US will leave, Iran remains
In some of my previous articles, I argued that the Kurdistan Region should strike a balance in its relations with Washington and Tehran, and not be embroiled in their rivalries. I also criticized the Kurdish policy for not taking into account the role and position of Iran in regional and international equations. This has led Iran to regard the future of the Kurdistan Region as a threat to itself.
Recent events demonstrated that Iran is the mind behind the political, diplomatic, military maneuvers and economic pressures put on the Kurdistan Region, costing Erbil nearly half of its territory with its income source falling under the control of Baghdad. From a military standpoint, it was a blow to Kurdish pride. From a political perspective, it led to a submission to being marginalized in Iraq again.
These events could have taken a different direction. But Iran’s attitude toward us, its hegemony and influence on Iraq led to this. There is suspicion that even US Envoy Brett McGurk and ambassador to Baghdad were in Iran’s agenda on this question despite their disagreements and rivalry.
The equations are about to change now. The Kurdistan Region passed some of these dangers and some of the doors closed on it have now opened. But this doesn’t mean it will not face danger again, especially now that Iran’s understanding that the Kurdistan Region is a threat to it has not changed.
Following the events that happened on October 16, references to Erbil as a danger to regional stability were made on several occasions during Friday prayers in Tehran. In the heat of December protests in several Iranian cities, Muhsin Razaye, head of determining the interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran, accused Erbil of orchestrating the protests staged by people in Iran.
These are dangerous references suggesting that Iran wants to tell its public that Kurdistan is their nearest enemy.
The Kurdistan Region shouldn’t repeat past mistakes and opt to disregard these dangerous references. It should change this kind of thinking by Iran. Iran has no evidence to show Erbil is a threat to its interests, but has an excuse for viewing Erbil in this way because it is the understanding of Iran that Erbil is the friend of its foes.
When Iran looks at Iraq on the map, it can see that it has imposed its hegemony on the entire Iraq other than Erbil and Duhok. It is now eyeing this geography too. The question is: Can Erbil not be friends with Tehran too? This is important because the survival of Erbil now and in the future depends on at least Iran not regarding it as a danger.
The events of October 16, the invasion of Kirkuk and genocide of Khurmatu require the Kurdistan Region to examine the stance and kind of treatment by friends from the US and EU, especially now that it is clear to Erbil that even if the US and EU do not help with Iranian expansionism, they are indirectly the reason behind the imposition of Iranian hegemony on the entire region.
In addition, the West took a blind eye on the reinvasion of a part of Kurdistan under the direct command of commanders from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, and the international community has also chosen to be quiet on Turkish attacks on Afrin. This should awaken us to the reality that the countries that have divided Kurdistan treat Kurds as inferior. The Kurds also have a problem with the international policy that was responsible for these territorial divisions and is still protecting its status.
Current equations are contrary to all political logic. Kurdish division over regional countries and the division of these countries over regional equations, required the Kurds in any part of Kurdistan to base their relations and coordination with neighboring countries on regional divisions which they benefitted a lot from in their past revolutions and uprisings.
In the past, Iraq and Turkey were two Sunni countries, but Iran and Syria were Shiite countries. The Kurds in Iraqi and Turkish Kurdistan had support from Iran and Syria for all their revolutions and uprisings. On the contrary, Iraq and Turkey benefitted from the disagreements and problems of the Kurds in Iran and Syria.
Regional equations have now changed – three of the regional countries are Shiite, and Turkey is the only Sunni country in the region. Political logic and types of regional disagreements required that the Kurds to reorganize their relations in light of the political changes in courtiers with Kurdish problems, whereas the current reality is contradictory.
Iran has to some extent managed to push the Kurdish problem from regional into its own hands. The reality has made the Kurds in Syria, Turkey and even in Iraq dependent on Iran.
If Iran had the willingness to resolve problems, it would have been of great help to find a peaceful solution to the Kurdish problem in these three Shiite countries. But the problem is that Iran tries to dissolve rather than resolve the problems.
Having good relations with Iran is good in spite of Tehran not willing to help resolve the Kurdish question in Iraq. Rather, Iran wants to further undermine us through Baghdad that is Tehran’s shadow.
The international community has turned a blind eye to the crimes being committed in the world and western countries, especially the US are directly or indirectly helping with Iranian expansionism, even if this is intended to drag Tehran to the heart of rivalries. Under current situations, Iran shouldn’t regard us as the only impediment to its aims. Experience has shown us that the US will finally leave and Iran will stay in the region.
Experience has also shown that Baghdad is not independent in making its decisions. Erbil should therefore have good relations with Tehran during this time where Kurdistan needs to stay part of Iraq for now. Kurdistan should deal directly with the decision-maker.