The United States, Kurdistan, and the Future of Iraq.

US Forces at the Crossroads – Again!

At the end of WWI, the victorious allies were creating a massive plan to divide what was left of the once great Ottoman Empire. The allies met in 1919 at the Versailles Conference where then US President Woodrow Wilson unsuccessfully pushed for the establishment of an independent state for the Kurds who at the time were spread out among six countries with the majority in what is now northern Iraq and southeastern Turkey, with lesser numbers in northeastern Syria, northwestern Iran and the Caucuses. They were, as today - known as the world's largest nation of over 30 million people without a state of their own. Their historical struggle for self-determination, over the past decades, has been hampered by the consistent bitter rivalry between competing nationalist groups - some of which have been used as pawns by regional powers - including the United States. Since the failure of US President Woodrow Wilson’s attempt for a Kurdish state U.S. policy toward the Kurds has been inconsistent, far less supportive, often cynically opportunistic, and disastrous.

One result of this often disastrous policy happened back in 1970 when the US was bed-fellows with the dictatorial Shah of Iran. During this time the United States encouraged the Iraqi Kurds to launch an armed uprising against the left-leaning Iraqi government with the promise of continued US support if they won or lost. Unfortunately, after the Kurds failed attempt the United States government abandoned them as part of a second agreement they had with the Bagdad regime for territorial compromise which turned out to be more favorable to Iran regarding control of the Shatt al-Arab Waterway. US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger ignored concerns from human rights agencies and allies of the Kurds regarding the humanitarian consequences of this severe betrayal. The US did not heed the warnings and as a result thousands of Kurds were slaughtered. Iran then cut off access to supply lines as a retaliatory measure costing the lives of thousands more Kurds.

In the 1980’s the Kurds would later regroup and retaliate against the central government in Bagdad during the Iran-Iraqi War which was led by the guerrilla wing of the Kurdish Democratic Party or KDP, with support by the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan or PUK. The PUK received massive support by the Iranian government which eventually caused them to be labeled traitors by Saddam Hussein’s regime which responded with savage repression, killing thousands of Kurds and hoarding their bodies to mass grave sites – many were buried alive. The genocide campaign stabled a bit until the latter part of the decade when as many as 4,000 Kurdish villages were destroyed in what became known in the Middle Eastern region as the Anfal campaign. During this campaign 10,000 Kurdish civilians lost their lives and more than one million, or one-quarter of the Kurdish population was displaced.

Despite these dehumanizing atrocities the United States continued its support for Saddam Hussein’s regime against the Kurds providing Baghdad with agricultural subsidies and other economic aid as well as limited military assistance. The US White House looked the other way while knowing that a majority of the funds given to Saddam was used to purchase military equipment is support of Baghdad's genocidal war against the Kurds.

In 1988, as a direct response to Saddam’s efforts to wipe out the Kurdish population the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee composed a fact-finding report exposing Saddam Hussein's policy of widespread killings of Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. From the details of this report Senator Claiborne Pell introduced "The Prevention of Genocide Act" to put pressure on the Iraqi government. Unfortunately, then US President Ronald Reagan -insisting on being able to continue its military and economic support of Saddam Hussein's regime--successfully killed the measure which lead to continued aid to Saddam Hussein regime’s campaign for widespread Kurdish genocide.

Fast forwarding to 1991 around the end of the Gulf War - and while the Iraqi military was licking its wounds from a six week assault by the United States and allied forces, the Kurds once again launched a major rebellion against Saddam Hussein’s regime - while at the same time fighting a Shiite led rebellion in Southern Iraq. The Kurds were able to make rapid military advances, seizing a series of key towns. Unfortunately, these gains were reversed with a brutal counter-attack by the Iraqi military forces. US President George Bush, under scrutiny from the United Nations and the Human Right Commission called on the people of Iraq, including the Iraqi Kurds to rise up against the dictatorship. Unfortunately U.S. forces - who temporarily occupied a large strip of southern Iraq at the time once again--did nothing to support the post-war rebellion and stood by while thousands of Iraqi Kurds, Shiites, and others were slaughtered. However, despite the set backs the Kurds were able to secure a stable section of Northern Iraq’s oil- rich territory to call home.

While the world’s focus was on the demise of Saddam Hussein’s regime in 2003, via the Iraqi War, the Kurds in the North formally and somewhat peacefully gained unprecedented rights as a somewhat free people supported by the U.S.-backed constitutional government structure. The Kurds supported this effort for providing a working parliamentary majority for the Shiite-dominated United Iraqi Alliance; as a result most of the predominantly Kurdish-populated areas of Iraq have come under the control of the KDP/PUK-dominated Kurdish Regional Government. The former KDP guerrilla leader Nechirvan Barzani serves as prime minister. Baghdad has virtually no jurisdiction in the northern part of their country and over the past decade Iraqi Kurdistan has evolved into a de facto independent state.

The Democratic Patriot Alliance of Kurdistan--an alliance of the KDP and the PUK and some minor parties—now constitutes the second largest bloc in the Iraqi parliament, holding 54 seats. PUK leader Jalal Talabani has held the position of Iraqi president – although a largely ceremonial post, since 2005. Other Kurdish parties hold an additional 14 seats. Collectively, these Kurdish nationalists constitute the strongest pro-American bloc in the Iraqi parliament. The Kurds has certainly come a long way from their turbulent past towards their goal of a sovereign statehood, but what about their future? They still have basically the same enemies from the break up of the old Ottoman Empire – namely the larger Iraqi population and the Turkey Government, and a few new ones as well. Can they trust the United States and depend on their support?

Probably not! Particularly considering the United States unexpected hands-off approach while Kurdistan was being heavily bombed by Turkey. The armed forces of Turkey have launched unprecedented attacks into the Kurdish-populated region in northern Iraq to fight guerrillas of the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK). However, Kurdistan is not without it provocations - taking advantage of the establishment of an autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government in Iraq, the PKK has been escalating their raids into Turkey, prompting the October 17 decision by the Turkish parliament to authorize military action within Iraq, with approval of the United States. So where does this leave the Kurds?!

With the US military withdrawal now imminent, a chain of potential events suggests that the Kurds could end up where they started over a century ago. They face a post-election resurgence of Prime Minister Maliki who seeks greater power for Baghdad and less freedom for Kurdistan, while at the same time tensions are increasing over Kirkuk and the distribution of oil. The US still refuses to meddle in Iraq's internal affairs beyond security and stabilization – despite Maliki's continued use of Iraqi forces to undermine Kurdish authority. Perhaps Maliki’s long-term goal is to coerce the Kurds into submission over outstanding issues from the past. Another drawback for the Kurds is the fact that theUS White House has largely stood by as Iraq’s Kurds have become deeply embroiled in a fierce dispute with Turkey that threatens to explode into violence, potentially destabilizing the Northern region of Iraq (once considered the only peaceful region of Iraq), and further strain relations between the United States and Turkey, who has been a vital strategic ally for over 60 years.

For certain the struggle by the Kurdish people and the governments seeking to control them pre-dates U.S. intervention in the region. This struggle has certainly been in effect for the past generation(s). However, since US involvement it has been the American foreign policy and inconsistency which has brought the situation to its current critical juncture and makes prospects for a just and peaceful solution almost impossible. With Gaza under the control of Hamas, Lebanon in a paralyzed position, Israel facing somewhat unstable leadership, and Iraq near total collapse, the Middle East has never looked more perilous. But if the United States continues to talk the talk but not walk the walk in their dealings with the Kurds and does not move to defuse the dangerous situation in Iraqi Kurdistan fast, Washington could find itself with yet another ticking time bomb and pulling the soldiers out now without a political solution just may set it off.

The Obama administration may feel that Iraq is ready for self government – but are they forgetting that Iraq’s future is intertwined with the stability of its Northern neighbor – the troubled Kurdistan?! Can the Kurds survive a US military withdrawal, and if not will their failure bring the US military back to Iraq in the not-so-distant future?

Only time will tell.

More by this Author


Comments 18 comments

A. Liatsis 7 years ago

Very interesting hub. It is very hard to view the Kurdish Question as potentially having a positive outcome for the Kurdish people.

The Turkish government should be heavily criticized (as it has been) for its treatment of the Kurds; after all, following WWI the Kurds were to have an independent state in Southeastern Turkey as outlined by Sevres. This was never realized as Araturk seized power and renegotiated a more favorable treaty for the Turks after defeating and expelling French forces from the new Turkish Republic.


jxb7076 profile image

jxb7076 7 years ago from United States of America Author

A. Liatsis - I am in agreement with your opening comment about the outcome of the Kurdish people. The odds does appear to be against them and without a viable military they are at the mercy of their government leaders to negotiate their future. Unfortunately, as you described in your well written hub, their government leaders have done a poor job in representing them for the betterment of all Kurds.

My prediction is that they will go back to a state of obscurity once the US forces leaves Iraq. Out of sight, out of mind!

Thanks for the feedback. I am looking forwarding to

reading more hubs from you.


Nervaline 7 years ago

Great article, keep up your writing. very good for students.


Linda Myshrall 7 years ago

That was, without question, the best chronology of events I have ever read with respect to that region. Admittedly, I am not as well-versed in middle eastern history, or the politics that surround the region as I should be, or would like to be, but I was still engrossed through the whole hub. I wonder, even though we are expected to pull our troops out of the region, isn't there some expectation that we will leave at least a respectable military presence there like we have done after other wars? Could we not expect that to have some deterring effect, or, is it because of the US's flip-flopping ways with respect to the Khurds that it will be business as usual?

Like you say, time will tell.

That was excellent reading!


jxb7076 profile image

jxb7076 7 years ago from United States of America Author

Hi Linda M - thanks for the comments. Personally, I think we will leave a very troubled region with even more problems. Particularly considering the troubled economy in the US. We simply can not afford the high cost of stabalization.


Lgali profile image

Lgali 7 years ago

another excellent article


jxb7076 profile image

jxb7076 7 years ago from United States of America Author

Thanks lgali - I think its a long road ahead for the Kurds, and Iraq.


suramahe profile image

suramahe 6 years ago

Good article. Now I am here in Suly, Kurdistan. I got a great understanding about this region and future by reading your article. Thanks again.

I also started to write about Kurdistan, but not political view. Keep in touch.


Naser 4 years ago

Time is changing. Kurds never surround again. They have very good friends, potentially all Shia. For the first time in the history, they have a common destiny. But Kurd has an upper hand in Middle East politic, and American cannot do anything without them. Will see that they are going to gain more from Syria and Turkey breakup.


Mr.Turko 4 years ago

What are you talking about? Which kurds had bad condition in this region? they are equal Arabs, Turks, and also Irani people. there is no dramatic events for the Kurds in the middle east. You are only attacking all states to Jewish's aim and the Capitalistic idea of Western states. Turkey is only Turkish citizens. the etnical or religios fact of kurds, arabs etc are not important in this country. There is human rights, equality, freedom in Turkey for all other etnical group without Turks. Please, Can You give a true explanation about this region( middle East)? Everybody must know that this region is only muslim people.


jxb7076 profile image

jxb7076 4 years ago from United States of America Author

Mr.Turko - thanks for stopping by and commenting. Please understand that this article is but one viewpoint of the events in the region. As you are aware, there are many viewpoints, any many perspectives. However, I am in the proccess of composing a new article which reflects the current environment in the region and would love to collaborate with you on the article for a more balanced viewpoint. Send me an email note if you're interested.


Ali Kareem - Erbil 4 years ago

Good Article . really the situation of Kurdistan of Iraq need to more researching in academic and natural way .

i think really a people here are want USA and the hope to establish a good long relation with USA .

regards


jxb7076 profile image

jxb7076 4 years ago from United States of America Author

Ali Kareem - Erbil - thanks for stopping by and commenting. I believe the USA should do all it can to ensure the Kurds maintain their sovereignty.


Kyle B 4 years ago

jxb7076- Great article, The end of the American military role has left Kurds in an anxious turning point, the political crises and the Iraqi vice-president fled to Kurdistan after charging him for a death squad,this is all leading to the possibility of civil war with the central government of Baghdad again.So giving the history Kurds should not & can not depend on US support. Washington has ties with Ankara and Baghdad than the Regional Government of Kurdistan.


Kyle B 4 years ago

i mean Greater tie with Ankara and Baghdad


jxb7076 profile image

jxb7076 4 years ago from United States of America Author

Kyle B - it will be really interesting to look ahead at the status of the Kurds in ten years. I think they're off to a good start.


lawrence01 profile image

lawrence01 24 months ago from Hamilton, New Zealand

Very few articles tell the truth of what really happened. Yours does. The Kurds have learned through hard and bitter experience no to totally trust the West.

Thank you


jxb7076 profile image

jxb7076 23 months ago from United States of America Author

Hello lawrence01 - thanks for stopping by and commenting. I'm in the process of updating the article to include current events.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working