Iraq Disintegrates
Kurdistan Exists: What Now?
show comments
  • bigfire

    The other problem has been transportation of oil. Previously the only pipeline out of oil production Kurd region have all been going south towards the Gulf. Perhaps Turkey is thinking of grabbing a piece of oil pipe by getting Kurd->Turkey->Black Sea pipeline and getting the transit fee. In exchange, Turkey gives up Kurdish Turkey region.

  • Honk

    Well, it is good to know that someone in the region other than al-Qaeda has a handle on things.

  • LarryD

    The Kurds were promised their own country during WWII, the stumbling block has been Turkey. If the Turks no longer object, Washington should either help or stay neutral.

    If Obama’s motives are as malign as some believe, he’ll try and throw a spanner in the works.

    • S.C. Schwarz

      This would be a good idea and enhance stability in the region. Who wants to bet Obama will oppose it anyway?

      • Curious Mayhem

        We’ll see how much Obama remains smitten with Erdogan. The State Department isn’t, but advice from people who might know something counts for little at the White House.

  • lukelea

    Maybe the Sunnis in Iraq and eastern Syria should have their own state too?

  • gabrielsyme

    The idea that the West should defer to the interests of Turkey is a ridiculous position. The realpolitik considerations and loose ideological kinship of the Cold War era is no longer a justification for protecting the interests of a decidedly unpleansant regime and nation; one that has illegally occupied a significant part of another sovereign nation for the past forty years; that continues to deny the genocide committed against the Armenians and does not even have diplomatic relations with Armenia to this day. Kurdistan should be born, whether the Turks are happy about it or not. A happy and independent Kurdistan is likely to be a stronger strategic ally than if it remains part of a divided Iraq.

    • Should NATO be scrapped, then?

      • John Stephens

        The United States should withdraw from NATO, and the remaining organization should become the military arm of the EU. Let Europe defend Europe.

        • S.C. Schwarz

          Exactly right. Why are they our problem?

      • f1b0nacc1

        Why not? Other than providing a fig leaf for policy implementation that American politicians don’t wish to accept responsibility for, what does NATO offer that a few well-placed bilateral agreements would not?

      • gabrielsyme

        I wouldn’t go that far, but Turkey should definitely be ejected from the alliance. It is a genocide-denier and continual violator of international law. Its domestic record on human rights is far worse than any other NATO member. And the overriding strategic rationale for their membership is gone.

  • stefanstackhouse

    The inclusion of any Kurdish areas within the state of Iraq was purely an accident of history, and certainly not a good accident at that. Of course there will be those who will be knee-jerk against any change in the status quo; there always are. When the perpetuation of the status quo serves mainly to perpetuate the unjust and the unsustainable, however, it is rarely if ever worth as much effort as the US usually puts into trying to perpetuate it – especially when it comes to perpetuating arbitrary border lines drawn on a map by dead white guys that were not living there and had never even seen those borderlands.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to and affiliated sites.