“Laugh it up, fuzzball!”
Ahhh...government, the bane of rationale thought (or at least in this time period in the United States). And when it comes to foreign policy.....hell what am I saying there is no coherent foreign policy and both Republicans and Democrats are to blame. For the politicians it is about the sound bite, the next campaign. Very few of these "august leaders" have the balls to take a controversial position and propose some outside the box thinking.
Let's take the current situation in Iraq and Syria as an example. We have a rogue inter-state within parts of Syria and Iraq. The Islamic State (IS) has made great strides in conquering territory and driving those who do not ascribe to their ultra-orthodox Islamic vision from their homes and in significant numbers into a grave. So what is our response, limited bombing to relieve the humanitarian crisis on Mount Sinjar and establish a corridor for the Yazidis to escape into Kurd held territory. Lately there is discussions of sending in more Special Forces advisers to assist the Iraqi military but it is a limited deployment relying on the Iraqi military capabilities.
There is not a stomach for a large deployment of American soldiers to redeploy to Iraq but there is a diplomatic and military solution that, in the long run, would stabilize the region. It is time that someone in the U.S. political or diplomatic establishment call for official U.S. recognition of an independent Kurdish state.
A Kurdish state aligns with our democratic values in the region and historically has been a bulwark in the region. In terms of religion the Kurdish people are mostly Muslim with both Shia (primarily of the Alevi sect), Sunni (primarily Shafi’i). There is also a large Sufi influence among many Kurdish Muslims, often cited as a moderating influence on Islamic fundamentalism. A small number of Kurds are also Yezidi Muslims and Christians. The Kurds also have a history that has included secular and atheist political leaderships.
Due to the relative safety and stability, the Kurdish economy is experiencing continued growth. Liberal markets and business friendly policies has encouraged foreign countries to invest well over $20 billion, mostly in oil industry, agriculture, and in the tourist industry.
Finally, the Kurds have a significant military force that can, with American assistance, blunt the IS threat. The approximately 120,000 peshmerga forces are a professional military that is well trained and disciplined but lacks modern military equipment to roll back and defeat IS.
By recognizing an independent Kurdish state, the U.S. can provide significant number of military hardware, through Federal Military Sales, and training, through various Department of Defense programs. With additional and modern military equipment, a small number of advisers to train, advise, and assist the peshmerga, and continued limited U.S. direct air support the IS threat can be eradicated. And another stable U.S.friendly democratic country, along with Israel, would exist in the Middle East to provide a moderating voice.
Okay, with any action there is opposite reaction. In this case an independent Kurdish state would be vociferously condemned by Turkey, due to its own restless Kurdish population. Yet, with an increasingly authoritarian Recep Tayyip Erdogan and a government that is moving away from its sectarian roots, a counter-balance in the region would be positive. And may begin to move Turkey back into the sphere of moderation, or not. But the benefits of an independent Kurdish state in the region and as an American stalwart outweighs the negative impact on U.S. relations with Turkey.
Yet, in all the discussions of how the U.S. should respond to the IS threat (especially after the gruesome execution of James Foley) I have not seen anyone in Congress (or any Congressman of note) or the Administration seriously discuss the Kurdish option. Why not? Is it because of the sensitivities that this issue will raise? Is it the notion that Iraq must remain intact (like Bosnia)? Is it because we do not want to upset the Turks? I do not know but I think it is more about a lack of vision and an Administration and Congress that does not give a shit about foreign policy or even have the capacity to develop a something known as foreign policy - but that is another subject for another post.
Let's take the current situation in Iraq and Syria as an example. We have a rogue inter-state within parts of Syria and Iraq. The Islamic State (IS) has made great strides in conquering territory and driving those who do not ascribe to their ultra-orthodox Islamic vision from their homes and in significant numbers into a grave. So what is our response, limited bombing to relieve the humanitarian crisis on Mount Sinjar and establish a corridor for the Yazidis to escape into Kurd held territory. Lately there is discussions of sending in more Special Forces advisers to assist the Iraqi military but it is a limited deployment relying on the Iraqi military capabilities.
There is not a stomach for a large deployment of American soldiers to redeploy to Iraq but there is a diplomatic and military solution that, in the long run, would stabilize the region. It is time that someone in the U.S. political or diplomatic establishment call for official U.S. recognition of an independent Kurdish state.
A Kurdish state aligns with our democratic values in the region and historically has been a bulwark in the region. In terms of religion the Kurdish people are mostly Muslim with both Shia (primarily of the Alevi sect), Sunni (primarily Shafi’i). There is also a large Sufi influence among many Kurdish Muslims, often cited as a moderating influence on Islamic fundamentalism. A small number of Kurds are also Yezidi Muslims and Christians. The Kurds also have a history that has included secular and atheist political leaderships.
Due to the relative safety and stability, the Kurdish economy is experiencing continued growth. Liberal markets and business friendly policies has encouraged foreign countries to invest well over $20 billion, mostly in oil industry, agriculture, and in the tourist industry.
Finally, the Kurds have a significant military force that can, with American assistance, blunt the IS threat. The approximately 120,000 peshmerga forces are a professional military that is well trained and disciplined but lacks modern military equipment to roll back and defeat IS.
By recognizing an independent Kurdish state, the U.S. can provide significant number of military hardware, through Federal Military Sales, and training, through various Department of Defense programs. With additional and modern military equipment, a small number of advisers to train, advise, and assist the peshmerga, and continued limited U.S. direct air support the IS threat can be eradicated. And another stable U.S.friendly democratic country, along with Israel, would exist in the Middle East to provide a moderating voice.
Okay, with any action there is opposite reaction. In this case an independent Kurdish state would be vociferously condemned by Turkey, due to its own restless Kurdish population. Yet, with an increasingly authoritarian Recep Tayyip Erdogan and a government that is moving away from its sectarian roots, a counter-balance in the region would be positive. And may begin to move Turkey back into the sphere of moderation, or not. But the benefits of an independent Kurdish state in the region and as an American stalwart outweighs the negative impact on U.S. relations with Turkey.
Yet, in all the discussions of how the U.S. should respond to the IS threat (especially after the gruesome execution of James Foley) I have not seen anyone in Congress (or any Congressman of note) or the Administration seriously discuss the Kurdish option. Why not? Is it because of the sensitivities that this issue will raise? Is it the notion that Iraq must remain intact (like Bosnia)? Is it because we do not want to upset the Turks? I do not know but I think it is more about a lack of vision and an Administration and Congress that does not give a shit about foreign policy or even have the capacity to develop a something known as foreign policy - but that is another subject for another post.
Comments
Post a Comment