We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Biji Kurdistan Azad

Iraq is over, done, finished. The literally insane paranoiac Nouri al-Maliki guaranteed Iraq was toast and only a wilfully blind fool can pretend it can be put back together, or that doing so would even be desirable at this stage. There is only one tortuous bloody route to regional stability and that needs to be centred on an independent Kurdistan.

And I am delighted to see that both Ted Cruz and now Rand Paul seem to understand this. There are already willing and able ‘boots on the ground’: Kurdish ones. There is totally no need for US boots or anyone else’s boots to be there in any substantive way, beyond training missions and perhaps some SAR capabilities. Enough with the whole White Man’s Burden shtick already! Even a great many locals are embarrassed about how often they need to get bailed out by the US, arguing they really need to do this themselves!

Yes yes, I know an independent Kurdistan will horrify theocratic Iran, the Iranian dominated rump of Iraq, the Ba’athist Socialist rump of Syria and Islamist dominated Turkey. And whilst that is really just awesomely wonderful, it is just gravy on the many benefits that will eventually come from an independent Kurdistan.

Biji Kurdistan azad.

30 comments to Biji Kurdistan Azad

  • Mr Ed

    Perhaps if the Kurds could form a half-decent political party, perhaps the United Kurdistan Independence Party….

  • Mr Ed

    Is there a leader waiting in the wings, a Nij al-Faraj?

  • Masoud Barzani (of the centrist ‘big tent’ Kurdish Democratic Party) is a *very* effective statesman. And the pro-market non-tribal based and overtly secularist Gorran Movement has replaced the socialist PUK as the main opposition party. Also moves are afoot to create a more truly unified national Peshmerga. To be honest Barzani, warts and all, is probably going to be remembered as the Kurdish George Washington.

  • Chip

    The Palestinians could learn from the Kurds. But they won’t.

  • Laird

    As a putative “nation” Iraq never made any sense: it was just lines drawn on a map by some dotty Englishmen with no knowledge of, or concern for, local factions or historical realities. It has been blatantly apparent for at least 20 years (and especially since the death of Saddam Hussein) that it cannot be held together and needs to be partitioned into at least three separate countries. An independent Kurdistan would be truly beneficial to the whole region, as well as to Western interests. (And, as Perry says, the fact that it would royally piss off Erdogan and the mullahs in Iran is just gravy!)

  • John Galt III

    Obama has two more years. His Rasputin, Valerie Jarrett, will work very quietly with our leftist pro Jihadist State Department to help the Turks and Iranians to prevent any independent Kurdistan.

  • Russ in TX

    I knew I was in good company when I saw Perry’s comments popping up on Rudaw. No friends but the mountains, my ass. They’ve plenty, and they got them th old-fashioned way: they earned them.

  • Mr Ed

    the Iranian dominated rump of Iraq, the Ba’athist Socialist rump of Syria

    ‘dump’ surely? Ed.

    But seriously, a nascent Kurdistan is wrong on so many levels for today’s elite.
    1. It would be inherently ethnocentric.
    2. It would set an unwelcome recent precedent of secession from crapholes.
    3. It would leave the Saudis upset with the Sunni minority in Iraq (those not under ISIS) having no potential partner to counter the Shia, who would be uncomfortably close to their own hellhole.
    4. Erdogan’s Turkey might start being far more unpleasant that it already is, whatever proportion of ‘Kurdistan’ emerges from its current subjugation.

    None of which are at all good arguments, of course, but they would be drivers of hostility or indifference to the Kurds’ fate.

    On the other hand, think of the economic stimulus of the new atlases that would be needed.

  • Paul Marks

    Agreed Perry an independent nation for the Kurds would be the sensible move.

    Both because it is just, and because it upsets all the really nasty people.

    Both the Shia and the Sunni Islamists will be enraged by a nation based on just that (nationhood) not upon what sort of Islam people back.

    The Iranian “Hasteners” will continue to pray that the “Hidden One” comes on his white horse to kill us all.

    And the Turkish Sultan (or Sublime Porte) will have to build himself another one thousand (plus) room to comfort himself.

  • Barry Sheridan

    Interesting to see another article putting forward this idea, the journalist Michael Totten had the same thought, see


    This would benefit all the peoples of the old Iraq, they have after all lost too much pointlessly fighting one another.

  • Laird

    An excellent article, Barry. Thanks for the link.

  • If we agree with the logic around the creation of Israel, then surely the same applies for the creation of Kurdistan, with bonus points for pissing in Erdoğan’s cornflakes.

  • Runcie Balspune

    Even the Ottomans saw fit to divide the region of modern day Iraq along Kurd, Shi’ite and Sunni lines. It was probably one of the biggest failings of the Iraq War (other than starting it, that is), because even Bush didn’t want to annoy the liberal elite by doing the “right” thing and breaking the place up afterwards, like they’d think less of him.

    Turkey has been surplus to requirements even since the fall of the Berlin Wall, even with Putin’s antics I doubt anyone is expecting a full scale nuke war anytime soon. The geopolitical situation and the emergence of drone warfare has placed less need on some ally we have to welcome through gritted teeth and turn a blind eye to in order to agree to help the US get bombs onto whatever new threat emerges in the ME. With Turkey’s current anti-Israel stance and especially since they’re considering banning Minecraft, perhaps the West needs some new best friends in the region.

  • Frederick Davies

    The main problem with an independent Kurdistan is that it would be a landlocked country surrounded by enemies. The Israelis can manage it because they can count with outside support coming in through their Mediterranean coast. Even if the West were willing to support an independent Kurdistan, it has no way to support it if its neighbours decide it should not be allowed to exist.

    Pity, but true; geography still matters.


  • It is only landlocked by hostile states if an independent Kurdistan does not soon add Rojava to its holdings, at which point an independent Kurdistan shares a border with Lebanon 😉 That is by no means a highly improbable outcome.

  • Rich Rostrom

    Independent Kurdistan will be a corrupt petrostate. (Autonomous Kurdistan already is.) Its ruler or rulers will probably make an accommodation with Iran at the expense of the Sunni Arab, Turkmen, and Assyrian minorities. They are not interested in being a surrogate for the West against Iran.

    At best, they will play off Iran against Saudi Arabia and ISIS.

  • Actually they are trying very hard not to be a petrostate by encouraging more diverse investments. And the whole thrust of the main opposition party (the Gorran Movement) is ‘anti-corruption’. An uphill task of course and a rough neighbourhood to boot.

    The minorities are an interesting issue as all of them are split between those backing an independent Kurdistan (for the self-evident reason it can protect them from the Sunni Arabs, and indeed the KRG is actually backing certain Assyrian militias), and those who fear the Kurds.

    But frankly what choice to they really have? Siding with Shi’ite Baghdad is not a serious option. The Turkmen in Kirkuk are more of a problem and the Kurds will do whatever it takes to stay in control there. But yeah, many of the Sunni Arabs on the Kurdish side of the border will indeed be fucked, particularly if there is the slightest suspicion their village had Daesh sympathies. Such is life, never said it would be nice or bloodless.

    My guess is Erbil will not get into all that deep a relationship with Iran for several reason: there *will* be clashes with Badr et al once independence comes, and frankly Erbil would rather play footsie with Ankara than Tehran. Iran has very little that Erbil wants, and there are PAK Kurds from Iran currently supporting the Peshmerga, and I doubt they will hand back their weapons once IS is defeated.

    However Turkey buys Kurdish oil and harshes the mellow of Masoud Barzani’s Kurdish political rivals (the PKK), and the PKK are trying to get a foothold in Shinjar, which is leading to a sense of humour failure in Erbil with their erstwhile Kurdish allies. As uneasy as Turkey will be with an independent Southern Kurdistan, Erbil does actually have quite a lot to offer Turkey both politically and economically. And Turkey is where much of the Kurdish oil being sold right now, much to the annoyance of Baghdad, who want it all to go via them.

  • thefrollickingmole

    Isnt there a chance of a fairly serious Maoist faction choosing to fight the new Kurd regime?
    Or would they be able to go political rather than keep fighting?

    And on the “arbitrary lines drawn”, I know its a long cherished idea the problems started after WW1 but the Ottomans didnt gime much of a crap about where their districs were as long as the loot kept coming to Constantinople.

  • Isnt there a chance of a fairly serious Maoist faction choosing to fight the new Kurd regime?

    Huh? Marxist PKK powerbase is in Turkey, not Iraq, so not really. Though clashes are not unimaginable in Shinjar if PKK persist with Yazidi shenanigans in what Erbil considers its turf.

  • thefrollickingmole

    Cheers Perry, I dont know the politics of the area but was aware on of the factions fighting was Marxist, but didnt realise they were more located on the Turkish “side” of the border.

  • KTWO

    A Kurdish state would be better. Laird and Marks state views similar to mine.
    Opposing a Kurdistan because it wouldn’t solve every problem or would introduce some new ones is not helpful; nothing will solve all problems and every change will produce new ones.
    A big obstacle is ego. Nations virtually never give up territory voluntarily. Possession of land and peoples is a mental disease of rulers. The Kurds have the misfortune of being split across several countries.

  • konshtok

    anyone here remembers the arab spring?

    so how do you say “civil war” in kurdish ?

  • David Wiley

    Syria is done too. Honestly might as well two for one. If we can get Assad to negotiate for a piece of Sunni Iraq in trade for an Independent Rojava then it would be a great score for Liberty and better Middle East.

  • The situation is completely different to the Arab Spring.

  • Paul Marks

    Yes the “Arab Spring” was all about “democracy” and “Social Justice”.

    The crowds in Egypt were demanding free (or cheap) bread – much like the mob of Ancient Rome (that was never going to turn out well).

    Even in Tunisia (the most peaceful bit of the “Arab Spring”) the crowds were not demanding less absurd government university spending (the government of Tunisia had vastly over expanded higher education).

    They were demanding more “graduate jobs”.

    Nationalism “we want own country” can be good or it can be bad – or it can be neither.

    “We want to vote ourselves more money and stuff” is what the “Arab Spring” was about.

    People did not want elections to cut government spending – they wanted more “free stuff”.

    And that always turns out badly.

    As Ben Frankin said “a Republic IF YOU CAN KEEP IT”.

    And rabble (the mob) are not the sort of people who can keep it. They will just spend their way into tyranny and chaos.

    If anyone wants to know what sort of people can keep a Republic – then read the description of them in the Constitution of New Hampshire (1784).

    What sort of nation would the Kurds produce?

    I do not know.

    But at least they are asking to be allowed to try and build a nation.

    Rather than screaming for free stuff – like the “Arab Spring”.

  • Julie near Chicago

    Very well said, Paul.

  • Mr Ed

    Egyptian bakeries appear to be subsidised and naturally, heavily regulated, with smart cards required to access bread rations, and when the internet (who runs that?) goes down, fights start as bread cannot be handed out

    There is little hope for that place.

  • konshtok

    Mr Marks

    I was thinking more of the results of the spring in syria
    when the independent kurds start killing each other what then?

    Mr wiley

    Why would the alawite assad be interested in having more sunis?

  • konshtok, there is some potential for violence between the Marxists in Syria and Turkey… and the KRG, but not that much really. In the long run, Erbil will be the dominant centre for the coming independent Kurdistan (probably a KDP/Gorran coalition initially post-independence) and as the Kurds in Rojava will probably need support from those in Erbil against the Syrian rump in Damascus, I am cautiously optimistic about the future of internal Kurdish politics.

    That said, this is the Middle East we are talking about, so who knows what weird shit might unexpectedly drop out of the sky.

  • Mr Ed

    Well Egypt, a craphole country with smart cards for bread rationing needs… a new capital!


    Prime that pump! Next thing you know, they’ll be building pyramids to make jobs…

    So if Kurdistan could emerge whilst everyone in the Arab World was distracted by this shining new capital city, that would be wonderful.