[Oxymandias]

@Ter

The first link doesn't mention ethnic cleansing at all. All it does is mention US intervention on behalf of Rojava, not Rojava directly bombing Raqqa, and blame it on Rojava:

Taking into account the logical limits of what’s being referred to when I talk about the “Kurds”, it’s now time to take a closer look at their role in the US’ Raqqa campaign. Reports have come out that the US is supporting the SDF-YPG through the illegal use of white phosphorus, which is a banned chemical weapon. Combined with the heavy and indiscriminate airstrikes being carried out against the city, 160,000 civilians have been forced to become refugees and flee their homes as internally displaced people. This works out to more than half of the city’s pre-war population of 220,000, and it confirms what independent journalist and associate editor at 21stcenturywire.com Vanessa Beeley told RT just recently about how the US is making no attempt whatsoever to protect civilians. In fact, it can be cynically suggested, the large-scale population exodus taking place in Raqqa is actually a deliberate ethnic cleansing of the majority-Arab population of the city on a much larger scale than any of the similar crimes that the Kurds have been accused of before.

Then the rest of the article is simply empty assertions with no evidence behind it:

It’s extremely doubtful to imagine that Arabs of any political disposition would rather live in a Kurdish-dominated statelet as second-class citizens than as equal ones within the Syrian Arab Republic, so the chances of the Kurds peacefully annexing Raqqa into their “federation” via a plebiscite are close to nil. However, if the Arabs were forced out of their homes due to egregious war crimes by the US such as indiscriminate bombing and the widespread use of chemical weapons, then it becomes much easier to “hack the vote” and create a public/international pretense of “legitimacy”.

The author has provided no evidence that Rojava does promote institutional racism against Arab minorities. Yes there is discrimination but certainly isn't at the level of ethnic cleansing the entirety of Rojava's Arab population.

Furthermore, the author is a Syrian Arab Republic sympathizer and has fervently opposed Rojava before because of his perceived belief that Rojava wishes to "balkanize" Syria despite the fact that Rojava held a referendum on whether or not to stay in Syria once Rojava is established and everyone unanimously agreed to stay, both Kurds and Arabs. The author has a clear bias and does not provide any other evidence to support his claims.

The rest of the article is just about claiming that Rojava wishes to be "another Israel" which is also unsupported and has no evidence to back itself up.

The second article is exactly the same as the other one, it even was made by the same author!

The third article is in fact a legitimate concern but does not indicate that there is any widespread ethnic cleansing happening within Rojava. Yes, Rojava commits war crimes and I condone them for that. Yes, minorities, both Arab and otherwise are also discriminated, just like in Europe and the West. But there is no proof that Rojava intends to ethnically cleanse anything at all. You still have no provided any solid proof for this.

All you have provided is an article claiming that US intervention is Rojava's fault and a list of displaced villagers that weren't displaced due to being Arabs but due to being ISIS sympathizers. Do I agree with this? No. But I do not find it as proof that Rojava is intentionally racist or supports the eviction of all Arabs.

[anasawad]

@Oxymandias

You may also be right that the Kurds may not, in fact, be Indo-European.

Indo-Europeans include both Persians (i.e the mixture of Parthians and Persisians) and Scythians.
The Kurds are the latter not the former.

But I don't think that's the goal of Rojava or Kurdistan. The president of Rojava has stated that they do not want to be apart from Syria as their own distinct country but rather a autonomous region that is apart of it. This is why Rojava cares so much for the well-being of Syria as a whole because it dependent on it. Kurdistan has historically been self-sufficient on farming and agriculture for many decades and has been apart of many different empires and nations remaining stubbornly independent throughout all those periods. But now it needs to depend on other countries and nations to modernize, to build itself up as an industrialized polity. But it cannot do that when many countries refuse to acknowledge it's existence. Iran never has ever mentioned at all I believe. I didn't even know what a Kurd was until was an adult. Kurds revolting and demanding autonomy is part of a greater issue. Kurds are heavily under-represented and are given no care at all, especially Kurds living in Turkey but they are very dependent on other nations.

This might be true, and I don't think many if any would have a problem with the Kurds gaining more autonomy in Iran as long as they are under a federal structure with the rest of Iran and follow the basic constitution. And also not have their own army like in Iraq.
However they would need to be very careful and detail-oriented when ever negotiating such thing.
The situation in Iraq while might be good for Kurds in Iraq has made a dangerous precedent for the Kurds in other countries; Being that Kurdish autonomy leads to Kurdish independence.
And although this might have worked in Iraq, Iran and Turkey are no easy picks to do these moves with for the Kurds.

So I have a solution, why won't Iran offer autonomy to areas and provinces with Kurdish majorities through a referendum. Those that accept autonomy will still remain in Iran and follow Iran's constitution but they will be given greater freedom that other provinces or areas in Iran. Unless backed by the Iranian Constitution, these autonomous areas will not have certain laws enforced upon them. Yes, this already happens in Iran in non-Kurdish majority places as well however this time it's formalized in these territories and no one has to hide this. I find that in Kurdish majority areas in Iran, lack of the enforcement of law is much more greater than that of other places in Iran (with a few exceptions, you know).

I agree with you here. However I restate my position that it must be done carefully and preferably also slowly due to the given the precedent in Iraq.

The Iranian constitutional structure applies everywhere in Iran, its the constitutional law that many choose not to follow and decide on their own (local authorities). This is the case for most provinces including the Kurdish ones, however the Kurds have a special case as they've had some insurgencies in the past years which put them in a bit of troubles with the IRGC, and that means more IRGC courts in Kurdish territories and under direct supervision of the central government. Which in turns means that in order for the Kurds to get more autonomy is not to start insurgencies but rather to fix up relations with the central government and shutting down separatist movements in their midst, as a single sign of active separatist movements running alongside the Kurdish mainstream politicians would trigger warnings across Iran, in turn pushing to put even more pressure on them.
They should follow the path of the North Eastern provinces to get more autonomy and less oversight rather than following the path of other Kurdish groups in other countries.

Another thing is that I find that your very military focused when discussing certain aspects of Iran. A military focused perspective of Iran is fine and very helpful in today's political climate but I also find that too much of a military focused perspective may draw away attention from other very important issues.

I prefer an Industrialist country to a militarized one, however all must work together and while I don't advocate for larger army, I do support increasing defenses in strategic and key areas specially around the borders.
Even in times of peace, one must prepare for war as the worst case scenario. And we're not so far away from the worst case scenario under the current regional political climate.

The CIA didn't overthrow Mossadegh through force, they set up an internal coup and exploited the chaotic government of Iran at the time when an atmosphere of uncertainty shrouded most government officials. No one knew who to trust so no one trusted each other. It was very easy to infiltrate Iran due to this and the CIA had no mercy. When Iran's democracy was overthrown, all the hopes and dreams of those Iranians were shattered in an instant.

The moral of the story is, we should focus on strengthening ourselves internally before we strengthen ourselves externally. Internal strength almost always beats external strength in every situation. This is because internal strength means that not only is the country efficient and hard to corrupt, but it also means that, no matter what happens, there will always be a government in that country. A strong, faithful organization of bureaucrats follow a vision, not whoever waves the largest dollar bill.

True, and this is why I prefer the Kurds follow a co-operative path with the rest of Iran to achieve their goals rather than a separatist one. Cooperation between everyone removes that uncertainty and brings the country close together internally. Not just the Kurds but between everyone to everyone.

[Oxymandias]

@anasawad

I agree. I'm afraid that Rojava essentially killed of any chance of Kurdish autonomy in Turkey and Iran. Every Turkish and Iranian official will be skeptical at any attempt for greater autonomy in Kurdish areas and see it as an attempt at independence.

But I don't see Kurds changing their approach anytime soon and I would like to see relative peace on both sides so I think the central government should make the offer and work towards mutual peace. The rather elitist idea present in both Kurdish authorities and Iranian officials that one side must apologize first while the other side believes they must apologize is by far one of the most damaging ideas to peace in the entire world.

At this point it isn't about who should apologize first but how can we solve the problem in the most efficient way possible. It doesn't matter who does it first, what matters is how can we fix it.

If you believe that, then we need to fix our problem with the Kurds without waiting on them or anyone else to fix it. An internally strengthened country doesn't focus on which side or group apologizes but focuses on how to solve it's problem efficiently, regardless of who does it.

[Victoribus Spolia]

Here is my practical suggestion, off the cuff, thinking in terms of American neo-colonial interests.

1. I think the Kurds should be given an independent state carved exclusively out of their majority regions in Northern Iraq since its in a state of flux anyway and basically under coalition control (there has already been votes and actions taken that seem to indicate this as a possibility).

2. I am a man of honor, so I think the United States should honor its word to the Kurds and help them get their state. This state should initially be secured by the United States, and it should be recognized by the UN akin to the way Israel was formed.

3. Propaganda for a "Kurdish Zionism" to this state should be propagated in order to pull those despised populations out of Syria, Iran, etc.. (instead of ceding lands), the Kurds should then be given a limited-term arms deal with the UK and US, but no continuing military alliance, and current Euro-American coalitions should just back-off and see what happens as we sort-of did with Israel.

4. If they survive their neighbors, they deserve their state, and the U.S. at that point can go back in and secure a deal for oil and investment in exchange for Arms and special market access once the region stabilizes. By initiating the process, the U.S. honors its word and gives the Kurds a fighting chance and does not completely piss off everyone else by backing off for a bit and we can still go back in later and make a profitable deal for the U.S. with the Kurds. I hate some of the political views of some of these Kurdish groups, but I can't help but think its still better than most of the other political movements in that region of the world.

5. The U.S. should exert limited political pressure on other states to cede Kurdish lands to add to the this new Kurdish state via local referendums, but should not support Kurdish nationalism trying to take them by force and instead would just stay out of those conflicts. Like I said, if the Kurds get a chunk of land out of the no-one-cares chaos that is Northern Iraq and are able to hold it....good for them....if not, we can say we did our end of the bargain and sleep well at night.

Problems solved.

[Oxymandias]

@Victoribus Spolia

As I have said before, your ideas are very interesting. I haven't seen a Western colonialist perspective before although I have seen Middle Eastern "colonialist" perspectives (i.e. Pan-Arabists, Aryan Nationalists (the Persian kind), and Ottoman Empire Revivalists). I find that your perspective is particularly interesting because most of these Middle Eastern "colonialists" or "imperialists" focus on building such a state and making it reach superpower status while you don't have to focus on such a thing, because the West is already the dominant superpower of the world as of right now. So the biggest issue for a modern Western imperialist is retaining that title as top dog, not trying to reach that title. That leads to interesting ideas, even though I don't agree with them.

EDIT: To touch on your idea of "Kurdish Zionism" I don't think that could really work. Zionism works because it encourages continuous expansion until you can't expand anymore. Even if a Zionist Israel reaches it's goal of reuniting the Kingdom of Israel, I bet it'll continue to expand, because Zionism is inherently pro-expansionism.

Kurdistan and most Kurdish nationalist groups do not intend on expansion or want to expand into non-Kurdish majority areas. Kurds simply want a homeland for Kurds, they don't seem to care about conquering non-Kurds. Kurds and Rojava only seem to have invested interest in Syria and Iraq because a protectionist (but not too protectionist) Syria and Iraq would serve as potential buyers for Kurdish agricultural products since Kurdistan would not be able to compete with cheap and efficiently produced Western agricultural products and to make this more problematic, agriculture would be Kurdistan's largest economic sector if it becomes an independent country. Furthermore, Iran and Turkey would immediately saction off Kurdistan or Rojava.

A Kurdish-friendly Levant is something Rojava and Kurdistan wants. Outside of that, it has no interest in conquering any territory and adding it to it's own.

[Victoribus Spolia]

To touch on your idea of "Kurdish Zionism" I don't think that could really work. Zionism works because it encourages continuous expansion until you can't expand anymore. Even if a Zionist Israel reaches it's goal of reuniting the Kingdom of Israel, I bet it'll continue to expand, because Zionism is inherently pro-expansionism.

That may be the case with the Jews, but that was not what I meant by my use of the term. I was implying only that migration of Kurds from places like Syria and Iran to a newly established Kurdish state in Northern Iraq should be encouraged through internalized propoganda for the very reason of avoiding expansionism on the part of that Kurdish state. If they attempt to liberate those traditionally Kurdish lands in Syria and Iran at a later time by force, that is their problem, not America's.

[anasawad]

Traditionally Kurdish lands in Iran ? Liberate ?
Kurds are migrants from central Asia, all of the land that they live on have been Persian for several thousands of years. Before Kurds even existed.

[Victoribus Spolia]

I think you know what I am saying and I don't really feel the need get into another pissing match with you. My point, is that Northern Iraqi Kurdish lands should be acknowledged and secured as Kurdish by western powers and then left alone for the Kurds to prove if they can survive their neighbors and do what they want afterwards to increase their state's size either geographically or demographically and that the west should capitalize on this state's existence financially inasmuch as possible without explicitly supporting any future expansionary efforts it may wish to engage in. That is all.

Indeed, it looks like shit is going down right now.....I wonder if the west will do as I have suggested? I doubt it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/16/worl ... .html?_r=0

[Deutschmania]

@Oxymandias

The Kurds Are Ethnically Cleansing Arabs From Raqqa, And The World Is Silent
https://www.globalvillagespace.com/kurd ... ld-silent/


US Backed YPG Kurds Are Ethnically Cleansing Arabs From Raqqa, and the World Is Silent
https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-backed ... nt/5595067

Amnesty International accuses Kurdish YPG of war crimes
In a 38-page report, "'We Had Nowhere Else to Go': Forced Displacement and Demolition in Northern Syria,” Amnesty International catalogues allegations of forced evictions of Arabs and Turkmens and the destruction of their homes and property. “In some cases, entire villages have been demolished, apparently in retaliation for the perceived support of their Arab or Turkmen residents for the group that calls itself the Islamic State,” Amnesty International noted. Villagers said they were ordered to leave at gunpoint, their livestock shot at. The watchdog used satellite imagery and video footage to verify the claims.

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ru/orig ... rimes.html

The first link is from a site that freely publishes anything , without any editorial control , or fact checking , by their own admission . < https://www.globalvillagespace.com/about-us/> The second link is from some sensationalist conspiracy kook website . < https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch > While the third is reputed to have a pro-Assad / Iran bias . < http://iraniansforum.com/lobby/index.ph ... washington > So you'll have to excuse us for taking such anecdotal reports with a grain of salt , as the authors clearly have an agenda .

[Ter]

@Deutschmania
I just cited the first tree references I googled when looking up "ethnic cleansing by Kurds".
I had seen mention of this ethnic cleansing in the news and was asked to provide proof.
Interestingly, the third reference repeats findings published in an Amnesty report. I agree that Amnesty is a biased organisation but I do not think they would go as far as to totally fabricate the ethnic cleansing allegation against the Kurds.

That said, I am not invested in this situation at all but I follow it because the Kurdish problem creates interesting geopolitical dilemmas for most parties involved and all neighboring countries..

[Oxymandias]

@Ter

Like I said, absolutely nothing here objectively proves that Kurds ethnically cleanse Arabs or intend to. All you did is just google search "ethnic cleansing by Kurds" and post the first articles you saw. You do happen to realize that that destroys your credibility, right?

Yet you understand so little about Kurds that you must make up BS about them in order to fit them with your stupid dogma.

[Ter]

@Ter

Like I said, absolutely nothing here objectively proves that Kurds ethnically cleanse Arabs or intend to. All you did is just google search "ethnic cleansing by Kurds" and post the first articles you saw. You do happen to realize that that destroys your credibility, right?

Yet you understand so little about Kurds that you must make up BS about them in order to fit them with your stupid dogma.

Another post by Oxymandias. another cheap attempt at scoring points based on nothing but personal attacks.
Since we talked about the Kurds in this thread the Iraqi army has occupied the oil-rich territory that is disputed between the Kurds and the Iraqi central government. But according to you there is a good understanding between the Kurds and the Arabs. Seriously?

Instead of making personal attacks, you could explain why Amnesty International reported ethnic cleansing of Arabs and Turqs in areas liberated by the Kurdish fighters ?

[Oxymandias]

@Ter

I'm not here to score points. I'm just pointing out that admitting that you simply posted the first articles you found on google does in fact destroy your credibility or are you arguing that it doesn't? Nothing I said is a personal attack. If you think it's a personal attack, then report me. It's as simple as that.

Iraqi central government =/= Arabs

Kurdish independence in Iraq =/= Rojava

I never said Rojava doesn't have discrimination, I'm saying that disagreements are a long way from ethnic cleansing. And because there are differences it's a good thing that Rojava let's Arabs and other minorities govern themselves and settle these differences democratically. I find it terrifying that you don't see the difference between disagreements and ethnic cleansing.

Also the Iraqi central government also has no power at this point btw. It's not a government anymore, it's a military that uses the government as a facade.

Do you have such low levels of reading comprehension that you can't even read the article that you posted to prove your point? It says here that the people evicted were ISIS sympathizers and that these evictions were not authorized by Kurdish authorities:

'We Had Nowhere Else to Go': Forced Displacement and Demolition in Northern Syria,” Amnesty International catalogues allegations of forced evictions of Arabs and Turkmens and the destruction of their homes and property. “In some cases, entire villages have been demolished, apparently in retaliation for the perceived support of their Arab or Turkmen residents for the group that calls itself the Islamic State,”

For God's sake, if you're going to misrepresent my posts do it, but don't misrepresent your own goddamn articles. It makes you look like a buffoon. BTW do you even know what ethnic cleansing is? This report seems ages away from ethnic cleansing.

[Ter]

@Ter
destroy your credibility
Do you have such low levels of reading comprehension
It makes you look like a buffoon.

Another post by Oxymandias, another post with personal attacks.
That seems to be your posting style. Maybe you can fool some uneducated people in your immediate environment but your pedantic style does not impress me or most others on this board...

Just for the record : the Kurds are a significant minority in Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran. They have been denied their own homeland. Until they get their own country or very significant autonomy, the Kurdish problem is not going to disappear.

You admit that there has been some ethnic cleansing in territories liberated by Kurdish fighters. Authorised or not, the ethnic cleansing happened. Thank you for admitting it.

[Oxymandias]

@Ter

You can cry "personal attacks" all you want but it doesn't change that you have not, for a single second, proven that Kurds are ethnic cleansing Arabs and other minorities. It seems to me you're the uneducated one here. How do you not even read the article you're posting to prove your point? How?

You do realize that in the OP I expressed my support for Rojava and I have several times, including when debating with you. Also calling Kurds a problem is a very poor choice of words. You portray Kurds as a sort of menace by doing so.

No, I haven't. All I said was that Kurds evicted some ISIS sympathizers from their homes. That doesn't mean that they're kicking out all the Arabs and Turks, it just means that anyone who sympathizes with ISIS was kicked out. And if you know the definition of ethnic cleansing (which you don't), ethnic cleansing is "the systematic removal of an ethnic or religious group". Nothing in these reports is either systematic or has a bias towards an ethnic or religious group. No one in the Kurdish army is evicting these people because they are Arab and Rojava is certainly not systematically doing so as in order for something to be systematic (a word you also probably don't know) means "done or acting according to a fixed plan or system". Nothing about these plans or any of the articles you posted suggests that Kurdish authorities have a fixed plan to ethnically cleanse Arabs.

In order words you have no idea what you're talking about. Stick to Europe son, you at least know something about what you're talking about there.

[Ter]

@Oxymandias
You admitted that there has been some ethnic cleansing.
The scale of ethnic cleansing was not specified anywhere by you or me.
You conceded the point.
Thank you.
All the rest of your post is the usual claptrap blah blah blah.
Feel free to continue your baseless grandstanding.
I will play back any insults you post in my reply like a faithful recorder.
If not, have a great day !

[demima]

Rather there are considerable evidence to put their origins in central Asia alongside the Azaris, Turks, etc.

Could you forward evidence for this claim? Genuinely curious where you got this information from.

[anasawad]

@demima

Multiple research into their ancestry put the Kurds as not only one but multiple multi-cultural societies of migrants from all across Eurasia and the middle east. With large influence of Turkic, Iranian, And Semitic influence. Meaning in one hand, there is no single Kurdish nation as it never was one nation. Not that its not obvious by the current affairs that they're not one nation. And on the other hand, they're mainly various migrant groups into the land not the original natives.


http://www.khazaria.com/genetics/kurds.html
https://file.scirp.org/pdf/AA20120200003_79323951.pdf

Their ancestry includes lines to Iranians, Turks, Turkman, Azeris, Georgians, Hindus valley, Armenia, Caucasus, and various central Asian groups.

[Oxymandias]

@Ter

I have not, if I have, please quote where. Furthermore these reports do not fit the definition of ethnic cleansing but you refuse to acknowledge the actual definition of ethnic cleansing and tout your own ridiculous assumption about it. You think it's all nonsense because you don't like what I'm saying, not because it doesn't make any sense. If it really did not make any sense you would've easily refuted me and I know you and your debating habits well enough that you wouldn't be able to resist doing so.

[Oxymandias]

@anasawad

Well Persian, Arabs, and Turks are also diverse and some of them might not even be their respective ethnicity (I thought I was a pure 100% Persian from when I was a kid to early adulthood). What matters is what they identify as, not who they actually are because, identity is the biggest issue of the ME.

Furthermore, I don't think whoever was once on a piece of land matters as much as who was on it before. Jews inhabited Palestine eons ago but that doesn't mean that Israel get's to take all it's land and tell Palestinians to deal with it. Indo-Europeans did in fact live on what was once Kurdistan but eventually, all of them moved to cities and urbanized. Kurds, migrating to Asia, find a nice piece of land that's completely empty and that no one wants. So they settle.

That's not to say that I think Kurdistan should be a thing or that Kurds should secede from Iran. I am the literal last person to believe that (also considering also my imperialist side that slips out when I go full pipe dream mode. It's very concerning and horrifying I know). But I don't think that genetics is a good justification for the opposition of a unified Kurdish state. Iranian identity and unity is. We can be sure that Kurdish Iranians are culturally different than other Kurdish so we encourage and strengthen it.

I think Iranians aren't patriotic enough about their own country so this should be a part of a greater initiative to instill more national identity among Iranians and unify them. This will stop secession from occurring.