Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

another_liberal

(8,821 posts)
Tue Jun 24, 2014, 08:07 PM Jun 2014

Does Democratic Underground favor an independent Kurdistan? [View all]

Secretary Kerry's separate stop in Irbil to visit the Kurdish President shows how important that region of northwest Iraq has suddenly become to American hegemony in the Middle East. Kurdistan is the only stable and largely reliable partner we have left in Iraq, but do we want them to stay "in Iraq," or should we support their declaration of independence, as a sovereign Kurdish nation? Most experts do agree independence is the ultimate Kurdish goal. They do have a thriving, oil-based economy. Their military is small but well-equipped and thought to be capable. If not now, when will the Kurds ever have a better chance to claim a homeland?



. . .

US officials believe that persuading the Kurds to stick with the government in Baghdad will help keep Iraq together. "If they decide to withdraw from the Baghdad political process, it will accelerate a lot of the negative trends," said a senior state department official.

Massoud Barzani, the Kurdish president, hardly provided a ringing endorsement for the Iraqi government, "We are facing a new reality and a new Iraq," said Barzani at the start of his meeting with Kerry. Earlier, he blamed prime minister Nouri al-Maliki's "wrong policies" for the violence and called for him to quit, saying it was "very difficult" to imagine Iraq staying together.

Kurdish troops have taken control of Kirkuk, which was abandoned by the Iraqi army after Isis forces seized Mosul at the beginning of a lightning campaign. The Kurds consider Kirkuk – just outside their autonomous zone – their historic capital; its capture makes it more tempting for the Kurds to go it alone rather than sticking with an unpopular and tottering regime.

The Kurdish region is home to several vast oilfields and has maintained stability, in stark contrast to the rest of Iraq. Senior Kurdish officials have said privately that they are no longer committed to Iraq and are biding their time for an opportunity to seek independence.

. . .

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/24/john-kerry-urges-kurdish-leaders-to-back-iraqi-government




4 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Time expired
The U.S. should support Kurdistan's independence from Iraq.
3 (75%)
The U.S. should oppose Kurdistan's independence from Iraq.
0 (0%)
The U.S. should remain neutral on the question of Kurdistan's independence from Iraq.
1 (25%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I generally support any people's effort to self-govern. [n/t] Maedhros Jun 2014 #1
It is their choice, and their risk . . . another_liberal Jun 2014 #2
The US opposes an independent Kurdistan because Turkey does BainsBane Jun 2014 #3
Yes, there are Kurds in Turkey . . . another_liberal Jun 2014 #4
Sure. BainsBane Jun 2014 #5
Probably not going to happen though Lurks Often Jun 2014 #6
Everything you say is true . . . another_liberal Jun 2014 #7
I am referring to a "hot" war Lurks Often Jun 2014 #10
The US should just stay out the area. Shoulders of Giants Jun 2014 #8
I do. A Kurdish state is long overdue. Nt Warren Stupidity Jun 2014 #9
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Does Democratic Undergrou...