Are the Kurds akin to the single ray of hope left inside?
I have a mixed attitudinal history on Iraq. I was against the invasion in 2003 because I did not see the point and thought WMD was not a sufficient reason to go in. Then I was later persuaded that it could be worth it from a neocon argument that to me struck me as a deeply liberal argument. The argument was that part of the rationale to go in was to free oppressed peoples and grant them democracy so that they could remove the swamp of dictatorships on the region and change the nature of the middle east away from radicalism.
That was what caught my attention, I thought if it was possible, was that not worth a war to remove the dictatorship? I never had the typical left/liberal baggage of thinking all optional foreign wars were tools of imperialism and stealing oil and property, my assumptions about American intentions did not immediately cling to such a wicked narrative. I did not even care if the US did not get international approval, as I did not and do not consider dictatorships legitimate sovereigns where removal is a great sin.
But the experiment largely failed. Iraq seems far worse than it was before the invasion, given freedom and autonomy the Shia used it to marshall death squads of militias to enact tribal vengeance on Sunnis, Sunnis in turn seemed incapable of believing they were not the majority in the nation. The Sunnis later allowed Isis to take over and now we have the disaster before us all now. Except for one group. There was one group where the result of the invasion seems like a near universal positive. The unshackling of the Kurds. While the main Iraq army turns and runs to vastly inferior numbers of Isis assaults for towns they don’t care about, the Kurds protect not just their own, but other marginalized people as well.
Part of this is likely do to self interest in their trying to carve out a defacto state, but you know what? I kind of WANT them to have a state, they seem like such decent people compared to all the detritus around them. I find the entire population fascinating. Mostly muslim, but unlike so many other groups in the region much less radically so.
In this podcast talking about some of the conflicts between Erdogan and segments of the Kurds I even learned that some factions (the ones Erdogan bombs) are secular leftist marxists ?!?! And others even want to return to Zoroastrianism (A religion that even as an Atheist, I would love to see get a revival in the region compared to Islam - It saddens me that that more benign and tolerant faith was replaced by something with such a warlike founder after his trip to Medina)
I read an article on one of their english language sites and there seems to be a surprising level of support from the readers there about returning to that religion.
http://rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/020620153
So… On balance Iraq was almost certainly a negative, but going forward, if the Kurds actually do get their own more secular and tolerant state in the middle east, I wonder if that lone ray of hope will grow into something of a better example to neighbors in the region? An example that is not Israel with all it’s baggage and associations with the west.
Well, congratulations on finding out about the Kurds. Yes, they surely deserve (and desire) an independent homeland; by common reckoning they are the largest ethnicity in the world without one. The Iraq invasion did incidentally lead to a partial liberation for them. It’s frankly grasping at straws to think that this justifies the stupendous violence America dealt, and roused, in the process.
Eh. Time will tell. Independence for a sympathetic minority is emotionally appealing, but it’s not magic and it won’t fix problems that are already there- and it’s likely to make some new ones in the process.
We had high hopes for South Sudan just a few years ago, and thought great things could happen the sympathetic Southerners were just free from the mean old Muslims. It’s turns out to be one of the worst disasters imaginable.
I’m generally sympathetic to the Kurdish cause, but, if the Iraqi Kurds declare independence, that is going to complicate everyone’s relations with Turkey for a long time to come. Who knows where it might lead, maybe even full-blown civil war in Turkey, and who knows where that might lead. It would provoke the Iranians, too, part of Kurdistan is in their northwest. And another part is the northeastern wedge of Syria, which Iraqi Kurdistan might see as ripe for annexation while the government’s weakened.
One of the interesting parts of that podcast I linked to the John Batchelor show was the discussion about some of the differences between Kurdish groups.
The Iraqi Kurds that operate the Peshmerga seem to be a bit more on the conservative Muslim side, they are treated as allies and apparently the Kurds in Turkey are more secular and marxist, or worse, wanting to ditch Islam and go to Zoroastrianism. Though apparently some in Iraq want that too.
The kurds are the most endearing group in the middle east from what I’ve found, and the news that some might be trying to resurrect the zoroastrian faith that is on life support around the world as an alternative religion to Islam makes them even more interesting.
One thing I still don’t quite get is why Asad cares whether some sect that is opposed to him leaves? Would’t it make it easier to govern if the Syrian Kurds took their own slice of land and left his Aloites alone and just focused on ISIS?
Wouldn’t it make it easier for Erdogan to create his dream of an Imperial presidency with him as religious sovereign if the Kurds who have always given him trouble just got their own land to control? What would they lose? tax revenue?
I suppose nations just don’t want to lose land, we fought a civil war over slavery and preserving the union, but in that case we actually WANTED to keep the nation whole and undivided. I keep getting the impression that Erdogan does not want the Kurds around, so why try to keep them around in Turkey instead of sectioning off some table scraps of land?
What would “resurrecting Zoroastrianism” look like? I thought you had to have a father who was a practicing Zoroastrian to be one yourself, which rules out most of the things I think of when I hear “resurrecting a religion” (which would likely rely on converts).
E: To be clear, I know there are living, practicing Zoroastrians. I just can’t conceptualize exactly what “moving to Zoroastrianism” and such means in this context.
Because people in the West have a tendency to raise one group as being super nice and great, and all the rest as evil bastards. Of course Kurds should have their own nation, but they’re hardly an endearing, loveable, peaceful bunch. Kurds are often rather religious and socially conservative. If there’s an honor killing in Turkey or among immigrants to Europe from Turkey, it’s likely from a Kurdish family. They’ve also engaged in female genital mutilation, stoning and other fun things. We can support them, but don’t have to get into bed with them. Same thing with the Yazidi btw. There was a very nasty stoning video that came out a few years ago, of the stoning of 17yo Yazidi girl. Doesn’t mean that they deserve the genocide that was visited upon them by a bunch of even worse sons of bitches, just that they probably do not share a lot of Western values.
There’s an atheist organisation in Turkey making some noice at the moment. That seems like a more endearing group to me.
Anti-regime Iranians often tend to romanticize ye olde Zoroastrianism of yore as a nice, friendly, tolerant, peaceful, and - most importantly - purely Persian religion, from before “those dirty Arabs” came crawling out of the desert and ruined everybody’s fun.
But even so, I can’t imagine Zoroastrianism coming back in a big way - not among the Persians, and not among the Kurds, either.
Ps. I’ve been to a few Zoroastrian spots in Iran BTW. A temple with an “eternal flame” in Yazd, the Towers of Silence (with Pink Floyd graffiti for some reason!?), and a cemetery for Zoroastrian soldiers who fell in the Iraq-Iran-war. Definitely worth a visit.
Some Kurds claim to be the descendants of the Medes, which were the Zoroastrian priest class in the Persian empire. They could probably claim to be already the sons of Zoroastrians.
This, basically. In terms of their commitment to democracy and human rights, the Kurds aren’t much better than any other group in the region. It’s the Middle East. Nothing unifies any given group but a common enemy, and even that doesn’t last for long. ISIS hates everybody else. Everybody else hates ISIS and everybody else.
A Kurdish homeland isn’t going to bring peace to the region, any more than the creation of Israel brought peace to the region, and for the same reasons.
Also, a politically united and independent Kurdistan would have the practical problem of being landlocked and surrounded by unfriendly neighbors – like Israel, but landlocked.