiers dirty work; in the vain hopes of carving their Kurdistan out of Syria, Turkey, Iraq, and Iran. Sounds like they are repeat suckers, and will side with anyone to get what they want.
Because Bush Sr was a hell of a lot smarter than his son. Invading Iraq would have handed the country over to Iran much sooner; and there still would not be a Kurdistan. Invading Iraq was a massive mistake that Bush Jr deserves blame for. Now it seems the left want it both ways- invading Iraq was bad; but betraying the Kurds was worse. WTF!!! Anyone trying to follow this logic would suffer whiplash!
Kosovo? Who the fucks fault was that? Oh, that is right Clinton and NATO. We still have troops there. Serbia is still just as big of a threat. Great job handing Kosovo over to terrorists Bill.
Gotta love them terrorists when it comes to removing foreign pro Russian governments.
Yes, let's support the formation of a Kurdistan. We haven't created enough terrorists yet. We have done a great job at nation building all over the planet. We need another yearly mutli billion dollar country to support economically, militarily, and protect politically in the UN. That would be a great use of US resources and our troops lives./S
Good question.
And Fox news is reporting than none other than Republican Senate majority Leader Mitch McConnell weighs in on that very question:
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell rebuked President Trump’s withdrawal of troops from Syria on Friday, calling it a “grave strategic mistake” in an op-ed that claimed the move had set back the U.S. fight against Islamic terrorism in the region.
“Withdrawing U.S. forces from Syria is a grave strategic mistake. It will leave the American people and homeland less safe, embolden our enemies, and weaken important alliances,” McConnell, R-Ky., writes.
“Sadly, the recently announced pullout risks repeating the Obama administration’s reckless withdrawal from Iraq, which facilitated the rise of the Islamic State in the first place.”