By Bzav Hewa Ahmed
After the recent escalated conflict between the United States and Israel against Iran, many significant changes have occurred over the political dynamics and interrelated security challenges in the Middle East and middle of Asia. The war’s consequences has affected the Iranian internal situation as well as spread its serious consequences on the region and especially on the Kurds inhabited areas.
The current security and political tensions have challenged the Kurds’ question in the region; in other term, the geopolitics of the region has always been a challenge to Kurds goals. This has been started since the Sykes-Picot agreement in 1916 since Kurd nation has been divided into four parts. which means four countries national security architecture has been linked with the Kurds question. Nowadays, we have ~12M Kurds in Iran, ~24M in Turkye, ~6M in Iraq, and ~3M in Syria. Despite that each of Kurdistan has its own social and political specificities, any movement from each part will leave direct consequences on the others. And this has complicated the resolution for the Kurds issue in the region.
Historically, Kurdish forces have been in tactical relationships with Western countries, especially with the USA. These relations became more active and seemed strategically important during the war against ISIS, as part of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS (2014–2018). However, this partnership has remained asymmetric in nature—as confirmed by Tom Barrack, the POTUS Special Envoy. The U.S. policy in the Middle East is limited by broader relationships, specifically with Turkey, and more importantly, the interests of Israel and other ongoing shifts in regional priorities.
For example, Kurdish forces in Syria were perceived as important partners in the fight against ISIS. But once the territorial hegemony of ISIS was defeated, the US repeatedly signaled a desire to avoid open-ended commitments.
Despite the fact that the Kurds actors and KRG are largely attempting to avoid any involvement in the recent war, their geographical and political circumstances have repeatedly turned Kurdish territory into a battleground. As a result, civilians, strategic infrastructures, and Peshmerga forces have been victims, and economic growth of this region has continuously suffered from insecurity.
Iran and its proxies have shown few justifications to attack the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI). The first is that the (KRI) hosts US troops and bases of the US-led coalition to defeat ISIS. While, according to official statements, there has never been any attack by these forces against Iran.
The other justification is the presence of Iranian Kurdish opposition parties in the KRI. While they are present in KRI under the United Nations monitoring and have never threatened Iranian security. They respected KRG’s will and sovereignty by not attacking Iran.
Also, Iran has officially stated that there are Israeli bases in the KRI. However, this has been denied by KRG officials and even the Iraqi National Security Council.
Ultimately, any long-term framework for stabilizing the Middle East needss to consider the Kurds as a legitimate political actor in the aim of providing security and political stability. Without a proper resolution to the Kurds’ issue in the region, a stable political atmosphere is not expected because when the rights of more than 40 million people are abandoned, instability is inevitable.