• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence [W:59]

Should the US and other Western states recognize Kurdish independence?

  • Yes

    Votes: 6 54.5%
  • No

    Votes: 5 45.5%

  • Total voters
    11
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

"In Rojava, we believe, genuinely democratic structures have indeed been established. Not only is the system of government accountable to the people, but it springs out of new structures that make direct democracy possible: popular assemblies and democratic councils. Women participate on an equal footing with men at every level and also organize in autonomous councils, assemblies, and committees to address their specific concerns. . . . Rojava, we believe, points to an alternative future for Syria and the Middle East, a future where the peoples of different ethnic backgrounds and religions can live together, united by mutual tolerance and common institutions. Kurdish organizations have led the way, but they increasingly gain support from Arabs, Assyrians, and Chechens, who participate in their common system of self-government and organize autonomously." The Revolution in Rojava | Dissent Magazine

I believe every nation has the right to have their independent country.but please lets be honest,demso.what do you know about the kurds in Turkey ? if they are sincere in what they want they can achieve their goals as we see in my sig.I wont give them anything unless a whole nation (if they are ) agrees that they want to live out of Turkey
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

I believe every nation has the right to have their independent country.but please lets be honest,demso.what do you know about the kurds in Turkey ? if they are sincere in what they want they can achieve their goals as we see in my sig.I wont give them anything unless a whole nation (if they are ) agrees that they want to live out of Turkey

So you want them to continue an arm conflict? Would you be in favor of something along the lines of what Iraq has established in their Kurdish regions?
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

According to you the Creek form the majority population in the Southern States of the US? That's news to me.

Of course not, the invading whites almost wiped them out in a genocide, but the point is that the Creek nation actually existed, where as Kurdistan did not.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

In view of the developments of the last couple of decades, should the US and other Western countries recognize the right of the Kurds to form an independent state, starting from the current Kurdish autonomous region in Iraq but eventually also encompassing the Kurdish areas of Syria, Turkey and Iran (if the Kurds in those areas choose to join such a state)?




Sure, why not. No culture/region/ethnicity that doesn't want to be part of a larger polity should be held against its will.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

Sure, why not. No culture/region/ethnicity that doesn't want to be part of a larger polity should be held against its will.

you may read my posts.I have much more information than him,sweety
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

Not just yes, but hell yes. If they can establish a capital and a government and defend it, that is, which seems unlikely. Syria, maybe, and maybe Iraq can be defended against but if they claim an inch of Turkey or Iran they're toast.
I say whatever borders they claim have to be defended first by themselves- if they can pull that off they definitely deserve support.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

I'm sorry but this is inaccurate. It is Turkey which is contesting the sovereignty of Greece over its territorial waters. Not the other way round. When is the last time Canadian fighter jets intercepted a plane carrying the US Secretary of Defense over US airspace?
haha :))
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

In view of the developments of the last couple of decades, should the US and other Western countries recognize the right of the Kurds to form an independent state, starting from the current Kurdish autonomous region in Iraq but eventually also encompassing the Kurdish areas of Syria, Turkey and Iran (if the Kurds in those areas choose to join such a state)?
Have they declared independence?
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

Moderator's Warning:
Simply because you like in a country does not mean a negative comment or thought on the country is personal to you. And responding to such comments by trying to make this personal is NOT acceptable. What "nationality" other people are is not a topic. Nor is it okay to attempt to silence someone simply because they're not a particular nationality. Discuss the topic and stop trying to make this personal
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

No, not really. Mainly because they are being held back from doing so by the Western countries trying to appease the governments in Ankara and Baghdad (which is pretty short-sighted).

They may not want independence. With independence can come revolution, in-fighting, chaos, civil war over who is in control, and invasion. There also are serious infrastructure and economic factors.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

The principal problem with this idea is the question of 'who are the Kurds?' Those people who self-identify generally as Kurds are a very diverse group. They speak several different languages, some are referred to as 'dialects', such as Kermanji and Sorani, but which are not intelligible one with another. There are also completely separate languages such a Zaza and Gorani, which other Kurdish speakers don't recognise as Kurdish at all. They are a hugely diverse group religiously too, with some half-a-dozen faiths all having major followings. Sunnis, Shi'as, Alevis, Sufis, Yarsan, Yazidis and some Christians all claim to be Kurdish. Trying to forge all these different faiths and languages into one homogenous nation would be no easier than the nation-building efforts in Iraq. The Kurdish region of Iraq, which so many people seem to hold up as being the model, has much less diversity than any Greater Kurdistan would have. The second such a state was declared, it would plunge into in-fighting and disorder.

I'm not saying Kurds don't deserve self-determination, it's just that they don't really have a clear idea of self. I very much doubt that a Syrian Yazidi Kurd would have anything very much in common with a Khorasan Iranian Shi'a Kurd, not culture, language, religion or history.

So, before the West decides to help the Kurds with their nation-building (when has that ever ended well, btw?) they need to wait to see who claims to be leading the Kurds and where they think that nation should be situated - it could be anywhere from the Med to the borders of Afghanistan.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

The principal problem with this idea is the question of 'who are the Kurds?' Those people who self-identify generally as Kurds are a very diverse group. They speak several different languages, some are referred to as 'dialects', such as Kermanji and Sorani, but which are not intelligible one with another. There are also completely separate languages such a Zaza and Gorani, which other Kurdish speakers don't recognise as Kurdish at all. They are a hugely diverse group religiously too, with some half-a-dozen faiths all having major followings. Sunnis, Shi'as, Alevis, Sufis, Yarsan, Yazidis and some Christians all claim to be Kurdish. Trying to forge all these different faiths and languages into one homogenous nation would be no easier than the nation-building efforts in Iraq. The Kurdish region of Iraq, which so many people seem to hold up as being the model, has much less diversity than any Greater Kurdistan would have. The second such a state was declared, it would plunge into in-fighting and disorder.

I'm not saying Kurds don't deserve self-determination, it's just that they don't really have a clear idea of self. I very much doubt that a Syrian Yazidi Kurd would have anything very much in common with a Khorasan Iranian Shi'a Kurd, not culture, language, religion or history.

So, before the West decides to help the Kurds with their nation-building (when has that ever ended well, btw?) they need to wait to see who claims to be leading the Kurds and where they think that nation should be situated - it could be anywhere from the Med to the borders of Afghanistan.

It is not really that difficult to determine who are Kurds. But obviously you are right that there is great divergences among kurds living in various countries and kurdish unity is at this moment a distant prospect. that is also why I suggest strating with the structure that exists, i.e. the Kurdish autonomous region in Iraq which has been functioning quite well as a quasi-independent entity for the better part of 2 decades.

The same goes for potential "borders".
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

I suggest starting with the structure that exists, i.e. the Kurdish autonomous region in Iraq which has been functioning quite well as a quasi-independent entity for the better part of 2 decades.
Which would be fine if you just wanted a Kurdish state dominated by Kurmanji/Sorani speakers and Shafiist Sunnis, plus you wanted to assume a mass migration of 25 million+ Kurds from other areas. The non-Iraqi Kurds wouldn't find this much of a solution at all.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

Which would be fine if you just wanted a Kurdish state dominated by Kurmanji/Sorani speakers and Shafiist Sunnis, plus you wanted to assume a mass migration of 25 million+ Kurds from other areas. The non-Iraqi Kurds wouldn't find this much of a solution at all.

No, I'm not talking about mass migration. But it is better to start on a realistic basis. The perfect should not be the enemy of the good.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

No, I'm not talking about mass migration. But it is better to start on a realistic basis. The perfect should not be the enemy of the good.
Better not to attempt nation-building with clichés. That doesn't ever end well.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

Better not to attempt nation-building with clichés. That doesn't ever end well.

It is up to the Kurds to build their own nation. They are not asking for other people to do that for them. I do question the wisdom of continuing to recognize the non-existent sovereignty of a failed regime in Baghdad over Northern Iraq and refuse to recognize the rights of an existing and functioning Kurdish government.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

It is up to the Kurds to build their own nation. They are not asking for other people to do that for them. I do question the wisdom of continuing to recognize the non-existent sovereignty of a failed regime in Baghdad over Northern Iraq and refuse to recognize the rights of an existing and functioning Kurdish government.

The Iraqi Kurds have not yet voted for independence. When they do, so be it, but that would not satisfy the Turkish, Syrian and Iranian Kurds, at all. What it might do is trigger more repression of Kurds in those other countries should they give the slightest indication that they wished to secede territory to the new state. It could also trigger military conflict between the fledgling state and its much, much more powerful neighbours, while still being threatened by the rump state of Iraq. They wouldn't have the manpower or the resources to resist those threats by themselves and would almost certainly look to the West - 'asking other people to do that for them'.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

The Iraqi Kurds have not yet voted for independence. When they do, so be it, but that would not satisfy the Turkish, Syrian and Iranian Kurds, at all. What it might do is trigger more repression of Kurds in those other countries should they give the slightest indication that they wished to secede territory to the new state. It could also trigger military conflict between the fledgling state and its much, much more powerful neighbours, while still being threatened by the rump state of Iraq. They wouldn't have the manpower or the resources to resist those threats by themselves and would almost certainly look to the West - 'asking other people to do that for them'.

Seriously, the Kurds in Syria, Turkey and Iran already have to fight for their survival. And the Western countries are already arming the Kurdish troops in northern Iraq since they have proven to be much more reliable than the Iraqi forces.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

Seriously, the Kurds in Syria, Turkey and Iran already have to fight for their survival.
And that's before they declare war on their home nations. Don't be in any doubt that that is exactly how Iran, Turkey and Syria would define any attempt to hive off Kurdish-majority territory to the new state.

And the Western countries are already arming the Kurdish troops in northern Iraq since they have proven to be much more reliable than the Iraqi forces.
They are holding their own against ISIS. They have not been seriously attacked yet by anyone else. Add Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey into the mix and they would need direct Western involvement, which wouldn't happen. War on five fronts would make the invasion of Iraq look like a bar brawl.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

And that's before they declare war on their home nations. Don't be in any doubt that that is exactly how Iran, Turkey and Syria would define any attempt to hive off Kurdish-majority territory to the new state.

They are holding their own against ISIS. They have not been seriously attacked yet by anyone else. Add Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey into the mix and they would need direct Western involvement, which wouldn't happen. War on five fronts would make the invasion of Iraq look like a bar brawl.

So presumably you are in favour of Western countries revoking their recognition of the independence of all countries that have potential territorial conflicts with neighbours and that can't fully defend themselves on their own?
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

So presumably you are in favour of Western countries revoking their recognition of the independence of all countries that have potential territorial conflicts with neighbours and that can't fully defend themselves on their own?

I'm assuming your aren't a very regular debater. You know what a straw man argument is, I take it.

Firstly, there is no recognition of independence to revoke, since Iraqi Kurdistan isn't yet a state and has no such recognition.

Secondly, such recognition would not be something any other state would rush to award until Kurdistan had fixed its borders, and it couldn't do that without revoking any potential claim on the territory of its neighbours.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

I'm assuming your aren't a very regular debater. You know what a straw man argument is, I take it.

Firstly, there is no recognition of independence to revoke, since Iraqi Kurdistan isn't yet a state and has no such recognition.

Secondly, such recognition would not be something any other state would rush to award until Kurdistan had fixed its borders, and it couldn't do that without revoking any potential claim on the territory of its neighbours.

I think I've debated more than you have. That is why I generally read the postings I respond to and try to remain coherent in my arguments.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

I think I've debated more than you have. That is why I generally read the postings I respond to and try to remain coherent in my arguments.
Were you being coherent you wouldn't ask about whether I'm in favour of revoking recognition of an independent state that doesn't even exist. Clearly the situation relating to recognising for the first time a hypothetical Iraqi Kurdish state is completely different to revoking recognition of a state that already has it.

The question in hand is: Should the West recognise Kurdish independence? My argument is pretty clear:

  1. There is no Kurdish independence, nor any in the process of being established.
  2. A declaration of Iraqi Kurdish independence may occur, but international recognition of it would not be automatic, especially if it immediately entered into armed conflict with either rump Iraq or any of its neighbours.
  3. Iraqi Kurdish independence is not the same thing as Kurdish independence, since Iraqi Kurdistan is home to only c.25% of the Kurdish people and comprises about the same proportion of territory of what can be loosely termed, and would be fiercely disputed, Greater Kurdistan.
  4. I severely doubt that there will ever be a unified Kurdish state whose independence may or may not be recognised by other nations. The Kurds are simply too diverse an ethnicity (or ethnicities) and far too dispersed geographically ever to create such a unitary state, especially in the teeth of opposition from every one of its potential neighbours. Sad perhaps, but true.
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence [W

In view of the developments of the last couple of decades, should the US and other Western countries recognize the right of the Kurds to form an independent state, starting from the current Kurdish autonomous region in Iraq but eventually also encompassing the Kurdish areas of Syria, Turkey and Iran (if the Kurds in those areas choose to join such a state)?

Sure, why not. And the independence of the separatists in eastern Ukraine, too!
 
Re: Should the US (and other Western countries) recognize the Kurdish independence?

As a principle yes, but in scope of real politics.. hell no.

The problem is not Kurdish independence but the fact that certain kurdish fractions (who are part of the government) want a "Greater Kurdistan" and that includes areas in Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria, and that is dangerous as hell since it is oil rich areas and is controlled by other countries.

Plus there is the small ignored fact, that "Kurdistan" has never really existed as an independent nation before so the argument for an independence is a bit...

Pretty much this. As a matter of idealism, yes, they should have their own nation. But as a matter of practical reality, it would be very messy to get there from here.
 
Back
Top Bottom