A United Kur­dis­tani Army, Dream or Real­ity

By: Abdul Ilah Ibrahim


Form­ing a united Kur­dis­tani army to pre­serve var­i­ous Kur­dish areas within ‘state of Kur­dis­tan’ has always been an aspi­ra­tion of mil­lions of Kurds. How­ever, in order to go through this ambi­tion and mea­sure its pos­si­bil­ity, spe­cific issues need to be taken into con­sid­er­a­tion, includ­ing ide­o­log­i­cal influ­ences on the Kur­dish people’s social, eco­nomic and polit­i­cal life.

Ide­ol­ogy, as a ‘sci­ence of ideas’, entail­ing the notion of ‘polit­i­cal soci­ol­ogy’, had con­stantly played a cru­cial role in the estab­lish­ment of com­mu­nal beliefs and fac­tual or nor­ma­tive con­cepts that are being used to explain intri­cate social phe­nom­ena, after deter­min­ing the polit­i­cal and social options for indi­vid­u­als and groups. Ide­o­log­i­cal method was always used by polit­i­cal par­ties to find cer­tain pre­texts in order to accom­plish its pri­vate agen­das, dom­i­nat­ing a community’s life on social, eco­nomic and polit­i­cal levels. 

The cur­rent insta­ble and chaotic sit­u­a­tion in sev­eral areas of ‘Syr­ian Kur­dis­tan’ (Rojava or west­ern Kur­dis­tan) indi­cates the care­less­ness and self­ish­ness of some polit­i­cal lead­ers who attempt to deploy the polit­i­cal agen­das of their par­ties in the ser­vice of their per­sonal and ide­o­log­i­cal inter­ests through the usurpa­tion of power and manip­u­la­tion of the des­tiny of mil­lions of civil­ians, espe­cially con­cern­ing the dom­i­na­tion of the Kur­dish armed forces who were sup­posed to pro­tect the peo­ple instead of turn­ing into a tool to defend the dom­i­nant fig­ure of their lead­ers. Thus, this monop­oly of dom­i­na­tion on the armed wing of the Kur­dish polit­i­cal move­ment and the exclu­sion and mar­gin­al­iza­tion of other cur­rents raised jus­ti­fi­able fears from either a frag­ile secu­rity vac­uum or clashes among Kur­dish forces themselves.

Under the spon­sor­ship of the Kur­dis­tan Regional Gov­ern­ment (KRG), an agree­ment was signed by dif­fer­ent Syr­ian Kur­dish polit­i­cal par­ties in Erbil, Sep­tem­ber 2012. This agree­ment included a com­pro­mise between the Demo­c­ra­tic Union Party (PYD) –a Syr­ian affil­i­a­tion of the Kur­dis­tan Work­ers Party (PKK)– and party mem­bers of the Kur­dish National Coun­cil in Syria (KNC) –a coali­tion of thir­teen Kur­dish polit­i­cal par­ties and cur­rents. More­over, the Erbil agree­ment called for a for­ma­tion of a ‘non-​partisan Kur­dis­tani army’, to be led polit­i­cally by the Kur­dish Supreme Com­mit­tee –an extended umbrella of the PYD and the KNC founded after Erbil agreement.

It is hard though to ide­o­log­i­cally unify the Kur­dish polit­i­cal move­ments, unless the supreme dream of ‘Kur­dis­tan state’ is con­cerned, which can be the only solu­tion to achieve a Kur­dish national secu­rity against the per­se­cu­tion and sup­pres­sion they always suf­fered from. Thus, this would ensure the pro­tec­tion of all dwellers of the region with­out bias towards any party at the expense of the other. The estab­lish­ment of such an army would remain the only guar­an­tee for a Kur­dish reas­sured and pre­served future. There­fore, we could shorten the path that would trans­form (Rojava) Kur­dis­tan into a safe and sta­ble area instead of a vol­cano burn­ing all sects of peo­ple and gen­er­ate a social mal­ice turn­ing cul­ture and civ­i­liza­tion back for decades if not centuries.

The ego­is­tic method of the par­ties’ dog­matic ide­ol­ogy can­not sur­vive with­out a pop­u­lar sup­port, and the Kur­dish polit­i­cal move­ment wouldn’t be able to con­tinue and develop with­out the estab­lish­ment of a ‘Kur­dis­tani pub­lic frame­work’ to be reor­ga­nized within. Based on these facts, the actual forces on the ground should recon­sider the supreme inter­est of the Kur­dish peo­ple. When we look at the inci­dents tak­ing place on ground, we spon­ta­neously con­duct a com­par­i­son between the var­i­ous poli­cies adopted by dif­fer­ent Kur­dish par­ties, being fully aware that the sit­u­a­tion in (Rojava) is approach­ing a dan­ger­ous trans­for­ma­tion that will most likely lead to dev­as­tated and loose areas.

Appar­ently, some polit­i­cal par­ties are char­ac­ter­ized by the self-​interest basis regard­ing their poli­cies towards the ongo­ing devel­op­ments, while try­ing to pre­vail the idea that the pop­u­lar demands and aspi­ra­tions are at ‘the top of the agenda’, for­get­ting that those peo­ple are the same who had suf­fi­cient courage to revolt against the most bru­tal and total­i­tar­ian regimes, and will never accept to return again to the cage of slav­ery after attain­ing their freedom.

Another point related to the topic, namely the used ter­mi­nol­ogy in soci­ety and its impact on the region’s pop­u­la­tion that show a sense of depen­dency and melt­ing of iden­tity. For exam­ple, the term (Rojava) car­ries a nation­al­ist trend by some com­po­nents of non-​Kurds, of course the title here does not jus­tify for any­body to stand against it, because it is his­tor­i­cally rel­e­vant to a land called Kur­dis­tan. Thus,history should be looked at objec­tively with­out any sense of chau­vin­ism and exclu­sion, only then the Kur­dish peo­ple can gain their legit­i­mate rights for which they have been oppressed by a num­ber of the world’s most tyran­ni­cal dic­ta­tors. Syr­ian Kurds (Kurds of Rojava) should not make the same mis­take founded by states that divided the land of Kur­dis­tan. Rights must be kept on a Kur­dis­tani basis instead of nation­al­is­tic or par­ti­san basis. Obvi­ously, some mem­bers of the Arab oppo­si­tion in Syria who have recently defected the Baath party, they still hold the same chau­vin­is­tic and exclu­sive men­tal­ity gen­er­ated by the Baath party for decades. We do not see any jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for them to adhere to the word ‘Arab’ when address­ing the Syr­ian Repub­lic as ‘Syr­ian Arab Repub­lic’, since the lat­ter implies a total mar­gin­al­iza­tion and exclu­sion of many non-​Arab gen­uine com­po­nents of the Syr­ian com­mu­nity, includ­ing the Kurds as the largest non-​Arab eth­nic group in Syria. Thus a con­sti­tu­tional recog­ni­tion of the Kur­dish legit­i­mate rights and demands is needed, oth­er­wise the door will be open to all the pos­si­bil­i­ties, includ­ing the topic dealt with in this arti­cle.

Source: ARA News

For the latest news follow us on Twitter

Join our Weekly Newsletter


Related Items

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

1 × 1 =