Problems with Kurdistan

So tomorrow is the referendum of Iraqi Kurdistan. Despite increasing threats from Iran, Iraq and Turkey the referendum seems to be happening regardless. Now, I am all for an independent Kurdistan. The Kurds are a very specific and historic ethnic group who are very progressive, but I don't think this independence should be forced right now.
Some of the issues that really make it difficult to hold such a state together is the PKK influence and the US influence there.
The PKK has been designated a terrorist organization by almost all nations, however it holds a lot of sympathy with many Kurdish people and a lot of militias (probably most notably the YPG/YPJ).
The US has been backing the SDF a lot since they've dropped the FSA start of this year. But the latest Deirezzor offensive worries me about the influence the US might have militarily within the SDF. A lot of Assad-supporters are *excuse my language* flipping their shit about the SDF taking gas and oil fields north of Deirezzor. When you look at the map, it seems eerily obvious that these fields were the main targets and not the liberation of villages and civilians from ISIS. The region in Markadah and in the northwest of Deirezzor were completely untouched, they specifically chose to advance quickly through the desert to reach the oil fields. I hope this is not on US command, or Kurdistan might be a pretext for US to achieve a military base just to oppose Iran. The Kurds would be alienated to the point of being a second Israel, which would not help their cause.
I think it is better to make an agreement with Assad (who is certain to win at this stage) and try to ease tensions more to get a better shot at a Kurdish state in the future.

LyriaMapping wrote:I think it is better to make an agreement with Assad (who is certain to win at this stage) and try to ease tensions more to get a better shot at a Kurdish state in the future.

1) Do you really think Assad would allow an autonomous Kurdish state within the borders of Syria?
2) Do you really think they are not already a "second Israel"? Turkey, Iran, Russia, Syria and Iraq already hate the Kurds. The US is their only "friend" and we have been extremely unhelpful in procuring arms for the Peshmerga even in their fight against ISIS.
3) Under what circumstances would Erdogan's Turkey ever permit a truly independent Kurdish nation-state to exist on his borders?

Thorfinn Karlsefni wrote:

LyriaMapping wrote:I think it is better to make an agreement with Assad (who is certain to win at this stage) and try to ease tensions more to get a better shot at a Kurdish state in the future.

1) Do you really think Assad would allow an autonomous Kurdish state within the borders of Syria?
2) Do you really think they are not already a "second Israel"? Turkey, Iran, Russia, Syria and Iraq already hate the Kurds. The US is their only "friend" and we have been extremely unhelpful in procuring arms for the Peshmerga even in their fight against ISIS.
3) Under what circumstances would Erdogan's Turkey ever permit a truly independent Kurdish nation-state to exist on his borders?

1) He has atleast opened the door for negotiations for an amount of autonomy: https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2017/9/26/assad-regime-says-syrian-kurdish-autonomy-negotiable

2) Russia does not hate Kurds and has supported YPG many times in north Aleppo. Al-Abadi just sent a tweet saying that Kurdish citizens are just as much Iraqi as everybody else. He does not accept the referendum result, but he certainly does not hate them.

3) Probably under no circumstances, but Turkey is a lot of talk but no fight right now. In 2016 they said they would secure their border with Syria and maybe even reach Raqqa. Well, a year later they barely reached al-Bab and have been completely stopped in their tracks by Syria, Russia and Kurds. If they are unwise enough to attack a proclaimed Kurdish state beyond their borders, they would make very little to no progress. Iraq and Syria would be more upset about Turkey invading Kurdish regions than about Kurds proclaiming autonomy in the first place.

Hmm. Ok. Cool. Always nice to hear a fresh perspective. I'll add your information to my collection of data on the prospects for a Kurdistan.

BTW, I think it was a horrible mistake for the British and French to divi up the Middle East the way they did after WW1. I call the Sykes-Picot agreement the Divide and Rule agreement. It was drawn up by Britain and France for the purpose of subjugating and controlling a number of people groups. It is a crime against humanity that the 1916 imaginary line was respected after independence. There should be at least a half dozen different nations there, including one for the Yazzidis, in my humble opinion.

I do hope Kurdistan can hold Iraq back until the US or someone can weigh in and recognize an independent Kurdistan.

The problems are manifesting right now. Promoting a Kurdish nation is akin to Israel 2.0. You are asking for terrorism in response to the idea of creating a nation out of established territory.

At the end of the day, it's not anyone's decision except the citizens of Iraq as to whether or not there is a "Kurdistan".

The differences between Kurds internally are showing again as well... KDP accusing PUK of giving up Kirkuk and vice versa PUK accusing KDP of giving up Sinjar. They really are back to their 2003 boundaries, I hope that dialogue between Erbil and Bagdad resume and can eventually come to some agreement about an independent Kurdistan.

1) Russia supports an independent Kurdistan in Syria and Iraq and arms the Kurds more heavily than the U.S.A. What all these Assad supporters also forget is that Israel was also heavily supplied by the Soviet Union, Russia, and the U.S.A and still is to this day.

Both of the world's superpowers are united on Israel and Kurdistan, as are the majority populace of these regions. Let them have their countries where they won't be forced to speak another people's language.

2) Young, weak countries like Kurdistan have a habit of looking for allies wherever they can find them. For the Kurds it is the PKK. The more Russia and USA step back the more the Kurds are dependent on the PKK. We need to offer the Kurds enough guns they can't refuse and then force them to make a choice between the USA and Russia vs the PKK.

DavidlVofGeorgia wrote:1) Russia supports an independent Kurdistan in Syria and Iraq and arms the Kurds more heavily than the U.S.A. What all these Assad supporters also forget is that Israel was also heavily supplied by the Soviet Union, Russia, and the U.S.A and still is to this day.

Both of the world's superpowers are united on Israel and Kurdistan, as are the majority populace of these regions. Let them have their countries where they won't be forced to speak another people's language.

2) Young, weak countries like Kurdistan have a habit of looking for allies wherever they can find them. For the Kurds it is the PKK. The more Russia and USA step back the more the Kurds are dependent on the PKK. We need to offer the Kurds enough guns they can't refuse and then force them to make a choice between the USA and Russia vs the PKK.

I love comments like this, because they really explain the root cause of what we call, "terrorism". I bolded each time you mention a separate sovereign entity being the final determinant over whether or not another sovereign country is split, broken up, or forced to cede territory.

You want to know what happens if we, "offer the Kurds enough guns they can't refuse and then FORCE them to make a choice..."? Genocide, war, and wholesale slaughter.

I'll say it once. That's a stupid idea, a short-sighted idea, and an idea nobody should ever try. Let Iraq and Syria decide for themselves. Can't keep trying to wash the blood of your hands.