# Powerful Kurds want a (de facto or actual) state. Good, or bad? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 18, 2005, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759 "2005-02-18T18:38:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2005, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/1 "2005-02-18T18:38:40Z")
Per this [article](http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/18/international/middleeast/18kurds.html?hp), the Iraqi Kurds, emboldened by their strong showing in the election, want to maintain a level of autonomy that equals or exceeds that which they enjoyed under no-fly protection during the reign of Saddam. To quote Massoud Barzani… > [@](#): > > The fact remains that we are two different nationalities in Iraq - we are Kurds and Arabs. If the Kurdish people agree to stay in the framework of Iraq in one form or another as a federation, then other people should be grateful to them. I take it some the Kurdish leadership aren’t all that interested in a Federation at all, but may tolerate it if it affords them almost complete military, economic and cultural separation from Arab Iraq. Not much of a Federation. I won’t rehash all the reasons why this sort of language causes neighboring countries, most notably Turkey, great consternation. Suffice to say, the emergence of a politically self-determined, veritably sovereign or _de facto_ sovereign Kurdistan, is going to be a major bone of contention both in and out of Iraq. One of the stated goals of invading Iraq and setting up a democracy was to stabilize the region. Some have posited that Balkanization of Iraq will do anything but, as it will lead inevitably to ethinic cleansing within Iraq, and increased ethnic strife in neighboring Kurdish regions in other countries. Did the Bush Admin/Neocons forsee this eventuality, and if so, what’s the plan to deal with it? Should they simply leave the matter alone? Is the assumption that the Kurds will accept a federalist approach in a more orthodox sense, and hence dire predictions of Balkanization (with its attendant attrocities) are typical left-wing distortions and pessimism? What does Bushco really want for the Kurds, and do those goals fit with the reality on the ground, in addition to the desire for a peaceful and democratic Iraq? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/2 "2005-02-19T07:20:53Z")
I don’t often sympathize with President Bush, but he got handed a can of worms on this issue. The Kurdish situation is about as close as being impossible to settle as a person could imagine. On the one hand you’ve got the Kurds, who have definitely shown they want to form a sovereign nation. On the other side, you’ve got Iraq, Turkey, Iran, and other regional powers, who are completely opposed to the formation of a sovereign Kurdistan. Whichever way the situation goes will probably further de-stabilize the region. Good luck on this one, George. ---
**Author:** ![rfgdxm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c0e974/32.png) [@rfgdxm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rfgdxm)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/3 "2005-02-19T07:35:06Z")
> [@Loopydude](#): > > Did the Bush Admin/Neocons forsee this eventuality, and if so, what’s the plan to deal with it? My presumption is not only did they forsee this, it is exactly what they are hoping for. Then again, if the only choices on the last presidential ballot were Bush and Satan, I’d have voted for Satan. ---
**Author:** ![Malodorous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e47774/32.png) [@Malodorous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malodorous)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 7:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/4 "2005-02-19T07:52:13Z")
The Kurds have had defacto autonomy for a decade, and Turkey didn’t implode then. I don’t see what the difference would be if they continue to have a similar amount of autonomy. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 10:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/5 "2005-02-19T10:12:17Z")
> [@Little Nemo](#): > > I don’t often sympathize with President Bush, but he got handed a can of worms on this issue. Oh come on, Bush went to great lengths to open this particular can of worms. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 10:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/6 "2005-02-19T10:45:24Z")
I don’t see why the Palestinians deserve their own country, and the Kurds don’t. ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/7 "2005-02-19T14:45:33Z")
> [@Malodorous](#): > > The Kurds have had defacto autonomy for a decade, and Turkey didn’t implode then. I don’t see what the difference would be if they continue to have a similar amount of autonomy. > [@NYT](#): > > Moreover, the region’s borders would be changed, in the Kurds’ vision. The “green line” that defines the boundary between the Kurdistan and the rest of Iraq would be officially pushed south, to take in the oil-rich city of Kirkuk, the city of Khanaqin and the area of Sinjar. Kurdish leaders argue that this would just reestablish historic borders where Mr. Hussein had drastically altered the demographics by displacing Kurds with Arab settlers. Seems different to me. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/8 "2005-02-19T15:38:28Z")
> [@Loopydude](#): > > Seems different to me. It sure is. See [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=5854794&highlight=alliance#post5854794) in the Iraq election thread for the bits of the transistional law that attempt to defuse the kurd problem. Neither the Kurds or the Shiites have enough votes to change that document without the other, but if they try, they could easily bring down the government. It does look like the shiites intend to try eliminating [“the kurdish veto”](http://www.aina.org/news/20050218174821.htm) set out in Article 61 section C. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/9 "2005-02-19T21:58:06Z")
> [@Malodorous](#): > > The Kurds have had defacto autonomy for a decade, and Turkey didn’t implode then. I don’t see what the difference would be if they continue to have a similar amount of autonomy. That’s kind of what I’ve been thinking. I sympathize with the Turks – the prospect of having a sovreign nation right on their borders that has the exact same ethnic makeup of a large portion of their citizenry, some of whom have behaved in ways that are definitely terroristic, is pretty scary. I imagine they fear an independent Kurdistan would be a constant source of trouble until and unless they ceded the lands now occupied to Turkish Kurds to said independent Kurdistan. OTOH, maybe if they gave all their current Kurds the option to move to the Kurdistan in Iraq, maybe that would cut down on the terrorism levels. Knotty problem, as noted, and I don’t think Bush gives a flip as long as he has the Kurds as friends. Problem is, how long can he keep both the Kurds and Turks as friends, given that their interests are almost diametrically opposed? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2005, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/10 "2005-02-19T23:12:05Z")
> [@rfgdxm](#): > > My presumption is not only did they forsee this, it is exactly what they are hoping for. But why? Surely the Bush Admin doesn’t want to provoke a war with Turkey? Iran or Syria I could see, but Turkey? A NATO member? ---
**Author:** ![rfgdxm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c0e974/32.png) [@rfgdxm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rfgdxm)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2005, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/11 "2005-02-20T02:53:37Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > But why? Surely the Bush Admin doesn’t want to provoke a war with Turkey? Iran or Syria I could see, but Turkey? A NATO member? Bush could provide military aid to Turkey such that the chaos in Iraq stays within Iraq. The idea is to create ethnic strife within Iraq. Bush’s goal wasn’t to save Iraq, but to destroy it. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2005, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/12 "2005-02-20T03:10:23Z")
> [@rfgdxm](#): > > The idea is to create ethnic strife within Iraq. Bush’s goal wasn’t to save Iraq, but to destroy it. Again, why? He has staked his credibility on turning Iraq into something with at least the appearance of democracy and stability. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2005, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/13 "2005-02-20T23:45:07Z")
There is a very interesting article in today’s NYT Sunday magazine on the subject of the Kurds. My NYT registration is not working for some reason, so I can’t link to it. But just go to the NYT home page and select “magazine”. There’s also quite a bit about the Turkmen in that region, too. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2005, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/14 "2005-02-20T23:58:25Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > interesting article in today’s NYT Sunday magazine on the subject of the Kurds. Here: [In the Balance](http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/20/magazine/20ELECTION.html?) ---
**Author:** ![rfgdxm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c0e974/32.png) [@rfgdxm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rfgdxm)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2005, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/15 "2005-02-21T00:04:56Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Again, why? He has staked his credibility on turning Iraq into something with at least the appearance of democracy and stability. My position is that this was done as a power grab in an economically vital region. If the goal is just democracy and stability, aren’t there an awful lot of other places on Earth US troops should be sent to? It isn’t like Iraq was invading other countries, or even had weapons of mass destruction that this was a major worry. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2005, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/16 "2005-02-21T00:52:07Z")
> [@rfgdxm](#): > > My position is that this was done as a power grab in an economically vital region. If the goal is just democracy and stability, aren’t there an awful lot of other places on Earth US troops should be sent to? It isn’t like Iraq was invading other countries, or even had weapons of mass destruction that this was a major worry. No . . . but Iraq does have oil, which we need, and which cannot be efficiently extracted and exported if the country collapses into civil war. ---
**Author:** ![rfgdxm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c0e974/32.png) [@rfgdxm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rfgdxm)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2005, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/17 "2005-02-21T01:14:08Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > No . . . but Iraq does have oil, which we need, and which cannot be efficiently extracted and exported if the country collapses into civil war. But if things do become stable in Iraq, then the US troops will no longer need to be there to control it. By arranging to keep things unstable, the US can stay around indefinitely. Stability can’t possibly be a reason for why the US invaded Iraq. The country was stable under Saddam before we invaded. As for the idea of bringing democracy to Iraq, I don’t believe for a second that is a US priority. If democracy is the US goal, then why hasn’t the US invaded other Middle Eastern countries that aren’t democracies? Heck, the US was happy to support Saddam the dictator while he was advancing US interests. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2005, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/18 "2005-02-21T01:46:49Z")
> [@rfgdxm](#): > > But if things do become stable in Iraq, then the US troops will no longer need to be there to control it. Thereby saving us money. Where’s the payoff in an indefinitely prolonged occupation? > [@rfgdxm](#): > > Stability can’t possibly be a reason for why the US invaded Iraq. The country was stable under Saddam before we invaded. Stable – but under the control of a dictator who had a grudge against the U.S. I still don’t understand what you mean when you say Bush’s goal all along was to “destroy” Iraq. What would be the benefit, from his POV or the neocons’ POV or the American people’s POV, of one of the world’s major oil-producing nations degenerating into a Lebanon the size of California? ---
**Author:** ![rfgdxm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c0e974/32.png) [@rfgdxm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rfgdxm)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2005, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/19 "2005-02-21T02:16:16Z")
> [@](#): > > Thereby saving us money. Where’s the payoff in an indefinitely prolonged occupation? That this guarantees that whoever will end up ruling Iraq won’t act hostile to US interests. Surely many Iraqis want revenge against the US for the invasion. > [@](#): > > Stable – but under the control of a dictator who had a grudge against the U.S. Correct. The US aim in Iraq isn’t stability, but domination. > [@](#): > > I still don’t understand what you mean when you say Bush’s goal all along was to “destroy” Iraq. What would be the benefit, from his POV or the neocons’ POV or the American people’s POV, of one of the world’s major oil-producing nations degenerating into a Lebanon the size of California? I mean destroy Iraq as a nation, and make it more like a US possession. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2005, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759/20 "2005-02-21T02:23:40Z")
> [@rfgdxm](#): > > I mean destroy Iraq as a nation, and make it more like a US possession. Like the Philippines were? That’s impossible. I mean, it might be materially possible to kill all the insurgents and pound the rest of the people into submission like we did with the Filipinos, but it’s **politically** impossible. We can’t sell plain old “white man’s burden” colonial imperialism any more. To claim Iraq as a success, Bush has to be able to point to a country that is internally at peace and has at least the semblance of independent self-government. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/powerful-kurds-want-a-de-facto-or-actual-state-good-or-bad/290759.md?page=2)