The Kurdish Issue in Iran: A Card of Conflict or an Opportunity for Resolution?

Dr Adalat Abdullah.

Written by: Dr Adalat Abdullah
Translated by: Narmeen Othman Mohammad

In any case, it is possible to understand the ideology of the government and political system in Tehran, both of which place great importance on the unity of the Iranian people and their various components, They regard this unity as a strategic prerequisite for building a strong Iran capable of confronting external challenges and threats, It is also seen as a means of supporting the peoples of the Islamic and Arab regions in freeing themselves from Western dominance in general, and from the pressures of the United States in particular, This is coupled with an ambition to expand the circle of political mobilisation against Israel, which Iran usually considers an entity that has usurped Palestinian land and the lands of the Islamic world.

We are also aware that, on the domestic level, the Iranian project has achieved notable success in containing Iranian society and unifying it to a considerable degree, This may be attributed either to the appeal and influence of the political–religious ideology adopted by Iran since the outbreak of the revolution in 1979 up to the present day, or to the use of coercion and force to suppress any internal opposition to the regime,This is especially so because, according to the well-known discourse of the Islamic Revolution, Iran perceives itself as having many enemies who strive to exploit the diversity and mosaic-like nature of Iranian society in order to sow discord and conflict within the country and undermine the objectives of the revolution.

On the external level, however, it is clear that the Iranian project in the Middle East has not succeeded in persuading Arab and Islamic states to support its call for opposition to the West and Israel or for the export of the revolution. This is due to ideological, ethnic, sectarian, and historical differences that have prevented the countries of the region from opening up to and engaging with the project. Indeed, quite the opposite occurred: not even a year passed after the Iranian Revolution before it encountered strong Western and Arab resistance through the outbreak of a prolonged war between Iraq and Iran (1980–1988). This war dealt a severe blow to the project, forcing it to retreat and focus on secondary priorities, foremost among them managing the war with Saddam Hussein’s regime, which was supported by Arab and Western powers seeking to thwart the Iranian project.

The war itself may have fundamentally altered Tehran’s political calculations, compelling the leaders of the Islamic Republic to support political groups and factions opposed to certain countries in the region that had backed Baghdad in its war with Iran, Among the most prominent of these were Kurdish parties in Iraq, certain Palestinian factions, Shiite opposition movements in the Gulf, the Lebanese group Hezbollah, and the Islamic Front for the Liberation of Bahrain, among others, In response, Western countries, in cooperation with several Arab states and Ba’athist Iraq, supported Iranian opposition forces, financing and arming them to destabilise Iran internally, Among those supported were Kurdish political parties and movements in Iran, which have a historical background of demanding rights for the Kurdish component within the country.

In other words, the Kurdish question—an inherently legitimate political issue concerning a people who have lived in their homeland for thousands of years—has been politically exploited in the region’s conflicts, particularly following the outbreak of the Islamic Revolution in Iran and the fall of the Shah’s regime, Yet since that time, and up to the present day, there has been no genuine will to resolve this issue either in Iraq or in Iran, lest it become a decisive factor in regional conflicts and wars, The Kurds are widely known for their fighting capabilities and their strong attachment to any political support that might help realise their aspiration for self-rule and end the historical injustice they have endured as an ancient people in the region who have yet to obtain a political entity of their own, unlike many other peoples and comparable communities in the region.

This very issue has perhaps re-emerged on the international stage and in the calculations of the parties to the conflict, particularly in light of developments in the Syrian file and the Iranian–American–Israeli confrontation, It has increasingly been utilised to serve regional and international agendas,The United States, for instance, appears to be seeking a role for Iranian Kurds in the current war, potentially positioning them as a field front aimed at weakening the political system in Iran. At the same time, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has praised the role of the people of Iranian Kurdistan who have refused to succumb to internal strife or confront the state on behalf of its enemies.

This situation has placed even the Iranian Kurdish parties—on which the United States is counting to engage in fighting against the Iranian regime—in a state of uncertainty, narrowing their range of options, They must carefully consider the consequences of participating in the war for the security and safety of Kurds in Iran, and even for Kurds in Iraq, especially given Tehran’s strong warnings that it will target any countries or regions involved in supporting Israel and the United States in the current conflict. This means that the Kurdish card has become extremely complicated within the equation of this war, and the manner in which it is handled by both Washington and Tehran may change simultaneously.

In other words, Iran has begun to realise that the legitimacy of the Kurdish question in the region, and the fact that Kurds constitute a significant part of the fabric of Iranian society, oblige it to reconsider how the issue should be addressed and acknowledged—potentially with the aim of removing it altogether as a political card used against Iran’s unity and its people, This implies that the challenges Tehran faces in the war and the sources of threat directed at it may require political flexibility regarding the Kurdish issue in the post-war phase, It may also necessitate serious consideration of effective political solutions that satisfy the Kurds and recognise the particular sensitivity and uniqueness of their cause in the region, without provoking ethnic tensions among the other components of Iranian society—especially after Tehran has observed Washington’s determination to support Kurds in Iran and highlight their role in the current conflict.
_________________________________________________
*Originally published in Al Zaman International Newspaper.
**Researcher at the Academic Centre for National Studies (ACNS).